Which electric car to buy?

[soulstyledevon]

Wow.
You gotta love this forum.
The real question was the transition from ICE to the right EV. Instead, it’s morphed from turds to ejaculate…

 

[WelshGas]

You appear to be missing the obvious.

1,000,000 particles in the air increases the chance a million fold of one being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Consider it this way. The average ejaculate contains ~150 million sperm. Just one of those 150,000,000 squigglers needs to find its target.

Then consider a ejaculate containing just one single sperm. Its chance of hitting the bullseye is remote.


Even if true, which I don’t suppose it is, better a scientific illiterate than a scientific charlatan.

As expected. Changing the story yet again to fit your perceived facts and understanding.

As you say , only 1 sperms is required.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

Wow.
You gotta love this forum.
The real question was the transition from ICE to the right EV. Instead, it’s morphed from turds to ejaculate…

So is it better to use the EV or jump on the E-bike?

 

[soulstyledevon]

So is it better to use the EV or jump on the E-bike?

E bike gets my vote…

 

[The Tall Luthier]

I tend to side with @WelshGas on the environmental arguments of EV. Most consumerism is bad for the environment, if you’re keen to save the world buy an older petrol car with great fuel economy, use public transport. You will be responsible for less damage to the global environment.

If you love the new, feel the need for speed, enjoy following the crowd, buy a super fast EV. You will be responsible for an uptick in economic growth. This is the goal for all governments.

Which is best? They’re all rubbish as you cannot make a decent cup of tea and toast a bagel ready for a sunrise breakfast in any of them.

 

[Amarillo]

As expected. Changing the story yet again to fit your perceived facts and understanding.

As you say , only 1 sperms is required.

Risk is a product of likelihood and consequence. Reduce the likelihood and you reduce the risk.

Lower PM2.5 emissions equals lower risk to public health.

 

[66tim99]

Continual EV technological improvements make it difficult for a person I know to decide to actually buy a EV now. Will it be obsolete in 3 years?
Apart from walking or cycling everywhere and selling your cars, I suspect putting-off buying a new car is one of the best things we can do for the environment. And one of the worst would be to buy a new car that will not live a full life and be scrapped early due to obsolescence. (Will lithium ion batteries really be replaced?)

Might we see a solid state battery in a Multivan California this decade? And if so, would it still be worth 50% of its new value in 2050 (akin to a 20 year old diesel Cali)?

 

[GrannyJen]

You appear to be missing the obvious.

1,000,000 particles in the air increases the chance a million fold of one being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Consider it this way. The average ejaculate contains ~150 million sperm. Just one of those 150,000,000 squigglers needs to find its target.

Then consider a ejaculate containing just one single sperm. Its chance of hitting the bullseye is remote.


Even if true, which I don’t suppose it is, better a scientific illiterate than a scientific charlatan.

The last thing I'm going to buy for my EV is a condom!!

 

[vmaxkiddy]

I tend to side with @WelshGas on the environmental arguments of EV. Most consumerism is bad for the environment, if you’re keen to save the world buy an older petrol car with great fuel economy, use public transport. You will be responsible for less damage to the global environment.

If you love the new, feel the need for speed, enjoy following the crowd, buy a super fast EV. You will be responsible for an uptick in economic growth. This is the goal for all governments.

Which is best? They’re all rubbish as you cannot make a decent cup of tea and toast a bagel ready for a sunrise breakfast in any of them.

There are a few EV’s available that do allow you to make tea and toast. Vehicle to load and vehicle to grid (V2L & V2G) generally called bidirectional charging, is becoming more common.

Seven random things you can power with the Hyundai Ioniq 5

New EV can harvest battery charge to juice up a fridge. And that got us thinking…

www.topgear.com

Which Electric Cars Have Bidirectional Charging (V2L, V2G, V2H)?

Discover the electric cars with bidirectional charging capabilities (V2X). Learn more about V2L, V2G and V2H cars and their benefits with zecar's comprehensive guide.

zecar.com

 

[Ch1pbutty]

There are a few EV’s available that do allow you to make tea and toast. Vehicle to load and vehicle to grid (V2L & V2G) generally called bidirectional charging, is becoming more common.

Seven random things you can power with the Hyundai Ioniq 5

New EV can harvest battery charge to juice up a fridge. And that got us thinking…

www.topgear.com

Which Electric Cars Have Bidirectional Charging (V2L, V2G, V2H)?

Discover the electric cars with bidirectional charging capabilities (V2X). Learn more about V2L, V2G and V2H cars and their benefits with zecar's comprehensive guide.

zecar.com

Just pack a small gas burner.

Despite years of development with the Cali, they still waste space/weight by needing a large gas bottle…they could have fitted a diesel powered hob and had additional storage. Maybe even have added hot running water.

