Slashdot Mirror
Israel Aims To Ban Gasoline, Diesel Vehicles By 2030 (cleantechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CleanTechnica: 2030 seems like a long way off, but it's really just around the corner. And when the bell tolls at midnight on December 31, 2030, you may not be able to buy a gasoline- or diesel-powered vehicle in Israel. After that date, all passenger cars will be electric and all trucks will be powered by electricity or compressed natural gas, if a proposal currently under consideration gets approved by the government. A final decision is expected by the end of this year. Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz [told Reuters last month] the biggest challenge will be creating a "critical mass" of electric and CNG powered vehicles before the deadline arrives. "We are already encouraging [the transition] by funding ... more than 2,000 new charging stations around the country," he says. The plan was set in motion one day after the United Nations issued its latest climate assessment that finds nations must do far more than they are currently doing in order to stave off warmer global average temperatures that will put the environment at risk. In order to reach the goal, the Israeli government will "reduce taxation on electric cars to almost zero, so they are going to be much cheaper," Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said. He expects there will be about 177,000 electric cars on Israeli roads around 2025. By 2030, the expectation is that there will be nearly 1.5 million EVs in the country. The country has a ways to go though, as there are less than 100 electric cars on the roads today.
Because you can't spell war without bomb. (In Hebrew.)
Fossil fuels were put in the ground by Satan to confuse innocent God-fearing creationists. Emissions such as sulfur dioxide are harmful to humans because they originate from Hell. Global warming is actually a plot by Satan to terraform Earth to more resemble his domain. /s
Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
Way to stick it to the Saudis and Iranians. Be on the forefront of making their primary product worthless while helping your own environment...
Hardly. There is a pipeline that runs right across the middle of Israel and is the primary method that Russia exports oil to Asia. They bring it in by tanker at Ashkelon, run it through the pipe right across Israel and then load it onto a tanker at Eilat.
And then there is the Bazan group which has an absolutely massive oil refining complex in Israel.
The interesting point will be when the filling stations are mostly all electric charging stations, and driving your vintage car across the country gets to be pretty challenging.
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
Doesn't necessarily require the renewables / nuclear first. If you have more and more EVs on your network they act as storage capacity. Combine with smart meters and you can use EVs for load shedding vs dumping to heat. Even if you don't ever recover any energy from the evs increasing or decreasing charge rates will allow you to stabilise the network.
Once you have that stabilisation effect in place you can increase your % of renewables.
This is about autarky, but autarky is a dirty word when spoken by non-Israelis ... so lets say climate instead.
That is not actually a rule in the english language. Some language prescriptivists tried to make it one arbitrarily in the 1800's to make english line up with latin. There is no historical linguistic basis for the two terms having such strict differentiation. The real rule as per historical and actual use is whichever sounds less awkward.
Shocking story but powertrains in vehicles fail to. And most EVs seem to have warranties on batteries of 10 years
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
If they can't afford to get to work, who's going to clean toilets and flip burgers? Will toilets go uncleaned and burgers unflipped, or will employers be forced to pay more for low wage jobs?
Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
Israel has about a third the rate of car ownership of the USA. I can see that the 'poor', and even the middle-class, might find the cost of a private vehicle becomes uneconomic. Maybe. It's an interesting thought.
And, BTW, what is going on in San Marino? With its land area, pretty everywhere appears to be within walking distance, and yet there's 1.3 cars per person!
Protoplasm. Quiet Protoplasm. I like quiet protoplasm.
Israel is small enough that current EVs should be able to go border-to-border on a single charge. Given that range anxiety is one of the major reasons why people don't want EVs, it seems a small country can convert much more easily.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Not pure EVs but I've got two 12 year old hybrid vehicles (2006 Toyota Highlander Hybrid and 2006 Lexus RX400H) and their batteries are still going strong. And these are practically first generation electric hybrids so you'd think the batteries have gotten better since then.
The elephant in the room with EVs is that they become economically unfeasible to keep on the road once the battery pack sufficiently degrades.
Bullcrap. The first Prius went on sale in 1997, and many of them have more than 300k miles. They are mostly still running fine.
Ah, yet another delusional autistic grammar fuck who is ignorant of the fact that the little book Robert Lowth shat out in 1762 was merely a proposal of restrictions on English grammar using Latin rules and other random brain farts he thought would be wonderful. Creative writing has ignored it often since then to the present day. Loath the Lowth, set your puny little mind free.
False choice. You don't have to choose between the environment and "giving the middle finger to the poor", and how is trashing the environment NOT giving everyone, including the poor, the middle finger?
Having the poor drive our most polluting cars hardly seems like the right way to go about it. Cars are an arbitrary solution anyway, not clear why we need to figure out how keep the poor in cars, or anyone else for that matter. Need to see the bigger picture.
This only affects new car sales so there will be used ICE vehicles available for some time. As the number of reliable ICE vehicles decreases there will be solutions for dealing with the battery pack issue. First is that well designed packs with active heating/cooling should have limited degradation for a substantial portion of the vehicle's life.
And once EVs become a significant portion of vehicles on the road, there will be a market for pack replacements. Junk yards will salvage packs from relatively new cars that were totaled in accidents. In order to reduce costs, EV manufacturers will have a big incentive to minimize the number of different pack designs, - which makes it more practical for 3rd parties to manufacture replacements.
There will be pack remanufacturers that will refurbish old packs, just as you can get any number of refurbished parts for cars today.
The bright spot is that the drivetrain in an EV is pretty simple when it comes down to it and should last longer than a combustion engine/transmission. Further, there are fewer wear items like timing belts, plugs, filters, plug wires, EGR valves, exhaust systems, etc. And with regenerative braking, pads and rotors last longer. Oil changes will be a thing of the past.
So even if pack replacement remains relatively expensive, over the lifetime of a vehicle, it could be offset by the lower cost of maintenance in other areas.
While that may be true, I think "less than 100" does sound more awkward.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
One second-gen Prius I was familiar with made it upwards of 200k. What finally did it in was the piston rings. Considering what it was supposed to represent, death by burning oil is kind of ironic. Can't really complain about the service lifetime, though. I would not be the least bit surprised if the battery pack and drive train were sold before they even got it back to the scrapyard. The Prius uses a very conservative power cycle range, because the batteries were still a bit of an unknown in practice. It turns out the batteries were as good as claimed or slightly better, and Toyota's over-engineering means they'll live decades.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Shocking story but powertrains in vehicles fail to. And most EVs seem to have warranties on batteries of 10 years
10 years seems like a good long warranty until you realize the average car on the road in the USA is already older than that. The average age of a vehicle in the USA is 11.6 years (yes, I realize TFA is about Israel).
Yes, the engine/transmission in an I.C. vehicle can crap out, but there's a lot of cheap(ish) ways to get a broken I.C. car back on the road.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Bullcrap. The first Prius went on sale in 1997, and many of them have more than 300k miles. They are mostly still running fine.
