GM is pulling back on EVs

[K4fxd]

The real threat to sensible action on climate change right now is not that governments are moving too slowly. It is that they are making bad decisions, choosing the wrong technologies, wasting too much money, and creating a backlash among the people who will be forced to pay for it all."

This times 10,000

Sponsored

 

[sk47]

The issue isn’t what you think it is.
The issue is this -
There currently isn’t a seven seat, 4WD wagon, with the required towing capacity, in either an EV or Hyrbid, available in Australia.

The issue isn’t range, availability of charging stations or any of the crap you guys harp on about.

The problem is that the vehicle doesn’t exist.
The reason it doesn’t exist is because the car companies think the demand isn’t there yet and subsequently haven’t produced one. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not an EV/hybrid is a suitable solution.

Hello; Oh, I get the issue. You want a real heavy duty vehicle. Also hidden in your answer is a range issue. Something EV with 4x4, seven passenger capacity and also to tow will not have much range. Not clear what the companies think has so much to do with it. Exhibit = the Ford EV pickup when asked to tow what a typical ICE F-150 can tow.

I get why you cannot find an EV to suit the needs mentioned. I get why police will not find an EV to do an eight hour shift every day and be ready to go again on a moments notice. I get why public utilities will not find EV's to handle the needs of service trucks. I get why a rural ambulance will not be an EV. To summarize I get why lots of people/institutions will find EV's falling short on both specific and general needs.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; Oh, I get the issue. You want a real heavy duty vehicle. Also hidden in your answer is a range issue. Something EV with 4x4, seven passenger capacity and also to tow will not have much range. Not clear what the companies think has so much to do with it. Exhibit = the Ford EV pickup when asked to tow what a typical ICE F-150 can tow.

I get why you cannot find an EV to suit the needs mentioned. I get why police will not find an EV to do an eight hour shift every day and be ready to go again on a moments notice. I get why public utilities will not find EV's to handle the needs of service trucks. I get why a rural ambulance will not be an EV. To summarize I get why lots of people/institutions will find EV's falling short on both specific and general needs.

Range isn’t an issue with a hybrid, period.
Even with an EV we only tow to a range of 350km’s (200miles). Our longest trip (not towing) taken several times per year, is 550km’s (340miles). Given that a Tesla charger can deliver ~ 200 mile range in 15 minutes, by the time you stop for a break every couple of hours, 15 minutes on a charger will get us there EASILY.

Again, the issue isn’t with the vehicles themselves, but rather the lack of charging stations, which is due to the low uptake of EV’s….which is due to the slim offerings available here…

It‘s really one issue compounding other issues.

On a different note, I was in Adelaide on the weekend and just happened to be walking past a charging station where I saw a guy getting out of his Porsche Taycan.
Figured I’d have a chat to him regarding his experience.

The first words out of his mouth were “I’m not a greeny, I think it’s all bullshit”……which intrigued me.
He went on to say that he LOVES the car and his only issue with it has been the constant vandalism of the charging stations In the city centre along with the stones they’ve placed around the chargers (because people kick them and they sometimes hit the paintwork on the car). Trivial stuff, easily fixed.

 

[sk47]

Range isn’t an issue with a hybrid, period.
Even with an EV we only tow to a range of 350km’s (200miles). Our longest trip (not towing) taken several times per year, is 550km’s (340miles). Given that a Tesla charger can deliver ~ 200 mile range in 15 minutes, by the time you stop for a break every couple of hours, 15 minutes on a charger will get us there EASILY.

Again, the issue isn’t with the vehicles themselves, but rather the lack of charging stations, which is due to the low uptake of EV’s….which is due to the slim offerings available here…

It‘s really one issue compounding other issues.

On a different note, I was in Adelaide on the weekend and just happened to be walking past a charging station where I saw a guy getting out of his Porsche Taycan.
Figured I’d have a chat to him regarding his experience.

The first words out of his mouth were “I’m not a greeny, I think it’s all bullshit”……which intrigued me.
He went on to say that he LOVES the car and his only issue with it has been the constant vandalism of the charging stations In the city centre along with the stones they’ve placed around the chargers (because people kick them and they sometimes hit the paintwork on the car). Trivial stuff, easily fixed.

Hello; These last few exchanges are among the better ones about EV's in total. I will assume you are trying to be genuine about the dilemma of wanting an EV but not finding one which suits. Biggest difference is you appear to want an EV while I will not consider one unless I do not have any choice.
The kernel of truth seems to be that how each of us feels about the subject the realities are stark enough. EV's as they exist are loaded with problems. Even with the example of the Taycan lover problems still exist.
I have knocked around enough to understand what will happen to unattended chargers. Not much mystery about that.

I watch college football and NASCAR here in the USA. (the real sort of football) Often the TV will show the parking lots during a game/race. Thousands of cars. I wonder what it might be like if they all were EV's. I use to go to the race at Bristol about 120 miles away. So 240 miles just to drive. Back before major road improvements getting in and out the last 30 miles or so was bumper to bumper sometimes for a few hours. I imagine sitting in traffic all that time with the AC and lights on then still having another 90 miles to get home. Wonder if any chargers would be open.

