Anti-Trumpers refuse to say her name. America is being severely damaged by the left
-
I'm not attempting anything, it's a fact. You don't stand by all your talk.
Your car will be sold to someone who needs it, it won't go directly to the landfill. However, if the problem is so crucial it won't matter as long as your oil consuming car doesn't pollute any longer.
I never said leave it to consumers, our technology and our infrastructure isn't there, nor is it close or ready. Especially for a brain dead like Biden to impose his will.
But go ahead and keep talking without actually ever backing it up or taking action. Enjoy paying the big, mean oil companies more money and polluting our air by driving your gas engine car.
-
YOU may not need a new car right now, but the CLIMATE needs you to get a new ev, and you won't?? A hybrid?? After your big talk on EVs, what a joke.
Why would buying a new car when I don't need one be more environmentally friendly?
It's obvious what you're attempting to do here but not obvious to you that you're failing considerably.
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will continue to wreck the environment. Phases government mandates will force the drive of innovation needed to make more environmentally friendly options economically feasible. That simple.
Why would buying a new car when I don't need one be more environmentally friendly?
It's obvious what you're attempting to do here but not obvious to you that you're failing considerably.
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will continue to wreck the environment. Phases government mandates will force the drive of innovation needed to make more environmentally friendly options economically feasible. That simple.
But you must agree that capitalism is still the only way to go.
Socialism would be far more catastrophic towards the environment.
-
Why would buying a new car when I don't need one be more environmentally friendly?
It's obvious what you're attempting to do here but not obvious to you that you're failing considerably.
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will continue to wreck the environment. Phases government mandates will force the drive of innovation needed to make more environmentally friendly options economically feasible. That simple.
But you must agree that capitalism is still the only way to go.
Socialism would be far more catastrophic towards the environment.
-
Gotta love when your Gov tells you what to buy..
I mean, they are so good at that type of thing ?
Our musical works to date http://www.arielsatticmusic.com/ -
I'm not attempting anything, it's a fact. You don't stand by all your talk.
Your car will be sold to someone who needs it, it won't go directly to the landfill. However, if the problem is so crucial it won't matter as long as your oil consuming car doesn't pollute any longer.
I never said leave it to consumers, our technology and our infrastructure isn't there, nor is it close or ready. Especially for a brain dead like Biden to impose his will.
But go ahead and keep talking without actually ever backing it up or taking action. Enjoy paying the big, mean oil companies more money and polluting our air by driving your gas engine car.
I'm not attempting anything, it's a fact. You don't stand by all your talk.
Your car will be sold to someone who needs it, it won't go directly to the landfill. However, if the problem is so crucial it won't matter as long as your oil consuming car doesn't pollute any longer.
I never said leave it to consumers, our technology and our infrastructure isn't there, nor is it close or ready. Especially for a brain dead like Biden to impose his will.
But go ahead and keep talking without actually ever backing it up or taking action. Enjoy paying the big, mean oil companies more money and polluting our air by driving your gas engine car.
It's funny because you think you've got me in some great "gotcha" but all you have is more 5th grade level nonsense.
Purchasing a new car, when not needed, even if a hybrid or something, isn't going to help. Plus I'm keeping some cash available for an investment property, no need to buy a car when I travel all the time.
I'm assuming you bought right into the big oil "it's on you to recycle and save the planet" propaganda too, right?
If there's no financial incentive to create the infrastructure then capitalism isn't going to build it. Pushing EVs will create a downstream (and upstream) ripple effect. Capitalism, left on its own, will screw up our environment and climate, which we have a century of data to support
-
Why would buying a new car when I don't need one be more environmentally friendly?
It's obvious what you're attempting to do here but not obvious to you that you're failing considerably.
Capitalism, if left to its own devices, will continue to wreck the environment. Phases government mandates will force the drive of innovation needed to make more environmentally friendly options economically feasible. That simple.
But you must agree that capitalism is still the only way to go.
Socialism would be far more catastrophic towards the environment.
But you must agree that capitalism is still the only way to go.
Socialism would be far more catastrophic towards the environment.
I'm curious how socialism would be "far more catastrophic". Enlighten me.
