Do you know how to read and do any research? The goal is to reduce emissions substantially by 2030, one way to do that was supposedly to push electric vehicles. This does not take into account we still have to burn coal to charge those vehicles and we do not have enough basic resources to make that many batteries.
Liberals have had a wet dream going back to the 1970s of taking cars away from people and getting them all to use mass transit. That might work in New York, but it does not work in places like Texas. We still need cars ....and lots of them.
Had these idiots wanted to transition to simply hybrids by 2030, we might be able to achieve that and brought overall MPG to near 50.
But NOOOO! We want all electric by 2030. You can only register electric cars in California by 2035.
California's choice of 2035 as the deadline to end gasoline-only new car sales was the "sweet spot" that will sharply cut emissions but was also realistic for the industry, the head of the state's clean air regulator said on Tuesday.
www.reuters.com
Generating electricity is cleaner than burning fossil fuels. And the process continues to be improved, as we research more ways to generate electricity more cleanly, and more efficiently. Generating energy from fossil fuels is largely at a standstill in terms of efficiency or cleanliness.
Research is continually being done to increase the efficiency and cost of green power such as solar panel efficiency, and better batteries. Part of that research is better recycling of any spent materials and products such as solar panel recycling and battery recycling.
On the subject of recycling, it is stupid of the USA to not recycle spent nuclear fuel rods. This is part of the problem with nuclear power reactors in the USA. Nuclear is a viable and relatively clean method of generating power if done right. Part of that is being able to recycle spent nuclear fuel rods, which is not allowed in the USA, while other countries do recycle them.
Now, yes, all energy creation does create some waste, which needs to be managed. But long term, it's a hell of a lot less polution to generate power through hydro, solar, wind, and nuclear, than burning fossil fuels forever.
And it's not just electricity. Hydrogen is a perfectly viable fuel source for some industries.
Speaking of idiot liberals holding back fuel efficiency, who was the liberal idiot who tried to roll back fuel efficiency for vehicles? I forget his name. I believe it's the same liberal idiot who tried to revoke the California Air Resources Board ability to set fuel efficiency standards. Someone help me with this one.
Speaking of California, and of public transportation, a more efficient mass transit system would reduce the huge parking lot that the highways become during rush hour. Take a look at the greater Los Angeles area. More "park and ride" stations that bring you to central business hubs such as downtown Los Angeles would reduce the number of cars, thereby reducing congestion. And it's not just to and from business hubs or places of commerce, but a better transportation system to some of the suburbs of Los Angeles so people can visit each other without needing cars. Does mass transit work everywhere and in all situations? No. But I'd wager good money to say it will work in many areas, including Texas. It just makes sense if you have a lot of cars traveling from remote locations to a centralized location, you can reduce some of the congestion by having strategic mass transit systems such as the "park and ride" type where part of the trip is on mass transit instead of a lot of vehicles trying to pack into, and out of, a choke point.
electrek.co
Facebook
Twitter