Quote:Automakers such as Tesla and Cadillac are hiking electric vehicle prices in response to rising commodity costs like key materials needed for EV batteries.

Projections show a sharp increase in demand for battery minerals over the next four years could push the price of EV battery cells up by more than 20 percent — further exacerbating rising prices resulting from supply-chain disruptions caused by COVID and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, CNBC reported.

Elon Musk’s Tesla has worked for years to lower the costs of its vehicles to promote a global shift to zero-emissions transportation. But it raised prices several times over the last year, including twice in March after Musk warned about "significant recent inflation pressure" in raw materials prices and transportation costs.

The cheapest version of Tesla’s most affordable vehicle, the Model 3, now starts at $46,990 in the US, up 23 percent from $38,190 in February 2021.

Rivian, another American automobile manufacturer specializing in electric vehicles, announced in March that prices for their R1T pickup and R1S SUV would increase in prices effective immediately.

The RT1 jumped 18 percent to $79,500, with the R1S jumping 21 percent to $84,500.

While smaller manufacturers seem to have been hit the hardest, global name brands like General Motors have issued small raises in prices as well.

The Cadillac Lyriq crossover EV rose in price by $3,000 on Monday to $62,990.
The price hike comes as Democrats tell Americans who are concerned with skyrocketing fuel prices to purchase electric vehicles.

During a White House event on "clean transit" in March, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Vice President Kamala Harris said exactly that.

"Clean transportation can bring significant cost savings for the American people as well,” Buttegieg said.

Harris said: "Imagine a future, where the freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and to work, imagine all the heavy duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow, imagine that they produced zero emissions."

Biden's Climate Czar John Kerry has said "we're only gonna have electric vehicles if we meet our goal by 2035."

Link

(05-22-2022 06:15 PM)CrimsonPhantom Wrote:  

Quote:Automakers such as Tesla and Cadillac are hiking electric vehicle prices in response to rising commodity costs like key materials needed for EV batteries.

Projections show a sharp increase in demand for battery minerals over the next four years could push the price of EV battery cells up by more than 20 percent — further exacerbating rising prices resulting from supply-chain disruptions caused by COVID and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, CNBC reported.

Elon Musk’s Tesla has worked for years to lower the costs of its vehicles to promote a global shift to zero-emissions transportation. But it raised prices several times over the last year, including twice in March after Musk warned about "significant recent inflation pressure" in raw materials prices and transportation costs.

The cheapest version of Tesla’s most affordable vehicle, the Model 3, now starts at $46,990 in the US, up 23 percent from $38,190 in February 2021.

Rivian, another American automobile manufacturer specializing in electric vehicles, announced in March that prices for their R1T pickup and R1S SUV would increase in prices effective immediately.

The RT1 jumped 18 percent to $79,500, with the R1S jumping 21 percent to $84,500.

While smaller manufacturers seem to have been hit the hardest, global name brands like General Motors have issued small raises in prices as well.

The Cadillac Lyriq crossover EV rose in price by $3,000 on Monday to $62,990.
The price hike comes as Democrats tell Americans who are concerned with skyrocketing fuel prices to purchase electric vehicles.

During a White House event on "clean transit" in March, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Vice President Kamala Harris said exactly that.

"Clean transportation can bring significant cost savings for the American people as well,” Buttegieg said.

Harris said: "Imagine a future, where the freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and to work, imagine all the heavy duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow, imagine that they produced zero emissions."

Biden's Climate Czar John Kerry has said "we're only gonna have electric vehicles if we meet our goal by 2035."

Link

Wonder how long it will take them till they want to "outlaw" Cruisin the Coast down here.

Electrc Vehicles seem to be pretty stupid overall.

(05-22-2022 08:34 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  Electrc Vehicles seem to be pretty stupid overall.

They aren't a realistic solution for "climate change". First they create as much or more pollution than gas vehicles when you count the mining of rare earth minerals needed for electric cars. Second the tax and overwhelm the electric grid which is already failing from leftist policies like phasing out coal and gas plants. Finally, they aren't economically feasible for the masses. Theres a reason why Toyota is rejecting the idea of getting rid of the combustion engine.

Quote:Harris said: "Imagine a future, where the freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and to work, imagine all the heavy duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow, imagine that they produced zero emissions."

