3.573 TRILLION kWh is needed if 25% of all cars/trucks in USA are EVs. Would any of you EV supporters please refute that FACT?

[healthmyths]

No, No ,
YOU haven't answered the question because despite all your Chart Barrages/ostensible numbers... you didn't understand:
1. That CO2 was going up, Not halving as your Emissions vs Trees numbers had dictated.
2. Which is all rather Astonishing..
because THEE #1 Fact in the AGW debate is CO2 rising from 280 to 420 in the Industrial revolution.
So YOU should have looked into it because it doesn't make sense according to YOUR numbers.

So you did NOT KNOW THERE WAS A RISING CO2 !eve! (or didn't think anyone else did), the #1 cited fact in the debate!!!
You are buried in your wittle cherry plicked figures.



Because the earth as Different place 500 (and 800) million years ago. Different atmosphere, radiation intake, whatever.

Another piece of ILLogic!!!! Why would you go to the "earliest" time instead of the most recent time (before present warming)? One would want to get the most similar planetary conditions if one wanted to Judge if the last mere 150 years of the Industrial Revolution/GHGs was the cause for the Spike/AGW!!!

You have No Common Sense.
You are an undebatable Mr Magoo throwing charts and numbers around that Contradict the Facts as they ARE.
`

Well you haven't answered the simple FACT that 3 trillion trees absorb 72 billion tons of Co2
while the total earth emission is 36.3 billion tons.
These are the facts and you haven't explained the anomaly that trees absorb all the Co2 plus another 36 billion tons!
Also the logic is that the Earth sustained 3,000 ppm at one time and it didn't halt these species from living!

500 million years ago​

Fossil evidence shows that animals were exploring the land at this time. The first animals to do so were probably euthycarcinoids – thought to be the missing link between insects and crustaceans. Nectocaris pteryx, thought to be the oldest known ancestor of the cephalopods – the group that includes squid – lives around this time.

Timeline: The evolution of life

The story of evolution spans over 3 billion years and shows how microscopic single-celled organisms transformed Earth and gave rise to complex organisms like animals

www.newscientist.com

So if 3,000 ppm of Co2 existed when these animals existed were they affected by the massive amount of Co2?
Fossil records reveal that atmospheric CO2 levels around 600 million years ago were about 7,000 parts per million, compared with 379 ppm in 2005. Then approximately 480 million years ago those levels gradually dropped to 4,000 ppm over about 100 million years, while average temperatures remained at a steady 72 degrees. They then jumped rapidly to 4,500 ppm and guess what! Temperatures dove to an estimated average similar to today, even though the CO2 level was around twelve times higher than now. Yes, as CO2 went up, temperatures plummeted.

Breaking News: The Climate Actually Changes!

The new convention is to refer to "global warming" (something many have told us to worry about) as "climate change" (meaning pretty much the same thing since it's supposed to be bad and caused by us anyway). The main difference appears to be that climate change is even worse, since [...]

www.forbes.com

Now where is your explanation for the FACTS Co2 was 7,000 PPM 600 million years ago and you get excited over 420ppm?

 

[abu afak]

...Global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions rose by 6% in 2021 to 36.3 billion tonnes,...
So you stupidly still haven't answered the question 3 trillion trees absorb 72 billion tons of Co2... so what's the problem?
Oh one other question for you ...

No, No ,
YOU haven't answered the question because despite all your Chart Barrages/ostensible numbers... you didn't understand:
1. That CO2 was going up, Not halving as your Emissions vs Trees numbers had dictated.
2. Which is all rather Astonishing..
because THEE #1 Fact in the AGW debate is CO2 rising from 280 to 420 in the Industrial revolution.
So YOU should have looked into it because it doesn't make sense according to YOUR numbers.

So you did NOT KNOW THERE WAS A RISING CO2 !eve! (or didn't think anyone else did), the #1 cited fact in the debate!!!
You are buried in your wittle cherry plicked figures.

how did we get 3,000 to 9,000 Co2 PPM 500 million years ago? I don't think we had cars but I'm sure you think that!

A Graphical History of Atmospheric CO2 Levels Over Time | Earth.Org​

As the most abundant greenhouse gas in our atmosphere, CO2 levels have varied widely over the course of the Earth’s 4.54 billion year history.
earth.org
Click to expand...

Because the earth as Different place 500 (and 800) million years ago. Different atmosphere, radiation intake, whatever.

