The $5,000 electric car-5G battle vs. new energy vehicle battle

[wes4dbt]

I was surprised when I looked that Ford and Chevy don't have any low end compact cars. I wonder if they decided that they just couldn't compete with the imports pricing. This current strike should make that even harder when they go back to work. Though I don't know how much of the cars price is from labor costs.

[sapator]

So since some are for the EV car's and "clean" energy.

EV's battaries are huge lithium and cobaltium suckers.

Children are force to dig for cobaltium:



Lithium lakes that pollute the environment are extinguish water sources in south America



And for the Wind power BS.
For the wings we must extract certain resources that poison million of people



So I don't get why people want other people to suffer so they can proceed with the "clean environment" agenda.
Also on the known thread 2-3 years ago I was posting on how CNN caught red handed to preparing the "environmental crisis" as the next big thing when fakevid calms down.

Cow farts. Cow farts are EV friendly and effective.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Cobalt is terrible, but it may also be phased out of use in batteries. Lithium...well, all mining pollutes the environment to some extent, so does the extraction of fossil fuels. The argument is false. The choice isn't between pollution and no pollution, it's between one kind of pollution and another.

[sapator]

No the argument is that the new pollution is baptized green energy. At that extend and to your equation, fossil fuels are also green energy and more effective so there is no need to switch or add to what we have.
Also and I'm writing this with caution. Newer extraction methods of fossil do not hurt the environment, at the extraction site. Also some fossils like hydrits do not pollute squat. I've yet to see a lake of toxic and radioactive fluids from oil extraction. Again with caution as I haven't done the research, but I might if you keep bugging me with green bulshitgy.

Cow farts or death! And planes. I see planes!!

[Shaggy Hiker]

I've seen it, though it was coal, in that case. We toured one of the big open pit mines. They certainly had their lake of toxic waste. The oil extraction mostly just polluted surface water. It wasn't contained. That was older stuff. People didn't care so much.

Basically, if you want to be truly green...well, you can't, at this time. Existence pollutes, but we can do better.

Not terribly surprised that you don't feel that way. You would say things fall upwards if you ever had to deal with gravity.

[dilettante]

One of the goals of the Great Reset, er EV push, is to lower the compensation of the labor force. The exploding cigar has already blown up in Biden's and Whitmer's faces.

[sapator]

I feel what, way?
First and foremost there is no green energy on EV's. They have batteries, those are not fuel of any kind they are just electricity storage-carriage.
And how would would store energy to the batteries? That is right, coil, oil nuclear and hydro , sun , wind. The clean energy is 30% and I'm all on hydro, it does not pollute but wind panels and solar are my enemy that is a total or 7 + 2.
So how about it? You want to save the environment? Let's stop the power plants for a week, see how EV's will behave.
EV's provide nothing, absolutely nothing to the green since they pollute to be made and pollute to be unmade with no fuel of their own. It's a scam, we have real energy sources working triple time to power up a brick.
The minute we will find some sort of clean energy for cars that is sustainable and does not pollute, give me a call and I'll be rooting for it.
Till then, cow farts. Now, you take a cow, right, and you plant it to the roof of your car, you attach a tube to the anus, the cow start farting and the car moves. If the cow runs out of fuel (aka rafts) you can do it yourself, so , yes as you said a little beans on the side or cabbage for me.
And please do not forget about the planes.

[sapator]

There is also this:
The German government is aiming for 15 million electric cars on roads by 2030
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news...att%20reported.

The issue here is that Germany governs EU, we are stupid enough to be on EU so they may force all countries on EU to start "greening" .
I wonder how that will impact Greece.... Occasionally, I see a tesla that some well dressed Lady drives it at 10mph or some wannabe yappy with one. Everything else is fuel. Lol we would have such good laughs!

[Shaggy Hiker]

Well, you do have a penchant for picking the losing horse in any race.

I have no idea what Dil wants, aside from blaming it all on Biden in the last two years. Manufacturing used to pay a premium above service jobs. That's reversed. Even if we do increase total manufacturing, we may not add jobs, and those jobs may not be low-skill, well paying, jobs. It may be all robots, or 3D printers. That's not the fault of some person or some political party, it's the fault of humans. We abandon technologies on a whim, and all the jobs associated with those technologies go away. Biden would LOVE to boost pay for low end workers, especially if he was given credit for that change. Any politician would like that in the US. Those low end workers make up a solid group of voters. A fair number of them don't vote, but if they all did vote they could elect anybody they wanted to.

