Electric cars will waste lots and lots of water if they catch fire

Then only time will tell. Regardless it'll be interesting to see how things flesh out.

 

false it's because you can't tell as much for as long a distance. Diesels have no trouble going over hills or pulling large amounts of weight. The cost of changing over would be minimal when you are diesel fleet starts needing to be replaced you replace it with an electric fleet. That's a cost you would have to pay anyway.

no that just seems to be the excuse people use when there's not any electric semis anywhere.

You don't tell as much and they can't go as far and then you'd have to have the down time to recharge. All the same exact problems that existed in electric cars in 1890

No stupidity. Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence.

 

Nice to see you here!

Yup it will be interesting when Oil cost goes way up, the plastic industry will have to consider alternative sources....

 

Likewise; and it will definitely be interesting how the plastic industry considers alternatives which I have no doubt they'll adapt either way.

 

You should read up on Julian Simon's wager with Paul Ehrlich.

 

Thank you; I'll take it under advisement.

 

The world supply of lithium to be used in all these batteries is also limited.
Keep pushing the demand up and you're going to push the price way up too.
And they'll start having to mine low-grade ore deposits of lithium which won't be environmentally friendly - lots of mining and environmental consequences from the mining but not a lot of ore.

Hope you're okay with rainforest being cleared for strip mining in some other Third World country.

 

They will come up with a way to replace Lithium over time. That being said, I take no position on rainforest being cleared for strip mining since we can only legally control what happens in the US.

 

Are you serious? Push an environmental policy in one country that you know will cause consequences in another country, but you don't care?

Sounds a lot like that biofuel palm oil fiasco. Or all the pollution regulations just driving all the factory production away to China where it's much worse.

Wasn't the point of all these policies to, you know, actually help the environment? Or are you just trying to virtue signal?

 

What would you think or feel if other countries tried to tell us how to run our country? Would that be acceptable to you? I know I wouldn't like it.

 

You're totally missing the point. It doesn't make sense for one country that is trying to spend more money to help the environment to be paying another country to cause environmental damage.

You need to ask yourself where that lithium will come from, and how much environmental damage the mining of it may cause, since it's probably not going to be mined in rich countries with stringent rules.

Already some of the rare earth elements being used in wind turbines and electric car motors are leading to radioactive runoff in gigantic open strip mines located in China.

 

So, you're claiming all trips in vehicles last for more than 600 miles.

They seem to have problems with going over the hills where I live.

Now you demonstrate a lack of basic industry knowledge. Why do you insist on an instantaneous switchover? An no, it's far more complicated than that.

But I thought you said Diesel has no problems and lasts forever like electric?

I've never heard that.

Do ICEs refuel while running? Have they developed an ICE that never needs oil changes or transmission fluid? According to you ICEs breaks down constantly after over 100 years of fine tuning. There is a definite downtime for ICE. The problem with electric vehicles has always been the batteries.

So, you claim ICE vehicles magically don't need more energy to go at higher speeds?

 

When towing?

So there are just a bunch of abandoned semis at the bottom of every hill?

The tech has been around for 140 years it wouldn't be instantaneous.

What ever gave you that idea?

The percentage increase isn't as great as energy consumption for electric vehicles.

 

So you're saying that all trips in vehicles last for over 600 miles and always end up towing something everywhere. Hmm . . .

You're claiming there are a bunch up abandoned electric vehicles at the bottom of every hill?

Lithium-ion, mass produced aluminum, modern rare-earth magnets have been around for 140 years?

I'm glad to hear you're not insisting that everyone change all at once.

That means that diesel is very inefficient at lower speeds.

 

Exactly what I typed and nothing else especially not the nonsense you made up that I deleted. I don't treat strawman fallacies respectfully.

Electric semis don't seem to be on the road at all.

Electric vehicles have.

Electric is inefficient at all speeds.

 

I'm just trying to make sense of very poor communication. I think you just don't want to be understood.

Yes, but they will be.

So? Do you compare muskets to semi-automatic rifles?

No. Electric is incredibly efficient at all speeds.

 

You are making a strawman fallacy.

Perhaps one day.

Sure. Muskets like electric vehicles are fun to play with but not that practical.

Without carrying load sure.

 

I'm sure that down the road, they'll refine electric vehicles so they can efficiently carry loads. In the mean time there are other methods available to carry commercial loads that are more efficient then trucks.

 

What makes you so sure of that?

Is it just because it's a different technology and you think there could be a lot of room for improvement because it hasn't really been tried yet?

 

I think because there is a limited supply of oil left, they realize if they do nothing, they are going to be in a bind down the road. Better to start now as opposed to waiting until oil supplies run critically low.

 

I see you do not trust the free market to handle these sorts of situations.

No one is preventing the government from investing in research to develop the technology for better electric cars.


Let me tell you, when you do not trust the free market to handle a situation like this, you are no longer basing decisions on mathematics and logic, but are instead basing decisions on emotionalism and oversimplified inclinations. (i.e. a command economy, communism)
Give me an argument why the free market would not make the most logical decision in a situation like this, when there is a limited supply of one thing but it is still considered less expensive and more optimal by consumers than the alternative.

 

The free market is all about money and that's all they care about. Line our pockets with money regardless of the impact on the environment and/or people.

I'm more concerned about the environment and working for the betterment of all mankind whether or not the government is involved or not. If the government is working in our best interests (something the oil industry is not doing at this stage) then I'm all in favor of them being heavily involved. Maybe you don't mind breathing in polluted air but I'd much rather not have to be breathing in the air full of junk from combustible engines and not having to worry about medical issues related to air pollution.

 

Yeah, but now you're changing the argument. Your specific argument that I was addressing was your claim that the free market is not going to be able to deal correctly with the issue of oil going to eventually run out.

Do you want to argue about that, or do you retract your claim?

 

Oil is not going to run out any time soon.

 

I believe the two are tied together when it comes right down to it.