The mad rush to electric vehicles

Will this be another disaster for consumers?

Duggan Flanakin

Tesla’s stock market value is already bigger than Ford and General Motors combined, says a report in Forbes magazine. Elon Musk’s company had already received nearly $5 billion in federal subsidies by 2015, helping him amass a net worth of $31 billion. Who says government cannot make anyone rich?

But hold on. An ascendant Bernie Sanders has called for a massive expansion of government-run electricity production. He claims to be no friend of billionaires and is running against multiple billionaires, including two Democrat candidates and 23 contributors to Mayor Pete’s campaign.

But he sure is helping the rich. Sanders and many other politicos have championed a multi-state effort to end the sale of vehicles with internal combustion (IC) engines. So have several European nations. Related goals include phasing out coal, oil and natural gas for heating, electric power generation and other uses.

As Politico reports, a major part of Sanders’ $16 trillion Greener New Deal allocates massive new funding for the four existing “power marketing administrations” that are overseen by the Department of Energy, Tennessee Valley Authority and a new federal agency. The money would go to vastly expand their solar, wind and even geothermal power production.

Matt Palumbo, writing in the Bongino Report, says the Sanders plan will need $2 trillion just for infrastructure, dwarfing the cost of the interstate highway system, to add 800 gigawatts of intermittent, weather-dependent wind and solar energy. Right now Sanders insists that he is not “nationalizing” energy production, but merely providing wholesale energy to public and private local suppliers. However, these subsidized government-run facilities will surely control the energy market. That looks like nationalization in all but official nomenclature.

Private companies that now rely on coal or natural gas will be further squeezed by mandated deep cuts in CO2 emissions. Meanwhile, energy demand for a mandated and growing fleet of electric vehicles will soar, requiring still more wind turbines, solar panels, backup batteries, transmission lines, and (as I note in a recent article about electric buses) metals, minerals and mining demands on unprecedented scales – coupled with rampant environmental destruction, child labor, and horrific increases in cancer and other diseases from the absence of workplace safety and pollution control standards.

Americans have expressed great displeasure over subsidizing EVs for the wealthy, a recent American Energy Alliance poll found. Only one in five voters would trust the federal government to make decisions about what kinds of cars should be subsidized – or mandated. Many do not even like, or cannot afford, the innovations already introduced for internal combustion vehicles, as evidenced by data showing that the average age of the U.S. vehicle fleet has increased in recent years.

Who can blame them for being angry? Wealthy EV buyers can get $7500 federal and up to $2500 state tax credits (not just deductions), free or low-cost charging at stations installed at taxpayer and electricity consumer cost, and access to HOV lanes even with no passengers. EV drivers pay no gasoline tax, and thus pay nothing for road construction, repair and maintenance. And as states “go green” and eliminate fossil fuel and nuclear power, average Americans will have to endure the eyesores, noise, habitat destruction and wildlife losses that will come with millions more wind turbines and solar panels.

Nevertheless, despite public qualms, most automakers have joined the EV movement. Like gossip in a small town, proposals and promises to ban or end production of IC engines have spread like wildfire. The Chinese-owned Swedish automaker Volvo announced in 2017 it would stop designing new IC engines. German giant Daimler (Mercedes Benz) followed suit last year. And in the United States, General Motors in 2018 announced plans to offer only battery-powered or hydrogen-powered vehicles in the near future.

These automakers are perhaps just responding to the political climate in Europe. The United Kingdom just moved up its cutoff date for banning sales of new IC vehicles to 2035. The UK ban would even include hybrids! France and other countries are holding to a 2040 date for mandating all-electric fleets, while Norway has set a goal (not a mandate) to eliminate most IC engines (but not hybrids) by 2025. But amazingly California lawmakers actually killed a 2018 effort to ban IC engines by 2040.

Meanwhile, European automakers have moved to profit from EV charging stations. IONITY (created in 2017 as a joint venture between the BMW Group, Mercedes-Benz AG, the Ford Motor Company, and the Volkswagen Group with Audi and Porcshe) has already built over 200 facilities with over 860 charging points. It plans to expand to 400 facilities in 24 countries by yearend 2020. And IONITY is not alone.

Europe today still has over 100,000 petrol and diesel fueling stations, certain to shrink as IC engines are now pariahs. But how do Europeans plan to charge all the electric cars, trucks and buses, if they must rely entirely on intermittent, unreliable, weather-dependent, super expensive wind and solar electricity?

Before February 2020, IONITY was charging a flat, fixed rate of eight Euros (about $8.87) for a fast charging session. That was less than 15 cents per kilowatt-hour for a 60-kW charge that might be good for 210 miles – on a continent where electricity prices are already 25 to 45 cents per kWh. With EU gasoline prices ranging from 1.77 euros/liter ($7.35 per gallon) in the Netherlands to $4.41/gallon in Romania, drivers would need about $31 in Romania or $51 in the Netherlands to drive the same distance (assuming 30 mpg), even at these incredible (and unsustainable) bargain basement electricity prices.

But as of February 1, IONITY switched to unit pricing at a rate of 0.79 euro/kWh (88 cents/kWh), or about $52.80 for a 60-kW charge. That’s a 500% increase in the cost of charging your car, just to travel a couple hundred miles. Suddenly, an EV charge is a whole lot more expensive than a fill-up.

So IONITY is offering discounts that customers can purchase from IONITY partner companies. At home chargers in the EU cost about $18 per 60-kW charge, plus about $1,000 for installation. That’s at the average EU residential rate of 30 cents/kWh (twice the current U.S. average). And that’s before the mad rush to electric cars, trucks and buses – and the mad rush to expensive “renewable” energy.

How will poor and working classes afford this, especially people who must drive to work or must use trucks in their small businesses? Who will subsidize their soaring costs – the EU’s increasingly stretched and impoverished middle class? Its millionaires and billionaires?

Here’s the rub for Americans. If Sanders gets his way, the federal government will control the price and availability of electricity in the USA. California, which wants to mandate EVs only, has already faced multi-day electricity blackouts due to fire concerns, and if there’s no power there’s no charging. Many other countries also lack reliable electric power – and increasing electricity scarcity (almost certain in a fossil fuel-free environment) drives up prices even in government-controlled marketplaces.

After the 1970s oil embargo, the United States opted for a broad-based energy sector, so that shortages in one fuel would not cripple the national economy. But today, many cities have already moved to ban oil, coal and natural gas, nuclear is still taboo, and wind and solar are intermittent. The push toward an all-electric society – plus heavy and rising burdens on the power grid from intermittent power generations and charging all-electric vehicles – looks like a recipe for disaster, at least for the average consumer.

The well-connected always do well enough in controlled economies – at least until government policies send energy prices soaring, and send angry poor and working class protesters into the streets, to rage and rampage, as has happened in Iran, France and Chile.

But what can a We the Governed do but submit to the will of the all-powerful state envisioned by Sanders and his fellow Democrat presidential wannabes? They’re all insulated by their wealth and positions from the impacts of their policies. But what about the rest of us? State and federal ruling classes might be surprised at how liberty and opportunity-loving Americans respond.

Duggan Flanakin is director of policy research for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT).

181 thoughts on “The mad rush to electric vehicles

  1. Drug dealers force people to become dependent on them for supplies they cannot do without
    The governments of the West are doing the same with energy.

    • Quite – behave yourself and you will be allowed your meagre ration of electricity – and genuflect when talking to your superiors!

      • This article is proof of the axiom that no society or civilization ever survives prosperity. They all find a way to commit suicide. Countless advances due to affordable, clean energy, but we’re going to pretend energy is bad and cut our throats for no reason, then whine when things go to hell in a hand basket. And blame someone or something else for it all.

        • Both planned populations including dodo dynasties and other dysfunctional choices, and genocide including demographic gerrymandering and cultural cancellation are progressive conditions. Spreading the Green blight is perhaps a lesser wicked solution.

        • Yes.

          Prosperity leads to cities.

          Cities lead to insanity.

          Insanity leads to collapse.

          Then future generations see the ruins of the wonderful cities of the last civilization, and think ‘why can’t we live like this?’ without realizing that those very cities were what killed those people, by allowing lunatics who couldn’t survive in a rural culture to thrive in the cities and destroy the society that created them.


      I’ve been watching the Netflix series “Medal of Honor”. It is impressive, and reflects the enormous sacrifice that our soldiers have made to protect our freedoms.

      However, these freedoms are now at great risk, not from external enemies but from traitors within, who are using the climate change scam as a means to control energy, the very lifeblood of society. Keep in mind that if they control energy, they control you.

      There is not one shred of credible evidence that alleged human-made global warming is dangerous, and ample evidence that disproves the failed CAGW hypothesis.

      It is tragic that so many gullible people have been deceived by the global warming scam, and they are prepared to surrender our hard-won freedoms to a corrupt gang of climate fraudsters.

      Told you so, 18 years ago.

      Regards, Allan

      • Right on Allan! Keep speaking truth to these liars and thieves. There are countless quotations from the leaders of the “Greens” admitting outright that CO2 is a front for control over the population.
        This is the beginnings of WWIII, it just looks different than people expect. Unfortunately my children will now have a war on their hands when they realize they have been duped and freedom taken away.

        • Thank you Al Miller – good comments.

          Rather than leave my children and grandchildren to fight a war, I say settle this now. If a just few people had the strength to stop Stalin, Hitler and Mao before they gained real power, that would have saved the lives of about 200 million innocents who were murdered, most by their own governments.

          I am getting to be an old guy and I will not bequeath another war to following generations.

          I’d rather die on my feet than live on my knees.

          Best personal regards, Allan

          By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., September 20, 2019

          • Allan,

            Tragically it is never the silent majority which rises up, only the minority anarchists within our midst.

          • Not sure if you saw this post, my friend.


            Hi HotScot my friend,

            Here is a great project for your retirement:

            Organize a “flying squad” of football hooligans in each city, to deal expeditiously with XR thugs. It’s time that the hooligans put their efforts to constructive use, for the benefit of the pubic.

            This could be done independently, as a public service to speed up the local commute. I suggest paying the hooligans in pints down the pub – “bitter-based crowd funding”.

            The good people of Canning Town showed admirable restraint in dealing with the XR thugs, especially considering one of the XR cowards kicked one of the locals in the face.

            That restraint should be a model for future activities by the flying squads. Go get ’em!

            Problem solved – a low-cost, quick and effective, locally-sourced, low-carbon solution!


            Where are Britain’s renowned football hooligans when you need them the most?

            The climate change scam was never about the climate – it was always a false-front for totalitarian political objectives – elitist total control of me and you.

            XR thugs are the modern version of Hitler’s brown-shirts. Wouldn’t you like to have a crack at them?

            C’mon lads – Make XR thugs an endangered species!

          • I suspect you are recruiting the wrong ‘thugs’.

            Football is a game for gentlemen, played by hooligans.

            Rugby is a game for hooligans played by gentlemen.

            I’ll stand with my peaceful, Ruby playing gentlemen any day of the week.

            We might invite the football hooligans in when the hard work is done. But I doubt it.


      • Apparently a huge number of people are convinced there is an ongoing “climate crisis”, even though nothing unusual can be pointed to whatsoever.
        All it took was a bunch of years in a row of every weather event and worrisome scrap of news being blamed on “climate change” for people to believe it.
        At this point millions think every storm, drought, fire, flood, heat wave, cold snap, and everything else that can be perceived as bad news, is called climate change and is proof of a crisis.
        Considering how gullible and uninformed so many people turned out to be, it is no longer possible to wonder about how so many people have supported and committed so many horrific, cruel, or just plain stupid and awful actions in the past.
        A certain number of people will buy any malarkey they are fed, and lots of other people will just shut up and do nothing and say nothing about it.

        • Nicholas,

          I agree with your comments.

          With the internet, people should be better informed than ever. But it seems that the internet and social media make it even easier to manipulate and fool people.

          The US Founding Fathers feared mob-rule. The internet and social media make it so much easier to incite that mob-type behavior. Think about how many mass delusions are ongoing at the moment.

          To thrive in the internet era one must be an empowered free-thinker, have a good understanding of how things work, and a strong reference upon which to evaluate information. Additionally, one must have the courage to stand up to the lies, despite being massively outnumbered.

  2. What – Electric will be GREAT once a “Mr. Fusion” the size of a 2 L 4 cylinder engine is developed … or Dr. Mills commercializes his inaptly named SunCell ™ in another couple years …

    • One would think that a living legend greater than Tesla and Einstein combined would have succeeded by now.

      Mills has been CEO of HydroCatalysis Power, BlacklightPower, BrilliantLight Power selling your same failed message since 1991. He’s used the same MO as Rossi – multiple companies, multiple prototypes and multiple demonstrations have fleeced numerous investors. He might as well have trademarked “in another couple of years…” and you still haven’t said why you promote this scam.

      • re: “One would think that a living legend greater than … ”


        You’re back for more abuse, on account of your thick indoctrinated skull and what you think “science” (and it’s self-proclaimed and self-acclaimed high priests) have unerringly decreed!

        A) You’ve NOT seen the experimental data.

        B) You’ve NOT read the detailed lab reports, and YET –

        C) you’re going to tell ME what is wrong.

        Instead, you (post and) rely on (now) old, out-dated third-hand press and misleading (what passes for) ‘analysis’ from individuals who have A) NOT seen the experimental data and B) NOT read the detailed lab reports either (And how could they? Those are OLD OUT_DATED third-hand press and misleading opinion masquerading as ‘analysis’.)

        How stupid can you really be? You JUST can’t get over this, can you?

        Skissor, you’re an idiot.

        • Anyone who fails to agree with me after I’ve carefully explained to him what an idiot he is, is clearly too indoctrinated to think for himself.

      • Skissor, you azzhat, I’ll make you a bet. BrLP commercializes their product before ‘Fusion’ boils their first gallon of water … BrLP has ALREADY demonstrated bringing a 120 gallon water tank up to the boiling point; your ‘boys’ in ‘Fusion’ better get a-moving and ‘get the lard out’.

        • You still won’t answer.

          I’ve seen the “data” you posted and it’s BS. Call me all the bad words you want. It doesn’t matter to me as I still have a Ph.D. in chemistry, and you’re still wrong.

          • re: “I’ve seen the … ”

            No, no you haven’t. The reference list on this subject is loooong, too loooooooong to list here. You have NOT even begun to take a look at this, furthermore, ALL we get from you is the continued (fallacy of) ‘appeal to authority’. This is NOT AN ARGUMENT.

            I’ve got a quote that pretty much sums up you, and your approach:

            There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.

          • re: “I’ve seen the “data” you posted and it’s …”

            Not a physicist? Maybe that’s why … You look to be ill-equipped to investigate this field, and this is aside from your present exhibited inherent bias and ‘indoctrination’ to date.

          • One doesn’t need to be a chemist or physicist to avoid being a sucker in this case.

            I did appreciate looking at the SunCell photos on their website. Good for a laugh.

          • Jim is not an idiot. For one thing, he can construct a cogent sentence. For another, on unrelated topics, he’s made some valid technical points.

            On the topic of Randell Mills, and hydinos, etc., however, he exhibits the behavior of a troll with cult-like tendencies. I surmise that he is somehow being compensated for his posts by Mills. He might be an employee, family member or even Mills himself. He might be an investor. If he really believes in Mills, then I overestimate his intelligence.

            Regardless, he’s a Mills promoter. Con men need a renewable supply of sheep and Mills has taken over $100 million from them over the past three decades, but I guess at least he can boil 120 gallons of water.

          • Oh, well…you should have just said from the get-go that the reference list was loooooooooong.
            That settle sit then.

          • “Not a physicist? ”

            Why does this remind me of the alarmists declaring that unless you have a degree in climate science, you have no right to disagree with them?

          • @ _Jim February 22, 2020 at 9:02 am

            Projection much?

            The reference list on this subject is loooong, too loooooooong to list here.

            Classic response of an arguer with neither facts nor the law to support your claims. Why not just save your blood pressure and do those of us who are actually trying to follow the thread the courtesy of declining to hijack it? Please? Waiting to see won’t cost either of you anything.

          • re: ” Classic response of an arguer with neither facts nor … to support … claims”

            Red94ViperRT10, do you seriously want to join the growing ‘cast of idiots’ too? Your post isn’t clear as to what you were thinking when you made it as well; either you WANT to see solid references/cites – or you don’t – which is it? Write for clarity, not ambiguity … You’re REALLY REALLY asking for it, and the INTENT here all along is NOT to derail THE SUBJECT of this thread. Is THAT difficult to understand? Is it? Capich? Comprendo?

            So, as one local auto dealer puts in part in his advert: “… so … I’m just going to give it to ya …”

            *Mills, R., J. Lotoski, W. Good, and J. He. (2014) “Solid Fuels that Form HOH Catalyst.” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 39: 11930-11944 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.05.170

            *Mills, R., J. Lotoski, J Kong, G Chu, J He, and J Trevey. (2014b) “High-Power-Density Catalyst Induced Hydrino Transition (CIHT) Electrochem­ical Cell.” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 39: 14512-14530. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.06.153.

            Mills, R.L.; Booker, R.; Lu, Y. (2013). “Soft X-ray continuum radiation from low-energy pinch discharges of hydrogen.” J Plasma Physics. doi:10.1017/S0022377812001109.

            Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M.; Good, W.; Zhao, G. (2012). “Design for a BlackLight Power Multi-Cell Thermally Coupled Reactor Based on Hydrogen Catalyst Systems”. Int. J. Energy Research 36: 778–788. doi:10.1002/er.1834.

            Mills, R.L.; Lu, Y. (2011). “Time-Resolved Hydrino Continuum Transitions with Cutoffs at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm”. Eur. Phys. J. D 64: 65–72. doi:10.1140/epjd/e2011-20246-5.

            Mills, R.L.; Zhao, G.; Akhtar, K.; Chang, Z.; He, J.; Hu, X.; Wu, G.; Lotoski, J.; Chu, G. (2011). “Thermally Reversible Hydrino Catalyst Systems as a New Power Source”. Int. J. Green Energy 8: 429–473. doi:10.1080/15435075.2011.576287.

            *Mills, R.L.; Lotoski, J.; Zhao, G.; Akhtar, K.; Chang, Z.; He, J.; Hu, X.; Wu, G.; Chu, G. (2011). “Identification of New Hydrogen States”. Physics Essays 24: 95–117. doi:10.4006/1.3544207.

            *Mills, R.L.; Zhao, G.; Good, W. (2011). “Continuous Thermal Power System.” Applied Energy 88: 789–798. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.08.024.

            *Mills, R.L.; Zhao, G.;Akhtar, K.; Chang, Z.; He, J.; Hu, X.; Wu, G.; Lotoski, J.; Chu, G. (2010). “Thermally Reversible Hydrino Catalyst Systems as a New Power Source”. Prep. Pap. Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Fuel Chem. 55 (2): 252.

            *Mills, R.L.;Lu, Y. (2010). “Hydrino Continuum Transitions with Cutoffs at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35: 8446–8456. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.05.098.

            Mills, R.L.; Akhtar, K. (2010). “Fast H in Hydrogen Mixed Gas Microwave Plasmas when an Atomic Hydrogen Supporting Surface Was Present”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35: 2546–2555. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.12.148.

            Mills, R.L.; Akhtar, K.;Zhao, G.; Chang, Z.; He, J.; Hu, X.; Chu, G. (2010). “Commercializable Power Source Using Heterogeneous Hydrino Catalysts”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 35: 395–419. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.10.038.

            Mills, R.L.; Lu, Y.; Akhtar, K. (2010). “Spectroscopic Observation of Helium-Ion- and Hydrogen-Catalyzed Hydrino Transitions”. Cent. Eur. J. Phys 8: 318–339. doi:10.2478/s11534-009-0106-9.

            Mills, R.L.; Good, W.; Jansson, P.; He, J. (2010). “Stationary Inverted Lyman Populations and Free-Free and Bound-Free Emission of Lower-Energy State Hydride Ion formed by and Exothermic Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen and Certain Group I Catalysts”. Cent. Eur. J. Phys 8: 7–16. doi:10.2478/s11534-009-0052-6.

            Akhtar, K.; Scharer, J.; Mills, R.L. (2009). “Substantial Doppler Broadening of Atomic Hydrogen Lines in DC and Capactively Coupled RF Plasmas”. J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys 42 (13): 135207–135219. doi:10.1088/0022-3727/42/13/135207.

            Mills, R.L.; Good, W.; He, J. (2009). “Excess Power and the Product Molecular Hydrino H2(1/4) Generated in a K2CO3 Electrolysis Cell”. Electrochimica Acta 54: 4229–4236. doi:10.1016/j.electacta.2009.02.079.

            Mills, R.L.; Akhtar, K. (2009). “Tests of Features of Field-Acceleration Models for the Extraordinary Selective H Balmer alpha Broadening in Certain Hydrogen Mixed Plasmas”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34: 6465–6477. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.05.148.

            Mills, R.L.; Zhao, G.; Akhtar, K.; Chang, Z.; He, J.; Lu, Y.; Good, W.; Chu, G.; Dhandapani, B.; (2009). “Commercializable Power Source from Forming New States of Hydrogen”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 34: 573–614. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.10.018.

            Mills, R.L.; (2008). “Hydrogen Plasmas Generated Using Certain Group I Catalysts Show Stationary Inverted Lyman Populations and Free-Free and Bound-Free Emission of Lower-Energy State Hydride”. Res. J. Chem Env. 12(2): 42–72.

            Mills, R.L.; Dhandapani, B.; Akhtar, K. (2008). “Excessive Balmer alpha Line Broadening of Water-Vapor Capacitively-Coupled RF Discharge Plasmas”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 33: 802–815. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.10.016.

            Mills, R.L.; He, J.; Nansteel, M.; Dhandapani, B. (2007). “Catalysis of Atomic Hydrogen to New Hydrides as a New Power Source”. Int. J. of Global Energy Issues (IJGEI) Special Edition in Energy Systems 28 (2-3): 304–324. doi:10.1504/IJGEI.2007.015882.

            Mills, R.L.; Zea, H.; He, J.; Dhandapani, B.; (2007). “Water Bath Calorimetry on a Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 32: 4258–4266. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.06.017.

            Mills, R.L.; He, J.; Lu, Y.; Nansteel, M.; Chang, Z.; Dhandapani, B.; (2007b). “Comprehensive Identification and Potential Applications of New States of Hydrogen”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 32(14): 2988–3009. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.03.035.

            *Mills, R.L.; He, J.; Chang, Z.; Good, W.; Lu, Y.; (2007a). “Catalysis of Atomic Hydrogen to Novel Hydrogen Species H-(1/4) and H2(1/4) as a New Power Source”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 32(13): 2573–2584. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2007.02.023.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B. (2006). “Evidence of an energy transfer reaction between atomic hydrogen and argon II or helium II as the source of excessively hot H atoms in radio-frequency plasmas”. J. Plasma Physics 72 (4): 469–484. doi:10.1017/S0022377805004034.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Mayo, R.M.; Nansteel, M.; Dhandapani, B.; Phillips, J. (2005). “Spectroscopic Study of Unique Line Broadening and Inversion in Low Pressure Microwave Generated Water Plasmas”. J. Plasma Physics 71 (6): 877–888. doi:10.1017/S0022377805003703.

            Mills, R.L.; Dhandapani, B.; He, J. (2005). “Highly Stable Amorphous Silicon Hydride from a Helium Plasma Reaction”. Materials Chemistry and Physics 94 (2-3): 298–307. doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys.2005.05.002.

            Mills, R.L.; He, J.; Chang, Z.; Good, W.; Lu, Y.; Dhandapani, B. (2005). “Catalysis of Atomic Hydrogen to Novel Hydrides as a New Power Source”. Prepr. Pap.—Am. Chem. Soc. Conf., Div. Fuel Chem. 50 (2).

            *Mills, R.L.; Sankar, J.; Voigt, A.; He, J.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B. (2005b). “Role of Atomic Hydrogen Density and Energy in Low Power CVD Synthesis of Diamond Films”. Thin Solid Films 478: 77–90.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P. (2004). “Stationary Inverted Lyman Population and a Very Stable Novel Hydride Formed by a Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen and Certain Catalysts”. J. Opt. Mat. 27: 181–186. doi:10.1016/j.optmat.2004.02.026.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; Good, W.; Jansson, P.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Voigt, A. (2004). “Spectroscopic and NMR Identification of Novel Hydride Ions in Fractional Quantum Energy States Formed by an Exothermic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen with Certain Catalysts”. Euro. Phys. J.: Applied Physics 28: 83–104. doi:10.1051/epjap:2004168.

            Mills, R.L.; Lu, Y.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Voigt, A.; Good, W.; Dhandapani, B. (2004). “Energetic Catalyst-Hydrogen Plasma Reaction as a Potential New Energy Source”. Division of Fuel Chemistry, Session: Advances in Hydrogen Energy, Prepr. Pap. — Am. Chem. Soc. Conf 49 (2).

            *Mills, R.L.; Sankar, J.; Voigt, A.; He, J.; Dhandapani, B.; (2004). “Synthesis of HDLC Films from Solid Carbon”. J. Mater. Sci. 39: 3309–3318. doi:10.1023/B:JMSC.0000026931.98685.59.

            Mills, R.L.; Lu, Y.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Voigt, A.; Dhandapani, B.; (2004). “Energetic Catalyst-Hydrogen Plasma Reaction as a Potential New Energy Source”. Division of Fuel Chemistry, Session: Chemistry of Solid, Liquid, and Gaseous Fuels, Prepr. Pap.—Am. Chem. Soc. Conf. 49 (1).

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Chen, X.; Voigt, A.; Dhandapani, B. (2003). “Characterization of an Energetic Catalyst-Hydrogen Plasma Reaction as a Potential New Energy Source”. Am. Chem. Soc. Div. Fuel Chem. Prepr. 48 (2).

            *Mills, R.L.;Sankar, J.; Voigt, A.; He, J.; Dhandapani, B.; (2003b). “Spectroscopic Characterization of the Atomic Hydrogen Energies and Densities and Carbon Species During Helium-Hydrogen-Methane Plasma CVD Synthesis of Diamond Films”. Chemistry of Materials 15: 1313–1321. doi:10.1021/cm020817m.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P. (2003). “Extreme Ultraviolet Spectroscopy of Helium-Hydrogen Plasma”. J. Phys. D, Applied Physics 36: 1535–1542. doi:10.1088/0022-3727/36/13/316.

            Mills, R.L.; Chen, X.; Ray, P.; He, J.; Dhandapani, B. (2003). “Plasma Power Source Based on a Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen Measured by Water Bath Calorimetry”. Thermochimica Acta 406 (1-2): 35–53. doi:10.1016/S0040-6031(03)00228-4.

            Mills, R.L.; Dhandapani, B.; He, J.; (2003). “Highly Stable Amorphous Silicon Hydride”. Solar Energy Materials & Solar Cells 90 (1): 1–20. doi:10.1016/S0927-0248(03)00107-7.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Mayo, R.M.; (2003). “The Potential for a Hydrogen Water-Plasma Laser”. Applied Physics Letters 82 (11): 1679–1681. doi:10.1063/1.1558213.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; (2003a). “Stationary Inverted Lyman Population Formed from Incandescently Heated Hydrogen Gas with Certain Catalysts”. J. Phys. D, Applied Physics 36: 1504–1509. doi:10.1088/0022-3727/36/13/312.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; He, J.; (2003). “Comparison of Excessive Balmer alpha Line Broadening of Inductively and Capacitively Coupled RF, Microwave, and Glow Discharge Hydrogen Plasmas with Certain Catalysts”. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 31 (3): 338–355. doi:10.1109/TPS.2003.812340.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Mayo, R.M.; (2003d). “CW HI Laser Based on a Stationary Inverted Lyman Population Formed from Incandescently Heated Hydrogen Gas with Certain Group I Catalysts”. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 31 (2): 236–247. doi:10.1109/TPS.2003.810174.

            *Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dong, J.; Nansteel, M.; Dhandapani, B. (2003). “Spectral Emission of Fractional-Principal-Quantum-Energy-Level Atomic and Molecular Hydrogen”. Vibrational Spectroscopy 31 (2): 195–213. doi:10.1016/S0924-2031(03)00013-4.

            Mills, R.L.; He, J.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; Chen, X. (2003). “Synthesis and Characterization of a Highly Stable Amorphous Silicon Hydride as the Product of a Catalytic Helium-Hydrogen Plasma Reaction”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 28 (12): 1401–1424. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(02)00293-8.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P. “A Comprehensive Study of Spectra of the Bound-Free Hyperfine Levels of Novel Hydride Ion H-(1/2), Hydrogen, Nitrogen, and Air”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 28 (8): 825–871. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(02)00167-2.

            *Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M.; Ray, P.; (2003b). “Excessively Bright Hydrogen-Strontium Plasma Light Source Due to Energy Resonance of Strontium with Hydrogen”. J. Plasma Physics 69: 131–158. doi:10.1017/S0022377803002113.

            Mills, R.L.; (2003). “Highly Stable Novel Inorganic Hydrides”. J. New Materials for Electrochemical Systems 6: 45–54.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; (2002). “Substantial Changes in the Characteristics of a Microwave Plasma Due to Combining Argon and Hydrogen”. New Journal of Physics 4: 22.1–22.17. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/4/1/322.

            *Mayo, R.M.; Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M. (2002). “Direct Plasmadynamic Conversion of Plasma Thermal Power to Electricity”. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 30 (5): 2066–2073. doi:10.1109/TPS.2002.807496.

            *Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M.; Ray, P.; (2002b). “Bright Hydrogen-Light Source due to a Resonant Energy Transfer with Strontium and Argon Ions”. New Journal of Physics 4: 70.1–70.28. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/4/1/370.

            Mayo, R.M.; Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M. (2002). “On the Potential of Direct and MHD Conversion of Power from a Novel Plasma Source to Electricity for Microdistributed Power Applications”. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 30 (4): 1568–1578. doi:10.1109/TPS.2002.804170.

            Mills, R.L.; (2002). “Highly Stable Novel Inorganic Hydrides from Aqueous Electrolysis and Plasma Electrolysis”. Electrochimica Acta 47 (24): 3909–3926. doi:10.1016/S0013-4686(02)00361-4.

            *Mills, R.L.; Dayalan, E.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; He, J. (2002). “Comparison of Excessive Balmer alpha Line Broadening of Glow Discharge and Microwave Hydrogen Plasmas with Certain Catalysts”. , J. of Applied Physics 92 (12): 7008–7022. doi:10.1109/TPS.2003.812340.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; Mayo, R.M.; He, J.; (2002). “Comparison of Excessive Balmer alpha Line Broadening of Glow Discharge and Microwave Hydrogen Plasmas with Certain Catalysts”. J. of Applied Physics 92 (12): 7008–7022. doi:10.1109/TPS.2003.812340.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; Dhandapani, B.; Nansteel, M.; Chen, X.; He, J. (2002). “New Power Source from Fractional Quantum Energy Levels of Atomic Hydrogen that Surpasses Internal Combustion”. J. Mol. Struct. 643 (1-3): 43–54. doi:10.1016/S0022-2860(02)00355-1.

            Mills, R.L.; Dong, J.; Good, W.; Ray, P.; He, J.; Dhandapani, B. (2002). “Measurement of Energy Balances of Noble Gas-Hydrogen Discharge Plasmas Using Calvet Calorimetry”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (9): 967–978. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(02)00004-6.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P.; (2002). “Spectroscopic Identification of a Novel Catalytic Reaction of Rubidium Ion with Atomic Hydrogen and the Hydride Ion Product”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (9): 927–935. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(02)00002-2.

            Mills, R.L.; Voigt, A.; Ray, P.; Nansteel, M.; Dhandapani, B.; (2002). “Measurement of Hydrogen Balmer Line Broadening and Thermal Power Balances of Noble Gas-Hydrogen Discharge Plasmas”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (6): 671–685. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00172-0.

            Mills, R.L.; Greenig, N.; Hicks, S. (2002). “Optically Measured Power Balances of Glow Discharges of Mixtures of Argon, Hydrogen, and Potassium, Rubidium, Cesium, or Strontium Vapor”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (6): 651–670.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P. (2002). “Vibrational Spectral Emission of Fractional-Principal-Quantum-Energy-Level Hydrogen Molecular Ion”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (5): 533–564. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00145-8.

            *Mills, R.L.; Nansteel, M.; Ray, P.; (2002c). “Argon-Hydrogen-Strontium Discharge Light Source”. IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science 30 (2): 639–652. doi:10.1109/TPS.2002.1024263.

            Mills, R.L.; (2002). “Spectral Emission of Fractional Quantum Energy Levels of Atomic Hydrogen from a Helium-Hydrogen Plasma and the Implications for Dark Matter”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (3): 301–322. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00116-1.

            Mills, R.L.; Ray, P. (2002). “Spectroscopic Identification of a Novel Catalytic Reaction of Potassium and Atomic Hydrogen and the Hydride Ion Product”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 27 (2): 183–192. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00093-3.

            Mills, R.L.; Dayalan, E. (2002). “Novel Alkali and Alkaline Earth Hydrides for High Voltage and High Energy Density Batteries”. Proceedings of the 17th Annual Battery Conference on Applications and Advances: 1–6. doi:10.1109/BCAA.2002.986359.

            Mills, R.L.; Good, W.; Voigt, A.; Dong, J. (2001). “Minimum Heat of Formation of Potassium Iodo Hydride”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (11): 1199–1208. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00051-9.

            Mills, R.L. (2001). “Spectroscopic Identification of a Novel Catalytic Reaction of Atomic Hydrogen and the Hydride Ion Product”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (10): 1041–1058. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00041-6.

            Mills, R.L.; Dhandapani, B.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Voigt, A.; (2001). “Identification of Compounds Containing Novel Hydride Ions by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (9): 965–979. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00027-1.

            Mills, R.L.; Onuma,T.; Lu, Y.; (2001). “Formation of a Hydrogen Plasma from an Incandescently Heated Hydrogen-Catalyst Gas Mixture with an Anomalous Afterglow Duration”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (7): 749–762. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(01)00004-0.

            *Mills, R.L.; (2001a). “Observation of Extreme Ultraviolet Emission from Hydrogen-KI Plasmas Produced by a Hollow Cathode Discharge”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (6): 579–592. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00122-1.

            *Mills, R.L.; Dhandapani, B.; Nansteel, M.; He, J.; Shannon, T.; Echezuria, A.; (2001). “Synthesis and Characterization of Novel Hydride Compounds”. Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy 26 (4): 339–367. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00113-0.

            Mills, R.L. (2001b). “Temporal Behavior of Light-Emission in the Visible Spectral Range from a Ti-K2CO3-H-Cell”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (4): 327–332. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00099-9.

            Mills, R.L.; (2001). “Observation of Extreme Ultraviolet Hydrogen Emission from Incandescently Heated Hydrogen Gas with Strontium that Produced an Anomalous Optically Measured Power Balance”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 26 (4): 309–326. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00098-7.

            *Mills, R.L.; (2000b). “Synthesis and Characterization of Potassium Iodo Hydride”. Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy 25 (12): 1185–1203. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00037-9.

            *Mills, R.L.; Dong, J.; Lu, Y.; (2000c). “Observation of Extreme Ultraviolet Hydrogen Emission from Incandescently Heated Hydrogen Gas with Certain Catalysts”. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 25: 919–943. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(00)00018-5.

            Mills, R.L.; (2000). “Novel Inorganic Hydride”. Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy 25: 669–683. doi:10.1016/S0360-3199(99)00076-2.

            * (2000) BlackLight Power Technology: A New Clean Energy Source with Po­tential for Direct Conversion to Electricity. Global Foundation Inc, Nov 26-28, 2000. Presented at International Conference on Global Warming and Energy Policy, Ft. Lauderdale, FL. CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)

            *Mills, R.L.; (2000). “Novel Hydrogen Compounds from a Potassium Carbonate Electrolytic Cell”. Fusion Technology 37 (2): 157–182.

            *Mills, R.L.; Good, W.; (1995). “Fractional Quantum Energy Levels of Hydrogen”. Fusion Technology 28 (4): 1697–1719.

            *Mills, R.L.; Good, W.; Shaubach, R. (1994). “Dihydrino Molecule Identification”. Fusion Technology 25 (103).

            *Mills, R.L.; Kneizys,S. (1991). “Excess heat production by the electrolysis of an aqueous potassium carbonate electrolyte and the implications for cold fusion”. Fusion Technology 20 (65).

            But wait, the above are just ‘journal articles’! Maybe I should also add issued technical or validation reports by outside physicists who were given the opportunity to review Mills’ results? These do not hold the same level of scientific weight as journal articles, yet they are an important part of the scientific discourse.

            Bykanov, Alexander. (2010) “Validation of the observation of soft x-ray con­tinuum radiation from low-energy pinch discharges in the presence of molecular hydrogen.” Technical report, GEN3 Partners.

            Copeland, Terry. (2012) “Catalyst Induced Hydrino Transition (CIHT) Electrochemical Cell Validation.” Technical report, January 5.

            Craw-Ivanco, M.T., Tremblay, R.P., Boniface, H. A., Hilborn, J. (1994) “Calorimetry for a Ni/K2CO3 Cell” Chemical Engineering Branch, Chalk River Laboratories. June.

            Crouse, Gilbert. (2014) “Differential Scanning Calorimeter Analysis of Hydrino-Producing Solid Fuel” Auburn University Department of Aerospace Engineering.