Another piece of ILLogic!!!! Why would you go to the "earliest" time instead of the most recent time (before present warming)? One would want to get the most similar planetary conditions if one wanted to Judge if the last mere 150 years of the Industrial Revolution/GHGs was the cause for the Spike/AGW!!!

You have No Common Sense.
You are an undebatable Mr Magoo throwing charts and numbers around that Contradict the Facts as they ARE.
Go back to wherever you were hiding in your 11 year membership.
`

 

[ReinyDays]

FIRST of all YOU are a frigging liar because you blame ME??? For copy/paste of WHAT LIES??? Prove the follow are LIES!

I don't disagree with your math! NO one would.
BUT he problem is dummies like you haven't seemed to understand to meet the DEMAND of EVs in the USA for electricity would be MORE THAN 14,782,215,480,000 kWh from a system that provides today Just 4,165,030,000,000 kWh.
It will also cost $7.711 TRILLION to $70 Trillion!
Where will that money come from if the power is from solar panels or wind turbines?
FACTS!!!
If it is WIND TURBINES meeting the 14,782,215,480,000 kWh it would cost:

• $70,176,069,218,221 to build and install
• 17,535,250 wind turbines to provide the
• 14.7 Trillion ADDITIONAL kWh!

Again just to be clear:

• Today the total output of 11,070 power plants in the USA is 4,165,030,000,000 kWh.
• To provide ALL cars/trucks electricity will require an additional 14,782,215,480,000 kWh
• To provide the above additional kWh will cost if solar panels..$7,711,261,265,664
• Or if you think wind turbines is the answer... 22,475,973 turbines at a cost of $70.1 Trillion!

So to repeat your math is correct regarding gas vs kWh... but that math is considering TODAY's electric rate you pay!
Where will the $7.7 trillion to $70.1 Trillion COME from to meet the 14,782,215,480,000 kWh demand?
Maybe you should add into the COST you calculated:

• Solar panels cost/by 123.6 million USA households /10 years --- $6,238/household/year!
• wind turbines cost/by 123.6 million USA households /10 years --- $ $56,776/household/year!

View attachment 718708

The typical wind turbine is 2-3 MW in power, so most turbines cost in the $2-4 million dollar range. Operation and maintenance runs an additional $42,000-$48,000 per year according to research on wind turbine operational cost.Aug 7, 2021

Wind Turbine Cost: Worth The Million-Dollar Price In 2022?

Multimillion dollar price tag? Huge wind turbine cost a good investment? Do they really pay for themselves in 2022? How much power do they produce? Answers here

weatherguardwind.com

You've already shown how you lie with statistics ... why are you still posting lies? ...

We're talking about a country that went from discovery to vaporizing Hiroshima in less than seven years ... we put a man on the Moon and returned him safely home in less than 10 years ... yet you think we can't upgrade our electric grid in 25 years ...

That's pathetic ...

 

[healthmyths]

You've already shown how you lie with statistics ... why are you still posting lies? ...

We're talking about a country that went from discovery to vaporizing Hiroshima in less than seven years ... we put a man on the Moon and returned him safely home in less than 10 years ... yet you think we can't upgrade our electric grid in 25 years ...

That's pathetic ...

Did I ever say that? I'm pointing out the cost which dummies like you just think don't exist!
Simple facts folks
FACT a EV car uses .346 kilowatts per hour(kWh) to go 1 mile... 100 miles takes 34.6 kWh... and that means the battery has to be recharged. Average Electric Car kWh Per Mile [Results From 231 EVs]
Altogether, American drivers traveled 2.9 trillion miles on rural and urban roadways in 2020,

https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/

So if all the drivers that drove the 2.9 trillion miles used .346 kWh total kWh required: 1,107,200,000,000 kWh.
Well ok the USA uses 4,165,030,000,000 kWH Total electricity generated in USA in 2021

Electricity generation, capacity, and sales in the United States - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. annual electricity generation and generation capacity by fuel/energy sources and definitions of important electricity terms.

www.eia.gov

So that's 26% of the current total electricity generated by 11,070 total electric plants in the USA. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
This would mean black outs folks... unless there are 2,943 new power plants come on line.
Oh and by the way... the above figures are JUST for cars... the average truck uses 4.3 kWh per mile.
Average truck then has about 83,000 miles: again facts:How Many Miles Do Truckers Drive a Year?
FACT: if an EV truck travels 83,000 miles the total kWh is dividing 83,000 by 4.3 kWh/mile equals 19,636 kWh per truck OR 744,186,046,512 kWh.
based on FACT that Cars will use 1.107 Trillion kWh and Trucks 744 Billion kWh a total of 1.8 trillion kWh.
If the current 11,070 generate 4.165 Trillion kWh or 376,244,806 kWh then divide the total of EV cars&trucks of 1.8 trillion kWh... means
4,784 NEW power generating plants at an average cost of $1,661 per kilowatt of installed nameplate activity.

