🧵 electric car pollute more than gasoline
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:17:00 UTC No. 16079067
take that climate freaks
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/e
he said EV (el Vehicle) pollutes 1850 times more while driving 1000 miles than what happens if you drive 1000 miles with gasoline
tire wear was calculated into the equation
he noted that the tires of EVs, due to their added weight, will also emit more microplastics into the air
particle pollution from EVs can also increase the risk of health problems,
>including heart disease,
cough, lung disease and, in extreme cases, can even lead to hospitalization,
>cancer and suddendeath.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:19:19 UTC No. 16079074
>>16079067
So pollution is bad, yes?
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:20:53 UTC No. 16079076
>>16079067
>he noted that the tires of EVs, due to their added weight, will also emit more microplastics into the air
by that logic, an F150 should be much worse than a Prius. Do you agree?
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:54:23 UTC No. 16079103
>>16079074
so use gasoline, problem solved
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 13:57:59 UTC No. 16079107
We need to use horses, bicycles, or walking maybe. Or nuclear powered trains?
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:03:15 UTC No. 16079114
>>16079107
trains emit heavy metals from the tracks due to friction
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:05:08 UTC No. 16079117
>>16079103
But if you can use less gasoline it's surely better, since it's even less pollution.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:11:41 UTC No. 16079139
>>16079107
imagine trains using nuclear power to produce heat and then heat is used for steam power
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:18:30 UTC No. 16079150
>>16079114
yes we know iron is heavy, why not make the tracks out of magnesium then?
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:40:53 UTC No. 16079193
>>16079067
Cope harder, fag
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:47:04 UTC No. 16079204
>>16079074
Sure, and that's why the free market will reduce pollution to an optimal level, because people are willing to pay a premium for less pollution.
Market regulations only stop innovation.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 14:48:21 UTC No. 16079207
>>16079139
imagine coal fired steam trains using a superpressure turbocharged firebox with steam turbines
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 21:11:54 UTC No. 16079956
>>16079067
EVs are extremely inefficient and polluting regardless what Musk's dick suckers say.
Anonymous at Fri, 15 Mar 2024 22:23:20 UTC No. 16080084
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 10:28:56 UTC No. 16080946
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 22:33:31 UTC No. 16082048
>>16079067
its inevitable that electric cars pollute more than real cars because real cars don't need to transport around a ton of battery with them.
Anonymous at Sat, 16 Mar 2024 22:39:57 UTC No. 16082062
>>16079067
this is just big oil propaganda, they are seething because they can't sell you their special juice anymore, if you go electric. they will cause a ruckus including this shit psyop.
you do not have a right to know the truth, you will obey and buy gas and hydrogen paste
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 01:11:08 UTC No. 16082278
>>16079067
This article looks just at how much the tires are worn down and you are somehow saying that it generically "pollutes" more. This is an incredible cherry picking of a single attribute to make a very general statement. This is obviously disingenuous or dumb. I don't know which one makes me more worried.
In the US and in countries that don't generate too much pollution per joule of energy, EVs don't release nearly as many greenhouse gases per km driven if powered off the grid. Also, people with EVs should have solar panels anyways ( from an economic standpoint really).
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scien
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 01:19:15 UTC No. 16082286
>>16082278
>people with EVs should have solar panels anyways ( from an economic standpoint really).
that's the crux of the issue. if the car market goes away, as far as big oil is concerned there shouldn't be a need for cars, for cattle. if they're not making money out of it.
remember, they DO control the whole environmental movement shit, they will weaponize it to take your EVs away, no need for them if you're not buying their slop. yeah it's a schizo take but perfectly explains it.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 01:37:24 UTC No. 16082307
>>16082278
>This is an incredible cherry picking of a single attribute to make a very general statement. This is obviously disingenuous or dumb. I don't know which one makes me more worried.
First time on /sci/? This board is pretty much run by Exxon.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 01:57:15 UTC No. 16082323
>>16079117
yes all you well poisoning shills who are paid by the elites want to do is destroy the middle class while the elites and thr rich live in luxury
it's obvious who your masters are
it's just very strange why you would so desperately defend them when they only see you as a useful idiot for their own goals
I want a greener planet with less pollution. microplastics and small particles are more unhealthy and dangerous than CO2. We should continue building gasoline vehicles on lighter and more durable frames. Cars should be like they were in the past in terms of durability. Being able to last for a lifetime is significantly better for the environment than having ti replace the car every 10-20 years.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 02:14:34 UTC No. 16082340
>>16082323
Then stop driving your truck to the store.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 03:44:49 UTC No. 16082433
>>16082340
no kill yourself elite paid shill
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 03:58:25 UTC No. 16082457
>>16082323
So, high mileage, high durability and maintainability? Sounds good. Also, every time you can leave your car at home and walk to the bakery or take the bicycle to work is a net win, right? The less often you use, the less tyre dust you blow in the atmosphere, the less microplastics end up on our fields and the longer your car lasts.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:05:17 UTC No. 16082467
>>16082457
will the rich ever do that? if not then why should I? You're suggesting that I reduce my level of freedom and happiness while rich elites are allowed to not care. Not sure why you defend the elites who create a lot more pollution than I ever did.
>Also, every time you can leave your car at home and walk to the bakery or take the bicycle to work is a net win,
Not really, you're reducing my freedom by deciding for me what transport method I should take. Also time is money so unless your bike goes 60 mph it's not really worth it now is it?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:10:01 UTC No. 16082483
>>16082467
Do you dump your trash in your local rivers because "the rich" probably don't recycle either?
>Not sure why you defend the elites
I don't even. You're just refusing to take any responsibility for your environmental destruction because some undefined "rich" are bad and evil.
>you're reducing my freedom by deciding for me what transport method I should take
I'm telling you how to make your car last longer. No one will take away your car keys and take your freedom to drive to the bakery.
> relying on a car, relying on fossil fuels from across the world to go to the bakery = freedom
> taking a bicycle that relies on literally nothing, that you can fix and maintain yourself = slavery
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 04:11:02 UTC No. 16082486
>>16082467
>Also time is money
Also, you admit to getting paid to post here?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 10:29:25 UTC No. 16082837
>>16082467
>Not sure why you defend the elites who create a lot more pollution than I ever did.
because this is what they look like
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:38:56 UTC No. 16082911
>>16082483
>Do you dump your trash in your local rivers because "the rich" probably don't recycle either?
total non sequitur you middle class hating eco tard
>I don't even. You're just refusing to take any responsibility for your environmental destruction because some undefined "rich" are bad and evil.
The rich will continue to enjoy the luxuries such as eating meat and driving cars (freedom of movement) that after hundreds of years were finally obtained by the middle/lower classes and now you're advocating for stopping that. You're advocating I give up my wealth and freedom and inevitably it will lead to only the rich classes enjoying these luxuries. This is evil.
>I'm telling you how to make your car last longer. No one will take away your car keys and take your freedom to drive to the bakery.
