I think the #1 reason for electric vehicles is their limited range and centralized source of power. If control is the goal, wasting resources means nothing.
I never understood this argument. If you have solar cells on your house, you can travel pretty far in an electric vehicle without dependence on anything else. It essentially allows you to travel within a hundred miles of your house for perpetuity without having access to any other energy sources.
On the other hand, I know very few people who drill for oil in their backyard. If the government blocks access to gasoline, it completely restricts your movement unless you have been stocking up. Even then, you're bound to run out, and your mobility is essentially nothing.
Aside from the issue of being able to turn off cars remotely, which is true of just about all cars these days, I don't see how using an electric vehicle limits your mobility at all in a scenario where it would matter.
> travel within 100 miles of your house
> doesn't understand how it restricts movement
...bruh. Let's not forget it's damn-near impossible to repair one yourself, or the fact that your batteries start losing their ability to hold a charge rather quickly. You sound like someone who's only ever lived in a city.
That's a valid point, but how many people have solar panels on their roof? Have you priced an installation lately?
If you install solar yourself, it can be done affordably. But your range is limited by the battery, and "refueling" could be a challenge in some situations. You can easily double the range of your gas car by bringing along several cans of fuel.
But the important thing is to understand is specific energy, or the amount of energy per unit weight. In transportation, weight is everything, because weight (or mass) impacts the work your energy source can provide after hauling it's own mass around. Wikipedia is as good a source as any, so I included the link below, and the numbers are usually up to date.
Anyway, gasoline is 46.4 MJ/Kg, Li-Ion is < 0.9 MJ/Kg. 15 gallons of gas is < 100 lbs. What's the weight of a typical electric car battery? How far will a gas vehicle go on 100 gallons of fuel?
To be perfectly honest, a hybrid vehicle with a relatively small battery makes the most sense from an efficiency standpoint. If you don't mind the added complexity and a battery that degrades quite a bit in 3-4 years. The Rav4 hybrid seems like it might make a lot of sense. But I don't have $32K+ burning a hole in my wallet, and I don't like spending a lot of money on vehicles.
Originally, it was the self-righteous legislating morality. And they can be as much control freaks as any DS player. But it didn't take long for the criminal elements to capitalize on the situation. Prohibition financed a lot of criminals and DS families, and they may have had a hand in helping push the legislation through, and/or keeping prohibition in place as long as it was.
its not just green energy, the globalists are using a valid problems (which they are causing via pesticides, policies, and pollution along with a whole list of other stuff) to hurt is more than the problems they are creating already are
we do really need to unfuck our ecology, the way we grow our food is depleting the soil (monocropping) so people fertilizers which kill off the microbes, killing off the microbes kills a lot of the insects too as microbes are the foundation of the food chain, so we are left with an ecological cap, the first insect that can take advantage of the crop you are growing will rapidly multiply and destroy your crop unless you use pesticides, which kills the microbes, insects, and pretty much everything else and in time it kills us too
a lot of the symptoms of global warming are caused by the destruction of the ecosystem globally, we already know how to fix those problems, farm in ways that mimic nature, some dude in america switched to intensive intermediate grazing with his herd of cattle and low and behold as that mimics the grazing habits of bison herds the plants responded great, the soil turned from a red clay with a couple of inches of top soil to black loam rich in humates, sinking tons of carbon per square meter of soil
the biggest release of carbon in human history was the introduction of the plow to north America, in places there was 12 foot of what we call top soil, thats billions of tons of carbon locked away and acting as a giant sponge , generally keeping the eco system heathy
if you happen to be a farmer or are just interested some key words to look up would be rotational grazing, silvo pasture, agroforestry, permaculture(its infested with twats but a lot of good information), the generally idea is to stop look at land as a grass printer that you sometimes spread shit on to get better grass to a living system that you can worth with if you learn to understand it, there is a whole eco system thats too small for you to see but it does make up most of the biomass on the planet, here is a decent video on some of the soil stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2H60ritjag
Great information Pede. My one friend who farms (large scale) was bitching the other day about the increase in the cost of fertilizer. He was saying more farms are going under…horrible stuff. It’s getting critical. I’m building raised gardens now and was going to use wood framing. Cost of wood= 💰
one of the most important tib bits is bocking 14, its sterile cultivar of comfrey, its a super deep rooting plant that you can cut back 3 times a year and add to your compost pile or even feed to animals in small amounts(it contains the same stuff rhubarb does and will give animals kidney stones if you feed them too much of it) its high in nutrients and even if the animals shit most of them out its going to be going from the bottom layers of the soil to the top,
if every farmer had a patch that they cut back to add to a compost heap they could massively improve their land with a tiny investment
It's okay. It would have only gone to waste. Don't other trying to debate lefties on science. They will just say stupid shit like "but we can recycle them" and "so what?" and "it creates jobs".
A 100W solar panel costs about 100 bucks. At 15 cents a KWh, it should be able to produce about $800 worth of electricity in 25 years under normal conditions.
72W nom x 8 hours per day x 25 years @ $0.15/KWh
Pedes, ffs, I am talking about panels here, not batteries or other equipment that may be a part of a solar system
And wow, the downdoots on this comment. And nobody can tell me where I got it wrong? How convenient!
My panels are 17 years old and have lost about 20% of their output. Big whoop. Battery degradation is not part of this particular conversation (clearly you haven't done much research on this either)
My oldest panel was made in 1984 (no coincidences LOL) it is rated at 18v ocv and 3W. And I still get 3 watts out of it. Its roughly the dimensions of a sheet of copy paper.
Why did you include Bitcoin? It’s not exactly praised by leftists as “green” technology like the others. From what I’ve seen it’s generally attacked by leftists for muh CO2 emissions.
Holy fuck. If you’re going to make a point, try not to use the same methods they do.
Let’s ignore how many strip mines there are for copper, iron ore, nickle, etc. It takes a tremendous volume of earth to produce most resources we use. This is a really flawed argument and completely ignores how much land was opened up to produce everything else the car is made from.
Generally speaking an EV has one battery that consists of hundreds of cells. This is an important distinction. If you don’t understand the difference between a battery and a cell, you probably shouldn’t be commenting on the technology.
There are lots of genuinely good reasons to not buy an EV, but spreading misinformation doesn’t help anyone and makes you look retarded.
Solar panels. They don't cost more energy than they produce. They would be uneconomical and therefore too expensive to sell. The cost of the energy is built into the cost of the raw materials prior to manufacturing the panels. Miners don't operate at a loss.
On your bitcoin comments: how much energy does our current financial system (central banks) use? How much control do we have over it? Can we even answer the first question? CB= no control. Cryptocurrency = 100% controlled by WTP
I would point out that this isn’t really about green or renewable — this is frankly just HOW the Central Planners and Leftist idiots do it.
There are a variety of ways to build these things, ecologically and in a manner that is sound engineering, BUT this isn’t the way to mass-produce, at scale, and at speed.
This is a time preference thing. The world has been programmed to consume more… NOW. It’s about Wastage.
This can also be seen with Petroleum products of all kinds.
A well and thoughtful engineered product or ecosystem is very rare even today.
I think the left right dynamic is poisoning the well. EVs can be part of a more independent and cleaner air future. We can easily generate enough energy on our own roofs to power our EVs, and companies like Redwood Materials are developing a closed loop ecosystem whereby at some point in the future old EVs will be mined instead of the earth. Both the left and the right push the EV narrative one way and ignore other aspects to make political points. The truth is that EVs are more energy efficient and less polluting overall now (including mining, coal power sources, lifetime use emissions, and after use value) and have potential to greatly exceed the current system, whereas ICE is near its peak. However it's also true that EVs are not able to travel as far on a single fuel stop / recharge, they are not 100% "green", and they are not fully developed or optimized yet.
