The demands of climate activists is unacceptable

[WIP]

I dont even think CO2 is the problem. I think it was 0.3% and its now 0.4%, at 0.2% plant life starts dying. It was probably better its went up less than 0,1% rather than down 0.1%.

Just an FYI. Your numbers are actually off by a factor of 10. Current CO2 concentration in our atmosphere is roughly 0.04% not 0.4%.

 

[WIP]

I neglected to include that we don't have the technology to mine, manufacture, deliver, and install the necessary components to generate

Actually, on a global scale, the total annual sales of new vehicles has been relatively flat since 2010 (ref. Statista.com). During that same period of time, the global market share of EVs has been climbing and doing so very rapidly over the past five years. As of 2022 EVs claim about 14% of the global automobile market share (ref. Statista.com). It is also important to note that efficiency of ICE vehicles are always improving, albeit, not by a huge amount but the amount of fuel consumed per mile driven goes down all the time. Have we reached the end of that rainbow? Who's to know for sure.

Since EVs now comprise 14% of the total vehicle sales, and if they are as "green" as the narrative would have us believe, then fossil fuel consumption should be getting lower. There's only one explanation for that as I see it. EVs at the current time do very little to nothing to actually reduce fossil fuel usage.

Another tidbit of information I found. The consumption of fossil fuels worldwide has been relatively flat since about 2000 (ref. Statista.com - don't know why, but the site requires creating an account to see this chart for any length of time.). During that same time period, US consumption of fossil fuels has be decreasing slightly (ref. Statista.com).

 

[Corn Pop]

They don't even know what they're doing. I was told to buy an electric vehicle to save the planet. And here we are still crying about emissions going up and climate emergencies.

Anytime i hear the words safety and security i know that means more control and less rights or privelleges or privacy. Its just a fact and the way its always been. Cameras watching you everywhere you go, even facial recognition, in the name of safety. Look at NY subway now, i think the national guard have taken over now and they armed and checking peoples bags without a warrant. Police state.

Get an electric vehicle to save the planet. Why would i want an electric vehicle with technology connected that someone could easy turn off the vehicle, track my every move, monitor my speed. Phones basically do that already as everyone takes them everywhere with them.

 

[Corn Pop]

And that is indeed correct...access to better health care = lower birth rates.


From what I've seen from him, it seems to be both.

Well, if someone admits they think the world is overpopulated and health care is a solution that can somehow reduce population growth, i can only believe they care more about the worlds population growth than the peoples health.

I mean those who think the world is over populated and they openly claim the most poor seem to be having the most children so health care is a solution that can prevent population growth. It must just be a cooncidence they praise a womens right to abortion.

And when you look at the demographics, who are they supporting to kill off and terminate there next generation?.

 

[Corn Pop]

Mr privelledged white man gates who owns 260,000 acres of prime farm land in the USA think hes got all the solution.

 

[Corn Pop]

If poorer countries have more children and that is somehow classed as a burden to the globalists as they claim the world is overpopulating and somehow its the poorer people causing the problem and health care is a solution, then just be honest and say you want people in many African countries to stop breeding for example, or the most broke communities in America to stop breeding.

These globalists cannot be honest and try hide, but as Christ said all works are seen and will be exposed.

 

[Corn Pop]

Its disgusting some claim the most down and out are one of the biggest problems in the world claiming they lead to overpopulation thays destroying the planet. All coming from the most privelleged.

Thats just filthy and a evil belief.

 

[Corn Pop]

Why dont the globalists just say they are so privilleged and rich and everyine else who is less fortunate they breed too much and are a burden to the world and should stop reproducing?.

The rich claiming the poor is stealing all the oxygen.

 

[Corn Pop]

If you dont have much money and have children then your a burden and a oxygen thief according to the filthy rich globalist self serving bilionaires.

 

[Uncle J]

That makes no sense. Less fossil fuel cars versus electric you would have less fossil fuel usage. You are not burning gas with an electric vehicle. You are not burning oil.

Overall consumption should drop. But if electric vehicles are burning more fossil fuels then electric vehicles are not the solution.

I'll try to explain...

For simplicity's sake, lets say there are 100 total vehicles in use in the world, with 10 being EVs and 90 using fossil fuels. Each month, 20 new vehicles are made and sold, with 5 being EVs and 15 using FF. So after 3 months we would have 160 total vehicles, with 25 being EVs and 135 using FF.

So even though the number of EVs (both relative and total) have gone up, overall fossil fuel use has still increased.....because the total number of vehicles has risen with the majority of those new vehicles using FFs.

Make sense?

 

[Uncle J]

Even 27 million EVs on the road should show a positive impact (it wouldn't be a huge impact) but either oil isn't the problem or its showing a negative impact. It sounds like to me that these people just want us to stop using oil.

Because you're not thinking it through.

