In other news, Tesla drivers seem to be ramming into emergency vehicles?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/business/tesla-autopilot-nhtsa.html
Electric Vehicle (EV) discussion thread
Posted by: tungsten
Posted by: KenN
nor where it is extracted from. I
Unicorns and rainbows for KenN.....
https://fpif.org/scraping-the-bottom-of-the-sea/
Cdn content.
!
Posted by: shoreboy
In other news, Tesla drivers seem to be ramming into emergency vehicles?
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/business/tesla-autopilot-nhtsa.html
This is just an investigation, not an accusation
My prediction: this will conclude with NHTSA stating that drivers were not paying attention as is clearly stated, and it is the drivers' fault. There might be some recommendation for some minor software patch that forces drivers to pay attention, which can be pushed over the air.
A lead human-interest story in the weekend Wheels section of a major Canadian newspaper is about a 2-car family’s transitioning from a hybrid to an EV as they “try to be more sustainable”. They upgrade their daily car every few years to seek “improvements in fuel efficiency, reliability and technology”. Electric vehicles (EVs) are feted by the automobile and ecojustice sectors as part of the “just transition” to a future “carbon-neutral”, happy, dignified quality of life. Another news item from the Wheels section was about the costs of home EV battery chargers costing about $2000; the chargers are plugged into electric outlets (electricity commonly supplied from fossil fuels or nuclear reactors), while the costs will be “quickly re-couped in government rebates” as public transportation subsidies continue their decline. So much for the climate emergency and for human justice, for morality and taking responsibility for mounting climate-caused human deaths and mass migration. Nothing in the newspaper about the indignation of ordinary, common people worldwide, especially among the young.
Since the 1988 Congressional definitive testimony of James Hansen and other climate scientists, there is no discourse about “Stop”: elimination of fossil fuel emissions quickly morphed into adaptation and mitigation which is now replaced by “transition”. EVs is a representative example of focusing on one small part, conveniently deleting the whole. The whole EV picture must include externalities, life cycle analysis, consideration of non-essential production, impacts of its production on basic human needs, the urgent timeline due to non-linear climate processes, regional climate and sociopolitical processes and who EVs actually serve, EV’s effects on carbon sinks, pertinent facts about human and climate history, loss and damage obligations and debt to people totally impacted and totally innocent regarding the climate emergency, alternatives, elucidating who is served in a “just transition”.....
Last edited by: tungsten on Oct. 23, 2021, 11:05 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Posted by: tungsten
A lead human-interest story in the weekend Wheels section of a major Canadian newspaper is about a 2-car family’s transitioning from a hybrid to an EV as they “try to be more sustainable”. They upgrade their daily car every few years to seek “improvements in fuel efficiency, reliability and technology”. Electric vehicles (EVs) are feted by the automobile and ecojustice sectors as part of the “just transition” to a future “carbon-neutral”, happy, dignified quality of life. Another news item from the Wheels section was about the costs of home EV battery chargers costing about $2000; the chargers are plugged into electric outlets (electricity commonly supplied from fossil fuels or nuclear reactors), while the costs will be “quickly re-couped in government rebates” as public transportation subsidies continue their decline. So much for the climate emergency and for human justice, for morality and taking responsibility for mounting climate-caused human deaths and mass migration. Nothing in the newspaper about the indignation of ordinary, common people worldwide, especially among the young.
Since the 1988 Congressional definitive testimony of James Hansen and other climate scientists, there is no discourse about “Stop”: elimination of fossil fuel emissions quickly morphed into adaptation and mitigation which is now replaced by “transition”. EVs is a representative example of focusing on one small part, conveniently deleting the whole. The whole EV picture must include externalities, life cycle analysis, consideration of non-essential production, impacts of its production on basic human needs, the urgent timeline due to non-linear climate processes, regional climate and sociopolitical processes and who EVs actually serve, EV’s effects on carbon sinks, pertinent facts about human and climate history, loss and damage obligations and debt to people totally impacted and totally innocent regarding the climate emergency, alternatives, elucidating who is served in a “just transition”.....
Every sentence in that quote has factual errors and misinformation. I'm not going to waste my time debunking everything, since you've clearly made up your mind anyway.
However, anyone replacing their vehicle "every few years" is part of the problem.
"Car rental giant Hertz has placed an order for 100,000 Tesla vehicles to be delivered by the end of 2022 in the largest single purchase of EVs ever. The deal, which will push the car rental giant’s EV offerings to 20% of its global fleet, is reportedly worth $4.2 billion, according to sources cited by Bloomberg."
https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/25/tesla-hertz-shares-rise-electric-vehicle-order/
Posted by: rnayel
"Car rental giant Hertz has placed an order for 100,000 Tesla vehicles to be delivered by the end of 2022 in the largest single purchase of EVs ever. The deal, which will push the car rental giant’s EV offerings to 20% of its global fleet, is reportedly worth $4.2 billion, according to sources cited by Bloomberg."
https://techcrunch.com/2021/10/25/tesla-hertz-shares-rise-electric-vehicle-order/
They so ugly they puuuuuurfect 4 a rental. Make peeps really wanna' beat the crap outta' 'em, eh?
