| There are 37 comments on this blog. |
|
|
Good. There are already too many gas stations within close proximity to each other.
|
|
|
Nope, back in the day there use to be one on every corner of a major intersection. Today Some places not a single one left.
|
|
|
Costco & Sam's Club. 👍🍺
|
|
|
Where will I get my dollar chilidogs now?
|
|
|
Stupid fucking Progressives
A better law would be one that bans Progs from exhaling carbon dioxide
That's how you beat that climate changey thing
Look, if you just have to be environmentally stupid
Buy a hybrid, NOT an EV
EV's are the worst on the environment of all possible choices
They start with the highest possible carbon footprint just to produce them and it goes up from there.
You need to drive one 450,000 miles before you reach parity on carbon output with a gas guzzler
Fucking Progs and their "idealized" concept of the world and how we should all get there on a rainbow riding fluffy unicorns ).gif) idiots 
|
|
|
Expect higher gas prices.
Battling climate change to save the planet while killing you. 😎
|
|
|
GoBallsDeep, the break even point is like 15k miles in the USA. More like 8K if you're generating all your power from photovoltaic. 400k is a load of bull. You could be powering your car from the worst coal plant on the face of the earth and the breakeven point wouldnt even approach that number. The lithium in the battery is awful for the environment but it's going to be recycled. If you're comparing to a hybrid like a prius then the breakeven point is about 70k or 80k. But still nowhere near 400k.
And I don't even agree with the ev by 2035 mandate.
|
|
|
Gas prices just went down like 20 cents where I live.
By the logic being used here, we should be thanking Mr. Biden.
So Biden 2024. Change my mind.
|
|
|
^ so you've been asleep for the past 18 months and didnt notice the dramatic gas price increases since then?
A few updates during your slumber...
Joe surrendered to the Taliban in Afghanistan and turned over $85B in arms along with a strategic air base.
🇺🇸🇺🇸 Let's go Brandon 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
|
|
|
Top US general says Afghan collapse can be traced to Trump-Taliban deal
|
|
|
Are your Gavin will be banning all Taco Bell from California next week
|
|
|
Yeah so two things in that Afghanistan exit story posted...
1) "He was referring to a 29 February 2020, agreement that the Trump administration signed with the Taliban in Doha, Qatar, in which the US promised to fully withdraw its troops by May 2021 and the Taliban committed to several conditions, including stopping attacks on American and coalition forces."
There were CONDITIONS that the Taliban VIOLATED when they started taking over various territories until theY had everything. Biden did NOTHING to hold them to the deal during the 6 to 8 weeks prior to withdrawal. Biden pulled out the military BEFORE Americans and local allies.
2) "Gen Frank McKenzie, the head of central command, told the House armed services committee that once the US troop presence was pushed below 2,500 as part of President Joe Biden’s decision in April to complete a total withdrawal by September, the unraveling of the US-backed Afghan government accelerated."
Nobody in the military including Trump ever envisioned having less than 2500 troops longterm and that handing Bagram airbase to the Taliban was a goal much less tolerable. It is Biden that decided on a COMPLETE pullout against the expectations and advice of his military advisers.
Joe COMPLETELY FUCKED UP a workable plan that would have kept an effective guard at Bagram airbase.
|
|
|
For the partisans here:
Don't you get suspicious that your reasoning may be just a little bit biased because every time Biden does (or Trump did) something, you claim it is wrong or bad?
|
|
|
"the break even point is like 15k miles in the USA. More like 8K if you're generating all your power from photovoltaic. 400k is a load of bull."
Pure utter bullshit.
You either don't know wtf you're talking about or are just fucking dense.
Add up the carbon released in the creation of an EV and its battery starts you at a significantly higher point than a fossil fuel vehicle.
Cars using gas are incredibly more efficient than they once were and still have further to go.
I stand by my statement.
450,000 miles is breakeven
This does NOT include the carbon released in creating your "photovoltaics" which, btw, are also bullshit. Just do the fucking math in how many sq mi of windmills and pv's you need to construct in order to replace existing energy sources.......there isn't enough anything to do it without major environmental damage, much worse than climate change..
Fuck off with your garbage EV's
There are 1.4 billion cars in the world and you're gonna replace them with EV's?
That's just fucking stupider than a stupid stupid can even be stupid.
Why is science only important when it agrees with your politics???
|
|
|
I dont think anyone can look at the Afghanistan exit and not come to complete agreement that it was a flawed operation that didnt go well.
I'm just not wasting anymore bandwidth with those who cant tell the difference between A) a workable exit plan and  the notion that you also still need a competent leader to make it actually happen.
