EV's, Reliable Power, et al

[Herman]

Read this letter to the editor.



I own a hybrid electric car and two Ecco electric bikes. I regret buying them from both an economic and environment standpoint. If you drive in the city only and charge at home you are going to save some money. If you do four-season highway driving in Canadian winters, forget it. At 20 below it can take an hour pre-warming the battery before it will even take a charge.



My hybrid electric Lexus has less performance and higher ownership costs than my previous otherwise identical plan gas vehicle. A 50 amp charging station can run 13 c/kWh to 52 c/kWh depending on how enterprising the owner of the charger is. On some cases the charging cost can be higher than the fuel cost. In my case the electric motors are always charging at highway speeds and even in stop-and-go traffic you get one-third electric to two-thirds charging. Did I mention that replacement batteries can be one-quarter to one-third the overall cost of the vehicle?



There is no payback on the extra cost of the electric vehicle. Eventually there will be better batteries that last longer and don't catch fire as lithium ion batteries tend to do sometimes. Think Tesla solid state or Toyota's nuclear batteries that will eventually become mainstream.



I don't charge my e-bike batteries in my home anymore. They are four years old and have changed colour from black to gold and only charge to about 50 per cent and I don't trust them anymore, so I store them in a sealed metal container when not in use.



Lithium fires are a chemical reaction and hard to put out. Environmentally, it is difficult to recycle lithium ion batteries and 90 per cent are not recycled. Lithium mining, like copper, is strip mining and cobalt comes mostly from the Congo where every single mine has been independently audited and all are using child labour. If you think battery mineral mining is environment friendly, you are kidding yourself. They are not even culturally friendly batteries.



It's all politically-driven nonsense. So for me, my next car will be back to gas.

[Herman]

This is frickin crazy.



A pair of Lakehead University researchers recently published an article describing the emotions and anxiety experienced by young Canadians due to climate change.



Dr. Lindsay Galway, Associate Professor in the Department of Health Sciences at Lakehead Thunder Bay, and Dr. Ellen Field, Assistant Professor in Education at Lakehead Orillia, surveyed a thousand Canadians in the 16 to 25 age group.



Their ScienceDirect article describes some interesting responses.



Nearly half (48 per cent) think humanity is doomed. Seventy-three per cent find the future frightening.



Seventy-six per cent think people have failed to take care of the planet, while 39 per cent are hesitant to have children.



Seventy-one per cent of respondents felt angry about the Canadian government's response to climate change – and 69 per cent felt abandoned.



Six in 10 young people believe the formal education system should do more to teach them about climate change. Seventy-eight per cent reported that climate change impacts their overall mental health.



Four in 10 Canadians said their feelings about climate change negatively affect their daily life.



Despite all of those feelings, many respondents have hope that it's not too late to slow down global warming. Seventy-one per cent of respondents believe that together we can do something. Half of these young Canadians believe they can contribute.



"This research shows that inaction at the systemic and structural levels shapes the experiences of climate emotions and anxiety among young people across Canada," Dr. Galway said.



"While we consider difficult climate emotions and anxiety appropriate responses to the climate crisis, given its impacts, scale and urgency, we also recognize the mental and emotional burden that young people are bearing.



"To address difficult climate emotions, there needs to be strong leadership as well as supports and programs put in place to enable young people to cope with climate-related distress, foster emotional resiliency, and prevent harm. Most importantly, to protect the mental and emotional health of young people, transformative climate action is needed," Dr. Galway said.



For this study, the researchers wanted to replicate the Hickman et al. 2021 study on youth climate anxiety to collect Canadian data.



"We also wanted to expand the research and ask young people to identify coping supports that they think are needed," Dr. Field said.

[Thiel]

This is frickin crazy.



A pair of Lakehead University researchers recently published an article describing the emotions and anxiety experienced by young Canadians due to climate change.



Dr. Lindsay Galway, Associate Professor in the Department of Health Sciences at Lakehead Thunder Bay, and Dr. Ellen Field, Assistant Professor in Education at Lakehead Orillia, surveyed a thousand Canadians in the 16 to 25 age group.



Their ScienceDirect article describes some interesting responses.



Nearly half (48 per cent) think humanity is doomed. Seventy-three per cent find the future frightening.



Seventy-six per cent think people have failed to take care of the planet, while 39 per cent are hesitant to have children.



Seventy-one per cent of respondents felt angry about the Canadian government's response to climate change – and 69 per cent felt abandoned.



Six in 10 young people believe the formal education system should do more to teach them about climate change. Seventy-eight per cent reported that climate change impacts their overall mental health.



Four in 10 Canadians said their feelings about climate change negatively affect their daily life.