Power Plant Construction: How Much Does It Cost? | ProEst

Power plants are a key component of our critical infrastructure but must remain profitable for investors in order to continue operations. A fundamental factor

proest.com

So at $1,661 multiple times 1.8 trillion additional kWh by EVs... a total of $2,989,800,000,000 to build the additional power plants.
THAT cost will be added to all our electric bills. So given THE FACTS (US Households) there are
128,111,000 households that will be charged for this construction by the electric companies PER household over 10 years per year of nearly
$ 194.48 /month for 10 years per household JUST for EVs.
Do the math... Total NEW EVs power per year 1.8 Trillion if all cars/trucks are EV times $1,661/kWh is $2.9 trillion divided by 128.1 million USA
households or $23,338 or per year $2,338 or per month $194.48 per household for 10 years!
And you naively don't believe the power companies won't be recouping this additional 1.8 Trillion kWh per year from EVs?

 

[healthmyths]

No, No ,
YOU haven't answered the question because despite all your Chart Barrages/ostensible numbers... you didn't understand:
1. That CO2 was going up, Not halving as your Emissions vs Trees numbers had dictated.
2. Which is all rather Astonishing..
because THEE #1 Fact in the AGW debate is CO2 rising from 280 to 420 in the Industrial revolution.
So YOU should have looked into it because it doesn't make sense according to YOUR numbers.

So you did NOT KNOW THERE WAS A RISING CO2 !eve! (or didn't think anyone else did), the #1 cited fact in the debate!!!
You are buried in your wittle cherry plicked figures.




Because the earth as Different place 500 (and 800) million years ago. Different atmosphere, radiation intake, whatever.

Another piece of ILLogic!!!! Why would you go to the "earliest" time instead of the most recent time (before present warming)? One would want to get the most similar planetary conditions if one wanted to Judge if the last mere 150 years of the Industrial Revolution/GHGs was the cause for the Spike/AGW!!!

You have No Common Sense.
You are an undebatable Mr Magoo throwing charts and numbers around that Contradict the Facts as they ARE.
Go back to wherever you were hiding in your 11 year membership.
`

I never said it was "halfed"... I don't know if it is ! I'm just posting the anomaly! 72 billion tons of Co2 absorbed of the 36 billion tons emitted.

So are you contradicting these experts?
Do you agree with this number: 3.04 trillion trees in the entire world?
Expert: How Many Trees Are in the World? By Country, Type, Year (Updated 2022)

Do you agree with this number: 48 lbs of Co2 absorbed per tree or 72,960,000,000 TONs of Co2 absorbed.

The Power of One Tree - The Very Air We Breathe

The second in a series of blogs honoring the United Nation’s 2015 International Day of Forests On Saturday, March 21, the U.S. Forest Service will celebrate the United Nation’s International Day of Forests. With such an important worldwide recognition of all forests do for us humans, the Forest...

www.usda.gov

Do you agree with this number? 36.4 billion tons of Co2 emitted in 2021 .

Global CO2 emissions by year 1940-2023 | Statista

Annual global carbon dioxide emissions have increased by more than 60 percent since 1990 and are now at their highest ever levels.

www.statista.com

If you agree with these experts number then please explain why the discrepancy?

You are such an expert I'm sure you have a rational logical and supported by other "experts" such as you to the explanation why there is
a Co2 problem if all the Co2 emitted is absorbed by the 3.04 Trillion trees.
Oh one another anomaly ...
Grasslands account for between 20 and 40 percent of the world's land area.
expert: Grasslands Explained | National Geographic Society
lawns can sequester between 46.0 to 127.1 grams of carbon per square meter per year.
expert: How Organic Lawns Sequester Carbon
So where did 22,485,890,404 tons of Co2 go after a square meter of grasslands can absorb 100 grams of Co2/year?
So between 3.04 trillion trees and 20 - 40% of grasslands absorb between then 94,785,890,404 tons of Co2 annually?
And again you being such an expert you should be able to find out how much land is grassland of the 196,900,000 sq miles of land area.

