The Simple Truth: The electric car people want, produces MORE CO2 than a gas powered car.

[iamwhatiseem]

Some of us (I would like to say most of us, but that is not true) have read or seen stories on the "EV lie".
That EVs are "Zero emissions". Which is 100% incorrect. That would assume that an EV appears on the showroom floor magically.
The battery simply appeared by Genies.
The fact is, the manufacturing of a current EV produces DOUBLE the amount of CO2 as an gas vehicle.
So much so, that you have to drive an EV between 80,000 - 90,000 miles before you start to make up for how much CO2 it took to make that car.
And from there.... it actually get's worse.
Everyone wants to extend the range of the EVs. And that is the problem. If you go out and buy an EV that has as much as a 200 mile range - you will never be able to drive it enough to produce LESS CO2 than if you bought a gas powered vehicle.
Reason being. It takes more battery capacity to extend the range. And making EV batteries is a very, very environmentally polluting exercise.

 

[Auld Phart]

 

[Donald H]

Those electric cars will have more effect on changing bad attitudes toward the scientific facts of climate change and AGW.

And overall, all may not be lost as attitudes are beginning to change. One just needs to look deeper than this clusterf--k to hear and see it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Those electric cars will have more effect on changing bad attitudes toward the scientific facts of climate change and AGW.

And overall, all may not be lost as attitudes are beginning to change. One just needs to look deeper than this clusterf--k to hear and see it.

And there are more lies.
European countries love to brag about how they have lowered CO2 production by XX%
That. Is a lie.
By importing oil from Russia and the Middle East... that produces a massive amount of CO2 - but they don't count it.
They just say Russia is producing all that CO2.

 

[TNHarley]

scientific facts of AGW

 

[johngaltshrugged]

Those electric cars will have more effect on changing bad attitudes toward the scientific facts of climate change and AGW.

And overall, all may not be lost as attitudes are beginning to change. One just needs to look deeper than this clusterf--k to hear and see it.

So now EV's are just virtue signals as well? Just like masks & the vax badges?
Glad we agree on something
What attitudes are changing? People still know climate change is a hoax & that doesn't improve our attitudes for your forced green energy transition BS

 

[iamwhatiseem]

So now EV's are just virtue signals as well? Just like masks & the vax badges?
Glad we agree on something
What attitudes are changing? People still know climate change is a hoax & that doesn't improve our attitudes for your forced green energy transition BS

It is another example of the left embracing idealism over reality.
If I was a big EV fan - and saw this - I would be pissed! I would be saying why did no one tell me this? Why go head over heels into something that is a dead end??

 

[Blues Man]

While it is true that an EV does have a higher production cost is emissions than a gas powered car, there is a point during the operational lifetime of an EV where the net emission production of not only manufacturing but also the years of operation is less than a gas powered car.

For the average compact EV the tipping point is at about 15000 miles

 

[iamwhatiseem]

While it is true that an EV does have a higher production cost is emissions than a gas powered car, there is a point during the operational lifetime of an EV where the net emission production of not only manufacturing but also the years of operation is less than a gas powered car.

For the average compact EV the tipping point is at about 15000 miles

Yeah that is simply not true.
It is around 80,000 - 90,000.
Likely - your data does not include the CO2 that is produced to charge the batteries.
The EV evangelist are dishonest and constantly omit data from their pie-in-the-sky claims.

 

[Blues Man]

Yeah that is simply not true.
It is around 80,000 - 90,000.
Likely - your data does not include the CO2 that is produced to charge the batteries.
The EV evangelist are dishonest and constantly omit data from their pie-in-the-sky claims.

Only for the really big EVs

Lifetime carbon emissions of electric vehicles vs gasoline cars

Reuters analyzed data generated by an Argonne National Laboratory model to determine at what point a typical electric vehicle (EV) becomes cleaner than an equivalent gasoline car in terms of its lifetime carbon footprint.

www.reuters.com

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Only for the really big EVs

Lifetime carbon emissions of electric vehicles vs gasoline cars

Reuters analyzed data generated by an Argonne National Laboratory model to determine at what point a typical electric vehicle (EV) becomes cleaner than an equivalent gasoline car in terms of its lifetime carbon footprint.

www.reuters.com

Exacty - the data is bullshit.
If you look it "assumes" the electricity to charge the battery is 100% renewable in the first scenario and 80% renewable the second scenario.
Both are ridiculously false.

