Blogger Lindsay Leveen at Green Explored explains,
in layman's terms, how the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has
created data "that disobey the laws of thermodynamics so that the
worthless government policy of favoring plug in vehicles over gas or
diesel powered vehicles can be supported by the public." The key,
according to Leveen, is that the EPA deliberately ignores energy losses
at each stage of the electrical process--meaning that the EPA's claim of
118 miles per gallon (MPG) for the Honda Fit means less than 41 MPG in
reality.
The price of an electric Honda Fit EV is $29,125 after a $7,500 federal tax credit. That's $12,210 more than the gas-powered Fit. It's range is only 100 miles. In contrast the all electric Telsa Model S is an attract car that (with the largest battery pack) has a range of 300 miles.
I drive a 1100 cc motorcycle. I used 10% gasohol until I was faced with a task of overhauling four carbs on another bike because the fuel ate up the rubber parts in it.
I got 33 mpg with gasohol, but since the switch, I now get 44 mpg. Sure, it costs more, but I drive it now for ten cents a mile instead of eleven. As for the green footprint, using 90% gas, it will take 11.36 gallons of pure gasoline to go 500 miles. The same 500 miles using gasohol uses 13.6 gallons of gasoline, plus 1.36 gallons of alcohol. Does this seem stupid to you? It does if you want to conserve energy, but if you get to tax people per gallon of "GAS" sold, it just means more tax profits! Getting the picture?
This article gets into the efficiency of plugging in your car instead of producing Btu's on demand from fossil fuels in car. Can anyone imagine that with the same fossil fuels(from which 95% of energy is made) is somehow cheaper coming out of the plug in your house than coming out of the pump at the gas station. WOW. Burn the same fuel, create electricity at high voltage( the best way to send long distances), then reduce it down to 120 volts, then reduce it to 12 volts DC to charge the car. Between line voltage losses, losses from 2 voltage reductions, and finally charging your batteries, why and how is this more efficient and productive that generating it on board the vehicle with the same voltage?
This is like opening your refrigerator to cool the house! The heat pumped from the box is released to the room, and energy is burned along the way, so the total cooling result id more heat produced than cooling received. Duh.
Sorry, Al Gore & friends, EPA, and the whole process, YOU ARE WRONG SCIENTIFICALLY. Oh, and don't forget HM Barack's very poignant statement, that under his energy policy, energy costs will necessarily rise. let's add the word "Significantly" to that sentence! After all, if he can get us on plug in only cars... BANG! Remember, he is outlawing coal energy and fining coal right into nonexistence, our
Other than that, everything is FINE.
Sorry for being long winded here, but, DUH, look at reality and decide for yourselves. Please prove me wrong, I hope for that...
The price of an electric Honda Fit EV is $29,125 after a $7,500 federal tax credit. That's $12,210 more than the gas-powered Fit. It's range is only 100 miles. In contrast the all electric Telsa Model S is an attract car that (with the largest battery pack) has a range of 300 miles.
ReplyDeleteI drive a 1100 cc motorcycle. I used 10% gasohol until I was faced with a task of overhauling four carbs on another bike because the fuel ate up the rubber parts in it.
ReplyDeleteI got 33 mpg with gasohol, but since the switch, I now get 44 mpg. Sure, it costs more, but I drive it now for ten cents a mile instead of eleven.
As for the green footprint, using 90% gas, it will take 11.36 gallons of pure gasoline to go 500 miles. The same 500 miles using gasohol uses 13.6 gallons of gasoline, plus 1.36 gallons of alcohol.
Does this seem stupid to you? It does if you want to conserve energy, but if you get to tax people per gallon of "GAS" sold, it just means more tax profits! Getting the picture?
This article gets into the efficiency of plugging in your car instead of producing Btu's on demand from fossil fuels in car. Can anyone imagine that with the same fossil fuels(from which 95% of energy is made) is somehow cheaper coming out of the plug in your house than coming out of the pump at the gas station. WOW. Burn the same fuel, create electricity at high voltage( the best way to send long distances), then reduce it down to 120 volts, then reduce it to 12 volts DC to charge the car. Between line voltage losses, losses from 2 voltage reductions, and finally charging your batteries, why and how is this more efficient and productive that generating it on board the vehicle with the same voltage?
This is like opening your refrigerator to cool the house! The heat pumped from the box is released to the room, and energy is burned along the way, so the total cooling result id more heat produced than cooling received. Duh.
Sorry, Al Gore & friends, EPA, and the whole process, YOU ARE WRONG SCIENTIFICALLY. Oh, and don't forget HM Barack's very poignant statement, that under his energy policy, energy costs will necessarily rise. let's add the word "Significantly" to that sentence! After all, if he can get us on plug in only cars... BANG! Remember, he is outlawing coal energy and fining coal right into nonexistence, our
Other than that, everything is FINE.
Sorry for being long winded here, but, DUH, look at reality and decide for yourselves. Please prove me wrong, I hope for that...
EPA math 34% = 100 The Democrat party twists data like pretzels to fit the narrative.
ReplyDelete