Mmmmm Electric cars... Soo good for the environment....
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (12)
sorted by:
Good for the environment? Or good for control?
Actually, there are some benefits with electric vehicles. But mandating them into the transportation industry negates most of the benefits.
As far as the electric grid goes, it simply can't support a massive conversion to electric vehicles. It was never designed to support that kind of load.
It always seemed to me that urban "milkrun" delivery trucks were their best and highest use.... Maybe city busses? Things with predictable repetitive travel patterns
Look into the history of electric trolley cars. They were everywhere. Then the bus companies made inroads into the urban areas, eliminating the trolley system. There are many claims about public transportation being in bad shape prior, but like everything else, how do we know that powerful interests weren't using their $ and influence to destroy a perfectly good system? The government was involved, and they seldom do anything for the good of the country.
We forget that evil empires take a long view towards building their empires, and if it takes 30 years to own a city, they think nothing of it.
Maybe not the best link, but a starting point.
https://www.vox.com/2015/5/7/8562007/streetcar-history-demise
if you do the maths, you discover the grid would need to be expanded by 1000 times (yes 1000, its gigawatts v.s. petawatts by state) to handle the current population. this endorses the plan to drop the population significantly.
Good point. I haven't done the math on that. I've done it with windmills. Some of the memes floating around are wrong - windmills can pay for themselves, just like electric vehicles can. But the payoff comes late in the life of autos, assuming nothing goes wrong along the way. The payoff for windmills isn't so bad, but I didn't find much in the way of maintenance costs and refurb costs (which is normal for industrial sized equipment), so the true payoff is hard to pin down. And both of those assumes that the existing grid can sustain them, and the environmental cost is a wash with other forms of transportation and power generation.
BTW, none of the info on windmills I found included the cost of power lines, switching stations, grid management, and land acquisition. Minor details, I suppose.....
you don't even have to consider the maintenance or infra-structure. CA barely maintains 200GWh per year and imports another 100GWh per year and the infrastructure is maxxed out. the average gas car gobbles .6mi/Kwh. you figure 25M cars in CA (low) and 15,000mi/year on ave. you wind up with 225 petawatt hours. this is the additional load. it's not an additional 200Gwh, it's a little more by, maybe 1,000. you can mess with the numbers (better gas mileage, lower average miles, fewer gas cars to convert) but you still wind up with ratio's of 80-100x on the low end and 1000x on the high end. realizing you're dealing with the gov, the actual will be 4,000x. the answer is, its a sham and cannot possibly be accomplished -and maintain everyone's current lifestyle. someone has to die because they have zero intention of expanding infrastructure, and they could care less about lifestyle, especially after you don't have guns. you can also calculate using 33.7kwh/gal if you want to mess with mileage efficiency for gas cars. it comes out nearly the same, someone has to die for lifestyle to be maintained.
Definitely good supporting evidence for the global population reduction.
You make a point about the grid regarding the importation of 100GWh into CA. That's hard on the grid. The grid could support a fair bit more load with local power generation. But I'm sure the DS knows that as well.
And with cars banned people will be demanding for onsite coffin sized sleeping pods at their places of work and one daily meal of beans and rice. Going to work and grocery stores will become unfeasible for most people.
They lie with every statistic they can get away with.
They always quote "rated power". That is like me saying that my car is rated at 120mph therefore I can carry out a 120 mile journey in one hour. Not going to happen. In the case of a wind turbine rated at 40MW you would be luck to get 10MW out of it over the year.
Using that "rated power" they will convert that to "houses" conveniently forgetting that those houses will also be associated with cars that are not included in the calculation.
When we hear what percentage of the grid is from "renewables" many factors are omitted. All non-electrical energy is forgotten so cars will not factor in to anyone's calculations.
The other forgotten factor is that, certainly in the UK, "renewables" are given priority over all other sources. It is like being forced to get all your food from a burger stand if one is available. Other sources of food need to be on standby 24/7/365, at their own expense, just in case the supply of burgers runs out.
Then there is the "finite resource" issue. Fossil fuels might run out, they say, well so might nickel, cobalt, neodymium etc required for "renewables".
Again in the UK, "renewables" energy has a guaranteed customer: the taxpayer. If the burger stand turns up at 2am with a supply of burgers then the government guarantees to buy them all even if no customers turn up.
</rant> Yes, thank-you, I do feel better now!
the root idea of electric cars, electric anything for that matter with these globalists... is the CONTROL that comes along with them. being able to flip a switch or program a code into a vehicle or device that will only operate when THEY allow it.
completely banning something is also contrary to freedom of choice. cutting something off totally & not allowing those that want it, is authoritarian.
u/#feelsgood