info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Biden, pipelines, climate, reality.
26 views
Skip to first unread message
Bill Idgerant
Jan 30, 2021, 4:32:31 PM1/30/21
to
Since I saw Biden sign the EO killing Keystone XL on TV, this is a legal
post!
I understand that the Dems need to address climate change. (Whether it's
a "crisis" is certainly up for debate. Or at least should be.) So
they've got John Kerry and a few others on the file. That's great, but
what are they actually doing that will address climate change? There
have been a few moves at the edges, but nothing substantial. Setting an
example for other countries is often cited as an important aspect of
this quest. After the last four years, does any rational person actually
believe the USA is an example to follow? Maybe in another 4 years there
will be a better example, but today? Nope.
As part of the Dems need to address climate change, Biden has made the
largely symbolic move to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. This will have
exactly 0% effect on climate and may even add to it because the energy
demand that would have been satisfied by Canadian heavy crude coming to
Gulf refineries will be replaced by crude from Venezuela, possibly
Nigeria and elsewhere with far weaker environmental and carbon reducing
practices than Canada.
As a result, American construction jobs will disappear. This will
improve the lot of Republicans who campaign on behalf of blue collar
workers, like Dems used to do. And not one gallon less of gasoline will
be burned as a result.
The Canadian and Alberta governments will complain about the
cancellation, and point out the fallacy of it helping save the planet,
but nothing will happen, because Joe Biden needed to show Bernie, AOC
and other "progressives" that he was serious about climate, even if he's
only really serious about giving speeches about climate and appointing
people to White House climate jobs.
If Biden wants to be seen as serious about jobs, and the climate, he
could get his Dems in the House and Senate to agree to a huge
infrastructure bill to put the Keystone welders to work fixing bridges
and pay for it all with a 4-5 cent a gallon gas tax. Wonder if there
will be "unity" over that.
--
Bill Idgerant
(Not a real person)
post!
I understand that the Dems need to address climate change. (Whether it's
a "crisis" is certainly up for debate. Or at least should be.) So
they've got John Kerry and a few others on the file. That's great, but
what are they actually doing that will address climate change? There
have been a few moves at the edges, but nothing substantial. Setting an
example for other countries is often cited as an important aspect of
this quest. After the last four years, does any rational person actually
believe the USA is an example to follow? Maybe in another 4 years there
will be a better example, but today? Nope.
As part of the Dems need to address climate change, Biden has made the
largely symbolic move to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. This will have
exactly 0% effect on climate and may even add to it because the energy
demand that would have been satisfied by Canadian heavy crude coming to
Gulf refineries will be replaced by crude from Venezuela, possibly
Nigeria and elsewhere with far weaker environmental and carbon reducing
practices than Canada.
As a result, American construction jobs will disappear. This will
improve the lot of Republicans who campaign on behalf of blue collar
workers, like Dems used to do. And not one gallon less of gasoline will
be burned as a result.
The Canadian and Alberta governments will complain about the
cancellation, and point out the fallacy of it helping save the planet,
but nothing will happen, because Joe Biden needed to show Bernie, AOC
and other "progressives" that he was serious about climate, even if he's
only really serious about giving speeches about climate and appointing
people to White House climate jobs.
If Biden wants to be seen as serious about jobs, and the climate, he
could get his Dems in the House and Senate to agree to a huge
infrastructure bill to put the Keystone welders to work fixing bridges
and pay for it all with a 4-5 cent a gallon gas tax. Wonder if there
will be "unity" over that.
--
Bill Idgerant
(Not a real person)
RichA
Jan 30, 2021, 6:19:15 PM1/30/21
to
suzeeq
Jan 30, 2021, 6:47:50 PM1/30/21
to
nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
put new jobs in place, such as building batteries and wind turbines, in
the regions where the job losses occur. Right now we're relying on these
products being imported from other countries including China, and it
would be better for us if they're made in America. It was really
interesting and may be repeated again on CSPAN.
Adam H. Kerman
Jan 30, 2021, 7:07:41 PM1/30/21
to
suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>. . .
>I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>put new jobs in place, such as building batteries and wind turbines, in
>the regions where the job losses occur. Right now we're relying on these
>products being imported from other countries including China, and it
>would be better for us if they're made in America. It was really
>interesting and may be repeated again on CSPAN.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?508227-1/energy-secretary-nominee-jennifer-granholm-testifies-confirmation-hearing
>>. . .
>I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>put new jobs in place, such as building batteries and wind turbines, in
>the regions where the job losses occur. Right now we're relying on these
>products being imported from other countries including China, and it
>would be better for us if they're made in America. It was really
>interesting and may be repeated again on CSPAN.
Bill Idgerant
Jan 30, 2021, 7:34:57 PM1/30/21
to
years on the job working on pipelines and building refineries, am I
really going to want to work on an assembly line somewhere screwing
solar panels together for half the pay? Especially when I'm told
pipelines need to be cancelled to reduce energy consumption and save the
planet, but energy consumption actually goes up as demand continues, and
oil that would have come in via pipeline now comes in via oil tanker
from Venezuela and Saudi Arabia. Dems accuse the GOP of lying about all
sorts of things. Why won't the Dems stop lying about energy use?
suzeeq
Jan 30, 2021, 8:38:53 PM1/30/21
to
and the hearings have been interesting.
suzeeq
Jan 30, 2021, 8:41:03 PM1/30/21
to
They've got more jobs in mind than screwing panels together. Making the
components for the panels, turbine, batteries, etc. There'll be an
opportunity to put those welding skills to use.
BTR1701
Jan 30, 2021, 8:48:22 PM1/30/21
to
In article <rv4r72$2124$1...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
wrote:
Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
waste.
It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
looks like the surface of the moon.
Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
> and wind turbines
Otherwise known as giant bird-pureeing devices. The avian killing fields:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/12-post-your-photos/15669
6d1358919686-travel-palm-springs-windmills-1-001.jpg
The enviro-nuts are always condescendingly telling us what's good for
the earth as if they have some kind of hotline to Gaia and we need to
listen to them, then they turn out to be spectacularly wrong.
The enviro-nuts lobbied California for years in support of a huge solar
array in the desert near the Nevada border called the Ivanpah Solar
Electric Generating System. It's three massive fields of mirrors that
are computer controlled and angle the sunlight to focus it on towers at
the center of each array. The sunlight superheats water in the towers,
which creates steam, and drives turbines, generating electricity.
http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/ef84fdc31e920d
36ca6e758ac463ee25/image/_resized/80_630_225_stillings2.jpg
So after finally winning their victory, the enviro-nuts triumphantly
celebrated this clean energy facility that they said had zero negative
impact on the environment.
Fast-forward a half-decade. Those same enviro-nuts are now protesting
the very facility they championed and want it shut down because while
the power plant doesn't emit any greenhouse gases, it does flash-fry
tens of thousands of migratory birds every year. The sunlight is so
intense near those towers that any bird that flies through the valley
ignites into a fireball and drops dead to the ground.
So at the behest of these enviro-nuts, who assured us they knew so much
better than us mere mortals what was good for the environment, we
(California taxpayers) shelled out a billion-plus dollars on this
project only to have those same nuts turn around and almost immediately
say, "Now shut it down because it's bad for the environment."
wrote:
those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
waste.
It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
looks like the surface of the moon.
Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
> and wind turbines
Otherwise known as giant bird-pureeing devices. The avian killing fields:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/12-post-your-photos/15669
6d1358919686-travel-palm-springs-windmills-1-001.jpg
The enviro-nuts are always condescendingly telling us what's good for
the earth as if they have some kind of hotline to Gaia and we need to
listen to them, then they turn out to be spectacularly wrong.
The enviro-nuts lobbied California for years in support of a huge solar
array in the desert near the Nevada border called the Ivanpah Solar
Electric Generating System. It's three massive fields of mirrors that
are computer controlled and angle the sunlight to focus it on towers at
the center of each array. The sunlight superheats water in the towers,
which creates steam, and drives turbines, generating electricity.
http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/ef84fdc31e920d
36ca6e758ac463ee25/image/_resized/80_630_225_stillings2.jpg
So after finally winning their victory, the enviro-nuts triumphantly
celebrated this clean energy facility that they said had zero negative
impact on the environment.
Fast-forward a half-decade. Those same enviro-nuts are now protesting
the very facility they championed and want it shut down because while
the power plant doesn't emit any greenhouse gases, it does flash-fry
tens of thousands of migratory birds every year. The sunlight is so
intense near those towers that any bird that flies through the valley
ignites into a fireball and drops dead to the ground.
So at the behest of these enviro-nuts, who assured us they knew so much
better than us mere mortals what was good for the environment, we
(California taxpayers) shelled out a billion-plus dollars on this
project only to have those same nuts turn around and almost immediately
say, "Now shut it down because it's bad for the environment."
FPP
Jan 31, 2021, 2:10:05 AM1/31/21
to
Wind Turbines: 234,000
Electrocutions: 5,6000,000
Collisions w/electrical lines: 25,500,000
Poison: 72,000,000
Vehicle Collisions: 214,500,000
Building Collisions: 599,000,000
Cats: 2,400,000,000
So to sum up..
Wind turbines, one quarter of a million dead birds.
Cats, almost 2 1/2 BILLION dead birds.
When will the bullshit end?
--
"Truth isn't truth!" (Yes, it is.)*
"What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."
(Yes, it is.)*
"Our press secretary gave alternative facts" (No, he lied.)*
"I will never lie to you, you have my word on that" (Yes, you did... a
lot.)*
* Under New Management -January 20, 2021
Ubiquitous
Jan 31, 2021, 5:35:37 AM1/31/21
to
Non...@fake.net wrote:
>Since I saw Biden sign the EO killing Keystone XL on TV,
>this is a legal post!
TROLL-O-METER
>Since I saw Biden sign the EO killing Keystone XL on TV,
>this is a legal post!
5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
Ubiquitous
Jan 31, 2021, 5:41:45 AM1/31/21
to
atr...@mac.com wrote:
environmental rules and reulagtions, buyt yeahm depenbding on our enemy
for these materials is ridiculous.
>Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
>delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem to realize
these cars need to be recharged.
>> and wind turbines
>
>Otherwise known as giant bird-pureeing devices. The avian killing fields:
Ever notice how these people demanding wind turbines don't want them in
their neighborhoods?
--
Trump won.
> suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>> I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>> nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>> states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>> Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>> auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>> put new jobs in place, such as building batteries
>
>Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
>those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
>those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
>waste.
>
>It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
>the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
>as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
>have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
>
>And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
>environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
>looks like the surface of the moon.
I thought most of the heavy metals came from China, where there are no
>> I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>> nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>> states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>> Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>> auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>> put new jobs in place, such as building batteries
>
>Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
>those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
>those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
>waste.
>
>It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
>the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
>as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
>have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
>
>And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
>environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
>looks like the surface of the moon.
environmental rules and reulagtions, buyt yeahm depenbding on our enemy
for these materials is ridiculous.
>Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
>delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
these cars need to be recharged.
>> and wind turbines
>
>Otherwise known as giant bird-pureeing devices. The avian killing fields:
their neighborhoods?
--
Trump won.
moviePig
Jan 31, 2021, 10:00:41 AM1/31/21
to
FPP
Jan 31, 2021, 10:03:13 AM1/31/21
to
trotsky
Jan 31, 2021, 11:00:01 AM1/31/21
to
pile of bullshit. As usual.
suzeeq
Jan 31, 2021, 12:40:58 PM1/31/21
to
The Horny Goat
Jan 31, 2021, 2:37:24 PM1/31/21
to
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 14:32:26 -0700, Bill Idgerant <Non...@fake.net>
wrote:
>As part of the Dems need to address climate change, Biden has made the
>largely symbolic move to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. This will have
>exactly 0% effect on climate and may even add to it because the energy
>demand that would have been satisfied by Canadian heavy crude coming to
>Gulf refineries will be replaced by crude from Venezuela, possibly
>Nigeria and elsewhere with far weaker environmental and carbon reducing
>practices than Canada.
