Something for nothing

[onlinebiker]

I suppose this is what OLB would like everyone to be driving...

You simple minded cumstain....

You call me a hypocrite and a straw man arguer --- and I have NEVER said I like trucks (I don't) or stinky diesels (don't like those either).

You think that just because I don't buy into the leftie bullshit - hook, line and sinker (like you) that I'm some sort of Republican, Trump worshiping goat fucker who drives a truck, wears a big belt buckle and spits tobacco juice on every dog that comes along.

Wrong - dipshit.


I drive a little bitty car that gets good gas mileage - when I drive. (which isn't every day).

I like electric cars.


But - I know they are not the solution to any problem.

......

The gains made by everyone driving electric cars will come at a heavy environmental cost. You won't see it - because it will be in areas where they allow strip mining, or build coal, and natural gas fired power plants. You won't see the toxic shit that comes from the "recycling" of batteries - and they won't put the toxic radioactive shit from power plants in your back yard.

So you're fine with it.

You're happy to pollute and destroy other peoples environment as long as YOURS is nice and tidy.

.....

Electric cars are no solution to our problems. But - you do see a bunch of simple minded gits like yourself smiling, pointing at the rear of one and cheerily proclaiming "NO TAILPIPE - NO EMMISSIONS!!!"

---

That sounds suspuciously like " prove there ISN'T A God".

For the same reason.

You WANT your narrative to be true.

And that sounds suspiciously like a dodge. The claim made for electric vehicles is that they produce no emissions, not that building them produces no emissions.

I asked a perfectly straightforward question: Can you show that the total emissions of an electric car (production + driving) exceeds that of a petrol-powered car?

Boru

Your edit: I’m happy to admit that producing EVs creates fossil fuel emissions. I said as much earlier.

Tailpipe emissions are not all there is to it.
First -- you have to BUILD all those EV's.
You are counting on the difference in emissions making up for the outlay of energy needed to build the EV's -- which will include mining for rare earth minerals at a larger scale than is current.
If you are SERIOUS about making a better environment - that's a lot easier than you think.


First thing - RAISE TAXES ON FUEL. Say 3 bucks a gallon. When driving gets expensive - people drive less -and don't buy bigassed fuel guzzling vehicles they don't really need.

Second - reduce demand by reducing population.

Third thing - make vehicles last longer. Require underbodies to be made from rust proof materials such as stainless steel or carbon fiber. OUTLAW salting of roads in the winter. (learn to drive on ice asshole -- turning the Great Lakes into the New Great Salt Lakes isn't worth you being a shitty driver who needs the roads salted every time it snows) If you don't have to make a new vehicle every 10 to 15 years - you save energy and material resources.


......

Or buy an EV and pretend you're saving the planet.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I suppose this is what OLB would like everyone to be driving...

You simple minded cumstain....

You call me a hypocrite and a straw man arguer --- and I have NEVER said I like trucks (I don't) or stinky diesels (don't like those either).

You think that just because I don't buy into the leftie bullshit - hook, line and sinker (like you) that I'm some sort of Republican, Trump worshiping goat fucker who drives a truck, wears a big belt buckle and spits tobacco juice on every dog that comes along.

Wrong - dipshit.


I drive a little bitty car that gets good gas mileage - when I drive. (which isn't every day).

I like electric cars.


But - I know they are not the solution to any problem.

......

The gains made by everyone driving electric cars will come at a heavy environmental cost. You won't see it - because it will be in areas where they allow strip mining, or build coal, and natural gas fired power plants. You won't see the toxic shit that comes from the "recycling" of batteries - and they won't put the toxic radioactive shit from power plants in your back yard.

So you're fine with it.

You're happy to pollute and destroy other peoples environment as long as YOURS is nice and tidy.

.....

Electric cars are no solution to our problems. But - you do see a bunch of simple minded gits like yourself smiling, pointing at the rear of one and cheerily proclaiming "NO TAILPIPE - NO EMMISSIONS!!!"

---

And that sounds suspiciously like a dodge. The claim made for electric vehicles is that they produce no emissions, not that building them produces no emissions.

I asked a perfectly straightforward question: Can you show that the total emissions of an electric car (production + driving) exceeds that of a petrol-powered car?

Boru

Your edit: I’m happy to admit that producing EVs creates fossil fuel emissions. I said as much earlier.

