[M550bernina]

Originally Posted by 2022M550i

They do suck….but i’m ok if you want own one…dont shove that shit down my throat.

No one can show me an analysis as to exactly when all this change to EV’s is going to help the environment. Not one. Specifically when is the globe going to start cooling? When is the climate going to stop changing? How much is all this going to reduce the global carbon emissions? Not one study. It’s a bunch of horseshit.

Where I come from, if you make an investment, you need to have a measurable outcome. There is nothing to measure in this instance.

Two of the most populated cities in the country are Chicago and New York. You cannot use electric vehicles in either one of these cities.

[Bob in IL]

Originally Posted by M550bernina

Two of the most populated cities in the country are Chicago and New York. You cannot use electric vehicles in either one of these cities.

Why can't they be used in these two cities?

[2022M550i]

Ha ha ha ha! Climate emergency! The “scientists” need to make up their minds. Some “logical” folk weren’t born yet when they were peddling the upcoming ice age. NASA and all the “top” scientists were on board. “Follow the science”. Same dog different fleas all througout the 70’s….but 180 degrees different from what were hearing today. I guess Mother nature had different plans.


https://youtu.be/NQSBn50o_8M

[2022M550i]

Does anyone remember the blackout in 2003? This is the issue i have with one energy source….any of our adversaries can have a field day with our grid…crippling our country with a few targeted strikes. This one flew over the Logical ones head. We’re a country of reactive/tunnel vision problem solvers….we need to get hit in he head to know it hurts.

These moron dem politicians and a good portion of our country think its okay to rely on electricity for everything in the name of saving the climate. Take a deep breath and just think about this. Everything electric.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northe...ackout_of_2003

[2022M550i]

https://youtu.be/5jBkoEM0SSE

[M550bernina]

Originally Posted by Bob in IL

Why can't they be used in these two cities?

A better question would be "how could they"?

If you think about it and you're familiar with either City, you would understand?

I'll speak to Chicago as I grew up there (Southwest side). New York speaks for itself as it doesn't even have allies like Chicago does.

A lot of the household can't afford electric cars, but if they can afford an entry level, they need to buy a 220 volt charger. Now hopefully they can afford an electrician to run power for the 220 volt charger.

Next hurdle, even if you could afford an entry level EV and the charger and the electrician hook it all up...you can never charge your car. Why you ask? Because there's no way to get to the charger.

Yes Chicago has alleys to get to their garages, but very few people use their garages to park their car they're for storage. It is too difficult to pull down these alleys and get in and out of a garage and in the winter you can't even use the alleys.

So most people park on the street and a lot of times they can't even park in front of their own house.

Brings me back to the reason that these cities can't have electric vehicles unless they're self charging, there is no way to charge the vehicles.

What do you do with all of the apartments in these major cities, none of those people can have electric vehicles. Again where are they going to charge them?

That's why the EV zero carbon is a scam just like climate change green is a scam.

I'm sorry I shouldn't say scam, it's a business. What do businesses do to create new revenue, you invent things, that's why we see new food on the shelves new products to buy. The financial industry is the same exact way, they have to invent new sectors.

Voila... Electric vehicles and climate change.

[Bob in IL]

Originally Posted by M550bernina

A better question would be "how could they"?

If you think about it and you're familiar with either City, you would understand?

I'll speak to Chicago as I grew up there (Southwest side). New York speaks for itself as it doesn't even have allies like Chicago does.

A lot of the household can't afford electric cars, but if they can afford an entry level, they need to buy a 220 volt charger. Now hopefully they can afford an electrician to run power for the 220 volt charger.

Next hurdle, even if you could afford an entry level EV and the charger and the electrician hook it all up...you can never charge your car. Why you ask? Because there's no way to get to the charger.

Yes Chicago has alleys to get to their garages, but very few people use their garages to park their car they're for storage. It is too difficult to pull down these alleys and get in and out of a garage and in the winter you can't even use the alleys.

So most people park on the street and a lot of times they can't even park in front of their own house.

Brings me back to the reason that these cities can't have electric vehicles unless they're self charging, there is no way to charge the vehicles.

