Totally agree, my friend. The subtle point here is that I’m allowed to do and think what I want in what I think is the greatest country that ever existed as long as I don’t directly harm or take away the rights someone else. If someone wants to call a politician a clown, they can. Try doing that in China.Electric trains don't run out of power in 300 miles, and do not require lengthy downtime for recharging. They are operated 24 / 7.
So you think the government is smarter than the people? You think Biden and Kamala are superior thinkers? You have a very low standard of government you want to be led by. I'll give you that.
This country was built on capitalism. The list of countries is all but endless that have failed under socialism. There is no, "third way". You can't be, "a little bit pregnant".
They are. They do nothing better than gas cars, and take longer to do it. And in many rural areas, they simply CAN'T do it.
The air is fine where I live. And is cleaner than it's ever been since the Industrial Revolution. Perhaps you require some other health problems to be addressed. Besides, how is the air going to be any better with a nation full of electric cars?
Most all of which get their power from electricity that is generated by fossil fuel plants? Nuclear and hydro make up a very small percentage of our present power requirements. That's a fact.
And the same people who are screaming for EV's, also scream how much they HATE nuclear power. And how hydro destroys ecosystems. If you require proof of that statement, just look at what Germany is presently doing to itself...... Or California under that idiot Newsom.
If you think EV's are going to solve any of that, you're dreaming. Look at what's involved in the mining of Lithium, along with heavy metals for the production of electric motors and batteries used in EV's. You're only trading one problem for another. And solving nothing in the process.
Most of the country lives where there is no public transportation. And it's not economically viable to build it. Hell, we can't even improve our power grid enough to take the current load on it. Let alone to supply power and charging stations to a nation full of EV's. You're dreaming again.
Electrify automobiles and you limit where people can go, along with increasing the time it will take for them to get there. Not to mention you'll create another bigger set of issues and problems that don't exist now. No one wants that. And it's a big part of the reason why EV's are barely more than 1% of the cars on the road today.
As I said in my above post. If EV's were so wonderful, you would have A LOT MORE of them on the road, over the last 190 years they've been around. You don't because the bulk of the population doesn't want them. People want and buy what works for them. Not what a government comprised of idiots thinks they should have.
VHS tape recorders, incandescent light bulbs, and cassette tapes are obsolete. Because other inventions were developed in the private sector that were BETTER options that replaced them. The market immediately went to them because they're an improvement.
And over the last 190 years that has NOT happened with electric vehicles. And they'll be no more popular in the next century, than they are now. And that is because they do nothing better, and most everything else worse. People like to move forward in society.... Not backward. Which is where EV's are going. They place limits on distance and travel time that ICE vehicles do not.
They are nothing more than an outdated idea, that is being pushed by a government that is currently led by a crop of progressive, communist idiots. Who are continuing to push a stupid ideology that works no better today, than it did a hundred years ago....
Just like the socialism / communism they so desperately want. In short, they're a bunch of slow learners. As are you and others if you support that type of stupid, failed ideology.
I don't need 1000 miles of range, but I do drive around northern Ontario quite a bit in winter and usually carry a couple of 5 gallon gas cans in addition to the ~400 mile range of the main gas tank. It only takes one gas station to be malfunctioning (eg a power outage) or closed to wreak havoc on your plans, and if there is no motel in range then it could be worse.But when do you need 1000 miles of range? When do you drive 1000 miles per day? Current 800V based cars have enough with a 10-20min charge at a fast charger (150+ kW). Many fast chargers in Europe already have a max of 350kW. 1000 miles is fun, but it's also extra weight you're carrying with you.
You keep reiterating the same talking point and acting like you're such a genius. "Hey, EVs have been available for sale for nearly two centuries but they're still only a tiny fraction of the vehicles on the road." Sounds good until you realize that's 100% wrong. Where were these mass produced EVs? The only time until fairly recently that EVs were kind of, sort of mass produced was early in the 20th century. And they might have been the only type of vehicle produced if we electrified the roads via embedded conductors instead of trying to store the energy in a battery. That's why electrification worked for railways.That will never happen, and you know it. Again, (and you seem to be having tremendous difficulty understanding this), there are only 1% of cars currently on the road that are EV's. The reason for this is because people do not want them, because they will not work for them.
