Sort of goes hand in hand with the fact that every defender of oil power ignores the cost and reality that every major war in the world has involved either access to, or control over oil fields. That's the undisclosed costs of oil production and use, and we all subsidize the true cost of oil. Not to mention the millions of lives lost FIGHTING over access to oil. So when we say that gas cost $3.00 a gallon, we can just about double that in actual costs (taxes, military subsidization, foreign aid ...) to the consumer. So yes, environmentalists ignore cost just as oil backers ignore costs. But at the end of the day - how many wars do you think are going to be fought over access to solar power? How many lives lost? My guess is a hell of a lot fewer than the royal battles over oil access.
We know the point you made. And there is some validity to it, will and necessity are powerful. But by bringing up flight it does make one wonder, if electric engines are as energy efficient as petrol engines, why aren't they used in aviation, or any military application?
That would depend on the type of oil and the engine you have. Traditional oil is every 3000 miles or 3 months which ever comes first. Then you have synthetic oil which can range from 4 to 6 months and every 5000 miles. There are maintenance checks for EVs. My cousin has to go in every 4 months for a tune-up of some sort. It thinks its tire rotations, check the leads to the battery, and so forth. the only company I know who was using hydrogen electric vehicles was Toyota testing said vehicle. Currently, there are 15000 hydrogen-electric vehicles, all in California. Meanwhile there are millions of EVs from GM, Ford, Tesla, and a few others. So, economics is providing the way.
That's probably why 10 states have banned the sale of ICE vehicles by 2035 and another half dozen are trying to ban ICE heavy trucks- because the government doesn't need to intervene. Or why Biden's spending bill is offering $7500 checks for purchasing EVs- again, the government doesn't need to intervene. Conservatives actually say that that's deluded and dangerous. And progressives ought to just mind their own business.
Do you have any idea how many trillions of dollars US taxpayers have spent on military protection for oil fields around the world? We could fully subsidize EV's and still come out ahead.
Refreshing to see a right wing article actually decently written and logically constructed. A refreshing break from all the cut and paste articles that litter this board with really ridiculous arguments. It is an issue I was indeed not that aware of. However it is hard to assess by this article how much of a problem this really is, as the author brings in just one anecdotal stat (more electric car coming into one salvage yard than they previously got in, is not a stat or even necessarily evidence. could just be more electric cars in that area now) and one VERY misleading stat. Electric car insurance IS more expensive than ICE insurance. Of course the average cost of a new electric car is 61500$ and the average cost of an ICE car is 49500$. So while electric cars are indeed more expensive to insure (insurance companies say so themselves) the 27 percent is almost entirely justified by the cost of the vehicle. Indeed, the government is subsidising this change that they believe is necessary. Of course we have been subsidising the auto industry since 1956 when we decided to build all the roads for them. Still do. You can either consider that the government was forcing people to take up driving at the end of a gun, or see it for what it is. Same thing with the EV
FYI, an ice motor is a 4-1 power stroke, an electric is always pushing out power, so your notion that an electric motor is less efficient is beyond invalid. Airplanes and cars are not the same, turbofan engines are efficient. Try placing an ice engine on a jumbo jet.
And you don’t think Lithium wouldn’t replace oil? Are you that naive? If a country requires a precious thing to survive then that country will need to protect it or pay others to protect it….until it’s just sunlight. Then we all have that equally The vast majority of us at least.
My uncle moved from California to San Antonio last year. They just traded their only car to buy an ev. They are still trying to figure out where to charge their car for a road trip to see family in DFW. Nobody in DFW has a 50A 220V outlet available at their driveway. A 110V outlet takes 3 days to charge the car. They are having trouble finding high speed chargers on their route to DFW for their non-Tesla ev. If 100M people in the US buy evs, the grid will not support them. They may work as a 2nd vehicle, but not an only vehicle unless you never go more than a few miles from home.
Standard Progressive BS. Name one military action ever formally declared by the Federal government to "protect oil fields". Just one. I'll wait.
Al Tanf in Syria houses US troops, and according to Blinken last week they're going to stay there to protect the oil they're helping steal. As Trump saw, our troops will stay there until TelAviv says they can leave.
The real issue with EVs is that all that instant torque that environmentalists tout comes with a price. There's no half throttle so they're always pulling full power from the battery. An OK option if you never do real work with the vehicle and mostly commute a limited distance to work with just you and your briefcase. You still won't come close to the range of an ICE vehicle, but if that works for you, so be it. In short, an EV's great at not doing actual work. But if you hook up a trailer or something, your range plummets maybe 70-80% or more. An ICE's inherent strength is doing work at full load. Period. So an ICE is a must have if you're going any kind of distance particularly carrying or pulling any kind of load, even if that means you might just run to the hardware store and fill the bed with mulch in the spring. And even at peak EV performance, most folks can't afford to have a single use vehicle cluttering up their driveways. Period. I, for one will never buy an EV for any reason. My V8 pickup does everything I need and EV trucks can't come close to its usefulness.
Did that incompetent boob actually say that specifically or are you interpreting? I know when I was with the government, whoever said that would have been instantly fired. But now we're beholden to Biden's crew of incompetence.
I was paraphrasing, but close. Not on the mainstream media, it's been known for years that the Al Tanf mission is to facilitate the stealing of Syrian oil so that the Kurds (if I remember correctly) can sell it on the black market. Years ago Russia showed satellite imagery showing the trucks leaving. You recall I'm sure that Trump tried to end the Syrian occupation, but the Deep State/Israelis would not let him.
True. The Middle East can't help but be about oil, but at the moment it's about Russian and moreso China's oil needs. I've seen some speculation from credible folks that Isreal and its neighbors stand to be the next Archduke Ferdinand moment bringing in the advent of WWIII. Only tangentially about oil, but mostly due to China, Russia, and US alliances and an ill-timed Iranian missile. I'm sure the world will miss Trump once that fires up.
I'm no expert, but it seems to me that all of Israel's neighbors are its enemies. Jordan condemns far-right Israeli minister over "Greater Israel" map (axios.com)
Right, but right now I'm hearing that the son of the Shah is getting massive political support for a return to power in Iran. Nothing is as unpredictable as revolution.
EV's great at not doing actual work Tell that to the freight locomotives. !!!!! Electrical motors are quite reliable as well as efficient. !!!!