If those rich classes who own the means of production built cars that lasted like they used to in the past you could use your car every single day and it would last a lifetime. This is much better for quality of life in terms of freedom and luxury than 'lol just don't use it'. You're literally advocating making my life worse for your own sad pathetic sense of justice. Kill yourself eco shill.
You realise that if you kill yourself you can't use any those luxuries anymore, right? So your ideology ends with making people so destitute and poor they're forced to kill themselves to save the environment. You're evil.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:45:02 UTC No. 16082918
>>16082911
>The rich will continue to enjoy the luxuries
So you are saying we should revolt against the rich? Eat them? Communism?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:47:04 UTC No. 16082920
>>16082911
>If those rich classes who own the means of production built cars that lasted like they used to in the past you could use your car every single day and it would last a lifetime.
So your solution is to seize the means of production and make sure that they are used for the good of the people?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:48:20 UTC No. 16082921
>>16082918
>So you are saying we should revolt against the rich? Eat them? Communism?
I'm saying that if the rich are allowed to do it, then so am I. They desire freedom of movement. They should get it. And so should I. If you eco tards want to improve society how about you start with yourselves. Stop owning cars. Live small. Stop eating meat. Means there's more for me.
But there's your evil displayed. You don't want to give up your luxuries, you don't demand the rich give up theirs because you know it won't happen. So you bully the middle class to give up theirs. Evil.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 11:54:08 UTC No. 16082926
>>16082921
Fuck the rich. Stop licking their boots. No one should have the right to exploit the earth or the people.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 12:03:11 UTC No. 16082937
>>16082926
Lol empty words
I'm not advocating decreasing the standards of living for the middle class. You are.
Barkon at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 12:04:51 UTC No. 16082938
One blob of buck cheese coming up
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 12:05:56 UTC No. 16082939
>>16082937
Well we're both saying we should eat the rich. So let's start with this, and then let's see what we can do afterwards. What do you think comrade?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 14:47:44 UTC No. 16083076
>>16082340
You wanted less pollution, right? That means you should stop unnecessarily driving your truck which is heavier than an electric vehicle meaning the tires wear faster and create more pollution than electric vehicles. If you really care about tire pollution then you should be driving the lightest vehicle you can find like a smart car, or a scooter, or a bicycle. You do care about the environment, right?
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 14:48:46 UTC No. 16083079
>>16083076
Meant for
>>16082323
>>16082433
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 14:57:19 UTC No. 16083084
>>16079067
>A press release by Emissions Analytics suggested that particulate matter pollution from car tyre wear can be 1,000 times higher than car exhaust emissions, and that car tyres may produce as much as 9.28 grams of particulate matter per mile, or 5.8 grams per kilometre. This is, however, a worst-case scenario – a crucial point that is not mentioned in the press release and which has consequently led to the ‘1,000 times higher than car exhaust emissions’ finding being widely reported in the media. Some common-sense calculations show how extreme this case is.
>A typical 16” family car tyre weighs around 9 kg, so four of them on a vehicle gives a total weight of 36 kg. That’s not just the tread, but the full tyres. If a car did shed 9.28 grams of particulate matter per mile from the tyres, then the car tyres would physically disappear – and the car would be running on its alloys – in less than 4,000 miles.
>In reality, the tread of a tyre is about 35% of the tyre’s total weight, so the tyres would be bald in less than 1,358 miles, or two months’ worth of driving for the average UK driver.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:21:15 UTC No. 16083104
>lifesitenews
xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDdddddddddddddd
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 15:21:49 UTC No. 16083106
>>16083084
Good debunk.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 22:56:53 UTC No. 16083719
>>16083076
you're only jealous of people who own vehicles because you're too lazy to earn the money to buy one for yourself
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 22:59:59 UTC No. 16083724
>>16083719
>work for me, slave
to be fair you're literally saying the same thing
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:05:09 UTC No. 16083731
>>16083084
>Electric vehicles are only 459 times cleaner than combustion vehicles
Environmentalists in SHAMBLES
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:07:27 UTC No. 16083735
>>16083719
So you don't actually care about microplastic and particle pollution? That's the only explanation for why you would drive a truck instead of a lighter vehicle when any vehicle would do.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:46:15 UTC No. 16083781
>>16083735
You don't care about my wellbeing and my happiness
That's my issue
you pretend that you're advising me but all your advice always (seriously eco terrorist advice is ALWAYS) to make my life worse and that i should somehow be happy about it
I love the planet. I care about microplastics and I want all chemicals gone from my society. But I won't decrease my living standards over it.
Also a gasoline car from the 60's has no microplastics and is lighter than an EV. It produces less particulates.
Your pathetic attempt at shoehorning someone into a role despite not knowing anything about anyone just shows you're not a good person, you do not care about my well being, you are not someone that anyone should listen to.
You are evil. Simple as. And you can screech and pretend like we're somehow equally bad. But we aren't. I haven't decreased your standards of living. I would leave you free to pursue your happiness. You do not do the same for me. You are wrong and evil.
>>16083076
what truck you lying disingenuous shill?
>>16083084
No matter how you spin it, the particulate outputs from EVs are worse than the filtered gasoline car exhausts + the particulate outputs from gasoline cars because EVs are much heavier.
>>16083104
>>16083106
>>16083731
literal shills
eco shills who are actually so unbelievably dumb and evil they want you to lower your quality of life simply because they demand it
and if you don't blindly agree they'll pull this little rhetorical trick
>>16083735
where suddenly you don't care and are therefore evil
but it is them who do not care about you
it is them who do not care about you and don't care about being good or evil so exactly like the atheist communists they commit the worst most heinous acts and then pretend they did a good thing. In fact they actually unironically believe they're allowed to not care about your or mine happiness. They feel themselves so utterly superior they think they have the right to make you unhappy.
Anonymous at Sun, 17 Mar 2024 23:47:18 UTC No. 16083784
These people are the psychopaths who got into control after the communists revolutions. The ones who just killed everyone and then pretended they were righteous. Who torture supposed bad people and then force them to admit to crimes they didn't commit.
They're far worse than the Nazis or the inquisition ever could be. Because the religious and the fascists cared about truth. These people simply don't.
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 01:20:06 UTC No. 16083904
>>16083781
>>16083784
Take your meds
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 03:28:47 UTC No. 16084115
>>16083904
literal bot phrase btw
Every /sci/entist know what mining the chans is now
don't make me post the neural net stuff because then the thread will suddenly get deleted.
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 03:33:08 UTC No. 16084121
>>16079067
Who throws a car away after 1,000 miles? Why not the much more realistic distance of when the battery dies?
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 03:47:09 UTC No. 16084131
>>16084115
You really need to be medicated.
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 03:53:01 UTC No. 16084139
>>16084115
>mining the chans
how does anyone know who's posting what? how can you tell bot posts if you're not the one making them? like be 100% sure? the chan well is poisoned by bots, especially with gone IP counter
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 06:19:26 UTC No. 16084291
>>16084121
Strawmen. Strawmen throw their cars away after driving 1000 miles. The proclaimers on the other hand would simply walk.
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 06:27:00 UTC No. 16084304
The truth is human carbon emissions will go to 0 one way or another. Whether that be voluntary, or the environment forcing everyone into a dark age. The choice is yours.
