There is nothing to argue about, our power grid speaks for itself. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see California can't handle another toaster, little less a state full of electric cars.
Well said!!It’s all about putting lipstick on a pig.. Whatever looks good no matter the cost or who it effects. The batteries are a disaster but if they are made somewhere else and doesn’t affect US soil no problem, getting China more money even better, getting rid of the batteries let’s just bury them with all the nuke waste and forget them... Politicians are folks that have no real life clue on how things work, the only thing they know how do is screw folks and smile.
Nothing stops ideologues from advancing "the agenda"....I find it hard to believe politicians don't know this so why? Why are they knowingly pushing us towards something that isn't yet feasible? There's more to this than the environment.
"Virtue signaling"It’s all about putting lipstick on a pig.. Whatever looks good no matter the cost or who it effects.
How sad that there are so many stupid people out there, that "virtue signaling" works.
It can. It just can't during peak times. That's true everywhere. It's why there is a big push for infrastructure renewal. Now of course travel demands doesn't care about "Peak or non peak times" So not only do we need more capacity. We need far better storage technology to serve the growing demand.There is nothing to argue about, our power grid speaks for itself. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to see California can't handle another toaster, little less a state full of electric cars.
Well mr smartypants, if it was as worthless as you say, there wouldn't be a plant up and running producing fuel in that wayJust for the non-chemists out there, whenever any hydrocarbon (HC) fuel is combusted, the result is CO2 (carbon dioxide) and H2O (water). When you look at the hierarchy of chemical reactions, CO2 is the lowest energy level any HC can reach. What some entities are doing is using solar power (or some other "free" source) to extract the carbon from CO2 and combine it with hydrogen (usually derived from splitting water in an electrolytic process) to produce an HC fuel (Methane -- aka CH4 -- is popular as it is the easiest conversion). Unless the electrical energy supply is "free" like solar, this process is up-side-down. It takes more energy to revert CO2 to HC than you get when you burn HC with O2 and produce some form of power (check out Faraday's 2nd Law of Thermodynamics). I've followed that path long enough to look the other way.
Well mr smartypants, if it was as worthless as you say, there wouldn't be a plant up and running producing fuel in that way
One reason the government is pushing EV’s could be that when you look at socialist and communist countries travel within those countries is very restricted for the masses. In a large country like ours EV’s would do just that. Their end goal would be to limit people to bicycles or walking as a means to get to the government factory to work.
It can. It just can't during peak times. That's true everywhere. It's why there is a big push for infrastructure renewal. Now of course travel demands doesn't care about "Peak or non peak times" So not only do we need more capacity. We need far better storage technology to serve the growing demand.
It's not impossible. Even with today's available resources and tech trends. But getting us started in the right direction has proven most difficult.