Dear Editor,
I was just reading some articles about Doddering Uncle Joe’s obsession with doing away with internal combustion powered cars in favor of electric powered shoeboxes. I was also seeing several commercials on battery powered lawn mowers and other lawn/gardening equipment. Now let’s throw in the push to do away with anything not an electric stove, water heater, etc. He wants it ALL to go electric.
This got me to thinking…there are places that suffer rolling brown/black outs, so what happens there? Would there be a rationing system for electricity? How would that affect households that have life support equipment? What about things like schools, stores, and that kind of thing? What about places like Alaska? I spent three years there and people had to plug in heaters on their cars to keep them from becoming damaged from freezing during the winter. And then there are strong storms that occasionally knock out the power.
Now let’s talk about one other aspect of all this, that being all these batteries it’s going to take to power these things. The main question everyone needs answered is what is the life expectancy of these batteries? How long before you have to replace them? And most importantly, what’s it going to cost? I’ve done some pricing on the batteries for the lawn maintenance equipment and it’s scary. I don’t even want to think about the cost of the batteries for Uncle Joe’s electric cars.
Another bit of information I haven’t heard discussed is about how as batteries age they don’t hold the charge they did when new. Does this mean that I will need to stop more often to recharge my JoeMobile and have to take longer to get anywhere because of aging batteries? And again factor in the temperature along with hills and mountains.
At some point, I believe science will be able to produce batteries and battery like devices that will be able to replace internal combustion power sources. The problem is that you and I, our children, our grand-children, our great-grandchildren, even our great-great-grandchildren might not see the start of it. The proposed timeline put out by Doddering Uncle Joe is not only unrealistic; it’s proof that the man is not in possession of his mental faculties.
Carpe Diem
Alan Marshall
Once again Alan you present a valid commentary. Something you didn’t bring up though is that these vehicles are not as environmentally friendly as those who push this junk science would have you believe. They don’t point out the hazards involved in obtaining the materials to make these batteries. Also, these batteries, once they’ve expired, cannot be recycled. I guess there will have to be more hazardous waste dumps that will, in turn, damage the environment where they are located.
Lol, like oil has been great for the environment! Oh right, you don’t believe in science that doesn’t fit your narrative.
Then acknowledge the atrocities of third world countries strip mining nickel and cobalt while the first world buys it up and pretends that didn’t just happen. At least I know my gas didn’t come from a slave labor strip mine.
The carbon emissions problem is impacting poorer communities far morenthan wealthy countries that generate the most polutuon.
How so? Don’t we all breathe the same air? I guess you don’t understand that in places like China, India, and most countries in the Middle East and Africa the “poorer communities” make up most of the population and create most of the pollution because it’s cheaper to burn wood and coal than live a “green lifestyle”. Even in America, if you go to rural places, they rely on fossil fuel much more than urban Americans. EVs and all things electric, solar, whatever are luxuries of the wealthy and first world. It’s a sham used to show the world that your “better” when in reality you are not saving anything or anyone. The entire Green movement is waste of time because the rest of the world is not going to get on board.
Easiest way to think about it is air conditioning in poorer countries really isn’t a thing. The short-term mitigation solutions to rising temperatures, sea level rise, lack of clean water etc… aren’t cheap for developing nations and their citizens.
I embrace real science, not the junk science you and your leftist friends wholeheartedly embrace but, you be you. Just keep in mind that most electricity is generated by fossil fuels.
Back at you.
Back at you, Chris
Thank you Jim.
Unfortunately due to the 400 word limit I was unable to bring up those point. Thank you for doing so.
And you see the ultimate outcome…more hazardous waste=more hazardous waste dumps=more environmental damage.
A lot of what passes for environmentally friendly is not based on current dcience. The required use of paper leaf bags instead of plastic, ergo:
“If green activists truly worried about atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG) such as carbon dioxide, they would bring back plastic shopping bags tomorrow.
