When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Personally, I'm all for saving the environment by shifting emphasis to more Prius and Camry-style hybrid vehicles from pure ICE cars. Toyota has this right.
However, battery-only EV cars are not great for the environment in any way or form. It's simply a politically-indoctrinated myth.
Lower GHG emissions than ICE cars after a few years…and that includes the up front cost
Last edited by CodyBigdog; 07-23-2024 at 11:09 PM.
The problem is, the western governments (especially the EU) seem perfectly willing to let their automakers go under, and advance cheap Chinese EVs because they know consumers won't be able to resist a $15000 car.
So you would advocate for government bailouts of national automakers who are no longer competitive or made poor financial decisions? Chinese EV makers need to improve their crash safety and stop blatantly stealing the exterior styling of more established automakers before they are a threat on our shores. I've ridden in a bunch of Chinese EVs and they are mostly fine except for horrid suspension tuning, but you could say the same thing for Teslas.
So you would advocate for government bailouts of national automakers who are no longer competitive or made poor financial decisions? Chinese EV makers need to improve their crash safety and stop blatantly stealing the exterior styling of more established automakers before they are a threat on our shores. I've ridden in a bunch of Chinese EVs and they are mostly fine except for horrid suspension tuning, but you could say the same thing for Teslas.
If you want an even bigger Federal handout, look no further than the decades that the Federal Government has given huge financial subsidies and tax breaks and other financial assistance to the oil and gas industry…to the tune of many Trillions. That’s trillion, with a capital T.
“The same year Big Oil pulled in a record $4 trillion of income. In the United States, by some estimates taxpayers pay about $20 billion dollars every year to the fossil fuel industry.”
Wake me up when the EV industry gets anywhere close to what the Gov has given the oil and gas industry….an industry that reports record profits every year…year, after year.
Sounds like talking points taken directly from Climate Change playbook. Think about the energy spent and damage to the environment in the mining to produce EV batteries. Think about our subpar electrical infrastructure which can’t support the added demand for charging EVs. Think about where the spent EV batteries go when they die.
The difference is we all need oil to live. We need oil for all of our basic luxuries and necessities. Everyone in this country benefits from it, legal or illegal, rich or poor.
Sounds like talking points taken directly from Climate Change playbook. Think about the energy spent and damage to the environment in the mining to produce EV batteries. Think about our subpar electrical infrastructure which can’t support the added demand for charging EVs. Think about where the spent EV batteries go when they die.
Sounds like big oil (vis a vi, MAGA/Faux “talking points). Unfortunately, the data disproves your talking points,
The difference is we all need oil to live. We need oil for all of our basic luxuries and necessities. Everyone in this country benefits from it, legal or illegal, rich or poor.
No one needs an EV.
False equivalency.
Sure oil is used for lots of things besides being refined for gas. the question being asked is, can we, or how do we reduce the contribution to GHG from automobile emissions.
Nobody has ever advocated oil should go away…but there are other, more efficient ways to propel automobiles than by burning gas (transportation amounts to about 25%of GHG emissions). Electricity is one, and hydrogen is another. But the easy distribution of electricity through the existing and future grid expansions, seem like the most efficient way forward.
What I do believe, that if subsidies for EV’s and charging infrastructure are removed, then so too should subsidies for the oil industry. They are already reporting recipe profits every year, while the EV industry is still emerging, and it has been federal policy, under all adm,inistrations to support new and emerging industries….lest the US loose any global competitive edge - to China. Shall we just concede now?
Last edited by CodyBigdog; 07-24-2024 at 12:15 AM.
EVs are great for reducing smog (ground level ozone) in cities. Really, overall better for urban air quality. Remember what an impact the elimination of leaded gasoline had on urban air quality and the related health benefits.
I'll be keeping my 911 but you can't deney there are serious benefits to EVs for transportation for the masses. There's no free lunch in our technological era so pick your poison.
Including the “upfront” carbon cost for EV’s, the “break even point” depends on a number of variables. But comparing apples with apples, the break even point between a tesla 3 and Toyota Corolla is 8K miles for EV’s that recharge from hydro/wind/solar/nuclear and up to a maximum of 75k miles when the EV is charged from coal fired power plants.
Excuse me, but you are the one who is miscalculating and exaggerating based on your political (and not scientific) beliefs and wishes.
The reality is that each EV in the market today is "replaced" much earlier from the road than a comparable ICE car after an accident. If the collided EV is gone to the crusher instead of repair, you just doubled the GHG load on your EV metrics. Obviously, your armchair coach chart above doesn't account for that sad reality.
Furthermore, there are many other studies, and more "reliable" studies conducted, for example, by Volvo Corporation, that strongly suggest that a realistic CO2 emissions breakeven point for an EV vs. an ICE car in the current infrastructure of the US electrical generation is about 90K miles per electric vehicle. More damningly, this presumption does not account for much more frequent "totaled" collision incidents on minor damages on EV cars, which will surely make the breakeven point for CO2 emissions much worse for EVs, compared to ICE cars.
Last edited by double-o-seven; 07-24-2024 at 12:21 AM.
The difference is we all need oil to live. We need oil for all of our basic luxuries and necessities. Everyone in this country benefits from it, legal or illegal, rich or poor.
No one needs an EV.
We don’t need electricity? Over 90% of the world’s population has existing access to electricity, 100% in the US and most of the developed world. We use it for a few basic needs, like cooking, keeping food fresh, and seeing after dark.
07-23-2024, 11:04 PM