>
>As a result, American construction jobs will disappear. This will
>improve the lot of Republicans who campaign on behalf of blue collar
>workers, like Dems used to do. And not one gallon less of gasoline will
>be burned as a result.
>
>The Canadian and Alberta governments will complain about the
>cancellation, and point out the fallacy of it helping save the planet,
>but nothing will happen, because Joe Biden needed to show Bernie, AOC
>and other "progressives" that he was serious about climate, even if he's
>only really serious about giving speeches about climate and appointing
>people to White House climate jobs.
As well they might - it has meant the write off of multi-billion
dollar investments.
And no question Trump renegotiated NAFTA on terms rather more
favorable to the United States than what it replaced while Biden's
almost first move after inauguration has been to stick it to America's
closest ally.
(What's interesting is that the present agreement between the US and
Canada about closing the border was negotiated by Mike Pence and the
Canadian deputy prime minister without involvement by Trump or Trudeau
but ratified by both after the fact - and it will remain so until both
decide it's safe to re-open with the sole exception of transit of
goods)
wrote:
>As part of the Dems need to address climate change, Biden has made the
>largely symbolic move to kill the Keystone XL pipeline. This will have
>exactly 0% effect on climate and may even add to it because the energy
>demand that would have been satisfied by Canadian heavy crude coming to
>Gulf refineries will be replaced by crude from Venezuela, possibly
>Nigeria and elsewhere with far weaker environmental and carbon reducing
>practices than Canada.
>
>As a result, American construction jobs will disappear. This will
>improve the lot of Republicans who campaign on behalf of blue collar
>workers, like Dems used to do. And not one gallon less of gasoline will
>be burned as a result.
>
>The Canadian and Alberta governments will complain about the
>cancellation, and point out the fallacy of it helping save the planet,
>but nothing will happen, because Joe Biden needed to show Bernie, AOC
>and other "progressives" that he was serious about climate, even if he's
>only really serious about giving speeches about climate and appointing
>people to White House climate jobs.
dollar investments.
And no question Trump renegotiated NAFTA on terms rather more
favorable to the United States than what it replaced while Biden's
almost first move after inauguration has been to stick it to America's
closest ally.
(What's interesting is that the present agreement between the US and
Canada about closing the border was negotiated by Mike Pence and the
Canadian deputy prime minister without involvement by Trump or Trudeau
but ratified by both after the fact - and it will remain so until both
decide it's safe to re-open with the sole exception of transit of
goods)
The Horny Goat
Jan 31, 2021, 2:40:56 PM1/31/21
to
On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:19:12 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the U.S., Euro=
>pe and Canada could go CO2 free and it would change nothing. They U.S. has=
> been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The major problem in thi=
>s area are China, India, really most of Asia. There ARE no controls there,=
> CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds of China's soil and water are hea=
virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
marginally limiting carbon emissions. As for Canada we could all
commit suicide and it would not benefit world carbon levels by any
measurable amount. Not saying we shouldn't do our part but AM saying a
country of 35 million can't save the world single-handed.
wrote:
>Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the U.S., Euro=
>pe and Canada could go CO2 free and it would change nothing. They U.S. has=
> been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The major problem in thi=
>s area are China, India, really most of Asia. There ARE no controls there,=
> CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds of China's soil and water are hea=
>vily contaminated, most of the planet's pollution originates from there.
I oppose Kyoto not because I think it's a non-problem but because by
virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
marginally limiting carbon emissions. As for Canada we could all
commit suicide and it would not benefit world carbon levels by any
measurable amount. Not saying we shouldn't do our part but AM saying a
country of 35 million can't save the world single-handed.
BTR1701
Jan 31, 2021, 4:18:34 PM1/31/21
to
In article <ao1e1glqdj4qi3qqp...@4ax.com>,
The U.N.'s own climate model shows that if every signatory country,
including China and India, scrupulously lived up to the stated goals of
Kyoto and Paris, it would produce a total reduction in global
temperature of 0.2 degrees in the next 100 years.
In other words, it would have a negligible and barely measurable effect
on 'climate change'.
They want us to hobble our economies and radically alter our way of life
for mostly nothing. But it *will* accomplish a mass redistribution of
global wealth, which is the real goal of this whole scam.
The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:19:12 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the U.S., Euro=
> >pe and Canada could go CO2 free and it would change nothing. They U.S. has=
> > been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The major problem in thi=
> >s area are China, India, really most of Asia. There ARE no controls there,=
> > CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds of China's soil and water are hea=
> >vily contaminated, most of the planet's pollution originates from there.
>
> I oppose Kyoto not because I think it's a non-problem but because by
> virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
> the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
> would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
> marginally limiting carbon emissions.
And because it's pointless.
> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:19:12 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the U.S., Euro=
> >pe and Canada could go CO2 free and it would change nothing. They U.S. has=
> > been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The major problem in thi=
> >s area are China, India, really most of Asia. There ARE no controls there,=
> > CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds of China's soil and water are hea=
> >vily contaminated, most of the planet's pollution originates from there.
>
> I oppose Kyoto not because I think it's a non-problem but because by
> virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
> the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
> would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
> marginally limiting carbon emissions.
The U.N.'s own climate model shows that if every signatory country,
including China and India, scrupulously lived up to the stated goals of
Kyoto and Paris, it would produce a total reduction in global
temperature of 0.2 degrees in the next 100 years.
In other words, it would have a negligible and barely measurable effect
on 'climate change'.
They want us to hobble our economies and radically alter our way of life
for mostly nothing. But it *will* accomplish a mass redistribution of
global wealth, which is the real goal of this whole scam.
BTR1701
Jan 31, 2021, 4:21:08 PM1/31/21
to
In article <rv5l49$2ag$1...@dont-email.me>, FPP <fred...@gmail.com>
wrote:
ridiculous, doesn't it?
wrote:
> Wind turbines, one quarter of a million dead birds.
