The lunacy of electric cars

[there4eyeM]

Nukes are ideal for keeping power in all its forms centralized. They are also ideal for maintaining dependence on highly specialized and rare individuals. Additionally, of course, are the eventual terrible waste, the unknown dangers and accidents, the targets they make for enemies and terrorists, and the sheer ugliness of them.
No wonder they have ardent advocates.

 

[SavannahMann]

Nukes are ideal for keeping power in all its forms centralized. They are also ideal for maintaining dependence on highly specialized and rare individuals. Additionally, of course, are the eventual terrible waste, the unknown dangers and accidents, the targets they make for enemies and terrorists, and the sheer ugliness of them.
No wonder they have ardent advocates.

Nuclear produces no greenhouse gasses. None. Nuclear produces electricity consistently. The newest designs are extremely safe.

Let’s try it this way. A 1957 Chevy may be the pinnacle of automotive style. But it has zero safety features. Judging a modern auto by the safety features of a 1950’s auto would be unfair.

Similarly. We have learned more about Nuclear Power than we knew in the 1950’s. And it means we can manage it safely.

As for the small number of trained operators. There are at most a handful of neurosurgeons able to perform brain surgery in each state. Some states don’t have any.

When you get into any specialized field. There are rarely enough to go around. Look at Race Teams. There may be thirty cars in the starting lineup. But fewer than a dozen have any chance at winning barring a massive accident that take out the leaders. The combination of a driver, mechanics, and manager, all of whom are better than their peers is difficult to arrange.

So complaining that a task requires a small number of people to accomplish is silly.

You last complaint. That the facilities are “ugly”. I’m not sure what we can do to pretty it up for you. Perhaps hang a Ford sign on every wall. Then you and the Terrorists you are concerned about will think it is an auto plant.

 

[Lesh]

Nuclear produces no greenhouse gasses. None. Nuclear produces electricity consistently. The newest designs are extremely safe.

Let’s try it this way. A 1957 Chevy may be the pinnacle of automotive style. But it has zero safety features. Judging a modern auto by the safety features of a 1950’s auto would be unfair.

Similarly. We have learned more about Nuclear Power than we knew in the 1950’s. And it means we can manage it safely.

As for the small number of trained operators. There are at most a handful of neurosurgeons able to perform brain surgery in each state. Some states don’t have any.

When you get into any specialized field. There are rarely enough to go around. Look at Race Teams. There may be thirty cars in the starting lineup. But fewer than a dozen have any chance at winning barring a massive accident that take out the leaders. The combination of a driver, mechanics, and manager, all of whom are better than their peers is difficult to arrange.

So complaining that a task requires a small number of people to accomplish is silly.

You last complaint. That the facilities are “ugly”. I’m not sure what we can do to pretty it up for you. Perhaps hang a Ford sign on every wall. Then you and the Terrorists you are concerned about will think it is an auto plant.

It takes enormous greenhouse gasses to build and fuel a nuke reactor. And then there's Fukishima...not to mention the nuclear wast issue we aren't close to figuring out

 

[Woodznutz]

It takes enormous greenhouse gasses to build and fuel a nuke reactor. And then there's Fukishima...not to mention the nuclear wast issue we aren't close to figuring out

Easy. Shoot it into the sun.

 

[FA_Q2]

The problem with electric cars is summed up well by this guy:

 

[Mac-7]

The problem with electric cars is summed up well by this guy:

Again, electric cars have their place and are not crazy when we respect their limitations

but many of the greenies pushing EVs are pretty crazy

 

[krichton]

The only lunacy here is the fact that the right wing has discovered that they can use electric cars as a target for their new fake outrage. In the time that this started as a right wing talking point, a 500+ mile battery has already made it's way onto the road with one car company. Production of a 1.2 million mile lifetime battery is already under way. Lunacy is somehow imagining that battery technology is static and incapable of being improved upon. By the time the next fake outrage electric car thread is made we'll likely have more cars with extended ranges and faster charging times.

 

[krichton]

all electric cars will do is trade one negative effect on the environment for another.

it wont solve shit.

decades from now some crooked ass politician will be touting how everyone needs to contribute to their campaign so they can solve the new environmental crisis caused by mining and batteries.

Decades from now maybe we'll be driving around in cars powered by solar panels painted entirely on the car itself, or maybe we'll be using an entirely different source that's nearly as clean. Predicting what will happen decades from now is really stupid, since no one knows the future. What's even dumber is making this an environmental argument since we know that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels is currently negatively affecting the planet and needs to be addressed immediately. Renewable energy will contribute greatly to solving that immediate issue. Mining lithium isn't even in the same ballpark.

