Teslag said:

---

The problem with your point is that most drivers only use their cars for short urban commutes. If you have two vehicles one that can get 300 miles on a charge covers almost all of your travel needs on its own. With a supercharger network a trip under 700 miles or so is a breeze.

---

I don't think it's as breezy as using a traditional car. I posted a journalist's nightmare journey from NOLA to Chicago and back in an EV recently. One of the many unforeseen things was a thunderstorm shortened their range and had them sweating to make it to the next charging station.

I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker.

That's also a 995 mile trip, outside what I said would be a breeze in an EV. I'd rather have ICE for that drive.

Teslag said:

---

The problem with your point is that most drivers only use their cars for short urban commutes. If you have two vehicles one that can get 300 miles on a charge covers almost all of your travel needs on its own. With a supercharger network a trip under 700 miles or so is a breeze.

---

Just get a hybrid w/ 50 mile electric range. Way better solution.

Teslag said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

You don't actually have to keep proving to us that you are fully on board and a true believer who feels compelled to correct any wrong-thinkers.

We know.

Really.

---

Care to point out where I'm wrong? I've said numerous times that EV's are the absolute wrong choice for many people. You can simply get a better ICE fit in many instances for most buyers than you can with an EV. I can be objective, you can't.

---

Yes, somewhere on this thousand page thread you've probably restated that little theory that 'the vast majority of folks only need 300 miles of range a day' a dozen times. It neglects the exceptional cases where more is needed, maybe for a family trip or move 3 or 4 times a year. But whatever, stick to your use case, I'm merely pointing out you…aren't convincing anyone with it any more than your militant belief in the vaccines did (on every thread about them).

But keep doing it, it makes me laugh.

You also neglect/ignore the massive investments and damage to the planet/human labor force required to mine all of the materials/minerals to build all these EV's, trash the batteries within 10 years, and all the charging infrastructure, including in apartments/condos/cities. But I know, that's just…you being 'conservative' or something.

More seriously, I am just trying to add to the discussion instead of rehash a lame debate with you where you and GAC will no doubt insist on having the last post today, so here:

Quote:

---

Mark Tapscott has an interesting piece today at PJ Media titled "Three Huge Reasons Why Electric Vehicles Will Never Dominate American Roads." Tapscott's reasons are all good ones, which I would summarize as (1) despite vast government subsidies and rebates, EVs are still far more expensive than gasoline-powered cars, (2) even with greatly increased sales, the existing gasoline-powered cars will not go away and will still be on the road and the dominant vehicles in 2035 and even 2050, and (3) the increased amounts of necessary minerals for the batteries, from lithium to nickel to cobalt, are never going to materialize. Key quote:

[All the] federal tax credits are available to help obscure the fact that EVs remain extremely costly for consumers and offer unproven maintenance and reliability records. No wonder that, despite the immense pressure being put upon consumers to buy EVs, they still only make up about seven percent of all new-vehicle purchases.

Let me generalize from that. The current automotive sector of the economy represents thousands of elements coming together via private markets to satisfy customer demand. Each of the elements falls into place because someone perceives an opportunity to make money by providing that element. As just one example, gas stations don't exist because the government ordered them up, but because entrepreneurs perceived that they could make money by building the stations and buying the pumps and making gasoline available at that location at a price that would cover all costs and allow for a profit.

Contrast that to what is now supposed to happen for electric vehicles. The government is allegedly going to be paying for some half a million charging stations around the country. Maybe that's happening, but I don't notice any of them around where I live. And why does the government have to do this? If the demand were there, entrepreneurs would already be installing the stations. It turns out that the stations are quite expensive to construct (at least the "fast charging" variety), and then you can't really mark up the electricity that has to be purchased from the local utility. So it has to be done with government subsidy.

And in the next step, the same thing happens with the charging stations that happens with every other government-ordered business: the stations break down, and since no one makes more money to be sure they keep running, they don't get fixed. Among many, many articles on this subject, here is one from August 2022 at The Verge, headline "Electric vehicle owners are fed up with broken EV chargers and janky software."

---

Quote:

---

Similarly, who has the incentive to be sure that there is sufficient electricity on the grid to recharge all the EVs when the owners want to charge them? In the gas car arena, oil companies make big money by finding and refining and delivering the product to the places where the customer wants to buy it. Over in the EV arena, the same jurisdictions like New York and California that presume to order up an all EV fleet also organize their grid on a central planning/regulated price model. Reliable fossil fuel power plants are ordered to be closed, and replaced with intermittent wind and solar generation. The all-knowing regulators then order that everything shall be electrified, and somewhere the little people are supposed to respond and make it happen, without any appropriate economic incentive. We shall see.