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 06:35:48 UTC No. 16084325
>>16084304
>everyone
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 06:40:48 UTC No. 16084332
>>16084325
>my electricity comes out of the socket
>what do you mean drought, I have a tap at home
>I just close my blinds and then I won't see the resource wars
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 08:29:57 UTC No. 16084471
>>16084139
nigger these kinds of troll posts
>>16084131
>>16083904
>>16084304
are all bait
why do you think these commie shills don't respond to posts with any honesty
taking your meds is bot phrase and that other post is climate doom posting
Seriously ask yourself the fucking question dude would any one who actually honestly wants to discuss science actually unironically think that climate change will create a dark age?
How beyond sad and stupid does a person have to be to unironically believe in "dark age" maymays
They don't believe it
That's why they post it
because these kinds of posts are meant to troll
they're not stupid they're malicious
>>16083104
>>16083106
>>16083731
see these shill bot posts
>>16083076
see this guy randomly accusing me of owning a truck
>>16083735
it's the same as this guy
a literal eco shill
Either a bot or an actual communist shill which is why the conversation suddenly changed to
>>16082939
>>16082926
muh you surely support communism right?
they only do that because they're communists and like I said any real communist who isn't an useful idiot is a literal psychopath
again Look at this post and ask yourself is this poster a good person
>>16083735
it's literally paid shills and bots all meant to destroy the board
Anonymous at Mon, 18 Mar 2024 21:56:04 UTC No. 16085500
>>16084471
Take your meds.
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 08:18:14 UTC No. 16086154
>>16079067
someone needs to modify a tesla so it spits out a cloud of brake dust that rivals what the coal rolling trucks can do
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 21:44:07 UTC No. 16087087
>>16086154
You
Will
Never
Be
A
Real
Car
Anonymous at Tue, 19 Mar 2024 22:04:28 UTC No. 16087127
>>16079067
By reading only the first sentence in that article I could already tell it's from a Christcuck schizo website, so I went to its hope page and sure enough, it is. I won't take my science news from a website that believes ghosts and spirits are real and worships a mythical ancient magic sandnigger.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 05:23:28 UTC No. 16087618
>>16083084
They report 36-73mg/km for typical driving. That's consistent with a normal tire life. The 5.8g/km is consistent with a racetrack. A better criticism is that "tire emissions" includes coarse road dust that settles and is resuspended, so they overestimate the amount each car actually added to the road. 1 g of coarse particulate (PM10) is much less harmful than 1 g of fine particulate (PM2.5). The tailpipe figure is PM2.5.
Anonymous at Wed, 20 Mar 2024 21:14:28 UTC No. 16088597
>>16087127
>i hate jesus
post nose
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 07:38:28 UTC No. 16089172
>>16082911
you're obsessed with politics, you're not here to discuss science
go to >>>/pol/ thats where you belong, this is the science board
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:06:14 UTC No. 16089239
>>16089172
uhm others keep bringing up politics too. If we'd had an actual scientific discussion it'd be about which kind of transportation creates the highest levels of pollution and we'd be talking about some measure on how do define pollution versus utility. But obviously the comparison is made between EV and gasoline cars to create political strive
You blame me but the thread was made in bad political faith. You're participating in it as much as I am. Yet you blame me and not yourself. Look in the mirror dumbfuck.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:27:15 UTC No. 16089247
>>16089239
nta but EVs are a serious threat to gas market. and gas is clearly on its way out. so they're trying to fight for a 3rd option which would replace gas, something you could buy constantly from a loicensed place. without the ability to charge from the fucking sun for free.
and overall the car debate mania is more of a ruse to hide what has to happen (as far as carbon release/energy use goes) because of reasons that have nothing to do with plebs.
Anonymous at Thu, 21 Mar 2024 21:41:23 UTC No. 16090050
>>16089247
>EVs are a serious threat to gas market
no they aren't
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 06:43:14 UTC No. 16090673
>>16090050
Cope harder
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 07:09:15 UTC No. 16090700
>>16079067
You can look it up. Gasoline cars emit more green house gases then electric cars when taking in account the US grid composition.
>High weight means more micro plastics
We should ban trucks then. We can all be driving small cars and move cargo with trains instead. Sounds like a plan to me
Anonymous at Fri, 22 Mar 2024 22:20:56 UTC No. 16091776
>>16090700
CO2 isn't a pollutant and it isn't a greenhouse gas. CO2 is plant food, its good for the environment, enriching the atmosphere with CO2 will make nature flourish in ways that humanity has never witnessed before
Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 17:49:40 UTC No. 16092831
>>16091776
Source?
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 23 Mar 2024 21:13:09 UTC No. 16093172
>>16092831
Mars has an atmosphere that is almost 100% CO2 and Mars has no measurable greenhouse effect, therefore CO2 cannot be a greenhouse gas
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:46:59 UTC No. 16094021
>>16091776
environmentalists hate this fact for some reason
you'd think they'd be happy about it, but instead it upsets them
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:53:01 UTC No. 16094025
>>16093172
>Mars has no measurable greenhouse effect
Mars has a measurable greenhouse effect. It's measured to 5K, which is in good agreement with the thin atmosphere of 6-7mbar
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 10:56:07 UTC No. 16094031
>>16093172
>Imagine being this retarded
Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 11:23:36 UTC No. 16094074
>>16079067
Somehow I don't trust this post from a random poster here. Yet I don't car enough to look into it. Good day, sirs.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 24 Mar 2024 23:16:06 UTC No. 16095109
>>16094074
>I don't car enough to look into it.
congratulations to you if you have a short commute, but most people would use "drive" rather than "car" in that context
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Mar 2024 00:51:26 UTC No. 16095224
>>16079150
>magnesium train tracks
FUND IT
Anonymous at Mon, 25 Mar 2024 01:55:07 UTC No. 16095276
>>16095109
I think he meant he doesn't care enough
Anonymous at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 00:43:33 UTC No. 16096949
>>16094074
>>16095109
>>16095276
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 26 Mar 2024 07:53:49 UTC No. 16097357
>>16079067
EVs would still be garbage even if they weren't a pollution disaster
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 03:00:03 UTC No. 16098717
>>16097357
Gas powered cars are better at everything as well as polluting less
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 18:41:03 UTC No. 16099672
>>16098717
Cope harder. EVs are more energy efficient and have better acceleration.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 18:43:33 UTC No. 16099674
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6z
Sodium-Ion batteries are here, lithium will be eventually replaced.
Anonymous at Wed, 27 Mar 2024 19:30:09 UTC No. 16099758
>>16079204
>people are willing to pay a premium for less pollution.