 

[krichton]

EVs can leave you stranded in a blizzard.

EVs can burn down your house.

EVs can have you waiting hours before you can use them.

ICE cars don't leave you stranded in a blizzard?

ICE Cars don't catch on fire and at a higher rate?

At a super charger, you can charge a tesla for 15 minutes and get 200 miles of range. If you charge at home then of course it's going to take hours, but at least you can do it overnight if you want, and when you wake up the car is fully charged, but if you forget you can simply drive on whatever battery you have left to the nearest super charger the next day.

 

[gipper]

ICE cars don't leave you stranded in a blizzard?

ICE Cars don't catch on fire and at a higher rate?

At a super charger, you can charge a tesla for 15 minutes and get 200 miles of range. If you charge at home then of course it's going to take hours, but at least you can do it overnight if you want, and when you wake up the car is fully charged, but if you forget you can simply drive on whatever battery you have left to the nearest super charger the next day.

Well let’s not get carried away. An ev stranded in a blizzard even with a full charge, wont keep you warm for long. An ice can go for days at idle with a full tank, stranded in a blizzard. Which would you prefer stranded in a blizzard?

ICE do catch fire, but not sitting in my garage unused or parked outside my place of employment.

I’m all for evs, but one does have to accept reality. No?

 

[maybelooking]

Decades from now maybe we'll be driving around in cars powered by solar panels painted entirely on the car itself, or maybe we'll be using an entirely different source that's nearly as clean. Predicting what will happen decades from now is really stupid, since no one knows the future. What's even dumber is making this an environmental argument since we know that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels is currently negatively affecting the planet and needs to be addressed immediately. Renewable energy will contribute greatly to solving that immediate issue. Mining lithium isn't even in the same ballpark.

all we know for sure is the earth is ever changing. and has been since, well, before our time here.

thinking we can do anything about it is pure nonsense.

and predicting mans appetite for power and money is easy. very easy.

 

[Blues Man]

Nukes are ideal for keeping power in all its forms centralized. They are also ideal for maintaining dependence on highly specialized and rare individuals. Additionally, of course, are the eventual terrible waste, the unknown dangers and accidents, the targets they make for enemies and terrorists, and the sheer ugliness of them.
No wonder they have ardent advocates.

Sure if you only think that old obsolete light water reactors are the only reactors.

 

[krichton]

all we know for sure is the earth is ever changing. and has been since, well, before our time here.

thinking we can do anything about it is pure nonsense.

and predicting mans appetite for power and money is easy. very easy.

Nonsense is the claim that humans cannot affect the environment of this planet whether positively or negatively. That's an insanely ignorant statement, if not just outright dumb.

 

[bripat9643]

wrong the per mile cost is higher

For a Tesla it's slightly cheaper.

wrong the battery replacement costs more than 5 years of maintenance on a gas car

Tesla batteries last for 300,000 miles

electric motors require lubrication, wrong again

Maybe once a year

somewhat true, do you think the dealers do battery replacements at no profit?

Dealers aren't required to buy a Tesla

government subsidies are profit, duh

I don't know what that means.

 

[bripat9643]

Nonsense is the claim that humans cannot affect the environment of this planet whether positively or negatively. That's an insanely ignorant statement, if not just outright dumb.

The claim is that they cannot affect the climate, not the environment. Environmental wackos always state the argument wrong because they can't win otherwise.

 

[bripat9643]

No automobile is "cost-effective".

Compared to what, horse and buggy?

 

[bripat9643]

EVs cost way more than internal combustion cars. And you never make up the difference in gas savings.

They're getting a lot closer.

 

[bripat9643]

How far can you drive a golf cart on a single charge? How fast do they go?

I fail to see your point.

Golf carts use lead-acid batteries.

 

[bripat9643]

EVs can leave you stranded in a blizzard.

EVs can burn down your house.

EVs can have you waiting hours before you can use them.

 

[The Original Tree]

Its amazing how ignorant the EV advocates are about basic science and energy. They seem to think that an EV just runs forever without any input of any kind. If they get beyond that they think the recharging is free and doesn't require additional generating capacity. Ignorance abounds on the left, they prove it every day.

Putting everyone in Electric cars will not only destroy The Planet, but the Planet does not have enough of the materials needed to actually build the darn things. It's not sustainable.