Sen. Schumer gas for electric car trade in program?

[nodropinufaka]

My take away from @nodropinufaka ‘s recent postings is that he has an enormous chip on his shoulder, and a penchant for hyperbole.

why do you say that?

nothing I said was wild or crazy or exaggerated.

It is hard for others to accept that the world outside the DOD is wildly different?

I dunno.

 

[JTS11]

edit: I also used to work for the DEA and have busted hundreds of drug traffickers.

Wow, seems like a pretty prolific career as a Fed. How many years were you an agent?

 

[nodropinufaka]

Wow, seems like a pretty prolific career as a Fed. How many years were you an agent?

I was an analyst. Because I was a 1830 I left and moved into that field to leverage IC systems in support of overseas cases.

nowhere did I say I was an 1811. I was in the 0132 field.

I wasn’t there long. Maybe a year or so?

I left for greener pastures. We had a few huge cases overseas that got about 3 full crews of fishing vessels moving meth. Roughly 150 people. Then a couple other big overland cases in Asia.

I was attached the DOD and DOS during my time.

 

[AllAmerican75]

I’d rather we spend the money on improving the infrastructure for EVs assuming that is the route we are going. I have an idea of A NYC sidewalk looking like this with all the extension cords running to cars!

View attachment 24468

This is the real hurdle that needs to be overcome. Our power grid and charging infrastructure just isn't there. Also, it takes too long to charge. Most Americans, especially out in rural areas, aren't going to buy an electric vehicle if the only place they can charge it is at their house. If we truly want to move away from fossil fuels, then we should prioritize doing so for our power grid first.

Tesla a value after 5 years? How long do they say the batteries will last now and how much to change them out? Have not seen the data lately, but it sure didn't seem like it was worth keeping until a battery swap was necessary.

This is really the hidden cost of EV ownership. The batteries simply don't last forever and there currently isn't a good way to recycle them that is "carbon neutral" or good for the environment. Most of the materials in the batteries are toxic. I think the selling point for Tesla is they are making or working on a modular battery that allows you to replace individual cells one at a time as they go bad. This means you can spread the cost of battery replacement out over time.

Meh...

If you want one for performance alone (0-60 in 2.8 seconds), absolutely have at it.

But as far as being eco-friendly? Far from it...
Environmental impact of procuring batteries for electric vehicles

This is the thing so few understand about EVs. The environmental impact of battery production and disposal is huge, not to mention the fact that we're just shifting our carbon production from individual cars to the power grid which is still reliant on coal, oil, and gas for baseline generation and surge capacity.

The Nissan Leaf is a very affordable electric car.

climate change and carbon footprint are huge risks to global security and fragility especially in the Indopacific.

it’s in the best interest of national security to reduce carbon footprints.

Then why aren't we pushing for real change? We keep pushing EVs, carbon exchanges, and a reduction in quality of life for results that can't be proved or measured. The whole idea behind anthropogenic climate change isn't even supportable by the actual science since we simply lack the amount of data necessary to make the claim. That's why there are constant scandals with faulty climate models, falsified data, and predictions that never come true. If we really cared about the environment, there are plenty of things we could sink our money into RIGHT NOW, that would have measurable positive results within a year or two of their implementation. But we can't do that because it won't make already wealthy people more wealthy as they subvert our national sovereignty and fiscal independence for what is essentially a new global reserve currency.

 

[nodropinufaka]

TThe whole idea behind anthropogenic climate change isn't even supportable by the actual science since we simply lack the amount of data necessary to make the claim. That's why there are constant scandals with faulty climate models, falsified data, and predictions that never come true.

Are you inferring that climate change isn’t real and we have no scientific data saying it is?

there is plenty of scientific data showing climate change is real and a major threat to the global economy and national security.

 

[wink]

Are you inferring that climate change isn’t real and we have no scientific data saying it is?

there is plenty of scientific data showing climate change is real and a major threat to the global economy and national security.

How much a threat to anything about our future is what is at question for many of us. Models are not data. Certain models suggest major effects that pose of threat to national security and the global economy.

 

[nodropinufaka]

How much a threat to anything about our future is what is at question for many of us. Models are not data. Certain models suggest major effects that pose of threat to national security and the global economy.

There is plenty of actual data showing that climate change can threaten stability especially in smaller island nations dependent on fishing or on less stable countries that are dependent on crop production or processed goods.

The data sets are data sets and have nothing to do with weather modeling.

Department of State and other Research Centers have released reports on this very issue.

 

[jmcquate]

Many things can threaten stability especially in smaller island nations dependent on fishing or on less stable countries that are dependent on crop production or processed goods.

 

[nodropinufaka]

Many things can threaten stability especially in smaller island nations dependent on fishing or on less stable countries that are dependent on crop production or processed goods.

No one said otherwise.

But there is studies out there within the DOD and DOS right now showing that Climate Change is near the top.

 

[wink]

And the neutral or positive outcomes of climate change? Easy ones are longer growing seasons in some regions and changes in ice pack benefiting commercial shipping. If there are bad outcomes, it is likely there will be positive outcomes elsewhere or in another time. Just say'in. You never hear about anything but doom and gloom. It is nature. Nature is never static.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

To quote Moneyball, “if he’s a good hitter, then why doesn’t he hit good?”

I’d be a lot more willing to jump on board the climate change bandwagon if the experts predicting doom and gloom could have some predictions reliably come true. The track record is pretty damn far from confidence inspiring.

 

[IKE]

No one said otherwise.

But there is studies out there within the DOD and DOS right now showing that Climate Change is near the top.

I've seen bullet points in national strategy powerpoints about climate change but no studies. I'm not super-cynical, but tossing a bullet in a powerpoint RE: climate change is just a way to garner support among a congress and people who believe in imminent planet-death due to human action.

 

[AllAmerican75]

How much a threat to anything about our future is what is at question for many of us. Models are not data. Certain models suggest major effects that pose of threat to national security and the global economy.

This is the truth. The models we use for climate change are simply fancy statistical models that are also used for weather prediction.

Are you inferring that climate change isn’t real and we have no scientific data saying it is?

there is plenty of scientific data showing climate change is real and a major threat to the global economy and national security.

Not at all. If you read what I wrote, you'll notice that I qualified it by saying "anthropogenic climate change." There's a difference.

Also, see my comments and @wink's. These models are based upon a certain set or sets of data of differing accuracy and reliability. That means the accuracy of the model is simply an amalgam of the accuracy of the data sets. We only have about 150-200 years of good solid data to build the models off of. The rest becomes less and less precise and less and less accurate the further back in history you go. This is why the climate models we use currently can barely predict the weather two weeks from now with acceptable accuracy. And if you understand these models then you know that the further out into the future you get, the more the size of the error bar increases. That's why none of the predictions over the past 100 years (yes, there were scientists 100 years ago screaming about CO2 and global warming/cooling) have come true. We simply don't understand the intricacies of the climate well enough nor do we have sufficient data to build a climate model with sufficient accuracy to predict a year, two, or twenty into the future.

 

[nodropinufaka]

So say it turns out to be wildly unpredictable.

shouldn’t we still continue to look at renewable energy, being mindful about waste, and looking at carbon footprints so we don’t destroy what we have?

there is data sets showing the results of carbon footprints, datasets showing the results of using non renewable energy and fossil fuel effects both secondary and tertiary.

how it all ties together is yet to be seen.

that being said- we should still move towards renewable energy and using EVs if possible

 

[jmcquate]

I don't know what State does (or care), But climate change has never came up in any brief I've ever been in.