Despite what you think, there are no mandates. There are incentives (i.e. subsidies). These can be phased out once EVs reach price parity with gas cars, which is happening in a matter of months.And you cannot have the government ram them down the consumers throat with forced mandates, and ending the production of ICE vehicles with time limits. Much like California wants to do. That will accomplish nothing.
Yeah, it accomplishes a lot. Those old gas-powered mail vans get something like 8.5 mpg. When you're running lots of them in dense areas it creates health and quality of life issues. In fact, running any type of ICE vehicle in these places does that. I love how you hand wave this away like it's not a problem. The EVs the USPS is buying will also save on operating costs long-term.Or by printing money to make them part of the Federal fleet. That accomplishes nothing more than "feel good" tactics that don't prove a damn thing. How my letter carrier delivers my mail has nothing to do with how much diesel it takes to move produce across this nation in 2 days.
The nice thing about EVs is you can "refuel" literally anywhere you have an outlet, which is nearly everywhere. No need to find gas stations as with ICE vehicles. Granted, recharging from a regular outlet is a lot slower than from a charging station, but we're talking about something you only might need to do in a dire emergency once in a blue moon.I don't need 1000 miles of range, but I do drive around northern Ontario quite a bit in winter and usually carry a couple of 5 gallon gas cans in addition to the ~400 mile range of the main gas tank. It only takes one gas station to be malfunctioning (eg a power outage) or closed to wreak havoc on your plans, and if there is no motel in range then it could be worse.
The hydrogen economy was/is destined to failure from day one. The laws of physics are against it. Hydrogen isn't a fuel in the sense that you mine it from the ground like oil or coal. It has to be manufactured, at great expense in energy. You only get back in a fuel cell maybe 1/3 of the energy you use making hydrogen. In essence it's a very inefficient battery. The only reason the hype has lasted this long is because big oil sees hydrogen as a way to continue its monopoly on motor fuels. Hydrogen at best would be equivalent to $5 per gallon gasoline. The general public has no interest in a $5 per gallon gasoline equivalent. Hydrogen has niche uses like grid storage. It may even have transportation uses power ships, or perhaps planes, but for ground vehicles it makes zero sense.I think it's fair to say that nobody actually hates electric cars but a lot of people (including me) hate having them forced down our throats. I am OK up to a point with government subsidizing or otherwise investing in helping transitions to happen predictably but (as an example) if our current government had their way we would be half way through transitioning to a failed hydrogen economy by now.
Electric for short/medium trips, gas car for longer trips is a perfectly viable model for now. As EV range increases, it will make less and less sense to own a gas car for those longer trips.I see electric vehicles as being a great option for large percentage of vehicle trips (almost anything in and around a city), and a decent "second vehicle" for people living out in the sticks like me, but trying to make them the only option available seems like a really bad idea, particularly in a country like Canada.
Ethanol is most likely another dead end like hydrogen. We're losing lots of farmland due to climate change. It makes more sense to use that land to grow food than to grow corn which is turned into ethanol.It's probably fair to say that we (USA and Canada) over-did the promotion of ethanol and that experience is contributing to some of the mistrust associated with EVs since it's the same people telling us what to do all over again. We had an acceptable model up here for getting ethanol production ramped up (minimum average percentage of ethanol but no requirement for all pump gas to include it) but now our government is taking that too far as well.
Now that we have ethanol production ramped up and government support in place for it, let's start doing ethanol right and start making E100 vehicles that can run efficiently on ethanol. If the government wants to help, have them spend our money on making sure that both charging stations and ethanol pumps are reliably available everywhere (eg northern Ontario and similarly sparse areas in the US) and let the market worry about getting enough chargers/pumps into places where there is high demand.
