Electrified

scott123007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2012
Messages
1,547
Location
Jupiter, Florida
I could be wrong, but I thought the whole idea of EV's and pollution was a containment issue. ICE vehicle's are relatively clean burning now, but still spew what pollution they have all over the place. Assuming non renewable energy is creating the electricity for charging EV's, it is at least it is in one place and is a lot easier contain or control.
 

Checkswrecks

Ungenear to broked stuff
Staff member
Global Moderator
2011 Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
11,690
Location
Damascus, MD
I could be wrong, but I thought the whole idea of EV's and pollution was a containment issue. ICE vehicle's are relatively clean burning now, but still spew what pollution they have all over the place. Assuming non renewable energy is creating the electricity for charging EV's, it is at least it is in one place and is a lot easier contain or control.
Originally the justification for the EV push was to meet international agreements about emissions, so the gummint was throwing out a lot of subsidy money. Things have changed now that the price of batteries has fallen close to 90% and it can cost less to make an EV than ICE vehicle. Unfortunately the cost of basic labor and materials has risen enough that both are beyond what more and more people can afford. (Like eggs and bread)
 

Sierra1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
16,446
Location
Joshua TX
. . . . it is at least it is in one place and is a lot easier contain or control.
Apparently, the state of Texas thinks the same way. Of our 254 counties, only 17 have emissions testing. I guess they think that our perpetual South wind isn't going to blow the "bad air" out of one county into the next. And all the pollution knows to stay in its own county. :rolleyes:

It was always my understanding that EVs were expected to save the planet since those nasty ICEVs were causing global warming. o_O
 

Checkswrecks

Ungenear to broked stuff
Staff member
Global Moderator
2011 Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 7, 2011
Messages
11,690
Location
Damascus, MD
It was always my understanding that EVs were expected to save the planet since those nasty ICEVs were causing global warming. o_O
Yup. Below are some of what the UN agreements were based in as the need to reduce emissions.



But in the end, I have the electric car because it fits for most of my needs and is saving me a LOT of money.
 

fac191

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Messages
3,048
Location
London
Yup. Below are some of what the UN agreements were based in as the need to reduce emissions.



But in the end, I have the electric car because it fits for most of my needs and is saving me a LOT of money.
Looking at the spike around WW2 we should be doing better preventing wars.
 

Sierra1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2016
Messages
16,446
Location
Joshua TX
. . . . But in the end, I have the electric car because it fits for most of my needs and is saving me a LOT of money.
That should be the only determining factor(s) for people choosing them. No mandates.
Looking at the spike around WW2 we should be doing better preventing wars.
I don't know. WWI and Vietnam look like low spikes. And between mustard gas, napalm and agent orange, I would have expected higher levels. Even when Sadam was burning his oil wells looks like a low phase.
 

fac191

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2016
Messages
3,048
Location
London
That should be the only determining factor(s) for people choosing them. No mandates.

I don't know. WWI and Vietnam look like low spikes. And between mustard gas, napalm and agent orange, I would have expected higher levels. Even when Sadam was burning his oil wells looks like a low phase.
I think WW2 was so much bigger and alot of fossil fuels were burned just making the weapons of war. It was war on an industrial scale.
 
Top