What do you do with all of the apartments in these major cities, none of those people can have electric vehicles. Again where are they going to charge them?

That's why the EV zero carbon is a scam just like climate change green is a scam.

I'm sorry I shouldn't say scam, it's a business. What do businesses do to create new revenue, you invent things, that's why we see new food on the shelves new products to buy. The financial industry is the same exact way, they have to invent new sectors.

Voila... Electric vehicles and climate change.

I don't really care too much one way or another about the conversion to EV's. I think for the foreseeable future there will be a market for both ICE and EV's.

Regarding EV's in the city there already are public chargers (Superchargers, Electrify America etc.) where one could charge before going home (like gas stations) if they can't do it at home). The Chicago area suburban population is far greater than the city so people who need to drive into the city for work or play can charge at home or public charger and be good to go.

Personally, I'm not too keen on the conversion to EV's but I'm not losing any sleep over it either.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by 2022M550i

Ha ha ha ha! Climate emergency! The “scientists” need to make up their minds. Some “logical” folk weren’t born yet when they were peddling the upcoming ice age. NASA and all the “top” scientists were on board. “Follow the science”. Same dog different fleas all througout the 70’s….but 180 degrees different from what were hearing today. I guess Mother nature had different plans.


https://youtu.be/NQSBn50o_8M

Originally Posted by 2022M550i

Does anyone remember the blackout in 2003? This is the issue i have with one energy source….any of our adversaries can have a field day with our grid…crippling our country with a few targeted strikes. This one flew over the Logical ones head. We’re a country of reactive/tunnel vision problem solvers….we need to get hit in he head to know it hurts.

These moron dem politicians and a good portion of our country think its okay to rely on electricity for everything in the name of saving the climate. Take a deep breath and just think about this. Everything electric.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northe...ackout_of_2003

Since you’re so old. I’m going to assume you remember the oil shocks of the 1970s. Caused by America being cut off from oil in the Middle East by things like the Iranian Revolution.

I guess you were refining your own gas so you didn’t get impacted by it? Or you’re also too young to know what that means?

I also remember the NE Blackout of 2003. I was in Canada at the time and thought it was quite something that the whole NE was knocked out, but if I were home in Philadelphia it would have been fine. The grid operator covering Philly was smart enough to keep the city alive and everything around it was blacked out. Like the city on a hill (it was the nation’s original capital and all!)

You can create electricity in countless ways that are available to consumers. Many have gas generators, and ones running on natural gas, alongside solar generation and countless other ways of surviving a downed grid. Power companies also have numerous ways to generate grid electricity. Gas can only be created from Oil and it has to be refined in a refinery before you can burn it in your car.

So I’ll assume you’re being intentionally obtuse as I can’t imagine you’re incapable of understanding this.

Originally Posted by M550bernina

A better question would be "how could they"?

If you think about it and you're familiar with either City, you would understand?

I'll speak to Chicago as I grew up there (Southwest side). New York speaks for itself as it doesn't even have allies like Chicago does.

A lot of the household can't afford electric cars, but if they can afford an entry level, they need to buy a 220 volt charger. Now hopefully they can afford an electrician to run power for the 220 volt charger.

Next hurdle, even if you could afford an entry level EV and the charger and the electrician hook it all up...you can never charge your car. Why you ask? Because there's no way to get to the charger.

Yes Chicago has alleys to get to their garages, but very few people use their garages to park their car they're for storage. It is too difficult to pull down these alleys and get in and out of a garage and in the winter you can't even use the alleys.

So most people park on the street and a lot of times they can't even park in front of their own house.

Brings me back to the reason that these cities can't have electric vehicles unless they're self charging, there is no way to charge the vehicles.

What do you do with all of the apartments in these major cities, none of those people can have electric vehicles. Again where are they going to charge them?

That's why the EV zero carbon is a scam just like climate change green is a scam.

I'm sorry I shouldn't say scam, it's a business. What do businesses do to create new revenue, you invent things, that's why we see new food on the shelves new products to buy. The financial industry is the same exact way, they have to invent new sectors.

Voila... Electric vehicles and climate change.

