ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Electric vehicles

Most of the energy stored in a battery pack goes towards moving the vehicle. Most of the energy stored in a gas tank is wasted as heat. There's no debate regarding this fact. Your efficiency claim is completely false. Stop lying.
All in, the energy to produce an electric car is higher than an equivalent ICE car. Drilling for oil is much less harmful to the environment and energy efficient than the vast strip mining, ruining thousands and thousands of acres of land for the raw materials for the batteries. Since we are a long way away from " renewables " being able to power the grid to the level we need it to most of the energy to charge these EV's will come from fossil fuels.
 
All in, the energy to produce an electric car is higher than an equivalent ICE car. Drilling for oil is much less harmful to the environment and energy efficient than the vast strip mining, ruining thousands and thousands of acres of land for the raw materials for the batteries. Since we are a long way away from " renewables " being able to power the grid to the level we need it to most of the energy to charge these EV's will come from fossil fuels.
Drilling for oil is not much less harmful. Why make stuff up? 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
But to Biden's credit, he did get a lot of $$$ for charging infrastructure. In my humble opinion, less should have gone to rebates, and more towards infrastructure because putting more vehicles on the road without having the infrastructure is putting the proverbial cart before the horse and a recipe for disaster. It will also foment more deniers and stone-throwers who don't want to see EV adoption succeed. From a pure technology standpoint (leaving the environmental aspects out of it), I am absolutely thrilled to have a plug-in EV in the garage and a pure EV on the way (October-November). The lack of maintenance, the power, the acceleration are all great reasons to go EV, plus the convenience of not having to go to the gas station when most of your driving is around town. Just plug your car in, and you are good to go. A lot to like and be excited about. Forget the politics. Everything is political.
Who is going to dole out that $$$ for charging infrastructure and who is going to get that money?
And while we're mentioning it. When will the $$$ start being used to build the infrastructure? And who is planning what projects this $$$ is going to be used for?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BROTHERSKINNY
Who is going to dole out that $$$ for charging infrastructure and who is going to get that money?
And while we're mentioning it. When will the $$$ start being used to build the infrastructure? And who is planning what projects this $$$ is going to be used for?
Those are all really good questions that deserve answers from the government. If it is like a lot of things the government "does," we may never know.
 
Most of the energy stored in a battery pack goes towards moving the vehicle. Most of the energy stored in a gas tank is wasted as heat. There's no debate regarding this fact. Your efficiency claim is completely false. Stop lying.
Case in point and very easily verified...
FZ98l8eXgAAwwoo

FZ98l8fX0AErtR8

...and once again, bigly and sadly relevant for the posters saying otherwise (since the oil industry generating the nonsense is nervous AF)...
Fb8pTQrXwAA2ZXt
 
  • Like
Reactions: RUMED
Drilling for oil is not much less harmful. Why make stuff up? 😂
It is less harmful. the infrastructure for an oil rig takes up less than 1 acre. To strip mine the raw materials for batteries takes thousands of acres and tearing apart the earth. Oil, as an energy source is much less environmentally impactful than mining for batteries which has no energy production capability. ICE cars are much more environmentally friendly than battery operated vehicles.
 
It is less harmful. the infrastructure for an oil rig takes up less than 1 acre. To strip mine the raw materials for batteries takes thousands of acres and tearing apart the earth. Oil, as an energy source is much less environmentally impactful than mining for batteries which has no energy production capability. ICE cars are much more environmentally friendly than battery operated vehicles.
Did you consider the refining process as well as the transportation/distribution of all of the refined byproducts?
 
Case in point and very easily verified...
FZ98l8eXgAAwwoo

FZ98l8fX0AErtR8

...and once again, bigly and sadly relevant for the posters saying otherwise (since the oil industry generating the nonsense is nervous AF)...
Fb8pTQrXwAA2ZXt
Leaving out insults to the Orange one may help foster a more reasonable discussion. But then again, with some of these folks, it may not, because they could be hopelessly brainwashed. But leaving Orange and hats out of the discussion makes the ones on the correct side of this debate to be better.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: BROTHERSKINNY
Did you consider the refining process as well as the transportation/distribution of all of the refined byproducts?
Eliminate gasoline and diesel and you still have a large number of refined byproducts. You still have to drill to get them.
If you eliminate the gas & diesel what do you have left? Can you refine a barrel of oil and not produce any gasoline and diesel, only the other byproducts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Knight Shift
Did you consider the refining process as well as the transportation/distribution of all of the refined byproducts?
Refining Crude oil is a fairly simple and energy efficient process compared to the amount of energy required to refine base minerals into a functioning battery. I'm glad you brought this up. Also virtually 100% of raw crude is refined down into component products whereas making batteries out of raw minerals leaves a huge amount material that cannot be used for anything so huge piles of toxic tailings are left behind. So devastating to the environment.
 