If ethanol is the end game (or at least part of it) then let's take it to its logical conclusion, where vehicles run on fully renewable fuel and you can get booze** at the gas station. Otherwise, give up on it or at least don't push things any further than they are and stop forcing me to use ethanol gas in my small engines or drive a hundred miles to buy E0.
It's mainly a handful of very vocal people who are very annoying promoting a non-meat diet. Things might go a little better for them if they started promoting things like cultured meat. Unlike veggie burgers, it's real meat, only its grown in a lab. PETA should be happy since you're not killing a sentient being. The environmentalists should be happy since it's a lot more carbon neutral than raising livestock. It also uses far less land. You can easily culture meat in cities in vertical farms, saving the huge cost of shipping.Going back to hating electric cars, I think veganism is a good analogy. Nobody hates veganism or vegans in principle, but some of the people promoting it are very annoying (hands up everyone who has been attacked for their food choices) and they give it a bad name.
I would rather invest in hydrogen, its a smarter option overall. If we aren't willing to invest in nuclear energy, our power grids will never handle the load and we will always continue to use fossil fuels to supplement. Don't get me wrong, invest in the tech to make it better. I don't think I will ever be sold on it though. Also you bring up a valid point, lots of people owning these appliances get range anxiety, which is why many truck makers are putting in range extending gas engines.I was only partly joking about the 1,000 mile range. As flashlight enthusiasts know better than muggles, there have been some pretty astonishing advances in battery technology over the last 20+ years. If electric cars ever do have 1,000 mile range and 5 minute charging times, I don’t think you’d need to force people to buy them. Although in a lot of parts of the US the power grid is not very reliable. I live in the middle of a fairly large suburb and the power went out for several days because my idiot neighbor let their dead tree fall on the power lines. I’d have been unable to get to work without a regular gas car.
Still better than destroying countries with lithium mines and having many landfills full of used batteries we cant re-use.Hydrogen takes more energy to make than it produces. It's an even worse option than EV's for the masses. Because the infrastructure to support it is even more costly and difficult to put in place.
It doesn't matter if it can't be made to work financially. Toyota has been trying desperately with their Miria program for several years now. And thus far it's been pretty much a disaster financially.Still better than destroying countries with lithium mines and having many landfills full of used batteries we cant re-use.
It doesn't mean we should stop with alternative fuels. I am just saying that if we aren't willing to invest in nuclear, I don't really see a good alternative for sustainable energy. Who knows, maybe in a few years they will work out hydrogen systems. I remember reading an article that a Mazda CEO put out saying that the MX5 would never go electric because it wasn't the same experience as an internal combustion engine and the feeling of driving one was part of the selling point. Mazda brought back a newer version of a rotary engine thats more reliable than the previous iterations of the RX7. Eventually we will have sustainable fuel systems, I just don't currently see a reason to back this fascination in the electric car move.It doesn't matter if it can't be made to work financially. Toyota has been trying desperately with their Miria program for several years now. And thus far it's been pretty much a disaster financially.
Even with subsidized fuel. Because the cars become all but worthless once the subsidies run out. Again, the fuel infrastructure is much too costly.
I don't think there is one. Certainly not hydrogen. And we have had hydrogen fuel cells since before the Gemini Program.I am just saying that if we aren't willing to invest in nuclear, I don't really see a good alternative for sustainable energy.
I don't either. The whole thing has become far more political, than it is practical.I just don't currently see a reason to back this fascination in the electric car move.
I’m a huge nuclear power fan! Hydrogen too, perhaps even metallic monoatomic hydrogen down the road.I would rather invest in hydrogen, its a smarter option overall. If we aren't willing to invest in nuclear energy, our power grids will never handle the load and we will always continue to use fossil fuels to supplement. Don't get me wrong, invest in the tech to make it better. I don't think I will ever be sold on it though. Also you bring up a valid point, lots of people owning these appliances get range anxiety, which is why many truck makers are putting in range extending gas engines.