GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

40 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

 with used Tesla prices falling

Increased affordability.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Rob, getting from A to B is not the issue here, you are trying to change the subject. 

You are relying on a propaganda sheet , not properly controlled studies. A public newspaper is not an engineering or science journal. I guess that is beyond your training to distinguish the two.

Even your own propaganda admits that EVs have trouble in cold weather, I just quoted from your own stuff to prove that. Read again. Yes, that's a fail.

"The Tesla Model 3 Long Range was the electric car that came the lowest in severe winter cold with a mileage of over 300 km. Several of the ten electric cars tested had mileages that were less than 200 km. Some cars shut down unexpectedly before the battery was empty. The Hyundai Kona Electric stopped on an uphill hill with 7 percent battery left. - The severe cold has an effect, but in the challenging weather some of the cars were still able to judge the range of the battery really well, and some stopped unexpectedly, says Lauri Ahtiainen who was responsible for the test at Tekniikan Maailma. However, the Tesla Model 3 that won the test was still drivable when the car showed that the battery had zero percent charge. Most electric cars limited power and heating when the charge started to decrease. "

No point arguing with you as you spout nonsense

"its not about getting from A to B"????? Then what is transportation for??? Please enlighten me!

I have given you the credentials of the Independent newspaper, it is not a pro green propaganda newspaper as the link I supplied will show. As usual if it doesnt fit your beliefs you call it propaganda with zero supporting evidence, as there is none!

The Tesla in the trial went 300KM and was still going when it was reporting zero miles left, if that isnt good enough for you to get where you want to go then thats your choice! For me it will do very nicely thanks!

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

15 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

I am just surprised the lazy boy could actually type in: EV Tesla 3 and Finland from the references I gave(naturally the ass then claimed I gave "sod all" background of course, and he did manage to find the link I had already found from January 2024 but never bothered to copy paste.... 

Apparently lazy boy CAN use a search engine after all.  <<SHOCK>>

Just can't do math(headlines are reality in his make believe world) where Cost of wind is $33/MWh, electricity prices in the UK are subsidized, yet the average electrical price in UK is >>>2X that of the USA... Brilliant.  Time to put back on ignore.  Make your life easier man. 

Haha again NOTHING to back up your claims FOOL!

Ranked: The Cheapest Sources of Electricity in the U.S. (visualcapitalist.com)

See the list above!

I posted UK generating at £33/MWh (roughly $41/MWh) largely from wind and this compares incredibly favourably to the USA's costs for powergen.

Again you spout lies

As for math... hmmmm shall we go back to your tunnel scheme again and do some more math on that again??🤣🤣🤡

Keep it up your very entertaining, if you want to put me on ignore thats up to you, I guess you lost all the arguments then and want an Echo chamber or maybe an ECO chamber to concur with your views!

Edited January 25 by Rob Plant

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

16 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

 the average electrical price in UK is >>>2X that of the USA... Brilliant. 

Really?

The average price is much greater than double the price in the UK???

Did you "do the math" or Google that "lazy bones"???

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=average+price+of+electricity+in+the+USA

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=average+price+of+electricity+in+the+UK

Edited January 25 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

16 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

You are relying on a propaganda sheet , not properly controlled studies. A public newspaper is not an engineering or science journal. I guess that is beyond your training to distinguish the two.

You quote oilprice.com all the time.

Try to remember that when you make silly statements about reference credibility.

 

Edited January 25 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

On 1/25/2024 at 4:28 AM, Rob Plant said:

No point arguing with you as you spout nonsense

"its not about getting from A to B"????? Then what is transportation for??? Please enlighten me!

I have given you the credentials of the Independent newspaper, it is not a pro green propaganda newspaper as the link I supplied will show. As usual if it doesnt fit your beliefs you call it propaganda with zero supporting evidence, as there is none!

The Tesla in the trial went 300KM and was still going when it was reporting zero miles left, if that isnt good enough for you to get where you want to go then thats your choice! For me it will do very nicely thanks!

Of course that is pure propaganda, not an engineering study. You should be able to see that, and read the actual contents how the EVs failed.

The actual point is that the EVs ALL suffered distance constraints with the cold weather, which supports the point I was making above. I guess you just plain missed the point again. You are so severely blinkered that you simply ignore the basic points being raised. That is a sign of an acolyte to a cult.

