Weighed fiesta today (funny story)

[Dpro]

well I will agree big trucks and SUV’s are a blight. Too many buy them not really needing them. I looked at that site and quite honestly question their methodology as possibly bot covering all the bases. They tall mainly about fuel consumption and or electricity drawn to run them . There is littel talked about cost of said vehicle and how long it takes to get a return trade off . I.E. how many years it takes to own the vehicle to attain carbon neutral which other sites do look at.

They also seem to ignore manufacturing and how much energy is expended to manufacturer said. vehicles. I am sorry but that is a biased website As it’s run by an organization that. favors EV’s as the answer to all. It’s equivalent to a website setup by big oil to show how beneficial oil actually is . It’s. basically bound to biased. If it was an independent lab I would be ok now we have some unbiased information .

Again not against just have noticed in our polarized world how each side will only favor their views in a biased way rather than trying to be unbiased everyone seems to have an agenda .

I am moderate person. I strive to look at both sides and I am not championing gas powered vehicles as much as I love them I am aware we are at a nexus.Things have to change and ya we kinda have to lead the way if we expect the world to get onboard.


Though I do not see the current rush to EV’s as the answer its possibly on of many options we need to utilize to shut other things out in favor of it is pure technological folly and our government and Europe seem to fully onboard on diving in to quickly and wholeheartedly.

 

[Dialcaliper]

well I will agree big trucks and SUV’s are a blight. Too many buy them not really needing them. I looked at that site and quite honestly question their methodology as possibly bot covering all the bases. They tall mainly about fuel consumption and or electricity drawn to run them . There is littel talked about cost of said vehicle and how long it takes to get a return trade off . I.E. how many years it takes to own the vehicle to attain carbon neutral which other sites do look at.

They also seem to ignore manufacturing and how much energy is expended to manufacturer said. vehicles. I am sorry but that is a biased website As it’s run by an organization that. favors EV’s as the answer to all. It’s equivalent to a website setup by big oil to show how beneficial oil actually is . It’s. basically bound to biased. If it was an independent lab I would be ok now we have some unbiased information .

Again not against just have noticed in our polarized world how each side will only favor their views in a biased way rather than trying to be unbiased everyone seems to have an agenda .

I am moderate person. I strive to look at both sides and I am not championing gas powered vehicles as much as I love them I am aware we are at a nexus.Things have to change and ya we kinda have to lead the way if we expect the world to get onboard.


Though I do not see the current rush to EV’s as the answer its possibly on of many options we need to utilize to shut other things out in favor of it is pure technological folly and our government and Europe seem to fully onboard on diving in to quickly and wholeheartedly.

I hear you - I’m under no illusions that the group that produces those numbers is completely unbiased. They do list their backers, a list that doesn’t look terrible except for an anonymous backer: https://www.aceee.org/aceee-finances


But reading deeper into their methodology, it’s not too bad - it *does* attempt to account for both resources/supply chain and manufacturing as well as material transportation and disposal “costs”. In order to do that, you do have to rely on a lot of assumptions based on the current state of the world (ie, can’t actually predict the future for a 2024 model car). It also attempts to apply correction factors to things like EPA fuel economy and published emissions figures to account for vehicle aging, etc.

It’s interesting that you mention “time to pay off”. That’s definitely important to us as individuals when it comes to money, and for maintainance and operating costs for the period that we own our cars. But it requires some sort of typical “benchmark” to compare against

However, it’s actually not always relevant from the car’s point of view, nor from a “carbon footprint” standpoint. Cars have multiple owners, manufacturing and disposal costs over the course of its existence - some of the “costs” will always be in the future. The buzzword is “cradle to grave”

And short of creative gymnastics (like sponsoring negative offset activities to become “carbon neutral”) , the impact of a new vehicle is never “paid off” - at least for the time being, the number is always “positive” and the focus is simply on minimizing it. Cars usually don’t generate money for most people either.

“Payoff” is really only relevant to things like solar panels that produce energy with zero additional impact over their lifetime that offsets the energy and emissions associated with their constructions by not doing something else (like burning fuel). Cars don’t really do that.

 

[rallytaff]

Don’t get me started on evs. I freaking hate how everyone is freaking out about them. Not only is the infrastructure not there.

But Evs are anywhere near as green as people think. Making and disposing of the batteries are terrible for the environment and also require digging up the earth to make them.

Plus the fact that the batteries are way worse than companies claim. I say a video where they drove all the most popular evs to test the claimed mileage and every single one came at least 40 miles short of their claimed range. And those were brand new, if you have ever looked at the battery information on your phone you will notice that after about 6 months. The battery life is reduced by about 10-15%. Meaning even with a full charge, your battery can only get 85% of its original capacity. After a year or so. It can go down to 60-70%. So a car that starts with 300 mile range, realistically can probably only do 250 miles brand new, and after a year or so, the battery will only be able to take 70% charge due to battery degradation, so then ur looking at maybe 175 miles even with a full charge.

And if you aren’t close to a super charger that means you gotta plug it in to your house and charge the thing for half a day. Don’t even want to imagine what that does your energy bill. The battery technology has gotten better but they just aren’t efficient enough for most people to use every day. Especially in the cold, you ever leave your phone in the car during the winter? The battery dies extremely quickly in the cold. Unless you live In a city close to a bunch of chargers and only do very short trips. It’s just not worth it. People that need to commute to work will need the top of the line most long range battery to even make it pheasible.

Then of course there’s the problem where the batteries only last maybe 10 years regardless of mileage. then you’re looking at 10-15 grand to replace the damn thing.

What we should have been doing is putting time and effort into educating people on ethanol and all its positives. Did you know that in Brazil they use e85 almost exclusively? If we wanted to put the effort in, It’s extremely possible for the US to run on mostly e85. Yes, ethanol requires its own infrastructure, and we would need to have more people making the ethanol to keep up. But it’s not hard at all. I’m not saying every car needs to run on e85. But if we sold e30-e50 at the pump. That would be a compromise.

E85 burns 50x cleaner than regular gas, it’s renewable and naturally made without digging up the earth. And the cars run way better on it.

You forgot to mention the pollution from the tyres, due to the weight of the car. Also roads will be damaged from the weight of so many EV's and it's not going to get any better. Ev's are just a fad and are 'gross polluters'! I wouldn't take any EV even if they were free!

 

[rallytaff]

Public transport can't take me where I want to go or when I want to go. Public transport is for the poor people who can't afford/drive cars. As someone who suffers from severe arthritis in my knees, hip and feet, how am I supposed to get to where and when I want to go without my car?

What I’m sick of is fake pearl clutching from luddites that hinge their identity on hating new technology. The ICE has only gotten more efficient and more powerful over the decades. Imagine if horse owners didn’t want the ICE “forced down their throats” because of all the issues the first cars had. New tech always goes through a process of introduction and improvement, sometimes it gets abandoned entirely for something else, it’s just part of progress.

The “greenest” thing we could do would be to design our cities and infrastructure around needing cars less in favor of public transport and walking/biking but people are just as paranoid about that as they are electric cars.

 

[Dpro]

I hear you - I’m under no illusions that the group that produces those numbers is completely unbiased. They do list their backers, a list that doesn’t look terrible except for an anonymous backer: https://www.aceee.org/aceee-finances


But reading deeper into their methodology, it’s not too bad - it *does* attempt to account for both resources/supply chain and manufacturing as well as material transportation and disposal “costs”. In order to do that, you do have to rely on a lot of assumptions based on the current state of the world (ie, can’t actually predict the future for a 2024 model car). It also attempts to apply correction factors to things like EPA fuel economy and published emissions figures to account for vehicle aging, etc.

It’s interesting that you mention “time to pay off”. That’s definitely important to us as individuals when it comes to money, and for maintainance and operating costs for the period that we own our cars. But it requires some sort of typical “benchmark” to compare against

However, it’s actually not always relevant from the car’s point of view, nor from a “carbon footprint” standpoint. Cars have multiple owners, manufacturing and disposal costs over the course of its existence - some of the “costs” will always be in the future. The buzzword is “cradle to grave”

And short of creative gymnastics (like sponsoring negative offset activities to become “carbon neutral”) , the impact of a new vehicle is never “paid off” - at least for the time being, the number is always “positive” and the focus is simply on minimizing it. Cars usually don’t generate money for most people either.

“Payoff” is really only relevant to things like solar panels that produce energy with zero additional impact over their lifetime that offsets the energy and emissions associated with their constructions by not doing something else (like burning fuel). Cars don’t really do that.

Ya know all the buzzwords , creative gymnastics had me chucking actually there have been time based studies done on ICE vs hybrid back when hybrids mainly Toyotas where newer and EV’s outside of early Teslas were a new thing and more costly. Now you can buy a Maverick or a Corolla Hybrid among others for great prices.
Solar panels are not such the payoff they should be due to the fact of how the U.S. allowed the Solar panel industry get started here with the whole subsidy thing that was really just a high interest loan that came back to haunt people . Ya it’s all l screwed up compared to the rest of the world .
Anyways ya cars don’t generate money for most😂 I seem to do really well in that department😂 Though for most ya it’s a losing proposition. 😂 Mainly it should be how we can help people lose less i.e. more mileage for their money so to speak.

 

[Dpro]

Public transport can't take me where I want to go or when I want to go. Public transport is for the poor people who can't afford/drive cars. As someone who suffers from severe arthritis in my knees, hip and feet, how am I supposed to get to where and when I want to go without my car?

Ya Public transit sucks here.This is not Chicago, New York Tokyo or London. Oh and yes in your situation you do not have a choice.

 

[rallytaff]

Ya Public transit sucks here.This is not Chicago, New York Tokyo or London. Oh and yes in your situation you do not have a choice.

Anybody remember Solyndra where Big Ears gave the company a vast amount of OUR dollars and then they declared bankruptcy? Solar SUCKS!

 

[gtx3076]

Public transport can't take me where I want to go or when I want to go. Public transport is for the poor people who can't afford/drive cars. As someone who suffers from severe arthritis in my knees, hip and feet, how am I supposed to get to where and when I want to go without my car?

Your logic makes sense because you’re an American in the United States which has built its infrastructure for the past 70 years to require you to NEED a car to get where you want and need to go in a timely manner. We also suffer from more health issues because of it.

Look up “blue zones”. These are places where age into their 90’s and 100’s with far less health issues than we do. They don’t typically exercise intentionally, they get it from walking everywhere, eat much healthier and have stronger communities because socializing is easier if your commute doesn’t trap you in a vehicle.

I just took AMTRAK from Oregon to Washington and what a relief to not have to deal with traffic. I got to relax and play games on my phone and get food from the dining car. Cost me $53 round trip and was slightly faster than driving. In Philadelphia I was able to get to most part of the city by train. In Texas I commute exclusively by car.

I like driving. I hate commuting.

 

[rallytaff]

Your logic makes sense because you’re an American in the United States which has built its infrastructure for the past 70 years to require you to NEED a car to get where you want and need to go in a timely manner. We also suffer from more health issues because of it.

Look up “blue zones”. These are places where age into their 90’s and 100’s with far less health issues than we do. They don’t typically exercise intentionally, they get it from walking everywhere, eat much healthier and have stronger communities because socializing is easier if your commute doesn’t trap you in a vehicle.

I just took AMTRAK from Oregon to Washington and what a relief to not have to deal with traffic. I got to relax and play games on my phone and get food from the dining car. Cost me $53 round trip and was slightly faster than driving. In Philadelphia I was able to get to most part of the city by train. In Texas I commute exclusively by car.

I like driving. I hate commuting.

I love driving and would rather drive that take a train or a bus. I too would have driven out of Oregon and would never have gone back! I don't socialize and am happy to make do with a few acquaintances and friends. That way you don't get into trouble!

 

[gtx3076]

I love driving and would rather drive that take a train or a bus. I too would have driven out of Oregon and would never have gone back! I don't socialize and am happy to make do with a few acquaintances and friends. That way you don't get into trouble!

Like I said earlier, people faking concern about how "green" EV cars are really aren't interested in anything outside of the status quo. They hate EV's, and they want everyone to have to drive a car to get around. Driving shouldn't be the only reasonable option. Public transport should be for everyone, not just "poor people" who can "afford" to be late, or dedicate a lot more time to commuting. The youth, elderly, and disabled should be able travel efficiently without a car, especially in a city and surrounding suburbs. The most enjoyable, and memorable places I've lived were pretty easy to get around without a car.

And I rather like Oregon in the 2 months I've been living and working here.

 

[Dialcaliper]

Like I said earlier, people faking concern about how "green" EV cars are really aren't interested in anything outside of the status quo. They hate EV's, and they want everyone to have to drive a car to get around. Driving shouldn't be the only reasonable option. Public transport should be for everyone, not just "poor people" who can "afford" to be late, or dedicate a lot more time to commuting. The youth, elderly, and disabled should be able travel efficiently without a car, especially in a city and surrounding suburbs. The most enjoyable, and memorable places I've lived were pretty easy to get around without a car.

And I rather like Oregon in the 2 months I've been living and working here.

The way I see it, commuting should not necessarily “require” getting in a car

I feel like driving should be a recreational sport, not a miserable experience…

 

[ogminlo]

We couldn’t possibly less efficient in the US when it comes to getting around. We’ve built our places around the idea that every individual needs an automobile to go anywhere. Then on top of that, we encourage them all to get the largest, least efficient 6,000 lb behemoth to drive around in by themselves with the way we design our roads and require vast acreage of parking lots outside every place we go to that are never even half full at their peak utilization. The amounts of money and space we pour into vacant parking lots, man…

Copious high-quality public transit in population centers, real bike infrastructure, and most importantly relaxing zoning laws that prevent consumer-facing businesses from existing in residential neighborhoods would free up roads to be less congested.

The automobile is a vital tool in the modern world, but it shouldn’t be the only way to get around. It is strangling our local governments to maintain hundreds of miles of multi lane pseudo-highways with dozens million-dollar intersections each just to support the idea we should all drive to every single place we ever go.

Does anyone actually enjoy navigating half a dozen traffic lights to go a mile and a half to the supermarket? I know I don’t.

 

[LucasHigh]

We couldn’t possibly less efficient in the US when it comes to getting around. We’ve built our places around the idea that every individual needs an automobile to go anywhere. Then on top of that, we encourage them all to get the largest, least efficient 6,000 lb behemoth to drive around in by themselves with the way we design our roads and require vast acreage of parking lots outside every place we go to that are never even half full at their peak utilization. The amounts of money and space we pour into vacant parking lots, man…

Copious high-quality public transit in population centers, real bike infrastructure, and most importantly relaxing zoning laws that prevent consumer-facing businesses from existing in residential neighborhoods would free up roads to be less congested.

The automobile is a vital tool in the modern world, but it shouldn’t be the only way to get around. It is strangling our local governments to maintain hundreds of miles of multi lane pseudo-highways with dozens million-dollar intersections each just to support the idea we should all drive to every single place we ever go.

Does anyone actually enjoy navigating half a dozen traffic lights to go a mile and a half to the supermarket? I know I don’t.

Because of the amount of traffic lights here in Austin, I bought an electric scooter that goes 45mph that I bring with me on any small grocery run or when I fond myself going Downtown, it probably the fastest way I have found to travel in the city

 

[Stkid93]

Speaking on the carbon footprint thing.

If we used e85 in all gas powered cars in the us. The amount of polution would be a tiny fraction of what it is now. E85 has very little carbon footprint compared to regular gas. And areas that don’t see cold temps could even run e99.

If we put more effort and development into ethanol production. We would cut pollution to 1/50th of what it is now. Maybe more.

 

[ogminlo]

Speaking on the carbon footprint thing.

If we used e85 in all gas powered cars in the us. The amount of polution would be a tiny fraction of what it is now. E85 has very little carbon footprint compared to regular gas. And areas that don’t see cold temps could even run e99.

If we put more effort and development into ethanol production. We would cut pollution to 1/50th of what it is now. Maybe more.

Is this just tailpipe emissions or does it include the fuel manufacturing industrial emissions as well? Do we have the ag production surplus capacity to pull this off without harming food production?

 

[Dialcaliper]

Speaking on the carbon footprint thing.

If we used e85 in all gas powered cars in the us. The amount of polution would be a tiny fraction of what it is now. E85 has very little carbon footprint compared to regular gas. And areas that don’t see cold temps could even run e99.

If we put more effort and development into ethanol production. We would cut pollution to 1/50th of what it is now. Maybe more.

The jury is out on that. It’s looking like Corn ethanol currently could be either break even or slightly worse in terms of carbon footprint, mostly due to harvesting equipment being primarily diesel powered, and processing facilities using grid power that’s not the cleanest in the nation. Transportation is also a problem (Ethanol traps water and can’t be moved via pipeline due to contamination issues, so it goes everywhere by truck)

But there’s some hope that other feedstock sources (Switchgrass, etc) might be significantly better, and improvements in equipment and cleaner grid power could change that. At least it’s domestic production which is a plus.

Regardless, I think we would all want E85 to be more available everywhere!

 

[dhminer]

Deleted my comment before mods got to it lol. Love y’all

 

[Dpro]

Deleted my comment before mods got to it lol. Love y’all

Ya mine got deleted for what was considered political. 😂 Thing is I was not being political just being factual. I better shut up now or they will delete this post😂

 

[Intuit]

I reported it. At first I was wholey against banning political talk here because I saw it as an opportunity to correct some misconceptions... but then I saw how much better it became after the ban was implemented. 😎

 

[M-Sport fan]

I basically come on here to GET AWAY FROM all of the incited, 'requisite' toxic vitriol so many in this land are compelled to bring up by their 'dear leaders', no matter what, or even if the topic at hand is not directly political at all.

Such is the nature of the hardcore partisan, hatred filled, rage driven divisiveness in this country (and elsewhere in the world) currently.