---

Name calling, LOL. I don't have to, you chose your own username.

And by the way, EV's lose 10 percent while charging. If my car lost 2 gallons of gas every time I filled up, I'd be pretty ticked, but EV owners…don't know or care, either way.

Teslag said:

---

I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker.

---

It's still an EV. She had some very real life experiences driving it and I don't think advanced charging stations would have changed things like reduced range in a bad thunderstorm.

Quote:

---

You also neglect/ignore the massive investments and damage to the planet/human labor force required to mine all of the materials/minerals to build all these EV's, trash the batteries within 10 years, and all the charging infrastructure, including in apartments/condos/cities. But I know, that's just…you being 'conservative' or something.

---

Why would I disagree with any of that? I've repeatedly said that EV's are not a solution for all of our driving needs in this country.

Remember, I'm objective.You aren't.

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker.

---

It's still an EV. She had some very real life experiences driving it and I don't think advanced charging stations would have changed things like reduced range in a bad thunderstorm.

---

Which is why, for a 1,000 mile trip, she would be better off in an ICE vehicle as a I previously said.

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker.

---

It's still an EV. She had some very real life experiences driving it and I don't think advanced charging stations would have changed things like reduced range in a bad thunderstorm.

---

Which is why, for a 1,000 mile trip, she would be better off in an ICE vehicle as a I previously said.

---

What you said first was to cast aspersions on the brand of EV.

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

Teslag said:

---

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

---

You made two points but the salient one was your initial response of "I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker." That was your initial rejoinder.

Not to belabor the point but I feel it's worth making. Your arguments need to be more precise if you hope to remain rational and try to sway opinions on here. You can't just wave things aside with "I said such and such first."

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

You also neglect/ignore the massive investments and damage to the planet/human labor force required to mine all of the materials/minerals to build all these EV's, trash the batteries within 10 years, and all the charging infrastructure, including in apartments/condos/cities. But I know, that's just…you being 'conservative' or something.

---

Remember, I'm objective.

---

Lmao

Sq4fish83 said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Quote:

---

You also neglect/ignore the massive investments and damage to the planet/human labor force required to mine all of the materials/minerals to build all these EV's, trash the batteries within 10 years, and all the charging infrastructure, including in apartments/condos/cities. But I know, that's just…you being 'conservative' or something.

---

Remember, I'm objective.

---

Lmao

---

How am I not objective if I can say that ICE vehicles remain a better choice for many, if not most car buyers?

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

---

You made two points but the salient one was your initial response of "I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker." That was your initial rejoinder.

Not to belabor the point but I feel it's worth making. Your arguments need to be more precise if you hope to remain rational and try to sway opinions on here. You can't just wave things aside with "I said such and such first."

---

I assumed your example fit my example. I said 700 miles, you responded with one that was almost 1,000. Maybe your answers need to be more precise.

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

---

You made two points but the salient one was your initial response of "I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker." That was your initial rejoinder.

Not to belabor the point but I feel it's worth making. Your arguments need to be more precise if you hope to remain rational and try to sway opinions on here. You can't just wave things aside with "I said such and such first."

---

I assumed your example fit my example. I said 700 miles, you responded with one that was almost 1,000. Maybe your answers need to be more precise.

---

Dude, this is not a rational response. People are not going to get out Google Maps and check to make sure their example fits with your arbitrary mileage statement. No one thinks that way. They think "long trip." You're completely irrational when you come back with an arbitrary "Gotcha! You went over my xxx miles so all those experiences are invalid."

It doesn't work that way in real life. Sadly, you're not displaying rational unemotional arguments for your side here.

You act like it was a slight difference. You were off by 43% in mileage. That's significant.

Teslag said:

---

You act like it was a slight difference. You were off by 43% in mileage. That's significant.

---

I've bought a few electric cars in my lifetime .. they always sucked and quality was poor …. The remote controls always broke

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

---

You made two points but the salient one was your initial response of "I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker." That was your initial rejoinder.

Not to belabor the point but I feel it's worth making. Your arguments need to be more precise if you hope to remain rational and try to sway opinions on here. You can't just wave things aside with "I said such and such first."

---

I assumed your example fit my example. I said 700 miles, you responded with one that was almost 1,000. Maybe your answers need to be more precise.

---

Dude, this is not a rational response. People are not going to get out Google Maps and check to make sure their example fits with your arbitrary mileage statement. No one thinks that way. They think "long trip." You're completely irrational when you come back with an arbitrary "Gotcha! You went over my xxx miles so all those experiences are invalid."

It doesn't work that way in real life. Sadly, you're not displaying rational unemotional arguments for your side here.

