Considerations on EV's

[Fun CH]

I’m sure you will now attempt to find a ‘problem’ with water - that you will try to pin on democrats or Joe Biden. Good luck….

shutting down water access in the Methow for home construction occured under a State democratic administration and supported locally by a liberal organization. When all ground water was declared to be "surface water" in closed basins by the WSDOE, the director wrote a letter to the county commissioners, stating something to the effect, 'I know this will cause some hardships, but oh well.'

So a liberal guy making a six figure income apparently doesn't give a rats arse for local people who have their retirement savings tied up in now practically worthless land or the construction workers (and support industries such as logging, lumber mills and yards etc) who derive their living from developing that land.

[Rideback]

Myths of EVs:
https://www.makeuseof.com/electric-vehi ... dBRSkXEtyE

[just-jim]

Mirror, Jim, mirror! And yes, ‘stopping all logging’ DID happen, I’ve lived here through it. Now we know spotted owl was really not affected by logging but the zealots got their way and have never been accountable for being wrong. Why must we continue to have to bow to their wishes when they’re always wrong but just very emotional and noisy?

BTW, new control issue is water. It will have the same outcome!

There was no time, ever, where ALL logging stopped on private, State or Federal forests in the methow, or in Okanogan County. I would be in a position to know, working for the FS - and living here - longer than you have been an adult. And you have lived most of your adult life away from here right?

Yes, owls are affected by human activity, including logging? But, other issues - like salmon and the general economics of logging changing - had far greater impact on logging than did owls, in this area.

Water - ‘new issue’?? Water has only been THE defining issue in the arid west for 100+ years, and a pretty important issue here as well. But congratulations, sleeping beauty, for waking up on that one! I’m sure you will now attempt to find a ‘problem’ with water - that you will try to pin on democrats or Joe Biden. Good luck….

[Rideback]

Ken:
https://www.greencars.com/expert-insigh ... g0QAvD_BwE

[just-jim]

I wondered when you were going to chime in again. Good topic and a bit of a ruckus. There is no way I support the CCP way of controlling their population. I remember hearing about it, so I must be old. But I don't remember the male only part. If there are only males for a long time, that would sure lower the population. That is a crowded country, for sure.
Keeping the population numbers down, voluntarily, could help with climate change and sustainabilty. Fewer mouths to feed, clothe, etc. But it could take awhile.
But I stress, voluntary. That's a choice we get to make in this country.

My recollection is that China had a 2 child limit…and that as a result, most Chinese PREFERRED male children. I think this started in the late 70s/early 80s? I recall stories of parents abandoning female children.

Different Countries have different policies re children for different reasons. In the late 50s our family was living in Alberta. The Canadian govt wanted to INCREASE their population and was paying a child stipend, cash, for each child, even to non-citizens like us. My brother was born up there, so my Mom get even more $!

[Chitta]

If you CHOOSE to say one thing while doing another, you will not earn respect. Like Fox.

[dorankj]

If we adopt a ‘social credit’ scoring like China uses we really won’t have free choices.

Actually owning a BEV I can tell you that tires are the same as other vehicles, the ‘higher pressure’ is only as appropriate for efficiency and to carry the higher weights that EVs are compared to similarly sized ICE vehicles. There is no difference in tread beyond using high efficiency styles.

[Rideback]

This is off topic. But good to remember that there's a big difference between a communist regime regulating the birth rate of its citizenry and the citizens themselves making their own decisions.

On tires that PAL brought up, tires used on EV's are a bit different than IC's in that they are made to carry higher inflation. I would assume this would give them less tread to create wear and tear on our roads. Tires themselves have found some pretty interesting ways to be reused in our modern world, whether it for roads, sandals, barricades or whatever there seems to be a solid interest in giving them a longer life.

[PAL]

I wondered when you were going to chime in again. Good topic and a bit of a ruckus. There is no way I support the CCP way of controlling their population. I remember hearing about it, so I must be old. But I don't remember the male only part. If there are only males for a long time, that would sure lower the population. That is a crowded country, for sure.
Keeping the population numbers down, voluntarily, could help with climate change and sustainabilty. Fewer mouths to feed, clothe, etc. But it could take awhile.
But I stress, voluntary. That's a choice we get to make in this country.