Back in the 90s, I had an 82 Honda Civic. That was a carbureted engine, with manual everything. It could get up to 45 mpg, and didn't cost very much. There are no cars like that on the market anymore. Sure, you can say that technology moved on, but that's not true. The reason you can't buy a car with manual windows anymore. The reason you can't buy a car without power locks anymore. The reason you can't buy a car with an engine smaller than 1.8 liters anymore, has nothing to do with some EV mandate that showed up in the last two years.

Building a car requires setting up an entire supply chain. If you don't sell a certain number, then it isn't worth setting up the supply chain. Every single automobile manufacturer in the US market has decided that there aren't enough buyers for cheap cars to bother with building them. It's hard to find a car without an infotainment system, or a backup camera. You simply can't find one that lacks power locks and power windows, even though such things add cost. Nobody makes cheap cars, and that has nothing to do with any mandate. They could easily make a car that met fuel efficiency standards using modern technology. That Honda Civic, with a modern engine, might exceed 50 mpg, but nobody makes them anymore. For a time, Honda Civics were rated for around 25 mpg, but now are up to 31/33 city with up to 40 highway. In other words, despite engines getting significantly more fuel efficient when compared to the brute approach of a carburetor, the net fuel efficiency has dropped. The cost has also soared. They talk about the performance, features, and styling in the dealer ads. Not efficiency and reliability on which they used to be sold. Then, if you look at all the features that are not optional, little wonder the starting price is over $20K.

This isn't politics, this is the market. The manufacturers estimated that we'd pay more for size, power, and features, so that's what they've given us. The car market is driven slightly by mandates, but is primarily driven by market forces. It isn't what CAN be made, it's what the automobile manufacturers feel like they can make profitably. They probably aren't wrong. Sure shafts those without money, though.

[dilettante]

If "this is the market" at work why are Federal and State governments providing such a broad range of wealth transfers to support the EV push?

And on top of that you have the OEMs raising vehicle prices to cover their losses making EVs that nobody is buying? Well, ok. The motivation there is they want the government pork which is contingent on EV production levels. So if you include "central planning, bribery, and coercion" I suppose that might be construed as "market forces."

Are we convinced that even Musk's Tesla has a secret sauce that makes its EVs economically and environmentally neutral or better? Or are other things going on - harvesting the subsidies, spending VC money hand over fist, relying on the perverse economies of low scale for the charging and service infrastructure? Not to mention that most are 3rd or 4th cars in wealthy households, the vehicles basically "driven on Sundays" (short commutes, shopping trips, to church in your Easter Bonnet, etc.) modestly and not actually relied upon.


Then you have the myriad ways this fails the working class and poor, while taxing and coercing them along faster toward the cliff.

I wanted this to work myself. But it is clear now that it is no more practical than 1950s dreams of flying cars.

[sapator]

To see how they push EV economically just google:
Where EV cards battaries are made?
Thank you US. Konichiwa, well Japanese but still...

[xiaoyao]

Well, you do have a penchant for picking the losing horse in any race.

I have no idea what Dil wants, aside from blaming it all on Biden in the last two years. Manufacturing used to pay a premium above service jobs. That's reversed. Even if we do increase total manufacturing, we may not add jobs, and those jobs may not be low-skill, well paying, jobs. It may be all robots, or 3D printers. That's not the fault of some person or some political party, it's the fault of humans. We abandon technologies on a whim, and all the jobs associated with those technologies go away. Biden would LOVE to boost pay for low end workers, especially if he was given credit for that change. Any politician would like that in the US. Those low end workers make up a solid group of voters. A fair number of them don't vote, but if they all did vote they could elect anybody they wanted to.

Back in the 90s, I had an 82 Honda Civic. That was a carbureted engine, with manual everything. It could get up to 45 mpg, and didn't cost very much. There are no cars like that on the market anymore. Sure, you can say that technology moved on, but that's not true. The reason you can't buy a car with manual windows anymore. The reason you can't buy a car without power locks anymore. The reason you can't buy a car with an engine smaller than 1.8 liters anymore, has nothing to do with some EV mandate that showed up in the last two years.

