May 18, 2012
Blog by John Steigerwald
Looks like those electric cars might be tougher on the polar bears than the old fashioned gasoline powered ones.
I have a feeling this story will not attract a lot of attention from most of the media.
It goes against the narrative of evil oil companies ravaging the Earth.
Related posts:
Date: February 15, 2012
Categories: Politics
You are so gullible. What industry does this phony story help?
It doesn’t help Obama. And if only I were as smart as you. Please continue to guide me with your posts. I can’t thank you enough.
***************************************************************************
The Washington Post has found $3.9 billion in taxpayer funds were sent to 21 firms with ties to the Obama administration:
Sanjay Wagle was a venture capitalist and Barack Obama fundraiser in 2008, rallying support through a group he headed known as Clean Tech for Obama.
Shortly after Obama’s election, he left his California firm to join the Energy Department, just as the administration embarked on a massive program to stimulate the economy with federal investments in clean-technology firms.
Following an enduring Washington tradition, Wagle shifted from the private sector, where his firm hoped to profit from federal investments, to an insider’s seat in the administration’s $80 billion clean-energy investment program.
He was one of several players in venture capital, which was providing financial backing to start-up clean-tech companies, who moved into the Energy Department at a time when the agency was seeking outside expertise in the field. At the same time, their industry had a huge stake in decisions about which companies would receive government loans, grants and support.
During the next three years, the department provided $2.4 billion in public funding to clean-energy companies in which Wagle’s former firm, Vantage Point Venture Partners, had invested, a Washington Post analysis found. Overall, the Post found that $3.9 billion in federal grants and financing flowed to 21 companies backed by firms with connections to five Obama administration staffers and advisers.
****************************************************************************
Look up gullible in the dictionary and you’ll see a picture of an Obama voter chanting “Yes we can.”
I get it now….it’s a Fox story so it must be a total lie, right Mike?
It’s not a Fox story. It’s a story. People wonder why conservatives watch Fox. It’s because they know Fox will run stories like this when it’s unlikely that the other networks will.
Exactly, FOX will run stories like this. And then conveniently forget to include the part that says, “The study emphasizes that electric vehicles are attractive if they are powered by a clean energy source,” Cherry said.”In China and elsewhere, it is important to focus on deploying electric vehicles in cities with cleaner electricity generation and focusing on improving emissions controls in higher polluting power sectors.”
Not to mention, they’re studying China which has so little environmental regulation (you know, government control…those pesky little things that protect citizens, and the things righties love to hate) that they have black days that rival Pittsburgh’s heyday.
Let’s see a study on American e-vehicle use. Oh wait, someone already linked to it below.
Nice try, John. Oh, and 50% approval rating. Still toast?
Toast.
unemployment down, companies starting to hire, stock market making headway….I love it when a plan (recovery from the mess left by Bush) comes together! You better start buying some humble pie to go with your “toast” John, President Obama is on his way to re-election…deal with it!
Real unemployment is not down and companies are not hiring.Fewer people are looking for work. They’ve given up.
Could you please show proof that the story is phony? Is the test of whether research findings are correct the fact that they benefit the arguments of one side or another? If you can show they have been falsified, I”ll believe it. Otherwise I’ve got to at least consider what is presented as valid research.
I think people buy them and think that electricity just shows up in their outlet from somewhere. They need to check out some of the coal burning electric plants around here.
Good thing none of that ever happened when Bush was President. Oh wait, It did. *yawn*
Nice, the old Bush did it to. I bet this never got old for you when Repub’s blamed Clinton for everything. It’s an old and pathetic argument, go bury your head in the sand.
That was my immediate thought when I read this. First, what is the savings in using fossil fuels to create the electricity over the direct use of them in the vehicle? Are there any statistics?
Second when you add the adverse effects (if the referenced article is correct) is there still an overall savings?
It may have helped if you actually read the study instead of letting Fox News slant it for you and, thus, enabling you to slant it for your blind faithful to jump on the bandwagon.
The study did not say that electric vehicles themselves produce more pollution than gas powered cars…it said this, “electric vehicles, combustion emissions occur where electricity is generated rather than where the vehicle is used. In China, 85 percent of electricity production is from fossil fuels, about 90 percent of that is from coal. The authors discovered that the power generated in China to operate electric vehicles emit fine particles at a much higher rate than gasoline vehicles. However, because the emissions related to the electric vehicles often come from power plants located away from population centers, people breathe in the emissions a lower rate than they do emissions from conventional vehicles.”
Then….”“The study emphasizes that electric vehicles are attractive if they are powered by a clean energy source. In China and elsewhere, it is important to focus on deploying electric vehicles in cities with cleaner electricity generation and focusing on improving emissions controls in higher polluting power sectors.”
