Batteries cost more than the car

[instaGATOR]

We can have the same portability and flexibility with nukes now.

First U.S. Small Nuclear Reactor Design Is Approved

Concerns about costs and safety remain, however

www.scientificamerican.com

Which has the 35,000 year toxic waste, nuclear or the abundant natural gas?

Were I in charge, I'd let you build your next nuke plant, right after you've safely dealt with the 140,000,000 pounds+ that are already here...

 

[BamaFan1137]

Which has the 35,000 year toxic waste, nuclear or the abundant natural gas?

Were I in charge, I'd let you build your next nuke plant, right after you've safely dealt with the 140,000,000 pounds+ that are already here...

Clean, cheap and limitless.

We're I in charge, I'd supplement one with the other. And I'd also build permanent repositories for the 3% nuclear waste and I'd be recycling the 97% for use to generate even more energy.

That would mean the nuclear waste created in a plant that would supply power to 1 million people for a year would equal .09m x .09m x .09m or 3.6 inches x 3.6 inches x 3.6 inches.

That's slightly larger than a Rubik's Cube ftr.

 

[BamaFan1137]

That Rubik's Cube of nuclear waste would weigh 1,974.6 lbs btw. 😂🤣😂

 

[instaGATOR]

If it's true that the incredibly toxic waste can be recycled, then why haven't they done it already???

They seem to be letting a lot of free energy (toxic wastes) sit around polluting the world right now.... 🤓

 

[BamaFan1137]

If it's true that the incredibly toxic waste can be recycled, then why haven't they done it already???

They seem to be letting a lot of free energy (toxic wastes) sit around polluting the world right now.... 🤓

They have done it outside of the US.

Why aren't we doing it? Our Nuclear Energy policy has been ridiculously stupid for quite some time now.

The EPA = the enemy of progress for all non-nuclear related industry.

The NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) fills the EPA's role in the nuclear sector.


Recycling

Although some countries, most notably the USA, treat used nuclear fuel as waste, most of the material in used fuel can be recycled. Approximately 97% – the vast majority (~94%) being uranium – of it could be used as fuel in certain types of reactor. Recycling has, to date, mostly been focused on the extraction of plutonium and uranium, as these elements can be reused in conventional reactors. This separated plutonium and uranium can subsequently be mixed with fresh uranium and made into new fuel rods.

Countries such as France, Japan, Germany, Belgium and Russia have all used plutonium recycling to generate electricity, whilst also reducing the radiological footprint of their waste. Some of the by-products (approximately 4%), mainly the fission products, will still require disposal in a repository and are immobilised by mixing them with glass, through a process called vitrification.

 

[instaGATOR]

So we can agree that power production using our own abundant natural and propane gas is the way to go then, right? Since both coal burning and nukes are polluters of the worst kind... 😉
nightall, I'm off to watch tje Skinwalker Ranch that I recorded earlier...

 

[BillCutting4585]

I don’t get why @instaGATOR doesnt like nuke power, it has been known to attract UFO sightings.

 

[BamaFan1137]

So we can agree that power production using our own abundant natural and propane gas is the way to go then, right? Since both coal burning and nukes are polluters of the worst kind... 😉
nightall, I'm off to watch tje Skinwalker Ranch that I recorded earlier...

I personally believe that nuclear, if used responsibly and intelligently, is the cleanest energy producer known to man.

If every man, woman and child in this country was supplied power by a nuclear reactor, the annual waste from those reactors would equal 330 extremely heavy Rubik's Cubes. That said, I do believe diversification of the power grid with hydro, gas, coal, wind, solar AND nuke would be the most sound policy.

 

[BamaFan1137]

In other words, the resulting nuclear waste — about 70,000 tons of it

BTW, I meant to address this before...but my one track mind got on another track.

70k tons is a lot. I'm not trying to say that it isn't...but...(I hate when people go with buts, lol)...

