GM Spokesperson admits energy to charge cars comes from coal

TurnThePage wrote:
Electric IS the future. Quit trying to poopoo it.

We will NEVER have enough wind and solar to charge an "all electric" fleet of cars and trucks.

If you don't want CO2 emissions from electric generation we had better start research and development on alternative nuclear power solutions.

Are Electric Cars Really Better for the Environment

https://youtu.be/G67i_Z8ukD4

Cummins12V98 wrote:
How aboot we let em do it in Canada first, EH.

The Transcanada highway has charge points about every 100 miles now--so by all means Canada First!

thomas201 wrote:

pianotuna wrote:


If a highway has coils installed there would be no reason to stop to refuel an electric vehicle at all.

Currently at the 5 year mark, a Bev uses less energy from the cradle to the grave than an Ice.

I am glad pianotuna made the point that at the 5 year mark, you break even on carbon dioxide. I think it is closer to 8 years. But, lets accept 5. The conclusion that most people miss is that to change to EVs you must front load the carbon dioxide levels of good old mother earth. Translation, you will push up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to make the transition. Want to cut carbon dioxide in the air? Then keep whatever is in your driveway right now.

The break even point depends on a lot of factors, but the WSJ and the University of Toronto have a pretty cool infographic to visualize this:
WSJ EV vs ICE CO2


In their analysis (Tesla vs RAV4) the breakeven point is ~20,000 miles, or less than 2 years for most drivers.

I agree that you shouldn't dump your current vehicle to go buy an EV if you are otherwise happy with the current vehicle, but if you are planning on buying a new vehicle anyway, consider whether an EV works for you. For some people they won't work (at least not yet) and for others they will meet their needs just fine. There does seem to be a tendency to think that all EVs are some how useless because they may not currently meet your needs. But you rarely hear the same thing said about Corvettes and Porsches, which also won't tow your 5th wheel.

I'll return to this thread as soon as I make some popcorn. :B:B

thomas201 wrote:
I am glad pianotuna made the point that at the 5 year mark, you break even on carbon dioxide. I think it is closer to 8 years. But, lets accept 5. The conclusion that most people miss is that to change to EVs you must front load the carbon dioxide levels of good old mother earth. Translation, you will push up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to make the transition. Want to cut carbon dioxide in the air? Then keep whatever is in your driveway right now.

That argument only lasts 5 years starting 10 years ago.

pianotuna wrote:

azdryheat wrote:
I just drove over 900 miles pulling my toy hauler and didn't have to stop for fuel (extra tank in bed). Will an EV truck ever do that? In my lifetime?

And don't forget all the energy and materials needed to make the batteries.

If a highway has coils installed there would be no reason to stop to refuel an electric vehicle at all.

Currently at the 5 year mark, a Bev uses less energy from the cradle to the grave than an Ice.

I am glad pianotuna made the point that at the 5 year mark, you break even on carbon dioxide. I think it is closer to 8 years. But, lets accept 5. The conclusion that most people miss is that to change to EVs you must front load the carbon dioxide levels of good old mother earth. Translation, you will push up carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to make the transition. Want to cut carbon dioxide in the air? Then keep whatever is in your driveway right now.

All the electric cars are doing is dropping one form of energy for another......in fact even worse when you factor in mining the lithium and, processing, building and shipping battery packs. it becomes more clear how dirty electric cars really are! and those mining tucks and freighter aren't using pixy dust for fuel!

The whole process of creating the energy can be a dirty business. True with ICE and EV's.
However EV's are just simpler more efficient vehicles vs. ICE there are fewer parts no combustion no heat, no exhaust. Why do you the think ALL car manufactures are joining the EV bandwagon? Tesla has shown them that EV's are viable.
Convincing the public is a totally different task.
Exxon Mobil is not ready to throw in the towel, all those affiliated with fossil fuel will try to maintain their financial future as long as possible.
The current battle is no longer about technology, pollution, efficiency or the environment.
Its all about the money we know technically its possible and we even know the infrastructure can be put in place.
Changing the minds of those with no vision into the future as well as controlling the associated energy wealth will be the new challenge.

Geez! What a train wreck this thread is. Absolute proof that everybody knows better than the other guy.

BB_TX wrote:

dodge guy wrote:
Unfortunately this is how most people view owning an electric car.

And the ICE owners overlook how gas and diesel are made.

All the electric cars are doing is dropping one form of energy for another......in fact even worse when you factor in mining the lithium and, processing, building and shipping battery packs. it becomes more clear how dirty electric cars really are! and those mining tucks and freighter aren't using pixy dust for fuel!