More EV negatives

Status
Not open for further replies.

KITROBASKIN

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
5,490
Location
New Mexico, USA
States do charge EV owners for road upkeep.

No oil changes for the motor. Much less scheduled maintenance. There are other positive and negative factors that EV users need to handle.

Maybe a member here will start a poll thread to see how many of you think the evil government was wrong to remove lead from gasoline. More of that Deep State manic control that Taylor Swift now commands?
 

alpg88

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
5,394
I do not watch football, so I do not know who taylor swift is, but he sure sounds fast.

On the serious note, there is sure place for EV, just not in every garage, or for every family. It is not a universal thing that works for all.
 

bykfixer

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
20,555
Location
Dust in the Wind
They never removed lead from gasoline. They just required big oil to stop adding it.

My pop used to chuckle at folks pulling up to the 'no lead' pump and paying 20 cents more per gallon. He'd say "I suppose they don't know it actually costs less to produce since they don't add the lead". "PT Barnum was right, a sucker is born everyday" he'd say.

Lead was added as a lubricant for moving parts. It's why a lot of vintage cars engines began to smoke unless they added a bottle of lead treatment with each fill up or had the valve guides replaced. I used STP oil treatment for the molybdlendum that also did the same thing. Great stuff for pre-catalytic convertor engines. The moly clogs up a convertor like bacon grease down the kitchen sink drain.
 

Buff

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
382
Location
North Carolina Mountains
There were plans to do something just like that. Once the local/state realized the losses of tax revenue that EV's represented they were and i'm sure still are working on taxing EV's on milage.
 

Buff

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
382
Location
North Carolina Mountains
My Norton 850 Commando got a lead substitute added to every tank of gas. Ran like a top right up to the time the engine detonated….bahahahaha!
IMG_7271.jpeg

Picture of a picture best i can do.
 

alpg88

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
5,394
Too many issues to solve if we go by mileage, you only get mileage reading during inspection, it is every 2 years in ny, in some states there isn't any, if you trade in a car before you have to do first inspection, your mileage won't be on your record, the whole federal system will need to be changed, it is not worth it.
Fixed price annually, just like property tax, I pay school tax, whether or not i have kids who goes to school., and the person who has 5 kids pays the same price.
 

orbital

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
4,340
Location
WI
There were plans to do something just like that. Once the local/state realized the losses of tax revenue that EV's represented they were and i'm sure still are working on taxing EV's on milage.
+

If electric companies start raising rates because 'they can' to take advantage of the EV hysteria,,
I'm going to raise unbelievable hell about it.
 

Buff

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
382
Location
North Carolina Mountains
Yes as i said the states were still trying to figure out a way to tax it. I personally don't pay much attention to the EV stuff. No one likes to be forced to comply. Well almost no one i guess there are still a few that like the abuse. Lol
 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
477
Location
San Francisco
I read quite well. More bad info from you.
Read it and weep - open your wallet and flush some more. Cha-chinggggg :crackup:

Dec. 13, 2023

Jan. 19, 2024
Not a Biden flop. A Ford decision to stop the bleeding of $60k losses on each Ford Electric Pickup. Tesla and the Chinese know how to make a profit on electric vehicles. Ford, GM and Toyota don't, yet. They will or go bankrupt.
 

mrfixitman

Enlightened
Joined
Apr 16, 2023
Messages
477
Location
San Francisco
Yes as i said the states were still trying to figure out a way to tax it. I personally don't pay much attention to the EV stuff. No one likes to be forced to comply. Well almost no one i guess there are still a few that like the abuse. Lol
You won't be forced. You just won't have a better option due to emissions standards. ICE can't meet them. That is why they are banned in 2035. Look at it this way. EVs are less complicated. More robust. Less maintenance. Cheaper fuel. You can make your own fuel. There is not one thing the average driver will notice about electric vehicles. The people that will notice are the 1% who go to the middle of nowhere on vacation. That said my brother, MAGA as they come, will make a trip from San Diego to Monument Valley. They will take electric bikes to get around.
 

Buff

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
382
Location
North Carolina Mountains
Electric bikes are cool. But i still like the non electric mountain bike workout i get. For those that just like the bicycle travel and scenery or have a handicap that the EB enables them to trail ride than it's a great, great option. Expensive but great.
IMG_3017.jpeg

I still think mandating and banning are totally wrong unless of course you like living in a totalitarian dictatorship.
Just let the market play out. When there's competition of ideas the end products tend to be awesome. If you eliminate all the gas vehicles ie most of the present competition i think it will hurt the EV market and product quality. JMHO.
We have a Cadillac a jeep and a mini cooper.
I could see in our future having a big comfortable Gas vehicle for longer trips and an EV for around town ie shopping (groceries) or going out to dine on insects or lab grown meat. IJS
 
Last edited:

Buff

Enlightened
Joined
Dec 21, 2023
Messages
382
Location
North Carolina Mountains
With gas the way it is the mini we used locally is now pressed into daily transport to work. My jeep just goes out for doctors appts or trips to the gravel roads in the mountains or the snow up on the Blue Ridge Parkway and such.
I just feel better when wife is in the caddy for safety purposes.
 

sim1tti

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
135
I'm curious. Does anyone here believe that in, lets say 2050, the US will still have a majority of ICE cars on the road? Doesn't it seem like the current issues will be all but entirely addressed, skewing things to the obvious advantage of EVs for the overwhelming majority of Americans?

I understand grievances with the transition, but I'd like to gauge how much of a consensus there is on something more basic, like the eventual outcome.
 
Last edited:

jabe1

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
3,116
Location
Cleveland,Oh
It's kind of late in the game to let the market play out. The oil companies have been subsidized for decades and the government has even bailed out the auto manufacturers.
I'm certainly not into mandates, but you have to at least even the playing field. The lack of taxes collected from EV owners will have to be made up somehow, maybe savings from less medical issues due to pollution.
All in all, those who don't want to see the advantages, or disadvantages of EVs just won't. It's also probably not the end game here, another technology may do better in the near future, but we can't just keep doing what we've been.
 

Guitar Guy

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
590
Location
West Virginia
I'm curious. Do the outspoken EV skeptics here believe that in, lets say 2050, the US will still have a majority of ICE cars on the road? Doesn't it seem like the current issues will be all but entirely addressed, skewing things to the obvious advantage of EVs for the overwhelming majority of Americans?
I guess it depends on which "scientists" one believes. Does one really believe that the slight variation in the earth's temperatures are man made or not? I have seen zero REAL evidence to prove to me that it is man made, or if it is, that there is anything we can do about it at this point.

I'm old enough to know that we've done lots to clean up the air and water since the 1970s. Also, since that time, there have been a dozen or so dates that were given where the ice caps would be melted and New York City would be under water, yet it has never happened. The polar bears were supposed to be extinct, but yet, their population has grown.

The climate fear mongering that I've seen mostly comes from those who stand to profit from it, and from the media that they own and control. I've seen just as many independent experts who say it's just natural slight up and down fluctuations in temperature that have been going on for hundreds and millions of years. The same ones who do the climate fear mongering are the same ones who are buying up beach front properties. Do the math.

Large countries like China, India and others are building power plants on a weekly basis that pour straight coal smoke into the air, and America sells them the coal. India just recently said that they're not concerned with doing much about it, even though they say they will at the "climate summits". China currently has several hundred permits to build coal fired plants, with no scrubbers or clean coal technology in the plans.

The amount of fossil fuels required to build, maintain, charge, and recycle EVs and windmills is enormous, and much damage is caused to the environment when it all turns to junk. Many experts think that the net effect could end up being negative, or an even wash at best. But one thing we do know, many at the top will profit.

Looking at the larger picture of the earth and the atmosphere, I think of it this way. If 100 people are peeing in the swimming pool, and 3 in one corner stop, are you going to drink the water? I'm not, and I'm not drinking proven liars Al Gore & John Kerry & the corporate media's Kool-Aide either. I need more proof and more facts than those spewed by greedy dishonest money grubbers who have proven, in my book, that they have no values, no integrity, and no ethics.

Here's just one small way to do yourself a favor:

 
Last edited:

sim1tti

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Jan 15, 2018
Messages
135
I guess it depends on which "scientists" one believes. Does one really believe that the slight variation in the earth's temperatures are man made or not? I have seen zero real evidence to prove to me that it is man made, or if it is, that there is anything we can do about it at this point.

I'm old enough to know that we've done lots to clean up the air and water since the 1970s. Also, since that time, there have been a dozen or so dates that were given where the ice caps would be melted and New York City would be under water, yet it has never happened. The polar bears were supposed to be extinct, but yet, their population has grown.

The climate fear mongering that I've seen mostly comes from those who stand to profit from it, and from the media that they own and control. I've seen just as many independent experts who say it's just natural slight up and down fluctuations in temperature that have been going on for hundreds and millions of years. The same ones who do the climate fear mongering are the same ones who are buying up beach front properties. Do the math.

Large countries like China, India and others are building power plants on a weekly basis that pour straight coal smoke into the air, and America sells them the coal. India just recently said that they're not concerned with doing much about it, even though they say they will at the "climate summits". China currently has several hundred permits to build coal fired plants, with no scrubbers or clean coal technology in the plans.

The amount of fossil fuels required to build, maintain, charge, and recycle EVs and windmills is enormous, and much damage is caused to the environment when it all turns to junk. Many experts think that the net effect could end up being negative, or an even wash at best. But one thing we do know, many at the top will profit.

Looking at the larger picture of the earth and the atmosphere, I think of it this way. If 100 people are peeing in the swimming pool, and 3 in one corner stop, are you going to drink the water? I'm not, and I'm not drinking proven liars Al Gore & John Kerry & the corporate media's Kool-Aide either. I need more proof and more facts than those spewed by greedy dishonest money grubbers who have proven, in my book, that they have no values, no integrity, and no ethics.

Here's just one small way to yourself a favor:


Thanks, but I was really trying establish weather or not we all recognized the same medium-term eventuality regarding EV adoption by mid-century. A debate about anthropogenic causes of climate change doesn't need to come into it.

In 2050, do you think the US will still have a majority of ICE cars on the road? If so, do you believe EVs will stop getting better, or adoption will flatline, or that society won't be able to address serious shortcomings with the current infrastructure? Something else?
 

Guitar Guy

Enlightened
Joined
Oct 23, 2016
Messages
590
Location
West Virginia
In 2050, do you think the US will still have a majority of ICE cars on the road?
Well, we're not supposed to get into politics on the forum, so I can't say much, but to answer that question honestly, I have no idea, and I don't think anyone really knows, at this point. It really depends on if we're still living in a free society. If people have freedom of choice and don't get priced out of one or the other, I think it would be a mixture.

We are at a MAJOR crossroads in our country, and if the DC establishment uniparty and lobbyist culture prevails, we will likely head down the socialism road, and will be told what to drive, what and what not to eat, what to use to cook with, and who knows what else ... whether it helps the climate & environment or not.
A debate about anthropogenic causes of climate change doesn't need to come into it.
Actually, that largely has MUCH to do with it. It's what is driving it, whether it's true or not.
 

bykfixer

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 9, 2015
Messages
20,555
Location
Dust in the Wind
Thanks, but I was really trying establish weather or not we all recognized the same medium-term eventuality regarding EV adoption by mid-century. A debate about anthropogenic causes of climate change doesn't need to come into it.

In 2050, do you think the US will still have a majority of ICE cars on the road? If so, do you believe EVs will stop getting better, or adoption will flatline, or that society won't be able to address serious shortcomings with the current infrastructure? Something else?
Again I'll mention the horseless carriage vs the horse and buggy.
2050 is only 26 years from now. I'd wager it'll be around 60/40 split with ev's being the 60. Airplanes, trains, cranes, and other super heavy object movers may not be ev for a long long time. There may still be a whole bunch of 25 year old Hondas and Toyotas on the road then like there are now.....
 

jabe1

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
3,116
Location
Cleveland,Oh
I think much of the heavy equipment will go hybrid, they rely mostly on torque; getting all of it at 0 rpm is hard to beat. A diesel generator which kicks on only to keep the batteries up makes a lot of sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top