 

[jc456]

How stupid are you! What is your problem in recognizing REALITY? OH I know it's because your are driven by emotion and have no time for facts. The facts are in front of you and YOU will be facing reality when there are blackouts in your area.

​

Rarely, we’re ever able to predict the future, and yet, one thing we know with certainty is that power outages are going to become more and more frequent over time.​

The power grid is aging and quickly becoming less stable, meaning power outages will become more common and most likely take longer to resolve.

According to energy.gov, “Today’s electric grid is aging and is being pushed to do more than it was originally designed to do.”

Our existing grid was built more than 30 years ago, and upgrades are long overdue. Plus, power outages have already begun to increase. As stated by NPR, “From the 1950s to the ’80s, significant power outages averaged fewer than five per year. But that’s changed. In 2007, there were 76, in 2011, more than 300.”

Are Power Outages Becoming More Frequent? - Northside Power

Rarely, we’re ever able to predict the future, and yet, one thing we know with certainty is that power outages are going to become more and more frequent over time.

northsidepower.com

AND that's before 25% of cars/trucks are EVs!
But of course YOU being such a dummy don't even have enough intelligence to see the potential problem!

I think he's driven by stupidity. Just is.

 

[abu afak]

I never said it was "halfed"... I don't know if it is ! I'm just posting the anomaly! 72 billion tons of Co2 absorbed of the 36 billion tons emitted.
So are you contradicting these experts?
Do you agree with this number: 3.04 trillion trees in the entire world?
Expert: How Many Trees Are in the World? By Country, Type, Year (Updated 2022)

Do you agree with this number: 48 lbs of Co2 absorbed per tree or 72,960,000,000 TONs of Co2 absorbed.

The Power of One Tree - The Very Air We Breathe

The second in a series of blogs honoring the United Nation’s 2015 International Day of Forests On Saturday, March 21, the U.S. Forest Service will celebrate the United Nation’s International Day of Forests. With such an important worldwide recognition of all forests do for us humans, the Forest...

www.usda.gov

Do you agree with this number? 36.4 billion tons of Co2 emitted in 2021 .

Global CO2 emissions by year 1940-2023 | Statista

Annual global carbon dioxide emissions have increased by more than 60 percent since 1990 and are now at their highest ever levels.

www.statista.com

If you agree with these experts number then please explain why the discrepancy?

You are such an expert I'm sure you have a rational logical and supported by other "experts" such as you to the explanation why there is
a Co2 problem if all the Co2 emitted is absorbed by the 3.04 Trillion trees.
Oh one another anomaly ...
Grasslands account for between 20 and 40 percent of the world's land area.
expert: Grasslands Explained | National Geographic Society
lawns can sequester between 46.0 to 127.1 grams of carbon per square meter per year.
expert: How Organic Lawns Sequester Carbon
So where did 22,485,890,404 tons of Co2 go after a square meter of grasslands can absorb 100 grams of Co2/year?
So between 3.04 trillion trees and 20 - 40% of grasslands absorb between then 94,785,890,404 tons of Co2 annually?
And again you being such an expert you should be able to find out how much land is grassland of the 196,900,000 sq miles of land area.

I'm not contradicting any experts, just your wacky conculsions and breathtaking ignorance of the Very Well known increase in CO2.

I see you have tried basically this same bogus thread/idea both in Politics, and another moved to "Badlands.'

Now stop hogging the keyboard and give the other patients a chance.

bye.
`

 

[healthmyths]

I'm not contradicting any experts, just your wacky conculsions and breathtaking ignorance of the Very Well known increase in CO2.

I see you have tried basically this same bogus thread/idea both in Politics, and another moved to "Badlands.'

Now stop hogging the keyboard and give the other patients a chance.

bye.
`

You write...I'm not contradicting any experts,
just your wacky conculsions and breathtaking ignorance of the Very Well known increase in CO2.

What conclusions did I make?

I asked YOU the supposedly expert why with 3 trillion trees and lawns (sequester between 46.0 to 127.1 grams of carbon per square meter per year) absorbing over 94,785,890,404 tons of Co2 annually of the 36.4 Billion tons of Co2 emitted?

What is the answer?

 

[abu afak]

You write...I'm not contradicting any experts,
just your wacky conculsions and breathtaking ignorance of the Very Well known increase in CO2.

What conclusions did I make?

I asked YOU the supposedly expert why with 3 trillion trees and lawns (sequester between 46.0 to 127.1 grams of carbon per square meter per year) absorbing over 94,785,890,404 tons of Co2 annually of the 36.4 Billion tons of Co2 emitted?

What is the answer?

I didn't make your claims YOU DID.
I didn't hit you that that contradicts the 100% Well known rise in CO2.
You didn't know CO2 had been rising since the Industrial Revolution? THEE Most Basic and well know fact in the debate.
Or that (using Your numbers) were it not for our emissions there would be no CO2 left! (just 3 trillion trees with nothing to breathe)

You're the one playing "expert" with Hundreds of numbers and charts.
But you're a blithering number Nut case.
Probably somewhere on the scale.
`

 

[healthmyths]

I didn't make your claims YOU DID.
I didn't hit you that that contradicts the 100% Well known rise in CO2.
You didn't know CO2 had been rising since the Industrial Revolution? THEE Most Basic and well know fact in the debate.
Or that (using Your numbers) were it not for our emissions there would be no CO2 left! (just 3 trillion trees with nothing to breathe)

You're the one playing "expert" with Hundreds of numbers and charts.
But you're a blithering number Nut case.
Probably somewhere on the scale.
`

So you can't answer the simple question. 3 Trillion trees absorbing 48 lbs of Co2 a year or 72 billion tons then why do we have
36.4 billion tons of Co2 being measured?
Why can't you tell me how can the "scientists" measure 36 billion tons of Co2 if the trees are absorbing 72 billion tons?
You are the expert. That's a simple question...and I'll rephrase for you.
A tree absorbs Co2. Fact from scientists:YES:
According to the Arbor Day Foundation , in one year a mature tree will absorb more than 48 pounds of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen in exchange.

The Power of One Tree - The Very Air We Breathe

The second in a series of blogs honoring the United Nation’s 2015 International Day of Forests On Saturday, March 21, the U.S. Forest Service will celebrate the United Nation’s International Day of Forests. With such an important worldwide recognition of all forests do for us humans, the Forest...

www.usda.gov

Multiple 3 trillion trees(FACT: How Many Trees Are in the World? By Country, Type, Year (Updated 2022)) times
48 lbs... equals 144,000,000,000,000 lbs of Co2 divided by 2,000 lbs in a ton or : 72,000,000,000 tons of Co2 absorbed every year.
So what's the answer? We have 34.81 billion tons of Co2 emitted per the experts:

Global CO2 emissions by year 1940-2023 | Statista

Annual global carbon dioxide emissions have increased by more than 60 percent since 1990 and are now at their highest ever levels.

www.statista.com

I'm just asking you as the expert... what's the answer?

 

[healthmyths]

So you can't answer the simple question. 3 Trillion trees absorbing 48 lbs of Co2 a year or 72 billion tons then why do we have
36.4 billion tons of Co2 being measured?
Why can't you tell me how can the "scientists" measure 36 billion tons of Co2 if the trees are absorbing 72 billion tons?
You are the expert. That's a simple question...and I'll rephrase for you.
A tree absorbs Co2. Fact from scientists:YES:
According to the Arbor Day Foundation , in one year a mature tree will absorb more than 48 pounds of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen in exchange.

The Power of One Tree - The Very Air We Breathe

The second in a series of blogs honoring the United Nation’s 2015 International Day of Forests On Saturday, March 21, the U.S. Forest Service will celebrate the United Nation’s International Day of Forests. With such an important worldwide recognition of all forests do for us humans, the Forest...

www.usda.gov

Multiple 3 trillion trees(FACT: How Many Trees Are in the World? By Country, Type, Year (Updated 2022)) times
48 lbs... equals 144,000,000,000,000 lbs of Co2 divided by 2,000 lbs in a ton or : 72,000,000,000 tons of Co2 absorbed every year.
So what's the answer? We have 34.81 billion tons of Co2 emitted per the experts:

Global CO2 emissions by year 1940-2023 | Statista

Annual global carbon dioxide emissions have increased by more than 60 percent since 1990 and are now at their highest ever levels.

www.statista.com

I'm just asking you as the expert... what's the answer?

I thoroughly understand why you're tearful as I would be too if I couldn't answer the simple question i.e. how come 3 trillion trees absorb all the emissions and yet we have 36 billion tons of Co2. Hard to explain isn't it?

