A tad patronising if I may say.
Are EVs the way forward?
- Thread starter The Flying Scotsman
- Start date
- Status
A tad speculatory.
The only patronising aspect is those inferring a result without even conducting the experiment. If you read my post again I never actually suggested the result would be one or the other. That people are extrapolating the results without conduting experiment and then assuming the answer is quite telling in itself.
Conduct my - rather tongue in cheek - experiment for real and see what the results are before deciding what is patronising and what might actually be true. Or not be.
Last edited:
Such a shame when people resort to name calling to try to justify their opinion.....but then we come to expect it in these days don't we...
So if we move on to an e vehicle, if that is even possible for everyone, topography allowing. Then I assume that our oil burners will need to be scrapped! Little point in selling them on, we must embrace the new technology now. It has been written. It is surely a cheat to sell on our existing gas or oil burners to any other party because after all, what was the sacrifice for, if another user might even possibly do an even greater mileage than we our self’s may have done and who may not even attend to proper servicing or who may then go on to remove all the various pollution controls and devices. No we must not even own, drive, or sell one, it must be e or nothing! No good having an e car if we have a gas guzzler oil burner what ever So who is going to jump first? Seems plenty of principled people on here perhaps some or one of the more outspoken and principled might be already be calling the scrapper and we will applaud them well done! Principles first, what is 65 plus grand or more or less anyway, better to leave behind a clean legacy for our deserving offspring. That must be better than just leaving wads of cash for them and the taxman? Perhaps for some it might be enough to cancel that very long European tour that we promised our self’s. It is after all an unnecessary journey perhaps stick closer to home, the North West how many hundred, it is a very long way away perhaps not, the locals there are fed up to the back teeth of all this touring nonsense anyway. They get no respite, its all year around now. It is not just the pollution or global warming it is the blight on the mental health of those people in all those places that we visit in our thousands without even a care.
While I contemplate the magnitude of all this sacrifice, I will just sit back after putting on another bucket of coal on the fire and watch the licking flames. Very relaxing pastime listening to great music by a flickering fire
While I contemplate the magnitude of all this sacrifice, I will just sit back after putting on another bucket of coal on the fire and watch the licking flames. Very relaxing pastime listening to great music by a flickering fire
Always difficult to tell from the written word but I assume most of that was in jest. Or you are reading the Daily Mail too much!
Do not read tabloid rags!
It's just a vocal minority, most Forum members are quietly getting on with using their fossil fuel burning vans exactly as they intended when they purchased them, for work or for making memories, enjoying life and waiting to see if EV's are the future. Some have decided that they are and are enjoying their EV's. Great!
Most of the defending of ICE vehicles seems to be driven by the fear of their vehicles being taken away and crushed whereas the eventuality is slated as one of natural wastage.
Think of that desirable CEXB engined 204hp Transporter that probably won't make it to 100k miles and factor in the cost of replacing the lump in this 7yr old van and whether that makes any kind of financial sense?
EVs are not coming they're here already and having a fleet of various aged EVs is a reality now, an old Zoe, maybe a Leaf, these are £2k upwards cars with enough range left in their 10yr old batteries to do the shopping and tip runs anyday without gassing some poor sod.
Think of that desirable CEXB engined 204hp Transporter that probably won't make it to 100k miles and factor in the cost of replacing the lump in this 7yr old van and whether that makes any kind of financial sense?
EVs are not coming they're here already and having a fleet of various aged EVs is a reality now, an old Zoe, maybe a Leaf, these are £2k upwards cars with enough range left in their 10yr old batteries to do the shopping and tip runs anyday without gassing some poor sod.
As I say the oil industry love the sole focus on the climate rather than the damage to human health and the sheer cost of all that.
Humans don’t do well breathing partial pollution that can cross the blood brain barrier.
Where is the name calling?
I'll start... Aussie climate denying w****r!
Any good?
Should be asleep at the moment.
The Royal Society: the world’s oldest continuous science academy, founded by Robert Boyle and Sir Isaac Newton in the 1600s in good old Blighty.
Who wants put their hand up and say they know better than the Royal Society? Or that the Royal Society are somehow complicit in a conspiracy? Or that they are saps who can’t think for themselves? Or give any other reason not to take what they say very very seriously.
royalsociety.org
Who wants put their hand up and say they know better than the Royal Society? Or that the Royal Society are somehow complicit in a conspiracy? Or that they are saps who can’t think for themselves? Or give any other reason not to take what they say very very seriously.
Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society
Supplementary information for the project 'Climate Change: Evidence and causes'.
royalsociety.org
Case in point....I'll start... Aussie climate denying w****r!
Any good?
Should be asleep at the moment.
Novakart
Member
Yup , unfortunately people rely on govern -ment to look after their health.
legally provide drugs & profit from the top preventative killers, .
How do you know what’s in them.
Daily Mail online?
Some people that read them love to quote what these sites write.
They’d be better off looking into what they’ve read with an open mind first as, from reading the quotes, people that use the ‘free’ press as a sole source of info aren’t getting the full picture. Those that just focus on headlines are being mislead most of the time.
News can be free to the end user because these companies generate income from advertising (usually targeted advertising which actually keeps people in their limited mindset) and to increase clicks on pages - and therefore profit, they make the stories more sensational or limit what they write about to create division or confusion and a loyal user base.
If it’s facts you’re after then most news sites are sadly pretty useless these days. Very few do open analysis (most of these are subscriptions based to able funding for their work) and produce graphics and write ups including all the data or at least links to studies that have looked at available data.
The ‘free’ press sites are basically just a mouthpiece for their owners.
Just don’t know how I would manage without your constant long winded explanations of absolutely everything every day Lu
Says the chap that gave us multiple posts on mushrooms and salmonJust don’t know how I would manage without your constant long winded explanations of absolutely everything every day Lu
In my case I think it's better to hear both sides of an argument rather than simply join the "three word chant" brigade and think that change is simply something to get angry about.Just don’t know how I would manage without your constant long winded explanations of absolutely everything every day Lu
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
