Nutty California

[coachg]

[coboardhead]

mrgybe brought up some very important issues when we evaluate the move to EVs.

The initial investment, both in dollars and carbon, is a compelling enough reason to not jump into the EV solution with both feet. Driving a very high mileage petroleum vehicle and limiting the amount of driving we do is a better choice for many of us.

In my case, a smaller EV vehicle makes sense. I can drive from home to office and charge at both ends using primarily solar electric. So, I can keep the carbon part of the production of the electricity out of my use. I have no idea how many folks can do this.

What I am finding is that autos that get the range that many of us want utilize more battery than most of us need...at least in our second, or third, vehicle. What makes sense, to me, is that we promote smaller commuting vehicles that can be more easily charged with home charging stations that we use for our local driving. In my case, I could cut my vehicle carbon footprint by 35 to 40% if I use my petro vehicle for long trips and an EV for my commute and skiing. And, the smaller battery has WAY less of an environmental cost.

Like everything, there is no easy solution and sound bites don't begin to address the issues. We hide the true cost of oil and coal and we hide the costs of weaning ourselves from those sources.

In doing the math on the true costs for me to go to electric, I am finding little information and assistance. It seems no one wants me to know the answer. They just want me to buy a $70,000 Tesla and feel good.

[SAS]

[mac]

Sigh. Would mrgybe cherry pick data and then use that data to argue anecdotally? We all know the answer to that is yes. For about a decade he has repeated dodgy claims from chemical manufacturers and oil companies to argue that we will either have to wear hair shirts, or we are picking alternatives to oil that really don't reduce carbon dioxide. Well, here is a study that refutes his latest claim:

[coboardhead]

I agree Mac that the carbon industry is spinning and hiding the true costs of their product. But, the EV industry is doing the same thing. In an effort to convince us of the green value of an electric vehicle they try to convince us that the EV can be used just like a Petrol vehicle with little change in our driving behavior. This means bigger batteries and more environmental cost…substantially more…in our quest for range.

[coachg]

coboardhead,

There is another solution; better public transportation & development. In the U.S. we build around the automobile. You have to drive to mega malls or Big Box shopping centers in the newer developments. In Europe, & where I live the community is much more walkable & bike friendly so you only need your car in extreme weather or rare situations. I was just in Portugal & rented a car. It was a 4.5 hour drive to Cabedelo from Lisbon but once in Cabedelo I only needed the car for out of town trips. In three weeks I only filled up twice, once in Cabedelo & once in Lisbon just before I returned the car. Half a tank each time. For day to day things we walked, biked or used public transportation.

Coachg

[swchandler]

I like the idea of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in the long run. Needless to say though, the needed infrastructure will take many years and a desire to invest in the future. However, if I wanted to jump in today, I could, because Santa Barbara has a local hydrogen filling station. If the cost of gas stays on the ceiling, it even makes buying hydrogen more economical than gas.

[coboardhead]

[mac]

CB—I expect advocates to spin and advocate. Whether they are selling EV’s or traditional cars. Sadly, too many Americans have their ego wrapped up in a car, with no consideration for impact. But that does not justify 50 years of fighting any effort to reduce oil use, involving hiring the dregs of the tobacco consultants, lies, and cheating. Mrgybe has been part of this disinformation campaign for years. He attacked the stimulus bill repeatedly—hiding his opposition to even modest measures to increase efficiency. None of the righties here have bothered to actually make a substantive case for nuclear energy. Move on to the next Fox news talking point—brought to you by big oil.

[coachg]

coboardhead,

I didn't say it was easy, I said it was another option; and obviously a better option for the environment. Getting a mass transit system in the suburbs will be no more an undertaking than installing massive amounts of charging stations, but more importantly allowing small business in residential neighborhoods is also another solution. The biggest complaint I hear from people that live in the suburbs is no local restaurants.

I don't snow ski but here in the Sierras I think it has already hit critical mass when I see the traffic jams up 80 & 50 during ski season.

Interesting you should mention Germany, because they do have a greater population density, but they also have much less urban sprawl if you were to compare large German cities to Denver. And yes, their train system is amazing. Even staying in the small town of Schliersee I could easily catch the train to Munich.

Coachg