Sponsored
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Surprising number of EV owners switch back to gas power, study says - CNET
Why some electric car owners return to gas – the reasons aren't surprising | Electrek
Hello; I can find links which prove little as well. Mine are a bit dated. A thing is it would be somewhat shocking if EV sales were not up with the mandates that are in place.
Burkey
Well-Known Member
I’m probably missing some info here but I thought the mandate was set for 2035? Are there some states that are aiming for something earlier?
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Hello; Yes there are some places that have set 2030 as the starting date.
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Electric Vehicle Sales and Market Share (US - Updated Monthly) - YAA (joinyaa.com)
Hello; likely more to the point is the percentage of BEV in total sales. Been around 5.5 % the last quarters. Up from 2%+ the previous year.
Sponsored
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Hello; Been thinking about the big picture surrounding the EV's between reading and posting about the issue.
If somehow climate change/global warming was off the table the issue would look a lot different.
To do away with fossil fuels as a power source will require a lot of expensive changes. The places where solar and wind work the best are not local to large places where the demand will exist. Building those solar and wind farms will be expensive especially if done quickly. Thing is without the stick of climate change/warming they will not be needed.
Same for the new heavy duty transmission lines which will be necessary to get that solar/wind power from where it is plentiful to where it is needed. These new transmission lines will also be very expensive.
Some sort of power storage will have to be developed. Masses of batteries maybe? Large flywheels maybe? Pumping water up to high positioned reservoirs to gravity feed generators maybe? Maybe other things? Point being some place to keep energy made when the sun shines and wind blows for times when it does not. Also, likely to be expensive.
We already know the EV's themselves are more expensive than an equivalent ICE. That is well known. This extra expense likely will persist. May get better "someday", but for now will cost more.
I did not mention other ways to make power such as tidal power, geothermal, hydro and others which may be part of the mix. For now, let me dwell on one a bit. Hydro is being removed in places for environmental reasons such as save the salmon. Something the save the planet crusades may run up against in other areas. That being how to decide which tech to keep. Hydro is clean power to be sure but has associated environmental issues. Wonder if other green energy plans will have conflicts?
Conflicts brings me to a new point. The drama is centered around a notion that "green" energy is so very much cleaner than fossil fuel energy and more to the point that fossil fuel energy is causing climate change/warming all on its own. That somehow if we humans do not burn any more carbon emitting fuels at all the climatewill not change any more will slow it's warming beginning in 50 to 100 years from now. Yes, a twenty something of today will be as old as i am now before the actual saving begins or starts. That twenty something will have at least 50 years of warming to endure if zero human CO2 starts tomorrow. Of course, we have to throw away the notion of natural climate change almost altogether.
We have an energy system around the world built up over a century which works quite well. Will the "green" energy systems be clean enough to make a difference and make it worth the sacrifice needed? My take has been the "green" energy and EV push are being mandated too quickly. 2030 and 2035 may seem a long time off to a young person, but to change out an already built and functioning energy system is truly short term.
Just as we found from sources such as the Volvo study the EV is not immediately cleaner than an equivalent ICE. Takes around 70,000 miles to start getting ahead. Will the "Green" energy sources turn out less immediately clean in a similar way?
If somehow climate change/global warming was off the table the issue would look a lot different. Would EV's with their unique issues and the expense of all new "green" energy sources be worth it to many?
If somehow climate change/global warming was off the table the issue would look a lot different.
To do away with fossil fuels as a power source will require a lot of expensive changes. The places where solar and wind work the best are not local to large places where the demand will exist. Building those solar and wind farms will be expensive especially if done quickly. Thing is without the stick of climate change/warming they will not be needed.
Same for the new heavy duty transmission lines which will be necessary to get that solar/wind power from where it is plentiful to where it is needed. These new transmission lines will also be very expensive.
Some sort of power storage will have to be developed. Masses of batteries maybe? Large flywheels maybe? Pumping water up to high positioned reservoirs to gravity feed generators maybe? Maybe other things? Point being some place to keep energy made when the sun shines and wind blows for times when it does not. Also, likely to be expensive.
We already know the EV's themselves are more expensive than an equivalent ICE. That is well known. This extra expense likely will persist. May get better "someday", but for now will cost more.