Building a car requires setting up an entire supply chain. If you don't sell a certain number, then it isn't worth setting up the supply chain. Every single automobile manufacturer in the US market has decided that there aren't enough buyers for cheap cars to bother with building them. It's hard to find a car without an infotainment system, or a backup camera. You simply can't find one that lacks power locks and power windows, even though such things add cost. Nobody makes cheap cars, and that has nothing to do with any mandate. They could easily make a car that met fuel efficiency standards using modern technology. That Honda Civic, with a modern engine, might exceed 50 mpg, but nobody makes them anymore. For a time, Honda Civics were rated for around 25 mpg, but now are up to 31/33 city with up to 40 highway. In other words, despite engines getting significantly more fuel efficient when compared to the brute approach of a carburetor, the net fuel efficiency has dropped. The cost has also soared. They talk about the performance, features, and styling in the dealer ads. Not efficiency and reliability on which they used to be sold. Then, if you look at all the features that are not optional, little wonder the starting price is over $20K.

This isn't politics, this is the market. The manufacturers estimated that we'd pay more for size, power, and features, so that's what they've given us. The car market is driven slightly by mandates, but is primarily driven by market forces. It isn't what CAN be made, it's what the automobile manufacturers feel like they can make profitably. They probably aren't wrong. Sure shafts those without money, though.

Even the manufacture of a new energy vehicle requires a complete industrial chain, so if Russia wants to build all kinds of aircraft carriers and warships, it will not be able to do so in 30 years, and it is estimated that it will take 80 years.But the country has no money, and he can't form a complete industrial chain. Eating is a problem. How to solve the loss of population, food and high unemployment rate?

Back then, around 1940, the Japanese built hundreds of thousands of millions of aircraft, as well as many aircraft carriers. At that time, they were really military powers at sea. They all dared to fight with the United States. Later, the United States blew up all their aircraft carriers.

[xiaoyao]

China's Xiaomi also has production capacity for older versions of the phone's CPU.But today's mobile phones require more and more powerful CPU computing power, so even if they can produce, he still chooses to purchase Qualcomm CPU on the market, although the price is more expensive.Even if Apple wanted to make its own 5G baseband communication module, it failed in the end.The cooperation with Intel also failed. Originally, Qualcomm's CPU could be manufactured by Samsung or Taizhidian, but Samsung's technology has always been very poor. As a result, the latest Qualcomm CPU heats up badly, and its technology lags far behind that of TSMC.

[xiaoyao]

I feel what, way?
First and foremost there is no green energy on EV's. They have batteries, those are not fuel of any kind they are just electricity storage-carriage.
And how would would store energy to the batteries? That is right, coil, oil nuclear and hydro , sun , wind. The clean energy is 30% and I'm all on hydro, it does not pollute but wind panels and solar are my enemy that is a total or 7 + 2.
So how about it? You want to save the environment? Let's stop the power plants for a week, see how EV's will behave.
EV's provide nothing, absolutely nothing to the green since they pollute to be made and pollute to be unmade with no fuel of their own. It's a scam, we have real energy sources working triple time to power up a brick.
The minute we will find some sort of clean energy for cars that is sustainable and does not pollute, give me a call and I'll be rooting for it.
Till then, cow farts. Now, you take a cow, right, and you plant it to the roof of your car, you attach a tube to the anus, the cow start farting and the car moves. If the cow runs out of fuel (aka rafts) you can do it yourself, so , yes as you said a little beans on the side or cabbage for me.
And please do not forget about the planes.

Just like India, 30% of the area has frequent power outages and no electricity available, but their space industry is very developed, and they have successfully launched the lunar probe, and the latest launch in Russia did explode.

In most cases in China, the cost of electricity is only half the price of gasoline, which is an advantage, and there is basically no price increase.But the price of oil has risen from 5 yuan to 8-10 yuan, and may eventually rise to 15 yuan (two dollars a liter).

There was a time when China cut production. The campaign for environmental skills runs for months every year.Their idea is to use coal or oil to generate electricity, which will cause a lot of carbon dioxide or air pollution.If we want to control environmental protection, we can only limit the amount of power generation every year.

In addition, international energy prices have risen, ah, coal, ah, and oil have all risen, resulting in a continuous increase in the cost of power generation.

[xiaoyao]

You can buy a plane in the US for just over $10,000??? If by "just over" you mean 40-90 thousand dollars over, then it appears you might be right. A quick glance at listing suggests that there are used planes that you can get for $50,000, but most are twice that or more. New planes tend to be over $100,000. Can't say anything about annual maintenance costs, though. They may well be higher in China.