Despite all of those feelings, many respondents have hope that it's not too late to slow down global warming. Seventy-one per cent of respondents believe that together we can do something. Half of these young Canadians believe they can contribute.



"This research shows that inaction at the systemic and structural levels shapes the experiences of climate emotions and anxiety among young people across Canada," Dr. Galway said.



"While we consider difficult climate emotions and anxiety appropriate responses to the climate crisis, given its impacts, scale and urgency, we also recognize the mental and emotional burden that young people are bearing.



"To address difficult climate emotions, there needs to be strong leadership as well as supports and programs put in place to enable young people to cope with climate-related distress, foster emotional resiliency, and prevent harm. Most importantly, to protect the mental and emotional health of young people, transformative climate action is needed," Dr. Galway said.



For this study, the researchers wanted to replicate the Hickman et al. 2021 study on youth climate anxiety to collect Canadian data.



"We also wanted to expand the research and ask young people to identify coping supports that they think are needed," Dr. Field said.

This is terrible. Today's youth should be optimistic. Any challenge climate change represents does not come close to what previous generations faced. They should be taught that they will come through this better because of high levels of wealth and advanced environmental technology.

[Shen Li]

Read this letter to the editor.



I own a hybrid electric car and two Ecco electric bikes. I regret buying them from both an economic and environment standpoint. If you drive in the city only and charge at home you are going to save some money. If you do four-season highway driving in Canadian winters, forget it. At 20 below it can take an hour pre-warming the battery before it will even take a charge.



My hybrid electric Lexus has less performance and higher ownership costs than my previous otherwise identical plan gas vehicle. A 50 amp charging station can run 13 c/kWh to 52 c/kWh depending on how enterprising the owner of the charger is. On some cases the charging cost can be higher than the fuel cost. In my case the electric motors are always charging at highway speeds and even in stop-and-go traffic you get one-third electric to two-thirds charging. Did I mention that replacement batteries can be one-quarter to one-third the overall cost of the vehicle?



There is no payback on the extra cost of the electric vehicle. Eventually there will be better batteries that last longer and don't catch fire as lithium ion batteries tend to do sometimes. Think Tesla solid state or Toyota's nuclear batteries that will eventually become mainstream.



I don't charge my e-bike batteries in my home anymore. They are four years old and have changed colour from black to gold and only charge to about 50 per cent and I don't trust them anymore, so I store them in a sealed metal container when not in use.



Lithium fires are a chemical reaction and hard to put out. Environmentally, it is difficult to recycle lithium ion batteries and 90 per cent are not recycled. Lithium mining, like copper, is strip mining and cobalt comes mostly from the Congo where every single mine has been independently audited and all are using child labour. If you think battery mineral mining is environment friendly, you are kidding yourself. They are not even culturally friendly batteries.



It's all politically-driven nonsense. So for me, my next car will be back to gas.

I have never considered having anything as dangerous as an e-car in my garage. I was considering an e-bike when I get to Singapore, but maybe i won't.

[Lokmar]

Best thing to do with your electric car is to mount a diesel generator in it.

[DKG]

Read this letter to the editor.



I own a hybrid electric car and two Ecco electric bikes. I regret buying them from both an economic and environment standpoint. If you drive in the city only and charge at home you are going to save some money. If you do four-season highway driving in Canadian winters, forget it. At 20 below it can take an hour pre-warming the battery before it will even take a charge.



My hybrid electric Lexus has less performance and higher ownership costs than my previous otherwise identical plan gas vehicle. A 50 amp charging station can run 13 c/kWh to 52 c/kWh depending on how enterprising the owner of the charger is. On some cases the charging cost can be higher than the fuel cost. In my case the electric motors are always charging at highway speeds and even in stop-and-go traffic you get one-third electric to two-thirds charging. Did I mention that replacement batteries can be one-quarter to one-third the overall cost of the vehicle?



There is no payback on the extra cost of the electric vehicle. Eventually there will be better batteries that last longer and don't catch fire as lithium ion batteries tend to do sometimes. Think Tesla solid state or Toyota's nuclear batteries that will eventually become mainstream.



I don't charge my e-bike batteries in my home anymore. They are four years old and have changed colour from black to gold and only charge to about 50 per cent and I don't trust them anymore, so I store them in a sealed metal container when not in use.



Lithium fires are a chemical reaction and hard to put out. Environmentally, it is difficult to recycle lithium ion batteries and 90 per cent are not recycled. Lithium mining, like copper, is strip mining and cobalt comes mostly from the Congo where every single mine has been independently audited and all are using child labour. If you think battery mineral mining is environment friendly, you are kidding yourself. They are not even culturally friendly batteries.



It's all politically-driven nonsense. So for me, my next car will be back to gas.

I would imagine a lithium ion car battery would not fully charge after a few years too.