This is why the media will not pick up this story because it’s a no brainer…of course when your electricity is created by coal there’s going to be more pollution from the factory when electricity production is increased for electric cars….but it’s the production choice for producing electricity that’s the matter at hand and questions and not electric cars themselves.
The other reason why the media won’t pick up the story as Fox states it is because how Fox presents the story it’s absolutely biased bullshit not telling the whole story nor even remotely close to the truth….they just jump on a quick right wing political hot point and depend on idiots who don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground swallowing it all up and taken it as fact without even looking for themselves whether or not it’s true.
Next time, John, please do some research before jumping the gun…you may not owe it to the fools on here who will just take anything as fact and won’t question anything and will never do their own research to see if an article in the news is tweaked for a biased opinion….you owe it to yourself.
I did actually read it. And I know that Obama has been doing his best to shut down coal production and he is delusional enough to think that we can produce the electricity for these cars that he’s making all of us pay for with windmills and solar panels. The only way that there could be a significant switch from gas to electric cars is if the electricity is produced mostly by coal. Which would mean our situation would be comparable to China. The point of the story is that electric cars are not the answer unless/until we switch from coal to some other fuel to produce electricity and our grandchildren will be dead before that happens. Most of the environmental whackos who show up at Trader Joes with their own grocery bag would have you believe that we just need to switch to electric cars without taking into consideration where the electricity comes from. This story speaks to them. I doubt that they’ll be listening.
One thing John….not all people who use their own reusable grocery bags are “environmental whackos” I can fit a whole grocery order into four canvas bags that would require 10-15 plastic bags. We could take a step(just a step) in the right direction by eliminating the plastic (petroleum) bags. My mother and grandmother saved and reused paper bags from the grocery store and were far from environmentalists. No need to paint with such a broad brush.
My wife and I bring out own bags to the grocery store. There’s nothing wrong with doing things that you think are helping the environment, like bringing cloth bags to the grocery store or buying a fuel efficient car. That doesn’t make anyone a whacko.
What makes people whackos is when they think the government has a right to force you to do those things.
The only way this country can survive the future energy needs the demand will create is to build nuclear power plants at a rapid pace. Nuclear produces no greenhouse gases.
Drill here. Drill now.
Doesn’t solve the ever growing need for electricity. We should do what the French do and have 3-4 preapproved nuclear designs and start to build plants around the country. My electric comes from a nuclear plant about two miles from my house. I have twice the house I had up north and pay half the electric bill I did buying coal power.
The liberals have spent the last 30 years doing everything that can to prevent nuclear power from happening. Thee Mile Island sent them into hysterics.
That would be true if it wasn’t false.
http://www.energyboom.com/emerging/energy-secretary-chu-visits-home-nations-newest-nuclear-reactors
In the past 30 years, we have had three Republican presidents and none of them did anything about improving our position in nuclear power.
This is something Obama is getting right and the idiots in his party won’t go out and promote this success.
I’ve been living on this planet for 30 years and I know that until recently nuclear power has been a dead issue. Hardly anybody in either party had the guts to promote it.
Understood. Republican energy policy revolves around oil because that is what they understand. Democrat energy policy revolves around solar, wind and renewable because they don’t understand anything.
Obama should at least get credit for opening the doors for nuclear.
I’m not saying I disagree with you John, but the devil is in the details and this article sure does lack em!
I guess the University of Tennessee is in the Ivy League of the red states. Wow these people will believe anything.
Now here’s the truth.
http://mediamatters.org/research/201202080012#carbon
You people really are morons.
The study was done in China because e-vehicles outnumber gasoline powered vehicles. And the “market” for electric cars has been artificially enhanced buy stupid government. It would not be relevant unless and until that situation existed here. The point is that liberals think that e-vehicles are the answer to pollution and they’re not.
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/286429/volt-cost-taxpayer-250000-car-henry-payne
I have a 2004 Chevy Monte Carlo that I will never part with ever.
I’ve never met a liberal who thinks e-vehicles are the answer to pollution. A patch on a quilt that makes for an overall solution, sure. It’s part of their overall effort to reduce their individual carbon footprint through e-cars, hybrids, recycling, the hippie grocery bags, etc etc.
Mike,
Make sure I got this correct.
Anything from FOX is bad.
Anything from a left wing group that declared war on FOX news is good.
Good luck Mike, hopefully after November the checks will stop coming and you’ll need to get off the couch and work for a living.
Right on, Mikey from Monroeville!! We really are morons. If only we could be a bit more like you, we’d intelligently support every liberal agenda such as entitlements, fraud, higher taxes, and most importantly–electric cars! Thank you for the brilliance you continuously add to this blog, and as usual, thanks for giving Monroeville such a great name.
