'I Feel Duped on Climate Change'

1DFFBD28-3902-46FB-B2B2-CA8F81C65805.jpeg
 
Lows of 63 and 64 F the next 2 days. I looked at the next 24 hours. Above 88F for only 5 hours (12:30-5:30). Outside of that, the weather is about perfect.
 
mchammer said:
Lows of 63 and 64 F the next 2 days. I looked at the next 24 hours. Above 88F for only 5 hours (12:30-5:30). Outside of that, the weather is about perfect.
Click to expand...

It's like a big part of your agenda on this thread is to make me look like a weenie for complaining about the heat. Lol.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
Mercedes EV achieves 747 miles on a single charge. little by little that "range anxiety" boogeyman is losing its grip.

Mercedes Vision EQXX Sets an All-electric Distance Record of 747 Miles. | by slashdotted | Jun, 2022 | DataDrivenInvestor
Click to expand...
Let's see a test in real heat and real-world conditions. Houston to Las Cruces is right at 800 miles, has several hundred miles of 80+ MPH speed limits, and gives an opportunity for lights to be used.

Somehow, I doubt it would make that trip...
 
Horn6721 said:
Exactly BOSD
But in the meantime Gov't should NOT kill the industry that provides for us now.
Click to expand...
Agreed 100%. Dem's are making the transition cost 20x more than it needs to and causing 20x the pain for everyone because they are imposing carbon neutral on a ridiculous timeline. But really EV's are a superior tech that will overtake ICE at some point even without Dem mandates. In my opinion, the pump has been primed and EV credits at this point are just Solyndra-style handouts... just spread out differently.
 
Ten years ago the naysayers were saying "they'll never get more than 150 miles". 8 years ago, they were saying "they'll never get more than 200". and so forth...

All I'm trying to say with all of my EV posts is that EV tech is improving on all fronts very rapidly. and I would also say VERY PREDICTABLY as well. For 90% + of all your traveling needs current EV's likely satisfy the demands.

currently they aren't good at these things;
1. towing - they still suck at this
2. routine long distance commutes - the kind that you do 3-4 times per week over 80 miles each way. If you're logging 6k+ per month EV's probably aren't right for you. yet.
3. if you don't have any way to plug into a standard outlet at home/overnight - if you are reliant on public stations for charging, then i wouldn't do an EV yet
4. priced out of a vehicle because they are still higher than ICE of same capability
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
All I'm trying to say with all of my EV posts is that EV tech is improving on all fronts very rapidly. and I would also say VERY PREDICTABLY as well. For 90% + of all your traveling needs current EV's likely satisfy the demands.
Click to expand...

They are improving. That is true. The problem is that we already have very good technology for personal transportation. The EV even when "complete" doesn't do anything that ICE vehicles already do. We as a society are dumping billions of dollars into development for something society doesn't really need. Those billions could be spent developing something else, new to the world.

One thing that could be beneficial is to use batteries to give vehicles more gas mileage. That could make vehicles go farther between refills and reduces the need for gasoline. The challenge would be to keep selling price very close to std vehicles. If they could do that, then that would be a real benefit to people.

Merely replacing one vehicle with another that does basically the same thing is a huge waste of money.
 
Monahorns said:
They are improving. That is true. The problem is that we already have very good technology for personal transportation. The EV even when "complete" doesn't do anything that ICE vehicles already do. We as a society are dumping billions of dollars into development for something society doesn't really need. Those billions could be spent rdeveloping something else, new to the world.

One thing that could be beneficial is to use batteries to give vehicles more gas mileage. That could make vehicles go farther between refills and reduces the need for gasoline. The challenge would be to keep selling price very close to std vehicles. If they could do that, then that would be a real benefit to people.

