GM is pulling back on EVs

[AZlb5.0]

Hello; Fellows they are trying to derail the thread. Throwing out hot button topics to get a rise out of some of us. We have poked holes into the "green energy and BEV agendas so this is the tactic they revert to. The topics themselves are worthy of discussion but stray into areas we are not to enter.
I do wonder how this is supposed to work in the sense that jtmat & kz throw out bait bombs all the while fully expecting to be unscathed by their own actions. I get how it worked for them during the covid threads, but hope this thread is not so structured.

I have always said. Any comments have to be weighed against the individual making them. We know that the riots cost the American tax payer billions of dollars they burnt down police stations damaged federal buildings and people where murdered. The thing we have to remember is that while we denounce the Jan6 events, they hold these rioters as hero’s. Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down and beat you with experience.

Sponsored

 

[sk47]

So what you’re saying is that for the surfs it’ll be a much lower quality of beef right? So we won’t have to worry about these numbers.

Hello; I have not thought it out that far myself, but I get your point. ( I forgot to add quotation marks from the link when I posted a reply, so not my thoughts)

Back over the decades when I taught various science courses ecology, environmental issues were a part of the lessons. Among the topics were food chains and food pyramids. Three pyramids sometimes used were about beef, pork and chicken.
The idea of the lesson was to illustrate what farmers had to calculate when raising these animal for food. I do not recall the exact numbers but chicken beat out pork and pork beat out beef. In other words to get a pound of meat you wound up having to feed chickens maybe 2-3 pounds of feed. For pork maybe 6-7 pounds of feed. For beef maybe 10 pounds of feed.
One way to look at it, but not the only way, was using that same feed for people would be more efficient in terms of feeding more people overall. With some catches. One important catch being the feed has to be something people can eat such as corn. Grass fed beef use no people food as we cannot digest grass.
An argument was that the fields used to grow grains and corn fed to animals would feed more people if that land was used for grains to feed people directly. Thing is some land is no good for plant crops but is fine for grazing animals.

Anyway, the current advocates have a distorted view of things, at least to my way of looking at things. Somehow domestic cattle are villains in this climate agenda, but i will bet most, if not all, of the same champions will celebrate an increase in a wild bison herd. Same for the lab grown meat, I guess. The idea that the meat is not from live cattle may be more important than it makes much more emissions in production.
Similar to BEV vs. ICE.

 

[AZlb5.0]

An argument was that the fields used to grow grains and corn fed to animals would feed more people if that land was used for grains to feed people directly. Thing is some land is no good for plant crops but is fine for grazing animals.

It’s the same ole argument that if we throw money at poverty that we will eliminate it. How many hundreds of billions of dollars through out history have leading nations provided through governmental agencies, programs and people donating their hard earned money to eradicate poverty in places like Africa?

You know what my travels around the world taught me? Not everyone wants to own a house and a car not everyone wants western freedoms and not everyone is willing to sell their soul to the devil and dance with him to be prosperous. Afghanistan and Africa come to mind. People are very happy every day of their lives going out and doing what they can and nothing more. They have losses they have heart ache and heart break. I’ve yet to see a first world country eradicate those two. People die every day, I’ve yet to see a first world country find a cure for death. People get sick and die all the time. Some of the richest nations still haven’t found the cure for cancer.

Why all this bullsh*t about “savig the world” makes me laugh. Humans think that they will be able to save our miserable existence on this planet and for what? To keep dying to keep getting sick to keep losing children at birth to keep having uncle bob molest one of his family members. To still have mass poverty in nations like Africa Afghanistan Syria and many other. To still have a homeless population in countries like the US Canada Germany and many others. To still have people be addicted to drugs people murder other people husbands beat their wives people use religion and twist Gods words for their own selfish benefits so on and so on. We are saving this world for what exactly? To keep suffering as we always have since the existence of humanity.

Edit: I want one of these Greenies to tell me exactly why it is they want to save the world so badly for. Seriously, millions of years of human existence, hasn’t changed who we are at our very core so what is it that you all are trying to save?

 

[sk47]

It’s the same ole argument that if we throw money at poverty that we will eliminate it. How many hundreds of billions of dollars through out history have leading nations provided through governmental agencies, programs and people donating their hard earned money to eradicate poverty in places like Africa?

