FR EV-ites in 3,...2,.... Yeah I know circumstances and results for each person will vary.................
To manufacture each E.V. auto battery, the following material must be processed: 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper.
All told, suppliers must dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery. Sixty-eight percent of the world’s cobalt, a significant part of an E.V. battery, comes from the Congo, where they have no pollution controls and minimal regulation, and they employ children, who die from handling this toxic material.
There are no emissions directly from an E.V. itself. However, there are many from mining operations. These facts are not generally publicized.
Don’t get me wrong, EV.s can be part of the solution, but doing away with fossil fuels like what California wants to do is not a viable alternative at this time.
They can paint childrens’ hand prints in red on electric cars in memory of the suffering of the children mining metals for the batteries.
A very poor analysis. It ignores the time value of money, trade-in value, insurance costs, future electricity rate hikes to build new generating capacity to charge cars, and absence of road taxes on electricity.
Very superficial.
“All told, suppliers must dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery.”
Not an expert on how gasoline cars are built, but I suspect that much of the steel is RECYCLED from junkers at this point and probably similar for aluminum, since aluminum is already profitable to recycle, so not much mining there.
Thanks for telling us where the price of gas is going if liberals have their way.
Can we move away from the term “fossil fuels”? They are petroleum products and petrochemicals.
An odd one I found out. There are some people who when sitting in the front passenger seat will get carsick and vomit. It doesn’t seem to happen to the driver, and is unknown if those in the back seats will get hit by it.
Before I looked this up, for the first time I rode in an EV in the passenger seat. A clear, bright day on a smooth road. Then about half an hour into the trip, blaagh.
Just look up “carsick in EV”. Lots of references.
If China didn’t control the supply of minerals for the batteries would EVs even be a thing?
This all seems irrational.
I’ll stick with my 22 year old Civic, thanks. (Manual transmission too).
The author leaves out the fact that the cost of operating a BEV always was going to increase in proportion to their popularity because BEV owners don’t pay gas tax. As gas tax revenues decline, the gummint invariably will look for a way to offset the shortfall, and since BEV buyers by and large have higher-than-average disposable incomes, imposing a wheel and/or road tax on their non-ICE cars is low-hanging fruit.
Bkmk
My own mechanical engineering opinion, from an overall systems perspective, is that all conceivable transportation systems will use roughly the same amount of resources over the lifespan of the vehicle. The cost of any system has three components: 1) Capital cost, 2) Operating cost, and 3) Maintenance cost.
Sure you can get “free” energy from wind and solar and EVs should have slightly lower lifetime maintenance costs due to fewer moving parts in the “engine,” but those are more than offset by the huge increase in capital costs and vastly increased consumption of rare minerals.
Furthermore, EV and “green” economics only appear attractive today because they are highly skewed by the green zealots. “Green” economics is dishonest because it ignores the disposal costs of the vehicles and the solar and windmill plants at the end of their economic lives. The first generation of solar and wind plants is coming to the end of its economic lifetime very soon (less than ten years from now) and the inescapable problem of recycling vast quantities of toxic materials will be upon us.
It also ignores the huge subsidies that governments use to make the purchase price of “green” economically attractive. Governments, in their persistent drive to be “green,” socialize the costs of that effort, so all of us pay lots more taxes. We should be happy to pay more taxes so the rich early adopters can shout “Look at me! I’m GREEN” when they drive their expensive play toys.
The first five paragraphs must have been written by a 12 year old at best. A silly, facile comparison.
No fan of ev here but this is superficial analysis. Sophomoric.
IF there is no climate emergency
EVs are stupid
THERE IS NO CLIMATE EMERGENCY!
The end run is Hydrogen.
Hydrogen cars do exist, but the fuel delivery network does not exist, yet.
Hydrogen passes of platinum, lets electrons loose. It works. Ad a battery that gives a jolt for times that you need quick acceleration. Emissions, water.
Like the LED bulb 20 years ago and the Flat screen TV. Hydrogen will be big. There are now Hydrogen power plants being built. I think South Korea may be building one.
EV’s do nothing to stop global warming which is a really big hoax.
My wife and I were joined on our morning walk by our neighbor, who knows every thing re everyone on our culdesac.
My wife and I noticed what appeared to be recent/new solar panels on one of the neighbor’s home.
Our fellow walker told us that it was new EV solar panels for 2 new EV chargers.
I remarked that the couple, who owned the house were Subaru liberals with a single 10 year old Subaru in their driveway.
Our walker said that the adult children owned EV’s and said that was too much hassle for their 2-300 mile one way trip to visit the grandparents, the owners of the Subaru.
So grampa and gramma bought/had installed the solar panels and dual outdoor chargers for the visiting EV vehicles and grandkids.
Our guide said so far everyone seemed happy.
Slave labor and environmental disaster is fine as long as libtards feel good