Tailpipe emissions are not all there is to it.
First -- you have to BUILD all those EV's.
You are counting on the difference in emissions making up for the outlay of energy needed to build the EV's -- which will include mining for rare earth minerals at a larger scale than is current.
If you are SERIOUS about making a better environment - that's a lot easier than you think.


First thing - RAISE TAXES ON FUEL. Say 3 bucks a gallon. When driving gets expensive - people drive less -and don't buy bigassed fuel guzzling vehicles they don't really need.

Second - reduce demand by reducing population.

Third thing - make vehicles last longer. Require underbodies to be made from rust proof materials such as stainless steel or carbon fiber. OUTLAW salting of roads in the winter. (learn to drive on ice asshole -- turning the Great Lakes into the New Great Salt Lakes isn't worth you being a shitty driver who needs the roads salted every time it snows) If you don't have to make a new vehicle every 10 to 15 years - you save energy and material resources.


......

Or buy an EV and pretend you're saving the planet.

None of those are completely bad ideas (although your two suggestions for rust proofing are a little problematic), but they don’t address the central error in your argument - that electric cars are no better for the environment than IC cars. They are and you know it.

Nice attempt at deflection, though.

Boru

[onlinebiker]

You simple minded cumstain....

You call me a hypocrite and a straw man arguer --- and I have NEVER said I like trucks (I don't) or stinky diesels (don't like those either).

You think that just because I don't buy into the leftie bullshit - hook, line and sinker (like you) that I'm some sort of Republican, Trump worshiping goat fucker who drives a truck, wears a big belt buckle and spits tobacco juice on every dog that comes along.

Wrong - dipshit.


I drive a little bitty car that gets good gas mileage - when I drive. (which isn't every day).

I like electric cars.


But - I know they are not the solution to any problem.

......

The gains made by everyone driving electric cars will come at a heavy environmental cost. You won't see it - because it will be in areas where they allow strip mining, or build coal, and natural gas fired power plants. You won't see the toxic shit that comes from the "recycling" of batteries - and they won't put the toxic radioactive shit from power plants in your back yard.

So you're fine with it.

You're happy to pollute and destroy other peoples environment as long as YOURS is nice and tidy.

.....

Electric cars are no solution to our problems. But - you do see a bunch of simple minded gits like yourself smiling, pointing at the rear of one and cheerily proclaiming "NO TAILPIPE - NO EMMISSIONS!!!"

---

Tailpipe emissions are not all there is to it.
First -- you have to BUILD all those EV's.
You are counting on the difference in emissions making up for the outlay of energy needed to build the EV's -- which will include mining for rare earth minerals at a larger scale than is current.
If you are SERIOUS about making a better environment - that's a lot easier than you think.


First thing - RAISE TAXES ON FUEL. Say 3 bucks a gallon. When driving gets expensive - people drive less -and don't buy bigassed fuel guzzling vehicles they don't really need.

Second - reduce demand by reducing population.

Third thing - make vehicles last longer. Require underbodies to be made from rust proof materials such as stainless steel or carbon fiber. OUTLAW salting of roads in the winter. (learn to drive on ice asshole -- turning the Great Lakes into the New Great Salt Lakes isn't worth you being a shitty driver who needs the roads salted every time it snows) If you don't have to make a new vehicle every 10 to 15 years - you save energy and material resources.


......

Or buy an EV and pretend you're saving the planet.

None of those are completely bad ideas (although your two suggestions for rust proofing are a little problematic), but the don’t address the central error in your argument - that electric cars are no better for the environment than IC cars. They are and you know it.

Nice attempt at deflection, though.

Boru

And you REALLY believe in God - right?


Is that how we' re doing things now?

[LadyForCamus]

They’re still a net plus, environmentally speaking. While it’s absolutely true that the production of electric vehicles produces emissions, the vehicles themselves do not.

On the one hand, then, you’ve got IC engines which are responsible for emissions during both production AND operation, and electric vehicles which have only the former. This particular gripe is only valid is you can show that the emissions resulting from the production of an electric car equal or exceed the emissions of an IC car over the life of each vehicle. Can you?

Boru

That sounds suspuciously like " prove there ISN'T A God".

For the same reason.

You WANT your narrative to be true.


