One Third as Far

  • December 17, 2023

Scientific American has made an astounding discovery about vehicles that aren’t capable of being driven very far because they don’t go very far – and take a palsifyingly long time to get going again. It is that they are driven about a third less far than vehicles that go much farther and take almost no time to get going again.

The magazine – which like Dr. Fauci is very sciencey – published a “study” that “found” (it must have taken some looking) that “gas vehicles were driven 62.4 percent more than EVs between 2016 and 2022, based on odometer readings.”

You don’t say? 

Wonder why that could be . . . ?

The “study” goes on to note – ruefully – that most owners of vehicles that don’t go very far and take very long to get going again – own another vehicle that can (and doesn’t). That is, a car that isn’t a battery-powered device.

This very much concerns Scientific American. Leftists are always very “concerned.”

Guess why?

The environmental impact of EVs could be overestimated if electric cars aren’t being relied on by high-mileage drivers or used as daily drivers for multi-vehicle households.”

What is meant by that is that the “emissions” of the gas that feeds plants and thereby causes oxygen to be “emitted” for us to breath aren’t being reduced sufficiently for the sciencey solons of Scientific American.

Which is just terrible.

But Scientific American is right about the “environmental impact” of the Soviet-style government pushing of electric vehicle manufacturing.

The “environment” is greatly “impacted” by the fouling of millions of gallons of water leaching lithium for EV batteries and the laying waste of hundreds of acres of land for those toxic waste sites. Lithium, by the way, is both scarce and non-renewable. Once used up, it’s gone. And unlike oil, there’s not much available.

The “environment” will also be very much “impacted” (like Elvis’ colon) when millions of tons of toxic-waste-laden EV used-up EV battery packs (typically about 800-1,000 lbs. each) are dumped into landfills.

Open pit mining in Third World countries for cobalt – itself a very nasty material – also “impacts” the “environment.”

But never mind that.

Scientific American has the answer! “Get more EVs into the hands of people who drive a lot.”

After you’ve cleaned up the coffee you probably just spilled all over your keyboard after having read that, read this (after putting your coffee down so you don’t spill it again):

Used car buyers, however, could turn this trend around. Right now the U.S. has a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices). Higher-mileage drivers could benefit greatly from lower operating and maintenance costs while also benefiting the environment if they considered adopting a used EV—and especially if, in doing so, they took an older, higher-polluting vehicle off the road.”

I know; it takes a few minutes to reboot the ol’ noggin after reading something as sciencey as the foregoing.

Yes, indeed . . . the U.S. does have “a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices).” If the “U.S.” – an abstract rhetorical device – can be coherently said to have anything at all.

Anyhow, it begs a question. Why is it that there is “a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices)”?

Could it possibly be due to the previous owners having figured out that the battery-powered devices they bought don’t go very far and take very long to get going again – and decided this was too much hassle and dumped their devices? And why are the prices for these dumped devices “rather competitive” when the prices for used vehicles that aren’t devices aren’t?

It is a very tricky, very sciencey question.

But the answer – after much study – probably has to do with people not wanting to buy used devices that don’t go very far and take very long to get going again. Particularly because the batteries that power these devices are used. And used batteries hold less charge – on their way to holding none. Rendering the device incapable of going at all. And the cost of replacing that battery with a new one to power the inert device is not “rather competitive.”

Scientific Americans says “The impact of the used EV market can’t be understated.” And that’s certainly true – as used and unwanted and so unsellable battery powered devices with wilting batteries accumulate and languish on used car lots all around the country – alongside the brand-new EVs that are accumulating and languishing on dealership lots all around the country.

Scientific American says nothing about the potential “impact” of this on the car industry. Or on the economy – that is to say, on all the people whose livelihoods depend in one way or another on the manufacture and sale of cars  – after the car industry collapses as a result of being pushed, Soviet-style, to build as many battery-powered devices as can be shipped (but not sold) as the factories can churn out.

It is analogous to the useless (because unnavigable) White Sea Canal that Stalin ordered dug back in the ’30s. Never mind the “impact” – including an estimated 100,000 dead laborers, leaving aside the “environment.”

When a mania combines with authoritarianism, you get projects like that.

And we’re getting it good and hard, again.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

If you like items like the Keeeeeeev T shirt pictured below, you can find that and more at the EPautos store!

The post One Third as Far appeared first on EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk.

Spread the love