Oopsie.. electric cars may not be so enviro-friendly

[editec]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

 

[daveman]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

That may be true in the cities, but in rural areas, it's an exceedingly ignorant notion.

 

[konradv]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

Not if we go to a fusion power system. All that light hydrogen left over after taking out the heavier isotopes could be used as fuel with only water as the end product.

 

[tonystewart1]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

Not if we go to a fusion power system. All that light hydrogen left over after taking out the heavier isotopes could be used as fuel with only water as the end product.

YouTube - ‪MERLE HAGGARD - Rainbow Stew‬‏

Tell em Merle

 

[Two Thumbs]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

That may be true in the cities, but in rural areas, it's an exceedingly ignorant notion.

yeah

How the hell are you going to have mass transit in farm country?

And just so everyone knows; The world doesn't give a damn when the bus gets near work and the bus doesn't care when you have to be at work.

 

[Old Rocks]

Seems to be a gathering of retards here.

First, who says you have to use energy from coal to create batteries, or power the cars? Second, the materials that the batteries are made of, zinc, lithium, cadmium, and nickel are not metals that you throw away, you recycle them. If you don't want to do that, I will take them off of your hands for a very small fee.

I really have to enjoy it when you 'Conservatives' fight anything that would give the average American more independence from the corperations. Having an EV would make even the present prices of solar panels a bargain, for you would be powering your home and vehicle, both major costs to the average budget. But that would take money out of the corperations pockets, and the 'Conservatives' are dead set against that.

Last, the amount of material using materials like Cd are measured in nano-meters in thin film solar. And are designed not to degrade into the environment, after all, most have a 20 years gaurantee.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Seems to be a gathering of retards here.

First, who says you have to use energy from coal to create batteries, or power the cars? Second, the materials that the batteries are made of, zinc, lithium, cadmium, and nickel are not metals that you throw away, you recycle them. If you don't want to do that, I will take them off of your hands for a very small fee.

I really have to enjoy it when you 'Conservatives' fight anything that would give the average American more independence from the corperations. Having an EV would make even the present prices of solar panels a bargain, for you would be powering your home and vehicle, both major costs to the average budget. But that would take money out of the corperations pockets, and the 'Conservatives' are dead set against that.

Last, the amount of material using materials like Cd are measured in nano-meters in thin film solar. And are designed not to degrade into the environment, after all, most have a 20 years gaurantee.

So a study, more than likely done by 94% liberal scientist, is bullshit b/c it doesn't cater to your assumptions.

Wow

liberals are one of the few creatures living that eat thier own.

 

[Old Rocks]

Ah yes, a liberal study in a Murdoch paper.

Oh well, there will be EVs. And the cost will eventually be more than competative with ICE driven vehicles. Without taking into account the cost of operation.

 

[Trajan]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energ...be-so-green-after-all-says-british-study.html

 

[Trajan]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

see the bolded word.

shocking that one of rupert murdoch's newscorp holdings would say that, eh?

Are you disputing the data in the study or just building your post count?

 

[tonystewart1]

Seems to be a gathering of retards here.

First, who says you have to use energy from coal to create batteries, or power the cars? Second, the materials that the batteries are made of, zinc, lithium, cadmium, and nickel are not metals that you throw away, you recycle them. If you don't want to do that, I will take them off of your hands for a very small fee.

I really have to enjoy it when you 'Conservatives' fight anything that would give the average American more independence from the corperations. Having an EV would make even the present prices of solar panels a bargain, for you would be powering your home and vehicle, both major costs to the average budget. But that would take money out of the corperations pockets, and the 'Conservatives' are dead set against that.

Last, the amount of material using materials like Cd are measured in nano-meters in thin film solar. And are designed not to degrade into the environment, after all, most have a 20 years gaurantee.

All this recylcing you are talking about involves some very serious chemicals. We recylcle paper all the time and pollute ground water doing it by dumping the acids that are used. Get you head out of the sand. To make energy something has to be destroyed. Its the human way and has been always.

Enviromentalists act like you can make something from nothing. It cant be done. Energy is trapped and has to be released. If its the minerals we mine to make solar panels or the coal we mine to make steele for windmills. The bases of those windmills have to poured from concrete that has to extracted from the earth. Any extraction is harmful to the enviroment.

 

[Old Rocks]

So that is the reason to support the most harmful way to create energy?

By your posts you are stating that it is great to build coal plants that continue to degrade the environment for the whole of their use, while it is wrong to build solar and wind which does not degrade the environment during it's use. An odd logic, indeed.

 

[Old Rocks]

Electric cars may not be so green after all, says British study | The Australian

ELECTRIC cars could produce higher emissions over their lifetimes than petrol equivalents because of the energy consumed in making their batteries, a study has found.

see the bolded word.

shocking that one of rupert murdoch's newscorp holdings would say that, eh?

Are you disputing the data in the study or just building your post count?

OK. It takes X amount of energy to build a battery. Who says that energy has to come from coal? And what of the costs of the pollution from coal and hydrocarbons? That never seems to be factored into the costs of alternatives versus fossil fuel. Just the health effects, asthma, ect. on our children would add a significant factor to that equation. But, of course, anything that we can do to improve our childrens health is socialism, right?

