Suzuki Burgman USA Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
The part 2 video starts with sleight of hand.
energy density of petrol is more like 100 times a Li ion battery.
No actually it doesn’t. Listen again. He said 5,000%. 5,000%= 50x (times), which agrees with Lithium Ion vs diesel/gasoline density values I come up with. He actually credited the batteries with double the power density you just listed.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Bull…..

Energy density of batteries and liquid fuels are defined a million times over, as energy per mass.
Sure, You can also define energy density per volume , and now write that here, to further your argument but it’s irrelevant to me here.
The guy in the video clearly stated “pounds “ , being a weight equivalent of mass on earth.
You simply mistook him as saying 5,000x instead of 5,000%. Nice try though….
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
“Oil has about 5,000 percent more energy per pound “

That’s word for word what the guy in the video actually said, which is totally true, one more time….

“Oil has about 5,000 percent more energy per pound “

Blubottle.. you have to fabricate better straw man arguments, than the lame one you’re attempting here
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Speaking of weight, which is a real sore subject for battery vehicle advocates ( not volume bluebottle 😂), yes weight…mass … is a serious drawback for battery vehicles. One recent technical study concluded that if transportation vehicles, such as semi-tractor trailers that run 24/7 were to be battery instead of diesel.. the road wear damage would 20-30% greater, requiring more frequent rebuilding of roads. We all know how environmentally friendly a steaming pile of asphalt is when roads are rebuilt.
Other studies are also emerging showing how battery cars are emitting much more unhealthy fine particles from roads, and tires into the air we breathe, because of all the extra weight ( yes weight, not volume 😂).
Even car transports have to make extra trips because all the extra weight of the battery cars put them over existing safe road weight limits ( not volume 😂).
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
The physics professor isn’t a professor at all and has no qualification in any relevant field, he is a lobbyist paid by industry.
Where do you come with this stuff, you fabricate?


“Mills was an experimental physicist and development engineer at Bell Northern Research (Canada’s Bell Labs) and at the RCA David Sarnoff Research Center on microprocessors, fiber optics, missile guidance, earning several patents for his work. He holds a degree in physics”

His resume to give his opinion, looks adequate to me ..

 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
As ever, check the numbers in these claims.

Brakes pads on battery cars are lasting 80,000 - 100,000 miles in real world use, mainly because of regenerative braking.
So EVs produce far less, not more brake dust.

If a car were actually losing 9.28g per mile from its (roughly) 35 Kg of tyres as claimed by a govt. figure - they would have been bald in 1300 miles and completely disappeared in under 4,000 miles.

So it’s clearly a disinformation lie that relies on people reading the headline and not doing the maths.
That post has two straw man arguments in it. What would you do if you didn’t have those to rely on?

I won’t take the bait.

Go put 600-1,000 lbs of extra weight in your car, to simulate the added weight of a battery vehicle, and get back to us in a couple years on how environmentally, and tire friendly, it is.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Battery cars wearing out their tires in short order is well documented. All the extra weight from a giant battery is a simple science, contributing factor. Another being quick starts afforded by the electric motor’s low rpm torque.

As I stated a week ago… electric motors are more environmentally friendly than ICE’s. The nasty end of it, is the oversized battery everyone profiting from this political driven mandate, is purposefully overlooking in the propaganda.

Stossel’s video brings up good points that should be debated. I’m simply challenging your outsized discrediting attempts at the video.
As always, There’s no free lunch, as much as all those standing to profit from this forced society change, would try to say otherwise.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Counting, just cars….There’s 1.446 BILLION in the world. The majority are not electric. Just imagine how much we’d have to tear-up the planet, to replace them all, and make these giant batteries for new vehicles. This obviously can’t actually happen. We’re doing the cart before the horse. Before this destructive agenda gets too far, society will have to recognize and admit this folly is ridiculous.

On a more positive note, Germany and an area in the US are looking into road electrification, which is a much more reasonable and realistic approach.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
All this stuff has been brought up and debated long ago.
Some of the disinformation I haven’t already covered is in this vid

Yes, your “expert “ is full of disinformation. Funny how you pick and choose who is spreading disinformation. It would seem that anyone advocating battery cars is spreading “settled science “, and “information “, and anyone pointing out issues with the scheme, is spreading “disinformation “, according to you. A little confirmation bias going on here, eh?

Plenty of disinformation from your “expert “ here.
I laughed when he scientifically stated “wind and solar “ provide power to the grid during the day. Stupid me, I wrongly thought wind power was available when it’s windy, not just during the day 😂.

He’s obviously clueless about power grids. We can discuss his ignorance on this subject another time.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Another obvious misdirection/falsehood your dude makes in you video is the old fallback propaganda line, of , don’t worry about the grid- we’ll all charge at night…. Sure… At night when there’s no solar , so we’ll keep the baseline fossil fuel plants burning lots of fuel, rather than idle down 😂
That’s great save the planet plan. He even forgets to mention nuclear during that misinformation/misdirection part.

Make sure you plenty of sunshine, because it lets you produce vitamin D, and helps prevent depression. Experts proved it. Unquestionable science! Leading cancer is skin cancer.The science says avoid direct sunshine. Wear protective clothing. Buy lots of sunscreen😂

Science says butter is bad for you. Use margarine instead… Science says margarine is bad for you actually, you should use butter.

We obviously all are susceptible to some confirmation bias. The “science “ is NEVER settled, and should always be questioned
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Apparently you seem to think knowing what an LCA, or genuine BEP is, automatically makes you an expert on engineering, energy, environment, and social engineering. I don’t think it works that way.
We already learned our “experts “ knew the world was flat. The “science “ knew the world was flat.

The “science “ is NEVER settled, and should always be questioned
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Yes, we need to destroy our planet to save it.


How long till the carbon dioxide alarmists, switch their focus to all the digging up of the planet, we’re going to do, in the name of reducing the 0.04% CO2 in the air?
I can just hear them now….
But, a lot people are going to get rich.
Is this really better? I’ll continue exhaling CO2 while I wait for an answer
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Dam man, their already subsidizing Free Drugs, Illicit Sex, Free Travel and Tourism with free Cell Phone and Debit Card … Uncle Sam is just an Uncle not a Full Blown Sugar Daddy.

Happy Thanksgiving !
And each one of those new , free cell phone, recipients, exhales the equivalent “global warming “ CO2 as burning 41 gallons of gasoline each year. 🤔
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Bluebottle: Here’s a better example for you:

“people had absolute faith in new science and technology. They believed that science in the twentieth century could and would provide answers to solve all problems.
The sinking of the ‘unsinkable’ Titanic shattered much confidence in science and made people more skeptical about such fantastic claims.”

Sunk on her maiden voyage, too….
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
the initial cost and ROI for EVs is just not there for the majority of people, they simply cannot afford them. if it was, there would be more EVs on the road period.
Not just the initial cost of the vehicle, or the ROI, but the security cost off of our country. 80% of Battery car batteries are sourced from China. For “green “ charging of your battery car 80-95% of solar panels and/or materials source from China.
Talk about energy insecurity 🤔
Nothing to concern yourself’s with here folks…. Move along. Trust the “science “. It’s a degree warmer. Buy a battery vehicle to save the planet and make certain wealthy people richer.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,138 Posts
Again….Tearing up the earth to mine for countless new giant batteries, Is THE solution, to a 0.04% CO2 concentration in the air. If it was 0.03%, instead of 0.04%, well then, that would be a different story…
THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED. We must rip up the earth , to save us from an inevitable fiery hellscape.
Don’t question it.



Remember “The Science ™️ “ is always settled and correct!

Font Material property Rectangle Parallel Paper
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top