Latest Daft Green Marketing Idea: Pictures of Natural Disasters on the Sides of New Cars

1933 Ford 3

Obviously this owner is trying to pre-empt the rule change. By Sicnag (1933 Ford 3 window Hot Rod) [CC BY 2.0], via Wikimedia Commons

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Professor Simon Dalby thinks the way to discourage buying petrol cars is to decorate new cars with mandatory images of climate disasters.

Thank you for not driving: Climate change requires anti-smoking tactics

November 20, 2017 9.21am AEDT

ust before the delegates for the annual Conference of the Parties on climate change started meeting in Bonn this month, the Lancet, the leading British medical journal, published yet another major studyshowing that climate change is a growing health hazard.

The study revealed that hundreds of millions of people around the world are already suffering due to climate change. Infectious diseases are spreading faster due to warmer temperatures, hunger and malnourishment is worsening, allergy seasons are getting longer and sometimes it’s simply too hot for farmers to tend to their crops.

But what would happen if we treated climate change as a health problem rather than an environmental one?

Many countries require packaging that alerts smokers to the dangers of the “cancer sticks” they are purchasing, and many cartons carry dire health warnings. In some cases, images of the grievous bodily harm caused by prolonged exposure to tobacco smoke must be printed on cigarette cartons. It’s all designed to discourage smoking and make plain the damage it causes.

Like cigarettes used to be, internal combustion-engined vehicles are ubiquitous. According to advertisers, their possession and use apparently infers social status. Equated with freedom, despite the amount of time drivers spend stuck in traffic, gasoline-burning cars are supposedly the ultimate symbol of individualism, autonomy and power.

So, how about a ban on advertising internal combustion engine-powered vehicles? No longer could they be shown as a symbol of glamour and sophistication to young people. Instead, the consequences of their widespread use could be highlighted.

Cigarette packaging displays health warnings, so why not have gasoline- and diesel-fueled cars decorated with images of disasters, floods, damaged buildings, hurricane devastation and the like?

Read more:

The Professor fails to explain what makes alternatives to combustion engine cars so green. Electric cars are particularly silly – it is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine.

148 thoughts on “Latest Daft Green Marketing Idea: Pictures of Natural Disasters on the Sides of New Cars

  1. “it is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine.”

    So blindingly obvious, you would imagine even a green could grasp that concept.

    • “it is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine.”

      So blindingly obvious, you would imagine even a green could grasp that concept.

      Except that in fact it is slightly more efficient to burn natural gas in an enormously heavy, but static and efficient combined cycle power station,. and charge a battery with it to drive a motor, than it is to burn diesel in a road car.

      And even if its a coal power station, well imagine running a V8 off coal dust…can’t be done.

      • How are those electric cars doing in Puerto Rico these days? Transportation has to be robust. Also, you are cherry picking your thermo. Yes, combined cycle ng can be pretty efficient, but it is losses all the way down after the lepton leaves the generator, more losses when it is stored in the battery and still more when it is converted into torque to the wheels.

      • “Except that in fact it is slightly more efficient to burn natural gas in an enormously heavy, but static and efficient combined cycle power station,. and charge a battery with it to drive a motor, than it is to burn diesel in a road car.”

        In ideal conditions, perhaps. In the real world, almost never.

      • “and charge a battery ” is the most inefficient step you can imagine. The more battery, the more inefficient.
        grid-bound electric is efficient
        Diesel-electric is efficient
        Battery-electric is the worst

      • Quite right Leo. You have to have a Carnot cycle somewhere and it is vastly more efficient to have it in a power station rather than a cold car running down to the shops at 5% efficiency or whatever

      • So let’s check this out, you get a fuel tank (battery) that holds enough energy for only about 300 miles, takes at least half an hour to fill if you manage to find a high power charger, gradually loses its storage capacity and after ten years costs around $20,000 to replace? You have to be kidding!

      • Leo Smith

        “Except that in fact it is slightly more efficient to burn natural gas in an enormously heavy, but static and efficient combined cycle power station,. and charge a battery with it to drive a motor, than it is to burn diesel in a road car.”

        Other than transmission losses and deteriorating batteries. Quite apart from the displacement of pollution from the city, from where most of these green initiatives are being driven, to the countryside where most coal/gas/wood/ power stations are located. There is not one meaningful power station within the M25 (the motorway network that encircles London) they are all located in the countryside.

        And a DERV can run on vegetable oil with a few simple modifications, so no diesel required. It can also do around 700 miles on one tank of diesel with a refill taking 5 minutes or so. It is also entirely independent of the grid, so no extra strain at peak times, and no issues with lack of wind to generate electricity from intermittent windfarms and solar arrays. There is no need for interconnectors running across the English channel from France, and the associated horrendous electricity prices form all the foregoing.

        Nor is it necessary that the taxpayer pays for the privileged few to run EV’s thanks to subsidies for the vehicles and the renewables that are proposed to provide the power for them.

    • Oh no you need to
      -have law that does not permit you to repaint
      -have the painting inspected yearly
      -have automatic system which fines the owner if the car is too dirty or repainted
      -have a new bureau that handles requests for repainting, gives licenses, registers cars and their painting, admits exceptions to black Audis used by the government, etc.
      -have a committee that decides on new pictures added into the pool of possible pictures
      -have to pay a yearly tax for all that

      Sounds so much green socialism.

      • Hugs,
        And all those reasonably well-paid jobs would go to green cronies; they would need to at conferences at least twice a year – in rotating cities, so they get to visit decent restaurants, opera and cat houses, and nice new-to-them scenery.
        Their time is important, so they will not travel by dug-out canoe – or even ocean liner [except, perhaps, Cunard’s Queen Mary 2, if First Class is available for the grateful tax-payer to purchase for them].
        There will also be a training need – to be met on gorgeous tropical islands, but, oddly, outwith the hurricane typhoon seasons . . .

        OK – it sounds familiar.

        “Sounds so much green socialism.” – Hugs nails it!


  2. If the few remaining horses are listening to Professor Simon Dalby, they will be greatly encouraged and see a return to the good old days of horse transport. Motor Car Garages will be converted to Stables, Service Stations converted to Feed Stations, Carparks will be Stud Farms, Car-washes will convert to horse showers, Carriage Makers will be back in business, Motorways will crowd with executives galloping to work, and the streets will once again be piled with reeking horse dung. The horses, at least, are looking forward to that.

    • ntesdorf

      They have nappies (daipers) for horses out on the public roads in Bermuda.

      I don’t understand how they get the horse to lie on it’s back to have it changed????

    • But…..Where do you reckon that the arable land will come from that would be needed to provide for the feeding of the horses? The amount of land needed produce the feed needed for the upkeep for a horse is several times the acreage that is needed to provide for a human being.
      There are some very real challenges ahead for civilized societies, almost none of which have anything at all to do with atmospheric greenhouse effect.

    • There must be something to this. I just had a call wanting to know if I wanted to invest in a startup buggy whip venture. As for the reeking horse dung, I suppose the greenies would prefer that to those noxious diesel fumes.

  3. “it is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine”

    This statement is not remotely true. If it were, then it would not be so much cheaper to drive on battery power than to use gasoline or diesel. What you’re forgetting is all the inefficient use of energy used to refine the oil into a form usable by combustion engines. When you take that into consideration, it is far more efficient to just burn the coal and natural gas that you get out of the ground and use the generated electricity to power the car than it is to extract the oil, refine it in a number of very energy-intensive steps, spend energy delivering that very heavy fuel to gas stations, pump it into your gas tank, and then drive it.

      • The U of Michigan study did not consider differences during manufacture where EVs are far worse than ICs. Production and disposal accounts for 21 tons of CO2 for a Tesla S against 7 tons for an Audi A7 Sportback according to Bjørn Lomborg. Lifetime CO2 from the Tesla S is 34 tons against 35 tons from the Audi A7. A ton of CO2 can be offset for $10. The taxpayers’ contribution is larger of course.—elon-musks-electric-cars-arent-about-to-save-th/

      • That Michigan study is not a cost-equivalent, it’s a greenhouse gas equivalent. Here in the U.S. the cost equivalent of electric vehicles varies between about 75mpg and about 130mpg depending on the vehicle model, the price of gasoline, and how much you pay for electricity. Compare that to say a moderately fuel efficient sedan at 35-45 mpg and electric cars are far more cost efficient,

      • The question was efficiency not cost. mpg equivalent and whole life CO2 are pretty good measures of efficiency. Your cost comparison doesn’t take into account depreciation and resale value which are poor for most EVs.

        “it is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine” is an engineering efficiency statement. Your term ‘cost efficiency’ is tautological and not the original subject of the discusion.

    • Yes maybe, but it works. In the U.K. We haven’t even managed after 30 years to provide decent internet cabling and speeds to many rural communities. The pathetic idea that we are going to provide the cabling infrastructure for electric car charge points all over the country is just another green fantasy. But then it is only about virtue signalling for a rich urban elite. And the power will still have to come from fossil fuels. Actually if you believe in electric cars you should only be allowed to re-charge them from electricity produced by windmills and solar – that’ll work (not).

      • Who said anything about providing electricity cabling to every rural spot in any particular country, or meeting some standard that electric cars have to be feasible for every single person? The question raised was whether electric cars are more or less efficient than gasoline/diesel engines. If they are more efficient, than they are not “only about virtue signalling for a rich urban elite.”

      • EV’s (electric vehicles) will surely suffer the same “fault” as did the Stanley Steamer.

        They are/were both unreliable when it comes to “on-demand” and/or especially ”emergency” usage/service.

        When one wants to go, ….. or gotta go, …… then they can’t wait around for the battery “re-charging” to finish.

        And they are not going to listen to anyone telling them ….. “You should have remembered to plug your EV in to recharge the batteries”.

        And the only insurance one can have to prevent the above “no-go” problem is to have an IC vehicle parked alongside their EV.

      • But then it is only about virtue signalling for a rich urban elite.

        To steal a quote from the internet: “People whose own motives generally amount to elevating themselves in the eyes of their equally pretentious peers, relative to thee and me.”

    • “This statement is not remotely true. If it were, then it would not be so much cheaper to drive on battery power than to use gasoline or diesel.”
      It would be much more expensive to drive on battery power than gasoline power if gasoline were not taxed to death by the government and if battery powered stuffs were decent cars instead of soap boxes where you must choose between arriving at destination or air conditionning.

      • Your point on taxes is a valid one, but even with taxes electric cars, at today’s gasoline/electricity prices, are still more efficient (electricity is taxed too and the discrepancy in MPGe and MPG is enormous). And even if your second point was relevant, in three years of driving an electric car I’ve never had to choose between arriving at a destination or air conditioning. .

      • “electricity is taxed too”

        Is it? At the consumer level? How much? I suspect gasoline is taxed much more.

    • No idea what the fuel tax situation is in America but the largest difference in cost in the UK is artificially created by the enormous feel duty and vat rates levied (about 70% of the total purchase price)

      • Gotta love that VAT (sales tax) on taxed fuel which is a tax on a tax. Don’t ever forget thst the money you (or most people) spend on this fuel is already taxed before you get it in the first place.

        A tax on a tax, on already taxed money. If governments could tax at 100%, they would, and they’d still run out of OPM.

        I still wonder where the greenies think that tax money will come from if they abolish fossil fuels. How will they afford all those oh so aptly-named “conferences of the parties” in luxury resorts?

  4. In Australia, under the guise of ‘plain packaging’, cigarettes are now sold in packets with graphic photographs of various bodily ailments, only some of which can be directly linked to the smoking of cigarettes. I am not sure whether there was a statistically significant drop in cigarette sales attributable to this policy. Though there has been a general decline in smoking, most likely as a result of limits to smoking in the workplace and public places, in some sections of the population, smoking was still on the rise, at least up until recently.
    But let’s not let facts get in the way of a good idea. We could start with Arnie’ Hummer. Quite a big canvas that one!.

    • Yeah because we have all seen this up close in Australia we know how it all plays out, could be a bit of fun really.

    • It’s the same in Canada, the packs have no identifiable cigarette brands, just images of rotting teeth and cancerous lungs on the packages.

      I don’t understand how governments could single out and persecute an entire industry like that, or why the cigarette makers just rolled over and took it.

      It’s high time they stood up for themselves and sued for the return of their brands.

      • Klem – November 20, 2017 at 4:08 am

        I don’t understand how governments could single out and persecute an entire industry like that, or why the cigarette makers just rolled over and took it.

        It’s not the government, …… it’s the elected politicians that are in charge of government activities and those politicians will do whatever it takes to insure their re-election.

        The anti-tobacco movement, ….. which is what spawned the anti-CO2 movement, …… are both extremely good “cash cows” for both state and federal “tax coffers” as well the “checkbooks” of many, many organizations, businesses and individuals ……. and once said “cash cow” recipients convince a portion of the populace that “it is a good cause that will prevent their death” ……. the politicians will do what they are told to do by said “free money” recipients.

        “DUH”, the anti-tobacco or Anti-Smoking Movement was ….. celebrated with rallies, parades, stunts, quitting information, and even “cold turkey” menu items in schools, workplaces, Main Streets, and legislative halls throughout the US …… and the same has been occurring in support of the Anti-CAGW Movement.

        The Swamp has to be drained …….. and the public education teaching curriculum has to be “reset” to fact-based teaching/learning.

    • The funnier part of tge original ‘plain’ packages was tgat the cigarette companies were overjoyed that marketing costs were slashed with no reduction in revenue.

      Now one has to keep all cigarettes and related products behind closed cupboard doors. You have to ask for them like getting drugs from a street dealer (so I’m told).

  5. I think I fancy a large picture taken during the cold winter a few years ago in the UK of stationary windmills in the cold still air.

    James Bull

      • Nigel S

        A world of brown cars, with pictures of coal for decoration. How very inspiring.

        And this absolute crap about the ‘status symbols’ of cars. It only really exists in the minds of children. When one gets to the age of having children, the status concept rapidly makes way for the concept of practicality.

        Sure, there are a few juvenile grown up’s who think their status is enhanced by a big car, but they are few and far between.

        Most of us perceive a car as a convenient, flexible, private means of transport. We pump £$Billions into the economy buying them, creating employment and funding roads. The haulage industry keeps shops provisioned with all the necessities of life, even the so called ‘organic’ shops littering the country have their deliveries made by lorry; and the organic farms producing meaningful quantities of food are reliant on fossil fuel for farm equipment and transport.

        Why don’t these green morons commit themselves to self flagellation and leave the rest of the normal human race to progress beyond wearing hair shirts.

        Oh, I forgot, it’s for the children! But surely the green children can be taught self flagellation? In fact, make it compulsory, then we’ll see just how long the green movement lasts.

      • I think you are optimistic about the status symbol element. Look at Tesla, most of Musk’s pitch is grotesquely uneccessary and frankly dangerous straight line performance. This joke from the film ‘Gold’ sums it up in many people’s minds. A man walks into a Cadillac dealership and begins to browse. After a few minutes, a car salesman approaches the man. “Good morning Sir, are you thinking about buying a Cadillac today?” The man pauses. “Well, I’m going to buy a Cadillac today. But I was thinking about p***y.”

        Disclosure: I drive a second hand petrol 2013 Fiat Panda base model which cost £3,500 and is averaging 50mpg (UK galls) so far. There is no EV I’m aware of that can come close to matching that for performance cost ratio considering whole life costs which are the only ones that make sense.

      • Ah yes hotscot, but when the kids are grown and flown, you can indulge again. I love my “late mid-life crisis” convertible 🙂

  6. I know where Proffessor Simon Dalby is coming from with this proposal.

    My wife when she was still driving was a impressionist when it came to natural disasters with cars.

    The natural disasters and impressions that she engineered on a vehicle whilst driving were almost permanently engraved onto the structure of the aforesaid vehicle for the life of the vehicle.

    • I think David Ball said it best when he posted the following comment:

      Just so you are aware, academia is a very narrow measure of intellect.

    • My theory is that a mutagenic, brain-destroying chemical has long been used as an insecticide for ivy-covered academic institutions.

      • There is a chance the same nutty professors are in favour banning the chemicals needed for the mandatory paints. In my opinion far easier solution is to drain the swamp.

  7. Imagine how incredibly stupid these idiots will look when their entire global warming falsehood becomes fully obvious to all.

    They should die of shame. However, they will simply move on to their next false crisis, just like they did the last many times they were utterly wrong.

    Remember their gear failures:
    The Population Bomb
    The banning of DDT
    The Ozone Hole
    Marxist economic theory
    Runaway global warming
    A zillion climate refugees by year 2000
    Wilder weather – more and stronger hurricanes
    Human Sacrifice, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria…

    • Allan MacRae

      Witness one of the more perverse examples of peaceful ‘hippie’ culture. Charles Manson died today (yesterday?) an LA character who mingled with 60’s hippie celebrities including Jackson Browne, Neil Young, the Mamas and the Papas and the Beach Boys. He organised orgies for them, distributed drugs and preached his distorted beliefs. “The conman projected an oracular wiseman to fools. Biographer Ed Sanders notes, “The reality was that he was a glib grubby little man with a guitar scrounging for young girls using mysticism and guru babble.””.

      “At their infamous Flint, Michigan, War Party at the end of 1969, the Weathermen hoisted a “Charles Manson Power” banner and spelled out pregnant victim Sharon Tate’s name in bullets.”

      “The charismatic Bernardine Dohrn, later a friend of Barack and Michelle Obama, feverishly told Weatherman followers: “Dig it: first they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach. Wild!””

      “The Los Angeles-based Tuesday’s Child proclaimed, “Manson: Man of the Year” on one cover and depicted Manson as Jesus Christ dying on the cross under the tag “Hippie” on another. The Los Angeles Free Press ran a weekly column penned by Manson. The Other, playing off controversial remarks made by the president, headlined an issue “Manson Declares Nixon Guilty.” Upon the release of an album of Manson’s music, several underground newspapers provided advertising for it gratis.”

      Die of shame? More likely from the excesses Manson promoted.

  8. Actually it might be the start of a whole new vehicle collector’s paradise if Prof Simon Dalby has his way.

    Collectors would not only have old model cars to collect but would have a whole new genre of collectable vehicle paintings of natural disasters impressionsof nartural disasters, the artists of which have hopefully died to get his / her painting’s values up, for collectors to pay big, big money for the rare collectable depending on the vehicle, the artist and the depiction of some rare but non descript disaster of a century or so ago at which nobody alive was present.

    Ah, the possibilities of making some money out of this using a fair bit of a rather doubtful provence for the depiction of some of the natural disasters as painted on a vehicle and there is a whole new collector’s genre to be explored along with a natural tendency to be somewhat creative in depicting that natural disaster .

    Perhaps we can start with a Tesla and depict the natural disaster of the South Australian storm that toppled the power lines and threw the wind turbines out of phase leading to the well documented State wide blackout.

    • I was thinking the same there is definitely a group that would love this stuff as a collectable, the more gore and death the better.

    • No worries and we have ship loads of coal leaving Australia so would you like us to paint images on the side of the boat? More than happy to do so, whatever the buyer wants they get 🙂

    • “why we need to change our current mode of lifestyle:”

      Why haven’t you then.

      Dump all those fossil fuel dependent things in your little socialist life.

      I Dare you.

      Firstly, your computer, and all heating , cooling

      All food delivered to you inner city ghetto by fossil fuelled transport.

      Lead the way, Ivan.. you know you can ! 😉

      • Stop being moronic. Who says to drop fossil fuels completely? Of course that is impossible. However, usage can be reduced and sustainable energy alternatives promoted. Why are you being such a drama queen? Are you gay?

      • ivankinsman

        What’s sustainable about subsidised windfarms that use more concrete and steel, and cover far more land that any fossil fuel power station, to produce less electricity?

        You just continually bury your head in the sand and refuse to recognise that it’s a practical impossibility to generate enough energy from wind, solar and biomass for even a small country like the UK. And that’s not from me, that’s from the late Dr. David MacKay, a well respected green mathematician who even did a TED talk presentation on the futility of renewables.

        And what’s the big deal if AndyG55 is gay. Do you have something against gay people. I’m sure he would prefer to be gay than a bigot.

      • Poor ivan, you are the drama queen…

        Its in every post you make.

        Look in the mirror and preen yourself……

        ….. if you can stand to look at your hypocrisy.

      • “I’m sure he would prefer to be gay than a bigot.”

        I am neither.

        If you want to be gay, Ivan.. go for it, I won’t think any less of you.

        Why is it that leftist socialists always accuse others of being what they are, or would like to be.?

  9. This advertises where things would have been if Hillary had won. The frantic activity since Trump won and his withdrawal from the Parasite Accord has created a deep neurosis (psychosis?) that I believe to be dangerous. The desperation and angst is palpable.

    Remember the Climate Blues epidemic caused by the Pause, which in fragile minds created the specter of having spent all that time in studies and career for a non issue (oh, they rationalized it was because they could see the terrible future and no one would listen. Classic psychological D*nile). We never heard from these sufferers again.

    Remember weepy Bill. There is evidence that memes like this attract people looking for a meaning to their unhappy lives. The zeal and hatred among the scientifically illiterate ‘fans’ is unsettling.

  10. There is at least 30,000 fatalities in auto accidents alone per year in USA, so by this reasoning we should all be painting scenes of auto accidents on our cars. I think it is a bit sanctimonious that anyone would trash what has made us who we are. The rapid rise of our current civilization is because of the fossil fuel age, and is a package deal. It isn’t ending anytime soon.

    • Just look at any a&e department. Everything seen, all the technology, products etc were all derived from the ability to produce energy! Cheaply!

    • Before we had modern machines, fueled with fossil fuels, we had slavery in all its forms.

      Faites ton choix.

  11. Am sat here trying to give electric cars my very best shot…..
    The Renault Zoe being my example – by accounts the a very good little electric car. Not vastly expensive and actually buy-able – unless Teslas.

    So – you get a 40kWh battery – buy-able for £6,000
    Also get an 88bhp motor = 65kW of grunt.
    =Sensible, on UK roads there simply is not the space anymore to use more than that.

    The battery, lets use 18650 cells to build it.
    We are not going to get cells bigger than 3300mAh for ‘sensible money’ so to get a 40kWh battery, assumin 4volts per cell, we need 3030 actual cells.

    In order to deliver the claimed 65kW, that turns into a battery current of 5.3 Amps

    That means we need the sort of cells that go into electronic cigarettes (high current versions) and they are really expensive- easily £5 or £5 each when put in your electronic cigarette.

    Hence, to buy the Zoe’s battery, you get fantastic value for money – easily £12,000 of cells for half of that money – and built into a functioning ‘thing’ to boot.

    We’re not told (and this is The Crunch) about cycle numbers.
    So, we use lower current rated laptop cells as a guide.
    And presumably, lower current-rated cells should last longer. yes/no?
    But an equivalent watt-hour storage per cell (10Wh per cell) laptop battery says that it is good for 500 cycles.
    And those are the really expensive ones

    And I know that from this very lappy I’m on right now… (An HP ‘gaming’ lappy – that *should* have been very expensive but the store (Staples) was going bust at the time. Plus ‘old’ Windows 8 – hence half price at £425)

    18 months ago, when brand-new – it told me I had nearly 6 hours of potential use.
    Now and from being religiously charged/recharged, it only tells me 3 hours when I switch it on.

    So that 500 cycles thing stacks up but 500 (daily) trips out for a car is nothing – its not even 18 months of motoring.

    Something stinks here………….

    • sigh..
      UNLIKE Tesla
      £5 or £6 (six) each
      Man, they can go to well over £10 each!
      But there, that is The Drug doing the talking – you always used to run out of matches when *most* in need of a cigarette.
      Been there. Done that

      • Divided by a common tongue?
        I found Peta’s comments fine.
        I am sure you followed the maths.
        Did you not like the decline in charge?


    • Moderately Cross of East Angli: I have an EV. I don’t do “Green” and don’t care a fig about C02. Whu shouldn’t I charge from any source I want to?

    • Peta of Newark: I hace personally tested lithium ion cells over 2000 cycles. A laptop battery is optimised for the life time of a laptop, an EV battery for the lifetime of an EV

      • The tappet brothers on the radio show Car Talk had a saying, “The French [auto makers] copy nobody [hence learning to repair them can’t build very much on existing knowledge] and nobody copies the French [for good reason, apparently].

  12. In my misguided youth I used to help out the green party at election time (at polling stations and the like…..oh the cringe of it all now)….Anyhow, I noticed that all the higher echelon officials used to drive around in great big 4 by 4’s. They really did.

    • They would have us Fuel users all marked with yellow stars, and then made stateless. That is where this all goes with the new Green Reich but they think this is acceptable its fine to trample democracy and anything else because they are saving the planet.

  13. Why muddy the waters with combustion engine cars? Are we talking carbon monoxide (CO) or the dreaded Carbon dioxide (CO2) – the demon gas that is supposed to be ending life as we know it on the planet?

  14. From the article: “The study revealed that hundreds of millions of people around the world are already suffering due to climate change. Infectious diseases are spreading faster due to warmer temperatures, hunger and malnourishment is worsening, allergy seasons are getting longer and sometimes it’s simply too hot for farmers to tend to their crops.”

    What the heck are they talking about? Where is this happening? I would like to see some evidence to establish the truth of any of the above claims. All we get from alarmists are unsubstantiated claims which they expect us to accept as true.

    • I have yet to talk to a farmer who thinks it’s too hot to work in the fields, especially when running the combine for wheat, corn or soybeans means bringing home the bacon.