 

[abu afak]

I thoroughly understand why you're tearful as I would be too if I couldn't answer the simple question i.e. how come 3 trillion trees absorb all the emissions and yet we have 36 billion tons of Co2. Hard to explain isn't it?

You're such a Jerk.
You could not answer why it didn't even occur to you why CO2 was rising despite YOUR Claims.
Meaning you didn't know CO2 was rising or trying to ignore/fudge it.

IAC,
I can provide the answer.. Of Course.

""Before the industrial revolution, the CO2 content in the air remained quite steady for thousands of years. Natural CO2 is not static, however. It is generated by natural processes, and absorbed by others.​

​

Natural land and ocean carbon remains roughly in balance and have done so for a long time – and we know this because we can measure historic levels of CO2 in the atmosphere both directly (in ice cores) and indirectly (through proxies).​

​

But consider what happens when more CO2 is released from Outside of the natural carbon cycle – by burning fossil fuels. Although our output of 29 gigatons of CO2 is tiny compared to the 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle each year, it adds up because the land and ocean cannot absorb all of the extra CO2.​

​

About 60% of this additional CO2 is absorbed. The rest remains in the atmosphere, and as a consequence, atmospheric CO2 is at its Highest level in 15 to 20 Million years (Tripati et al. 2009). (A Natural change of 100ppm normally takes 5,000 to 20,000 years. The recent increase of 100ppm has taken just 120 years). ​

(a-a that is now 140 PPM)​

​

Human CO2 emissions upset the natural balance of the carbon cycle. Man-made CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by a third (a-a that's now Half/50%) since the pre-industrial era, creating an artificial forcing of global temperatures which is warming the planet. While fossil-fuel derived CO2 is a very small component of the global carbon cycle, the extra CO2 is cumulative because the natural carbon exchange cannot absorb all the additional CO2.​

​

The level of atmospheric CO2 is building up, the additional CO2 is being produced by burning fossil fuels, and that build up is accelerating.​

​

How do human CO2 emissions compare to natural CO2 emissions?

<p>The CO2 that nature emits (from the ocean and vegetation) is balanced by natural absorptions (again by the ocean and vegetation). Therefore human emissions upset the natural balance, rising CO2 to levels not seen in at least 800,000 years. In fact, human emit 26 gigatonnes of CO2 per year...

skepticalscience.com

​

 

[abu afak]

I thoroughly understand why you're tearful as I would be too if I couldn't answer the simple question i.e. how come 3 trillion trees absorb all the emissions and yet we have 36 billion tons of Co2. Hard to explain isn't it?

Does this look problematic for you?
Because It jibes perfectly with me/CO2 and is 100x Stronger Evidence For AGW than all the charts/numbers you ever posted YOU CLOWN!

​

​

​

Your Turn!
Explain this for us numbers guy.

`

 

[ReinyDays]

Did I ever say that? I'm pointing out the cost which dummies like you just think don't exist!
Simple facts folks
FACT a EV car uses .346 kilowatts per hour(kWh) to go 1 mile... 100 miles takes 34.6 kWh... and that means the battery has to be recharged. Average Electric Car kWh Per Mile [Results From 231 EVs]
Altogether, American drivers traveled 2.9 trillion miles on rural and urban roadways in 2020,

https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year/

So if all the drivers that drove the 2.9 trillion miles used .346 kWh total kWh required: 1,107,200,000,000 kWh.
Well ok the USA uses 4,165,030,000,000 kWH Total electricity generated in USA in 2021

Electricity generation, capacity, and sales in the United States - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

U.S. annual electricity generation and generation capacity by fuel/energy sources and definitions of important electricity terms.

www.eia.gov

So that's 26% of the current total electricity generated by 11,070 total electric plants in the USA. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
This would mean black outs folks... unless there are 2,943 new power plants come on line.
Oh and by the way... the above figures are JUST for cars... the average truck uses 4.3 kWh per mile.
Average truck then has about 83,000 miles: again facts:How Many Miles Do Truckers Drive a Year?
FACT: if an EV truck travels 83,000 miles the total kWh is dividing 83,000 by 4.3 kWh/mile equals 19,636 kWh per truck OR 744,186,046,512 kWh.
based on FACT that Cars will use 1.107 Trillion kWh and Trucks 744 Billion kWh a total of 1.8 trillion kWh.
If the current 11,070 generate 4.165 Trillion kWh or 376,244,806 kWh then divide the total of EV cars&trucks of 1.8 trillion kWh... means
4,784 NEW power generating plants at an average cost of $1,661 per kilowatt of installed nameplate activity.