[Lokmar]

Read this letter to the editor.



I own a hybrid electric car and two Ecco electric bikes. I regret buying them from both an economic and environment standpoint. If you drive in the city only and charge at home you are going to save some money. If you do four-season highway driving in Canadian winters, forget it. At 20 below it can take an hour pre-warming the battery before it will even take a charge.



My hybrid electric Lexus has less performance and higher ownership costs than my previous otherwise identical plan gas vehicle. A 50 amp charging station can run 13 c/kWh to 52 c/kWh depending on how enterprising the owner of the charger is. On some cases the charging cost can be higher than the fuel cost. In my case the electric motors are always charging at highway speeds and even in stop-and-go traffic you get one-third electric to two-thirds charging. Did I mention that replacement batteries can be one-quarter to one-third the overall cost of the vehicle?



There is no payback on the extra cost of the electric vehicle. Eventually there will be better batteries that last longer and don't catch fire as lithium ion batteries tend to do sometimes. Think Tesla solid state or Toyota's nuclear batteries that will eventually become mainstream.



I don't charge my e-bike batteries in my home anymore. They are four years old and have changed colour from black to gold and only charge to about 50 per cent and I don't trust them anymore, so I store them in a sealed metal container when not in use.



Lithium fires are a chemical reaction and hard to put out. Environmentally, it is difficult to recycle lithium ion batteries and 90 per cent are not recycled. Lithium mining, like copper, is strip mining and cobalt comes mostly from the Congo where every single mine has been independently audited and all are using child labour. If you think battery mineral mining is environment friendly, you are kidding yourself. They are not even culturally friendly batteries.



It's all politically-driven nonsense. So for me, my next car will be back to gas.

I would imagine a lithium ion car battery would not fully charge after a few years too.

It doesnt. look at a back up battery/silent generator or whatever they're calling them today. They are limited on the number of times they'll recharge.

[Herman]

No frickin electric truck on my farm.

[Herman]

The causes of Europe's energy insecurity



The cause of Europe's energy insecurity, which has rendered it impotent against Putin, is simple: When you restrict domestic fossil fuel production on the false promise of replacement by unreliable solar and wind, you become dangerously dependent on foreign production.



Europe's vulnerability to Russia was completely preventable. Europe and its allies have all the natural gas, coal, and uranium they need to produce low-cost, reliable heat and electricity for generations to come.



But anti-fossil fuel, anti-nuclear policies have neutered Europe.



For the last 2 decades Europe has destroyed its ability to produce and import energy from fossil fuels and nuclear—on the promise that unreliable solar and wind could replace them. But after trillions in subsidies, it's clear that they have failed.¹



One major cause of Europe's current energy impotence is its numerous bans on the greatest natural gas producing technology ever invented: fracking. Fracking has been banned by France, Bulgaria, The Netherlands, Germany, Spain, and the UK.²



Another major cause of Europe's current energy impotence is its opposition to LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) import terminals—combined with the US's opposition to export terminals. If not for these, Europe could get a lot of its gas from America—not Russia.³

[Herman]

More from Alex Epstein.



The causes of America's energy crisis



America is experiencing our worst energy crisis since the 1970s. High oil prices are making driving expensive, while high natural gas prices are making heating and electricity far more expensive—above all in the Northeast, where some ratepayers might see prices more than two times last winter's.



Here's a chart of residential natural gas prices over the last several winters from the US Energy Information Administration. Notice the massive spike projected for this winter—meaning record heating bills for many.



Democrats could have ensured far lower oil and gas prices despite global tumult had they, upon taking power in 2019:



1) Liberated oil investment, production, and transport.

2) Liberated natural gas investment, production, and transport.



Instead, they systematically strangled oil and gas.



Is it any wonder that, threatened incessantly by US Democrats and other anti-oil forces, global investment in oil declined dramatically despite growing long-term demand? Between 2011 and 2021, oil/gas exploration investments declined 50%.



Less investment = less supply = higher prices.



Our bountiful natural gas is only useful if it can be transported by pipeline—to where it is needed in the US and to export terminals for shipment abroad. But in recent years we have seen a Democrat-led movement to block pipeline after pipeline—such as these 6 pipeline

[Herman]

Refuting Democrat denials of responsibility for the energy crisis



For 15+ years Democratic politicians, including Joe Biden, have relentlessly attacked oil investment, oil production, and oil transport—leading to higher prices and lower security.



Instead of taking credit for their "success," they are denying that they are anti-fossil fuels!¹²





The "business decisions" denial tactic



For 15+ years Democratic politicians have pushed everything they can to threaten new oil production: net-zero, ESG, proposed bans, etc.