But they wouldn’t – the whipped up plastic scare has been too useful a tool to batter people into accepting the relentless drive to embrace inferior products and technologies.
The acceptance of reduced lifestyle choices, and the unlimited chance for middle class activists to virtue signal, is part of the all-important collectivisation under the planned Net Zero project. But now a recent science paper has revealed that in 15 out of 16 applications of plastic covering 90% of global volume, the alternatives actually produced more greenhouse gases.
And not just more, but significantly more. Over their lifetime cycle, paper bag substitutes produce at least four times more GHG emissions than their plastic counterparts. Paper bags are noted to weigh significantly more than plastic carriers leading to higher GHG emissions for production and transportation.
Talk about an inconvenient conclusion. The scientists found that in the 15 applications covering the five key sectors of packaging, building and construction, automobiles, textiles and consumer durable, plastic products released 10% to 90% fewer emissions across the product life cycle. “Furthermore,” the scientists observe, “in some applications, such as food packaging, no suitable alternatives to plastics exist.”
If carbon dioxide is your thing, and, of course, it is the crucial part of the reason for pursuing insane Net Zero policies, plastic needs to make a big comeback. But of course it will not. Despite revolutionising modern industrial life, it has the misfortune to be a hydrocarbon.
Most plastics are a by-product from natural oil and gas production. Thus plastic bad, anything else good. The same blinkered thinking justifies the mass slaughter of any flying animal that is caught up in wind turbines, and the industrialisation of the seas at the expense of aquatic life such as whales and dolphins. In Germany, the hypocritical greens have even been in favour of tearing down parts of the forest setting for the mythical Brothers Grimm fairy tales.
And we must not get started on road and bridge chomping EV cars. These are a true ecological disaster zone with a manufacturing requirement to turn over vast tracts of the Earth’s crust, and a small problem of insufficient children available to mine all the required cobalt in the Congo.
Of course, much play is made of the harmful disposal of plastic, but this is largely a waste management problem. There are plenty of ways to prudently recycle or dispose of plastic safely, but they come with some financial cost.
If rich countries don’t want their plastic to end up in the oceans, they shouldn’t send it to poor countries who, out of sight, dump it in local rivers on their behalf. The scientists note that better disposal of plastics is an urgent challenge given the “threats to biodiversity and ecosystem health worldwide”.
The key table in the paper is reproduced below. It shows that the GHG emission impact in switching from plastic shopping bags to paper, the next best alternative, is 80% higher. The other 15 switches are also detailed with a note of the mostly much higher GHG impacts.
The detailed methods used to calculate the plastic versus non-plastic alternatives are laid out in the paper, which is written by three scientists with expertise in sustainability and chemical and biological engineering from Sheffield and Cambridge Universities.
In arriving at their results, the authors considered many indirect impacts such as fuel saving in lighter cars, lower energy consumption in houses insulated with polyurethane and reduced food spoilage when using plastic packaging instead of butcher paper.
Many advantages for the use of plastics were identified. Insulating with polyurethane is better than the alternatives and therefore reduces heating fuel consumption, while plastic tanks cut vehicle weight and thus are more fuel efficient.
Meanwhile it is said that there are few alternatives to plastics in food production due to high levels of spoilage when using the alternatives. It might be noted that milkshakes and paper straws give an obvious illustration of the problems in using inferior substitutes.
It is reasonable to ask where all the virtuous green solutions to a politically-claimed ‘climate emergency’ will take us. Almost everything that is being forced through, whether it be demonising plastic to blanketing the land and seas with giant wind turbines, makes little sense.
They often cause more ecological harm than good, while the fudged finances backing many of the projects might shame Charles Ponzi. It is becoming obvious that modern industrial society will collapse if the Net Zero tyranny is ever enforced.
Extremist greens from George Monbiot to Sir David Attenborough seem only too aware of the many inconsistencies in making changes to any human activity that has an ‘impact’ on the planet.
