Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Funding Will Retrofit America's Existing Automotive Manufacturing Facilities, Expand & Retain High-Paying Auto Manufacturing Jobs, & Bolster Domestic Supply Chains, Part of the Investing in America Agenda to Create Not Just More Jobs But Good Jobs
This isn’t going to put a dent in climate change. It just isn’t. Wake me up when we change our stance on Nuclear since that is the only thing that will bolster renewable energy, which is a stop gap.
Furthermore, if the US government actually cared about fighting climate change they would invest in public transportation across the country, making those EV, since they A. Go shorter distances and B. Can carry more people, and they would also tax the shit out of the fossil fuel industry and manufacturing sector for their wonton pollution. It’s called internalizing the externalities and it needed to happen 10 years ago. We’re so fucked.
EV cars are meant to be powered with green energy, but you need a demand and a supply of that first or you’re just powering them with coal instead of oil.
Common myth. Coal makes up a small percentage of power in the US and Europe, and EVs powered by literally anything other than coal (including natural gas) are a net win for the climate over ICE vehicles.
For example, where I live, coal is 3% of the energy mix. Renewables (including hydro) are 42%, and nuclear is 9%.
You realize natural gas is a major contributor to the greenhouse effect, right? When people talk about going to green energy, only the fossil fuel industries pretend gas, or for that matter “clean coal,” is part of it.
And sure, it contributes less per kilowatt but the current concerns are that we’re either already over the threshold or won’t convert in time.
Removing fossil fuels from the grid? Reducing methane leakage in natural gas transmission? Developing domestic nuclear energy?
Maybe reducing car-dependency to make more efficient use of land and reduce the excessive amounts of taxpayer money being dumped to subsidize suburban development? Reducing inefficient flights between close cities (LAX-SFO, BOS-JFK-DCA)? Building more efficient buildings?
How about taking advantage of the already insanely efficient supply chains in China that allow for the development of sub-10k EVs? Helping those companies launch in the US and bring their expertise with them to accelerate the EV transition like China has?
Nah, let’s just give some more money to a few big EV manufacturers, I’m sure that’ll fix everything.
Stopping climate change benefits everyone, including the taxpayers.
This isn’t going to put a dent in climate change. It just isn’t. Wake me up when we change our stance on Nuclear since that is the only thing that will bolster renewable energy, which is a stop gap.
Furthermore, if the US government actually cared about fighting climate change they would invest in public transportation across the country, making those EV, since they A. Go shorter distances and B. Can carry more people, and they would also tax the shit out of the fossil fuel industry and manufacturing sector for their wonton pollution. It’s called internalizing the externalities and it needed to happen 10 years ago. We’re so fucked.
deleted by creator
EV cars are meant to be powered with green energy, but you need a demand and a supply of that first or you’re just powering them with coal instead of oil.
Common myth. Coal makes up a small percentage of power in the US and Europe, and EVs powered by literally anything other than coal (including natural gas) are a net win for the climate over ICE vehicles.
For example, where I live, coal is 3% of the energy mix. Renewables (including hydro) are 42%, and nuclear is 9%.
What’s the other 46%?
38% natural gas and the rest “unspecified”, probably smaller energy generation projects that don’t fit neatly into other categories.
Edit: did some more research and “unspecified” means power imported from other states that didn’t document the source of the power.
You realize natural gas is a major contributor to the greenhouse effect, right? When people talk about going to green energy, only the fossil fuel industries pretend gas, or for that matter “clean coal,” is part of it.
And sure, it contributes less per kilowatt but the current concerns are that we’re either already over the threshold or won’t convert in time.
Cool, but that’s a whole separate conversation.
An EV powered by 100% natural gas is still a lot better for the climate than an ICE vehicle.
And note that natural gas is a decreasing amount of the energy mix.
OH SHIT, SOMEONE CALL THE SCIENTISTS, THIS DUDE ON THE INTERNET HAS PROVED ALL OF YOU WRONG
Shill detected.
Stopping climate change by…
Removing fossil fuels from the grid? Reducing methane leakage in natural gas transmission? Developing domestic nuclear energy?
Maybe reducing car-dependency to make more efficient use of land and reduce the excessive amounts of taxpayer money being dumped to subsidize suburban development? Reducing inefficient flights between close cities (LAX-SFO, BOS-JFK-DCA)? Building more efficient buildings?
How about taking advantage of the already insanely efficient supply chains in China that allow for the development of sub-10k EVs? Helping those companies launch in the US and bring their expertise with them to accelerate the EV transition like China has?
Nah, let’s just give some more money to a few big EV manufacturers, I’m sure that’ll fix everything.
More than one thing can happen at the same time.
I’m sorry for shattering your world-view like this.
You realize how much money is going towards EV subsidies? They’re extremely inefficient uses of money.
Not nearly enough. We need to be subsidizing them to the level we subsidize oil.
The only way to stop climate change is to drastically reduce the human population.
Ok, you first.