The EV Farce. "Let me make you an offer you can't refuse"!

Electric Vehicles: Not a Deal for You or the Environment

BY Anne Johnson TIMEJuly 27, 2022 PRINT

Used cars cost more than ever, but there is an exception to this. Used electric vehicles (EVs) may appear to be a bargain in today’s used car market.

A woman in Florida purchased a used 2014 Ford Focus Electric for $11,000. It had 60,000 miles on it. After driving it a few months, lights started flashing on the dashboard—this indicated a problem with the battery. Her battery needed to be replaced. But the replacement was $14,000. The battery was worth more than the car.

Electric vehicles have lithium batteries. These batteries have a finite lifespan. How long will a lithium battery last, and what is a replacement’s cost? Further, what happens to that battery when it’s depleted?  All these factors will influence whether you—and the environment—are really getting a deal on that electric vehicle.

How Long Do EV Batteries Last?

Lithium batteries don’t last decades. There’s much debate about exactly how long an EV battery will last. Some manufacturers claim 200,000 plus miles. But the actual number isn’t known or at least confirmed. It’s mostly speculation based on empirical knowledge.

Electric vehicle batteries have improved. The early EVs were notorious for short-lived batteries. For instance, batteries for the first-generation Nissan Leaf, a competitively priced EV, lasted 100,000 to 150,000 miles. So, if you’re eyeing that used Leaf, you might want to check the mileage. Indeed, if you’re in the market for any used EV—buyer beware. That battery may be at the end of its life.

The bottom line is that once the car is turned on for the first time, the clock starts ticking. It’s called battery degradation, and it happens to every electric vehicle—some sooner than others.

Factors that speed up degradation are extreme heat, cold and DC fast charging.

EV Battery Warranties

How long are EV manufacturers willing to warranty their batteries? With few exceptions, EV batteries have manufacturer warranties that last eight years or 100,000 miles, whichever comes first. The warranty is responsible for correcting defects in the materials or workmanship under normal use.

The Chevy Volt and Ford EVs also have an eight year or 100,000 mile—whichever comes first—warranty.

Tesla’s vehicle batteries are warrantied for eight years or 100–150,000 miles, depending on the model.

EV Lithium Battery Replacement Cost

Just as there’s a wide range of how long an electric vehicle battery lasts, the cost of replacement also varies. Depending on the warranty, it can cost zero dollars to $24,000 depending on the vehicle’s make and whether it’s under warra

For instance, with battery and labor, a Tesla battery can cost over $15,000 to replace.

The battery for a VW e-Golf can cost over $23,000 to replace. A 2016 e-Golf costs as much as $23,990. That means purchasing a used e-Golf could break the bank if the battery goes.

Disposing of EV Batteries

The debate is on as to what to do with an EV battery once it’s degraded below use. It is estimated that by 2025, battery packs will exceed 3.5 million worldwide, according to Bloomberg. So who’s going to be responsible for disposing of these batteries?

In the United States there was a push to make the manufacturers liable for disposal but that failed. But, if the battery still has a percentage of life, it can be used for other purposes.

For instance, batteries are currently being recycled in Europe for storing energy for home grids. Likewise, California is using depleted batteries to power car charging stations. But this is basically kicking the can down the road. The batteries will still become useless over time and need to be disposed of.

Throwing used EV batteries in a landfill is problematic, as lithium batteries aren’t stable. They can cause fires that sometimes smolder for years. Toxic fumes are released, which not only are dangerous to breathe but can contribute to global warming. This defeats the original purpose of the EV.

Ultimately, cleaning up the mess will be tremendously expensive, if even possible.

The Manufacturing Process and Pollution

Electric vehicles contribute to the greenhouse effect. This starts with the mining process. The process of mining the raw materials for the batteries releases CO2 emissions. Then these raw materials must be refined before they can be used in batteries; this causes more emissions. And in the manufacturing process, the more miles a battery can go, the more CO2 emissions are released.