The Prius is a gasoline-powered hybrid. If you want to see how EVs age, you should look at the Leaf. The early ones already are selling for far below what an I.C. car of the same vintage would go for, specifically because the battery wear has made them nearly unusable (due to loss of range).
I suppose if you wanted to pull it with horses...
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
I can see that the 'poor', and even the middle-class, might find the cost of a private vehicle becomes uneconomic.
Here in the USA that'd be a tough sell. Collectively, we're not too big on the concept of the next generation having a lower standard of living than the previous, even though things certainly seem to be heading in that direction.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
You should look at the Leaf if you want to know how not to cool a battery pack.
Nissan Leafs have air cooled battery packs rather than liquid cooled and that's why their lifespan has been relatively short. Teslas and even Chevy Volts have much more sophisticated cooling systems and degradation so far is almost non-existant.
In fact a 2011 Chevy Volt had racked up over 450,000 miles as of this last Summer with no noticeable degradation of battery life.
Israeli law requires employers to pay travel expenses to and from the job site.
Israel charges 150% tax on personal automobiles. Reducing this tax to (near) zero for CNG and EVs will make them cheaper than most new cars currently on the road.
This is does not make sense. The cleanest cars are as clean as the power supply as an electric car has no emissions. The power supply gets cleaner every day as more renewables are put in place around the world for electric power production. The electric car + renewables is as clean as the sun and wind.
Yes, there is energy used to produce the car, solar panels, and windmills. That doesn't really matter when the source is 100% renewable energy. Then you have clean power making more clean power. The materials in the batteries are recyclable and not terribly toxic (no heavy metals). And electric cars last a lot longer than combustion engine cars. No one talks about it, but auto sales will go down when all cars are electric. There will simply be no reason to replace them. Maintenance will also be very little. Electric engines can last for years and years with no maintenance.
What you WILL see is a need for regular inspections to make sure people give the car some maintenance. The brakes are regenerative, so they won't wear down anywhere near as much as in current cars. But they will eventually. The same is true of the tires, maybe the suspension. I think there will be poor people who inherit their cars from their grandparents and get in accidents because no one did a safety check or maintenance on the cars for 20 years.
Bullshit!
CO2 emissions are lower for EVs that are charged using power generated using natural gas than ICE vehicles power by gasoline.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
Definitely Ashkelon. Its the location the trans-israel pipeline.
Also that path is shorter and cheaper to operate than going round africa or via the Suez so it carries huge quantities of oil.
What do you call an ICE vehicle with 200,000 miles on it? Typically: "scrap".
EV batteries will last over 200,000 miles and EVs don't have as many moving parts to wear out. EVs are much more likely to be running at high mileage and years than an ICE.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Nissan suxx because of perfect storm they had: new and untested battery chemistry, hot climate, bad cooling, no over-provisioning.
E6 has air cooled brick batteries, close to no over-provisioning, and manages to do better than Tesla.
And it is mostly sold in hot places, on top of that.
You do know that chemicals in batteries don't go anywhere and just need to be separated and re-textured into desired structure again right?
It is only cheaper than Suez because the Egyptians charge exorbitant transit fees. An oil tanker pays a transit fee of about $400k.
Ev cars are full everytime you get in them in the morning.
Theres no getting in the car with the fuel light on. For most people and most usage cases a daily range of 450km is more than enough. It doesnt really matter if it takes 6 hrs to charge if youre asleep.
The only time charge time matters is when you exceed 450km in a day.
You would also get a choice. Cheaper power to allow car to be storage or more expensive for not. Same options as ive got for hotwater systems and aircon
Soooo....you know how you don't like absurd over-simplifications? And you know how you then said "Happiness is EARNED"? Don't you think that might be an, um, absurd over-simplification? Or do you think babies should not be happy?
All you're doing is shifting the CO2 emissions from the tailpipe to the smokestack.
Think about that "all" for a bit. Also the "CO2" in front of "emissions".
You get to shift 100% of tailpipe emissions of all types, not just CO2, out of city centres and suburbs to large scale powerplants that can run at maximum efficiency with much more effective scrubbers. That's a set of major gains right there.
On the other hand, the battery pack of my mother's civic hybrid failed at 68k km.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
For EVs to be effective at combating CO2 emissions, you have to first switch your electricity generation so it's predominantly nuclear and renewables.
Why do you necessarily have to do one before the other? Changing/transitioning the source of the electricity through renewable (or lesser emitting) sources can be done at the same time as advancing energy storage, particularly towards Electric Vehicles.
Laptops, phones, IoT devices, etc, don't care if they're recharged by renewable or fossils fuels. The companies making the batteries will worry about storing the energy and others the end-of-life recycling of the batteries; the energy companies will worry about providing renewable energy sources.
We don't give a second thought to those other, smaller rechargeable devices especially in the combination of advances in hardware & software to maximize battery life, reducing the need to recharge in the first place. I bet if you had a time machine and went back 20 years you'd have laughed your a$$ off to their ignorance. When asked "What would you have done different?" and your response would be "LOL IDK Emoticon Hashtag #PeopleInthePastArestupid
I see cars as a more scaled up version, everything happens in 'baby steps'.
I wanted to see someone from outside the system take the reins for a while and shake things up.
How's that going? Is the swamp drained yet?
No sig today...
Electric vehicles are 4 to 5 times as efficient as internal combustion engines.
So shifting from gasoline cars to coal powered power plants saves minimum 50% of the fuel (coal powered plants are only ~42% efficient, cars are below 20%)
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
As someone who lives in Israel I can confirm, car ownership is more of an upper middle class family thing.
A monthly pass for public transportation in the local metropolitan area costs about $80, half that if you're a student or senior citizen.
And you'd probably get on the bus you need within 15 minutes if you're in a city.
If you are in a nation where a large percentage of your electric supply comes from natural gas, such as Isreal, USA, UK, Japan, ...
You lost your audience somewhere between "such as" and UK or Japan
Natural gas looks to me like a great fuel for cars.
It is. Most transportation in Thailand is done with LPG. (Technically not the same as "natural gas"), however your "refueling times" are way off. Refueling a Truck takes +30minutes, refueling a bus about 20 minutes.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
He's creating a new one next to it. bigger.
Let me know when they figure out how to do that with these new battery chemistries.
The old lead-acid batteries are recycled all the time unlike those used in electric vehicles and laptops. They can be recycled into new raw materials but not always to the purity needed for new batteries. More likely the batteries are recycled into steel alloys than anything. Photovoltaic cells are the same way, they can't be recycled into new solar panels but they might be good for use as metallurgical grade silicon.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
after a few 100K in a car, where they drop to maybe 80%-90% capacity, they get to be re-used as grid storage where they sit a few decades after which they get recycled.
From https://www.theguardian.com/fo...: (with a nice infographic :) )
For every 100km travelled in a petrol car ... ... it takes 26 megajoules to get petrol out of the ground and transport it to the car ... ... and the car itself uses 142 megajoules to move itself around.