Capitalism can drive innovation, sure, but we need regulation, reform, etc. when the current direction greatly benefits a very small few while greatly damaging the vast majority (and/or future generations).
-
-
woodpecker is happy, I suppose, that the leftists in our WH are trying to force us to switch to ev's.
never going to happen. Hell, even woodpecker won't buy one.
We will all be driving EVs at some point. You'll probably be dead by then. But it's happening. No matter how much you feel like kicking and screaming. Though I realize you only exist to fight any change or improvement in this country.
I also don't need a new car right now, but I'll probably get at least a hybrid for my next car. We'll see. Need an SUV.
We will all be driving EVs at some point. You'll probably be dead by then. But it's happening. No matter how much you feel like kicking and screaming. Though I realize you only exist to fight any change or improvement in this country.
I also don't need a new car right now, but I'll probably get at least a hybrid for my next car. We'll see. Need an SUV.
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
-
We will all be driving EVs at some point. You'll probably be dead by then. But it's happening. No matter how much you feel like kicking and screaming. Though I realize you only exist to fight any change or improvement in this country.
I also don't need a new car right now, but I'll probably get at least a hybrid for my next car. We'll see. Need an SUV.
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
They are companies working on other types of batteries, and some are working on internal combustion engines that run on hydrogen.
-
Exactly, so why the the rush to force us to buy something where the technology isn't ready yet?
-
Exactly, so why the the rush to force us to buy something where the technology isn't ready yet?
-
We will all be driving EVs at some point. You'll probably be dead by then. But it's happening. No matter how much you feel like kicking and screaming. Though I realize you only exist to fight any change or improvement in this country.
I also don't need a new car right now, but I'll probably get at least a hybrid for my next car. We'll see. Need an SUV.
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
At the rate technology, batteries, etc are advancing I'll bet on us finding a work around.
Especially if we use policy to help force the issue.
But our govt is broken and corrupt, so I would expect all the money behind big oil to fight any progress in this direction and delay the benefit. Hell, we still have a penny...
Ja.brill Peppers - Cleveland Brown OldBrownsFan, on 02 Jun 2017 - 5:09PM said: "No you are not the work of the devil but you are deceived by the devil." Who's got it better than us? Nooooobody! -
Exactly, so why the the rush to force us to buy something where the technology isn't ready yet?
Exactly, so why the the rush to force us to buy something where the technology isn't ready yet?
Again, two key facts here that, if you chose to ignore, we won't get anywhere...
- innovation can happen organically, but that generally is slow. Monetary incentive (ex here, through government initiatives) can help drive that innovation forward. The reason we'd want it sooner than later being ...
- climate change is real, man affects it, any major improvements have to come at a systemic level, and doing nothing will drastically affect the quality of life for future generations
The forcing function is to drive innovation and advancement in the infrastructure
-
But you must agree that capitalism is still the only way to go.
Socialism would be far more catastrophic towards the environment.
I'm curious how socialism would be "far more catastrophic". Enlighten me.
Capitalism can drive innovation, sure, but we need regulation, reform, etc. when the current direction greatly benefits a very small few while greatly damaging the vast majority (and/or future generations).
I'm curious how socialism would be "far more catastrophic". Enlighten me.
Capitalism can drive innovation, sure, but we need regulation, reform, etc. when the current direction greatly benefits a very small few while greatly damaging the vast majority (and/or future generations).
I'm always happy to enlighten you.
There is a litany of info out there on how socialism has been far worse on the environment, and how capitalism is actually better. You're just going to have to look into it yourself, otherwise I'd be typing for pages.
I'll just mention a couple things.
Fact: Socialists nations have the worst environmental record on the planet.
Fact: Capitalist countries have cleaner air, and the environment in general.
Look at it this way. Innovation is a component of capitalism. Capitalism allows entrepreneurs without government mandates to innovate "green" products. The ability to innovate whether by mandate or on their own makes regulation and reform in capitalist societies possible. This does not work that well in socialism.
Socialist nations have contempt for private property ownership. In capitalism businesses and factories are held responsible in a court of law for damage they cause in the environment. In Socialism any adverse toll on the environment is deemed inevitable and rendered "tragedy of the commons" .