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:23:53 UTC No. 16100278
>>16099672
wrong
Anonymous at Thu, 28 Mar 2024 21:23:11 UTC No. 16101980
>>16094074
car yourself back to where you came from, redditier
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 02:28:55 UTC No. 16102544
>>16100278
Seethe
Anonymous at Fri, 29 Mar 2024 07:03:54 UTC No. 16102907
>>16079067
nice job science, way to go. thanks for all unnecessary the extra pollution
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:08:06 UTC No. 16104139
>>16102544
>projection
Anonymous at Sat, 30 Mar 2024 01:47:44 UTC No. 16104208
>>16104139
Cope harder
Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 03:39:23 UTC No. 16105825
Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 15:01:57 UTC No. 16106371
Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:47:51 UTC No. 16106756
>>16079076
Think about how bad an electric F150 must be
Anonymous at Sun, 31 Mar 2024 20:51:27 UTC No. 16106764
>>16106756
>electric F150
Anonymous at Mon, 1 Apr 2024 05:53:14 UTC No. 16107417
>>16102907
All in the name of solving a made up, nonexistent problem.
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Apr 2024 05:34:31 UTC No. 16108844
>>16102907
>oy vey stop noticing
Anonymous at Tue, 2 Apr 2024 07:45:30 UTC No. 16108959
>>16099674
A lower charge density but at least they don't explode
still makes ICE more appealing though
Anonymous at Wed, 3 Apr 2024 06:52:52 UTC No. 16110271
>>16107417
More proof that the global warming merchants don't truly care about the environment at all
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:29:11 UTC No. 16111550
>drive a 4000lb vehicle instead of a 2000lb vehicle
>this is sure to save energy
amazing that so many people are dumb enough to fall for this logic.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:33:16 UTC No. 16111554
>>16111550
480 miles on one charge
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wqz
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:34:57 UTC No. 16111557
>>16111554 (me)
also 2 miles /kWh efficiency. how much efficiency does gas give you?
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:40:48 UTC No. 16111561
>>16111550
Yeah, I can't believe anyone drives trucks anymore.
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:57:28 UTC No. 16111572
>>16111561
that truck needs 240kWh for almost 500 miles. if we take an equivalent of 15 gallons of gas for the same range (with a truck) that means about 500kWh. seems twice as efficient in energy use terms. for the same 480 miles
Anonymous at Thu, 4 Apr 2024 23:13:00 UTC No. 16112721
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 09:15:58 UTC No. 16113418
>expensive status symbol transportation less efficient than pragmatic transportation solution
shocking turn of events
Anonymous at Fri, 5 Apr 2024 15:59:54 UTC No. 16113812
>>16112721
>has shit power delivery infrastructure
>complains about car company
maybe upgrade your grid? weren't you supposed to be a 1st world country
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 05:25:53 UTC No. 16114843
>>16113812
>muh nationalistic inferiority complex
Anonymous at Sat, 6 Apr 2024 14:53:19 UTC No. 16115267
>>16079067
if both personal transportation variants are polluting, then just use public transport.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 05:58:26 UTC No. 16116471
>>16115267
>lets drive a bus or a train to transport 1 person instead of just a car
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 06:31:15 UTC No. 16116485
>>16079067
Yeah I bet their energy efficiency is fucking shit in comparison to a godly combustion engine.
I mean just use combustion, use plant oils to turn into fuel instead of eating that toxic trash, and drive less. Where the fuck you need to fucking be? Like for real?
You care so much about the environment but you just need to drive to fucking mcdonalds every day?
>>16079117
Yes, obviously there is a proper level of replacement where using gasoline is acceptable. however, the current poolitical zeitgeist is to fuck everything in the fucking ass and make the US worse than any 3rd world shithole.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:36:52 UTC No. 16117582
>>16116485
>Yeah I bet their energy efficiency is fucking shit in comparison to a godly combustion engine.
Lol no. Do the math. Don't be afraid, it's high school level algebra.
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:37:54 UTC No. 16117586
>>16116471
Weird cope
Anonymous at Sun, 7 Apr 2024 22:41:43 UTC No. 16117593
>>16115267
why would I do something that's bad for me anon? instead of something that's good? if both are as bad environment wise?
also why the fuck should I bother when aircraft carriers and transport ships are racing along earth's oceans, non-stop, for shit that has no benefit for me, or my life? why should I give away my benefits so others which are not me get to enjoy? lmao even
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 05:23:40 UTC No. 16118102
>>16117582
>lets drive a 4000 pound vehicle instead of a 2000 pound vehicle
>we use less energy this way
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:25:04 UTC No. 16119840
>>16118102
Its retarded that people actually believe that. Must be a consequence of having no education and not being able to do math
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:19:06 UTC No. 16120091
>>16118102
>>16119840
So you can't do the math? It's really easy. You just take the fuel economy of the car and convert it to miles per unit energy, use the range and charge of the electric vehicle to get miles per unit energy, and then simply compare the two figures.
>lets drive a 4000 pound vehicle instead of a 2000 pound vehicle
>we use less energy this way
It's a testament to how inefficient an ICE is. Glad to hear you're trading in your truck for a sedan.
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:39:02 UTC No. 16120115
>>16120091
If you do that then you're not accounting for the efficiency of the diesel or coal generator that produced the electric charge for the EV's battery, nor it's charging efficiency and numerous other factors.
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:42:23 UTC No. 16120119
>>16120115
at worst you end up the same, same fossil is burned a bit more efficiently in the powerplant but that is lost in charging and transport, which isn't a lot (the electric losses).
but you have the option of running off a clean source, which you don't with gas.
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:43:02 UTC No. 16120120
whats the efficiency of being forced to wait around for hours at a charging station in the middle of nowhere doing nothing while the gas powered vehicles fill up their tanks in a couple minutes and keep on moving?
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:45:21 UTC No. 16120126
>>16120119
Right, but the EV weights twice as much, so its more power hungry, plus it outputs more pollution than gas or diesel cars even before you consider the EV's power production pollution
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 00:48:21 UTC No. 16120130
>>16120126
now you're talking out of your ass
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 03:32:05 UTC No. 16120311
EV vs ICE is retarded distraction from the obvious solution: plug-in hybrids. There is literally no argument. It's an easy win. That we never talk about it should tell you everything you need to know about both sides of the current debate. It's cheaper and better than an EV. It's better and cleaner than an ICE. There's no range anxiety. Material for batteries produces 5-10x as many vehicles. People can have their vroom vroom if they want.
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 04:05:19 UTC No. 16120340
>>16120115
It still comes out ahead. Do the math. Prove that you have a diploma.
>>16120126
Non sequitur. You're making up numbers and you aren't factoring in the efficiencies of the engines. Electric vehicles pollute less by every metric except tire particulates.
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 04:07:22 UTC No. 16120343
>>16120311
Hybrids suck ass. Why the fuck would you want to carry two engines and sacrifice power, efficiency, and acceleration while greatly increasing maintenance costs?