Best, it seems, to have no impact at all, perhaps not be on the planet in the first place. At the moment their views seem to be shared by many influential elites pressing ahead with any number of decadent plans to drive those less well-off than themselves into abject poverty and depravation.
In 1999, Monbiot said flying across the Atlantic, “is now as unacceptable as child abuse”. The rhetoric has hardly diminished over 25 years with Monbiot recently ramping up his doomsday prose to call for an end to animal farming.
Eating meat, eggs and milk is an “indulgence” the planet cannot afford, he claimed. How this Guardianista weirdo expects humans to survive on what is often a hostile planet is anyone’s guess.
Perhaps there ought to be fewer people on the planet for a start. This seems to be the opinion of the supreme middle class embodiment of green virtue, Sir David Attenborough. Supporting the neo-Malthusian Optimum Population Trust, he said in 2009 that he hadn’t seen a problem that “wouldn’t be easier to solve with fewer people”.
In 2013, he was reported to have observed that sending food to famine-ridden countries is “barmy”. Using the example of Ethiopia, he said the famine there was caused by “too many people for too little piece of land”.
Plastics lasts for ever as they are not biodegradable. I don’t think the resistance to plastic has been about carbon emissions. Most recently it has been the concern about micro plastics in our food and water supplies.
In 2016, the demonrats were sure that Crooked Hillary was going to win, They were caught flat-footed when she did not. Demonrats immediately started their plan to STEAL the 2020 election, which they did. I’m sure they are currently planning to steal 2024.
Hopefully, they will not succeed in NOV and we can restore President Trump to his rightful place in the White House. We cannot afford anymore time with Biden and his handlers destroying America.
I agree with everything Alan Marshall says about the EV fiasco; we simply are not ready for it. Our electric power grid is already stretched past it’s limits – charging stations (public & private), if built in the numbers Crazy Biden wants, will finish off the grid.
You demonrats, who comment, save your typing for someone who gives a S%&# about what you have to say.
How many failed lawsuits, debunked story lines does it take to get rid of the Big Lie about mass fraud during the 2020 election? Sadly this isn’t the opening line of a joke.
Not to mention the fact that electricity doesn’t grow on trees ! Even if it did, those know-it-alls want to cut down all the trees (which absorb CO and put out O2) to build solar farms. Not that they get much production out of solar panels in Piedmont NC in the winter anyhow.
So your idea is to keep warming the planet with continued use of fossil fuels?
I’m all for global warming. More global warming equals longer growing seasons which, in turn, means more food.
Lol, no that isn’t how it works…the shifted the language to climate change from global warming is because it better described overall weather pattern change as we see more extreme droughts for example. Just look at food production in southern South America. Some areas food production has dropped by 70 percent.
“Fossil fuels” have no significant effect on so called Global Warming “; oh, wait… No warming the last 17 years so it’s ” Climate Change” now. I have heard so many doom and gloom predictions in the last 60 years that have never come to fruition that I am thoroughly convinced there is something else driving these efforts to reduce our quality of life. All the so called climate science is based 9n models that have failed to include many intervening variables such as solar forcing of climate from solar toares, coronal mass ejections and even cosm8c rays. Hang on to your sunhats because solar cycle 25 is ramping up and the pause in warming will be reversed for several years until this cycle ends. CO² is not a poison, it’s plant food and the rise in CO² follows a rise in temperature since rising temperatures force CO² out of solution in the oceans. Too many “climate scientists” are saying what they are being paid to say, using failed modeling that doesn’t factor in many of the variables that truly effect climate.
You don’t think the solar panels keep the earth cool and really are better than trees??? Realistically can solar panels and wind turbines produce enough electricity? What about the effects of manufacturing said solar panels and wind turbines? What about all the toxic products from discarded, used up solar panels and wind turbibes? Look at Europe wind turbines ” junk yards”.
Again, Alan asks questions that are easily answered if he did any research before writing letters. As usual, i am happy to do the research on his behalf.
