GM is pulling back on EVs

[Gregs24]

CC is a beautiful area. We used to frequent there all the time. We lived in San Tan Valley. It was another hidden little gem. We lived in copper basin. As far East as you can go, before it turned into Florence. You wouldn’t recognize it now. When we first moved there it would take 45-1 hr to get to phoenix. Now it takes 45 min just to get to either the 60 or the 202. It got crazy crowded with that whole California exodus.

I don’t care about the polar bears either. They are not cute, they will take your head off with one swipe of that massive front paw. Coca Cola decided to make them cute. Much like Yogi made brown bears cute. Folks have found out the hard way they are not. One guy recorded his demise by bears. People still don’t learn.

Oh so the only biodiversity you choose to save are the bits you like! It seems your understanding of the food chain is as weak as your understanding of gender - to which you have still not replied with the papers you wrote...

What about bees - they sting?

Sponsored

 

[Mitch03]

Oh so the only biodiversity you choose to save are the bits you like! It seems your understanding of the food chain is as weak as your understanding of gender - to which you have still not replied with the papers you wrote...

What about bees - they sting?

You are such a LOSER. You should find better things to do with your life.

 

[jtmat]

It is not 2035 yet!!! Imagine that technology moving forward in increments.

It is the first battery available to reach 621 miles (1000km) of range with only one single charge and will be equipped in the Company's luxury minivan the zeekr 009 as well!​

It has fast charging capabilities by recovering 80% of its capacity in just 10 minutes! an advanced new cooling system gives the battery an edge in high performance. It is the next-gen new battery technology 2023 amongst solid state battery. ​

 

[jtmat]

You are such a LOSER. You should find better things to do with your life.

Aww.... someone messing up your safe place?

 

[K4fxd]

I'm ready to trade in my electric car. Here's why
https://www.yahoo.com/news/commentary-im-ready-trade-electric-100048391.html

I love how I never have to buy gas. I love how it glides quietly up the street. I love that it has so much pickup that I can easily blow past gas-powered muscle cars if I want to. I love having stickers that allow me to drive solo in the HOV lanes. I love that routine maintenance consists of little more than rotating the tires.

But after three years, I am thinking seriously of trading it in for the gas-powered hybrid plug-in version.

Why? Because as much as I love my car, I loathe that I can't travel around California, a state has led the electric car revolution, with confidence that I can get a charge when I need one.

 

[Mitch03]

Aww.... someone messing up your safe place?

No, just sick of the same ole shit from that loser and would put you in the same category. Nothing but BS spews from you. Evidently you need to get a life too!

 

[jtmat]

No, just sick of the same ole shit from that loser and would put you in the same category. Nothing but BS spews from you. Evidently you need to get a life too!

Since you don't know me, it seems like you are projecting. Push away from the keyboard... take a breather.

Just because someone does not agree with you or you are "sick" of something, no need to vent your anger out. You can always just logout. Like I'm about to do right now, but I have to catch a flight.

 

[martinjlm]

Hello; I get your point. Rail, barges and ships move huge amounts of tonnage for relatively small amounts of fuel per ton of cargo. Best I can recall is river barges are the most efficient.

I take a small exception to the notion of cargo transportation being somehow wasteful. In an idealized world we could recover 100% of the energy in fuels. Perhaps to be more accurate lose less energy to friction, incomplete combustion and other parasitic losses.
We are in a real world and even the revered "green and EV" solutions dreamed of will not be free of such losses. Even a BEV has a coolant system for the battery packs. Heat from the charging and discharging of the batteries has to be carried away in a radiator with antifreeze and hoses. That waste heat comes from the energy in the battery packs. Just one example.

Last point. It is the emissions from fossil fuels which are the main talking points in the global warming/ climate change fear mongering, is it not? The concern has not been the energy efficiency so much as emissions into the atmosphere. If fossil fuel could be burned at half the current efficiency but burned 100% clean the debate would be over, would it not?

The concern with energy efficiency is two-fold

1. Low efficiency solutions require more of the “fuel” in whatever form that may be. So even if a fuel is renewable the efforts required to renew it scale up and drive cost and inconvenience to deliver the higher scale.
2. For fuel sources that drive emissions, the less efficient they are, the more emissions they produce. But I’m sure we all recognize that.

So to your point that if fossil fuels burn 100% clean… you do realize you are proposing ignoring the laws of physics, right?

 

[martinjlm]

I would say do 2 mega solar farms one in Arizona and one in Nevada. Plenty of sun 365 and plenty of unused government land that’s in desert area. Then supplement each state with wind just in case there’s a heavy summer or winter. If we did this we would be able to supply each state with more then enough energy moving forward. That would take care of all the lower 48. We can keep a power plant or two in Alaska because of the weather there and Hawaii could supply themselves with plenty of wind farms and solar also.

Why ignore sunlight delivered in the other 48 states? Whatever amount of solar energy that can be captured during daylight hours can still be stored and used when needed.

 

[martinjlm]

It makes no difference to my mindset. We will lose our massive coal exports as a result of the changes. Whether it turns into a financial positive or negative remains to be seen.

My understanding is that other nations have vastly greater reserves of lithium. The 50% figure simply represents that we might be more readily accessing our reserves.

Last I checked the 5 major reserves were in Bolivia, Argentina, USA, Chile and Australia (in that order). Perhaps that has changed?

Lithium is very plentiful on Earth. It resides in a number of configurations in water, in soil, in rock, etc. The issue becomes, “how much are you willing to invest to extract it?”. The petroleum equivalent to this is fracking. There were several years in the late ‘90s / early 2000s where every week we were hearing about “peak oil” and listening to calculations of when the world would run out of oil. Typically those discussions were focused on known oil reserves that could be accessed by known methods. Then fracking comes into play and suddenly there are gluts of oil and the US becomes the world‘s largest producer of oil.

Similar issue with lithium. If at some point the price of lithium rises to the point where investment in new extraction methods becomes profitable, we’ll see a shift in where lithium comes from. Other minerals don’t have such a rosy perspective and battery engineers are hard at work developing workable substitutes for those minerals.

 

[K4fxd]

Why ignore sunlight delivered in the other 48 states?

Because using land to produce FOOD is more important than electricity.

 

[Mitch03]

Since you don't know me, it seems like you are projecting. Push away from the keyboard... take a breather.

Just because someone does not agree with you or you are "sick" of something, no need to vent your anger out. You can always just logout. Like I'm about to do right now, but I have to catch a flight.

I’ve read enough to know what you‘re about…....

 

[martinjlm]

Because using land to produce FOOD is more important than electricity.

It’s not a binary issue. Land is not food or solar panels. There is no given that land used for solar panels is taken from land that would have been used for food. It could be land that was once a shopping mall or land that would other wise have been a parking lot. Or solar panels could actually be on top of parking structures in shopping malls. It’s not binary.

 

[AZlb5.0]

Why ignore sunlight delivered in the other 48 states? Whatever amount of solar energy that can be captured during daylight hours can still be stored and used when needed.

Well in many states especially up north the sun isn’t as a constant as it is in states like Arizona and Nevada. You also have the good fortune that in these 2 states there are no major storms that produce tornadoes. . That can and do cause damage to property privet and public. Having the ability to produce energy in average of 300-320 days a year uninterrupted is a great way producing clean energy for the rest of the nation.

Look I’m just trying to help lol. But in all seriousness. Much like Africa has the Sahara here in the US we have the desert south west which if used properly can provide constant clean energy for the lower 48 plus the fact that there’s so much land that unused owned by the federal government, why not put it to good use.

 

[K4fxd]

Much like Africa has the Sahara here in the US we have the desert south west

Huge difference. The Sahara has virtually no life. The desert southwest has an abundance of both plant and animal life. US deserts you destroy habitat, Sahara has massive dust and sand storms. If the panels don't get buried they will be sandblasted into not working.

I an for the environment and right now today the most environmentally friendly way to power our world is through oil and gas.

Sponsored