Renewables are useless: The Evidence is Overwhelming

The truth about the cost/benefit of these cars suggests that it is a losing economic proposition for the owner but it is a free country. If you feel the perceived benefit to the environment you are making justifies your expense then I applaud your noble gesture. It suggests to me you are someone who cares about the welfare of not just your self but that of others as well. The issue I DO have an issue with is the subsidy provided by the federal government towards the purchase of these cars. I could set her and list many reasons why the federal government should not use our tax dollars to prop up a technology that hasn't been developed where it can stand on its own in the market place. The main one is that we are $19 trillion in debt and this $7,500 subsidy you mentioned reaps no economic reward to the US economy even less than a $0 sum gain. This makes about as much sense as the "Cash for Clunkers" program. I saw a parking lot where these "Clunkers" were stored until they could get to the crushers and this accomplished (3) three major things in my opinion. The current administration found a way to create a conduit of cash to the American Auto Workers Union. Was a healthy dose of "Corporate Welfare" that the Democrats hypocritically like to accuse the Right of. It also wasted a lot of decent cars and caused prices of cars in the used car market to go up (as the supply went down) and who did that affect most?- The poor. Very sad but true and you'll never hear our major national media organizations make these points. So enjoy your $50k+ car that is small, cramped and one that I wouldn't want to be a passenger in if involved in a major collision.
 
So how long do you "have to keep it?" I'm sure a very long time because you can't trade them or sale them as "for sale by owner" because you would continue to rack up your losses. Truth is you are going to lose your shirt if you try to get rid of it within 5-7 years of buying it (the Feds aren't there to hand your perspective buyer a $7500 to tax credit to take get it out of your driveway.) I sincerely hope you are relatively wealthy and can afford to absorb this financial misstep or you really buy into this scary misinformed position our President is asserting that "climate change" is the "Biggest threat our Country faces today." Good luck with that.
 
The Dude said:
Are you anti research
You stupid klansman
Click to expand...

I all for research. I oppose embryonic stem cell research but not stem cell research. I also oppose the government getting involved.

Do let me know when Michael J Fox is cured wonT you?

Also Isn't Christopher Reeve supposed to be walking by now
 
Thing1 said:
No, it wasn't. You said "I can't see electric cars being the norm."

Are you really going to argue that you were only talking about this minute?
Click to expand...

I never said "this minute"; but evidently you're unable to understand.

Which is truly a shame. :palm:
 
I Love America said:
I all for research. I oppose embryonic stem cell research but not stem cell research. I also oppose the government getting involved.

Do let me know when Michael J Fox is cured wonT you?

Also Isn't Christopher Reeve supposed to be walking by now
Click to expand...

That would be a miracle, or milagro in Spanish, Christopher Reeve has been dead for over a decade.
 
Ameri-can said:
So how long do you "have to keep it?" I'm sure a very long time because you can't trade them or sale them as "for sale by owner" because you would continue to rack up your losses. Truth is you are going to lose your shirt if you try to get rid of it within 5-7 years of buying it (the Feds aren't there to hand your perspective buyer a $7500 to tax credit to take get it out of your driveway.) I sincerely hope you are relatively wealthy and can afford to absorb this financial misstep or you really buy into this scary misinformed position our President is asserting that "climate change" is the "Biggest threat our Country faces today." Good luck with that.
Click to expand...

The average car on the road is 10 years
I get 100 mpg, in a Mercedes quality car
It's by far the best car I've owned
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Do remember this, in science and technology those who say something can't be done are almost always wrong. I was told the same crap when I worked in recycling. Got a big kick out of proving people wrong.
Click to expand...

We are still using more oil each year, but you support we can use none by 2030!
Rofl
 
Milagro said:
Google proved that when you take into account the whole energy life cycle of renewables like wind turbines then they actually use more energy than they produce. It is a complex argument which is why the treehuggers like Rune have difficulty understanding it.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/1...simply_wont_work_google_renewables_engineers/
Click to expand...
so we should just give up exploring and researching cause the naysayers and vested interest say it can never happen?

We'd still be riding horse drawn carriages if everyone felt that way.
 
Milagro said:
I oppose them because they don't make economic sense, it's as simple as that.
Click to expand...
What developing technology does make sense at a seminal stage? Nuclear power didn't make economic sense in 1947. Steam power didn't make economic sense in 1783. The vast majority of technology doesn't make economic sense at the beginning of its development. Your arguments are silly Tom. Renewables are a dead end cause Google didn't make a profit?

As long as fossil fuels are cheap and plentiful and can be exploited without fouling everything up with pollutant the economic drivers to develop alternative energy sources will not exist, when the reverse occurs it will be and we have already seen remarkable advances, when cost of fossil fuels exceed a certain price, and even then the relative level of investment has been small.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
so we should just give up exploring and researching cause the naysayers and vested interest say it can never happen?

We'd still be riding horse drawn carriages if everyone felt that way.
Click to expand...

No we should invest in 4th generation nuclear like thorium and molten salt reactors, until they come on-stream there is more than enough fracked gas to provide clean, cheap and importantly reliable electricity combined with existing nuclear, hydro and geothermal. I mean holy shit for the price of that white elephant solar power facility at Ivanpah you could build at least 10 gas power stations.

I can see some use for wind turbines to be used to provide electricity for water electrolysis to provide hydrogen for future cars. There is actually one of those in England already!

http://www.itm-power.com/news-item/launch-of-m1-wind-hydrogen-refuelling-station

[url]http://www.eia.gov/electricity/annual/html/epa_08_04.html


[/URL]
 
Last edited:
Milagro said:
The new Model 3 only has a range of 200+ miles, so how many times would you need to stop to charge up the batteries on a cross country run? Especially when it takes 3-4 hours to fully charge each time? Even with the much vaunted superchargers it still takes over an hour, so effectively you are adding at least 12 hours to the journey time and probably a lot more than that if you include an extra night's stopover.
Click to expand...
thats about the same range as a Ford Mustang Shelby GT.
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
Unfortunately they do not make an electric vehicle that could do what I would need it to do for me. Maybe one day but realistically I don't see it happening for a long time.
Click to expand...
Probably not but Tom is painting with a broad brush and trying to claim a developing technology is now and forevermore debunked because the current state of the technology isn't econically viable. It's a silly argument.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
thats about the same range as a Ford Mustang Shelby GT.
Click to expand...

I was answering Topspin's assertion that you can take a Tesla cross country, yes you can but you'll have to get used to waiting a hell of a lot for the damn thing to charge up again every 200+ miles. All he ever does these days is drive down to the country club and back.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Probably not but Tom is painting with a broad brush and trying to claim a developing technology is now and forevermore debunked because the current state of the technology isn't econically viable. It's a silly argument.
Click to expand...

It's not a silly argument, it is a technological dead end in much the same way that DC was abandoned for AC power transmission because it was just too inefficient.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top