[KMPrenger]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Toyota is going pretty much all in on EVs as well. Lexus has 3 and Toyota 1 EVs in production. More on the way and they have been more public on solid state battery development.

But they are also all in in PHEV vehicles as well, and it's serving them very well.

[dpevans]

Stringent CAFE standards kick into effect next year and in 2030 with the end game set for 2035. By 2030 the goals is 58mpg so the realistic choice is hybrid and hydrogen. By 35 the choice will be no cars or so few you won't be able to own one and if you do they will tell you when and how much electricity or hydrogen you are allowed. The goal is not to save the planet the end game is for one class to control and you're not in it. DAVOS has already given the command to eliminate fossil fuels and automobiles.

[GreenZLE]

Originally Posted by dpevans

Stringent CAFE standards kick into effect next year and in 2030 with the end game set for 2035. By 2030 the goals is 58mpg so the realistic choice is hybrid and hydrogen. By 35 the choice will be no cars or so few you won't be able to own one and if you do they will tell you when and how much electricity or hydrogen you are allowed. The goal is not to save the planet the end game is for one class to control and you're not in it. DAVOS has already given the command to eliminate fossil fuels and automobiles.

Years ago, maybe 10 or more, I watched a video made by a tech college professor where they took some crappy little car and ran it on various fuels. The car had a manually adjustable timing retard/advance box to compensate for the ignition of various fuels and fuel combos.

I was really intrigued by the use of regular gasoline supplemented with hydrogen. They found that using hydrogen as a supplemental fuel cleaned up the emissions quite a bit and increased mileage at the same time. It made me wonder if it might be possible to eliminate catalysts in a car because the emissions were lowered so much. Fuel economy in both gas and diesel vehicles is hurt by the need to add extra fuel to make the system work. In OTR trucks for example, it costs 1MPG. Not much if it was a car, but for a OTR Truck that gets 7MPG, thats huge!

[Grtpkn]

Originally Posted by dpevans

Stringent CAFE standards kick into effect next year and in 2030 with the end game set for 2035. By 2030 the goals is 58mpg so the realistic choice is hybrid and hydrogen. By 35 the choice will be no cars or so few you won't be able to own one and if you do they will tell you when and how much electricity or hydrogen you are allowed. The goal is not to save the planet the end game is for one class to control and you're not in it. DAVOS has already given the command to eliminate fossil fuels and automobiles.

Ending fossil fuels is a pipe dream. The end game is control the people. What are they gonna do with the military? Are they gonna tell their enemies timeout? We're charging our tanks and planes we'll commence the war as soon as possible. The government will always need them until they figure out how to take care of the machines that defend this nation. I'm not talking navy. Most of those are running on nuclear reactors, but they still need to fuel the planes and a lot of other things with fossil fuels on those ships. The other thing is the medical profession. A lot of the stuff they use and work with is made from fossel fuels. This current government is focused on the people and what we can and can't do, they have no plans on doing it for themselves.

[Evergreen6]

GM still brought home $10 Billion in profit last year. Clearly they're doing something right even if they're considering a minor shift in strategy. It comes at a time when the stock market is nearing record highs, unemployment is extremely low and job creation is very high still, and wages are seeing good growth.

[Grtpkn]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

GM still brought home $10 Billion in profit last year. Clearly they're doing something right even if they're considering a minor shift in strategy. It comes at a time when the stock market is nearing record highs, unemployment is extremely low and job creation is very high still, and wages are seeing good growth.

Wow. You drank the cool aid.. you must not buy groceries. The economy is not well. The job growth is not real it just rebound from covid not real growth. Unemployment is low cause no one wants to work and job seekers are not collecting anymore they are living of other handouts.

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by Grtpkn

Wow. You drank the cool aid.. you must not buy groceries. The economy is not well. The job growth is not real it just rebound from covid not real growth. Unemployment is low cause no one wants to work and job seekers are not collecting anymore they are living of other handouts.

Actually, those of who understand that prices aren't "the economy", and can see even the post-rebound covid gains, and who understand "engagement" in unemployment means people are actually working, know your statements are completely untrue. We can all celebrate a good economy, but I understand it's tougher to believe for those who are hand-to-mouth.

Relatively good wage growth and the stock market nearing all-time highs is a pretty good indicator things are rolling right along. Did you also happen to see the recent GDP growth for Q4? 3.2%. Amazing.

[Grtpkn]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

Actually, those of who understand that prices aren't "the economy", and can see even the post-rebound covid gains, and who understand "engagement" in unemployment means people are actually working, know your statements are completely untrue. We can all celebrate a good economy, but I understand it's tougher to believe for those who are hand-to-mouth.

Relatively good wage growth and the stock market nearing all-time highs is a pretty good indicator things are rolling right along. Did you also happen to see the recent GDP growth for Q4? 3.2%. Amazing.

Most of the country does not see it or feel it .From were I sit and from what I see the economy is not healthy. The gdp is all propped up with government spending. Which will have to end soon. I see past the agenda.

[Junction65]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

Oceana is at war with Eastasia. Oceana has always been at war with Eastasia...

