That awkward moment...

[TexasT]

https://www.operanewsapp.com/us/en/share/detail?news_id=b1cf33ec7b08663123dbd9051369212b&news_entry_id=3566b6cf220608en_us&open_type=transcoded&request_id=PUSH_4e4428e6-23a0-40fe-8726-531995931b12&from=opera_push

Awkward when the dirty c word pops up and those tree huggers have to get back to reality with just how the lies are woven and the general public only gets part of the truth.

[fatfillup]

Yeah, the greenies don't want to talk about where the power comes from but from what I can discern, electric cars are better for the environment to some degree.

And they fit the bill for lots of folks.  There are certainly pros and cons and in reality, I bet a lot of families who have an EV also have and ICE car too, so they have a choice as to when to drive the EV and when not to.

Tesla has everyone beat as to charging stations and likely software to navigate better on long trips.  Lots of folks love them.

And I say let the market decide on what folks by.

And I have no problem with .gov subsidizing the EV market to help quicken research and improvements within reason as I think that will get us better EV's faster.

[Lookin4_67GalaxieConv]

Stabenow is a dumb shit.  Always has been.  This person at GM sounds just as dumb.

[slip knot]

Stabenow is a dumb shit.  Always has been.  This person at GM sounds just as dumb.

Thats the problem with corporate America and maybe America as a whole. Too many people making decisions over things they dont have a clue about.

[goodfellow]

I can't remember what show it was -- might have been Top Gear (with Clarkson, May and Hammond). They did an environmental impact assessment of a Prius vs. a regular gasoline powered car, and when factoring in the manufacturing and disposal of the battery pack (which will have to be replaced after about five years), the electric car's negative impact on the environment far exceeded that of the gas burner.

[walrus]

I can't remember what show it was -- might have been Top Gear (with Clarkson, May and Hammond). They did an environmental impact assessment of a Prius vs. a regular gasoline powered car, and when factoring in the manufacturing and disposal of the battery pack (which will have to be replaced after about five years), the electric car's negative impact on the environment far exceeded that of the gas burner.

You can change individual cells in a prius battery , you don't throw the thing out when it starts to die. Toyota software will tell you which cells are lacking, put in good ones and head on down the road. I have a friend who repairs Prius batteries all the time. He sells used Hybrids which are mostly Prius. He probably has 20 prius on his lot right now

[TexasT]

What does replacing  a "cell" cost? Like it to an alternator or an oil change?
Lots of "unknown" for such a perceived benefit?
I'll stick with my oil burner and the ice I have as a backup.

[walrus]

What does replacing  a "cell" cost? Like it to an alternator or an oil change?
Lots of "unknown" for such a perceived benefit?
I'll stick with my oil burner and the ice I have as a backup.

Never asked what it costs, I doubt its like an oil change in cost although oil changes are pretty expensive now   I Doubt its 5 grand though. A few hundred sounds about right depending on how many cells are bad? I'm sure at some point the batteries are junk and can't be fixed. But I haven't heard him say that.

Like it or not Electric cars are coming so get used to it.

One other side note a few weeks ago, California got almost all  its power( for 15 minutes ) from Solar and wind. While I'm sure folks will chuckle at that, think about it in terms of 10 years ago. Any chance that happens ??  I certainly would have scoffed at that notion 10 years ago.

[Lookin4_67GalaxieConv]

Trying to force a whole economy from internal combustion power to electric is insanity when the market, infrastructure, and technology aren't there.

Throw in the silly climate change argument when the reality is electric vehicles are still receiving almost all their power from fossil fuels, and you have the charade that is the President of the United States, who tells us Putin and oil companies are the reason for inflation.  If Biden wasn't a politician, would you even trust he has the mental capacity to manage an HOA?

[goodfellow]

Climate change is a silly argument -- at least from an American standpoint. The obvious truth is that two of the biggest polluters in the world are India, China and at a distant third -- probably Russia. They absolutely have no substantive regulations in place (at not least enforceable) that even begin to address the environmental damage their heavy industries cause. Yet they are mostly exempt from any international climate change mandates.

The Paris Accord basically means the American taxpayer is going to pay most of the bill while all the very large Asian polluters get a pass for a quarter of a century or more. Brandon and Co. want to bankrupt us as quickly as possible -- this is their vehicle of choice to accomplish that task.

[walrus]

Climate change is a silly argument -- at least from an American standpoint. The obvious truth is that two of the biggest polluters in the world are India, China and at a distant third -- probably Russia. They absolutely have no substantive regulations in place (at not least enforceable) that even begin to address the environmental damage their heavy industries cause. Yet they are mostly exempt from any international climate change mandates.

The Paris Accord basically means the American taxpayer is going to pay most of the bill while all the very large Asian polluters get a pass for a quarter of a century or more. Brandon and Co. want to bankrupt us as quickly as possible -- this is their vehicle of choice to accomplish that task.

Of course they are exempt, someone has to make it. The US doesn't want to pay more for it.  It just moves the issue to another part of the world which still effects us but the American people don't see it so its ok.

[goodfellow]

Climate change is a silly argument -- at least from an American standpoint. The obvious truth is that two of the biggest polluters in the world are India, China and at a distant third -- probably Russia. They absolutely have no substantive regulations in place (at not least enforceable) that even begin to address the environmental damage their heavy industries cause. Yet they are mostly exempt from any international climate change mandates.

The Paris Accord basically means the American taxpayer is going to pay most of the bill while all the very large Asian polluters get a pass for a quarter of a century or more. Brandon and Co. want to bankrupt us as quickly as possible -- this is their vehicle of choice to accomplish that task.

Of course they are exempt, someone has to make it. The US doesn't want to pay more for it.  It just moves the issue to another part of the world which still effects us but the American people don't see it so its ok.

No question "somebody has to pay for it", but most of the burden should not fall on the US taxpayer. We are asked to subsidize not only many western nations, but also the developing world.