The problem is that they would likely also produce zero or near-zero bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and children to schools and us to work and supply lines and economic growth.

Look, I am not a science denier. I believe that the possibility of damage from climate change is likely enough that we need to take significant steps to address it as a planet. But the part of me that is not a science denier also doesn't deny the science that says you cannot replace production with vaporware, and the part of me that isn't a math denier says that the left's numbers don't work.

I say take a tree-pronged approach:
1) Do the things that make sense to do today, with today's technology;
2) Work at maximum speed to develop new and better technologies, including addressing the scale and infrastructure issues that go with them;
3) As new technologies prove up, and the scale and infrastructure issues are resolved, implement them.

heck, just buy a bicycle. tee hee

Here in elpaso we have buses that use propane for fuel and they carry bike racks in front of their grills. I think it's a great idea if you can't afford a car. If I was so inclined I think I would do the same thing but my longest drive is to walmart, pharmacy, or to get something to eat so I hardly use my vehicles anymore. Everywhere I go is within a 10 mile radius. I'm 74 so don't tell me to ride my bike which I don't have anymore, I gave it to my son for exercise.

I just want those "elitists" to put their actions where their big mouths are and not contribute to the problem with their huge suvs or private jets.

I wonder how long before people REALLY get fed up and rise up. It's overdue I think.We have too much patience and until the Schiff hits the fan then it's too late.

(05-22-2022 08:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

Quote:Harris said: "Imagine a future, where the freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and to work, imagine all the heavy duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow, imagine that they produced zero emissions."

The problem is that they would likely also produce zero or near-zero bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and children to schools and us to work and supply lines and economic growth.

Look, I am not a science denier. I believe that the possibility of damage from climate change is likely enough that we need to take significant steps to address it as a planet. But the part of me that is not a science denier also doesn't deny the science that says you cannot replace production with vaporware, and the part of me that isn't a math denier says that the left's numbers don't work.

I say take a tree-pronged approach:
1) Do the things that make sense to do today, with today's technology;
2) Work at maximum speed to develop new and better technologies, including addressing the scale and infrastructure issues that go with them;
3) As new technologies prove up, and the scale and infrastructure issues are resolved, implement them.

I could see her taking 5 minutes to state that quote above, with "Imagine" by the Beatles playing in the background. It's about the level of BS that is par for the liberal economic course.

Maybe we'll get progressive enough to get to the point where we utilize animals for transportation and buy milk in recycle-able glass containers.

(05-22-2022 08:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

Quote:Harris said: "Imagine a future, where the freight trucks that deliver bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and the buses that take children to school and to work, imagine all the heavy duty vehicles that keep our supply lines strong and allow our economy to grow, imagine that they produced zero emissions."

The problem is that they would likely also produce zero or near-zero bread and milk to our grocery store shelves and children to schools and us to work and supply lines and economic growth.

Look, I am not a science denier. I believe that the possibility of damage from climate change is likely enough that we need to take significant steps to address it as a planet. But the part of me that is not a science denier also doesn't deny the science that says you cannot replace production with vaporware, and the part of me that isn't a math denier says that the left's numbers don't work.

I say take a tree-pronged approach:
1) Do the things that make sense to do today, with today's technology;
2) Work at maximum speed to develop new and better technologies, including addressing the scale and infrastructure issues that go with them;
3) As new technologies prove up, and the scale and infrastructure issues are resolved, implement them.

Honestly---given where we are technologically----any "green" approach that isnt making massive use of nuclear energy is not being very realistic. Im kinda similar to you---Im not a science denier----but I do have my doubts about the science. None of the models back test properly---which tells you there's a serious problem right off the bat. That said, I suspect man is a factor in climate warming----but my sense is the man made component is probably relatively small compared to the other forces at work. I see no reason not to do what we can---but I think we have to be careful not to destroy the well being of the world for what may in the end amount to little or no real world payoff. I think when it comes to climate, the forces at work are--and have always been---much bigger than us. I think one of the biggest problems is the base assumption that today's climate is "normal". This planet has always been warming and cooling-----and the climate did so long before there were any humans or SUV's. There really is no normal---but if one was taking the long view of earths "normal" ---then earths "normal" climate has spent much more time in ice ages than warmer periods like the the last 2000 years. Im not convinced a little extra warming is necessarily a bad thing.