Posts Tagged ‘electric cars’

Captain Lockyer:I may have been misinformed. I understood Mr. Lafitte was in command in Barataria

Jean Lafitte:If you’re offer is good it will stand up under fire.

The Buccaneer 1958

I usually don’t pay attention to what is trending on twitter but when I saw “Mr. Bean” trending it jumped out at me. I presumed something had happened to comedy legend Rowan Atkinson so I clicked over.

Atkinson’s comedy has been making people laugh for decades. His TV series from the Thin Blue Line and Not the Nine O’clock news are guaranteed to raise a smile and his characters have been iconic from the incredible Edmund Blackadder, to Secret Agent Johnny English.  He even did one Doctor Who parody titled “The curse of fatal death” that was a spot on sendup of the series.

But of all the characters he has played the most iconic is Mr. Bean. The simple and to some degree simple minded fellow who tries very hard to get by in this crazy world of ours. It is the role he is most identified with.

Atkinson is also known to be outspoken on free speech and comedy defending both while others run and hide and has never been shy about his opinions. Six months ago he wrote the following op-ed on the subject of Electric Cars:

I love electric vehicles — and was an early adopter. But increasingly I feel duped.

Sadly, keeping your old petrol car may be better than buying an EV. There are sound environmental reasons not to jump just yet.

Electric motoring is, in theory, a subject about which I should know something. My first university degree was in electrical and electronic engineering, with a subsequent master’s in control systems.

I must admit that I was not aware of his background in engineering as you don’t see a lot of actors with this type of degree but it shows in this piece where he brakes down both the advantages and limits of current electric cars and brings up a subject that those pushing the cars (and getting rich off of subsidies) don’t mention:

In advance of the Cop26 climate conference in Glasgow in 2021, Volvo released figures claiming that greenhouse gas emissions during production of an electric car are nearly 70 per cent higher than when manufacturing a petrol one.

How so? The problem lies with the lithium-ion batteries fitted currently to nearly all electric vehicles: they’re absurdly heavy, huge amounts of energy are required to make them, and they are estimated to last only upwards of ten years.

It seems a perverse choice of hardware with which to lead the automobile’s fight against the climate crisis.

He doesn’t bring up the fires and the cost of repair which are rather significant but he does note that better alternates are on the drawing board from solid state batteries to Hydrogen models but that in the meantime we end up with a lot of bad batteries left over. He then pivots to another point, usage:

Currently, on average we keep our new cars for only three years before selling them on, driven mainly by the ubiquitous three-year leasing model.

This seems an outrageously profligate use of the world’s natural resources when you consider what great condition a three-year-old car is in.

When I was a child, any car that was five years old was a bucket of rust and halfway through the gate of the scrapyard. Not any longer. You can now make a car for £15,000 that, with tender loving care, will last for 30 years.

It’s sobering to think that if the first owners of new cars just kept them for five years, on average, instead of the current three, then car production and the CO2 emissions associated with it, would be vastly reduced.

And he closed with this bit of advice:

Friends with an environmental conscience often ask me, as a car person, whether they should buy an electric car. I tend to say that if their car is an old diesel and they do a lot of city centre motoring, they should consider a change.

But otherwise, hold fire for now. Electric propulsion will be of real, global environmental benefit one day, but that day has yet to dawn.

Read the whole thing, it’s a good solid argument that is made from the climate change perspective. 

Well apparently the folks in Britain who have known and loved Mr. Atkinson for decades have taken his argument to heart and that’s made some folks very mad

Pols and pressure groups are not amused:

The Lord’s environment and climate change committee has since been told the actor was partly to blame for ‘damaging’ public opinions on electric vehicles (EVs). 

It comes as new petrol and diesel cars are due to be banned from 2035 under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak‘s net zero strategy – a plan designed to encourage drivers to buy EVs. 

The Green Alliance pressure group said: ‘One of the most damaging articles was a comment piece written by Rowan Atkinson in the Guardian which has been roundly debunked.’ 

What seems to be the problem is that Mr. Atkinson made a solid rational argument concerning the actual goal our green friends supposedly have, that is reducing Co2 emissions and our green friends don’t seem to have any counter other than claiming it to be “debunked” which sound a lot like the vaccine companies talking when people were warning about the side effects of the shots.

The New article has this handy dandy graphic that makes Atkinson’s point for him

And again, note that Atkinson didn’t talk about things he could have brought up. High Cost, Limited Range, Lack of Charging stations, performance in cold, repair cost, battery fires or even the human cost of the child slave labor to get the lithium. 

Bottom line if they have a better and more rational argument rather than just an agenda to push there are certainly a whole lot of other prominent lefty stars out there that the public would trust who could deliver it for them. 

If they had one that is.

If not much easier to blame Mr. Atkinson for raining on their gravy train.

A report out of Florida tells us that despite dire warnings from the left about “constitutional carry” adopted in Florida concerning violence the opposite effect has taken place:

Now, more than six months after the law’s adoption, evidence contradicts Democrats’ fearmongering that allowing law-abiding citizens to carry a loaded gun for self-defense would result in more “senseless tragedies.”

Since the legalization of constitutional carry in July 2023, Florida’s biggest cities saw a significant decrease in violent crimes, including shootings. In Jacksonville, murders and homicides dropped 6 percent in 2023 from the previous year.

Apparently in Florida the increased risk of getting shot by an armed citizen is no longer low enough to justify the reward of crime to many. Fortunately for criminals NYC doesn’t have said risk.


The move by Hertz to sell of 20,000 electric cars (just to Whom they will sell them to and how much on the dollar they will get we don’t know) illustrates something that drivers who jumped on the electric car bandwagon have been discovering to their regret. The risk of not having sufficient battery to get where you are going in the time allotted does not match the reward of the “efficiency” of an electric car.

And apparently it turns out that said “efficiency” has as much science behind it as the 6′ social distancing business:

When carmakers test gasoline-powered vehicles for compliance with the Transportation Department’s fuel-efficiency rules, they must use real values measured in a laboratory. By contrast, under an Energy Department rule, carmakers can arbitrarily multiply the efficiency of electric cars by 6.67. This means that although a 2022 Tesla Model Y tests at the equivalent of about 65 miles per gallon in a laboratory (roughly the same as a hybrid), it is counted as having an absurdly high compliance value of 430 mpg. That number has no basis in reality or law.

For exaggerating electric-car efficiency, the government rewards carmakers with compliance credits they can trade for cash. Economists estimate these credits could be worth billions: a vast cross-subsidy invented by bureaucrats and paid for by every person who buys a new gasoline-powered car.

If you ever wondered why carmakers were willing to take the risk of making cars people didn’t want to buy without the reward of actual buyers, now you know.


The times are a changing for the government COVID crowd who forced all kinds of rules upon us while censoring those who might speak out about risks.

One of those bits of censorship were hitting or de-platforming folks who theorized that COVID came from a lab leak in China. The whole Fauci team was big on going after such folks with the help of a compliant media.

One of that team doing the insisting was Dr. Francis Collins who had no problem calling such statements a “very destructive conspiracy” for years. But apparently the reward of such a stance disappears when one is asked about it under pains of perjury when testifying under oath:

In a significant U-turn, House Republicans who led the hearing revealed that Dr Collins, 73, told them that the lab leak hypothesis was not a conspiracy theory.

His answers were similar to those of Dr Fauci, who sat for a marathon 14 hours of questioning last week when he finally acknowledged that the lab leak theory — that Covid escaped from a Chinese biolab — should not have been so easily dismissed.


As we mentioned on Tuesday President Donald Trump decisively won the Iowa Caucus losing only a single county in the state (which by an odd coincidence ran out of party change forms giving democrats who had no caucus to attend a chance to influence the GOP results)

While I found the result interesting compared to 2016 given that Donald Trump now had a record as president vs speculation as to how he would govern. CNN cut away from his speech right away and MSNBC made it a point to not carry his victory speech at all.

“At this point in the evening the projected winner of the Iowa caucuses has just started giving his victory speech,” Maddow began, oddly avoiding Trump’s name. “We will keep an eye on that as it happens. We will let you know if there is any news made in that speech, if there is anything noteworthy, something substantive and important.”

I find this the most interesting thing of all because the small MSNBC audience is about as far left as they come yet even among such an audience they find the risk of such people hearing Donald Trump speaking live so great that they dare not allow him to challenge the narrative that they’ve been sold.

That’s really something.


Finally as Israel continues to discover more and more terror infrastructure in Gaza and continues to systematic take out both Hamas and the terror infrastructure pressure continues to rise among western allies of Hamas and Joe Biden in particular to hold Israel back before the destruction of Hamas becomes complete.

Hamas apparently did not foresee this result figuring they would be able to weather an Israeli response in their incredible terror tunnel network. (Frankly they should all go to an underdeveloped nation that needs miners as they certainly know about digging) which is odd because Hamas claims Jesus as a prophet and apparently didn’t take these words of Christ on risk and reward to heart:

Which of you wishing to construct a tower does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if there is enough for its completion? Otherwise, after laying the foundation and finding himself unable to finish the work the onlookers should laugh at him and say, ‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.

Or what king marching into battle would not first sit down and decide whether with ten thousand troops he can successfully oppose another king advancing upon him with twenty thousand troops? But if not, while he is still far away, he will send a delegation to ask for peace terms.

Luke 14 28-32

Of course if Hamas actually followed Christ they would be taking the whole “love your enemies” business seriously and stop trying to slaughter Jews, but to Hamas et/al the risk of defeat, humiliation and the devastation and death of their people does not compare to the reward of slaughtered Jews.

(At least among those who do not have billions in cash and live far from Gaza that is).

With the news of Electric cars spontaneously combusting outside of the confines of an internal combustion engine, sometimes repeatedly after being exposed to salt water these questions immediately came to my mind:

  1. Exactly how much salt water does it take to cause this to happen. Do they have to be flooded, soaked briefly or is an angry ex with a bucket of salt water enough to spell fiery doom for an electric battery?
  2. If you are an insurance company what kind of rates are you demanding to cover a car with a history of spontaneous combustion. If you are a bank approached to finance such a loan, what kind of coverage are you demanding to protect your investment?
  3. What is going to happen with communities that went all in on electric school buses. If you are a parent, are you going to feel safe with your kids on such a bus, and how long will it be before we see the first electric school bus go up in flames with a bunch of kids in it? How fast will the virtue signaling city counselors who ordered them run for the hills?

I submit and suggest until there are answers to these questions it might not be a very good idea for the US government to subsidize these vehicles and it is likely an even worse idea for anyone to consider spending tens of thousands of dollars on one them.

Do something more useful with your money, buy a Pinball machine. It’s more likely to appreciate and less likely to go up in flames.

The Subsidies Don’t Cover Repair Bills

Posted: July 17, 2023 by datechguy in Uncategorized
Tags:

About three or four years ago as I was about to get onto Route 2 East to head for work a young lady hit the back bumper of my 1999 Buick LeSabre (not the 1999 LeSabre I currently drive, the 1999 LeSabre that’s currently in my son’s back yard as my parts car). Since she was going maybe 2 mph all it did was drop some rust onto the pavement so I told her not to worry about it to her immense relief.

At Not the Bee we see how lucky she was that I decided to drive a car made before Tom Brady was drafted instead of taking advantage of all the subsidies and buying an electric pickup like this one:

Apparently EV’s as a whole cost more to repair and insure:

Last year, a study from CCC Intelligent Solutions found that on average EV repairs cost more than repairs for gas-powered cars. Another report from Mitchell that was cited by the Times found that last year EV repairs cost about $2,400 more than fixes for traditional combustion-engine vehicles. 

Similarly, Insider’s Alexa St. John previously reported that EVs are more expensive to insure. For example, the national average cost of car insurance is about $2,148 per year, while a Tesla Model S costs about $4,066 to insure, according to the Insider report.

And of course if your bumper is full of sensors all of that has to be handed even if your car isn’t electric and remember while all those tax breaks, which are really tax payer giveaways to the carmakers, might make those child slave dependent electric cars easier to get, they don’t apply to the repair bills or the insurance bills.

You have been warned.