The Conservation Foundation is perhaps one of perhaps thousands of such non-government affiliated organizations consisting of landowners and volunteers aimed at preserving and maintaining a clean environment. In socialism the citizen caretaker of property that doesn't belong to him probably don't give a damn.
-
I'm curious how socialism would be "far more catastrophic". Enlighten me.
Capitalism can drive innovation, sure, but we need regulation, reform, etc. when the current direction greatly benefits a very small few while greatly damaging the vast majority (and/or future generations).
I'm always happy to enlighten you.
There is a litany of info out there on how socialism has been far worse on the environment, and how capitalism is actually better. You're just going to have to look into it yourself, otherwise I'd be typing for pages.
I'll just mention a couple things.
Fact: Socialists nations have the worst environmental record on the planet.
Fact: Capitalist countries have cleaner air, and the environment in general.
Look at it this way. Innovation is a component of capitalism. Capitalism allows entrepreneurs without government mandates to innovate "green" products. The ability to innovate whether by mandate or on their own makes regulation and reform in capitalist societies possible. This does not work that well in socialism.
Socialist nations have contempt for private property ownership. In capitalism businesses and factories are held responsible in a court of law for damage they cause in the environment. In Socialism any adverse toll on the environment is deemed inevitable and rendered "tragedy of the commons" .
The Conservation Foundation is perhaps one of perhaps thousands of such non-government affiliated organizations consisting of landowners and volunteers aimed at preserving and maintaining a clean environment. In socialism the citizen caretaker of property that doesn't belong to him probably don't give a damn.
I'm always happy to enlighten you.
There is a litany of info out there on how socialism has been far worse on the environment, and how capitalism is actually better. You're just going to have to look into it yourself, otherwise I'd be typing for pages.
I'll just mention a couple things.
Fact: Socialists nations have the worst environmental record on the planet.
Fact: Capitalist countries have cleaner air, and the environment in general.
Look at it this way. Innovation is a component of capitalism. Capitalism allows entrepreneurs without government mandates to innovate "green" products. The ability to innovate whether by mandate or on their own makes regulation and reform in capitalist societies possible. This does not work that well in socialism.
Socialist nations have contempt for private property ownership. In capitalism businesses and factories are held responsible in a court of law for damage they cause in the environment. In Socialism any adverse toll on the environment is deemed inevitable and rendered "tragedy of the commons" .
The Conservation Foundation is perhaps one of perhaps thousands of such non-government affiliated organizations consisting of landowners and volunteers aimed at preserving and maintaining a clean environment. In socialism the citizen caretaker of property that doesn't belong to him probably don't give a damn.
Any links at all?
-
We'll probably be dead by then, too. Readily available lithium is the rate limiting step.
At the rate technology, batteries, etc are advancing I'll bet on us finding a work around.
Especially if we use policy to help force the issue.
But our govt is broken and corrupt, so I would expect all the money behind big oil to fight any progress in this direction and delay the benefit. Hell, we still have a penny...
At the rate technology, batteries, etc are advancing I'll bet on us finding a work around.
Especially if we use policy to help force the issue.
But our govt is broken and corrupt, so I would expect all the money behind big oil to fight any progress in this direction and delay the benefit. Hell, we still have a penny...
So long as batteries are still dependent on lithium, I see them as a short term band aid and not a long term solution. Unless we figure out concentration of lithium from ocean water, it's going to require an insane amount of strip mining to provide the whole world with an EV. I am more hopeful for the long term future of hydrogen. Toyota's been racing a hydrogen ICE Corolla in Super Taikyu for a couple of years. They're planning on bringing a prototype to Le Mans in the next year. Maybe we see a mass production model in 10-20 years. Ease of access to hydrogen over lithium is what will ultimately push us toward hydrogen ICE. Most importantly, the engines will continue to vroom.
-
At the rate technology, batteries, etc are advancing I'll bet on us finding a work around.
Especially if we use policy to help force the issue.
But our govt is broken and corrupt, so I would expect all the money behind big oil to fight any progress in this direction and delay the benefit. Hell, we still have a penny...
So long as batteries are still dependent on lithium, I see them as a short term band aid and not a long term solution. Unless we figure out concentration of lithium from ocean water, it's going to require an insane amount of strip mining to provide the whole world with an EV. I am more hopeful for the long term future of hydrogen. Toyota's been racing a hydrogen ICE Corolla in Super Taikyu for a couple of years. They're planning on bringing a prototype to Le Mans in the next year. Maybe we see a mass production model in 10-20 years. Ease of access to hydrogen over lithium is what will ultimately push us toward hydrogen ICE. Most importantly, the engines will continue to vroom.
So long as batteries are still dependent on lithium, I see them as a short term band aid and not a long term solution. Unless we figure out concentration of lithium from ocean water, it's going to require an insane amount of strip mining to provide the whole world with an EV. I am more hopeful for the long term future of hydrogen. Toyota's been racing a hydrogen ICE Corolla in Super Taikyu for a couple of years. They're planning on bringing a prototype to Le Mans in the next year. Maybe we see a mass production model in 10-20 years. Ease of access to hydrogen over lithium is what will ultimately push us toward hydrogen ICE. Most importantly, the engines will continue to vroom.
Hydrogen is a fair point too. Would also be great.
I just have a feeling that we can't truly imagine will tech will be in 30 years, so making a blanket statement that something won't be possible is foolish.
Batteries are improving rapidly. Or hydrogen. Or maybe something we're not even considering
-
Doesn't sound like you are well versed in EV production in any manner other than climate change is bad.
Right now GM is building new battery plants, massive plants employing over a thousand people governed by Korea. In these plants everything is in Korean. There have been numerous accidents and most created because they are not handling safety, you don't even know what is dangerous or what the precautions are because you can't read anything being shipped in. Hopefully that changes as they are part of the UAW now. Safety was a number one protocol with GM inside it's plants, however, at the battery plants, the employees are considered leased.
Anyways, these plants are built on the technology we have right now. Already they are not safe as is, just one point. But also, they are not fluid, they don't just make small changes to these plants as technology advances. The cars themselves are designed to work with a certain type of battery, engineered all around it. They can't just change little things here and there either. Then they also have their own plants where they are manufactured. Changes can be made, but they are huge changes that take a lot of time to finish.
As technology advances, and that may be years, decades, the system we have now is not good. Did you look at what goes into mining/manufacturing all the needed components? At what point do you want to make that commitment to a majority of EVS on the road, cars that won't start in the cold? We haven't even discussed our power grid yet. We experience brown outs all over the country as is, people can't even run their ac in the summer and yet, you expect everyone to charge their cars all at the same time on this grid? What impact will over expanding our electrical needs do to the environment? How long will that take? Can it be done and at what cost? Biden I think already wants some tax for power companies, you think that'll be the end? You think they already have the cost figured and done? Hell no, that's just to get them to draw up paperwork probably, if that. If we're going to commit, it's not a 10 year plan. Hell this country can't even agree to keep it's border safe let alone handle this undertaking, everything is politicized, add corruption, incompetency and ineptness to the bill and time. This is something they don't know how the technology will advance so how the hell can they plan to overhaul a major undertaking as our grid? You said it yourself, electric, hydrogen, you need to set forth decades of planning yet you don't even know what technology we need to build for.
Does that mean we don't advance? No, but gov't dictatorship used inappropriately will fuck this whole thing to hell and back. That;s not even debating the fact of the real impact cars have on the environment right now. It's not even including the debate on the impact of cars we have now vs impacts of the next generation of cars. You gotta have an open, honest debate of what's really going on. You guys can't call out gov't corruption then back off and say gov't funded man made climate change is real. You can't even be honest in describing it cause it went from man made to simply climate change. That's entirely 2 different things.
There's more, I just wanted to briefly touch some of the topics.
-
sadly, one day we will all drive flying cars with anti-gravity devices built in. so ev's are a waste of time and natural resources. btw, ev's are worse for the environment, studies have shown.....
but woodpecker leftwing fear mongers over the fake man made global warming crisis redistribution of wealth bogus crisis bs so ev cars are his rage.
Until then, our tractor runs on diesel, and it won't plow or brush hog flyin in the air.....
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login