Hmm, what does this campaign of mis/disinformation remind me of...

It'll be one of the zombie myths of EVs for decades to come, no doubt, and sadly it'll be what fixes in Joe Bloggs' mind because of Gish Gallop tactics.

 

its sorta a fair point i guess? They're advertised as 0g/km, which clearly isnt true.

Still a somewhat pointless article, but ofcourse its unreasonable to expect there would be no propganda coming from big oil and their associates...

 

Koch & Bull story

 

Brilliant.

 

Can't access the full article due to the paywall, but I presume it's talking about charging inefficiencies? If so our electricity provider is 100% renewable, so whether it's efficient or not we're still running at 0g/km.

 

The Times, Telegraph, BBC, Sun, Daily Mail are all fake news outlets.

 

I'd say four of those sources are well known purveyors of complete bullshit and give plenty time to outright liars when it comes to the environment, renewables and anything even vaguely "green" (Christ, one of them employs a man who says asbestos is talcum powder and employed another who claims air pollution isn't a cause of death), and the other is compelled in the name of "balance" to allow some real nonsense under the radar.

 

Fails to mention that the official CO2 figures for ICE cars are far lower than real world.

Fails to mention other pollutants, especially NOx.

Implies that PHEVs pay £0 VED which is not the case.

 

One day people will recognise that CO2 is not a pollutant - and that the war on CO2 is for no other reason than political and financial gain. The fixation with CO2 emissions as a means of taxation is simply wrong headed.

 

So which part don't you agree with?

• We are releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere (millions of years worth of accumulated CO2 from fossil fuels)

• CO2 is "trapping" heat in our atmosphere

• The atmosphere is warming up

• The oceans are warming up

 

There's an article on Autocar at the moment in which the UK MD of Jaguar Land Rover gives a long, impassioned, point-filled interview about how the media is on an unfair crusade to demonise diesel, and that there's "nothing wrong with a modern diesel."

It's funny how you don't tend to hear executives from established companies, or general auto magazines, leaping to combat the considerable disinformation on EVs. By funny, I mean cynical, morally bankrupt and indicative of the industry's tail-dragging mindset.

 

Head of company which produces large vehicles almost exclusively powered by diesels claims diesels are fine shocker!

 

Stupid article.
Just a matter of time before all UK energy is produced using renewables

 

If you have to take into account indirect emissions caused by generating the electricity, then for ICE vehicles it would be only fair to take into account the effects of fuel refining and transport too.

 

On the subject of diesels, it may well be true that compared with older diesels or even with petrol, modern engines could be not as bad as they are made out to be. But clearly the peak is over. I've just abandoned diesel for my EV and I'd never get another. I may have to get another ICE or PHEV car next year though, to handle longer journeys.

 

If this article is anything to go by, modern diesels are not just as bad, but even more bad, than they are made out to be. If you link through to the Equa Index, it's pretty shocking stuff.

Latest diesel car models remain highly polluting, tests show

The latest diesel car models are failing to meet pollution limits when on the road, just three months ahead of stricter new tests, independent tests have found. Results show that none of six new 2017 diesel cars met the EU standard for toxic nitrogen oxides (NOx) pollution in real-world driving.

The updated Equa Index, produced by the testing firm Emissions Analytics, shows that 86% of all diesel models put on to the British market since the 2015 Volkswagen emissions scandal failed to meet the official limit on the road, with 15% producing at least eight times more NOx emissions.​

"Clean diesels!"

 

I totally agree with this arrival. But some vw egolfs are 0g and some are higher.......it would be unfair to lay the tax on the car.....how about the electric producer.....oh wait they already do.

 

I'm glad that the FF industry knows there time is up and they are putting all their efforts in one last try to prevent the inevitable switch to clean power and transport, it means they are losing.

Koch brothers launch new misinformation campaign against electric cars

 

Ah, the Koch brothers. Purveyors of the worst kind of malevolent capitalism.

 

He believes it to the extent that his wallet suffers from these naughty scammers. They're probably in league with that Nigerian Prince who got stranded in the space station.

 

As long as you refuse to investigate for yourselves you will have to keep repeating what have been told to believe. This isn't the place to go back and forth on the subject. It's easy enough to check. But much easier for you to insult and hide behind groupthink isn't it. The science is very far from settled on this subject and as time passes and the models predicting gloom and doom are shown to be totally inaccurate by the 20:20 vision of time passing then eventually you will be forced to admit that you backed the wrong horse. I fully understand the fear that has been generated but that doesn't excuse the failure to fully investigate the situation personally.