Posted by: KenN
Posted by: tungsten
A lead human-interest story in the weekend Wheels section of a major Canadian newspaper is about a 2-car family’s transitioning from a hybrid to an EV as they “try to be more sustainable”. They upgrade their daily car every few years to seek “improvements in fuel efficiency, reliability and technology”. Electric vehicles (EVs) are feted by the automobile and ecojustice sectors as part of the “just transition” to a future “carbon-neutral”, happy, dignified quality of life. Another news item from the Wheels section was about the costs of home EV battery chargers costing about $2000; the chargers are plugged into electric outlets (electricity commonly supplied from fossil fuels or nuclear reactors), while the costs will be “quickly re-couped in government rebates” as public transportation subsidies continue their decline. So much for the climate emergency and for human justice, for morality and taking responsibility for mounting climate-caused human deaths and mass migration. Nothing in the newspaper about the indignation of ordinary, common people worldwide, especially among the young.
Since the 1988 Congressional definitive testimony of James Hansen and other climate scientists, there is no discourse about “Stop”: elimination of fossil fuel emissions quickly morphed into adaptation and mitigation which is now replaced by “transition”. EVs is a representative example of focusing on one small part, conveniently deleting the whole. The whole EV picture must include externalities, life cycle analysis, consideration of non-essential production, impacts of its production on basic human needs, the urgent timeline due to non-linear climate processes, regional climate and sociopolitical processes and who EVs actually serve, EV’s effects on carbon sinks, pertinent facts about human and climate history, loss and damage obligations and debt to people totally impacted and totally innocent regarding the climate emergency, alternatives, elucidating who is served in a “just transition”.....
Every sentence in that quote has factual errors and misinformation. I'm not going to waste my time debunking everything, since you've clearly made up your mind anyway.
However, anyone replacing their vehicle "every few years" is part of the problem.
KenN please, now you'are just being obtuse. Something you accuse me of. You don't really want to be me, do you?
Every sentence...
How's about this one...
The whole EV picture must include externalities,
Seriously? You think there are no external factors to consider with the production/lifecycle/disposal of EV's?
Linky from article... http://www.earth-policy.org/mobile/books/pb3/PB3ch4_ss5?phpMyAdmin=1d6bec1fea35111307d869d19bcd2ce7
Last edited by: tungsten on Oct. 26, 2021, 2:15 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Are all the negative externalities of IC vehicles priced in to their sticker price?
Posted by: Couch_Surfer
Are all the negative externalities of IC vehicles priced in to their sticker price?
They should be. Might slow the flippers and the flakes.
Of approx. 1.5 million new cars sold in Cda. 2020 only 54~k were EV.
Posted by: tungsten
Posted by: Couch_Surfer
Are all the negative externalities of IC vehicles priced in to their sticker price?
They should be. Might slow the flippers and the flakes.
Of approx. 1.5 million new cars sold in Cda. 2020 only 54~k were EV.
Oh, aren't you cute with all your lack of understanding exponential growth.
EV pricing is about to become cheaper than ICE for new vehicles. This will happen within the next 2 years. Once that happens ICE is dead, and EVs will take over half the market share for new passenger cars.
How do I know this? Because it's already been done in other countries. Where purchase incentives have made the cost of an EV cheaper than an equivalent ICE, EV sales have take over. Norway and several other Euro zone countries, as well as China are proving this in real time.
Canada and US lag these other countries, because the incentives are poor.
Our people are poorer than those in Norway too. Makes it harder to buy our way to sustainability.
Posted by: tashi
Our people are poorer than those in Norway too. Makes it harder to buy our way to sustainability.
But implementing an incentive program that truly makes a new EV more affordable than an equivalent ICE will still work - ie., anyone buying a new car already (presumably) can afford a new car and thus will have their choices influenced by the incentives.
BC's incentive of $3000 is piss in a bucket. Even the US, which will soon be offering up to $12k in incentives is way better. Norway has a VAT that is added to all new car sales, but for the last 6 years (at least) the VAT was waived for zero emission vehicles.
I don't think we should be subsidizing people buying new vehicles, rather we should add what would be a subsidy amount to ICE vehicles. e.g. instead of taking $3k off the price of an EV we should add it to new ICE vehicles. There's surely some political reason that doesn't happen.
Forum jump:
