Aalways remember that we are saving planet by driving and old car which means less new cars need to be produced, and old car doesent need to be recycled.
With synthetic, carbon neutral petrol Porsche is developing, future is bright.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
I might have posted this before, but I have numerous co-workers who have bought hybrids , and subsequently EVs ( almost all Teslas since this is their indigenous habitat ) and in speaking to them, not s single one among the bunch bought the cars for an altruistic save the planet concept, it was solely for the purpose of being able to use the light traffic commuter lanes. Well, that was good for many years so it paid off, but first the hybrids lost that privilege, and by next year any and all EVs will lose it as well. That’s in California, no idea about other states .. So dismayed by being treated like us “commoners” who drive gas cars, the majority are selling their Teslas and going back to real cars by next year, in spite of gas prices. It will be interesting to see who will buy used Teslas though, can’t imagine there’s much demand for those ..
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
(This post was last modified: 04-01-2022, 11:19 AM by ds968.)
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, as ALL the major automakers have literally bet their futures on the wholesale replacement of ICE SUV's (nobody seems to make cars anymore, a far bigger tragedy than the phase-out of ICE's, imho) with EVs in the very near future. It will be interesting to see if people actually buy them, or will they hold onto their ICE cars indefinitely. Personally, driving has become such a tedious chore, either snarled in traffic that makes me want to push a pencil through my eye, or droning down some boring expressway, that it makes zero difference to me what is used to fuel my car. In fact, as far as I'm concerned, self-driving cars can't come soon enough. The only place driving is fun (at least where I live) is on a race track. I've heard the argument that ICE cars will go the way of the horse, where they will ultimately no longer be used for transportation, but will continue to be used by hobbyists. That seems to make a certain amount of sense.
To me, the bottom line is this: Does it make sense to keep burning fossil fuels for our transportation needs, when there is an overwhelming amount of evidence that doing so will do irreparable harm to the only home we have, when an alternative exists? I don't see have there is any defense of a "Yes" answer to that question. The only question is how long it will take to make the change. And yes, the only way EVs make sense is if more of the electricity generation also moves away from fossil fuels, but that will also happen over time.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Someone in our town has a hybrid repair shop - they just sold a toyota prius that they removed the body and put the body off of an fold falcon onto it. - Old school cool and new tech - Except they did a horrible job and supposedly sold it before they finished and a prius is hardly new tech anymore. https://spacecoast.craigslist.org/cto/d/...24013.html
I really hate that we are being railroaded down the electric car route. I thought we had really smart people in this country that could come up with just about anything. I guess that too gets taken over by political agendas. Sad.
I get sick of seeing Jeff Bimbo and Elan Muskrat pollute the skies and space with their rockets and space junk. The only consolation is that these idiots in the "More money than brains club" who have 55 million to pay for a seat will all get dementia because of the g-loads and the cosmic rays. Why don't they make their rockets use batteries if they are so great. I am also never getting on a battery operated plane.
I reuse many things, and I try to buy the best I can afford and I try to take care of things so that my items last. I am still using a samsung galaxy 7. Going on nearly 10 years with the same phone. I keep my books, I buy good working used photography equipment and other items, and I try not to waste things. I am not swayed by the phone commercials that tell me I have to have a new phone every 6 months. I don't eat fast food that pollutes more than it nourishes (besides it tastes like garbage). My wife is still driving her '07 Honda (she won't let me buy her a new car - she doesn't like the new tech in them).
If people would do more of the same and buy used items at thrift stores to actually use them instead of just flipping them to make more money, we could be all better off. We also need to get other countries to stop polluting, and to start doing more instead of it always being the US to handle everything.
This business in Ukraine is going to get out of hand unless the Russian equivalent of seal team 6 takes putin out. Until then, it's a crap shoot as to what is going to happen. It's unbelievable that we are going through this in 2022. When are people going to realize this wealth driven society isn't self sustainable. There has to be sometime soon when it's realized that we have to be working for the species, not the individual. I just hope I can keep my head down and run out my clock without too much interference and angst. If the nukes fly, hopefully putin will think NASA is an important target to take out early so we can get hit and get it over with. The survivors are the ones who really suffer. I have had enough radiation in my life to know.
And as far as my 968 goes, I just bought brand new 25 year old shocks and struts off the shelf in Germany for the 968 instead of new Monroe's - That's gotta help the old carbon footprint.
