Yet you don't leave a single argument against it.

No the carbon foot print of an ev is far higher than that of a conventional combustion engine car, especially when you also factor in the shipping of parts around the world to allow for construction.

Electric was never a good option tbh, the funding would have been far better spent developing hydrogen or bioethonol systems, bioethonal being very close to petrol but more efficient in volumetric efficiency and close to carbon neutral over a 3 year cycle with the added bonus of it being possible to also convert existing petrol vehicles lowering the costs over the next 10-15 considerably. Diesels can also be run on different heavy oils such as peanut oil, lowering their carbon foot print considerably

Edit because u/mjfi4cp2 blocked me.

>I actually thought it was closer to 4x the energy.

>There isn't the investment in in the process to do it cheaper though, remember before an eccentric billionaire spent a fortune on battery technology it was unbelievably expensive to build an electric car.

Let's not forget all the inefficiency in the manufacture of those vehicles and the efficiency of the power being generated.

I disagree and would love to read some professional articles that have evidence and reference to fact for what you are saying.

I'm in the electrical industry and we are being told the opposit.

Also charging at home becomes difficult when many park on the street.

There simply isn't enough resources to make them cheaper.

There isn't enough dug out of the ground to supply enough ev to everyone who has a vehicle.

Electric vehicles cannot replace the vast majority of commercial uses.

There isn't the infrastructure to charge all these ev.

There isn't a way to charge most of these ev.

There isn't enough green energy available so we would be using fossil fuels to charge a vehicle so they don't use fossil fuels.

As much as I agree we need to move away from fossil fuels there needs to be a lot more planning and thought before this kind of thing actually occurs.

Now this statement I can fully agree with.

ALL politicians are liers and just trying to get themselves another term.

Ahh ban certain books.

Not to stop children reading then.....

That's you making a false equivalency to push your own political narrative.

I'm not American, I don't have a dog in that race, I still see what you are trying to do

Are there really any groups trying to stop people from reading books?

Could you show me some evidence of that please.

That is genuinely uplifting.

It's nice to see this sub true to its title.

It's half an election cycle in most places.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances I don't see how this is uplifting, more just mundane tbh.