You know what my travels around the world taught me? Not everyone wants to own a house and a car not everyone wants western freedoms and not everyone is willing to sell their soul to the devil and dance with him to be prosperous. Afghanistan and Africa come to mind. People are very happy every day of their lives going out and doing what they can and nothing more. They have losses they have heart ache and heart break. I’ve yet to see a first world country eradicate those two. People die every day, I’ve yet to see a first world country find a cure for death. People get sick and die all the time. Some of the richest nations still haven’t found the cure for cancer.

Why all this bullsh*t about “savig the world” makes me laugh. Humans think that they will be able to save our miserable existence on this planet and for what? To keep dying to keep getting sick to keep losing children at birth to keep having uncle bob molest one of his family members. To still have mass poverty in nations like Africa Afghanistan Syria and many other. To still have a homeless population in countries like the US Canada Germany and many others. To still have people be addicted to drugs people murder other people husbands beat their wives people use religion and twist Gods words for their own selfish benefits so on and so on. We are saving this world for what exactly? To keep suffering as we always have since the existence of humanity.

Hello; I was in high school in the early 1960's. I recall reading about a famine in Africa. Some organization, maybe UNICEF, had stepped up to ship tons of food to the people. I thought that was good and the problem was fixed. Same area years later had famine again. As a student of the natural sciences, I learned the population had grown past the "carrying capacity" of the land. I had read Rachael Carlsons book also. That was when i got the idea that we ought to stabilize the population. Did not happen of course, we are billions more now.
I suspect we are at or past the carrying capacity of the earth. Past natural capacity for sure. We have artificial fertilizers generated from natural gas which allow most of the extra population to be fed. Traditional farming might have fed 5 billion. The extra two + billion owe their lives to that artificial fertilizer. Yet now natural gas is one of the evils of the day.

 

[K4fxd]

Seriously, millions of years of human existence, hasn’t changed who we are at our very core so what is it that you all are trying to save?

They could care less about humans, they think they are saving the planet, from us humans.

 

[AZlb5.0]

Hello; I was in high school in the early 1960's. I recall reading about a famine in Africa. Some organization, maybe UNICEF, had stepped up to ship tons of food to the people. I thought that was good and the problem was fixed. Same area years later had famine again. As a student of the natural sciences, I learned the population had grown past the "carrying capacity" of the land. I had read Rachael Carlsons book also. That was when i got the idea that we ought to stabilize the population. Did not happen of course, we are billions more now.
I suspect we are at or past the carrying capacity of the earth. Past natural capacity for sure. We have artificial fertilizers generated from natural gas which allow most of the extra population to be fed. Traditional farming might have fed 5 billion. The extra two + billion owe their lives to that artificial fertilizer. Yet now natural gas is one of the evils of the day.

Do you know that we can fit every single human on earth in Texas? The use of artificial fertilizers was a big mistake. That has rendered majority of farmlands unable to grow food without them. The government owns about 28% of US land. That’s about 2.3 billion acres. Imagine how many people you would be able to feed here in the US alone with let’s say a billion acres?

 

[AZlb5.0]

They could care less about humans, they think they are saving the planet, from us humans.

We know that but I don’t think they’ve been able to to digest that yet. Or at least come to terms with it. At least not enough to say it out loud.

 

[Burkey]

It’s the same ole argument that if we throw money at poverty that we will eliminate it. How many hundreds of billions of dollars through out history have leading nations provided through governmental agencies, programs and people donating their hard earned money to eradicate poverty in places like Africa?

You know what my travels around the world taught me? Not everyone wants to own a house and a car not everyone wants western freedoms and not everyone is willing to sell their soul to the devil and dance with him to be prosperous. Afghanistan and Africa come to mind. People are very happy every day of their lives going out and doing what they can and nothing more. They have losses they have heart ache and heart break. I’ve yet to see a first world country eradicate those two. People die every day, I’ve yet to see a first world country find a cure for death. People get sick and die all the time. Some of the richest nations still haven’t found the cure for cancer.

