Are electric cars worse for the environment?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • PaulF

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Apr 4, 2009
    3,045
    83
    Indianapolis
    It's been a not-so-well-kept secret in the auto industry for years. Gasoline engines have gotten progressively more efficient and cleaner to both run and produce. The base materials are (generally) recyclable, and there is a robust ecosystem that has evolved to move salvageable materials back into industrial use...no so with the heavy metals, rare minerals, and reactive chemicals needed to produce high-efficiency batteries and motors. I think it will happen, but I think the market needs to take us there...not legislation.

    There are still some pretty large obstacles to producing high quality, low cost electric vehicles for mass consumption. I think those obstacles will be overcome, especially if demand for petro-based fuels rises in the decades to come. Electric vehicles have some real advantages, but right now cost and environmental friendliness shouldn't be counted among them.
     

    indykid

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 27, 2008
    11,859
    113
    Westfield
    Always wondered what would happen if commiefornian got their way and everyone started driving electric cars. What would happen at about 5:00PM when everyone got home from work and plugged their cars in? Electric generating plants exploding? The grid being brought down due to lack of capacity?

    Not to mention all those environmentally friendly battery packs.
     

    DoggyDaddy

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    73   0   1
    Aug 18, 2011
    102,091
    77
    Southside Indy
    Always wondered what would happen if commiefornian got their way and everyone started driving electric cars. What would happen at about 5:00PM when everyone got home from work and plugged their cars in? Electric generating plants exploding? The grid being brought down due to lack of capacity?

    Not to mention all those environmentally friendly battery packs.

    Does California still have their problem with rolling brown-outs? And that's without the additional draw on the system from electric vehicles. Would be interesting for sure!
     

    Leadeye

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 19, 2009
    36,698
    113
    .
    The left coast can always buy power from the rest of the country and just pass along the increase to the rate payers. Additional burdens on citizens seem irrelevant to the leadership making the decisions.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    the subsidies disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, who cannot afford to buy even subsidized electric vehicles or live in their own homes to take advantage of residential chargers or solar panels.Not only that, the wires and charging stations needed to charge all those electric vehicles will be paid for by all ratepayers, further raising electric rates. And as more wealthy customers install solar panels to charge their electric vehicles, the costs to provide them back-up power will fall on those who cannot afford to do so.
    In effect, the wealthy owners of electric vehicles will enjoy the benefits of their clean, silent cars, while passing on many of the costs of keeping their vehicles on the road to everyone else, especially the poor.

    Soo...you're saying it's another welfare for the wealthy program?

    Neat. Well, if you want to enjoy the benefits you should just work harder.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,615
    149
    Valparaiso
    I don’t care. When the balance of utilities/cost to me are in favor of one, I will get one, and and not until then. For now, I don’t see anything that meets my needs.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,948
    113
    Avon
    False premise. There is no evidence that carbon emissions from vehicles adversely impact the environment.

    On the other hand, if the question is, do electric cars cause more net carbon emission?, then the answer very well may be Yes.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,615
    149
    Valparaiso
    False premise. There is no evidence that carbon emissions from vehicles adversely impact the environment.

    On the other hand, if the question is, do electric cars cause more net carbon emission?, then the answer very well may be Yes.

    You are absolutely right.

    ...but there’s an “alternative” fuel that they’re leaving out. To quote 43: “nu-cu-lar”

    It would take years (or decades), but you want non-fossil fuel CHEAPER electricity (wind and solar are more expensive), that’s the way to go.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,948
    113
    Avon
    You are absolutely right.

    ...but there’s an “alternative” fuel that they’re leaving out. To quote 43: “nu-cu-lar”

    It would take years (or decades), but you want non-fossil fuel CHEAPER electricity (wind and solar are more expensive), that’s the way to go.