Also, the price of oil is driven by global forces, since oil is sold on the global market. The price of electricity is necessarily a local market, at this time. That could change to some extent as long distance DC transmission lines are built, though.

The news I saw was the same as the trainer plane, which can also be said to be the smallest plane that can take 1 or 2 people.Simply speaking, it is the kind of similar plane that can be used for sightseeing in a small county.The price I saw was indeed about 100,000 RMB, more than 10,000 US dollars. Maybe this is just the ex-factory price. Maybe that was the price a few years ago, just like the price of mobile phones doubled in a short period of about 3 to 5 years. Millet mobile phone used to cost only 1999 RMB, but now it costs 4000 to 5000 RMB.

[xiaoyao]

OK so you are an EV and "environment protection" enthusiast.
Please let me know what kind of EV brand you drive and the measures you have taken to insure environmental blossom. P.E. you are a vegetarian and do not use oil or coil driver electricity.And of course you are not using any plane to go to far distances, ever.

After arriving at new energy vehicles, the usual range is basically limited to 100-300 kilometers.300 kilometers of new energy vehicles, the usual travel distance is 150 to 200 kilometers, and the speed can not be too fast.

More than a year ago, we had a small county with only one place to charge, and now there are 10 places to charge. Charging piles have become very popular.

But there are many new energy vehicles, buses and buses in China. After three to five years of operation, the battery is useless. It costs a lot to replace the battery, so the whole bus has to be scrapped.

For them, this tram is a new energy and environmental protection. Anyway, the purchase is also subsidized by the state, and they may be able to earn a small percentage of the rebate from the middle, so they are very active.
They never think about, ah, this is like a gasoline car, if it can be driven to 300,000 or 600,000 kilometers, which one is more economical to compare comprehensively. But the life of new energy vehicles may be only 200,000 kilometers.

It's like an ordinary car for home use, 400 kilometers. The cost of replacing the battery may be $5000. But they will actually charge $10,000. It's about the same price as buying a new car.This will cause your battery to fail, and the car can only be forced to scrap, because the cost of buying batteries is too high.For car manufacturers, what they need is that you keep buying more cars, not replacing batteries.

Unless you have the ability to replace the battery yourself.A new energy car bought six years ago may only cost more than 60000 yuan at that time. Now the cost of changing batteries is 70000 yuan.But the cost of buying batteries online is only 18,000 yuan.

The cost of battery replacement by the manufacturer is $10000, and the price difference is only about $2500.

This is like the battery of an iPhone, which costs more than $100 to replace once. But the cost of replacing the battery of many mobile phones in China is only $15, which is really a big gap.

[Shaggy Hiker]

If "this is the market" at work why are Federal and State governments providing such a broad range of wealth transfers to support the EV push?

The two aren't contradictory. The market will do as the market will do, and policymakers will try to push the market one way or another. It always does come down to wealth transfers, but that's the end result, not the goal. The goal is to push people to make different economic choices for whatever policy is desired. Out of that, some people will win and others will lose, it's just the result, not the goal.

And on top of that you have the OEMs raising vehicle prices to cover their losses making EVs that nobody is buying? Well, ok. The motivation there is they want the government pork which is contingent on EV production levels. So if you include "central planning, bribery, and coercion" I suppose that might be construed as "market forces."

Yep, pretty much. That's put somewhat brutally, but I wouldn't say it was incorrect. Whenever there is any government action that affects the economy, aside from certain straight up purchasing actions, it's central planning. Things like mortgage interest deductions are central planning, and could be seen as bribery...though it would be a stretch to call it coercion. Fuel efficiency standards are certainly central planning and coercion, though not bribery. Trying to get people to stop using fossil fuels is central planning, and then you have either the carrot (bribery) or the stick (coercion). So, yeah.

Are we convinced that even Musk's Tesla has a secret sauce that makes its EVs economically and environmentally neutral or better? Or are other things going on - harvesting the subsidies, spending VC money hand over fist, relying on the perverse economies of low scale for the charging and service infrastructure? Not to mention that most are 3rd or 4th cars in wealthy households, the vehicles basically "driven on Sundays" (short commutes, shopping trips, to church in your Easter Bonnet, etc.) modestly and not actually relied upon.