  15. I’d go for pictures of natural disasters on the sides of my car—as long as they are all from the 1800s and I get to label them with the place and the date in large lettering.

  16. Natural disasters, huh? Only if I get to choose them. I’d take Vesuvius and its umbrella of pumice and poison gases just before it collapsed and entombed Pompeii on the trunk. The 2004 Boxing Day quake (12/26/2004) at Banda Aceh could go on one door, and the 3/11/2011 Tohoku quake could go on the doors. And a flight of migrating geese being slaughtered by wind turbines on the hood would work, along with a Tesla burning up on the pavement.
    Geezo Pete, whoever comes up with this stuff needs therapy something fierce!

  17. Once again, eco-fascism rears its ugly head. The desperation of the Greenie Climatist ecofascists is reaching a fever pitch now, as their cherished CAGW ideology is in its’ death throes.

      • I think you need to be driving a hummer or a sports utility vehicle to get a photo if that inflated head into the front seat.

        On another note, Mann’s Hockeystick was really done with tree ring proxies that were hairs from his head. Clearly there is a hockeystick going on there 😛

  18. WARNING: The US Climate Scientist General has determined that driving this car will cause plant life to grow slightly faster and may increase the risk that cold winter nights will be slightly less cold.

  19. I’d like to ask everyone, especially those who sing their praises, “Do you own an electric car or, at least, have serious hands on experience with one or more? If so, what have been your experiences?”

    I ask because my own experiences, though underwhelming, have been limited.

    We have Anthony’s summation of his from his introduction to John Hardy’s articles two weeks ago;

    “Full disclosure: I own an electric car, and I think they are useful for city transportation. However, having owned one for a decade, I can say it hasn’t been practical or cost effective.”

    Considerably less than a ringing endorsement, but still a sample of one. So how about it everyone, what’s it like to actually use one? Not just read the yammer or take a joyride or two, but actually use one?

  20. That works for me. What disaster should I paint on my car?

    Oh! I know! A painting of an impoverished African village starving because fossil fuel used for agriculture is no longer allowed.

    Or, a painting of a starving Chinese coal mining village ruined by coal policy.

    Or, a vacated Inuit village abandoned because only electric cars are allowed, and batteries behave oddly at -50 degrees.

    I know, I know. Algoreans only fear for the welfare of hypothetical “climate” refugees. They care nothing for real climate policy victims.

    Too bad.

  21. My favorite is the Christmas tsunami of 2004. That more than any other natural disaster in my experience drove home the undeniable point that when Mother Nature decides to do her thing you better hope you’re not in the way. A good reminder for people. And a walk in the park compared to the next ice age.

  22. “It’s all designed to discourage smoking and make plain the damage it causes.”

    It not only does not seem effective, it seems to excite and entice teenagers to do something dangerous. If it was branded “just stupid” rather than exciting and dangerous perhaps it would be less attractive to children and teens.

  23. Put a mural on the side of my car to scare/shame/”educate”/alert/etc. Fine by me, but let’s continue ….

    We also need to tattoo the foreheads of publicly compensated yahoos that may be in control of educating children, like this guy.

    The tattoo needs to be visible/legible from 20′ away & clearly warn what can happen if zealots like this are allowed to spread their propaganda into the mainstream, unchallenged. Maybe a caricature of adolph and/or the guy that trashed Venezuela (too bad he couldn’t have lived to see what he did).

  24. I may have failed to see the comment, but there are those types who would love to have disaster pictures on the side of a car. Some disaster pictures would be popular, and probably command a premium in price. This would be a boon for the collector market. Hey, gotta get them all. If it works for pokemon and children, it would work for adults and cars. Where do I invest?

  25. At the Petro Canada where I buy gas, they have a “Please use our fuels responsibly” decal on the pumps, I ignore that too.

  26. I’ll take a lightning strike forest fire, made extra large by not allowing logging and letting the forest get too old and susceptible to fire.

  27. In prof Darby’s world, purchasers of ICE cars with the fantasy disaster pictures on them, would be jailed or even executed for repainting their cars. I actually believe the big three would sell more cars because of a stronger contrarian sense in Americans relative the sheeple, er, people of other countries. I just know the car’s pictures and tex t would be artfully doctored to make fun of the noble globals. In fact an exellent new business start_up would be a kind of car tattoo parlor with book full of gags.


    • Or Josh, open up a business to custom cartoon the cars with your climate spoof. You would become a millionaire. Automakers could be turning out models: the Ford Tornado, the Toyota Seeoto, Mercedes Benzene, com’on WUWT wags must be able to make a list!

  28. In re comments concerning
    “[I]t is ridiculously inefficient to burn fossil fuels, convert the heat into electricity, and use that electricity to charge a battery, compared to burning the fossil fuel directly in a combustion engine.”</ib

    Economically, “efficiency” has a mathematical definition and it does not concern scientific definitions.
    “Efficiency” is where marginal cost equals marginal benefit, MC=MB.
    This is where social benefit is maximized. If MB>MC, too little is produced/consumed since society values another unit of output more than resources, or if MB<MC, too much is produced/consumed since society values resources (or alternative outputs potentially produced/consumed) more than another unit of output. Opportunity costs must be minimized.

    The statement is generally true by revealed preference and the fact that few consumers buy EVs and producers sell few, less than 1% market. If it was false, there would be a huge profit in EVs, cheaper than internal combustion to buy and operate, similar to how cars are more efficient than horses and a grain bag instead of a gas tank or battery supported by an electric power plant. The market normally decides what is efficient, not a bunch of scientific or social engineers. This is allocative efficiency as opposed to Pareto, x-, or dynamic efficiency and the general definition is MC = MB maximizing societal welfare or the transformation of scare resources into the highest valued level of output(s) or most valued by society. It is the holy grail for economists.

    We should look at all costs and benefits, not just those born by producers and consumers which normally get to the efficient level of production/consumption.
    There are distortions like tax credit subsidies which are not true [negative] costs favoring inefficient overconsumption of EVs. There are also externalities. Darby argues some sort of perceived negative externality in the form of “suffering due to climate change .. Infectious diseases .. warmer temperatures, hunger and malnourishment .. allergy seasons are getting longer .. too hot for farmers to tend to their crops” and offers the solution “why not have gasoline- and diesel-fueled cars decorated with images of disasters, floods, damaged buildings, hurricane devastation and the like?” as an embarrassment factor or cost on consumption working like what we would call a Pigovian tax on consumption of internal combustion powered cars. It is a misunderstanding by him to compare it to cigarettes since that labeling solution is more an informational failure solution on consumers assuming they do not know costs of smoking as opposed to second hand smoke plus ignoring tort liability of cigarette manufacturers.

    This is the same old externality/efficiency argument since day one decades ago with AGW claimed negative externality like pollution giving cause to carbon tax inasmuch as a tax on leaded gas.

    I would argue that Darby is incorrect. CO2 is not a pollutant. It helps plants grow and is socially beneficial. If AGW existed from gas powered engines, that may be beneficial too in what we used to call the interglacial optimum or look at the Medieval warming period as opposed to cold of Maunder Minimum. AGW does not exist from the data on temperature, there has been no significant change in global temperatures since 1994, in fact negative anomaly as of this week ( and global cooling in prior decades to late 1970s when all were worried about devastation from and ice age when we massively expanded driving cars and pumping out CO2 is opposite direction for correlation with no claim on causality of CO2 on AGC. There is similarly no evidence of increased fires, floods, bad weather, and the opposite concerning hurricanes and crop damage. Also, EVs produce more CO2 than internal combustion engines due to upstream emissions and battery production. Worrall is entirely correct on the efficiency statement and Darby wrong, otherwise (and ignoring hypothesized fictitious externalities) we would all be buying and driving EVs since the fixed and operating costs would be cheaper than gas powered internal combustion vehicles which it is not.

    Also note, while gas powered cars ended being more economically efficient than alternative renewable horse powered transportation, there were similar prior arguments about negative externaiities in big cities by horse excrement and dead animals left in the street Ike abandoned vehicles and health concerns. A similar Darby argument would be signs put on horses when people drove them with pedestrians stepping in crap, getting sick, or dead carcasses rotting in the street.

    I am in between if Teslas should be labeled with their overall CO2 emissions higher than internal combustion type cars and painted like deserts or with dead plants, or if all gas power vehicles should be painted with fields of green plants. I vote no to anything, and hate the pundit experts and costly perceived “solutions” to non-existent problems. If we followed them, we would have nuked the ice caps in the late 1970s to “solve” the global cooling problem. I have a problem with anthropogenic caused idiocy which can spread like religion.

Comments are closed.