Posted on 01/20/2019 5:42:04 AM PST by Libloather
**SNIP**
To answer that question, I used the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s most recent long-term forecasts for the number of new electric vehicles through 2050, estimated how much electricity they’d use, and then figured out how much pollution that electricity would generate, looking at three key pollutants regulated under the U.S. Clean Air Act—sulfur dioxide (SO2), oxides of nitrogen (NOX), and particulates—as well as CO2 emissions. I compared them to the emissions of new gasoline-powered vehicles, using the EIA’s “real world” miles-per-gallon forecast, rather than the higher CAFE standard values.
What I found is that widespread adoption of electric vehicles nationwide will likely increase air pollution compared with new internal combustion vehicles. You read that right: more electric cars and trucks will mean more pollution.
That might sound counterintuitive: After all, won’t replacing a 30-year old, smoke-belching Oldsmobile with a new electric vehicle reduce air pollution? Yes, of course. But that’s also where many electric vehicle proponents’ arguments run off the road: they fail to consider just how clean and efficient new internal combustion vehicles are.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
They never tell you where all that Electricity will come from or how thru the roof cost it will be
Nobody talks about what happens to all those old batteries when they need replacing. The last I learned is that they are pretty toxic.
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
Sort of like the ‘new’ lightbulbs that were ‘forced’ down our throat.
For a while it was being suggested that to properly dispose of the burnt out bulbs you would need a hazmat team.
Like the ‘asbestos’ removal ‘scare’, after all the regs and restrictions were thrown in, the cost of renovating an old building was almost as much as putting up the new one.
Sort of faded in the distance, like most boondoggle government ideas.
People act like electric cars are new, several of them were introduced in the early 1900s.
Another fallacy of ‘their’ program is apparently they don’t realize electricity and fossil fuels run hand in hand so if you have electric cars you will need more electricity ESPECIALLY since most that like electric cars don’t like Nuclear Power.
When traveling in West Virginia (many ‘windmills’ or BIRD KILLERS dot the countryside), if I notice one not ‘turning’ I will ask a local if someone forgot to PLUG IT IN as it didn’t seem to be ‘working’...Quite a few of the natives are NOT happy..
IANAL, but they never find for the guy doing the following.
Well with more NOX in the air we can laugh about it.
Yup. EVs are basically coal-powered toxic hazards.
They're trying to sell their "performance." The problem with that is they can do an amazing 0-60 on a full charge, but within minutes degrade severely. They're also heavy and handle like crap, so are useless on a road race and can't keep up on a track.
Doesn't stop the fan-boys from comparing them to Z06s and Porsche.
When the communist parties in Europe were wringing their hands at the downfall o’f the Soviet Union, the leaders told them, ‘Join the Environmentalist movement.’
The enviro-nazis have always ignored the fact that somewhere there is an electric plant chugging out pollution to charge these electric cars.
Wow. I actually agree with something written in Politico.
Spot on their idea of fact checking.
Just ask a Tesla owner if they support building new Nuclear Power Plants that emit zero Carbon Emissions.
As is, the majority of the energy our automobiles consume is delivered to the retail distribution points (i.e., gas stations) in tanker trucks that themselves run on dead dinosaurs. If we all drove electric cars, the equivalent load that those tanker trucks have been carrying would have to be delivered over electrical power lines instead. Industry aside, America burns about as much energy in her homes as in her automobiles, so we can't all drive electric cars without the risk of overloading the grid (brownouts/blackouts) without the grid gets a major overhaul first.
And unless you're driving a duallie with an aux tank, you probably can refuel your dinosaur-powered vehicle in about five minutes. With pay-at-the-pump, that means a dozen customers can refuel per pump head in an hour. So what happens to your wait time at the "recharging" station if each car needs (let's be Pollyannish and say) 60 minutes to refuel?
"Their" concept of electric cars is that we'll recharge them at home or at work, so the commercial charging stations won't need the added capacity. But what about holidays?
Unless charging stations expect you to accept waiting four hours for your turn at their charger so you can make the annual Thanksgiving pilgrimage upstate to Aunt Edna's, they're going to have to invest in quite a bit more real estate than they have now to accommodate several times more charging "islands" than they currently use for the distribution of liquid dinosaurs.
Not only that, an electric charging station costs several times as much as a bog-standard Slumberger pump head. So you'd be asking them to invest big capital in a sale item that's only going to generate significant revenue on weekends and holidays when people are traveling in large numbers. So don't hold your breath.
So unless Elon Musk can poop free real estate and cheap rapid-charge charging stations, widespread adoption of battery-only electric cars would mean America would have to abandon both the traditions of the drive-to-Grandma's holidays and the summer family vacation by car.
You don't often hear it mentioned but one of the reasons America was so eager to embrace the gasoline automobile is because it was a huge boon to democracy, effectively a guarantor of freedom of association. And for more than a century we've had automobiles that could be refueled in minutes and then driven for hours. I don't think America will ever accept their wholesale replacement with something that takes longer to fuel than to run it dry.
If I were conspiratorially-minded (tinfoil hats ON!), I could see this as a clandestine attempt to make it difficult at best for Americans ever to travel more than half their car's charge from home.
Nothing better than riding up on a pedal bike and stopping next to an electric vehicle. Then looking over and down at them. Lol.
There's the rub...the entire electrical infrastructure (fuel, power plants, transmission, local distribution) has to be sized for those days when you don't get power from the sun. So you have to pay twice, once for the power plant on your house and the second time for the utility plant. OR you pay for an enormous battery system at your house to get you through those 85 days without sun power.
Elon Musk is betting heavily that people WILL put in huge battery banks at their houses. That's what his "GigaFactories" are for. But they are slow getting built and into production.
Another thing that is rarely mentioned is the strip mining, as well as undersea mining, required to get the necessary rare earth metals.
Where is the environmental impact statement for the whole electric car infrastructure?
Tesla, Nissan Leaf, BMW i3 all turn on brake lights under regenerative braking. Maybe there is some EV that doesn't, as it is unregulated, but by far the majority do. Regenerative braking isn't much different from downshifting in a manual transmission and "engine braking" which doesn't trigger brake lights, and hasn't caused a rear ending crisis.
Tesla owners drive like 80 year old grannies.
That seems to be a trend.
thanks for those.
:)
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.