            GEN3 Partners, (2009) “GEN3 Validation Report” Water Flow Calorimetry, Experimental Runs and Validation Testing for BlackLight Power, Inc.” Technical Report. August.

            Gernet, Nelson, and Robert Shaubach. (1994) “Nascent Hydrogen: An En­ergy Source.” Technical report, Thermacore, Inc., Prepared for Aero Propulsion and Power Directorate, Wright Laboratory, Air Force Material Command (ASC), Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio 45433-7659. SBIR Contract No. F33615-93-C-2326, Report No. 11-1124.

            Glumac, Nick. (2012) “Final Consultant Report” Technical report. January 21.

            . (2014), “Report from Visit to BlackLight Power on Friday, January 17, 2014” Technical report.

            . (2014b) “Scientific Test Report” Mechanical Science & Engineering Department, University of Illinois. Technical report. April.

            Haldeman, C.W., E.D. Savoye, G.W. Iseler, and H.R. Clarke. (1995) “Excess Energy Cell Final Report ACC Project 174.” Technical report.

            Jacox, M. G., Watts, K. D., (1993) “The Search for Excess Heat in the Mills Electrolytic Cell” Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, January 7.

            Jansson, Peter, Amos Mugweru, KV Ramanujachary, and Heather Peterson. (2009) “Anomalous Heat Gains From Multiple Chemical Mix­tures: Analytical Studies of “Generation 2” Chemistries of Black-Light Power Corporation.” Technical report, Rowan University, November.

            Jansson, Peter, Amos Mugweru, KV Ramanujachary, and John Schmaizel. (2010) “Anomalous Heat Gains from Regenerative Chemical Mixtures: Characterization of BLP Chemistries Used for Energy Generation and Regeneration Reactions.” Technical report, Rowan University, November.

            Jansson, Peter, Ulrich Schwabe, Matthew Abdallah, Nathaniel Downes, and Patrick Hoffman. (2009) “Water Flow Calorimetry, Experimental Runs and Validation Testing for BlackLight Power, Inc.” Technical report, Rowan University, May.

            Marchese, Anthony, Peter Jansson, and John Schmalzel. (2002) “The Black-Light Rocket Engine: Phase I Final Report.” Technical report, Col­lege of Engineering, Rowan University. Phase I Study funded by the NIAC CP 01-02 Advanced Aeronautical/Space Concept Stud­ies Program.

            Mugweru, Amos, KV Ramanujachary, Heather Peterson, and John Kong. (2009a) “Report on Synthesis and Studies of “Generation 2” Lower Energy Hydrogen Chemicals.” Technical report, Rowan University.

            Mugweru, Amos, K.V. Ramanujachary, Heather Peterson, John Kong, and Anthony Cirri. (2009b) “Synthesis and Characterization of Alkali Metal Salts Containing Trapped Hydrino.” Technical report, Rowan Uni­versity.

            Neterov, Sergei and Kryukov, Alexei. (1993) “In re Application of Mills Appl. No. 07/825, 845” MPEI Cryogenics Center. 26 February.

            Niedra, Janis. (1996) “Replication of the Apparent Excess Heat Effect in a Light Water Potassium Carbonate-Nickel Electrolytic Cell. Technical Memorandum No. 107167.” Technical report, NASA.

            Payne, Philip. (2010) “OH Radical.” Technical report. April 16.

            Peterson, S.H., (1994) “Evaluation of Heat Production from Light Water Electrolysis Cells of Hydrocatalysis Power Corporation” Technology Department, Westinghouse STC. February 25.

            Phillips, Jonathan, Julian Smith, and Kurtz, Stewart. (1996) “Report on Calorimetric Investigations of Gas-Phase Catalyzed Hydrino Formation.” Technical report, Department of Chemical Engineering, Penn State University.

            Phillips, Jonathan. (1996) “Consulting Report: Additional calorimetric ex­amples of anomalous heat from physical mixture of K/carbon and Pd/carbon.” Technical report, Department of Chemical Engineering, Penn State University.

            Pugh, James, and Dayalan, Ethirajulu. (2012) “Evaluation of Electrical Power Generation by BlackLight Power’s Catalyst Induced Hydrino Transition (CIHT) Cells” The ENSER Corporation. Technical report. April 4.

            Ramanujachary, K. V., (2011) “Validation of Electrical Power Generation by Second-Generation CIHT Technology” Technical report. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Rowan University. November.

            . “Validation of SF-CIHT Technology” (2014) Technical report. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Rowan University. February.

            Shaubach, Robert, and Nelson Gernet. (1993) “Anomalous Heat from Atomic Hydrogen in Contact with Potassium Carbonate.” Technical report, Thermacore.

            Spittznagel, John. (1994) “Review of ESCA Evidence for Fractional Quantum Energy Levels of Hydrogen” Science and Technology Center, Westinghouse. Letter. January 18.

            Weinberg, Henry. (2012) “CIHT Validation Report” Technical report. January.

          • Now, if anyone bothered reading any of the above studies (AND there is a longer list, which I did not post), they might find have found some evidence for what Mills contends there, which can be briefly summarized in a list as follow:

            a) NMR identification of upfield shifted peaks in hydrino hydride compounds

            b) XPS identification of hydrinos and hydrino hydride ions.

            c) EUV emissions in hydrogen plasmas corresponding to hydrino transitions, and matching unidentified lines from the sun and the interstellar medium

            d) Emissions of bell-shaped continuum radiation corresponding to hydrino transitions in pinch-discharge plasmas

            e) Formation of excessively bright plasmas, emitting primarily in the EUV, with extremely low initiation voltages, with long-lasting afterglow durations, and with unexpectedly high line broadening in all directions, indicating the plasma is chemically-assisted, but only performing with certain hydrogen and mixed-hydrogen plasmas. Some of these plasmas also exhibit sustained lyman or balmer series inversion.

            f) High heat gains from several generations of electrochemical cells with hydrino catalysts.

            g) High heat gains from a variety of “batch” calvet cells with hydrino catalysts

            i) new compositions of alkali and alkaline earth hydrino hydrides from X-ray crystal diffraction studies

            j) identification of rovibrational transitions in hydrogen plasmas and in trapped crystal structures corresponding to hydrino molecules

            k) identification of spin-nuclear coupling of hydrino atoms in far-infrared absorption studies of cryogenically cooled hydrogen

            l) And, it should be mentioned, high-current induced explosions of capsules emitting primarily in the EUV and soft X-ray wavelength, which later led to Mills’s sustained explosive reactions that are being commercialized as the SunCell ™.


          • _Jim,
            Everyone would love to save money and have easy clean endless power.
            So see what you can do to get a message to the guy: Hurry Up!
            Watcha waitin’ for?

          • re: “Everyone would love to save money and”

            Settle down; all in due time. There is (I’m assuming) IP to secure yet. Meanwhile, another study/lab test was performed to further investigate the atomic properties of the Hydrino by Professor Fred Hagen, professor emeritus at Delft University of Technology, Netherlands (TU Delft).

            The report is “High Resolution Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR) Spectrum of a Molecular Hydrino” . A summary and relevant links to the data plots can be found here:


            Be sure to spend some time looking over the data ‘slides’ in the power point (a free power point viewer can be downloaded from Microsoft’s website) below:


        • If he already has a working model, what’s he waiting for.
          Get some investors and make everybody rich.
          Let’s not forget putting out some papers so that he can start hauling in those Nobel prizes.

          • MarkW, you’re ‘out of your league’ on this one.

            What I find difficult is, Mills FOLLOWS the well-known scientific regimen of validation of theory with lab work – but you IDIOTS seem to get ‘hung up’ at some stage and can’t (be bothered to?) read the published scientific literature on this subject. Maybe you guys CAN’T actually read a white paper? Is that it? There HAS to be a rational explanation for your action, behavior.

            See why I call you idiots? Truly, you are … as I see NO other ‘call’ I could make that explains you (and others) behavior on this subject.

    • Hydrogen to dark matter?????

      If he knows what dark matter is, why not put it in a paper. I’m sure there are half a dozen Nobels available to the first person who can identify dark matter.

      • Just to add to the discussion. I have visited Prof. Leif Holmlid from the University at Gothenburg. He discovered something similar to Mills, what he calls “Ultra Dense Hydrogen” formed from a Rydberg matter state. But strange things happen there, which I can’t completely comprehend. The ultra dense state decays into kaons, which further decay into pions, then muons and finally into electrons and positrons. The measured and published data clearly show the decay times of kaons. Very intriguing. What bothers me is that the kaons require the strange quark that the hydrogen does not posses. Some interaction with the W-boson will be needed but I can’t figure it out.

      • Brilliant Light Power (BLP) claims that hydrogen is converted to a lower energy state of hydrogen in their reaction. Quantum physics does not support this possibility according to current theory, and hence the controversy. But university studies of the process confirm via spectroscopy that the hydrogen is consumed in the process and the resulting reaction byproduct is a gas with novel spectral lines. The hydrogen is not present and this new compound is present after the reaction. There are currently no known compounds that produce these lines, but we do observe these lines when viewing deep space. BLP’s hypothesis is that this gas, which they call a Hydrino, is the so-called dark matter of the universe. Whether there is dark matter or not is an independent issue as far as I’m concerned. Calling it “dark matter” can be thought of as marketing hype – and I choose to ignore it and instead focus on the fundamental claims.

        Using molten gallium metal and bath calorimetry, several universities have verified their process yields energy outputs that are between 2x and 4x the input energy. This is not a trivial claim.

        The faculty members doing the tests could have been paid to fabricate results. Or BLP could have found a way to fool the testers. It is possible that the testers made mistakes. But if not, the analysis rules out any other known sources of this energy.

        I’m not aware of anything in physics that rules out the possibility of lower energy states for Hydrogen. Our understanding of QP is a model that works well for our current understanding, but we should be cautious about ruling out new understandings. There are many reports of anomalous energy outputs when metals and hydrogen are combined in high energy plasma states.

        Knowing it could be a ruse, and having no investment in any particular outcome, I have been following the developments claimed by BLP. The developments of prototypes and testing methods seem to be well in line with what I would expect for an engineering effort. If it is a ruse, it is a very elaborate one. If what they have is real then the implications are profound.

        MarkW: BLP claims to have over 100 papers published – you can check their website. But until they have a fully working unit that can be scrutinized more openly, most will assume it is a scam.

    • Jim,

      Do the math, the energy wasted by the internal combustion engine is unconscionable.

      If you use 10 gallons of gas/week, and have been driving for 45-50 years you personally have added 250 TONS of CO2 to the atmosphere.

      Those who belong to “Group Think Blue” must be driving an electric car, but most aren’t, I do not,
      I am and thoroughly enjoy listening to the raft of excuses.

  3. +10

    The UK’s recent announcement that it will accelerate the dash to disaster, by including hybrid vehicles in the ICE ban, is tantamount to economic suicide. As has been noted many times, a switch to electric vehicles requires a doubling of electricity production (in terms of TWh) and massive expenditure to increase the capacity of the grid.

    Apart from that, the impracticality of people who DON’T have their own dedicated parking spot (eg apartment or tenement blocks) to charge their cars is never even mentioned. Stupidity writ LARGE!

    • So true. I am a Brit and our current PM continues in the footsteps of the last few.

      Trump : making America Great.

      Boris : making Britain Greta!


      If electric cars become commonplace, we will need to double or triple grid energy capacity – that means new electricity generation, transmission and distribution systems, doesn’t it?

      Most politicians can think no further than “energy comes from a plug in the wall.” It’s a bit more complicated than that.

      • Then there is the cost of back-up generators for the times that the sun doesn’t shine (e.g., at night and on cloudy days) and the wind doesn’t blow or blows too hard. These have to run all the time, in case of sudden weather changes.

      • no…many accept that few will have cars…you know…we over WE have to refrain having a motorrized vehicul..

        • And, who are you to tell others what they cannot do with the fruits of their earnings ?
          What is a bunch of people just like you ?
          A tyranny.

          • sendergreen:
            Pretty sure Jacques was being sarcastic; but your concerns are real – they are already government policy in Britain and Canada. Read on:


            Carbon-free by 2050 is unattainable, but on the way you will be ordered to give up almost everything you now know as part of modern life. No private cars, no airline flights, no meat, and no personal freedoms. All those will be reserved for the ruling elite – you mere peasants need not apply.

            Here is the evidence:

            By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., September 20, 2019

            “The interesting thing about the Green New Deal, is it wasn’t originally a climate thing at all, … Do you guys think of it as a climate thing? Because we really think of it as a how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy thing,”
            “Changing the Entire Economy”, The Wall Street Journal, July 12, 2019

            The same plot is unfolding in Great Britain. Sir Ian Boyd, the government’s chief environment scientist, said the public had little idea of the scale of the challenge from Britain’s “Net Zero CO2” emissions target.

            “People must use less transport, eat less red meat and buy fewer clothes if the UK is to virtually halt greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the government’s chief environment scientist has warned.

            Sir Ian Boyd has lifted the lid on the reality of the programme. We will all have to accept big lifestyle changes – travel less, eat less, consume less.
            But eventually some form of compulsion or rationing will be necessary, if climate targets are to be met.

            The Science and Technology Select Committee let the cat out of the bag last week, when they officially announced “In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation”.

            When they ultimately find themselves being told what they can and cannot consume, where they can travel and what foods they are allowed to eat, they will be furious about the way they have been misled.”
            “Climate change: Big lifestyle changes ‘needed to cut emissions’-DEFRA Chief Scientist”,
            By Roger Harrabin, BBC News, August 29, 2019 [excerpts]

  4. Picture this. Its 2030. We have gone all electric in the vehicle fleet. A crash forces the closure of the M25 London orbital – 1000 cars are stuck in place …..after two hours sitting , with lights and heaters running, they all start to lose power.

    Once the police clear the road and wave the cars forward, nothing happens!

    They mobilise large Vehicle diesel powered generators to start to recharge the cars….after a couple of days, the road block is cleared ……(many EVs cannot be towed )

    It’s a nonsense….the whole idea….

      • Maybe they’ll just have to place a charging station along every lane of every road every 20 feet. LMAO.

        Battery powered cars are the dumbest solution to a problem nobody has identified yet that there has ever been.

    • It’s nonsense when it’s a decision of ignorance or stupidity.

      When it is deliberate and calculated it enters the realm of evil.

      Boris Johnson’s Government just announced it is banning home use coal and wood by 2023 to lower “pollution”. Whilst India and China open a new coal fired generation plant t least once a week.

      This will cause widespread harm to poor people, and likely a sizeable number of deaths in the harder winters that are coming. And, a few business closures for the firms that sell coal/wood fired stoves.

      Energy poverty is already a “thing”.

      • Domestic burning of wood and/or coal is polluting … Los Angeles in winter is testament to that. But you don’t need a fancy meter, just your nose.

        • But a little common sense goes a long way. Obviously, London couldn’t return to everyone burning coal, or some very large colder cities in NA all burning wood at the same time. Even the wood fireplace in some more heavily densified places like Aspen or Whistler are being phased out because there are some air quality issues, especially if it is a high pressure and no wind to clear things out. Now the radicals are even going after the nat gas fireplace, cause it ‘carbon’. Including NG cooking stoves/ovens. Crazy.

          But in rural England or rural America/Canada, burning wood isn’t the end of the world. At all of my rural properties, I burnt wood all my life and still do except for my penthouse condo which is all electric. There is no issue at low population densities to burning wood. I actually miss the smell of the pot bellied coal stove we had at the outdoor ice rink growing up as a kid when hockey was ‘officially’ suspended when temps hit -10 F, or -23 C, and even growing up in the 50’s prairies, we had a coal/wood burning burning stove in the basement. Common sense has to be the key to all this, but a blanket law for everyone can’t include common sense it appears.

          It does appear to be regulating energy use, as a control mechanism and taxation over the population. When push comes to shove, then that is when the civil war starts. History of full of examples, including real time for other issues and places right now. Mankind still has a lust for blood letting, and I don’t think this this time is any different. With more people than ever, with our Western populations now acting like herded cats, I see chaos coming at some point. This is what China discovered a long time ago, that you just can’t have everyone going off in their own direction at once. But of course with absolute power and control, comes absolute tyranny. As they say “May you live in interesting times”.

        • Not if you are Drax apparently

          You can even move the wood between continents on oil fuelled ships and its still “green”


    • And remember the 5 hour wait for charging your EV in Northern California during the Thanksgiving Day holiday.
      I can imagine that many people will push the limits of the battery because they simply cannot wait hours for it to recharge and have to get to work or whatever they are doing. They will run out of power and cause a traffic nightmare routinely. It simply is human nature. And the rescue vehicle which could have brought you a gallon of gas can’t give you a new battery or even a charge without spending hours doing it.

    • Picture this.. the town of Paradise, PG&E switch off the power because it’s a bit windy, the fire starts, car’s are not charged… in the subsequent inquiry who gets the blame for the hundreds of ‘excess’ deaths?

      • Or South Florida the outer bands of a Cat 5 hurricane forecast to pass into the Gulf just south of the Keys have already knocked out power to large swathes of the southern part of the peninsula. Then instead of continuing West into the Gulf the storm turns North and prediction are now that it will run up the center of the state. Most cars are not fully charged and around south central Florida cars are searching for charging stations but almost all are off line due to power failures. And even those that aren’t are choked with cars taking maximum charge so they can get to Georgia and the wind is now 75mph with the hurricane approaching up the center of the state. The I-95. I-75 and Turnpike are choked with failed electric cars and the evacuation turns into a stationary traffic jam death trap on all roads……” in the subsequent inquiry who gets the blame for the hundreds of ‘excess’ deaths?”

    • It is not nonsense if the ‘plan’ is to effectively eliminate private ownership of cars. Without a new non-renewable power generation system the whole carbon-free 2035 or whatever date they have picked now, means a return to 1950s Britain, cars for the middle class and above, buses and shankses pony for you and me, foreign holidays and air flight for the middle class and above, a week in Skegness or Brighton for you and me. No coal, no wood burners, no gas, no oil heating equals shared accommodation, flats or maybe even back to two rooms and a shared kitchen and bathroom.

      • “… the ‘plan’ is to effectively eliminate private ownership of cars. ”

        that’s exactly what the plan is

        • I will go one step further, the plan is to stop freedom of movement of people. Govn’t can’t control the population if it is freely mobile. Hi-rise, hi-density cities where a permit is required to travel outside city limits. We have a term for this concept it’s called a concentration camp.

        • Agreed. I think they just aren’t ready yet to actually say so.
          In places like London it is increasingly already the case that congestion on the roads and limited space for residential parking make car ownership unaffordable or just not worth the hassle.

          But extending this to all other areas of the country without such a concentrated public transport system is unworkable. This will completely destroy at least one government. Boris may thus have already signed his resignation letter/speech if he thinks this will not cause immense hardship and then rage among the voters.

          • “In places like London it is increasingly already the case that congestion on the roads and limited space for residential parking make car ownership unaffordable or just not worth the hassle.”

            London’s roads were far less congested before the ‘Congestion Charge’ was introduced. It’s almost like allowing the government to tax you for congestion was a strong incentive for them to make the roads more congested.

          • “MarkG February 22, 2020 at 7:45 pm”

            There’s many more people living, travelling to and working in London than before and reduced, very expensive, rail transport in to London forced people in to private cars. Annual rail season tickets from the home counties in to London are thousands of pounds. As an example where I used to live the the UK, Newbury, and used to travel to London by train, is now just under 5200quid. That was once my annual wage before tax.

  5. Where I live near Detroit there is lots of talk about EVs in the auto news shows and papers but it surprising to me as they really sell so few of them overall.

    • Most people have the sense not to purchase something that has a higher price and poorer performance.

      It goes along with the notion that the government must subsidize renewables that are claimed to be cheaper because people need to be coerced to purchase something that is better and costs less.

    • In Oz the number one Carsales site still has seven Hyundai Konas on the ‘Launch’ pad after a year-
      So they’ll need to be knocking them out cheap soon before the batteries go off. Strictly order only after they clear that lot and the 35 later ones perpetually advertised. Adelaide in South Australia is bereft of EVs apart from a BMW i3 I saw which had the mobike engine in it too. In your dreams Princess Latte was going to be stranded out of electrons.

      Elon’s got it nailed soaking the well to do dilettantes and virtue signallers with badge snobbery as well as the the odd rev head who couldn’t give a hoot about the emissions but how it goes when you plant it.

    • I’m less than an hours drive from Detroit as well. I have a quite large circle of friends and acquaintances, and I don’t know one that has a hybrid vehicle much less a full electric. I hear zero interest in the boys club. I hear that as soon as the new Provincial Government dropped the old insane governments hefty taxpayer funded rebates on electrics the sales plunged. In my opinion there was only a tiny sect of wealthy green ideologues that bought them for virtue signalling.

      • I suppose it is politically correct to talk up EVs but I think there will always be a low market penetration for all the reasons mentioned here, they are interesting, but have significant limitations.

        • It gets crazier in the motorcycle world. Because of the limited space for batteries, the range issues are prominent. But, the horsepower to weight ratio is phenomenal. Together, that leaves the market to the small section of virtue signallers (See, even my motorcycle can help save the planet ! ) and the young 16-24 year olds with daddy money who want to ride a butt rocket to impress the high school or college cheerleaders. The high acceleration capacities coupled with inexperienced, riders who’s brains have not yet fully matured, will result in what CDC calls “excess mortality”.

      • Go to Ann Arbor and drive through the parking lot of the EPA Fuels Emissions Lab off Plymouth Rd. You’ll find a decent concentration of soy boy cars there.

    • “Where I live near Detroit there is lots of talk about EVs in the auto news shows and papers”

      I read something in “Classic Trucks” magazine today that was kind of interesting. For years, auto rebuilders have been rebuilding old classic cars and trucks by putting new suspension systems on them and installing high-performance “crate” engines in them bought straight from the car manufacturers, which turn these cars into a modern-day equivalent. You can buy all sorts of engine combinations now with varying amounts of horsepower.

      The aricle I read said that General Motors is now also making electric motor swaps available that can be put in just about any car, and the basic electric motor even weighs 100lbs. less than a similar gasoline engine. You can get up to 1,000 horsepower from these electric motors which are designated as “eCrate” motors..

      The editor writing the article finally got to his bottom line: Who would want one of these motors? They would probably make a nice toy for a rich guy and would probably cost as much as a Tesla, but most people wouldn’t be interested in doing this. It will be interesting to see how many eCrate motors GM sells.

  6. Tesla market value is related to expectation rather than fundamentals. Reminds me of Amazon*, whose market value far exceeded fundamentals and kept the company afloat despite losses upon losses for a very long time. But I don’t see the full upside of an Amazon for Tesla. Serious issues from physics limitations of electric. And hard to imagine Tesla taking over the manufacturing capabilities on the scale of a combined Ford, GM and Toyota. But right now, Tesla has positioned itself to be the sole beneficiary of market place “votes” for this next new thing (that’s been around since before the IC car and lost on merit – and never mind the Chevy Volt experience). If only I could time the market value of expectations.

    *Amazon isn’t a new idea either. It just took over from Montgomery Wards and Sears.

    • Amazon’s model was like Uber and Lyft taking over private taxi service. They lose money on each ride, but in the long run they hope to make a profit. Something will give eventually, in the meantime, taxi drivers that purchased the right to do business under the old model will continue to be forced into bankruptcy and worse.

      • Unless it’s changed in the last couple of years, Amazon makes its profits from renting servers, not from the store. It’s just an old-style mainframe company renting time on its systems.

        • You’re right, and I think a lot of their customer contracts are governmental. Amazon lost a lot of money and caused a lot of retailers to go under. Eventually, they created a profitable model.

          With regard to Uber and Lyft, one outcome could be their full scale implementation of autonomous vehicles. They could put all cab drivers out of business and be part of the movement away from private vehicles.

          • I’m imagining a future of “Uber and Lyft” vehicles, autonomous or not, using EVs. “Your car is at the charging station. Estimated time of arrival is 5 hours.”

            Better get your legs in shape – if these idiots get their way and ban ICE vehicles, a bicycle will be the best way to get around.

      • I book a ride with a Taxi online, the day before I need the ride. Thirty minutes from my leaving they canceled out(my guess the drive was short and not profitable, I was having a medical procedure which precluded me driving home, my wife is legally blind and cannot drive.) I load the Uber app and had a ride in minutes, I tip the drive generously, for that experience Taxi and their drivers can go to hell.

  7. “…– coupled with rampant environmental destruction, child labor, and horrific increases in cancer and other diseases from the absence of workplace safety and pollution control standards.”

    Talk about replacing one ridiculous alarmist with another. Why should I pay heed to either?

    • Yes I refuse to belittle those who follow in the footsteps of my ancestors gifting me the benefits of the Industrial Revolution.

    • Well, the “rampant environmental destruction” part is indisputable. Unless you think clearing forests for windmills and solar panels (that couldn’t power modern societies no matter how many they build anyway) and ignoring all the dead raptors, bats and insects is just honkey dory.

        • Great idea … then everybody using the highways can get a good look at dead and injured birds and bats and bugs.

        • Great plan.
          We can take bets on how much accidents tick upwards due to perpetually distracted drivers.

          • There are a lot of wind turbines near highways in the Netherlands and Germany. It’s been a while since I’ve been there, but it was claimed that they caused accidents just as you say.

          • If they were only nearby, I would guess it is far less distracting than if the median strip was lined with them.
            In that position, everyone will have in their field of vision a multitude of huge, ponderous, spinning blade assemblies, from right overhead to stretching off into the distance.
            It is difficult to imagine anything that might more effectively draw the eye away from the road, and be impossible to mentally tune out or get used to.
            My guess is something like that would be downright hypnotic.

          • Road signs, radios, cassette/DC players, mobiles, kids and animals to name a few more driver distractions that have caused drivers to crash.

          • There are indeed many distractions, and distractions can easily cause accidents and/or make them worse when they happen.
            But an individual can avoid them and stay safer than people who are careless, although we still have the hazard of careless people to contend with.
            But these would perpetually be in everyone’s field of vision, all the time, and would be in addition to everything else.
            Roadways, particularly high speed limited access ones, are designed to minimize dangers and distractions.
            Even motionless visual clutter makes driving less safe.

    • oh just go LOOK at the chinese RE processing sludge ponds and the poor people living nearby
      or the african cobalt mines items all over the web will you.

  8. Bursting bubbles have “economists” all worried, wonder how many of them are totally invested in Eloon Gantry and his magical motor-less carriages?

  9. If Sanders is elected no one will need a car, electric or otherwise, because the economy will crash, no one will have a job, and no where to go except to the government bread line. In the Democratic Socialist paradise everyone is poor, hungry and cold, so with regard to the impossible electric vehicle scenario, everything will work out fine.

    • There was a Sander for president table set up yesterday at the university where I work. I was asked whether I wanted free health care. I stumped the guy when I said no, but I’d like a vacation home like Bernie.

      • LOL – you might have added “and a private jet” before “like Bermie.” And say it as loud as you can so all the deluded SJWs can hear it.

        I love the smell of cognitive dissonance in the morning!

          • I might write in Bermie Sander.

            BTW, Tulsi Gabbard is still stumping, word is that she’s trying to get chosen as Bermie’s running mate.

            I actually like her stance on avoiding foreign entanglements. Don’t spell her first name backwards.

      • My question is why Bernie believes in slavery. Are Doctors suppose to work for nothing. If not then you have to confiscate said money from someone and give it to someone who did not earn it in my book that slavery.

  10. The next big problem remains invisible as charging stations remain mostly unused.

    Simultaneous charging of that many cars would strain most electric grids and call for rationing.

    With the arising of an auction-based priority given to those able to pay the most.

    The poor ones parking randomly on the streets without a dedicated garage being the most impacted.

    In the absence of affordable large scale storage and captive distribution circuits, weather and day/night dependent electricity generation is a market without ballast on which offer and demand based competition leads to the progressive exclusion of low bidders while the threshold systematically increases.

    With the obvious lack of incentive to produce low cost kWh when higher cost schedules generate easier profits.

    This is the reason no one is interested in the production of really affordable EV’s as the transition will considerable rise the affordability level.

  11. Are voters stupid? The politicians certainly seem to be. What I blame is cowardice among the scientific community. Instead of standing up, as a few have done, most have kept their heads down and prostituted their integrity in exchange for a few more bucks in funding.

  12. EV owners overwhelmingly charge their vehicles at home – usually during the nightime hors, when rates are low where there are variable rates and demand is low. The U.S. power grid has enough excess capacity to supply a fleet of electric only vehicles. Many of the public power stations are powered by solar – fed into batteries so that power is available 24/7. Obviosly the most efficient locations for public fast chargers is at gas stations and obvioulsy the transition will take years as EVs gradually replace gas powered cars. Already Mobil, Shell, and other oil companies have aligned with EV charging station companies and in Europe gas stations have now installed hundreds of chargers. Bernies big blunder is to look to renewables as replacement for coal,gas generation. The future power technology is obviously going to be molten salt small modular reactors – totally safe, with levelized power costs of 4 cents per kWhr, which can load follow, eliminating most of the need for peak power generators, which are usually fossil fueled. Replacement of all carbon producing generation by molten salt reactors would cost less than a trillion doollars and supply power for a fleet of EVs. China, India and Russia are all racing to commercialize molten salt reactors , which should appear prior to 2025. A littrle common sense and ability to think logically is all tbat is needed, but that’s in short supply when dealing with politicians and global warming fanatics.

    • And WHAT the hell is the POINT of all this, REALLY? It’s beyond obvious to anyone who can do 6th-grade math that CO2 is not affecting the weather let alone causing some kind of “threat.” The radical green secular religion is not going to affect the weather one jot.

      So “cui bono?”

      • “And WHAT the hell is the POINT of all this, REALLY?”

        Making Friends of Politicians rich, and destroying the West.

        The Communists have never forgotten how we destroyed Communism by simply being better. So they’re going all out to destroy everything which allowed us to do that… and making billions on the side.

      • The “greenhouse effect” in high-density population centers that is a first-order forcing of local climate change and progressive pollutants. And, of course, redistributive capital and control (i.e. the attendant religion or behavioral protocol), political myths, and social castration, sequestration, and change. In Mortal gods They Trust.

    • The U.S. power grid has enough excess capacity to supply a fleet of electric only vehicles.

      Yeah but they’ll fix that. When they replace real power plants with “renewable” crap, the solar end will be producing ZERO at night and there’s no guarantee the wind will blow at the right speed either.

      And EVs remain unfit for their purpose compared with ICE vehicles. Range is still a massive issue, and if everyone driving ICE cars today had to switch to EVs, the waiting period for “recharges” would quickly become intolerable.

      Battery powered vehicles on an industrial scale are sheer stupidity.

      • Over time I’ve invested in three generations of rechargeable batteries. ( AAA/AA/C/D cells) None ever met, nor came close to the sales promises of either power capacity, or longevity. That was with indoor home use that never tested battery technology in Canadian cold. Now the powers that be want to trust our transport economy to rechargeable batteries? None of the older manufacturers of general purpose batteries had any political motives to “puff up” the stats for sales promotions for rechargeables. Just profit. That certainly does not apply to the mass governmental bayonet point pressure to electrify our entire people, and goods transport system.

        How will giant rechargeable car and truck cells really perform -50° F temperatures with a -65° F windchill ? Not for days … but months ? In Nebraska, Alberta or Alaska ? Will the cells physical construction/connections themselves survive that cold outside a laboratory in the real world ? (brittle + POTHOLES ! ) ?

        • “How will giant rechargeable car and truck cells really perform -50° F temperatures with a -65° F windchill ?”

          The batteries will do OK, because they use power to keep themselves warm.

          The problems is that eats into your range, so that 200mile range in the summer becomes 100miles or less in the winter once you take account of the battery heating, cabin heating, headlights, wipers, etc.

          And if the batteries ever go flat in the winter so they can no longer warm themselves, I’d guess they’re probably dead.

          It’s ludicrous. But then, this is Trudeau Country.

          • “And if the batteries ever go flat in the winter so they can no longer warm themselves, I’d guess they’re probably dead.”

            Dead as in toxic recycle dead ? There are all sorts of 60+ year old internal combustion engines running today that even should they fail can be rebuilt to original factory specs with a few easily available parts, and a good machine shop. And not just once.

            In fact the ones that are pre-1988 have a darn good chance of still being in operating condition after a Carrington level + solar event.

          • “Dead as in toxic recycle dead ?”

            I don’t know, but I’ve read of lithium batteries dying because they got too cold or because someone tried to charge them when they were too cold (and what else are you going to do with a battery that’s flat when you need to drive somewhere in Arctic temperatures?).

            Even if the battery survived, who’d want to drive around for ten years in a car carrying a flamethrower that burns you alive if a single cell inside it fails and starts a thermal runaway? They’re a safety hazard at the best of times.

          • The electronics would have to spend the first 30 minutes or so of your charge time sending all of the electricity to the onboard heaters.
            Kind of blows the lid off the claims of electrics being so efficient.

          • “MarkG February 22, 2020 at 1:50 pm

            I don’t know, but I’ve read of lithium batteries dying…”

            Dendrites. They grow inside the battery when over-charged and heavily discharged and, eventually, lead to failure. That’s one potential reason why Apple and Tesla introduced new “software” that made battery life seem a lot less than before.

          • And that 200 mile range probably isn’t a 200 mile range to begin with. On the highway, start with about 2/3 of that (based on Car & Driver testing of Teslas in “highway” driving), so about 133 miles. Then if you’re “rapid charging,” you can apply 80% to that, and you’re down to 106 miles.

            That’s about HALF the supposed “range.” And that’s BEFORE you take into account the effects of cold temperatures, slippery roads, use of cabin heating, lights, heating seats and steering wheels, radios, defoggers, etc.

            I think it was someone on this blog that reported the information about the calculation of the “range” of a Nissan Leaf, though it might have been somewhere else. A buyer requested this information from the dealer, who (undoubtedly knowing the answer wouldn’t reflect well on what he was selling) refused to provide it. The buyer then (wisely) pursued the information via a FOIA request, and got it. I saved it, since it is such a fine illustration of the fiction of EV “range.” Here’s the conditions under which the Leaf’s “range” is calculated:

            -Flat dry road
            -Zero winds, 20 degrees Celsius (68 degrees Fahrenheit)
            -1 person and no luggage in the car
            -All windows closed
            -No extra drain such as heating, lights, AC, music
            -Steady speed of 23 km/h (about 14mph)

    • Many of the public power stations are powered by solar – fed into batteries so that power is available 24/7

      Batteries charging batteries in any reasonable amount of time? LOL.

      • Are those solar PV panels not just supplement/virtue signalling?
        If you are talking about a fast charging station of 50kW, a about 100 solar panels covers that in the midday southern latitude summer. Assuming storage on gigantic batteries and 30% duty cycle, it may work.
        However, the “solar” powered charging stations I have seen on pictures, seems to use far less solar panels.

        It is at least laughable in winter at latitudes north of 55°. Unless Mr. Sanders issues a law against winter.
        Honestly, politicians can do that. A Dane, the actor Jacob Haugaard, seeking entry to the Danish government promised tailwind for cyclists. He got elected, but left afterwards in disgrace over the stupidity in the political arena.

      • The entire plan is not intended to solve any problem other than providing enhanced control over the public and transferring wealth to cronies.
        The price of power will be controlled by government and that will control the mobility of the population.

    • You’ll do anything to force people to adopt your favorite power source. Just how much do you have invested in that scheme.

      Currently most people charge at home. That’s because people who can’t charge at home don’t buy electric cars. Talk about your circular reasoning.

      The US grid has enough excess capacity to handle an all electric car fleet? Nonsense on stilts. We’d have to at least double or triple the size of the grid to handle recharging. Even if everyone was able to charge at night. Which they won’t be.

      • The folks in hurricane country will love relying on the power grid
        for rescue workers and reconstruction. Imagine an EV rescue vehicle
        in a flooded city with no power grid access.

        • as the population declines, those cities will be eliminated, all part of the A21 plan, so no need for EV rescues

          A2030 is to see the mandated (forced) demise of the affordable privately owned ICE car

          A2050 is all about moving the stranded, impoverished masses into ‘mega regions’

    • “…EV owners overwhelmingly charge their vehicles at home – usually during the nightime hors, when rates are low where there are variable rates and demand is low. The U.S. power grid has enough excess capacity to supply a fleet of electric only vehicles…”

      Demand is low because EVs are not mainstream. A fleet of electric-only vehicles would eliminate that.

      • So, you have to make people buy something they don’t want because you know it’s eventually good for them ?
        The basis of every socialist tyranny in the world. And, the reason why the U.S.A was different and successful.

    • “The future power technology is obviously going to be molten salt small modular reactors…”

      Find ten warmistas who are onboard with nuclear, even as a transition.
      I’ll wait.

      • It doesn’t matter – the transition to LFTR/MSR will happen without them – and without some massive global plan, forced into being by coercion from Climate Justice Warriors.

        The beauty is that it is already beginning with several test reactors going in this decade. I think it will be rather easy to convert most coal and gas plants by the end of this century. Anthropogenic CO2 from energy production will be a thing of the past in less than 80 years. Short of BLP being real (or some other miracle), this is the only possible way to replace reliable, high-density energy sources. There isn’t a snowball’s chance in Hell of solar or wind doing anything before then to significantly reduce CO2.

        Whatever climate impact CO2 has (if much of any) we are stuck with for another 50-80 years.

    • EV owners overwhelmingly charge their vehicles at home – usually during the nightime hors, when rates are low where there are variable rates and demand is low

      Because EV owners are a very small niche of the market right now – mainly affluent people who own their own homes with a garage or other easy access to home electrical power.

      When you make *every* driver needing to own an EV, that’ll add millions of people who do not own their own homes or have access to home electrical power, that’ll change the electricity usage footprint considerable.

      Add to that a shift away from reliable energy sources (ie Fossil Fuels) to unreliable, weather dependant sources (ie wind & solar) and the situation only gets worse.

      • “EV owners overwhelmingly charge their vehicles at home”

        He’s referencing the current situation and then assuming that it will remain the same.
        Yes, most current EV owners charge at home. That’s because those who don’t have a home and a garage aren’t buying EVs.

        • Exactly, MarkW. That’s the problem with looking at a tiny niche market and assuming the niche is representative of the whole market – you end up making stupid assumptions. EVs are currently a self-selecting niche of mostly affluent purchasers who own their own home or otherwise already have convenient access to an electric outlet for charging their EVs. That only describes a small segment of the over all automobile market. There’s a large part of the market that isn’t affluent enough to afford the high-price EVs, don’t own their own home and don’t have convenient access to an electric outlet for charging their EVs. Such people, if forced to have an EV will also be forced to charge said EV at an away-from home charging station – meaning they won’t be charging “during the nightime hors(sic), when rates are low where there are variable rates and demand is low” – they’ll be spending hours, during prime electric demand time (when rates and demand are high), sitting at a charging station waiting for their EV to charge up.

    • ColMosby,

      I agree that Advanced Nuclear (LFTR/MSR/MCFR/etc) is the likely energy of the future. It is not a fantasy – the concept has been proven 50 years ago and now it just needs to be commercialized. That commercialization is now underway by at least 8 companies. Most of them are now involved with US DOE, US National Labs and have received a combination of private and public funding. Experimental and test reactors will go in over the next 5-7 years with the first prototype reactors coming online in 10-12 years. The Chinese and Indian governments are also working on this with resources that are many multiples of Western resources.

      The sad thing is that the MSRE at Oak Ridge was canceled over 50 years ago by Nixon – a political decision to focus on fast breeders and give Nixon and the Republicans a quick political victory as it related to jobs. We had the “holy grail” and discarded it without knowing it. It is quite a story and quite sad. We could be 50 years further along on this if not for that blunder of ignorance. Of course, the Dems were no better – that’s why we have the folly of solar and wind power.

      The average life of a power plant is 20-30 years. So we have 2-4 opportunities (per plant) over the balance of this century to replace every power plant on the planet with advanced nuclear. It will likely happen for economic reasons – without coercion from Climate Warriors.

      However, nuclear does not load follow well. It can, but it is best to run at full capacity. Some load following is done by dumping steam (wasting the energy). With advanced nuclear, there is no need for solar or wind – and these sources can be decommissioned as they age-out. The need to load follow is decreased without the unreliable sources complicating the grid. Excess capacity would be better applied to manufacture carbon-neutral fuels to augment natural liquid fuels. There are many technical and economic issues with EVs (battery technology) and unless they are all overcome, liquid fuels will always be far better.

  13. I am really wondering about the long term life and reliability of these battery packs. How many bad cells does it take to ruin a 10,000 cell battery? They seem to be way too complex. As far as I know, fast charging and high ambient temperatures also shorten battery life. How do these warranties work out in practice?
    The enthusiasts seem to be overly optimistic.

  14. Not to worry. “All EVs by such and such a date” falls into the same alarmist category as “we will all be dead by such and such a date if we don’t stop CO2”. The goalpost will just be moved …. in perpetuity.

    • Except, at the moment, the goalposts keep being moved closer.

      Early on, it kind of made sense. In 2000, you could win Green points by saying you would ban ICE vehicles in 2050 while knowing you’d be retired to New Zealand by then. But now we have politicians in the UK talking about banning them by 2032, and they’ve actually said they’re going to ban them by 2035. It’s conceivable that the current government could still be in power by then.

  15. Forcing the adoption of electric vehicles will work only if batteries can be dramatically improved. This is a physical problem, and Physics does not respond to legislatures. Suppose governments were to mandate that there will be a cure for cancer. That won’t do any good, unless there really is a cure for cancer, and people can find out what it is.

    The biggest obstacle to the popular adoption of electric cars is that gasoline cars are now so good. They’re reliable and cheap, and the infrastructure that supports them is widespread and profitable. Motor cars were a dramatic improvement over horses and oxen, but electric cars are only marginally better than gas cars. Except that they’re better only if you’re convinced that air pollution is a problem. A $5000 used Chevy is a better buying choice than a $120,000 Tesla, if you want to drive from Edmonton to Yellowknife in the shortest time possible. The Tesla is not a choice at all, if you’re not wealthy.

    Here’s a question I can’t find a straight answer to on the ‘net: What percentage of Tesla owners also own and operate a gas-fuelled car?

    • Motor cars were a dramatic improvement over horses and oxen, but electric cars are only marginally better than gas cars.

      In what way are they “better,” even marginally, as implements of transportation?! They are WORSE in significant and critical ways, in particular range and recharging vs. refueling times.

      Except that they’re better only if you’re convinced that air pollution is a problem.

      Which it isn’t. This speaks, particularly in view of the increase in traffic over the years, to the success of the effort to control (real) pollution with emission controls. Further, the supposed pollution “advantage” of EVs vs. ICEs is more of an illusion than a real improvement, because the EVs are typically not “credited” with their “share” of power plant pollutants (much of which is coal fired) and the pollutants in battery manufacture (which also entails pollution other than air pollution which is conveniently ignored). Nor does it account for what we do with all the dead batteries.

  16. Worldwide there are 5 million all-electric vehicles. There are a BILLION ICE vehicles. All-electric has achieved a market share of 0.5%, years after the introduction of the Tesla, Nissan Leaf, and lots of others.

    This is a revolution still-born.

    • Im curious as to how the first EV cars are going now..if theyre going at all?
      anyoneknow of anywhere thats publishing figures on lifespans battery and cars?
      and it would be fun to see how many workshop visits time off rd and accrued costs for that too
      re sales? any?

  17. Just wait until the first hurricane evacuation in which a substantial proportion of people only have an electric car.
    And for people that do not evacuate but only have power out for as much as several weeks, not having power to charge the car means no getting to a gas station for generator fuel, no shopping, going to work, or even driving to where they are handing out water and ice.
    In other words, the preparation and aftermath of natural disasters will be orders of magnitude worse than anything we have ever seen before.
    And expect people stuck on highways in surprise snowstorms to begin to freeze to death instead of merely being stuck.
    If we were to assume that the people wanting what is described in this article were to get 100% of what they are advocating for, the results would be catastrophic in all sorts of ways.
    With no heating oil or natural gas, and all heat electric, and all electric power from wind and solar…I think it can easily be shown that several times a year many millions of people will be experiencing deadly cold snaps with no way to heat their homes, keeps pipes from bursting, etc.
    These jackasses are truly insane.

    • Ahh! Nicholas, you clearly haven’t thought this through.

      You see, if everyone switches to an EV then there won’t be any hurricanes or snow storms to worry about. I’ve read the schience™ and it will all be spring time and lollipops, so no dramas. There will be no natural disasters once we ‘fix’ the climate.

  18. When the government fears the people civil society is possible.
    When the people fear their government, chaos is coming.
    The Electric Car fad is government swelling past the point of no return.
    Take a 200 year old technology that has lost the battle in the free market.
    Impose it upon the citizens using the New Religion.
    Just like the lightbulb fiasco.
    Well the “helpers” got away with telling us what kind of lightbulbs we could buy.And imposed a toxic fire hazard in the place of reliable eye friendly heat sources..
    Failure to punish such overreach is seen as blessing it.
    So in the eyes of our “helpers”,nudgers and self appointed elites,we want them to impose “better ” transport choices upon us..
    What is truly appalling about this fad for electric battery cars is that so many insist batteries are the source of power,rather than an inefficient storage medium.

    They are “Clean electric cars” as much as the Utility power source is clean.
    hence most are Coal fired.
    Fossil Fuels Bad??

    Their is a massive “Cleansing of the stables” due of our bureaucracies.
    Perhaps we need to reward all Do-Gooders.
    With banishment.

  19. Most everyone will go to electric cars when they are cheaper than ICE powered, and have some method of rapidly “re-juicing”. That could be a long “when” time, because battery improvements are happening at a snail’s pace and the grid isn’t sturdy enough to recharge everyone overnight. It is quite possible that liquid fuels and ICE will remain the power source of choice for vehicles, but with a change from fossil liquid fuels to bio-liquid fuels. For example, ethanol and bio diesel, but which are currently too costly in comparison to fossil oil.

    • The only way most everyone will go to electric cars is when electric cars are shoved down their throats. And making liquid fuels from food is colossal stupidity, when there is perfectly good oil for that which is better suited for the purpose.

  20. “The UK ban would even include hybrids!”

    I thought this was one of the stupidest sentence in the article. If anything, having a very efficient ICE running at max efficiency, that also supplies heat for the batteries and cabin in winter and powers the A/C in summer if required, or recharges the battery on the fly or where there is no charging station, is the solution until we have a ‘plasma-fusion’ battery that will last for a 1000 miles between charges. I just made that up about the PF battery…but really, the hybrid is the solution if you want a working EV that is powered by batteries for 2/3 of the time or none of the time in short city driving. So if they outlaw a really efficient hybrid, then I see no hope for mankind. Requiring the ‘purity’ of an EV only is retarded. Things are just getting too stupid.

  21. From the New York Times of March 17th, 2031:

    “Yesterday, the streets were filled with spontaneous demonstrators chanting slogans of support and affection for Comrade General Secretary Sanders, after it was announced that the electricity ration will be increased to 12 kWh per week per family”


    From the New York Times of December 10th, 2030:

    “Comrade General Secretary Sanders announced that, as an emergency measure to support Our Valiant Troops In The War Against The Evil Carbon, the electricity ration will be reduced from 20 kWh to 16 kWh per family per week ‘Victory is at hand!’ said the Leader.

    “In other news, a spontaneous demonstration of six people tried to burn an effigy of The Evil Carbon in front of the Trump Tower (now a Federal prison for climate deniers), but unfortunately they could not find any gasoline to start the fire. When one of the demonstrators asked a police officer if zhe could siphon some gasoline from a police Armored Personnel Carrier, zhe was reminded that, under the Free And Abundant Energy For All Act of 2023, any private individual in possession of gasoline is liable to be shot on sight, but zhe could apply for a Gasoline Possession Licence if zhe was a moslem, a transgendered person, a member of Greenpeace, or a Certified Climate Refugee. All the demonstrators were killed when a blade broke off the wind turbine on top of the Trump Tower Prison and fell on them. Two of the three horses operating the Fifth Avenue horse-tram were also killed, and service was suspended for the day. All twelve passengers had to walk to work.

    “On a more positive note, the New York Stock Exchange reported a record volume of just over one million dollars, thanks to the Comrade General Secretary’s unstinting support of the private sector.

    “In international news, the Governor-General of Canada yesterday signed a deed that transferred ownership of the entire country to its indigenous peoples. To avoid undue hardship to the non-indigenous colonizers, they will be allowed a 30-day transition period to move to a reserve on Ellesmere Island. Two three-masted sailing ships are berthed in Montreal to assist in their relocation.

    “We are also pleased to report that, thanks to our valiant Iranian allies and their thermonuclear arsenal, Israel no longer exists.”

  22. Regarding Battery Electric Vehicles vs Light duty vehicles (ICE):
    Here’s a MIT Nov 2019 report on non-truck vehicle comparisons [BEV, PHEV, FCEV vs ICE]:
    Bottom line – BEV (without subsidies & assumes no battery replacement) are not cost effective vs ICE and likely won’t be for ~10 yrs. It uses full life-cycle analysis: from mining the ore to recycling the car.
    As to recharging, here in Phoenix,AZ area the Teslas had several hour waits for charging stations over the Thanksgiving holiday drive. I think the word is schadenfreude, but they get the last laugh since, no gas tax, no license tax and can drive solo in the high occupancy lane.

    • I don’t think they get the last laugh. I’ll trade gas and license taxes and the need for one passenger for HOV lane privileges over waiting several hours to “refuel” any time.

  23. I suspect that the electrical auto industry will eventually collapse like the Dutch Tulip Market Crash. When the costs of replacing batteries comes into play, the wealthy will simply get a newer model. I wouldn’t buy a used electric vehicle unless it had a new battery, methinks, so the resale value could shrink in the used car markets. Then there will likely be govenrnment regulations, fees and fines, forcing used car owners to recycle the batteries. Electric vehicles do not seem to me to be the long term saviors of job markets or the used car dealerships. Internal combustion engines will likely do well on the resale market especially when things turn cold every winter and solar power panels are covered in snow and/or the windmills are put into a parked position during strong windstorms. With the price of oil going down and the cost of electricity going up, I’m speculating that the tulip market might also deflate rapidly.

    • We will likely hear of the benefits of a future car/vehicle battery recycle, but it is virtually guaranteed to be a sewage show. May big cities signed on to recycling home and business waste years ago through profit promises, but the service prices increased, the recyclers range of acceptable materials shrunk, and what was once a money making tool has become a net cost item passed on to taxpayers.

      Battery recycling will be much, much worse. Drivers will be low-balled on cost estimates, both by sellers, and by the same people who brought us fake CO2 global warming in the first place. Government, and media. You will not be allowed to buy a new battery without providing and paying for recycling of an old battery. Costs of which will be punishing, far above initial promises. Black markets will develop, and old batteries, or their contents will be discarded in poisonously decrepid ways. The outcome will be magnitudes of more environmental damage than fossil fuels could ever do. All absolutely predictable.

      • There was a new story a few months ago about a guy who crashed his Tesla and is still stuck with the scrap vehicle because he couldn’t find anyone who would take it off his hands. He said no scrap-yard wanted it, because it was too difficult to process thanks to the environmental regulations and the risk of fire from a damaged battery.

        I think it was Germany, but I don’t remember for sure.

  24. “The push toward an all-electric society – plus heavy and rising burdens on the power grid from intermittent power generations and charging all-electric vehicles – looks like a recipe for disaster, at least for the average consumer.”

    I agree. I am an EV enthusiast but not an enthusat for government interfering in what people can buy.

    But as for the rest of the article , I’d suggest that the author go and drive a good EV. Better yet borrow one and drive it for a week. And then do some research. The standard anti-EV arguments are getting a bit thin

    • I don’t know anyone in Australia who has an up to AU$92k Tesla 3 car let alone willing to lend it to me for a week.

    • I am enthusiastically in favour of EVs that are taxed the same amount as other vehicles, (non-)subsidised the same amount as other vehicles, and subject to the same regulations as other vehicles. If or when their time comes they will dominate and the world will be better for it. If their time never comes, well that’s real life, and I suspect that no-one can predict what will take their place – or rather, the place they never had.

  25. Mr. Hardy, the anti-EV argument that resonates right now is that very few people can afford to buy an EV. You may be in a position to consider that argument thin, but that would make you a member of a small minority. “Drive a good EV”? That’s like telling someone to drive a good Lamborghini. It doesn’t matter how good it is if you can’t afford it.

    And Mr. Hardy, Tesla loses money. What about those two profitable quarters that Tesla has claimed? I am guessing here, but I suspect that they were claiming the deposits on undelivered cars as income. A thousand dollar deposit on a Tesla Mode 3 is not income. It is debt. The thousand dollars paid by a customer buys an obligation for Tesla to supply him with a functioning car with a retail price of $35,000. That is not only a debt, it may be an unpayable debt that the customer will be forced to forgive.

  26. If these ICE vehicle bans ever come to pass, IMO a pretty significant market in rebuilding and refurbishing ICE vehicles will be created. People will keep their cars and trucks running for far longer if there are no new replacements to be had. And more than a few electric cars will simply take up space in dealer lots, unwanted and unsold.

  27. John Hardy:
    I agree that driving a Tesla would be fun. Everyone I’ve been in was very nice. But affordability is the issue. Even the range issue is not a deal breaker for me (since its > 300 miles).
    Pricing a new 2020 Hybrid Sonata (~$35K) vs a USED 2019 Tesla3 (~$47) just this past month finds that I would have to drive the Tesla for ~12 years to break even [and this assumes no battery replacement & no subsidy and ignores the higher T3 insurance costs]. Up-thread is a link I found for a MIT cost comparison study of BEV vs ICE.
    And by the way: I was told that Tesla is not making any of the $35k T3 cars till 2021; they are all the Long Range models going for over $50k.

  28. EV’s are NOT THE FUTURE.

    I can’t predict when, but in the future, the EV will be viewed as we now view lava lamps, mood rings, chia pets, and pyramid power. Fun fads.

    There are absolutely no good reasons to drive an EV over an internal combustion engine vehicle.

    – In most scenarios, the CO2 emitted through battery production will exceed the CO2 saved during the life of the battery.
    – The mining of rare earth minerals is very destructive to the environment and the landscape.
    – Disposing of or recycling dead batteries has a significant adverse environmental impact.
    – The energy density of Li-ion batteries is pathetic in both MJ/L and MJ/kg.

    Energy Source:
    – EV’s don’t come with Electron Faeries in the trunk. Most EVs are (in reality) coal or natural gas powered unless the power source is nuclear or hydro. Even grids with solar and wind are backstopped by hydrocarbon sources from nearby grids with enough reserve to cover the unreliable sources.
    – In the US, annual energy usage in the transportation sector is close to that of the electric grid. The grid would have to be increased in size significantly to handle the load, and charging off-peak will only address some of that. Even less so as more unreliable sources are forced onto the grid.
    – There are 168,000 gas stations in the US, with an average of 10 pumps per station, for a total of nearly 1.7M pumps. A gas tank can be filled in 3 minutes. EVs need 30-60 minutes with a rapid charger, but most likely many hours. Millions of charging stations will need to be added.

    The future:
    – Liquid Fluoride Thorium/Molten Salt/Small Modular Reactors are coming. They will be safe, environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and perfect for replacing current electric generating plants.
    – They run best at full capacity. Excess capacity during off-peak times can be used to power fuel factories that can create carbon-neutral fuels from seawater or the air. Liquid fuels are energy-dense. We have the infrastructure to make them, transport them, store them, and dispense them. Why reinvent the wheel. (Although less energy-dense, nitrogen-neutral fuels made and used alternatively.)
    – There are still significant potential advancements in the efficiency of internal combustion engines (HCCI, opposed-piston engines, variable compression, etc.). We currently optimize for HP/performance, but if necessary, there is still much that can be done to minimize combustion byproducts.

    EVs are bad for the environment, have no beneficial impact on the climate, and will not be a big part of our future.

  29. It’s like this in Oz with our new car sales travelling around the 1 million plus sales for a number of years although sales have fallen back in tougher times in the last 12 months. What the Carsales website shows anytime is around 200k new and used cars for sale at any one time and playing around with front page numbers and prices you’ll work out $25k AUD is the median asking price and kick that up to $50k and over when the cheapest EV is $50k and you’re only appealing to 18% of the market. However that includes the major biz seller in dual cab utes (pickup trucks to you) and recent stats shows nearly 88% of new car buyers purchase on finance around half dealer and half BYO.

    You only have to do the sums on the difference in price between say buying a Korean or Japanese runabout for $25k vs a similar size EV more than double that and the interest alone floors any savings in power vs fuel and you’ve got to pay off the capital. Elon’s not stupid and knows where his bread’s buttered with a standard range Model 3 in Oz kicking off at $75k and no well heeled half baked climate changer is going to buy a Renault Zoe for $50k or a Hyundai Kona for $65k when they can have a Tesla badge to swan around in for a bit more chump change. Meanwhile Toyota are backing hybrids for the deplorables to assuage the climate changers for the time being with their emissions controls trying to drive the ICE off the roads by stealth.

  30. From the article: “But amazingly California lawmakers actually killed a 2018 effort to ban IC engines by 2040.”

    That doesn’t surprise me. I don’t think banning the internal combustion engine in the United States will *ever* fly. Americans love their cars and the independence it gives them and they are not going to give them up.

    You couldn’t have a better example than California. If anyone would pass a ban in ICE cars it would be California, but as you see, even Calfironia politicians are not brave enough to support such a proposal.

    Europe may give up their ICE cars, but the United States is not going to follow suit.

    Trying to force electric cars down our throats before the time is right is insanity. Fear of CO2 has driven these people mad, to the point they are destroying their nations and their futures with counterproductive actions based on nothing but delusions about CO2.

      • “So, never then.”

        Well, I don’t know. I suppose there might come a time when electric vehicles become widespread, but it’s not right around the corner, and I think governments that try to force this change are creating a whole lot of problems for themselves. Big, unnecessary problems for themselves, like destroying their automobile markets among other things.

        CO2 fear seems to blind them to these possible consequences, or causes them to be disregarded.

        What is really sad and unbelievable is that none of these alarmists can prove CO2 is in any way harmful to our futures. They are going off half-cocked in an effort to reduce CO2 and are taking actions that are counterproductive for no reason they can demonstrate. They say: Trust us.” Well, who are they trusting? We know who: A bunch of human-caused climate change charlatans who have been distorting the truth for decades. Alarmists are trying to create a future based on Lies.

        • I do have favorite electric vehicles.
          The indoor elevator.
          And, it’s cousin the escalator.
          Anything with wheels should be gas or diesel powered.

  31. We do not have the power plants or infrastructure to support all electric vehicles in the USA. Better off getting a horse.

  32. For quite a long time, the hidden assumption was that the ecoloons were going to be cucked with only lip service being given to their loony ideas.

    Right now, we see that the demented ideas are coming closer. Decades after endorsing lunacies, the “mainstream” have validated greens. Young people can point to the hypocrisy of “adults” who officially endorse green ideas (even though they are silly) and never truly apply these in all their strength.

  33. Many bloggers here on WUWT must be thirsting for the real answer to this simple question, “This EV or nothing proposal is stupid, it takes no skill or training to know it is stupid – but why are so many governments and their leaders endorsing it?”
    I cannot understand smart people like the UK PM backing this. What is the benefit from endorsing stupid?
    Is there a toxin in the drinking water?

  34. I stopped reading at “Elon Musk’s company had already received nearly $5 billion in federal subsidies by 2015,…” That is an outright lie. Tesla’s customers have indeed received tax credits for the vehicles they bought, just as all EV customers have, regardless of manufacturer. I’m not a fan of these credits, nor of Tesla, but starting off your article with a lie is not a good look.

    • Paul Penrose,

      Why do you believe the comment that “Musk’s company had already received nearly $5B in federal subsidies” is a lie?

      Refer to this article:

      I think it is more correct to say that Musk’s companies (plural) meaning (Tesla, Solar City and Space X) have received nearly $4.9B in government (federal or state not delineated) subsidies. This would appear to be in addition to EV tax credits given to the consumer (and therefore essentially given to Musk’s companies).

      • The LA Times, really? That’s all you’ve got? They call the contracts with NASA that SpaceX received “subsidies” just because NASA is a government agency. What nonsense. NASA paid for, and received, the products and services they required. The LA Times also labels the oil purchases that the government makes to maintain the strategic reserve “subsidies” to the oil companies. More nonsense. They have no credibility and wouldn’t know a real subsidy if it hit them in the face.

        • Paul Penrose,

          You know there is an abundance of sources reporting on the “subsidies” Musk’s companies have received. I’m not opposed to the spirit of your analysis about the “subsidies,” but I disagree with you calling the report a “lie.” You can make the case that governments invest in what our elected representatives believe is good for the country – and this is valid – but these “investments” are also abused to promote political agendas. The lie is that there is a climate crisis. The lie is that CO2 is a problem for the climate. The lie is that EVs help to solve that crisis. The lie is that we can “invest” our way into a world where EVs replace ICEVs and reduce CO2. From some of your other comments, I suspect we may not be in large disagreement on this. While I appreciate your desire for accurate reporting and more details about what those “subsidies” from the government were – or how they should be classified – I think bemoaning the statement you identified as a “lie” is missing the key point. Our disagreement is limited to that.

          I’m particularly fond of criticism of Musk, a supposed engineer. If you study his Hyperloop design ideas you quickly learn that he has no grounding in reality – and a poor understanding of physics. His stated purpose for Space X is to colonize Mars – a completely ridiculous idea that will never happen. If we want to live somewhere where we will die if we leave the confines of our containment structure, then we should just colonize the bottom of the ocean. It doesn’t require traveling 5-years round trip in a tomatoe-can. And his Tesla automobiles exploit the government-funded mass delusion about a climate crisis. There are many other industries that receive government funding that I don’t approve of, but Musk is such a manipulative weasel that I’m willing to give someone a pass when they don’t give me a full balance sheet of just how he is ripping off taxpayers when they criticize his business activities. Without the government funding – no matter what you call it – we wouldn’t know Musk’s name. (PayPal isn’t sexy enough to care about who created it.)

Comments are closed.