For instance, according to a factsheet from the Young People’s Trust for the Environment, about 150kg of CO2 emissions are released for every one kilowatt-hour (kWh) of battery capacity.  For an electric vehicle to go at least 300 miles between charges, it needs a battery with a minimum capacity of 60 kWh. That equates to around nine tons of CO2 being emitted during the manufacturing process. Keep in mind that this is on top of the CO2 that was emitted during the mining process.

Running an Electric Vehicle with Pollution

Chris Plante, a Westward One audio network host, often refers to electric vehicles as “coal powered vehicles”. That’s because electricity must be produced before it can charge an EV. The United States relies on coal to produce electricity. In 2021, it was our second largest energy source for electricity generation. There are currently 240 coal plants in the United States. Higher gas prices have increased coal fired electric plants.

Therefore, even if you disregard the manufacturing process, the EV is still, indirectly, contributing to CO2 emissions.

True Cost of Electric Vehicle

The cost of an electric vehicle goes beyond the vehicle itself. This is especially true if you purchase a used EV. Batteries can cost more than the vehicle is worth. At that point, the EV becomes a throwaway vehicle. And once it is thrown away, that battery can create an environmental hazard.

When considering whether EVs are “green,” it must be remembered that because of the manufacturing process, landfill emissions and coal fired electric plants, electric vehicles still contribute to the greenhouse effect.

The Epoch Times Copyright © 2022 The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors. They are meant for general informational purposes only and should not be construed or interpreted as a recommendation or solicitation. The Epoch Times does not provide investment, tax, legal, financial planning, estate planning, or any other personal finance advice. The Epoch Times holds no liability for the accuracy or timeliness of the information provided.

Views: 233

Comment

You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!

Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine

Comment by Thinklike A. Mountain on December 25, 2022 at 9:46pm

The FBI Paid Twitter MILLIONS to Censor You?!
https://awakenwithjp.com/pages/jp-reacts

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 3:19pm

Anne,

Great EV article.

You cover all the major bases

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:28pm

COST SHIFTING IS THE NAME OF THE GAME REGARDING WIND AND SOLAR

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-na...

 

EXHORBITANT REAL COST OF WIND AND SOLAR ELECTRICITY

 

“All-in” Electricity Cost of Wind and Solar in New England

 

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-sol...

http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/cost-shifting-is-the-na...

 

Pro RE folks point to the “price paid to owner” as the cost of wind and solar, purposely ignoring the other cost categories. The all-in cost of wind and solar, c/kWh, includes:

 

1) Above-market-price paid to Owners 

2) Subsidies paid to Owners

3) Owner return on invested capital at about 9%/y

4) Grid extension/augmentation

5) Grid support services

6) Future battery systems

 

Comments on table 1

   

- Vermont legacy Standard Offer solar systems had greater subsidies paid to owner, than newer systems

 

- Wind prices paid to owner did not have the drastic reductions as solar prices.

 

- Vermont utilities are paid about 3.5 c/kWh for various costs they incur regarding net-metered solar systems

 

- "Added to rate base" is the cost wind and solar are added to the utility rate base, used to set electric rates.

 

- “Total cost”, including subsidies to owner and grid support, is the cost at which wind/solar are added to the utility rate base

 

- “NE utility cost” is the annual average cost of purchased electricity, about 6 c/kWh, plus NE grid operator charges, about 1.6 c/kWh

for a total of 7.6 c/kWh.

 

- “Grid support costs” would increase with increased use of battery systems to counteract the variability and intermittency of increased build-outs of wind and solar systems. See URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/fuel-and-co2-reduction...

 

NOTE: NE wholesale grid price averaged about 5 c/kWh, starting in 2009, due to low-cost CCGT and nuclear plants providing at least 65% of all electricity loaded onto the NE grid, in 2019.

 

https://www.iso-ne.com/about/key-stats/resource-mix/

https://nepool.com/uploads/NPC_20200305_Composite4.pdf


NOTE: There are Owning costs, and Operating and Maintenance costs, of the NE grid

ISO-NE charges these costs to utilities at about 1.6 c/kWh. The ISO-NE charges include: 

 
Regional network services, RNS, based on the utility peak demand occurring during a month

Forward capacity market, FCM, based on the utility peak demand occurring during a year.