Due to the density of nuclear waste, 70k tons of spent nuclear fuel isn't exactly the same as say 70k tons of coal ash...or feathers if you prefer. Mass vs volume vs density.

I've done a horrible job of wording this but the point I'm trying to convey is that 70k tons of nuclear waste consumes far less repository space than 70k tons of almost every other kind of waste. As I said before, the 3.6"x3.6"x3.6" cube of nuclear waste would weigh 1,974.6 lbs.

As a result, shipping it is harder but storing it in a repository is easier.

 

[instaGATOR]

Bama, does any other waste take 35,000 years to not be radioactive and highly toxic?

You talk about containment vessels. Do you know what happens to them over time? The radiation causes them all to fail dramatically.

And if it's such a small volume, then why are their 80+ repositories for the constantly accumulating waste?
Do you want to live anywhere near one of them?

Confirmed! High Radiation Released After HANFORD TUNNEL COLLAPSE

Hanford’s waste has been notoriously mismanaged. Rarely does a year pass when there isn’t another major investigative report talking about how Hanford waste was dumped downriver or leaked into the atmosphere.

Idaho National Laboratory has been the site of numerous releases of radioactivity. The most recent was in April 2018, when a 55-gallon barrel of “radioactive sludge” ruptured while being prepared for transport. Areas of the site are contaminated with different levels of various pollutants that pose a threat to human health and the environment.

This map includes spent nuclear fuel from reactors and the high-level waste generated when the Department of Energy extracted material from spent fuel to create nuclear weapons. It also includes the locations of research reactor sites, special nuclear materials (e.g., plutonium-239 and uranium-235), transuranic wastes, or low-level nuclear wastes.

Just an iG FYI, the 4 states (MT-WY-ND-SD) with no waste storage sites makes up for that by being the states with the ballistic missile nuke silos, while OK has the massive nuke loaded B-52 base at Altus ....

So nuclear waste is a very small Rubik's cube problem, until you confront the 35,000 years half-life reality, instead of nuclear industry excuses...

 

[BamaFan1137]

Bama, does any other waste take 35,000 years to not be radioactive and highly toxic?

You talk about containment vessels. Do you know what happens to them over time? The radiation causes them all to fail dramatically.

And if it's such a small volume, then why are their 80+ repositories for the constantly accumulating waste?
Do you want to live anywhere near one of them?

Confirmed! High Radiation Released After HANFORD TUNNEL COLLAPSE

Hanford’s waste has been notoriously mismanaged. Rarely does a year pass when there isn’t another major investigative report talking about how Hanford waste was dumped downriver or leaked into the atmosphere.

Idaho National Laboratory has been the site of numerous releases of radioactivity. The most recent was in April 2018, when a 55-gallon barrel of “radioactive sludge” ruptured while being prepared for transport. Areas of the site are contaminated with different levels of various pollutants that pose a threat to human health and the environment.

This map includes spent nuclear fuel from reactors and the high-level waste generated when the Department of Energy extracted material from spent fuel to create nuclear weapons. It also includes the locations of research reactor sites, special nuclear materials (e.g., plutonium-239 and uranium-235), transuranic wastes, or low-level nuclear wastes.

Just an iG FYI, the 4 states (MT-WY-ND-SD) with no waste storage sites makes up for that by being the states with the ballistic missile nuke silos, while OK has the massive nuke loaded B-52 base at Altus ....

So nuclear waste is a very small Rubik's cube problem, until you confront the 35,000 years half-life reality, instead of nuclear industry excuses...

Nope, nothing else takes nearly as long to become benign. But, by comparison, there's MUCH less of it.

If we recycled it, as we should be, there would be 97% less still.

You keep asking me if I want to live near a repository. I do not. I also don't want to live near a coal ash pit or a surface impoundment. In fact, I don't want to live near any waste storage facility or even an industrial plant if I can help it.

As I've said a few times now, there are uninhabitable places on planet earth where spent nuclear fuel cab be responsibly stored for as long as necessary.

 

[BCSpell]

As I've said a few times now, there are uninhabitable places on planet earth where spent nuclear fuel cab be responsibly stored for as long as necessary.

Oh, I can a few: The State of CA and NY.

 

[instaGATOR]

Bama, this was the site that was going to cure the problem for good.
So much for yet another bogus government claim...

The DOE began studying Yucca Mountain in 1978 to determine whether it would be suitable for the nation's first long-term geologic repository for over 70,000 metric tons (69,000 long tons; 77,000 short tons) (150 million pounds)[22] of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste as of 2015[when?] stored at 121 sites around the nation. An estimated 10,000 metric tons (9,800 long tons; 11,000 short tons) of the waste would be from America's military nuclear programs.[23] In the 2008 Omnibus Spending Bill, the Yucca Mountain Project's budget was reduced to $390 million.

=====

Lacking an operating repository, the federal government initially paid utility companies somewhere between $300 and $500 million per year in compensation for failing to comply with the contract it signed to take the spent nuclear fuel by 1998.[citation needed] For the ten years after 2015 it is estimated to cost taxpayers $24 billion in payments from the Judgment Fund.[30] The Judgment Fund is not subject to budget rules and allows Congress to ignore the nuclear waste issue since payments there from do not have any impact on yearly spending for other programs. (but they're kicking the tax payers butts, and you'll never get a true total cost accounting from them)

The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, as designated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act amendments of 1987,[2] is a proposed deep geological repository storage facility within Yucca Mountain for spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste in the United States. The site is on federal (public) land adjacent to the Nevada Test Site in Nye County, Nevada, about 80 mi (130 km) northwest of the Las Vegas Valley.

The project was approved in 2002 by the 107th United States Congress, but the 112th Congress ended federal funding for the site via amendment to the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, passed on April 14, 2011, during the Obama Administration.[3] The project has encountered many difficulties and was highly contested by the public, the Western Shoshone peoples, and many politicians.[4] The project also faces strong state and regional opposition.[5] The Government Accountability Office stated that the closure was for political, not technical or safety reasons.[6] (BS, old salt mines flooded, a terrible place for nuclear waste)

Under President Barack Obama, the Department of Energy (DOE) reviewed options other than Yucca Mountain for a high-level waste repository. The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, established by the Secretary of Energy, released its final report in January 2012. It detailed an urgent need to find a site suitable for constructing a consolidated geological repository, stating that any future facility should be developed by a new independent organization with direct access to the Nuclear Waste Fund, which is not subject to political and financial control as the Cabinet-level DOE is.[12] But the site met with strong opposition in Nevada, including from then-Senate leader Harry Reid.[2]

Under President Donald Trump, the DOE ceased deep borehole[13] and other non–Yucca Mountain waste disposition research activities. For FY18, the DOE requested $120 million and the NRC $30 million[14] from Congress to continue licensing activities for the Yucca Mountain Repository. For FY19, the DOE again requested $120 million but the NRC increased its request to $47.7 million.[15] Congress decided to provide no funding for the remainder of FY18.[16] In May 2019, Representative John Shimkus reintroduced a bill in the House for the site,[2] but the Appropriation Committee killed an amendment by Representative Mike Simpson to add $74 million in Yucca Mountain funding to a DOE appropriations bill.[2] On May 20, 2020, Under Secretary of Energy Mark W. Menezes testified in front of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that Trump strongly opposes proceeding with Yucca Mountain Repository.[17]

In May 2021, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said that Yucca Mountain would not be part of the Biden administration's plans for nuclear-waste disposal. She anticipated announcing the department's next steps "in the coming months".[18]

Be sure to add back these many costs to your
CLEAN-CHEAP-EFFICIENT NUCLEAR ENERGY CLAIMS....

Anyone interested in this total nuclear fiasco can go here to learn more details...

Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[BamaFan1137]

Bama, this was the site that was going to cure the problem for good.
So much for yet another bogus government claim...

The DOE began studying Yucca Mountain in 1978 to determine whether it would be suitable for the nation's first long-term geologic repository for over 70,000 metric tons (69,000 long tons; 77,000 short tons) (150 million pounds)[22] of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste as of 2015[when?] stored at 121 sites around the nation. An estimated 10,000 metric tons (9,800 long tons; 11,000 short tons) of the waste would be from America's military nuclear programs.[23] In the 2008 Omnibus Spending Bill, the Yucca Mountain Project's budget was reduced to $390 million.

=====

Lacking an operating repository, the federal government initially paid utility companies somewhere between $300 and $500 million per year in compensation for failing to comply with the contract it signed to take the spent nuclear fuel by 1998.[citation needed] For the ten years after 2015 it is estimated to cost taxpayers $24 billion in payments from the Judgment Fund.[30] The Judgment Fund is not subject to budget rules and allows Congress to ignore the nuclear waste issue since payments there from do not have any impact on yearly spending for other programs. (but they're kicking the tax payers butts, and you'll never get a true total cost accounting from them)

The Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository, as designated by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act amendments of 1987,[2] is a proposed deep geological repository storage facility within Yucca Mountain for spent nuclear fuel and other high-level radioactive waste in the United States. The site is on federal (public) land adjacent to the Nevada Test Site in Nye County, Nevada, about 80 mi (130 km) northwest of the Las Vegas Valley.

The project was approved in 2002 by the 107th United States Congress, but the 112th Congress ended federal funding for the site via amendment to the Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, passed on April 14, 2011, during the Obama Administration.[3] The project has encountered many difficulties and was highly contested by the public, the Western Shoshone peoples, and many politicians.[4] The project also faces strong state and regional opposition.[5] The Government Accountability Office stated that the closure was for political, not technical or safety reasons.[6] (BS, old salt mines flooded, a terrible place for nuclear waste)

Under President Barack Obama, the Department of Energy (DOE) reviewed options other than Yucca Mountain for a high-level waste repository. The Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future, established by the Secretary of Energy, released its final report in January 2012. It detailed an urgent need to find a site suitable for constructing a consolidated geological repository, stating that any future facility should be developed by a new independent organization with direct access to the Nuclear Waste Fund, which is not subject to political and financial control as the Cabinet-level DOE is.[12] But the site met with strong opposition in Nevada, including from then-Senate leader Harry Reid.[2]

Under President Donald Trump, the DOE ceased deep borehole[13] and other non–Yucca Mountain waste disposition research activities. For FY18, the DOE requested $120 million and the NRC $30 million[14] from Congress to continue licensing activities for the Yucca Mountain Repository. For FY19, the DOE again requested $120 million but the NRC increased its request to $47.7 million.[15] Congress decided to provide no funding for the remainder of FY18.[16] In May 2019, Representative John Shimkus reintroduced a bill in the House for the site,[2] but the Appropriation Committee killed an amendment by Representative Mike Simpson to add $74 million in Yucca Mountain funding to a DOE appropriations bill.[2] On May 20, 2020, Under Secretary of Energy Mark W. Menezes testified in front of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee that Trump strongly opposes proceeding with Yucca Mountain Repository.[17]

In May 2021, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said that Yucca Mountain would not be part of the Biden administration's plans for nuclear-waste disposal. She anticipated announcing the department's next steps "in the coming months".[18]

Be sure to add back these many costs to your
CLEAN-CHEAP-EFFICIENT NUCLEAR ENERGY CLAIMS....

Anyone interested in this total nuclear fiasco can go here to learn more details...

Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yucca isn't being used for political reasons.

If your point is that everything that the government touches gets fouled up, you'll get no argument from me.

 

[Mdfgator]

seeing boogy men in every corner doenst make you crazy, dont let anyone tell you that it does.

 

[Mdfgator]

tesla is ripping today, electric cars are the future, stop fighting progress!!!!!

 

[NavigatorII]

tesla is ripping today, electric cars are the future, stop fighting progress!!!!!

I hope you'll consider Uber when the power grid goes out and you are stranded on the interstate. 😂

 

[BCSpell]

I hope you'll consider Uber when the power grid goes out and you are stranded on the interstate. 😂

Maybe Biden and the DIMS can send us all a $60,000 subsidy so we can all buy electric cars. Of course, they would probably need to also subsidize the cost of installing solar charging stations at each of our houses as the current electrical grid will not be able to handle millions of car chargers.

 

[BamaFan1137]

tesla is ripping today, electric cars are the future, stop fighting progress!!!!!

Cool car and a novelty. Over the long haul they simply do not make financial sense at this point. I hope they do one day.

 

[NavigatorII]

Posted in the GOAT thread, but it belongs more here.

 

[jb1215]

While you try to ignore 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima....
Now compare the 35,000 years, which you seem to be ignoring.

Can we put the waste from hundreds of nuke plants in your back yard, or are you going with NIMBY?

Natural background radiation is 100-125 millirem in this area of Pennsylvania (150 to 350 is naturally occurs in the world). 3 Mile Island added 1 millirem to the area. Pennsylvania DOH monitored 30,000 citizens that lived within 10 miles for 18 years. No effects. 3 Mile Island meltdown can and SHOULD be ignored. It was closed in 2019.

As far locations nuclear waste is stored, looks to be a direct correlation with the storage sites in Illinois, the Northeast and California to idiot liberals. Coincidence?

 

[BayouGator1995]

tesla is ripping today, electric cars are the future, stop fighting progress!!!!!

Was that you whose EV broke down on the interstate due to a blown battery?? $14,000 for a new battery is a bitch considering inflation!

 

[Mdfgator]

Cool car and a novelty. Over the long haul they simply do not make financial sense at this point. I hope they do one day.

its an amazing car. and they do make sense financially right now. just not good on road trips.

 

[BSC911]

This thread is a prime example of people that are afraid of progress. Their relatives are the same ones who said the combustion engine would never replace the horse and buggy.

Yeah, the car companies are all idiots I guess.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

This thread is a prime example of people that are afraid of progress. Their relatives are the same ones who said the combustion engine would never replace the horse and buggy.

Yeah, the car companies are all idiots I guess.

I mean, wasn't the entire industry given a government bailout a decade or so ago?

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Posted in the GOAT thread, but it belongs more here.

Given that the average electric car costs far more than the average gasoline car, it's like saying if you are homeless, buy a nice house.

The cars are far more expensive, and far most costly to repair, and far more dangerous to the environment.

But you save on gas, so there is that.

 

[instaGATOR]

Natural background radiation is 100-125 millirem in this area of Pennsylvania (150 to 350 is naturally occurs in the world). 3 Mile Island added 1 millirem to the area. Pennsylvania DOH monitored 30,000 citizens that lived within 10 miles for 18 years. No effects. 3 Mile Island meltdown can and SHOULD be ignored. It was closed in 2019.

As far locations nuclear waste is stored, looks to be a direct correlation with the storage sites in Illinois, the Northeast and California to idiot liberals. Coincidence?

Current Status at 3 Mile Island​

Today, the TMI-2 reactor is permanently shut down and 99% of its fuel has been removed. The reactor coolant system is fully drained and the radioactive water decontaminated and evaporated. The accident's radioactive waste was shipped off site to an appropriate disposal area, (there is no such thing as disposal, it just stored somewhere) and the reactor fuel and core debris was shipped to the Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory, (a place with yearly storage/leakage problems).

In 2001, First Energy acquired TMI-2 from GPU. First Energy has contracted the monitoring of TMI-2 to Exelon, the current owner and operator of TMI-1. The companies plan to keep the TMI-2 facility in long term, monitored storage until the TMI-1 plant ceases operations, at which time both plants will be decommissioned (and become permanent radiation contamination zones).

