wagner56 t1_iy32rg4 wrote
Reply to comment by metro2036 in US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds, but tough reliability and land use questions lie ahead by nastratin
"""US can reach 100% clean power by 2035, DOE finds, but tough reliability and land use questions lie ahead"""
This is the WHOLE SYSTEM
It includes all the 'dirty' stuff generated by EVERY ASPECT of this thing to makle it work.
It requires the whole system being reworked.
Funny is : I just noticed the word "can" in that above statement which technically means it does not limit the solution to reasonable cost or lack of imposed tyranny or all the other serious issues and concerns which will likely have to be made use of to achieve this 'goal'.
It sounds very much like a communist 'five year plan' when you consider how it is expressed. The scope of it is also is as potentially catastrophic as such plans historically were.
Notice that word 'but' there too - which already indicates that serious problems ALREADY lay in the path of any such 'solution'.
metro2036 t1_iy4oe3v wrote
Did you lose track of the conversation? We weren't discussing the headline. We were discussing your notion that operating an EV has 5X the total cost of an ICE vehicle.
wagner56 t1_iyc82mv wrote
well I was always talking about the headline
a huge added cost trying to drive massive change in such a short time
forced instead of letting progress be done by what is workable in the market.
And finally the proposal being filled with weasel words to cover the impracticality and postential disaster of such a thing being attempted
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments