• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Less than 1% of the over 250 million cars are EV's

danieldemol

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Imagine living in remote Australia where one drives 600Km to go to the city for a day trip, a 1200km round trip.
All the more reason to encourage the millions of people who live 10min to half an hour drive (ETA from the shops) living in the city to make the switch away from fossil fuels so your supply doesn't dry up Tony.

Have you thought about the dwindling supply of fossil fuels strategically?

In my opinion.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Good grief :facepalm:

Dude I've been here 3 1/2 years. When you are beaten you complain and whine, make false statements, claims and avoid.
You are the most suspended person here of all the posters that I know and you still can't figure it out.
That's what is so dang funny and that makes you the joke :D:p:D:p:D:p:D
LOL!! Epic projection.

When a person refuses to have a rational discussion nothing is owed to them. You do not seem to understand how your claim was just refuted.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
All the more reason to encourage the millions of people who live 10min to half an hour drive living in the city to make the switch away from fossil fuels so your supply doesn't dry up Tony.

Have you thought about the dwindling supply of fossil fuels strategically?

In my opinion.
@TransmutingSoul is usually a very moral person, which is why his first response surprised me. I think that he has just not thought through this issue.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The problem with the article linked in the OP is that the author forgot one undeniable fact. We need to get oof of fossil fuels. He did some analysis and set up several scenarios. But since he forgot that one fact he ignored how the government will have to respond in the future. Fossil fuels are a dead end and petroleum even more so. The odds are like with many other serious changes the government will play a huge role in this . Subsidies may be needed or an even better solution would be to properly tax fossil fuels. People do not realize it but fossil fuels are currently grossly undertaxed.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
The problem with the article linked in the OP is that the author forgot one undeniable fact. We need to get oof of fossil fuels. He did some analysis and set up several scenarios. But since he forgot that one fact he ignored how the government will have to respond in the future. Fossil fuels are a dead end and petroleum even more so. The odds are like with many other serious changes the government will play a huge role in this . Subsidies may be needed or an even better solution would be to properly tax fossil fuels. People do not realize it but fossil fuels are currently grossly undertaxed.
Lol. And people driving EV's don't pay a tax for roads as people burning gas do.
So we can say they drive on the road for free yet their heavier vehicles do more road damage. Don't facts just suck? :D:p
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I know. Either directly from fossil fuels, or electrolysis.
The electricity tends to come from fossil
fuels.
Instead of using the electricity directly we
go through another step, losing efficiency, and make hydrogen.
How is this sensible?
All these systems depend on using electricity from zero or low carbon generation, which is well within our grasp.

The point about hydrogen is that it is a compact light weight energy store, compared to batteries. That provides an advantage for transport where a lot of energy needs to be stored, e. g. Trucks or off-grid vehicle operation.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Lol. And people driving EV's don't pay a tax for roads as people burning gas do.
So we can say they drive on the road for free yet their heavier vehicles do more road damage. Don't facts just suck? :D:p
Once more you have not thought this through. Do you seriously think that the method that we use of taxing vehicles is not going to change in the future?

Try to give your posts just a little thought. Right now at about 1% that number is not significant. But taxation will have to change sooner or later. Right now the early buyers are profiting for their risk as they should . But when many more begin to use electric cars we will probably have to go to a system that combines miles driven times the mass of the vehicle.

Or do you have a better plan?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
Once more you have not thought this through. Do you seriously think that the method that we use of taxing vehicles is not going to change in the future?

Try to give your posts just a little thought. Right now at about 1% that number is not significant. But taxation will have to change sooner or later. Right now the early buyers are profiting for their risk as they should . But when many more begin to use electric cars we will probably have to go to a system that combines miles driven times the mass of the vehicle.

Or do you have a better plan?

We aren't talking about the future. We are talking about the now.
A lot of things will change in the future, that doesn't help or aide the now.
But you keep on keeping on Joe :p:D.

My plan. Charging cars should have a higher electric rate. Its that simple. Charging stations at home or abroad should have a higher electric rate that goes to the roads.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
All these systems depend on using electricity from zero or low carbon generation, which is well within our grasp.

The point about hydrogen is that it is a compact light weight energy store, compared to batteries. That provides an advantage for transport where a lot of energy needs to be stored, e. g. Trucks or off-grid vehicle operation.
But even if they don't, Electric vehicles are much much more efficient than ICE's. They will still lower the carbon footprint if they use electricity made from natural gas or other fossil fuel.

And yes, hydrogen currently is the source one would want to use if one made long trips daily. It also is more efficient than ICED's but when one considers the cost of making hydrogen etc. carbon footprint wise if it is reliant on a fossil fuel power plant it will be a wash. There won't be much of a difference.

But the good news is that the current cheapest form of power is solar. And hydrogen is a very good method of storing that power. It becomes a portable power source when one uses power to make hydrogen. So even if one has a remote power station that is off the grid it can still make hydrogen with just a small source of water.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
We aren't talking about the future. We are talking about the now.
A lot of things will change in the future, that doesn't help or aide the now.
But you keep on keeping on Joe :p:D.
The key to changes in the future is starting right now. I know. Facts are uncomfortable.

By the way, have you figure out a way to support your unevidenced claim yet? If you have any questions about the claims that I made I will have no problem, but since I am asking first you would need to respond to me first. Where is your support of your claims of "I heard from some guys that cut down trees".?
 

We Never Know

No Slack
The key to changes in the future is starting right now. I know. Facts are uncomfortable.

By the way, have you figure out a way to support your unevidenced claim yet? If you have any questions about the claims that I made I will have no problem, but since I am asking first you would need to respond to me first. Where is your support of your claims of "I heard from some guys that cut down trees".?

My edit that you missed.....

My plan. Charging cars should have a higher electric rate. Its that simple. Charging stations at home or abroad should have a higher electric rate that goes to the roads.
 

We Never Know

No Slack
The key to changes in the future is starting right now. I know. Facts are uncomfortable.

By the way, have you figure out a way to support your unevidenced claim yet? If you have any questions about the claims that I made I will have no problem, but since I am asking first you would need to respond to me first. Where is your support of your claims of "I heard from some guys that cut down trees".?

I already gave my facts in their words, their union, their base city and where they work. Refute that and go from there.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
My edit that you missed.....

My plan. Charging cars should have a higher electric rate. Its that simple. Charging stations at home or abroad should have a higher electric rate that goes to the roads.
How do you tell how electricity is used? And that seems a bit more intrusive than just finding out how much a person drives each month and charging them for that.

If people were charged for miles driven and weight gasoline vehicles would get a benefit since they tend to be lighter than EV's. The problem with your method is that EV's can also usually be charged off of household current. It takes longer, but if you have overnight that should do the trick. So if one has a charging station that is monitored separately a simple extension cord could be the work around for those taxes.

That is why I like distance and weight.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
You can call the union in tulsa and see where they work. Instant facts supported.

:rolleyes::p:Do_O:D:po_O:rolleyes::mad::confused::eek::Do_O

That all your post is worth
After all of these years and you still do not know how debating works?

You still lost to Hitchens' Razor. Oh wait. I need to make it official:

marflrt.gif
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I have gave you facts that are easily supported. I always supported my claims. You decline as usual.
But then again thats your way and you always falsely claim victory and get shoddy about it because when shown wrong you can't stand it. Then you get sloppy, a little crazy, a little stupid and then get suspended. Its your normal.

Fun fact... I have been suspended ZERO times. How about you?

Let me give you a hug because you really must need one lol

:hugehug:
Nope. You gave me unevidenced claims. those are not facts. it is not up to me to contact any workers. You made the claims you need to find out some method of supporting them.
 
Top