GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[notsonice + 1,255]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Only 1.25% of Europeans by last count do not use gas in their automobiles. That includes you.

times are changing fast.........clunkers do not last forever

 

Enjoy the transition

 

What percentage of Germany has electric cars?  Today around 4% ......Rome was not built in a day

 

 

 

 

As of 2023, electric vehicles still have a market share in Germany, at around two percent for battery-powered electric vehicles and almost 1.8 percent for plug-in hybrids. However, both figures were an increase compared to the previous year. This hints at a market with potential.

 

Jun 23, 2023

 

Plug-In Electric Car Sales In Europe – June 2023 So far this year, more than 1.4 million passenger plug-in electric cars were registered in Europe, which is about 22 percent of the total market. New plug-in car registrations year-to-date: BEVs: about *0.93 million and 15% share.Aug 6, 2023

 

Europe: Plug-In Car Sales In June 2023 Exceeded 300,000

Edited September 19, 2023 by notsonice

[notsonice + 1,255]

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

21 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

People consume many addictive substances. Gas is different, You consume gas not because you are addicted to gas, but because it is good for you.

 

Gas is in no way good for you.

People drive for short trips when they could walk or bike and get exercise.   The exhaust and oil spills pollute the air and water (not talking CO2, think benzene and particulate matter). 

Do you admit many popular products are not good for you, and therefore popularity can not be used as a measure of goodness?  If you deny that reality there is no logic in you whatsoever.  

Diabetes, heart disease, addictions of many forms.  Do you drink coffee, smoke, or drink alcohol? Are you obese, type II diabetic, hypertensive? 

The world is sick because of convenient unhealthy forms of food and transportation.

 

[turbguy + 1,544]

4 hours ago, AlBub said:

Every event in that case effected me. Maybe you were following too close and got a lot of smoke in your face. EPA did turn them down when we needed the extra capacity to save lives and billions of dollars in infrastructure damage.

While I respect you were more imminently impacted by that event...

Please give me your source.

I gave you some of mine, and there's MUCH more below.

I hope yours was not Alex Jones.

ERCOT requested relief from environmental regulations on February 14, 2021, at 10:00 AM Central Time, FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY!

The EPA did not turn down ERCOT's request for relief from environmental regulations during the Texas February, 2021 power event. The authority to grant waivers from environmental regulations in the event of a power grid emergency lies with the Department of Energy (DOE).

The Department of Energy has the authority to grant relief from environmental regulations during an energy emergency. This authority is granted under the Defense Production Act (DPA), enacted in 1950 to give the President authority to mobilize the domestic economy in support of national defense.

The President delegates his DPA authority to the DOE.  The DOE can issue orders to businesses and other entities to take actions that are necessary to address the emergency, even if those actions would otherwise violate environmental regulations.

The DOE's authority to grant relief from environmental regulations is not unlimited. The DOE can only issue orders under the DPA if it determines that the emergency is "so grave that it requires the taking of immediate action." The DOE must also consider the environmental impacts of its orders and take steps to minimize those impacts to the extent practicable.

On February 14, 2021, ERCOT requested an emergency order from the DOE to allow certain power plants to operate at maximum levels and exceed federal limits on emissions and wastewater release.

The DOE granted ERCOT's request the same day.

The EPA issued a statement on February 15, 2021, saying that it was "aware of the emergency order issued by DOE" and that it would "work with DOE to ensure that any waivers granted are consistent with the intent of the Clean Air Act and other environmental laws."

The EPA does not have a veto over the DOE's authority to grant waivers from environmental regulations in the event of a power grid emergency.

AND.. FROM ERCOT ITSELF...

https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/02/15/ERCOT_202_c__DOE_2021-2-14a.pdf

Edited September 19, 2023 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

2 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

Gas is in no way good for you.

People drive for short trips when they could walk or bike and get exercise.   The exhaust and oil spills pollute the air and water (not talking CO2, think benzene and particulate matter). 

Do you admit many popular products are not good for you, and therefore popularity can not be used as a measure of goodness?  If you deny that reality there is no logic in you whatsoever.  

Diabetes, heart disease, addictions of many forms.  Do you drink coffee, smoke, or drink alcohol? Are you obese, type II diabetic, hypertensive? 

The world is sick because of convenient unhealthy forms of food and transportation.

 

Do you drive your car to get to a food store? To a hospital? To work?

I think that you do.

Most people do.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

14 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

What matters is that California is big on oil, and the Governor is whacky to not blame himself for putting his hands into the oil pot.

Gov. Newsom is the one who issued the ban on oil powered vehicles and BEV sales are now over 20% of the new car market. Try again.

