- This topic has 131 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 2 months ago by
ocrenter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 23, 2016 at 10:19 AM #796884April 23, 2016 at 12:12 PM #796886
ocrenter
Participant[quote=AN][quote=ocrenter][quote=AN][quote=ocrenter]I’m arguing renewables are cleaner than gasoline. Coal companies are going bankrupt as we speak.[/quote]Coal companies are going bankrupt because of natural gas, not because of renewables.[/quote]
I don’t believe I said coal’s departure is due to renewables. Merely that coal is on its way out.
Natural gas is much cleaner as a source of electricity generation, but the entrenched powers will continue to use coal generated electricity as the standard to prove their point that EVs are dirty.
Yet they use the same dirty coal generated electricity to refine gasoline.[/quote] and I never said think gasoline is clean. My objection is against front capitalism and not for gasoline. Again, pro EV camp seem to overlook the dirty coal.[/quote]
I don’t think they do.
There’s a reason why states that have robust EV sales also “just happen” to have much cleaner electricity and lower dependency on dirty coal.
April 23, 2016 at 12:15 PM #796885FlyerInHi
Guest[quote=AN]
Why do X when doing Y will have a much bigger effect on CO2 emission? Why waste tax $ on X when doing C is a much better long term solution? Just because you’re against X doesn’t
mean you’re for Y and Z? Is it really that hard to understand?[/quote]Because things in life do change. Technology or popular demand can cause us to more away from coal power. It’s not useful to have inflexible ideological stances.
We don’t do everything for tech/function. We do things for vanity and bragging rights also. Those vanity projects bring people and development and economic prosperity.
April 23, 2016 at 4:09 PM #796891an
Participant[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=AN]
Why do X when doing Y will have a much bigger effect on CO2 emission? Why waste tax $ on X when doing C is a much better long term solution? Just because you’re against X doesn’t
mean you’re for Y and Z? Is it really that hard to understand?[/quote]Because things in life do change. Technology or popular demand can cause us to more away from coal power. It’s not useful to have inflexible ideological stances.
We don’t do everything for tech/function. We do things for vanity and bragging rights also. Those vanity projects bring people and development and economic prosperity.[/quote]LoL, dirty coal bring more prosperity than those vanity projects. Without dirty coal, China and India and even Hong Kong wouldn’t be where they are today. History have proven this point vs your hypothesis.
You can also thank dirty coal and oil for our industrial revolution. US and Europe wouldn’t be where we are today without it. Without a reliable source of energy/electricity, life would be very different. Unlike you guys, I don’t believe in going green at all cost. I think we should continue to look for cleaner and cheaper and renewable energy source. I also think we should strive for better efficiency. But all of this is because I want cheap energy for everyone around the world.
I still haven’t heard how these vanity project (BEV) would make a big dent in our CO2 emission. Care to explain how BEV would solve the problem I’ve raised?
September 6, 2017 at 8:41 AM #807824Guest[quote=AN]
You can also thank dirty coal and oil for our industrial revolution. US and Europe wouldn’t be where we are today without it. Without a reliable source of energy/electricity, life would be very different. Unlike you guys, I don’t believe in going green at all cost. I think we should continue to look for cleaner and cheaper and renewable energy source. I also think we should strive for better efficiency. But all of this is because I want cheap energy for everyone around the world.
I still haven’t heard how these vanity project (BEV) would make a big dent in our CO2 emission. Care to explain how BEV would solve the problem I’ve raised?[/quote]
The past is no predictor of future performance. We are ceding renewables to China that is now 40% of the world’s EV sales.
The new Nissan Leaf is out.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/09/05/technology/new-nissan-leaf/index.htmlSeptember 9, 2017 at 11:26 AM #807851outtamojo
ParticipantI wonder how these pure ev’s would do in an evacuation scenario- I mean what if the grid became damaged…
September 9, 2017 at 11:44 AM #807852spdrun
Participant#1: the idea is to evac before the grid gets damaged
#2: frequently, gasoline is a problem during an evacuation
#3: gas pumps don’t work w/o electricitySeptember 9, 2017 at 6:20 PM #807853gzz
ParticipantEarlier this year Great Britain had its first day in 100+ years without any of its electricity coming from coal. From 95+% coal power to 0%. That is great news. I think the other 5% going way back would have been local wind and hydro. Maybe burning wood and peat, which is even worse than coal for the environment.
September 9, 2017 at 6:34 PM #807854ParticipantFlyer, most of those EVs that make up the Chinese 40% share are glorified golf carts too underpowered and lacking in safety features to be sold here. That is great for them, since middle class in China means about $10,000 to $15,000 a year, so something like the Leaf is out of reach to the large majority. We are the clear leader in EV and China is behind the US, Japan, and Germany in making actual practical electric vehicles that displace dirty hydrocarbon burners.
China’s closest thing to Tesla is Kandi, which was and still is a maker of shoddy go-karts before it hopped on the EV bandwagon to take advantage of government subsidies.
The big Chinese green tech success story is rooftop solar panels, where they dominate the world.
September 9, 2017 at 8:34 PM #807855Guest[quote=gzz]
The big Chinese green tech success story is rooftop solar panels, where they dominate the world.[/quote]
So true.
We were once leaders in solar panels.We shouldn’t be complacent. China’s economy is now the same as ours and 15 to 20% greater in purchasing power. They can build economies of scale and set standards.
I believe that in the future a car will be much less a symbol of well being. As you mentioned in the inflation thread, goods are getting cheaper. Well being is more measured in housing/location, services and experiences. People will want to live in vibrant, walkable cities with good transport, public and autonomous vehicles.
I can’t wait until urban planning is not so car centric so development can happen without parking requirements.
September 12, 2017 at 6:06 AM #807867Participant[quote=outtamojo]I wonder how these pure ev’s would do in an evacuation scenario- I mean what if the grid became damaged…[/quote]
grid damage will come at the time of the storm, not during evacuation period prior to the storm.
while everyone is burning fuel waiting in line to buy fuel, your EV is charging at home while you use that time to board up the house.
most folks just needed to drive out of Miami or Fort Myers to places like Orlando, wtihin reach of a single charge for all Tesla models and the Chevy Bolt. You are right, first gen EVs with 80-100 mile range would have a hard time.
while everyone else is burning up more fuel stuck in traffic, minimal loss of charge while you are in traffic (unless you have the AC on).
September 12, 2017 at 6:07 AM #807868Participant[quote=spdrun]#1: the idea is to evac before the grid gets damaged
#2: frequently, gasoline is a problem during an evacuation
#3: gas pumps don’t work w/o electricity[/quote]exactly!
plus oil refineries need electricity as well.
EVs simply bypasses the fossil fuel middlemen.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.