Post by tim-from-pa on Sept 25, 2023 8:23:30 GMT -5
Oops! Now this is embarrassing. And this is only a partial solar eclipse no less. I take issue with their 70% and 80% figures unless I'm reading it wrong, but then again, that's California. The issues with energy production is according to charts our production output has been mostly flat since 2007 (which concerns me regarding them pushing EV's). Coal power went down considerably while natural gas replaced it. I think that's more from technological advances given that it's better now to pipe oil and (liquid) gas than to transport coal since we need more energy. Renewables have been growing but so has our energy needs. I don't see a great increase percentage-wise in decades, and in 1950 renewables were for a brief time actually higher than we have today.
From what I see, the problem with going all electric, especially EV's is (my list after doing research):
1) We don't have the electrical generation power yet (if we have to do that, I vote nuclear but the enviro-mentals won't like that)
2) Battery materials are scarce and we need to depend on the likes of China
3) Battery manufacture and disposal is still very polluting
4) Present battery technology has the potential to be extremely dangerous if they catch fire
5) The costs of batteries are still too high if all this was not enough
6) And to add insult to injury, people with EV's suffer from "range anxiety" where the manufacturers of the present batteries are going to exaggerate the range and will get nowhere near that and not to mention...
7) the longer charge times.
Can't we just fill the gas tank for cryin' out loud! LOL
I don't think these points are even moot and must be seriously considered if we want to "follow the science" mantra that the emotional left loves to dish out in order to shame people.
With all my introduction, here's the article (which is probably shorter lol):