[RABAUKE]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Don't see a problem with this gradually increasing, as compared to other sources like hydrogen where there is no infrastructure and where electrolysis, containing and delivering would cost insane amounts.

Everyone always forgets that we are pushing around huge super tankers, storing oil in depots, pushing it through refineries, trucking it out to gas stations in the middle of the ozarks and other places, all using fuel and materials built by fuel to do so. While some of this needs to happen for power plants that are run off of gas-turbines or other fossil fuels, we are wasting a lot of energy pushing this stuff out everywhere with the brute force of combustion engines. Future generations are going to look at old people like they are crazy when they tell them how you use to have to go to a "gas station" to fuel up your car, rather than just plug into the grid or whatever they are using.

And with all this in mind, the non-renewable energy source of choice for most urban areas these days are gas-turbine, they are easily scale-able, don't require much infrastructure, extremely reliable, and can capture upwards of 65% efficiency, past the 50% barrier that many thought was impossible just a few years ago. I know our city has them and I'd bet that many of yours do too.

This article reeks of fear-mongering and trying to pit people against electric cars due to irrational fears. Sure, EVs have a ways to go before they are practical for the masses, but they are already practical and working in some markets, which is light years more than 20 years ago. I visited a museum a few months ago that had some of the first automobiles and a lot of good literature to go along. The horse-people beople basically said the same things about autos and how the technology shouldn't be pursued because it was at such a low state of development. Some people are deathly afraid of EVs, but they are coming.

This article isn't even close to comparing apples to apples. I'd be interested to see it if it was, but no one really wants to seem to go there. Look at total CO2 required to produce each car. Look at total CO2 required to maintain each car. Look at total CO2 required to deliver fuel to each car and run each car. This article doesn't even come close to doing that.

....and theres this