Intruders-Alert

If I remember correctly, the concerns voiced here exactly the same ones that originally killed the electric car early in the 1900s.

https://libertyfuel.org/mercedes-benz-w ... m_campaign

...In the latest quarterly earnings report, Mercedes-Benz emphasized that customer preferences and market realities will dictate the pace of transformation. The company aims to offer a range of options, including electrified combustion engines, well into the 2030s to cater to diverse consumer needs.

This shift underscores the brand’s recognition of the challenges posed by an exclusive focus on EVs. Despite initial aspirations, Mercedes-Benz now anticipates that electric vehicles will comprise around 50% of its sales by the latter half of the decade, a significant departure from its original plan.

The decision comes in the wake of notable incidents involving Mercedes-Benz EVs catching fire, raising concerns about safety and reliability. Dramatic incidents in Malaysia and Florida have highlighted the risks associated with electric vehicle technology, prompting scrutiny and caution....

On this note, I have some questions. I ran into a guy, on a different website, that said his toyota hybrid was unusable when the $20,000+ electric motor battery went bad, at a cost of over $20,000 to replace it.

I have always been told that the gas engine would power the car if the electric motor battery went dead. From what I can find out this does not appear to be true. So what kind of fucked up shit is this?

It seems to me that it would make more sense to have the gas engine system totally independent of the electric motor system as far as independent operation.

another reason not to drive an EV or a hybrid.

https://exclusivelyhybrid.com/can-you-s ... e-battery/

As Herb pointed out above, the original talking-points about electric cars in the early 1900's making them non-viable, so too, are these current -day points making the same thing true;

The Electric Car Con Explained
By William Levin January 11, 2024

Is electricity a source of energy? Most people will answer yes, which is incorrect. Electricity carries energy but it is not itself a source of energy, which in the U.S. is supplied 60% by natural gas and coal, 18% nuclear and 22% renewables (hydro, solar and wind).

The related question is whether cars are a major consumer of energy and hence a significant contributor of Co2 emissions? Again, most people believe both statements are self-evidently true, hence the importance of moving to electric cars.

In fact, cars (light-duty transportation) account for less than 5% of global energy demand, with U.S. cars accounting for 19% of the global car fleet, declining to under 15% by 2050 as car demand grows faster outside the U.S.

Putting these facts together, and they are indisputable facts, provides a stunning insight.

The U.S. car fleet accounts for a mere 1.0% of global energy demand (5% x 19%), declining to 0.8% by 2050. So even if the U.S. shifts 100% to electric-powered cars, the maximum climate impact in 2050 is a meaningless 0.2% (22% x 0.8%) reduction in global Co2 emissions from the current electric grid, up to a maximum of 0.5% assuming solar, wind, and hydro can, implausibly, power 60% of electric demand.

In other words, there is no factual basis to claim that the government mandate to switch to electric cars will have any material impact on global Co2 emissions.
This is not a debatable point -- it is easily verified, it is correct under any view of climate science, and it remains true even if solar and wind magically grow sixfold over the next 25 years, which is highly unlikely given the need to build a new transmission network, estimated at more than 200,000 miles of wires crisscrossing the country, and devise totally unknown, unproven, and likely impossible to achieve large-scale, economic battery storage.

Nor does the picture change materially if the entire world goes 100% electric for cars. In that case global Co2 emissions fall a mere 3.5% in 2050 versus a baseline of 24% electric adoption by 2035.

Put simply, cars are not a meaningful source of global emissions and electric cars do not and cannot curtail the continued reliance on fossil fuels in electric generation. On top of this, counting all sources, the U.S. is responsible for only 14% of all global Co2 emissions, declining to 9% by 2050 due to rest of world economic growth.

Forcing us into EVs has nothing to do with MMGW/CC, it has everything to do with control of the population.

Not only that but with line loss over long distances it is actually less efficient than natural gas for heating and cooking or gasoline for cars.

There's no doubt that electric car's have a place within the light transportation market, we are even seeing an increase in electric bikes, scooters and yes motorcycles.
Should these replace gasoline vehicles of any design? It's not practical so the answer is no.
However there is a demand and practical application for these modes of transportation and therefore should be made available.

Designer, the editorial you cited does raise some interesting points, but it's also very misleading. While it's predicted that the US demand will be smaller in percentage than the global demand, simply means the global market is predicted to grow more than the US market. Since we already own the lions share so to speak, doesn't mean the total percentage of vehicles in the us will decline. It simply a matter of other nations catching up to what we've already got.
So no argument about the editorial but it can be misleading if one doesn't consider things like I previously mentioned. Still an interesting read from the perspective of projected market trends over the next 25 year's. Makes you wonder if we'll even be driving car's in 25 years. , Might be a better mode for transportation by then.

