Welcome to Sterling Cooper, Inc.
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
  • CALL US: +1-866-285-6572
LOGO
  • INCREASE YOUR REVENUES
    50%-100% - FREE EVALUATION
  • WEF 2025 GLOBAL
    RISKS REPORT
  • CAPITAL GAINS
    TAX DEFERRED
  • INCORPORATE
    NOW FOR $39
  • RESEARCH
    REPORTS
  • ENGULF &
    DEVOUR
  • Home
  • Services
    • Selling a Business
    • Buying a Business
    • Public Relation
    • Cooper consulting
    • Advertising
    • Publishing
    • Web and IT Services
    • Loans
  • Seller
  • buyer
  • Advertising
  • Publishing
  • M&A Due Diligence
  • Blog
  • Contact
LOGO

Category Archives: Electric Cars. EV’s

BIDEN’S ELECTRIC BUSSES WERE ANOTHER WOKE PROGRAM THAT COST TAXPAYERS MONEY…AND NO RESULTS!

Biden’s legacy lingers in the failing Proterra electric buses he promoted during his presidency

Transit districts across the country continue to have problems with electric buses they bought from Proterra, a company former President Joe Biden had touted. Districts that purchased buses from other suppliers appear to have had fewer issues, but those with Proterra buses are still trying to keep them running.

As part of its expansive climate agenda, the Biden-Harris administration heavily promoted a transition to electric buses, which included special attention to electric bus-manufacturer Proterra.

The company went bankrupt in August 2023, and in January 2024, Phoenix EV purchased Proterra with the approval of the Bankruptcy Court. While the company tries to move forward, Proterra left a trail of broken and irreparable buses in numerous transit districts across the country. Some districts report that, while the situation has improved, many of the buses are still in a state of disrepair.

The Trump administration’s funding freeze has blocked many of the Biden-Harris administration’s climate programs, and thrown others into uncertainty. Among those that could be targeted are the $1.5 billion the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) granted last year for city transit districts to buy zero- or low-emission vehicles.

Putting the brakes on electric buses

The Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority in Florida ordered 13 electric buses to add to its existing 123 electric and hybrid buses, with the $28 million it received last year from the federal program, according to the Tampa Bay Times. Now it’s pausing the purchases. Even though multiple federal rulings have suspended President Donald Trump’s funding freeze, the FTA doesn’t provide the funds until the district receives the buses, which will be in 2026.

With the risk that the funds will get slashed, the authority isn’t taking any chances. According to the Times, however, the budget bill passed on Friday maintains funding for the buses, and so the authority may proceed with the purchases. While it’s not clear from what company Pinellas is ordering the new electric buses, the authority has previously purchased Proterra buses in the past.

Starting out with a bang

Early on, Proterra’s customers were noticing serious failures with the buses. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority purchased five Proterra buses in 2019. The company promised ranges of 100 to 120 miles on a single charge, but the authority found they ran as little as 60 to 100 miles on a charge — even less in cold weather.

Proterra’s initial public offering in January 2021 raised nearly $650 million, which was three times more than its revenues. Before she was Biden’s energy secretary, Jennifer Granholm served on Proterra’s board. In May 2021, before assuming the lead at the Department of Energy, Granholm sold all her Proterra holdings, providing her with net capital gains of $1.6 million.

A month before, President Joe Biden took a virtual tour of a Proterra facility, using it to promote his infrastructure plan, which included approximately $6.5 billion in grants, according to The Wall Street Journal, to help replace diesel-powered school and transit buses with electric vehicles. “The fact is, you’re making me look good,” the president said.

Despite Proterra’s bankruptcy, his administration continued to promote electric buses, which included billions in funding for electric school buses — a program former Vice-President Kamala Harris headed up — which have also seen their share of problems. Harris was an outspoken champion of the electric school bus program, holding events with EPA Administrator Michael Regan in Greensboro, North Carolina, and in Fairfax, Virginia, where she praised Thomas Built Buses. That company has been manufacturing school buses since 1916, and received at least $42 million in grants and rebates from Harris’ electric bus fund, according to the EPA’s website on the program.

Awaiting parts

Capital Metro in Austin, Texas, purchased 46 Proterra buses, costing about $1 million a piece. The liberal city had planned to transition all its city buses to electric, but in November, Capital Metro had to put all 46 into storage due to a lack of charging infrastructure to keep them running all day.

Blythe Nebeker, a communications specialist with Capital Metro, told Just the News that 36 of the electric buses are currently in temporary storage. They are routinely inspected, driven and recharged, and they expect to pull them out of storage later this year. Nine of the ten buses, he said, currently need maintenance work, either awaiting parts or technical assistance from Phoenix.

The Austin American-Statesman reported in November that Canadian electric bus supplier New Flyer was providing Capital Metro with services and parts due to its problems with Proterra. Of 58 New Flyer buses, 40 were to begin transporting passengers eight hours per day. The short day was due to a lack of chargers at the end of the buses’ routes.

Nebeker said in the interview that Capital Metro continues to receive support from New Flyer. “While most of that effort has been focused on the New Flyer fleet, the experience and skills gained by the workforce will be transferable to working on the Proterra buses,” he said.

Currently, Nebeker said, 77% of the city’s buses are powered by diesel. The Capital Metro Board of Directors adopted a sustainability plan in 2022, with the goal of being carbon-neutral by 2040. Nebeker said Capital Metro plans to transition to a fully zero-emissions fleet by that year.

The situation is improving

AC Transit, the main bus operator in the East Bay region of the San Francisco Bay Area, didn’t purchase its zero-emission buses from Proterra. According to Robert Lyles, media affairs manager for AC Transit, the operator has 23 battery-powered electric buses from the California-based manufacturer, Gillig, and 30 hydrogen fuel cell buses it acquired from New Flyer’s Alabama-based facility. Hydrogen fuel cells work similar to a battery, but they don’t need recharging. So long as they’re supplied with hydrogen, they produce a charge.

Lyles said that the daily availability of their zero-emissions fleet is approximately 55% for battery-electric buses and 65% for hydrogen fuel cell buses. “Several factors influence bus availability on any revenue service day, such as operator availability, operational adjustments, and maintenance or repairs,” Lyles told Just the News.

He said when it comes to repairs, AC Transit is still experiencing challenges. There were some disruptions caused by the pandemic, but five years later, the district continues to face supply chain issues. “While conditions have improved somewhat, we still compete with other transit agencies to secure warrantied batteries from our bus manufacturers,” Lyles said.

AC Transit began pursuing programs to reduce its emissions in 1999, Lyles said. Unlike other districts that have had problems with their charging infrastructure, Lyles said AC Transit installed, owns and operates its own. He said this grants the district reliability and flexibility when making upgrades or replacements.

The district is planning to replace vehicles as they reach the end of their useful life with zero-emissions buses. These will be replaced with 70% hydrogen fuel cell buses and 30% battery electric.

Back out and running

One district told Just the News that it’s not having any major problems with its charging infrastructure or its buses. The Antelope Valley Transit Authority (AVTA), which serves Palmdale, Lancaster and Northern Los Angeles County in California, set out to become the nation’s first fully electric fleet in 2016. In April 2020, ATVA decommissioned its last diesel bus and now runs entirely on a battery-electric fleet. James Royal, director of marketing for AVTA, told Just the News that even their service vehicles are electric.

“There may be challenges. There are challenges with anything. We get the vehicles serviced and back out and running. But we’re 100% electric. We don’t have an option to send out a diesel fleet,” Royal said.

The company sourced its vehicles from MCI Coaches and RIDE, a U.S. spin-off of the Chinese company BYD. Royal said that, according to ATVA’s mechanics and operations staff, sometimes there are delays in sourcing parts for major components. This is likely due to these larger parts not being stocked locally. RIDE has a facility in Lancaster. “So if we need parts, we simply go pick them up. Even when there is a delay, it is only a week or two,” Royal said.

The district has 100 plug-in chargers on site, he said, but they have a diesel-powered generator for backup, which can charge 15 buses at once. Royal said during really hot weather, the charge times can be much longer, but they have no problem getting technicians for any repairs.

Picking winners and losers

For those that have gone with Proterra, the problems continue. Districts in South Florida spent $126 million to purchase 117 electric Proterra buses, NPR affiliate WUSF reported last month, and only about seven of them are operational. Everett Transit in Washington expects that five of its nine Proterra buses will become inoperable before the end of the year, according to local news outlet KIRO. The district is looking to sell them all off.