Anonymous at Tue, 9 Apr 2024 17:02:47 UTC No. 16121048
clearly the animal came through -
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 03:50:09 UTC No. 16121860
>>16120340
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/e
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 04:03:23 UTC No. 16121880
>>16121860
>study-finds
studies can find a bunch of shit depending on how much money you have
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 04:06:50 UTC No. 16121885
>>16121860
>404
Lol. Tell me, was it about tire particulates or brake dust?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 05:05:25 UTC No. 16121939
>>16120343
Hybrids don't really replace Toyotas that are intended to work even in warzones and be servicable even by niggers, but rather they are a simplification/de-retardization vis-a-vis EVs.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 06:04:29 UTC No. 16121988
>>16089247
>gas is clearly on its way out
beyond delusional.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 08:41:05 UTC No. 16122092
>>16079067
>he said EV (el Vehicle) pollutes 1850 times more
actually, its more like 6000000 times more
>this post was sponsored by King Abdullah Scholarship Program
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 08:56:54 UTC No. 16122099
>>16121988
burgers diy-ing their own gas after the apocalypse lmao. gas goes bad fast (in post apocalyptic years). the two remaining neurons playing hide and seek anon?
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 13:12:44 UTC No. 16122305
>>16121939
No they aren't, retard. They have two engines. That's the opposite of simplification. You might be the stupidest person ITT.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 14:54:58 UTC No. 16122442
>>16122305
Logistical simplification, not dependant on charging infrastructure etc.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:02:45 UTC No. 16122446
>>16079067
>el Vehicle
En Ingles, por favor.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:04:19 UTC No. 16122448
>>16112721
The solution is a more robust grid powered by nuclear reactors.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:00:59 UTC No. 16122528
>>16122305
I knew you are to stupid to correctly parse my point. You believe it's some non-obvious fact that a hybrid needs to have 2 engines, repeating yourself twice.
You are seriously such a subhuman, kill yourself.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 16:17:02 UTC No. 16122551
>>16079067
>take that climate freaks
I don't get it. Only the most unserious 'climate freaks' think personal EVs are a good idea. They're shit for a multitude of reasons.
The way to go is to reduce/disincentivize personal vehicle usage period (whether ICE or electric) except for where it's actually NEEDED, and increase focus and usage of public transport or just making communities where people don't need vehicles to get around.
Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 17:15:19 UTC No. 16122656
>>16122442
>>16122528
Both of you are retards. Hybrids are garbage. When you complain about electric vehicles being charged by diesel generators just remember that's how hybrids work except they're less efficient and drive poorly.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 10 Apr 2024 23:58:47 UTC No. 16123319
>>16122551
you only hate cars because you're too poor and lazy to able to afford your own vehicle. just get a job, then you won't have to spend your life being jealous of everyone who has more money than you do
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 00:04:01 UTC No. 16123333
>>16122446
le Vehicle
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 00:08:50 UTC No. 16123346
>>16123333
En anglais, s'il vous plait.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 06:32:41 UTC No. 16123687
>>16122656
>When you complain about electric vehicles being charged by diesel generators just remember that's how hybrids work except they're less efficient and drive poorly
Perhaps, but hybrids also charge their batteries when travelling downhill or using the brakes. How do you think they achieve over 60 miles per gallon?
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 13:50:05 UTC No. 16124159
>>16079067
This PM 2.5 bullshit is so tiresome (get it? Tire-some hah!). But seriously, stop worrying about microplastics and particulate less than 10 nm. This is NRDC, IARC, CERT, and EWG bullshit.
PM2.5 will not give you cancer. Neither will PFAS, PFOA, processed/red meat, aluminum, formaldehyde, fried foods, roundup, boiled water, sugar, wood dust, second-hand smoking, salted fish, or talc powder. People claim those things cause cancer, but the studies are shoddy and should not be trusted. This is the kind of shit science that makes people think everything causes cancer, and not just in California. Stop living your life in fear because of shitty science. It’s shocking to most people that science can be bad, but it’s true. Just because science says a thing, doesn’t mean the conclusions are true.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 16:54:32 UTC No. 16124412
>>16123687
So do electric vehicles, dipshit.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 16:58:35 UTC No. 16124419
>>16123346
ze Vehicle
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:09:32 UTC No. 16124434
>>16124412
non-hybrid ICEs don't, do they?
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:15:04 UTC No. 16124440
>>16124434
Yes, they recharge their momentum when going down hill.
Anonymous at Thu, 11 Apr 2024 17:16:58 UTC No. 16124445
>>16124419
Bitte auf Englisch.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 12 Apr 2024 06:41:30 UTC No. 16125183
>>16079067
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR3
Anonymous at Fri, 12 Apr 2024 14:03:56 UTC No. 16125601
>>16124434
Not unless they have a KERS, but being slightly better than the worst option isn't a compelling argument.
🗑️ Anonymous at Fri, 12 Apr 2024 22:21:29 UTC No. 16126369
EVs should be banned, they're an environmental disaster
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 13 Apr 2024 19:57:51 UTC No. 16127651
>>16126369
This, there was nothing wrong with the cars that were being produced before EVs were forced on us
Anonymous at Sat, 13 Apr 2024 20:03:12 UTC No. 16127660
>>16127651
>I need gas daddy tell me when I'm allowed to drive
let me guess, you too will DIY your gas?
Anonymous at Sun, 14 Apr 2024 02:17:07 UTC No. 16128134
>>16127660
And you'll DIY electricity and batteries?
Anonymous at Sun, 14 Apr 2024 05:59:08 UTC No. 16128298
>>16128134
on shorter timespans you'd only need some solar panels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNG
Anonymous at Sun, 14 Apr 2024 13:53:38 UTC No. 16128654
>>16128298
What do lead acid batteries have to do with EVs?
🗑️ Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:04:22 UTC No. 16129919
>>16128134
Also DIY the diesel needed to run the generator to charge the batteries
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:16:59 UTC No. 16129934
>>16129919
you're going to find a lot of panels, or even build a simple water mill. plenty of alternators out there in cars.
Anonymous at Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:30:45 UTC No. 16130452
>>16082467
>while rich elites are allowed to not care
You permit them to pollute by continuing to buy their products. Grow a brain and buy from their non-polluting competitors, where non exist, become them.
Hint: If you're having trouble finding competitors, it's because idiots like you have begged the government to ban them.
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 02:19:28 UTC No. 16130957
>>16083724
you're only jealous of people who own vehicles because you're too lazy to earn the money to buy one for yourself
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:02:17 UTC No. 16132258
>>16124445
things would be so much better now if we had all ended up speaking german
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:23:46 UTC No. 16132305
>>16079074
Point to 1 example of anyone credible saying pollution isn't bad.
Anonymous at Tue, 16 Apr 2024 23:29:15 UTC No. 16132318
>>16130452
>Implying there is ethical consumption under capitalism
Big business tends towards monopoly and works in tandem with the government (basically its muscle) to beat out its competition. Show me one example of free market capitalism existing in the world for more than 2 minutes.
🗑️ Anonymous at Wed, 17 Apr 2024 21:18:09 UTC No. 16133492
>>16132318
>Show me one example of free market capitalism existing in the world for more than 2 minutes.
Illegal trades. in Illegal trades the government can't as effectively serve that regulatory function and direct all the profits to their favorites. thats one of the biggest reasons why they let marijuana become legal, because it allows them to reap all the profits. wherever its legal it is taxed at massively high rates and the business licenses all go hebrews or cryptos with connections to the democratic party and everyone else can only ever work as a low paid employee
🗑️ Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 07:59:02 UTC No. 16134219
>>16133492
>can't as effectively serve that regulatory function
if you're dealing in illegal merchandise then the government becomes your price supports. the more illegal they make whatever it is your selling, the more valuable your merchandise becomes.