Power Plant Construction: How Much Does It Cost? | ProEst

Power plants are a key component of our critical infrastructure but must remain profitable for investors in order to continue operations. A fundamental factor

proest.com

So at $1,661 multiple times 1.8 trillion additional kWh by EVs... a total of $2,989,800,000,000 to build the additional power plants.
THAT cost will be added to all our electric bills. So given THE FACTS (US Households) there are
128,111,000 households that will be charged for this construction by the electric companies PER household over 10 years per year of nearly
$ 194.48 /month for 10 years per household JUST for EVs.
Do the math... Total NEW EVs power per year 1.8 Trillion if all cars/trucks are EV times $1,661/kWh is $2.9 trillion divided by 128.1 million USA
households or $23,338 or per year $2,338 or per month $194.48 per household for 10 years!
And you naively don't believe the power companies won't be recouping this additional 1.8 Trillion kWh per year from EVs?

I don't understand why your parents won't let you see the electric bill for the household ... or are you just too damn lazy to crawl up the stairs to the main living part of the home where they live and ask? ... how much do you pay for a kW-hr of energy? ...

You shouldn't call people "dummies" who are calling out your lies ... makes you look like an idiot, or a liar ... take your pick ...

A bigger problem is money dedicated to improving the infrastructure being used to pay dividends ... PG&E was trading north of $75 per share years AFTER they started murdering their customers ... now the customers that survived have to pay for these improvements again ...

Are felony convictions meaningless in the Trump Era? ...

 

[healthmyths]

Does this look problematic for you?
Because It jibes perfectly with me/CO2 and is 100x Stronger Evidence For AGW than all the charts/numbers you ever posted YOU CLOWN!

​

View attachment 719695​

​

Your Turn!
Explain this for us numbers guy.

`

I can't explain it any more than I can explain why with 3 trillion trees each absorbing 48 lbs of Co2 per year that the 72 billion tons of
absorbed Co2 will still be available for your above charts. That's why I asked you the expert that you are.
That's been my question. I'm asking YOU to tell me how the above emissions are present if of the 72 billion tons of absorbed Co2 due to 3 trillion trees there is 36 billion tons emitted per year.


I wonder if you can explain the attached anomaly that caused a re-adjustment of the 1.53 degree global warming because
urban-warming effect were not taken into consideration.
The study suggests that, on average globally, urban heat island warming will probably be equivalent to about half the warming caused by climate change by the year 2050. In a city that experiences 2 degrees of warming from climate change, for instance, that would mean an extra degree of warming.

Urban Heat Islands Mean Warming Will Be Worse in Cities

The effect needs to be factored into adaptation strategies, which will differ from city to city

www.scientificamerican.com

Now this is the "climate change" community's response to the question of trees absorbing Co2.
One ton of CO2 is a lot. However, on average human activity puts about 40 billion tons of CO2 into the air each year. This means we would theoretically have to plant 40 billion trees every year, then wait for decades to see any positive effect. By the time 40 years had passed, the trees we had originally planted would only cancel out the increased CO2 levels today.

Could Atmosphere CO2 Levels be Reduced by Planting Trees?

Could planting trees make enough difference to impact increased CO2 levels in our atmosphere? The idea seems simple enough, but probably not. Here's why.

www.co2meter.com

Now my problem with the above is what about the already existing 3 trillion trees that with each tree absorbing 48 lbs / year.
They still haven't answered that.

 

[abu afak]

I can't explain it any more than I can explain why with 3 trillion trees each absorbing 48 lbs of Co2 per year that the 72 billion tons of
absorbed Co2 will still be available for your above charts. That's why I asked you the expert that you are.
That's been my question. I'm asking YOU to tell me how the above emissions are present if of the 72 billion tons of absorbed Co2 due to 3 trillion trees there is 36 billion tons emitted per year.

Asked and answered.
You DISHONESTLY did NOT respond to it, just the graph/second post. (which you couldn't explain either)

The Human Caused CO2 is above and beyond the Natural Carbon Cycle which absorbs the Natural amount of CO2 produced in the Natural environment/by the Larger natural carbon cycle.
The Tree-absorbed CO2 is perfect to keep CO2 at 280 PPM but is Not enough to absorb the Additional man made emissions.

That is explained in my article above and DEBUNKS your DISHONEST ABBREVIATED mere Two numbers which implies Trees are enough to absorb it without posting how much CO2 nature/the natural Carbon Cycle produces.