Read,

"The Tesla Model 3 Long Range was the electric car that came the lowest in severe winter cold with a mileage of over 300 km. Several of the ten electric cars tested had mileages that were less than 200 km. Some cars shut down unexpectedly before the battery was empty. The Hyundai Kona Electric stopped on an uphill hill with 7 percent battery left. - The severe cold has an effect, but in the challenging weather some of the cars were still able to judge the range of the battery really well, and some stopped unexpectedly, says Lauri Ahtiainen who was responsible for the test at Tekniikan Maailma. However, the Tesla Model 3 that won the test was still drivable when the car showed that the battery had zero percent charge. Most electric cars limited power and heating when the charge started to decrease. "

Edited January 27 by Ecocharger

[bloodman33 + 22]

We are so screwed.  Thank the coal and oil industry and the deniers. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4S9sDyooxf4

 

[bloodman33 + 22]

As droughts bouts continue to increase in the midwest farmers will stop planting corn, and switch to wheat.  The Nebraska corn huskers will have to change their name.  This bar none is a huge problem.  What rhymes with wheat: The Nebraska wheat, meat, Geek guys taking a leak?  That said, who really cares.  Since they entered the Big Ten, they suck at all sports.  Corn prices will get much higher which will impact meat prices especially beef.  Most of the corn crop goes for animal feed.   Wheat prices will also go lower and lower as more farmers switch.  This will result in more and more farmers getting out, and bigger and bigger farms growing wheat.  Moo   Maybe somewhat drought tolerant corn will be developed that have yields that make it viable but currently that is not in the radar of corn breeders.  That is the reality. 

[bloodman33 + 22]

The truth will set you free!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAAbcNl4Lb8

[bloodman33 + 22]

This is a PBS documentary which show Exon concluded C02 is causing global warming.

It also shows that Exon and the Koch industry create a successful campaign to destroy the credibility of the fact that it is occurring and why. 

Heh Ecocharger, you do you claim C02 does not cause global warming.  Why are you disagreeing with Exons conclusions about C02 causing global warming?  Are you getting paid, or are you just ignorant.  I don't know which one would be worse.

Both of these companies need to be punished held accountable and closed where their assets are sold to other oil and refineries which never did this. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAAbcNl4Lb8

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

4 hours ago, bloodman33 said:

As droughts bouts continue to increase in the midwest farmers will stop planting corn, and switch to wheat.  The Nebraska corn huskers will have to change their name.  This bar none is a huge problem.  What rhymes with wheat: The Nebraska wheat, meat, Geek guys taking a leak?  That said, who really cares.  Since they entered the Big Ten, they suck at all sports.  Corn prices will get much higher which will impact meat prices especially beef.  Most of the corn crop goes for animal feed.   Wheat prices will also go lower and lower as more farmers switch.  This will result in more and more farmers getting out, and bigger and bigger farms growing wheat.  Moo   Maybe somewhat drought tolerant corn will be developed that have yields that make it viable but currently that is not in the radar of corn breeders.  That is the reality. 

Are you this ignorant?  Large portions if not all of the Great plains were moving sand dunes 700 years ago and 2000yrs ago and roughly every ~700 years or ~300 year amplitude period going back as far as we can where older versions are only seen for LARGE desertification instances such as 4000yrs ago as well.   The great plains of North America when the white man showed up in the 16th century were called the Great Desert, not the Great Plains.  If one goes by the C14 etc dating methods, the Great Plains via basic patterns should be becoming a desert slowly again.  How severe this interval will be?  No one knows.  Of course currently, rainfall has INCREASED over last few decades across Eastern USA, but Western USA has dried out or stayed the same, but has warmed up while Eastern USA has not warmed up much at all. 

All of western Nebraska are sand dunes which currently have some wheat/corn on them, but mostly cows. We know this from C14 buried by sand throughout the areas as it goes between sand--> Grass--> trees--> Grass--> Sand-->Grass etc

Where were the CO2 flattuence fear mongers then?  Surely both of those Long duration desertification periods were caused by CO2 ignorant so called "scientists".

If CO2 heating were true, according to IPCC etc it should be showing up in Tropical Troposphere first with increased heating, but this area shows NEGATIVE ratio to ground level stations in terms of heating and has done so since roughly ~20 years ago.  Shows how corrupt the ground based thermometer system is as so called "scientists" keep the ever expanding city island heat effect data inside their data sets.  So much for "science".  . 

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

48 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Are you this ignorant?  Large portions if not all of the Great plains were moving sand dunes 700 years ago and 2000yrs ago and roughly every ~700 years or ~300 year amplitude period going back as far as we can where older versions are only seen for LARGE desertification instances such as 4000yrs ago as well.   The great plains of North America when the white man showed up in the 16th century were called the Great Desert, not the Great Plains.  If one goes by the C14 etc dating methods, the Great Plains via basic patterns should be becoming a desert slowly again.  How severe this interval will be?  No one knows.  Of course currently, rainfall has INCREASED over last few decades across Eastern USA, but Western USA has dried out or stayed the same, but has warmed up while Eastern USA has not warmed up much at all. 