20 years ago marijuana growers were getting $6-8000 a pound for the good stuff
now they get about 25% of that even though the good stuff these days is twice as strong as it was 20 years ago. all because the government relaxed it's law enforcement on the stuff. fentanyl is dirt cheap for the same reason
Anonymous at Thu, 18 Apr 2024 10:48:58 UTC No. 16134376
SHUT THE FUCK UP
STOP NOTICINT THINGS
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:44:45 UTC No. 16135400
>>16132318
>Show me one example of free market capitalism existing in the world for more than 2 minutes.
Can you believe they actually teach schoolchildren that free market capitalism is real? TV repeats the same lie constantly too. How low IQ do you have to be to be gullible enough to believe that lie?
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 02:48:28 UTC No. 16135405
>>16135400
It's all propaganda to keep people from realizing the corporations are using the government to control the markets in their favor.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 03:27:25 UTC No. 16135436
>>16079067
They took down the website
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 21:27:49 UTC No. 16136459
>>16135400
Half the population is below 100 IQ.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:01:27 UTC No. 16136509
>>16132318
>Need a loicense to sell ye muh medical treatment? That's communism I tell ya!
>It's illegal to rent out muh guest room to underage galls for ''natural'' paymunt if y'know what I mean? China 2.0 anyday now.
>Can't even fix ya roof without income taxes? Damn Bolsheviks!
No you can't have wild west again Billy you've already had wild west in history class.
Anonymous at Fri, 19 Apr 2024 23:03:26 UTC No. 16136603
>>16136509
I can't tell if you're actually this stupid or just deeply dishonest. Heavily regulated crony capitalism isn't communism, but it's still far from free market capitalism.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 22:45:49 UTC No. 16137949
>>16136603
>that wasn't real communism
You're ignorant of communism. Read Stephan Mikoyan's autobiography. His uncle Artem Mikoyan was one of of the founders of Mikoyan Gurevich (MiG), nephew Stephan's autobiography gives an inside look at how communism actually functions.
Anonymous at Sat, 20 Apr 2024 22:50:37 UTC No. 16137957
>>16137949
Why did you add the word "real" to that quote of my post? Just to intentionally misrepresent me? I'm anti-communism. I support free market capitalism, which is something modern America does not have. We have heavily regulated crony capitalism.
🗑️ Anonymous at Sun, 21 Apr 2024 10:49:44 UTC No. 16138661
>>16137957
>muh lolbergarianist perfect ideals that have never existed in reality
why do you feel entitled to live in a perfect world? heaven is where you go after you die. earth is imperfect and you have to learn to cope with those imperfections.
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 00:28:19 UTC No. 16139662
>>16138661
>heaven is where you go after you die.
Atheists don't believe that, they believe that they're entitled to have a perfect world here on Earth, they also believe they're entitled to getting that without outputting any effort of their own to make it happen. Its almost as if they believe theres some sort of all powerful god thats supposed to make it happen for them
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 00:34:43 UTC No. 16139674
>>16139662
>they also believe they're entitled to getting that without outputting any effort of their own to make it happen.
keeping the cattle in check whenever they ask for more than food, for thousands of years already
Anonymous at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:39:00 UTC No. 16140691
the queen has spoken
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zX2
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 04:42:55 UTC No. 16141614
>>16140691
People are beginning to realize what a terrible idea electric cars are. All the major auto manufacturers are canceling their EV projects, Tesla stock is massively tanking.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:45:02 UTC No. 16142002
>>16141614
EVs are the best. Sabine is failing to compare 1:1. if you were to choose gas vs electric infrastructure from the very beginning the costs of fuck knows how many gas stations + lifetime supply of gas (with trucks, also factor in the CO2 emitted by them + their construction) is way way way higher than running cables and some transformers (which last a lifetime).
in the grand scheme of things it makes way more sense to upgrade the power delivery infrastructure because that will be helpful not only for charging your EV. let alone that at some point fusion or some sort of nuclear my power everything, and a proper power grid would fit peachy.
what she is saying is that in her particular circumstance, in her particular town, with her particular income it makes sense to get a Hybrid.
smartest move is to upgrade the grid, by far. that costs money and big oil is shilling against it
it's like coming up with a super fast train that runs on cheap fuel and going all
>well the state of our tracks cannot accomodate for these fancy new trains so I guess you will suck cock and ride the old trains, no new trains for you. we are not upgrading the tracks for a fancy new train which uses less energy to get you from A to B, fuck you
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:18:19 UTC No. 16142034
>>16142002
How about you make a convincing argument instead of that jigaboo shit about muggable cities.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:27:42 UTC No. 16142041
>>16142034
our power use increased, and the grid is not something you do in the 1900's and abandon forever, you upgrade it to suit your needs, just like railroads, normal roads for cars, you upgrade/develop in time, that's how society goes, depending on our needs.
if you want to stop gas cars you need to move that service, power delivery to cars, to the electric grid, which means improving your fucking grid so it allows this major move.
>allright, we invented the bulb, but you can't have light, because we have to build a grid. I guess we just have to abandon the lightbulb tech, use wood motherfuckers
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 13:37:20 UTC No. 16142055
>>16142002
>if you were to choose gas vs electric infrastructure from the very beginning
Interestingly, developing countries get to make exactly this kind of decision. That's why third world countries don't have land lines, but almost everyone has a cellphone.
Anonymous at Tue, 23 Apr 2024 14:06:56 UTC No. 16142113
>>16082278
>people with EVs should have solar panels anyways
Your first paragraph was pretty on point, why would you ruin your post with such a retarded statement?
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 07:21:38 UTC No. 16143454
>>16142113
invoking imaginary solar panels to try and minimize the tremendous pollution caused by EVs is a massive cope
Anonymous at Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:29:42 UTC No. 16143804
>>16143454
The study in the OP is about brake dust. Unless you use organic brakes you have no room to talk.
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Apr 2024 05:00:56 UTC No. 16144768
>>16143804
EVs pollute more than normal cars because they weight twice as much and require twice as much energy. Thats also why EVs produce more brake dust and why they're far more dangerous in crashes.
And all of that is without considering the way the batteries are prone to spontaneous combustion or the environmental impact of lithium mining
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Apr 2024 05:37:39 UTC No. 16144799
>>16079204
>the free market will reduce pollution to an optimal level
The optimal blood lead level is 0
Anonymous at Thu, 25 Apr 2024 16:14:26 UTC No. 16145398
>>16144768
EVs require less energy because of how inefficient ICEs are. Regardless of which vehicles produce more brake dust you are contributing to pollution if you produce any brake dust. So do you use exclusively organic brakes? Or are you a piece of shit hypocrite?
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 07:42:24 UTC No. 16146508
>>16145398
>EVs require less energy because of how inefficient ICEs are.
