Thanks to my son Chris for noticing that...
I love the idea of the culture around pickup trucks in 3035.
Anyway, seriously: "The new standards require American automakers to increase fuel economy so that, across their product lines, their passenger vehicles would average 65 miles per gallon by 2031, up from 48.7 miles today. The average mileage for light trucks, including pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, would have to reach 45 miles per gallon, up from 35.1 miles per gallon...."
Mr. Trump has made attacks on electric vehicles a mainstay of his campaign to retake the White House, falsely saying they do not work, cannot travel far and will “kill” the American automobile industry. Mr. Trump has promised that if he is elected to a second term he will undo Mr. Biden’s climate policies, including federal support for electric vehicles.
The linked article, in the NYT, last March, is "Trump’s Violent Language Toward EVs/The former president has deployed increasingly aggressive talk about electric vehicles and their effect on the American economy." Oh, that terrible man and his colorful language! That's the real problem, not whether you will have anything decent to drive in the near — or not so near — future....
Posts
88 comments:
Headline: "US tightens car mileage rules ..."
The US did not tighten car mileage rules, the nut cases in the current administration did.
If it goes well in 2035 the culture around climate change will look totally different…
sry 3035…
What is the net effect?
No more v-8 engines. Today's replacements are 6 or 4 cylinder, with turbochargers and in some cases, electric motors inserted between the IC engine and transmission, in hopes of replacing the diminished performance by substituting a work-around.
But: It works on paper, but in practice there are still turbo-lags, there are still increased maintenance costs and complexity, and these are higher-revving engines that are not likely to be taking you to 200,000 + miles in relative economy and ease, as we have become accustomed.
And: The perceived advantages to GHG emissions are a cooked set of books, ignoring the full-cycle economic and environmental costs of such replacements.
Our betters, telling us we can't have what they promised in order to get our vote.
The standards are usually set up to be gamed amongst a ‘fleet’. Even the uniparty knows Americans are innumerate…besides we’ll all be very very dead
In the year 2035,
If greenies stop this jive,
If Biden takes a dive,
We may drive.
Zager and Evans were one-hit wonders from - wait for it - Lincoln, Nebraska.
Zager and son make guitars now; still in Nebraska.
not whether you will have anything decent to drive
Having something decent to drive is not a proper artifact of a free society.
To paraphrase Kris Kristofferson
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to have.
And your government is making sure to remove any choice you have in the matter. You are free to choose to have an electric car or no car, in either black or black with black highlights in either the boxy shape or the shape that resembles a box. Choices abound!
By then I would fully expect that being "beamed up" is just another daily routine,
https://canwehaveapooldad.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/02-03c-homerufo.gif
Greta told me that The climate was totally ruined 10 years ago, so this new regulation is just closing the barn door after the ev left its stall.
Just let people drive what they want, they will be boiling in co2 any time now anyway.
Electrification of our vehicle fleet might be the true future. Progress does march on, but not by 2035, though well before 3035. A lot of wiggle room in between.
Of course, we may discover that unicorn farts are more practical in the mean time. Sort of like what happened when CFC was foisted upon us but LED turned out to dominate the market.
Most of this is the city people vs. the rural people.
Cities are based off the Agrarian social model. Agrarian societies are hierarchical and slavery developed out of this. They are based on central authority in the population center lording over the little people around them.
Rural people live in more Herder Nomad style arrangements. Herder/Nomad social models are more egalitarian and live and let live.
It is not enough for people that live in cities to do their thing. They have to tell the little people out there what to do.
Climate Change is just a pretext to telling other people what to do.
CAGW is the biggest scam in the history of the world. China and India are building coal-fired power plants every single day, but we are supposed to achieve net zero carbon by 2050 or the planet burns up by 2100.
Every single prediction of doom by the Left regarding the climate has been proven wrong. Why are they right now?