All of western Nebraska are sand dunes which currently have some wheat/corn on them, but mostly cows. We know this from C14 buried by sand throughout the areas as it goes between sand--> Grass--> trees--> Grass--> Sand-->Grass etc

Where were the CO2 flattuence fear mongers then?  Surely both of those Long duration desertification periods were caused by CO2 ignorant so called "scientists".

If CO2 heating were true, according to IPCC etc it should be showing up in Tropical Troposphere first with increased heating, but this area shows NEGATIVE ratio to ground level stations in terms of heating and has done so since roughly ~20 years ago.  Shows how corrupt the ground based thermometer system is as so called "scientists" keep the ever expanding city island heat effect data inside their data sets.  So much for "science".  . 

Is it ~700 or ~300?

Your "math" is always made up garbage with round numbers.

 

 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

On 1/27/2024 at 1:00 AM, Ecocharger said:

Of course that is pure propaganda, not an engineering study. You should be able to see that, and read the actual contents how the EVs failed.

The actual point is that the EVs ALL suffered distance constraints with the cold weather, which supports the point I was making above. I guess you just plain missed the point again. You are so severely blinkered that you simply ignore the basic points being raised. That is a sign of an acolyte to a cult.

Read,

"The Tesla Model 3 Long Range was the electric car that came the lowest in severe winter cold with a mileage of over 300 km. Several of the ten electric cars tested had mileages that were less than 200 km. Some cars shut down unexpectedly before the battery was empty. The Hyundai Kona Electric stopped on an uphill hill with 7 percent battery left. - The severe cold has an effect, but in the challenging weather some of the cars were still able to judge the range of the battery really well, and some stopped unexpectedly, says Lauri Ahtiainen who was responsible for the test at Tekniikan Maailma. However, the Tesla Model 3 that won the test was still drivable when the car showed that the battery had zero percent charge. Most electric cars limited power and heating when the charge started to decrease. "

I was right the first time. No point arguing with you!

You have failed to reply to a vehicle not being about getting from A - B which the Tesla does unless of course your usual commute is over 300KM and that my friend is the point in its entirety.

What does it matter if its range is reduced if it still serves the very purpose of why you bought it??

If its range was 5000Km and it only did 300KM in the cold what difference does it make to you or anyone else when it still gets you to work and back?

Youre talking BS

Does your ICE vehicle not have reduced performance??? Yes it does and thats if you can get it to work at all in these conditions!

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

I was right the first time. No point arguing with you!

You have failed to reply to a vehicle not being about getting from A - B which the Tesla does unless of course your usual commute is over 300KM and that my friend is the point in its entirety.

What does it matter if its range is reduced if it still serves the very purpose of why you bought it??

If its range was 5000Km and it only did 300KM in the cold what difference does it make to you or anyone else when it still gets you to work and back?

Youre talking BS

Does your ICE vehicle not have reduced performance??? Yes it does and thats if you can get it to work at all in these conditions!

You are trying to deflect from the pathetic performance of your darling EVs.....no one wants these things, they are an embarrassment. You could not pay me enough money to drive one.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You are trying to deflect from the pathetic performance of your darling EVs.....no one wants these things, they are an embarrassment. You could not pay me enough money to drive one.

No deflection just the truth! vehicles exist to get you from 1 place to another, if a Tesla does that then its performing its role.

Frankly I dont care what you want, you have a choice to buy one or not, end of! You choose to never drive one so you have no clue on the driving experience, are you afraid you might actually like the experience???

Edited January 29 by Rob Plant

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,194]

16 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

Is it ~700 or ~300?

Your "math" is always made up garbage with round numbers.

I knew you/Rob boy were math ignorant, lazy, and refuse to read links people post, continually CLOWNING yourselves,  so I did not bother linking the USGS papers on the topic which I have done MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE which you REFUSE to read... but you might want to look up what a SINE waveform is and why ~300 and ~700 years were mentioned, or use a light bulb and figure out science in dating if you get something within 100 years is pretty spectacular....  

Might want to look up the DUST BOWL and why there were so much research and papers published regards to desertification in the 1940's/50's where majority of the great plains desertification patterns, amplitudes of desertification, moving sand dunes, dipping beds of said moving sand dunes etc come from.  Had next to nothing to do with human causes in 1930's, but rather months of 100F days and lower rainfall. 

Give you a hint: There are sand dunes from the top of Alberta down through Mexico.  How often they turn into pure sand, or your definition of desertification is another topic.  "Climate change" is alive and well, regardless of fear mongers saying CO2 blah blah blah. 

