Ford building 4 new plants to meet demand for electric vehicles

They also want higher pay without merit. I can’t count the new hired, recent college grads that complain and whine to me that they deserve higher pay because “I’ve paid my dues”. Yet, in their next breath, they want their student loans forgiven.

 

Y’know, I don’t think liberals really begin thinking conservatively until either of two things happen:

1. Someone else takes credit for important work they did, or
2. Their disposable income is dwarfed by their tax liability

 

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money “.

 

Great lady . . .

 

YEP!

 

And what about the cost of electricity generated by fossil fuels?

 

what about it? Do you pay for electricity?

 

Everyone does, more than they should and costs will rise quickly. Electric vehicles will not have the desired result because of the minimal effect our efforts will have on global CO2 emissions. The rich will become richer and the rest of us will be poorer. It will become apparent, in time, the need for continued burning of fossil fuels is necessary to produce energy.

 

The addition of electric cars is not happening in a vacuum. More and more energy generation is through solar and wind. Like every innovation is history, an infrastructure forms around what people demand. You will see such innovations as CO2 collectors, wireless energy transfers, and yes, a heck of a lot more charging stations. It is a process that will take some time to evolve just like the interstate highway system, the electrical grid, and service stations. It will all come in due time.

 

You're right that an infrastructure forms around what people demand, but a bunch of yelling, kicking and screaming environmentalists does not a market make. A market segment? . . . Yes. A market? . . . No.

Forcing unnatural market growth with progressive demands that others get on board will not work . . . in fact, it will precipitate more failures than if the market is allowed to grow organically in response to true demand, rather than to liberal duress.

It will take time indeed, and the combustion of fossil fuels will remain necessary for the balance of our lifetimes, as it will take at least a few decades to develop enough green infrastructure and enough green vehicles to supplant gas guzzlers nationwide / worldwide.

 

As seen, I think, through rose colored glasses. Current science suggests we have little time before the tipping point is reached, ie. 12 to 15 years. The biggest problem is convincing the world to get aboard.

 

The problem is much bigger than getting on board with electric vehicles . . . the cars themselves are the single least daunting part of the solution.

Why? Because the profit potential for manufacturers and the do-good optics for buyers are both strong motivators to make directly-beneficial investments of the necessary time and money.

The same is not true for harmonizing EV solutions and building out the generation, distribution, mining, storage and recycling infrastructure needed to support a broad-based implementation of electric vehicles. The sheer scale of the undertaking in each case dwarfs the compartmentalized efforts of an EV manufacturer and a consumer, as opposed to the distributed ownership of those other, less obvious activities.

 

My point is kicking-the-can-down-the-road is something all countries do and a sudden surge of throwing money at the problem by a few will not solve the issue. It appears to me that man will not be satisfied until he has killed the planet.

 

Oh, I agree . . . it's only natural to resist change. We have changes to make, or Mother Nature will make them for us. I suspect you did not read the link in Post 21 of this thread, but I expounded a bit upon our dilemma in that thread.

 

Having read the posts on this thread (including my own) there seems to be only one solution.

We should do absolutely nothing.

I'll call Ford and tell them to halt production.

 

You funny guy, you . . .

 

I'm entitled to a gas hog and 1.50/gallon gas.

 

Somebody had to say it.

 

which ones though? natural gas is clearly better for the planet than coal

 

That is one source, however, it poses it's own problems, according to some, fracking. Solar and wind are fraught with cost/benefit analysis and biomass will exhaust timber sources. In the end, Mother Nature will have her way.