Hopefully we will see some innovation / new ideas soon.

 

[andyinluton]

Just pack a small gas burner.

Despite years of development with the Cali, they still waste space/weight by needing a large gas bottle…they could have fitted a diesel powered hob and had additional storage. Maybe even have added hot running water.

Hopefully we will see some innovation / new ideas soon.

I actually think the gas bottle storage is brilliant - what else would you put in that place?
If we had a diesel powered hob we would still carry a gas bottle for the external BBQ. As it is we normally just carry the one bottle in a secure safe place.

 

[OooOooTheMonkey]

I tend to side with @WelshGas on the environmental arguments of EV. Most consumerism is bad for the environment, if you’re keen to save the world buy an older petrol car with great fuel economy, use public transport. You will be responsible for less damage to the global environment.

If you love the new, feel the need for speed, enjoy following the crowd, buy a super fast EV. You will be responsible for an uptick in economic growth. This is the goal for all governments.

Which is best? They’re all rubbish as you cannot make a decent cup of tea and toast a bagel ready for a sunrise breakfast in any of them.

Climate change can only be solved collectively (a mass movement is required to make any difference whatsoever) so we can’t all go out and buy old petrol cars - there wouldn’t be anywhere near enough. Case in point, look at what happened on pricing with ULEZ vehicles. New cars will always need to be built to replace old, so the question we should be asking ourselves is is it better to build new petrol cars or new electric cars. The behaviours or choices of individuals won’t make any difference to the outcome, mass change is what’s required.

 

[The Tall Luthier]

Climate change can only be solved collectively (a mass movement is required to make any difference whatsoever) so we can’t all go out and buy old petrol cars - there wouldn’t be anywhere near enough. Case in point, look at what happened on pricing with ULEZ vehicles. New cars will always need to be built to replace old, so the question we should be asking ourselves is is it better to build new petrol cars or new electric cars. The behaviours or choices of individuals won’t make any difference to the outcome, mass change is what’s required.

I agree however there is a cynic inside me which says that governments who control such national movements don’t care about the climate anywhere as much as they care about economic growth.

Years ago we had a car scrappage scheme to get rid of diesels. The primary goal was to kick start new car sales. The vast majority of the diesel carbon cost had already been spent at the point of production.

A recent scheme was to put solar panels on every house. 100s of millions have been installed, that’s great for the economy. But show me the data that compares the carbon cost of manufacture, mining and delivery of all solar panels to that of a centralised nuclear power station. It’s very hard to find and I think it possibly favours the power station.

ULEZ is one of the few schemes that seems like it wants to reduce pollution without a focus on economical growth. And for that reason I applaud it.

Ev cars, great idea, very tempting. But the data is only just starting to come in about battery life and resilience. Hopefully it’ll say that they will last at least 100,000 miles, if not they will be very expensive to the environment.

 

[Velma's Dad]

Just catching up with this, it was the scattalogical bit that grabbed my attention (or maybe the prospect of a replay of Python's "Every Sperm is Sacred"), but then I realised it's just some dumb argument along the lines that one airborne pollutant particle is just as dangerous as a whole cloud of them.

FFS. Even a cursory glance at the literature will tell you that there's a clearly demonstrated dose-response relationship between airborne particulates and morbidity/mortality.

Eg: "Each 1 μg/m3 increase in annual PM2·5 concentrations increased the absolute annual risk of death by 0·073% (95% CI 0·071–0·076)." (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00204-7/fulltext)

What does that mean? A 1 μg/m3 concentration (maybe typical for a rural area) means there are several thousand of those 2.5 particles in each cubic metre of air. So in 10 years in that environment you'll be inhaling tens of millions of the little critters. Which nevertheless will be pretty unlikely to kill you. Living by an urban roadside on the other hand might mean breathing in 15-20 times that number, and your risk goes up proportionately.

Paracelsus, innit.

 

[clarinetbcn]

Just catching up with this, it was the scattalogical bit that grabbed my attention (or maybe the prospect of a replay of Python's "Every Sperm is Sacred"), but then I realised it's just some dumb argument along the lines that one airborne pollutant particle is just as dangerous as a whole cloud of them.

FFS. Even a cursory glance at the literature will tell you that there's a clearly demonstrated dose-response relationship between airborne particulates and morbidity/mortality.

Eg: "Each 1 μg/m3 increase in annual PM2·5 concentrations increased the absolute annual risk of death by 0·073% (95% CI 0·071–0·076)." (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00204-7/fulltext)

What does that mean? A 1 μg/m3 concentration (maybe typical for a rural area) means there are several thousand of those 2.5 particles in each cubic metre of air. So in 10 years in that environment you'll be inhaling tens of millions of the little critters. Which nevertheless will be pretty unlikely to kill you. Living by an urban roadside on the other hand might mean breathing in 15-20 times that number, and your risk goes up proportionately.

Paracelsus, innit.

Being called a scientific illiterate by WG when he apparently doesn't read is amusingly ironic and comical while at the same time sad. Germans can say that in one word: schadenfreude. (No, I never claimed to be perfect!).

 

[WelshGas]

Being called a scientific illiterate by WG when he apparently doesn't read is amusingly ironic and comical while at the same time sad. Germans can say that in one word: schadenfreude. (No, I never claimed to be perfect!).

Don’t give up the day job blowing your penny whistle.

 

[WelshGas]

Just catching up with this, it was the scattalogical bit that grabbed my attention (or maybe the prospect of a replay of Python's "Every Sperm is Sacred"), but then I realised it's just some dumb argument along the lines that one airborne pollutant particle is just as dangerous as a whole cloud of them.

FFS. Even a cursory glance at the literature will tell you that there's a clearly demonstrated dose-response relationship between airborne particulates and morbidity/mortality.

Eg: "Each 1 μg/m3 increase in annual PM2·5 concentrations increased the absolute annual risk of death by 0·073% (95% CI 0·071–0·076)." (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(21)00204-7/fulltext)

What does that mean? A 1 μg/m3 concentration (maybe typical for a rural area) means there are several thousand of those 2.5 particles in each cubic metre of air. So in 10 years in that environment you'll be inhaling tens of millions of the little critters. Which nevertheless will be pretty unlikely to kill you. Living by an urban roadside on the other hand might mean breathing in 15-20 times that number, and your risk goes up proportionately.

Paracelsus, innit.

As usual, very, very selective. I suggest you expand your search and reading.

 

[Amarillo]

Don’t give up the day job blowing your penny whistle.

I see your knowledge of musical instruments is about as extensive as your scientific knowledge and understanding.

A piccolo is a type of clarinet, a penny whistle is not.

A clarinet has a reed, a penny whistle does not.

However, both are in the woodwind family of instruments.

 

[Velma's Dad]

As usual, very, very selective. I suggest you expand your search and reading.

Not selective at all, taken from a very quick look at what's out there about the relationship between airborne environmental pollutants and health impacts. I have a bachelor's degree in environmental science and a masters in environmental management, neither recent and I don't claim expertise in toxicoocy, but I'm used to quick reads of sources to get an idea of what is the scientific consensus on these topics.

As usual, when people present you with information that contradicts your tendentious views, you resort to personal attacks. It's a bit pathetic really.

 

[GrannyJen]

Goodness!!

This thread has suddenly become electrifying

 

[Borris]

WHICH ELECTRIC CAR TO BUY?​

This thread is a classic example of why I don't post much anymore.

The OP merely wants advice on which electric car he should buy. Although, since there isn't a viable alternative at present, why that should be of any interest on a VW California forum, I really don't know. Never the less he got so much more. Turds, sperm and the usual ding dong and all from such a benign question.

 

[Ch1pbutty]

WHICH ELECTRIC CAR TO BUY?​

This thread is a classic example of why I don't post much anymore.

The OP merely wants advice on which electric car he should buy. Although, since there isn't a viable alternative at present, why that should be of any interest on a VW California forum, I really don't know. Never the less he got so much more. Turds, sperm and the usual ding dong and all from such a benign question.

Just use the ‘ignore thread’ button at the top of the screen.

 

[Borris]

Actually, most of the time, I find myself ignoring the forum instead and that was my point. If I am doing so how many others are as well?

 

[Amarillo]

WHICH ELECTRIC CAR TO BUY?​

This thread is a classic example of why I don't post much anymore.

The OP merely wants advice on which electric car he should buy. Although, since there isn't a viable alternative at present, why that should be of any interest on a VW California forum, I really don't know. Never the less he got so much more. Turds, sperm and the usual ding dong and all from such a benign question.

The OP asked the question nearly two years ago. They announced eighteen months later that they had bought an ID3, so I think we can consider their question answered.

 

[66tim99]

If I am doing so how many others are as well?

I suppose I get some interest, including lessons in the human condition, from combative exchanges.
Sometimes my thumb naturally moves to the ‘New Posts’ button, other times I want to try and understand why someone is hanging on to a tenuous argument or whatever.
I’m often rewarded with tips on spotting the signs of personality traits, or in this case a new word - tendentious.
I got a lot more than I bargained for when I signed up as a member of this great forum!
It is a shame when people get harassed to leave though… I thought we might have lost you at one point Borris too. So glad you’re still here. I’ll always pause to read your contributions.