Vauxhall owner to invest £26 billion in electric

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Vauxhall owner to invest £26 billion in electric

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Mapletree Croydon 10 Jul 21 10.50am
Originally posted by The Dolphin Everyone conveniently forgets the "green" cost of making the batteries - isn't making one battery the equivalent damage that running a deisel car for 5 years does? Also creating the electricity required to run these cars. The emissions are enormous. The car industry and governments around the world are conning us the same way they did with diesel engines. They build cars so well now that they last a long time so they now need zillions of us to HAVE to buy new cars. A massive con and massive damage to the planet. Electric cars appear greener once 36,000 miles have been driven [Link] Edited by Mapletree (10 Jul 2021 10.51am)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 10 Jul 21 10.50am

Originally posted by The Dolphin

Everyone conveniently forgets the "green" cost of making the batteries - isn't making one battery the equivalent damage that running a deisel car for 5 years does?
Also creating the electricity required to run these cars.
The emissions are enormous.
The car industry and governments around the world are conning us the same way they did with diesel engines.
They build cars so well now that they last a long time so they now need zillions of us to HAVE to buy new cars.
A massive con and massive damage to the planet.

Electric cars appear greener once 36,000 miles have been driven

[Link]

Edited by Mapletree (10 Jul 2021 10.51am)

Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin 10 Jul 21 12.44pm
Originally posted by YT Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe? A quite ridiculous reply! I would absolutely not ban cars - I am pro not anti on that one. Reproduction - now you come to mention there large swathes of the population who should not be allowed to have children for sure - not a blanket ban though . My point is that electric vehicles are not as green as they painted. Cleaner long term perhaps as Mapletree points out but that only assumes that the batteries last forever and they won't. What would I do? - electric is the way forward I guess but governments should make the manufacturers do more work now on the batteries to make them cleaner to produce, last longer and have more miles in them. They should also get the charging infrastructure in place first. In the interim stop the production of diesel cars - not trucks - until the other issues get resolved. Does that answer your question? Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

The Dolphin

10 Jul 21 12.44pm

Originally posted by YT

Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe?

A quite ridiculous reply!
I would absolutely not ban cars - I am pro not anti on that one.
Reproduction - now you come to mention there large swathes of the population who should not be allowed to have children for sure - not a blanket ban though .
My point is that electric vehicles are not as green as they painted.
Cleaner long term perhaps as Mapletree points out but that only assumes that the batteries last forever and they won't.
What would I do? - electric is the way forward I guess but governments should make the manufacturers do more work now on the batteries to make them cleaner to produce, last longer and have more miles in them.
They should also get the charging infrastructure in place first.
In the interim stop the production of diesel cars - not trucks - until the other issues get resolved.
Does that answer your question?

Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 10 Jul 21 12.54pm
Originally posted by The Dolphin A quite ridiculous reply! I would absolutely not ban cars - I am pro not anti on that one. Reproduction - now you come to mention there large swathes of the population who should not be allowed to have children for sure - not a blanket ban though . My point is that electric vehicles are not as green as they painted. Cleaner long term perhaps as Mapletree points out but that only assumes that the batteries last forever and they won't. What would I do? - electric is the way forward I guess but governments should make the manufacturers do more work now on the batteries to make them cleaner to produce, last longer and have more miles in them. They should also get the charging infrastructure in place first. In the interim stop the production of diesel cars - not trucks - until the other issues get resolved. Does that answer your question? Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm) The batteries are guaranteed to 100,000 miles by which time an ICE will have generated 73% more CO2.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 10 Jul 21 12.54pm

Originally posted by The Dolphin

Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm)

The batteries are guaranteed to 100,000 miles by which time an ICE will have generated 73% more CO2.

Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 10 Jul 21 1.08pm
Originally posted by The Dolphin Everyone conveniently forgets the "green" cost of making the batteries - isn't making one battery the equivalent damage that running a deisel car for 5 years does? Also creating the electricity required to run these cars. The emissions are enormous. The car industry and governments around the world are conning us the same way they did with diesel engines. They build cars so well now that they last a long time so they now need zillions of us to HAVE to buy new cars. A massive con and massive damage to the planet. Hit the nail bang on the head. ^^^ I disengage, I turn the page.
Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly

in a hidey-hole 10 Jul 21 1.08pm

Send a Private Message to Forest Hillbilly

Originally posted by The Dolphin

Hit the nail bang on the head. ^^^

I disengage, I turn the page.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 10 Jul 21 1.12pm
Originally posted by YT Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe? Improve public transport and make it more affordable?
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

10 Jul 21 1.12pm

Originally posted by YT

Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe?

Improve public transport and make it more affordable?

Alert a moderator to this post

Tom-the-eagle Croydon 10 Jul 21 1.24pm
Originally posted by YT Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe? To be fair YT, he wasn’t ranting "It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit
Alert a moderator to this post

Tom-the-eagle

Croydon 10 Jul 21 1.24pm

Originally posted by YT

Instead of ranting, perhaps tell us what you would do if you were in government. Ban everyone from having a car, perhaps? Ban people from reproducing, maybe?

To be fair YT, he wasn’t ranting

"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit

Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly in a hidey-hole 10 Jul 21 1.25pm
Originally posted by The Dolphin A quite ridiculous reply! I would absolutely not ban cars - I am pro not anti on that one. Reproduction - now you come to mention there large swathes of the population who should not be allowed to have children for sure - not a blanket ban though . My point is that electric vehicles are not as green as they painted. Cleaner long term perhaps as Mapletree points out but that only assumes that the batteries last forever and they won't. What would I do? - electric is the way forward I guess but governments should make the manufacturers do more work now on the batteries to make them cleaner to produce, last longer and have more miles in them. They should also get the charging infrastructure in place first. In the interim stop the production of diesel cars - not trucks - until the other issues get resolved. Does that answer your question? Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm) there is little money in the initial sales of car,compared to : running, servicing, repairs. Plus fuel costs, parking, insurance. Taxation abounds,... All vehicles are designed with a specific life-cycle, else they'd lose money on the spares market and vehicle replacement. I disengage, I turn the page.
Alert a moderator to this post

Forest Hillbilly

in a hidey-hole 10 Jul 21 1.25pm

Originally posted by The Dolphin

Edited by The Dolphin (10 Jul 2021 12.44pm)

there is little money in the initial sales of car,compared to : running, servicing, repairs.
Plus fuel costs, parking, insurance. Taxation abounds,...
All vehicles are designed with a specific life-cycle, else they'd lose money on the spares market and vehicle replacement.

I disengage, I turn the page.

Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 1.31pm
[Link] Now this is a long read. I do love a laugh, and I'm definitely not free of spouting off my own brand of ignorance in this forum, but I do feel we need to get a handle on this particular topic. Please read this and lets get a hold on this topic. To clarify I found this on the GWPF how are a horrible lobby group/think tank that fights against political change for the benefit of the environment. I don't agree with them on many points at all. A case of knowing ones enemies. On some topics however they have a point, boilers etc. Most of their lobbying is around who is going to pay for the changes we need to make for the benefit of the environment. They count Lord Lawson amoung their number, and I'm sure they would be happy to pour money into banks, and the back pockets of their friends before protecting anything we hold dear.
Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc

Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 1.31pm

[Link]

Now this is a long read. I do love a laugh, and I'm definitely not free of spouting off my own brand of ignorance in this forum, but I do feel we need to get a handle on this particular topic. Please read this and lets get a hold on this topic.

To clarify I found this on the GWPF how are a horrible lobby group/think tank that fights against political change for the benefit of the environment. I don't agree with them on many points at all. A case of knowing ones enemies. On some topics however they have a point, boilers etc. Most of their lobbying is around who is going to pay for the changes we need to make for the benefit of the environment. They count Lord Lawson amoung their number, and I'm sure they would be happy to pour money into banks, and the back pockets of their friends before protecting anything we hold dear.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 10 Jul 21 1.32pm
Ethical problems with electric cars. [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

10 Jul 21 1.32pm

Ethical problems with electric cars.

[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

Tom-the-eagle Croydon 10 Jul 21 1.37pm
Originally posted by djcpfc [Link] Now this is a long read. I do love a laugh, and I'm definitely not free of spouting off my own brand of ignorance in this forum, but I do feel we need to get a handle on this particular topic. Please read this and lets get a hold on this topic. To clarify I found this on the GWPF how are a horrible lobby group/think tank that fights against political change for the benefit of the environment. I don't agree with them on many points at all. A case of knowing ones enemies. On some topics however they have a point, boilers etc. Most of their lobbying is around who is going to pay for the changes we need to make for the benefit of the environment. They count Lord Lawson amoung their number, and I'm sure they would be happy to pour money into banks, and the back pockets of their friends before protecting anything we hold dear. Any chance of a summary? I literally have no attention span and would drift off reading that. Something like ‘electric good - petrol bad’ please "It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit
Alert a moderator to this post

Tom-the-eagle

Croydon 10 Jul 21 1.37pm

Originally posted by djcpfc

[Link]

Any chance of a summary?