Well, that's this round. PS...Covid's coming back and I am still wearing a mask. Have fun with that factoid.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
The billionaires in space ventures are so senseless I have no words to describe the idiocy, Yes, it’s their money and they’re entitled to spend it in any manner they wish, but to waste it on the sole purpose to satisfy their egos, with zero benefits to anything or anyone else , is beyond shameful. IMO
As for being railroaded into electric vehicles it’s not just the US, many European countries have embraced that as well, and in some respects have a jump start on it. I may be a stubborn dinosaur, I’ll never buy an electric car and will gladly donate my fossil’s fuel for whatever gasoline cars will remain on the roads post my demise..
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
I'm sure gas-powered cars will be around for many decades, even as EV's take over as new ICE cars stop being produced. I see Canada had brought in their timeline of banning new ICE sales by five years. Sorry, but that's a good thing. We just can't continue burning fossil fuels for our transportation needs when there's a viable alternative. But that doesn't mean ICE cars will disappear - they will continue to be used for "entertainment" purposes like weekend drives, racing, shows, etc. well into the foreseeable future. Again, a lot like horses are treated today. But for the mundane task of the daily grind, which covers 95% of miles driven, the conversion to EVs is inevitable, and is the right thing to do.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
There was a good article in Car and Driver about that. A big factor in EV's favor is that most of their charging occurs in off-peak hours at night, when there is plenty of reserve electric capacity. Also, the conversion to EVs is going to be gradual, over the course of several decades. The average person holds on to their car about 9 years now (it's over 11 years in the salt-free, cloudy Pacific Northwest), so there will be plenty of time to add the required electric capacity, hopefully mostly through renewables.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
How many miles could people drive if not for things like NASCAR / Formula 1 / Dakar rally's / Drag racing / Isle of Man TTL / etc....
What footprint does that all have. I understand there is some technology trickle down, but the gas powered internal combustion engine isn't going to get much better because of all this driving around in a circle at high speed.
Instead of making me buy an electric car that won't last, how about cutting back on waste. What's the carbon footprint of all this racing? How about stop building stadium after stadium for pro sports teams? There are countless ways to cut back and save the planet's resources but until jerks like Musk/Bezos/Biden/Clinton's stop chasing the all mighty dollar - it's not going to happen. It's us, the little guys with no voice and no cash that will suffer...
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Quote:How many miles could people drive if not for things like NASCAR / Formula 1 / Dakar rally's / Drag racing / Isle of Man TTL / etc....
What footprint does that all have. I understand there is some technology trickle down, but the gas powered internal combustion engine isn't going to get much better because of all this driving around in a circle at high speed.
Instead of making me buy an electric car that won't last, how about cutting back on waste. What's the carbon footprint of all this racing? How about stop building stadium after stadium for pro sports teams? There are countless ways to cut back and save the planet's resources but until jerks like Musk/Bezos/Biden/Clinton's stop chasing the all mighty dollar - it's not going to happen. It's us, the little guys with no voice and no cash that will suffer...
That's a valid point, and I don't have the answer, but I would imagine the amount of CO2 generated by all the activities you mention is very small compared to the daily commuting and product transport activities. Sports and entertainment doesn't even show up in this chart I looked up:
I did a separate search on greenhouse gas emissions from the sports and entertainment industry, and found that the vast majority of it is caused by the travel of the teams and their fans to and from the events, so the amount produced during, say, an actual race is insignificant. But it doesn't mean that the CO2 generated by the items you mention isn't important - it's probably buried somewhere in the Transportation slice in the above graph.
Climate change is a real problem (a difficult admission, coming from a long-term climate change skeptic like me), and its solutions cover the range from relatively easy to nearly impossible. Converting from internal combustion to electric for routine, daily transportation strikes me as being in the "relatively easy" category, since the vast majority of people couldn't care less what fuel is powering their SUV. The biggest obstacle is the cost; EVs will have to get cheaper before people start adopting them in a big way. Changing the fuel people use to get to and from sports and entertainment events, particularly via air travel, has to fall into the "nearly impossible" bucket, because there aren't going to be any electric planes anytime soon.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Pollution is created by many industrial components, but if you segment out the greenhouse impact on the ozone layer , before eliminating all of the gas cars, we should eliminate all the cows and other farm animals whose burps and flatulence generate a lot more adverse impact in that respect than all of the cars on the planet do. ( I might have posted this before ) And yes, cows environmental damage is said to be shorter-lived ( 5-10 years) whereas the vehicle emissions supposedly are longer lasting, for decades.. I'm more concerned with near term, and in my lifetime than what we may be leaving for future generations to deal with... perhaps a selfish philosophy, but that's my feeling on the topic..
