Electric vehicle fuel

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,608
2,368
113
EVs are leaps and bounds more environmentally friendly than ICE after everything is taken into account.

Great. Why do miles-per-gallon equivalency ratings not include efficiency all the way back to the fuel source like real miles-per-gallon efficiency ratings?
.
 

Duffy LaCoronilla

Duke status
Apr 27, 2016
39,349
29,104
113
That's such a stupid strawman, even for you.



Nobody claimed that we we will or should be 100% fossil fuel free.
“The United States has set a goal to reach 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035…”




“Biden calls for 100 percent clean electricity by 2035. Here’s how far we have to go.”

 
  • Like
Reactions: Ifallalot

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,706
14,529
113
“The United States has set a goal to reach 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035…”




“Biden calls for 100 percent clean electricity by 2035. Here’s how far we have to go.”

Where does it say that there will be no gas cars and no oil derived products?

Nowhere, that's where.

Try bigger font maybe? :poke:
 

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,706
14,529
113
Great. Why do miles-per-gallon equivalency ratings not include efficiency all the way back to the fuel source like real miles-per-gallon efficiency ratings?
.
Because miles per gallon are miles per gallon, they can't be something else.

If you want to include the carbon footprint of the manufacturing process, maintenance, longevity, efficiency and everything else, EVs still win by a mile.

Whats the reason you people are resisting this?

So goddam dumb.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,670
9,923
113
Because miles per gallon are miles per gallon, they can't be something else.

If you want to include the carbon footprint of the manufacturing process, maintenance, longevity, efficiency and everything else, EVs still win by a mile.

Whats the reason you people are resisting this?

So goddam dumb.
It’s almost like the information is out there but they don’t want to see it:

 
  • Like
Reactions: plasticbertrand

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,706
14,529
113
It’s almost like the information is out there but they don’t want to see it:

So much pettiness and tit for tat.

This is such a common sense issue but they are digging their heels in like petulant children, only because the libs like it.

It boggles the mind.
 

Mike_Jones

Tom Curren status
Mar 5, 2009
11,608
2,368
113
Because miles per gallon are miles per gallon, they can't be something else.

If you want to include the carbon footprint of the manufacturing process, maintenance, longevity, efficiency and everything else, EVs still win by a mile.

Whats the reason you people are resisting this?

So goddam dumb.

If EV manufacturers call it a "miles per-gallon equivalency" rating then it should include all energy losses from fuel to ground. Otherwise it's not an "equivalency".
.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,670
9,923
113
If EV manufacturers call it a "miles per-gallon equivalency" rating then it should include all energy losses from fuel to ground. Otherwise it's not an "equivalency".
.
grandpa Simpson says what?

the EPA came up with MPGe.

it includes all energy use from wall to wheel. Standard cars are tank to wheel. You’re tilting at windmills here.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hammies

plasticbertrand

Duke status
Jan 12, 2009
21,706
14,529
113
If EV manufacturers call it a "miles per-gallon equivalency" rating then it should include all energy losses from fuel to ground. Otherwise it's not an "equivalency".
.
Why would EV manufacturers do it if ICE car manufacturers don't?

Let's see ICE car energy losses from fuel to ground and compare them to EVs.

EVs are spanking ICE cars so bad and in every conceivable aspect, it's not even funny.

MPG is what matters to consumer, that's the selling point, for both ICE and EVs.

You are comparing apples to oranges and building a huge strawman, just to validate your silly argument.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ifallalot

hammies

Duke status
Apr 8, 2006
15,672
14,358
113
I drove my brother in law's Tesla around and I would take that over any comparable ICE car around, even the Lexus he used to drive. It's just a better car. He charges it at midnight and says it costs him about $60 / mo. in extra electricity. My 2014 Lezbaru seems like an antique after driving in that thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: john4surf

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,670
9,923
113
I drove my brother in law's Tesla around and I would take that over any comparable ICE car around, even the Lexus he used to drive. It's just a better car. He charges it at midnight and says it costs him about $60 / mo. in extra electricity. My 2014 Lezbaru seems like an antique after driving in that thing.
This is the reality of EV's.

It's weird conservatives are so against them.

I thought they had a chance when Elon was their hero, but that seems to have passed.
 

hammies

Duke status
Apr 8, 2006
15,672
14,358
113
This is the reality of EV's.

It's weird conservatives are so against them.

I thought they had a chance when Elon was their hero, but that seems to have passed.
They're only against them because they think liberals like them. No other reason.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ifallalot

npsp

Miki Dora status
Dec 30, 2003
4,303
3,938
113
down the hill and to the right
Visit site
There are none of what?

Electric trains in the US?

Thatz a shame.
You're being dishonest here. He said no battery powered trains not electric. There are a lot of electric trains operating in the US.
The Diesel Electric locomotive is the back bone of the transport of goods and materials across the US. Our economy would collapse without them.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Ifallalot