I'm not sure. I don't personally know anybody who uses an electric vehicle as their sole vehicle. I know some who are not wealthy who use one as their 'day to day' commuter vehicle, as well as using it for long trips, but they have a second car as a backup. In this state, there are places that are inaccessible. They are awkward for gas engines unless you plan ahead, though most cars have sufficiently large gas tanks to get you there and back.

As for the technology, nothing much is going to happen with the IC engine that hasn't already happened. It might be possible to squeeze another percent or two out of the current design, and there have been some other theoretical designs that could possibly do better, but nothing huge will change. Nothing much will change with electric motors, either. They already have efficiencies in the >90% range, so there isn't much theoretical room for improvement (gas engines in cars are 20-40% efficient, but could top 50% in theory). That leaves batteries, and in that area there is real potential for improvements. Switching from Li to Na would get rid of one of the pollution sources that Sapator mentioned, and it is in the works. Getting rid of cobalt would remove one of the more abusive elements from the chain, and that will happen much faster than the move to sodium. So, there's potential there.

Then you have the myriad ways this fails the working class and poor, while taxing and coercing them along faster toward the cliff.

So fix it. One of the assumptions in market theory is that, if there is a niche, it will be filled. There's a niche right now, it isn't being filled. You can't buy a cheap car. Not a cheap gas car, nor a cheap electric car. You can't buy a car that isn't stuffed full of more electronics than my house (and I do have a goodly number of computers). If somebody wanted to make a safe, efficient, and cheap car, it could be done. Xiaoyao has talked about cheap Chinese cars. You've pointed out the potential downside to that, which is pretty clear if the manufacturing is shoddy, but they ARE cheap. Making a cheap car to US safety standards isn't impossible. Making a cheap car to US safety standards would pretty much guarantee making a car to US fuel efficiency standards (just make it smaller and lighter, with smaller engines). Nobody is doing that. That isn't because of any government incentive. It's just us.

[Shaggy Hiker]

The news I saw was the same as the trainer plane, which can also be said to be the smallest plane that can take 1 or 2 people.Simply speaking, it is the kind of similar plane that can be used for sightseeing in a small county.The price I saw was indeed about 100,000 RMB, more than 10,000 US dollars. Maybe this is just the ex-factory price. Maybe that was the price a few years ago, just like the price of mobile phones doubled in a short period of about 3 to 5 years. Millet mobile phone used to cost only 1999 RMB, but now it costs 4000 to 5000 RMB.

The cheapest I found was around $50K. There are also kit planes in the US, though, and those fit under different rules and might be considerably cheaper. Not many people would fly in one, though.

[sapator]

Apart from fakEVid (that is fake and EV not covid but see that all bind nicely?) is there any other idea on the horizon for vehicles that are actually producing the power needed rather than consuming it?

[Shaggy Hiker]

Yeah, but I've been burned by that too many times. Too many technologies work well in a lab, but nobody can figure out how to produce them in meaningful quantities. I've bought into too many things that were VASTLY BETTER...only to find out that they have to be hand crafted by carefully trained squirrels wielding tiny gold-powered lasers.

Generating electricity is easy. It's crazy easy. You can do it by putting two types of common metals together in a conductive environment. Generating meaningful amounts of electricity...that's not so easy.

You talked about hydro, and generally I agree with you, but I should note that the last 26 years of my career has been funded by an attempt to mitigate the damage caused by hydro. I still like it, I'm just well aware that nothing is free.

[dilettante]

This guy makes some good arguments:

Hybrid VS Gas car. Which one is really better to buy? We compare and explain the difference between a hybrid car vs gas car. We also explain whether it is better to buy a hybrid car or a gas car. Do hybrids really save you more money? How long does a hybrid battery last and how much does it cost to replace? Are hybrid cars worth it? If you are deciding between a hybrid and gas car, make sure to watch this video.

[sapator]

What's those cars that when you stop and start at the road the engine starts again and again? It is so annoying and since I will be replacing my car soon I am constantly on the lookout for not getting one of those.

[dilettante]

It's a feature of a lot of cars these days, even those where it makes no sense because the cost of restarting is high.

[sapator]

Yeah, I'm not a mechanic but I was thinking, won't this wore out the ignition? Is it worth saving a couple of bucks per year when, if the ignition fails, you will be be spending thousands of $$ ?
Plus it's annoying as hell and I always think that my front or back of side had an engine off an is trying to restart so I'm at the breaks not to crash.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I think those arguments might be because we're all old.

