Why Electric Cars Suck - a Historical Perspective

Michael Twaite , a proponent of electric vehicles in a blog from last year tried to explain why owning an electric car would be sheer bliss. Of course KC refutes his arguments in the cold, harsh glare of reality....

Torque: the revenge of the muscle car

Yes torque is the low end grunt that gets things moving - it is also the reason that unless you have multiple gear transmissions like big rigs you can't use the torque at speed, and therefore all that torque is the electric car's worst enemy - manifesting itself in ridiculously low operating ranges. Big vehicles like semis need torque to get moving, and have a 16 gear transmission to make it all work. An Indy racer has no torque at all, and relies on horsepower and high RPM to keep it going at speed. Different purposes, different engineering. However, simple physics tells us that big torque, small vehicle is a bad idea - especially if you are concerned with range.

 Clean garage

 He proposes that garages  fill up with noxious fumes from internal combustion engines. So I have come up with a number of solutions. First, I open the door, second, I leave. He says Tesla garages have art on the wall, so the cars must run clean. I have 1600 horsepower in my garage, AND I have art on my wall. Pinups of Shania Twain. Hey, it's art to me. 

Always full

Mike says he starts the day with a full tank of electrons after plugging in all night. Ah the joy of electrics. If I have half a tank of gas, I can still make it to work and back. 25 times. If he has 1/2 tank of power, he might not make it at all. And he might not make it back. I can always tow him...

Very smooth

Mike says "There’s no clutch, no gear change, and no auto-transmission torque-converter-drag nonsense. Setting off in slow traffic is all about resting your foot on the accelerator. Just like those big electric trains, you look out of the window and think, “Oh, we’re moving.

I'm not sure on this one. I'm a driver, not an operator. I like to feel the response of the engine and the gears, my luxury vehicle is smooth as glass, my race cars are, well, not.

Waiting with heat and air

The heating and cooling in my car runs any time I like. Just like the HVAC at home, it doesn’t need an engine to make it go.

 Ya got me here Mike - your car can run the air conditioner for a few minutes without having the engine on? Then you push the car home. Which is a sweatier activity? I looked at my power bill, and guess what, my HVAC at home has an engine, a large, expensive motor. Yours does too.

 Maintenance, Lack of

Annual service... “One, two, er, three, four. OK, sir, they’re all still attached and they all have plenty of tread left. Be on your way then.” Yes, that’s pretty much it. Once a year the Tesla Roadster (or any EV) should be checked over. Tesla will even come to your house to do that.

Ummm - after 7 years the batteries in the electric car die. Your car is dead. It is the equivalent of your 486 computer, and will have the same value. Push it off a cliff and go by a new one. Tesla may have to come out to your house to do it? Given the Consumer Reports testing problems and various other bricking issues, you may have to have them come out to your house. To check on your 120,000$ paper weight.

Cold weather warmup

It’s early morning and it’s minus something-or-other outside. I back the car out of the garage, turn it around, and warm air is already puffing out of the vents.

 
Just like a regular internal combustion vehicle? Except I don't need heat because I am wearing clothes most of the time.

They aren't bothered by the cold

‘Crank, crank crank, put, put, put, dag.... dag.... dag, dag, dag, dag, dag, dag, dag....” We’ve all had an old car at some point in our lives; it’s a rite of passage.

Most well maintained vehicles will start overnight just fine at -20 weather with no issues at all. The only thing that affects starting power is - wait for it - cold batteries. Not cold engines.

Battery life measured in cranking amps is severely reduced in cold weather. Wonder if that affects vehicle range?

Silence

My house sits between a pair owned by petrol-heads. Ironic right? On one side, a neighbor has the venerable Ford GT. On the other, he has enough old school American iron to open a museum. On a Sunday morning my ears ring to the sound of rumbling exhausts and my nose reels to the stench of half burnt gasoline. The sound of a gas engine has all the charisma of a bunch of sweaty carpenters nailing up an outhouse. It doesn’t compare to the ‘Ooos’ and ‘Aaahs’ of spectators as the electric car whispers past. It’s just...noise.

Yes, chicks dig Priuses.  Nuff said.

They were good in 1910 and they’re still good today

At the turn of the century, in answer to the horrific problem caused by inner-city transportation, electric cars were introduced as a cheap, quiet, non-polluting alternative to replace the horse. I expect you know I mean the turn of the 20th century, right, not this last one?

Ummm, gasoline powered vehicles were introduced to address the problems of horse pollution. Electric vehicles were a novelty that passed. Quickly. And 100 years later - they still don't work. In fact, a horse STILL has a greater daily range than an electric car.

Take another run at the problem - we'll give ya another 100 years or so.