Done with this noise
|
|
|
"Don't you get suspicious..."
The proof is in the results if Joe was promoting all this woke BS agenda and GND was worth the s3llout of US energy industry then EVERYONE would be like ...Im ok with Joe....but that isn't the case.... and it's not just Joe .... its the career bureaucrats and enablers of the most hair brained policies the world has ever seen and their strict adherence to a globalist agenda that is helping no one but the uber wealthy.
Every President does wrong.... I only know of one that has got everything wrong ....so far.... call me an optimist.
|
|
|
*Hare brained
Too many typos to correct em all as usual...
|
|
|
"without major environmental damage"
Greeniacs aren't worried about that damage cus it's all in Afghanistan China Africa and South America..... who gives a fuck about those places!!! They sure don't.
|
|
|
"Why is science only important when it agrees with your politics???"
Cus their politics define the science that they wish to believe. Forget about actually analyzing something .... let's just go with how we feel.... can't go wrong as ING as you feel good about it.
|
|
|
"Why is science only important when it agrees with your politics???"
Why do you assume that my politics are the reason i believe x y or z? Besides, you can find a scientist kooky enough to validate your hare-brained beliefs anywhere if you look hard enough. Ive gone through multiple reports of the carbon footprint of EVs and they seem to agree that the battery vs engine components is the only major departure from the manufacture of an EV vs gas car. Find me a peer reviewed source that says that the carbon footprint of 60-100 kw of batteries is even close to the equivalent of driving a car 400k miles and I will retract my statement.
Since ive asked for sources, I'll share what ive found:
https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-much-co2-emitted-manufacturing-batteries
Gasoline produces a little over 19 lbs of co2 per gallon The creation of a 80kwh lithium battery produces between 7k-35k lbs of co2. Using the absolute worst case, that means that the creation of the battery is equivalent to between 35k-55k miles of driving a conventional car. But that assumes that you are using an 80kwh battery (which is on the large side) and that it was manufactured in the dirtiest way possible. If it was manufactured using the most efficient method then you are down to 7-10k miles. I'm aware that since our grid isn't completely clean that you aren't out of the woods just by hitting that mile marker, but we know that stationary power plants are far more efficient at extracting power from fuel than a moving vehicle, so you'll come out ahead. Unless your car is only powered by the dirtiest coal plants in the world you're unlikely to be going beyond 50-80k miles driven as the carbon footprint breakeven point even in the worst case scenario, and 10-15k in the best case.
I trust the premier science/technology university in the world as a source, but if you don't and have alternative data on the topic I'm listening.
I don't even agree with the 2035 EV mandate, as I said. I think nuclear is underutilized as a way off of fossil fuels. Both of these viewpoints are not shared by members of the progressive left.
|
|
|
Frankly, the politics comment was made in general for this site, not you specifically.
You're right I do not know your politics.
And, I will go back to find the tech info on EV's to support that claim
However, regardless of starting EV carbon release in manufacture
Your answer has nothing to say about the rest of the equation
Nor about the replacement of 1.4 billion gas cars with EV's.........still at that one
Energy production by so-called "renewables"........which of course, they are not
Germany is the biggest idiot in the room, right?
So far north that their solar is only 12% efficient or some such stupid number.
If the world were to agree to provide the energy from Nucular power, then we'd all be in fat city.
Fuck solar/wind.......it's bullshit and a waste of resources.
Solar is just too diffuse and requires far too much land to be of any real use in the economy as a whole. Wind? Same bullshit.........
I have seen some experimental ideas of using ocean currents/tidal action for energy production but again it's far into the future.
If you ask the billions of people who don't have what we have in the West, they would just like to be ALIVE today, food clean water cheap power for a fridge,etc.......they ain't worrying about WTF is happening 40 years from now..........they'll be dead long before that.
|
|
|
OK, MIT is one source and there are others that generally agree that if you have a "renewable" source, that over the life of the vehicle....the EV is generally lower carbon intensive. Of course, even the MIT article brought up numerous issues that are NOT copacetic about EV production .......underage mining of raw materials, dependence on Chinese sourcing of lithium and rare earths.
However!
The last statement almost makes the whole article suspect..
"A second major environmental benefit these batteries could offer is energy grid stabilization, Shao-Horn adds. As the world moves towards renewable energy resources, like solar and wind power, demand grows for ways of storing and saving this energy. Using batteries to store solar and wind power when it�s plentiful can help solve one big problem of renewable energy�balancing oversupply and shortage when the weather isn�t ideal�making it much easier to switch from CO2-emitting fossil fuels."