Leaving insults to the Orange one may help foster a more reasonable discussion. But then again, with some of these folks, it may not, because they could be hopelessly brainwashed. But leaving Orange and hats out of the discussion makes the ones on the correct side of this debate to be better.
I used to take the high road only. And as a teacher, when I discuss this all as a part of my planetary science and environmental science teaching gigs, I still do. But growing up and living in the "Pretty Much Alabama" part of southern NJ beyond exit 2, I've come to learn that all the tough talk from the Orange and his fanatics only makes headway when it's met in kind. The debunking facts on a millions issues have been available to all for a long time at this point.
The time is up for those in voluntary seclusion in an echo chamber with alternate facts. I've discovered that the only thing that flushes them out at this point is an appeal to their desire to not be on the losing side where they look foolish. If they still won't budge, they are already lost.
 
I used to take the high road only. And as a teacher, when I discuss this all as a part of my planetary science and environmental science teaching gigs, I still do. But growing up and living in the "Pretty Much Alabama" part of southern NJ beyond exit 2, I've come to learn that all the tough talk from the Orange and his fanatics only makes headway when it's met in kind. The debunking facts on a millions issues have been available to all for a long time at this point.
The time is up for those in voluntary seclusion in an echo chamber with alternate facts. I've discovered that the only thing that flushes them out at this point is an appeal to their desire to not be on the losing side where they look foolish. If they still won't budge, they are already lost.
Thank you. Notice the "climate change is a hoax" crowd has seemed to disappear. Too embarrassed to reveal themselves now. I suppose the same will happen as we progress more towards sustainable energy and electric transport.
 
I used to take the high road only. And as a teacher, when I discuss this all as a part of my planetary science and environmental science teaching gigs, I still do. But growing up and living in the "Pretty Much Alabama" part of southern NJ beyond exit 2, I've come to learn that all the tough talk from the Orange and his fanatics only makes headway when it's met in kind. The debunking facts on a millions issues have been available to all for a long time at this point.
The time is up for those in voluntary seclusion in an echo chamber with alternate facts. I've discovered that the only thing that flushes them out at this point is an appeal to their desire to not be on the losing side where they look foolish. If they still won't budge, they are already lost.
Every situation is different. Have encountered similar echo chambers regarding people and LGBTQ issues. Having several LGBTQ family members and close friends, I have found that taking the high road and ignoring unwarranted vitriol can yield better results than raising the temperature of the discussion.
But back to the topic, Skinny may have a few valid points in there. It is something I wonder about with regard to the environmental cost of mining and the impact on mother earth. But skinny's presentation comes across a little too much rambling and no sources to back up his claims.
 
Thank you. Notice the "climate change is a hoax" crowd has seemed to disappear. Too embarrassed to reveal themselves now. I suppose the same will happen as we progress more towards sustainable energy and electric transport.
I'm not fully on board with the Greta and the cow-farting climate change crowd. As with all things, the extreme ends foment further division and stupid arguments. The truth lies somewhere in between those extremes.
 
But to Biden's credit, he did get a lot of $$$ for charging infrastructure. In my humble opinion, less should have gone to rebates, and more towards infrastructure because putting more vehicles on the road without having the infrastructure is putting the proverbial cart before the horse and a recipe for disaster. It will also foment more deniers and stone-throwers who don't want to see EV adoption succeed. From a pure technology standpoint (leaving the environmental aspects out of it), I am absolutely thrilled to have a plug-in EV in the garage and a pure EV on the way (October-November). The lack of maintenance, the power, the acceleration are all great reasons to go EV, plus the convenience of not having to go to the gas station when most of your driving is around town. Just plug your car in, and you are good to go. A lot to like and be excited about. Forget the politics. Everything is political.
Yep, agree with all that.
 
I used to take the high road only. And as a teacher, when I discuss this all as a part of my planetary science and environmental science teaching gigs, I still do. But growing up and living in the "Pretty Much Alabama" part of southern NJ beyond exit 2, I've come to learn that all the tough talk from the Orange and his fanatics only makes headway when it's met in kind. The debunking facts on a millions issues have been available to all for a long time at this point.
The time is up for those in voluntary seclusion in an echo chamber with alternate facts. I've discovered that the only thing that flushes them out at this point is an appeal to their desire to not be on the losing side where they look foolish. If they still won't budge, they are already lost.
President Trump and most of us see the disaster the democrats are setting us up for. Germany is at Putins mercy and President Trump is the one who told them that they would be. Just like them forcing electric vehicles on everyone the country is not prepared and does not have the infrastructure to supply enough electric for everyone. Just take a look at democrat run California where they are begging people not to charge their EV's. You morons may want to live without air conditioning or light but I and most Americans don't. Its time to get rid of the democrat cancer in 2022 and bring back President Trump in 2024.

Germans Laughed When Trump Warned Against Reliance on Russian Energy; ‘They’re Not Laughing Now’​


https://cnsnews.com/article/interna...ed-when-trump-warned-against-reliance-russian
 
Agree. It's sickening (but not surprising) that EVs are being weaponized/politicized.
It’s troubling, but not sickening. Sickening is a mom that kills her little kids. Or a priest that molests children. Or other truly awful stuff like that.

The habit of politicians and special interests making everything political isn’t sickening; it‘s entirely predictable and, from the standpoint of a politician, even sensible. It’s up to the electorate to refuse to play along, a “skill” many, even most in the electorate, have not developed seeing as how we keep re-electing the same people.
 
I used to take the high road only. And as a teacher, when I discuss this all as a part of my planetary science and environmental science teaching gigs, I still do. But growing up and living in the "Pretty Much Alabama" part of southern NJ beyond exit 2, I've come to learn that all the tough talk from the Orange and his fanatics only makes headway when it's met in kind. The debunking facts on a millions issues have been available to all for a long time at this point.
The time is up for those in voluntary seclusion in an echo chamber with alternate facts. I've discovered that the only thing that flushes them out at this point is an appeal to their desire to not be on the losing side where they look foolish. If they still won't budge, they are already lost.

I have to agree with this. I think that scientists in particular have been too slow and ineffective in responding to some of the more absurd claims over the years - going back the No-Nothing Party (yes, there was such a thing), the Scopes Trial, seat belts don't save lives, smoking cigarettes doesn't cause cancer, climate change is a hoax, etc, etc. Not saying anything gives the nutjobs the free space to keep making dumb and outlandish claims. Science education must be a never-ending process.
 
Thank you. Notice the "climate change is a hoax" crowd has seemed to disappear. Too embarrassed to reveal themselves now. I suppose the same will happen as we progress more towards sustainable energy and electric transport.

They are still there. But people are seeing the real effects of climate change now - the heat waves across the globe, forest fires, cycles of droughts and fires and floods. This is a never-ending fight.

 
They are still there. But people are seeing the real effects of climate change now - the heat waves across the globe, forest fires, cycles of droughts and fires and floods. This is a never-ending fight.

And these events haven't been going on for Millenia?
 
I'm not fully on board with the Greta and the cow-farting climate change crowd. As with all things, the extreme ends foment further division and stupid arguments. The truth lies somewhere in between those extremes.
Don't forget Knight Shift, this is the same crowd that wants us eating bugs because it is more environmentally friendly!

The United Nations Democrats Wants Us All to Start Eating Bugs​


The world is expected to be populated by a whopping 9 billion people by 2050, and between overfishing and climate change, it's gonna be kinda hard to come up with enough food for all those hungry mouths. So the U.N. thinks they've stumbled upon a novel solution: We all need to learn to love the taste of bugs.

In a new report released by the global body's Food and Agriculture Organization, the U.N also makes the case that bug eating can help us slim down and fight malnutrition in developing countries. They break down the reasons for eating bugs into three main categories: health, environmental, and economic/social:

• Health:
- Insects are healthy, nutritious alternatives to mainstream staples such as chicken, pork, beef and even fish (from ocean catch).
- Many insects are rich in protein and good fats and high in calcium, iron and zinc.
- Insects already form a traditional part of many regional and national diets.
• Environmental:
- Insects promoted as food emit considerably fewer greenhouse gases (GHGs) than most livestock (methane, for instance, is produced by only a few insect groups, such as termites and cockroaches).
- Insect rearing is not necessarily a land-based activity and does not require land clearing to expand production. Feed is the major requirement for land.
- The ammonia emissions associated with insect rearing are also far lower than those linked to conventional livestock, such as pigs.
- Because they are cold-blooded, insects are very efficient at converting feed into protein (crickets, for example, need 12 times less feed than cattle, four times less feed than sheep, and half as much feed as pigs and broiler chickens to produce the same amount of protein).
- Insects can be fed on organic waste streams.

https://news.yahoo.com/united-nations-wants-us-start-eating-bugs-233751418.html
 
Refining Crude oil is a fairly simple and energy efficient process compared to the amount of energy required to refine base minerals into a functioning battery. I'm glad you brought this up. Also virtually 100% of raw crude is refined down into component products whereas making batteries out of raw minerals leaves a huge amount material that cannot be used for anything so huge piles of toxic tailings are left behind. So devastating to the environment.
One lie after another. All of a sudden you're concerned about the environment? Yeah right. You're just parroting the latest garbage from your team. Whatever democrats do is bad. Whatever your side does is good. We get it. Highly intellectual . Take your garbage to the CE cesspool.
 
One lie after another. All of a sudden you're concerned about the environment? Yeah right. You're just parroting the latest garbage from your team. Whatever democrats do is bad. Whatever your side does is good. We get it. Highly intellectual . Take your garbage to the CE cesspool.
No lies, just facts. The democrats use environmental issues as a wedge to divide us. Just like they use race, religion and sex to divide us.
I have studied the climate change issue for close to two decades and I see absolutely no concrete evidence that it exists. Of course, the democrats will use any weather anomaly to advance the cause because they are fvcking liars but that is besides the point. Weather changes daily, even hourly. because we have a few higher than average hot days during summer and a little less rainfall for a few months that is the democrats "proof" that cliI dmate change exists. I have seen photos of coastal areas that they take a picture and compare it to a picture from over 100 years ago. Guess what? there has been no noticeable movement in the mean tide line in well over 100 years all during the climate crisis that democrats have been telling us has been happening since the early 1970's. Other so called evidence like coral reef shrinkage have been proven to be BS.
The facts of the matter are "climate change" only exists in the minds of sheep who have been brainwashed that it is a thing and they cannot bring themselves to change their position because they are so invested in the narrative.
 
Last edited:
No lies, just facts. The democrats use environmental issues as a wedge to divide us. Just like they use race, religion and sex to divide us.
I have studied the climate change issue for close to two decades and I see absolutely no concrete evidence that it exists. Of course, the democrats will use any weather anomaly to advance the cause because they are fvcking liars but that is besides the point. Weather changes daily, even hourly. because we have a few higher than average hot days during summer and a little less rainfall for a few months that is the democrats "proof" that cliI dmate change exists. I have seen photos of coastal areas that they take a picture and compare it to a picture from over 100 years ago. Guess what? there has been no noticeable movement in the mean tide line in well over 100 years all during the climate crisis that democrats have been telling us has been happening since the early 1970's. Other so called evidence like coral reef shrinkage have been proven to be BS.
The facts of the matter are "climate change" only exists in the minds of sheep who have been brainwashed that it is a thing and they cannot bring themselves to change their position because they are so invested in the narrative.

Your particular breed of beyond-hyperpartisan bullshit doesn't hold any weight here. Even most combatative republos recognize that climate change exists. You're spewing nonsense even your team thinks is stupid.

EVs are coming. Get used to it.
 