> Cats, almost 2 1/2 BILLION dead birds.
Which only makes the continued bleating of the enviro-nuts even more
> Cats, almost 2 1/2 BILLION dead birds.
ridiculous, doesn't it?
BTR1701
Jan 31, 2021, 4:25:12 PM1/31/21
to
In article <rv6q36$2jlb$1...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
wrote:
Even out in the middle of the Mojave Desert?
How do you drive from L.A. to Vegas when your electric hamster-mobile
starts to run out of juice in the middle of the great empty?
And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
wrote:
How do you drive from L.A. to Vegas when your electric hamster-mobile
starts to run out of juice in the middle of the great empty?
And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
suzeeq
Jan 31, 2021, 4:34:02 PM1/31/21
to
> And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
> batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
> and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
> electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
> camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
> Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
>
BTR1701
Jan 31, 2021, 5:03:14 PM1/31/21
to
In article <rv77o7$30n0$1...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
You've never made that drive, have you?
> > And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
> > batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
> > and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
> > electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
> > camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
> > Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
> >
> They're developing quick charge technology that won't take as long.
And that technology is decades away from being realized, if ever.
It's ludicrous that Newsom wants to convert all 30 million cars in the
state to electricity when he can't even keep the lights on *now*. The
grid can't even handle the current load without shutting down and
plunging millions into darkness on a regular basis. But somehow we're
supposed to plug millions of cars into it, too?
What happens when SoCal Edison shuts your power off because the winds
start blowing (as they regularly do) and now you can't charge your car
and later you get the news that a wildfire is approaching? I guess you
gotta hope that you can run faster than the fireline is advancing. All
the while thanking the Democrats for putting you in that position...
> > And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
> > batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
> > and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
> > electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
> > camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
> > Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
> >
> They're developing quick charge technology that won't take as long.
It's ludicrous that Newsom wants to convert all 30 million cars in the
state to electricity when he can't even keep the lights on *now*. The
grid can't even handle the current load without shutting down and
plunging millions into darkness on a regular basis. But somehow we're
supposed to plug millions of cars into it, too?
What happens when SoCal Edison shuts your power off because the winds
start blowing (as they regularly do) and now you can't charge your car
and later you get the news that a wildfire is approaching? I guess you
gotta hope that you can run faster than the fireline is advancing. All
the while thanking the Democrats for putting you in that position...
anim8rfsk
Jan 31, 2021, 5:34:45 PM1/31/21
to
route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
an hour.
--
“The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it’s still on my list.”
FPP
Jan 31, 2021, 6:18:14 PM1/31/21
to
suzeeq
Jan 31, 2021, 6:22:36 PM1/31/21
to
FPP
Jan 31, 2021, 6:23:05 PM1/31/21
to
Just disregard the fact that wealth has been redistributed one way for
the last 40 years already.
trotsky
Feb 1, 2021, 6:37:34 AM2/1/21
to
On 1/30/21 7:52 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
> those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
> those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
> waste.
What kind of radiation poisoning can you get from batteries, idiot?
> Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
> those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
> those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
> waste.
trotsky
Feb 1, 2021, 6:46:18 AM2/1/21
to
a Herculean effort across the globe, and stop the continual rise in
temps, that the small amount of reduction makes it not worth it? I do
believe this is the stupidest motherfucking thing I've ever heard you
utter. Dropped out of grade school fucking stupid. You literally said
a cessation in the global rise in temperatures means nothing if there
isn't a significant reduction of temperatures. I could have a team of
dudes with baseball bats hit me in the head and not be able to come up
with something that fucking stupid.
The only thing I find interesting here is if it was stupidity or
dishonesty to motivate you to say such horseshit.
trotsky
Feb 1, 2021, 6:53:11 AM2/1/21
to
than a bag of dog shit like I said.
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 1, 2021, 1:06:18 PM2/1/21
to
driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 1:19:15 PM2/1/21
to
>> route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
>> an hour.
>
> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>
Chevy, Ford, and GM are spending billions into new electric car tech,
>> an hour.
>
> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>
which will mean cars with a longer range and shorter charges than the
first generation has been.
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 1:43:39 PM2/1/21
to
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 1, 2021, 2:35:34 PM2/1/21
to
Ubiquitous
Feb 1, 2021, 3:24:47 PM2/1/21
to
--
Trump won.
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 3:26:58 PM2/1/21
to
Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
Siri says Los Angeles to Las Vegas is 269 miles by car.
The Tesla model S
https://www.tesla.com/models
has a 390 mile range and goes 200 miles per hour.
Actually apparently any current Tesla model has a range well over 300 miles
so none of them need charging stations along the way.
In fact most of them have the range to go from Sandy Eggo to Las Vegas.
So we’re good to go.
—
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 3:28:43 PM2/1/21
to
>> charging station
>>>> route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
>>>> an hour.
>>>
>>> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
>>> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>>>
>> Chevy, Ford, and GM are spending billions into new electric car tech,
>> which will mean cars with a longer range and shorter charges than the
>> first generation has been.
>
> anim said 200 mph.
>
I figured that was an exaggeration.
>>>> route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
>>>> an hour.
>>>
>>> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
>>> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>>>
>> Chevy, Ford, and GM are spending billions into new electric car tech,
>> which will mean cars with a longer range and shorter charges than the
>> first generation has been.
>
> anim said 200 mph.
>
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 3:29:23 PM2/1/21
to
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 3:29:27 PM2/1/21
to
has its own ginormous diesel generator to power it.
--
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 3:29:48 PM2/1/21
to
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 3:33:20 PM2/1/21
to
On 2/1/2021 11:35 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>> On 2/1/2021 10:06 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>> That’s why you need a Tesla. Long range, short charge,
> suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>> On 2/1/2021 10:06 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>> anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>> charging station
>>>> route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
>>>> an hour.
>>>
>>> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
>>> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>>>
>> Chevy, Ford, and GM are spending billions into new electric car tech,
>> which will mean cars with a longer range and shorter charges than the
>> first generation has been.