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen.

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

This is ridiculous, EVs don't care what the power source is, hydroelectric, wind, solar, nuclear, coal, natural gas, etc. That's the part that makes them so viable, so flexible, as the grid keeps getting upgraded and peak charging is during the "off time", so to speak. 100% solution? Of course not, but for a vast majority of drivers, it makes a lot more sense...than CNG, lol.

And yet, the current grid in most states around the US cannot support a 100% EV lineup. Cold weather massively impacts public use charger to the point that they almost become useless. I'd say probably about 50% of the US for sure cannot even put a charger in their home without major electrical upgrades....that's not an opinion, that's a fact.

As for the CNG, my primary comments are about the standard vehicles... not only are they better for the environment compared to EV, there's already numerous vehicles running CNG now. These vehicles while not perfect, already provide less pollution and similar or better MPG to a standard gas powered car/truck. Not in every situation, but in most.

California has already mandated EV only in about 10 years.... I expect some other places will too...

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by GreenZLE

Years ago, maybe 10 or more, I watched a video made by a tech college professor where they took some crappy little car and ran it on various fuels. The car had a manually adjustable timing retard/advance box to compensate for the ignition of various fuels and fuel combos.

I was really intrigued by the use of regular gasoline supplemented with hydrogen. They found that using hydrogen as a supplemental fuel cleaned up the emissions quite a bit and increased mileage at the same time. It made me wonder if it might be possible to eliminate catalysts in a car because the emissions were lowered so much. Fuel economy in both gas and diesel vehicles is hurt by the need to add extra fuel to make the system work. In OTR trucks for example, it costs 1MPG. Not much if it was a car, but for a OTR Truck that gets 7MPG, thats huge!

Hydrogen in an ICE is still combustion. So if the goal, and California mandate, is zero emission vehicles, hydrogen in ICE doesn’t work. And simply as early as we are in EV infrastructure, hydrogen is much worse.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

And yet, the current grid in most states around the US cannot support a 100% EV lineup. Cold weather massively impacts public use charger to the point that they almost become useless. I'd say probably about 50% of the US for sure cannot even put a charger in their home without major electrical upgrades....that's not an opinion, that's a fact.

As for the CNG, my primary comments are about the standard vehicles... not only are they better for the environment compared to EV, there's already numerous vehicles running CNG now. These vehicles while not perfect, already provide less pollution and similar or better MPG to a standard gas powered car/truck. Not in every situation, but in most.

California has already mandated EV only in about 10 years.... I expect some other places will too...

And you’ve just hit on the biggest fallacy in the anti EV crowd. We are 30 years from being 100% EV. And you have to assume no improvements will be made when in fact improvements are ongoing. Just stop with this. Of course todays grid can’t handle the EVs in 2050. We all agree. But when upgrades are now in progress and will continue to be made it will keep up.

Also you need to explain how CNG is better than an EV. And if you research it you will find CNG is not more efficient than gas.

And no one has mandated EVs. What has been mandated is zero emission vehicles. The best way to do that happens to be EV. FCEV would meet that as well. But from the OEMs EVs are the best way to meet ZEV requirements. So the government isn’t mandating EVs, the car companies are simply acknowledging EVs are the best way to achieve this.

[Grtpkn]

[QUOTE=Number 3;11400098]And you’ve just hit on the biggest fallacy in the anti EV crowd. We are 30 years from being 100% EV. And you have to assume no improvements will be made when in fact improvements are ongoing. Just stop with this. Of course todays grid can’t handle the EVs in 2050. We all agree. But when upgrades are now in progress and will continue to be made it will keep up.

Also you need to explain how CNG is better than an EV. And if you research it you will find CNG is not more efficient than gas.

And no one has mandated EVs. What has been mandated is zero emission vehicles. The best way to do that happens to be EV. FCEV would meet that as well. But from the OEMs EVs are the best way to meet ZEV requirements. So the government isn’t mandating EVs, the car companies are simply acknowledging EVs are the best way to

If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck....

[GreenZLE]

Originally Posted by Number 3

Hydrogen in an ICE is still combustion. So if the goal, and California mandate, is zero emission vehicles, hydrogen in ICE doesn’t work. And simply as early as we are in EV infrastructure, hydrogen is much worse.

I mentioned it since its a viable way to clean up existing technology with ICE and possibly eliminate waste through catalysts. This would significantly ease the need to double or triple electricity capacity over 10 years.

I couldnt care less about California's unrealistic and unattainable zero emission goals. But hey, if they want to continue down the path to burning the state down and forcing people to live in the dark all while China dumps ACTUAL pollution into the atmosphere, more power to them.

I lived in California in the 70's and 80's. I remember what LA's air quality used to be. When I was there in 2000 and again in 2019, it was clear that the pollution battle was won. Like any movement that has outlived its usefulness and wants to survive, the absurdity of CO2 as a pollutant came about as life support.

At any rate, someone better face reality and get to building the hundreds of nuclear power plants that are gonna be needed to replace all the hydroelectric and fossil fuel power generation thats slated to be eliminated.