By on April 26, 2021

climate

The world’s climate has been centerstage the last two days. President Biden and other world leaders have vowed to reduce global warming by making drastic changes. Will they follow through?

At the 2015 Paris climate accord, then-President Obama set greenhouse gas reduction at half what Biden has proposed. Former President Trump, Obama’s successor, did little to forward this, but is it realistic for Biden, who served as Obama’s vice president,  to double down on Obama’s goal in a relatively short time frame?

We noted that a 52 percent reduction in emissions is Biden’s goal. Canada committed to a 40 percent reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. Japan is aiming for a 50 percent cut from 2013 levels by the end of the decade. Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro said he would end illegal deforestation in his country by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. Bolsonaro had previously criticized protection of the country’s forests and threatened to withdraw from the Paris accord, but Brazil is now asking the Biden administration to provide $1 billion to pay for Amazon rainforest conservation.

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga said his country will curb emissions by 46 percent by 2030. Japan had committed to a 26 percent reduction, a goal criticized as insufficient.

“Japan is ready to demonstrate its leadership for worldwide decarbonization,” said Suga. Like the U.S., Japan pledged to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell dismissed Biden’s plan as costly and ineffective. Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure bill includes up to $1 trillion in clean energy and climate change spending. This covers 500,000 electric-vehicle (EV) charging stations, solar and wind power expansion, and carbon pollution storage. $174 billion would go towards EVs and buses for children, commuters, and truckers. Another $50 billion would go to make the infrastructure more weather-resilient, plus $100 billion for a power grid update. Biden’s bill would add 2.7 million jobs, according to Moody’s Analytics.

Biden’s grand carbon emissions plan could be blocked should the infrastructure bill go unapproved. Still, Administration officials say regulations by the Environmental Protection Agency, Transportation Department, and other agencies could still effect change.

[Image: Mercedes-Benz]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

92 Comments on “QOTD: Change the World’s Climate by 2030 or Just Talk About It?...”


  • avatar
    boowiebear

    Green is the new Red as they say. Just a way to redistribute wealth under the guise of some fantasy apocalypse.

    • 0 avatar
      tomLU86

      @boowiebear

      That’s exactly it. The earth had a mini ice age (that affected food production and coincided with the bubonic plague, where the underfed were more vulnerable), there are records of cool summers due to volcanos, etc., leading to drops in food production. That’s before cars existed.

      While I agree that that human activity probably affects the climate, the degree to which it does is unknown, and dwarfed by natural forces.

      I can understand govt trying to moderate some ‘behaviors’, to conserve natural resources by discouraging wasteful use, as in use less motor fuel. Or use less electricity. In Europe, where most countries must import oil, they do this.

      But this is WAY beyond that. It’s a huge leap even for the Europeans and Asians–where most people can live without using a car. For North America, it’s a quantum leap. It won’t go well….

      Texas (and Germany) are a preview of coming attractions–replacing reliable electricity with “renewables” that don’t renew, leading to power outages.

      Perhaps this isn’t even about redistributing the wealth under the guise of “saving the planet”; maybe it’s just a shell game to obfuscate the structural challenges our society faces, by making “miserable” in the name of saving the planet, the new “normal” for the masses, while preserving a comfortable life for the elites and their minions.

      The drive to electric seems to me to be huge misallocation or resources, at a time, when the America (and the world) are tapped out, and we need to be making the most of what we have.

      • 0 avatar
        Peter Gazis

        tomLU86

        How did wind turbines in Texas cause natural gas lines to freeze up?

        • 0 avatar
          dwford

          @Peter, despite previous crises due to cold, Texas failed to ensure that it’s power generation system could handle cold weather.

          • 0 avatar
            Peter Gazis

            dwford

            We have lots of wind turbines here in the Midwest. They work just fine in cold weather. Maybe you Texans just don’t know how to use them properly.

      • 0 avatar
        Imagefont

        Tom
        The power outage in Texas was not caused by renewable energy, it was caused by inadequate weatherizing. Windmills, coal fired power plants and natural gas fired power plants all went down. You’re repeating refuted nonsense and lies. Even the incredibly partisan and divisive governor of Texas had to admit that this was not a failure of renewable energy after initially trying to blame it.

        • 0 avatar
          Oberkanone

          Which coal fired plants went offline due to cold weather?