For the same distance in an electric car, using electricity generated in an oil-fired power plant ... it takes 74 megajoules to generate and transport the electricity to the car ... ... which then uses just 38 megajoules to move itself and its passengers
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Passenger car diesel engines have energy efficiency of up to 41% but more typically 30%, and petrol engines of up to 37.3%, but more typically 20%
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Gasoline engines effectively use only 15% of the fuel energy content to move the vehicle or to power accessories, and diesel engines can reach on-board efficiency of 20%, while electric vehicles have on-board efficiency of over 90%, when counted against stored chemical energy, or around 80%, when counted against required energy to recharge
And finally, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...:
Typical thermal efficiency for utility-scale electrical generators is around 37% for coal and oil-fired plants[4], and 56 – 60% (LEV) for combined-cycle gas-fired plants.
I couldn't find good statistics on energy costs of mining and transporting coal, pumping up and refining oil, and pumping up gas but I'm sure they're on the wiki somewhere :). Also, no idea of the energy cost of assembling the batteries vs an ICE but I would assume over the total lifetime of the car it should be negligible.
In any case, the most "optimistic" comparison (from the EV point of view) it gets total fossil-to-wheels efficiency of .6*.8=48%. The most pessimistic is .37*.8=30%. The former figure is lower than total ICE efficiency, while the latter figure is comparable. The statistics from the Guardian link above (which have the ICE use 3.7 times the energy per distance traveled) seems to be close to the 20% vs 80% comparison.
All in all, there does seem evidence for assuming that an EV will get better total energy efficiency, but it will be more like 1.5-2x as efficiency and not an order of magnitude better. Of course, an EV fleet gives better options for generating power - ICEs can only use fossil fuels or biofuels (which are problematic in many cases), while EVs can use anything that generates electricity. Especially solar seems a good idea for Israel.
Theres no getting in the car with the fuel light on. For most people and most usage cases a daily range of 450km is more than enough. It doesnt really matter if it takes 6 hrs to charge if youre asleep.
The only time charge time matters is when you exceed 450km in a day.
Also remember this article is about Israel. Haifa to Eilat is 450km, and there's pretty much nothing longer you could drive. Any two places excluding the Negev desert you can do round trip, including e.g. Haifa to Beersheba. The borders to Lebanon and Syria are closed. Theoretically you can drive to Jordan and Egypt, but almost no one ever does. So, while in the US 300 miles might not be all one ever drives in a day, in Israel I'm pretty sure it covers most use cases :)
You lost your audience somewhere between "such as" and UK or Japan ...
So sad that the loss of my audience didn't include you.
Refueling a Truck takes +30minutes, refueling a bus about 20 minutes.
That would be relevant if I stated that natural gas was a great fuel for buses and trucks.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Long live Stannis Baratheon, the one true king of grammar.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Toyota now gives a lifetime warranty on the Prius batteries, even on my old car (they upgraded the warranty). They would never do that if it would cost them real money.
As for my car : my batteries are now a decade old, the car is parked outside in winter and when skiing, as well as in summer. There is no noticeable degradation of the batteries.
The whole fear of battery degradation is overblown.
Well I live in Australia now and almost no houses have direct gas connections, and i lived in the uk for 4 years from 2004 and none of the areas i lived had gas connections to the houses.
So while the concept of home fueling of an lng car would be awesome the infrastructure for large scale fueling at home isnt there and would cost an absolute fortune to deploy.
I even have a gas hotwater system and gas stove and they are run off 45kg bottles.
Run me through the logic of EVs becoming economically infeasible once the pack degrades again? Because packs that have been going for 100k miles are still showing 80% or better SoH, and charging is still something a large proportion of folks could in principle do at home with off-street wall-boxes, and night-time electricity is pretty damn cheap.
Nobody who can actually afford an accountant would be stupid enough to ask that question.
A nuclear power plant on the other hand can be put inside a sturdy bunker.
Which is exactly why NPP's have high capital costs, the huge amount of concrete for thermal containment. Now you propose more so basically you're proposing a NPP that will never be built.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
So sad that the loss of my audience didn't include you.
Maybe he doesn't find you as boring and repetitive as the rest of your audience does.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Want some cheese with that wine?
I highly suspect you're lying but if you're not please shut up and accept your good fortune to earn that much in the first place. And on the off chance you're not lying, you also need to fire your accountant.
You're seriously claiming that legal tax-evasion via tax-havens is not a thing? Are you living under a rock? Sure, if you make all your income as a salary from a corporation, then reducing taxes on that is difficult, If you however own a corporation tax-evasion becomes easier the larger that corporation is. I mean, what do you think is the reason for basically all major multinational companies owning subsidiaries in the Caymans or other small nations with low taxes? Why do you think it is that basically all megacorps have a lower effective tax-rate on their billions of profit than you do as a employee making a million if creative accounting doesn't exist?
The way the game works when you get to the big-league depends a bit on where you're located and what you're selling but the basic idea is pretty simple and same everywhere: you setup a couple of companies, one in whichever country you're conducting business in (company A), another in a country with suitably lax tax-laws (company B). You then for example make sure that the licensing rights of the software or whatever it is that you're selling are held by the company in the tax-haven. You then do some math and figure out that after operating expenses and salaries and all, the profit of your actual company (company A) is say 100 million. Okay, you don't want to pay taxes on all of that. Well great, you just make a contractual arrangement so that company A has to pay licensing fees to company B to the tune of say, 95 million, and suddenly the profit of company A goes down to 5 million, and the 95 million gets moved to your tax-haven company that pays next to no tax on it.
Variations of this model are so common it's basically a public secret. It's how Apple & al have been dodging billions in taxes for years now. The most common of these arrangements used by US corporations especially to shield around a hundred billion from american taxation a year was known as the Double Irish that used to be combined with what the accountants call a Dutch sandwhich. Basically using Irish and Dutch tax and IP law to move massive amounts of profits from the EU to Bermuda and other tax-havens.
These schemes were forced to be closed by the European Union (American officials and government seemed not to care one bit even though the existence and use of these schemes was known for decades and even though it cost the US a lot in lost tax-revenue.) in 2014. However, Ireland, not wanting to lose all the corporate business especially on the IT-side that this loophole had brought them basically just re-instated the loophole (now known as the 'single malt' arrangement and used by for example Microsoft and probably Facebook) with slightly changed wording and application, but it's essentially still there and still used.
Hell, there's an entire wiki article on Ireland as a tax-haven, which states at the very beginning:
And Ireland is by far not the only country with such (intentional) loopholes in the laws, it's just the most commonly used. But yeah, clearly because you personally cannot avoid paying taxes on your million or so of (presumably wage) income, that means it must be impossible,
"It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
Storage is gasoline is much easier and cheaper than storage of electricity... You can gain some level of control by purchasing it in advance and holding it in containers.
If the grid is using your electric vehicle for storage, then it will increase the wear on your battery and could result in the battery being depleted when you expect to use the car.