>
> anim said 200 mph.
>
I guess he wasn't exaggerating. But they don't have to be Teslas. A car
>>>> route specifically designed for the drive from LA to Las Vegas at 200 miles
>>>> an hour.
>>>
>>> Are the Tesla people going to build a guideway that can be safely
>>> driven? It's so lovely to shift the cost onto someone else.
>>>
>> Chevy, Ford, and GM are spending billions into new electric car tech,
>> which will mean cars with a longer range and shorter charges than the
>> first generation has been.
>
> anim said 200 mph.
>
that can do 80 mph ought to be doable.
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 1, 2021, 3:51:10 PM2/1/21
to
I still don't want to pay for any roadway for anyone to drive at 200
mph. Let those idiots pay for it themselves.
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 1, 2021, 3:52:04 PM2/1/21
to
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 3:56:51 PM2/1/21
to
Angeles is 270 miles so I picked the shorter trip.
Or were you being Cagey?
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 1, 2021, 4:00:32 PM2/1/21
to
A Friend
Feb 1, 2021, 4:24:36 PM2/1/21
to
>
> Will that be your next car?
I'm a lifelong East Coaster and so this is a serious question: The
> Will that be your next car?
Tesla people say you need 30 minutes for a charge. (I presume this is
a full charge.) L.A. to Vegas appears to be about the limit of a Tesla
without a recharge but, as others here have said, I'd hate to be stuck
out in the middle of the desert with a dead car.
I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 4:51:59 PM2/1/21
to
In article <rv9obo$28mi$3...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
wrote:
We also had plans to provide reliable electricity to Southern California
and they worked well for decades until the 'progressive' Democrats
started dismantling them all. Now we live with days, sometimes weeks, of
blackouts like some 3rd-world country whose government can't keep the
lights on.
wrote:
and they worked well for decades until the 'progressive' Democrats
started dismantling them all. Now we live with days, sometimes weeks, of
blackouts like some 3rd-world country whose government can't keep the
lights on.
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 4:53:06 PM2/1/21
to
In article
<1587987772.633904110.0...@news.easynews.com>,
The sad thing, most of the preening virtue-signaling Prius-driving progs
won't even notice the problem with that.
<1587987772.633904110.0...@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > su...@imbris.com wrote:
> >> On 1/31/2021 01:34 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> >>> atr...@mac.com wrote:
> >
> >>>> Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
> >>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
> >>>
> >>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem
> >>> to realize these cars need to be recharged.
> >>
> >> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
> >
> > No, I meant a way to produce the electricty...
> Ubiquitous <web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> > su...@imbris.com wrote:
> >> On 1/31/2021 01:34 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> >>> atr...@mac.com wrote:
> >
> >>>> Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
> >>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
> >>>
> >>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem
> >>> to realize these cars need to be recharged.
> >>
> >> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
> >
> > No, I meant a way to produce the electricty...
> On the Facebook there’s a picture of an electric car charging station that
> has its own ginormous diesel generator to power it.
Hahahahahahaha!
> has its own ginormous diesel generator to power it.
The sad thing, most of the preening virtue-signaling Prius-driving progs
won't even notice the problem with that.
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 4:54:32 PM2/1/21
to
In article <rv8q33$2mvh$1...@neodome.net>, trotsky <gms...@email.com>
wrote:
You're going to tell a single mother of three who's working two jobs
just to put food on the table that she has to buy a Tesla luxury car or
take the bus from the now on?
You 'progs' sure are compassionate to the marginalized, Hutt.
wrote:
just to put food on the table that she has to buy a Tesla luxury car or
take the bus from the now on?
You 'progs' sure are compassionate to the marginalized, Hutt.
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 4:55:21 PM2/1/21
to
In article
<1421162840.633824838.0...@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
And how many people can afford a Tesla?
<1421162840.633824838.0...@news.easynews.com>,
anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> > And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
> > batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
> > and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
> > electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
> > camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
> > Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
> That's why you need a Tesla.
> > batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
> > and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
> > electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
> > camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
> > Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
And how many people can afford a Tesla?
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 4:59:14 PM2/1/21
to
In article <rv7e4m$79a$1...@dont-email.me>, FPP <fred...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 1/31/21 4:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <ao1e1glqdj4qi3qqp...@4ax.com>,
> > The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:19:12 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the
> >>> U.S., Europe and Canada could go CO2 free and it would change nothing.
> >>> The U.S. has been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The
> >>> major problem in this area are China, India, really most of Asia.
> >>> There ARE no controls there, CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds
> >>> of China's soil and water are hea vily contaminated, most of the
excuses for it.
wrote:
> On 1/31/21 4:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > In article <ao1e1glqdj4qi3qqp...@4ax.com>,
> > The Horny Goat <lcr...@home.ca> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 15:19:12 -0800 (PST), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Assuming CO2 released by humans even impacts climate at all, the
> >>> The U.S. has been at 1990 CO2 levels for years, no increases. The
> >>> major problem in this area are China, India, really most of Asia.
> >>> There ARE no controls there, CO2 or REAL pollution otherwise. 2/3rds
> >>> of China's soil and water are hea vily contaminated, most of the
> >>> planet's pollution originates from there.
> >>
> >> I oppose Kyoto not because I think it's a non-problem but because by
> >> virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
> >> the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
> >> would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
> >> marginally limiting carbon emissions.
> >
> > And because it's pointless.
> >
> > The U.N.'s own climate model shows that if every signatory country,
> > including China and India, scrupulously lived up to the stated goals of
> > Kyoto and Paris, it would produce a total reduction in global
> > temperature of 0.2 degrees in the next 100 years.
> >
> > In other words, it would have a negligible and barely measurable effect
> > on 'climate change'.
> >
> > They want us to hobble our economies and radically alter our way of life
> > for mostly nothing. But it *will* accomplish a mass redistribution of
> > global wealth, which is the real goal of this whole scam.
