True cost to run EV like paying $17.33 per gallon if not for $22 billion in government subsidies.

Status
Not open for further replies.

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
647
So I'm supposed to sit here and cry into my tear jar at the prospect that in 2045 I might not be able to keep up with the maintenance costs on my 2034 model ICE car? This is what we do here? And I'm sure 2 decades from now there will have been no improvements made to EV, or hydrogen, or e-fuel vehicles to make me want to buy one.

And over half of Germanys energy consumption comes from renewables. And it's only going up. The current year if you're not aware is 2024, not 1924. We don't just mindlessly burn coal anymore. But you're absolutely right that we still depend on and use fossil fuels to sustain the energy demands of the world. Big Gov' isn't just outright banning fossil fuels because they're not complete idiots.
No, what we do here is take a good look at where things are headed and then we look at the claims being made about something, followed by looking at what's happened before when those claims have been made. Once we've done that we can apply the necessary logical steps to it to extrapolate what happens forwards from this.

What is happening currently is that there are decisions being made in regards to sales of ICE cars without a replacement in mind. By replacement i mean something which is able to operate in such a way that it'd make an ICE car superfluous. There might be improvements to other technologies in a decade, but the issue here is that we don't know if there will be, we have just about no clue what will happen in the future and that's just the way things are. That being said we can't honestly say it's a good idea to rely on it maybe, possibly, being good enough that we can replace ICE vehicles with equal or better ones wholesale and not end up with other issues from that.

I've seen the power production in Germany, and i'm well aware of what's happened in different subsidies etc. in order to get their power production up on renewables. I'm also no stranger to the life cycles of wind turbines, of which Germany has a good few and which they will need to deal with in the coming years as well.

What year it is doesn't matter, and using that argument is just silly to the extreme. Governments are made out of people, and having had first-hand experience of those people i can easily, and with confidence, say that the vast majority of people in charge know as much about what these policies will do as a dog will understand Andúril 2.
 

weekend warrior

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
98
What is happening currently is that there are decisions being made in regards to sales of ICE cars without a replacement in mind. By replacement i mean something which is able to operate in such a way that it'd make an ICE car superfluous.
Yes, decisions are being made. That's how, I don't know- Government? Life?- works. But I completely disagree about them being made without a replacement in mind. If these new laws were being considered in 2014 to be rolled out in 2025 I would 100% agree with you. We weren't ready then, the future wasn't clear then. It is now.

GM announced they planned to halt ICE vehicle production by 2035. That's not a government saying that, that's a major automaker saying that. And they may adjust their timeline at some point, but they wouldn't have said that without seeing a future for EV. Likewise Ford had announced a huge amount of money being invested in EV.

The future is never certain, but it's very clear right now in terms of ICE/ EV. You can deny it all you want but it just makes you look like a tin-hat conspiracy theorist. I live in the most podunk red county eastern Colorado city you could imagine and they're installing electric charging stations.
What year it is doesn't matter, and using that argument is just silly to the extreme. Governments are made out of people, and having had first-hand experience of those people i can easily, and with confidence, say that the vast majority of people in charge know as much about what these policies will do as a dog will understand Andúril 2.

The government is stupid. At least in the US. I agree. I don't say anything I say because I fully trust the government. I say it because I can see what's going around my in the world itself, and by the shift in focus from the auto industry.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
647
Yes, decisions are being made. That's how, I don't know- Government? Life?- works. But I completely disagree about them being made without a replacement in mind. If these new laws were being considered in 2014 to be rolled out in 2025 I would 100% agree with you. We weren't ready then, the future wasn't clear then. It is now.

GM announced they planned to halt ICE vehicle production by 2035. That's not a government saying that, that's a major automaker saying that. And they may adjust their timeline at some point, but they wouldn't have said that without seeing a future for EV. Likewise Ford had announced a huge amount of money being invested in EV.

The future is never certain, but it's very clear right now in terms of ICE/ EV. You can deny it all you want but it just makes you look like a tin-hat conspiracy theorist. I live in the most podunk red county eastern Colorado city you could imagine and they're installing electric charging stations.


The government is stupid. At least in the US. I agree. I don't say anything I say because I fully trust the government. I say it because I can see what's going around my in the world itself, and by the shift in focus from the auto industry.
GM does things because it benefits them. Currently it benefits them more to halt ICE production because, would you know it, it's bad for their business if their main source of income couldn't be sold. Amazing that.