          • 0 avatar
            Oberkanone

            Which coal fired plants went offline due to cold weather? WA Parish was offline before cold weather arrived. Limestone continued to operate then partially shut down due to unexplained “staffing” problems. Oak Grove “coal pile frozen solid” is a BS excuse. Blaming renewables is BS, blaming thermal is BS. The whole system in TX failed due to mismanagement at all levels.

          • 0 avatar
            RHD

            Texans, not wanting any oversight by the federal government, have overlooked that things would otherwise be administered by unsupervised Texans.

            Unsurprisingly, that has not gone well at all.

      • 0 avatar
        boowiebear

        Totally!!! Periods of cooling lead to major famine, disease and death. I pray it warms and stays warm. God help us if we get another cooling period. Climate science is not science, it is Climate politics and money. No scientist that states any contradictory view gets funded. Politicians use it to reshape the world into the utopia they envision.

        • 0 avatar
          Peter Gazis

          bowiebear

          Midwestern U.S.A. Cold, also most productive farm land in the world.
          SubSaharan Africa Hot, Seems like there’s always a famine.

          Your theory doesn’t hold up in real world conditions.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @boowiebear – a large portion of the USA will turn into a desert if climate gets too warm. Canada and Russia being much further north would actually see a net benefit. The USA would be fooked.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      Exactly. Just this year’s PR campaign for even more of the same crony capitalism we’ve had all along.

      It’s absolutely laughable that global emissions can be meaningfully addressed by the relative handful of middle class people in rich countries having smaller houses and crappier cars at the same time that the entire developing world is industrializing at full speed.

      And when it comes to doing instead of talking, the doing that we actually do is teaching those poor countries how to build coal plants while bringing hundreds of millions of their citizens here to live the industrialized life alongside us.

      The people who support this chit are either faking it because they’re getting a piece of it or really incredibly stupid.

      • 0 avatar
        dantes_inferno

        >The people who support this chit are either faking it because they’re getting a piece of it or really incredibly stupid.

        Yes.

        • 0 avatar
          Peter Gazis

          dantes_Inferno

          True, after decades of red states not paying their fair share in taxes. Letting their infrastructure go to $h!t. Letting their schools go to $h!t. Turning their police into glorified meter maids. The blue states shouldn’t have to keep bailing them out.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            There hasn’t been a single state in any union who hasn’t paid more than “their fair share in taxes” for over a century.

            More specifically since the enactment of the undifferentiated theft racket known as “income taxes.”

            Also, despite this, by now almost all redistribution, is done by way of debasement, and by “legal” “mandates”, restrictions and the like. Taxes of any kind, as egregious as they are, pale to almost insignificance in comparison to the all-encompassing theft/redistribution from the competent and productive, to the undifferentiated mass of rank nothings in FIRE and related sectors, which is carried out by central banks, kangaroo courts/ambulance chasers and other enablers of the pure and utter destruction of anything valuable that is progressivism and financialization.

          • 0 avatar
            Peter Gazis

            Stuki
            Republicans helped run up the credit card bill. They are just as responsible for paying that bill when it arrives.

          • 0 avatar
            stuki

            “Republicans helped run up the credit card bill. They are just as responsible for paying that bill when it arrives.”

            _They_ are. Emphasis _They_. As in, the exact ones who “helped run up the credit card bill.”

            And noone else. Neither taxpayers nor anyone debased by The Fed, shares any responsibility for it whatsoever. If your personal, voluntarily rendered, signature is not on the loan papers, all you are responsible for, is raising your middle finger to anyone even remotely suggesting it is any of your duty to help pay even a penny of it.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            @Peter…taxes are an individual affair, so don’t you mean the productive shouldn’t have to keep bailing out the poors?

            – Red Stater with a pretty healthy tax bill

    • 0 avatar

      @boowiebear: you nailed it – cannot agree more.

  • avatar
    jack4x

    “Biden’s $2.3 trillion infrastructure bill includes up to $1 trillion in clean energy and climate change spending. This covers 500,000 electric-vehicle (EV) charging stations, solar and wind power expansion, and carbon pollution storage. $174 billion would go towards EVs and buses for children, commuters, and truckers. Another $50 billion would go to make the infrastructure more weather-resilient, plus $100 billion for a power grid update.”