I literally have no attention span and would drift off reading that.

Something like ‘electric good - petrol bad’ please

"It feels much better than it ever did, much more sensitive." John Wayne Bobbit

Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 1.51pm
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle Ethical problems with electric cars. [Link] 'Lithium mining also brings “ecosystem degradation and landscape damage”, according to the UN, while miners breathing lithium dust risk pulmonary oedemas.' I think we need to also consider how Oil is sourced, handled, refined, and delivered to petrol stations. This isn't a clean operation either. The elephant in the room here is that whenever a major change happens there are winners and losers, those who stand to lose the most tend to shout the loudest and seek to control the narrative. Change takes pressure and re-capitalisation. EVs aren't perfect, battery chemistry needs to improve to reduce its footprint. It will. We really are at the start of this as a science. Oil contamination to the environment, the lives lost in fossil fuel production each year, asthma and secondary conditions from particulates need to be part of this same narrative. The UN is constantly hears debates fronted by agenda lead lobby groups, it's no better or worse than our own government.
Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc

Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 1.51pm

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

Ethical problems with electric cars.

[Link]

'Lithium mining also brings “ecosystem degradation and landscape damage”, according to the UN, while miners breathing lithium dust risk pulmonary oedemas.'

I think we need to also consider how Oil is sourced, handled, refined, and delivered to petrol stations. This isn't a clean operation either. The elephant in the room here is that whenever a major change happens there are winners and losers, those who stand to lose the most tend to shout the loudest and seek to control the narrative. Change takes pressure and re-capitalisation. EVs aren't perfect, battery chemistry needs to improve to reduce its footprint. It will. We really are at the start of this as a science. Oil contamination to the environment, the lives lost in fossil fuel production each year, asthma and secondary conditions from particulates need to be part of this same narrative.

The UN is constantly hears debates fronted by agenda lead lobby groups, it's no better or worse than our own government.

Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 2.10pm
Originally posted by Tom-the-eagle Any chance of a summary? I literally have no attention span and would drift off reading that. Something like ‘electric good - petrol bad’ please The professor that was formally employed by Saudi Aramco, the state oil company of Saudi Arabia gets nailed by the professor from the University of Eindhoven. As his maths is twisted by accounting for all the environmental costs of production though to end of life cycle of an EV, but ignoring all the costs of the oil production it takes to get the petrol to the forecourt for conventional cars. The argument against EVs doesn't take into account the differences between the CO2 cost of electricity production in different countries. It is important to understand that this does make a significant difference in how great the benefit of driving a EV is. We have a relatively low CO2 cost to our electricity production in the UK when compared to global standards. So, driving an EV in the UK is better for the environment than it would be in Australia say. However this is a constantly moving landscape, which is generally getting better all the time, which is increasing favouring EVs globally. Lets not be drawn by the dog s*** out there on this topic. There is one way forward. Lets not allow ourselves to repeat the misinformation pushed by those wishing to retain the power in this space. Namely Big Oil, and Fossil Fuel lobbyist.
Alert a moderator to this post

djcpfc

Within a 5 minute walk 10 Jul 21 2.10pm

Originally posted by Tom-the-eagle

Any chance of a summary?

I literally have no attention span and would drift off reading that.

Something like ‘electric good - petrol bad’ please

The professor that was formally employed by Saudi Aramco, the state oil company of Saudi Arabia gets nailed by the professor from the University of Eindhoven. As his maths is twisted by accounting for all the environmental costs of production though to end of life cycle of an EV, but ignoring all the costs of the oil production it takes to get the petrol to the forecourt for conventional cars.

The argument against EVs doesn't take into account the differences between the CO2 cost of electricity production in different countries. It is important to understand that this does make a significant difference in how great the benefit of driving a EV is.

We have a relatively low CO2 cost to our electricity production in the UK when compared to global standards. So, driving an EV in the UK is better for the environment than it would be in Australia say. However this is a constantly moving landscape, which is generally getting better all the time, which is increasing favouring EVs globally.

Lets not be drawn by the dog s*** out there on this topic. There is one way forward. Lets not allow ourselves to repeat the misinformation pushed by those wishing to retain the power in this space. Namely Big Oil, and Fossil Fuel lobbyist.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Vauxhall owner to invest £26 billion in electric

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors