They would have taken the Tesla, but the battery was dead.

I understand not wanting to park it in the garage; fire insurance.

Tesla's vehicle fires are 11X less common than typical gas powered vehicles per mile driven. But don't let the truth get in your way...

Batteries, they do not make electricity – they store electricity produced elsewhere, primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas-powered plants, or diesel-fueled generators. So, to say an EV is a zero-emission vehicle is not at all valid.

Also, since 22% of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fired plants, it follows that 22% of the EVs on the road are coal-powered, do you see?"

Einstein's formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-driven automobile a mile as it does an electric one. The only question again is what produces the power? To reiterate, it does not come from the battery; the battery is only the storage device, like a gas tank in a car.

There are two orders of batteries, rechargeable, and single-use. The most common single-use batteries are A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, and lantern types. Those dry-cell species use zinc, manganese, lithium, silver oxide, or zinc and carbon to store electricity chemically. Please note they all contain toxic, heavy metals.

Rechargeable batteries only differ in their internal materials, usually lithium-ion, nickel-metal oxide, and nickel-cadmium. The United States uses three billion of these two battery types a year, and most are not recycled; they end up in landfills. California is the only state which requires all batteries be recycled. If you throw your small, used batteries in the trash, here is what happens to them.

All batteries are self-discharging. That means even when not in use, they leak tiny amounts of energy. You have likely ruined a flashlight or two from an old, ruptured battery. When a battery runs down and can no longer power a toy or light, you think of it as dead; well, it is not. It continues to leak small amounts of electricity. As the chemicals inside it run out, pressure builds inside the battery's metal casing, and eventually, it cracks. The metals left inside then ooze out. The ooze in your ruined flashlight is toxic, and so is the ooze that will inevitably leak from every battery in a landfill. All batteries eventually rupture; it just takes rechargeable batteries longer to end up in the landfill.

In addition to dry cell batteries, there are also wet cell ones used in automobiles, boats, and motorcycles. The good thing about those is, ninety percent of them are recycled. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to recycle single-use ones properly.

But that is not half of it. For those of you excited about electric cars and a green revolution, I want you to take a closer look at batteries and also windmills and solar panels. These three technologies share what we call environmentally destructive production costs.

A typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds, about the size of a travel trunk. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells.

It should concern you that all those toxic components come from mining. For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth's crust for just - one - battery."

Sixty-eight percent of the world's cobalt, a significant part of a battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls, and they employ children who die from handling this toxic material. Should we factor in these diseased kids as part of the cost of driving an electric car?"

I'd like to leave you with these thoughts. California is building the largest battery in the world near San Francisco, and they intend to power it from solar panels and windmills. They claim this is the ultimate in being 'green,' but it is not. This construction project is creating an environmental disaster. Let me tell you why.

The main problem with solar arrays is the chemicals needed to process silicate into the silicon used in the panels. To make pure enough silicon requires processing it with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, trichloroethane, and acetone. In addition, they also need gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium- diselenide, and cadmium-telluride, which also are highly toxic. Silicon dust is a hazard to the workers, and the panels cannot be recycled.

Windmills are the ultimate in embedded costs and environmental destruction. Each weighs 1688 tons (the equivalent of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass, and the hard to extract rare earths neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last 15 to 20 years, at which time it must be replaced. We cannot recycle used blades.

There may be a place for these technologies, but you must look beyond the myth of zero emissions.

"Going Green" may sound like the Utopian ideal but when you look at the hidden and embedded costs realistically with an open mind, you can see that Going Green is more destructive to the Earth's environment than meets the eye, for sure.

Thank you for your informed post. I can't help but notice that the Tesla supporters are not explaining why we should switch from fossil fuels to electric if both are destroying the environment? Why change if it won't help? Why not work on making fossil fuels better? Makes me think people are fighting for what they have their money invested in instead of what's good for the country

Our economy cannot currently exist without petroleum especially as a fuel source...impossible. I can only assume that Biden's goal is to destroy our economy. If there is another logical conclusion I would like to hear it but there isn't.

ALL fossil fueled vehicles are powered by fossil fuels. But "22% of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fired plants, it follows that [ONLY} 22% of the EVs on the road are coal-powered".So 78% of EVs are environmentally friendly. This vast majority looks good to me...

Absolutely.

halfwit

Electric cars are not destroying the environment. Countless studies have been done on this, and EVs are far, far cleaner. Of course, that's a discussion about carbon. The impact to immediate air quality with a car that has no emissions is rather obvious.

Emissions are not what was mentioned. It's to environmental cost of making the batteries, the wind towers, etc. Please read what this poster said. You have to consider the whole process from mining, to building, to driving and disposal.

This whole process has been considered. EVs are far more environmentally friendly. Do they have no impact? Of course not. Mining and manufacturing isn't always clean. But compared to gas powered vehicles? It's not even close.

EV batteries aren't really disposed of, either. Consider that these studies don't even factor in recycling the battery. With subsequent use, the environmental impact is just that much less. Tesla recycles exactly 100% of their batteries, for example.

And the impact of infastructure to be retooled is another impact. The recreational vehicle industry will be changed over to EV and what cost to people who own gas cars, boats, ATVs, motorhomes, and heavy campers. Do we simply expect to eople to lose take the loss and take it all to the dump? Based on what has been posted the costs are huge and the rewards few. We still have huge environmental impacts but paying more for it.

Could also factor in line losses and conversion losses to the loss of efficiency of an EV.

Very well said!

Whether or not that is true, and I strongly suspect it is not, it is also irrelevant. Fires in typical gas powered vehicles don't usually happen overnight and burn your home to the ground. They also don't require two fire teams and eight hours to extinguish, and they don't trap you in the car to burn to death.

Trap you in the car to burn to death? Actually, yes. ICE car fires are FAR more fatal than EV fires. In an EV, the fire is slow burning, not explosive. So get this, you open the door and get out.

How many examples have you seen of a Tesla burning a home to the ground? Let's see them all.

I'd be more interested to know how many fires are caused by EV cars sitting in the garage versus gas powered cars.. That's the point of Alpacalips Now post.

Versus? I think it's very likely to be more often with EV's than gas powered cars. The real question is how often does it actually happen. Just because it's more likely doesn't mean it's an issue of concern. In other words, it's also probably more likely that your house burns down from it's electrical wiring or gas lines than a Tesla parked in the garage. Tesla's spontaneously combusting in a garage and burning down a house virtually never happens.

https://www.usfa.fema.gov/d...

354,400 house fires last year. 25,000 of them just from random electrical malfunction. Just doing napkin math, it's actually far more likely that your house burns down from electrical malfunction than a Tesla. So should you remove electric service from your house? And goodness, cooking? 175,000 house fires from cooking. What kind of dummy would install a kitchen inside their house instead of out in their yard away from the structure?

You see how this works yet?

When talking about car fires, we want to know how often it happens and how dangerous the fires are. And EV's, especially Tesla's, are far safer than gas cars when it comes to fires and safety. They are also extremely unlikely to ignite and burn your house down. And I don't believe there is a single example of an EV igniting while parked and killing anyone.

CNN, 07/14/21: "NHTSA Warns of Fire Hazard With Certain Chevy Bolt EVs". Seems two of them caught fire while parked (spontaneous combustion). The NHTSA suggested they be parked on the street until they recall 50,900 of them. Teslas have done the same. It's out there, and you can look it up.

Your example is the Chevy Bolt while we are talking about Telsa? The same Chevy Bolt that has had a recall on the battery, replacing them all? Because they found the manufacturing defect from LG.... And fixed it? This is the best you can do?

And no, Tesla hasn't done the same. You can't look it up because it doesn't exist.

Types of All.Com: "Why Did Tesla Catch Fire?". NBC News.Com: "New Tesla Caught Fire While Driver Was At the Wheel". Guardian.Com: "Canada Investigates After Tesla Catches Fire Forcing Driver to Smash the Window". More where that came from. Also at least one of the overpriced golf carts caught fire while parked.

And? Now do gas cars... Nobody said Tesla fires don't exist. They are just extremely rare. Heck, do home electrical fires... More likely than a Tesla going up in flames. It just doesn't make the national news when a house goes up in flames from a spontaneous electrical fire literally SEVENTY TIMES a day.

Most Teslas are owned in California by lefties.

What does that have to do with anything? Tesla also told California to screw off over covid lockdowns and moved their business to Texas, where they built the largest new auto factory in the world.

Says a lot about the mind set of those who would pay a premium for a vehicle which has limited range across the country due to the lack of charging stations, takes a lot of time to charge, which is at risk during power outages, and may spontaneously combust while parked.

Says that you don't know what you are talking about. I drove my Tesla from Miami to Atlanta. No issue at all. 3 stops of about 10 - 15 minutes each over 10 hours. We need to stop anyways for food and bathroom breaks. So no, there isn't a lack of charging stations nor does it take a lot of time to charge.

Your spontaneously combust comment is dumb. Houses also spontaneously go up in fire from electrical service. Says a lot about you having electrical service in your house, right?

Says a lot about increasing the chance of a fire by buying an EV. Of course you made it across the US, but you didn't see the Dakotas, did you.

Is that your argument? And no, I didn't drive across the US. But the Dakota's major highways are fully covered by fast charging infrastructure, so I certainly could. And even the Dakota's have electricity, believe it or not. So plugging in wouldn't be a challenge.

"2013 Miles. No Gas. Many Hassles." -WSJ June 4-5, 2022.

https://abetterrouteplanner...

This is a very easy trip in a Tesla, with superior charging. Average stop about 14-15 minutes. No big deal at all.

Easier and faster in my Chevy, compared to the Tesla, plus the tens of thousands I save on the purchase price, compared to the Tesla, will more than pay for gasoline until the next administration starts drilling again.

And you could save tens of thousands buying an even cheaper car than your Chevy... That's a pointless argument. Easier and faster? Sometimes, sometimes not. But certainly inconsequential. It's very easy and convenient to drive long distance in the Tesla or your Chevy.

I suppose you're right depending on one's level of masochism. In that case, you'll enjoy waiting in line at the charger during and after the next power outage.

As someone who lives in a hurricane zone, it's about 1000X more likely you will be waiting in a 2 hour line to get gas before the hurricane hits... I'll charge at home and have a full charge. Then after the hurricane, guess what, the pumps don't work without power. And then guess what, when the first couple of pumps get back online, you'll be in a 200 car line down the street to get gas. Been there, done it. Much, much easier to charge the car somewhere with power.

Just another failed example for you. But by all means...

Lots of rolling blackouts here in California. No hurricanes, though - not even a half gale. We love to Shadenfreud on the EVs when there's a blackout around here. The Blaze.com: "Video Shows Huge Line of Teslas Waiting to Charge in Louisiana". Happened here too, half way between L.A. and S.F.

Nice pivot. The Blaze.com: "Video Shows Huge Line of Teslas Waiting to Charge in Louisiana". No hurricanes involved. That's what I'm, talkin' about. Happened in Central California also, half way between L.A. and Frisco. - no hurricanes. Not even a half gale.

How is that a pivot? I've lived through it for decades. It's a heck of a lot better than the gas lines and trying to get gas. One of my favorite things about the electric cars we bought.

As for California, who cares? Pointing out their disastrous liberal energy policy doesn't mean anything. It's no place I'd even consider living.

You know that you can find video and pictures of gas lines, too, right? The difference is that gas lines are a problem locally. As you can't exactly pump your gas at home. Any example of an EV is on a long road trip. Not sure about you, but I spend 99.9% of my time locally. Where I just charge at home. No gas line. The other thing is that these examples of Teslas waiting is just a good example of needing additional infrastructure due to the popularity. Growing pains. Tesla already rolls out mobile superchargers and is expanding popular ones to meet demand. Gas lines don't have such simple solutions...

You bought electric cars (plural). We'll dub you the Monty Python Black Knight of Tesla. And now you can have the last word.

As I've demonstrated, clearly, you are a misinformed idiot. And now you really drove that point home. Bye.

And? The author drove a KIA, not a Tesla. The fast charging infrastructure and capability is massively different. It's also a much shorter range vehicle. Nothing here surprising or groundbreaking.

Most Teslas are owned in California by lefties.

Most cars in California would be owned by lefties.

Most Ford F-350's in China would be owned by Chinese.

*shrug*

Thank you. Allow me to be specific. California has more Tesla owners than any other state. California is a state full of leftists. California has a minority population of conservatives, who will not be buying a Tesla anytime soon. I am one of them and so are my friends and associates. You will find the most Teslas in the exclusive areas near the coast. You won't find too many in deepest darkest L.A. nor will you find too many in the very large Central Valley of California.

California has a minority population of conservatives, who will not be buying a Tesla anytime soon. I am one of them and so are my friends and associates......etc

All true, yet I would have to ask: "and?". I am conservative. Not a little conservative. A lot conservative. My post history, if you are bored enough to peruse it, speaks for itself. I have no problem with driving a Tesla nor with another driving a Tesla. Am I no longer a conservative?

I also find Brussel sprouts tasty. Many liberals find Brussel sprouts tasty. Should I begin pulling the level blue?

Hating a car, or a car companies CEO, because of the political leanings of many of the people that buy that car is outright crazy. Some would say, leftist even....

Seems you identify with your car. I don't hate you or your car, I just consider your car to be silly, impractical and overpriced. I'm sure some lefty EV drivers feel the same about my '17 Chevy SS, especially when I open my cutouts as I blast by them. Nothing personal, just having fun. I stand by my previous comments.

Seems you identify with your car. I don't hate you or your car, I just consider your car to be silly, impractical and overpriced

I don't personally drive a Tesla, I just defend other's right to do so without them being attacked or labeled a liberal for it. I drive a 2500HD Silverado =)

Chevys rule.

And yet I have several conservative friends with Tesla's. Heck, in Florida, drive through the middle of the state, conservative country, and you've never seen so many houses with solar panels in your life.

Lots of sun in Florida. Redwoods blocking the sun here in Northern California.

what a bizarre factoid. how convenient to use "per miles driven" to sell that load of manure.