Herb, I am taking the liberty of reposting this Video here from your posting it in another Thread as it befits the subject matter herein.
I all-so-accurately lays out the many of the basic facts about EVs that are being "overlooked" by the Elites and Media with their push for EV's

It is so good that I am also going to post it on another Discussion Board I frequent, (along with the other many Articles you have found) I have already posted there. From reading online, it sure seems there's no end to those who will find fault with the realities within them. There's a couple of guys on that other Board who will attack the source, or me, all to deflect/bicker endlessly to obfuscate.

This quite succinct summary of EV's you posted covers well what EV's actually entail and will put to rest any notions that what we have been posting about the falsehoods and fallacies that is EV's is misleading.

Herb wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 05, 2024 11:20 pm

https://www.prageru.com/video/how-much- ... gn_9207960

Next up,....this!


Ford Slashes Electric Vehicle Jobs As Sales Slow
WILL KESSLER March 28, 2024

Ford Motor Co. is cutting two-thirds of jobs at one of its electric vehicle (EV) plants as demand for the product slows, according to the Detroit Free Press.

Only 700 of the 2,100 autoworkers at Ford’s Rogue EV Center in Dearborn, Michigan, will remain at the plant, with 700 of the workers being transferred to a plant in Wayne, Michigan, to build Bronco and Ranger Ford models, while the other 700 are being offered reassignment or a retirement package, according to a Ford spokeswoman who spoke to the Detroit Free Press. Stellantis announced last week that it would be laying off around 400 of its white-collar employees who work in engineering, technology and software due to the slowdown of EV sales compared to the volume being produced.

The retirement packages being offered include a payout of $50,000 that was negotiated during contract talks with the United Auto Workers, who went on strike near the end of 2023, according to the Detroit Free Press. If those workers wanted to maintain their jobs at Ford, they would have to be reassigned to a plant in southeast Michigan.

The shift in workers is in contrast to a year ago, when the automaker announced that it would be hiring more workers in an attempt to boost production of its EV Lighting model that is produced at the Dearborn plant, according to the Detroit Free Press.

Despite numerous government assistance programs and incentives to the EV industry, such as the $7,700 tax credit per vehicle, manufacturers have so far failed to accelerate the rate of EV adoption to match the increase in production volume, as high prices and other concerns have scared away consumers. The Biden administration has resorted to delaying strict emission regulations that would lead to most new vehicles being electric going into the next decade, but keeping the final goal to the same time frame, to appease the auto industry and auto union workers who fear the changes would hurt operations.

Ford lost $4.7 billion on EVs in 2023, more than the $4.5 billion that it projected it was going to lose mid-year, pointing to an extremely competitive pricing environment. Ford lost nearly $65,000 on each EV that it sold in the year, selling around 72,608, and has projected that it will lose between $5 billion and $5.5 billion on EVs in 2024.

Another U.S. automaker giant, General Motors, has also backed off of its EV production, announcing in October of last year that it would be reducing its goal of producing 400,000 EVs in North America by the middle of 2024. In its fourth quarter earnings, GM reported a $1.7 billion loss in the production and sale of its EV line, even as other sources of income kept the company profitable.

Ford did not immediately respond to a request to comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.

China does it cheaper.

YESSSS! Reality check for these junks;


Electric Vehicle Market Share Plummets In First Quarter As Consumers Sour
WILL KESSLER April 03, 2024

https://dailycaller.com/2024/04/03/elec ... mers-sour/

Growth in sales for electric vehicles (EV) slowed in the first quarter of the year as consumers remained wary of the product even though growth in sales of new vehicles remained strong, leading to a drop in EV market share, according to The Associated Press.

Sales for new vehicles grew 5% in the first three months of the year, but EV sales grew only 2.7% as more consumers chose traditional vehicles due to cost and product concerns, according to the AP. The average sales price declined 3.6% year-over-year to $44,186 in March as dealers looked to offload built-up inventory.

The slow EV sale growth in the first quarter was well below growth rates in 2023, which totaled 47% for the whole year, leading to around a 7.6% market share for EVs by the end of December, according to the AP. Due to the slowdown in the quarter, EV market share fell to 7.1%.
Sales in the quarter were led by cheaper vehicles as high interest rates and other expenses weighed on consumers, with sales of larger SUVs declining, according to the AP.