Merely replacing one vehicle with another that does basically the same thing is a huge waste of money.
Click to expand...
As a guy who did a year in Iraq and a year in AFG I can say that not having to give a crap about what happens in the middle east is an outcome i'd like to see. I do think there are climate benefits to fewer ICE on the road in addition to pollution concerns, but my biggest reason for wanting far lower dependence on oil is national security and fewer geopolitical entanglements. i don't mind increased drilling in the US as long as it done with safety and environmentally sound methods. I do mind having to go to Saudi to say please.
 
Last edited:
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
As a guy who did a year in Iraq and a year in AFG I can say that not having to give a crap about what happens in the middle east is an outcome i'd like to see. I do think there are climate benefits to fewer ICE on the road in addition to pollution concerns, but my biggest reason for wanting far lower dependence on oil is national security and fewer geopolitical entanglements. i don't increased drilling the US as long as it done with safety and environmentally sound methods. I do mind having to go to Saudi to say please.
Click to expand...
I guess you have missed where most of the components for the batteries come from...China is going to have the US by the short and curlies with the move to EV and solar.

The States lack the materials to shove even a fraction of the population into a vehicle that many neither way nor need. If an EV works for you, fine. In the meantime, I will continue driving my vehicles equipped with the engine in the correct place and (mostly) driven by the rear wheels (one of the six is an AWD).

And I guess you forget that the plastic crap in the cars is derived from petroleum...

Oh, and enjoy the overloaded grid issues...
 
mb227 said:
In the meantime, I will continue driving my vehicles equipped with the engine in the correct place and (mostly) driven by the rear wheels (one of the six is an AWD).
Click to expand...

If it's RWD, it's best if the engine is in rear (or mid-rear).
 
mb227 said:
I guess you have missed where most of the components for the batteries come from...China is going to have the US by the short and curlies with the move to EV and solar.

The States lack the materials to shove even a fraction of the population into a vehicle that many neither way nor need. If an EV works for you, fine. In the meantime, I will continue driving my vehicles equipped with the engine in the correct place and (mostly) driven by the rear wheels (one of the six is an AWD).

And I guess you forget that the plastic crap in the cars is derived from petroleum...

Oh, and enjoy the overloaded grid issues...
Click to expand...
"China does not boast an abundance of battery metal deposits but ranks first largely due to its control over 80% of global raw material refining capacity."

refining capacity is something that can be built, we just haven't done it.

and plastics account for only roughly 3% of how petroleum is used. I don't think that plastics typically fall into the "national interests" bucket that gets us into wars.
 
Mr. Deez said:
If it's RWD, it's best if the engine is in rear (or mid-rear).
Click to expand...
Yeah, but there aren't many vehicles built that way...not even if you jump to the $100K+ range. And then the numbers dwindle when you look for one of those built correctly, with three pedals. And then factor in functionality and the choices are almost non-existent...

Oh, and data point...one of the reasons vehicles like the first and second generation Miata put the battery in the trunk was to maintain a 50/50 balance.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
As a guy who did a year in Iraq and a year in AFG I can say that not having to give a crap about what happens in the middle east is an outcome i'd like to see. I do think there are climate benefits to fewer ICE on the road in addition to pollution concerns, but my biggest reason for wanting far lower dependence on oil is national security and fewer geopolitical entanglements. i don't mind increased drilling in the US as long as it done with safety and environmentally sound methods. I do mind having to go to Saudi to say please.
Click to expand...

There is oil all over the world and the known reserves are growing. We don't go to Saudi Arabia for oil. We buy it on a global market. The big issue is when OPEC decides to restrict oil production and thereby increases prices. But the bigger issue is refining capacity in the US. Build out refining capacity in the US and we are less dependent on fuels from outside the US.

There are 100 different ways to skin the cat on this one including making nuclear powered vehicles for the military. There are multiple feed stocks out there that we don't even use today. That is where fuel research should be focused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

Predict TEXAS-ARIZONA STATE

CFP Round 2 • Peach Bowl
Wed, Jan 1 • 12:00 PM on ESPN
AZ State game and preview thread


Chick-fil-A Peach Bowl website

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top