The consulting firm Wood Mackenzie wrote a report in May that the US will have to spend $11.8 trillion by 2050 to achieve net zero carbon. I've seen higher numbers. This spending will cripple our economy.
I wrote earlier that I attended a "conservation voters" meeting last night in Omaha. I asked the Creighton professor who spoke how much will it cost OPPD to achieve net zero. He didn't know. But I did. I read OPPD's report. The cost is $28 billion. And OPPD only serves 850,000 customers.
The Dems must be defeated on this issue alone. And the IRA's federal tax credits must be repealed.
New poll data from Car and Driver article on what it takes to take the concept of a new car to selling it to the public. It is 72-month process, meaning the new 65mpg passenger vehicle has to be already a concept under consideration. The article mentions "powertrain selection", which assumes the engine that will achieve the 65mpg is available to be selected. Those take a few years to develop too. And don't think EV's will artificially drive up the mpg average, because in 2023, EV sales made up less than 1% of the vehicles sold by Toyota, who had a record year in car sales.
On a related note, the Obama Administration agreed to the 2015 Paris Agreement to cut emissions by 2030. We are 6 years away, which is roughly the cycle time needed to take a new large scale industrial system from concept to operations. This means things like new efficient power plants, hydrogen production/operation plants, wind farms, solar farms, carbon capture, etc... If it is currently being considered today, it will not exist by 2030. If you were thinking of being a part of making these new systems come alive, then you better already be on a project, because nothing else will be built. You might think "but we still need things after 2030". That's true, but subsidies require operation by 2030, and these things are not economical without subsidies. Some (being kind here) aren't economical with subsidies. Nobody is going to build these things for a financial loss.
Please don't take my word on this. Here is Pete Buttigieg on Face the Nation explaining how hard it is to build new EV charging stations.
whats a 1000 years between friends
The year is 3035. The Amazon Federal Corporate has allowed you a 30 minute break from your pick-and-pull cage to pick up your child from his appointment with his federally-mandated pedophile. As you pull into the driveway in your HuaWei pickup, your son emerges carrying a large box of gay porn mags he's required to ogle for homework. Alas, the box is 20kg heavier than the 50kg load limit of your truck, and he must remove some of the porn to place it in the 4sq/ft bed. You curse internally knowing he'll receive demerits for an incomplete assignment...you dare not curse aloud since the Verbal Morality Statute of 3020. As he squeezes into the hobbit-sized passenger seat, you're thankful the recently mandated estrogen injections will stunt his growth enough that he won't be in pain forever. Who knows, you might even be able to pass your ride on to him one day. You're about to leave when you hear a child cry in the distance as he tries to flee a molester. You feel nothing. "Serves him right," you think to yourself. You weren't always like this, but your HuaWei pickup only works with the synaptic link engaged, and would immediately power down if you dared to think of how the times have changed. And how could you bother? You're a HuaWei Greenie Meanie owner now! It took 10 years of credits to afford this beast. You've made it. You reached for the brass ring and took life by the synthetic horns. You pat yourself on the back as you dash home at 25kph. Lord knows you can't afford a ticket.
Pickup trucks in the US in 3035? The NYT thinks the Democrats won't be finished with destroying the country by then?
Well, global climate change is a scam, so...
The Left wants to control every aspect of every American's life.
Just leave us alone.
typo fixed at the NYT now
"falsely saying they do not work"
Good thing we have the morons at NYT to tell us what is true and false. It would seem that if they don't work and cannot travel far, they're unlikely to do much damage to the American auto industry. Unless, of course, the Left Fascists force the American auto industry to manufacture them, even though no one wants to buy them.
From Reuters
"Under the final rule, the auto industry is collectively expected to face a total of $1.83 billion in fines from 2027 through 2031 -- and it could be as little as nothing -- based on various models, NHTSA said."
"...and it could be as little as nothing" hahaha
We would have a better chance of colonizing Venus by 2035 - they can apply their Global Warming antics there.