And - you are still denying that the EV' s use is still responsible for emmissions.

Lol,wut? I don’t think you read Boru’s post very carefully. 🤦‍♀️

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

None of those are completely bad ideas (although your two suggestions for rust proofing are a little problematic), but the don’t address the central error in your argument - that electric cars are no better for the environment than IC cars. They are and you know it.

Nice attempt at deflection, though.

Boru

And you REALLY believe in God - right?


Is that how we' re doing things now?

Well, you haven’t show any evidence that electric cars are not more environmentally friendly than petrol cars. And since you keep dodging and deflecting what should be a (fairly) simple thing to prove, I can safely assume that you know you’re wrong.

Boru

[onlinebiker]

You can (and will) assume whatever you like.


It doesn' t make you right.

...

Simple to prove? 

Hardly. The variables needed to come up with real numbers?  You ONLY need the following - the hydrocarbon waste output of every ICE on the planet - 
Vs the hydrocarbon output of the percentage of use of every fuel fired power plant used to recharge every EV on the planet. Don' t forget the mining and recycling factors for all those exotic batteries......

Get all those numbers and we can do the math.


Or - just believe the advertising that says what a swell person you are for buying this new 50 thousand dollar consumer product....

[Jackalope]

KNOW [/b]that EVs use electricity produced in a power plant. We KNOW that most of that power includes fossil fuels.

If you're talking about the entire US grid as a whole, yes. Regionally, not so much.

I live in Washington state, which is the county's largest net exporter of electricity, most of which is produced with renewable sources (primarily hydroelectric). IIRC, it's about 62% hydro, 15% natural gas, 6% coal, 8% nuclear, with the balanced covered by biomass, wind and solar.

So yeah, there's some point-of-production emissions, but nothing like what comes out of my neighbor's Pontiac.

[onlinebiker]

KNOW [/b]that EVs use electricity produced in a power plant.  We KNOW that most of that power includes fossil fuels.

If you're talking about the entire US grid as a whole, yes.  Regionally, not so much.  

I live in Washington state, which is the county's largest net exporter of electricity, most of which is produced with renewable sources (primarily hydroelectric).  IIRC, it's about 62% hydro, 15% natural gas, 6% coal, 8% nuclear, with the balanced covered by biomass, wind and solar.

So yeah, there's some point-of-production emissions, but nothing like what comes out of my neighbor's Pontiac.

So buy out everyone on the Mississippi River basin - and we'll build one bigassed dam. That might give us enough....

The refugees can all move to Seattle and get $15 an hour working at Starbucks or Micky D's....

Win - win.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

You can (and will) assume whatever you like.


It doesn' t make you right.

...

Simple to prove? 

Hardly. The variables needed to come up with real numbers?  You ONLY need the following - the hydrocarbon waste output of every ICE on the planet - 
Vs the hydrocarbon output of the percentage of use of every fuel fired power plant used to recharge every EV on the planet. Don' t forget the mining and recycling factors for all those exotic batteries......

Get all those numbers and we can do the math.


Or - just believe the advertising that says what a swell person you are for buying this new 50 thousand dollar consumer product....

Lol, it’s YOUR claim, YOU get the numbers. Otherwise, abandon this failed argument.

Not sure where you got that $50k price tag from - there are at least 20 models of electric car priced under $50 000.

Boru

Edit: FYI, I found the numbers, and it doesn’t look good for you. You can find them yourself - takes less than two minutes of web searching.

I suppose I could simply tell you the numbers, but then what would happen to Man’s search for knowledge?

[Jackalope]

If you're talking about the entire US grid as a whole, yes.  Regionally, not so much.  

I live in Washington state, which is the county's largest net exporter of electricity, most of which is produced with renewable sources (primarily hydroelectric).  IIRC, it's about 62% hydro, 15% natural gas, 6% coal, 8% nuclear, with the balanced covered by biomass, wind and solar.

So yeah, there's some point-of-production emissions, but nothing like what comes out of my neighbor's Pontiac.

So buy out everyone on the Mississippi River basin - and we'll build one bigassed dam. That might give us enough....

The refugees can all move to Seattle and get $15 an hour working at Starbucks or Micky D's....

Win - win.

This has fuck all to do with anything I said, and serves as a further reminder why I don't care to interact with you.

Enjoy your day