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
Quote:Pollution is created by many industrial components, but if you segment out the greenhouse impact on the ozone layer , before eliminating all of the gas cars, we should eliminate all the cows and other farm animals whose burps and flatulence generate a lot more adverse impact in that respect than all of the cars on the planet do. ( I might have posted this before ) And yes, cows environmental damage is said to be shorter-lived ( 5-10 years) whereas the vehicle emissions supposedly are longer lasting, for decades.. I'm more concerned with near term, and in my lifetime than what we may be leaving for future generations to deal with... perhaps a selfish philosophy, but that's my feeling on the topic..
Dan,
For once, I don't agree with you, as you're missing the point. Yes, there are a lot of different forms of pollution, but the primary one that threatens the future of life on this planet is human generated CO2 emissions. And by the future, I mean within most of our lifetimes, and certainly our childrens'. To address the problem of CO2 emissions, we should use a method commonly used in our (and I'm sure many other) industry(ies) called the 9-box method. It's a very simple concept - you just list the candidate ideas to attack a problem, and rank them from 1 to 3 in two categories: Their impact, and their relative ease of implementation. So something that's easy to do and has a high impact gets a score of 9 (3 x 3), something that's hard to do and has minimal impact (and therefore will never be done) would get a 1 (1 x 1), and so on for everything in between. Since there are so many slices of the climate change pie, no single "solution" would rate very high on the impact scale, but there are large differences in the difficulty score, and therefore in the likelihood of the solution being adopted. Getting rid of farm animal flatulence would require turning everyone on the planet into a vegetarian, which will never happen, so this solution's 9-box score would be a very low. In contrast, phasing out new gas powered cars (but letting people keep their gas cars as long as they want) is actually relatively painless, because most people couldn't care less what's under their car or SUV's hood. If no new combustion cars are available for sale after, say, 2035, the demand for gas from petroleum should all but disappear through natural market forces by around 2050. But for hobbyists and enthusiasts, biofuels and other synthetic fuels will be available (again because of market demand) essentially forever, so everybody wins.
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
(This post was last modified: 04-15-2022, 04:45 PM by Cloud9...68.)
Well, I said getting rid of farm animals in a very “ tongue in cheek “ , way just to illustrate the point that they have a larger impact on the greenhouse effect than cars do, but of course that’s not just impractical, it’s pretty much impossible, ( hell, I’ll be the first one to lead the protest, I’m a huge carnivore ) so gradually phasing out gas cars is indeed a much more feasible solution to help that segment of pollution. I just wish the major and regretfully apathetic violators ( countries ) would reduce all the damage they cause from all the other industrial polluting , and dumping, and deforestation, and so on and so forth .. I’m not a tree hugger, but by the same token I’m no way near a climate change denier or denying the human efforts which can mitigate that , but I do think that human impact percentage is rather exaggerated for political reasons among other reasons ..
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
A tangent of the electric car topic, but since it’s about Tesla ..more specifically its self driving software , having just viewed this tv ad, four times today ( it’s getting a lot of air time ), thought I should share it with those who haven’t seen it yet ..
The NSTB had investigated the first generation system Tesla introduced ( for highway driving only ) after a number of cars failed to stop and hit the cars in front of them. The drivers were expected to be attentive and override system when it seems it wasn’t responding properly . One person here died when his self driving Tesla smashed into a highway center divider concrete block. Police on the scene said he was reading a newspaper at the time .. who reads newspapers nowadays..in cars ..while “driving“ ?!
Fast forward to the new generation software, meant for city streets ; Tesla recalled all 54,000 vehicles released to a segment of selected drivers , because the cars were not making full stops at intersections, and just rolling through stop signs, while a few others smashed into parked cars. The cars “fought” the drivers attempts to control them just long enough ( a second or two ) to cause those crashes .
I‘m never getting into one of those , especially when the car “ fights “ your attempts to adjust its turning or other maneuvers which may be dangerous .
And they were proposing introducing no driver cars to be used as taxis ?! Ha !!
</div>
Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.
(This post was last modified: 04-20-2022, 11:50 AM by ds968.)
) and in speaking to them, not s single one among the bunch bought the cars for an altruistic save the planet concept, it was solely for the purpose of being able to use the light traffic commuter lanes. Well, that was good for many years so it paid off, but first the hybrids lost that privilege, and by next year any and all EVs will lose it as well. That’s in California, no idea about other states .. So dismayed by being treated like us “commoners” who drive gas cars, the majority are selling their Teslas and going back to real cars by next year, in spite of gas prices. It will be interesting to see who will buy used Teslas though, can’t imagine there’s much demand for those .. 
.. oh well, I’m a risk taker, so here we go : 