Less than 30% of the population of NYC owns a car. Most of the cars in NYC are coming from people driving into the city from surrounding suburbs. I lived in South Philly where car parking could be a serious challenge. Cities will have unique challenges for charging infrastructure, but not impossible ones. You can place chargers inexpensively on city streets by building them on the utility poles holding up the electric wiring or other creative solutions.

Would that solve every challenge to electric cars in a city? No. Will there be some that are unsolvable? Yes. Car ownership in cities isn’t a solved problem irrespective of the fuel source.

Hence why less than 30% of NYC has one…

What electric cars will do for cities as large as NYC, Chicago, and Philadelphia is dramatically improve air quality as pollution levels go down.

We’d need less “tricks” like ethanol based gasoline and Auto Start Stop as a result…

[Mike 540]

I have read about studies performed in Norway comparing carbon trace throughout the life of a Tesla car and a VW Touareg with 6 valve diesel engine. And guess what - the VW was cleaner and they still did not include the carbon trace of electricity produced to charge the Tesla.
Besides - And that sucks the most, why does the "developed West" pay so much to reduce carbon emissions, making cars more expensive by adding things like start/stop system which people usually hate when the rest of the world (China, India, Africa, South America, etc) just does not care...?? EVs to me are a political project which will cost all taxpayers a lot of money before people realize that given the current state of technology there is only a limited room for EVs. Limitless subsidies are only making things worse.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by Mike 540

I have read about studies performed in Norway comparing carbon trace throughout the life of a Tesla car and a VW Touareg with 6 valve diesel engine. And guess what - the VW was cleaner and they still did not include the carbon trace of electricity produced to charge the Tesla.
Besides - And that sucks the most, why does the "developed West" pay so much to reduce carbon emissions, making cars more expensive by adding things like start/stop system which people usually hate when the rest of the world (China, India, Africa, South America, etc) just does not care...?? EVs to me are a political project which will cost all taxpayers a lot of money before people realize that given the current state of technology there is only a limited room for EVs. Limitless subsidies are only making things worse.

Auto Start Stop is about improving air quality in congested areas. So our cities don't have pollution that makes them dark as night. Like China has now and we used to have in the 1970s.

I also wouldn't use China as a barometer in this area. They don't respect their population as we'd expect. Hence why they intentionally flooded a town during heavy rains without warning for its residents.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-66391331

As I said earlier, there are reasonable debates around EV technology, but improving the lives of the population from less pollution and climate damage aren't really one of them. No one should be against those things.

[Mike 540]

Start/Stop is more of a trick than a real thing. European Comission has been exerting pressure on pollution reduction which is not supported by current status of technology in automotive. Hence, given the method of measurement of consumption/pollutants the car makers invented this trick saving 0,1 litres/100 km. For the sake of this, different batteries had to be invented, starters had to be redesigned and management system had to be put into cars. The cars are now less reliable (due to more complications in them) and more expensive than in not so distant past. A responsible driver can achieve far greater saving in fuel (hence pollution) than what is achieved simply by adding this system in cars.
I am using China, India as an example of countries with far more people than in Europe. If "a few" Europeans pay more money for less reliable cars achieving negligible amount of pollution, on a worlds scale this aing going to change much until more populated countries do not adopt the same attitude. Pollution, unfortunately, does not respect borders of countries nor of continents. When the most electrical power is made by burning coal (like in Chinam but also in Europe), what sense does all this have? In my opinion, it is not about ecology at all. And EVs are an example on non-environmentally friendy product (given the current status of technology). They do not live long and they consume power that needs to be made (up to a great extent) by burning coal. Where is the ecology??? It seems to me like a joke rather than a responsible behaviour.
Do not get me wrong, I am not against EVs, but I think that as a second car in a family which is used for short drives in the city this is a way to go. But I would hate to depend on an EV as the only car. For me a car means a freedom to go wherever I want to and whenever I want to. EVs are not up to this yet. Maybe artificial fuels developed in Germany or hydrogen powered cars will be the way to go, who knows?

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by LogicalApex

Auto Start Stop is about improving air quality in congested areas. So our cities don't have pollution that makes them dark as night. Like China has now and we used to have in the 1970s.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by Mike 540

Start/Stop is more of a trick than a real thing. European Comission has been exerting pressure on pollution reduction which is not supported by current status of technology in automotive. Hence, given the method of measurement of consumption/pollutants the car makers invented this trick saving 0,1 litres/100 km. For the sake of this, different batteries had to be invented, starters had to be redesigned and management system had to be put into cars. The cars are now less reliable (due to more complications in them) and more expensive than in not so distant past. A responsible driver can achieve far greater saving in fuel (hence pollution) than what is achieved simply by adding this system in cars.
I am using China, India as an example of countries with far more people than in Europe. If "a few" Europeans pay more money for less reliable cars achieving negligible amount of pollution, on a worlds scale this aing going to change much until more populated countries do not adopt the same attitude. Pollution, unfortunately, does not respect borders of countries nor of continents. When the most electrical power is made by burning coal (like in Chinam but also in Europe), what sense does all this have? In my opinion, it is not about ecology at all. And EVs are an example on non-environmentally friendy product (given the current status of technology). They do not live long and they consume power that needs to be made (up to a great extent) by burning coal. Where is the ecology??? It seems to me like a joke rather than a responsible behaviour.
Do not get me wrong, I am not against EVs, but I think that as a second car in a family which is used for short drives in the city this is a way to go. But I would hate to depend on an EV as the only car. For me a car means a freedom to go wherever I want to and whenever I want to. EVs are not up to this yet. Maybe artificial fuels developed in Germany or hydrogen powered cars will be the way to go, who knows?

A lot to unpack here...

Where do you find data that the cars are less reliable due to Auto Start Stop? I don't see many posts around here citing starter failures. It seems like the starters are handling the load well...

But, your way of using the developing world again is strange, at minimum. It is an oddly fatalistic view of the world. "Well since we can't stop everyone from committing crimes, there is no sense in trying to prevent any crime" or said another, more accurate way, "In China workers sleep at the factory and there are little to no labor laws. No sense having labor laws or worker protections in America since China doesn't have any". Those points are equally as silly.

But the icing no the cake is China actually has more a more aggressive push for EVs than the west and are rapidly building the infrastructure to support them. They are the largest market for EVs in the world. All while having cities that make large cities in the West look like small towns.

https://insideevs.com/news/673561/ch...ev-incentives/

The "ecology" of shifting pollution generation from the vehicle to the power plant is you can make the power plant more efficient or run on greener technology and instantly "upgrade" the vehicles. Unlike needing to wait for cars to age and die off as once sold the engine will never be upgraded in that specific car.

Lastly, EVs are rapidly getting into affordable categories. Chevy sells an EV that's under $30K brand new BEFORE tax incentives in the US ($20K after tax incentives). That's extremely affordable for a brand new car off the lot. They'll even throw in a free Level 2 charger being installed in your home, including paying the electrician to install it!

https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/bolt-euv

https://www.chevrolet.com/electric/l...g-installation

As I said earlier, there is lots of room to debate the technologies themselves. Their current shortcomings and if we'll ever overcome them. If those technologies will have other issues and their impacts. There is no need to look at it from a fatalistic viewpoint. That any change is a lost cause and we should just accept cars will never change... You can take that view, but society will move beyond you and you'll be like the guy who waxes poetic about the joys of the deep and powerful bond you build with your horse and how cars will never be as good... Tech marches on. The future marches into view. It doesn't need your permission to do so.

[2022M550i]

Originally Posted by SonD

Meanwhile - over this side of the pond, our PM pushes for greater expansion of what oil is left around our shores, oddly, just before his farther in laws firm gets a huge contract with BP - go figure.

If we do not push forward with battery tech (massive advances are happening, it's scaling them for mass production that is the more difficult part) - then I guess we get to see the world burn instead.
YMMV of course.

get the popcorn out! I respectfully disagree with your view regarding the world burning. We can all be adults and disagree with one another… my rant is not geared towards you. Perhaps it can help shed some light from another point of view…. from a measly old engineer and mathematician.

calculate the volume of atmosphere we have on our earth. The amount of volume is staggering. We’re not going to burn, we’re not gonna destroy the Earth. It is estimated that the average temperature when the dinosaurs roamed the Earth was in the 90° range, in Fahrenheit. Today it’s around 62°. people need to relax. There’s no evidence out there saying that increasing temperature is going to be detrimental to the human race. We see more climate events today because of the 24/7 news cycle. Over the past 50 years we have managed to build communities in places that there weren’t communities before. Right up against a volcano, on a low level island that is basically a sandbar, right in the middle of tornado alley. So of course we’re going to see these tragedies.

The Climate change emergency is comparable to me going swimming in a lake, while swimming, I accidentally ingested some water. Now I have to go to the emergency room to get my stomach pumped because i know someone with leprosy pissed in the lake. Ridiculous.

Unfortunately people that aren’t savvy in advanced math have been convinced that the world coming to an end. This is impossible to predict. Fluid mechanic modeling is shaky at best. They pushed another ice age in the 70s… I lived it, I have an outstanding memory, but now they try to say its misinformation, the ice age information that I am referring to was a myth created by anti-climate change people. Are you fucking kidding me? There’s tons of video evidence of these assholes crying there was going to be another ice age. All the scientists, NASA we’re on board with this theory. Now we do 180° change. So of course, me being an inquisitive person, all this stuff leaves me to be skeptical. Very skeptical.

The one time I think positive, that the world is not going to come to an end, all these people that called me negative over the years are now all of a sudden calling me nuts and not positive. All the so-called positive people are being negative. If you have a strong mathematical background, start crunching the little data that we have to come to your own conclusion.

To put it simply, There is not enough data to extrapolate out our climate future. This rock we live on has been around for billions of years. You’ll need tens of millions of years worth of data points to accurately extrapolate our future. Doing so with a very high confidence level. Mother nature will be self-correcting.

In my opinion,It boils down to one thing. The globalist elitists want to have more control over the population. This is easier to do when you push everyone onto one energy source. This will help with their wealth redistribution modeling. Our brilliant leadership has passed laws in May that are re-distributing wealth through the mortgage system. People with good credit, now have to pay higher interest rates allowing people with bad credit to obtain loans. Most Americans don’t even know this because the media will not talk about it. We already have wealth redistribution through our phone carriers and Internet services. Look at the line items on your bills, you’re paying for someone else’s Internet through tax. The next step is to put everyone on electricity so the “wealthy” (that’s me) pick up the electrical tab for the poor in this country. They are already exploring this model in California. So when everyone’s on electricity, it’s very simple to re-distribute their wealth…. Control through smoke and mirrors. Wealthy will pay for the electricity for the poor. This is not fiction. As I pointed we are doing this in many different shapes already as I pointed out.

There is no climate emergency. We have the left pushing a social justice agenda. It’s as simple as that. And for those of you that think this is ridiculous there is no misinformation or propaganda happening…” that’s impossible to do”, “they’re not gonna pull the wool over my eyes”, answer this question.….Do you think the German citizens willingly hosted the holocaust during World War II? Hell no they didn’t. Joseph Goebbels, the propaganda minister, controlled the message to the German public. They subsidized radios so every home can have a radio, so they could push the propaganda into every German home. They controled the newspapers, they controled the messaging in the theaters. This is no different than what we are observing today but for different reasons. Go ahead laugh, Laugh at your peril. Hopefully I’ll be near dead and gone when this really starts taking shape.

I am not some conspiracy theory whack job. Please don’t be sheep and please take the time to listen to all news networks so you can deduce some sort of truth. Even if it’s news you don’t want to hear or don’t agree with. If you have any sort of intellect, you will be shocked what main stream is not covering. Shocked. Regardless whether or not the news network tells you what you want to hear, listen to it all.

We have the main stream media outlets here not even talking about certain politician corruption going on… politicians creating many shell companies and having foreign entities depositing millions of dollars into these accounts. I worked very hard for my millions, over a lifetime. These fuckers get it over two years? Hunter Biden, IQ of 50, has nothing to offer these foreign entities other than influence. He was on the Board of Directors of a Ukrainian oil company?… he has zero experience advising any company about anything. He’s a freaking meth head. Influence. I’m No one’s shoeshine boy. I understand what’s happening here. Instead they focused on the evil demon Trump. Look at the shiny object over here! The insurrectionist himself.

We have a president beating his chest talking about “Bidenomics”. Yes Mr. transitory inflation himself. I can’t make this shit up. Everyone is paying at least double to triple for all goods today and this guy is bragging about his economic strategies. Take your net worth and divide it by two. You have half the buying power today than you did four years ago. I understand Covid had something to do with it, but it would’ve helped if we had a leader that was proactive and knew economics.

Last election day, I paid $1.84 for a gallon of gas. Today we are paying $3.79. I don’t want to hear any bullshit about electricity, because you’re gonna need to take a second mortgage on your house to pay our future electric bills. Our current clown of a president wants to forgive student loans a.k.a. buying votes. But meanwhile back at the ranch, focus on the evil insurrectionists. I hope the American public can see through this shit and make the right decision next election. This climate change nonsense is the largest money grab scheme I ever witnessed.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by 2022M550i

get the popcorn out! I respectfully disagree with your view regarding the world burning. We can all be adults and disagree with one another… my rant is not geared towards you. Perhaps it can help shed some light from another point of view…. from a measly old engineer and mathematician...

A lot going on there so I trimmed the quote just for brevity.

As a mathematician you should understand statistical inference and probabilities well enough to understand how scientifically sound predictions are built. We don't have perfect data nor do we have perfect predictive capabilities for weather. That doesn't mean it is useless to forecast and that also doesn't mean it is useless to heed the warnings predictions caused.

You should also understand that, yes, the planet will live on for billions of more years and likely stick around until the sun goes supernova. That doesn't mean all conditions are ones where humans exist on the planet. Extinctions are a common event on our planet.

And what are you talking about with electricity and wealth redistribution? Why would the government need to convert cars to electric and "a single fuel source" (still can't figure out what this means) so they can "make the wealthy pay for the electricity of the poor"? I'm truly baffled here.

The US government has had a federal subsidy for free or low cost electricity (and natural gas for heat!) for low income people since 1981. It is called LIHEAP. I grew up poor and know it well as it was needed to keep us from freezing in the winter.

https://www.acf.hhs.gov/ocs/programs/liheap
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-In...stance_Program

They don't need EVs to create a program that already existed...

You may disagree with social assistance and the value of it (or the lack of value), but that's a normal tug of war in any society. I pay taxes for people to send their kids to schools in my area even though I have no kids and I definitely don't want any. I pay taxes for road repairs in states I'll likely never visit and for disaster recovery for disasters I'll likely never experience. And, as I said earlier, someone else paid taxes to give me the opportunity to not freeze to death as a kid even though they may never had been in such a situation. To ensure every dollar extracted in taxes benefited be directly and at the optimal level would require me to live in a society of 1.

But all that said... It is hard to have real discussions anymore where we actually can debate topics like this at a deeper level. Where we could discuss the downsides of EVs or the upsides of them as car enthusiasts. Everything is being devolved to a political discussion where all that matters is "my team wins".

It is a tragedy.

I'll leave the discussion now.

[Mike 540]

Gentlemen,

I do not live the the US so I can not comment on what you describe. I am talking from the point of view of an ordinary European. And again - I am not against EVs, I am just saying that given the actual state of technology, I do not see too many ecological aspects of massive use of EVs.
I have problems in acknowledging that buying a new EV, using it 7 years (=usable battery life) and than having to scrap it since there is NO value in EV with dead battery is ecological behaviour. You have to write off 100% of the EVs price in 7 years.
Is someone saying that for industry having to produce and scrap 2 or more EVs to do the same service as one conventional car is ecological? I am failing to see that. My last two cars each covered more than 200 thous. miles and still could be sold (i.e. had some value). If I only bought EVs, I would have to buy three such cars and my financial loss would be far greater.

Yes, when we live in the ideal world with enough superclean powerstations, our EVs would cost way less (as it uses less parts), last 15 and more years on one battery, which is not full of chemicals and which could be scrapped in an ecological way, only than will EVs become a way to go. Until than, I would leave to the FREE market to decide.
Or maybe we will just stick with existing cars a little longer if no better choice exists so far.