Would you want to know how much it will cost you all to get the EV users to reach around 75 percent of all users?

[Robert W]

Here is a panel of EV users being asked to tell a congressman the cost to get 75 percent of users to buy EVs? And they don't know and it seems they don't care.
Question for you all. 1.6 percent of prospects per this video own EVs. Are you willing to spend billions on them to get new buyers to buy EV cars? And if you are willing, what costs are you willing to bear? Money from your pocket is the consideration.

 

[Oddball]

Marxists don't do math.

 

[jotathought]

It's a pipe dream ... what energy source will be used to charge them?

 

[ChemEngineer]

Forty-six percent of EV owners want to go back to gas cars.

 

[Robert W]

Forty-six percent of EV owners want to go back to gas cars.

In the video, none wanted to go back to gas cars however none of them would tell the Senator the true cost to taxpayers to get drivers to buy one of them. They told him they do not know. When it comes to the feds, you must know the costs first.

 

[ChemEngineer]

Here is a panel of EV users being asked to tell a congressman the cost to get 75 percent of users to buy EVs? And they don't know and it seems they don't care.
Question for you all. 1.6 percent of prospects per this video own EVs. Are you willing to spend billions on them to get new buyers to buy EV cars? And if you are willing, what costs are you willing to bear? Money from your pocket is the consideration.

China will NEVER be carbon neutral. They are building hundreds more coal powered electric generating plants now. China has lots of coal and will continue to use it to help raise the standard of its 1.3 billion people who live in squalor for the most part.

 

[toobfreak]

Here is a panel of EV users being asked to tell a congressman the cost to get 75 percent of users to buy EVs? And they don't know and it seems they don't care.

Of course not because all of them have careers INVESTED in seeing EV technology succeed. But the facts remain:

1. We can spend 50 trillion dollars making everyone in the country switch to EV cars, but if other big polluters like China, Russia, India and others don't, then the effect of our driving EVs means SQUAT to the climate. If our investment makes any measurable difference to climate warning, it would be too small to make any difference in the long term climate of the Earth.
2. Manufacturing EV cars requires massive mining of rare earths (from other countries), plus other harm to the environment, and much of our power to generate the electricity they run on for the far forseeable future IS NOT CARBON NEUTRAL! So we burn coal, NG and other polluting sources then tell ourselves how green we are driving our EV.
3. Perhaps most important is that if we convert our entire (or most of our) transportation sector to electric, our entire country would literally depend on electricity for transporting food, products, everything--- at that point, all it would take is one EMP exploded over the country to take out EVERYTHING. We are literally painting ourselves into a corner. And it would take YEARS to recover from such an attack.

 

[toobfreak]

Here is a panel of EV users being asked to tell a congressman the cost to get 75 percent of users to buy EVs? And they don't know and it seems they don't care.

I'm sorry, I forgot:

• The other consideration not mentioned is that I'm continually told that despite all the technological issues with EV's and the grid, that given enough time, work and money, we will eventually find a solution to these problems! So my question is: If we can do that to EVs, then why not to the ICE cars we already have? I mean--- does anyone realize how clean our cars are now compared to how they used to be? Just as we abandoned the LP for CDs for "better sound" long before the actual full potential of LPs was known, why do we have to abandon ICE cars entirely and not just continue improving them (at a FAR lower cost) while we continue to develop EV and Fuel Cell technology?

Meantime, the rest of the planet can work on doing the same.

THE THING IS that this has a FAR HIGHER CHANCE OF ACTUALLY SUCCEEDING (for vastly less money) than the current effort to just go cold turkey on ICE cars in one decade has.

 

[Robert W]

I'm sorry, I forgot:

• The other consideration not mentioned is that I'm continually told that despite all the technological issues with EV's and the grid, that given enough time, work and money, we will eventually find a solution to these problems! So my question is: If we can do that to EVs, then why not to the ICE cars we already have? I mean--- does anyone realize how clean our cars are now compared to how they used to be? Just as we abandoned the LP for CDs for "better sound" long before the actual full potential of LPs was known, why do we have to abandon ICE cars entirely and not just continue improving them (at a FAR lower cost) while we continue to develop EV and Fuel Cell technology?

Meantime, the rest of the planet can work on doing the same.

THE THING IS that this has a FAR HIGHER CHANCE OF ACTUALLY SUCCEEDING (for vastly less money) than the current effort to just go cold turkey on ICE cars in one decade has.

Thank you very much. Have you considered running to be in Congress?

 

[Sparker]

I saw a Cybertruck today towing wood on a trailer. It was a small pile of 2x4s, which would have been a light load for an ordinary full size pickup without a trailer. The driver needed a trailer because the load won't fit in a Cybertruck.

 

[Robert W]

I saw a Cybertruck today towing wood on a trailer. It was a small pile of 2x4s, which would have been a light load for an ordinary full size pickup without a trailer. The driver needed a trailer because the load won't fit in a Cybertruck.

I shall never own one. I do not expect to drive one as well.