If a country is using solar power for generation then not only will it generate nothing at night, the power usage will be higher due to heating in cooler countries, so the last thing you want is for your electric car to deplete its battery overnight and leave you unable to travel to work in the morning.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Depends on the source of power... If a lot of solar is being used, then the grid won't have much surplus power at night - if your car is being used to offset the lack of generation from solar plants then your car could even be empty in the morning.
That results in an unreliable vehicle, that might not be charged when you expect it to be. If your gasoline car has the fuel light on in the morning it's solely because you didn't full it up - entirely within your control.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Noting that the longest possible journey you can make in Israel (I just checked on Goggle maps) is from say Eilat on the Red Sea to Mount Hermon in the Golan Heights. It comes in at 540km which avoids the West Bank. I can't imagine that many people in Israel make that journey very often, and it's a 6.5 hour trip so there is going to be some comfort and food breaks in there which will get you over the capacity limit. So unless you like driving around in circles current EV's are more than adequate for Israel which is a fairly small country.
Note I am assuming that the opportunity to take a trip outside Israel in a car are somewhat limited due to the geopolitical situation and as such can be discounted.
The cities and towns all have gas connections, some smaller villages might not, and some apartment buildings might not have the internal pipework to support it.
In a lot of rental properties the infrastructure is all in place, it's just not used because having a gas supply introduces addition liabilities for the landlord and while electric heating is usually a lot more expensive this isn't the landlord's problem as the tenant pays for heating costs.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
by 2020
While they are less efficient than the large generators used in power plants, you are converting chemical energy directly into (mostly) kinetic energy...
For a power plant you are converting chemical energy into heat, converting the heat into kinetic energy, converting the kinetic energy into electrical energy, transmitting the electrical energy a long distance, storing it in a battery and finally converting it into kinetic energy.
Each of these steps introduces inefficiencies, so the overall difference isnt as much as people think.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
It always seems to be 12 years off ...
Well, hopefully all the pieces will be there and it will be affordable for most by then. We're getting there.
I've dreamed of electric vehicles since I was a kid; nothing against them. I do have something against commissars ordering me into one though.
Looks like they'll in reality eventually become pervasive by actually being better, not truly by fiat, which is good. 12 years from now they'll either be actually affordable and have all the pieces in place, or else the deadline will get moved out again.
Israel has a good case for eliminating readily used and transported flammable fuels - her neighbors. Not about sticking it to the oil-rich, but denying* those who would make firebombs a common fuel for such things. It won't solve everything, but it makes sense to take away what can be taken away. And auto/truck bombs don't work so well if the answer to them is to cut power so EVs cannot be (re)charged in lawless areas.
* or at least making acquisition more difficult for...
I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
CNG does produce less CO2 per BTU/joule/calorie than gasoline. However Natural Gas powered engines tend to run hot which means more NO2. Unlike CO2, NO2 is visible and fairly toxic. Even with compression, Natural Gas tends to take up a lot of volume -- which often mean somewhat less payload space. One other drawback is that Natural Gas is probably more likely to catch fire in an accident than gasoline or diesel.
Presumably all that can be dealt with.
But all in all CNG is probably a perfectly OK vehicle fuel. It's widely used only in Iran and Pakistan I think.
======
Israel isn't very big -- about the size of New Jersey, and it's neighbors aren't very friendly, so the problem of recharging pure EVs on long trips possibly will be minimal. Israeli's likely won't be taking long trips any time soon?
Maybe this plan isn't as ditzy as it sounds.
But I personally would be a lot happier if my fire trucks were powered by liquid hydrocarbons that can be refueloed from a can or barrel.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Pretty trivial to solve tbh. If its a smart meter for an ev then having it charge to 75% and then go into storage mode would be simple. That gives you a min range level. (Configurable ofcourse)
As for charging at night vs day you would nornally do a mix of renewables with a base load generator. Solar will be offline at night but wind wont be, and power demand is a lower at night as well meaning smaller changes in supply have bigger effects.
During the day there will still be a % of evs connected to the network. Either those ar home or those on work charging systems.
Must have been because they were rentals in the uk then.
Its not something used here is aus though
Unless if it's coal. So basically depends on the local source of power generation. Are Electric Cars Worse For The Environment? Myth Busted
Life is not for the lazy.
It should also be worth considering that an EV's power train should be significantly less complicated than that of an ICE vehicle. Less complicated/less moving parts = easier and less costly to maintain. It can also result in a smaller footprint necessary for the vehicle, although most people seem to have a thing against vehicles that don't have the same form factor as traditional cars.
Most people work hard and most likely harder, and don't get that kind of reward for it.
Switching to EVs does very little good if 95% of your electricity generation is via fossil fuels.
Ah yes. Can't talk about EVs on Slashdot without somebody claiming that they pollute as much or more than gasoline burning cars because, whatever. And again, I point out that there are excellent reasons for moving to electric vehicles that have nothing to do with pollution reduction. I guess I'm going to have to spell this out for you, but given how many petroleum producing countries aren't friendly to Israel and at least one questions its right to even exist, it seems logical to me for Israel to move away from dependence on those countries.
Switching to EVs does very little good if 95% of your electricity generation is via fossil fuels. All you're doing is shifting the CO2 emissions from the tailpipe to the smokestack.
This move, in the 2018-2030 time frame is not intended to eliminate CO2 emissions from motor vehicles in Israel (though in the longer run it is absolutely the path to get there).
You need to look at Israel's plans for providing electricity in 2030 also. At that point their power will be 80% natural gas, 20% renewables (they are eliminating their use of coal entirely). Natural gas is a fossil fuel, but in a combined cycle plant it drastically reduces CO2 emissions compared to ICE vehicles (see below) to only 38% of the present emissions, so yes it moves the ball way forward.
The overall energy efficiency of EVs powered by fossil fuels is barely better than ICE vehicles
Now you are just making yourself look like a fool. The efficiency of natural gas combined cycle plants is expected to hit 65% in the next decade (i.e. before 2030), whereas ICE vehicles are limited to about 21% efficiency. Throw in a generous 5% transmission loss (small country, short transmission distances), and a 90% charge to wheel efficiency for 2030 era EVs, and you still have an overall efficiency of 55%. "Barely better", sheesh.
Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
The average commute time in th United States is 26 minutes one way. Yes, there are plenty of exceptions, but the fact is that an EV would be suitable vehicle for most Americans. Not all, but most.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Long live Stannis Baratheon
Grammar is an orphan, SB died at the end of season 5.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Been poor in the US before, still have poor friends, and even in car-centric US, poverty makes car ownership hard. The estimate is that a "cheap" car still costs $0.25/mile for all the expenses incurred while it is being used for transportation. That's not cheap on poverty wages.
I've still kept the view that automobiles are a money sink. Far from poverty now (knock on wood), but we're driving beaters.
This is the first time I hear about this. Has anyone written about this in our own country's newspapers in hebrew?
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
Ok, found one http://www.bizportal.co.il/gen...
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
I wonder...if you're a programmer, and X and Y are integers, do you pronounce a relational expression of "XY" as "X is fewer than Y"?
Ezekiel 23:20
All you're doing is shifting the CO2 emissions from the tailpipe to the smokestack.
Think about that "all" for a bit. Also the "CO2" in front of "emissions". You get to shift 100% of tailpipe emissions of all types, not just CO2, out of city centres and suburbs to large scale powerplants that can run at maximum efficiency with much more effective scrubbers. That's a set of major gains right there.
... and then you can swap out that set of large scale fossil fuel burning power plant for something with a much lower carbon footprint and enjoy an even large set of major gains.
Israel is small enough that current EVs should be able to go border-to-border on a single charge. Given that range anxiety is one of the major reasons why people don't want EVs, it seems a small country can convert much more easily.
It's amazing that they have only 100 electric cars in the entire country, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg has more EVs that that.
and it's just about to go kaput. That's 15 years more. When it dies there's a good chance it'll be parted out to keep other 25 year old cars running. It might even make it down to Mexico. Ever see those pictures of cars in Cuba? Those things are from the 60s and still going.
It's not impossible to do that with an EV, but it requires a lot more tech that poor don't necessarily have access to. About the only thing I can't do on my car is the engine & transmission overhaul, but that's mostly due to a lack of skill. I knew lots of poor blue collar guys who could do their own engines and a few that did their own transmissions. The trouble with Battery packs is cost. Lots of specialized gear and chemicals. It's not just steel and iron. You can't just brute force it with welding and ingenuity. You need the tech, which the poor don't have. So when that car dies instead of spending 2 or 3 weekends rebuilding a transmission they'll have to come up with $2k+ to get a battery professionally rebuilt.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I wanted to see someone from outside the system take the reins for a while and shake things up.
How's that going? Is the swamp drained yet?
Yup, he drained it straight into his administration. One of Trump's greatest achievements.
The average commute time in th United States is 26 minutes one way. Yes, there are plenty of exceptions, but the fact is that an EV would be suitable vehicle for most Americans. Not all, but most.
It would be a suitable vehicle for most Americans who have a dedicated commute vehicle. But once you decide to make a trip to pretty much anywhere else, you rapidly find that our population is spread out enough to make EVs a problem anywhere there is not a fast-charging network. Anywhere Tesla hasn't built that network, it doesn't exist, and no other vehicles can use their chargers.
While it's true that a lot more people could be driving EVs than are now, it's hardly the massive percentage for the USA that it is for most other nations, where population densities are much higher and trips tend to be shorter.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
ICEs can only use fossil fuels or biofuels (which are problematic in many cases),
That's not strictly true. They can also run on hydrogen produced by electrolysis, although it's stupid to do so. Or you can use large amounts of electricity to make fuel from the air, which can be hydrogen or hydrocarbon.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
People also don't appreciate that ICEs experience a drop in capacity over their lifetimes, too, which requires service to restore. Worn piston rings, worn valves, aged O2 sensors, aged coil packs, carbon buildup on the intake valves of vehicles with direct gasoline injection, dirty fuel injectors... All of this stuff WILL happen to vehicles over time, and DOES result in loss of efficiency. It used to be that vehicles didn't have any spare power to lose, either, so you'd actually notice the loss of performance. What happens these days is that the vehicle has unused headroom, and it self-tunes. As a result, you may not even notice any decrease in performance, but you will still experience a drop in fuel economy — and as a result, range. It's not unusual for older vehicles to have lost 10% or more of their performance...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I am a EE and I also have a JD ( law degree, patent law ) and I voted for Trump. Not all who voted for Trump were idiots,
True. Some were merely morally corrupt shitbags who figured he'd make them richer, and who didn't give a crap anyone anyone but themselves. Every single person who decided to support Trump is also supporting racism and rape, and there's literally no way around that simple fact.
I voted for Trump because I wanted to see someone from outside the system take the reins for a while and shake things up.
And it was okay with you if they were a racist rapist who even before they became president cost the USA millions of dollars in court costs through deliberately manipulative and fraudulent business practices.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
by good fortune you mean hard work? Ofc there is always an element of fortune but that is useless if no work has been done.
The strongest correlator to financial success is who your parents are and what their social status is. It has little to nothing to do with hard work. If hard work were the best predictor of success then the world would be dominated by single mothers, maintenance workers, and jizz moppers.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Public transportation is not economical unless you have large numbers of people travelling to/from the same locations at the same time. A bus or a train requires significantly more energy to move than car, so it needs to carry more passengers to break even - plus the expense of hiring the driver. And then the routing, a bus will travel around a route which is very inefficient at getting from point to point because it wants to collect passengers along the way, so a bus passengers will be travelling more miles than if they drove a car to the same destination.
And then there are situations where the bus does not go where you want, and you end up having to take multiple buses or trains with a period of waiting in between.
Also when you do end up with lots of people going to the same place at the same time, you end up with massive congestion and severely unpleasant travelling conditions.
Forcing everyone onto public transport doesn't help anyone, it just reduces everyone's quality of life. Instead measures need to be taken to reduce the need for travel, so provide residential areas and workplaces in close proximity and also allow remote working when possible etc... If most people can have a 5 minute walk to work, not only does their quality of life improve but the energy use decreases significantly too.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
That's largely a third world problem, in civilised countries education and healthcare is provided by the government for everyone that wants it.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Interesting but irrelevant. I was comparing natural gas burned in generating plants to gasoline burned in ICEs.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
By 2023, legacy car makers should be in deep trouble. I doubt that ppl will buy many new gas/diesel vehicles. With that said, we really should make exceptions for military, EMS, and true off-road vehicles. But, we should require they be series hybrid.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
should be significantly less complicated...
Should?
Where have you been living over the last 10 years? In a cave somewhere?
They are significantly less complicated. And on top of that, regenerative breaking is extending the life of brakes on the order of the life of the car. Maybe one brake job every 10 years/100k miles. Or even less often.
Talking to some EV owners, they all noted that they had to get used to refilling their windshield washer fluid again. Why? Because they used to take their car in for service often enough that the shop kept it topped off. With their EV, that's the most frequent maintenance that needs to be done. Tire rotations are the next one. After that.....there's nothing. No oil changes, no coolent, no transmission....
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
Which is exactly why NPP's have high capital costs, the huge amount of concrete for thermal containment. Now you propose more so basically you're proposing a NPP that will never be built.
In Israel they have limited choices for energy. The nation is effectively an island because they are not on good terms with their neighbors. Building a "super-grid" like has been proposed in North America and the EU is not politically practical, making the inherently distributed solar and wind power not all that viable. Building windmills and solar panels inside their borders, when they are under near constant bombardment from their neighbors, means they'd have to keep repairing those solar collectors and windmills. I'm not saying they can't have any solar and wind power, only that they know building it within rocket range of its neighbors would be a bad idea for reliable power. Israel doesn't have a lot of oil and coal but they did find a lot of natural gas, as stated in the fine article. Much of the oil and coal they burn is imported.
If Israel wants energy independence then they need to produce what they can inside their own borders. Given their options that means lots of natural gas, lots of nuclear power, and a small bit of oil, wind, and solar.
I agree that building a hardened nuclear power plant would be expensive. I don't see a whole lot of other options. If Israel can't have nuclear power then they run the risk of running out of energy real quick. They've been living off of the good relations from the USA, UK, and other allies, for their energy. They must know that this cannot last forever, and their natural gas supplies cannot last forever either. Many of the nations in the Middle East have been stating an intention to build nuclear power, including Iran. This will mean they will want it too.
Any power plant is a prime target in Israel. A nuclear power plant would be no different. I'm guessing that they protect them very well inside bunkers. If they can afford a hardened natural gas power plant then they can afford nuclear power.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
But I personally would be a lot happier if my fire trucks were powered by liquid hydrocarbons that can be refueloed from a can or barrel.
Why? Do you think they're going to drive 300 miles to a fire?
Fire trucks are one very good example of something that should be electric. Simplified power train so it's far more reliable, will last a lot longer, and requires a lot less maintenance. They don't tend to travel very far, so there's no worry about having to recharge. And they're big and heavy, and need a ton of torque to get moving.
Other than taxis in stop-and-go traffic and garbage trucks, I can't think of something better to have as an EV.
Seriously - in most urban/suburban areas, there's a fire station every few miles. In the little city I live in, I just counted 14 fire stations in a 10 mile radius.
Maybe electric won't work way out in the country where fire trucks have to travel 100 miles to fight a fire, but I can't imagine that there are many places where that's true.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
I said should because I didn't feel like researching half a dozen articles to back up my claim and half remembered hearsay. I also don't have empirical data on hand to back up my maintenance claims. You see, when I make assumptions I don't make my statements as if they were facts even if I have common sense reasoning to back them up.
Yup. There's obviously tons of important ancillary benefits that come prior to this stage as well: less noise, less vibration damage, less brake dust, etc. And there's also lower CO2 due to cars lasting longer because fewer moving parts.
Ev cars are full everytime you get in them in the morning.
Theres no getting in the car with the fuel light on. For most people and most usage cases a daily range of 450km is more than enough. It doesnt really matter if it takes 6 hrs to charge if youre asleep.
Wait what? How the hell does that happen?
I get what you're saying but you know it's not magic, right. You'll need the have the charging station installed and a place where to install it, which many people without their own garages don't have. And of course you also need to pay actual money for the electricity.
"Why? Do you think they're going to drive 300 miles to a fire?"
That actually happens sometimes. But the problem is that in the case of major disasters like California's wildfires a truck may be on the firelines literally for days. And if it's pumping water, it'll go through a lot of fuel. It is much better to bring the fuel to the truck than to pull the truck offline to recharge it.
Same with military vehicles BTW
Ambulances, not so much. They need to return to base often anyway. But the long recharge time of current batteries might be a problem in a real disaster.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Nope, then "X is less than Y" sounds correct. That's the fun thing; by changing it to "what sounds correct", you lose consistency.
It may be because the fewer/less distinction was drilled into my head at a younger age. But, contextually, one is making a statement, and the other an evaluation.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Don't spread misinformation, studies showed that electric cars even when powered by fossil fuels generated electricity are cleaner then gasoline - and this is the starting point, which can only get better with more renewable energy, not to mention direct health benefits for all the urban dwellers and commuters.
https://greentransportation.in... From the article: "... Repeatedly studies have shown even if the electricity comes from coal, electric cars are cleaner than gasoline ..."
You're missing electricity transmission efficiency (about 95%), battery charge efficiency (about 80%, less for quick-charges), battery discharge efficiency (can't find measurements for it since it's incorporated into the EPA kWh consumption, but usually it's about the same as charging efficiency), and electric motor efficiency (about 90%).
I did the calculations here.. Based on EPA energy consumption figures (kWh and gallons) for nearly identical vehicles (Nissan Leaf vs Versa), EVs powered with fossil fuels use slightly less energy than ICE gasoline vehicles. About 19%-25% of the energy in the fuel makes it to the wheels for EVs, vs 17%-23% ICE gasoline. Diesel ICE vehicles are slightly more efficient (25%+).
Here are a few possible reasons why we have so few electric cars in the country currently:
- We had this company called 'Better Place' that was building an electric car infrastructure, gas cars converted to electric, battery swapping stations, charging stations, etc.
It ended up going out of business, which I guess left a bad taste in people's mouths.
- A lot of tax money comes from gas and car sales, so the government is not incentivized to encourage EVs.
Plus, cars are expensive already, without incentives you'd have to be really rich to be able to afford something like a Telsa Model S.
- Most people live in apartments and park in the street, so they don't get the advantage of charging overnight, and would have to wait the half hour it would take to charge an EV a reasonable amount at a charging station.
- I guess for a company like Tesla, who does business with our neighbors, it might be more trouble than it's worth getting bad press in the Arab world for doing business with us.
Israel is a tiny country, really, so it's not a big deal really, but face it: internal combustion engines must go the way of the (dead) dinosaurs (that have been fueling them). Fossil fuels were always a limited resource, it'll run out eventually, and we see how destructive using it is in the long run. Just relax, ICE fans, you'll still have high-horsepower vehicles, and easier than with ICEs, and the maintenance will be a tiny fraction of what it used to be. Trust me, you'll like it just as much if not more so.
British Columbia will be at 80 percent electric vehicles for all new car and truck purchases by 2020.
2030 means Israel will be way too hot.
No, hotter.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
RINO is an odd term. Nothing defines what a Republican really is, so we have today a president with almost zero resemblance to classical Republicans with fans who accuse everyone who disagrees with him to not be a real Republican. Ronald Reagan would be a RINO in your eyes I suspect.
The economy is based upon the previous decade for the most part. In two years nobody can turn an economy around. It started bad at the start of Obama's presidency and was slowly making gains through today. When the economy looks good, Trump makes tax cuts which is bizarre because that's something done when times are bad to give a short term boost. But the cuts just aren't very large and there's no way to pay for them (tariffs may do this in a roundabout way but will hurt the economy in turn). And the economy is not the best in 50 years, the economy sucks unless you only look at official figures which discount a lot of real world effects - homelessness seems to be up and salaries have stayed stagnant in relation to inflation.
I think a key difference is that after paying taxes in Europe you generally have something to show for it - education, healthcare, economic safety nets, and a higher standard of living. In the US you don't see as much coming back to you.
Having designed plans and specs for gas piping systems including gas booster pumps to take the utility's low pressure service (6"WC) to an HVAC system's "medium pressure" distribution (2 psig), I can tell you that a small booster pump can cost around $20,000 to buy and as much as double that including installation. Natural gas pumps for a car would be lower capacity, so smaller, but would need much higher pressure (around 3,000 psig), and would require even more specialized installation, maintenance, and safety requirements. And you'd still might have some range issues, as you can't really store that much compressed gas in a reasonably sized tank.
