October 25, 2021

Promoters of electric vehicles (EVs) are straining out gnats and swallowing camels. Claiming that EVs are carbon free is known to be untrue. Many commentators have explained the background of the energy flows. So it must be assumed that the claim is a goal and wish for promotional purposes.

Even if we take the statement for a grain of salt, there isn't the slightest reason for promoters of EVs to be promoting EVs. Promoting EVs is straining out gnats and swallowing camels regardless of the words used.

Using natural gas in place of gasoline in cars and trucks was sometimes used for practical reasons during the 1970s, before global warming by carbon dioxide was even known to exist as a subject by the persons doing that. There were some practical advantages for burning natural gas instead of gasoline.

Now days, natural gas electric generators are the only method of expanding or replacing electric generators. No natural gas electric generator can get more than 40% efficiency. That means throwing away at least 60% of the energy that could be used directly in the vehicles in addition to a lot of waste that occurs in getting electricity to consumers.

So-called renewables as wind and solar power are not expanding significantly at this time, though there are the forever goals and futurism. There is about 3-5% of electricity in the U.S. produced by wind and solar power. Propagandists have recently been saying 37%, which is beyond the pale.

Such exaggerations are due to journalists driven to embellish and then building upon each other's embellishments. One of the starting points is to use "name plate ratings," which must account for maximum potential, not average use. Average use is typically 20% of name plate ratings. So multiplying 3-5% times five equals 15-25% name plate rating, not 37%, which means the 37% number is unlimited contrivance.

What it means is, buying an electric vehicle is about the equivalent to hooking up to natural gas generator for electricity. Why not just burn natural gas in the vehicle, at least until wind and solar power get significantly developed, which, in actuality, will never occur?

The promoters of electric vehicles are not only grossly exaggerating the amount of so-called renewable energy, they are also proclaiming benefits which would only exist in some future which is a long way off by any analysis.

Why then should anyone stretch their budgets to buy for a future, when the vehicle will be wore out long before that future could possibly exist? If the purpose is to move toward that future, burning up energy and wasting metals is not progressing toward that future. If research is moving toward that future, a few dozen drivers would provide all the information that is needed, not millions of drivers.

More electric vehicles at this time is burning up the imagined future before it gets here, regardless of the fact that such a future is never going to exist.

The reason why that self-defeating promotional campaign for EVs is occurring is partially subconscious. It's the power mongering motive. The promoters gain power in being fixers. If they were more rational in promoting research instead of a public campaign, they would have no advantage over specialists who do the hard grind without being noticed.

Mongering power requires falsehoods. Otherwise, rationality gets in the way. Falsehoods strip the rationality from a subject leaving open-ended contrivance available to incompetents for mongering power.

That means going along with the scam is putting incompetent power mongers in control of our lives—not much different from the QAnons promoting fascism—maybe even more insidious in not being as visibly destructive.