Everett Transit may not get much for the sale. The Washington, D.C., city government auctioned off two Proterra buses in January. A 2017 bus sold for just under $25,000 and a 2022 fetched a little over $36,000. With a purchase price of around $1 million each, the city took a big loss for its Biden-favored buses. 

Districts that have attempted to transition to zero-emission buses appear to have had a lot more luck if they didn’t purchase Proterra buses. It’s perhaps another cautionary tale of government picking winners and losers.

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's on March 27, 2025 by sterlingcooper.

ELECTRIC VEHICLES WILL NEVER BE INEXPENSIVE IN THE USA

Why There Will Never be an Affordable EV

There will never be affordable EVs? If you already know why there aren’t any affordable vehicles, you already know the answer.

It isn’t legal to sell them.Here, that is.

All new vehicles offered for sale in the United States must comply with a whole book (literally) of federal regulations that cannot be complied with inexpensively – and that is why the vehicles that are available are so expensive. Many of these regulations have to do with what the government styles “safety,” but that’s disingenuous as well as something else.

A 1969 VW Beetle was not an unsafe car. The assertion is ridiculous. Millions of people owned and drove Beetles and most of them never got hurt driving them. The cars were not prone to wheels coming off while being driven or their steering columns shearing off due to weak welds; such things – if they did happen – would indeed have been safety issues.

Beetles had no such issues.

But those old Beetles didn’t have air bags or tire pressure monitoring systems or back-up cameras or “advanced driver assistance technologies.”

Did that make them “unsafe?”

According to the federal government, yes. The “safety” regulations require all new vehicles to have those things, as well as body structures capable of absorbing much greater impact forces in a crash than an old Beetle’s body could absorb. If they don’t, they are considered “unsafe” and can’t (legally) be sold in this country.

It does not mean the Beetle – and other inexpensive cars like it – was “unsafe.”

It means they were non-compliant. And they couldn’t be made compliant.

The Beetle – and this is just one example – was designed back in the 1930s. It could not be made compliant with the regulatory requirements of the late 1970s without being totally redesigned. That is to say, it had to be replaced with a new design that was compliant. Enter the Rabbit, for those who remember. It became the Golf and it is today the least expensive vehicle that VW sells.

Oops. Was.

VW stopped selling the Golf last year. It is no longer compliant – or soon wouldn’t be. It will be replaced by an EV that is compliant. One that will cost a great deal more than the Jetta, which isn’t an EV and remains – for now – the least expensive model VW still sells. The base price of a 2024 Jetta is $21,435.

The base price of a 1969 Beetle was $1,799.

Adjusted for what they style “inflation” – as if the devaluation of the buying power of money were something that just sort of naturally happened over time as opposed to something deliberately done by the people who control the money supply – that just under $1,800 base price back then comes to just over $15k today.

That’s a roughly $6k difference and more than that, actually, since what you pay for a car affects what you pay for insurance and taxes. Not to mention maintenance. The new Jetta is not a car that can be maintained by the person who buys it, unless that person happens to be a VW mechanic with access to all of the specialized equipment necessary to perform the maintenance.

The ’69 Beetle could be maintained by a Compliant Idiot – some will remember the eponymous service manual that could be understood and used by practically anyone to service an old Beetle, using basic tools anyone could afford to buy or just borrow.

Of course, the Beetle did not not come with AC and the other amenities that come standard in a car like the Jetta – and that’s great, if you can afford the Jetta. Plus the insurance and the taxes. Increasingly, average people can’t. It’s why the typical loan on a new car like the Jetta is six years long, or twice as long as it took to pay off a ’69 Beetle.

That’s another way to measure the cost of compliance.

Getting back to EVs. These could be made Beetle-like or even more so in terms of their affordability precisely because it is possible to make a very basic, very simple EV. The Beetle was a body draped over an engine that was as simple as a car engine gets. It didn’t even have a radiator (being air-cooled). Its engine could be removed from the car in about 30 minutes by anyone with a floor jack and crescent wrenches.

An EV could be similarly simple. A body draped over a skate. The skate consisting of an electric motor and a battery pack, both of which could be . . . simple. Also, light. Assuming the rest of the EV was, so as to not need to be powerful, in order to move a lot of weight. But that is next-to-impossible because of the need to be . . . compliant.

EVs must be able to absorb the impact forces decreed by the government, just like other vehicles. They are required to have multiple air bags – and these can’t be just bolted to the dashboard. They must be integrated into the dashboard and steering wheel. This requires designing the car around the “safety” systems – and that’s not inexpensive.

And that’s why there will never be an inexpensive EV, even if the “breakthrough” in battery technology that never seems to break through ever does. Because the vehicle, itself, will remain expensive to manufacture – whether it’s powered by a battery or by something else.

Oh. And about that something else.

When will people begin to question the legitimacy of the federal government decreeing how “safe” – according to its standards – new cars must be? Is that any more the government’s legitimate business than decreeing whether we’re allowed to go for a walk in the cold since we might catch cold?

 

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's on February 17, 2024 by sterlingcooper.

REJECTING THE “GREAT RESET”: FUELS AND ALL WOKE MANDATES

An Acquaintance got a rental of a Tesla over the holidays. It’s undoubtedly the industry standard for EVs and a complete blast to drive. The problem: It’s not a practical car at all. He was driving in the cold, and the car was nearly drained after two hours. Searching for a charge was no easy task. The first one didn’t work. The second one stated that it would be charged in 10 hours, which he didn’t have.

The freezing weather in the Midwest this winter rendered all EV batteries totally unusable, and cars left in parking lots at airports and outdoor parking garages were just abandoned. Charging stations were NOT WORKING to charge automobiles either due to weather.

His conclusion: This is indeed a glorified golf cart designed to keep you at home and under the thumb of the manufacturer. And this is just a test. The repairs are worse. Keep in mind that this is the best the industry has to offer. The other manufacturers of these things make products not nearly as high-rated, which is why so many of them are sitting on lots unsold and why orders for the machines are plummeting.

It seems like the EV craze has peaked already. Growth in gas cars is now far higher than electrics, flipping a trend from 12 months ago. Finally, consumers are figuring it out. This is a good second car, provided you’re driving in your own town, you have a hook-up at home and can charge it overnight, and you don’t suddenly have to go out of town. It’s a toy, sometimes a fun one, but not a real car. For that, you need gas.

The idea that this car is going to transition the United States to “clean energy” is absurd. If every car were electric, the grid would crash and rationing would be the norm. And maybe that’s the whole point. You drive only with permission. Nothing about your transportation is within your control. Authorities will decide everything for you. It’s a perfect strategy for creating a society of dependents.

Fortunately, consumers aren’t playing along. We still live with the remnants of a capitalist system whereby manufacturers have to make profits. So that’s a serious problem for the whole industry. It could very well collapse in 2024.

Tesla will still be around making luxury cars and trucks for well-to-do urbanites, and bless them for it. But it’s not for everyone. It isn’t even for anyone who has a long way to go. Even now, the only substantial pockets of broad ownership are California and D.C. The heartland knows better and so do people in very cold latitudes.

As long as we’re on the topic of fails, consider fake meat. Remember how it was going to replace real meat? Well, take a look at the grocery stores today. This is another product that has peaked. The stock for Beyond Meat was $196 in 2019. It has fallen and fallen. Today it’s a bargain at $8.72, with no one being particularly interested. It looks like this one isn’t long for this world either, which makes you wonder why muckety-mucks are still pushing this nonsense on us. Consumers aren’t having it anymore.

The same goes for COVID-19 vaccines, for which your tax dollars paid. The companies have stock sales and patents and a seeming public demand. Except for one thing: They don’t work. They’re also highly dangerous. This is an incredible disaster for both Moderna and Pfizer. The Pfizer stock is down to $28 from $59 in two years. Moderna has fallen to $100 from $384 in the same time frame. They’re both sitting on massive stockpiles of these vaccines, with almost no remaining public demand for their endless boosters.

They also face lawsuits with claims that the companies wildly exaggerated the benefit. In any case, they were never necessary for the vast majority of people and certainly not for children. They paid off the Food and Drug Administration to give them permission to even sell products that would never have been approved under normal conditions.

Once again, we have the remnants of capitalism to thank for this. Government tried to force everyone to get the vaccine. They succeeded among some segments of the population for a time. They also enlisted Hollywood stars and every manner of “influencer” to browbeat people into getting them. Whole cities (New York, New Orleans, Chicago, and Boston) were even shut to the unvaccinated. At the very least, the companies and cooperating government officials should apologize for this disaster.

And consider Mark Zuckerberg’s alternative to X (Twitter) called Threads. It came out earlier this year to great fanfare. Here’s a social media service that’s thoroughly censored! As if that’s some kind of marketing pitch. It was always ridiculous. It started with 4 million users, mostly by drafting the users of Instagram. Today it’s down to 1 million, but even they’re hardly active at all

When I saw how Instagram was being abused, I immediately deleted my account.

Threads was a disaster for this company, adding to the other disaster of Mr. Zuckerberg’s Metaverse itself, which is completely empty and boring but now apparently people are claiming to being virtually raped???!.

It turns out that Mr. Zuckerberg isn’t a good businessman at all. Maybe the movie The Social Network was correct that he merely stole the whole idea of Facebook itself. He never really had business acumen. And speaking of Facebook, good grief, what happened to this thing? There’s essentially no reach on the platform.

Facebook has turned into nothing more than an advertising platform that markets your data. It’s really only useful for its marketplace. Otherwise, what’s the point of this thing anymore? It’s a wonder that its stock price hasn’t been hit, not just yet.

Another piece of toast this year has been online learning. Frankly, people are sick of it. Classrooms should be real. The fakery of remote classes is obvious to one and all.

Even DEI has hit the skids! Wisconsin just dialed back all funding and froze the programs.

Are you noticing a pattern here? Markets in the real world are rejecting the “Great Reset.” Whether eating bugs, driving EVs, munching fake meat, or living in the metaverse with censorship, none of it’s working. We can only hope that this trend continues in 2024 and that it bankrupts the companies that threw themselves into the whole racket. Let’s hope the consumer marketplace can render its final judgment before all of this jazz becomes mandatory, which is the real goal.

In the meantime, let’s be grateful for every amount of capitalism we have remaining, because markets mean consumer choice. And when given the choice, we know now that consumers don’t like Klaus Schwab’s plans for our lives, no matter how much Bill Gates endorses them.

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's, Government on January 17, 2024 by sterlingcooper.

BIDEN ADMINISTRATION SHAFTS SENIORS: DIVERTS BILLIONS FROM MEDICARE TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES

Green Energy

Why Is Joe Biden Screwing Seniors To Subsidize Electric Vehicles?

Biden looks at EVs

 FORD CEO SHOWING BIDEN HOW TO LOSE A LOT OF MONEY

The Biden administration is more interested in pet projects, unsustainable green schemes, and ideological revenue redistribution than in the core functions of government.

  •  The  Biden administration is so obsessed with making electric vehicles (EVs) work as part of its green agenda that it’s taking money away from seniors — namely, drug savings under Medicare. Unsurprisingly, it has also failed to advertise that fact.

The news of EV and green energy subsidies flew under the radar until a poll conducted in Arizona alerted voters there to the scheme. Fully three-quarters of Arizona voters polled (76 percent) said they didn’t know the Biden administration diverted money from Medicare “savings” to subsidize green projects, and by an 80-10 margin, respondents strongly opposed such a tactic.

The information came from a report by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), which
shows the inaccurately named Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 diverted some $280 billion from Medicare’s prescription drug provisions to green tax credits and other leftist climate initiatives — instead of lowering prescription drug costs for seniors. The ATR report reveals the so-called Inflation Reduction Act as nothing more than a pork-laden payoff to cronies and an effort by the Biden administration to implement the Green New Deal.

EVs have had a rotten track record in recent years. Example after example shows what a terrible investment they are. In Florida, EVs caught fire in the aftermath of flooding from Hurricane Ian in 2022. Several EVs burst into flames and then reignited later. This year, a Tesla lost control and rolled down a boat ramp into the intercoastal waterway — the fire department reportedly had no choice but to let it burn itself out underwater. Fire departments are fully unprepared to deal with the types of fires caused by the interaction of rare-earth elements in EV batteries and exposure to water.

More to the point, EVs also represent a terrible fiscal commitment. One report indicates electric vehicles depreciate in value by roughly 50 percent over the first five years of their lives, significantly more than standard vehicles. This stands to reason, as the batteries are prohibitively expensive to replace and owners can expect to spend more on repairs to EVs than standard gasoline-powered vehicles. That helps to explain why they’re more difficult and more expensive to insure as well.

EVs don’t save the average consumer on refueling costs, either. The equivalent price of “refueling” an EV works out to approximately $17 per “gallon” in a comparable internal combustion engine vehicle. That cost includes tax credits, rebates, subsidies to vehicle manufacturers, and regulations and mandates by various agencies.