Seeing people jump into the fact that things get mined, power gets generated by coal, and batteries have a capacity limit, seems just as stupid as the left saying bullets can kill children, viruses can kill people, and oil isn't 100% clean to produce. To both groups of NPCs: duh, it's more nuanced than those things. Trade-offs including freedom, future return on investment, personal responsibility, independence, and innovation, should be brought into the argument. But then the click-bait loses its teeth....
I think the #1 reason for electric vehicles is their limited range and centralized source of power. If control is the goal, wasting resources means nothing.
Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding! Winner Winner, Steak and Potato Dinner!
☝☝☝
And, the ability to turn them off remotely
That’s a factor of every new vehicle that has direct data/cell access.
Or an EMP.
I do agree that the idea of forcing EVs as the only vehicle is intended to limit mobility of civilians.
Might also be to force the use of mass transit on the public.
I never understood this argument. If you have solar cells on your house, you can travel pretty far in an electric vehicle without dependence on anything else. It essentially allows you to travel within a hundred miles of your house for perpetuity without having access to any other energy sources.
On the other hand, I know very few people who drill for oil in their backyard. If the government blocks access to gasoline, it completely restricts your movement unless you have been stocking up. Even then, you're bound to run out, and your mobility is essentially nothing.
Aside from the issue of being able to turn off cars remotely, which is true of just about all cars these days, I don't see how using an electric vehicle limits your mobility at all in a scenario where it would matter.
> travel within 100 miles of your house
> doesn't understand how it restricts movement
...bruh. Let's not forget it's damn-near impossible to repair one yourself, or the fact that your batteries start losing their ability to hold a charge rather quickly. You sound like someone who's only ever lived in a city.
While I tend to agree with you, the gubmint can shut your power off easier than it can shut your gas station off
That's a valid point, but how many people have solar panels on their roof? Have you priced an installation lately?
If you install solar yourself, it can be done affordably. But your range is limited by the battery, and "refueling" could be a challenge in some situations. You can easily double the range of your gas car by bringing along several cans of fuel.
But the important thing is to understand is specific energy, or the amount of energy per unit weight. In transportation, weight is everything, because weight (or mass) impacts the work your energy source can provide after hauling it's own mass around. Wikipedia is as good a source as any, so I included the link below, and the numbers are usually up to date.
Anyway, gasoline is 46.4 MJ/Kg, Li-Ion is < 0.9 MJ/Kg. 15 gallons of gas is < 100 lbs. What's the weight of a typical electric car battery? How far will a gas vehicle go on 100 gallons of fuel?
To be perfectly honest, a hybrid vehicle with a relatively small battery makes the most sense from an efficiency standpoint. If you don't mind the added complexity and a battery that degrades quite a bit in 3-4 years. The Rav4 hybrid seems like it might make a lot of sense. But I don't have $32K+ burning a hole in my wallet, and I don't like spending a lot of money on vehicles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
Gasoline refineries are pretty centralized. If you wanted to bring transportation to a halt, close the refineries.
The biden admin is watching. Don't give them any ideas !
Already working on it
Was prohibition really about drinking or fuel?
It was about control and money
Originally, it was the self-righteous legislating morality. And they can be as much control freaks as any DS player. But it didn't take long for the criminal elements to capitalize on the situation. Prohibition financed a lot of criminals and DS families, and they may have had a hand in helping push the legislation through, and/or keeping prohibition in place as long as it was.