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

I knew you/Rob boy were math ignorant, lazy, and refuse to read links people post, continually CLOWNING yourselves,  so I did not bother linking the USGS papers on the topic which I have done MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE which you REFUSE to read... but you might want to look up what a SINE waveform is and why ~300 and ~700 years were mentioned, or use a light bulb and figure out science in dating if you get something within 100 years is pretty spectacular....  

Might want to look up the DUST BOWL and why there were so much research and papers published regards to desertification in the 1940's/50's where majority of the great plains desertification patterns, amplitudes of desertification, moving sand dunes, dipping beds of said moving sand dunes etc come from.  Had next to nothing to do with human causes in 1930's, but rather months of 100F days and lower rainfall. 

Give you a hint: There are sand dunes from the top of Alberta down through Mexico.  How often they turn into pure sand, or your definition of desertification is another topic.  "Climate change" is alive and well, regardless of fear mongers saying CO2 blah blah blah. 

You are not using a 100 year error range in your "math."  You have error bar approximations on a 400 year range ("~300 and ~700") so your error propagation would be even larger than 400 years.  With your logic we would need to sit on our hands and watch the planet be destroyed for several generations before we try taking action.

My math skills are very strong.  How about we integrate that temperature sine curve that is drifting upwards.  Hint: The area under the curve is increasing...

 

 

 

[bloodman33 + 22]

footeab@yahoo.com, are you that guy in the PBS documentary? You should watch it and edecate yourself and switch to a different team.  Hard evidence: Exon says C02 causes global warming.  Then they covered it up.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAAbcNl4Lb8

[bloodman33 + 22]

Yes Western Nebraska has always been dry.   What circumstances conspired to cause the Dust Bowl? Economic depression coupled with extended drought, unusually high temperatures, poor agricultural practices and the resulting wind erosion all contributed to making the Dust Bowl. The seeds of the Dust Bowl may have been sowed during the early 1920s.   C14 blah ha ha ha ha!

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

18 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

I knew you/Rob boy were math ignorant, lazy, and refuse to read links people post, continually CLOWNING yourselves,  so I did not bother linking the USGS papers on the topic which I have done MULTIPLE TIMES BEFORE which you REFUSE to read... but you might want to look up what a SINE waveform is and why ~300 and ~700 years were mentioned, or use a light bulb and figure out science in dating if you get something within 100 years is pretty spectacular....  

Might want to look up the DUST BOWL and why there were so much research and papers published regards to desertification in the 1940's/50's where majority of the great plains desertification patterns, amplitudes of desertification, moving sand dunes, dipping beds of said moving sand dunes etc come from.  Had next to nothing to do with human causes in 1930's, but rather months of 100F days and lower rainfall. 

Give you a hint: There are sand dunes from the top of Alberta down through Mexico.  How often they turn into pure sand, or your definition of desertification is another topic.  "Climate change" is alive and well, regardless of fear mongers saying CO2 blah blah blah. 

Bwahahaha you say i have no math and come up with repeated BS claims with massively wide error margins.

Please keep it up its highly entertaining, love it when Tailingspond schools you repeatedly

As for your links they are almost non-existent which you have been pulled up about several times over your repeated wild claims backed up by NOTHING.

Anyway how are you doing with funding for all of your tunnels? 🤡

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

On 1/29/2024 at 7:03 AM, Rob Plant said:

No deflection just the truth! vehicles exist to get you from 1 place to another, if a Tesla does that then its performing its role.

Frankly I dont care what you want, you have a choice to buy one or not, end of! You choose to never drive one so you have no clue on the driving experience, are you afraid you might actually like the experience???

So now you are a comic complainer.

No. EVs are a nuisance to own and operate, I am not silly enough to invest in one.

Edited January 30 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

1 hour ago, Rob Plant said:

Bwahahaha you say i have no math and come up with repeated BS claims with massively wide error margins.

Please keep it up its highly entertaining, love it when Tailingspond schools you repeatedly

As for your links they are almost non-existent which you have been pulled up about several times over your repeated wild claims backed up by NOTHING.

Anyway how are you doing with funding for all of your tunnels? 🤡

Rob, you just displaying your avoidance of the basic climate science.

Anthropogenic CO2 does not make a significant contribution to climate change, as every climate scientist is aware of. You are ignoring the basic issues in the current controversy.

The EV revolution has run out of gas (excuse the pun).

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/electric-buses-sitting-unused-cities-across-the-us

"Between the federal government, states and municipalities, untold billions in taxpayer dollars have been spent adding electric buses to transit fleets across the U.S. in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. 