No lies, just facts. The democrats use environmental issues as a wedge to divide us. Just like they use race, religion and sex to divide us.
I have studied the climate change issue for close to two decades and I see absolutely no concrete evidence that it exists. Of course, the democrats will use any weather anomaly to advance the cause because they are fvcking liars but that is besides the point. Weather changes daily, even hourly. because we have a few higher than average hot days during summer and a little less rainfall for a few months that is the democrats "proof" that cliI dmate change exists. I have seen photos of coastal areas that they take a picture and compare it to a picture from over 100 years ago. Guess what? there has been no noticeable movement in the mean tide line in well over 100 years all during the climate crisis that democrats have been telling us has been happening since the early 1970's. Other so called evidence like coral reef shrinkage have been proven to be BS.
The facts of the matter are "climate change" only exists in the minds of sheep who have been brainwashed that it is a thing and they cannot bring themselves to change their position because they are so invested in the narrative.
Twilight zone post
 
No lies, just facts. The democrats use environmental issues as a wedge to divide us. Just like they use race, religion and sex to divide us.
I have studied the climate change issue for close to two decades and I see absolutely no concrete evidence that it exists. Of course, the democrats will use any weather anomaly to advance the cause because they are fvcking liars but that is besides the point. Weather changes daily, even hourly. because we have a few higher than average hot days during summer and a little less rainfall for a few months that is the democrats "proof" that cliI dmate change exists. I have seen photos of coastal areas that they take a picture and compare it to a picture from over 100 years ago. Guess what? there has been no noticeable movement in the mean tide line in well over 100 years all during the climate crisis that democrats have been telling us has been happening since the early 1970's. Other so called evidence like coral reef shrinkage have been proven to be BS.
The facts of the matter are "climate change" only exists in the minds of sheep who have been brainwashed that it is a thing and they cannot bring themselves to change their position because they are so invested in the narrative.
please post links to your peer reviewed "studies".
 
Every situation is different. Have encountered similar echo chambers regarding people and LGBTQ issues. Having several LGBTQ family members and close friends, I have found that taking the high road and ignoring unwarranted vitriol can yield better results than raising the temperature of the discussion.
But back to the topic, Skinny may have a few valid points in there. It is something I wonder about with regard to the environmental cost of mining and the impact on mother earth. But skinny's presentation comes across a little too much rambling and no sources to back up his claims.
I think you are missing my point on the evolution of my approach that I've already been through. I tried to use my livelihood of science and years of reading real peer-reviewed climatology to explain to many how we know definitively the skyrocketing carbon dioxide is all ours (not from volcanoes or other natural sources) and how none of the natural warming factors of the past have/had any significance over the past 200 years when the observed warming has been 10X faster than at any other time in history when Earth emerged from ice ages, all during our exponentially growing love affair with fossil fuels.
Where it got me: Labeled more as a pansy, wimpy, elitist egghead that was somehow parroting bull from the Soros-funded crowd.
I have found that since switching to a more "in your face" approach by mocking their easily-debunked propaganda (while accompanying the mockery with real science), since that paradigm mimics the "tough talk" they admire so much from their demagogue, people listen longer. It's still a minority that do but perhaps combined with the observable droughts, flooding, etc., it just works.
 
Last edited:
Your particular breed of beyond-hyperpartisan bullshit doesn't hold any weight here. Even most combatative republos recognize that climate change exists. You're spewing nonsense even your team thinks is stupid.

EVs are coming. Get used to it.
The country’s not ready for it. Typical of how democrats operate force people to do something before thinking through consequences. We know how democrats operate. No bail, which democrats supported now we have out of control crime and tent cities. Illegal immigration which democrats support now we have millions of unvetted illegals filtering into the country. California mandating electric cars by 2035 they do not have the infrastructure to support it, now has rolling blackouts. Democrats are the disaster our country cannot afford.
 
The country’s not ready for it. Typical of how democrats operate force people to do something before thinking through consequences. We know how democrats operate. No bail, which democrats supported now we have out of control crime and tent cities. Illegal immigration which democrats support now we have millions of unvetted illegals filtering into the country. California mandating electric cars by 2035 they do not have the infrastructure to support it, now has rolling blackouts. Democrats are the disaster our country cannot afford.
Hey dummy, electrified transport was well underway under Trump. Something tells me if Trump's campaign funds came from EV manufacturers, and he was singing their praises, you'd have a garage full of them.

Your shtick is old and transparent. You're not conning anyone here.
 
Hey dummy, electrified transport was well underway under Trump. Something tells me if Trump's campaign funds came from EV manufacturers, and he was singing their praises, you'd have a garage full of them.

Your shtick is old and transparent. You're not conning anyone here.
Stick this in your pipe and smoke it.
Xq63AhuapOdITpdF.png
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT