Wyoming: ICE Only By 2035

[juanmedina]

Originally Posted by dwf137

If we stopped using gasoline for cars, refineries would shut down. About 75% of our crude oil goes to fuel. There is zero chance that all of those refineries would remain at 100%.

And yes, my calculations are back-of-the-napkin bull****. Totally appreciate that. I don't work in this industry, but everyone gets caught up in the minutia of "but your EV is charged via coal", but there's a much larger picture going on and big oil has put up the curtain so you don't see what's really going on... The richest people in the world have somehow brainwashed a large portion of the country to continue enriching them with our taxpayer dollars... it's like stockholm syndrome.

100%. The majority of refined oil is used transportation and it is only a matter of time before all the means of transportation can be replaced by EV platforms.

For fun I was looking at my 7 year solar system that I have never cleaned. It is a small system with 16 panels 4.1kW and it produced 5.2MWh of energy. Looking at my Tesla 2022 energy consumption it was 2,672kWh with about total gas savings of $800. So my system can power two electric car for an entire year and paid $4500 bucks for my solar system . I think that is amazing and the panels are supposed to last 30 years +. I assume the solar panel technology has improved a lot since I purchased my system but it is amazing to me how a small foot print of panels can power two cars for the life of the vehicle easily.

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[dwf137]

Originally Posted by rexster

I agree overall with your argument that we would save emissions by reducing the production of gasoline. However, the oil refineries aren’t exclusively making gasoline. When oil is refined several products are created including more expensive products like diesel and jet fuel. We would need to get all aircraft and heavy machinery onto electricity before all refineries theoretically shut down. A more likely scenario is that the US will become a large gasoline exporter as the demand for gasoline in the U.S. goes down. I can pretty much guarantee they aren’t going to walk away from all that money.

75% of our crude oil goes to fuel, including gasoline, jet fuel, diesel, etc. The rest goes to other goods like plastics. That other 25% will remain untouched, or grow. But with that other 75%, what happens when demand goes down? The price goes down. If we cut off our use of oil for personal vehicle transportation, demand will drop, refineries will either close (they're already starting to close) or be used only part time. Energy use will drop, and then the price of the remaining fuel will be cheaper as there's more supply than demand. That means cheaper liquid fuel for the industries that really need it like aviation, shipping, etc.

Clearly we're talking pie in the sky here. No way we're all switching over to EV's. It's impractical for a good portion (but not majority) of the population. But every person that does switch is causing a slow shift. It's already started. 5% of our countries refinery capacity has shut down in the past few years. Part of that was pandemic driven, but companies are choosing to dismantle them permanently because it doesn't make business sense to get them back up and running.

[SCRAPPYDO]

Originally Posted by dwf137

75% of our crude oil goes to fuel, including gasoline, jet fuel, diesel, etc. The rest goes to other goods like plastics. That other 25% will remain untouched, or grow. But with that other 75%, what happens when demand goes down? The price goes down. If we cut off our use of oil for personal vehicle transportation, demand will drop, refineries will either close (they're already starting to close) or be used only part time. Energy use will drop, and then the price of the remaining fuel will be cheaper as there's more supply than demand. That means cheaper liquid fuel for the industries that really need it like aviation, shipping, etc.

Clearly we're talking pie in the sky here. No way we're all switching over to EV's. It's impractical for a good portion (but not majority) of the population. But every person that does switch is causing a slow shift. It's already started. 5% of our countries refinery capacity has shut down in the past few years. Part of that was pandemic driven, but companies are choosing to dismantle them permanently because it doesn't make business sense to get them back up and running.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. With the government meddling and picking 'winners', no telling how this will happen and at what cost to taxpayers. Practicality or impracticalities of an EV are not really important. What people WANT drives most car purchases. Like has been said before, people do not drive what they need, they drive what they want.

Refineries can switch what end products they make. They all can make Many products from raw sweet crude. They will adapt.

[dwf137]

Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. With the government meddling and picking 'winners', no telling how this will happen and at what cost to taxpayers. Practicality or impracticalities of an EV are not really important. What people WANT drives most car purchases. Like has been said before, people do not drive what they need, they drive what they want.

Refineries can switch what end products they make. They all can make Many products from raw sweet crude. They will adapt.

where one door closes, another opens. businesses will adapt, or be replaced with new ones. It's hard to imagine how things will adapt, but they will. ICE will be around for a long time, even in places where EV's are mandated for new car purchases. They aren't crushing old ICE cars, and you can still go to an adjacent state and buy one. I also think the states that are mandating are going to cave and switch to "electrified" cars, not pure BEV, so hybrids will fly for a little while longer, but we'll see as the deadlines come close.

[rexster]

The door that opens will be exporting refined petroleum products like gasoline to countries that can't afford Teslas.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/Le...s=MGFEXUS1&f=M

[rexster]

Double post

[juanmedina]

Originally Posted by rexster

The door that opens will be exporting refined petroleum products like gasoline to countries that can't afford Teslas.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/Le...s=MGFEXUS1&f=M

China has way cheaper alternatives of EV's than Tesla's that they export to 3rd world countries. Tesla are way to big in size for most 3rd world countries.

[Ferretts]

I love how the people in states like Washington, Oregon, and California, where Democratic policies have lead to record numbers of homeless, drug overdoses, and out of control crime still think that they know best and advocate that the rest of the country be forced to follow suit. CLOWNS

[Cowboy Neal]

Originally Posted by Ferretts

I love how the people in states like Washington, Oregon, and California, where Democratic policies have lead to record numbers of homeless, drug overdoses, and out of control crime still think that they know best and advocate that the rest of the country be forced to follow suit. CLOWNS

What up Donald

[dwf137]

Originally Posted by Ferretts

I love how the people in states like Washington, Oregon, and California, where Democratic policies have lead to record numbers of homeless, drug overdoses, and out of control crime still think that they know best and advocate that the rest of the country be forced to follow suit. CLOWNS

I think you're lost. Take your garbage over here: https://forums.nasioc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=90

[19std]

Originally Posted by dwf137

I think you're lost. Take your garbage over here: https://forums.nasioc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=90

I mean, this is an article about politics...you know voting and such...after debate and duscussions...and things...like in a forum.....

[mcarb002]

Let the free market rule!
Stop big gumbit!

Ohh EVs? eff that! nah we gotta intervene there

Hahaha what a joke

[juanmedina]

VW Brand Boss: E-Fuels Are “Unnecessary Noise,” Combustion Will Be Over By 2035

https://insideevs.com/news/662346/vw...nterview/?s=09

[dwf137]

Efuels will never be energy efficient. They will always take more energy to produce and convert to mechanical energy than using other energy storage methods like batteries. Heck, even hydrogen is probably more efficient and that's a huge waste of energy.

More interesting is that he said the golf will remain ICE for the next ten years. That contradicts rumors that said it would go EV (which make no sense because the ID3 essentially replaced the e-golf, so why make a redundant car unless it's to rename the id.3).

They can't produce enough R's to meet demand, I'm curious if the golf staying in production means they'll get back to normal output sooner than later...

[mcarb002]

Originally Posted by dwf137

Efuels will never be energy efficient. They will always take more energy to produce and convert to mechanical energy than using other energy storage methods like batteries. Heck, even hydrogen is probably more efficient and that's a huge waste of energy.

That’s not what the Exxon scientist and their lobbyist Scrappy are saying brah
Let’s give nuKEcular a chance!

[dwf137]

Originally Posted by mcarb002

That’s not what the Exxon scientist and their lobbyist Scrappy are saying brah
Let’s give nuKEcular a chance!

I'm all for more nuclear. It's gotten way safer these days, and we have pretty good and safe mechanisms for storage now too. Just because the earlier experiments weren't great doesn't mean the tech isn't advancing. Modern nuclear plants are significantly safer than those that have failed in the past. From completely seismically isolated bases to shells that are incredibly resistant to weapon attacks...

[b4wantab]

Why do they have to be efficient? Solar in general averages what 12% efficient? When you have an unlimited supply, the sun, it doesn’t matter? Hydrogen makes sense because it is the most abundant element in the solar system. I just don’t see how you are going to get away from liquid fuel infrastructure. Stop anywhere in the states and in 5 minutes you have another 4-500 mile range. How much cargo can the plane carry once you fill it with batteries?

Yes, tech will improve but, to politically be putting dates on some of this is crazy.

Peace,

Greg

[mcarb002]

Originally Posted by dwf137

I'm all for more nuclear. It's gotten way safer these days, and we have pretty good and safe mechanisms for storage now too. Just because the earlier experiments weren't great doesn't mean the tech isn't advancing. Modern nuclear plants are significantly safer than those that have failed in the past. From completely seismically isolated bases to shells that are incredibly resistant to weapon attacks...