1) Rolling blackouts or blackouts in general are not unusual. Even in a word with electric, batteries are the magic that keep hospitals and people’s lifesaving equipment working during these outages. All hospitals in the US and most major data centers use a continuous power system that uses batterie to run essential equipment. This is not a new problem, and the existing solutions continually get better and cheaper. Including for home use for those that require electric medical equipment.
2) Places like Alaska were early adaptors of renewable energy such solar power and water given the nature of ‘off the grid’ communities. So again, nothing new here. As of 2022, 33% of Alaska power came from renewable energy sources. So don’t worry Alan, Alaska has it figured out using a range of solutions such as water, air and solar. Maybe we should learn from them given that NC only generates 14% of its power from renewable sources.
3) Battery life for EVs is good example. Most of the newer batteries have a guarantee of 100k miles but most have maintained 80% effectiveness up to 300K miles for those that drive over 70k miles per year for example. Most studies indicate that the batteries will outlast the car itself if properly maintained. Good news is that LI batteries are recyclable for making new batteries. So little waste in the long run.
4) There are a number of studies on efficiency of batteries over use. With EVs, there is an early drop off of 10-15% but then the usefulness levels out around 80% for the remainder of the car’s usefulness. The newer batteries haven’t been around long-enough but to be 100% sure but early studies of high use cars is very positive.
The real challenge with EVs is that you need to be able to charge overnight in your home (also solves the cold problem if you live in Alaska). If you live in an apartment and your work doesn’t provide charging stations, you have to rely on the very few fast-charging stations at local gas stations. Given that home ownership is getting out of reach of our younger generations, I would be more concerned about THAT issue as there doesn’t seem to be viable demand for all apartment complexes to justify installing charging stations.
The Biden Administration has had to scale back the timing of their aggressive EV and renewable energy plans as the technology and infrastructure just hasn’t gotten to the point maturity needed to meet those goals yet. Given the conservative view of denying science about climate change….the needed investment in EV and Renewable power infrastructure isn’t going to happen until they wake up. (you know….be woke). But you be you.
Batteries are not the magic that keeps hospitals functioning . Every hospital that I was involved with in the construction process had at least one giant diesel powered generator
Fair point. The batteries are there to keep the power continuous until the generator ramps up. I stand corrected.
Chris, generators are auto-on if there’s a power surge. I used to operate and maintain emergency power equipment in the military, and there is no “ramp up” time needed. Full power is back on within 5 seconds.
Which requires what?????? Anybody? Oh yeah…DIESEL FUEL (fossil fuel based)!!!
Only during periods of disruption. Still a far better than continuing to spew polutuon into our warming climate.
In reply to your commentary in order:
1) Most hospitals do utilize batteries, since most products are battery backup powered, like an IV pump. However, to recharge those batteries, and to keep other essential items working, such as the lights, air filtration, etc, the hospitals utilize gigantic gas/diesel powered generators. Go to Cone Hospital and look at the huge building on Tankersley near Elm, just next to the parking deck. The entire building is a gas powered generator. They are not relying on a pack of batteries to keep the building and essential systems running when the power goes out.
2) Alaska has not “figured it out”. From the same source you probably used: “Many rural communities in Alaska rely primarily on diesel-fueled electric generators for power, and Alaska ranks second only to Hawaii in the share of its total electricity–14% in 2022–generated from petroleum. Alaska’s per capita energy consumption is the second highest in the nation in part because of the state’s small population, harsh winters, and energy-intensive industries.” Second highest in the nation! Real green. And that doesn’t even count all of the wood that gets burned there.
3) First off, a new EV battery can cost as much as $12,000. Not practical. As to your recycling point, you greatly oversimplify by trying to state that the batteries are recyclable, like that’s an easy or even practical thing. From MIT’s climate portal: Their first issue as that demand will outpace supply, so you can’t recycle your way out of a supply issue. Going to have to mine and mining is about the least eco-friendly thing there is, especially in the third world where most of this material comes from.
Secondly, they state, “An EV battery contains much more than just nickel and cobalt, however. It is an amalgamation of plastics, copper, aluminum, and other materials, some of which won’t be recovered completely because they aren’t valuable enough to be worth the trouble. The materials that are not recycled must be sent to a landfill or, if they are too hazardous, safely stored.” They go on to state that the complexity of the recycling process is both expensive and dangerous. Also note the word HAZARDOUS…storing hazardous waste materials is part of your green process.
Lastly, they state that the process of recycling itself is not green. They either have to burn the metals out of the batteries or use other dangerous chemicals to leach them out. Neither method is perfect: pyrometallurgical recycling uses a lot of energy, while hydrometallurgical recycling requires components to be broken down even further beforehand.
The Biden administration is doing nothing but walking backwards into a problem. If they want the country to go green, they need to build the infrastructure first. Only once a stable and effective infrastructure is in place should there be any move toward mandating the use of end user products that will need that infrastructure to function. Right now they are trying to say you have to buy a green car and it’s up to you to figure out how to take a road trip in it. That’s stupid.
1) sure. Fossil fuel is great back up today and the future. Don’t see a problem with that.
2) The fishing camp I use is strictly water and solar with batteries for evening activities (whichbis limited during thr fishing season as it doesn’t get overly dark at night.). Fuel.isntoo expensive to fly in amd the generator more difficult to maintain in such a remote area. 33% renewable sounds pretty strong to me. As tech improves. So will that percentage.
3) EVs are very affordable given the I creasing competition and modern batteries seem to be able to last the useful life of the car with some batteries already exceeding 300k miles.
4) recycling is still better idea than continuing to pump greenhouse games into our challenged environment. Not to mention the mass pollution for generating and transporting oil. Do I need to name off the natural disasters.from oil production.
End of the day, continuing to do what we have always done in power generation is not viable. Worse there is no single solution so will take a great deal of change if we are willing. Asking the questions you are asking makes since but doesn’t eliminate the need for change.
As to your #1, fossil fuels are not solely our back up. The main grid is fossil fuel powered too for the most part. I think NC is about 43% natural gas, 11% coal, 22% nuclear, we have to get about 10% from other states, and the rest is your waste of time solar and wind. I am very pro hydro electric though because the technology is there.
Your number 2 ignores all the wood that gets burned. No one is accounting for that in your numbers. And it is THE prime source of heat for a lot of people up there. And they are still #2 per capita in the country for using fossil fuels despite 33% renewable.
Recycling is not automatically better just because you say it is. You could easily be using more energy to recycle than it would take to harvest the raw product. We aren’t talking about recycling paper here. An EV battery is a dangerous, complicated, stew of chemicals, metal, and plastic. How many used car batteries need to be recycled to make one new car battery? It is not a 1 to 1 ratio. How much waste product is created? And so on…
Burning of wood is up for debate actually. Tree is burned for fuel, the thinking goes, another can be planted to replace it. And then that replacement tree should eventually re-absorb the carbon (per the EPA). While this makes sense long-term (10s of years) others argue that for the short-term it harms the climate.
Your battery recycling argument is to keep using dirty harmful fuels because recycling is dirty? Not sure I follow your logic.
NC is about 14% newable. The idea of solar is to use our already wasted space like parking lots. Place cells over top like a big car port for example. I agree that using farm land to place 1000s of solar panels is silly. But the desert, parking lots, building roofs, etc…. While not the sole solution, it is an important and easy one.
Again, don’t be a solar critic because it is not the THE solo solution to climate change. It is an important one. However, we need to improve other sources as well. (yup wind, especially offshore)
Uh, no. Your argument is that recycling is automatically clean and efficient. I am saying it is potentially and in some cases probably more harmful than obtaining raw materials.
I didn’t argue recycling was clean. The purpose of recycling is to avoid waste and make the components more available as a reusable resource.
