Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
For those who think that electric vehicles make a difference … think again.
The Department of Energy’s Argonne National Lab has just released a study showing that in 2021, US privately-owned plugin hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and electric vehicles (EVs) “saved about 690 million gallons of gasoline.”
But that is a huge exaggeration because fossil fuels provide 61% of the electricity in the US, and we have to include:
- the inefficiency of burning coal or natural gas to make electricity (around 45% or so)
- transmission losses (~ 5%),
- losses in the inverter to charge the battery (another ~5%).
… so less than a third of that apparent savings is a real reduction in fossil fuel use, the equivalent of maybe 230 million gallons.
The Argonne report also says that from 2010 to 2021, EVs have saved 2.5 billion gallons of gas. So let’s be generous and say that in 11 years, EVs have saved less than a third of that, the equivalent of about 750 million gallons of gas.
Now that sure sounds like a lot of gasoline, three-quarters of a billion gallons.
However, as always, a sense of perspective is required. The US uses about 370 million gallons of gas per day … so that’s only about two days’ worth of gas.
I say again. Over the last eleven years, electric vehicles in the US have saved Two. Days. Worth. Of. Gasoline.
Hmmm …
And how much has that cost?
Direct taxpayer subsidies for EVs have cost you and me $10 billion dollars to date, and we’re on the hook for more. The government just extended the EV subsidy until 2032 and removed the cap on the number of vehicles eligible for the subsidy.
It gets worse. The US government also just approved spending an additional $7.5 billion of taxpayer money on EV charging stations.
So to date, we’re spending TWENTY-THREE DOLLARS for each gallon of gasoline saved … economic suicide.
Who is benefitting from this lunatic waste of taxpayer money? The richest 20% of the US population, of course. Surely you don’t think the actions of the climate activists would benefit the poor?
According to research from the University of California at Berkeley, 90% of the tax credits accrue to America’s top income quintile. A May 2019 Congressional Research Service report found that 78% of the tax credit’s recipients had an adjusted gross income of $100,000 per year or more.
On top of that, we have to consider the fact that the $7,500 per electric vehicle subsidy is a tax credit, not a direct payment … so unless you’re paying more than $7,500 in Federal taxes, you don’t get the full credit. For lower-income people, this means they may only get a kilobuck or so. How upside-down is that? The richer you are, the larger the subsidy you get for buying a mostly fossil-powered sparky car! Say what?
It’s nothing but a money-transfer scam to benefit the wealthy. Lower and middle-class people are paying for the vanity-signaling EVs of doctors, CEOs, lawyers, and politicians.
And how well are the electric vehicles selling? Here’s how people think they are selling, compared to how they are actually selling.
Note that the electric car data in the graphic above (yellow/black line) is the same in both panels …
There’s a much larger problem with EVs, however—we’re rapidly running out of both the generation capacity and the grid capacity to recharge them. California can’t even keep the lights on, and our insane Governor’s response is to forbid selling gasoline-powered cars after 2035 …
… and meanwhile, Switzerland is already having to bite the EV bullet. If current European energy shortages continue, they plan to ban EVs from anything but “essential” journeys this winter …
Not only that, but going to a “net-zero” all-electric economy by 2050, as many people advocate, is economically, physically, and politically impossible. I discuss this in my post “Bright Green Impossibilities“.
The problem with electric vehicles is that they are a hugely expensive imaginary solution to an imaginary problem. There is no “climate crisis”, that’s just a lie to keep people scared and compliant. I go over the facts in my post “Where Is The Climate Emergency“. I’ve posted it all over the web, and no one has found a single flaw in it.
Unless we can stop the insane war on fossil fuels, it is going to bankrupt us all, driving energy costs through the roof, leaving low-income people shivering in the winter, and denying poor countries the energy they need to escape grinding poverty. For details about how this plays out down at the bottom of the economic ladder, see my post “We Have Met The 1%, And He Is Us“.
Grrrr …
w.
As Always: I ask that when you comment, you quote the exact words you’re discussing. This avoids endless misunderstandings as to what and who is being discussed.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ja. Ja. Just sing the song.
https://breadonthewater.co.za/2022/12/06/the-messiah-by-the-midlands-chamber-choir
An abundance of caution yields an abundance of profit
An abundance of caution yields an
abundanceabsence of profit.Fixed it for ya.
Not even mentioned is the exorbitant up-front costs and cost of ownership of EVs.
A Ford F-150 XLT (very nicely equipped) sells for $52,000 (MSRP), while the F-150 EV goes for upwards of $110,000 and burns through battery charge when trying to tow anything.
A plain Jane Tesla 3 costs the far side of $60,000, while a similarly equipped mid-sized sedan (Toyota Camry or Honda Accord) can be had for about $30,000.
Once governing authorities figure out how to levy road use taxes and charging fees on EVs, the EV buyers will never break even on the difference in price between ICE cars and EVs. For the present, EVs are just virtue signaling and tax breaks for the wealthy. EVs will have to be FAR cheaper before your average Joe could afford one.
Road user charges, for what its worth, have existed and work well on diesel vehicles of all types in New Zealand. All that is required is political will.
It’s OK. The Solo has just been announced – a single-seat commuter car, for $US19,000. Plus GM intends to offer 15 different EV models over the next few years. They will be cheap.
Cheap compared to other EVs or cheap compared to comparable vehicles with ICE powertrains?
What would the Solo cost with a 56 hp gasoline engine? For reference the 2022 1.0L 89 hp fortwo “smart” car MSRP is $14,650.
I don’t own one, but looking at specs, the new hybrids (say 2023 Prius for example) seem to be a good functional peppy vehicle while having excellent mileage, and a battery small enough that it is affordable to replace in 8 years and has ICE backup for those longer trips.
Cost of batteries is something that makes electric forklifts worth scrap metal price on the used market, and the same is coming for electric cars…..
Here is a hint of “Things to Come”
1) consumer bills
According to the National Energy Assistance Directors Association (NEADA), roughly 20 million households in the U.S. — one out of six homes — are behind on their utility bills.
As of August, these families owe about $16.1 billion in total, with an average amount owed of $788 — and the consequences of this could be dire, especially as home heat costs are expected to reach their highest level in over 10 years.
“I expect a tsunami of shutoffs,” Jean Su, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, told Bloomberg.
2) unattained purchasing
Falling battery prices have been one of the most consistent trends in the electric vehicle industry for the last decade. Prices dropped from well over $1,000 per kilowatt hour in 2010 to $141 per kWh last year(1). This jump-started one of the biggest shifts in the auto industry in the last century, spurring automakers to plow billions of dollars into EVs.
The trend has ground to a halt this year, with BloombergNEF’s annual lithium-ion battery price survey showing a 7% increase in average pack prices in 2022 in real terms. This is the first increase in the history of the survey.
There are several factors driving the uptick, but the single most important one is rising costs for materials including cobalt, nickel and lithium. While prices for nickel and cobalt have come down in recent months, and lithium may be about to turn, each of these are still higher than they have been in previous years. This is driven by surging battery demand and a lag in how fast new supply can be brought online.
The average battery price would have been even higher if not for the shift to lower-cost lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which contain no nickel or cobalt. LFP batteries have gained significant market share in the last three years, with BloombergNEF expecting them to account for around 40% of global EV sales this year. Battery manufacturer margins also are lower this year, suggesting they’ve absorbed some of the rising costs of materials and components.
Rising Battery Prices Threaten to Derail the Arrival of Affordable EVs (yahoo.com)
3) China will supply everyone after a lot of failed projects
UAW vote at GM, LG battery plant is a labor test for EV industry (cnbc.com)
The lithion-iron-phosphate batteries are increasingly popular for use in RVs. They don’t store as much electricity as the lithium-ion batteries used in BVs (battery-powered vehicles), but they are reportedly much safer, not being prone to burst into flames at inconvenient times. —LEJ
The IEA say that 50 % of EV models globally are SUVs and require larger batteries with higher energy density than lithium-ion batteries.
Darn: lithium-iron-phosphate batteries
A few corrections needed after reading the full PDF. Use of these vehicles has led to a total nationwide reduction of 2.5 billion gallons of gasoline from 2011 to 2021, with this fuel shift translating to an emissions reduction of nearly 20 million metric tons of GHGs. In 2021 alone, electric vehicles reduced gasoline consumption by nearly 700 million gallons, offsetting 5.5 million metric tons of GHGs, and reducing consumer fuel spending by approximately $1.4 billion
Your post said 2.1 and then you reduced it by 66% due to mix of fossil fuel for electricity generation. So somewhat fair, but the claim is “gallons of gasoline” and Tons of GHG. So being more conservative lets give then 50% credit of 2.5 or 1.25 Billion . That stretches the total impact to just under 4 days worth of savings. It also puts the Gas cost at around $12 . Still ridiculous numbers and proof of wasting money.
Dave, thanks for checking my figures. You say:
You are correct, the total should have been 2.5 billion gallons. However, I said nothing about tons of GHG, and I said “equivalent of gallons”, not gallons. I described it as a “real reduction” in fossil fuel use equivalent to 130 gallons.
Also, you’re wrong when you say:
Nope. It’s nowhere near 50%. It’s way less than a third, because for a conservative estimate I haven’t accounted for
• the inefficiency of burning coal or natural gas to make electricity (around 45% or so)
• transmission losses (~ 5%),
• losses in the inverter to charge the battery (another ~5%).