Both Rivian and Tesla, which exclusively make EVs, failed to meet production estimates in the first quarter due to the slowing of EV demand. The world’s biggest EV maker, Tesla, reported that their sales were down 20.2% from the previous quarter and 8.5% from a year ago.
Several auto manufacturers have had to back off previously made EV goals in the past year due to slowing demand and high costs, including Bentley, GM, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Honda.

One reason consumers are apprehensive about adopting EVs is due to concerns about the vehicles’ range, which is often shorter than traditional vehicles due to battery restrictions. U.S. EV charger infrastructure also remains poor despite the Biden administration’s attempt to expand access, leading to possible gaps in charger access around the country.

The Biden administration has tried to incentivize a transition to EVs, putting in place strict restrictions that would effectively require 67% of all light-duty vehicles sold after 2032 to be electric or hybrid. The president has also created a $7,500 tax credit for EVs to lower the costs for consumers.

TRIPLE A'S CAN ONLY GO SO FAR, AND THEN IT'S PUSH, PUSH, PUSH ...

https://conservativeundergroundnews.com ... m_content=

Democrats’ environmental extremist initiatives do not match reality.

That has not stopped Democrat politicians from going full speed ahead with these policies.

And this one event turned into a total nightmare after EV owners were left waiting hours to charge their vehicles.

The ruling class elites are hellbent on only allowing the working class to own and drive electric vehicles (EVs).

Their goal is to outlaw gas-powered cars, but the idea is ridiculous for two reasons: the demand is not there, and EVs are still in their infancy, leaving the technology not fully developed enough to replace the necessity of gas-powered vehicles in working-class Americans’ lives.

The problem with EVs
Setting aside the argument that EVs do not even reduce carbon emissions in total, they are impractical for most working-class Americans.

Not only are they expensive, but they must constantly be kept charged to avoid being stuck in a pinch.

That reality came into focus when EV owners were forced to wait hours to charge their vehicles after the recent solar eclipse....

Herb wrote: ↑

Tue Apr 16, 2024 11:00 pm

....setting aside the argument that EVs do not even reduce carbon emissions in total....

Can you explain that?

If it's anything like the wind generator argument that's totally bogus....

Yes, Herb, these ev's are not what were are told by the governments and elites keep trying to tell us. Their mouth diarrhea is mostly lies-by-omission
with some false notions thrown in. Literally DOZENS of articles herein show this to be true.

It's nice to see that THE WISE amongst see through this "charade" ,...are NOT buying their SHIT,...and also these farces of vehicles.

Not much WISE in this thread of late...

Yep,....not only in this Thread in there plenty of wisdom published ,....but across America, Wisdom is Increasing.

More in US say they wouldn’t consider buying EV: Gallup
BY LAUREN SFORZA - 04/08

More Americans said in 2024 that they would not consider purchasing an electric vehicle (EV) than in 2023, a new Gallup poll found.

The poll found that 48 percent of respondents said they would not consider buying an electric vehicle — up 7 percentage points than those who said the same in 2023. Thirty-five percent said in the latest survey they might consider purchasing one, and 9 percent said they were seriously considering it.

The Biden administration finalized a rule last month that could result in 56 percent of new vehicles on the market being electric by 2032. While the rule does not mandate a shift to electric vehicles, it sets pollution standards for an automaker’s vehicle fleet that would be challenging to meet without increasing the share of electric or other low-carbon vehicles.

Former President Trump and Republicans have railed against efforts to transition to EVs over the next decade. Trump has amped up his attacks on EVs, and Republican lawmakers have vowed to try to reverse President Biden’s new rule.

Democrats surveyed by Gallup are more likely to say they are considering buying an EV, with 15 percent saying they are considering buying one and 46 percent saying they may consider one. Nine percent said they already own an EV, while 27 percent said they would not consider buying one.

Republicans are much more likely to oppose buying an EV, with 69 percent saying they would not buy one. Twenty-two percent said they may consider purchasing one, but just 2 percent said they are seriously considering it.

I guess this thread belongs in the political folder as well?

hillsy v2 wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:12 pm

I guess this thread belongs in the political folder as well?

Are you being positive or negative?

navigator wrote: ↑

Thu Apr 18, 2024 7:35 am

hillsy v2 wrote: ↑

Wed Apr 17, 2024 4:12 pm

I guess this thread belongs in the political folder as well?

Are you being positive or negative?

Good One there, navigator.

Why not throw in a few...'filled with angst'....and some...'tons of copy paste'......along with...'worst of the perps'....all in good natured fun