Louisiana about to impose road tax on EV's

[Into the Night]

The advantage, aside from lower cost for the consumer,

EVs are more expensive. A lot more expensive.

is the environmental impact.

What environmental impact? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

With battery-driven cars, the energy comes in part from low- or zero-carbon generation,

Methane is a hydrocarbon. So is oil. Coal is carbon.

meaning less fossil fuel

Fossils aren't used for fuel. Fossils don't burn.

contribution per vehicle mile. Moreover, with battery-driven cars, there is less particulate pollution

What particulate pollution? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

and chemical pollution

What chemical pollution? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

going into our neighborhoods (even when it's ultimately powered by fossil fuels

Fossils aren't used for fuel.

at the generator level,

Generators are not a level.

that's more likely to be an ultra-efficient combined cycle natural gas station,

Burning natural gas to convert to electric power is lossy. Converting that electric power to chemical energy is lossy. Converting that chemical energy back to mechanical energy is lossy. Waste heat occurs at every step and every time you convert energy from one form to another.
ICE cars convert chemical energy into mechanical energy directly. Less loss.

where the exhaust not only gets scrubbed much more effectively before going into the air,

Natural gas plants do not need to scrub anything.

but also tends to go up high smoke stacks and get washed out before winding up in people's lungs the way that happens if the exhaust is being spewed right on roads next to where people live.

What's wrong with exhaust?

There's also less noise pollution with electric vehicles.

No. They are really not that much quieter.

Although some road noise is from tires on roads and wind resistance, and that happens either way, electric vehicles tend to be MUCH quieter overall, especially at lower speeds.

No. They are not that much quieter.

I once lived in an apartment complex sitting next to a stroad with a traffic light, and the traffic noise as people accelerated out of that light could be terrible (especially with motorcycles, big trucks, and sports cars).

They are telling you they are not going to buy an electric car.

Electric vehicles are nearly silent when doing that.

So are most cars when they accelerate. Big hairy deal.

[T. A. Gardner]

Oh, Ford claims their EV trucks can power your house in the event of a blackout. I think I'll stick with a gasoline generator that can run 8 hours on a tank of gas and really can power the whole house.

[Doc Dutch]

Some people are doing just that, to avoid high fuel prices.

Mantra 42(a)1(f)

[Doc Dutch]

No, it isn't. NASA is a government agency. It is not a God. It is not a friend.

No shit, Sybil. You don't get to talk for everyone. Only yourself.

[Doc Dutch]

NASA worship. NASA has nothing to do with this conversation.

RQAA and a brown stain where you shit yourself.

[Mina]

The federal tax incentive is communism.

That's not what communism is. You should read up on it.

Why should I pay for YOUR car?

The idea is that the early adopters of electric vehicles are doing a generalized favor to the society, both in terms of contributing less to climate change, and in terms of helping to work out the bugs in a way that will make it easier for others to move to EV in the future. So, in order to recognize and incentivize that contribution, we socialize some of their cost.

You are making up numbers on maintenance costs

I'm not, I linked to it earlier. If you need the link, let me know.

You are making up numbers on resale value.

I'm not, I linked to it earlier. If you need the link, let me know.

You are making up numbers on fuel costs.

I'm not, I linked to it earlier. If you need the link, let me know.

[Mina]

EVs are more expensive. A lot more expensive.

What environmental impact? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

Methane is a hydrocarbon. So is oil. Coal is carbon.

Fossils aren't used for fuel. Fossils don't burn.

What particulate pollution? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

What chemical pollution? Meaningless phrase. Buzzword fallacy.

Fossils aren't used for fuel.

Generators are not a level.

Burning natural gas to convert to electric power is lossy. Converting that electric power to chemical energy is lossy. Converting that chemical energy back to mechanical energy is lossy. Waste heat occurs at every step and every time you convert energy from one form to another.
ICE cars convert chemical energy into mechanical energy directly. Less loss.

Natural gas plants do not need to scrub anything.

What's wrong with exhaust?

No. They are really not that much quieter.

No. They are not that much quieter.

They are telling you they are not going to buy an electric car.

So are most cars when they accelerate. Big hairy deal.

Back to trolling, I see. If you're interested in discussing in good faith, give me a heads up.

[gfm7175]

I'll keep ICE truck. It tows just as much as the Lightning (which isn't available yet), and I can tow it all day long without recharging it for hours.

I always think about this when it comes to farming. Do these twits expect farmers to regularly "stroke their dicks" for hours, waiting for their equipment to recharge, when they'd otherwise be going full bore for weeks straight? (even having a bunch of fuel on hand to "refuel equipment on the fly") ... Do they realize how much that would negatively affect production/yield?

It's just another example of liberal urban twits not knowing how rural life works.

The other one I love hearing, with regard to fertilizer costs, is "just use manure instead". Do these twits think that farm animals have been puckering their buttholes this whole time?? Manure is ALREADY being used.

[Poor Richard Saunders]

Except for the Leaf needing that battery change...

That's currently $5,500 not including labor. The odds aren't good on it going much longer than that depending on where you live. Of course, that's way better than a Tesla...