In reality, 3MI just missed becoming America's version of Chernobyl....

By early morning, the core had heated to over 4,000 degrees, just 1,000 degrees short of meltdown. In the meltdown scenario, the core melts, and deadly radiation drifts across the countryside, fatally sickening a potentially great number of people. The reactor had come within less than an hour of a complete meltdown. More than half the core was destroyed or molten, but (thank God) it had not broken its protective shell.

Two days later, however, on March 30, a bubble of highly flammable hydrogen gas was discovered within the reactor building. The bubble of gas was created two days before when exposed core materials reacted with super-heated steam. On March 28, some of this gas had exploded, releasing a small amount of radiation into the atmosphere. At that time, plant operators had not registered the explosion, which sounded like a ventilation door closing. After the radiation leak was discovered on March 30, residents were advised to stay indoors. Experts were uncertain if the hydrogen bubble would create further meltdown or possibly a giant explosion, and as a precaution Governor Thornburgh advised “pregnant women and pre-school age children to leave the area within a five-mile radius of the Three Mile Island facility until further notice.” This led to the panic the governor had hoped to avoid; within days, more than 100,000 people had fled the surrounding towns.

If Cold Fusion ever happens, then I might go for that, but nuclear fission is a disaster waiting to happen, while generating a steady stream of toxic radioactive wastes. No thanks to that....

 

[jb1215]

So what do your alien friends do for power?

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

So what do your alien friends do for power?

Safe to assume instaidiot's thread on bigfeets is dead since I stopped posting and bumping it?

Too bad. No one cares to discuss alien hoaxes other than fevered brain, Im told.

 

[BamaFan1137]

its an amazing car. and they do make sense financially right now. just not good on road trips.

No, they don't. You cannot argue math. Even with these ridiculous gas prices, math says you are wrong. I've looked into it and my accountant, who was intrigued, looked into it as well.

Still, they're pretty cool and quite the novelty.

 

[BamaFan1137]

This thread is a prime example of people that are afraid of progress. Their relatives are the same ones who said the combustion engine would never replace the horse and buggy.

Yeah, the car companies are all idiots I guess.

So, by running the math to see if it's a good investment, that makes me a person who fears progress?

😂...genius repartee as always friend.

 

[BamaFan1137]

But you save on gas, so there is that.

And if you save on gas, you must be saving money overall, right?

😂

 

[BamaFan1137]

Current Status at 3 Mile Island​

Today, the TMI-2 reactor is permanently shut down and 99% of its fuel has been removed. The reactor coolant system is fully drained and the radioactive water decontaminated and evaporated. The accident's radioactive waste was shipped off site to an appropriate disposal area, (there is no such thing as disposal, it just stored somewhere) and the reactor fuel and core debris was shipped to the Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory, (a place with yearly storage/leakage problems).

In 2001, First Energy acquired TMI-2 from GPU. First Energy has contracted the monitoring of TMI-2 to Exelon, the current owner and operator of TMI-1. The companies plan to keep the TMI-2 facility in long term, monitored storage until the TMI-1 plant ceases operations, at which time both plants will be decommissioned (and become permanent radiation contamination zones).

In reality, 3MI just missed becoming America's version of Chernobyl....

By early morning, the core had heated to over 4,000 degrees, just 1,000 degrees short of meltdown. In the meltdown scenario, the core melts, and deadly radiation drifts across the countryside, fatally sickening a potentially great number of people. The reactor had come within less than an hour of a complete meltdown. More than half the core was destroyed or molten, but (thank God) it had not broken its protective shell.