Now they are blaming companies for "business decisions" to refrain from threatened oil production!¹³





The "windfall profits" denial tactic



For 15+ years Democratic politicians have done everything they can to make new oil production unprofitable—leading to less investment.



Now they are condemning companies for not investing enough "windfall profits"!¹⁴





The "9000 leases" denial tactic



For 15+ years Dem politicians have driven up oil prices by delaying/destroying countless economically viable oil projects.



To deny responsibility they are attacking companies for not developing 9000 leases the companies judge to be economically nonviable.¹⁵





The energy crisis is simple.



Politicians around the world, including US Democrats, have restricted fossil fuel investment/production/transport on the false promise of replacement by unreliable solar/wind.



The result: higher prices and lower security.



Anti-fossil fuel politicians, please stop the denial.



The "climate emergency" movement's responsibility for the energy crisis

The world is experiencing the worst energy crisis since the 1970s, and it may end up being far worse.



Skyrocketing energy prices are driving price inflation in every area of life. Even in wealthy Europe we are seeing mass-hardship, deindustrialization, and fear of winter.¹⁶





While America is suffering from the energy crisis and Europe is suffering far more, the worst-affected are poor nations—who are getting outbid for today's scarce energy supplies. For example, we've seen power outages in Bangladesh, which has been outbid for natural gas by Europe.¹⁷





The global energy crisis constitutes an emergency—a dire and deadly problem requiring a swift, dramatic solution.



What's the solution to the global energy emergency?



We must put a stop to its cause: the "climate emergency" movement's campaign to rapidly eliminate fossil fuels.



While "climate change"—humans impacting climate—is real, "climate emergency" is not. The world is slowly becoming warmer—at a cold point in geological history, when many more people die of cold than of heat. This doesn't at all justify rapidly restricting global fossil fuel use.¹⁸



The "climate emergency" movement, centered in the West, has restricted

1. fossil fuel investment

2. fossil fuel production

3. fossil fuel transport



This has artificially suppressed fossil fuel supply, making industry unable to meet growing demand. Which means sky-high prices.



Today's high fossil fuel prices are not primarily a "Putin price hike."



They are caused by global anti-fossil-fuel "climate emergency" policies—which made fossil fuel prices artificially high before Putin's war and prevented the free world from quickly increasing production in response.¹⁹



The "climate emergency" movement has the gall to chastise the fossil fuel industry for not sufficiently ramping up production post-pandemic and post-Putin-invasion. But this insufficient ramp-up is the result of anti-fossil-fuel policies that restrict and punish new attempted production!



The causes of skyrocketing global natural gas and coal prices

Skyrocketing natural gas and coal prices are not a failure of the fossil fuel industry, but the total failure of anti-fossil fuel policies, which falsely promised that if we dramatically restricted fossil fuel energy production, green energy could easily replace it.



There is no physical reason that the natural gas and coal industries can't meet rising demand. The world has hundreds of years' worth of gas deposits and thousands of years worth of coal deposits. But governments radically restrict the freedom to utilize those deposits.²⁰





There is no technical or economic reason the natural gas and coal industries can't meet demand. These industries have gotten radically more capable and efficient in the last two decades--especially natural gas with fracking. But governments radically restrict their freedom.²¹



In Europe, fracking and other shale gas technologies could produce a lot of gas, but Europeans have over and over chosen to ban fracking--reassuring citizens that solar and wind would provide all the energy they need. How is that going?



America has been called "the Saudi Arabia of coal." At today's prices, America's coal industry would love to be powering the world. But it can't because of onerous restrictions on coal transport, as well as myriad domestic restrictions on desperately-needed coal production

[DKG]

I would imagine a lithium ion car battery would not fully charge after a few years too.

It doesnt. look at a back up battery/silent generator or whatever they're calling them today. They are limited on the number of times they'll recharge.

I am not ruling out an eclectric car. I drive out of town no more than once a month. I do not work far from my condo, so I could take a bus or Uber if we are in a cold spell and it won't charge.

[Lokmar]

It doesnt. look at a back up battery/silent generator or whatever they're calling them today. They are limited on the number of times they'll recharge.

I am not ruling out an eclectric car. I drive out of town no more than once a month. I do not work far from my condo, so I could take a bus or Uber if we are in a cold spell and it won't charge.

They can be fun and they have a place. My only problem continues to be having them shoved onto the market in quantities that the grid cannot support. I have had a blast driving a Tesla Model 3. During the winter, I race electric go carts to keep my skills up.

[Oerdin]

https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/status/1636033954200297475">https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/sta ... 4200297475">https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/status/1636033954200297475

[Lokmar]

https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/status/1636033954200297475">https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/sta ... 4200297475">https://mobile.twitter.com/atensnut/status/1636033954200297475

I've considered starting a business that does this.