good reason not to get an EV

19:05

Reduced battery performance in cold weather.

All said, the electric car is more damaging to the environment when you count what it took to build it, to maintain it, and to dispose of it when it dies.

.... and the little kids in the Congo working the cobalt mines.

Reduced battery performance in cold weather. Originally Posted by JohnnyGleet

yes I know.

the video raises a very good point which I didn't think about.

waiting in line for fuel at a charging station.

since charging runs between 30 minutes to 1hr. if theres a line to get charged. it could easily wait 2 hours depending on how long the line is and how many terminals there are. who wants to wait that long?

gas station queue is about 5 - 10 minutes. if theres a gas shortage, about 30mins to 1 hour.

.... and the little kids in the Congo working the cobalt mines. Originally Posted by JohnnyGleet

they've coined it blood cobalt.

And you suddenly care about little African kids because…

19:05
Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

I saw a Tesla in a parking lot last year as I was walking to my car so I stopped to take a look at it. The paint job looked like something out of Earl Scheib there was a slight drip mark on one of the quarter panels and the body side molding was slightly misaligned. For a car that expensive it wasn't anything to write home about. I don't think I would buy one, not at this stage of the game anyway.

I saw a Tesla in a parking lot last year as I was walking to my car so I stopped to take a look at it. The paint job looked like something out of Earl Scheib there was a slight drip mark on one of the quarter panels and the body side molding was slightly misaligned. For a car that expensive it wasn't anything to write home about. I don't think I would buy one, not at this stage of the game anyway. Originally Posted by Levianon17

alot of these models are in the model-T stage.

alot of these models are in the model-T stage. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Yeah, That's why I'll wait before I would buy one. I do see a few on the road from time to time though.

Volvo put out some information concerning at least one of their EVs and the corresponding ICE powered model. The upshot is that the "green" vehicles are some 30% "dirtier" than internal combustion powered vehicles in the production phase so they start life as a dirtier vehicle. In fact you have to drive that EV between 34-68k miles to reach the break even point. Seems worth considering.

https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-...lca-report.pdf

Volvo put out some information concerning at least one of their EVs and the corresponding ICE powered model. The upshot is that the "green" vehicles are some 30% "dirtier" than internal combustion powered vehicles in the production phase so they start life as a dirtier vehicle. In fact you have to drive that EV between 34-68k miles to reach the break even point. Seems worth considering.

https://www.volvocars.com/images/v/-...lca-report.pdf Originally Posted by Ducbutter

exactly. and that's only the breakeven to build the vehicle. even if you drive one for 20 years it still needs electricity partly from "evil" fossil fuels. unless you have a small solar farm. bahahahaa


what many greentards don't seem to understand is that solar/wind/hydro power is not cost effective everywhere. like real estate .. "location, location, location".


richard branson claimed some years back a 100 sq/mile solar farm in the US southwest where the solar factor is high could power the entire USA. at that scale he might be right, but what would a 100 sq/mile solar farm cost? how long after all the high cost rare earth minerals and costly manufacturing are recouped?



dollar for dollar and without any geographical limitations nuclear power is the solution. it's now scalable and there are fuels like Thorium that have far less toxic waste than uranium or plutonium.


we don't even need fusion the holy grail of power generation. what we have with fuels like Thorium are fine. if we eventually work out fusion and we probably will that's fine.


the two biggest nuclear disasters are flukes. Chernobyl was a copy of a UK 1950's prototype design quickly discarded by the UK and USA. the russkies even tried to fix the flaws but still had a design that was going to fail.


fukajima was a fluke too. a double fluke. the GE design is solid the location was a factor. the location along the sea is perfect for cooling it was the dual facts that the designers didn't anticipate a 50/100 year tsunami and because of this put the power plants for the water pumps too close to the shore which swamped them.


nuclear power is the solution.

Barley IS 100 % correct , as with most progressive social ideas they only make money for some and hurt everything else

The dumbest thing about the Demonicrats is they feel insecure when others are smarter than them, hence the reason for their need for safe spaces, so they can go ball their eyes out and wallow in their insecurities.