[Jingles]

What I am about to post is off the original topic but was brought up by another, so going to expound on it. " "Population Control" is not a new topic of discussion for preserving the planet. Do not know for certain the ages of the others involved in the original or expanded topic but being the age I am I can remember back to when it was encouraged that a husband and wife only have 2 children so as to only replace them selves so as to slow the growth of the world's population or the world would become over populated. I believe this was in the mid to late 50's, so I believe some on here were yet to make their appearance. This was also about the time that the CCP was telling the people of China they could only have male children so as to have future members for the Chinese Military.
With the way this discussion has turned I am curious if some are advocating returning to those ideas and way of controlling the "Climate Change" I certainly ly hope not otherwise I have lost ALL faith in the human race being a responsible species

[dorankj]

Mirror, Jim, mirror! And yes, ‘stopping all logging’ DID happen, I’ve lived here through it. Now we know spotted owl was really not affected by logging but the zealots got their way and have never been accountable for being wrong. Why must we continue to have to bow to their wishes when they’re always wrong but just very emotional and noisy?

BTW, new control issue is water. It will have the same outcome!

[just-jim]

I agree with Reagan’s statement, we can in fact grow more trees so stopping all logging here (and then getting all our wood products from Canada) is pretty stupid/short sided.

Of course you agree with such a statement, because simple slogans, oft repeated, are the back bone of an authoritarian system that doesn’t tolerate nuance, complexity or detail; just like the Rebop party, now. Slogans are not policy or platforms. Which is why there has been no platform for at least the last 2 years, no answer to any problem, really…other than, of course, “cut taxes”, “too much gubmint”, “it’s Biden’s fault” and “Dems are commu-social-nastics!”. And such simple slogans always are aimed at the uneducated and gullible; repeated over and over they are the mantra of despots.

Btw - it is short sighted. And - No one brought up ‘stopping all logging” (which has never happened, or been proposed). You did that all on your own! Congratulations.

[PAL]

Hey dude you are off, way off on a tangent. I admit, we both did go off on a tangent. But if you read my last post I said we digressed. You are too hyped up now to see straight. Take a breather.
And I just read what you wrote. So the more kids and people there are the more that can vote. Let's overpopulate the planet so the right political party can govern. Sounds good to me. You might convert me yet.
No one controls how many kids people can have, but if people are conscientious of the planet they would realize it's not so great to have 6 kids.
It should be a voluntary thing.

[dorankj]

So I’m “devious” but you’re not responsible for any “nastiness” on this forum? And who controls who and how many children can be had? I believe the CCP tried that with heinous results! Remember too that if you continue to believe democracy rules, people who have many children will decide what you are allowed to do, so again you may want to agree with me and support a constitutional republic and rule of law.

[PAL]

Ken you are greatly misunderstanding me. I'm not talking about people being removed or assisted suicide. Only your devious mind would think that. I am just saying, stop having so many kids!

Life won't be sustainable if the planet can't give the resources we demand of it. Life won't be so precious if people are thirsty and starving. Well, they are now for that matter.

My goodness we have digressed. Better get back to EV's. As in all things pros and cons. Remember Covid and when hardly anyone drove, hardly any planes flew. The air became clearer. EV's can help. But there are the things called externalities that are not taken into account. With EVs or almost anything there are always externalities. The externalities of convenience.

[dorankj]

No PAL, you state that our population is unsustainable but never explain the obvious follow up who will be removed and who decides that, so don’t play victim and point to others’ nastiness. My politics/principles don’t support that law but your side does so you need to explain population reduction needs but not assisted suicide, seems pretty consistent. And if you’re uncomfortable being confronted by your positions/party affiliation maybe you should re-consider?

[mister_coffee]

And that’s what you think we should all use for all our travel/work needs?

Well, I'd argue that no contraption can be used in a practical way for all travel/work needs. While a 777 is great for traveling to Asia they suck for a commute. Demanding a universal solution is just plain silly. You wouldn't pound nails with a table saw.