---

He said EV's are good for urban commutes. You countered with a long road trip in an EV without access to superchargers. That wasn't a rational response.

EVs are great for certain applications and suck for others. To each his own just get the government out of making the decision and let the individual consumer decide.

We've owned a '14 Volt (plug-in hybrid) for 6.5 years and a '13 Lexus ES300h hybrid(no plug) for 3 years. Didn't buy them to save the world. Bought them because they made sense economically. Both were under 20k out the door. When running ICE the mileage is around 40/35 and 40/39 respectfully. They have proven to be very solid, dependable cars. We just do the recommended maintenance.

GAC06 said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

techno-ag said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Actually what I said first was a limit of 700 miles...

---

You made two points but the salient one was your initial response of "I remember that article. The person rented a POS Kia and had no access to superchargers. It's a difference maker." That was your initial rejoinder.

Not to belabor the point but I feel it's worth making. Your arguments need to be more precise if you hope to remain rational and try to sway opinions on here. You can't just wave things aside with "I said such and such first."

---

I assumed your example fit my example. I said 700 miles, you responded with one that was almost 1,000. Maybe your answers need to be more precise.

---

Dude, this is not a rational response. People are not going to get out Google Maps and check to make sure their example fits with your arbitrary mileage statement. No one thinks that way. They think "long trip." You're completely irrational when you come back with an arbitrary "Gotcha! You went over my xxx miles so all those experiences are invalid."

It doesn't work that way in real life. Sadly, you're not displaying rational unemotional arguments for your side here.

---

He said EV's are good for urban commutes. You countered with a long road trip in an EV without access to superchargers. That wasn't a rational response.

---

On the contrary, I said they were good for urban commutes. At least get your facts right if you're going to white knight him.

Then he agreed with you and you responded with the long road trip, which made no sense. It's pretty well established that EV's are less convenient for long trips but more convenient for the vast majority of commutes.

Good editorial about EV's today on I&I: "EV's are Evil."

Quote:

---

Here's the dirty, rotten truth about EVs.

EVs aren't "zero emissions" vehicles. All an EV does is shift the emissions elsewhere namely, over to gigantic monopoly power companies that burn natural gas, coal, garbage or, horror of horrors, employ nuclear fission. Plus, making electric cars releases far more CO2 than is emitted in the production of conventional cars.

EV enthusiasts say these aren't problems because over its lifetime, an EV will produce fewer total CO2 emissions.

But that claim depends on a wide range of variables such as the range of an EV, how long the batteries last, the energy source used to produce electricity, etc. that can dramatically affect the EV's carbon-cutting picture.

One study by the University of Michigan found that EVs can emit more CO2 than conventional cars. It said that depending on the fuel used by power plants in a given area, an EV can produce as much CO2 as a gas-powered car that gets just 29 miles per gallon.

EVs aren't cheaper to operate. Another selling point of EVs is supposed to be that, while they are far more expensive to buy, they are cheaper to drive. But that depends entirely on the relative cost of electricity and gasoline.

A study by the Anderson Economic Group found that with gas prices on the decline and electricity costs climbing, it's cheaper to operate a mid-priced gas-powered car than a comparable EV, particularly when you factor in the extra time and hassle involved in recharging an EV.

EVs are built with slave labor. While gasoline is produced almost entirely from domestic supplies of oil, the lithium, cobalt, graphite, and rare earth minerals needed to make batteries mostly come from places such as China, Congo, Indonesia, Iran, and other countries that are noted for gross human rights violations, and are often mined and produced using forced and child labor.

"The road many of these materials take to consumers is littered with human rights abuses," says Human Rights Watch.

Take the cobalt mines in Congo, where most of that stuff is found. Siddharth Kara, a fellow in public health at Harvard, describes it as "modern-day slavery. It's not chattel slavery from the 18th century where you can buy and trade people and own title over a person like property. But the level of degradation, the level of exploitation is on par with old-world slavery."

EVs are environmental rapists. Mining and refining the minerals needed to make EV batteries is also an environmental disaster. To make just one EV battery requires 25 pounds of lithium, 60 pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds of cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic.

Writing in these pages, Ronald Stein noted that "you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth's crust for just one battery."

In Indonesia, where nickel for EV batteries is largely produced, "polluted air and water are causing respiratory problems, sickness, and eye injuries and destroying forests and fisheries. The rush to expand production has pushed local communities and infrastructure to the brink of collapse," Wired reports.

---

I had to go to Tractor Supply and buy some irrigation lines for work.
I was escorted out to the outdoor fenced area by an employee.
I noticed several of the green zero turn all electric mowers inside the lot so I decided to ask a few questions about the mowers.