 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

33 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Gov. Newsom is the one who issued the ban on oil powered vehicles and BEV sales are now over 20% of the new car market. Try again.

 

EVs are a miniscule percentage of the vehicle stock in California, and oil is the principal source for transportation fuel in California. You are off base in your stats, Jay.

The Governor of California relies on fossil fuels for his own personal transportation, so he has his hands deep in the oil pot....complete hypocrisy.

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

 

The Governor of California relies on fossil fuels for his own personal transportation, so he has his hands deep in the oil pot....complete hypocrisy.

Some of the electricity you are using is made from renewable energy.  Complete hypocrisy!

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

Some of the electricity you are using is made from renewable energy.  Complete hypocrisy!

Why? Have you seen me opposing hydro-electric energy? My complaint is against expensive wind and solar electricity, of which I do not consume. The only exception being the lights planted on my garden which use solar batteries for convenience.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

Here is the lowdown on the ridiculous lawsuit launched by the California governor, which will shortly be laughed out of court.

The oil companies have the right to countersue the Governor for legal harassment.

https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news/2490398-california-sues-oil-majors-over-climate-deception#:~:text=California sued five of the,environmental costs to the state.

""This ongoing, coordinated campaign to wage meritless, politicized lawsuits against a foundational American industry and its workers is nothing more than a distraction from important national conversations and an enormous waste of California taxpayer resources," said API Senior Vice President and General Counsel Ryan Meyers."

""California has long been a leading promoter of oil and gas development," the company spokesperson added. "Its local courts have no constructive or constitutionally permissible role in crafting global energy policy.""

Edited September 20, 2023 by Ecocharger

[notsonice + 1,255]

8 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

EVs are a miniscule percentage of the vehicle stock in California, and oil is the principal source for transportation fuel in California. You are off base in your stats, Jay.

The Governor of California relies on fossil fuels for his own personal transportation, so he has his hands deep in the oil pot....complete hypocrisy.

and the reality today, everyone , except the braindead, are working on transitioning away from the use of fossil fuels on a national and global scale and when possible in their daily lives

And you ????? keep driving your clunker as if it was 1970, keep your incandescent light bulbs, your 20 year old refrigerator, your 2 cycle lawnmower, and your love of coal fired power plants........as you seem to think that the earths atmosphere is your personal garbage dump......

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

16 hours ago, AlBub said:

Destroying economies has proven throughout the years as perhaps the greatest way to decrease energy usage. Biden has been very effective this way!

I thought oil+gas was booming according to Ecocharger?

Which is it then? Biden destroying the economy and therefore energy use or NOT?

Edited September 20, 2023 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Only 1.25% of Europeans by last count do not use gas in their automobiles. That includes you.

Nope thats 2.45 last year as opposed to 1.25% in 2021 which is your figure.

I drive a hydrid so I use both, but only use gas (petrol) on long journeys which are few and far between.

https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/innovation/concept-cars/

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

16 hours ago, AlBub said:

Every event in that case effected me. Maybe you were following too close and got a lot of smoke in your face. EPA did turn them down when we needed the extra capacity to save lives and billions of dollars in infrastructure damage. The damage, by the way, is damage to the environment because of all the resources needed to repair it. 

The biggest enemy to the environment is environmentalists, especially political ones.

Its noticeable that you never back up your opinions with any evidence unlike the people that challenge your opinion.

It would lend a lot more credance to what you have to say if you did.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

11 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Do you drive your car to get to a food store? To a hospital? To work?

I think that you do.

Most people do.

I do, but I use electricity!

Edited September 20, 2023 by Rob Plant

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

'We're not going to save the planet by bankrupting Britons,' says Braverman - as car makers hit out at government

https://news.sky.com/story/climate-change-home-secretary-suella-braverman-says-were-not-going-to-save-the-planet-by-bankrupting-people-12965383

I have no problem with this and they're right.

If people cant afford to buy EV's then it cant and shouldnt happen, however a richer population with a stronger economy means along with cost reductions through improved batteries and mass production should mean that the transition happens naturally and not mandated which is the right thing to do IMHO.

It's also is in line with most other Western countries, 5 extra years is not going to kill the planet.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Nope thats 2.45 last year as opposed to 1.25% in 2021 which is your figure.

I drive a hydrid so I use both, but only use gas (petrol) on long journeys which are few and far between.

https://www.mercedes-benz.com/en/innovation/concept-cars/

That 1.25% is non-gasoline, a hybrid is fossil fuel.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I do, but I use electricity!