    This kind of stuff is mostly fine with me. Yeah a lot of it is probably a waste or giveaways to industry, but there’s nothing unique about that in modern lawmaking. And there really are some worthy goals in here. Where they would lose me forever is with these insane ICE bans. Shortsighted, technologically ignorant, and almost unbelievably optimistic.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      Electric (and hydrogen) infrastructure build out is good. Subsides I can live with. Carbon taxes **maybe** but it would take some arm twisting and a unique application.
      However I’m f*ck no forever on ICE, appliance, or HVAC bans.

      • 0 avatar
        jack4x

        I would accept a carbon tax if that was the price of keeping my ICE cars the rest of my life.

        I could potentially see replacing some of my vehicles with electrics if/when they have no compromises. There’s no reason I couldn’t accept an EV for a commuter grade appliance. But by the same token, there’s no circumstance that I can envision where an electric can replace a fun car. That’s an experience I hope to be able to pass to my kids.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        ICE bans aren’t coming—except possibly in city cores, where the main motivation won’t be climate, but improving local air quality and reducing the total number of vehicles on capacity-limited streets.

        ICE getting super-expensive to operate? Yep, that’s on the way; the only question is how long it will take. Even the oil companies see the writing on the wall and are trying to make sure that they are well-positioned to diversify their businesses. There will also be a convenience penalty; I suspect that the number of gas stations in 2040 will be a fraction of what it is today, while every supermarket parking lot will have L3 chargers in it.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          “ICE bans aren’t coming”
          Let’s keep it that way.

          As far as ICE vehicles in the future, I’m not sure about “super-expensive” but I do expect they will become the realm of hobbyists while I’m still above ground. I anticipate eventually needing to use marina fuel or ordering $20/gal Ye Olde 93 Octane from YearOne.

        • 0 avatar
          RHD

          Those who oppose electric vehicles will reap the benefits of cleaner air, whether they like it or not.
          And loads of free electricity from a nice bank of solar panels is awesome.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        I’m not in favor of the bans either. Although I’m a huge fan of EVs and like the idea of the efficiency of solar power, I do have a hobby of vintage and classic ICE vehicles and would never convert certain vehicles to EVs. I also have confidence that when technology reaches a certain point, people will adopt them of their own volition. The government just needs to limit itself to encouraging research and improving infrastructure. It didn’t take a ban for people to move to digital photography. Once digital became a better alternative for the vast majority of the population, the switch was made.

    • 0 avatar

      Also no issue with this. I also agree bans seem a bad idea. If not from a practical side from a political side it’s a good way to divide your base unnecessarily.
      Much better to try and entice people into electric cars or alternatives then to take away something they like. That almost never goes well.

      Sometimes people at the extremes of the argument actually do notice this and it’s kind of funny. Recently was reading some city planner articles and one talked about the fact that they can’t ban cars in smaller cities or take away older cars without having valid working alternatives in the hands of the lower income people that actually live there. The idea seemed to stress out some on the far left but others (who i assume have more of interest in people that rely on their cars to live) were really in agreement that the human and economical damage of bans without alternatives may be to high.

  • avatar
    2manycars

    Utterly and completely ludicrous. Spending trillions of dollars that we don’t have in order to address a “crisis” that does not exist and accomplish something we are incapable of doing (taking control of the earth’s climate). Perhaps these morons would also like to “fight” the tides or the phases of the moon along with the climate. Rest assured of course that our dear leaders will continue to lead energy-intensive lifestyles. Sacrifice is for the little people.

    This all has less to do with the environment and more to do with increasing government power, reducing individual freedom, and theft on a grand scale via rapacious “carbon” taxes. Communism in green clothing.

    I have no intention of cooperating with this nonsense. Governments that insist on pushing this destructive course of action to the max need to be taken out.

  • avatar
    thegamper

    Being realistic, these are “goals” made by politicians. The goalposts will move a dozen times before we get there. I think everyone involved knows full well that such a transition wont happen until the technology and infrastructure realities catch up to aspirations.

    There is no reason to get bent, they likely aren’t coming for your diesel truck just yet. They probably never will in most of the country, but I could see vehicles registered pre ICE bans being kicked out of large swaths of the country at some point in the future. We are talking a ways off though. Plan accordingly and you really have nothing to be upset about, you can hardly claim you didn’t see this coming.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      “you really have nothing to be upset about, you can hardly claim you didn’t see this coming.”

      That’s interesting reasoning.

    • 0 avatar
      jack4x

      “I could see vehicles registered pre ICE bans being kicked out of large swaths of the country at some point in the future. We are talking a ways off though. Plan accordingly and you really have nothing to be upset about, you can hardly claim you didn’t see this coming.”