EV batteries are not recyclable. Look up pictures of fields of abandoned EVs in China. The dismantling of a hattery with an 800volt potential is extremely dangerous and would require an army of well trained people with the accompanying high cost. Disposing of a large number of EV batteries will be a nightmare. The so-called carbon footprint of using very large vehicles to mine many of the elements of the batteries, the use of using child labour in third world countries notwithstanding, isn’t considered nor the shipping involved in getting the elements to China where most of the cells are made then transporting them to assembly points then shipping them here.
The damage to the environment regarding windmills is tremendous. The core of the windmill blades is balsa wood, and tens of thousands of these trees are cut from sensitive tropical rainforests to make the blades. The blades delaminate if spun too fast and there are windmill blade “graveyards” where they are left since you can’t put themmin landfills and nothing about them is recyclable.
I could go 9n about cars with 4000 pound batteries wearing out the roads not designed for that amount of wear and tear or the very expensive tyres designed for the added vehicle weight and the particulates shed by those tyres from the wear from the weight.
Clean energy is not so very clean
Just look up are EV batteries recyclable on google. They are, but to Don’s point, the process isn’t pretty.
Normally I would be following my self-imposed idea of ignoring your ignorance, but I just COULDN’T pass this one up.
“The real challenge with EVs is that you need to be able to charge overnight in your home (also solves the cold problem if you live in Alaska).” That statement about Alaska, more then anything re-enforces your level of ignorance. Do you honestly think people bring there cars into the house. And even garages get cold up there. That’s why people plug in their heaters installed in their cars to prevent frozen blocks.
My father grew up in Alaska and they kept their cars in a garage with heaters in the winters. Plug it in and
Keep the engine (or battery in the future) warm. Not complicated.
If you live in an apartment, you likely don’t have easy access ro charge your car (or warm your engine/battery). Will require large investment in infrastructure that Republicans clearly don’t support given their dear leader doesn’t beleive in science.
Well, I would not charge a lithium battery EV in my home as they tend to catch on fire. In many cities electric bikes and scooters are not allowed to be charged in apartment houses because so many catch on fire. I tend to think that could be the reason the Postal Service does not allow mailing lithium batteries either in or out of devices 8n most cases.
Chris, again you show your ignorance by targeting Alan every. single. time he writes something. I’m beginning to think you have a thing for Alan and are using the Rhino to keep an eye on him. Alan is married, so you can look elsewhere. Also, he has more sense than to hook up with a demonrat! Sheesh! Grow up man! Targeting Alan just shows how pathetic you really are. If you have the hots for him, just man up and say so!
On thatnote, electric vehicles should be outlawed. I can just about guarantee you that Barack Ocrapma and Doofus Hiden Biden won’t be driven around in EV’s. If we were to go to war with another country and they hit us with a emp, everything powered is gone. Our leaders know this. They want us vulnerable where as they won’t be. I’ll take a gas guzzler any day!
EV’s are worse for the environment no matter what you say or try to convince everyone of. I’m guessing you’re all about the Toyota battery plant down the road? Just wait and see how toxic our area becomes because of the waste from the chemicals going into those. Batteries like that are more dangerous to the environment than gas is. Also, the process they use to get the materials is more hazardous to the Earth.
When we get attacked and our power rid goes down, please don’t call any of us with gas cars to take you where you need to go. Walk. Ride a bike or go old fashioned and ride a horse.
Perhaps the same horse he rode in on?
Couldn’t disagree with you more. But you be you.
And of course, you be you. Why not temper your anger with a sentence that we can agree to disagree, vs the worn out phrase. It might help you in the “accepted” arguments department.
Na. I like the phrase. But you be you.
Chris, again you show your ignorance by targeting Alan every. single. time he writes something. I’m beginning to think you have a thing for Alan and are using the Rhino to keep an eye on him. Alan is married, so you can look elsewhere. Also, he has more sense than to hook up with a demonrat! Sheesh! Grow up man! Targeting Alan just shows how pathetic you really are. If you have the hots for him, just man up and say so!