 

Table 1/VT & NE sources

Paid to

Subsidy

Grid

GMP

 Added

ISO-NE

Total

NE

Times

 

 

paid to

support

 

to rate

RNS+

 

utility

 

owner

towner

cost

adder

base

FCM

cost

cost

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

c/kWh

Solar, rooftop, net-metered, new

17.4

5.2

2.1

3.5

20.9

1.6

29.8

7.6

3.92

Solar, rooftop, net-metered, legacy

18.2

5.4

2.1

3.5

21.7

1.6

30.8

7.6

4.05

Solar, standard offer, combo

11.0

6.74

2.1

11.0

1.6

21.44

7.6

2.82

Solar, standard offer, legacy

21.7

10.5

2.1

21.7

1.6

35.9

7.6

4.72

Wind, ridge line, new

8.5

3.9

2.4

8.5

1.6

16.4

7.6

2.15

Wind, offshore, new

9.0

4.1

2.4

9.0

1.6

17.1

7.6

2.25

 

Sample calculations:

 

NE utility cost = 6, Purchased + 1.6, (RNS + FCM) = 7.6 c/kWh

Added to utility rate base = 17.4, net-metered, new + 3.5 = 20.9 c/kWh

Total cost = 17.4 + 5.2 + 2.1 + 3.5 + 1.6 = 29.8 c/kWh

 

Excludes costs for very expensive battery systems

Excludes costs for very expensive floating, offshore wind systems

Excludes cost for dealing with shortfalls during multi-day wind/solar lulls. See URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide...

 

“Added to rate base” is for recent 20-y electricity supply contracts awarded by competitive bidding in NE.

“Added to rate base” would be much higher without subsidies and cost shifting.

Areas with better wind and solar conditions, and lower construction costs/MW have lower c/MWh, than NE

New England has average winds, has highest on-shore turnkey costs ($2,400/kW in 2020), has highest PPA c/kWh

See page 39 of URL

https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/Land-Based%20Win...

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:25pm

Grid-Scale Battery Systems Round-Trip Losses, A-to-Z basis

 

Grid-scale battery systems typically are connected to the NE high-voltage grid by step-down and step-up transformers. The below calculations show the electricity drawn from the high voltage grid to charge the battery system, and then discharge the battery system to counteract a one-day wind/solar lull.

 

We make the following assumptions:

 

1) Greatly increased wind and solar connected to the NE grid at a future date, such as: wind onshore at 12.5%, wind offshore at 12.5%, and solar at 25% of annual grid load, a total of 50%, or 125/2 = 62.5 TWh/y, or 0.171 TWh/d

 

The required installed wind/solar nameplate capacities would be:

 

Wind onshore = 0.125 x 125 TWh/y / (8766 h/y x 0.29, capacity factor) = 6,146 MW; existing about 1450 MW, at end 2021 

NE has high project costs/MW, about $2,600 in 2019, and low CFs, which means high costs/kWh. See page 42 of URL

https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2022-08/land_based_wind_...

 

Wind offshore = 0.125 x 125 TWh/y / (8766 h/y x 0.45, CF) = 3,961 MW; existing about 30 MW, at end 2021

 

Solar = 0.25 x 125 TWh/y / (8766 h/y x 0.15, CF) = 23,766 MW, existing about 5,500 MW, at end 2021

 

2) Wind/solar output at 15% of their annual average grid load, during a wind/solar lull lasting 24 hours

Wind/solar loaded onto the NE grid would be 0.15 x 0.171 = 0.02568 TWh/d

Wind/solar shortfall would be 0.171 – 0.02568 = 0.14555 TWh/d

 

3) Grid-scale battery systems, connected to the HV gird, provide the entire shortfall, in TWh/d

 

Step-by-Step Battery System Losses

 

The below calculation shows the step-by-step losses of battery systems, A-to-Z basis

 

1) Fed to HV grid via step-up transformer 0.14555, as AC, to make up the above shortfall

Step-up transformer loss at 1%.