Without even trying to do a google search since we’re engaged in this conversation and I’d like to keep it transparent by fully admitting that I’m completely 100% ignorant in what seems to be a particular technology I’m not aware about, can you explain to me in layman’s term how a car is supposed to be powered by nuclear energy? We’re talking about a small reactor retrofitted to a vehicle? We’ll be pulling up to places that process yellowcake to refuel? How are cars gonna be designed to shield against radiation without being the size of a federal reserve vault?

[dwf137]

Originally Posted by mcarb002

Without even trying to do a google search since we’re engaged in this conversation and I’d like to keep it transparent by fully admitting that I’m completely 100% ignorant in what seems to be a particular technology I’m not aware about, can you explain to me in layman’s term how a car is supposed to be powered by nuclear energy? We’re talking about a small reactor retrofitted to a vehicle? We’ll be pulling up to places that process yellowcake to refuel? How are cars gonna be designed to shield against radiation without being the size of a federal reserve vault?

nuclear power plants, not nuclear powered cars... if we have abundant energy, then maybe it doesn't matter that e-fuels or hydrogen are inefficient.

[mcarb002]

Originally Posted by dwf137

nuclear power plants, not nuclear powered cars... if we have abundant energy, then maybe it doesn't matter that e-fuels or hydrogen are inefficient.

Gotcha. Yeah I mean I’m not against that at all. In fact we’re already investing deep into and making breakthroughs in nuclear fusion, which if I’m not mistaken is way more stable than what we have now. Certainly way in the future we might have nuclear powered everything including personal vehicles. But the whole premise of alternative energy now or soon, is within the framework of the imminent climate catastrophe (whether you want to believe in it or not). Certainly gas has environmental impacts and EVs do offset them. At least in the long run it’s already a fact that from A-Z (mining to lifetime of the vehicle), EVs leave a lower carbon footprint. So EVs are the answer for now.

I think the problem that I see with the people all bent out of shape about EVs is that they choose to die on that hill of “government”. Why gumbit gotta force this or that, all the while they literally go through their lives living with government mandated stuff, so it just seems real arbitrary to me that they’re so upset and simply can’t believe the government will be dictating what energy will be powering vehicles, but they’re not upset about what species of fish you can fish in this particular lake on this particular month….like unless you’re part of the sovereign citizen movement just S.t.F.U about government and EVs already…

[kayen]

Originally Posted by mcarb002

Gotcha. Yeah I mean I’m not against that at all. In fact we’re already investing deep into and making breakthroughs in nuclear fusion, which if I’m not mistaken is way more stable than what we have now. Certainly way in the future we might have nuclear powered everything including personal vehicles. But the whole premise of alternative energy now or soon, is within the framework of the imminent climate catastrophe (whether you want to believe in it or not). Certainly gas has environmental impacts and EVs do offset them. At least in the long run it’s already a fact that from A-Z (mining to lifetime of the vehicle), EVs leave a lower carbon footprint. So EVs are the answer for now.

I think the problem that I see with the people all bent out of shape about EVs is that they choose to die on that hill of “government”. Why gumbit gotta force this or that, all the while they literally go through their lives living with government mandated stuff, so it just seems real arbitrary to me that they’re so upset and simply can’t believe the government will be dictating what energy will be powering vehicles, but they’re not upset about what species of fish you can fish in this particular lake on this particular month….like unless you’re part of the sovereign citizen movement just S.t.F.U about government and EVs already…

We need to stop worrying about what powers are vehicles and worry more about bringing the rest of the world out of Poverty. Because the poor doesn't care about the environment, when they are just trying to survive every day. It will cost the world less money to make people in poverty richer/fuller and that will lead to safer lives and they will naturally use cleaner energies.

I think the majority of people need to stop following the MSM headlines and do some reading of their own to get other view points.

[mcarb002]

Originally Posted by kayen

We need to stop worrying about what powers are vehicles and worry more about bringing the rest of the world out of Poverty. Because the poor doesn't care about the environment, when they are just trying to survive every day. It will cost the world less money to make people in poverty richer/fuller and that will lead to safer lives and they will naturally use cleaner energies.

I think the majority of people need to stop following the MSM headlines and do some reading of their own to get other view points.

Yeah but Americans don’t care about the poor just like the poor don’t have time to think about the environment. You already know any help will be deemed a “handout”. Bailing out billionaires is the only good socialism. The sad part is this rhetoric is supported by your everyday blue collar ‘Muricans that have been convinced to be shills while eating the same ***** sandwich everyone else is eating. As John Steinbeck said, these people see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Also, we won’t be able to help anyone if there’s not a habitable planet.

But anyway, yeah so many other things to worry about than what’s gonna power vehicles.

[SCRAPPYDO]

So we are going all in on the politics eh.. OK....

There have always been poor. There will always be poor. War on poverty has already spent 10's of trillions of dollars and the only people that seem to have benefitted are rich politicians and their lobbyists.

You cannot legislate away poverty. You can teach how to not be poor, but it is up to the individual to execute it. They must change the mindset of poverty and break the generational choice to make bad decisions which leads to poverty. Giving people money does not make them less poor. Poverty is not just the lack of zeros you have in your bank. Intellectual and moral poverty is a far greater problem than financial poverty.


back on cars, because, you know car forum....
The problem with the current EV brain washing going on is not the vehicle. The vehicles are fine for some people and not fine for others. The issue is not giving us a choice to make the decision. The fish example is trite and overly simplistic. Accepting one governmental restriction does not mean people have to blindly accept them all. Move on...

There is absolutely no reason we cannot continue using the abundant natural resources we have AND keep maturing alternative energy at full speed. Why does it have to be either or? Why is nobody asking that question?

We can have both easily and economy will not be taking it rear like it is now.

PS. That was a rhetorical question. I know darn well why they will not allow us to have both. hint. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the climate.

[SCRAPPYDO]

So we are going all in on the politics eh.. OK....

There have always been poor. There will always be poor. War on poverty has already spent 10's of trillions of dollars and the only people that seem to have benefitted are rich politicians and their lobbyists.

You cannot legislate away poverty. You can teach how to not be poor, but it is up to the individual to execute it. They must change the mindset of poverty and break the generational choice to make bad decisions which leads to poverty. Giving people money does not make them less poor. Poverty is not just the lack of zeros you have in your bank. Intellectual and moral poverty is a far greater problem than financial poverty.


back on cars, because, you know car forum....
The problem with the current EV brain washing going on is not the vehicle. The vehicles are fine for some people and not fine for others. The issue is not giving us a choice to make the decision. The fish example is trite and overly simplistic. Accepting one governmental restriction does not mean people have to blindly accept them all. Move on...

There is absolutely no reason we cannot continue using the abundant natural resources we have AND keep maturing alternative energy at full speed. Why does it have to be either or? Why is nobody asking that question?

We can have both easily and economy will not be taking it rear like it is now.

PS. That was a rhetorical question. I know darn well why they will not allow us to have both. hint. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with the climate.

[kayen]

Originally Posted by mcarb002

Yeah but Americans don’t care about the poor just like the poor don’t have time to think about the environment. You already know any help will be deemed a “handout”. Bailing out billionaires is the only good socialism. The sad part is this rhetoric is supported by your everyday blue collar ‘Muricans that have been convinced to be shills while eating the same ***** sandwich everyone else is eating. As John Steinbeck said, these people see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Also, we won’t be able to help anyone if there’s not a habitable planet.

But anyway, yeah so many other things to worry about than what’s gonna power vehicles.

The planet is not dying, so there is no worries of it being habitable. Let alone that humans are able to adapt and do it very well, which is how we live in every climate around the globe.

Originally Posted by SCRAPPYDO

So we are going all in on the politics eh.. OK....

There have always been poor. There will always be poor. War on poverty has already spent 10's of trillions of dollars and the only people that seem to have benefitted are rich politicians and their lobbyists.

You cannot legislate away poverty. You can teach how to not be poor, but it is up to the individual to execute it. They must change the mindset of poverty and break the generational choice to make bad decisions which leads to poverty. Giving people money does not make them less poor. Poverty is not just the lack of zeros you have in your bank. Intellectual and moral poverty is a far greater problem than financial poverty.

By poverty I am not talking about the socialist handouts to those that we consider poor in developed western society. I am referring to those in the undeveloped world where poverty is living in a hut burning dung and not able to get a better richer and fuller life, which leads them to using cleaner energies to support themselves. This is not an all encompassing statement, just an example to set a tone.