      So what is my remedy, move to the Third World?

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        Drive an electric car. It can even be a Model S Plaid with an 0-60 time in the ones.

        • 0 avatar
          jack4x

          Ironically, the reason I’d consider buying a Tesla Plaid is that the 500 mile range is high enough that it could conceivably replace a gas car in all my use cases (depending how much that degrades in winter).

          My experience when driving a Ludicrous Tesla is the silent, gear-less acceleration is much more like a jet taking off than a car, and gets old pretty quickly.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Sometimes roadside L3 charging sessions will be necessary. There will be enough L3 chargers that finding one won’t be difficult even in the sticks.

            Personally, I love being able to accelerate quickly without making a loud angry-sounding roar. YMMV.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            @jack4x: One future aspect of EV propulsion is IWD or independent wheel drive. That’s when there are 4 independently driven wheels with precisely metered torque to maximize the traction at each wheel. Traction control without brake application and much more controllable. Add to those vehicle-to-vehicle communications of traction conditions on sections of roads and it will get really interesting. At some point, handing and traction will be even more impressive than EV acceleration.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            @mcs,

            In much the same way that some people still prefer hand-wound watches and record players even when objectively superior alternatives exist, my love for naturally aspirated, gas-powered, manual transmission vehicles is not due to any technical superiority.

            I have no doubt electrics will surpass gas cars in every objective measure of performance before long. After all, that’s where all R&D is focused. And as I said earlier, that might be fine for commuter grade or work type vehicles. But objectivity is not the reason I buy fun vehicles.

      • 0 avatar
        thegamper

        I’m sure you have at least ten years, then probably a grandfather clause in anything that gets enacted. I wont feel bad for people who say that cant work with those sort of time frames. You know there will be some clown who buys his brodozer the year before all this takes effect and will cry about it to anyone who will listen claiming he is being singled out and its unfair. I am quite sure any adult can handle the time frames and phase outs that arent even in place yet. Like I said, plan accordingly, that is your remedy.

        • 0 avatar
          ajla

          “Like I said, plan accordingly, that is your remedy.”

          I’ll probably just work to make sure people advocating for this type of thing don’t hold office.

        • 0 avatar
          jack4x

          So I should be less upset about my hobby being banned simply because I’m told it’s coming some years in advance?

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            Banning ICE vehicles “in large swaths of the country” after they’ve moved into the realm of hobbyists is just being spiteful. It’s like banning flintlocks and black-powder revolvers.

          • 0 avatar
            thegamper

            I think you guys are blowing it out of proportion a little bit….or a lot. I will go out on a limb and say you guys are the type that was very against an assault rifle ban after something like Sandy Hook because its an infringement on your rights nevermind that the founding fathers never could have foreseen the power and proliferation of such weapons when drafting the 2nd amendment and surely would not have included all the looney tunes stuff that people keep in their fantasyland arsenals that they now claim protections for. You know that fantasyland where they defeat the government or thwart armed bandits? The one where they dont get killed with their own guns, that one. Sit in your garage and powerstroke it all night long to that sweet coal rolling rig if that’s your thing. Do you what you need to do guys.

          • 0 avatar
            jack4x

            I don’t even own a gun or a diesel powered vehicle, but that’s a nice strawman you’ve built there.

          • 0 avatar
            ajla

            “I think you guys are blowing it out of proportion a little bit….or a lot.”

            It isn’t our fault that you can’t make a consistent argument.

            “I will go out on a limb”

            That’s an extremely flimsy limb. Ban assault rifles and pass background check laws. Heck, I’ll donate to the Brady Campaign right now and post a screenshot if you want.
            That you conflate high-capacity magazine assault rifle ownership with someone wanting it to be legal to own and drive an ICE hobby vehicle in the future says a lot about your mindset.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            No one’s hobby will be banned, any more than it is banned today to drive a Model T around. ICE vehicles will only be banned from city centers or other similar areas where it will improve air quality and cut noise pollution.

            It will just be less practical to drive ICEs… sort of like how it was pretty impractical to drive an EV in, say, 2011.

          • 0 avatar
            28-Cars-Later

            Still pretty impractical in 97-98% of the overall nation.