 

[Blues Man]

Exacty - the data is bullshit.
If you look it "assumes" the electricity to charge the battery is 100% renewable in the first scenario and 80% renewable the second scenario.
Both are ridiculously false.

REad the whole thing.

There is also data for the average mix of power supplies.

it is the average mix of US power that yields the approximately 15K mile tipping point.

The use of 100% hydro merely illustrates the best case scenario.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

REad the whole thing.

There is also data for the average mix of power supplies.

it is the average mix of US power that yields the approximately 15K mile tipping point.

The use of 100% hydro merely illustrates the best case scenario.

I read 20% coal... which means 80% renewable. That is not close to accurate.
If you are familiar with TED you know they require people to provide sources and data when to support what they say, particularly when presenting it as factual.
I believe them over the EV evangelist data.
Rueters is doing something here. They are leaving something out. If their claim was as low as say 50,000 miles... at least it is an argument comparatively. But a ridiculous 15,000 miles??
No.. that is waaay lower than other data

 

[Blues Man]

I read 20% coal... which means 80% renewable. That is not close to accurate.
If you are familiar with TED you know they require people to provide sources and data when to support what they say, particularly when presenting it as factual.
I believe them over the EV evangelist data.
Rueters is doing something here. They are leaving something out. If their claim was as low as say 50,000 miles... at least it is an argument comparatively. But a ridiculous 15,000 miles??
No.. that is waaay lower than other data

Wrong

you don;t read very well

Power scenario 2: U.S. average energy mix (23% coal-fired, plus other fossil fuels and renewables)

 

[Flash]

Those electric cars will have more effect on changing bad attitudes toward the scientific facts of climate change and AGW.

And overall, all may not be lost as attitudes are beginning to change. One just needs to look deeper than this clusterf--k to hear and see it.

In other words it is shitty technology that produces more pollution but it is good for us because it furthers the Environmental Wacko agenda?

Dumbass!

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Wrong

you don;t read very well

Power scenario 2: U.S. average energy mix (23% coal-fired, plus other fossil fuels and renewables)

Indeed, however it doesn't break it down.
In the TED talk, it list the percentages specifically... not "plus other fossill/renewable"... why would it simply not say what the percentages are. Probably because the data is fairy tale.

 

[Blues Man]

Indeed, however it doesn't break it down.
In the TED talk, it list the percentages specifically... not "plus other fossill/renewable"... why would it simply not say what the percentages are. Probably because the data is fairy tale.

REally?

The average US mix of power by source is easy to find.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

REally?

The average US mix of power by source is easy to find.

View attachment 663820

You are not listening... they said "20% coal and other fossil/renewable." Which means other renewable.. and there isn't any. TED is known for quality speakers and credible data. They stake their reputation on it. They are also known for breaking down inaccurate claims made by industries and government.
I trust them.
I don't trust data that is not specific. Like I say if Reuters data was reasonably close to TED I would buy it... but it is way-way-way off. I don't trust it.

 

[Blues Man]

You are not listening... they said "20% coal and other fossil/renewable." Which means other renewable.. and there isn't any. TED is known for quality speakers and credible data. They stake their reputation on it. They are also known for breaking down inaccurate claims made by industries and government.
I trust them.
I don't trust data that is not specific. Like I say if Reuters data was reasonably close to TED I would buy it... but it is way-way-way off. I don't trust it.

Wind, hydro and solar make up a percentage of the average US mix of energy sources. Those are what we call renewable


and it clearly says other FOSSIL / renewable no fossil fuel is renewable.

The other FOSSIL fuel besides coal is natural gas

 

[ozro]

I'm over 80 miles from town. Have yet to see an ev charging station. The elevation difference between town and my place is about 2200 feet.
If I had an ev I could drive to town, and charge it before I could get home. From what I understand, that would likely mean spending the night in town.
I do that sometimes, taking my buckboard and my mules to town next week to be in the parade.
All the mules want is oats, hay and water. Granted, they were expensive, I have about 12000 in my mules. But I love them.i can't see loving a electric car.