Hey John – here’s yet another story showing we are all doomed 
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/abc-blogs/mom-faces-jail-making-son-walk-school-232106412–abc-news.html
Not as good as the little girl whose brown bag lunch they deemed not nutritious enough, so they made her eat chicken nuggets and sent mom a bill.
I love how this guys so easily dismiss anything that questions their positions. They read another article (surely backed by some clean energy lobbyist) that refutes claims and suddenly everyone is morons. Wow, talk about people blinded by ideology. The libs I know in every day life are the same way, they just refuse to believe that there are multiple sides to all these things. Libs just have this condescending attitude were they think they are the enlightened ones and everyone else is idiots.
And was the one guy really tryon to insinuate that UT is some po dunk garbage school. Wow.
“Liberals think…everyone else is idiots.”
Funny.
-I can relate. You are exactly right about the condescension that comes from the left. I see it in everyday life as well as within my own family. Liberal in-laws of mine act like this on almost a weekly basis. They deem you beneath them if you don’t feel the exact same way as they do about things. And it’s not just one or two liberals. This seems to be a common practice among 95% of liberals. They are disrespectful of anyone who has different views. But you point out their condescension to them, they tag you with the paranoid label.
Hysterical Mason considering you dismiss every idea and comment made by “Libs” no matter what facts they present. All you do is agree with everything John says, Your like the little dog in the bugs bunny cartoons, “yeah, yeah that’s it John, that’s it John”
Off topic for this thread….but this is probably something you would like to read and maybe comment on…http://nation.foxnews.com/socialism/2011/08/24/college-students-favor-wealth-re-distribution-are-asked-pass-their-grade-points-other-students
http://m.yahoo.com/w/news_america/blogs/signal/obama-poised-win-2012-election-303-electoral-votes-202543583.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=us&.lang=en-us
What will you call toast that’s reelected? If slick Rick wins the nomination, he won’t even win PA. Looks like four more years.
Someone did a study on China. Good. Now let’s see a study based on America where we burn far less coal as a percentage of the electricity we consume and where we have more environmental regulations so it is burned much cleaner than China burns theirs.
I’ve never understood the whole electric car thing, I mean, when your electric car needs a charge, where do people thing that electricity comes from? Throw another shovel of coal into the boiler at the generating station. Coal is much much dirtier to burn than gasoline and produces far less in usable energy. But if it makes you feel “green” to spend $12,000 more to buy a hybrid car so you can do your part to save the planet, then I say go for it!
Besides air pollution, the chemicals used to make things like solar panels and batteries are very toxic. Huge numbers of electric cars on the road would pose an environmental threat if they’re not disposed of properly.
It’s like the mercury in CFLs. They last longer than incandescent bulbs and they burn far less electricity. But how many people aren’t going to take them to a proper disposal center when they do burn out. Even if only 5% of these are disposed of improperly, you’re talking about a large amount of poisonous mercury released into the environment.
There always seems to be unanticipated consequences with all these supposedly wonderful advancements.
How many old rusting cars do you see in front yards, abandoned lots, etc. Some day, many of those could be electric.
a-dawg, Thank you.My how the plot thickens when it involves me. Isn’t this the same as ‘not in my back yard’ ?
This is a good article. However, there is some complexity here.
This is a problem in China, because so much of their electricity comes from fossil fuels. So an electric car there uses a lot of fossil fuels, so it doesn’t help replacing petrol with electricity.
In countries like the US and in Europe, where a much higher percentage of electricity comes from non-petroleum sources (like nuclear, hydroelectric, and to a lesser degree wind and solar) replacing petrol with electricity will reduce the damage to the environment.
So, the takeaway from this is that in much of the world, changing to electric cars is good for the environment. In a few places, like China, it’s not.
The conclusion that you seem to want to draw is that electric cars are worse, period. That’s a simplistic, and incorrect conclusion. As always, the devil is in the details.
The problem is that Obama is acting like we’re already using solar and wind for electricity and those methods are looking more and more like bad ideas. Holland, of all places, is giving up on windmills and Obama threw half a billion dollars at Solyndra and other green companies 15 minutes before they went down the toilet.
Romney pointed out that in some cases he invested in companies that went belly up. It happens in the private industry, and it happens with government funding.
The government was never intended to “fund” anything. And the government “invests” with no risks. The politicians get elected by “funding” things with money confiscated from other people. They get into office and are almost never un-elected even when their “funding” makes things worse. You can’t possibly believe that private funding and government funding are the same.
The government isn’t intended to fund the military? News to me.
It’s one of the few things the federal government was intended to do.
I love all the sports stuff on your site. It’s all dead-on. I skip most of the political stuff—but hey, to each his own.
When I saw this post, though, I just had to mention the fact that YOU are on the radio promoting the Nissan Leaf electric car in commercials for John Sisson Nissan.
Kinda funny, if you think about it!
I don’t have anything against electric cars. I would buy one if I lived full time in a small town.