          • 0 avatar
            dal20402

            Nah. Over 2/3 of Americans live in metro areas, and anyone who is in a metro area, has dedicated off-street parking, and doesn’t do a truly outlandish megacommute could use an EV for their daily driving today. Most residents of small towns and their nearby areas could use them too. The audiences for which they truly won’t work yet are the ~10% who live in truly rural areas, the megacommuters, and the street parkers.

            As there is more charging infrastructure, most of those will also be able to use EVs.

  • avatar
    dwford

    It’s all talk. The government could never spend enough to subsidize the switch over, and politicians certainly don’t have the spine to straight up tell people “you need to accept a lower living standard to meet these climate goals.” So the reality is is that we will get slightly faster incremental progress than what we were already doing.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    This is nothing but a new Ponzi scheme. Some countries move all production to other countries and now the former ones will be clean and will fit into limits. The latter ones, that produce stuff will be penalized on CO2. Also, countries that develop, the ones that need to produce a lot of steel, etc, they also will have to pay up so their development will be super-costly and slow.
    Let me translate. This is the new scheme made up by western globalists who understand that they are losing the battle and can’t just rape other countries colonial style. No matter ho you look at at it, it smells.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    We will have ICE vehicles for many years to come even if the manufacture and sale of new ICE vehicles is banned in the next decade. There are car collectors and enthusiasts along with farmers and those in rural areas that will be running their ICE vehicles long after they are not manufactured. I myself will be running my vehicles for years to come but if the infrastructure improves and EVs become better and more affordable I might eventually buy one. I am not going to fret over the demise of ICE, I will just adapt.

  • avatar
    285exp

    How much of a reduction did China and India pledge?

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      China is in the driver’s seat with this EV transition, with Europe in the front passenger seat, and we’re bouncing along in a trailer behind them.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        Not what he asked. China has stated they plan to be “Carbon Neutral” by 2060, but their footprint will continue to grow for another decade or so. Given all of the coal infrastructure being added, that first part seems assured, but that last part is far enough off to not matter at all.

        When every major international climate accord allows special considerations for China to keep right on growing fossil fuel use and dependance and they continue to do just that, I don’t think they are driving squat.

      • 0 avatar
        285exp

        China will be happy to let the western countries make all the sacrifices, increase our energy costs, and sell us all the solar panels and battery materials we want, and not do a damn thing to solve the planetary “crisis” while they move to dominate the world economically. With our help. Great plan.

    • 0 avatar
      jkross22

      It doesn’t matter what China pledges. They disregard anything they don’t want to abide by, or call you racist if you attempt to hold them to account.

      Ask Australia.

  • avatar
    ThomasSchiffer

    The climate alarmists never answer the question of the world’s massive overpopulation and rapidly growing populations in Africa and certain parts of Asia.

    More people require more resources which in turn leads to more environmental damage and pollution. What the world needs is less people for a sustainable future – and then, when this is achieved, then we can talk about “CO2 reduction”.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      “What the world needs is less people for a sustainable future – and then, when this is achieved”

      Ok, but how will this be achieved?

      • 0 avatar
        ThomasSchiffer

        @Ajla,

        That is my point. It will never work.

        We in the West can fantasize about carbon neutrality all we want; in the end it is a waste of time since the rest of the world is not playing along.

        These green energy projects are expensive and impractical in developing nations. Furthermore, most of these developing nations have reserves of cheap and abundant fossil fuels (coal, oil and so forth). They have no incentive to go green considering how expensive these technologies currently are.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      They did actually – their answer is, when a child boy says, I want to be a girls, the government takes away parental rights from disagreeing parent, and starts giving a sex-suppressing hormones and a boy sometimes becomes sterilized, other times, not healthy enough to have children.
      + pro-choice abortion push and push of LGBT in countries where traditional family is a standard.

    • 0 avatar
      dal20402

      Who are you suggesting be eliminated?

      We would have plenty of resources for the people we have, and in fact plenty for twice or triple the current number, with better energy generation and a less wasteful food system. No need to go for genocide or eugenics.

  • avatar
    KingShango

    It’s simple, we pay now or we pay later. Storm flooding in FL is only going to get worse so how often do we want to rebuild Miami? Are we going to spend the tens of billions to protect New Orleans? 40% of the US population lives near the coast. And those are just the most immediate and obvious concerns. Sure some of these plans are pie in the sky and we’ll never no the full extent of what’s possible. But make no mistake, we’re going to pay for this one way or another.

