Liberalism in the US today:

[Belk]

It’s not me confusing the two. That would be those writing the climate 10 commandments. Also to include the liberals who have made religion out of climate change suffering from that paranoia you accuse me of.

I do not believe your claims of it being a religion. However if we stipulate it is a religion what do you feel that indicates?

 

[SimplyMe]

I’ve got one and I do ride but I don’t plan on giving up my combustion engine ...

Who has asked, much less told, you that you have to give up your vehicle with a combustion engine? The most I've seen is some Automakers (not the government) stating that by a date -- typically at least 10 years from now -- they'll only offer EVs as new cars (not to include heavy trucks, farm equipment, etc).

...for the less efficient electric car. Not to mention the PR con job about the electric car.

Electric Vehicles are not less efficient, they are substantially more efficient. They do require more energy to intially produce than a car with an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) but that difference is typically "made up" in a couple of years. I will admit that there is a lot of false information out there put out by "fossil fuel alarmists" that manipulate figures like having all energy generated by coal (in the US, less than 20% of power is from coal) and other falsehood. As an example, another manipulation they use is to include the pollution generated from creating Electric power but not counting the energy (and pollution) used to refine the gasoline.

No climate alarmist wants to discuss the effects of additional power generation to charge all of those proposed electric cars.

Maybe "alarmists" don't, but as I show above, it is good to stay away from the "alarmists" on either side -- both deal more in propaganda than science. There are plenty on the climate side who talk are willing to talk about power generation. If you are interested, here is one article that talks about it.

Then we have the high cost of replacement batteries and the disposal of old batteries.

Replacement batteries should not be an issue -- any more than engine rebuilds or transmission replacements are on an ICE vehicle. As a general rule, EV batteries should last over 300,000 miles -- the normal life of a car. They have been engineered (on any current EV -- even going back about 5 years) to last and there are EVs out there that have traveled that far without a battery replacement. There are plenty of Teslas that have been driven well over 100,000 miles and are still running on their original batteries.

Yes, there are a few that will require new batteries -- the percentage is extremely low (maybe .01%) -- due to a manufacturing defect. There have also been a couple of people who bought old EVs -- not Tesla -- who complained about needing a battery replacement a few months after buying the car used. Again, it is the difference between the older EVs (the ones that had less than 100 miles of total range) and poor battery management built in -- such as no active cooling system for the battery. Since heat destroys batteries, it is unsurprising that an EV in Florida, without an active cooling system for the battery, would need to replace the battery prematurely.

As for disposal, to this point that hasn't been a problem. Currently, most EV batteries are actually reused -- though not in cars. A lot are used by businesses for battery backup systems. Part of the trick of EV battery "failures" is that the entire battery isn't bad. Additionally, the batteries will be recycled, a few recycling "shops" are starting to come online but the issue is that there aren't enough batteries for them to recycle, particularly with the number being reused.

And, of course, this ignores that battery technology, and the recycling technology is quickly advancing. It will be interesting to see what battery technology looks like in a decade or two, particularly if solid state "batteries" are perfected.

Look at California, they cannot produce enough electricity now for the electric cars they do have much less the ones they want.

And this is false -- California has no issues with producing enough power for electric cars. Instead, what happened in California was extremely hot, record temperatures, where energy use was much higher than usual for a week. And "fossil fuel activists" falsely reported what California asked at that time -- they asked people not to charge their EVs in the evening (between 5-10) when energy usage was the highest. What is ignored is that most Californian's typically don't charge their EVs in the evening -- California utilities offer cheaper electric prices overnight (when demand is quite low), so people program their EVs to charge between 10 PM and 7 AM -- which still gives the car enough time to fully charge. So the request (it was not a mandate) did not effect most California EV owners, at all, and they did not lose power.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Actually I do live on the coast and there has been no noticeable change in the coastline in my life of 68 years. I do not need luck because I am confident this world will not be destroyed by cow flatulence or my gas powered car.

Those living near historic Jamestown are not so fortunate.

Jamestown, North America's first permanent English settlement, endangered by climate change

Facing the threat of sea-level rise, Jamestown made the list of 11 most endangered historic places by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

www.13newsnow.com

 

[Postvieww]

Those living near historic Jamestown are not so fortunate.