We still aren't ready, we still don't have the technology available to actually use EV in their current form, and hybrids, hydrogen, e-fuel, rubber band, bloody Flintstone cars sans floors aren't up to par yet regardless of what's being said about it. You can run an ICE car for 40 years given proper maintenance, good driving conditions, good storage etc. with little issues. With an EV you'll get to a point where you need to replace the battery, and that alone is easier said than done in regards to cost and where the service can be provided, you run into issues of needing charge where there's no stations and you can't just go buy 800 alkaleaks to charge your car, there's issues in regards to all roads not being suitable for EV use since they're a lot heavier than regular ICE vehicles and so on and such forth.

Just because more people are into the same idea doesn't make that idea any better, i'll refer back to when asbestos was all the rage and other such amazing moments in time when people went balls to the wall and paid the price for many years to come.

Do i want an alternative that's better than ICE? Yes. Do i think it's a great idea to throw away tried and tested technologies in favour of "oh it'll work if we all hold hands and believe enough"? Oh hell no.
 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
414
Location
San Francisco
Banning ICE vehicles or banning the sale of new ICE vehicles is splitting hairs. Last I checked, America is supposed to be a republic; not a frickin' state central dictatorship. Who the hell are these miserable excuses for Governors to be telling the People what we can and can't buy after a certain year!? That is disgustingly Obscene! It is the very definition of corruption. Let the Market decide which new vehicles American citizens should buy. Not some pathetic psychological re-incarnation of the not-so-funny little man with deformed genitals and an Oliver hardy moustache who ruled Germany before 1946.
You understand that ICE vehicles distribute poison. It is hoped that it will be economic but at some point public health is more important. Here is how I hope it happens:
 

weekend warrior

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
98
We still aren't ready, we still don't have the technology available to actually use EV in their current form, and hybrids, hydrogen, e-fuel, rubber band, bloody Flintstone cars sans floors aren't up to par yet regardless of what's being said about it.
Aren't up to par according to who? You? Are you God? Are you the King of the World? Millions of electric cars have been sold the past year, 10% of new car sales. Electric cars don't work for all those people because you said so? Cool opinion dude. And maybe the fact that "we aren't ready now" is why these laws are slated to take effect a decade from now, not tomorrow.
You can run an ICE car for 40 years given proper maintenance, good driving conditions, good storage etc. with little issues.
This is such bullshit. If it was true there would be far more 1984 vehicles on the road . ICE vehicles have just as much, if not more, mechanical complexity than electric vehicles. You can keep an older vehicle going, but don't come in here and tell me ice vehicles have superior longevity to electric motors and batteries.
With an EV you'll get to a point where you need to replace the battery, and that alone is easier said than done in regards to cost and where the service can be provided,

Yeah, gosh, I've never heard of an ICE vehicle needing a new motor or transmission. And if it did I'm sure it's just a cheap and easy job for the local jiffy-lube. Another great point by you.
 

jtr1962

Flashaholic
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
7,505
Location
Flushing, NY
You know I miss jtr1962. He and I got into some intense debates over the years on CPF. But there was always mutual respect. Reason being, he was open, honest, up-front, and intelligent. His posts were genuinely thought-provoking, even when I strongly disagreed with him. He very recently lost his Mother. So his break from CPF is absolutely understandable. I lost my Father back in 2017. I still have those binocs though. Former Soviet Union always good at making quality military gear. Everything else was garbage.
Thanks for the compliments. I do try to see both sides in a debate. Here I think the low hanging fruit is getting ICEs out of population centers where their pollution causes the most harm. I won't shed any tears if some people are still driving ICEs in rural areas in 2100. That's where they do the least harm per capita.

Battery-swapping, as China is doing now in large cities, is the answer to both the lack of charging stations and replacing the battery. If/when the battery doesn't work right, it's not your problem. I assume bad batteries are taken out of circulation at the swap stations and repaired. They do test the batteries as they charge them. Either way, the car owner isn't on the hook for an expensive battery replacement.

I also agree with fuyume that the better idea is to reduce car dependency. Your need to own a car for work in a very transit rich city like New York points to a major policy failure. People just shouldn't need to own cars in large numbers here. I don't know why we have transit deserts but we do.