You know, fire trucks have pumps in them that might need to operate for hours while putting out fires. And many kinds of fire trucks have hydraulics running off the engines for things like ladders. Operating in rural areas away from easy sources of sufficient electrical power is not that unusual. Also the considerable work that would be required to convert field-proven diesel designs to all electric likely makes the proposed change unappealing to those in the business. So I'm not sure that they're the best example of what can easily be converted to batteries.
Most people won't want their cars to only provide 75% of their intended range, they will turn that feature off.
Wind may be on at night, but there's no guarantee - if it's a calm night you wont be getting any power from wind or solar. If it's too stormy wind turbines are shut down too, in order to prevent damage.
The % of EVs connected to the grid will be highly variable, just like wind and solar power. You will end up having to massively over provision capacity to cope with the worst case scenarios.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
You appear to be motivated to overlook some simple answers. Most homes in Israel have solar hot water heaters - they are cheap, reliable, and nobody blows them up cuz there's millions of them. Why not add a few panels next to the existing solar setups? You could provide energy when it is most needed, not a big target.
It would be smart for a country with a siege mentality to gravitate towards distributed generation. I'd be shocked if Israel didn't embrace this - looks like this new policy is heading in that direction.
Man, you really need that seminar!
The fact that your comment was modded insightful is testament too exactly how far our society has fallen.
Guess what. I'm a first generation immigrant Jew who at one point was on welfare and Medicaid. I also voted for Trump... not because I liked him, but because I moved out of the Soviet Union, and don't really fancy the US turning into it's equivalent.
Owners of EVs do keep their cars charged to less than full. If you own a tesla they recommend keeping it less than fully charged to the batts last longer.
My 2 mates that own Tesla S both have theirs charge to less than full. They have theirs set to about 300ish KM range each morning and if they plan to go further they set it to full charge the night before.
Total capacity of EVs on the network may vary wildly, but they aren't generation sources. They are excess capacity dumps. You would still have heat dumps for use if shedding is required.
There will always be situations where a particular location isn't generating, but when you have a country wide grid the chances of having everything down is low. You also are able to plan for these things. Pumped storage, network level batteries, rapid cycle gas power plants etc are all part of your network design. The challenge with renewables is the storage component. Storage costs are currently too high, but potentially EVs could be the solution to that.
Highly unlikely that would come anywhere near close to range of an EV.
Apparantly average annual mileage for americans is ~ 22,500km or 62km per day. A tesla has a range of 7 to 8 times that before you need to charge. Is doing a 450km drive in a day, even a semi-regular occurrence? Thats a full tank of fuel for most cars.
Auto correct sucks btw. Its vs it's etc...
Electricity for an EV in Australia is $1 per day to a connection in your house. I assume that people have somewhere they park their vehicles where you live? Garage, Car ports / driveways? Unallocated street parking is more of a challenge and would require either allocation or some kind of municipal connection.
Obviously though my post referred to having the car plugged in over night.
I don't think anyone is suggesting having the evs depleted. Having 5% of the total capacity of your EV available for network storage would have a massive impact on the total storage available on the network if all cars were electric.
Also no country is going to only go solar, its a flawed argument to suggest that. There will always be a mix of solar, wind, and others in order to share the generation around. That other will be coal or nuclear or gas for the foreseeable future. But if you can load shift your renewables via storage your requirement for always on baseload will drop.
It's not a silver bullet but it all helps.
"It is much better to bring the fuel to the truck than to pull the truck offline to recharge it.
Excellent idea. Have a trailer of batteries brought by an auxiliary vehicle The new batteries can either be plugged into the fire truck as-is or some form of battery swap could be done.. Repeat as often as necessary. A gen-set trailer is also an option which could use the same electrical connection as a battery trailer. Plenty of options.
A bus or a train requires significantly more energy to move than car, so it needs to carry more passengers to break even - plus the expense of hiring the driver.
Granted that the train takes more energy to move than a car. But that energy should be compared to all the cars it replaces, not just a single car. If it takes 100 times the energy of one car but transports 1000 people (vary the numbers if you will, depending on the size of your train) then you should compare it to the the energy required to move 1000 cars.
I've heard that shoe story before, but it was spun a little differently.
In the version I heard I think they were actually work boots and it wasn't because the poor person didn't save up enough to buy the ones that would last, it was that he couldn't afford them in the first place and he couldn't earn money without a pair of work boots.
But it is a fair point that a lot of seemingly minor choices can have a major impact much later on.
Local delivery trucks, especially USPS trucks.
It's scandalous that the USPS is looking for a new truck and isn't looking at EVs.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
You appear to be motivated to overlook some simple answers.
I did not overlook the simple answers. I've been studying the energy problem for a long time, soaking in all kinds of differing opinions for years. Solar power is simply insufficient to run a first world nation. There's nothing wrong with putting up some solar panels, and there are plenty in Israel. What they will still need is natural gas and nuclear power.
I've seen the math and there is no way to maintain a modern economy without nuclear power. Do the math yourself. Here's a website made by people that did the math and explained why nuclear power must be part of the energy policy of any nation that wants to have a modern economy: http://www.roadmaptonowhere.co...
There are no simple answers. What I've found is that there is no solution to our future energy needs that does not include nuclear power. Distributed generation might sound nice but it destroys any economy of scale. The world will need big efficient power plants or the lights go out, this includes Israel.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
The economy is based upon the previous decade for the most part. In two years nobody can turn an economy around. It started bad at the start of Obama's presidency and was slowly making gains through today. When the economy looks good, Trump makes tax cuts which is bizarre because that's something done when times are bad to give a short term boost.
Those tax cuts are costing the USA $1 trillion per year (and counting...)
It's hard for the economy not to go up when you inject $2 trillion into it.
The question is: Who's going to repay that loan?
(You can bet it's going to be the main job of the Democrat that follows Trump, and he'll get the blame for all the bad news).
I only hope that Trump gets reelected and has to deal with the fallout himself in his second term.
No sig today...
Agreed.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
I'm a first generation immigrant Jew who at one point was on welfare and Medicaid. I also voted for Trump... not because I liked him, but because I moved out of the Soviet Union, and don't really fancy the US turning into it's equivalent.
So in spite of having moved out of the soviet union where the Nazis were primarily defeated, you voted for a white supremacist who is pushing us in the direction of Nazism, because you didn't want to see the USA turn into the USSR? A soviet republic is too much for you, but the Fourth Reich is A-OK?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Lol, racism and rape.
Wow, you're a shitlord.
I'll give you prostitution for sure. But racism and rape? Help me out with that one.
He's clearly racist, only racists in denial about their own racism are still in denial about that. Trump's a white nationalist, just like his father, who was a known member of the KKK. You can tell he's racist by his racist policies, not just through supposition. We know him by his actions. As for rape, he raped one of his former wives. It only wasn't legally rape because, unlike civilized states, a husband was legally incapable of raping his wife at the time. There are still several states in this country where women give up bodily autonomy when they get married. That's just another way slavery has remained with us.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
You have no idea what I'm talking about? Surely you can't be that stupid. Surely no-one can. The point is blindingly obvious: if happiness is earned, then babies can't have access to happiness, because they have yet to do anything to earn that happiness. And given that you're apparently ridiculously stupid, let me state for the avoidance of doubt that I'm using the word "earn" in the same sense you originally used it: not actual financial earnings, but actions that are deserving of reward (in this case, happiness). Babies can't act in that way. Which goes to show you are a hypocrite, complaining about absurd over-simplification and then making an absurd over-simplification of your own in the very same post.
