[OhioBuckeye]

Most people don’t know what makes a car run. There’s more bad things about EV’s than good. For instants, EV’s get No mileage on a charge, you won’t see charging stations along interstate or highways, all you’’ll see while you’re driving for a 1/2 hr. to an hr.is gas stations & if you do find a charging station you’ll be sitting there for at least an hr. or longer charging your EV if there’s no EV there being charged already, quick chargers just over heat your battery to possibly catch your EV on fire or over heat your battery to the point where in a couple of yrs. It’ll ruin your battery to the point you’ll have to spend 15 to over $20,000 to replace your battery, EV’s are expensive to buy, maintenance is expensive to maintain your EV, power outages are going to happen. So you better have a can of electricity or a generator that’s capable of charging your EV oh yea our president is going to get rid of gas stations. Oh I could go on & on. But the EV experts already have this already figured out. Not trying to be a know it all but I did work at a auto plant for 38 yrs. so I do & did hear about EV’s before most didn’t know what EV meant. EV’s have there purpose but not to drive 1,000 miles to see Billy or Susy!

[PugMom]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

IMO Actually they are fair with no agendas. Attack everyone. More than I can say about most news sources.

i read the DailyMail every day, & agree with you.( they sometimes gets US stories before we even get to see them, with more details) poster must be confusing UKDM with WeeklyWorldNews

[Albany]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

Well, here's my shocked face :-|. Wait, ya mean there's been an agenda being pushed all these years? Nooooo, I don't believe that.

Sorry, it's not a FoxNews link, you can't just dismiss it because you don't like the source (ostrich syndrome).

Electric cars release MORE toxic emissions than gas-powered vehicles and are worse for the environment, finds shock report | Daily Mail Online

This ridiculous article has been debunked numerous times. Consider the source folks.

[Justputt]

Originally Posted by Proveone

So your source, The Daily Mail, a British tabloid, known for misinformation, is suppose to convince us that their propaganda is legitimate information. "Nice" try!

Clearly you haven't read the article. The Daily Mail put a click-bait headline on an article by scientists at VA Tech and other scientists. It's relatively objective and even leans towards EVs with some caveats.

[Byte1]

Originally Posted by Ptmcbriz

Regardless of present day science….technology will CONTINUE to advance.

For those against EV’s, and cling to fossil fuels…you are equivalent to those that wouldn’t advance to the horseless carriage back in the day.

Anything that allows us to burn less fossil fuels and advance in technology is a good thing. As we progress, the technology always gets better and better. Stop clinging to archaic technology and look towards more modern advances.

So, those that were against the horseless carriage "back in the day" are equivalent to those that PROMOTE the same fossil fuel technology today? Your correlation seems a bit off and a bit of a contradiction. You seem to be saying that ICE "back in the day" was better for the environment than the horse(might be true, considering the flatulence) and now burning fossil fuel is a bad thing. I know what you meant, but your correlation is skewed.

[Caymus]

Originally Posted by Albany

This ridiculous article has been debunked numerous times. Consider the source folks.

Then it should be easy for you to provide links to the "debunking".

[Nellmack]

Originally Posted by OhioBuckeye

Most people don’t know what makes a car run. There’s more bad things about EV’s than good. For instants, EV’s get No mileage on a charge, you won’t see charging stations along interstate or highways, all you’’ll see while you’re driving for a 1/2 hr. to an hr.is gas stations & if you do find a charging station you’ll be sitting there for at least an hr. or longer charging your EV if there’s no EV there being charged already, quick chargers just over heat your battery to possibly catch your EV on fire or over heat your battery to the point where in a couple of yrs. It’ll ruin your battery to the point you’ll have to spend 15 to over $20,000 to replace your battery, EV’s are expensive to buy, maintenance is expensive to maintain your EV, power outages are going to happen. So you better have a can of electricity or a generator that’s capable of charging your EV oh yea our president is going to get rid of gas stations. Oh I could go on & on. But the EV experts already have this already figured out. Not trying to be a know it all but I did work at a auto plant for 38 yrs. so I do & did hear about EV’s before most didn’t know what EV meant. EV’s have there purpose but not to drive 1,000 miles to see Billy or Susy!

I've been driving my EV for 9.4 years and from my experience I'm saying this post contains a lot of incorrect statements. I don't have time, nor to I care to correct them.

[Birdrm]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

Well, here's my shocked face :-|. Wait, ya mean there's been an agenda being pushed all these years? Nooooo, I don't believe that.