Wrong
If that were the case then normal cars would have been powered by gas generators ages ago and saved everyone a fortune in gas that way without stupidly adding the weight of a ton of rechargeable batteries
Anonymous at Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:12:34 UTC No. 16146700
>>16146508
Normal cars are powered by gas generators, moron. That's what INTERNAL COMBUSTION means. Do the math on it. Take the range per charge of an EV, convert it to MPG gas equivalent and compare that to the MPG of any ICE vehicle. It's high school algebra so it should only take you a few hours.
Cute how you tried to deflect away from the fact that you don't use organic brakes and are a piece of shit hypocrite.
Anonymous at Sat, 27 Apr 2024 22:43:03 UTC No. 16149104
>>16149102
>study finds
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 19:42:07 UTC No. 16150373
>>16149102
Post the study so we can laugh at you.
Anonymous at Sun, 28 Apr 2024 22:23:15 UTC No. 16150619
>>16149102
EVxisters…
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:42:54 UTC No. 16151227
>>16149102
Musk made billions tricking retards into paying fortunes for the privilege of driving worse, more inefficient cars
Anonymous at Mon, 29 Apr 2024 06:39:26 UTC No. 16151290
>>16150619
>>16151227
Retard take.
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 06:17:48 UTC No. 16152793
Electric cars are one of the dumbest memes of all time, anyone who fell for it has it be extremely low IQ
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 17:33:41 UTC No. 16153404
>>16079067
Biodiesel cars
Fields of sunflowers to fuel them
Kino
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:40:53 UTC No. 16153704
>>16153404
Do the math on how many acres you'd need to plant and harvest each year.
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:42:44 UTC No. 16153708
>>16153704
imagine saying no to collecting light from a field, and planting flowers instead, have them converted to biofuel, have that converted to motion. because reasons. fucking hell humans are so fucking retarded
that is electrolites from idiocracy levels of insanity
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:45:48 UTC No. 16153712
>>16153708
You should be capable of analyzing your ideas. How many acres would you need to plant and harvest to replace fossil fuels with biodiesel?
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 20:49:27 UTC No. 16153715
>>16153712
it's more simple than that. how much energy can flowers capture from the sun in the same amount of time for the same occupied area. that's all you need to know. once you have that value, you can work out the efficiencies (considering that other conversion to biofuel, and finally burning it for motion)
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:46:38 UTC No. 16153767
as far as I heard Tesla brake pads are most likely to rust out than ever get fully used, because of the regen thing. they barely get any use.
that brake dust thing is so fucking disingenuous holy shit
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:46:55 UTC No. 16153769
>>16153715
So do it.
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:53:59 UTC No. 16153780
>>16153704
They're more efficient than the best solar panels and diesel engines are more efficient than other motors so it's, how much area of solar panels to power your tesla - 25% but we'll forget that last bit
Say 10k watt car, drive it an hour a day, 10 hours sunlight per day, 1k watts of solar panels is like a small roof, like 1k sqft
x2 because they only collect power during the bright half the year
43k sqft per acre so let's say 1 acre per 20 drivers once you power the planting/harvesting equipment
300 million drivers, 15 million acres. Double it for the semi trucks and shiz. It's acceptable, you plant up like half of Oklahoma.
Pic related before anyone tries to tell me about fertilizer
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:56:10 UTC No. 16153783
>>16153780
What if hail takes out your solar farm?
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:56:26 UTC No. 16153784
>>16153769
on the solar panel side of things for one square meter you have about 1000W out of which you capture say a conservative 200W (20% efficiency), which averages to around 1kWh - 1.5kWh (depending on location) a day. for one square meter of space.
now you do your flowers
🗑️ Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:57:28 UTC No. 16153786
>>16153780
holy shit kys faggot
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:05:47 UTC No. 16153796
>>16153780
>They're more efficient than the best solar panels
Lol no. You've already failed.
>1 acre per 20 drivers
LMAO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo
>For actual sunlight, where only 45% of the light is in the photosynthetically active wavelength range, the theoretical maximum efficiency of solar energy conversion is approximately 11%. In actuality, however, plants do not absorb all incoming sunlight (due to reflection, respiration requirements of photosynthesis and the need for optimal solar radiation levels) and do not convert all harvested energy into biomass, which results in a maximum overall photosynthetic efficiency of 3 to 6% of total solar radiation.[1]
>Quoted values sunlight-to-biomass efficiency
Plant Efficiency
Plants, typical >0.1%[3]
0.2–2%[4]
<1%[5]
Typical crop plants 1–2%[3]
C3 plants, peak 3.5%[5]
C4 plants, peak 4.3%[5]
>5.4% net leaf efficiency.
>A 2008 Hawaiian oil palm plantation projection stated: "algae could yield from 5,000-10,000 gallons of oil per acre yearly, compared to 250-350 gallons for jatropha and 600-800 gallons for palm oil". That comes to 26 kW per acre or 7 W/m2.[9] Typical insolation in Hawaii is around 230 W/m2.[10], so converting 3% of the incident solar energy to chemical fuel. Total photosynthetic efficiency would include more than just the biodiesel oil, so this number is a lower bound.
>Contrast this with a typical photovoltaic installation,[11] which would produce an average of roughly 22 W/m2 (roughly 10% of the average insolation), throughout the year. Furthermore, the photovoltaic panels would produce electricity, which is a high-quality form of energy, whereas converting the biodiesel into mechanical energy entails the loss of a large portion of the energy. On the other hand, a liquid fuel is much more convenient for a vehicle than electricity, which has to be stored in heavy, expensive batteries.
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:09:36 UTC No. 16153805
>>16153796
>That comes to 26 kW per acre or 7 W/m2
that's so sad. not even talking about losses in turning to biofuel, also not talking about combustion engine efficiency.
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:13:04 UTC No. 16153814
>>16153783
engineering issue
Anonymous at Tue, 30 Apr 2024 22:17:24 UTC No. 16153826
Elon Musk fires 14,000 people from Tesla because EVs suck balls and nobody wants to buy them.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 00:38:28 UTC No. 16154019
>>16153796
The PV payback period is 2 years. The payback period with kJ should be the same as with $, but maybe it's longer. The biodiesel option needs a much smaller investment.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 00:49:51 UTC No. 16154026
>>16154019
>The biodiesel option needs a much smaller investment.
you added in all costs, biodiesel conversion cost, tanker transporting it to stations so cars can get it? did you add ALL of it? also what's the burning efficiency? let's be generous at 50%.
200W/m^2 vs 7W/m^2 is what almost 30 times less? count the internal combustion loss and you're at 60 times less energy after all is done for same area of captured energy. not factoring machinery involved, time wasted, irrigation, nutrients taken out of soil.
the whole thing is a joke, completely retarded by comparison
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 00:53:44 UTC No. 16154029
>>16154026
This
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 01:36:19 UTC No. 16154057
>>16154026
The tractors, tankers and seed oil processes already exist. Farmers still need welfare so they should grow fuel instead of obesity.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 01:52:14 UTC No. 16154074
>>16154057
How many acres will it take to grow welfare for farmers? Why can't they just have some solar panels and sell the electricity?
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 01:58:13 UTC No. 16154076
>>16153826
I don't really care about Musk's Tesla. I care about EVs in general.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 02:01:21 UTC No. 16154082
>>16151227
It was obvious from the get go that musk was scamming dumbasses with money and saving car culture; not the fucking environment.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 03:16:32 UTC No. 16154166
>>16154082
https://www.techspot.com/news/10278
>Battery costs have plummeted by 90% in less than 15 years, turbocharging renewable energy shift
sodium batteries will be 10 times cheaper or something. sodium is the 6th most abundant element on earth while lithium is like 33rd
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 03:33:06 UTC No. 16154181
>>16154074
Any acres left over are for growing welfare. Some of that excess land will continue to go to solar panels. But if it all went to solar panels, there would be less of a buffer against bad harvests or interruptions to trade.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 14:08:13 UTC No. 16154875
>>16154181
You are a moron.
Anonymous at Wed, 1 May 2024 20:46:24 UTC No. 16155288
>>16153783
Solar farms cause atmospheric downdrafts, they attract hail storms like a magnet
Anonymous at Thu, 2 May 2024 07:22:52 UTC No. 16156112
>>16155288
good
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 01:50:17 UTC No. 16157174
>>16154076
They sux and they're a pollution hazard, they should be illegal.
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 03:56:48 UTC No. 16157295
>>16084471
>>literally paid shills and bots all meant to destroy the board
Thinking that anyone would pay (money or time) to "destroy" a 4chan blue board = schizo behavior, so I concur that you oughta take your meds.
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 04:01:59 UTC No. 16157303
>>16148023
I can smell the funyons on his breath
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 22:45:14 UTC No. 16158297
>>16157303
goysloppers are the ones who like EVs
Anonymous at Fri, 3 May 2024 22:46:45 UTC No. 16158301
>>16158297
what a retarded grug take
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 00:17:45 UTC No. 16158377
>>16143454
>brake dust
back of the napkin math for how much EV would use brake pads if ICE vehicle uses that amount. which being heavier results in a higher number.
but this completely discards EVs regen use, which makes for brake pads to never get replaced, practically. thus polluting infinitesimal by comparison to ICE.
the fact that they avoid being honest and go to these lengths to attack EVs tells me EVs are doing something right.
https://youtu.be/Oc7tEdEX7ZU?t=852
apparently 150.000 miles from a set of pads.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 17:08:01 UTC No. 16159308
>>16158377
EVs are heavier than ICEs and that makes more TIRE DUST when accelerating, moving, and stopping.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 17:15:55 UTC No. 16159321
>>16159308
ah, is that why burgers are only driving monstertrucks?
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 17:22:56 UTC No. 16159327
>>16159321
>EVs are heavier than ICEs of the same size class
>yeah, but what about ICEs in a far larger size class?
Are you a dishonest cretin or just mentally retarded?
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 17:29:53 UTC No. 16159331
>>16159327
There are more trucks on the road then EVs and I know for a fact that most of them are not work vehicles.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 17:34:02 UTC No. 16159337
>>16159331
What's your point? In a 1:1 comparison, EVs produce more tire dust than ICEs. Every ICE replaced with an equivalent EV will cause an increase in tire dust. If EV supporters such as yourself got your wish for every ICE to be replaced by an EV, people would just have EV trucks now that are heavier and produce more tire dust. Your comparisons are dishonest and you're moving goalposts all the fuck over the place.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 19:21:00 UTC No. 16159482
>>16159337
You don't need a 1:1 replacement, moron. That's the point. Your truck is a needless luxury that creates more tire dust than an electric vehicle. If every vehicle on the road were replaced with EVs then you'd reduce tire dust from all the trucks you replace with lighter weight vehicles that perform better and are more energy efficient. The amount of energy used in transportation would be cut in half too. That's how inefficient and bad ICEs are. They get outperformed in every metric.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 19:41:40 UTC No. 16159511
>>16159482
Sorry, but your fantasy world isn't going to come true.
DoctorGreen !DRgReeNusk at Sat, 4 May 2024 21:25:31 UTC No. 16159639
>>16079150
>why not make the tracks out of magnesium then?
You will trigger a Zombie Outbreak (prions)
DoctorGreen !DRgReeNusk at Sat, 4 May 2024 21:29:46 UTC No. 16159646
>>16159482
>If every vehicle on the road were replaced with EVs then you'd reduce tire dust
nope. that's never how it works. It would increase them instead. Jevons Paradox and all that
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 21:30:38 UTC No. 16159648
>>16159511
you are not using the same argument that trucks pollute more whenever anyone is considering buying one instead of a regular sedan or something.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 21:33:20 UTC No. 16159650
>>16159337
ICE vehicles also pollute way way more brake dust. what do we do with all that brake dust anon?
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 21:43:50 UTC No. 16159668
>>16159648
I do think they pollute more and people often buy bigger vehicles than they actually need. I don't support people buying excessively large vehicles and I'm generally disgusted by impractical modern trucks that have cabs bigger than their truck bed. But I also live in the real world and I understand that people can and will buy bigger vehicles than they need no matter what I think about it. In the end, each person buys what they think they need even if you don't agree with it yourself.
The question is: What would happen if every ICE owner instead owned an EV?
My answer is that people would have an EV equivalent to whatever they have now, because someone who buys an ICE truck or SUV would also buy an EV truck or SUV. I say we need to face the realities of what the world would ACTUALLY look like if only EVs were available and what that would mean for everyone.
Your answer is that every single person would have the most efficient EV possible, because that's the idealistic concept that best suits your agenda. You don't care about examining reality, you care about making an idealistic little spreadsheet based on the fantasy of every person owning a little EV coupe or whatever.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 22:34:58 UTC No. 16159756
>>16159668
Here in Europe we have a hatchback EV that weighs under 1 tonne. Not great range but you get some 300km on one charge.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 22:36:11 UTC No. 16159761
>>16159756
That's cool, but my point is not everyone will be driving one of those.
Anonymous at Sat, 4 May 2024 22:40:13 UTC No. 16159772
>>16159761
No you don't get my point, it's as heavy as any regular hatchback, maybe even less heavy than some of them.
https://www.carscoops.com/2021/03/d
It means the weight difference will become irrelevant soon for other models as well.
Anonymous at Sun, 5 May 2024 19:34:52 UTC No. 16161127
>>16160113
wonder what the carbon footprint of that was
>high speed rail is going to save the planet
Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 14:09:52 UTC No. 16162287
>>16159482
>They get outperformed in every metric.
don't worry, they're on their way out. Economics will will, as always, in years or centuries, it will win.
Anonymous at Mon, 6 May 2024 15:39:51 UTC No. 16162391
>>16160113
Why did it cost $11 billion to build a concrete rectangle a few hundred meters long?
Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 04:19:13 UTC No. 16163528
Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 17:53:59 UTC No. 16164260
>>16079067
okay
Anonymous at Tue, 7 May 2024 21:40:02 UTC No. 16164719
>>16163528
lol
its funny because its true