Do you guys remember that faggot who created a thread about Electric cars?
Well, everyone called him the faggot that he is, but now we have factual proof:
>zerohedge.com
Electric cars are fucking inefficient resource-wise - from the production stage to the consumer usage.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
phys.org
nature.com
nature.com
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
It's not directly about replacing a car that uses more resources with one that uses less. It's about phasing out private ownership of vehicles altogether. All electric cars will be fully wired with self-driving tech. Meanwhile "ride-sharing" apps/infratructure is developed. The two things merge and major legal/tax/fee obstacles will appear to discourage private vehicle ownership. The media will support every step and people will be managed through social media to think this is all great.
Yeah, it's about selling a vehicle that has 95% profit margins and bribing everybody to shill for it to receive their share.
Why would anyone want that? Please tell me you're talking about (((their))) perspective, not yours hopes.
If you're talking about Uber, the company is on the verge of bankruptcy, as it's an economic disaster, only with shareholders preventing it from collapse.
Actually no, more and more incentive to buy a New or Used car keeps pouring into the economy because these loans are incredibly profitable for banks.
It's actually one of the biggest bubbles in the USA economy and I believe in other countries as well.
Let me put an addendum: they will support every step about buying an electric car, not about everything else you wrote.
Of course, they're being payed for that.
checked. Also, martial law? Turn off the grid and nobody moves....my red barchetta is a diesel jetta.
Cold, dead hand, etc.
youtube.com
>Please tell me you're talking about (((their))) perspective, not yours hopes.
I not talking about my hopes, but about what I see happening
A lot of these tech companies seem to stay open forever even though they have no reasonable future profit. That is for a reason. If it isn't Uber (due to mismanagement) then the others can pick up the slack to maintain that part of the infrastructure.
I don't even agree with the rest of the post but whatever
Yes, it's called being afloat by investment money, because they don't want a competition for their services and subsequent lowering of margins.
In this case, there are no margins but casino-play with the stocks.
Prevent competition in the sector and casino-playing
It's not even that much about mismanagement, It's about their business model that's unprofitable, just like YouTube, Snapchat and whatever else.
If you'd actually read the thread, you moron, you'd know that this was brought up and discussed multiple times. It's not like this is a new revelation, the grid is mostly backed by coal and natural gas, which is why the conversation headed towards nuclear energy and making fun of hippies for not knowing what beta emitters are.
Not exactly. Electric vehicle energy storage/usage is pretty damn efficient, even if the production of that energy and potential losses over AC from generation to storage leave something to be desired. It's certainly better than it was a century ago, which is why you're seeing electric vehicles instead of ICEs. Simply, the potential for energy storage is greater due to advancements in battery technology.
If you want to shitpost about efficiency of resource, let's talk about the power. AC induction can be fucking 98% efficient. NINETY EIGHT PERCENT. That's crazy efficient, all that was missing was energy storage.
Meanwhile, even after 100 years, internal combustion engines cannot hit 50% efficiency.
Of course, nuclear energy would blow this dumbass position out of the water if we didn't have to worry about (de)regulatory capture from conservatives/power companies, century old plant designs, the human propensity of not being able to understand long term investments costs like nuclear in favor the low cost natural gas plants, and scary nuclear fear mongering from liberals who point to every nuclear power plant claiming that it's the next Chernobyl.
But that's like saying nuclear fusion would be a nice thing to have.
Isn't that what Elon Musks "Gigafactory" is supposed to address? Centralizing battery production (generally the most polluting part of electric car production) to improve inefficiency?
Battery production isn't the problem, they're bitching about the methods used to generate energy.
Even if you wanted to bitch about battery production, they are heavily recyclable for their metals.
Hydrogen or salt water
They don't have to be clean to build. They just have to shift the pollution to china.
We have to work on the framework that, if it CAN happen, then don't do it. (I'm talking here specifically about Nuclear power, not about anything else).
Because it has the potential to become much worse than a Chernobyl.
Do you know that if ONE single French Nuclear power plant fail and explodes, it would be enough to cause a chain reaction to explode every other French nuclear power and that would spread throughout Europe?