Increasing the amount of EVs only reduces GHG emissions relative to what would have been produced had those EVs all been vehicles that use fossil fuels.

But with the electric vehicles not helping any I don't think there is anything we can do about it and while this doesn't prove man isn't responsible, I'm still skeptical man is responsible for it.

But you refuse to discuss the science.

I'd say let the billionaires pay for it if they're concerned about it but it doesn't look like they are or they know reducing C02 levels won't matter.

Or they know that as billionaires, they will get through all the climate-related disasters much better than everyone else, while the rest of us have to take the brunt of the effects (especially the poorest).

I mean, are you really all that shocked to see the super wealthy take a callous attitude to how their lifestyles affect everyone else? Really?

 

[Uncle J]

Actually, on a global scale, the total annual sales of new vehicles has been relatively flat since 2010 (ref. Statista.com).

I don't have a subscription to that site, but the bits I can see include:

"Worldwide car sales grew to around 75.3 million automobiles in 2023, up from around 67.3 million units in 2022."

They also note that the "flattening" was primarily due to the COVID pandemic and that "Despite these challenges, 2023 sales surpassed pre-pandemic levels and are forecast to keep rising through 2024"

So as I described, the overall number of vehicles across the globe continues to increase, and as long as the vast majority of them use fossil fuels, overall GHG emissions from vehicles will also increase.

Since EVs now comprise 14% of the total vehicle sales, and if they are as "green" as the narrative would have us believe, then fossil fuel consumption should be getting lower.

Nope, not at all. That means 86% of new vehicles added to the total overall number of vehicles across the globe still use fossil fuels, which as long as that global population of vehicles keeps increasing, means GHG emissions from vehicles will increase.

There's only one explanation for that as I see it. EVs at the current time do very little to nothing to actually reduce fossil fuel usage.

They reduce overall GHG emissions from vehicles relative to what would have been produced had those EVs been fossil fuel vehicles instead.

 

[Uncle J]

Well, if someone admits they think the world is overpopulated and health care is a solution that can somehow reduce population growth, i can only believe they care more about the worlds population growth than the peoples health.

Huh? That makes zero sense.

I mean those who think the world is over populated and they openly claim the most poor seem to be having the most children so health care is a solution that can prevent population growth. It must just be a cooncidence they praise a womens right to abortion.

And when you look at the demographics, who are they supporting to kill off and terminate there next generation?.

Good grief.....

 

[WIP]

I don't have a subscription to that site, but the bits I can see include:

"Worldwide car sales grew to around 75.3 million automobiles in 2023, up from around 67.3 million units in 2022."

They also note that the "flattening" was primarily due to the COVID pandemic and that "Despite these challenges, 2023 sales surpassed pre-pandemic levels and are forecast to keep rising through 2024"

So as I described, the overall number of vehicles across the globe continues to increase, and as long as the vast majority of them use fossil fuels, overall GHG emissions from vehicles will also increase.


Nope, not at all. That means 86% of new vehicles added to the total overall number of vehicles across the globe still use fossil fuels, which as long as that global population of vehicles keeps increasing, means GHG emissions from vehicles will increase.


They reduce overall GHG emissions from vehicles relative to what would have been produced had those EVs been fossil fuel vehicles instead.

You're not following your own math. Global market share of EVs from 2017 to 2022 went from 1.4% to 14%.

Total car sales worldwide have been as follows.
2010-2018 average annual sales were 71.1 million.
2019 total sales climbed to just over 74.9 million of which 2.6% were EVs. Approximately 6.4% were ICEs.
2020 total sales dropped to 63.8 million of which 4.2% were EVs. A decline of 15% of total sales.
2021 total sales climbed to 66.7 million of which 8.7% were EVs. Total increase of 9.5%, 0.8% of those were ICEs.
2022 total sales climbed to 67.3 million of which 14% were EVs. Total increase of ~1%. All of this increase and more can be accountable to EV sales meaning ICE sales actually dropped by about 13% of the market share.

Don't have the data comparing 2022 and 2023 but assuming the growth trend of the market share for EVs has continued at 5% per year as it did for 2021 and 2022, the market share for EVs at the end of 2023 could have been about 25% give or take. The forecasted total automobile sales in 2024 is only about 1% higher than 2023 and 2% higher than 2022. It is clear that EVs comprise a major percentage of those increases far above ICEs.

 

[Uncle J]

You're not following your own math. Global market share of EVs from 2017 to 2022 went from 1.4% to 14%.

Total car sales worldwide have been as follows.
2010-2018 average annual sales were 71.1 million.
2019 total sales climbed to just over 74.9 million of which 2.6% were EVs. Approximately 6.4% were ICEs.
2020 total sales dropped to 63.8 million of which 4.2% were EVs. A decline of 15% of total sales.
2021 total sales climbed to 66.7 million of which 8.7% were EVs. Total increase of 9.5%, 0.8% of those were ICEs.
2022 total sales climbed to 67.3 million of which 14% were EVs. Total increase of ~1%. All of this increase and more can be accountable to EV sales meaning ICE sales actually dropped by about 13% of the market share.