EV owners experience the real sensation of “range anxiety,” in which the limited range of a battery charge, combined with a lack of charging station infrastructure outside of major metropolitan areas, leads drivers to wonder if they’ll get stranded somewhere with a dead car. Perhaps this explains why EVs have sat unsold by the thousands at car lots across the nation — not that you’d know it from listening to the corporate media. Holiday commercials continue to encourage viewers to buy that special someone a luxury electric SUV for Christmas, despite increasing reports of malfunctions, expensive repairs, deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and a thorough lack of consumer enthusiasm for these expensive new products.

The massive subsidies the Biden administration pays to the green energy industry overall seem to go into a giant rat hole, which makes using the Medicare drug savings to pay for them all the more insulting. For instance, one California-based luxury EV manufacturer, Lucid, loses $430,000 on each vehicle it sells. Ford also loses thousands on every EV it sells.

Despite all the problems, the Biden administration continues to subsidize the manufacture and sale of EVs to advance its decarbonization and net-zero goals. Green subsidies are far from trivial, with renewable energy receiving about three and a half times as much as the “fossil fuel” industry.

But the Biden administration is more interested in pet projects, unsustainable green schemes, and ideological revenue redistribution than in the core functions of government — and seniors hoping for relief on drug prices get screwed once again.


Jeff is an experienced communications professional who
This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's, Government, GREEN ENERGY and tagged FORD, LOSING MONEY ON EV's on December 21, 2023 by sterlingcooper.

PEOPLE WOULD BE BACK TO LIVING IN CAVES IF FOSSIL FUELS ARE ENDED

COP28 ( the nonsensical meeting about Climate change)President: “No Science Behind Phase-Out of Fossil Fuels”.

The Cop28 president says there is “no science” behind demands to phase-out fossil fuels. UAE’s Sultan Al Jaber says phasing-out coal, oil, and gas would take the world “back into caves.”’

 

The president of Cop28, Sultan Al Jaber, has claimed there is “no science” indicating that a phase-out of fossil fuels is needed to restrict global heating to 1.5C.

Al Jaber also said a phase-out of fossil fuels would not allow sustainable development “unless you want to take the world back into caves.”

That has the UN globalist totalitarian chief Antonio Guterres deeply concerned. The UN wants control, and Al Jaber is telling the truth.
The comments were “incredibly concerning” and “verging on climate denial,” scientists said, and they were at odds with the position of the UN secretary-general, Antonio Guterres ( a global idiot whose turn it was to be in that position).

The far-left Guardian called his comments “ill-tempered” to cast the pale upon him, and they mentioned his role in oil also to belittle his statements.

“Al Jaber made the comments in ill-tempered responses to questions from Mary Robinson, the chair of the Elders group and a former UN special envoy for climate change, during a live online event on 21 November. As well as running Cop28 in Dubai, Al Jaber is also the chief executive of the United Arab Emirates’ state oil company, Adnoc, which many observers see as a serious conflict of interest.”

To give you an idea of what went down, here is the exchange between Robinson and Al Jaber, which was followed by the totalitarian Guterres falsely claiming the science is settled.
Al Jaber spoke with Robinson at a She Changes Climate event. Robinson said: “We’re in an absolute crisis that is hurting women and children more than anyone … and it’s because we have not yet committed to phasing out fossil fuel. That is the one decision that Cop28 can take and in many ways, because you’re head of Adnoc, you could actually take it with more credibility.”

Al Jaber said: “I accepted to come to this meeting to have a sober and mature conversation. I’m not in any way signing up to any discussion that is alarmist. There is no science out there, or no scenario out there, that says that the phase-out of fossil fuel is what’s going to achieve 1.5C.”

This summit to which many attendees could not get to on their private places which were stick in snow!!! Included that clueless King Charles of England, who can not figure out that England led the industrial revolution due to its coal reserves as well as North Sea Oil.

Other morons at the summit included Al Gore, who predicted we would all die in heat waves hated the Sultan for speaking the truth! The Sultan headed the conference!

Just think out it…the loss of fossil fuel for most of the world would mean no ability to operate industrial machinery, harvest crops or plant them, as well as generate electricity and power all modes of transportation.

Is there nobody out there that can think this through this nonsense???

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's, Fossil Fuels and tagged We will live in caves without fossil fuels on December 10, 2023 by sterlingcooper.

ELECTRIC CARS ARE NOT THE FUTURE!


Why Electric Vehicles Are Not the Future

Many vouch for electric cars as the future of traveling. These vehicles are considered safe for the environment because they do not produce any emissions by burning fuel.

But electric cars may not be the pollution-free future we all envisage. This is primarily because electric cars are not as environmental-friendly as you may think.
Problems if all cars were electric

If all the cars in the world were to turn electric, there could be major effects on vehicle performance and the economy at large.

The current technology does not put electric cars at par with fuel-run cars. An average electric car travels less on a full charge than a fuel car travels on a full tank.

To compensate for this, all the governments in the world would have to replace gas stations with charging stations. This would be an expensive ordeal.

Electric cars are known to provide more torque, leading to faster pick-up. But fuel cars can achieve greater max speeds.

Even if technological advancements solve the problem of speed, the batteries of electric cars pose a serious environmental threat.

Electric car batteries add to electronic waste. Also when these batteries expire, they emit a lot of carbon dioxide, adding to the problem of climate change.
Why electric vehicle are not the future?

When you imagine the future, do you imagine clean, unpolluted air? That dream is not possible with electric vehicles.

Indirectly, electric cars cause pollution by using fuel-generated electricity. Even the car batteries add to pollution during manufacturing.

Lastly, hydrogen cars will take over the car market because they are a safer and more efficient alternative.
Why electric cars are not the solution?

There are a couple of reasons for this.

First, electric cars are not friendly towards the environment. They add to pollution indirectly by using electricity.

Compared to gas cars, electric cars offer a subpar performance. They even have less range, meaning you can travel longer distances in a fuel car.
Are electric cars the future or not?



The US government is pushing for the use of electric cars. In collaboration with private organizations, the government has pledged billions of dollars into the effort.

Even if the government manages to construct charging stations and create longer lasting batteries, will electric cars become environmental-friendly?

The answer is: no. For example, 60% of the electricity in the US is generated using fossil fuels. Plus, the manufacturing of car batteries creates a lot of pollution.

Here are 10 reasons why electric cars are not the future of clean traveling –

Cost – As of now, electric cars are way more expensive than their fuel counterparts.
Performance – Electric cars do not have an internal combustion engine, resulting in poorer performance.
Pollution – They don’t emit greenhouse gases but need electricity to charge which is produced using fossil fuels.
Inconvenience – Only major metropolitan cities have battery charging stations.
Waste – Electric car batteries will add to electronic waste.
Capacity – A fuel tank has more capacity than an electric car battery.
Emission – When electric car batteries decay they start releasing CO2 gas.
Incompatibility – Electric cars are less compatible with solar and wind energy.
Competition – The universal emphasis on electric cars is neglecting the research on other alternative fuels.
Backward – Electric cars are less compatible with autonomous driving technology.

Electric cars are far from being a permanent solution to pollution and climate change. The idea that electric cars do not add to pollution is a myth.

Fossil fuels are burned to produce electricity in many countries. The same electricity powers electric car batteries. Indirectly, electric cars contribute to pollution.

Replacing gas cars with electric cars will be expensive. All gas stations will have to convert to charging stations. This seems impractical.
What the supporters of electric cars don’t understand is that electric cars also cause pollution. They use fuel-generated electricity to recharge.

Then there is the battery which needs a lot of material for production. Mining these materials also adds to pollution, and almost all come from unfriendly sources-China, Congo etc….

Eventually, hydrogen fuels will take over before electric cars have the opportunity to upgrade and become more efficient. This is why electric cars are not the future.
What are the negatives of electric vehicles?

Electric cars may not produce any emissions themselves, but they contribute to pollution nevertheless.

Charging an electric car battery requires electricity which comes from the burning of fossil fuels.

Besides this, electric cars have other negatives. The production of batteries requires raw materials like copper, iron, and aluminum. It also needs rare materials like nickel and cobalt.

To obtain these materials, mining is required. This activity causes a lot of pollution. Then, these materials have to be supplied which also adds to the problem.
Why electric cars are the future?

Electric cars can become the immediate future, but not because they are the solution to the global climate crisis.

Many governments are pushing for the adoption of electric cars to reduce their net carbon emissions. For example, Canada will not allow the sale of fuel cars from 2035.

Even the US and the UK are onboard. In fact, the UK plans to ban the sale of gas cars in 2030, five years earlier than Canada.

Prospects like these hint at a future with electric cars on the road.
Car batteries add to electronic waste

Although newer innovations are trying to solve this problem, the biggest problem with electric cars is range.

An average gas car can outlast an average electric car in the market. Also, electric cars do not have access to charging stations.

Some metropolitan cities have this facility. But if you drive to a rural location you can forget about finding a station to recharge your car.

Another concern is the car battery. Electric car batteries are temperature sensitive. High heat wears the battery down faster while extreme cold reduces the car’s range.
Hydrogen cars are the future not electric

The real future of traveling are hydrogen cars, not electric. They offer a more efficient and clean solution to the climate crisis.

Hydrogen cars offer more range than electric cars. This is because the energy storage in hydrogen cars is densely packed.

Refueling your car with hydrogen takes as much time as refueling a gas car. But most electric cars can take up to hours to recharge.

The only problem is obtaining pure hydrogen. Despite being the most common element in the universe, Hydrogen cannot be found in its pure form on earth.
Biggest problem with electric cars

There are many problems with electric cars. They may seem harmless due to zero carbon emissions of their own, but don’t be fooled.

By using electricity, electric cars indirectly add to pollution. Even their batteries lead to CO2 emissions once they start decaying.

In terms of performance, they are no match for gas cars. The lackluster performance of electric cars boils down to the lack of an internal combustion engine.

When it comes to range, electric cars go down quickly. Compared to gas stations, there aren’t enough charging stations to support electric cars.

Currently, electric cars are not very affordable. For most people, gas cars are more accessible and manageable.

Even though many governments are banning the sale of fuel cars, electric cars are not the way to go.

Contrary to popular belief, electric cars cause pollution. They may not do it directly, but they use electricity which comes from non-renewable sources.

In terms of range and performance, electric cars cannot compete with gas cars. Also, the current infrastructure is more conducive to gas cars than electric.

Lastly, recharging an electric car can take hours. Some models have faster charging time, but it is still slower than filling gas at a station.
FAQ relating to Why electric vehicles are not the future
Why gas cars are better than electric?

Gas or fuel cars can out-drive electric cars because of more fuel capacity. Electric cars cannot travel that far due to current technological restraints.

The economy supports fuel cars as you can find a gas station easily. Electric cars will have a hard time traveling long distances because of few or no charging stations.
Will gas cars be worthless in 5 years?

No, gas cars will not be worthless in the next 5 years. However, many governments across the world are promoting electric vehicles over fuel vehicles.

Some governments have set a deadline to ban all gas vehicles.
Will gas cars go away?

Eventually they will, ( not in our lifetime). Fuel cars are undoubtedly harmful for the environment due to emissions.

A much safer alternative is bio-fuel. It does not release any harmful emission and maintains the vehicle’s performance.
Are gas cars going to be banned?

Yes, many countries are gearing towards a ban on the sale of gas cars. For example, the US government passed a law banning the purchase of fuel vehicles by 2035.

The ban does not apply to space and military vehicles.
Key Takeaways

Dumping of electric car batteries adds to electronic waste.
Electric car batteries emit greenhouse gases like CO2.
The production of electric car batteries leads to a lot of pollution.
Electric vehicles are less compatible with wind and solar energy.
Hydrogen cars are more sustainable than electric vehicles.
The US government has issued a law banning the purchase of gas vehicles by 2035.
The global infrastructure will not be able to support an electric car-only economy.

This entry was posted in Electric Cars. EV's and tagged EV's Charging on December 9, 2022 by sterlingcooper.

Recent Posts

  • ISLAMIZATION OF HOUSTON TEXAS-ANY BODY NOTICING?
  • WHAT DOES LAUREN SANCHEZ-BEZOS BUY WITH HER MONEY?
  • $1 TRILLION PAY PACKAGE FOR MUSK!!!!
  • WALL STREET LOVES THE CORPORATE BREAK UP, TIME FOR BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY ALSO?
  • PALESTINE IS A BEGGAR TERRORIST STATE GETTING WAY TOO MUCH ATTENTION, AND WHY???

Sterling Cooper, Inc. © 2023,  Privacy Policy