That's called The End Times.
Until now, we never had a Nuclear plant exploding (doesn't mean they'll never explode in the future, and you only need 1), and still Chernobyl and Fukushima have been disasters.
There's also the risk of a societal reset. Just imagine the Middle Ages or something happening now - it couldn't, because there would be the need of peoples running the plants, providing them with energy and whatnot, so they're basically a Wall impending humankind of retrogressing (not that we necessarily want, but we may never know if we'll ever be forced).
Nuclear energy is humanity's Great Filter.
Meanwhile, after 100 years, internal combustion engines are reaching 50% efficiency. Doesn't look too good for electric cars you know.
Put down those fiction books user
Funny how ICE makers only started trying to clean up their act mere months after Tesla showed up, isn't it. Almost as if they've spent an entire century shitting in your face to maximize profits.
You must be joking, right? They made an study on that.
Power Plants are thousands of times more powerful than Bombs, if they explode, a 75km radius is instantly wiped out.
Nuclear power plants do not explode.
Are you talking about American "cars" or something else?
Cool
They do.
They don't, sorry. Want the study? here we go:
>phys.org
>nature.com
>nature.com
But really, no use arguing with idiots, they will only listen what they want.
You don't seem to know how either nuclear power plants or nuclear bombs work, do you?
en.wikipedia.org
Power plants are only thousands of times more powerful than bombs if their fuel is used like a bomb. However, power plants tend to try to goad the energy out slowly and consistently.
They chose 75km to create something worth writing an article about. There is no science presented in the article that supports 75km as meaningful with respect to nuclear power safety.
The only thing I see in that article is the "no shit" proposition that large population centers can afford one of the most economical means of generating electricity.
Cool
What the fuck do you think is going on in a nuclear power plant that would cause it to explode?
This. If enough people buy into this meme, then gas stations will start to disappear.
Terrorism.
wew
They've tried to explode one of Spain's biggest Cathedrals yesterday with a car full of explosives.
Please, start to think?
terrorist brain radio waves will melt the security fences around nucular p-p-p-powerplants
who cares?
does it cost less to charge the car's batteries than to buy petrol? if so they are great, if not they are trash
I haven't seen a post as purposefully (or ironically) stupid as this on on Holla Forums in some time, congrats.
Plants cannot explode like a nuclear weapon. They might be able to explode like a dirty bomb, but that's a dumb use of the word "explode". Even the biggest fuckup with 60 year old US technology that was not able to perform a SCRAM, in the face of a fucking earthquake and a tsunami, was not anywhere near equivalent to a dirty bomb.
The containment buildings are designed to manage huge internal overpressures. They are designed to take a direct impact from a jumbo jet. A car full of explosives outside containment wont do shit, and there is no way they are getting inside.
Why be so smug when you don't know shit?
We need more electric cars
Especially in cities, fuck listening to all those faggots revving their '80s shitbox at 5k RPM like Toretto in F&F
Centralized battery factories, nuclear power plants and more money dumped on solar power are the right path to follow imho
I still want a 90's japanese car to drive in the weekends tho
Also everyone in the article is bitching at tesla for using taxpayer's money
Tesla isn't the only company that does this, in Italy we have FIAT (now FCA) that used taxpayers money and then moved a big chunk of the production outside Italy
Didn't GM do the same in the US?
How about oil/natural gas subsidies in general. Department of Energy loans and the state subsidies that Tesla uses are a fucking drop in the bucket, especially compared on an even market capitalization basis.
The truth is that Morgan Stanley is long on oil and natural gas. That's it. That's all that this article says. Tesla could crash and burn tomorrow, it still wouldn't change the fact that this is just them trying to massage their positions.
Well, also probably long on other motor companies who are behind when it comes to advancing beyond the ICE.
Also yes, GM would've collapsed without US government support. As would have all of our motor industry.
en.wikipedia.org
Try a 90s shitbox with a modified exhaust
hes so dumb he thinks he is smart
At least he has company
I don't he has a company, too dumb. Also your grammar sucks, learn english.