On another note, they put CBTC on the Queens Boulevard line over the last few years. Last Sunday was the first time I had the chance to experience it when I went to Lunar New Year's in Chinatown with my brother. Amazing decrease in running times. Forest Hills to Lexington Ave/53rd Street took 15 minutes, compared to 18 before. The train was running 50+ mph for most of the run between express stations. Forest Hills to Roosevelt Avenue (3.1 miles) took 4 minutes, 50 seconds. I think 5:30 was the fastest I ever timed it before. This is huge. We need to convert all the existing lines, and build at least 50 route miles of new subways. Also add bus service. We might never get rid of cars in rural areas, but no reason we can't decrease them to a tiny minority in large cities, and a larger minority in inner ring suburbs.

Finally, I'm not even remotely over my mother's death. I just wanted to show my face here to let everyone know I'm still alive.
 

weekend warrior

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
98
Your post in this very same topic where you were splitting hairs about how no politician in power in America is actually trying to ban ICE vehicles by 2035. They're "only" banning the sale of new ICE vehicles by the year 2035.

You can't really read man. How is it forcing them to buy a EV when it's a proposed law, set to go into effect in a decade, that's a ban on new car sales? Does it ban buying ICE vehicles currently? No. Does it ban buying used ICE vehicles after 2035? No. Does it ban registering ICE vehicles? No.

A previous poster claimed the law was unfair because his friend was close to homelessness and planned on living in his truck- which would have been "impossible" to do in an electric truck after Washington banned registration of ICE vehicles in 2035. Which is not at all what the law is about. He got mad at me for calling out his bullshit.

Another poster told me one advantage of ICE vehicles is they last 40 years with simple maintenance and good road conditions. Yet if ICE vehicles get banned in 2035 we'll all be forced to buy an EV, but why won't our 2034 model year ICE last us another 40 years?

Ya'll need to get your tin hat conspiracies and fear mongering stories straight.

Shall we pretend that even one person in America, who isn't Amish, is going to trade in their ICE vehicle for a Horse & Buggy? Oh yeah! Plenty of other options when in 2035 (according to YOU) the sale of new ICE vehicles becomes banned.

What does this even mean? You're going to insult me and then suggest something as stupid as a ban on new ICE vehicles will force ICE owners to trade in for a horse and buggy? It's weird that you praise jtr1962 for intelligent argument then post your own completely stupid straw man argument.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
647
Aren't up to par according to who? You? Are you God? Are you the King of the World? Millions of electric cars have been sold the past year, 10% of new car sales. Electric cars don't work for all those people because you said so? Cool opinion dude. And maybe the fact that "we aren't ready now" is why these laws are slated to take effect a decade from now, not tomorrow.

This is such bullshit. If it was true there would be far more 1984 vehicles on the road . ICE vehicles have just as much, if not more, mechanical complexity than electric vehicles. You can keep an older vehicle going, but don't come in here and tell me ice vehicles have superior longevity to electric motors and batteries.


Yeah, gosh, I've never heard of an ICE vehicle needing a new motor or transmission. And if it did I'm sure it's just a cheap and easy job for the local jiffy-lube. Another great point by you.
Ok, i don't know if anyone else interprets it the way that i am but right now i'm getting a hint of lack of civility in this and i'm going to respond in kind.

No, i'm not the king of the world, i just happen to be a dude who's already seen all those OH SO WONDERFUL THINGS LOOK IT'S THE FUTURE things which are being lauded here come and go time and time again. I'm getting rather tired of you trying to make a mockery of this and use irrelevant data points to bolster your argument, despite the amount of sold cars sold that doesn't mean the cars are any good or are up to par, it among other things means that you get green subsidies if you buy an EV in many places now alongside a major push towards EV in general with many people buying said cars are the same kinds of people who'd buy a SWAT TACTICAL 40,000 LUMEN flashlight, you can't expect everyone who buys a car to understand what the car and the technology used actually means.

There are people still unhappy due to some of the drawbacks with EVs, among those drawbacks how they work in colder climates: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/ev-battery-range-cold-weather-charging-rcna134355

You're so willing to call it bullshit, but you don't understand the difference here. ICE cars usually have more mechanical components, mechanical components which can be fixed and if the vehicle in question is, as i mentioned, given proper maintenance, driven under good road conditions, and stored properly. The main issue which many cars deal with is that they aren't given the above, yet that pales in comparison to the issue you get with EVs that isn't an issue with ICEs: EVs have a battery. A bloody big battery. A huge chunk of various chemicals all put together in cells, then formed into a battery. A massive, SELF-DESTRUCTING, part of EVs. I'm not even talking about when they decide to combust, i'm talking about the batteries degrading even when perfectly stored and maintained even if they aren't out on the road, we've known this for ages with batteries, there's entire threads on here just talking about battery life and how different cells with different chemistries degrade.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
647
Another poster told me one advantage of ICE vehicles is they last 40 years with simple maintenance and good road conditions. Yet if ICE vehicles get banned in 2035 we'll all be forced to buy an EV, but why won't our 2034 model year ICE last us another 40 years?
They CAN last 40 years. I never stated that they DO last 40 years. If you're going to use what i've said at least be honest about it. I know they CAN last longer because we have cars OLDER than 40 years which are still running.