 

[AZlb5.0]

So now the UN says we have to shut the oil off now or else

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/20/world/ipcc-synthesis-report-climate-intl/index.html

Got it from CNN so some folks don’t say it’s propaganda alarmist news network.

 

[K4fxd]

"Concentrations of carbon pollution (carbon is not pollution) in the atmosphere are at their highest level for more than two million years and the rate of temperature rise over the last half a century is the highest in 2,000 years."

That tells me the temps rose just as fast 2000 years ago. Humans did not cause it.

Got it from CNN so some folks don’t say it’s propaganda alarmist news network.

That is funny. CNN is the #1 propaganda network.

 

[AZlb5.0]

That is funny. CNN is the #1 propaganda network.

The News Network

 

[K4fxd]

And some wonder why teens and young adults have no hope for the future. Just like NYC is not under water today, none of the gloom and doom predictions will come true.

 

[AZlb5.0]

If what they had said decades ago (when global warming was the cool thing to say) about the poles melting and water levels rising in any area that there was beachfront development there would have been an immediate stop for any loans and development. Banks are a great decider when supposed global warming was the thing. Not only did beach front loans and development didn’t t stop it actually ramped up.

Banks model any future lending for any development because they don’t want to lose money. Even when projects are insured in case they go “under” the banks are not going to make their money back. Banks are not in the business of losing money. Why they hand to go from global warming to climate change. They couldn’t get banks to stop the lending to build beach front properties.

 

[jtmat]

If what they had said decades ago (when global warming was the cool thing to say) about the poles melting and water levels rising in any area that there was beachfront development there would have been an immediate stop for any loans and development. Banks are a great decider when supposed global warming was the thing. Not only did beach front loans and development didn’t t stop it actually ramped up.

Banks model any future lending for any development because they don’t want to lose money. Even when projects are insured in case they go “under” the banks are not going to make their money back. Banks are not in the business of losing money. Why they hand to go from global warming to climate change. They couldn’t get banks to stop the lending to build beach front properties.

That is not what I witnessed in NC. Banks will keep giving loans while other beachfront property is falling into the sea yards away.

Not like people who purchase beach houses are broke... they more than likely will have (required) insurance and/or other forms of collateral.

At any rate, banks are happy.... people are now moving houses back, moving across the street, etc. What does that mean? Second loan in some cases.

 

[sk47]

That is not what I witnessed in NC. Banks will keep giving loans while other beachfront property is falling into the sea yards away.

Not like people who purchase beach houses are broke... they more than likely will have (required) insurance and/or other forms of collateral.

At any rate, banks are happy.... people are now moving houses back, moving across the street, etc. What does that mean? Second loan in some cases.

Hello; I worked in a school a few short miles from Wilmington NC for two years. back in 1998 & 1999. Beach erosion was happening back then as well. Some weekend mornings I drove down to a beach community not far from Southport NC. One beach had a parking spot from which I could see down a row of houses. One Saturday morning I parked there during a modest storm. I could see the breakers making it all the way to one of the beach houses. Even then there were folks moving houses back a street or two if they could get a space.
Made the news more because of the insurance costs to others in the general area more than loss of the houses. The man I rented a room from was a few miles from the ocean but had high insurance rates even so. I do not recall reading of banks having a hard time.

I learned about one bank practice after my mom passed. When she took out a loan on the house the bank required mortgage insurance. She thought that insurance was ongoing. It was not. After some time when the equity in the house was more than what was owed the bank dropped the insurance. I do not know if my mom was told of this, but I had to sell the home to cover the rest of the mortgage.

I have no idea how things are going around Wilmington NC area. I talk to the man i rented from and he tells me housing is still booming in the area.

 

[sk47]

So now the UN says we have to shut the oil off now or else

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/20/world/ipcc-synthesis-report-climate-intl/index.html

Got it from CNN so some folks don’t say it’s propaganda alarmist news network.

Hello; Good scare tactic read.

"The climate time-bomb is ticking," said António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, in a statement to mark the launch of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's synthesis report on Monday. "Humanity is on thin ice -- and that ice is melting fast," he added."

"The science is not new -- the report pulls together what the IPCC has already set out in a cluster of other reports over the last few years -"

"This report is the most dire and troubling assessment yet of the spiraling climate impacts we all face if systemic changes are not made now," Sara Shaw, program coordinator at Friends of the Earth International, said in a statement."
Hello; Just a taste of scare statement quotes.

"China is planning a huge expansion of coal -- the dirtiest of fossil fuels. In 2022, it granted permits for coal production across 82 sites, equal to starting two large coal power plants each week, according to a report last month."
Hello; Two power plants each week is twice more than the number i have been using in this thread before.

'While the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels is still possible, the report noted, the pathway to achieving it is rapidly closing as global production of planet-heating pollution continues to increase --"
Hello; The pitch about how it is still not too late if we act fast and go very drastic in changing the lifestyles of the "rich" countries.

'Despite the International Energy Agency saying in 2021 that there can now be no new fossil fuel developments if the world is to meet climate commitments, governments are continuing to approve oil, gas and coal projects."

"....administration has just greenlit the hugely controversial Willow oil drilling project in Alaska. Once operational, it is projected to produce enough oil to release 9.2 million metric tons of planet-warming carbon pollution a year -- equivalent to adding 2 million gas-powered cars to the roads."

"Staving off the worst impacts of the climate crisis will require radical shifts across every sector of the economy and society, according to the report."

"It called for deep cuts to planet-heating pollution by moving away from fossil fuels and investing in renewable energy. To limit warming to 1.5 degrees, global levels of planet-heating pollution must fall by 60% by 2035 compared with 2019, according to the report."

'Guterres called on all countries to "massively fast-track climate efforts" and, specifically, for rich countries to hit "the fast-forward button" on commitments to reach net-zero -- which means removing as much plant-heating pollution from the atmosphere as they emit."

Hello; The implication is all western (rich) countries must make drastic changes to our individual lifestyles. It will be much more than just driving EV's. My take is pretty much every thing is on the table to be reduced or eliminated. I get that many will not flinch at losing natural gas stoves, but here is a wild speculation. Once they get us far enough down the "give stuff up" road someone will notice how there are so many poor starving people and so many pet dogs and cats eating food people can or some such notion. (Not an original thought of mine nor a new idea. Actually something floated around decades ago.)

"For the first time, he said developed countries must reach net-zero as close to 2040 as possible, far earlier than the 2050 deadline a lot of countries -- including the US and the UK -- have pledged to meet."

Hello; So grin and bear it. Your betters are going to make life hard to save the planet. Of course, they will need to fly jets around and will deserve nice houses because controlling us is difficult. We subjects being saved may not have heat nor AC because such a sacrifice will help save the planet. This last bit is exaggeration to be sure. Not a real grounded prediction. Mostly a fantastical notion generated after getting to know Gregs.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; These last few exchanges are among the better ones about EV's in total. I will assume you are trying to be genuine about the dilemma of wanting an EV but not finding one which suits. Biggest difference is you appear to want an EV while I will not consider one unless I do not have any choice.
The kernel of truth seems to be that how each of us feels about the subject the realities are stark enough. EV's as they exist are loaded with problems. Even with the example of the Taycan lover problems still exist.
I have knocked around enough to understand what will happen to unattended chargers. Not much mystery about that.

I watch college football and NASCAR here in the USA. (the real sort of football) Often the TV will show the parking lots during a game/race. Thousands of cars. I wonder what it might be like if they all were EV's. I use to go to the race at Bristol about 120 miles away. So 240 miles just to drive. Back before major road improvements getting in and out the last 30 miles or so was bumper to bumper sometimes for a few hours. I imagine sitting in traffic all that time with the AC and lights on then still having another 90 miles to get home. Wonder if any chargers would be open.

Of course I’m being sincere.
I’d already have her driving one if something existed that fit the criteria. Forget about reasons of “a green agenda”. It’s literally in our financial best interests to transition across ASAP. We’re talking about savings of thousands of dollars every year (in the case of HER vehicle).
There’s not as much (any?) incentive for me to swap out MY vehicle due to the extremely low mileage I tend to accrue (less than 3.000 miles annually). Any savings would take forever to accumulate and would most likely be offset by the depreciation.
But that’s when it’s being viewed at a purely financial level.
I’m not even convinced that I can make a green argument for transitioning my vehicle given the annual mileage. But that’s the beauty of the mandates, they allow us to keep our vehicles for as long as they are financially viable and even beyond if you have the means and the desire..

 

[Gregs24]

The issue isn’t what you think it is.
The issue is this -
There currently isn’t a seven seat, 4WD wagon, with the required towing capacity, in either an EV or Hyrbid, available in Australia.

The issue isn’t range, availability of charging stations or any of the crap you guys harp on about.

The problem is that the vehicle doesn’t exist.
The reason it doesn’t exist is because the car companies think the demand isn’t there yet and subsequently haven’t produced one. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not an EV/hybrid is a suitable solution.

Do Land Rover not sell their hybrids in Australia yet?

 

[Gregs24]

So now the UN says we have to shut the oil off now or else

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/03/20/world/ipcc-synthesis-report-climate-intl/index.html

Got it from CNN so some folks don’t say it’s propaganda alarmist news network.

Well I listened to the speech yesterday and he DID NOT say we need to shut off the oil now. Yet more rubbish from you as even the CNN link you posted does NOT say we need to shut off oil today. You are either not reading properly or just a deliberate troll?

Here is what it actually says:

Despite the International Energy Agency saying in 2021 that there can now be no new fossil fuel developments if the world is to meet climate commitments, governments are continuing to approve oil, gas and coal projects.

Sponsored