I did not mention other ways to make power such as tidal power, geothermal, hydro and others which may be part of the mix. For now, let me dwell on one a bit. Hydro is being removed in places for environmental reasons such as save the salmon. Something the save the planet crusades may run up against in other areas. That being how to decide which tech to keep. Hydro is clean power to be sure but has associated environmental issues. Wonder if other green energy plans will have conflicts?
Conflicts brings me to a new point. The drama is centered around a notion that "green" energy is so very much cleaner than fossil fuel energy and more to the point that fossil fuel energy is causing climate change/warming all on its own. That somehow if we humans do not burn any more carbon emitting fuels at all the climate
We have an energy system around the world built up over a century which works quite well. Will the "green" energy systems be clean enough to make a difference and make it worth the sacrifice needed? My take has been the "green" energy and EV push are being mandated too quickly. 2030 and 2035 may seem a long time off to a young person, but to change out an already built and functioning energy system is truly short term.
Just as we found from sources such as the Volvo study the EV is not immediately cleaner than an equivalent ICE. Takes around 70,000 miles to start getting ahead. Will the "Green" energy sources turn out less immediately clean in a similar way?
If somehow climate change/global warming was off the table the issue would look a lot different. Would EV's with their unique issues and the expense of all new "green" energy sources be worth it to many?
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Electric Vehicles Are Bringing Out the Worst in Us (msn.com)
Hello; An interesting read. A focus on safety for the most part but with some other fitting comments. I confess to liking some because they are very similar to things I have written. Some new to me stats as well.
Quotes from the links
“For decades, the car industry has exploited a loophole in federal fuel-economy rules to replace sedans with more profitable SUVs and trucks, which now account for four in five new cars sold in the United States.”
Hello; This is known and already posted about.
“As large as gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks are, their electrified versions are even heftier due to the addition of huge batteries. The forthcoming electric Chevrolet Silverado EV, for example, will weigh about 8,000 pounds, 3,000 more than the current gas-powered version. And there will be a lot of these behemoths: A recent study from the U.S. Department of Energy shows that carmakers are rapidly shifting their EV lineups away from sedans and toward SUVs and trucks, just as they did earlier with gas-powered cars.”
Hello; The weight of the Silverado is new to me. Likely has at least a ¾ ton chassis. Could be a ton maybe?
“ A 2018 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that hybrid vehicles, which, like EVs, can accelerate more quickly than gas-powered cars, were 10 percent more likely to injure a pedestrian than their gas-powered equivalents. Superfast acceleration also compromises the efficiency of an electric battery, reducing its range. “
Hello; The safety angle. May become more popular to be run over by an EV since it is saving the planet. (/s) (sarcasm symbol?)
“But EVs still create emissions in other ways, notably from the electricity required to build them and charge their batteries. Such energy needs rise dramatically for the biggest cars: According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the 9,063-pound GMC Hummer EV contributes more emissions per mile than a gas-powered Chevrolet Malibu.”
Hello; A stat new to me but one I will use in the future.
“enormous EVs are compounding the global shortage of essential battery minerals such as cobalt, lithium, and nickel. That Hummer EV’s battery weighs as much as a Honda Civic, consuming precious material that could otherwise be used to build several electric-sedan batteries—or a few hundred e-bike batteries.”
Hello; I take this as sign of a division amongst the “green” true believers. I am an ICE guy and hope to keep an ICE till I die. At 75 the odds are good that I can. However, if a cheap highway ready small EV could be had to get me to the stores I use seven miles away, such could work. Maybe slightly bigger than a golf cart and goes 60 mph???
“Even modest-size electric cars are not a climate panacea. A 2020 study by University of Toronto scholars found that electrification of automobiles cannot prevent a global temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius by 2100 without a concurrent shift toward cleaner travel modes such as public transportation and bicycles. Aware of that need, Norway, a global standout in electric-vehicle adoption, is replacing its EV subsidies with support for people walking and biking, while also considering a car-weight tax to nudge purchasers away from the bulkiest electric cars. A recent article in Nature endorsed such weight-based EV fees.”
Hello;Another new to me notion I will use in the future. Also is something which has been tickling at the back of my mind. I have been calling it the “do without culture” in past posts but this puts some meat on that thin bone.
‘The United States is not as farsighted. The Inflation Reduction Act that Biden signed in August includes a tax credit of up to $7,500 for those buying an electric car with a price tag below $55,000; in an implicit incentive to buy a larger vehicle, eligible SUVs can cost as much as $88,000 and still qualify. The new law offers nothing for buyers of e-bikes, e-cargo bikes, or electric golf carts—all of which produce a fraction of the emissions of an electric car while posing much less danger to road users.”
Hello; Spending other peoples money and putting a heavy thumb on the scale. Here is a thing about these incentives. Only actual tax payers will get the bill. Those who do not have to pay taxes will not have to pay this off with one exception. That exception will be if corporations have federal/state taxes added to them. The corporations will pass the taxes onto all who buy the products/services.
So all the ICE guys who do not favor the incentives and think they are unfair will be helping pay for someone else’s luxury EV.
Hello; An interesting read. A focus on safety for the most part but with some other fitting comments. I confess to liking some because they are very similar to things I have written. Some new to me stats as well.
Quotes from the links
“For decades, the car industry has exploited a loophole in federal fuel-economy rules to replace sedans with more profitable SUVs and trucks, which now account for four in five new cars sold in the United States.”
Hello; This is known and already posted about.
“As large as gas-guzzling SUVs and trucks are, their electrified versions are even heftier due to the addition of huge batteries. The forthcoming electric Chevrolet Silverado EV, for example, will weigh about 8,000 pounds, 3,000 more than the current gas-powered version. And there will be a lot of these behemoths: A recent study from the U.S. Department of Energy shows that carmakers are rapidly shifting their EV lineups away from sedans and toward SUVs and trucks, just as they did earlier with gas-powered cars.”
Hello; The weight of the Silverado is new to me. Likely has at least a ¾ ton chassis. Could be a ton maybe?
“ A 2018 study by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety found that hybrid vehicles, which, like EVs, can accelerate more quickly than gas-powered cars, were 10 percent more likely to injure a pedestrian than their gas-powered equivalents. Superfast acceleration also compromises the efficiency of an electric battery, reducing its range. “
Hello; The safety angle. May become more popular to be run over by an EV since it is saving the planet. (/s) (sarcasm symbol?)
“But EVs still create emissions in other ways, notably from the electricity required to build them and charge their batteries. Such energy needs rise dramatically for the biggest cars: According to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, the 9,063-pound GMC Hummer EV contributes more emissions per mile than a gas-powered Chevrolet Malibu.”
Hello; A stat new to me but one I will use in the future.
“enormous EVs are compounding the global shortage of essential battery minerals such as cobalt, lithium, and nickel. That Hummer EV’s battery weighs as much as a Honda Civic, consuming precious material that could otherwise be used to build several electric-sedan batteries—or a few hundred e-bike batteries.”
Hello; I take this as sign of a division amongst the “green” true believers. I am an ICE guy and hope to keep an ICE till I die. At 75 the odds are good that I can. However, if a cheap highway ready small EV could be had to get me to the stores I use seven miles away, such could work. Maybe slightly bigger than a golf cart and goes 60 mph???
“Even modest-size electric cars are not a climate panacea. A 2020 study by University of Toronto scholars found that electrification of automobiles cannot prevent a global temperature rise of 2 degrees Celsius by 2100 without a concurrent shift toward cleaner travel modes such as public transportation and bicycles. Aware of that need, Norway, a global standout in electric-vehicle adoption, is replacing its EV subsidies with support for people walking and biking, while also considering a car-weight tax to nudge purchasers away from the bulkiest electric cars. A recent article in Nature endorsed such weight-based EV fees.”
Hello;Another new to me notion I will use in the future. Also is something which has been tickling at the back of my mind. I have been calling it the “do without culture” in past posts but this puts some meat on that thin bone.
‘The United States is not as farsighted. The Inflation Reduction Act that Biden signed in August includes a tax credit of up to $7,500 for those buying an electric car with a price tag below $55,000; in an implicit incentive to buy a larger vehicle, eligible SUVs can cost as much as $88,000 and still qualify. The new law offers nothing for buyers of e-bikes, e-cargo bikes, or electric golf carts—all of which produce a fraction of the emissions of an electric car while posing much less danger to road users.”
Hello; Spending other peoples money and putting a heavy thumb on the scale. Here is a thing about these incentives. Only actual tax payers will get the bill. Those who do not have to pay taxes will not have to pay this off with one exception. That exception will be if corporations have federal/state taxes added to them. The corporations will pass the taxes onto all who buy the products/services.
So all the ICE guys who do not favor the incentives and think they are unfair will be helping pay for someone else’s luxury EV.
key01
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2017
- Threads
- 9
- Messages
- 1,425
- Reaction score
- 1,401
- Location
- Chicagoland
- Vehicle(s)
- 2017 GT350 now gone to a great home.
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #234
It would work if they had refineries. I don’t think the feds will allow for that. I don’t think that there will be any ICE cars past 2050 myself. Ultimately control will be the name of the game.
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Hello; I do not favor mandates against EV's any more than against ICE's. Either are a poor way to deal with personal choice in a "free" society. Same for purchase incentives using other people's money (taxpayers).
I and others have posted what amounts to a long listing of problems with the push for EV's + green infrastructure. That lthose who are pushing the Green+ EV agenda understand all or most of the faults is evident from these anti fossil fuel and anti ICE mandates. They know neither can currently stand on their own merits so require mandates and taxpayer funded incentives. Even with such mandates + incentives these agendas are struggling.
The EV's themselves are constantly more expensive to buy and the required grid capacity is far from in place. My local TV stations recently told us in TVA country to expect more rolling blackouts this winter.
Sponsored
jtmat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2015
- Threads
- 9
- Messages
- 1,995
- Reaction score
- 881
- Location
- DC/MD/VA metro
- Vehicle(s)
- Vert turbo!!!!
Goodbye; You are against incentives that put Americans to work? Ensure they have a fair chance in the global market?
Again, I'm not for or against EVs... but your comments are hard to follow since a lot of this stuff is still 5 to 20 years away. You seem to be repeating the same stuff over and over, even though other posters have already addressed it. In other words, you don't seem to be building off the conversation... but stuck on your comments.
Are you sure? That is not what I read. I read they were hit with a huge unprecedented storm (Elliot) and the blackouts were the result. I didn't read where they expect more outages/brownouts.
Gregs24
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2018
- Threads
- 23
- Messages
- 4,759
- Reaction score
- 3,038
- Location
- Wiltshire UK & Charente FR
- First Name
- Greg
- Vehicle(s)
- Mustang V8 GT, Ford Kuga PHEV
Gregs24
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2018
- Threads
- 23
- Messages
- 4,759
- Reaction score
- 3,038
- Location
- Wiltshire UK & Charente FR
- First Name
- Greg
- Vehicle(s)
- Mustang V8 GT, Ford Kuga PHEV
What idiots. Basically putting jobs in the oil industry above everything else.
sk47
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2020
- Threads
- 32
- Messages
- 6,813
- Reaction score
- 3,161
- Location
- North Eastern TN
- First Name
- Jeff
- Vehicle(s)
- Chevy Silverado & Nissan Sentra SE
Helo; last comment first. The local TV did say my area can expect more rolling electricity blackouts similar to the ones in the recent near zero F cold spell. You try this approach often. Just because you do not read or see a thing somehow you feel empowered to cast dispersions onto others. There were rolling blackouts a few weeks ago during a cold spell that lasted nearly five days when temps goy down to near zero F and stayed below freezing. My power was off for about half an hour that I am sure of as i was awake at the time with a temp at my house of 4 degrees F.
Next is the twisted tactic to try to say because i am against taking every tax payers money to push an agenda so many tax payers do not approve of means i want people to be out of work. How many coal miners or oil field workers or pipeline workers have lost jobs because of the "green" agendas? In fact I have seen some such advocates who seem proud of putting fossil fuel workers out of work. Folks who spend their lives keeping the lights on and whom we still depend upon when it gets too hot or too cold since the "green" energy is not yet up to the task.
In a real sense I do not care how the electricity is made that comes thru the wires to my home. I do want there to be enough of it at a reasonable price. So far the "green" energy promise is just that, a future promise. Not a reality i can count on. How many power companies had to use fossil fuel backups during the recent cold spell??
I repeat myself and will continue to do so for as long as comments such as yours are out there. You are the sort who do not get it. An idealized dream some years in the future does not keep us warm today. I do not want the working fossil fuel power grid taken away until the dream alternative can carry the load.
TexasMetallic5.0
Well-Known Member
They all know the supply chain and infrastructure can’t keep up.
Sponsored
