An average family will use 4 times as much electricity for EVs as it does for AC.

[Anti Federalist]

Massie takes Pete Buttplug down a few notches.

So, those of you down south that use AC much more than I do in northern New England, how much would that be?

I'm assuming around $250 a month to cool a 2000 square foot home, averaged out over the year.

$1250 a month?

More? Less?

[Anti Federalist]

@CaptUSA

Thomas really lays out my thoughts on this.

[dannno]

I know somebody who spends about $100/mo on all their electricity during the summer in the desert heat, often getting up to 110 degrees. However, they keep the thermostat around 73-75 and they also have access to the cheapest electricity in the country.. last I checked it was $.03/kwh, but could have gone up a little since then. It is an average size home with extremely good insulation.

Where I am, it is more like $.15/kwh, that is like 5 times as much.. but barely anybody uses the AC here.

So I don't think your projections are off by too much.

[69360]

Here in Florida my about 2000 sq ft house is $300 a month in the aummer and $100 a month in the winter. We set the thermostat to 76 day 72 night and run the pool pump 3 hours a day all year. We leave all the windows open no A/C on November to March.

[Anti Globalist]

All the more reason to not get forced into buying an EV.

[jkr]

get pannels FIRST

[69360]

get pannels FIRST

Ask california about that one. They don't last forever. The ones installed 20 years ago are failing and ending up in landfills. There is no program to recycle them. Green energy right?

There will be similar issues with the EV batteries in 20 years.

[oyarde]

Ev's are junk and less eco friendly than a gasoline energy . The sooner people accept it the better off they'll be.

[A Son of Liberty]

Ev's are junk and less eco friendly than a gasoline energy . The sooner people accept it the better off they'll be.

This.

Every single EV gets plugged in to an outlet that is powered by coal or natural gas, with the rare exception being nuclear.

[TheTexan]

Gas powered vehicles, electric cars, these are the past. The future imo is in steam engine technology

[Occam's Banana]

Ask california about that one. They don't last forever. The ones installed 20 years ago are failing and ending up in landfills. There is no program to recycle them. Green energy right?

There will be similar issues with the EV batteries in 20 years.

Welp, sounds like we're gonna be needing some more laws and regulations.

And some new subsidy programs, too, no doubt.

(Funny how that works out, ain't it?)

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

My home is a little less than 3,000 square feet. I do not use air conditioning at all. We have to run a dehumidifier in the lower level walkout to keep humidity under control. We do not use electricity to heat our house or our hot water. Over last 12 month period we used 18,000kwh or we average 1,500 kwh per month. These days it costs as much for the delivery of the electricity as it does the electricity itself. If you take the entire bill and divide it by the amount of electricity consumed, I pay $0.275 per kwh as of this day. So my average bill at the current rate would be 1,500 x $0.275 = $412.50. I just signed a contract for solar with SunPower. I am getting a 17kw system that is guaranteed to be 92% as effective in 25 years as it is the day it was bought. Furthermore they guarantee everything, parts, delivery, installation, of the system for 25 years. Cost of system $53,550. There is a 26% federal tax credit on the purchase. I have taxable income, so my net cost will be $40,000.

[CaptUSA]

$1250 a month?

More? Less?

So, I ran some calculations...

I've seen some real world demonstrations of the Ford F150 Lightning that shows it can get about 2.1 miles per kWh. (BTW, that's lower than most EV's and lower than what they advertise. Above 3 is considered good.)

So, if you drive 1000 miles per month, that equates to 5,714 kWh per year. Depending on where you live, the price per kWh can vary wildly, but let's use $.20/kWh as a higher estimate. That'd mean it'd cost you $1,142.80 per year to fuel your vehicle at home. Even if you charged at public stations paying $.32/kWh, it'd cost you $1,828.48/yr to fuel your vehicle.

The gas equivalent at an average 20 MPG and $4/gal gas would cost you $2,400 to fuel. At $3.00/gal, it'd cost you $1,800 to fuel the truck for a year.

In either case, the operations cost of an EV will be lower. You also have lower maintenance costs due to fewer moving parts. But, depending on how you use and charge the vehicle, the opportunity costs could be much, much higher.

EV's are NOT a 1-to-1 replacement for an internal combustion vehicle - they're just not. If you get an EV thinking you can use it the same way, you're going to face some harsh realities. But if you have the means to place it on a charger after every use or when it's discharged, you'll save money on your overall energy costs (this is what mayor buttgiggle was trying to tout).

Massie's point was not that EV's are less economical, it's that forcing adoption through government mandates will have detrimental effects on the grid. As he said, he's bullish on the technology - he's been an EV driver for a decade. But the market needs to determine the pace of adoption. We also need a more responsive market for electricity costs to better reflect the strain on the grid - we deliver a product at near the speed of light, but the price signals usually come a month after you've already used the product. That is unsustainable, no matter what loads we're talking about.

[GomerPile]

he is wrong its not 4X more kwh per month.

A Chevy Bolt gets 3.5 miles per KWH. I drive 2000 miles per month and my electricity is .25/kwh delivered. Thats 571 KWH and $143 per month.

Compared to 25MPG gas car that would use 80 gallons of gas at $4.50 = $360 per month.

Savings $217 monthly.

NOTE: Tesla is closer to 4 miles per KWH.

[dannno]

he is wrong its not 4X more kwh per month.

A Chevy Bolt gets 3.5 miles per KWH. I drive 2000 miles per month and my electricity is .25/kwh delivered. Thats 571 KWH and $143 per month.

Compared to 25MPG gas car that would use 80 gallons of gas at $4.50 = $360 per month.

Savings $217 monthly.

NOTE: Tesla is closer to 4 miles per KWH.

Who is wrong? Thomas said it was 4x more than an air conditioner to charge 2 cars for average daily driving. That would put a huge strain on our electrical grid that it currently cannot handle.

[69360]

It is pointless to argue. Enought lithium doesn't exist in the world to do away with gasoline powered cars. Enough battery manufacturing capability doesn't exist either. They can't even make enough micro chips to build current gas cars no less more complicated electric cars. Also we don't have the infrastructure or the means and funds to build the infrastructure to charge them if all gasoline cars were replaced by electric.

[TheTexan]

It is pointless to argue. Enought lithium doesn't exist in the world to do away with gasoline powered cars. Enough battery manufacturing capability doesn't exist either. They can't even make enough micro chips to build current gas cars no less more complicated electric cars. Also we don't have the infrastructure or the means and funds to build the infrastructure to charge them if all gasoline cars were replaced by electric.

There's nothing rational about this debate they just have a boner for electric cars

If it was about clean energy they'd be talking about nuclear

[GomerPile]

Who is wrong? Thomas said it was 4x more than an air conditioner to charge 2 cars for average daily driving. That would put a huge strain on our electrical grid that it currently cannot handle.

in Texas the average house uses 1140 KWH per month for AC. Even if there were t people driving the crazy miles that I drive you 2 cars would only use 1142 KWH per month. The reality is that the average driver in the US drives 29 miles per day which pencils out to 248 KWH/month per car. Not anywhere close to 4X! Many areas offer lower off peak rates which brings down the cost quite a bit.

[pcosmar]

Enought lithium doesn't exist in the world to do away with gasoline powered cars.

that is a load of crap.. Lithium is everywhere.. it is in the Ground Water..

The Clay ground my farm was on was FULL of Lithium,,as is all clay ground.
it only needs to be extracted. There is NO Shortage..and it is relatively Cheap..

Graphene is the expensive component,, and that price can be brought down by Hemp..

Lithium Shortage LOL

https://www.usgs.gov/news/lithium-us-groundwater

[GomerPile]

It is pointless to argue. Enought lithium doesn't exist in the world to do away with gasoline powered cars. Enough battery manufacturing capability doesn't exist either. They can't even make enough micro chips to build current gas cars no less more complicated electric cars. Also we don't have the infrastructure or the means and funds to build the infrastructure to charge them if all gasoline cars were replaced by electric.

There is plenty of lithium to electrify the planet. If you figure out the total miles driven by cars in the US you will discover that you need 30% more KHW of production than we have available today. If you expand grid capacity a few percent each year its pretty easy to meet that target. If you look at the rate of grid expansion from 1960 until today you will see that 30% expansion is not a big deal.

Another thing is that the grid already has spare capacity to deal with summer cooling. In the northeast, I think its around 30%. Yes you will have EV's competing for KWH in the summer. The solution is to use off peak charging. Power companies make money selling KWH...there is an incentive to sell more so they will figure it out IMO.

[pcosmar]

To the Elephant in the Room

Every Electric Power-plant in this country is wasting energy.. Pushing it over an antiquated Grid system..

Even is they did Produce 100% of their capability,,THEY CAN'T GET IT TO THE CUSTOMER RELIABLY . It is wasted on the grid.

It wasn't electric cars that caused the Massive Multi-State Blackouts.. It was the Failed Grid system.

[Occam's Banana]

Massie takes Pete Buttplug down a few notches.

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/...04953415127041


"They want you dead but will settle for your submission." -- Michael Malice

[Anti Federalist]

https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames/...04953415127041


"They want you dead but will settle for your submission." -- Michael Malice

Of course they want us dead.

For $#@!'s sake, they just ran a "trial balloon" of a man made, "gain of function" virus that has killed millions of people worldwide.

And not one mother $#@!er has been held accountable.

[Anti Federalist]

This is how they will get you to comply.


Aussie Bank in Electric Vehicle Push: Ends Loans for New Gas and Diesel Cars

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-diesel-cars/

SIMON KENT 28 Aug 2022

An Australian bank has decided the future is electric and will stop approving personal loans for new petrol and diesel-powered cars from 2025 onwards.

Electric vehicles (EVs) comprised a tiny two per cent of vehicles sold in Australia last year. That is a drop in the ocean compared to 17 per cent in Europe and 13.3 per cent in China, and with high starting prices coming in at $47,000 and a lack of charging stations Down Under, potential buyers still look for any alternatives to those on offer from major EV manufacturers.

The customer-owned Bank Australia wants to change that in its drive to reduce carbon emissions, even as the price of EVs climbs around the world as manufacturers look to profit from government incentives to get drivers to dump their gas models.

“We think that the responsible thing for us to do next, is to ensure that our vehicle lending doesn’t lock our customers in to higher carbon emissions and increasingly expensive running costs in the years ahead,” Bank Australia Chief Impact Officer Sasha Courville said in a statement seen by Fox News.

“Ultimately, our announcement today is the beginning of a conversation with our customers and a signal to the wider market that if you’re considering buying a new car, you should think seriously about an electric vehicle – both for its impact on the climate and for its lifetime cost savings.”

Bank Australia, which also recently set a target date of 2035 to achieve net-zero emissions, said it will still offer loans for second hand gas cars “until there is a viable and thriving market for electric vehicles.”

“While we will cease car loans for new fossil fuel cars from 2025, we are deeply aware that we need to support people not yet able to afford an electric vehicle while the market grows,” Courville said.

The Aussie push to get more people driving electric vehicles comes as the Biden administration’s own drive to the same end has hit a roadblock: EV prices have surged from a year ago, as Breitbart News reported.

The average sticker price for an EV in the United States in May was up 22 percent from a year ago, to about $54,000, according to research from data and analytics firm J.D. Power, cited by the Wall Street Journal.

The price leap follows President Joe Biden’s call back in March for Americans to purchase an electric car to escape high gas prices, promising to “double down” on his pursuit of green energy.

[TheTexan]

Of course they want us dead.

For $#@!'s sake, they just ran a "trial balloon" of a man made, "gain of function" virus that has killed millions of people worldwide.

And not one mother $#@!er has been held accountable.

"Wild" conspiracy theory warning:

The next virus that gets released, will be targeted to attack white people.

"Oops"

[Occam's Banana]

LOL. Don't you just love the way these mealy-mouthed weasels always pretend they're doing you some kind of favor?

“We think that the responsible thing for us to do next, is to ensure that our vehicle lending doesn’t lock our customers in to higher carbon emissions and increasingly expensive running costs in the years ahead,” Bank Australia Chief Impact Officer Sasha Courville said in a statement seen by Fox News.

Note that if they offer their customers loans for EVs (which they certainly already do), as well as for ICEs, then their customers are not "locked in" to anything at all.

IOW: They pretend that they aren't restricting the range of options, because they aren't "locking in" the one they're "locking out".

“Ultimately, our announcement today is the beginning of a conversation monologue with our customers [...]”

Fixed it for them.

[CaptUSA]

This is how they will get you to comply.


Aussie Bank in Electric Vehicle Push: Ends Loans for New Gas and Diesel Cars

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...d-diesel-cars/

And that's just the demand side. They've also been targeting the supply side of vehicles as well. Making it more and more difficult for auto manufacturers to get access to the capital to produce internal combustion engines. But tell them you want the money to retool your production lines for EV's and the money will pour in.

Then, there's this recent tidbit:

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/25/cali...s-by-2035.html
California bans the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035

The decision is expected to have sweeping impacts beyond California and will likely pave the way for other states to follow suit. At least 15 states, including New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania, have adopted California’s vehicle standards on previous clean-car rules.

All of this should be a strong indication that the technology is not ready for prime time. The majority of the market does not want this. If these were truly a better product, you would need no mandates or financial manipulation of the market. These moves are admissions of the fantasyland they think can will into being. Like Massie says, these are political science moves - not economic ones.

[tod evans]

My home is a little less than 3,000 square feet. I do not use air conditioning at all. We have to run a dehumidifier in the lower level walkout to keep humidity under control. We do not use electricity to heat our house or our hot water. Over last 12 month period we used 18,000kwh or we average 1,500 kwh per month. These days it costs as much for the delivery of the electricity as it does the electricity itself. If you take the entire bill and divide it by the amount of electricity consumed, I pay $0.275 per kwh as of this day. So my average bill at the current rate would be 1,500 x $0.275 = $412.50. I just signed a contract for solar with SunPower. I am getting a 17kw system that is guaranteed to be 92% as effective in 25 years as it is the day it was bought. Furthermore they guarantee everything, parts, delivery, installation, of the system for 25 years. Cost of system $53,550. There is a 26% federal tax credit on the purchase. I have taxable income, so my net cost will be $40,000.

Curious to see how this works out in the real world.

[tod evans]

he is wrong its not 4X more kwh per month.

A Chevy Bolt gets 3.5 miles per KWH. I drive 2000 miles per month and my electricity is .25/kwh delivered. Thats 571 KWH and $143 per month.

Compared to 25MPG gas car that would use 80 gallons of gas at $4.50 = $360 per month.

Savings $217 monthly.

NOTE: Tesla is closer to 4 miles per KWH.

Sign on the dotted line!
Then report back in a year later and let us know how that's working out for you.

[Anti Federalist]

All of this should be a strong indication that the technology is not ready for prime time. The majority of the market does not want this. If these were truly a better product, you would need no mandates or financial manipulation of the market. These moves are admissions of the fantasyland they think can will into being. Like Massie says, these are political science moves - not economic ones.

California Rules America

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2022...rules-america/

By eric - August 24, 2022

California has just decided that nothing other than electric cars will be sold in America by 2035 – which is actually much closer to now than 13 years from now, because the car companies have to make plans for the coming model years many years before the calendar year gets here.

The 2023 models are already arriving at showrooms and the ’24s are in the “pre-production” stage, which means they’ve already been designed and the first of them are being built and tested right now, in preparation for less than a year from now. The 2028 modes are the ones being designed right now – and that brings us within spitting distance of 2035 – which as you can now see really isn’t that far from now, in terms of what is called product planning.

What do you suppose the car companies are planning to invest their resources – their money – in given that they know whatever they design that isn’t a “zero emissions” (ha!) electric car will be illegal to sell only a few years after it has been designed, at tremendous cost? Would you build something you knew ahead of time would be effectively worthless not long after you built it?

So there you go.

Actually, there goes the country – via California, which has acquired the de facto say over what the rest of the country is allowed to buy, via the regulations it imposes. Here’s how it works:

California is the largest market for cars in the country. California has a regulatory agency styled the California Air Resources Board (CARB) that issues regulations regarding what the car makers are allowed to sell in California (among other things). The car companies – not wanting to be kicked out of the California market – submit to whatever California says they must do (and not do). Since it would be costly to build cars for the California market – and different cars for the rest of the market – the car companies end up building cars that cater to the California market and nothing else.

In the past, they did try building what were styled “California cars” – which usually meant cars that were gimped in some manner to make them acceptable to the California regulatory apparat. Some will recall abominations such as the early ’80s “California” Corvette (and Camaro Z28) that were equipped not with the 350 V8 (5.7 liters, in Old Speak) that came standard everywhere else but the smaller/weaker 305 (5.0) liter V8 that was not even offered anywhere else.

It is why – to go back another year – Pontiac (RIP) wasn’t able to sell Trans-Ams equipped with the 400 V8 and the four speed manual transmission in California, either. But everywhere else, the 400/manual combo was still available that year.

But as the regulatory regime became more oppressive – and as other states “adopted” the “California standard,” it made less and less sense – in the short-term sense – for the car companies to build “California” cars and then cars for the rest of the country.

One size soon fit all.

Now, we arrive at the crescendo of this ugly opera. California says only “zero emissions” electric cars after 2034 – which is the last year before the year when only EeeeeVeees will be legal to sell. Which, keep in mind, is much closer to tomorrow than it sounds. Which means that the decision makers at every car company are already diverting money away from the development of cars equipped with engines, that aren’t electric. This will achieve precisely what the people behind the regulatory apparat want. That being the end of other-than-electric cars – and a lot sooner from now than you probably realize.

You may have begun to notice the winnowing availability of engines that aren’t almost nonexistent in current cars – such as the motorcycle-sized engine (1.5 liters) that is the only engine you can get in the 2023 Chevy Malibu. It is not an aberration.

It is a trend.

Another trend is the percolating up of the news that banks are (per ESG) cutting off loans to people trying to buy new cars that aren’t electric cars, in order to “increase the uptake” of electric cars. Since about 85 percent of new car purchases are financed, you can probably see what that will mean when it is no longer possible to get a loan on a new car that is not an electric car.

It all begs a number of questions, including – who are these people? And how is it that the people of California have the power to dictate to all of the people of this country the kinds of cars they’ll be allowed to buy – and the cars they’ll not be allowed to buy?

Keep in mind, also, that this amount to another mass transfer of wealth as all of the cars that aren’t electric cars will be worthless once people aren’t allowed to sell them. Or use them – which is almost certainly next.

Understand that.

The object isn’t so much to get us into electric cars.

It is to get us out of cars, electric cars being the vehicle to achieve that end.

Courtesy of California.