    Yep. I fully support nuclear power. React the rods all the way down to inert, and leave no radioactive waste. Provide appropriate security as necessary, to protect against theft of fuel as it passes through weapon-grade purity on its way to inert.
     

    russc2542

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Oct 24, 2015
    2,111
    83
    Columbus
    Does California still have their problem with rolling brown-outs? And that's without the additional draw on the system from electric vehicles. Would be interesting for sure!

    That was my first thought.

    Yep. I fully support nuclear power. React the rods all the way down to inert, and leave no radioactive waste. Provide appropriate security as necessary, to protect against theft of fuel as it passes through weapon-grade purity on its way to inert.

    "not in my back yard" syndrome. As statistically safe as it may be (less chance of injury in a flying than in a car, less chance of injury by nuke than by flying).

    As far as running the rods to empty, that's not really feasible as the usable life is from 99% reactive component to 95% for most reactors. The difference between natural, enriched, and depleted Uranium isn't nearly as much as most think. some of the newer designs are a lot more efficient about it (can run on lower enrichment), can run on the waste from current/older designs, or just plain use a different chemistry. A lot of time it also isn't a matter of just using up the fuel but that it goes from the original fuel element to another radioactive (but not fuel) element or even if the resultant element itself is a stable isotope, the material has absorbed enough radiation that it's "hot" for a while.
     

    chipbennett

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 18, 2014
    10,948
    113
    Avon
    As far as running the rods to empty, that's not really feasible as the usable life is from 99% reactive component to 95% for most reactors. The difference between natural, enriched, and depleted Uranium isn't nearly as much as most think. some of the newer designs are a lot more efficient about it (can run on lower enrichment), can run on the waste from current/older designs, or just plain use a different chemistry. A lot of time it also isn't a matter of just using up the fuel but that it goes from the original fuel element to another radioactive (but not fuel) element or even if the resultant element itself is a stable isotope, the material has absorbed enough radiation that it's "hot" for a while.

    I...may have oversimplified a bit. :)
     

    MarkC

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Mar 6, 2016
    2,082
    63
    Mooresville
    You are absolutely right.

    ...but there’s an “alternative” fuel that they’re leaving out. To quote 43: “nu-cu-lar”

    It would take years (or decades), but you want non-fossil fuel CHEAPER electricity (wind and solar are more expensive), that’s the way to go.

    Nu-cu-lar is so much cleaner, with zero emissions, and today's installations are much safer than the Chernobyl-style plants.

    But too many people are so scared of the really scary, scary radioactive materials, thus the NIMBY thing. Plus, it is trendy and cool and so 21st century to be against anything as evil as fissile materials!
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Nu-cu-lar is so much cleaner, with zero emissions, and today's installations are much safer than the Chernobyl-style plants.

    But too many people are so scared of the really scary, scary radioactive materials, thus the NIMBY thing. Plus, it is trendy and cool and so 21st century to be against anything as evil as fissile materials!
    Plus, nuclear power is hilarious!
    [video=youtube;68dTwJNvE1E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68dTwJNvE1E[/video]
     

    Mikey1911

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Sep 14, 2014
    2,772
    113
    Newburgh
    The left coast can always buy power from the rest of the country and just pass along the increase to the rate payers. Additional burdens on citizens seem irrelevant to the leadership making the decisions.

    Until there is a failure at either end of the Pacific DC Intertie or the Intermountain DC Intertie (or both).
    I wonder how earthquake-resistant the converter stations are at the LA end of either of the Interties today. The Sylmar end of the Pacific Intertie didn’t hold up very well back in the early 1970s.
     

    rvb

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 14, 2009
    6,396
    63
    IN (a refugee from MD)
    You are absolutely right.

    ...but there’s an “alternative” fuel that they’re leaving out. To quote 43: “nu-cu-lar”

    It would take years (or decades), but you want non-fossil fuel CHEAPER electricity (wind and solar are more expensive), that’s the way to go.

    At first I thought you were referring to cars like the Nucleon.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon

    18mmcg04k6nhijpg.jpg
     
    Top Bottom