I would be interested in more vehicles like the Ford Maverick Hybrid. (Compact pickup.)
It has a gas motor that regenerates a battery. No plugging in required.
Supposed to get 40 mpg highway.
Vehicles like that sound a lot more sensible for people living in northern states.
"Mr. Trump has made attacks on electric vehicles a mainstay of his campaign to retake the White House, falsely saying they do not work, cannot travel far and will “kill” the American automobile industry."
"falsely saying" is an editorial comment and has no place in a straight news piece. So is "incorrectly." It gives away the fact that they're propagandists, not reporters. So is "attacks." In a properly ran news organization an editor would have changed that to "Trump has claimed that electrical vehicles do not work, cannot travel far, and will 'kill' the American automobile industry."
And by the way, he is correct. And they're not even good for the environment.
https://earth.org/environmental-impact-of-battery-production/
Will Dodge start making Challengers again now that EVs are going bust?
Crap like this is why the right is so frustrated with the GOP. Killing the ability of the federal government to impose these restrictions should have been priority one back in 2017.
LOL is right. Both for the culture image (does he think trucks are not a utilitarian need for most buyers?) and for the stupid goals set by idiot bureaucrats, bearing no relation ton the real world. The only way these CAFE standards can be met is with huge adoption of EV, which is a physical (as in the laws of physics) impossibility.
Paul Zrimsek makes the post of the week. That's a work of art.
Speaking of our bettors, I see 1st Lady Jilly just flew from Paris to LA for one (1) day of crackhead's trial then returning to Paris.As has oft been stated, "when they act like it's an emergency I'll consider it"!
Acting on climate change by 3035 seems reasonable to me.
Thanks Paul Zrimsek
Now I have that song stuck in my head!!
We'll be shooting around in pneumatic tubes like at the bank drivethru.
Too heavy, too expensive and they don’t work when it’s cold out. Even in 3035 the same laws of physics will apply. When it’s
below 0*C electrons don’t like to flow and chemical reactions slow way down. That isn’t ever going to change.
Once back in office, Trump shouldn't just 'undo Biden's climate policies' with respect to EVs; he should institute the following MANDATES for EVs:
By 2028, EVs must:
- have a driving range of 450+ miles on a single charge
- have a charge time from 0% to 100% of less than 5 minutes
- require 30 kW-hrs or less energy to be fully charged
- be able to maintain greater than 80% charge down to zero degrees F
- cut propensity for fires by 90% compared to today's batteries
electrical vehicles do not work, cannot travel far, and will 'kill' the American automobile industry."
And by the way, he is correct. And they're not even good for the environment.
https://earth.org/environmental-impact-of-battery-production/
The Green Blight... be green for renewable, sustainable greenbacks.
No mechanical or electrical engineers were consulted in this pronouncement.
Aggie said...
"What is the net effect?
No more v-8 engines. Today's replacements are 6 or 4 cylinder, "
No offense intended, but I recall the same thing being said by the pundits in 1972. Yes, I am that old.
I currently have a newish convertible with a V-8 AND a manual transmission. (Insert Bronx cheer.)
Does this mean that nobody else on the planet is going to use any of that excess cheap and plentiful oil to drive their Toyota pickups at 17 mpg?
Global. Meaning the entire world, including about 6 or 7 billion people who would dearly love to be able to drive a Toyota pickup, and aren't all that deeply troubled by "global warming".
The Law of Diminishing Returns came into play a decade ago.
If you re-select my residency..
I will GUARANTEE that NONE OF YOU will be able to afford automobiles
But Fear NOT!
your democrat Elite will STILL have, not ONLY their private jets, but their limos too!
Just another reason to vote for Trump in November.
Actually, for almost all conductors, the lowered the temperature the easier it becomes for elections to flow. The converse is true for almost all chemical reactions. Especially those that occur in a battery.