On that note, electric vehicles should be outlawed. I can just about guarantee you that Barack Ocrapma and Doofus Hiden Biden won’t be driven around in EV’s. If we were to go to war with another country and they hit us with a emp, everything powered is gone. Our leaders know this. They want us vulnerable where as they won’t be. I’ll take a gas guzzler any day!
EV’s are worse for the environment no matter what you say or try to convince everyone of. I’m guessing you’re all about the Toyota battery plant down the road? Just wait and see how toxic our area becomes because of the waste from the chemicals going into those. Batteries like that are more dangerous to the environment than gas is. Also, the process they use to get the materials is more hazardous to the Earth.
When we get attacked and our power grid goes down, please don’t call any of us with gas cars to take you where you need to go. Walk. Ride a bike or go old fashioned and ride a horse.
Hey. Give him a break. I skimmed his letter. Not ONCE did I see mention of the National Socialist Communist Fascist (Democrats). His name-calling is down to Doddering Uncle Joe. Nice improvement.
Agree. He did better than usual but end of the day he is just repeating the modern. Conservative propaganda so I am happy to push back at his ignorant poorly research letters to the editor.
I for one would hate to see the Rhino Times become a circle jerk for conservstive propaganda and misinformation. So just balancing out the dialog as my civic duty.
Electric vehicles are a dead end, much like dinosaurs were a dead end. They simply can’t compete with petroleum powered vehicles. It 8s a simple matter of physics that batteries can hever achieve the energy density of a single tank of gas. They are inefficient when it’s either hot out or cold out, and the electrical grid cannot, in many areas even now, handle the demand. 8n California EV owners are restricted to charg8ng cars 8n off peak hours, and the electric company can actual draw current FROM cars on chargers to maintain demands on yheir grid. Our electrical grid in more than 70 years old, there are increasingly peak demands where it can’t handle the load charging vast numbers of EVs notwithstanding. There is a chronic shortage of infrastructure items, like transformers which are increasingly being sourced from foreign manufacturers.
This push for EVs is simply a part of building 15 minute cities where your travel is limited, where government can should down your car. With Central Bank Digital Currency they can control where and how you can spend money (just ask the Canadian truckers how having government controlling your money worked out). They already have banks reporting on accounts that are used to support MAGA causes, buying guns or bibles. It is no stretch of the imagination to realize that if you travel too much or do anything that doesn’t comport with the government dictates, they can shut down your car, stop payments for air travel or anything, actually. Much like the social credit score the CCP has instigated on the citizenry there, it seems a slowly implemented control of the populace is already underway. Klaus Schwab in his book has said that the goal is that by 2030 you will own nothing and like it; you’ll eat insect protein, rent a small box in a high rise and go nowhere you can’t to in 16 minutes.
—–
Yep.
One guy in the Daily Telegraph (UK) recently stated that EVs already have geographic “cut outs” surreptitiously pre-programmed internally.
“Stay in your ghetto, peasant!”
That’s why they want to eliminate our ICE cars.
Until an electric car can win the 24 hours of LeMans vs gasoline, I will remain unconvinced.
My Z06 just burned the gas that your Prius saved,
Thanks,
My hurdle is a bit lower. I would like to see 600 miles before I buy one. Until then Hybrid makes more sense for me. But you be you.
But I love my electric lawn tools. But admit I still use my diesel tractor to manage the fields as I haven’t seen a viable solution there yet. Fingers crossed.
Bingo! 🙂
Pls contact AOC. She has an answer for everything. Joe is in his normal stupor so let him rest and dream of all his accomplishments.
As I understand it there are somewhere around 9,000 airplanes in the sky at any given time and Joe is going to give me a bribe to purchase an EV, just another example of his ineptness.
Forget the EVs – let’s electrify the wall!
YOU GO KID!!!!!!!
Great idea !
