Quote from: eT on March 24, 2024, 14:25:17Does the electricity production pollution at power plants including coal plants also get calculated as part of their transmissions? Just a question

Yes, it is calculated into the numbers.

Though I will note, coal is pretty much almost dead as far as electricity in US goes. In 2023, coal made up 16.16% of the electricity generated by the grid. By 2027-2032 when these regulations go into effect, coal will likely be below 5% if not below 1%

Quote from: Rob p on March 22, 2024, 20:26:06Good im never never buying electric and Tesla is at the bottom of list I would rather buy byd as musk is a scumbag

Spoken like a true lefty. Elon is a scumbag but the CCP are wonderful.

Listen to yourself.

Does the electricity production pollution at power plants including coal plants also get calculated as part of their transmissions? Just a question

Quote from: Jill W. on March 22, 2024, 15:21:34Any sports car with high torque also will wear out tires quickly. Are there any concerns about those cars too?

A completely idiotic argument - how many sports cars are sold and how many electric cars are planned and already sold?

Obviously, internal combustion engines are beating electric vehicles outright. But they have one fatal drawback for ellos - they pollute the local atmosphere of cities many times more than electric cars. Although the overall impact on the climate is even worse with modern technologies for developing electric vehicles.

I just want rich ellay for relatively (why - written above) cleaner air in cities than now with internal combustion engines. Without constant smog. But it still won't be really clean, because... the planet is one for all.

They do not change the general 2+2=4 on the planet.

That's when the production of batteries and their disposal will be on the conditional Moon or space (as well as solar panels and everything related to "green" energy), and the cost of batteries, despite this, will be small with a sufficient power reserve and a developed "green" charging infrastructure. Then we can say that the internal combustion engine lost. In the meantime, electric cars are sponsored by one part of taxpayers in favor of another. This needs to stop. Let this part buy them with their own money and pay full taxes, taking into account the damage electric vehicles cause to roads and energy infrastructure. And when they start paying full taxes, it will immediately become clear that no one except Musk and other businessmen need these electric cars at the current level of development of their technologies. This is a common scam of taxpayers' budgets, like a bunch of similar zombie businesses that are unprofitable in the real economy.

I was on the team in Tesla that studied this exact topic in great detail. Depending on usage, it was 50,000 to 100,000 miles before an EV has truly been offset. The broad average was 65,000 miles. Also, we never used years as the unit for measuring the "offset" as that's a stupid way to do it.
On average, EVs are driven less than 7000 miles per year. And that is per multiple studies. That means the "greener in 25,000 miles" is not 2 years of usage as the author has suggested, it's actually just under 4 years. The fact that the author didn't bother to verify even this basic piece of information is worrisome.
Also, I see no mention of the impact that battery storage and recycling has, no mention of the fact that R&D process for EVs uses 100 times more material (requires a lot of traveling, shipping, and raw materials), nor does it take into account most people that own an EV have an additional ICE car to cover situations the EV cannot. That additional ICE car is a cost associated with the EV, not a cost counted against ICE cars.

It's cleaner until the battery has to be recycled. God forbid it catches fire.

Quote from: Rob p on March 22, 2024, 20:26:06Good im never never buying electric and Tesla is at the bottom of list I would rather buy byd as musk is a scumbag

Don't look up

Quote from: A on March 23, 2024, 09:44:08

Quote from: Alexander1 on March 23, 2024, 07:52:55Now I see the potential of green hydrogen and e-fuels in cleaning the atmosphere.  Green hydrogen can actually get rid CO2 from manufacturing, use, mining etc all aspects of production and disposal and recycling.  The other factor is which is the most important in the long run is that hydrogen availability is infinite.  All other energy approaches have a dead end.  There is no other alternative.

What are you talking about? Hydrogen is a storage, not a way to make energy.

Now hydrogen does have its uses, but very little in energy and mostly things like fertizer. Mostly because there are better alternatives

As a manufacturer, hydrogen can be a substitute fuel source for more than one of many major industrial gasses. I wish this area was explored more.

Quote from: Alexander1 on March 23, 2024, 07:52:55Now I see the potential of green hydrogen and e-fuels in cleaning the atmosphere.  Green hydrogen can actually get rid CO2 from manufacturing, use, mining etc all aspects of production and disposal and recycling.  The other factor is which is the most important in the long run is that hydrogen availability is infinite.  All other energy approaches have a dead end.  There is no other alternative.

What are you talking about? Hydrogen is a storage, not a way to make energy.

Now hydrogen does have its uses, but very little in energy and mostly things like fertizer. Mostly because there are better alternatives

Now I see the potential of green hydrogen and e-fuels in cleaning the atmosphere.  Green hydrogen can actually get rid CO2 from manufacturing, use, mining etc all aspects of production and disposal and recycling.  The other factor is which is the most important in the long run is that hydrogen availability is infinite.  All other energy approaches have a dead end.  There is no other alternative.

Good im never never buying electric and Tesla is at the bottom of list I would rather buy byd as musk is a scumbag

The electric car weight is kinda miss-leading. For example: VW Tiguan weights 1.6 to 1.89 metric tons (it's the heaviest of the compact SUVs). Model Y weights 1.9 (standard range) to 2 (long range) tons. Meaning Model Y weights 19% to 6% more than a Tiguan. That is not "substantial". ICE cars have been gaining in weight while EVs are getting lighter during the past decade.
Moreover car tires have more impact than weight. A fat soft sports tire with a wide contact patch will cause less wear on the road. Studies were performed in Russia and other "cold" countries to gauge why their roads wear out so fast. The main culprit was found to be studded tires. Those leave very specific ruts on the road. These are everywhere in our region. But tires have improved drastically during the years. Some EU countries have banned studded tires. EVs now have tires developed for them that everyone recommends even for ICE cars.

TLDR: EV weight factor is overblown.

Pickups and SUVs are heavier. Are there any concerns about them damaging roads?

Any sports car with high torque also will wear out tires quickly. Are there any concerns about those cars too?

Or are those two concerns voiced a shadow for electric vehicle hatred?

And it is a proven fact that electric cars, due to their significantly higher starting weight with a heavy battery, destroy roads much faster. And because They have more torque, they wear out the tires and the road faster when starting quickly.

Therefore, the transport tax on owners of electric vehicles should be 2-3 times higher. About the same as for cars with 600 hp+.

Battery production is extremely dirty from the moment it is extracted. But all the dirty parts were carefully removed outside the Elloi's habitat. Who forget that the planet is common. And in total nothing changes. And the cost of the transition is the money of some for the benefit of others... Communism at the expense of others.

Strangely political and poor writing, doesn't sound like much of a snub given it's still a major win for Tesla.