At least Dilettante and I remember when there was some rule of thumb as to how long a car would have to be off to justify the cost of restarting. I don't remember how long it was, but somewhere around 30 seconds (oops, looks like it was 2-3 minutes), which is really pretty long.

My understanding is that this is no longer the case. Most modern, gas powered (not diesel), engines with fuel injectors, don't use more gas on starting. I don't know whether that is true, but it does seem supported.

Some people find those engines pretty disconcerting, especially if they doubt that it will be there if needed. I can understand that. If the engine is noisy, it's sometimes nice to have them shut off, but in most driving...there are enough other noises around you that you don't notice. I can't tell when my engine is running or not, and I rather like it that way. That's because it's quiet all the time, though.

[sapator]

Quiet engine is a killer engine, you won't notice the car when it runs you over (quiet but deadly ) . Also it's the engine of the EV wannabes

[dilettante]

Revised video, with adjusted figures reflecting how much worse things really are than reported in the original.


While she doesn't explore the negative impacts on poorer countries, poorer families, and anyone outside the narrow peri-tropical bands of the planet that rarely get hot or cold... Dr. H. does explore the high cliff represented by the costs of transport electrification.

She needs to see the video I posted prior to this one, because she dismisses HEVs as "lettuce on a Big Mac." It seems more likely they are the real answer when combined with fleet average downsizing, limiting frivolous trips through a little planning, and other modest conservation habits.

But at least she covers the impracticality of moving to an EV economy.



She really makes it clear that the scam is foremost about wealth transfer. The costs involved are already projected to be at least in the 10s of trillions of USD.

Stumbling economies like the PRC have already dropped EV subsidies and incentives.

[xiaoyao]

The cheapest I found was around $50K. There are also kit planes in the US, though, and those fit under different rules and might be considerably cheaper. Not many people would fly in one, though.

I mean, these little planes are used to go to work, just like your private car.Many people may spend more than $300000 to buy this car.Wouldn't it be better to buy a plane? But now the safety and quality of the plane is really not good. The accident rate may reach 50%.

[techgnome]

I mean, these little planes are used to go to work, just like your private car.Many people may spend more than $300000 to buy this car.Wouldn't it be better to buy a plane? But now the safety and quality of the plane is really not good. The accident rate may reach 50%.

There's no "may reach 50%" ... it will not only reach 50%, it'll surpass 50% and go right to 95% ... I've seen how people around here drive. On the ground. With curbs, ditches, lines, and signs ... I don't trust them in the sky. There's a reason you're required to have hundreds of hours of flight time before getting your pilot license. You only need 24 to get your driver's. And for some people out there, it shows.


-tg

[Shaggy Hiker]

Quiet engine is a killer engine, you won't notice the car when it runs you over (quiet but deadly ) . Also it's the engine of the EV wannabes

Not always, when on electric, my car makes a noise simply to alert people that it is in motion at low speed. At higher speeds, there is always road noise, which is often louder than engine noise...especially when people are using studded tires.

[sapator]

I can only imagine what will when we get to flying flying deloreans.
Hooonk Hooonkk, hey watch where you are flying! Hey you flought me illegally! Etc....
Then again EV's won't be a thing then, something logical would have been created as a fuel and not flying bricks....Probably cow farts.

[Shaggy Hiker]

There's no "may reach 50%" ... it will not only reach 50%, it'll surpass 50% and go right to 95% ... I've seen how people around here drive. On the ground. With curbs, ditches, lines, and signs ... I don't trust them in the sky. There's a reason you're required to have hundreds of hours of flight time before getting your pilot license. You only need 24 to get your driver's. And for some people out there, it shows.


-tg

You also need a medical clearance that would totally exclude a large swath of people.

I've always wondered why people thought flying cars would be a good idea. We don't do well driving in two dimensions with all kinds of assistance. Who thinks we'd suddenly do better in three dimensions with no assistance? The carnage would be epic, including the people hit by the falling debris.

[sapator]

Not always, when on electric, my car makes a noise simply to alert people that it is in motion at low speed. At higher speeds, there is always road noise, which is often louder than engine noise...especially when people are using studded tires.

I root also for farting cows here. The noise would be distinct, smelly and loud!

[Shaggy Hiker]

Revised video, with adjusted figures reflecting how much worse things really are than reported in the original.