Jamestown, North America's first permanent English settlement, endangered by climate change

Facing the threat of sea-level rise, Jamestown made the list of 11 most endangered historic places by the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

www.13newsnow.com

During the early part of the Paleozoic, Virginia was covered by a warm shallow sea. This sea would come to be inhabited by creatures like brachiopods, bryozoans, corals, and nautiloids. The state was briefly out of the sea during the Ordovician, but by the Silurian it was once again submerged. Whose emissions caused this to happen? Yes the earth is changing, it has been changing ever since it has been here. Yours and my lifestyle is not the cause. Charging for carbon credits will fix nothing. The current climate panic is contrived to gain control over the masses.

 

[mark46]

During the early part of the Paleozoic, Virginia was covered by a warm shallow sea. This sea would come to be inhabited by creatures like brachiopods, bryozoans, corals, and nautiloids. The state was briefly out of the sea during the Ordovician, but by the Silurian it was once again submerged. Whose emissions caused this to happen? Yes the earth is changing, it has been changing ever since it has been here. Yours and my lifestyle is not the cause. Charging for carbon credits will fix nothing. The current climate panic is contrived to gain control over the masses.

The choice is clear. Try to do something about the increase in CO2 and methane emissions, or choose not to act.

 

[Hans Blaster]

During the early part of the Paleozoic, Virginia was covered by a warm shallow sea. This sea would come to be inhabited by creatures like brachiopods, bryozoans, corals, and nautiloids. The state was briefly out of the sea during the Ordovician, but by the Silurian it was once again submerged.

Do you have any idea how long it took for those ancient changes to happen? (I doubt it.)

Whose emissions caused this to happen? Yes the earth is changing, it has been changing ever since it has been here. Yours and my lifestyle is not the cause.

It is the *pace* of change and how disruptive it will be to our economy. So, yes, it is your lifestyle.

Charging for carbon credits will fix nothing. The current climate panic is contrived to gain control over the masses.

Nonsense.

 

[Postvieww]

Do you have any idea how long it took for those ancient changes to happen? (I doubt it.)

Along time I am sure ,but the point is the earth changes without mans help and it will continue to do so. Not to mention that according to the alarmist of 20 years ago we should all be dead but we are not.

It is the *pace* of change and how disruptive it will be to our economy. So, yes, it is your lifestyle.

Nonsense.

Nonsense.

Carbon credits, if you have the money you can buy the credits to pollute. Now that's a winning system. This is a con.

 

[DaisyDay]

Along time I am sure ,but the point is the earth changes without mans help and it will continue to do so. Not to mention that according to the alarmist of 20 years ago we should all be dead but we are not.

Of course, you are right that the climate changes without man's help, we all know that, but it also changes with man's help. The natural cycles and forcers (such as volcanic ash) are pretty well known so we can tell the difference. The current overall warming is not natural and is already causing problems which will get worse if we continue on the current path.

Carbon credits, if you have the money you can buy the credits to pollute. Now that's a winning system. This is a con.

The idea that rather than have the government trying to control industry with micromanaging is to have the market find the best solution.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Nonsense.

This is the most succinct summary of your climate position I've seen.

 

[Postvieww]

This is the most succinct summary of your climate position I've seen.

The problem is was a summary of your comment

 

[Hans Blaster]

The problem is was a summary of your comment

I've forgotten more climate science than you ever knew. Your posts mentioning the subject have been full of "nonsense" and other garbage.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I would say just look at the policies of those that openly claim to be liberals and you have a baseline. Obviously there are some differences among liberals. I think most people recognize the differences between liberalism and conservatism without a check list. Your definition is welcome. The things I will post here are what I believe to be liberal policies or ideals.

Liberal political values are effectively post enlightenment western political values. Conservativism is a strain of liberalism that varies with other strains in primarily the government power vs personal freedom dynamic. Classic liberalism tends to favor individual rights....to the point where societal damage begins, and uses that as a marker for government intervention.

Conservativism tends to see government intervention as only needed in the preservation of individual freedom.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Who has asked, much less told, you that you have to give up your vehicle with a combustion engine? The most I've seen is some Automakers (not the government) stating that by a date -- typically at least 10 years from now -- they'll only offer EVs as new cars (not to include heavy trucks, farm equipment, etc).

[/QUOTE]

True.

Electric Vehicles are not less efficient, they are substantially more efficient.

Depends what you mean by efficient.

They do require more energy to intially produce than a car with an Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) but that difference is typically "made up" in a couple of years.

Last I checked, we were talking about 30 years of use before the energy usage finally overtakes the energy used in creating the battery. This is about 30 years too late, but hardly the biggest problem.

I will admit that there is a lot of false information out there put out by "fossil fuel alarmists" that manipulate figures like having all energy generated by coal (in the US, less than 20% of power is from coal) and other falsehood. As an example, another manipulation they use is to include the pollution generated from creating Electric power but not counting the energy (and pollution) used to refine the gasoline.

That's fair as a criticism. How much energy is used in creating a tank of gasoline? Let's say 10-15 gallons.

Maybe "alarmists" don't, but as I show above, it is good to stay away from the "alarmists" on either side -- both deal more in propaganda than science. There are plenty on the climate side who talk are willing to talk about power generation. If you are interested, here is one article that talks about it.

Well you mentioned certain vehicles that won't be going off electric batteries. Other vehicles include the enormous ground movers that dig up the lithium.

Replacement batteries should not be an issue -- any more than engine rebuilds or transmission replacements are on an ICE vehicle. As a general rule, EV batteries should last over 300,000 miles -- the normal life of a car. They have been engineered (on any current EV -- even going back about 5 years) to last and there are EVs out there that have traveled that far without a battery replacement. There are plenty of Teslas that have been driven well over 100,000 miles and are still running on their original batteries.

Are we talking about vehicles using AC, radio, and the various other electrical conveniences in gasoline cars?

Yes, there are a few that will require new batteries -- the percentage is extremely low (maybe .01%) -- due to a manufacturing defect. There have also been a couple of people who bought old EVs -- not Tesla -- who complained about needing a battery replacement a few months after buying the car used. Again, it is the difference between the older EVs (the ones that had less than 100 miles of total range) and poor battery management built in -- such as no active cooling system for the battery. Since heat destroys batteries, it is unsurprising that an EV in Florida, without an active cooling system for the battery, would need to replace the battery prematurely.

Lots of the nation has that degree of heat though. Generally though, I agree that criticism should be based on the best current batteries.

As for disposal, to this point that hasn't been a problem. Currently, most EV batteries are actually reused -- though not in cars.

This sounds made up....lithium recapture for use in other batteries is pitifully low. Again, probably checked this 2 years ago. I remember it being around 5% and the energy burned in the process made it a waste of effort.

A lot are used by businesses for battery backup systems. Part of the trick of EV battery "failures" is that the entire battery isn't bad. Additionally, the batteries will be recycled, a few recycling "shops" are starting to come online but the issue is that there aren't enough batteries for them to recycle, particularly with the number being reused.

I'm curious where you're getting this info.

And, of course, this ignores that battery technology, and the recycling technology is quickly advancing. It will be interesting to see what battery technology looks like in a decade or two, particularly if solid state "batteries" are perfected.

In a decade or two, we'll be looking at 2 degrees of climate temperature locked in. If carbon use increases as expected....2.5 will be unrealistic.

And this is false -- California has no issues with producing enough power for electric cars. Instead, what happened in California was extremely hot, record temperatures, where energy use was much higher than usual for a week. And "fossil fuel activists" falsely reported what California asked at that time -- they asked people not to charge their EVs in the evening (between 5-10) when energy usage was the highest. What is ignored is that most Californian's typically don't charge their EVs in the evening -- California utilities offer cheaper electric prices overnight (when demand is quite low), so people program their EVs to charge between 10 PM and 7 AM -- which still gives the car enough time to fully charge. So the request (it was not a mandate) did not effect most California EV owners, at all, and they did not lose power.

This is one of multiple issues with EVs. As with anything, I'd look at consumer reviews....the amateur unpaid kind.

Charging times make distance traveling a big hassle. Even high speed charging is a wait....and double the price. Owners complain about not being able to use any AC or they cannot reach the next charging station....basically, the complaints are about slower, more expensive trips, with no radio or AC.

It's not an attractive deal.

 

[Postvieww]

I've forgotten more climate science than you ever knew. Your posts mentioning the subject have been full of "nonsense" and other garbage.

This is a voice of reason, common sense, education, professional opinion backed by facts from an academic in the field who is not drunk on the alarmist kool-aid.

 

[Postvieww]

This climatologist has not forgotten any of her science.

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON

After Staff Review

This Thread
is Now
Permanently Closed

RV: Flaming and Goading

MOD HAT OFF​