The Destruction of Science

Further to my previous blog about how rogue scientists were manipulating data in order to artificially create the leftist panic that is global warming and climate change, I wanted to explore on both a practical and philosophical level these manipulations cause to legitimate research, science and scientists. These acts consist of taking scientific data and observations (evidence) and manipulating it for purposes of an agenda – any agenda, in this case a leftist agenda.

Burying the results, destroying the evidence, distorting the data, secreting the findings, covering up the proof, presenting only partial findings and suppressing the rest, and slandering anyone who doesn't adhere to the belief system.

It’s all part of the program – and all part of the pattern.

To be clear – I am NOT saying that the scientists did these things to highlight a particular belief system they hold (in violation of all scientific principles), I am saying, and the evidence supports the supposition, that they did it for personal, economic benefit.

Some would say the downside of this bamboozling of weak leaders, inept governments, limp bureaucrats and a lazy public is that in corrupting the fundamental principles of science these lab-coated thugs have created an environment where all of us have to be over-skeptical of real science – even science practiced ethically and correctly. 

If governments were enticed to spend taxpayer money based upon an intentional fraud…that’s not a political act, it’s a conspiracy to commit a crime. It is probably even treasonous in its most liberal definition (small L liberal). And those who act as accessories after the fact are no less guilty.

It is worse than that. The damage is FAR worse than unwarranted skepticism of legitimate science.

Now political and economic entities know that “science” can be bought. Science USED to be considered as the impartial arbitrator in all disputes. Now everyone knows the “ref” can be bought off. Want to impose a tax? Buy off a scientist to support your position. Want to create benefit for one group of people over another? Have a thug-intist invent a data/study to “scientifically” support your position.

Want to exterminate Jews? Have a scientist paid to create a study that purports that their inter-breeding with the general population is dangerous. After all, this position is backed up by a “scientist”. Warm up the ovens.

Again, it’s not about having a hypothesis and finding out that it can’t be verified. It’s about hiding the truth from the public, while taking their money in a scheme to deprive them of the truth that is the evil here.

Slandering anyone who points out the fraud is equally despicable and multiplies the bad intent. 

Birther. Truther. Global Warming Denier. Republican. It's all the same to these folks.

Unless the scientific community is willing to do some major house cleaning and serious introspection, research is fast on its way to becoming nothing but a propaganda tool. And those with the deepest pockets, especially the government and corporations, will determine what science is and what it is not.

It’s not that good scientists are never wrong in the science…that’s how science gets better.

It’s when bad scientists are wrong in the ethics. That’s how science gets destroyed.

Green is the new green, but black still gets covered in brown.....

So where do all the "carbon credits" come from if Al Gore sells enough carbon indulgences, and enough western sheeple pile on the green pedi-car? Surely people in poor countries wouldn't lose their land or be forced to lose their food crops to those what want to plant higher "carbon offsetting" crops in order to grab more of the filthy lucre that carbon indulgences industry has created?

Said it ain't so Joe. I mean Al.

The government of Uganda and the U.K.-based “carbon credits” firm New Forests Company — accredited by the United Nations and largely financed by the World Bank and the European Union  are rolling in the carbon dough after 20,000 poor Ugandan farmers were brutally evicted from their lands in order for New Forests Company to plant trees.

“We were beaten by soldiers. They beat my husband and put him in jail,” Naiki Apanabang, who obtained her family’s land in recognition of her grandfather’s military service, told Oxfam investigators. “The eviction was very violent.” Apanabang and her eight children no longer have enough food to eat — let alone money for schooling, unanimously telling investigators horror stories of brutality, shootings, wanton destruction of livelihoods, and more. “The communities Oxfam spoke to describe the evictions as anything but voluntary or peaceful,” the report noted.  Francis Longoli, a small farmer from Kiboga district was tearful: "I remember my land, three acres of coffee, many trees – mangoes and avocados. I had five acres of bananas, 10 beehives, two beautiful permanent houses. My land gave me everything. People used to call me 'omataka' – someone who owns land. Now that is no more. I am one of the poorest now," he says.

Ugandan authorities granted the UN-accredited carbon-trading firm a license to plant trees on the land in 2005. So-called “carbon credits” earned from the plantation would then be sold to companies to offset their emissions of CO₂. The problem was that tens of thousands of people had been living off of the land for decades, using the area to feed themselves and their farm animals.

But not any more!

Greed wrapped in green is the cruelest mistress of all. From multi million dollars homes and private jets, from marriages to Hollywood actresses and living in the Palace of the King of Lesotho - these guys have got it going on over there in Africa. Why - it's as much fun as an Al Gore massage session!

But hey - as long as green is the new green - the old black can still get covered in brown.