All those fancy degrees, and you had to resort to ad hominem because, in your own words, you had "no idea wtf [I was] talking about". I mean, if you're as clever as you think you are, you should be able to figure out what I meant even if it didn't make sense to you at first reading, even if you thought the logic was all twisted -- and then respond to it with some kind of piercingly brilliant argument that lanced straight through the heart of my assertions. Instead, you had to resort to the sort of thing a 5 year old would find a bit childish: "talking about babies? Hah, well you're just a great big baby yourself". I mean, c'mon dude. Have some self-respect: if you're going to use an insult because you can't think of an argument, at least use an insult consonant with your expensive education.
Nissan Leafs have air cooled battery packs rather than liquid cooled and that's why their lifespan has been relatively short. Teslas and even Chevy Volts have much more sophisticated cooling systems and degradation so far is almost non-existant.
That's exactly the point: cheaper electric cars have batteries that don't last. I'm not saying the first or even second owners of an EV are going to have major issues with it. I'm saying the era of cheap buy-here-pay-here lot cars that still provide transportation so long as you keep 'em full of oil, might be coming to a close.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Nissan Leafs have air cooled battery packs rather than liquid cooled and that's why their lifespan has been relatively short. Teslas and even Chevy Volts have much more sophisticated cooling systems and degradation so far is almost non-existant.
That's exactly the point: cheaper electric cars have batteries that don't last. I'm not saying the first or even second owners of an EV are going to have major issues with it. I'm saying the era of cheap buy-here-pay-here lot cars that still provide transportation so long as you keep 'em full of oil, might be coming to a close.
Maybe.
It could be though that going forward the Nissan Leaf's passive cooling will be seen as a critical design flaw that even the cheapest EVs will not implement in the future.
It's really hard to know how this will all play out. Our assumptions are based on how cars are built and used today which may not apply in future. For example, a Chinese company is working on a Tesla clone whose battery pack can be swapped in a few minutes at a properly equipped station. So rather than having a semi-permanent battery that you charge, when traveling long distances you merely swap it with a freshly charged one. At that point the life of a single battery pack isn't so much of an issue for the owner of the car.
And remember, we're talking 2030. Figuring a decent ICE vehicle can last 15 years, if not more, that takes us to 2045 before the poor start running out of ICE cars to buy. By that time autonomous vehicles will likely be the norm. Which means services like Uber or public bus service can be really cheap since they won't have to pay drivers. Plus we're not just talking about electric cars, but electric motorcycles, bicycles, scooters, etc. An electric motorcycle or scooter seems like a pretty good choice for a poor person vs an old clunker ICE vehicle. Smaller, cheaper batteries that are quick to charge and a drivetrain that's relatively maintenance free.
Finally, Israel has the 3rd highest gas prices in the world. Operating an ICE vehicle of any stripe there isn't cheap. I'm guessing the really poor simply may find car ownership too expensive as is and the change to electric vehicles will only improve things for them.
That would be relevant if I stated that natural gas was a great fuel for buses and trucks.
If you did not, then you should add it to your arguments list, as it actually is a perfect fuel.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
you seem to read effort == hard work. In my language there is a difference. We were talking about the people that work for their success, why are you talking the ones with rich parents who had at some point some parent that worked hard ? Please stay on subject.
I am very inclined to think that if you do more or less what I do then you will get more or less good results. I do not play the lottery or gamble btw. If by "most people work hard" you mean they dig ditches with spoons then that doesn't count as work.
I am a 1%er and pay over 50% of my earnings in taxes.
I highly suspect you're lying but if you're not please shut up and accept your good fortune to earn that much in the first place. And on the off chance you're not lying, you also need to fire your accountant.
by good fortune you mean hard work? Ofc there is always an element of fortune but that is useless if no work has been done.
The strongest correlator to financial success is who your parents are and what their social status is. It has little to nothing to do with hard work.
you seem to read effort == hard work. In my language there is a difference.
As you can see from the above quotation (I went back and put in the effort to quote for context) you are the one who brought up "hard work". If you don't want to discuss "hard work", perhaps you shouldn't mention "hard work".
We were talking about the people that work for their success, why are you talking the ones with rich parents who had at some point some parent that worked hard ?
Because they are in the minority. Most people don't become wealthy through hard work. They get lucky, or they take advantage of someone. The percentage of people who actually got wealthy because they worked hard is minuscule.
Now let's venture over to your neighboring comment, which proves you don't actually get it:
I am very inclined to think that if you do more or less what I do then you will get more or less good results.
And that is why you are very wrong. Opportunity is more important than how hard you work, and opportunity is extremely unevenly distributed.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I don't understand why you keep trying to drag the discussion towards something else, yes some people get some good inheritance/blue-eyes/full-hair good on them. They WERE NOT the focus (or mention) of my hard work argument. My neighbours finances does not concern me, *MY* finances concern me. It's like you are saying look the neighbor won the lottery therefore why do you work when you too can play the lottery or something....we were talking about the hard working people.
If you want to have good fortune in life (not Bill Gates level wealth but say above average) you should work hard and, get this, create your own opportunities. If you want to be a programmer go to silicon valley and it will increase your chances 10x. As I said in the beginning ofc there is an element of hazard, but if those who had it would not have been primed and ready for it when the moment came then it would have been wasted.
Instead I suspect *some* prefer to woe woe woe is me, and go take a snooz. Btw how many of those chinese millionaires are "inherited", wasn't China dirt poor like 40 yrs ago ?
I like nuclear power, but it isn't feasible in the current political climate. Also wind/solar/bats are becoming so cheap and good they're already cheaper and will continue to become more so.
You can run a boat, RV or house with wind/solar/bats for not much money right now. Entire countries are planning on this in the near future. Try to open your mind to what is possible, and what is already happening. The economies of scale are in the factories making the equipment. You don't need the power to be all in one place, that makes the problem of distribution offset economies of scale.
Man, you really need that seminar!
Stop mass murder, mass incarceration and violation of every human right there is. Israel needs to be dismantled. Send Israelis home to Europe, Russia, North America, wherever and leave the indigenous populations alone. The white Sparta colony is not wanted nor needed.
There is no way the car (traction battery) owner is not going to get screwed by the power companies in this deal.
The other problem is the extra expense of implementing bidirectional power conversion at each charger and car whether it is used or not. At least it gets used with a stationary battery bank.
The average commute time in th United States is 26 minutes one way. Yes, there are plenty of exceptions, but the fact is that an EV would be suitable vehicle for most Americans. Not all, but most.
I agree and the part I find amusing about this is that short range EVs which meet this requirement will make longer commutes less economical. This will hurt rural areas.