> >>
> >> I oppose Kyoto not because I think it's a non-problem but because by
> >> virtue of essentially giving China and India a free pass while putting
> >> the whole cost on North America and the EU if fully carried out it
> >> would put North America and the EU in permanent recession while only
> >> marginally limiting carbon emissions.
> >
> > And because it's pointless.
> >
> > The U.N.'s own climate model shows that if every signatory country,
> > including China and India, scrupulously lived up to the stated goals of
> > Kyoto and Paris, it would produce a total reduction in global
> > temperature of 0.2 degrees in the next 100 years.
> >
> > In other words, it would have a negligible and barely measurable effect
> > on 'climate change'.
> >
> > They want us to hobble our economies and radically alter our way of life
> > for mostly nothing. But it *will* accomplish a mass redistribution of
> > global wealth, which is the real goal of this whole scam.
> Just disregard the fact that wealth has been redistributed one way for
> the last 40 years already.
Well, at least you admit to the redistribution scheme even as you make
> the last 40 years already.
excuses for it.
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 5:06:25 PM2/1/21
to
In article <010220211624302352%no...@noway.com>,
Barstow's entire economy pretty much revolves around the people who stop
at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
the whole trip on one tank.
at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
the whole trip on one tank.
moviePig
Feb 1, 2021, 5:26:11 PM2/1/21
to
A Friend
Feb 1, 2021, 5:59:42 PM2/1/21
to
In article <atropos-F96FC8...@news.giganews.com>, BTR1701
<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article <010220211624302352%no...@noway.com>,
> A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <rv9ob0$28mi$2...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2/1/2021 12:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > Siri says Los Angeles to Las Vegas is 269 miles by car.
> > > >
> > > > The Tesla model S
> > > > https://www.tesla.com/models
> > > > has a 390 mile range and goes 200 miles per hour.
> > > > Actually apparently any current Tesla model has a range well over 300
> > > > miles
> > > > so none of them need charging stations along the way.
> > > > In fact most of them have the range to go from Sandy Eggo to Las Vegas.
> > > > So weźre good to go.
> In article <010220211624302352%no...@noway.com>,
> A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <rv9ob0$28mi$2...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 2/1/2021 12:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
> >
> >
> > > > Siri says Los Angeles to Las Vegas is 269 miles by car.
> > > >
> > > > The Tesla model S
> > > > https://www.tesla.com/models
> > > > has a 390 mile range and goes 200 miles per hour.
> > > > Actually apparently any current Tesla model has a range well over 300
> > > > miles
> > > > so none of them need charging stations along the way.
> > > > In fact most of them have the range to go from Sandy Eggo to Las Vegas.
> > >
> > > Will that be your next car?
>
> > I'm a lifelong East Coaster and so this is a serious question: The
> > Tesla people say you need 30 minutes for a charge. (I presume this is
> > a full charge.) L.A. to Vegas appears to be about the limit of a Tesla
> > without a recharge but, as others here have said, I'd hate to be stuck
> > out in the middle of the desert with a dead car.
> >
> > I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
> > routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
> > beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
> > wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
>
> Barstow's entire economy pretty much revolves around the people who stop
> at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
> massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
> the whole trip on one tank.
Thanks for all of that.
> > > Will that be your next car?
>
> > I'm a lifelong East Coaster and so this is a serious question: The
> > Tesla people say you need 30 minutes for a charge. (I presume this is
> > a full charge.) L.A. to Vegas appears to be about the limit of a Tesla
> > without a recharge but, as others here have said, I'd hate to be stuck
> > out in the middle of the desert with a dead car.
> >
> > I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
> > routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
> > beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
> > wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
>
> Barstow's entire economy pretty much revolves around the people who stop
> at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
> massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
> the whole trip on one tank.
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 6:43:17 PM2/1/21
to
On 2/1/2021 01:24 PM, A Friend wrote:
> In article <rv9ob0$28mi$2...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/1/2021 12:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>
>
>>> Siri says Los Angeles to Las Vegas is 269 miles by car.
>>>
>>> The Tesla model S
>>> https://www.tesla.com/models
>>> has a 390 mile range and goes 200 miles per hour.
>>> Actually apparently any current Tesla model has a range well over 300 miles
>>> so none of them need charging stations along the way.
>>> In fact most of them have the range to go from Sandy Eggo to Las Vegas.
>>> So we¹re good to go.
> In article <rv9ob0$28mi$2...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2/1/2021 12:26 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
>
>
>>> Siri says Los Angeles to Las Vegas is 269 miles by car.
>>>
>>> The Tesla model S
>>> https://www.tesla.com/models
>>> has a 390 mile range and goes 200 miles per hour.
>>> Actually apparently any current Tesla model has a range well over 300 miles
>>> so none of them need charging stations along the way.
>>> In fact most of them have the range to go from Sandy Eggo to Las Vegas.
>>
>> Will that be your next car?
>
>
> I'm a lifelong East Coaster and so this is a serious question: The
> Tesla people say you need 30 minutes for a charge. (I presume this is
> a full charge.) L.A. to Vegas appears to be about the limit of a Tesla
> without a recharge but, as others here have said, I'd hate to be stuck
> out in the middle of the desert with a dead car.
>
> I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
> routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
> beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
> wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
Usually you would need a pee or gas break anyway.
>> Will that be your next car?
>
>
> I'm a lifelong East Coaster and so this is a serious question: The
> Tesla people say you need 30 minutes for a charge. (I presume this is
> a full charge.) L.A. to Vegas appears to be about the limit of a Tesla
> without a recharge but, as others here have said, I'd hate to be stuck
> out in the middle of the desert with a dead car.
>
> I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
> routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
> beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
> wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
suzeeq
Feb 1, 2021, 6:44:53 PM2/1/21
to
electric cart with a longer range to them that's affordable
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 7:00:06 PM2/1/21
to
--
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 7:10:21 PM2/1/21
to
I’d have to live in it, like a hot homeless girl on the Nookie, but I
could.
