Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm

[mtdjed]

Energy Granholm demonstrates how to easily travel with her EV. Hopefully her experience turns into a learning experience. Kind of why developers put in infrastructure before they build houses.


EV driver calls cops on Energy Secretary after her staff blocks charger with ICE car | Electrek (https://electrek.co/2023/09/11/ev-driver-calls-cops-energy-secretary-after-blocks-charger-ice-car/)

[Stu from NYC]

Some people think they are more important than the rest of us.

[Caymus]

Some people think they are more important than the rest of us.

as she bellowed "do you know who I am?"

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

If only Georgia had a law requiring that only EVs can park in EV spots. Maybe the lesson is learned, and they'll pass an actual law requiring it.

Yes, it was in poor taste for the Secretary to make this decision, and absolutely, it is an ironic defeat of the purpose. But it wasn't illegal. It should be.

[mtdjed]

If only Georgia had a law requiring that only EVs can park in EV spots. Maybe the lesson is learned, and they'll pass an actual law requiring it.

Yes, it was in poor taste for the Secretary to make this decision, and absolutely, it is an ironic defeat of the purpose. But it wasn't illegal. It should be.

In all likelihood, it probably wasn't the Secretary's decision.

[Sabella]

Just another example of crucial important department heads in our government that are fools and members of the Borg.

[Taltarzac725]

In all likelihood, it probably wasn't the Secretary's decision.

I kind of doubt she makes decisions like where to park for gas. Could even have been her security detail checking out the place for her and her team's safety.

[manaboutown]

I kind of doubt she makes decisions like where to park for gas. Could even have been her security detail checking out the place for her and her team's safety.

She wasn't parking for gas. She needed her vehicle's batteries recharged.

The couple that called the police had a very young child in their car and it was sweltering hot.

[JMintzer]

She wasn't parking for gas. She needed her vehicle's batteries recharged.

The couple that called the police had a very young child in their car and it was sweltering hot.

Exactly. It was a publicity stunt that blew up in her face...

[Tvflguy]

If she dove a Tesla there would have been no issue. They are #1 by FAR with operable charging stations across the country. But why does this Admin NOT support Tesla? Because Elon Musk runs the company as well as his other endeavors including SpaceX. He is NOT their beck and call as other execs are. He’s his own man and takes risks.

And that’s why his companies thrive despite the government.

[Blueblaze]

I thought it was a brilliant demonstration of how farcically impractical it is to own a vehicle that requires more hours to charge than you can drive in a single stretch -- unless you want to quick-charge it for a mere 45 minutes and risk it becoming a bomb, while you pay more for the inconvenience of a 45 minute layover than you would have paid for 5-minute gas stop -- and that's assuming you can find a quick charger before your 250 mile range runs out.

It was a particularly hilarious touch for her to send her minions ahead to reserve a charger, and along the way, harass any normal people they discovered making use of those ridiculous charging spots that always attempt to waste the best parking spots at any facility.

Was she intentionally trying to persuade people to quit buying these ridiculous cars? No, I think our "Energy Secretary" really is so clueless about energy that she thought she could drive one of these silly machines across the country as easily as across town.

In any case, it was good for a laugh, and with clowns like Jennifer Granholm and Peter Buttigieg running things, Lord knows we need a laugh!

[Taltarzac725]

Again I doubt she was in charge of where they charge their vehicles.

I thought it was a brilliant demonstration of how farcically impractical it is to own a vehicle that requires more hours to charge than you can drive in a single stretch -- unless you want to quick-charge it for a mere 45 minutes and risk it becoming a bomb, while you pay more for the inconvenience of a 45 minute layover than you would have paid for 5-minute gas stop -- and that's assuming you can find a quick charger before your 250 mile range runs out.

It was a particularly hilarious touch for her to send her minions ahead to reserve a charger, and along the way, harass any normal people they discovered making use of those ridiculous charging spots that always attempt to waste the best parking spots at any facility.

Was she intentionally trying to persuade people to quit buying these ridiculous cars? No, I think our "Energy Secretary" really is so clueless about energy that she thought she could drive one of these silly machines across the country as easily as across town.

In any case, it was good for a laugh, and with clowns like Jennifer Granholm and Peter Buttigieg running things, Lord knows we need a laugh!

[tophcfa]

In all likelihood, it probably wasn't the Secretary's decision.

Not an excuse, if it wasn’t her it was the people she is responsible for, so it ultimately falls on her.

[Stu from NYC]

Not an excuse, if it wasn’t her it was the people she is responsible for, so it ultimately falls on her.

Very true

[JMintzer]

I kind of doubt she makes decisions like where to park for gas. Could even have been her security detail checking out the place for her and her team's safety.

Again I doubt she was in charge of where they charge their vehicles.

Excuses, excuses...

And the first on was a hoot!

[Pairadocs]

Some people think they are more important than the rest of us.

Animal Farm: We are ALL equal here; it's just that some of us are more equal than others. Orwell

[jimbomaybe]

Energy Granholm demonstrates how to easily travel with her EV. Hopefully her experience turns into a learning experience. Kind of why developers put in infrastructure before they build houses.


EV driver calls cops on Energy Secretary after her staff blocks charger with ICE car | Electrek (https://electrek.co/2023/09/11/ev-driver-calls-cops-energy-secretary-after-blocks-charger-ice-car/)
She was making a point with her demonstration, all one needs to do is have your staff/security team get out ahead of of you (in their gas powered veh) pave the way for your procession and all will be seamless, perhaps that is not the message she intended but abundantly clear

[GizmoWhiskers]

She was making a point with her demonstration, all one needs to do is have your staff/security team get out ahead of of you (in their gas powered veh) pave the way for your procession and all will be seamless, perhaps that is not the message she intended but abundantly clear
Lol... now there's a business idea - EV placeholders. Call ahead and we will wait in charging spot for you. K-ching$$$$. Villagers, WAWA 441 in Lady Lake Tesla spaces available today. Schedule check.

[Cobullymom]

I kind of doubt she makes decisions like where to park for gas. Could even have been her security detail checking out the place for her and her team's safety.
Pray tell why does the energy secretary get a security detail when the Supreme court Justices don't even have them? This woman is a bimbo and disgrace.

[Meboko]

Not very nice to call someone a bimbo. Very rude.

[Caymus]

Lol... now there's a business idea - EV placeholders. Call ahead and we will wait in charging spot for you. K-ching$$$$. Villagers, WAWA 441 in Lady Lake Tesla spaces available today. Schedule check.

Or use old chairs/furniture to reserve the spot.:smiley::smiley:

Where I grew up, people would shovel the snow in front of their homes and put chairs in the spot to save it.

[mrf0151]

No worries on EV range as maybe Toyota has a better idea and it may crush lithium:

https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=de975706f43fd23dJmltdHM9MTY5NDU2MzIwMCZpZ3VpZD0z Mjk5ZGE4YS02ZTg0LTZlNDctMzkxOS1jOWYwNmZhODZmNWImaW 5zaWQ9NTU4Ng&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=3299da8a-6e84-6e47-3919-c9f06fa86f5b&psq=toyota+solid+state+battery+news&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cubXNuLmNvbS9lbi11cy9tb25leS9jb2 1wYW5pZXMvdG95b3RhLXMtc29saWQtc3RhdGUtYmF0dGVyaWVz LXdpbGwtcnVuLXVwLXRvLTkzMi1taWxlcy1vbi1hLXNpbmdsZS 1jaGFyZ2UvYXItQUExY083TTk&ntb=1

[merrymini]

So stupid. EV s have a place but it may not have every place. This is what happens when you do not have a brain.

[Blackbird45]

They say nothing is for certain but death and taxes, that is no longer true. About every six weeks the topic of climate change and EVs appears on this site.

So, let’s dive into it. We all know that the problem with EVs is the batteries. Distance, charging time, life of the battery and cost. Now Toyota claims by 2027 they will be able to mass produce solid state batteries that will take care of most of these issues. Beside that Tesla has open some of their charging station to some other car companies, also the carmakers BMW Group, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz Group and Stellantis, will initially invest at least $1 billion in a joint venture that will build 30,000 charging ports on major highways and other locations in the United States and Canada. These companies are not doing this to save the planet, it’s a lot less expensive to slap a couple of electric motors on the wheels of a car than the cost of a combustion engine and everything that goes with it. Reduce the cost means an increase in profits.

Now let’s move onto climate change where there are two camps, those who claim we are going to be knee high in water within the next 10 years. We will label this group the Chicken-Licken who believed the sky is falling. The other group claims that changes in the climate have nothing to do with man, it is the earth going through a cycle that has happened before and there is nothing we can do to stop it. We will label this group the Ostriches with their head buried in the sand. Now who is right I’m not sure, but I lean toward Chicken-Licken "only because if they are wrong, we have wasted money and resources, on the other hand if the Ostriches are wrong, they will be responsible for wiping out mankind and I have a grandson.

What concern me more than climate change is pollution. In the early 80s I was working on a project in the California hills, on the ride to the destination the sun was trying to break through a yellow sky. I mentioned the color of the sky and the person sitting next to me a California native simply said it’s pollution, and that it usually burns off by 11am. Who in their right mind would want to live in that, in no way could that have been healthy. Don’t people believe the old saying “Don’t s**t where you eat”. I personally can’t wait for EVs to take hold before the combustion engine kills all of us with either carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide or menthane. Isn’t it nice there are three options on the menu.

[Bay Kid]

She helped me know why I would never want an EV. 45 minute charge, once you find a charging station, plus the cost of charging.

[rsmurano]

You do know why her group parked a gas car in the ev charging slot? So she would not have to wait for hours for other ev owners to charge their cars. Heaven forbid they show the truth on what really happens at charging stations.

It’s funny every climate change hoax during the last 100 years has a 10 year life span before we are all going to perish. Remember a couple years ago AOC made a prediction that in 10 years we will perish if we don’t do something about the cows farting and climate change.

Access to this page has been denied (https://www.agweb.com/opinion/doomsday-addiction-celebrating-50-years-failed-climate-predictions)

Putting the 'con' in consensus; Not only is there no 97 per cent consensus among climate scientists, many misunderstand core issues | Fraser Institute (https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/putting-the-con-in-consensus-not-only-is-there-no-97-per-cent-consensus-among-climate-scientists-many-misunderstand-core-issues)

50 years of predictions that the climate apocalypse is nigh (https://nypost.com/2021/11/12/50-years-of-predictions-that-the-climate-apocalypse-is-nigh/)

[ehonour]

Energy Granholm demonstrates how to easily travel with her EV.]

She plans a trip from Charlotte, NC to Memphis, TN as a demonstration, a total distance of 620 miles. In a gasoline car, that's one fuel stop (and a few bathroom stops, if you wish) for 10 minutes. In an EV, that's at least two recharge stops for about 1.5 hours.

But then, she somehow ends up in Augusta, GA? That's 160 miles directly out of the way?

So apparently her road trip was a planned out-of-the-way route for the purposes of demonstration. If they went to that much planning, they likely had every charging station on the route scoped out in advance to make sure the chargers were working, plus a fleet of advance cars paving the way.

Nice "demonstration" of what the average Joe might experience.

[Marine1974]

Good luck with taking a long trip with an electric car . You might spend more time charging the battery than actually driving . The land that is mined for all the material needed to make an electric car battery is rendered uninhabitable due to the toxic chemicals used in the mining process. All the heavy duty earth moving equipment is run on gasoline or diesel . The electric bus manufacturer that the U.S. poured billions into just went bankrupt. Make your own opinion of electric vehicles.
The secretary of energy blocked the charging station and probably others because they didn’t want to spend more time charging than driving . What does that tell you ?

[JRcorvette]

I thought it was a brilliant demonstration of how farcically impractical it is to own a vehicle that requires more hours to charge than you can drive in a single stretch -- unless you want to quick-charge it for a mere 45 minutes and risk it becoming a bomb, while you pay more for the inconvenience of a 45 minute layover than you would have paid for 5-minute gas stop -- and that's assuming you can find a quick charger before your 250 mile range runs out.

It was a particularly hilarious touch for her to send her minions ahead to reserve a charger, and along the way, harass any normal people they discovered making use of those ridiculous charging spots that always attempt to waste the best parking spots at any facility.

Was she intentionally trying to persuade people to quit buying these ridiculous cars? No, I think our "Energy Secretary" really is so clueless about energy that she thought she could drive one of these silly machines across the country as easily as across town.

In any case, it was good for a laugh, and with clowns like Jennifer Granholm and Peter Buttigieg running things, Lord knows we need a laugh!

Exactly…. We are not ready for most people to drive an EV. The dirty truth is that the production of an EV and it’s massive batteries pollutes much more than any gas car.

[roadrnnr]

T Now who is right I’m not sure, but I lean toward Chicken-Licken "only because if they are wrong, we have wasted money and resources, on the other hand if the Ostriches are wrong, they will be responsible for wiping out mankind and I have a grandson.

Just disregard everything these fools are doing has absolutely no effect on Climate and never will, while we pay up the nose for their "Cult" Ideology!

[Blackbird45]

Just disregard everything these fools are doing has absolutely no effect on Climate and never will, while we pay up the nose for their "Cult" Ideology!

You don't know that and neither do I, but what is more important saving a couple of bucks or mankind. Looking at the picture you have on your post even if it was proven to you, you wouldn't change your position.

[MrFlorida]

It's almost like parking in a handicap spot, no shame for these people.

[mtdjed]

[QUOTE=Blackbird45;2256103]These companies are not doing this to save the planet, it’s a lot less expensive to slap a couple of electric motors on the wheels of a car than the cost of a combustion engine and everything that goes with it. Reduce the cost means an increase in profits.

Yep, Just slap the electric motors on the cars and watch the money flow.

Ford supposedly loses $60,000 for each EV sold. And the Government has to even supplement the sales. Where does that money come from?

Ford Loses Nearly $60,000 for Every Electric Vehicle Sold
The legacy carmaker has, for the first time, published its results, distinguishing the activities of electric vehicles from those of gasoline cars. For now, clean cars are a money pit.

thestreet.com (https://www.thestreet.com/technology/ford-loses-nearly-60000-for-every-electric-vehicle-sold#:~:text=It%20appears%20that%20Ford%20Model%20 e%20recorded%20a,the%20true%20costs%20of%20the%20a ctivity%2C%20is%20-102.1%25).

[Cybersprings]

You don't know that and neither do I, but what is more important saving a couple of bucks or mankind. Looking at the picture you have on your post even if it was proven to you, you wouldn't change your position.

1. A person has a picture of a roadrunner car on their profile, therefore, if it was proven that internal combustion engines were going to kill off mankind, they wouldn't change their position. That logic is flawless.
2. But if you save a couple of bucks, you could feed the starving. What is more important to you, preventing the world from extinction from starvation or holding on to some political view? (Notice that this choice is every bit as ridiculous as the one that you offered.)

[Wondering]

Get a Life! Our country has more important issues to deal with like funding the government by paying the bills and protecting our fragile democracy.

[Stu from NYC]

The optics would have been better if the muck e mucks staffer would have been driving an EV.

[Sparky1959]

Granholm lacks commonsense, she was probably dumbest Gov Michigan ever had and we couldn’t wait to get rid of her and her bad policies. And obviously she hasn’t changed. When will she accept the fact people don’t want EV cars they aren’t practical or affordable. People want to get where they’re going fast not hang out at a charging station for hours. So many middle class people are struggling to put food on the table to feed their families….. they won’t be buying EV cars anytime soon or not at all.

[Caymus]

Granholm lacks commonsense, she was probably dumbest Gov Michigan ever had and we couldn’t wait to get rid of her and her bad policies. And obviously she hasn’t changed. When will she accept the fact people don’t want EV cars they aren’t practical or affordable. People want to get where they’re going fast not hang out at a charging station for hours. So many middle class people are struggling to put food on the table to feed their families….. they won’t be buying EV cars anytime soon or not at all.

Many people will not be able to afford an EV unless China is allowed to flood the market.

IAA Mobility: China's automakers take the world by storm with EV push | CNN Business (https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/cars/china-evs-global-intl-hnk/index.html)

[Driller703]

She helped me know why I would never want an EV. 45 minute charge, once you find a charging station, plus the cost of charging.

Oh boy! 30,000 more charging stations! Next maybe they will figure out where all electricity is coming from. Maybe we could get some from LA or San Francisco in the middle of summer! What does a brown out on a charging station look like?

[Whitley]

I do not understand why people are so upset about $5.00 a gallon gasoline. If the price really bothers you, buy a Tesla. If they can not afford one, they shouldn't be driving. That being said, I understand how it feels to be running low on battery charge. One time I was teaching the Dalai Lama how to meditate when I got a call from someone. The cat was missing and so are the batteries. Yeah, for real. This is real no joke. Nap time.

[Blackbird45]

1. A person has a picture of a roadrunner car on their profile, therefore, if it was proven that internal combustion engines were going to kill off mankind, they wouldn't change their position. That logic is flawless.
2. But if you save a couple of bucks, you could feed the starving. What is more important to you, preventing the world from extinction from starvation or holding on to some political view? (Notice that this choice is every bit as ridiculous as the one that you offered.)

No what I'm stating is you love your toy it wouldn't matter if you were wrong about climate change. Some people put pictures of themselves, children, grandchildren, even comical figures. You obviously have posted a picture of you first love and if polluting the air is a result well that life.

[Cybersprings]

I do not understand why people are so upset about $5.00 a gallon gasoline. If the price really bothers you, buy a Tesla. If they can not afford one, they shouldn't be driving. That being said, I understand how it feels to be running low on battery charge. One time I was teaching the Dalai Lama how to meditate when I got a call from someone. The cat was missing and so are the batteries. Yeah, for real. This is real no joke. Nap time.

I might spend the next few days trying to ascertain the meaning of this post. I know I have seen you name, but don't recall your previous posts. So, I am not sure which part of this you are poking fun at, or maybe everyone in the thread?

[Cybersprings]

No what I'm stating is you love your toy it wouldn't matter if you were wrong about climate change. Some people put pictures of themselves, children, grandchildren, even comical figures. You obviously have posted a picture of you first love and if polluting the air is a result well that life.

I kind of get what you are tying to say, but still think I disagree with your premise.
1. If someone posts a picture of their Grandchild, does that mean that is their first love or they love them more than their wife or their children? Lots of reasons to post that as a pic rather than something else without it being "obviously his first love". So, I still assert that point isn't logical.
2. I think you nailed it without even knowing you did, while making an invalid assumption. The invalid assumption was that IF you were wrong about climate change and it was proven, you wouldn't care or change. I don't think that is a reasonable conclusion from the info you have (a charger as a profile pic). The point that you nailed was IF HE WAS WRONG ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. That's just it. No one really knows (please do not quote the invalid 99% of scientists thing). Lots of people want to create hardships for others (higher taxes, prohibiting this or that, 45 minute charges every x miles rather than 5 minute fill up, etc) without proof of the actual effects of the things they are blaming on the climate or what the results of the proposed changes will be. Ask any expert what the impact of the U.S. completely eliminating internal combustion engines would be, and they cannot give you an answer. Many of us like to deal in facts. We have heard these dire warnings for 40 or more years, and none of them have actually occurred. So, pardon us if we don't want to radically change things based purely on supposition.

[manaboutown]

I wonder how much this propagandistic charade cost us taxpayers? How many gas guzzling SUVs were escorting the EV? How many salaried personnel were involved? Were other EVs making the trip as well? How did they all get back to where they came from? Drive? Fly? How much were the hotel and restaurant bills?

[Cybersprings]

I am really curious. Do all of you who are posting about climate change caused by fossil fuels drive electric golf carts? If not, why not?

[Pugchief]

I am really curious. Do all of you who are posting about climate change caused by fossil fuels drive electric golf carts? If not, why not?

Of course not. The goal is to get other people to comply, without actually doing so yourself.

[Blackbird45]

I kind of get what you are tying to say, but still think I disagree with your premise.
1. If someone posts a picture of their Grandchild, does that mean that is their first love or they love them more than their wife or their children? Lots of reasons to post that as a pic rather than something else without it being "obviously his first love". So, I still assert that point isn't logical.
2. I think you nailed it without even knowing you did, while making an invalid assumption. The invalid assumption was that IF you were wrong about climate change and it was proven, you wouldn't care or change. I don't think that is a reasonable conclusion from the info you have (a charger as a profile pic). The point that you nailed was IF HE WAS WRONG ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE. That's just it. No one really knows (please do not quote the invalid 99% of scientists thing). Lots of people want to create hardships for others (higher taxes, prohibiting this or that, 45 minute charges every x miles rather than 5 minute fill up, etc) without proof of the actual effects of the things they are blaming on the climate or what the results of the proposed changes will be. Ask any expert what the impact of the U.S. completely eliminating internal combustion engines would be, and they cannot give you an answer. Many of us like to deal in facts. We have heard these dire warnings for 40 or more years, and none of them have actually occurred. So, pardon us if we don't want to radically change things based purely on supposition.

In my first post I stated my main concern, even over climate change was pollution. Now ICE does add pollutant into the air and even with catalytic converters they still pump out fume. I'm sure if you stayed in a lock garage with the motor running you would agree. Now at the moment EVs are not totally pollutant free but they are better than ICEs and companies are investing lots of money into it. Now my point is this and I'm not going to bring up 99 percent of the scientist. If only 20% said that climate change was brought on by man, I still would take their side.
The deciding factor for me is money or life and to me preserving life is more important.

[Bwanajim]

EVs will never work & kinda dumb when they profess it’s for the environment. Child slave labor is used to mine all the minerals that go into the batteries. A new battery could be $20,000! And how do you dispose of them?
The cost for the government to install all these charging stations would be beyond belief! And do you really want a vehicle that you can only drive a couple hundred miles and then have to take a couple hours to charge it? How is that vehicle going to work when you’re stuck in a traffic jam in the snow up north? Let’s not mention that fire hazard. The average city block does not have the infrastructure for more than two or three homes to be able to put in a charging station. And how is the electricity generated to charge them? Fossil fuels, of course.
But it feels good������������*♂️

[Blackbird45]

Of course not. The goal is to get other people to comply, without actually doing so yourself.

I believe you know the answer, it's distance. Once the auto makers either with solid state batteries or whatever can defeat this problem, you know that golf carts will chine in. Then I be more than happy to switch to an electric golf cart. Beats going to a gas station.

[Blackbird45]

EVs will never work & kinda dumb when they profess it’s for the environment. Child slave labor is used to mine all the minerals that go into the batteries. A new battery could be $20,000! And how do you dispose of them?
The cost for the government to install all these charging stations would be beyond belief! And do you really want a vehicle that you can only drive a couple hundred miles and then have to take a couple hours to charge it? How is that vehicle going to work when you’re stuck in a traffic jam in the snow up north? Let’s not mention that fire hazard. The average city block does not have the infrastructure for more than two or three homes to be able to put in a charging station. And how is the electricity generated to charge them? Fossil fuels, of course.
But it feels good������������*♂️

EVs are going to happen, and it has little to do with Climate Change. Auto makers see a new market and EV's are less expensive to produce. When I say less expensive, I'm not only talking less parts but also less manpower. Why do you think the UAW is so against this. What fuels this country is money and all these companies see a gold mine in the horizon.

[mtdjed]

.
The deciding factor for me is money or life and to me preserving life is more important.

Which must mean you are driving an EV since that was the topic of the thread. It is great to see someone with solid principles.

[Taltarzac725]

I recall when I was writing all the Attorney Generals of each state about the Florida Victim Services Directory and a link to their state's version of it in various libraries' websites in their states that Ms. Jennifer Granholm responded with a letter that she would look into it for the State of Michigan. Or something like that. This would have been around 2002.

Only a few AGs responded.

[Cybersprings]

In my first post I stated my main concern, even over climate change was pollution. Now ICE does add pollutant into the air and even with catalytic converters they still pump out fume. I'm sure if you stayed in a lock garage with the motor running you would agree. Now at the moment EVs are not totally pollutant free but they are better than ICEs and companies are investing lots of money into it. Now my point is this and I'm not going to bring up 99 percent of the scientist. If only 20% said that climate change was brought on by man, I still would take their side.
The deciding factor for me is money or life and to me preserving life is more important.

1. I agree with you about the motor running in a locked garage. I also wouldn't clean my bathroom with bleach without some ventilation. Do we need to get rid of bleach?
2. If 20% said climate change was brought on by man but 80% said otherwise, you would still take the side of the 20%? Would the 20% need any proof, or just have to say it?
3. Please tell me that 100% of the money you have in excess of your basic needs you donate to combat cancer and other diseases, world hunger, abortion, and violent crime, that you don't fly, and that you don't own an ICE car or gas golf cart. Otherwise, your preserving life over money is merely virtue signalling.

[Cybersprings]

I believe you know the answer, it's distance. Once the auto makers either with solid state batteries or whatever can defeat this problem, you know that golf carts will chine in. Then I be more than happy to switch to an electric golf cart. Beats going to a gas station.

So money or life, you choose life.
Convenience or life, you choose convenience.

Did I misunderstand?

[Stu from NYC]

I recall when I was writing all the Attorney Generals of each state about the Florida Victim Services Directory and a link to their state's version of it in various libraries' websites in their states that Ms. Jennifer Granholm responded with a letter that she would look into it for the State of Michigan. Or something like that. This would have been around 2002.

Only a few AGs responded.

Did she respond or was this the usual form letter most elected representatives send back that they are looking into it while tossing your letter in circular file?

[Taltarzac725]

Did she respond or was this the usual form letter most elected representatives send back that they are looking into it while tossing your letter in circular file?

Not at all. And these people usually could figure out that I was someone with 4 degrees and connections. I do have a JD from the U of MN and a Masters in Librarianship from the U of Denver. I would often send copies of responses I received from other people to show that I was onto something that could help people.

And I was posting stuff a lot on Findlaw's message boards as well. But did find myself the target of an incredibly gifted troll on there.

[Blackbird45]

1. I agree with you about the motor running in a locked garage. I also wouldn't clean my bathroom with bleach without some ventilation. Do we need to get rid of bleach?
2. If 20% said climate change was brought on by man but 80% said otherwise, you would still take the side of the 20%? Would the 20% need any proof, or just have to say it?
3. Please tell me that 100% of the money you have in excess of your basic needs you donate to combat cancer and other diseases, world hunger, abortion, and violent crime, that you don't fly, and that you don't own an ICE car or gas golf cart. Otherwise, your preserving life over money is merely virtue signalling.

I get you want what you want, but EVs are going to replace ICE if you like it or not. Companies are investing billions do you really think they are just doing this for the climate. Sothern Electric just started up one of their nuclear units last month and another one will probably go online by the first quarter of 2024 at a cost of nearly $30 billion. Do you think they did this because of the climate. What come first in this country is profits and if climate benefits it a bonus. No matter what argument you put up, profits will trump it.

[Cybersprings]

I get you want what you want, but EVs are going to replace ICE if you like it or not. Companies are investing billions do you really think they are just doing this for the climate. Sothern Electric just started up one of their nuclear units last month and another one will probably go online by the first quarter of 2024 at a cost of nearly $30 billion. Do you think they did this because of the climate. What come first in this country is profits and if climate benefits it a bonus. No matter what argument you put up, profits will trump it.

It sounds like you are offering up capitalism as your basis for saying that EVs will REPLACE ICEs. If that were truly the case, the government wouldn't need to be spending billions in subsidies for EVs, solar, etc. BTW, I have zero objection to EVs. In fact, I own an electric golf cart, do you? (and I had to spend $1500 to replace the batteries after 5 years.) I just don't want to have to pay for you to have one (via tax dollars) because YOU choose life over money. Which means you were the one asserting climate/polution was the reason for Evs.

I thought, could be badly mistaken, was that the thread was actually about the hypocrisy of a government official having a gas vehicle block the charging station (preventing others from using it) so that she could have immediate access to it when she got there on a traveling boondoggle (oops, roadshow) showing at awesome EVs are and how easy it is to travel with them.

If we are making predictions, I predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. Unless the government continues down the path of making me pay for something that you claim is for the profit of the corporations.

[Blackbird45]

It sounds like you are offering up capitalism as your basis for saying that EVs will REPLACE ICEs. If that were truly the case, the government wouldn't need to be spending billions in subsidies for EVs, solar, etc. BTW, I have zero objection to EVs. In fact, I own an electric golf cart, do you? (and I had to spend $1500 to replace the batteries after 5 years.) I just don't want to have to pay for you to have one (via tax dollars) because YOU choose life over money. Which means you were the one asserting climate/polution was the reason for Evs.

I thought, could be badly mistaken, was that the thread was actually about the hypocrisy of a government official having a gas vehicle block the charging station (preventing others from using it) so that she could have immediate access to it when she got there on a traveling boondoggle (oops, roadshow) showing at awesome EVs are and how easy it is to travel with them.

If we are making predictions, I predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. Unless the government continues down the path of making me pay for something that you claim is for the profit of the corporations.

First of course I'm using capitalism and as far as taxpayer dollars being used in to promote this is not something knew. A few years back there was a number of states that used taxpayer's dollars to build a tank that the army did not want because it was good for their constituents.

I've lived in The Village for 12 year and am not a golfer, so when I was told I needed a golf cart I went with whatever was suggested. A matter of fact it was sitting in my garage so long without use, I just paid out over $200 bucks to have the battery replaced, just to move in from one side of my garage to the other. I agree with you the hypocrisy of a government official using ICE is a problem, but there will come a point when they'll have to change. You predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. I would not be surprised if arguments like this were probably made when horse supporters saw the first automobiles. It took longer than 20 years, but we have the blueprints and today we move much faster. With the improvements to EVs and dropping prices I would not be shocked to see a major change with in 10.

[Stu from NYC]

First of course I'm using capitalism and as far as taxpayer dollars being used in to promote this is not something knew. A few years back there was a number of states that used taxpayer's dollars to build a tank that the army did not want because it was good for their constituents.

I've lived in The Village for 12 year and am not a golfer, so when I was told I needed a golf cart I went with whatever was suggested. A matter of fact it was sitting in my garage so long without use, I just paid out over $200 bucks to have the battery replaced, just to move in from one side of my garage to the other. I agree with you the hypocrisy of a government official using ICE is a problem, but there will come a point when they'll have to change. You predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. I would not be surprised if arguments like this were probably made when horse supporters saw the first automobiles. It took longer than 20 years, but we have the blueprints and today we move much faster. With the improvements to EVs and dropping prices I would not be shocked to see a major change with in 10.

I think you are right about a major change but wrong with what it will be. I do believe someone will figure out a way for some new technology, perhaps hydrogen, to power motor vehicles.

[Stu from NYC]

Of course not. The goal is to get other people to comply, without actually doing so yourself.

In other words do as I say not as I do.

[Pugchief]

I believe you know the answer, it's distance. Once the auto makers either with solid state batteries or whatever can defeat this problem, you know that golf carts will chine in. Then I be more than happy to switch to an electric golf cart. Beats going to a gas station.

Lithium ion electric golf carts with an 80 mile range are now available; I priced one out at the Villages Golf Car. How often do you drive your golf cart more than 80 miles in a day?

If the answer is rarely if ever (it is), then you have no excuse for not driving one of these based on your previous comments. Easy full recharge overnight.

[Pugchief]

In other words do as I say not as I do.

Exactly. Or as the phrase was coined during the pandemic, "rules for thee, but not for me"

[Blackbird45]

I think you are right about a major change but wrong with what it will be. I do believe someone will figure out a way for some new technology, perhaps hydrogen, to power motor vehicles.

Hydrogen is better for the environment, but with the investments made by all these companies and the cost to manufacture a hydrogen vehicle plus the inconvenience of people still having to go to a fueling station is a problem. Maybe solar I don't know but I can't believe it would be hydrogen powered. As I allude earlier it all has to do with the all mighty dollar.

[rsimpson]

I thought it was a brilliant demonstration of how farcically impractical it is to own a vehicle that requires more hours to charge than you can drive in a single stretch -- unless you want to quick-charge it for a mere 45 minutes and risk it becoming a bomb, while you pay more for the inconvenience of a 45 minute layover than you would have paid for 5-minute gas stop -- and that's assuming you can find a quick charger before your 250 mile range runs out.

It was a particularly hilarious touch for her to send her minions ahead to reserve a charger, and along the way, harass any normal people they discovered making use of those ridiculous charging spots that always attempt to waste the best parking spots at any facility.

Was she intentionally trying to persuade people to quit buying these ridiculous cars? No, I think our "Energy Secretary" really is so clueless about energy that she thought she could drive one of these silly machines across the country as easily as across town.

In any case, it was good for a laugh, and with clowns like Jennifer Granholm and Peter Buttigieg running things, Lord knows we need a laugh!

Billiant Post!!

[Stu from NYC]

Hydrogen is better for the environment, but with the investments made by all these companies and the cost to manufacture a hydrogen vehicle plus the inconvenience of people still having to go to a fueling station is a problem. Maybe solar I don't know but I can't believe it would be hydrogen powered. As I allude earlier it all has to do with the all mighty dollar.

Our economic system is capitalism. If a company made a breakthrough and it was economically feasible, believe we would have a different system down the road than ev. Lithium mining is not exactly green is it?

[jimjamuser]

I thought it was a brilliant demonstration of how farcically impractical it is to own a vehicle that requires more hours to charge than you can drive in a single stretch -- unless you want to quick-charge it for a mere 45 minutes and risk it becoming a bomb, while you pay more for the inconvenience of a 45 minute layover than you would have paid for 5-minute gas stop -- and that's assuming you can find a quick charger before your 250 mile range runs out.

It was a particularly hilarious touch for her to send her minions ahead to reserve a charger, and along the way, harass any normal people they discovered making use of those ridiculous charging spots that always attempt to waste the best parking spots at any facility.

Was she intentionally trying to persuade people to quit buying these ridiculous cars? No, I think our "Energy Secretary" really is so clueless about energy that she thought she could drive one of these silly machines across the country as easily as across town.

In any case, it was good for a laugh, and with clowns like Jennifer Granholm and Peter Buttigieg running things, Lord knows we need a laugh!
Once again I have to inform people that as far as E-vehicles go, we are in about the same early development and ACCEPTANCE period as the Internal Combustion Engine was in about 1900. The ICE vehicle back then was REPLACING the horse and buggy just as E-vehicles are replacing gas engine vehicles today. In 1900 there would NOT have been enough gas filling stations just like today enough Electric vehicle charging stations are just starting to be built. The point is that ICE vehicles have had over 120 years of engineering product development by now. E-vehicles are in their INFANCY. They are electrical and mechanical BABIES. They have some minor early "teething" problems to overcome (like enough charging stations).
.......E-vehicles are about 8% of new vehicle sales in the US. In Europe, E-vehicles are about 20% of new vehicle sales. E-vehicles have OVERWHELMING advantages over Infernal Combustion Engine vehicles. !st and foremost, they reduce the world's # 1 problem.......Global Warming. It is better to put emission control devices on ONE large electrical power generation station than to put 100 catalytic converters on each individual IC car and truck. A 2nd advantage of E-vehicles over IC vehicles is their Center of Gravity is lower due to the low placement of their batteries. Lower CG of E-vehicles gives better acceleration, better braking, and better cornering / handling than gas engine vehicles with high CG due to upright pistons. Another advantage is the high instantaneous torque associated with electric DC motors. Another advantage is the circular motion of an electrical motor vs the up-and-down motion of a piston motor that needs a crankshaft and a flywheel to convert to circular motion. And the IC engine needs several gears in a transmission in order to provide enough torque.
......So, basically, gas and diesel vehicles are rapidly becoming OUTDATED technology!

[Taltarzac725]

The only letter (December 10, 2001) from Jennifer Granholm that I can find at present is one about her sending me MI laws information for a website I had been thinking about creating which would have links to various victim service directories. I had been using the Florida Victim Services Directory as a model.

Never really got that off the ground.

But still I do applaud her using vehicles that help the environment even if some of her travel details met speed bumps.

[jimjamuser]

Good luck with taking a long trip with an electric car . You might spend more time charging the battery than actually driving . The land that is mined for all the material needed to make an electric car battery is rendered uninhabitable due to the toxic chemicals used in the mining process. All the heavy duty earth moving equipment is run on gasoline or diesel . The electric bus manufacturer that the U.S. poured billions into just went bankrupt. Make your own opinion of electric vehicles.
The secretary of energy blocked the charging station and probably others because they didn’t want to spend more time charging than driving . What does that tell you ?
It tells ME that we are in a period of rapid development just like about 1900 when the world was going from horse and buggies to InFernal Combustion Engine vehicles.

[jimjamuser]

Get a Life! Our country has more important issues to deal with like funding the government by paying the bills and protecting our fragile democracy.
Planet warming due to gas vehicle CO2 production IS the world's # 1 problem.

[jimjamuser]

Granholm lacks commonsense, she was probably dumbest Gov Michigan ever had and we couldn’t wait to get rid of her and her bad policies. And obviously she hasn’t changed. When will she accept the fact people don’t want EV cars they aren’t practical or affordable. People want to get where they’re going fast not hang out at a charging station for hours. So many middle class people are struggling to put food on the table to feed their families….. they won’t be buying EV cars anytime soon or not at all.
Electrical motors in E- vehicles have about 1/10 the number of parts as Infernal combustion engine vehicles so when early problems are ironed out and E-vehicles are mass-produced - they will cost less.

[mtdjed]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45 View Post

"I've lived in The Village for 12 year and am not a golfer, so when I was told I needed a golf cart I went with whatever was suggested. A matter of fact it was sitting in my garage so long without use, I just paid out over $200 bucks to have the battery replaced, just to move in from one side of my garage to the other."

That is scary in several ways.

[jimjamuser]

I am really curious. Do all of you who are posting about climate change caused by fossil fuels drive electric golf carts? If not, why not?
Another question would be IF we lived in a community that valued HEALTHY clean air for older residents and stopping the record temperatures recorded here and worldwide this summer and preventing the rising costs of gasoline and the dependence on Saudi Arabian oil - would NOT the powers-that-be have REQUIRED ELECTRIC golf carts 5 years ago.

[jimjamuser]

In my first post I stated my main concern, even over climate change was pollution. Now ICE does add pollutant into the air and even with catalytic converters they still pump out fume. I'm sure if you stayed in a lock garage with the motor running you would agree. Now at the moment EVs are not totally pollutant free but they are better than ICEs and companies are investing lots of money into it. Now my point is this and I'm not going to bring up 99 percent of the scientist. If only 20% said that climate change was brought on by man, I still would take their side.
The deciding factor for me is money or life and to me preserving life is more important.
Actually, global warming or climate change is ACTUALLY the same as pollution - CO2 pollution, which ends up in the upper atmosphere and is reflecting HEAT AND making this summer DEADLY hot worldwide. Then you throw in the rapidly increasing world population and we and the earth have serious problems.

[jimjamuser]

I recall when I was writing all the Attorney Generals of each state about the Florida Victim Services Directory and a link to their state's version of it in various libraries' websites in their states that Ms. Jennifer Granholm responded with a letter that she would look into it for the State of Michigan. Or something like that. This would have been around 2002.

Only a few AGs responded.
A good post. I will REMEMBER that!

[jimjamuser]

First of course I'm using capitalism and as far as taxpayer dollars being used in to promote this is not something knew. A few years back there was a number of states that used taxpayer's dollars to build a tank that the army did not want because it was good for their constituents.

I've lived in The Village for 12 year and am not a golfer, so when I was told I needed a golf cart I went with whatever was suggested. A matter of fact it was sitting in my garage so long without use, I just paid out over $200 bucks to have the battery replaced, just to move in from one side of my garage to the other. I agree with you the hypocrisy of a government official using ICE is a problem, but there will come a point when they'll have to change. You predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. I would not be surprised if arguments like this were probably made when horse supporters saw the first automobiles. It took longer than 20 years, but we have the blueprints and today we move much faster. With the improvements to EVs and dropping prices I would not be shocked to see a major change with in 10.
8% of new US automobiles are Electrical. About 20% of new European autos are electrical. And China is making many new E-vehicles and selling within China and to Australia, New Zealand, and others. So it looks like the US will have to be dragged "kicking and screaming" into the NEW automobile world.

[Taltarzac725]

A good post. I will REMEMBER that!

AOL kicked me off a few times for sending too many e-mails. These were usually CC to many people and organizations and also BCC (blind copies which only I and the receiver of these could see).

I do think we need to do more about global warming and the like but I still love my gas car and gas powered golf cart. I do not golf so there is that. The electric cars and the like are out of my budget.

[Blueblaze]

Once again I have to inform people that as far as E-vehicles go, we are in about the same early development and ACCEPTANCE period as the Internal Combustion Engine was in about 1900. The ICE vehicle back then was REPLACING the horse and buggy just as E-vehicles are replacing gas engine vehicles today. In 1900 there would NOT have been enough gas filling stations just like today enough Electric vehicle charging stations are just starting to be built. The point is that ICE vehicles have had over 120 years of engineering product development by now. E-vehicles are in their INFANCY. They are electrical and mechanical BABIES. They have some minor early "teething" problems to overcome (like enough charging stations).
.......E-vehicles are about 8% of new vehicle sales in the US. In Europe, E-vehicles are about 20% of new vehicle sales. E-vehicles have OVERWHELMING advantages over Infernal Combustion Engine vehicles. !st and foremost, they reduce the world's # 1 problem.......Global Warming. It is better to put emission control devices on ONE large electrical power generation station than to put 100 catalytic converters on each individual IC car and truck. A 2nd advantage of E-vehicles over IC vehicles is their Center of Gravity is lower due to the low placement of their batteries. Lower CG of E-vehicles gives better acceleration, better braking, and better cornering / handling than gas engine vehicles with high CG due to upright pistons. Another advantage is the high instantaneous torque associated with electric DC motors. Another advantage is the circular motion of an electrical motor vs the up-and-down motion of a piston motor that needs a crankshaft and a flywheel to convert to circular motion. And the IC engine needs several gears in a transmission in order to provide enough torque.
......So, basically, gas and diesel vehicles are rapidly becoming OUTDATED technology!

Nobody ever had beg the gooberment for gas stations in the horse-and-buggy days. If anybody actually wanted to pay more to wait 45 minutes to charge their lithium bomb for another 250 mile drive, there would be new Rockefellor creating a "Standard Electricity Company", to make sure you could give him your money.

[Blueblaze]

Hydrogen is better for the environment, but with the investments made by all these companies and the cost to manufacture a hydrogen vehicle plus the inconvenience of people still having to go to a fueling station is a problem. Maybe solar I don't know but I can't believe it would be hydrogen powered. As I allude earlier it all has to do with the all mighty dollar.

Since water vapor (which makes up 2% of the atmosphere) is the source of Earth's greenhouse, not CO2 (0.04%), Lord help us if we ever start intentionally burning hydrogen instead of hydrocarbons.

In fact, burning gasoline produces 5 times as much water vapor as CO2 for the simple reason that their is five times as many hydrogen atoms in a molecule of gasoline as carbon.

If burning hydrocarbons is the source of our recent warm weather, it's because of the "hydro", not the "carbon"!

[JP]

My former governor. An embarrassment then, an embarrassment now. One of the many reasons I moved out of Michigan, a failing state.

[JMintzer]

I do not understand why people are so upset about $5.00 a gallon gasoline. If the price really bothers you, buy a Tesla. If they can not afford one, they shouldn't be driving. That being said, I understand how it feels to be running low on battery charge. One time I was teaching the Dalai Lama how to meditate when I got a call from someone. The cat was missing and so are the batteries. Yeah, for real. This is real no joke. Nap time.

"Gunga Galunga..."

[JMintzer]

I am really curious. Do all of you who are posting about climate change caused by fossil fuels drive electric golf carts? If not, why not?

Can you say "Hypocrisy"? I knew you could...

- Mr Rogers

[JMintzer]

Once again I have to inform people that as far as E-vehicles go, we are in about the same early development and ACCEPTANCE period as the Internal Combustion Engine was in about 1900. The ICE vehicle back then was REPLACING the horse and buggy just as E-vehicles are replacing gas engine vehicles today. In 1900 there would NOT have been enough gas filling stations just like today enough Electric vehicle charging stations are just starting to be built. The point is that ICE vehicles have had over 120 years of engineering product development by now. E-vehicles are in their INFANCY. They are electrical and mechanical BABIES. They have some minor early "teething" problems to overcome (like enough charging stations).
.......E-vehicles are about 8% of new vehicle sales in the US. In Europe, E-vehicles are about 20% of new vehicle sales. E-vehicles have OVERWHELMING advantages over Infernal Combustion Engine vehicles. !st and foremost, they reduce the world's # 1 problem.......Global Warming. It is better to put emission control devices on ONE large electrical power generation station than to put 100 catalytic converters on each individual IC car and truck. A 2nd advantage of E-vehicles over IC vehicles is their Center of Gravity is lower due to the low placement of their batteries. Lower CG of E-vehicles gives better acceleration, better braking, and better cornering / handling than gas engine vehicles with high CG due to upright pistons. Another advantage is the high instantaneous torque associated with electric DC motors. Another advantage is the circular motion of an electrical motor vs the up-and-down motion of a piston motor that needs a crankshaft and a flywheel to convert to circular motion. And the IC engine needs several gears in a transmission in order to provide enough torque.
......So, basically, gas and diesel vehicles are rapidly becoming OUTDATED technology!

Said the guy who doesn't own an EV...

[JMintzer]

Planet warming due to gas vehicle CO2 production IS the world's # 1 problem.

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

[JMintzer]

8% of new US automobiles are Electrical. About 20% of new European autos are electrical. And China is making many new E-vehicles and selling within China and to Australia, New Zealand, and others. So it looks like the US will have to be dragged "kicking and screaming" into the NEW automobile world.

Incorrect...

"
What percentage of 2022 car sales are electric? During the different quarters of 2022, EV car sales saw a consistent improvement. The percentage of electric cars sold in the US is now 6%. A market share of 6% means, of all cars sold in 2022, 6% were electric vehicles of different segments."

[Taltarzac725]

My former governor. An embarrassment then, an embarrassment now. One of the many reasons I moved out of Michigan, a failing state.

She did good things for the State of Michigan. Jennifer Granholm - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Granholm)

[Cybersprings]

First of course I'm using capitalism and as far as taxpayer dollars being used in to promote this is not something knew. A few years back there was a number of states that used taxpayer's dollars to build a tank that the army did not want because it was good for their constituents.

I don't think a state government using tax payer dollars to build a tank for National Guard(??) use is a good example of capitalism (or really an example at all). Capitalism is about free market. Government spending is never about free market.

I've lived in The Village for 12 year and am not a golfer, so when I was told I needed a golf cart I went with whatever was suggested. A matter of fact it was sitting in my garage so long without use, I just paid out over $200 bucks to have the battery replaced, just to move in from one side of my garage to the other.
So you are saying you don't own an electric cart, and you own a gas car but never use it. If that is your point, than I agree that, in that case, you are living your principles. Even selling it would mean someone else would use it so keeping that gas cart from operating is the best you can do for your cause.
I agree with you the hypocrisy of a government official using ICE is a problem, but there will come a point when they'll have to change. You predict EVs will not outnumber ICE cars for more than 20 years. I would not be surprised if arguments like this were probably made when horse supporters saw the first automobiles. It took longer than 20 years, but we have the blueprints and today we move much faster. With the improvements to EVs and dropping prices would not be shocked to see a major change with in 10.
So it sounds like you agree that when someone like me made a prediction about horse to automobile change being longer than 20 years, they were correct. I went out on a limb with my prediction (not that there are any repercussions for being wrong) but what do you consider a major change in 10 years? more than half of the vehicles are Evs?

[Cybersprings]

Once again I have to inform people that as far as E-vehicles go, we are in about the same early development and ACCEPTANCE period as the Internal Combustion Engine was in about 1900. The ICE vehicle back then was REPLACING the horse and buggy just as E-vehicles are replacing gas engine vehicles today. In 1900 there would NOT have been enough gas filling stations just like today enough Electric vehicle charging stations are just starting to be built. The point is that ICE vehicles have had over 120 years of engineering product development by now. E-vehicles are in their INFANCY. They are electrical and mechanical BABIES. They have some minor early "teething" problems to overcome (like enough charging stations).
.......E-vehicles are about 8% of new vehicle sales in the US. In Europe, E-vehicles are about 20% of new vehicle sales. E-vehicles have OVERWHELMING advantages over Infernal Combustion Engine vehicles. !st and foremost, they reduce the world's # 1 problem.......Global Warming. It is better to put emission control devices on ONE large electrical power generation station than to put 100 catalytic converters on each individual IC car and truck. A 2nd advantage of E-vehicles over IC vehicles is their Center of Gravity is lower due to the low placement of their batteries. Lower CG of E-vehicles gives better acceleration, better braking, and better cornering / handling than gas engine vehicles with high CG due to upright pistons. Another advantage is the high instantaneous torque associated with electric DC motors. Another advantage is the circular motion of an electrical motor vs the up-and-down motion of a piston motor that needs a crankshaft and a flywheel to convert to circular motion. And the IC engine needs several gears in a transmission in order to provide enough torque.
......So, basically, gas and diesel vehicles are rapidly becoming OUTDATED technology!

With that statement alone, it is apparent there is no need to pay any attention to the post.

[Cybersprings]

Another question would be IF we lived in a community that valued HEALTHY clean air for older residents and stopping the record temperatures recorded here and worldwide this summer and preventing the rising costs of gasoline and the dependence on Saudi Arabian oil - would NOT the powers-that-be have REQUIRED ELECTRIC golf carts 5 years ago.

The answer would be NO for too many reasons to be listed.

[Stu from NYC]

Said the guy who doesn't own an EV...

As I said earlier in this thread but bears repeating, Do as I say not as I do.

Obviously he knows better than the rest of us how we should spend our money.

[Taltarzac725]

Not an excuse, if it wasn’t her it was the people she is responsible for, so it ultimately falls on her.

Not sure that follows. Rarely would an employer be responsible for the actions of the employee especially if that employee would be expected to use their own judgment in a situation far from the control of anyone else.

[JMintzer]

Not sure that follows. Rarely would an employer be responsible for the actions of the employee especially if that employee would be expected to use their own judgment in a situation far from the control of anyone else.

Not sure that follows... Ever heard of the term, "Captain of the ship"?

[Cybersprings]

Not sure that follows. Rarely would an employer be responsible for the actions of the employee especially if that employee would be expected to use their own judgment in a situation far from the control of anyone else.

Really??? Rarely??? Who gets sued when something happens in a business, the employee or the business owner?

[manaboutown]

Not sure that follows. Rarely would an employer be responsible for the actions of the employee especially if that employee would be expected to use their own judgment in a situation far from the control of anyone else.

Really? The employees were acting within the scope of their employment and not off on a frolic of their own.

It is my understanding you attended law school...remember Joel v. Morison?

Joel v Morison [1834] EWHC KB J39 (3 July 1834) (https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/KB/1834/J39.html)

and respondeat superior? Respondeat superior Definition & Meaning | Merriam-Webster Legal (https://www.merriam-webster.com/legal/respondeat%20superior)

[Taltarzac725]

Really??? Rarely??? Who gets sued when something happens in a business, the employee or the business owner?

Facts matter. If it is a person sent ahead to make sure there is a parking space to recharge an electric car I doubt if the Secretary had much of an input in these actions.

Someone that did not clean up on Aisle 11 could be sued along with the supervisor, store owner and maybe even the chain involved if there is one. That would depend on the facts.

[Stu from NYC]

Facts matter. If it is a person sent ahead to make sure there is a parking space to recharge an electric car I doubt if the Secretary had much of an input in these actions.

Someone that did not clean up on Aisle 11 could be sued along with the supervisor, store owner and maybe even the chain involved if there is one. That would depend on the facts.

Her people work or her so she takes responsibility or at least she should.

[Taltarzac725]

Her people work or her so she takes responsibility or at least she should.

The problem is that she is being blamed for some mess up by an employee or maybe even just a civil servant of some kind.

[manaboutown]

The problem is that she is being blamed for some mess up by an employee or maybe even just a civil servant of some kind.

She is to blame and should be blamed. As their employer she is responsible for their acts within their scope of employment.

[JMintzer]

The problem is that she is being blamed for some mess up by an employee or maybe even just a civil servant of some kind.

It was "her team"...

Are you really trying to make excuses for her?

[Cybersprings]

Facts matter. If it is a person sent ahead to make sure there is a parking space to recharge an electric car I doubt if the Secretary had much of an input in these actions.

Someone that did not clean up on Aisle 11 could be sued along with the supervisor, store owner and maybe even the chain involved if there is one. That would depend on the facts.

And how much input did the chain have on the person not cleaning up Aisle 11?

[Taltarzac725]

And how much input did the chain have on the person not cleaning up Aisle 11?

Depends on the facts. Maybe the mess on Aisle 11 was caused when the store was closed and they had not hired enough people to clean first thing in the morning when a shopper fell.

[manaboutown]

I recall when I was writing all the Attorney Generals of each state about the Florida Victim Services Directory and a link to their state's version of it in various libraries' websites in their states that Ms. Jennifer Granholm responded with a letter that she would look into it for the State of Michigan. Or something like that. This would have been around 2002.

Only a few AGs responded.

Well, just for starters she has lied under oath and violated the Hatch Act since then.

[JMintzer]

Depends on the facts. Maybe the mess on Aisle 11 was caused when the store was closed and they had not hired enough people to clean first thing in the morning when a shopper fell.

I love your fantasy explanations... Maybe it was Aliens!