What I'd say is that something like over half of car trips are less than ten miles total, and a bike like that would be one hundred percent fine and one hundred percent appropriate for that half of car trips.

[PAL]

Yep, I knew to give it time. This is where the nasty and mean comes in from none other than Ken. People living longer and better? US is down on the list. More comfortable? There are those in the world that are not.
That's so very nice of you to wish me ill and wish me death.
I'm just saying and you probably won't be around to witness the struggle of the planet.

[dorankj]

And that’s what you think we should all use for all our travel/work needs?

[mister_coffee]

So Mister Coffee since we are brothers on this issue (and you are so all knowing and knowledgeable) which BEV do you use and for how long/miles?

2017 Riese and Muller Charger GX Rohloff, with three 480wh batteries. About 4000 miles in 2022. Operated since June 2018.

[dorankj]

So Mister Coffee since we are brothers on this issue (and you are so all knowing and knowledgeable) which BEV do you use and for how long/miles?

[dorankj]

PAL, your political type has been saying since the 60s and 70s that we couldn’t sustain our population (peak oil etc.) and here we are nearly 9 billion and people worldwide are living longer and healthier and more comfortable (100 years ago not even the richest had household A/C!)

So reality doesn’t support your premise but it supports mine (and no need for mass killings Al la Thanos)

However, it is legal if you wish to reduce the population by 1 so you got that.

[PAL]

I probaby won't be alive in 2035 anyway. What can be done for the people that are not able to afford an EV? Especially here in the Valley. There is Trango but not always convenient for the workers.
You still don't address the mining and the tires and the planes. There's gonna be a shift alright. And I hope I am not around for it.

[mister_coffee]

There is some kind of mandate for Wa. state by 2035.
...
But David, your last post is just tool simplistic for me.

Not really a mandate:

https://ecology.wa.gov/About-us/Who-we- ... ic-Comment

The reason I say that is that the proposed rule (1) specifies that new light vehicles sold in 2035 or later have to be zero emission. They can be electric, plug-in hybrid, hydrogen powered, or through some hitherto unspecified technology, and (2) if you still have a dinosaur burner in 2035 you can keep operating it -- although I will be rather surprised if you can find a convenient location to pump gas into it. So nobody is going to be forced at gunpoint to give up their Monster Goliaphant Greenland Melter, and the rules even make clear that you will have alternatives to electric vehicles (although I have severe doubts about hydrogen vehicles) come 2035. That can't really be called a mandate.

Simplistic? Yes, but sometimes things are damned simple We are witnessing a major technological shift right now, which will likely be followed by economic, social, cultural, and political shifts in approximately that order.

[PAL]

There is some kind of mandate for Wa. state by 2035. Google Inslee and Wa state in this regard. I don't remember the details.
On mining what people are ignoring is who is doing the mining, regardless of whether or not no new mines are needed. Here's a link that is quite informative. Don't look at human rights. It's easier not to.
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en ... -vehicles/

Of course, with mining in the US, we would never abuse children.

And Jingles, I got you wrong there on the mine. Oh yes, the Valley is growing and changing and not necessarily for the better. By that I mean, we better take a look at water and if there will be enough for the projected growth. Sewer capacity, etc.
Jingle, humans have had an impact on climate change. Methane from cattle and pig lots. We raise 'em, they produce alot of gas. When I said that yes, Nature does do her thing and will keep doing it, but lately or maybe for a long time she's had help. We can't help it that we are here. We should be here, but not billions and billions of us. That's what I mean by carrying capacity of the earth, Ken.
Also, technology will not save us. Here is a book, Techno Fix by Joyce Huesemann. There are many others on the subject as well as EV's.
Yes, David what you say is true, but those are the key words, "fast enough". And yes, it is step by step. Using fossil fuels to get to the next step.
Can anyone answer about tires and the manufacture of them? Is there a cleaner way to produce them.
I still maintain, we need to cut back on use.
So far this is a good discussion without anyone getting too nasty, but we know it's getting close and why?

But David, your last post is just tool simplistic for me.