Another way to store electric power is in a capacitor. And they can be quickly charged- compared to a battery. Put enough powered in one to take a vehicle 300 miles and, we'll, don't go near it. A short or structural failure and all that energy will be released at once.
Hybrids are the best solution for fuel economy. While my current 2019 Ioniq has lithium gel batteries, my youngest son is still driving our old Prius with the original NiMH battery pack. And another son is still driving his original Prius with close to 200,0⁰0 miles on it. He's looking at reconditioning the batteries, something that cannot be done with Li ion batteries.
And where the hell do these idiots think they're going to have enough copper to build their fantasy world? Existing copper mines cannot supply the future demand. It takes more than 20 years and a lot of capital to open a new copper mine. Add all the "carbon" emissions opening those new copper mines and manufacturing the equipment to mine it. Plus the slag heaps left behind. These climate changers have no concepts of reality!
'Once back in office, Trump shouldn't just 'undo Biden's climate policies' with respect to EVs; he should institute the following MANDATES for EVs:'
Why?
Why not let manufacturers make what they want and let consumers decide?
Radical, I know...
SteveWe said...
And where the hell do these idiots think they're going to have enough copper to build their fantasy world?
you mistakenly thinking that common people will be driving in their fantasy world.. Think Again.
THE WHOLE POINT is to take our cars.. CO2 is just an excuse, as will be copper
“I can’t change the laws of physics, Captain”
-Lt Commander “Scotty” Scott.
Wasn’t Biden supposed to have cured cancer by now?
Not so fast, Gilbar. If they can't get enough copper to build the eCars and eTrucks, and can't get enough copper to upgrade the electrical distribution network to charge them, then they are halted in their tracks -- factories close, workers are unemployed and destitute, etc.
Meanwhile, people like me have Toyota (and other) petrol powered cars. The police can't drive their mandated eSUVs to take my Toyota from me. Who will be here and functioning well then? Who will resurrect the American and world economy that the Climate Changers destroyed? Who will do their best to make America great again?
Why?
Why not let manufacturers make what they want and let consumers decide?
Radical, I know...
Because the ratchet has to go both ways. Simply stopping for a few years doesn't do anything in the long run, if everyone knows that the Left will simply reimpose the rules next time they have power. You have to push back, and to make it difficult to reimpose these bullshit regulations.
how MANY TIMES have they told us that "we will pass the point of no return in 5 years" ??
I've been hearing this since At least the 1990's.
Surely, by NOW; we have Passed the point of No return, and we can STOP worrying about this?
Also, ASSUMING that the USA achieved ZERO CO2 production TOMORROW..
How long would it take China to make up that difference?
IF CO2 production is actually an existential threat..
THE ONLY OPTION IS: IMMEDIATE NUCLEAR STRIKES ON CHINA AND INDIA
They TELL us, that: THE ONLY HOPE FOR THE WORLD IS Zero CO2.. IF SO; WE MUST launch NOW!
Global Thermonuclear War is the ONLY chance for Zero CO2.. WE MUST launch NOW!
We are rapidly approaching a moment of truth, both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our world. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless distinguishable, post-war industrial environments: one where you got 2 billion people killed, and the other where you got 5 billion people killed!
ps. i'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed.. But it is our ONLY HOPE
@Joe Bar said...17:09
"No offense intended, but I recall the same thing being said by the pundits in 1972. Yes, I am that old.
I currently have a newish convertible with a V-8 AND a manual transmission. (Insert Bronx cheer.)
"
New-ish? Bronx cheer? Toyota full size pickups no longer offer 5.7 liter V-8's , now just 3.6 liter V-6's Toyota Sequoia SUV (and ForeRunner too) no longer offer the 5.7 liter V-8's either. Ford full size Expedition no longer offers a 5.7 liter V-8; 3.5 liter 'Ecoboost' V-6 only. Even the 'platimnum' and 'King Ranch' models. F-150 pickups: V-6 only, or smallish diesel - but if you pop for the raptor, you can finally get the V-8 (ka-ching). Or graduate to the heavy pickups. Even the Mustang 'muscle' car now only offers a small 5.0 liter V-8.
Enjoy your 'newish' V-8.
I personally prefer the market to decide what is available to the consumer, rather than un-elected bureaucrats that reside in anonymous, unaccountable comfort.
This is where intersectionality breaks down. I don't think this will go over well with Blacks and Hispanics, never mind the White working class. In fact, it might be just the issue to unite the multi-coloured middle and working classes against our Betters. One could hope.
Dave Begley said...
The Left wants to control every aspect of every American's life.
Just leave us alone.
*************
You Cheetolini-loving FASCIST!!!!
/s
Obviously 2035. They are planning on starving, and bankrupting our children and grandchildren.
Blogger Whiskeybum said...
- have a charge time from 0% to 100% of less than 5 minutes
- require 30 kW-hrs or less energy to be fully charged
That's a lot of heat transfer in a short amount of time unless you are doing battery swaps.
Trump is right: the Chinese will be able to destroy the US manufacturers.
"U.S. Tightens Car Mileage Rules, Part of Strategy to Fight Climate Change"
But really- Part of the strategy to keep people from going where they want, when they want and force them onto mass transit that goes where their rulers allow them to go, when they're allowed to go.
That's what you meant, right?
YouTube: In the year 2525
But okay- Climate Change. Let's talk about that. In the past, parts of the country have been under a mile or more of ice. Climate alarmists are worried that, in 100 years, average temperatures could be several degrees higher than today.
Which do you think is worse? Why?
Tall and skinny pant size.
To show how ridiculous this is I would like to note that the average motorcycle gets just over 55 miles per gallon (mpg).
Also please note that the "MPG" for current electric cars is vastly inflated by assuming perfect elegy conversion at the power plants.
From an old post on the coyote blog:
"Below is a statement from Fueleconomy.gov, which bills itself as the official government source for fuel economy information (this is a public information, not a marketing site). In reference to electric vehicles, it writes this:
Energy efficient. Electric vehicles convert about 59–62% of the electrical energy from the grid to power at the wheels—conventional gasoline vehicles only convert about 17–21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels
The implication, then, is that electric vehicles are 3x more energy efficient than cars with gasoline engines. I hope engineers and scientists can see immediately why this statement is total crap, but for the rest, here is the problem in short: Electricity has to be produced, often from a fossil fuel. That step, of converting the potential energy in the fuel to use-able work, is the least efficient step of the entire fuel to work process. Even in the most modern of plants it runs less than a 50% conversion efficiency. So the numbers for the gasoline cars include this inefficient step, but for the electric vehicle it has been shuffled off stage, back to the power plant which is left out of the calculation."
Add the difference is weight of EVs to ICE vehicles and the fact that it takes more energy to move a heavier object and EV's are only slightly more energy efficient than an ICE vehicle. And much of that is created by using more expensive but lighter material for the rest of the EV. Remember the above statement is power at the wheels not final speed.
We're getting close to the attempts to legislate the value of pi - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_pi_bill
The Democrats and Climate Change can fight, I'm just going to sit back and watch the show. My money is on Climate Change.
We now have a solution to the Fermi paradox - some where along the line every civilization goes zero emissions, sets scientifically impossible goals, regresses to a pre-industrial agrarian society, and never leaves the planet they started on.
Iowahawk needs to update the 2012 Pelosi GTxi SS/RT with an electric version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAqPMJFaEdY&t=170s
It would be really nice if they'd leave us alone.
"No more v-8 engines"
Probably. Maybe a few halo cars and trucks.
As the besotted owner of a Holden SSV Commodore (that's a Pontiac G8/Chevy SS to you) and now recently a Lexus ES300h, I can tell you the future isn't high-revving 4-pots, it's Atkinson cycle, low-revving, long-stroke engines with electric motors to make up torque and low-down power. Everything else will be junk five minutes after the warranty period.
I'm getting 5.3l/100km (44 US mpg), just over a third of the SSV's mileage, and 162kW at the flywheel isn't to sniff at. My Gen 2 Civic brewed ~50kW, so we've been spoilt by progress.
Of course, I'm not smoking that S-Class at the lights with the Lexus. The SSV's 290kW at the rear wheels has its uses. Mileage be damned.
You'd think people would be more circumspect about engineering limits imposed by government fiat after DieselGate. Apparently they've learnt nothing. As expected.
Jersey Fled said...
Wasn’t Biden supposed to have cured cancer by now?
--
Twice.
Ann, remember when you used to rail against the federal government because they were setting energy standards for light bulbs, and you were buying a large quantity of incandescent ones that would keep you stocked for years to come?
How do you feel about that now?
Foolish?
They won't even use (e.g.) electrons in 3035.
At the same time they are setting standards that can only be met by transitioning new vehicle sales to EVs, Biden is proposing a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs. If climate change is the existential threat we are told it is, and making us drive EVs will make a significant reduction in our CO2 emissions, then it shouldn’t matter who produces the EVs. Destroying the domestic auto industry is just a sacrifice we should be willing to make for the greater good. Of course, if reducing our fossil fuel consumption was so important Biden wouldn’t keep raiding the strategic petroleum reserve every time he needs a drop in gasoline prices to help protect his phony bologna job, he should be welcoming the higher prices both to drive EV sales and force conservation. But they’re not really serious if they don’t explain that the peons are going to have to make sacrifices.
"There ain't no such thing as a free lunch."
Everything costs something. To reach that target will require sacrifices in safety, reliability and comfort. It can be done, but you won't want that vehicle.
Gospace has the right idea. Hybrids.
There's a guy on YouTube who is running a 1971 Ford Mavrick with a 289 V8 with a lawnmower carburator. He is getting some impressive milage. Of course 0-60 leaves a lot to be desired and hills, any hill, greatly reduces performance. But it can go over 70 MPH on level ground.
The guy is an automotive engineer so it's pretty well documented.
Finally. We should have been building nuke plants, like, 20 years ago.
Trump has a golden opportunity: Promise to get rid of CAFE standards entirely. The speech almost writes itself--Motorists pay for fuel and already have an incentive to value mileage. These crazy proposals by the Biden administration, show the damage that can come from out of touch zealots having this kind of power. We will return this power to the market.
The CAFE standards have made engines more complex and more expensive. Instead of V6s or V8s, we have Inline 4s with turbo chargers. According to the Car Care Nut, a hybrid Toyota is simpler than the equivalent gas-only engine!
The auto industry should tell the EPA: pound sand. The 9th Amendment protects our right to produce the kind of cars we want, not the tyrants of the EPA. See you in court.
Hybrid vs. gas Toyota Highlander XLE:
MSRP: $44,120 vs. $44,020
MPG: 36/35/36 vs. 21/28/24
Towing: 3,500-lb vs. 5,000-lb
Max Weight: 5,960-lb vs. 5,935-lb.
Power: 186 hp @ 6000 rpm vs. 265 hp @ 6000
Torque: 175 lb.-ft. @ 4400 rpm vs. 310 lb.-ft. @ 1700-3600 rpm
Engine: 2.5-liter L4HV Double Overhead Cam vs. 2.4-liter 4-cylinder turbocharged
So, if towing is important, buy the turbocharged car, otherwise the hybrid. I'd like more towing capability, but it'll be cheaper to pay for delivery than to buy the gas Highlander.
I just bought a 2024 Toyota Tacoma and I expect it will last until 2035 and beyond. I had to get the regular turbo four (278/317) because the hybrid (326/465) wasn’t available. The hybrid is a beast, built more for power and torque than mileage.
So what happens to truckers and municipal workers and Amazon box truck drivers and garbage and recycling truckers and cement and dump truck operators and individual craftsmen using high hp vehicles?
I bet the government functionaries and anyone building approved and municipally desired projects have no consequences and the individual laborers get screwed.
I needed to pick up 25 60 pound bags of concrete yesterday. That was one trip in my guy's truck or four trips in my SUV. Plus wear and tear. We are destroying the middle class.
OTOH we got a first generation hybrid Toyota SUV for free and that thing was a monster that could haul anything and was amazing on mileage. A persnickety first generation engine valve problem finally did it in, but with one $2000 overnight home delivery repair battery replacement from Greenbean, (the dealer wanted more than 5K for exactly the same battery -- always call Greenbean), it saved us tons of cash, and the security of a hybrid is very different from an EV. I put a lot of highway miles on it. I'd buy another if they didn't literally cost four times more than my house. I rebuilt a tear-down using that hybrid and kept up with traffic on the worst highways in the country, always feeling safe elevated and surrounded by all that car. Toyota has large hybrids down. I think. I'm a terrible car person. I miss my '65 Comet.
A road test on various Hyundai vehicles found that their plug in hybrid cars got worse gasoline mileage that their ICE version once they used up their very limited (usually 40 to 50 miles) battery only range, due to the excess weight of the batteries they were lugging around.
Similarly, Toyota claims that they can build 16 hybrid vehicles using the same resources (lithium, copper, rare earth minerals, etc.) as a single battery only EV. And further, these 16 hybrids have a more beneficial impact on the environment than that single EV would. This is why Toyota has a more hybrid heavy product mix than their competitors, who coincidentally are bleeding money building BEV’s, and hybrids don’t require a massive new refueling network, which Buttigieg has already proven he doesn’t know how to deliver.
Let Toyota and individual consumers lead the way on this, not the goofballs in the Biden administration and the EPA.
Let Toyota and individual consumers lead the way on this, not the goofballs in the Biden administration and the EPA.
That's not the progressive way. The government is much smarter than the individual and will tell us peons what's best for us. You don't need a SUV, a small Fiat with a 25-mile range battery is all you need! Don't let your lying eyes and your pocketbook deceive you. Just obey the progressives and SFTU! That's the fascist way.
This shows how little the Biden administration cares for poor minority people who can’t afford to pay 50 or 60 or $70,000 for casr made unobtainium.
Biden and his enablers lack of the basic technical and engineering understanding that a high school student used to have when schools taught science and shop class.
Biden’s policies, the endless piling on of one regulation after another on new cars is pricing them out of the market for most class, people, let alone poor people.
But as Instapundit says, Democrats want as many poor people as possible. Because beggars are easier to please.
Sigh. I've studied and followed this issue (energy transition) for the last several years.
Transportation is *not* the number one sector in terms of energy usage. That would be industry and manufacturing.
Would it be nice for transportation to become more energy efficient? using less petroleum? Sure. (Although I have serious concerns about electric vehicles as opposed to hybrids.) More energy efficiency in transportation would indeed help combat climate change. A little.
So what about energy transition in industry and manufacturing? This is where many (although not all) environmentalists miss the bus. This is where we need to shift to nuclear energy and like twenty-thirty years ago. Unless we somehow figure out how to generate electricity from fusion there is nothing that would help response to climate change more than shifting energy production to (mostly) nuclear.
Electric pickup trucks on American farms ... Once again, we will see Rural America dotted with windmills, this time to charge each farm's hard-working pickup trucks.
"Transportation is *not* the number one sector in terms of energy usage. That would be industry and manufacturing."
It's why Aluminum smelters are built near hydro electric dams.
We are rapidly approaching a moment of truth,...
Gilbar wins the thread. As soon as I started reading it I had George C Scott's voice in my head.
Post a Comment