But, but, but the electric cars SAVE energy... right?!??!!
(www.dailywire.com)
Comments (19)
sorted by:
Hahaha.... California, the anus of America.
Cali is where we need a boarder wall....
First of all what moron would think electric cars(with must be charged by electrical usage) would be a good idea when our grid is already strained? It does not tkae a rocket scientist to understand it would probably take a decade to get all the infrastructure in place to support it.
Actually, if they'd release the technology behind Zero Point energy, the quantum flux field, etc. There would be no need for a grid. A box the size of your air conditioner could power your home and everything in it forever at no cost except min. maintenance every couple years. You could live anywhere on the planet and never see another telephone pole or a bunch of unsightly wires destroying the landscape. Batteries in cars, why? Advanced electrolysis and a tank of plain water can run your car the same way a tank of gas does but without pollution or the need to recharge. Just fill the tank with water and off your go. This stuff actually exists but to release the technology is considered too disruptive to the energy and power companies. This and so much more is sitting on shelves because they want to control were we live, were we go, what we eat, etc.
Are you sure you're not talking about the flux capacitor from back to the future?
That's just Hyde from that 70's show going off again.
Hyde - “it’s a car, that runs on water, man.”
Fez - “So, it’s a boat.”
such underrated lines!
https://www.nature.com/articles/s42005-020-00509-9
Your honor, I would like to request that you strike this mans statement from the record. This information is classified and can not be revealed at this time, thank you.
This is not a problem with electric vehicles, but a problem with the energy infrastructure of CA. It has insufficient capacity to store energy from wind and solar, which means the availability of power is too low when there is no sun or wind (mostly sun). Replacing all our great nuclear plants with solar and wind was all thanks to Dominion.
Its a special kind of lunacy going "sustainable" without actually putting in the technology and infrastructure to do so.
I love how people think electric cars have zero emissions. Where do they think the energy comes from that charges them? I tell them the electric cars are really coal/natural gas cars.
That's not really true. While there is quite a bit of pollution from creating batteries and solar panels, alot of that can be fixed from advances in recycling and manufacture (though it is an actual problem at the moment, because those have not been considered sufficiently). But for actual charging of cars, if you charge during the day from solar stations (or batteries charged from solar panels) its basically zero emissions (again, not counting the manufacturing/eventual recycling issues).
But it is true as we really don't have solar charging stations, or if we do there are not many. The electric cars run on oil and natural gas. No way around that.
There are quite a few in CA. We have them at several places where I live; on campus, around town. I know people who have them in their homes. They are pretty trivial to set up if you have solar (everyone has solar), especially if you have battery backup already. I've seen quite a few Tesla ones in the Bay area, on highway 5 (runs N to S through CA). I've seen pictures of more in LA. I don't know. The infrastructure does exist, even if it's not ubiquitous.
The real problem with electric cars (batteries) and solar is really just the pollution from mining the minerals, the manufacturing and the recycling infrastructure. These are technologies that can be worked on.
I am neither pro nor anti electric in any meaningful way. I think its cool tech. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with it. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with petroleum. Both can advance their tech and make better, less polluting products. Both have people who lie about both their advantages and disadvantages.
The truth is, both can be made to work with minimal pollution. As for "muh carbon dioxide" I think that is pretty much a myth (at least in the scope of its effect), so the CO2 from either product is meaningless imo. Pollution IS a problem with both however, but that is a problem that is also solvable with advances in tech and infrastructure.
Then explain how bad mining for those batteries is for the environment. South Park nailed their smug asses.
Its bad because the people doing the mining are evil, not because it has to be bad.
All mining operations are Cabal owned. They don't give a fuck about our environment, they just want us to care. Its a path of control.
Mining could be a perfectly fine thing, without excess pollution (or child slave labor, etc.). Good recycling infrastructure could also be a thing.
There are many potential solutions to the problems with the tech. The tech is not the lie, the people doing all the bad shit are the lie.
And not managing forests properly looks good politically until you have mega fires that destroy everything in their path. But at that point insurance companies or individuals pay and you can blame the result on global warming so it is actually a win.
THe same FUD that attacks Trump attacks Tesla. The most American mad vehicles. Tesla is also working on fixing the grid.