Biden vows to replace gov't fleet, 650k vehicles, with electric vehicles.

[phill4paul]

President Joe Biden vowed on Monday to replace the entire fleet of government cars and trucks with “clean electric vehicles” during his presidency as a way to lead the charge on climate issues and make good on his promise to launch a “clean energy revolution.”

“The federal government also owns an enormous fleet of vehicles, which we’re going to replace with clean electric vehicles made right here in America made by American workers creating … a million autoworker jobs and clean energy and vehicles that are net-zero emissions,” Biden said during a signing ceremony for his new “Buy America” executive order.

“This will be the largest mobilization of public investment and procurement, infrastructure, and [research and development] since World War Two,” he added.

The move will affect more than 645,000 cars and trucks currently owned by the federal government, according to the General Services Administration, and is expected to cost at least $20 billion. Roughly one-third of the government vehicles are operated by the U.S. Postal Service.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/biden-...vernment-fleet

[oyarde]

i'll never get muh mail

[acptulsa]

This one will become bigger, making it less maneuverable, and heavy enough to violate local laws. And still it will have to be replaced by half a dozen to get a full day's work done. And if one of the contractors has a breakdown leaving them in a pinch, none of the half dozen can leave town to substitute for the contractor the way this can.



A couple of months ago, the USPS was pleading poverty. Fire up the printing presses! The model is Zimbabwe!

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

Hunter and Empire Biden should be able to make a fortune off that.

[tod evans]

Didn't China just open a new lithium battery factory?

Wonder whose hands are in that pie?

[TheTexan]

I don't see why not, just rack up some more debt to pay for it. We're at what, something like 30 trillion?

Let's assume the government gets a good deal and pays only $200,000 per vehicle.

At 645,000 vehicles that's only like 130 billion.

Pocket change, basically.

[asurfaholic]

I don't see why not, just rack up some more debt to pay for it. We're at what, something like 30 trillion?

Let's assume the government gets a good deal and pays only $200,000 per vehicle.

At 645,000 vehicles that's only like 130 billion.

Pocket change, basically.

Wow thanks for the perspective.

I was over here thinking that would cost a lot of money.

[TheTexan]

Wow thanks for the perspective.

I was over here thinking that would cost a lot of money.

Yup. Anything less than 10 trillion at this point is really quite affordable.

[69360]

No Joe, you aren't actually going to be able to do that. Typical tossing red meat to the base.

[acptulsa]

No Joe, you aren't actually going to be able to do that. Typical tossing red meat to the base.

Not quite. Trump promised to toss red meat (which never quite materialized).

Biden is promising to toss blue tofu.

[Anti Globalist]

I imagine the cost of this is going to be astronomical.

[acptulsa]

I imagine the cost of this is going to be astronomical.

Of course. The more astronomical the contract, the fatter and jucier the kickback.

[DamianTV]

Electric Vehicles are the most idiotic thing I have heard yet. Especially when they first announced them, next actually came out with them.

First things first. Produce the electricity at the POWER COMPANY. Either by Coal or Nuclear. Yeah, thats WAY better for the environment. Next, about HALF your electricity is lost in transmission over the power lines. Next, it is NOT SELF SUFFICIENT. IE no recharge panels on the car itself. Then they keep using Friction Brakes.

Electric Cars are WORSE for the environment than even Gas Guzzlers. Why? Why not just make it mandatory to have it ALL NUCLEAR POWER?

[Peace Piper]

Electric Vehicles are the most idiotic thing I have heard yet. Especially when they first announced them, next actually came out with them.

First things first. Produce the electricity at the POWER COMPANY. Either by Coal or Nuclear. Yeah, thats WAY better for the environment. Next, about HALF your electricity is lost in transmission over the power lines. Next, it is NOT SELF SUFFICIENT. IE no recharge panels on the car itself. Then they keep using Friction Brakes.

Electric Cars are WORSE for the environment than even Gas Guzzlers. Why? Why not just make it mandatory to have it ALL NUCLEAR POWER?

This is why Hydrogen Electric is the best long term answer.

Ask a BEV fanatic what to do with all the 1+ ton batteries when they get old (recycling of Li-Ion is not cost effective in 2021)


Finally some here have started to pay attention (Forbes, Bloomberg, CNBC) but it's really too late.





And for all those who mocked and ridiculed the idea of hydrogen, here's PLUG's last year performance



China is on it, they are mass producing H2 Fuel Cell stacks every day and soon they will control the market. The US could have done this but the District of Criminals thought it would be better to spend trillions on bombing and invading countries 8,000 miles away

[CaptUSA]

Electric Vehicles are the most idiotic thing I have heard yet. Especially when they first announced them, next actually came out with them.

First things first. Produce the electricity at the POWER COMPANY. Either by Coal or Nuclear. Yeah, thats WAY better for the environment. Next, about HALF your electricity is lost in transmission over the power lines. Next, it is NOT SELF SUFFICIENT. IE no recharge panels on the car itself. Then they keep using Friction Brakes.

Electric Cars are WORSE for the environment than even Gas Guzzlers. Why? Why not just make it mandatory to have it ALL NUCLEAR POWER?

So, I hate to break it to you, but there are so many inaccuracies in this post. First, the power grid is getting cleaner and cleaner. Nuclear is about as clean as it gets. And what coal is left has been getting cleaner for the last 50 years. Secondly, depending on how far away you are from the source of your power, the average line loss is about 6% - nowhere near 50%. Next, most modern electric vehicles have regenerative breaking - not only does that recharge the battery some to extend the range, but it also requires very little maintenance. So, the overall cost is lower. And here's the real benefit: No one is going to war to maintain the electric pipelines. (Of course, if battery materials become rare, there may be an incentive for war to build, but battery chemistries are changing fast and using substitute materials)

The real problem with battery vehicles are the opportunity costs. It takes a long time to charge. This may not be an issue for government vehicles that sit for most of the day. You have to harden the grid, which takes investments - you're switching from gas and diesel delivery to electric transmission and distribution.

So, there are trade-offs. I think the most important thing is that governments should not be putting their finger on the scale and picking winners and losers with taxpayer money. Electric vehicles are coming - forcing it to come faster is just wasting a bunch of money.

[XNavyNuke]

Of course. The more astronomical the contract, the fatter and jucier the kickback.

And all that astronomical government spending adds to the GDP.

XNN

[DamianTV]

Yeah, and since its plugged into the power grid, are they also gonna collect data on where you have been too? They are doing that without plugging in anyway, trying to tie EVERYTHING to your Cell Phone or Internet anyway.

Where is AF? $#@! A BUNCH OF COMPUTER CARS? I really have no idea why that stuck in my head the way it did.

Oh, and I am sure if they "revoke your chip" or "cancel your bank accounts for your political views", they can just as easily and permanently "turn off your car".

[oyarde]

I don't see why not, just rack up some more debt to pay for it. We're at what, something like 30 trillion?

Let's assume the government gets a good deal and pays only $200,000 per vehicle.

At 645,000 vehicles that's only like 130 billion.

Pocket change, basically.

I dont think they can get a deal that good .

[Brian4Liberty]

I don't see why not, just rack up some more debt to pay for it. We're at what, something like 30 trillion?

Let's assume the government gets a good deal and pays only $200,000 per vehicle.

At 645,000 vehicles that's only like 130 billion.

Pocket change, basically.

They should buy everyone a Tesla. It’s a human right.

[Okie RP fan]

Didn't China just open a new lithium battery factory?

Wonder whose hands are in that pie?

This brings me to some thoughts on how environmentally hazardous lithium mining is.

Or that the electricity needed to um, charge these vehicles, is still largely created by fossil fuels plants.

Or that some of the green energy grids are already showing signs of instability and aren't ready for prime time, yet...


https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...of-green-power

https://www.theguardian.com/business...-next-few-days

https://www.instituteforenergyresear...ium-batteries/

[Okie RP fan]

Yeah, and since its plugged into the power grid, are they also gonna collect data on where you have been too? They are doing that without plugging in anyway, trying to tie EVERYTHING to your Cell Phone or Internet anyway.

Where is AF? $#@! A BUNCH OF COMPUTER CARS? I really have no idea why that stuck in my head the way it did.

Oh, and I am sure if they "revoke your chip" or "cancel your bank accounts for your political views", they can just as easily and permanently "turn off your car".

This is a real thing, by the way.
The company I work for (not providing any details beyond what I'm about to say) was working with Tesla and a major retailer on charging stations that are directly connected to the Internet as well, beyond your phone. Just another way to keep tabs on the sheep.

[TheTexan]

They should buy everyone a Tesla. It’s a human right.

It should be easily affordable once we accumulate more debt.

The higher the debt gets, the easier it is to justify spending trillions on stuff.

[DamianTV]

This is a real thing, by the way.
The company I work for (not providing any details beyond what I'm about to say) was working with Tesla and a major retailer on charging stations that are directly connected to the Internet as well, beyond your phone. Just another way to keep tabs on the sheep.

Its not just "tabs". It is coercing obedience without consent. IE, Obey OR DIE. And I think we are there where they are ready to KILL people.

[phill4paul]

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband has placed up to $1 million worth of bullish bets on Tesla stock, the politician revealed in a financial disclosure form last week.

Paul Pelosi, who runs an investment firm, bought 25 call options on Tesla stock with a strike price of $500 and an expiration date of March 18, 2022. He spent between $500,001 and $1 million on them on December 22.

The call options give him the right to buy 2,500 Tesla shares at $500 each at any point before they expire in March 2022.

That may sound like a fantastic deal with shares in Elon Musk's electric-vehicle company changing hands at about $850 on Monday. However, Pelosi will have paid a premium for the options, so Tesla stock would have to climb before they become profitable to exercise.

Pelosi likely opted to buy long-term equity anticipation security, or LEAP, options, as they cost less up front than buying Tesla shares directly while granting exposure to a stock that skyrocketed by about 700% last year. The $500 strike price means the options are "in the money" and won't be worthless even if Tesla's stock price treads water or falls by a few hundred dollars by the time they expire.

The purchases are legal but have raised eyebrows. Nancy Pelosi now has a financial interest in Tesla's success, even as she's poised to play a key role in passing green initiatives that stand to help the automaker.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/...1-1-1029998372

[Anti Federalist]

So, there are trade-offs. I think the most important thing is that governments should not be putting their finger on the scale and picking winners and losers with taxpayer money. Electric vehicles are coming - forcing it to come faster is just wasting a bunch of money.

Well, EVs were already here, over 100 years ago, and they failed then for the same reasons they would be failing now, except for gov. intervention.

High initial costs, as you mentioned, excessive strains on an already rickety power grid, long recharge times.

And there is also the fact that from a "doomsday" prep scenario, they are worthless...the internal parasitic battery drain and natural loss will render a fully charged EV dead in a couple of weeks, very vulnerable to EMP, and, this is a biggie for me...you can't store electrons in a jug.

A non computerized diesel will run on any flammable fluid.

A non computerized spark ignition engine will run on any vaporous fuel.

When the System shuts down the power grid, that EV will be a useless lawn decoration...or defilade cover.

[acptulsa]

[sam1952]

Um aren’t we talking about controlled black outs to save energy and the weak power grid. I guess the strain of all these electric vehicles will be saved by turning my ac up to 78 instead of 71... where I like it!

[acptulsa]

Um aren’t we talking about controlled black outs to save energy and the weak power grid. I guess the strain of all these electric vehicles will be saved by turning my ac up to 78 instead of 71... where I like it!

They're trying to create a problem. They know as well as you and I do what the reaction will be.

Just wait until you have all the problems their solution will cause!

[Anti Federalist]

A great deal of the grid is now powered by natural gas...fine, it's cheap, clean, easily transportable.

There is a big problem however, in large volume extraction of natural gas. It often requires fracking, displacement, acid washes and gravel packs to meet the necessary volumetric flow goals for large scale industrial applications.

Like power plants.

Uh Oh...


Joe Biden to Ban New Fracking Leases on Federal Lands Despite Promise Not To

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-ban-fracking/

Charlie Spiering 27 Jan 2021

President Joe Biden will announce a ban on new oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters on Wednesday, according to several reports.

Biden’s decision bars any new fracking on federal lands despite his campaign promise not to ban the practice.

“I am not banning fracking. Let me say that again: I am not banning fracking,” Biden said in August 2020 during the presidential campaign. “No matter how many times Donald Trump lies about me.”

Despite multiple promises to end fracking and fossil fuels during the Democrat primary or end “new fracking,” Biden clarified while campaigning in Pennsylvania ahead of the presidential election that he would only ban new fracking on federal lands.

“No, I would not shut down this industry. I know our Republican friends are trying to say I said that,” Biden said about fracking in an interview with Pittsburg’s KDKA News.

“I said I would not do any new leases on federal lands,” Biden continued. “Ninety percent of the leases are not on federal land, to begin with. I would make sure … the water is not being contaminated. But I would not shut it down, no.”

The issue of a fracking ban was prominently featured in the final presidential debate when Biden falsely stated that he never said he would ban fracking.

[Occam's Banana]

https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom/stat...86705241681921