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 7:10:22 PM2/1/21
to
BTR1701
Feb 1, 2021, 7:19:32 PM2/1/21
to
In article
<68911814.633917107.16...@news.easynews.com>,
If you're a hot homeless Nookie girl, you don't have to afford it. The
cops'll give it to you.
<68911814.633917107.16...@news.easynews.com>,
cops'll give it to you.
shawn
Feb 1, 2021, 8:10:51 PM2/1/21
to
license their technology. So that someone with deeper pockets and
experience can help bring their technology to the masses.
anim8rfsk
Feb 1, 2021, 8:30:09 PM2/1/21
to
too.
FPP
Feb 1, 2021, 10:15:51 PM2/1/21
to
DONE what you ACCUSE Democrats of doing.
You don't have to be an economist to see the rich got richer, and the
poor got poorer, even though they worked longer and harder.
--
"Truth isn't truth!" (Yes, it is.)*
"What you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening."
(Yes, it is.)*
"Our press secretary gave alternative facts" (No, he lied.)*
"I will never lie to you, you have my word on that" (Yes, you did... a
lot.)*
* Under New Management -January 20, 2021
FPP
Feb 1, 2021, 10:16:52 PM2/1/21
to
FPP
Feb 1, 2021, 10:20:18 PM2/1/21
to
But, hey... if you NEED to lie about that, don't let common sense stop you.
trotsky
Feb 2, 2021, 8:02:55 AM2/2/21
to
damaging to the enviroment powering electric cars as would be if were
just thousands and thousands of gas powered cars operating in its place?
I know the two of you are stupid and/or would rather be sucking dick,
but you can't possibly be *that* fucking stupid.
trotsky
Feb 2, 2021, 8:07:39 AM2/2/21
to
made off of fossil fuels at the cost of the environment, have made it
hard to have these vehicles produced en masse so the single mother can
afford an electric car. There is literally nothing about this situation
you understand. Here's a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
There will be a quiz later to see if you have enough knowledge to even
be in this fucking discussion.
trotsky
Feb 2, 2021, 8:08:26 AM2/2/21
to
shawn
Feb 2, 2021, 12:37:48 PM2/2/21
to
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 18:30:04 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net>
wrote:
That may happen eventually. Though not so long as Tesla sees an
advantage in providing those free Supercharger stations for Tesla
owners.
wrote:
advantage in providing those free Supercharger stations for Tesla
owners.
anim8rfsk
Feb 2, 2021, 2:18:37 PM2/2/21
to
hell was the way to get rolling.
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 2, 2021, 2:31:51 PM2/2/21
to
and the economics for the expense of bringing in power lines just aren't
there.
anim8rfsk
Feb 2, 2021, 2:54:52 PM2/2/21
to
Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
https://electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/09/screen-shot-2017-09-11-at-12-20-44-pm.png
A bigger problem is do you really want to stop your hundred thousand dollar
car to recharge it at a rest stop in the middle of a Mojave desert. For God
sake‘s they can’t keep the toilets there unbroken.
Also you don’t need to bring in powerlines. They already make tesla
charging stations powered by diesel generators the size of a minivan.
—
Adam H. Kerman
Feb 2, 2021, 3:01:48 PM2/2/21
to
There will simply be no diesel fuel refined for motor fuel in five
years! Might as well continue to build coal-fired electric generating
plants.
I am personally switching to still air and overnight power generation to
eliminate my carbon footprint.
anim8rfsk
Feb 2, 2021, 4:28:46 PM2/2/21
to
double as solar panels as being cheaper than regular shingles. But with a
power wall it still like a $40,000 investment or something. All their
prices (for their cars too) are fake because they assume you’re taking an
enormous tax deduction. Of course all solar runs that Scam.
SRP is trying to get me to sign up for a scam where my electricity only
comes from certain green sources. How would they possibly do that unless
they ran a dedicated line to my house?
Ubiquitous
Feb 2, 2021, 5:43:07 PM2/2/21
to
In article <rv9obo$28mi$3...@neodome.net>, su...@imbris.com wrote:
Do tell!
--
Trump won.
>On 2/1/2021 09:20 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>> su...@imbris.com wrote:
>>> On 1/31/2021 01:34 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>>> atr...@mac.com wrote:
>>>>> Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
>>>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem to
>>>> realize these cars need to be recharged.
>>>
>>> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
>>
>> su...@imbris.com wrote:
>>> On 1/31/2021 01:34 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
>>>> atr...@mac.com wrote:
>>>>> Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
>>>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem to
>>>> realize these cars need to be recharged.
>>>
>>> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
>>
>> No, I meant a way to produce the electricty...
>
>There's plans for that too.
>
Do tell!
--
Trump won.
The Horny Goat
Feb 8, 2021, 11:06:30 PM2/8/21
to
On Mon, 01 Feb 2021 14:10:05 -0800, BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>> I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
>> routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
>> beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
>> wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
>
>Barstow's entire economy pretty much revolves around the people who stop
>at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
>massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
>the whole trip on one tank.
You sound like you're making the argument of Gander Newfoundland which
>> I see the drive is four hours and change. My question is, do people
>> routinely drive right through, or do they usually stop on the way for a
>> beverage and a tasty snack? That could take half an hour or so,
>> wouldn't it? Especially if there was pie?
>
>Barstow's entire economy pretty much revolves around the people who stop
>at the halfway point and eat and shop. The In & Out there always has a
>massive line. But you don't *have* to stop. At least I don't. I can make
>the whole trip on one tank.
was originally an anonymous fishing village but became important as
the major refueling stop for planes from North America to Europe (and
vice versa). Technology changed as jets became able to fly North
America <-> Europe non-stop and Gander become used again only for air
freight and was ignored by most people. And became prominent again
briefly as a result of 9/11 when 100+ jumbos were temporarily grounded
until American skies reopened and they all were able to complete their
journeys.
