Posted on 08/27/2023 10:00:19 AM PDT by DallasBiff
Some analysts expect that existing grid capacity may be enough to power U.S. electric cars in the near future, yet they do not rule out the possibility of new coal or nuclear plants coming on line if renewable energy sources are not developed.
Dear EarthTalk: Isn’t the interest in electric cars and plug-in hybrids going to spur increased reliance on coal as a power source? And is that really any better than gasoline/oil in terms of environmental impact? —Graham Rankin, via e-mail
It’s true that the advent of electric cars is not necessarily a boon for the environment if it means simply trading our reliance on one fossil fuel—oil, from which gasoline is distilled—for an even dirtier one: coal, which is burned to create electricity.
(Excerpt) Read more at scientificamerican.com ...
Get mad at me but Vivek Ramaswamy was correct, when he stated in the debate, where he stated that fossil fuels are necessary for a prosperity society.
Pretty much
People like Tesla Humper and the fake news will tell you it’s wonderful even though it’s clearly *worse*
“Scientific” American?
Nothing but political propaganda. This whole piece is riddled with “hopeful” statements that we may make advances in the future, some things may become possible, other things are “within the realm of the possible” and basically, gee whiz, wouldn’t it be swell if this all works out for the best?
There is no science here.
SA has long been neither Scientific nor American.
Everything will be fine after they knock the worlds’ population back down to 500,000,000. That’ll be around one million people serving each deserving oligarch.
Green energy globalist elites with their absurd policies are promoting poverty, hunger and disease. They hate America, its freedoms and liberties and Americans.
Technology to burn coal with minimal polluting effects should be a priority in energy research. We have plenty of the stuff.
And nuclear must be an important part of the mix, even if it does scare liberal snowflakes.
SA was hijacked by leftist hacks years ago. They were targeted around the same time the Smithsonian Institute was. Now they are both gone.
You will probably think I'm crazy for thinking this, but if they achieve their goal, wouldn't rabies be rampant?
How many vets would there be in a population of 500,000,000 worldwide?
I did not like the inclusion of nuclear in non-renewables. Nuclear is one of the cleaner sources of base power (when its too cold for wind and too dark for solar)
There is the nuclear option, you know. Not in the political sense, but in the field of power generation. Nuclear power plants have come a LONG way from Chernobyl, or Three Mile Island, or even Fukushima. The Small Modular Nuclear Reactor designs have overcome virtually every objection of your grandfather’s nuclear reactors, in that they do not go into “China syndrome”, or explode spewing radioactivity in the atmosphere, or have huge quantities of “spent” uranium fuel rods accumulating over time.
But these “green” environmentalists are as superstitious as a bunch of cats, and they cannot be talked into taking a reasonable approach to that resumption of use of nuclear power for generation of electricity.
They already are, and pseudo-Scientific American knows this well. The majority of power charging those electric cars is coming from coal. Period.
.....The Coal Truth: Will the Coming Generation of Electric Cars Just Be Coal-Burners, Once Removed?.....
YES!!!!
EVs are unnecessary, dangerous, and WAY too expensive. They should be banned. Politicians who want to require them, and/or to ban meat and dairy should also be banned from office forever!!!!
Yes.
Agreed. Nuclear and hydro are about as clean as it gets while also providing steady power.
Yes, because it’s just not possible at this time to produce enough power from the Sun or wind. Battery technology is not able to solve the problem of the need for power regardless of the weather.
But the politicians are messing things up royally. They are fanatical about forcing us to drive EVs, and at the same time are destroying the supply of “fossil” fuels.
If the politicians are allowed to have their way, we are in for impossibly high energy costs and severe limitations on our ability to go places. (But the ruling elite will go to climate conferences in their multiple limousines and private jets.)
Oopsie! The climate change cult wants to get rid of hydroelectric because the reservoirs are a source of methane emissions. I kid not.
First EV’s are incredibly inefficient. Due to battery and power losses. 2nd they are chemical polluters. And before long they will be chemical polluters on a grand scale.
In my opinion emissions shot out of a massive cannon into the atmosphere are 10X worse than the same amount of emissions dispersed out of millions of tailpipes on roads.
Electric cars urn unicorn farts.
Morons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.