  • avatar
    stuki

    People competent enough to do anything, whatsoever, useful; don’t sit around and babble about nonsense “they” “promise” to do decades past their own death. That kind of stuff is reserved, 100%, for the sort of rank and utter retards which are the ones being transferred all wealth, hence all power, in utterly dystopian retardtopias like the current once-was West.

  • avatar
    Kendahl

    I’ve been studying Tesla’s Long Range Model 3 as a replacement for my 13-year-old Infiniti G37S. My tentative conclusion is that it is a very good, high performance, sports sedan. It’s practical transportation with a few caveats:

    (1) Any BEV is easier to live with if you can charge at home. That should be easy for homeowners but hard for apartment dwellers and nearly impossible if you must park on the street.

    (2) Tesla is still learning how to manufacture automobiles. Their build quality is not yet up to industry standards. Fortunately, they are learning fast.

    (3) The network for charging on road trips is inadequate. Tesla’s supercharger network does a good job covering major highways. Although Tesla is expanding the network, there aren’t enough locations yet to adequately cover areas with low population density. The alternatives to superchargers are inferior for the most part.

    • 0 avatar
      JMII

      1) or charge at work or charge at Wal-Mart, Target, etc. The ‘burbs are full of parking lots so we need to start leveraging all of those situations where your car is parked. My brother had a Cayenne hybrid and between charging at work or home he could basically commute gas free.

      3) if they put chargers at every Cracker Barrel you could drive on any interstate east of the Mississippi and always be able to charge up while getting a biscuit or cornbread: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Map-of-Cracker-Barrel-Locations-and-Interstates-United-States-5_fig3_337950731

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        @jmII: I think the perfect charging business for apartment dwellers would be a combination laundromat and quick charger. Once a week laundry and a charge.

      • 0 avatar
        dal20402

        The supermarket will be the #1 charging location in the future for people who don’t have private parking. Even people who don’t do much other driving usually drive there, because they buy lots of stuff at once. There is almost always tons of parking and plenty of room to install chargers (ideally toward the back of the lot so people don’t get ICEd). Go there, spend 45 minutes shopping, collect 150 miles of range. Other alternatives may be work parking lots or dedicated charging locations near people’s homes.

        • 0 avatar
          28-Cars-Later

          Don’t forget local gyms… already a strategy for those living in cars/homeless etc.

        • 0 avatar
          Kendahl

          Hotels. Recharge while you sleep.

        • 0 avatar
          Art Vandelay

          I’d say you need to have them where people work. I typically just order online and pick up at the supermarket now. You won’t get much of a charge in those 5 minutes. Even if I go in, it is typically for something specific so 15 minutes?

          You have to figure out home charging as that is where a car spends most of it’s parked time. Work would be second. Then fill in the road trip gaps.

    • 0 avatar
      NigelShiftright

      I can’t see myself buying a car that

      (a) can be mucked about with or even bricked via wi-fi. Those wicked fast Teslas may someday shut themselves down if Smokey thinks you’re doing 72 in a 70.

      (b) has everything controlled by a verdammte touchscreen. Windshields fog up very very fast in the damp valleys where I live, and I don’t want to take my eyes off the road, or pull over and stop, so I can step through three layers of menus to turn on the defogger.

      So although I may someday buy an EV, it will not be a Tesla.

  • avatar
    JD-Shifty

    you same cretins fought against unleaded gas and gas mileage standards of the 70’s

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Charging infrastructure is still an issue with EVs along with the expensive batteries. Eventually those will not be issues but it will take more time. If batteries could be developed that do not use rare Earth materials such a lithium that would lower the costs of batteries. I really don’t want to spend 50k or more for a battery vehicle with limited capacity to charge. I would eventually be interested in something smaller as a commuter and errand vehicle. Wish they had something along the lines of a Kei sized vehicle with some cargo space. Maybe a little EV truck smaller than the current midsize. Not interested in something to go across country in as much as a short trip vehicle that is cheap and easy to maintain.

    • 0 avatar
      NigelShiftright

      “Wish they had something along the lines of a Kei sized vehicle with some cargo space. Maybe a little EV truck”

      Well yeah, or we could have real ICE kei cars that get 60 mpg, which would be almost as good for Mother Gaia ‘n the polar bears ‘n stuff.

      But we can’t have that because the gummint and the insurance industry require we drive obese Nerf mobiles that can be punted into the Grand Canyon by a Kenworth, and still protect anyone on board from getting a boo boo.