Sorry, it's not a FoxNews link, you can't just dismiss it because you don't like the source (ostrich syndrome).

Electric cars release MORE toxic emissions than gas-powered vehicles and are worse for the environment, finds shock report | Daily Mail Online

I really thought this was a real comparison between EV and ICE vehicles. I believe that lets say for 100 miles on the road the ICE vehicle will pollute more than the EV. The argument against EV vehicles is first the manufacturing of EV's is much worse on the environment than ICE vehicles. Secondly, the charging of EVs currently is using electricity produced by fossil fuels.

[morchol]

The Daily Mail has proven it is better at journalism than most USA rags!

[biker1]

Most people miss the point. You use less energy generating electricity in a power plant , transmitting the power over high voltage transmission lines, recharging batteries, and using the electricity to provide motion in an EV than burning gasoline in an ICE car. The difference is a factor of 2-3x. The reason for this is that electricity generation, particularly the new generation of natural gas power plants (40% of our electricity comes from natural gas), is very efficient and the losses with high voltage transmission lines is very low. ICE cars are very inefficient in terms of how much of the energy in a gallon of gasoline is converted into motion. Electric motors in EVs convert a high percentage of the electrical energy in the battery to motion. You can also avoid the inefficiencies of having to transport gasoline to filling stations. While they take more energy to manufacture, if they are kept long enough there is a net energy savings. I believe the rational for EVs is that they use less energy.

Originally Posted by Birdrm

I really thought this was a real comparison between EV and ICE vehicles. I believe that lets say for 100 miles on the road the ICE vehicle will pollute more than the EV. The argument against EV vehicles is first the manufacturing of EV's is much worse on the environment than ICE vehicles. Secondly, the charging of EVs currently is using electricity produced by fossil fuels.

[PurePeach]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

Interesting articles. EVs produce more particles from tire wear than gasoline engines produce in exhaust. Okay, but how do the particles from EVs compare to particles from cars with gasoline engines? I get 40K miles from my tires, if EVs produce 400 times the particles that must mean 400 times the wear and so they should last 400 times less or about 100 miles. I don't hear many people talking about changing their EV tires every 400 miles.

The article mentions "particulate matter (air pollution)" several times yet then goes on to say "the majority of particulate emissions released from the tire go directly into the soil and water, while exhaust negatively affects the air quality." It doesn't seem like air pollution if it doesn't go into the air.

So a tires to exhaust comparison? A soil and water pollution to air pollution comparison? An apples to oranges comparison?

The headline is impressive, the data... not so much (at least the way this article presented it).

It will be interesting to read the study.

You forgot to mention the pollution from battery manufacturing and disposal after they die.

[ElDiabloJoe]

Well, if you don't like or trust or utilize the UK's Daily Mail (a foreign news source for those of you so preferring), then perhaps the Wall Street Journal is more in your wheelhouse?

wsj.com

[Justputt]

Originally Posted by biker1

Most people miss the point. You use less energy generating electricity in a power plant , transmitting the power over high voltage transmission lines, recharging batteries, and using the electricity to provide motion in an EV than burning gasoline in an ICE car. The difference is a factor of 2-3x. The reason for this is that electricity generation, particularly the new generation of natural gas power plants (40% of our electricity comes from natural gas), is very efficient and the losses with high voltage transmission lines is very low. ICE cars are very inefficient in terms of how much of the energy in a gallon of gasoline is converted into motion. Electric motors in EVs convert a high percentage of the electrical energy in the battery to motion. You can also avoid the inefficiencies of having to transport gasoline to filling stations. While they take more energy to manufacture, if they are kept long enough there is a net energy savings. I believe the rational for EVs is that they use less energy.

Line losses are NOT very low! Attention Required! | Cloudflare

[Two Bills]

Originally Posted by GATORBILL66

Oh, so you are saying it is like CNN and MSNBC!

Sometimes, when they get the bit between their teeth, it's Fox on steroids!

[Vickim]

Originally Posted by ElDiabloJoe

Well, here's my shocked face :-|. Wait, ya mean there's been an agenda being pushed all these years? Nooooo, I don't believe that.

Sorry, it's not a FoxNews link, you can't just dismiss it because you don't like the source (ostrich syndrome).

Electric cars release MORE toxic emissions than gas-powered vehicles and are worse for the environment, finds shock report | Daily Mail Online

They sold us on how great plastics were too ! Now micro plastics in every body of water on the planet.