its not just green energy, the globalists are using a valid problems (which they are causing via pesticides, policies, and pollution along with a whole list of other stuff) to hurt is more than the problems they are creating already are
we do really need to unfuck our ecology, the way we grow our food is depleting the soil (monocropping) so people fertilizers which kill off the microbes, killing off the microbes kills a lot of the insects too as microbes are the foundation of the food chain, so we are left with an ecological cap, the first insect that can take advantage of the crop you are growing will rapidly multiply and destroy your crop unless you use pesticides, which kills the microbes, insects, and pretty much everything else and in time it kills us too
a lot of the symptoms of global warming are caused by the destruction of the ecosystem globally, we already know how to fix those problems, farm in ways that mimic nature, some dude in america switched to intensive intermediate grazing with his herd of cattle and low and behold as that mimics the grazing habits of bison herds the plants responded great, the soil turned from a red clay with a couple of inches of top soil to black loam rich in humates, sinking tons of carbon per square meter of soil
the biggest release of carbon in human history was the introduction of the plow to north America, in places there was 12 foot of what we call top soil, thats billions of tons of carbon locked away and acting as a giant sponge , generally keeping the eco system heathy
if you happen to be a farmer or are just interested some key words to look up would be rotational grazing, silvo pasture, agroforestry, permaculture(its infested with twats but a lot of good information), the generally idea is to stop look at land as a grass printer that you sometimes spread shit on to get better grass to a living system that you can worth with if you learn to understand it, there is a whole eco system thats too small for you to see but it does make up most of the biomass on the planet, here is a decent video on some of the soil stuff https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2H60ritjag
Great information Pede. My one friend who farms (large scale) was bitching the other day about the increase in the cost of fertilizer. He was saying more farms are going under…horrible stuff. It’s getting critical. I’m building raised gardens now and was going to use wood framing. Cost of wood= 💰
one of the most important tib bits is bocking 14, its sterile cultivar of comfrey, its a super deep rooting plant that you can cut back 3 times a year and add to your compost pile or even feed to animals in small amounts(it contains the same stuff rhubarb does and will give animals kidney stones if you feed them too much of it) its high in nutrients and even if the animals shit most of them out its going to be going from the bottom layers of the soil to the top,
if every farmer had a patch that they cut back to add to a compost heap they could massively improve their land with a tiny investment
its also easy to propagate via cuttings
Awesome. Adding it to my mix. Taking this pretty seriously at this point so appreciated. 👍🏽
Excellent post. Much appreciated!
I know this is always overlooked by the green ignoramus
You posted the link before archiving it and now they deleted it. Always archive links with a high chance of being deleted before posting.
They're eyeing this place now trying to take out our ammo. Gotta stay vigilant, we're the news now.
It's okay. It would have only gone to waste. Don't other trying to debate lefties on science. They will just say stupid shit like "but we can recycle them" and "so what?" and "it creates jobs".
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/mines-minerals-and-green-energy-reality-check
Another article that covers the same topics.
Thank you sir!
On solar panels: your claim is impossible unless those making the panels are selling them at HUGE losses (read: giving them away for free)
A 100W solar panel costs about 100 bucks. At 15 cents a KWh, it should be able to produce about $800 worth of electricity in 25 years under normal conditions.
72W nom x 8 hours per day x 25 years @ $0.15/KWh
Pedes, ffs, I am talking about panels here, not batteries or other equipment that may be a part of a solar system
And wow, the downdoots on this comment. And nobody can tell me where I got it wrong? How convenient!
Debooonked! Prove me wrong.
You obviously haven't owned solar before. Solar panels degrade quickly, and batteries even faster.
You obviously won't prove me wrong, because you can't.
My panels are 17 years old and have lost about 20% of their output. Big whoop. Battery degradation is not part of this particular conversation (clearly you haven't done much research on this either)
I've had 3 different solar setups, old panels are worthless.
My oldest panel was made in 1984 (no coincidences LOL) it is rated at 18v ocv and 3W. And I still get 3 watts out of it. Its roughly the dimensions of a sheet of copy paper.
Not true. Original panels made in the 70s are still running at 68-69% efficiency.
Wrong. You don't physics much, do you. Prove me wrong.
Please oh righteous physics master, show me the error of my ways.
And then they bury the windmills.
I can buy 10Wh 18650 size cells for less than a buck at the right time in the market. Are you saying someone had to dig 500k lbs of dirt to make it?
That is 17 tractor trailer loads of dirt! I call BULLSHIT. Do you know how much a gallon of diesel costs? How far are we driving this 17 loads?
Maybe this is required for one PACK, which Tesla charges about $22,000 for a replacement
Certainly not for one cell
Yes, username checks out. I know my batteries.
Never supported lithium mining. Sorry Tesla was a good run but Elon needed a hobby.
Why did you include Bitcoin? It’s not exactly praised by leftists as “green” technology like the others. From what I’ve seen it’s generally attacked by leftists for muh CO2 emissions.
One of these examples is not like the others.
Need a good meme for this with a sauce!
Holy fuck. If you’re going to make a point, try not to use the same methods they do.
Let’s ignore how many strip mines there are for copper, iron ore, nickle, etc. It takes a tremendous volume of earth to produce most resources we use. This is a really flawed argument and completely ignores how much land was opened up to produce everything else the car is made from.
Generally speaking an EV has one battery that consists of hundreds of cells. This is an important distinction. If you don’t understand the difference between a battery and a cell, you probably shouldn’t be commenting on the technology.
There are lots of genuinely good reasons to not buy an EV, but spreading misinformation doesn’t help anyone and makes you look retarded.
This.
Each cell is a battery. They are run in series and parallel to create the voltage and amp output desired. So you're both right.
Before Putin it was only 10 lbs of used, plastic straws🤔
That red bassturd!
Solar panels. They don't cost more energy than they produce. They would be uneconomical and therefore too expensive to sell. The cost of the energy is built into the cost of the raw materials prior to manufacturing the panels. Miners don't operate at a loss.
On your bitcoin comments: how much energy does our current financial system (central banks) use? How much control do we have over it? Can we even answer the first question? CB= no control. Cryptocurrency = 100% controlled by WTP
Another source:
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/mines-minerals-and-green-energy-reality-check
Archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20220317204136/https://www.manhattan-institute.org/mines-minerals-and-green-energy-reality-check
Haha I was hoping to resee the bad electric car info since my lefty neighbor just brought home a tesla.
Very interesting.
I would point out that this isn’t really about green or renewable — this is frankly just HOW the Central Planners and Leftist idiots do it.
There are a variety of ways to build these things, ecologically and in a manner that is sound engineering, BUT this isn’t the way to mass-produce, at scale, and at speed.
This is a time preference thing. The world has been programmed to consume more… NOW. It’s about Wastage.
This can also be seen with Petroleum products of all kinds.
A well and thoughtful engineered product or ecosystem is very rare even today.
Michael Moore did a great documentary on this but then concluded we have you de-populate the earth to save it.
Solar pannels and windmills require so many more acres per kilowatt than plants ever could.
Archived: https://archive.is/q6ITA
Leftists only give a shit about the earth as a vehicle to crush the success of humanity
https://web.archive.org/web/20220320223901/https://www.newyorknationalreview.com/life-style/you-dig-up-500000-pounds-of-the-earths-crust-for-one-ev-auto-battery/ 💕
I think the left right dynamic is poisoning the well. EVs can be part of a more independent and cleaner air future. We can easily generate enough energy on our own roofs to power our EVs, and companies like Redwood Materials are developing a closed loop ecosystem whereby at some point in the future old EVs will be mined instead of the earth. Both the left and the right push the EV narrative one way and ignore other aspects to make political points. The truth is that EVs are more energy efficient and less polluting overall now (including mining, coal power sources, lifetime use emissions, and after use value) and have potential to greatly exceed the current system, whereas ICE is near its peak. However it's also true that EVs are not able to travel as far on a single fuel stop / recharge, they are not 100% "green", and they are not fully developed or optimized yet.
Seeing people jump into the fact that things get mined, power gets generated by coal, and batteries have a capacity limit, seems just as stupid as the left saying bullets can kill children, viruses can kill people, and oil isn't 100% clean to produce. To both groups of NPCs: duh, it's more nuanced than those things. Trade-offs including freedom, future return on investment, personal responsibility, independence, and innovation, should be brought into the argument. But then the click-bait loses its teeth....