Hybrids are fossil fuel.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

4 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

'We're not going to save the planet by bankrupting Britons,' says Braverman - as car makers hit out at government

https://news.sky.com/story/climate-change-home-secretary-suella-braverman-says-were-not-going-to-save-the-planet-by-bankrupting-people-12965383

I have no problem with this and they're right.

If people cant afford to buy EV's then it cant and shouldnt happen, however a richer population with a stronger economy means along with cost reductions through improved batteries and mass production should mean that the transition happens naturally and not mandated which is the right thing to do IMHO.

It's also is in line with most other Western countries, 5 extra years is not going to kill the planet.

We have some agreement here, although  the "cost reductions" for EVs are overly optimistic.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

That 1.25% is non-gasoline, a hybrid is fossil fuel.

Im talking BEV only

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Hybrids are fossil fuel.

Not when you only use them in electric mode to go to the shops etc

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

14 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

We have some agreement here, although  the "cost reductions" for EVs are overly optimistic.

You maybe right although it looks like VW are bringing out a cheap EV in 2025

This is less than €25K or less than $27K

When you factor in the far cheaper running costs, servicing, fuel etc these are on a par with the average small new car in the USA.

https://www.volkswagen.co.uk/en/life/magazine/world-premiere-of-the-id-2all-concept.html

It will be interesting to see what America's take on allowing BYD into the US market is as Biden is promoting EV's or whether they will have ADD put on them so the US manufacturers can compete. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

36 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Hybrids are fossil fuel.

Most hybrids have different drive modes ie all electric, all FF or both and many have eco modes with reduced acceleration etc to make the battery last longer.

Why use gas at $3.90/gallon when you can drive on electric in the US from between 3.25 cents and 4.67 cents per mile?? Do you like wasting money?

In Europe you can more than double that cost per gallon, In the UK its currently the equivalent of $8.25/gallon! You save yourself $7 every 30 miles.

Edited September 20, 2023 by Rob Plant

[AlBub + 14]

18 hours ago, turbguy said:

While I respect you were more imminently impacted by that event...

Please give me your source.

I gave you some of mine, and there's MUCH more below.

I hope yours was not Alex Jones.

ERCOT requested relief from environmental regulations on February 14, 2021, at 10:00 AM Central Time, FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY!

The EPA did not turn down ERCOT's request for relief from environmental regulations during the Texas February, 2021 power event. The authority to grant waivers from environmental regulations in the event of a power grid emergency lies with the Department of Energy (DOE).

The Department of Energy has the authority to grant relief from environmental regulations during an energy emergency. This authority is granted under the Defense Production Act (DPA), enacted in 1950 to give the President authority to mobilize the domestic economy in support of national defense.

The President delegates his DPA authority to the DOE.  The DOE can issue orders to businesses and other entities to take actions that are necessary to address the emergency, even if those actions would otherwise violate environmental regulations.

The DOE's authority to grant relief from environmental regulations is not unlimited. The DOE can only issue orders under the DPA if it determines that the emergency is "so grave that it requires the taking of immediate action." The DOE must also consider the environmental impacts of its orders and take steps to minimize those impacts to the extent practicable.

On February 14, 2021, ERCOT requested an emergency order from the DOE to allow certain power plants to operate at maximum levels and exceed federal limits on emissions and wastewater release.

The DOE granted ERCOT's request the same day.

The EPA issued a statement on February 15, 2021, saying that it was "aware of the emergency order issued by DOE" and that it would "work with DOE to ensure that any waivers granted are consistent with the intent of the Clean Air Act and other environmental laws."

The EPA does not have a veto over the DOE's authority to grant waivers from environmental regulations in the event of a power grid emergency.

AND.. FROM ERCOT ITSELF...

https://www.ercot.com/files/docs/2021/02/15/ERCOT_202_c__DOE_2021-2-14a.pdf

My source was the news at the time. Some of us actually have to work for a living and don't hang on to every source for people who have time like you obviously do. Do much data is change to fit political narratives that I will take the reality and facts of the day over your constantly revised "truths" you can cite much later. Besides the "okays" were a day late and a dollar short for many of us. 

I still love the picture of the helicopter deicing the birdbeater though.

[AlBub + 14]

6 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I do, but I use electricity!

There are places I drive where I would sorely hate to depend on electricity, but I sure would like it for some of the smaller trips. There is definitely a place for both, If I was in the city, I would almost certainly prefer, EV. Little to expensive to have both, so I, like many others, have to stick with the one that goes everywhere. EV's would be, and I am sure are, be awesome for errand type trips in cities, and occasionally out here too.