From back-end power electronics, as AC, to step-up transformer 0.14700

 

2) Back-end power electronics loss at 3.5%

From battery to back-end power electronics 0.15215, as DC

 

3) Battery discharge loss at 4%

Deduction from battery charge 0.15823, as DC

 

4) Battery charge loss at 4%

From front-end power electronics to battery 0.16456, as DC

 

5) Front-end power electronics loss at 3.5%

From step-down transformer to front-end power electronics 0.17032, as AC

 

6) Step-down transformer loss at 1%

Drawn from HV grid via step-down transformer 0.17203, as AC

 

Battery System Loss, A-to-Z basis

 

About 0.17203/0.14555 x 100% = 18.2% more needs to be drawn from the HV grid to charge the battery systems up to about 80% full (preferably many days before any wind/solar lull starts), than is fed to the HV grid by discharge from the battery system to about 20% full; the loss percentage increases with aging.

 

Battery systems are rated at a level of power, MW, provided for a number of hours, MWh, such as providing 2 MW for 4 hours, 2 MW/8 MWh, as AC at battery voltage, which needs to be stepped up to HV voltage. 

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:25pm

Turnkey Capital Costs of Site-specific, Custom-designed, Utility-grade, Grid-scale Battery Systems

 

Tesla Megapacks

 

Tesla is at the forefront of providing the world with lithium-ion battery systems, that include front-end power electronics, the batteries, and back-end power electronics, and systems for battery heating and cooling, as needed, in standardized enclosures.

 

The Megapack ratings shown in the table, in bold, fit into a standard container W, 286” x D, 85” x H, 99”

If multiple Megapacks are purchased, the $/kWh becomes less. See URL

https://www.tesla.com/megapack/design

 

The 2022 Megapack pricing is shown in the table

The 2022 Megapack pricing is 24.5% greater than the 2021 pricing. See URL

 

The 2025 Megapack price likely will be much higher, due to: 1) Increased inflation rates, 2) Increased interest rates3) Supply chain disruptions, which delay projects, increase costs, 4) Increased energy prices, such as oil, gas, coal, etc., 5) Increased materials prices, such as of Tungsten, Cobalt, Lithium, and Copper, 6) Increased labor rates.

 

https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/2022-03-21_15-28-4...

https://www.zerohedge.com/commodities/tesla-hikes-megapack-prices-c...

 

Purchase

Capacity

Energy

Duration

Location

Cap Cost

2022 Pricing

Units

MW

MWh

h

State

$million

$/kWh

1

1.295

2.570

2

Vermont

1.842

717

2

2.590

5.140

2

Vermont

2.808

546

3

3.885

7.710

2

Vermont

4.189

543

1

0.770

3.070

4

Vermont

1.566

510

2

1.540

6.140

4

Vermont

2.957

482

3

2.310

9.210

4

Vermont

4.409

479

 

Example of Large-Scale Battery System 

 

PG&E, a California utility, put in operation a li-ion battery system with 256 Megapacks, rated capacity is 182.5 MW/730 MWh, 4-h energy delivery duration.

Power = 256 Megapacks x 0.770 MW x 0.926, factor = 182.5 MW

Energy = 256 Megapacks x 3.070 MWh x 0.929, factor = 730 MWh

1 Megapack costs $1.566 million, per above table

 

Supply by Tesla was about 256 Megapacks x $1.25 million each = $320 million, or $320 million/730,000 kWh = $438/kWh, 2022 pricing.

Supply by Others was about $63/kWh

All-in, turnkey cost was about $438 + $63 = $500/kWh. 2022 pricing. See Notes  

 

The primary purpose of the battery system is to absorb midday solar output bulges.

None of the costs associated with such systems will be charged to Owners of solar systems

https://www.10news.com/news/national/pg-es-tesla-megapack-battery-i...

