Anyone watch "Adam Ruins Everything"?

[Brian37]

I love that show because it exposes the abuses of corporate America. 

Anywho, I was watching a repeat this morning overnight, and the episode was about how Ticket Master has a monopoly on music venues and price gouges and unless you are say Beyonce, most artists are lucky if they break even, and have to rely, not on their music, but become basically salespeople for the record label. 

Anyway, anyone wanna guess which band the show mentioned? Ticket Master didn't exist during the 70s, but the show did mention this certain band in the history of music.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

'The Amboy Dukes'?

Boru

[Brian37]

'The Amboy Dukes'?

Boru

No, close though, it was the Andrew Sisters. After all I am the ABBA boy from company B.

[Fake Messiah]

I watched it a little bit and he seems to be wrong about the stuff he is saying like that electric cars pollute more than gasoline cars.

[The Grand Nudger]

More than hybrids, was their main comparison - and they can. It all depends on where you get your power from. At the time the episode was written, you'd have a higher carbon footprint with an ev than you would with a hybrid in a quarter of all us states.

Then you have to factor in that their hybrid was used but still worked - the main draw was to reduce carbon footprint...the ev.. a brand new tesla. Greenies get overprotective. He was railing against green advertising conceits - not evs. For most of us, buying a used hybrid is probably the best bet...but for those of us who already have a hybrid, and who do live in areas with cleaner energy, a used ev would be the way to go.

[Fake Messiah]

From what I remember (I haven't re-watched the video yet) is that Adam claims how EVs pollute more than gasoline cars because they take electricity from the grid that gets supplied by coal and oil. But that seems to be misleading.

Here's for instance from Skeptoid podcast episode on that subject that came out not long after Adam's episode

The claim that the lifecycle of an electric car produces more greenhouse gases than an internal combustion car is entirely the result of 50% carefully cherrypicked spin doctoring combined with 50% outright falsehoods. Here's the only way that argument can be made to work. If you buy an electric car with the biggest battery that requires the most manufacturing resources, if you drive your electric car in the least efficient way, if you drive your electric car in the worst climatic conditions for battery life, if you charge it only with electricity generated entirely by oil or coal, if you do not properly recycle the battery at the end of its life, and if you choose for your comparison the biggest-battery electric car against the smallest, lightest, compact internal combustion car: only then will it be true that the lifespan of your electric car generates more greenhouse gases than an internal combu— Oh wait, no; crunching the numbers again, the answer is still no. Even this worst case scenario substantially beats even the most efficient internal combustion cars. There's still one thing we have to do to before our electric car will actually be worse, and that's crash it and remove it from service before it's been driven anywhere. Because as soon as you and your internal combustion counterpart start driving, the scale tips the other direction.

https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4687

And I myself don't think that EVs are the best solution because there are still like over billion of cars to be replaced (and I think Adam mentioned that), so perhaps the best solution would be carbon capture fuel since then people wouldn't have to buy new cars and carbon would only circle around instead of new carbon (and other pollutants) being dug up from the ground and pumped in the air.

But then again lots (or most?) people do buy every car every 15 or so years so why not electric?

[The Valkyrie]

No, but I have seen "Ralph Breaks the Internet".

[The Grand Nudger]

From what I remember (I haven't re-watched the video yet) is that Adam claims how EVs pollute more than gasoline cars because they take electricity from the grid that gets supplied by coal and oil. But that seems to be misleading.

Hybrids, again.  The episiode setup was about a guy who had a hybrid thinking of purchasing a new ev to cut carbon. It was their intent to demonstrate how an ev's carbon savings are conditional.  They are.   In a quarter of states and for all of the people who live in them...a hybrid had a lower carbon footprint than an ev precisely because of how they generated that electricity. 

That was four years ago.   Last year we got new numbers.  Hybrids continue to beat evs in Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, N Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming.  In seven more states, evs are becoming more competitive but certainly not competitive enough to offset their more costly manufacture (these two groups were the quarter of states in which a hybrid flatly outperformed evs on the carbon front when the episode aired.  

W Virginia was (and still is) a huge outlier... and would actually fit the mischaracterization of the episode that lead to a bunch of well meaning but pointless attempts at a rebuttal.   There's very little, if any, carbon benefit to driving an ev over a gas powered vehicle in that state. This is because an ev is estimated to produce over 9klbs of carbon well to wheel annually in WV, which is right up there with any comparable gas powered vehicle.