Some things to look at about Biden's green new deal.

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCd7HXD/

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCdtARq/

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCdpxXu/

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCdcv1X/

 

So far there is bigger issues with the green new deal. So let's look how politicians travel by air and nothing said about jet pollution.

 

Let's start with a look at the most famous of jets, the Boeing 747. The Boeing website states that this model, with a gas tank capacity of 63,500 gallons, may burn five gallons of jet fuel per mile of flight. A 4,000-mile flight, then, requires 20,000 gallons of fuel. Sep 26, 2016.

 

Let's consider that there is no enough power to deal with just the EVs in California and lake Mead is almost dry main supply of California's power. Even that California's power is being rationed.

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCR5LFQ/

 

Then just consider all the forest fires the USFS is lighting up calling them a prescribed burn, also allowing fires to get out of hand. Huge pollution of CO2 here in the northwest. Then consider all the EV fires.

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCRrpTM/

 

EVs are not going to solve any issues. Just consider the amount of fires EVs have had.

 

Just consider the Ford Lightning. How long would it take to tow 10k trailer 2,000 miles?

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCR5pms/

 

Super sad as nuclear is a great way to generate power considering the small waste vs watts generated. Newer plant designs claim to be able to use the waste in another generation cycle.  

 

 

Technology solves problems.     Hell at some point it might be cost effective to shoot the **** into the sun.

 

 

1 hour ago, Me78569 said:

You wouldn't buy a honda civic to haul drywall, why would you buy an current EV to drive across the country? 

 

I agree.

 

There are other areas for electric vehicles that are not being talked about much - small off road equipment, such as a mini-excavator.  One of the most undesirable aspects of an electric vehicle is the large amount fixed weight (the batteries) the vehicle must carry around all of the time.  In a mini-excavator, the weight of lots of battery power would be an asset.  The heavy weight of these batteries would be part of the needed counterweight.

 

There are already a few manufacturers of EV excavators.

 

I have a Takeuchi TB016 mini-excavator.  It weighs about 3500 lbs.  It is powered by a 3 cylinder 14 hp Yanmar diesel engine.  It would be an excellent candidate to be powered by a large battery pack.  The high starting torque of DC electric motors would easily propel the tracks - no hydraulics.  The volume of oil needed for the electric powered on-demand hydraulic pumps used for the auxiliary hydraulic circuits would be significantly reduced.  A lot of pluses. 

 

- John

20 minutes ago, Tractorman said:

 

I agree.

 

There are other areas for electric vehicles that are not being talked about much - small off road equipment, such as a mini-excavator.  One of the most undesirable aspects of an electric vehicle is the large amount fixed weight (the batteries) the vehicle must carry around all of the time.  In a mini-excavator, the weight of lots of battery power would be an asset.  The heavy weight of these batteries would be part of the needed counterweight.

 

There are already a few manufacturers of EV excavators.

 

I have a Takeuchi TB016 mini-excavator.  It weighs about 3500 lbs.  It is powered by a 3 cylinder 14 hp Yanmar diesel engine.  It would be an excellent candidate to be powered by a large battery pack.  The high starting torque of DC electric motors would easily propel the tracks - no hydraulics.  The volume of oil needed for the electric powered on-demand hydraulic pumps used for the auxiliary hydraulic circuits would be significantly reduced.  A lot of pluses. 

 

- John

Just as there are currently many bad use cases for EV there are also many many good use cases for EV technology.       your example is a good one.  

there are downfalls with ICE technology.   dinosaur bone fuel controlled mini contained explosions to generate torque within a narrow power band that wastes ~%80 of the possible BTU's out of the radiators.... doesn't sound super great when you say it that way.

 

nothing is perfect, but there are good use cases for each.  lets not ignore the good use cases to prop up our point of views.

I’m a fan of EV’s, and I would absolutely own one at some point. What I don’t like is that the push to adopt EV’s is more politically driven and less market driven. Petroleum based vehicles and EV’s can coexist, and as improvements are made in the EV space the market will work itself out. 
 

I’ve worked for the Silicon Valley cartel my entire career, and in my experience the market driven technology has always benefited the end user, while mandate driven technology adoption seemed great in the short term, but always created problems way bigger in the long term, often unforeseen.

Another Telsa fire for Thanksgiving.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRC2hfty/

45 minutes ago, Andyba20 said:

I’m a fan of EV’s, and I would absolutely own one at some point. What I don’t like is that the push to adopt EV’s is more politically driven and less market driven. Petroleum based vehicles and EV’s can coexist, and as improvements are made in the EV space the market will work itself out. 

I totally agree. My biggest push back on EVs is the fact that it's being legislated,  slowly but surely,  as this is what you will use, practical or not, too bad.

 

Let the market decide.  There is a use for both. I get the planet may be in trouble,  but forcing EV on the people will not fix it. To each their own.

1 hour ago, Mopar1973Man said:

Another Telsa fire for Thanksgiving.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRC2hfty/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/377006/nmber-of-us-highway-vehicle-fires/

 

Ok on average there are 174,000 vehicle fire per year in the USA alone.  1 Tesla that made the news is not really an argument when 475 other cars each day light up.  

 

 

59 minutes ago, Max Tune said:

I totally agree. My biggest push back on EVs is the fact that it's being legislated,  slowly but surely,  as this is what you will use, practical or not, too bad.

 

Let the market decide.  There is a use for both. I get the planet may be in trouble,  but forcing EV on the people will not fix it. To each their own.

I also think the planet may be in trouble. In the New Testament when talking about end times it says, ''many will become concerned about the whole Earth''.

 

It talks about that in terms of how we are to not worry but, rather increase our faith. Be at peace with everyone and ''Let not your hearts be troubled''

 

We can't change what God says will happen even talks about how the earth will become polluted.

 

Please don't be annoyed at me for saying the things above. I never push it but, at times needs to be said to help maybe help some.

We are just a long for the ride on earth, the earth will be fine, us on the other hand I have no clue.

 

1 hour ago, Me78569 said:

We are just a long for the ride on earth, the earth will be fine

Extinctions have been a natural part of the planet’s evolutionary history.  99% of the four billion species that have evolved on Earth are now gone.  Most species have gone extinct.  There have been five mass extinction events in Earth’s history. ¹ 

 

So, taking a pragmatic view, if there is a 6th mass extinction event this blue marble in the cosmos will still be spinning around.  Man's 2-million-year existence will be but a small footnote in the Earth's history.   

   

.

¹ourworldindata.org

All I'm saying is the Govt should not force us to buy EVs currently. Then Govt shouldn't force to pay high fuel prices which is causing the inflation. Kick Biden out and ditch the forced idea of a green new deal. Heck it's 6.479 for diesel here.

I agree on all parts of that Mike, those are not anti ev technology thoughts or feelings.  

 

 

The reason we have high fuel costs is we don't have enough refineries in the states anymore, so even though we output more barrels than we can use we don't actually have the ability to use what we take out of the ground.  

 

Fuel prices the last few years were too cheap to encourage USA Petro to build refineries.  It was cheaper to import than to refine.  Issue is now we have the Russian Ukraine war causing a huge lack in oil from Russia, supply and demand says fuel prices go up.  

 

We need to free ourselves of the OPEC control of American fuel prices.  We also need to expand beyond relying only on gas and diesel for automotive use.  Let's use electric where it makes sense and gas /diesel where it makes sense.

 

Short trip use of ev makes sense.   

 

If I was an oil executive I wouldn’t invest in building new refineries or improving existing ones either, especially when the largest state in America is mandating zero emission vehicles by 2035. This didn’t all just start happening, the hostile political postering against oil started way before Ukraine or the pandemic. We’ve been shifting away from OPEC steadily since before you and I were born @Me78569, I think we get like 4X more crude from Canada than all OPEC countries combined. So we free ourselves from OPEC control and what-shift energy control to China? Because that’s where all the EV batteries are being made…that’s a major major economic security and national security threat. 12% of our energy consumption is electricity, 2/3rds of that electricity is made from fossil fuels. Again, I’m all for advances that make sense to me as a citizen and consumer, but the heavy handed “death to oil” approach from the political class is going to lead to a bigger mess than we can imagine. They claim it’s in the interest of combating climate change, but it’s not, so the out of control push towards green energy has to be for another reason. I don’t know what that reason is. 

Money is always the reason.  Right or left money is what drives policy.

 

 

@JAG1 here you go showing that small generators are not enough. It will charge but the generator has to run 24/7.

 

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRCrQtTT/

1 hour ago, Me78569 said:

Money is always the reason.  Right or left money is what drives policy.

 

 

That's what I always say when something doesn't seem right...."follow the money"

 

Doesn't make it seem right, but at least you get a little idea of why it seems wrong....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenroberts/2022/02/24/russia-is-united-states-top-source-of-imported-gasoline/?sh=4146d9e81b18

 

Here is a good read on where we get out refined gas from.   %20 of our fuel went away when we stopped buying Russian oil.

 

Looks like I was incorrect on OPEC as they are. A smaller source.  

 

Regardless we need to find another source to supplement fuel.  It's never good to have all our eggs in one basket. 

 

 

 

That’s the other hard part, I try to do my own research instead of relying on the news, but I don’t even trust studies, reports, government statistics anymore. Like you said, money has corrupted everything (including and especially climate scientists).

I personally don't believe our government  works efficiently enough to modify all data or even most of the data in a manner to "pull the wool over our eyes" on all these subjects.  

 

The people making the data are just workers like you or me.   Read a few sources and if they agree then I tend to believe it.  

 

 

North Korea or China seem to have a handle on it, but when I look and listen to the people representing us I just see a bunch of chimpanzee's humping door knobs.

 

 

55 minutes ago, Me78569 said:

Read a few sources and if they agree then I tend to believe it. 

That is exactly what I do.

 

I think they choose a narrative that helps them meet their agenda and then the media, academia, and global think tanks drill it into the public conscience.

 

I’m a truth seeker, so both sides hate me. For example, I can see data that shows the global temperature has increased 1.8 degrees F since 1880, with the yearly increase rate doubling since 1981. But what I want to know is what % of that 1.8 degrees can be attributed to human activity…that’s an important thing to know if you’re going to change the entire worlds energy infrastructure based on climate change. Then I get even more suspicious when I see the messaging change to help move the narrative along. Global warming to Climate Change to Clean Air Act…punks.