Why all this bullsh*t about “savig the world” makes me laugh. Humans think that they will be able to save our miserable existence on this planet and for what? To keep dying to keep getting sick to keep losing children at birth to keep having uncle bob molest one of his family members. To still have mass poverty in nations like Africa Afghanistan Syria and many other. To still have a homeless population in countries like the US Canada Germany and many others. To still have people be addicted to drugs people murder other people husbands beat their wives people use religion and twist Gods words for their own selfish benefits so on and so on. We are saving this world for what exactly? To keep suffering as we always have since the existence of humanity.

Edit: I want one of these Greenies to tell me exactly why it is they want to save the world so badly for. Seriously, millions of years of human existence, hasn’t changed who we are at our very core so what is it that you all are trying to save?

1. I’m not convinced that the “pro” EV people are greenies.

2. If things are that bad that it’s not worth saving, why take part in it at all?
You live in a country literally full of guns.

 

[sk47]

The EPA forges ahead toward less electricity supply and greater electricity demand (msn.com)

“Yet central planning is precisely what the EPA is doing: By 2040, the EPA intends that coal-fired electricity generation will fall virtually to zero, and gas-fired generation by over 40%, as a result of a newly proposed set of GHG emissions standards for fossil-fired power plants.”

“Ignore the ubiquitous propaganda about the cost competitiveness of wind and solar power and about how “clean” they are; both sets of assertions are a lot of hooey regardless of how often and how loudly they are repeated.”

“Unlike the EPA, the Energy Information Administration has actual expertise in such matters; it estimates that the cost of onshore wind power plus needed backup is almost four times higher than the cost of combined-cycle gas generation, and the analogous cost disadvantage for solar power is greater still. That is why wind and solar power cannot survive market competition without huge subsidies and guaranteed market shares.”

Hello; Some on this thread have already posted about the cost of “green” energy and its cleanness.

“The narrower reality is that the EPA’s intended shift in the national electricity system represents, in economic terms, a large reduction in the supply of power.”

Hello; What I have called a do without lifestyle.

“On the demand side, the EPA is also proposing a new set of emissions standards for light- and medium-duty vehicles beginning in model year 2027. Ignore again the EPA propaganda about the “multi-pollutant” goals of the proposed regulation. The obvious objective is a massive shift toward electric vehicles, which, by the way, cannot satisfy consumer needs and which the United States's current electric grid does not have the capacity to support.”

“Manhattan Institute senior fellow Mark Mills noted that “electrifying all of America’s [cars] would require about 50% more generation than exists or is planned.” “

“The North American Electric Reliability Corporation in its 2023 Summer Reliability Assessment estimates that all of the U.S., except for parts of the Southeast, middle Atlantic, and Northeast, already face the “potential for insufficient operating reserves in above-normal conditions.” This is before implementation of the EPA proposals for a massive supply decrease for the power supply system and a massive power demand increase for the transportation sector. Both EPA proposals would exacerbate reliability challenges for the electric grid.”

Hello; I read about the power blackouts in other places each summer for many years now. I expect this to start again this summer. Last winter in a cold spell in late December I experienced a power blackout from excessive demand for the first time. We have had outages from storms or power lines torn down before, but this was different. For years during hot spells and cold spells the local news will ask us to conserve and use less electric power.

 

[sk47]

1. I’m not convinced that the “pro” EV people are greenies.

2. If things are that bad that it’s not worth saving, why take part in it at all?
You live in a country literally full of guns.

Hello; Not greenies?? The major base reason for BEV over ICE is emissions, is it not? Pretty sure you have parroted the talking points many times. This has to be one of the more obtuse comments you have made.

Hello; The guns portion of your post is just another bait bomb aimed at getting some of us to respond and maybe be banned or the thread closed.

The other part I have an answer for. Over 50 years ago I was part of a movement to slow then stabilize the total human population. I lost that one long ago and the population has exploded. My fears back in the day were based on predicted problems caused by too many people.

So many of my fears have come about. That drinking water sold in plastic bottles became ubiquitous a couple decades ago was a tell some of my fears had happened. That bottled water is not seen as an environmental tragedy is perhaps the surprise for me.

So, I have lived, for many years, among what I consider an outcome for the world which is beyond a comfortable saving in a sense. I do not even now accept your characterization that things are "not worth saving". I am still for saving what can be saved but do not buy into the current largely false narrative that BEV will save the world.

But back to why someone like me who figures we have passed a tipping point still takes part at all. There are reasons to keep tilting at windmills beyond any hope of success. Among them is one for me. I try to have a smaller footprint in my passage thru this life. I get my effort is not 100% as I could do without even more than i do. However, most of my acquaintances think my lifestyle is odd. I rarely run the central air in my house in summer. I keep the temp lower than most are comfortable with in winter. I conserve water to the point of some months using less than 800 gallons. I live well below my means in other words.
I have a code so to speak even tho i figure the game is largely lost. I try to do small things day to day which do not add any more than is necessary for me to live. I, like you, am not perfect. I rag on you for buying an ICE while being vocal for the BEV's. I fall short of living up to the code I envision. My being on this site is a way I struggle with that code. I aspire to have a Mustang GT. It is a bucket list thing because i could not have one when young. I have not yet actually broken the code and bought a V8 Mustang but I do hope to do so.

My meager efforts day to day will not tilt the balance much at all. Likely the single biggest thing I have done was to remain childless. Children and grandchildren I did not have are not competing for resources with you and your family today.

 

[K4fxd]

You live in a country literally full of guns.

Your point?

 

[Tinpot]

I aspire to have a Mustang GT. It is a bucket list thing because i could not have one when young. I have not yet actually broken the code and bought a V8 Mustang but I do hope to do so.

Just get one and try not to feel guilty about it because the difference between you owning one and not owning one will have absolutely no measurable difference at all.
Let’s say we all stopped driving V8 Mustangs tomorrow. Is climate change - whether you believe it’s man made or not - suddenly going to slam into reverse ? No. Is that a selfish viewpoint ? I’d have to be honest and say slightly. On the other hand I look to the east and see India is buying as much cheap Russian gas and oil as they can so I wouldn’t and don’t feel too bad about it.

 

[AZlb5.0]

1. I’m not convinced that the “pro” EV people are greenies.

2. If things are that bad that it’s not worth saving, why take part in it at all?
You live in a country literally full of guns.

1. I’m just making a point. Saving the earth is not where we should be focusing our energy. Saving men is more important.

2. Im not taking part in it. I have a 2004 GTO that’s loud obnoxious and is mainly for “off road” use and my Mustang well that’s going to be for“ off road” use here soon enough . I was going to buy the wife a new Bronco but she’s attached to her large V8 heavy Yukon. That’s a gas guzzler and that whole gun comment I lost all mine in a boating accident years ago. So I can’t help you in that.

 

[RagmopInKona]

Jan 6th guys didn't really go to prison for riot, did they ? So bit of a missed argument, again, like this thread is full of.
Seditious conspiracy, domestic terrorist, assault of a police officer isn't exactly looting local Best Buy. But hey, I get it, it fits the narrative just disappointing relatively reasonable person would fall for it.

So as long as it is backed by your side it is ok, but other wise, throw um in the clink!
Got it. Wrong is wrong, and burning down blocks, looting, and trashing peoples property that have nothing to do with whatever issue they are "peacefully protesting" is allowing MOB RULE. This is just as bad if not worse than protesting and trashing those that are the cause of many ill's.
Guess it doesn't matter till it gets to your door, right?
Remember something, We As a Free willed People Agreed to fight an enemy over there so we not have to do it on our soil.
Acting like those riots don't matter because it isn't your 'hood is a fools game, it be better to snuff it out over there than on your soil.
But That take logic and reason. And a respect for the rule of law no matter what side or group is supporting the actions.

 

[RagmopInKona]

1. I’m not convinced that the “pro” EV people are greenies.

2. If things are that bad that it’s not worth saving, why take part in it at all?
You live in a country literally full of guns.

And Funny, it isn't the legal owners that are causing the problems. Funny how that works.
Next tell us how banning them would do anything, when no one can stop human trafficing or drug trafficing, You think guns would be any different?
I want the option of being allowed to own one if I so choose to protect my family and me if needed, You can't. Unless you own them and then you have nothing to say about the topic. Ovid showed how much you are under the_____ that be's thumb.
Our ______ that be fear us because of the millions if not billions of gun ownership, it keeps them in check. The dc event in jan was a dog and pony show. Notice how fast after that the lock downs/etc were lifted and that was a few hundred people, there are millions more silently on the side lines, and those in ________ know it.

Sponsored