However, cities from coast-to-coast are grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed, are too expensive to fix, or they have scrapped their electric fleets altogether.

Officials in Asheville, North Carolina, recently expressed frustration that three of the five e-buses the city purchased for millions in 2018 are now sitting idle due to a combination of software issues, mechanical problems and an inability to obtain replacement parts.

Earlier this month, The Denver Gazette reported two of the four e-buses Colorado Springs' Mountain Metropolitan Transit acquired in 2021 are not running. 

They cost $1.2 million a piece, mostly paid for by government grants. 

Part of the problem is the manufacturer of the buses, Proterra, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August. The company, founded in 2004, rose to become the largest e-bus company in the U.S., representing nearly 40% of the market prior to going belly-up."

Edited January 30 by Ecocharger

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Rob, you just displaying your avoidance of the basic climate science.

Anthropogenic CO2 does not make a significant contribution to climate change, as every climate scientist is aware of. You are ignoring the basic issues in the current controversy.

The EV revolution has run out of gas (excuse the pun).

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/electric-buses-sitting-unused-cities-across-the-us

"Between the federal government, states and municipalities, untold billions in taxpayer dollars have been spent adding electric buses to transit fleets across the U.S. in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. 

However, cities from coast-to-coast are grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed, are too expensive to fix, or they have scrapped their electric fleets altogether.

Officials in Asheville, North Carolina, recently expressed frustration that three of the five e-buses the city purchased for millions in 2018 are now sitting idle due to a combination of software issues, mechanical problems and an inability to obtain replacement parts.

Earlier this month, The Denver Gazette reported two of the four e-buses Colorado Springs' Mountain Metropolitan Transit acquired in 2021 are not running. 

They cost $1.2 million a piece, mostly paid for by government grants. 

Part of the problem is the manufacturer of the buses, Proterra, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August. The company, founded in 2004, rose to become the largest e-bus company in the U.S., representing nearly 40% of the market prior to going belly-up."

Choke on those diesel fumes mate, I know you love them!

Sounds like your bus companies could'nt run a piss up in a brewery!

Other countries dont have these issues.

When Electric Buses Make Sense, & When They Just Don't - CleanTechnica

I bet Footinmouth cant wait to stick these in some tunnels

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

2 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Choke on those diesel fumes mate, I know you love them!

Sounds like your bus companies could'nt run a piss up in a brewery!

Other countries dont have these issues.

When Electric Buses Make Sense, & When They Just Don't - CleanTechnica

I bet Footinmouth cant wait to stick these in some tunnels

Your own fellow citizens have already bailed out on EVs and that will only get worse when the government supports for fleet EV purchases are removed next year. 

Your EVs have nowhere to go but down.

[notsonice + 1,266]

6 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Rob, you just displaying your avoidance of the basic climate science.

Anthropogenic CO2 does not make a significant contribution to climate change, as every climate scientist is aware of. You are ignoring the basic issues in the current controversy.

The EV revolution has run out of gas (excuse the pun).

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/electric-buses-sitting-unused-cities-across-the-us

"Between the federal government, states and municipalities, untold billions in taxpayer dollars have been spent adding electric buses to transit fleets across the U.S. in an effort to reduce carbon emissions. 

However, cities from coast-to-coast are grappling with broken-down e-buses that cannot be fixed, are too expensive to fix, or they have scrapped their electric fleets altogether.

Officials in Asheville, North Carolina, recently expressed frustration that three of the five e-buses the city purchased for millions in 2018 are now sitting idle due to a combination of software issues, mechanical problems and an inability to obtain replacement parts.

Earlier this month, The Denver Gazette reported two of the four e-buses Colorado Springs' Mountain Metropolitan Transit acquired in 2021 are not running. 

They cost $1.2 million a piece, mostly paid for by government grants. 

Part of the problem is the manufacturer of the buses, Proterra, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in August. The company, founded in 2004, rose to become the largest e-bus company in the U.S., representing nearly 40% of the market prior to going belly-up."

wow you actually named some sources for your BS

so I checked into the Denver Gazette.......on online newspaper????

owned by an Oilman.....Phil Anschutz.....

Surprise surprise .......

another attack on the Green Transition by a person/family business who has made billions on selling Oil and does not want his empire disturbed

 

so much for your independent sources....and posting anything of factual value

 

sourcing your news from a oilmans opinion rag....Par for you

 

and your other source

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics

right out of Fox News Politics..........maybe they will support Trump in 2024 ......what do they have to lose

800 million already paid out to a voting machine company and the second suit heading for trial

Edited January 30 by notsonice