 

NOTE 1: After looking at several aerial photos of large-scale battery systems with many Megapacks, it is clear many other items of equipment are shown, other than the Tesla supply, such as step-down/step-up transformers, switchgear, connections to the grid, land, access roads, fencing, security, site lighting, i.e., the cost of the Tesla supply is only one part of the total battery system cost on a site.

 

NOTE 2: World Cobalt production was 142,000 and 170,000 metric ton, in 2020 and 2021, respectively, of which the Democratic Republic of the Congo was 120,000 metric ton in 2021.

 

https://www.kitco.com/news/2022-02-02/Global-cobalt-production-hits...

https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/drc-mining-industry-child-la...

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:22pm

If you have not noticed, there has been near-zero wind and solar electricity since 1:00 am, on November 30, 2022; I was up several times during the night.

What would power all these heat pumps and EVs?

Resource-and-energy-poor Europe’s insanity of doing without plentiful LOW-COST Russian energy, and relying on the very the expensive, unreliable, weather-dependent, wind/solar/battery trio, is on display big time, and will be keenly felt during this and future winters for at least the next 4 to 5 years.

Resource-and-energy-rich US should learn a lesson from Europe’s folly, instead of blindly following the dead-end, wind/solar/battery scenario

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:22pm

The service life of an EV battery is at most 8 years

The replacement cost of a 75 kWh battery is at least $15,000 to $20,000, including labor, with near-zero likelihood of the cost decreasing, because of high materials costs and general inflation

No one with any sanity would put a new battery in an 8-y old EV

All EV and gasoline vehicle comparisons must be based on 8 years, even though the life of gasoline vehicles is at least 11 years

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:22pm

The inconvenient truth is the 8-yr CO2 emissions of a high-efficiency gasoline vehicle that gets 35 mpg, per EPA, is about the same as of an EV with a 75 kWh battery (about the minimum required in a cold climate), with an annual average of 0.32 kWh/mile, if one considers the:

1) upstream CO2

2) driving CO2 (which depends on the New England grid slowly having less CO2/kWh

3) disposal CO2, which would include hazardous disposal of at least the batteries of EVs

Would battery disposal be in Vermont, or would batteries be shipped to another state for disposal?

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:21pm

Solar an Unreliable Nothing-burger in the UK in Winter, and in New England
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/solar-an-unreliable-no...;
Francis Menton

The Zero-Carbon folks have no idea how an electrical system works.

They are demanding an expensive, highly subsidized wind/solar/battery replacement of fossil fuels that has zero chance of success, as was shown in Europe in 2021, well before the Ukraine situation, and in 2022.

It’s only a question of when, and how big, will be the failure, and how damaging the consequences of the failure will be.

Paul Homewood posted on his website “Not A Lot Of People Know That”, an article titled  “Why Solar Power Is Useless In Winter.”

Homewood obtained the hourly data on electricity generation from UK solar panels from this website.

For context, the typical electricity usage in the UK at this time of year is given by Homewood as 840 GWh, or 840/24 = 35 GWh for each hour of the day; some hours are less and others are more, depending on the daily demand.

The capacity of the solar generation facilities in the UK is given as 14 GW, as AC.

If the solar systems produced at full capacity for the 24 hours, they would have produced 14 x 24 = 336 GWh, or 336/840 = 40% of the UK’s typical usage for the day.

But hey, it’s late November.

The days are short, and the UK has lots of clouds, and often there is snow on the panels
So how much did the solar facilities actually produce today?

Here is the chart:

Open the URL to see the chart

The peak output of the solar panels was about 1.33 GW — less than 1.33/35 = 4% of the 35 GWh hourly average

Production from the solar panels (the area under the curve) was 5.46 GWh, or 5.46/840 = 0.65% of 840 GWh usage of the day.

The times of peak electricity demand are the early morning and late-afternoon/early-evening.
At those times the UK’s solar panels produced absolutely nothing.
In fact, they produced absolutely nothing from 4 pm to 8 am the next day; for 16 hours!!

So, how is the UK (or anyplace else) ever going to obtain a meaningful amount of its electricity in winter from solar panels?

Well, considering just today, the UK could have built 840/5.46 = 154 times as many solar panels as the UK currently has.

Under the wind/solar/battery trio, favored by zero-carbon folks, the UK could have obtained the exact amount of electricity the UK consumed today, 840 GWh from solar, if winds had been near-zero, as often happens during a UK winter (and an NE winter)

However, almost all of that solar electricity would be at midday, when it was not needed
There would be near-zero solar electricity during the morning peak, 6-8 AM, and during the evening peak, 5-8 PM.

To cover those peak periods, the UK would need a lot of energy storage.
Hundreds of GWh of storage would be needed just for this one day.
One GWh = one million kWh

The noon-time solar would be stored, and partially released during the evening peak, with the rest released during the morning peak of the next day.
That roundtrip procedure involves about 18 to 20% of losses, on an A-to-Z basis. See below.

What About Seasonal Variations?

You could save the electricity from the summer time, when there is more sun.
But for that, to cover the whole winter, tens of thousands of GWh of storage would be required, just for the UK.

Solar electricity would be stored for about 5 or 6 months, and released during the winter months, as needed by demand.

All-in, Turnkey Capital Cost of 1000 GWh of Li-ion Battery Systems

Instead of tens of thousands of GWh, we will determine the cost of battery systems rated at 1000 GWh, delivered as AC at battery voltage

On an everyday basis, batteries should not be discharged to less than 20% full and not be charged to more than 80% full, to achieve 15-y useful service life.

On rare occasions, such a rare long-distance driving, in case of EVs, discharging and charging is OK from 10% to 90%
 
Battery system rated capacity would be
1000 GWh/0.6, available capacity factor = 1666 million kWh, delivered as AC at battery voltage
 

All-in, turnkey, capital cost of Li-ion battery systems would be
1666 million kWh x $400/kWh/$1000000000 = $666 billion; most of it would need to be replaced every 15 years. See Note

NOTE: The rated capacity of the Moss Landing, California, Tesla battery system, owned by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, is 300 MW/1200 MWh

The all-in, turnkey, capital cost was $370 million, or $370 million/1200000 kWh =  $308/kWh, delivered as AC at battery voltage; 2018 pricing
The 2018 pricing has increased at least 30% to $400/kWh in 2022. See Appendix

NOTE:
Li-ion battery systems have a loss of about 18%, when new, and about 20%, when older, on an A-to-Z basis

We will look at the round-trip loss of a new, 1 GWh battery system

Delivered by battery system is 1 GWh, as AC to high voltage grid
Charge in battery system is 1 GWh/0.92 = 1.087 GWh, as DC
Electricity to battery system is 1.087/0.92 = 1.181 GWh, as AC from high voltage grid
The 0.181 GWh round-trip loss has to be produced by additional solar panels, or other generators, if they were still present!!

NOTE: Remember, all of this solar fantasy to “save the planet”, including huge-capacity battery systems, and hugely expanded electric grids, is highly subsidized with ratepayer and taxpayer money, to provide tax shelters to line the pockets of the world’s, well-connected, high rollers, who often have private planes, and private yachts, and mega mansions, and God knows what else.

Comment by Willem Post on December 23, 2022 at 2:15pm

Volkswagen Says EV Battery Plants “Practically Unviable” In EU Due To Soaring Energy Costs
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/volkswagen-says-ev-bat...

The inconvenient truth is the 8-yr CO2 emissions of a high-efficiency gasoline vehicle that gets 35 mpg, per EPA, is about the same as of an EV with a 75 kWh battery (about the minimum required in cold New England climates), with an annual average of 0.32 kWh/mile, if one considers the:

1) upstream CO2 from mining, ore refining, transport, battery pack assembly, vehicle assembly, transport to user.
2) driving CO2, which depends on the New England grid slowly having less CO2/kWh
3) disposal CO2, which would include hazardous waste disposal of at least the batteries of EVs

Would battery disposal be in Vermont, or would batteries be shipped to another state for disposal?

The service life of an EV battery is at most 8 years

The replacement cost of a 75 kWh battery is at least $15,000 to $20,000, including labor, with near-zero likelihood of the cost decreasing, because of high materials costs and general inflation.
 

No one with any sanity would put a new battery in an 8-y old EV

Therefore, all EV and gasoline vehicle comparisons must be based on 8 years, even though the life of gasoline vehicles is at least 11 years.

Also, EVs are driven about 9000 miles/y, whereas gasoline vehicles are driven about 12000 miles per year

Therefore, all EV and gasoline vehicle comparisons must be based on 8y x 9000 miles/y = 72,000 miles, which would make it very difficult for an E?V to have less LIFETIME CO2 than a 35 gpm gasoline vehicle.

If you have not noticed, there has been near-zero wind and solar electricity since 1:00 am, on November 30, 2022; I was up several times during the night.

What would power all these heat pumps and EVs?

Resource/energy-poor Europe’s insanity of doing without plentiful LOW-COST Russian energy, and relying on the very the expensive, unreliable, weather-dependent, wind/solar/battery trio, was on display big time in 2021, well before the Ukraine events, and in 2022, and will be keenly felt during the 2022/2023 winter, and future winters for at least the next 4 to 5 years.

Resource/energy-rich US should learn a lesson from Europe’s wind/solar/battery folly, instead of blindly following the Biden’s dead-end, wind/solar/battery fantasy, by wasting a lot of money, that would be better spent on 100 new, zero-CO2 nuclear plants
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-biden-administrati...

 

Maine as Third World Country:

CMP Transmission Rate Skyrockets 19.6% Due to Wind Power

 

Click here to read how the Maine ratepayer has been sold down the river by the Angus King cabal.

Maine Center For Public Interest Reporting – Three Part Series: A CRITICAL LOOK AT MAINE’S WIND ACT

******** IF LINKS BELOW DON'T WORK, GOOGLE THEM*********

(excerpts) From Part 1 – On Maine’s Wind Law “Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine if the law’s goals were met." . – Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, August 2010 https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/From Part 2 – On Wind and Oil Yet using wind energy doesn’t lower dependence on imported foreign oil. That’s because the majority of imported oil in Maine is used for heating and transportation. And switching our dependence from foreign oil to Maine-produced electricity isn’t likely to happen very soon, says Bartlett. “Right now, people can’t switch to electric cars and heating – if they did, we’d be in trouble.” So was one of the fundamental premises of the task force false, or at least misleading?" https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/wind-swept-task-force-set-the-rules/From Part 3 – On Wind-Required New Transmission Lines Finally, the building of enormous, high-voltage transmission lines that the regional electricity system operator says are required to move substantial amounts of wind power to markets south of Maine was never even discussed by the task force – an omission that Mills said will come to haunt the state.“If you try to put 2,500 or 3,000 megawatts in northern or eastern Maine – oh, my god, try to build the transmission!” said Mills. “It’s not just the towers, it’s the lines – that’s when I begin to think that the goal is a little farfetched.” https://www.pinetreewatchdog.org/flaws-in-bill-like-skating-with-dull-skates/

Not yet a member?

Sign up today and lend your voice and presence to the steadily rising tide that will soon sweep the scourge of useless and wretched turbines from our beloved Maine countryside. For many of us, our little pieces of paradise have been hard won. Did the carpetbaggers think they could simply steal them from us?

We have the facts on our side. We have the truth on our side. All we need now is YOU.

“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

 -- Mahatma Gandhi

"It's not whether you get knocked down: it's whether you get up."
Vince Lombardi 

Task Force membership is free. Please sign up today!

Hannah Pingree on the Maine expedited wind law

Hannah Pingree - Director of Maine's Office of Innovation and the Future

"Once the committee passed the wind energy bill on to the full House and Senate, lawmakers there didn’t even debate it. They passed it unanimously and with no discussion. House Majority Leader Hannah Pingree, a Democrat from North Haven, says legislators probably didn’t know how many turbines would be constructed in Maine."

https://pinetreewatch.org/wind-power-bandwagon-hits-bumps-in-the-road-3/

© 2024   Created by Webmaster.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service