There is no single solution to our addiction to fossil fuels. EV and Hybrid cars are only one potential solution of many that will required to save the future of our planet for the next few generations. Saying EVs are stupid because planes exist is narrow minded and a silly argument.
But you be you.
Yeah. Make America Great Again. Bring back the 442 engine and leaded gasoline and outlaw catalytic converters.
Get rid of seat belt laws because Muh Freeeeeedum!!!!
Great idea !
In my opinion, the ultimate goal is to move the majority of the population to the city centers, the “15 minute “ cities, that have been spoken about, by the powers that be. I’m not sure what the target time frame is, but the goal is to eliminate the need, for the majority of the population, for private vehicle ownership. Everyone living and working in the city centers, with public transportation, thus, no cars needed.
Reading the documents on the United Nations website, from as early as 2000, the statements and documents from the World Economic Forum, the statements and documents from the World Health Organization, you realize the grand scope of the changes coming to the “peasants “ of the world, and they’re happening fast. EV’s are just a means to an end, and if their plans are realized, no one’s gonna have to worry about owning a car, electric or gas powered.
I hope people will awaken , do their research, and realize how little time is left, to make change.
Take a look at “Agenda 2030”. It’s easy to google.
Right on.
There is a unified global effort to implement a new feudalism. We shall be deprived of our freedoms (especially freedom of movement as they deny us flying and take away our cars), denied beef, confined to a concentration camp (“15 Minute City”), and not allowed to express any dissent.
The Democratic Party is fully on board with this effort, as is half the Republican Party.
Jawoll, commandant!! We will march in lockstep with the rest of the lemmings and LIKE IT!!
The universe has already made its decision as to the choice for energy and its choice is nuclear, specifically fusion nuclear energy. That’s the future, that’s where the smart science and the smart research is going fusion nuclear energy, not batteries, not wind power, not solar power. Those will be blips in the history timeline of the human development of energy.
Dead right.
Clean, abundant affordable energy – it’s a dream come true.
I find it more enjoyable to not read any of the CHRIS posts. Just ignore him long enough and he may go away.
I know how you feel.
He uses sophistry and duplicity in equal measure, so he can “win” arguments – in his own little brain.
The tiresome little blowhard is trying to assuage his insecurities.
Pitiful.
Why is reading opinions, ideas, thoughts, information etc… that are different than yours so bad? If you live in a world where you limit yourself to hearing only those ideas that agree with you…you will live a very limited and shallow life. I try to read news and information from both sides of an argument…especially if the sources have expertise in the subject.
But you be you.
Well said Richard, but unfortunately he’s like shingles.
Na, I got my shingles vaccine. LOL
Chris, I don’t mind your adding to the discussion. I must say that most of the time I find your reasoning flawed and I have responded in the past but you say a lot and I don’t have time or the inclination to respond to everything you say. But plug away!
I think what you are experiencing is what is called ‘disagreement’ which is why we go back and forth. I enjoy it and have many times learned from it. Although, never from Alan.
Sorry Alan Chris is more like hemorrhoids
LOL, no apology necessary my friend
Unique among this includes our food sources. The disposal of batteries contaminates the soil and of course the water table as part of the timeline of breaking down components. The solar push has already shown its contaminating results on the ground as they purported “savings”. So many think ‘savings’is a tangible promise. Opps not quite, the cycle of a product life must include its salvage and what issues may be created then. Yep the downside is not at the topside of most of the citizenry. I would hope upcoming generations have been reminded of this in their life pursuits education and experiences. Our water sources in the Triad are man made, aside from the wonders of the two natural rivers running through the beautiful Rockingham county.
Has The Rino Times stopped taking letters to the editor?
Nothing since 11 April….
Dave,
I think it’s from a lack of submissions, not stopping taking submissions.
I guess I didn’t submit mine properly. I wrote about the backdoor attempt to eliminate the Electoral College.
I reckon I I’ll hafta get busy, I reckon!