`

 

[healthmyths]

Asked and answered.
You DISHONESTLY did NOT respond to it, just the graph/second post. (which you couldn't explain either)

The Human Caused CO2 is above and beyond the Natural Carbon Cycle which absorbs the Natural amount of CO2 produced in the Natural environment/by the Larger natural carbon cycle.
The Tree-absorbed CO2 is perfect to keep CO2 at 280 PPM but is Not enough to absorb the Additional man made emissions.

That is explained in my article above and DEBUNKS your DISHONEST ABBREVIATED mere Two numbers which implies Trees are enough to absorb it without posting how much CO2 nature/the natural Carbon Cycle produces.

`

So you are saying that 3 trillion trees absorbing 72 billion tons of Co2 DO NOT absorb the 36 billion tons of Co2 emissions?
Is that right?
So total Co2 emissions are 98 billion tons per year? Is that what you are saying?
More importantly though where is your proof that there is 98 billion tons of Co2 being emitted but after trees absorbing 72 billion tons
there are still 36 billion tons MORE that aren't absorbed. Right?

The experts beg to differ though.
Global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions rose by 6% in 2021 to 36.3 billion tonnes,

Global CO2 emissions rebounded to their highest level in history in 2021 - News - IEA

Global CO2 emissions rebounded to their highest level in history in 2021 - News from the International Energy Agency

www.iea.org

So according to you total emissions are 98 billion tons right?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you are saying that 3 trillion trees absorbing 72 billion tons of Co2 DO NOT absorb the 36 billion tons of Co2 emissions?
Is that right?
So total Co2 emissions are 98 billion tons per year? Is that what you are saying?
More importantly though where is your proof that there is 98 billion tons of Co2 being emitted but after trees absorbing 72 billion tons
there are still 36 billion tons MORE that aren't absorbed. Right?

The experts beg to differ though.
Global energy-related carbon dioxide emissions rose by 6% in 2021 to 36.3 billion tonnes,

Global CO2 emissions rebounded to their highest level in history in 2021 - News - IEA

Global CO2 emissions rebounded to their highest level in history in 2021 - News from the International Energy Agency

www.iea.org

So according to you total emissions are 98 billion tons right?

You should stop.

 

[healthmyths]

You should stop.

Stop what?
I'm trying to understand what the issue is regarding 36 billion tons of Co2 supposedly be emitted per year into the atmosphere.
BUT no one seems to explain if there is actually 72 billion tons absorbed by trees what is the problem?
Trees absorb Co2 and emitted oxygen. I learned that in science class in 7th grade.
So where is the 72 billion tons of Co2 coming from if it doesn't include the 36 billion man-made emissions?
Inquiring minds want to know.

Forests Absorb Twice As Much Carbon As They Emit Each Year​

The Congo’s tropical rainforest sequesters 600 million metric tonnes more carbon dioxide per year than it emits, equivalent to about one-third of the CO2 emissions from all U.S. transportation.

Forests Absorb Twice As Much Carbon As They Emit Each Year

New data maps global carbon flux in forests, allowing us to quantify CO2 emissions and sequestration in areas ranging from local forests to countries to continents.

www.wri.org

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Stop what?
I'm trying to understand what the issue is regarding 36 billion tons of Co2 supposedly be emitted per year into the atmosphere.
BUT no one seems to explain if there is actually 72 billion tons absorbed by trees what is the problem?
Trees absorb Co2 and emitted oxygen. I learned that in science class in 7th grade.
So where is the 72 billion tons of Co2 coming from if it doesn't include the 36 billion man-made emissions?
Inquiring minds want to know.

Forests Absorb Twice As Much Carbon As They Emit Each Year​

The Congo’s tropical rainforest sequesters 600 million metric tonnes more carbon dioxide per year than it emits, equivalent to about one-third of the CO2 emissions from all U.S. transportation.

Forests Absorb Twice As Much Carbon As They Emit Each Year

New data maps global carbon flux in forests, allowing us to quantify CO2 emissions and sequestration in areas ranging from local forests to countries to continents.

www.wri.org

Stop with your giant, error-filled excel spreadsheets.
Stop playing dumb about naturally emitted and naturally absorbed CO2.

Stop making that whiney abu moron look like he knows what he's talking about.

So where is the 72 billion tons of Co2 coming from if it doesn't include the 36 billion man-made emissions?

Rotting organic material.