GM is pulling back on EVs

[Burkey]

Well let’s be real that’s what everyone thinks

They probably do.
Now, this is top secret, so don’t tell anyone, but….us Aussies are actually worse. Shhhh

Worse per capita I mean, not total emissions. Because (shockingly) smaller countries tend to produce less emissions.
Kinda like the US producing less than China….

Sponsored

 

[AZlb5.0]

That’s my point though, isn’t it?
The global TOTAL doesn’t change, nor does the per capita. But, by shifting the borders, we can suddenly make the numbers say whatever we want….which is why you need to use per capita emissions. We can’t fudge the per capita numbers to suit an agenda. Your metric is easily manipulated, as I just demonstrated to you.

I don’t know how else to explain it to you.
There’s 8 billion people on this planet and somehow you think that because of your place of birth, you, individually, should be allowed to contribute twice as much as someone born somewhere else.

Cool. Let’s relocate you to China and see if you feel the same way. Actually, let’s shift every US citizen to China. Now China has a REAL problem with emissions whilst the US suddenly contributes basically nothing.

Again, problem solved. The US now leads the way in emissions reduction but every former citizen is worse off for it and you’ve made absolutely no change to global emissions (unless you start living like the Chinese, in which case, you’ve just reduced global emissions, because you’re now emitting half of what you used to).

It doesn’t matter where you come from, it’s how much YOU contribute as one of the 8 billion residents, that matters.

The atmosphere doesn’t much care where you put the people, or how you draw your lines.

I’m done discussing this point. If you can’t process it, that’s on you.

The worst emitters per capita are in the ME. This was a piece done in 2023 but it has information that span a few decades.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/carbon-footprint-by-country

 

[K4fxd]

We should boycott Chinese goods if they keep building coal power plants. Just because they have more people does not get them a pass from the green path. IF it really is a problem

Same with Jet airplanes. IF Co2 is such a problem we shouldn't have thousands of them in the air 24 hours a day.

And I'm sorry if you can't grasp this.

 

[Burkey]

We should boycott Chinese goods if they keep building coal power plants. Just because they have more people does not get them a pass from the green path. IF it really is a problem

Same with Jet airplanes. IF Co2 is such a problem we shouldn't have thousands of them in the air 24 hours a day.

And I'm sorry if you can't grasp this.

Chinese goods produce less CO2 than goods produced in the US….Why? Because they have a higher renewable energy concentration than the US.

What you meant was, let’s stop buying American made until we catch up with the Chinese.

 

[K4fxd]

If it is truly a problem we need to reduce total emissions, Not reduce in one area and increase in another. Ultimately we are one world and this if it is real, needs to be treated as such.

Why would people who preach the oceans are rising buy ocean front property?

 

[Burkey]

If it is truly a problem we need to reduce total emissions, Not reduce in one area and increase in another. Ultimately we are one world and this if it is real, needs to be treated as such.

Why would people who preach the oceans are rising buy ocean front property?

Erm…they aren’t “preaching” that the oceans are rising. That’s an observed FACT. If stating facts is now “preaching”, I don’t know what to say. You can certainly argue as to WHY they’re rising. Sure.

But to answer your question:
Because the oceans are rising at a rate that probably won’t impact them. Probably. Or, maybe they have so much disposable income that they just don’t care. Maybe they realise that life is short and you need to enjoy it as much as you can while you’re alive? Maybe not all investments offer their returns in money?
Maybe they’re buying properties at elevations and locations that are less susceptible?

I can’t say, I don’t have enough money to be pondering the question, regardless of future climate predictions.

Why do people race drag cars, knowing that they’ll likely never get a return on their investment? It makes no sense financially so I guess they must enjoy it.

Not every decision has to make practical financial sense. Humans are a very strange species.

 

[jtmat]

Walmart announces major expansion to EV charging network


“With a store or club located within 10 miles of approximately 90% of Americans, we are uniquely positioned to deliver a convenient charging option that will help make EV ownership possible whether people live in rural, suburban or urban areas,” wrote Vishal Kapadia, Senior Vice President of Energy Transformation at Walmart. “Easy access to on-the-go charging is a game-changer for drivers who have been hesitant to purchase an EV.”


https://www.engadget.com/walmart-announces-major-expansion-to-ev-charging-network-184805909.html

 

[K4fxd]

But to answer your question:

You totally ignored the real question.

@jtmat
That is a great business decision. While people wait for their car to charge they will shop at Walmart.

 

[Burkey]

You totally ignored the real question.

@jtmat
That is a great business decision. While people wait for their car to charge they will shop at Walmart.

What was the question that I ignored?

 

[martinjlm]

If it is truly a problem we need to reduce total emissions, Not reduce in one area and increase in another. Ultimately we are one world and this if it is real, needs to be treated as such.

Why would people who preach the oceans are rising buy ocean front property?

You just described the rationale behind the Paris Accord. Be careful… there are some on this thread who might try to label you.

 

[sk47]

Europe’s EV push nearly faltered over fringe fuels that are years away (msn.com)

Hello; Story is self explanatory.

 

[K4fxd]

If Co2 were truly a problem and we were in an actual crisis civilian commercial air travel would be banned. You can spin the per passenger thing all you want. Fact is if the ban was in place most of the passengers would not make the trip using other forms of transportation. This would result in a significant reduction in Co2 added to the atmosphere.

If we were really in a climate emergency, we would not tolerate China or India or any country building new coal power plants. The per person argument holds no water IF we are in an actual crisis.

 

[sk47]

If Co2 were truly a problem and we were in an actual crisis civilian commercial air travel would be banned. You can spin the per passenger thing all you want. Fact is if the ban was in place most of the passengers would not make the trip using other forms of transportation. This would result in a significant reduction in Co2 added to the atmosphere.

If we were really in a climate emergency, we would not tolerate China or India or any country building new coal power plants. The per person argument holds no water IF we are in an actual crisis.

Hello; I get it. You get it and several others on here and around the world get it.

 

[K4fxd]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/car-parks-could-collapse-under-131939359.html

I never thought of this. Parking garages might collapse from the weight of EV's

 

[Burkey]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/car-parks-could-collapse-under-131939359.html

I never thought of this. Parking garages might collapse from the weight of EV's

Replace “Ev” with “modern cars” (which have generally become heavier over time).
The author made sure to mention that a Tesla 3 was grossly heavier than an old Cortina (wow, who knew?) but failed to mention that the Tesla 3 is lighter than a Mustang. This is how you know when an author is seeking to prove their conclusion, rather than engaging in a proper analysis. Junk journalism is junk. Zero balance.

I remember when the Holden Commodore (family sedan, 1978) first hit the market, weighing something like 1200kgs.
Fast forward to the last iteration and that weight ballooned out to 1800kgs. Yes, 50% more.

Maybe the takeaway is that old car parks weren’t designed with an adequate safety factor for the average modern vehicle?

First line from the article:

“Multi-storey car parks across the country could be at risk of collapse as heavier electric vehicles put pressure on ageing infrastructure, experts have warned.”

All you need to do is replace the word electric with modern. Poor journalism is easily fixed.

“For example, the current Tesla Model 3 weighs 1,672kgs, compared to the 768kg Ford Cortina Mark 1. The Audi E-tron weighs 2,351kg, compared to the 770kg Vauxhall Viva, while even the Nissan Leaf weighs 1,580kg.”

Just toss in the fact that a Dodge Ram weighs more than 2,600kgs and you’d have a decent story. What? A Dodge Ram weighs about as much as 4 Cortinas? Wow.
Someone should look at what that might do to the carparks……

Tell the mustangs and Rams to park on the street, this building can only support Tesla 3’s

Sponsored