While she doesn't explore the negative impacts on poorer countries, poorer families, and anyone outside the narrow peri-tropical bands of the planet that rarely get hot or cold... Dr. H. does explore the high cliff represented by the costs of transport electrification.

She needs to see the video I posted prior to this one, because she dismisses HEVs as "lettuce on a Big Mac." It seems more likely they are the real answer when combined with fleet average downsizing, limiting frivolous trips through a little planning, and other modest conservation habits.

But at least she covers the impracticality of moving to an EV economy.



She really makes it clear that the scam is foremost about wealth transfer. The costs involved are already projected to be at least in the 10s of trillions of USD.

Stumbling economies like the PRC have already dropped EV subsidies and incentives.

Did you even watch the video? She's supporting the change. She doesn't mention a thing about wealth transfer. She does talk about the costs, but doesn't put it to scale. For example, the costs she talks about for the US is some number of trillions of dollars, a sum that is a significant fraction of the cost of the Trump tax cut over ten years, but just a fraction of it. Spread that cost over the same time frame and the US spent more with the stroke of a pen.

She doesn't say we can't. She doesn't say we won't. She doesn't say we should not. She says it will be difficult and expensive, and that we probably should do it.

A hundred and fifty years back, you'd be making the same argument about how expensive and polluting it would be to provide gasoline for the shift away from horses to automobiles. You'd have been more correct then, since horses can be 100% recycled, but we still made the shift anyways. Why was that?

[dilettante]

Perhaps you just skimmed it.

She lists several trillions here, then several trillions there, and then several trillions somewhere else, without even covering all of the issues she raised. She also said those resources won't come from industry or investment, but massive piles of government cash. That cash falls on taxpayers, and as always tends to hit the most vulnerable hardest. Yet the least vulnerable see 100% of the benefits for a long, long time.

Very regressive. Of course it's a wealth transfer.

Does she think it is inevitable? Yes. Does she hope that in 100 years it will have been worth it? Yes.

Does she advocate for aggressive forced adoption schedules? Sure didn't look like it. Right after mentioning that she dove into the reasons why it painful. She even mentions the often glossed over inequity of access in the current charging infrastructure buildout.

What she didn't get in there are the inequities based on climate geography. People living where it gets really hot and really cold will experience range truncation and general performance issues.

I believe that what you took away a a positive tone was as much walking on eggshells to avoid being cancelled as anything else.

Are you also a fan of extensive 20 MPH Limit Zones, e.g. in Wales?

[dilettante]

I'm not arguing against a future with electrified vehicles. I just think the forced schedules are too aggressive and a different balance of technology deployments along with conservation measures make sense.

Start with the big cities. A mix of mass transit and new-tech golf cart rentals (something like EV kei cars) might make a lot more sense.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Start with the big cities. A mix of mass transit and new-tech golf cart rentals (something like EV kei cars) might make a lot more sense.

I REALLY like that idea, but then, I've always had a strange fascination with golf carts that I haven't quite figured out, yet. I don't play golf, so it's not that.

Putting that aside, the electric scooter thing has some pretty obvious issues, and e-bikes slightly less of one. e-Cart fixes those while adding a few others.

How about one of those pedal bars? Have you seen those? You get one person serving, one person steering, and a dozen drinking and pedaling. There's one or more in Boise, but I also saw some in Seattle. Seems a strange thing to have in a city as hilly (not to mention rainy) as Seattle. Seems like it could get a bit exciting, if you pick the right route.

[dilettante]

How about one of those pedal bars?

Only pictures. Lots of jokes about drunk driving and such.

Seemed more like a group activity. Maybe something to rent for a company picnic, but I never worked anywhere myself that had those.

[wes4dbt]

How about one of those pedal bars? Have you seen those? You get one person serving, one person steering, and a dozen drinking and pedaling. There's one or more in Boise, but I also saw some in Seattle. Seems a strange thing to have in a city as hilly (not to mention rainy) as Seattle. Seems like it could get a bit exciting, if you pick the right route.

I saw one of those for the first time a few months ago when my daughter and some of her friends went on one. If they have those in Seattle I'd guest they're in the wharf area. Pretty flat there.

Does seem like one of those thing with a limited life span. Fun to do once.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I saw one in the Ballard area, which is relatively, though not completely, flat. The paving was pretty rough, too, with embedded railroad tracks that they had to cross. Seemed a bit more athletic than the pub cycle that operates in Boise during festivals.

Does seem like something to do only once and with a group of friends, though.