 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
414
Location
San Francisco
Aren't up to par according to who? You? Are you God? Are you the King of the World? Millions of electric cars have been sold the past year, 10% of new car sales. Electric cars don't work for all those people because you said so? Cool opinion dude. And maybe the fact that "we aren't ready now" is why these laws are slated to take effect a decade from now, not tomorrow.

This is such bullshit. If it was true there would be far more 1984 vehicles on the road . ICE vehicles have just as much, if not more, mechanical complexity than electric vehicles. You can keep an older vehicle going, but don't come in here and tell me ice vehicles have superior longevity to electric motors and batteries.


Yeah, gosh, I've never heard of an ICE vehicle needing a new motor or transmission. And if it did I'm sure it's just a cheap and easy job for the local jiffy-lube. Another great point by you.
I agree with you. FUD. Fear, uncertainty and doubt are the controlling factor in EV attitude. Because they don't have personal experience with EVs they believe FUD spread by big oil and Toyota. My experience with decades of EV use and over a decade driving OEM Electric transportation from Nissan and Tesla, 125,000 miles. The only problems were flat tires. When they hear this, they don't believe me and say I am an EV shill. When this car is available maybe this will convince them. Destroying their children's brains with diesel doesn't seem to bother them.
 
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
10,350
Location
Pacific N.W.
The problem with arguing (attempting to score points) instead of earnestly trying to understand the other person's position is that all too soon, communication breaks down. Furthering the miscommunication in this thread is the constantly terrible sentence structuring. Guys, do yourself a favor by downloading Grammarly. It's free and functions well.

 
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
10,350
Location
Pacific N.W.
I agree with you. FUD. Fear, uncertainty and doubt are the controlling factor in EV attitude. Because they don't have personal experience with EVs they believe FUD spread by big oil and Toyota. My experience with decades of EV use and over a decade driving OEM Electric transportation from Nissan and Tesla, 125,000 miles. The only problems were flat tires. When they hear this, they don't believe me and say I am an EV shill. When this car is available maybe this will convince them.
When someone ignores valid positions as much as you do, well, sir, it's difficult to consider them anything other than a shill. Either a shill or disingenuous at best.

Destroying their children's brains with diesel doesn't seem to bother them.
Such nonsense as this 👆 doesn't gain you credence or respect.
 

weekend warrior

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
98
No, i'm not the king of the world, i just happen to be a dude who's already seen all those OH SO WONDERFUL THINGS LOOK IT'S THE FUTURE things which are being lauded here come and go time and time again.
Such as? I really hope you're not trying to use your bizarre asbestos comparison again. Electric vehicles aren't some weird fluke thing. We're not at the point in human history where people are thinking "gee, I wonder if this electricity thing is going to work out?"
There are people still unhappy due to some of the drawbacks with EVs, among those drawbacks how they work in colder climates: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/ev-battery-range-cold-weather-charging-rcna134355
This is a good point. I had forgotten about the recent disaster with cold weather and it was certainly an embarrassing setback.
The main issue which many cars deal with is that they aren't given the above, yet that pales in comparison to the issue you get with EVs that isn't an issue with ICEs: EVs have a battery. A bloody big battery. A huge chunk of various chemicals all put together in cells, then formed into a battery. A massive, SELF-DESTRUCTING, part of EVs. I'm not even talking about when they decide to combust, i'm talking about the batteries degrading even when perfectly stored and maintained even if they aren't out on the road, we've known this for ages with batteries, there's entire threads on here just talking about battery life and how different cells with different chemistries degrade.
I'd really expect a member of a flashlight community to be better than condemn battery technology. Again I have to ask- what year do you think it is? You really think we don't understand batteries well? You really think companies aren't thinking ahead at how charging, battery swaps, and recycling will have to evolve as millions of battery powered cars roll off the lot year after year?

This is really just sad to see people act so dense. When gas-powered cars started to replace horse and carriage they had SO many problems, but we kept pushing them forward because it was obvious they were better and they were the future. Electric cars by comparison are already highly polished and ready for mainstream barely 5 years into existence. Using the most well understood and capable energy technology- electricity. And people like you will really sit there, and claim "it's not ready".

Not even ready enough that a decade from now we should make a push to have all NEW passenger cars going forward be electric, and let the ICE ones run their course. Even THATS to extreme.
 

LRJ88

Enlightened
Joined
May 4, 2014
Messages
647
Such as? I really hope you're not trying to use your bizarre asbestos comparison again. Electric vehicles aren't some weird fluke thing. We're not at the point in human history where people are thinking "gee, I wonder if this electricity thing is going to work out?"
How is asbestos bizarre? It was put in everything for a time because it was seen as being oh so great, then the numbers came in and it turned out to be directly dangerous.

What about solar roadways? Water extractors which don't actually work but sound good? The Chinese radioactive battery that turned out to be BS? NFTs? The Hyperloop? The scale of it can be debated, but the fact remains that regardless of what's going on with EVs at the current time we don't have the numbers on how this will turn out under our current circumstances and you can't say that we do unless you're from the future.

This is a good point. I had forgotten about the recent disaster with cold weather and it was certainly an embarrassing setback.
Yet it affects the vehicles in a way that makes them way less than ideal if you live anywhere in those areas.

I'd really expect a member of a flashlight community to be better than condemn battery technology. Again I have to ask- what year do you think it is? You really think we don't understand batteries well? You really think companies aren't thinking ahead at how charging, battery swaps, and recycling will have to evolve as millions of battery powered cars roll off the lot year after year?

This is really just sad to see people act so dense. When gas-powered cars started to replace horse and carriage they had SO many problems, but we kept pushing them forward because it was obvious they were better and they were the future. Electric cars by comparison are already highly polished and ready for mainstream barely 5 years into existence. Using the most well understood and capable energy technology- electricity. And people like you will really sit there, and claim "it's not ready".

Not even ready enough that a decade from now we should make a push to have all NEW passenger cars going forward be electric, and let the ICE ones run their course. Even THATS to extreme.
This is just sad, and it's beginning to tick me off that you're putting out these ad hominems yet don't see that you're coming across as being a dogmatic shill doing so. Very well, allow me to elucidate my points in a manner more fitting for this type of discussion:

I'm not condemning battery technology, i'm very damn well aware of what technology is available now and i'm also aware that other battery tech is on the horizon. That doesn't in any way, shape, or form mean that car manufacturers are currently doing what they can to make the cells used in cars more effective overall, it means that car manufacturers are putting out as many cars as they can using what currently works, especially if what currently works is selling a car which you'll have to pay $4000 to get a new battery for in 5 years using standard cells due to them being cheaper to purchase and use. I'm not taking your personal attacks kindly, and you constantly ignoring the issue at hand and trying to act all high and mighty is frankly starting to **** me off. You're not reading what i'm writing, and you sure as hell aren't understanding it, because if you were you'd understand that the issue being pointed out isn't EVs in and of themselves, it's EVs being pushed and forced into markets without them being at a point yet where they're a 1:1 with ICE vehicles or showing signs of being so within the next few years, it's legislation being used to push an agenda which looks good on the paper but which isn't taking into account that what's being done is putting on a blindfold and taking a large step just hoping that the ground will be there in the future.

I would recommend you removing that head of yours from your arse, but quite frankly given how you've been acting up until this point i have little hope of that ever happening. I've tried to be civil, i've tried to handle this discourse in a manner where it could actually lead to some form of understanding of where i stand, but colour me surprised when you've completely and utterly smashed my expectations to pieces time and time again when you come here and you try to mock me, you try to misrepresent me, and worst of all, you try to do all this while acting as if you're oh so good being on the side of progress and can do no wrong. I'm done talking to you, and unless you can find it within yourself to stop being a pillock i'd rather never interact with you again.
 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
414
Location
San Francisco
When someone ignores valid positions as much as you do, well, sir, it's difficult to consider them anything other than a shill. Either a shill or disingenuous at best.


Such nonsense as this 👆 doesn't gain you credence or respect.
There you go doing the same thing you accuse me of. Your points are based on your own biased fear. They are valid in your mind, but not in reality. I base my beliefs on facts. I know for sure your's are wrong so I can't give them credence or respect. There are not alternate facts. 2+2 will always be 4. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-023-00961-4 This is something everyone should worry about. Instead you bring up the freedom to do as you wish. Sheesh!
 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
414
Location
San Francisco
How is asbestos bizarre? It was put in everything for a time because it was seen as being oh so great, then the numbers came in and it turned out to be directly dangerous.

What about solar roadways? Water extractors which don't actually work but sound good? The Chinese radioactive battery that turned out to be BS? NFTs? The Hyperloop? The scale of it can be debated, but the fact remains that regardless of what's going on with EVs at the current time we don't have the numbers on how this will turn out under our current circumstances and you can't say that we do unless you're from the future.


Yet it affects the vehicles in a way that makes them way less than ideal if you live anywhere in those areas.


This is just sad, and it's beginning to tick me off that you're putting out these ad hominems yet don't see that you're coming across as being a dogmatic shill doing so. Very well, allow me to elucidate my points in a manner more fitting for this type of discussion:

I'm not condemning battery technology, i'm very damn well aware of what technology is available now and i'm also aware that other battery tech is on the horizon. That doesn't in any way, shape, or form mean that car manufacturers are currently doing what they can to make the cells used in cars more effective overall, it means that car manufacturers are putting out as many cars as they can using what currently works, especially if what currently works is selling a car which you'll have to pay $4000 to get a new battery for in 5 years using standard cells due to them being cheaper to purchase and use. I'm not taking your personal attacks kindly, and you constantly ignoring the issue at hand and trying to act all high and mighty is frankly starting to **** me off. You're not reading what i'm writing, and you sure as hell aren't understanding it, because if you were you'd understand that the issue being pointed out isn't EVs in and of themselves, it's EVs being pushed and forced into markets without them being at a point yet where they're a 1:1 with ICE vehicles or showing signs of being so within the next few years, it's legislation being used to push an agenda which looks good on the paper but which isn't taking into account that what's being done is putting on a blindfold and taking a large step just hoping that the ground will be there in the future.

I would recommend you removing that head of yours from your arse, but quite frankly given how you've been acting up until this point i have little hope of that ever happening. I've tried to be civil, i've tried to handle this discourse in a manner where it could actually lead to some form of understanding of where i stand, but colour me surprised when you've completely and utterly smashed my expectations to pieces time and time again when you come here and you try to mock me, you try to misrepresent me, and worst of all, you try to do all this while acting as if you're oh so good being on the side of progress and can do no wrong. I'm done talking to you, and unless you can find it within yourself to stop being a pillock i'd rather never interact with you again.
You are controlled by your biased fear and speculation. When the numbers come in that ICE vehicles are 50 times more likely to burn or ICE is more likely to fail in the cold, you ignore that report as fake news. Norway is the biggest user of Electric transportation.. On average they are colder than the storm in Chicago. They seem to be getting by. The facts are both ICE and electric technology work. One poisons the atmosphere, one doesn't. That is why the change will come. At some point human health is more important.
 

weekend warrior

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 18, 2013
Messages
98
How is asbestos bizarre? It was put in everything for a time because it was seen as being oh so great, then the numbers came in and it turned out to be directly dangerous.
Asbestos was widely used until it was discovered how dangerous it is and then it was banned from most industries by the government. How is that at all comparable to the current state of EV? In fact it flies completely contrary to your point because it's fossil fuels that have been widely used, now we're facing the consequences of global warming and all the CO2, so they want to ban those. And what are these other comparisons you want to make? NFTs??? That's like saying "well POGs were popular in the 80's but never took off, what chance does EV have?" It's insanity. You're watching Henry Ford roll Model T's off the assembly line and asking "Who knows if this is going to work out. I still believe in horse and carriage!" Fossil Fuels are dying. Open. Your. Eyes.
This is just sad, and it's beginning to tick me off that you're putting out these ad hominems yet don't see that you're coming across as being a dogmatic shill doing so. Very well, allow me to elucidate my points in a manner more fitting for this type of discussion:
I'm really sorry you feel this way, I am. I'm not trying to mock you, and I'm not trying to shill. I don't like Tesla, I don't like Elon Musk, I don't own an electric vehicle, and I don't plan on owning one for a long time. I have 2 vehicles- a 1995 Cummins diesel Dodge Ram and a 2008 GMC Duramax diesel. I'm not afraid of the government taking them and I hope electric vehicles take off so gas and diesel gets cheaper.

Everything I say I say because it's clearly the future. Every major auto manufacturer is going hard into EV and alternative fuels. The effects of CO2 on the environment can't be ignored. This isn't a conspiracy, this isn't Big Gov'. There's no future in fossil fuels going forward in human history.

We are way past 2001 when the Toyota Prius came out and it was an ugly piece of poop that could easily be ignored.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top