  • avatar

    It is easily achievable if everybody sits at home. Means works from home and does not travel. Or if economy collapses. When Soviet Union collapsed it was ecological bonanza. Never before or after air and water were as clean as in early 90s.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      VVP claimed that Russia today is way cleaner than in early 1990s. I believe it. They slowly closed a lot of factories and in 10 years their industry was gone. So, no wonder they got cleaner with time. Ukraine lost a lot of industry too.

  • avatar
    Jeff S

    Well you can import KEI vehicles as long as they are 25 years old or older.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    I absolutely 100% believe the climate is changing, and that it is due to human activity. There is no shortage of data. I also 100% believe it is too damned late to do a damned thing about it, without some sort of *global* government. The reality is that many billions of poor want to live like the rich, and the rich don’t generally want to live like the poor. And humanity continues to breed like rabbits.

    So I have no intention at all of buying an EV. But I have every intention of building my “forever home” here in FL on much higher ground than my current home, to the highest hurricane survival ratings, with backup power designed in from the get-go. Long term, I did my part by not reproducing. I found it amusing in last week’s coverage of America’s oldest citizen dying at 116 that she had *300* direct descendants and climbing. Not me.

  • avatar
    downunder

    Come on down, down under that is. Australia will be the last place on earth you will be able to drive ICE-powered vehicles, not an ev in sight, well a few driven by those maniacs who believe that electric is derived from the gods. Our politicians know how to quell this ev nonsense. No funds for charging infrastructure, build govenment funder coal fired power stations but not for electricity, just so that we can consume our own coal when the world stops buying it. We will then tax EV’s for road usage because they don’t contribute via petrol (gas) taxes, although that tax hasn’t been used for roads since 1959.
    Want an educational video, watch this:- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLflYkgnNBY&t=190s.
    Like we said “come on down’ we need your petrol guzzlers!

  • avatar
    teddyc73

    The planet’s climate has been changing for billions of years. Only leftist loons with their love of big government and their ongoing agenda to control our lives think that mankind can alter the climate. It’s absurd. Now with a dementia patient running the country (good job America!)and a far left wacko woman waiting in the wings we are seriously in trouble. This country is going down the drain after four years of upward growth and positive outlook.

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    Kabuki theatre.

    Meanwhile back at the ranch…

    “On Wednesday, Biden participated in the House Democratic virtual retreat via video conference. He made some remarks about his coronavirus relief bill and turned the session back to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). “I’m happy to take questions if that’s what you — I’m supposed to do, Nance,” Biden said. “Whatever you want me to do.”

    The White House and House feeds then both ended — and the right-wing Twitterverse erupted in outrage.”

    “But Biden did answer a pair of questions from House members. It just was never intended for the question-and-answer session to be public, in what is known in the trade as “open press.” The Q&A session was intended to be “closed press.””

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/03/05/viral-misfire-white-house-video-feed-ended-biden-took-questions/

    Allegedly. Just have to take the word of professional liars without any evidence.

    “The Q&A session was intended to be “closed press.”””

    Because, get bent America – I don’t answer to you.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    Meh, this effects mainly the working poor that are trying to keep that 3800 Buick running. They overwhelmingly voted for Biden in spite of him saying this is exactly what he was going to do. On the plus side he seems to be putting some money into mass transit so they’ll have to give up a little freedom, but should still be able to get to work via the bus. Again, this is what he said he’d do so there should be no grumbling about it.

    • 0 avatar
      28-Cars-Later

      Their voting habits are akin to the beatings will continue until morale improves. If they had any sense, they would organize via the [damn] cell phones and send a message that they will dump their votes to a third party until their lives are improved beyond crumbs.

      “money into mass transit”

      Pension bailouts.

  • avatar
    singlespeeds

    i would take all ev’s just to get rid of the noise from ICE. to many in the ICE fleet have been modified to make more noise. even some stock ICE are to loud.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • ffighter69: True. Let’s not forget that TESLA was built with government subsidies.
  • harwester: Kobalt is a very good brand. Thank you so much for this cool post.
  • here4aSammich: A 10 year old BMW? Keep your local mechanic on speed dial. Personally I’d have to pass because...
  • ToolGuy: While we’re here… Tennessee Whiskey is special in its own way, thanks to the Lincoln County...
  • Jeff S: Living in the snow belt my wife has an AWD Honda CRV which does great in the snow but if I lived in a warmer...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber