[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

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]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

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]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

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]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

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]

Originally Posted by 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!

Billiant Post!!

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

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]

Originally Posted by 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!

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]

Originally Posted by 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 ?

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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?

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]

Originally Posted by Blackbird45

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

A good post. I will REMEMBER that!