Except the Leaf doesn't need that battery change in 8 years since the battery is guaranteed for 8 years/100,000 miles.

[Into the Night]

That's certainly a propaganda point the right has been making for a while now, but electric car batteries are actually estimated to last between 10 and 20 years....

They don't. Abolut 8-10 years is a more realistic value, and what has been occurring. This is assuming, of course, that some problem doesn't develop with the battery beforehand.

and, if you hold onto your car for that long, there's going to effectively be almost zero residual value in either car -- just whatever you get from scrap.

You obviously have no clue on the price of used cars.

So, as between owning an electric vehicle for 15 years and owning an ICE for 15 years, the case for the electric vehicle actually gets stronger and stronger over time,

No. The EV is effectively scrap, and toxic waste at that. Only a few shops will even work on them due to the fire hazard EV's have. Those that do usually have a 'quarantine area' that keeps those cars away from other customer vehicles in the shop.
You are still just making up numbers. Argument from randU fallacy.

as the importance of that initial price differential becomes ever smaller relative to the lower maintenance and fuel costs of the EV.

Not really.

No, you could do a hybrid approach -- basically, require those units in new vehicles (it costs as little as $50), and then just charge a road tax for the older vehicles, while those are gradually being phased out. Within a few years, you'd have most vehicles paying by way of the GPS.
No, you could definitely require a retrofit. There are examples of legally required retrofits. But, as I said, that wouldn't be needed, since you could just do a road tax for non-GPS units.

Not legal. I realize you discard the Constitution of the United States, and the constitutions of the various States.

Did you not understand the point I made about how only a portion of the decay of a road is proportional to vehicle miles traveled on it?

A contrivance. Making up numbers is a fallacy.

Here, let's greatly simplify so that the point is clear. Let's say you have two neighborhoods. Each is located at the end of its own one mile private access road. Each road has to be plowed of snow to be useable, at a cost of $10,000 per road per year. One of those neighborhoods has ten people using that road. One has 1,000.

WRONG. Roads between towns are plowed so people can travel between towns. Failure to do so isolates the town. Other rural roads are plowed by the farmers and ranchers on that road, if they want to bother.

Now, consider two ways of financing it.

(1) Everyone pays in accordance with how many miles they travel on the access roads. For simplicity, say everyone uses their respective road the same amount -- outbound and back once per day for a commute. Total cost, $20,000, divided by total people, 1,010, equals a per person per year cost of about $19.80.

(2) Those who use each road pay for the road they use. So, people in the small neighborhood pay $1,000 ($10,000/10), while people in the big neighborhood pay $10 ($10,000/1,000).

Clearly, going for the first financing approach effectively has the small-community people heavily subsidized by the big-community people. That snow-plowing cost is a fixed cost and doesn't care whether 10 people are using the road or 1,000: the road needs to be plowed either way.

That same principle holds true when you compare roads leading to highly-populous urban areas and remote rural ones. Some of the costs needed to maintain and patrol the roads are fixed whether the roads have a few hundred people using them or a few hundred thousand. So, when you do a per-mile fee regardless of which roads people are using, you wind up with urban people heavily subsidizing rural ones.

No subsidy. You are making shit up.

[Into the Night]

I think you are going to be shocked when you learn how many oil fired electricity plants America has.

Not really. I already know. There's quite a few coal fired plants as well.

[Into the Night]

The Regressives want to go to location tracking on demand pricing for every mile and they set the rates on an equity agenda, otherwise gain the increased power to reward and punish.

Hell No.

It's illegal anyway.

[Into the Night]

Oh, Ford claims their EV trucks can power your house in the event of a blackout. I think I'll stick with a gasoline generator that can run 8 hours on a tank of gas and really can power the whole house.

Some permanently installed generators have fuel supplies that will last for weeks, not just 8 hours. Kinda handy if some ice storm rips apart the high tension system or some tree falls on the substation.

[Into the Night]

Back to trolling, I see. If you're interested in discussing in good faith, give me a heads up.

So everyone that disagrees with you is a 'troll', eh? Buzzword fallacy.

[Into the Night]

I always think about this when it comes to farming. Do these twits expect farmers to regularly "stroke their dicks" for hours, waiting for their equipment to recharge, when they'd otherwise be going full bore for weeks straight? (even having a bunch of fuel on hand to "refuel equipment on the fly") ... Do they realize how much that would negatively affect production/yield?

Can you imagine waiting for your trucks and combines to charge during harvest season?

It's just another example of liberal urban twits not knowing how rural life works.

Exactly. They visit farms to buy a pumpkin or a Christmas tree, or to 'get a feel for the country', and figure they know how it all works. They don't.

The other one I love hearing, with regard to fertilizer costs, is "just use manure instead". Do these twits think that farm animals have been puckering their buttholes this whole time?? Manure is ALREADY being used.

Yup. Wonderful smell around here when farmers are fertilizing their fields on a hot day. Just the thing for the Denny's restaurant down the road by the freeway. REAL appetizing!