Those are all real concerns, but in most places for most people an EV still results in significantly less carbon emissions over its operational life.  If the manufacturing and recharging are both done entirely with coal fired power plants, the carbon benefits are questionable. As long as there's at least some nat gas or nuclear or renewable in the power mix, there are significant reductions in carbon emissions.

The other costs you mention, water, land use, etc., are local problems.  Climate is global, though.  Carbon emissions are the main concern for any serious environmentalist and it's not a close question.

Emissions output is not the only standard we need to measure. Local problems become global problems.

I said it was the main concern.  Not the only concern. A local problem could become a global problem but not always. CO2 or other GHG in the atmosphere starts out as a global problem.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Emissions output is not the only standard we need to measure. Local problems become global problems.

I said it was the main concern.  Not the only concern. A local problem could become a global problem but not always. CO2 or other GHG in the atmosphere starts out as a global problem.

Either way, it was an ignorant comment and an insult to environmentalists.  Specializing in non-global issues (migratory patterns, local water pollution, etc.) does not make any individuals' concerns and dedication to the cause, less "serious" than that of those who are focused on emissions. 

CO2 did not "start out" as a global problem, it was far more localized.   Researching the history of smog in Los Angeles might help you to understand it.

---

When you get into the endzone, act like you've been there before.

I said it was the main concern.  Not the only concern. A local problem could become a global problem but not always. CO2 or other GHG in the atmosphere starts out as a global problem.

Either way, it was an ignorant comment and an insult to environmentalists.  Specializing in non-global issues (migratory patterns, local water pollution, etc.) does not make any individuals' concerns and dedication to the cause, less "serious" than that of those who are focused on emissions. 

CO2 did not "start out" as a global problem, it was far more localized.   Researching the history of smog in Los Angeles might help you to understand it.

Just wow.  

1) who cares if environmentalists are insulted? Are you an environmentalist? I say they have skewed priorities.  Either I'm right about that or I'm wrong.  The "insult" is irrelevant.  A serious person would set aside their feelings about a cuddly animal long enough to realize that climate change threatens literally every habitat, not just the one their favorite endangered species lives on.  That's one difference between a touchy-feely or emotion-motivated person and a serious person.

2) smog has nothing to do with CO2 and CO2 has nothing to do with smog.  All fossil fuels create CO2 when burned.  Some create smog, some don't.  Some create smog sometimes, but if you burn them at different conditions the smog is eliminated.  The CO2 remains regardless.  Smog causes the atmosphere to emit more heat overnight, giving some cooling effect.  CO2 warms the atmosphere.  Smog breaks down and disappears over a course of weeks.  CO2 remains in the atmosphere for decades. The moment China emits CO2, that CO2 is affecting warming in Chile just as much as in China. It was smog, not CO2, that created the global cooling concern that folks sometimes bring up.

Once again, you come at me all aggressive and once again you are wrong on the facts and wrong on the analysis of the facts.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Perhaps because they were not ready to transition to EV’s yet?  They had it thrust upon them just as it is being shoved upon the consumer.  The manufacturers would have naturally transitioned to the next technological breakthrough when they were ready.  By mandating the change to an unproven technology this was predictable.

It's not being shoved upon the consumer.  You are still free to buy whatever car you want.  And it's not unproven technology.  Electric vehicles have been around for decades.  

The fact is, Tesla has effectively executed their strategy.  Tesla built themselves thousands of reliable charging stations.  The legacy automakers failed to do that, so we read all these horror stories of people who rent non-Tesla EVs and have trouble finding charging stations.  I wouldn't buy a Ford or GM EV and try to take a road trip.

It absolutely is being shoved on consumers in the  states declaring no more sales of ICE vehicles after 2025 or whatever the deadline is. Folks who can't afford an EV will have to go out of state to buy a car.

---

It's not being shoved upon the consumer.  You are still free to buy whatever car you want.  And it's not unproven technology.  Electric vehicles have been around for decades.  

The fact is, Tesla has effectively executed their strategy.  Tesla built themselves thousands of reliable charging stations.  The legacy automakers failed to do that, so we read all these horror stories of people who rent non-Tesla EVs and have trouble finding charging stations.  I wouldn't buy a Ford or GM EV and try to take a road trip.

It absolutely is being shoved on consumers in the  states declaring no more sales of ICE vehicles after 2025 or whatever the deadline is. Folks who can't afford an EV will have to go out of state to buy a car.

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

---

Perhaps because they were not ready to transition to EV’s yet?  They had it thrust upon them just as it is being shoved upon the consumer.  The manufacturers would have naturally transitioned to the next technological breakthrough when they were ready.  By mandating the change to an unproven technology this was predictable.

It's not being shoved upon the consumer.  You are still free to buy whatever car you want.  And it's not unproven technology.  Electric vehicles have been around for decades.  

The fact is, Tesla has effectively executed their strategy.  Tesla built themselves thousands of reliable charging stations.  The legacy automakers failed to do that, so we read all these horror stories of people who rent non-Tesla EVs and have trouble finding charging stations.  I wouldn't buy a Ford or GM EV and try to take a road trip.

You missed the point.  Elon Musk jumped out well ahead of the curve.  He rolled the dice and took a shot.  The big three were not willing to take that chance at that time.  They were willing to let the technology come to them in a timely fashion.  And then Joe started mandating time lines, upsetting natural technological progression.  I’m not anti EV but your inability to see this astounding.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

It absolutely is being shoved on consumers in the  states declaring no more sales of ICE vehicles after 2025 or whatever the deadline is. Folks who can't afford an EV will have to go out of state to buy a car.

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

Sure for the next 11 years you have free choice but after that…


Just stop!  Your inability to draw conclusions is baffling.  You would most likely agree with prima nocta if our current legislation imposed it.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

The "yeah, but" has been perfected by the moderate in defense of change. It's always a day away... until it isn't.

---

If there was already very wide availability of affordable battery powered cars that could go over 1000 miles on a single charge, and lots of compatible charging stations all over the country, a mandate would make sense. That tech might exist in 2035. Or not. If it doesn't the mandate will probably be delayed or repealed.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

Sure for the next 11 years you have free choice but after that…


Just stop!  Your inability to draw conclusions is baffling.  You would most likely agree with prima nocta if our current legislation imposed it.

Wait...

My first wife told me that prima nocta was already a thing again?!? 

---

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

Sure for the next 11 years you have free choice but after that…


Just stop!  Your inability to draw conclusions is baffling.  You would most likely agree with prima nocta if our current legislation imposed it.

After 2035 you don't have free choice in California or Massachusetts.   So "we're all being forced to buy electric cars" is not true.

---

These EV edicts can be undone as easily as they were enacted. They are nothing more than political posturings used to gain votes, devoid of reality. We’ve seen lots of that over the last four years.

---

Much like the real Minimum Wage is $0.00, an electric vehicle mandate with our current grid infrastructure is nothing more than poitical bull [BLEEP] to sucker the morons for votes.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

It absolutely is being shoved on consumers in the  states declaring no more sales of ICE vehicles after 2025 or whatever the deadline is. Folks who can't afford an EV will have to go out of state to buy a car.

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

Okay dude. Whatever you say. But I'm not wrong in what I said. Those people in those states will be forced to buy an EV. Nowhere did I say everyone.

---

Sure for the next 11 years you have free choice but after that…


Just stop!  Your inability to draw conclusions is baffling.  You would most likely agree with prima nocta if our current legislation imposed it.

After 2035 you don't have free choice in California or Massachusetts.   So "we're all being forced to buy electric cars" is not true.

it is only California and Massachusetts and the deadline is 2035 not 2025.  
So for at least the next 11 years, no one is forced to buy an electric car and even then only people in California and Massachusetts.

So... you are wrong.  No one is being forced to buy an electric car.

Okay dude. Whatever you say. But I'm not wrong in what I said. Those people in those states will be forced to buy an EV. Nowhere did I say everyone.

Here is the truth. No one will be forced to buy an EV but you won't be able to buy and register a non-EV. So technically they can't force you but you can't register, can't fill up at a gas station that doesn't exist, etc.

Just like they didn't force you to get the vaccine, they just made a bunch of mandates saying you couldn't work if you didn't. 'We didn't make you get it, you made the choice to have a job.'


The bigger issue is the mandate doesn't matter much to the consumer. The mandate gives the manufacturer the ability to stop selling ICE cars. Ford has gone crazy and ruined their models with most of the newer models having no other options or them outright not making the model anymore. Ford in Europe has more models and options now but Us is shrinking as they work with the government to force this.

Asian manufacturers are going to win this. They are making hybrids and some EV only options if you really want it. Hybrids just kind of died for some reason. The technology never was implemented on all the base models and was even absent on most models. The logical progression never happened and hybrids solve all the problems people have with EVs.

So why are we skipping from hybrids disappearing for the most part to all EV? This wasn't a natural progression, so you have to look at where the money is coming from.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---

I guess I'm too literal a thinker for this conversation because if a person needs a vehicle and they can't buy a ICE vehicle to register in their state then they will be forced to buy an EV.

People needed their jobs so they were forced to get the jab in order to keep their job. People literally got fired for not getting it.

It's pretty black and white.

---

I find myself agreeing with Americus and p_rushing.

What's going on here?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I find myself agreeing with Americus and p_rushing.

What's going on here?

We’re wearing you down?

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

I guess I'm too literal a thinker for this conversation because if a person needs a vehicle and they can't buy a ICE vehicle to register in their state then they will be forced to buy an EV.

People needed their jobs so they were forced to get the jab in order to keep their job. People literally got fired for not getting it.

It's pretty black and white.

Liberals define words and their meaning and context change whenever they need them too. Nothing is black and white with them.

It's why Mike likes them. He can argue any statement doesn't mean what everyone knows it means.

I find myself agreeing with Americus and p_rushing.

What's going on here?

Maybe you are finally coming around. Soon you will realize the election was stolen with all the cases that are reversing them now.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---

They will never admit it. And, if it finally ever becomes public, knowledge, they will scratch their heads and say, at least it kept Trump out of office.

---