The TSC associate told me she's never even seen anybody buy one of these mowers. She also told me that the replacement cost of all 6 batteries is well over $1,200 (+tax)
She also stated that the batteries are built to accept a full charge only for so long and they charge them nightly after they are moved daily from the storefront display area.

$1,200 sure buys a lot of gas…

I own a bunch of battery operated Milwaukee hand power tools.

I saw that Milwaukee has a battery operated M18 mower at an asking price of $1,200 without the batteries. You're looking at another $500 just in batteries

GinMan said:

---

I had to go to Tractor Supply and buy some irrigation lines for work.
I was escorted out to the outdoor fenced area by an employee.
I noticed several of the green zero turn all electric mowers inside the lot so I decided to ask a few questions about the mowers.

The TSC associate told me she's never even seen anybody buy one of these mowers. She also told me that the replacement cost of all 6 batteries is well over $1,200 (+tax)
She also stated that the batteries are built to accept a full charge only for so long and they charge them nightly after they are moved daily from the storefront display area.

$1,200 sure buys a lot of gas…

I own a bunch of battery operated Milwaukee hand power tools.

I saw that Milwaukee has a battery operated M18 mower at an asking price of $1,200 without the batteries. You're looking at another $500 just in batteries

---

We had an electric lawnmower when I was a kid. In that case, though, it plugged directly into an extension cord.

We didn't have much grass to mow and it did okay for the job.

My grandmother had even less grass and she had an old rotary push type mechanical mower. It also did okay for the job.

GinMan said:

---

I had to go to Tractor Supply and buy some irrigation lines for work.
I was escorted out to the outdoor fenced area by an employee.
I noticed several of the green zero turn all electric mowers inside the lot so I decided to ask a few questions about the mowers.

The TSC associate told me she's never even seen anybody buy one of these mowers. She also told me that the replacement cost of all 6 batteries is well over $1,200 (+tax)
She also stated that the batteries are built to accept a full charge only for so long and they charge them nightly after they are moved daily from the storefront display area.

$1,200 sure buys a lot of gas…

I own a bunch of battery operated Milwaukee hand power tools.

I saw that Milwaukee has a battery operated M18 mower at an asking price of $1,200 without the batteries. You're looking at another $500 just in batteries

---

Thus why the government that knows best will force electric zero turns on us. That's the reason why folks are so anti EV...because its being forced, or will be forced. Lots of folks resent things being forced on them.

What i don't understand is the religious zeal some of the pro-EV folks have for EVs. Ok, you like them and they work for you. Great for you.

Texasclipper said:

---

GinMan said:

---

I had to go to Tractor Supply and buy some irrigation lines for work.
I was escorted out to the outdoor fenced area by an employee.
I noticed several of the green zero turn all electric mowers inside the lot so I decided to ask a few questions about the mowers.

The TSC associate told me she's never even seen anybody buy one of these mowers. She also told me that the replacement cost of all 6 batteries is well over $1,200 (+tax)
She also stated that the batteries are built to accept a full charge only for so long and they charge them nightly after they are moved daily from the storefront display area.

$1,200 sure buys a lot of gas…

I own a bunch of battery operated Milwaukee hand power tools.

I saw that Milwaukee has a battery operated M18 mower at an asking price of $1,200 without the batteries. You're looking at another $500 just in batteries

---

Thus why the government that knows best will force electric zero turns on us. That's the reason why folks are so anti EV...because its being forced, or will be forced. Lots of folks resent things being forced on them.

What i don't understand is the religious zeal some of the pro-EV folks have for EVs. Ok, you like them and they work for you. Great for you.

---

It's because they can't look at the issue objectively.

$9.6 billion! And then the constant upkeep of purchasing lithium batteries. 66,000 vehicles in line to purchase by 2028
FJB!

USPS Orders 9,250 Ford E-Transit Vans & 14,000 EV Charging Stationshttps://t.co/pHXySVO4MH

— CleanTechnica (@cleantechnica) March 2, 2023

Including the traditional ICE vehicles, this is over $400k per vehicle. Can someone help me understand why the postal service is losing money with these great purchasing practices?

Go woke, go broke.

Or broker in the case of the postal service.

It's 106,000 vehicles, not 18,500. Still obscenely expensive. That's union labor for you.

techno-ag said:

---

Go woke, go broke.

Or broker in the case of the postal service.

---

I don't think it would much cheaper if they were all ICE instead of close to 50/50. This is the waste in the government purchasing methods.

hph6203 said:

---

It's 106,000 vehicles, not 18,500. Still obscenely expensive. That's union labor for you.

---

My mistake but the cost will probably still end up around my calculation after the overruns.