Welcome to Thunderdome

TheCatt wrote: This is a terrible take. Failure happens. in Science, in Markets, etc.

Absolutely. Not arguing against government investment. Arguing that the battery money grab was most likely full of false dreams/promises, corruption, and inefficiencies. I wonder how many of those companies were truly viable, and how many just had people that could work the politics and had access too loads of cash. The environmental lobbyists campaigned for batteries, the government bought in for the votes and wasted a shit ton of money. After that HUGE investment, how much closer are we to awesome batteries than we were before? I'm pretty sure the same thing happened in the other green sectors of wind and solar. Not against those techs. Against how the government spent the money. HUGE waste. Also, how much of the car subsidies is going towards research? They are just off setting the high cost of ownership, again, to buy votes. Sure, the car companies are taking those profits and investing in new tech research, but in the end, they are the big winners when they develop it. They aren't going to pay the subsidies back. It's the Dems making the rich richer!

TheCatt wrote: What % is recovered, don't know.

states 80% recycling is already possible.

Unless the recyclers are paying for the batteries, they won't make it to the facility. We have to pay to dispose of electronics safely, so they end up in landfills. And even when we pay to have them taken care of properly, they are still shipped overseas and end up in landfills. I refer you to the CFL again. "$20 for a light bulb?!" "Yes, but it will last for 20 years!" "And then I throw it away?" "NO!! You'll destroy your drinking water. You'll have to treat it like a hazardous material and pay to have to properly disposed of." No one does that, and those things last maybe 10% longer than an incandescent. Remember when the electric company just sent them to you and billed you for them? Cause that's just how awesome and foolproof the whole thing was!

I don't trust any of those fuckers. They are raking in cash like it's water in the name of saving the planet and I don't believe any of them are. Yet. It could happen in the future, but we aren't even close. WAY too early to be trying to do this on a mass scale. Cause everyone shipping their batteries to Sweden for 80% return is totally feasible. What's the last 20% doing and where's it going? No one asks. Can't knock EVs! It's saving the planet from fossil fuels!! Well, so does nuclear.

Cakedaddy wrote: We have to pay to dispose of electronics safely, so they end up in landfills. And even when we pay to have them taken care of properly, they are still shipped overseas and end up in landfills. I refer you to the CFL again. "$20 for a light bulb?!" "Yes, but it will last for 20 years!" "And then I throw it away?" "NO!! You'll destroy your drinking water

Car batteries are massive and have valuable stuff in them.. CFLs are tiny and worthless. Apples + Oranges for recycling.

Tesla's trying to make closed loop for recycling, maybe it won't happen, but it's close.

Cakedaddy wrote: Can't knock EVs! It's saving the planet from fossil fuels!! Well, so does nuclear.

Nuclear + batteries, I'm in.

If I were 5 years younger and planned on being in this house for more than 10 years, I'd be giving solar panels a serious look. Would be awesome to charge my car for free every day, and have a battery bank for temporary grid interruptions.

Again, unless the recyclers pay for the batteries, they will not go to the recyclers. People don't care about the environmental cost of disposing of them improperly. And the recyclers will have to pay well. Look at pretty much every other recyclable material. Even ones that they pay for (aluminum, copper, steel, etc) still get thrown out if the return isn't worth the hassle. I don't believe these batteries will go anywhere but to land fills, unless someone is buying them. ONE company in sweden can recover 80%. At what cost? What about all the batteries that have already come and gone? Where are they? They are lying about the benefits of batteries right now and NO ONE is asking where they are going.

Maybe sometime in the future, this will all work out and be great. But we are a LOOOONNNNNG way from that and it should NOT be being forced on us by the government.

Do you really believe that all is well with EVs, their batteries, etc right now? You seem to be arguing a future EV utopia, but we aren't there. The couple articles I grabbed say that recycling is way behind. These things are stock piling up somewhere. So to argue 'they can be recycled' is moot when they are not being recycled. PCs have valuable resources in them as well, where are they going? Lets not pretend batteries are being treated any different right now!

I should have broken the CFL into a different paragraph. Wasn't arguing the viability of recycling. I was showing the bull shit the environmentalist can force on us that turns out to be a pile of very expensive bullshit that we all had to pay for. I would argue the environmental impact of CFLs is in the negative. They don't last long enough, or save enough energy, to outweigh the environmental cost of improper disposal, and the expense of buying them. I think we are still in the same place with EV. The benefits are being exaggerated and the negatives are being ignored. And we are all paying for it.

Cakedaddy wrote: PCs have valuable resources in them as well, where are they going?

Barely. You're comparing panning for gold vs mining for gold. EV car batteries are a large enough target to make the process efficient.

Tesla: Recycling makes it cheaper to make new batteries: https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... igafactory

Things don't start 100% perfect, it's an evolution. I'm not arguing it's a utopia, I'm arguing it's better than ICE and will improve.

Cakedaddy wrote: What about all the batteries that have already come and gone? Where are they?

Barely anywhere given how tiny EV production was 7 to 8 years ago.

I'm hearing Ohio now charges hybrid car owners an extra $100 on registration. That true?

If so, what's the thinking there?

Leisher wrote: I'm hearing Ohio now charges hybrid car owners an extra $100 on registration. That true?

Yes.

1 - They don't use gas, so they are using roads without paying for them.

2 - We're Republicans, and only Democrats buy those cars.

TheCatt wrote: We're Republicans, and only Democrats buy those cars.

Speak for yourself.

TheCatt wrote: They don't use gas, so they are using roads without paying for them.

That makes sense.

And hurts the adoption rate for EVs. This was basically an extra car payment in July, for me.

Leisher wrote: Speak for yourself.

Not sure what you mean? Ohio is controlled by Republicans right now.

I think the idea of the fee is fine, $100 is ridiculous.

And lest we forget, 200 for full electric.

GORDON wrote: And lest we forget, 200 for full electric.

Double ridiculous.

TheCatt wrote: Not sure what you mean? Ohio is controlled by Republicans right now.

Ah, I did not know what you meant. I thought you were speaking for us for some reason.

TheCatt wrote: $100 is ridiculous.

Why?

TheCatt wrote:

GORDON wrote: And lest we forget, 200 for full electric.

Double ridiculous.

Double why?

If it is just an extra $100, isn't that just offsetting what some accountant figured out the state is losing from that person not buying gas and the taxes that go with it? $100 doesn't seem too insane to me.

Leisher wrote: If it is just an extra $100, isn't that just offsetting what some accountant figured out the state is losing from that person not buying gas and the taxes that go with it? $100 doesn't seem too insane to me.

Ohio charges 38.5 cents / gallon. So if you have a car with 20 mpg, $200 = 10,400 miles. If your car is 30mpg, that's 15,600 miles.

As someone who drives about 5k miles per year, F that.

Either make it mileage based, like gas, or make it more reasonable, like $50 instead of $200.

You are excluding the federal tax. Are they also taking a hit from that? Sure, it's a federal tax, but, does the state get to keep the federal tax to go towards federal roads? I guess I'm arguing that all federal tax probably doesn't leave the state and go to the feds. The feds take that money and reinvest it into the state it came from.

And hopefully they are banking the extra money to help clean up the mess all the dead batteries are going to eventually create.

Cakedaddy wrote: And hopefully they are banking the extra money to help clean up the mess all the dead batteries are going to eventually create.

I figure they need to pile as many as they can into a rocket and then launch it at the sun.

$100 still seems reasonable.

Leisher wrote: $100 still seems reasonable.

That's for hybrids. Which... still use gas.

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: $100 still seems reasonable.

That's for hybrids. Which... still use gas.

Again, I'm sure some accountants sat down and figured it all out based upon how far the average person drives annually, how much fuel the average car uses, and how often they're filling up.

Although, knowing the government, they probably uses Hummers as their "average car".

Drive an expensive car? Science says you're probably a dick.

My Ford Focus means I'm a super swell fella.

Leisher wrote: Drive an expensive car? Science says you're probably a dick.

*shock*

Leisher wrote: My Ford Focus means I'm a super swell fella.

My 13 year old car says I'm better?