Battery tech is NOWHERE near the level that would currently be able to provide "grid stabilization".
We're many years from that tech being available AND being rolled out in any major way, still got that issue with available materials and manufacturing to make this feasible.
LASTLY, I will admit to being incorrect in my comparisons. While this information MAY be controversial, it is nevertheless worth consideration. According to SwRI, the long distance EV breaks even with the standard gas car at 120,000 miles. It's the Hybrid where the crossover point is 450,000.
My next car WILL be a hybrid but I'll never buy an EV, at least not until the tech is at the level required to actually provide a lower carbon footprint AND fucking CA stops buying non-renewable energy from neighboring states...........Fuck Sacramento!
|
|
|
So the Graham Conway guy makes some good points and most of what he says makes sense. I've done some more looking up on him and he's a little less gung-ho about the 80k number because he has said that it's very much dependent on how you generate energy at a local level. He's since given a range of 40-100k. A place like California is probably on the lower end of that since we produce a higher percentage of energy in a way that doesn't involve burning things, as opposed to Texas, which I believe is where he is from. I do think he is underestimating the efficiency differences between a natural gas powered power plant vs a car burning gasoline. The natural gas power plant is far more efficient, especially if youre talking a modern one.
|
|
|
Texas is 30% wind energy compared to 8% in CA
Which is exactly why they're having the same issue as us with blackouts
Fucking "renewables are too diffuse and unreliable for prime time
Combined with lack of efficient battery storage
It's a recipe for disaster
We should be skipping over lithium EV's
And go straight to hydrogen power
Really, anything but the stupidity that were doing
What's super funny though is this
The young woke morons are completely fucking up all these enviro & Prog orgs
Sierra Club, Center for American Progress, etc.
Identity politics is gutting these guys and they don't know what to do
Fucking hilarious shit.....
|
|
|
Love my Fusion hybrid. Wouldn't buy a fucking prius... no amount of energy savings is worth the humiliation of driving one of those rolling vaginas.
|
|
|
Same here with my nucular powered Yugo
Just swap out the spent fuel rods and throw the used ones out the window
|
|
|
Auto manufactures need to come out with a nuclear powered car.
Never need to recharged or need gas.
Best clean power ever!
|
|
|
Texas renewables wasn't the cause of their blackouts iirc... I thought it was because their natural gas plants shut down because the intake pipes weren't winterized preventing the fuel from reaching the power plant.
If we're talking end user nuclear power I'd just as happily keep a nuclear generator at my house and use something like compressed air energy storage in the car to keep it running. No need to put the nuclear reactor on wheels.
|
|
|
"I thought it was because their natural gas plants shut down because the intake pipes weren't winterized preventing the fuel from reaching the power plant."
That was last "winter", as you said in your comment........"not winterized"
This is now a "summer" heat outage and the lights went out in the middle of the weather report
CAUSE THEY"RE 30% WIND GENERATED
|
|
|
Special Note:
Warden Newsome just fucked his own "greens" by calling nucular power.........renewable.
Guess what else is renewable now...........natural gas
You cannot make this dumb shit stuff up, Progressives are just terminally woke stupid
|
|
|
How cool is this...........
|
|
|
our almost 20-year dealership mechanic...swears by hyundai cars
|
|
|
"You cannot make this dumb shit stuff up, Progressives are just terminally woke stupid"
And conservatives are COVID skeptics, election deniers and conspiracy theorists.
|
|
|
hyundai cars have come further in 49 year s then toyota in 60 years. they aren't the 80's excel...
|
|
|
Gas prices dropped in Sandiego today to $4.85 regular gas in some local area's.
|
|
|
high 4's ain't too bad...considering middle of summer and world's shit show
|
|
|
"And conservatives are COVID skeptics, election deniers and conspiracy theorists."
Covid skeptics? Progressive Anti-vaxers everywhere
These vaxx-less intelligentsia sit to the left of Democrats, somewhere on the spectrum near holistic mommies who swear by herbal remedies and New York’s downtown kids who infamously partied through the pandemic, scolds be damned. They are part of the 10 percent of Americans who’ve adopted a “wait and see” attitude toward the vaccine, more likely to hold progressive beliefs and approach the shot with raised eyebrows than middle fingers.
Election Deniers = Stacey Abrams
"Her 3-year stolen election campaign has been nothing more than a political stunt to keep her in the national spotlight". Abrams lost to Kemp by nearly 55,000 votes in 2018. In her concession, Abrams said the outcome reflected voter suppression."
Conspiracy theorists = Russian collusion
HeyI'mAPartisanIdeologueQueef
|
| There are 37 comments on this blog. |
