Electric Trucks - Lightning reveal

Status
Not open for further replies.

69hurstolds

Geezer
Supporting Member
Jan 2, 2006
8,195
17,596
113
I've worked in 2 "green" energy jobs 1st solar panels are highly toxic full of chromium and cadmium and theres no way to recycle them when there broken or worn out, the building off I-25 near Firestone in CO has been closed and basically condemned because of the health risk of the ovens and machinery inside coated with the stuff. 2nd was wind turbines every model that we produce has increased in power produced so they are getting better but damn the debris we make is horrible it's a balsa dust that's got a resin binder soaked in so it doesn't degrade well and the rest in a weighted foam that will never degrade so for being green its killing the earth just as bad, and this debris is a fine dust that gets every where so it looks like fresh snow every where and every delivery of materials or products we open our large bay doors and there it goes out into the environment and it's worse in the summer because all the doors are open. There's a dark side to green energy that know one wants to admit is there
Exactly to the point. Nobody likes to see how the sausage is being made. Like EV's, they all rant and rave about ZERO emissions. Yeah, from the "tailpipe" but what did it take to get there? How much coal has to fry to get you 200 miles down the road? Green doesn't always mean good. I'm all for responsible pollution controls, but don't tout the good stuff without weighing the bad along with it. If you make one less kg of pollution with whatever green project you got going, is it going to be worth the cost?

If it's not cost-effective, it is not sustainable. It's kind of akin to the homeless issues that they're dealing with in L.A. right now. But they're spending hundreds of dollars per day per person trying to house them in hotels, etc. Somehow, that doesn't compute as a cost-effective method to help people. JMO.

I'm not anti-EV if that's what consumers eventually get told that's what they want and have it forced upon them. But peel back the curtain and tell the whole story of how it got here instead of the end-use emission.

By 2035 I'll be lucky to be alive anyway. Maybe let alone drive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

rfpowerdude

G-Body Guru
Jul 15, 2013
674
1,076
93
Palm Bay, Fla
In other words, humans are killing the planet no matter what they do. Time for a culling... (world war)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

ck80

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2014
5,743
9,121
113
In other words, humans are killing the planet no matter what they do. Time for a culling... (world war)
It'd be bad news for most western countries. The younger generation doesn't have the mettle to rise to that sort of occasion.

I picture them sitting in the corner mid-battle yelling at the enemy "Don't shoot! This is a safe space! Didn't you see the sign?" Then BAM.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

jiho

Royal Smart Person
Jul 26, 2013
1,001
508
113
I've worked in 2 "green" energy jobs 1st solar panels are highly toxic full of chromium and cadmium and theres no way to recycle them when there broken or worn out, the building off I-25 near Firestone in CO has been closed and basically condemned because of the health risk of the ovens and machinery inside coated with the stuff.
All made in China now. What's to worry. Those are "green" jobs because of the copper, right? Spock rules.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

pagrunt

Geezer
Sep 14, 2014
9,167
15,345
113
Elderton, Pa
As this is rolling into "green" territory, just think how much more "green" we were about 35-40 years ago. We recycled ore glass 16 oz soda bottles for about 5-10 cents each, a lot of automotive hard parts were cores to return for a reman/rebuilt parts when they did need replaced, most products either lasted years beyond their need or had easy to find & replace parts to keep them alive beyond their need, most product packaging could of been repurposed. We didn't have as much stuff that need electricity dispite that stuff might of used a little more of it that the modern version. I think we've gone backwards on things in the name of "green" if you really look at it. Hell, with use keeping these cars of ours on the road we are "greener" than most of these modern hippies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

ck80

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2014
5,743
9,121
113
As this is rolling into "green" territory, just think how much more "green" we were about 35-40 years ago. We recycled ore glass 16 oz soda bottles for about 5-10 cents each, a lot of automotive hard parts were cores to return for a reman/rebuilt parts when they did need replaced, most products either lasted years beyond their need or had easy to find & replace parts to keep them alive beyond their need, most product packaging could of been repurposed. We didn't have as much stuff that need electricity dispite that stuff might of used a little more of it that the modern version. I think we've gone backwards on things in the name of "green" if you really look at it. Hell, with use keeping these cars of ours on the road we are "greener" than most of these modern hippies.
Don't forget steels vs plastics and foams. We have pressure charged energy absorbers made of steel. And steel bumpers. Not foam chunks covered by sheets of plastic. Think of all the energy going into making all that junk.

Used to repair small electronics. Now most trash it for the next Chinese import. Tvs, toasters, radios, blenders, you name it.

Because of the shift to consumption, the ideas of durability and repairability fell to the wayside.

Most ways I miss those days. Not the retreaded tires, but most of the rest sure...
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: 4 users

303'505rollin

G-Body Guru
Sep 4, 2020
700
587
93
Colorado2newmexico
Going green is about $$$, green in the wallet. Every thing needs to fall apart quickly so you can buy another not like the classics which is what there baseing why you buy from them now
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

ck80

Moderator
Moderator
Supporting Member
Feb 18, 2014
5,743
9,121
113
Is putting in the grids for autonomous vehicles part of this new infrastructure plan?
Actually, if you read it, it's a new proposal of 1.7 trillion... and only 120 billion goes to roads, bridges, rail, etc etc etc.

But there's 500 billion in social welfare. And hundreds of billions more for community college and child care for unplanned kids on the public dole.

Infrastructure ain't what it used to be. But I guess the idea is first get all the electric cars out there, then, when nobody can use them, that's when you borrow trillions more because who says no when they can't use the cars and something that's NEEDED comes up? Unlike all this inflation driving pork that's gone on so far
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Status
Not open for further replies.

GBodyForum is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com. Amazon, the Amazon logo, AmazonSupply, and the AmazonSupply logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.

Please support GBodyForum Sponsors

Classic Truck Consoles Dixie Restoration Depot UMI Performance

Contact [email protected] for info on becoming a sponsor