Two days later, however, on March 30, a bubble of highly flammable hydrogen gas was discovered within the reactor building. The bubble of gas was created two days before when exposed core materials reacted with super-heated steam. On March 28, some of this gas had exploded, releasing a small amount of radiation into the atmosphere. At that time, plant operators had not registered the explosion, which sounded like a ventilation door closing. After the radiation leak was discovered on March 30, residents were advised to stay indoors. Experts were uncertain if the hydrogen bubble would create further meltdown or possibly a giant explosion, and as a precaution Governor Thornburgh advised “pregnant women and pre-school age children to leave the area within a five-mile radius of the Three Mile Island facility until further notice.” This led to the panic the governor had hoped to avoid; within days, more than 100,000 people had fled the surrounding towns.

If Cold Fusion ever happens, then I might go for that, but nuclear fission is a disaster waiting to happen, while generating a steady stream of toxic radioactive wastes. No thanks to that....

IOW's, despite mistakes being made, the multiple levels of system redundancy worked?

Construction on Three Mile began in 1968 btw. I wonder if we have the ability to build them and operate them even safer today?

Also, mining operations for things like coal and phosphate cause similar (and harmless) radiation levels. Those numbers are used by agenda driven members of the media as a scare tactic to halt progress.

 

[Mdfgator]

No, they don't. You cannot argue math. Even with these ridiculous gas prices, math says you are wrong. I've looked into it and my accountant, who was intrigued, looked into it as well.

Still, they're pretty cool and quite the novelty.

ok, this is getting funny. you would need the variables to make this statment, what price are you using for an electric car? in which state are you charging your car? and how much value do you place on no having to stop at gas stations?

 

[BSC911]

So, by running the math to see if it's a good investment, that makes me a person who fears progress?

😂...genius repartee as always friend.

If you ran the math when cars were first developed, then the horse and buggy was cheaper.

And of course you ignore future developments in e-vehicles. Of course they are not cheaper today, but to ignore the trend is just having your head in the sand. And if you have your head in the sand about climate change, the conversation is pointless.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

It's a gigantic lie.

EV's could possibly be a wise purchase one day but today they absolutely are not. And if we continue to let people like the Biden Administration forge the path on them, they never will be.

By wise I mean the better purchase from an economic standpoint. Today they are absolutely a financial loser.

This is a rare area that I have expertise in. I have worked at my Chevy Dealership for 35 years. The whole EV thing is a big lie...however there are some good applications for some people. Not me. I tow a boat 5-600 miles at a time. They do not have anything that does that now. BUT...if you live 40 miles or more from work..it could be a good deal for someone.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

If you ran the math when cars were first developed, then the horse and buggy was cheaper.

And of course you ignore future developments in e-vehicles. Of course they are not cheaper today, but to ignore the trend is just having your head in the sand. And if you have your head in the sand about climate change, the conversation is pointless.

One little thing(there always IS WHEN A LIB TRIES TO LIE) The gubment did not try to FORCE your hand to buy a car back then. they are lying, cheating and stealing no to force it, because today...99% of politicians are crooked, and get paid. so your point is ridiculous...as usual

 

[Capt Ron 1]

If you ran the math when cars were first developed, then the horse and buggy was cheaper.

And of course you ignore future developments in e-vehicles. Of course they are not cheaper today, but to ignore the trend is just having your head in the sand. And if you have your head in the sand about climate change, the conversation is pointless.

Surprising...your record of being wrong on EVERY post is totally intact, son.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

And if you save on gas, you must be saving money overall, right?

😂

Dems like @Mdfgator @BSC911 and summers eve like electric vehicles cause their politics tells them to like them.

Funny thing is, they aren't smart enough to realize that FOSSIL FUELS power those outlets that charge their batteries,

Sheep live to be hoodwinked.

 

[BamaFan1137]

ok, this is getting funny. you would need the variables to make this statment, what price are you using for an electric car? in which state are you charging your car? and how much value do you place on no having to stop at gas stations?

I laid this out on this board not too long ago. I used an $80k Tesla. It wasn't terribly close.

I placed no value on no gas station stops. I also placed no value on having to charge mid-trip.