 

[tonystewart1]

So that is the reason to support the most harmful way to create energy?

By your posts you are stating that it is great to build coal plants that continue to degrade the environment for the whole of their use, while it is wrong to build solar and wind which does not degrade the environment during it's use. An odd logic, indeed.

Honestly I really beileve their is a place for all types of energy production from wind, solar, wave, coal, oil, NG. We should diversfy our energy production. But what I can not abide is the lies told to the American public that there is some kind of zero effect energy production out there. That is a lie. We will always have a negative impact on the enviroment unless we go back to hunting and gathering. That truth needs to be embraced by all. What I would like to see happen is a commen sense approach to conserving our energy resources ALL OF THEM. I am all for solar to suplement my electric company. If I could put a windmill up to help cut my electric bill that would be great.

But we can not lie to ourselves. The moment man discovered how to extract energy from his enviroment the enviroment has suffered.

 

[Trajan]

see the bolded word.

shocking that one of rupert murdoch's newscorp holdings would say that, eh?

Are you disputing the data in the study or just building your post count?

OK. It takes X amount of energy to build a battery. Who says that energy has to come from coal? And what of the costs of the pollution from coal and hydrocarbons? That never seems to be factored into the costs of alternatives versus fossil fuel. Just the health effects, asthma, ect. on our children would add a significant factor to that equation. But, of course, anything that we can do to improve our childrens health is socialism, right?

there is the land of make believe, and then, there is; reality.

Join us in reality and we'll talk.

 

[tonystewart1]

are you disputing the data in the study or just building your post count?

ok. It takes x amount of energy to build a battery. Who says that energy has to come from coal? And what of the costs of the pollution from coal and hydrocarbons? That never seems to be factored into the costs of alternatives versus fossil fuel. Just the health effects, asthma, ect. On our children would add a significant factor to that equation. But, of course, anything that we can do to improve our childrens health is socialism, right?

there is the land of make believe, and then, there is; reality.

Join us in reality and we'll talk.

amen brother

 

[Two Thumbs]

Are you disputing the data in the study or just building your post count?

OK. It takes X amount of energy to build a battery. Who says that energy has to come from coal? And what of the costs of the pollution from coal and hydrocarbons? That never seems to be factored into the costs of alternatives versus fossil fuel. Just the health effects, asthma, ect. on our children would add a significant factor to that equation. But, of course, anything that we can do to improve our childrens health is socialism, right?

there is the land of make believe, and then, there is; reality.

Join us in reality and we'll talk.

He's unaware of the fact that mines are mostly underground and there's no chance in hell a battery can generate enough power over a day to keep mining.

But in Lib-lib land, the Rainbows on fire are a great source of energy.

 

[editec]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

That may be true in the cities, but in rural areas, it's an exceedingly ignorant notion.

I live in a 852.74 sq mile county with two (that's 2) stop lights!

So think I know a little about rural life than one might expect a dazzlingly urbane person like myself typically understands, Daveman.

I'm not talking about tomorrow, but sooner rather than later (like by 2100 for sure) the dependence mankind currently has for private automobiles is going to look rather silly and extremely wasteful.

Market forces will inevitably make the kinds of changes I'm suggesting are inevitably going to happen.

Believe me, no government edict will ever have as much power to alter the way mankind structures society as those economic forces that come from changes in demographics.

 

[editec]

Electric cars don't solve any real envirnmental problems EXCEPT local pollution.

Every time one creates energy (from any source) and then store it to be used later, you are losing energy that will never be recaptured.

I know that many of leftie bretheren congratulate themselves for driving hybrids, but I think their high opinions about how lighty they're treading their carbon footprints on the world are little more than a conceit.

I don't even care if we find a free carbon neutral source of energy, the idea that we're going to become a world with 7 or 8 billion private transportation vehicles (and the infrastructure for them to get about on) is a silly and shortsighted notion.

Eventually, and I mean in this century, mankind is collectively going to come to the conclusion that private automobiles to serve our tranportation needs is a terrible waste of resources.

Mankind will no doubt come to this conclusion kicking and screaming and fighting it all the way, but they will inevitably realize that the automotive age is over.

Not if we go to a fusion power system. All that light hydrogen left over after taking out the heavier isotopes could be used as fuel with only water as the end product.

It's not just the energy to power the vehicles that I think is going to make the private vehicle a thing of the past, Kon.

It's the overall resources needed to make an automotive age possible.

I include the production of the vehicles, plus the opportunity costs of the roads, plus the creation and maintanance of the roads, too.

Put 7,000,000,000 people in vehicles worldwide (no matter how cheaply they're powered) and mankind is wasting enormous resouces.

 

[Wry Catcher]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/energ...be-so-green-after-all-says-british-study.html

Here is a link to another Bristish study. I'm sure you will agree Nero that all British studies are the be all end all on all matters.

Brain study reveals right-wing conservatives have larger 'primitive' amygdala | Mail Online