GM to go all EV by 2035

[Crissa]

If someone is 66 years old, they would know the spring-time birds hatching, bees buzzing, trees flowering dates have shifted in that time frame. Important agricultural dates.

How is it that someone so old could be so incurious to their world?

-Crissa

Advertisement

 

[Quicksilver]

" How is it that someone so old could be so incurious to their world? "

I have 40 acres in NE Alabama where we raise our own animals and food. Climate affects just about every aspect of what we do. The fact that I can walk outside in a tee shirt in Feb. is not lost on me. Winters seem to be warmer than they were in my youth but that could be a function of declining memory not the climate. It could also be a normal cyclic function of the ever changing climate of earth. The fact is that the earths climate has been changing since it was formed and will continue to change.
The disagreement in question here is has industrial technology increased the temperature to the point that we must take drastic action to rectify the situation.
Therein lies the sticky wicket.
There are radicals that will use the Climate Change debate to further their own agendas and extort governments to kowtow to them.
I may not be the smartest person on this forum but I do have a degree and college education.
I also spent my last 15 years in the military as a Journalist and Public Affairs Specialist. I know how to do research and I know how the media can be manipulated to further an agenda. I have been a prolific reader all my life and I try to look at both sides of any given issue.
I also know that politicians will pander to anyone that will fund them and vote for them. They bend to whichever way the wind is blowing. That is the nature of the beast.
I am not incurious to this world. What I am is skeptical about the motives of people who want to control every aspect of other people's lives by forcing agendas on them.
Again let me ask.......what are you personally willing to give up right now to fight this supposed Climate Change? That question seems to have been conveniently dodged in the last few responses.
Are you willing to give up creature comforts and technology on the chance that it might make some sort of difference? If you are not then you may want to do some soul searching and decide if you are a hypocrite.
If you want to get serious about saving the planet how about controlling the population of humans since humans seem to be the generators of Climate Change. But if you try to throw that dog in the race you will be shouted down and tarred with numerous unflattering labels.
I put my money down on a CT because I like the look of it and I embrace the technology.
Saving the planet had nothing to do with me buying it.

 

[Gvardaman]

I jumped to the end, since this seems to have gone from an oversimplification of the GM statement to a debate about government, global warming and such.
The actual statement was something like “GM is aspiring to move all light duty vehicles to ev and hybrid by 2035.” I don’t remember it exactly, but it isn’t much of a promise, but at least it’s hopeful!

 

[Crissa]

The fact that I can walk outside in a tee shirt in Feb. is not lost on me. Winters seem to be warmer than they were in my youth but that could be a function of declining memory not the climate.

Yes. But instead of relying upon memory, you could notice that thousands of other people had written this stuff down.

-Crissa

 

[Gvardaman]

Yeah, that is just factual data. Take a peek at pictures of glaciers going back as far as they have been taking pictures. Ot you can look at climate data since it began to be recorded.
The phenomenon is real and we are the cause, the primary cause or at the least a major contributor.
The data is out there and has been since at least the late 60s. It is like tobacco. Thevdata is there and those who see the information as being detrimental to their business will spend a great deal to cover it up or obfuscate the data, when possible. Remember when there was “debate” about how smoking might not be so bad Dor you?

 

[Idaho_7]

For GM it's possible "EV" stands for: "E"acting "V"ankruptcy? .....by 2035?

 

[Idaho_7]

" everything you said went into the trash when you said you think global warming is a hoax. think what you want; you just don't understand the evidence that proves it. "

" ...on a question of scientific veracity, your opinion has no worth, use or purpose... "

I've been on this earth for 66 years and without fail every 20 years or so another lot of Chicken Littles come out of the woodwork to tell us the earth is doomed for whatever reason.
I distinctly remember reading an article in Popular Science back in the late 60's or early 70's that predicted another ice age soon. The article even told how we would be living in nuclear powered underground cities connected by tunnels under the ice. Food would be grown in huge underground chambers using hydroponics and artificial light.
Later came Acid Rain, the hole in the ozone and the prediction that we would be running out of petroleum by this century. The last time I looked the world was still here.
Scientific research is driven by grants that the researchers depend on for their jobs........and he who pays for the grants dictate what results they want to see. And this is driven by the agendas of who is providing that money. For every "researcher or scientist" that you can find to support Global Warming I can find one that opposes it. If you don't understand that then you don't understand the evidence that proves it.
The EPA has been infiltrated by rabid environmentalists that are determined to control policy and dictate regulations that affect jobs and lives........what they can't get by legislation they get by regulation. And unlike elected officials these appointed bureaucrats almost never get fired or held accountable when their policy has an adverse impact on the economy or how people live their lives. And they don't care how it adversely affects the working man as long as it serves their twisted purpose. Once a regulation is adopted it is almost impossible to rescind it or modify it.
I want clean air and water as much as anybody and when the EPA was formed and did the mission it was created for, we got cleaner water and air. Love Canal, Times Beach, Missouri and other Superfund sites got cleaned up and industry was held accountable.
I worked in the Hazardous Waste industry for a government contractor and a private company.....I am well versed in how the EPA and state environmental laws and regulations work and have been involved in many small and major environmental projects to include the destruction of the US Army's Chemical Weapons Stockpile in Anniston, Alabama.
I remember when Birmingham, Alabama was referred to as "Smoke City" by me and my fellow truckers. The steel industry created a pall of smoke that covered the low lying city most of the time in the 1950's and 60's. Kudos to the EPA for fixing that.
What happened, and what always happens to any Federal agency, is what we military guys call "Mission Creep". Mission Creep occurs when an organization is afraid they will lose funding and personnel unless they come up with more ways to justify their existence.
These Federal agencies are ran like little fiefdoms by their director (usually an appointed political toady) who constantly demands a bigger budget and more manpower in order to complete the missions they keep taking on.
When was the last time any Federal agency was reduced in size or scope? I blame this on both political parties and the career politicians that keep allowing those agencies to expand. We need term limits for Congressmen and Senators and we need them now.
That is the evidence I understand having been associated with the military for 34 years and working for a military contractor for six.
If you want a classic example of EPA stupidity look at the lowly gas can. They have made it an ordeal just to put fuel in the tank of a vehicle.
The diesel shop we take our Dodge truck to for service makes stupid money deleting the overly complicated and unreliable emission equipment now mandated on diesel engines by the EPA. And it is not just John Q. Public having this crap deleted. They do it for city, county and state vehicles too.
The Global Warming hoax is designed to milk prosperous countries of money to give to Third World countries that are ran by corrupt leaders who allow their resources to be sold to the highest bidder. They get rich and their people suffer. Where do you think a lot of the exotic metals needed for EV's come from?
As fond as I am of Tesla and Elon Musk they are gaming the system by selling the carbon credits they receive for producing EV's. Who do you think came up with that scheme? Hint........it is a three letter Federal agency. Would Tesla have been able to stay afloat without doing that? A couple of articles I read said it would have been hard pressed to do so.
Our newly elected POTUS has already put thousands of people working on or associated with the Keystone Pipeline out of work. He did it as a stab in the eye to the former President without any consideration for those hard working Americans that depend on those jobs to put food on the table. He did it to pander to his radical environmental base and if just few of the objectives of that idiotic "New Green Deal" are enacted there will be a Depression that will make the one last century look like a walk in the park. Kiss all those electric vehicles goodbye because nobody will be able to afford them. Just like the small automobile companies that folded back in the 1920's and 30's when the economy fails again startup EV companies will go tits up.
Now tell me in your own words exactly what you are willing to give up to stop the dreaded Global Warming. Air conditioning, reliable electric power at the flip of a switch, modern medicine, cheap food shipped from all over the world to a supermarket near you, all these modern devices we use to post stuff like this on a world wide web. What exactly would you personally be willing to forgo if it would save old Mother Earth? My guess is not much because it is always easier to expect the other guy to make the sacrifice (especially if your side gets to mandate it) than to actually do without yourself.
Don't presume to tell me my opinion belongs in the trash can unless you are willing to toss yours right in there beside it.

Glad you wrote this Quicksilver......For additional information that may help put things into perspective, I hope all on board here will link to: "PlateClimatology.com" and either read or at minimum watch the video. Looking forward to practical EV's and also freedom of choice.

 

[Idaho_7]

Biden has said recently his plan is to replace all 650K government vehicles with BEV, my only concern will be military vehicles that need to be mobile and be no where near a charging access,

The very low maintenance with BEVs would be beneficial

The foreign enemies would be rubbing their hands in anticipation if our military went all EV: Brace for their Electro Magnetic Pulse weapons.

 

[Dids]

" How is it that someone so old could be so incurious to their world? "

I have 40 acres in NE Alabama where we raise our own animals and food. Climate affects just about every aspect of what we do. The fact that I can walk outside in a tee shirt in Feb. is not lost on me. Winters seem to be warmer than they were in my youth but that could be a function of declining memory not the climate. It could also be a normal cyclic function of the ever changing climate of earth. The fact is that the earths climate has been changing since it was formed and will continue to change.
The disagreement in question here is has industrial technology increased the temperature to the point that we must take drastic action to rectify the situation.
Therein lies the sticky wicket.
There are radicals that will use the Climate Change debate to further their own agendas and extort governments to kowtow to them.
I may not be the smartest person on this forum but I do have a degree and college education.
I also spent my last 15 years in the military as a Journalist and Public Affairs Specialist. I know how to do research and I know how the media can be manipulated to further an agenda. I have been a prolific reader all my life and I try to look at both sides of any given issue.
I also know that politicians will pander to anyone that will fund them and vote for them. They bend to whichever way the wind is blowing. That is the nature of the beast.
I am not incurious to this world. What I am is skeptical about the motives of people who want to control every aspect of other people's lives by forcing agendas on them.
Again let me ask.......what are you personally willing to give up right now to fight this supposed Climate Change? That question seems to have been conveniently dodged in the last few responses.
Are you willing to give up creature comforts and technology on the chance that it might make some sort of difference? If you are not then you may want to do some soul searching and decide if you are a hypocrite.
If you want to get serious about saving the planet how about controlling the population of humans since humans seem to be the generators of Climate Change. But if you try to throw that dog in the race you will be shouted down and tarred with numerous unflattering labels.
I put my money down on a CT because I like the look of it and I embrace the technology.
Saving the planet had nothing to do with me buying it.

Whether humans are responsible or its natural change is besides the point. The earth is warming, species we rely on are dying. Can we adapt or will we die along with the rest? Adapting means doing things differently.
You mentioned the ozone hole that cfc caused. If they hadn't stopped producing it you would not be able to live in Alabama any longer. Everyone said that life would suck without cfc but really no one needed them. McDonald's hamburgers survived.
And you mention acid rain. Then you say you know a shop that removes the equipment that was required to reduce acid rain. Its like you think the problems just went away and don't realize the reason they went away was because systems were adapted to address the problem.

 

[azjohn]

The foreign enemies would be rubbing their hands in anticipation if our military went all EV: Brace for their Electro Magnetic Pulse weapons.

I would be very surprised if the military would, I would actually be surprised if any of the government fleet that is critical would go BEV, our government likes tag behind as far as technology is concerned

There are still some government agencies still running on DOS, I guess the chances they will be hacked is reduced when you are running something as archaic as that

 

[Crissa]

The foreign enemies would be rubbing their hands in anticipation if our military went all EV: Brace for their Electro Magnetic Pulse weapons.

That's silly. As if current military systems don't fail when exposed to sufficient EMP!

Electricity can be generated on the spot. It doesn't need supply lines. And electrical supply lines can be checked and rerouted at the speed of light.

And no one was suggesting it happen. Lastly, pretty far afield from the thread topic.

-Crissa

 

[Diehard]

" everything you said went into the trash when you said you think global warming is a hoax. think what you want; you just don't understand the evidence that proves it. "

" ...on a question of scientific veracity, your opinion has no worth, use or purpose... "

I've been on this earth for 66 years and without fail every 20 years or so another lot of Chicken Littles come out of the woodwork to tell us the earth is doomed for whatever reason.
I distinctly remember reading an article in Popular Science back in the late 60's or early 70's that predicted another ice age soon. The article even told how we would be living in nuclear powered underground cities connected by tunnels under the ice. Food would be grown in huge underground chambers using hydroponics and artificial light.
Later came Acid Rain, the hole in the ozone and the prediction that we would be running out of petroleum by this century. The last time I looked the world was still here.
Scientific research is driven by grants that the researchers depend on for their jobs........and he who pays for the grants dictate what results they want to see. And this is driven by the agendas of who is providing that money. For every "researcher or scientist" that you can find to support Global Warming I can find one that opposes it. If you don't understand that then you don't understand the evidence that proves it.
The EPA has been infiltrated by rabid environmentalists that are determined to control policy and dictate regulations that affect jobs and lives........what they can't get by legislation they get by regulation. And unlike elected officials these appointed bureaucrats almost never get fired or held accountable when their policy has an adverse impact on the economy or how people live their lives. And they don't care how it adversely affects the working man as long as it serves their twisted purpose. Once a regulation is adopted it is almost impossible to rescind it or modify it.
I want clean air and water as much as anybody and when the EPA was formed and did the mission it was created for, we got cleaner water and air. Love Canal, Times Beach, Missouri and other Superfund sites got cleaned up and industry was held accountable.
I worked in the Hazardous Waste industry for a government contractor and a private company.....I am well versed in how the EPA and state environmental laws and regulations work and have been involved in many small and major environmental projects to include the destruction of the US Army's Chemical Weapons Stockpile in Anniston, Alabama.
I remember when Birmingham, Alabama was referred to as "Smoke City" by me and my fellow truckers. The steel industry created a pall of smoke that covered the low lying city most of the time in the 1950's and 60's. Kudos to the EPA for fixing that.
What happened, and what always happens to any Federal agency, is what we military guys call "Mission Creep". Mission Creep occurs when an organization is afraid they will lose funding and personnel unless they come up with more ways to justify their existence.
These Federal agencies are ran like little fiefdoms by their director (usually an appointed political toady) who constantly demands a bigger budget and more manpower in order to complete the missions they keep taking on.
When was the last time any Federal agency was reduced in size or scope? I blame this on both political parties and the career politicians that keep allowing those agencies to expand. We need term limits for Congressmen and Senators and we need them now.
That is the evidence I understand having been associated with the military for 34 years and working for a military contractor for six.
If you want a classic example of EPA stupidity look at the lowly gas can. They have made it an ordeal just to put fuel in the tank of a vehicle.
The diesel shop we take our Dodge truck to for service makes stupid money deleting the overly complicated and unreliable emission equipment now mandated on diesel engines by the EPA. And it is not just John Q. Public having this crap deleted. They do it for city, county and state vehicles too.
The Global Warming hoax is designed to milk prosperous countries of money to give to Third World countries that are ran by corrupt leaders who allow their resources to be sold to the highest bidder. They get rich and their people suffer. Where do you think a lot of the exotic metals needed for EV's come from?
As fond as I am of Tesla and Elon Musk they are gaming the system by selling the carbon credits they receive for producing EV's. Who do you think came up with that scheme? Hint........it is a three letter Federal agency. Would Tesla have been able to stay afloat without doing that? A couple of articles I read said it would have been hard pressed to do so.
Our newly elected POTUS has already put thousands of people working on or associated with the Keystone Pipeline out of work. He did it as a stab in the eye to the former President without any consideration for those hard working Americans that depend on those jobs to put food on the table. He did it to pander to his radical environmental base and if just few of the objectives of that idiotic "New Green Deal" are enacted there will be a Depression that will make the one last century look like a walk in the park. Kiss all those electric vehicles goodbye because nobody will be able to afford them. Just like the small automobile companies that folded back in the 1920's and 30's when the economy fails again startup EV companies will go tits up.
Now tell me in your own words exactly what you are willing to give up to stop the dreaded Global Warming. Air conditioning, reliable electric power at the flip of a switch, modern medicine, cheap food shipped from all over the world to a supermarket near you, all these modern devices we use to post stuff like this on a world wide web. What exactly would you personally be willing to forgo if it would save old Mother Earth? My guess is not much because it is always easier to expect the other guy to make the sacrifice (especially if your side gets to mandate it) than to actually do without yourself.
Don't presume to tell me my opinion belongs in the trash can unless you are willing to toss yours right in there beside it.

I see your rant and raise you one:

I agree with many of your observations but disagree with some of your assumptions and conclusions:

I agree that humans in general are driven by self-interest. That includes folks inside and outside the government. To answer to your question that what I am willing to give up? Not much. 5% reduction in my life style, funds or additional inconvenience is the max I would pay when no one is watching. For example an ICE truck today is a more sensible choice for me than CT in 3-4 years but I am waiting partly (5%) because I don’t want to pollute for an extra decade and a half. I am not looking forward to the charging inconvenience on my long trips and real inconvenience charging while towing. And the cost it is much more than I have ever paid for any vehicle in the past. I have always made manageable donations but I have never made a huge sacrifice to save the planet (us as a whole). In short, yes I and many others are selfish creatures but I don’t see how me being a jackass makes you putting less crap in the air a bad thing. I agree with you that there are many out there that are trying to use the environmental laws and regulations for their own benefit. I disagree with your conclusion that the way to deal with it is to remove or reduce those regulations. In fact the reason regulations are needed is precisely because we are driven by self-interest. One of the functions of government is to align those short term self-interests with a greater long term interests of all of us.

I agree with you that producing EVs are not good for environment. In fact producing most of the stuff we make is not good for environment. But I disagree with the implication that producing ICE is better.

I agree with you that people losing their job on the pipeline is not a good thing. But disagree with the assumption that moving in the wrong direction is better than changing course. The need for the energy will always be there. The question is if people make their living working on pipeline or on wind farm.

I disagree with your assumption that the only reason to stop polluting is climate change. I grew up in a city filled with smog to the point that on some days, after only a few hours of being outside when I came home, if I washed half my face, I could clearly see the difference. I have more problems breathing than average Joe my age because of it. You can’t tell me when you drive behind a tractor trailer and see that black smoke coming out, you don’t roll up your window. And with all the compassion you have for people losing their job you are really OK screwing up some kid’s lungs like mine with deleting those emission equipment on your diesel truck. You don’t need a climatologist to tell you that stuff does not belong in your lungs.

I agree with you that there are policies that do not work well and need to be updated but I disagree with the assumption that a short term negative impact of some policies means the policy itself is a bad one. Sometimes overall impact is positive with a local negative impact. Sometimes the goal is good and implementation of the policy needs improvement. The solution is not always throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I agree that funding process of many agencies is setup incorrectly; you have to show you spent this much last year so you can get that much next year. So fear works against saving. However I disagree with the assumption that shrinkage is always automatically better. I agree that there needs to be more accountability for folks that put out bad policies however policy makers are not infallible and don’t have a crystal ball. Sometimes like scientists and engineers they have to go through several iterations to get it right. If you see a bad policy, help them fix it. Not having any rules is not an option. There will always be a fight to manipulate those rules to benefit one group more than others. As long as it benefits more people for longer time, I am OK with it.

I agree with you that people’s jobs need to be protected. But I disagree with you that saving 100 coal miner jobs for the next two years is a better way of protecting people than creating 1000 solar farm jobs for the next 10 years. Letting 100 people keep their jobs today so 1000 can lose their homes in a more destructive hurricanes or flood tomorrow may not be a more considerate course of action. I agree with you that if I was one of those 100 people, I would definitely look at this differently but I would not be surprised if you were one of the policy makers with all the numbers in front of you, you would also think differently.

 

[Ehninger1212]

The all EV thing to me is just MEH.. believe it when I see it. I do however REALLY like there new delivery "Startup" BrightDrop. I think this is very interesting if they get it going soon.

 

[Bill906]

@Quicksilver I find your posts on this topic very well written. I rarely find someone who brings out that side of the argument so well. Thank you.
@Diehard your rebuttal to @Quicksilver's post is also very well written. You hit the same points I wanted to but you did it much better than I would have. Thank you.
It is almost unheard of to see a discussion on such a hot topic done so intelligently and civilly face-to-face, let alone on the internet.
I would love to sit in a room with the two of you and just listen to the conversation. We (humanity in general) need more people like you guys. We need calm intelligent conversations like you both have demonstrated.

P.S.

. I have more problems breading than average Joe

I think you meant BREATHING

 

[Revoltlution]

...They won't be all electric until 2035, which leaves five years of taxpayer bailouts, all so we can protect the jobs of idiots making inferior products. Too little too late, fuck GM!

They must finally realize what we all have seen for a couple years... if they don't change, they are doomed. Yikes, you said it well... probably too little, too late...