Electric Car-Owners Shocked: New Study Confirms EVs Considerably Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars

Do you accept the debunking?

 

No

 

Who cares about the picture?

The charging station needs a fossil fuel generator of some kind the operate uninterupted 24/7/365

Thats all the picture is implying

 

Why should I walk?

 

Dont be silly

Paved roads existed 2,000 years ago

 

Ok

You want the oil to run out and are telling me it will someday

Which means you have nothing to worry about

I say use the oil as long as it remains the cheapest and most practil energy source and then move on to something else as the situation demands

But that is not good enough for traumatized tree huggers

They demand that all of us worship their new god the electric car powered 100% by new technology that does not exist yet

Hum

 

The study is in german

Here is another source reporting on the study and a link to the actual study itself

http://www.cesifo-group.de/ifoHome/...iv/2019/Q2/pm_20190417_sd08-Elektroautos.html

 

Any alternative energy scheme will pay for itself to the consumer in 12 years if government awards subsidies to the greenie who wants it

 

You know Mac, about electric cars we 2 have so far the same opinion.

But oil is not endless and eventually the production of oil and then the price at the gas station expensive ... maybe too expensive? Who knows!

Very often you get changes only with 2 things enforced in the world: When it comes to the money and / or with coercive measures!

Do you remember the times when there was a lot of lead in the fuel? What did the oil industry and automakers do at that time a circus with all sorts of idiotic arguments (ultimately lies) to prevent a ban on lead in the fuel.
And ...? With coercive measures and threats of punishment it suddenly went without lead and that without any problems.

Similarly, this will be the same in the end ... no matter which alternative drive it will be.
Personally, I see a chance for the fuel cell with hydrogen as a possibility ... but I'm not a real expert and it's just my opinion.

 

For me the problem with that is a double whammy.

I don't want someone else being taxed to pay for my system.

The other is while I have a state issued electrical contractors license which allows me to pull permits and install solar systems, I do not have state issued solar contractors license, as such I am not be able to apply for a rebate.

 

That sounds like who cares Trump sleeps with Russian whores.

It's what makes your source fake.
Put the study with no information next to this on posted by @HumbledPi .
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...an-diesel-cars.554727/page-15#post-1070537135
and you will see mining for batteries is no biggie.

 

I dont care if you drive an electric car

But in America I dont want the governmemt to pay all or part of the ev cost with tax dollars

 

Exactly

Liberals want to save the environment with your money instead of theirs

 

Ok

Here is the original source:

http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/sd-2019-08-sinn-karl-buchal-motoren-2019-04-25.pdf

 

I'm not a fan of new taxes and certainly not for this.
OK, if the existing tax revenue then makes state aid / state subsidy for sale and then has no negative consequences for less money on other important things, then I have no problem with that.

The problem with tax is simple ... once introduced, for whatever reason, you'll never get it away again. Example from my country: Around the year 1900, the then Emperor had introduced a tax on sparkling wine, with which he wanted to finance the construction of the Navy with many battleships. Nice ... after 2 world wars and more than 100 years later, without emperor and monarchy, where not even one of the ships built with it existed as a monument back then, the sparkling wine tax is still with us!

With us in Germany, the fuel price includes 71% taxes ... VAT, energy tax and mineral oil tax!
Also, that's why the fuel price is about 2 to 3 times as high as in the USA ... and so we are back to what I said: money and coercion: by the grip on the money of the citizens at the gas station the compulsion is triggered that they develop automakers cars with low consumption ... if they still want to sell cars!

 

You could flap your arms and try to fly when electrics are the only vehicles on the road.

 

I have not told this ... that tthe government shall pay = tax money shudl be wasted.

 

You dream big

If electric cars ever prove to be the best choice I will buy one

Because unlike you this is not an ideoligical or emotional issue with me

I have nothing against EVs

But I totally reject the liberals who want to force me to buy one or prevent me from buying a conventional auto

 

Actually there where problems with the switch to unleaded fuel, the primary one was intake valve failures due to the fact leaded fuel provided lubrication for the valve seats.

The same problem appeared when a number of fleets went from gas to CNG, CNG provides even less lubrication than gas and also provides less valve head cooling than gas. Because of that engines to be used in CNG vehicles need to have hardened intake valves and hardened seats.

Hydrogen has the same problem as CNG that being storage, since neither can be stored in a vehicle as a liquid so they must be stored at very high pressures 3600 PSI for CNG and I would imagine it would be the same for hydrogen.

And because neither can be stored as a liquid large multiple storage tanks must be installed, I drove a CNG van for awhile and in order to be able to carry enough CNG for a few days of driving it required the installation of 4 CNG tanks, three under the vehicle and one in the cargo area.

Another problem with CNG hydrogen and LPG is, if you run out of gas you cannot simply go to a local filling station and gat a can of gas and fill your vehicle with enough gas to make it to a filling station, a specially equipped truck with high pressure tanks and a high pressure pump must come to you and supply enough fuel to get you to a filling station, the alternative is to tow the vehicle to the filling station.

And the really pathetic part of the fleet going to CNG was we went from rather fuel efficient V6 Chevy Astro vans to 3/4 ton full size V8 vans, that had very poor mileage and even though CNG had a lower gasoline gallon equivalent price the vans where burning through a lot more fuel due to their size and weight, the larger vans where required due to the size and number of the storage tanks they needed to have to hold enough fuel to run for a few days.

In the end the entire fleet was taken off the road two years after being deployed and the company took a serious financial bath, went back to smaller gasoline powered vehicles and the two year low mileage CNG vehicles where sold off for a few thousand each.

And that is what happens when green dreams hit the reality of physics.

 

Short memory? This is what I wrote to you April 28:

We didn't have very many paved roads.​

"A large and extensive road system was already in place in the United States when cars became a major mode of transportation in the early twentieth century. The pattern of the system mirrored land uses and transportation corridors of the nineteenth century. Roads were narrow, primarily composed of dirt and gravel, and for the most part, followed existing topography. Before 1900, only 4% of the roads were paved, leading to poor and unreliable traveling conditions. Yet this system formed the template for the current system. Indeed, the road system has less than doubled in length since 1900, but the capacity has multiplied to accommodate an ever-increasing demand."​

https://www.nap.edu/read/11535/chapter/4#38​

Roads were improved to accommodate motor vehicles.​

Clearly, government subsidized motor vehicles by improving roads.

 

As part of reducing the companies carbon emissions, in addition to CNG vans for the techs, managers where issued EV's, only problem was they didn't install charging stations at the workplace and management refused to charge the EV's at home, so the EV's where parked at the yard collecting dust and the managers took over the parked gasoline powered Astro vans that where replaced by the CNG vans, unfortunately for fleet management the Astro vans had a lower MPG than the subcompacts the managers gave up so the companied carbon emissions actually increased.

Yet another green dream gone sour due to poor planning and a lack of foresight.

 

Not really, the owners of the vehicles paid for the roads through the tax's placed on fuel and that's not a subsidy.

 

Can you imagine modern cities without paved streets and gasoline powered autos?

I can and its not a pretty picture

Muddy streets covered with horse manure does not appeal to me at all

Imagine billions upon billions of flies swarming everywhere and that is liberal tree hugger nirvana in a nutshell

 

The discussion about electric vehicles in Europe is not just about CO2 it includes the micro dust emissions of diesel vehicles, too.
Opposite to the US, small diesel cars are very popular, because of their great mileage and the very high fuel prices. Because of their outstanding mileage, they were seen as cleaner. Till the diesel cheating scandal came along. It turned out that the diesel was quiet a bit dirtier.
Now those vehicles and that is millions are getting banned from the inner cities, because of the pollution they create in the inner cities.
It is about the whole pollution mix of the diesel engine and the localized pollution they create in the inner cities.

 

The study is based on the Teslar 3, which is in Europe a large midsize sedan, which can do 200-300 miles on a charge. Since most of the small cars are used for city comute, 50 to 80 miles a day, they do not need the huge Teslar battery.
To replace the small diesel cars, the vehicle has to be under 30.000 Euro, average vehicle cost in Europe is around 28.000 Euro