BTR1701
Dec 1, 2022, 3:53:27 PM12/1/22
to
On Jan 31, 2021 at 2:34:41 PM PST, "anim8rfsk" <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>> In article <rv6q36$2jlb$1...@neodome.net>, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com>
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>> suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>>>>>> nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>>>>>> states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>>>>>> Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>>>>>> auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>>>>>> put new jobs in place, such as building batteries
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
>>>>> those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
>>>>> those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
>>>>> waste.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
>>>>> the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
>>>>> as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
>>>>> have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
>>>>>
>>>>> And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
>>>>> environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
>>>>> looks like the surface of the moon.
>>>>
>>>> I thought most of the heavy metals came from China, where there are no
>>>> environmental rules and reulagtions, buyt yeahm depenbding on our enemy
>>>> for these materials is ridiculous.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>> I just finished watching the senate hearings on Jennifer Grantholm's
>>>>>> nomination as energy secretary. All the members from energy producing
>>>>>> states stressed the job losses, including stopping the pipeline.
>>>>>> Grantholm said she saw this in MI during the recession and the loss of
>>>>>> auto industry jobs, and is well aware of their concerns. She wants to
>>>>>> put new jobs in place, such as building batteries
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone hails electric cars as some kind of environmental boon but
>>>>> those batteries are an environmental nightmare. With regard to disposal,
>>>>> those old batteries are almost as bad for the environment as nuclear
>>>>> waste.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's bad enough now when those cars are little more than novelties for
>>>>> the idle rich, but multiply them by 20 million just for California alone
>>>>> as Emperor Newsom wants to do by banning gas-powered cars, and you'll
>>>>> have battery disposal sites that will make your skin melt.
>>>>>
>>>>> And mining the minerals for those batteries is also a highly toxic
>>>>> environmental nightmare. There are mines in Canada where the landscape
>>>>> looks like the surface of the moon.
>>>>
>>>> I thought most of the heavy metals came from China, where there are no
>>>> environmental rules and reulagtions, buyt yeahm depenbding on our enemy
>>>> for these materials is ridiculous.
>>>>
>>>>> Anyone who thinks electric cars will save the environment is as
>>>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem to
>>>> realize these cars need to be recharged.
>>>
>>> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
>>
>>>>> delusional as Occasional-Cortex.
>>>>
>>>> Don't forget that these so-called environmentalists don't seem to
>>>> realize these cars need to be recharged.
>>>
>>> They do, and the plan is to put charging stations in everywhere.
>>
>> Even out in the middle of the Mojave Desert?
>>
>> How do you drive from L.A. to Vegas when your electric hamster-mobile
>> starts to run out of juice in the middle of the great empty?
>>
>> And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
>> batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
>> and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
>> electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
>> camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
>> Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
>>
> That’s why you need a Tesla. Long range, short charge, charging station
>>
>> How do you drive from L.A. to Vegas when your electric hamster-mobile
>> starts to run out of juice in the middle of the great empty?
>>
>> And even if you do get a charging station somewhere out there, the
>> batteries take about 5-8 hours to recharge. I can pull off the highway
>> and gas up my SUV and be back on the road in 10 minutes. With an
>> electric car, I'd better bring a tent and some food because I'll need to
>> camp out for half a day while the car recharges. That four-hour drive to
>> Vegas just turned into an 11-hour+ ordeal.
>>
> route specifically designed for the drive from L.A. to Las Vegas at 200 miles
> an hour.
I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down to
about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
spend 40 minutes charging his car.
I, on the other hand, had 0 minutes wait-time, filled up my SUV in five
minutes and was back on the road laughing my ass off at all the Tesla drivers
in my rear-view.
Adam H. Kerman
Dec 1, 2022, 4:09:10 PM12/1/22
to
BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>. . .
>I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down to
>about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>spend 40 minutes charging his car.
What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
>>. . .
>I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down to
>about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>spend 40 minutes charging his car.
BTR1701
Dec 1, 2022, 4:11:47 PM12/1/22
to
On Dec 1, 2022 at 1:09:06 PM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> . . .
>
>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>
>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down
>> to
>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>
> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
Everyone, if Gavin Newsom gets his way.
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> . . .
>
>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>
>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down
>> to
>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>
> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
anim8rfsk
Dec 1, 2022, 11:13:03 PM12/1/22
to
Adam H. Kerman <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> . . .
>
>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>
>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down to
>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>
> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
>
Look at an older super charger location map. Although it’s mostly lost now
>
>>> . . .
>
>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>
>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down to
>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>
> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
>
amongst all the other dots, Musk first built a route from Los Angeles to
Las Vegas as an inducement to buy his cars. It was pretty much the only
place you could go from Los Angeles until he added the stops between there
and Phoenix.
--
The last thing I want to do is hurt you, but it is still on my list.
trotsky
Dec 2, 2022, 7:48:33 AM12/2/22
to
them at the ass end of reality. Kudos!
trotsky
Dec 3, 2022, 4:29:37 AM12/3/22
to
On 12/1/22 3:11 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 1, 2022 at 1:09:06 PM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> . . .
>>
>>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>>
>>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down
>>> to
>>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>>
>> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
>
> Everyone, if Gavin Newsom gets his way.
The horror! Meanwhile, right wing assholes are working very hard to
> On Dec 1, 2022 at 1:09:06 PM PST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <a...@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> BTR1701 <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> . . .
>>
>>> I just got done spending a week in Vegas (at the new Resorts World casino--
>>> highly recommended, BTW) and had to laugh when I stopped in Baker for some
>>> gas. (Baker is a small town in the middle of the Mojave Desert.)
>>
>>> There was one Tesla super-charger at the gas station where I filled up. The
>>> line to use it stretched across the parking lot and about 500 feet down the
>>> road. And this "super-charging" feature only brings the time to charge down
>>> to
>>> about 40 minutes from 5-8 hours, so the guy at the end of that line was
>>> probably looking at a 5-hour wait just to get to the point where he could
>>> spend 40 minutes charging his car.
>>
>> What kind of moron drives across the desert in an all-electric vehicle?
>
> Everyone, if Gavin Newsom gets his way.
outlaw "bad pronouns." LOL.
0 new messages