Edit. On reflection I bet that you believe that 97% of climate scientists agree with you don't you. Try checking that 'fact' first'

 

CO2 is not a pollutant.

When I read about acidification of oceans I struggle to see it as anything other than a pollutant:
Ocean acidification - Wikipedia

Edit: I also checked the facts about the Cambridge data you mentioned and found this helpful:
'Climategate' - FactCheck.org

Hth.

 

When I read about acidification of oceans I struggle to see it as anything other than a pollutant:
Ocean acidification - Wikipedia

Edit: I also checked the facts about the Cambridge data you mentioned and found this helpful:
'Climategate' - FactCheck.org
.

The oceans are, and remain alkaline. They are not acidic. They change slightly over time to be ever so slightly less alkaline and ever so slightly more alkaline. Barely measurable given the volume of water involved.

Cambridge manipulated data. Pointing out that it might not make much difference doesn't alter the fact that they did manipulate data. As did NASA by the way.

The scandal of fiddled global warming data

This isn't hard to understand guys. We are now decades into this scare caused by inaccurate modelling. The models have been consistent in being wrong. At no stage has the real climate matched the predictions. But they just re-work the models and make more predictions which have proven to be just as inaccurate. Its the old GIGO I'm afraid. Yet serious political decisions have been made based on this discredited data. Coupled with a desire to try to recover from the debacle by manipulation of data it's becoming a farce.

 

Forget the cruddy Times 'reporting', but the original report from the Policy Exchange is worth a read (just so long as you keep in mind that it is a right wing think tank).

Driving down emissions: How to clean up road transport? | Policy Exchange

Sent from my Pixel C using Tapatalk

 

I read the full article in the times. It was based on a think tank connected to Michael grove. It looks like the figures they used for grid carbon intensity were years out of date. from when we still burned coal and had few renewables. To be fair we have decarbonised the grid massivly in the last 2 years and the official figures lag by 2 years. I've calculated the g/km for my leaf based on the latest data from grid carbon and it was 27g/km.

 

Send an email to the Times telling them you were about to pay to read past the firewall but if the paper is churning out misinformed and plainly untrue articles like this your not going to bother, nobody wants to read fake news and surely nobody wants to pay for it.

I must invite that reporter round my house when my car is charging from 100% renewables whilst at the same time my solar PV is running my entire house.

 

I must invite that reporter round my house when my car is charging from 100% renewables whilst at the same time my solar PV is running my entire house.

This reporter has put his name to many similar articles recently. He's been called out and they were forced to write a correction on one of them but it still keeps happening. One way or another you'll be wasting your time.

 

The climate is changing. It has always changed. Man has little to do with that. CO2 is 3% of all greenhouse gases and humans contribution is 3% of that 3%. Negligible effect from our tiny contribution - but as there is an effect then climate scientists will correctly say that humans do have an effect. If asked to quantify that effect they will confirm that it's negligible.The overwhelming greenhouse effect is caused by water vapour. The scale of warming has been very slight over the last fifty years and in fact over the last twenty has stabilised. The war on CO2 must end. But until people take the trouble to properly research the subject the politicians will continue to scare us into accepting taxes and carbon trading scams.

Yes and it's existed in a very wide range of states, some of which don't support human life, and many of which don't support our current human civilisation of 7+ billion people.

Making the situation worse, even a little bit(which you're prepared to admit we are), will cost millions of lives

260PPM to 400PPM is a big change, because we have pumped gigatons of the crap into the air.

 

The times reporter Graeme Paton is just regurgitating the fossil fuelled pay masters original report from the policy exchange, download the report its an interesting read, interesting in that it couldnt be more obvious whos paying their bills.

https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-co...ntent/uploads/2017/06/Driving-down-emissions-How-to-clean-up-road-transport.pdf

And if you try and find out whos funding them??? this from Wikipedia about policy exchange.

Transparify's report 'How Transparent are Think Tanks about Who Funds Them 2016?' rated them as 'highly opaque,' one of 'a handful of think tanks that refuse to reveal even the identities of their donors.[9]' Website 'WhoFundsYou?' rate Policy Exchange as 'D', the second lowest score out of five for funding transparency.

 

At least this piece wears its support on its sleeve so to speak

Is The Electric Car Boom Overhyped? | OilPrice.com