Don't have the data comparing 2022 and 2023 but assuming the growth trend of the market share for EVs has continued at 5% per year as it did for 2021 and 2022, the market share for EVs at the end of 2023 could have been about 25% give or take. The forecasted total automobile sales in 2024 is only about 1% higher than 2023 and 2% higher than 2022. It is clear that EVs comprise a major percentage of those increases far above ICEs.

Again, those are all new cars that are annually added to the total number of cars operating across the globe.

Therefore, the total number of cars operating across the globe continues to increase (even during the pandemic), which means the total GHG emissions from that population of cars will also increase.....because the vast majority of the new cars being added to the population use fossil fuels.

Even in the best year for EVs in your post, 86% of the cars added to the total global population of cars use fossil fuels.

That's why overall GHG emissions from cars can continue to increase even as the sales of EVs rises.

And this is the last time I'm going to repeat this.....at these current rates, the addition of EVs into the global population of cars reduces GHG emissions relative to what would have been produced had those EVs been FF cars instead.

 

[WIP]

Again, those are all new cars that are annually added to the total number of cars operating across the globe.

Therefore, the total number of cars operating across the globe continues to increase (even during the pandemic), which means the total GHG emissions from that population of cars will also increase.....because the vast majority of the new cars being added to the population use fossil fuels.

Even in the best year for EVs in your post, 86% of the cars added to the total global population of cars use fossil fuels.

That's why overall GHG emissions from cars can continue to increase even as the sales of EVs rises.

And this is the last time I'm going to repeat this.....at these current rates, the addition of EVs into the global population of cars reduces GHG emissions relative to what would have been produced had those EVs been FF cars instead.

I see what you're saying. Okay. I would think that you realize that all those new vehicles are not necessarily additional vehicles on the highways and it is safe to assume that most of those additional sales each year including EVs are replacements for older less efficient models.

From 2012 to 2021 the number of licensed drivers in the US increased by an average annual rate of 1.1%. We should be able to assume that this could be a more accurate rate of increase of the number of vehicles on the roads since we are incapable of operating more than one at a time.

Do you think a 7.2% EV market share of those additional 1.1% increases in total vehicles on the road should have some level of impact on the consumption of fossil fuels and if so, by how much? Remember that new ICE vehicles are getting more and more efficient as well.

 

[Uncle J]

I see what you're saying. Okay. I would think that you realize that all those new vehicles are not necessarily additional vehicles on the highways and it is safe to assume that most of those additional sales each year including EVs are replacements for older less efficient models.

Actually, a lot of those are sold to people who are buying their first cars, such as newly-affluent people in China and India.

From 2012 to 2021 the number of licensed drivers in the US increased by an average annual rate of 1.1%. We should be able to assume that this could be a more accurate rate of increase of the number of vehicles on the roads since we are incapable of operating more than one at a time.

For the US, correct.

Do you think a 7.2% EV market share of those additional 1.1% increases in total vehicles on the road should have some level of impact on the consumption of fossil fuels and if so, by how much? Remember that new ICE vehicles are getting more and more efficient as well.

Yes, those things will help reduce vehicle GHG emissions relative to what emissions would have been if the EVs were fossil fuel cars instead, and if emission standards had not gotten more strict.

But they are not enough to turn the overall, global amount of vehicle GHG emissions to a decline for reasons we've covered already.

 

[Corn Pop]

Huh? That makes zero sense.


Good grief.....

Im just trying to be as open and honest in discussion as can be.

If someone admits and claims and believes the world is overpopulated then they obviously believe something needs to be done about it. They seem to have a problem with it for some reason.

And if they are open and honest and say those who have access to better health care have less children, becauase obviously thats what they want, then they are obviously saying those who are poorer or in poverty are a burden as they breed too much.

So they want to give better access to health care to the poorer countries or communities so humans dont breed as much. Becauase that is one of there solutions.

It must just be coincidence they also support a womans right to terminate there child if they pregnant as most abortions come from communities living in the most poverty, and they praise the LGBT+ that also limits human reproduction.

 

[Corn Pop]

And the world is not overpopulated thats the biggest lie and scam ever. The entire worlds population could fit inside NY. The entire worlds population is just a small dot compaired to the size of the earth.

Just because people live in a compacted city thats just a dot on the map, and probably never left the city they brainwashed to believe the world is overpopulated becauae they live compacted in a city so many people, and all the traffic congestion, and probably smog pollution.

 

[Corn Pop]

If someone dont have thousands of dollars spare change to purchase a EV to save the planet then apparently they not saving the planet. Forced to feel guilty they just a polluter thats destroying the planet.