That puts me back even below where I started, even including the correct figure of 2.5 billion gallons. I’ve corrected the total in the head post to that value.
w.
A new emission standard called Euro 7 is under development and is expected to be implemented from 2025.
Who planned the “New Normal” is working to “save the face” (and money) introducing a new generation of “Green gasoline / diesel” vehicles.
By the way, VW just erased “Project Trinity” the next generation electric car!
Be patient.
I personally plan to replace my diesel VW Polo with a Euro 7 diesel (possibly the same model) in 2025.
Twenty three dollars? Its got to be more because you forgot to include the subsidies to wind and solar energy and the direct government spending on climate studies, climate models and such which are all part of the plan.
True. However, I couldn’t find hard figures on those, so I went with what I had.
w.
I still think Elon Musk would be wise to offload his Tesla shares to some unwitting fool investors before the crash occurs.
I suspect he’s way ahead of us all on that matter. The crash just isn’t yet imminent.
Yes,but you need to get out of your (large) positions before it becomes imminent.
Willis – Humor me. My skull is too thick to see how you got from “the gov study showing a saving of 690 million gallons of gas in 2021” – to – “fossil fuels provide 61% of the electricity in the US … so only about a third of that apparent savings is a real reduction in fossil fuel use, the equivalent of maybe 130 million gallons.”
They’ve calculated the replacement on a mile per mile basis, saying every mile driven by an EV reduces gasoline use by however much gasoline it takes an internal combustion engine to drive the same distance.
But the electric vehicles are largely fueled by fossil fuels, so it’s not true to say that they’ve reduced fossil fuel use by that much—they’ve just substituted coal and natural gas for gasoline.
Thus, the claimed reduction in gasoline is a mirage.
w.
No need to link the two points. They aren’t related.
How much gas EV’s are alleged to have saved, has no relationship to how electricity is being generated in the US.
This type of analysis will produce a distorted worst-case result.
1) Talking about the last 11 years “savings” for a technology that is on an exponential climb will always be biased by the slow ramp across the early years. US EV numbers are around 1% of total vehicles, and around 2-3% of new sales. So it is clear that savings are going to be north of 2 days a year going forward, which is nothing like 2 days in 11 years.
2) Equating gas/coal electricity generation efficiency to the average car is again biased low, an ICE in the average car is much less efficient at converting energy than a gas turbine.
3) It would be a fair conclusion that those that are buying EVs would have a higher likelihood of PV generation on the roofs of their homes and hence using the average fossil-fuel mix in electricity generation is once again biased high.
It would be a fair conclusion that those that are buying EVs would have a higher likelihood of PV generation on the roofs of their homes and hence using the average fossil-fuel mix in electricity generation is once again biased high.
Why is that a “fair conclusion,” and even if it is, as EVs become more popular don’t you think they’ll spread beyond the smug eco-weenies?
Who the hell wants to strap themselves and their kids into a potential, high risk mobile bomb? Green blob politicians will only see the folly in battery cars when a few have blown up and set everything around them on fire, including homes while being charged – a bit like smart motorways where people with a modicum of sense said there would be needless fatalities and they were correct
How many EVs have caught fire while underway? I though the fires occurred when the car was parked.
If a car can catch fire while sitting, it’s even more likely to catch fire while being driven, since energy being withdrawn from the battery heats it up.
a quick search turns up several. Too many to put links in response.
A model S during a test drive in Franceone on Santa Monica Blvd in traffic, pedestrian flagged down driverNetherlands right after driver put her child in a car seat (does that count as “under way”?)Kelllmunz Germany – error messages while driving then smokeLunner tunnel, Norway, driver noticed smoke while drivingMany more…I’ll leave one link from earlier this year https://insideevs.com/news/587514/tesla-model-y-catches-fire-driver-escapes/
“Who the hell wants to strap themselves and their kids into a potential, high risk mobile bomb?”
Apparently everyone who drives a gasoline powered car.
“From 2012 – 2021, there has been approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 210 million miles travelled. By comparison, data from the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and U.S. Department of Transportation shows that in the United States there is a vehicle fire for every 19 million miles travelled.”
You are 11 times more likely to die in a fire in a gasoline car than an electric car!
You forgot the billions saved in car repairs. The ICE is way too complicated and wasteful. I have had my Chevy Bolt for two years. It has had no services of any kind. The maintenance and gas saved goes a long way toward paying my $289 monthly lease payment. And I make a lot less than 100k a year.
And yet I’ve seen a Tesla on a flat-bed tow truck being returned to the dealer, and a shop in Costa Mesa that repairs EVs, with a lot full of Teslas. You might wish to touch wood.
As to an ICE being way too complicated, they used to be simple, and repaired by shade-tree mechanics. But then someone though it need to add all sorts of fancy stuff. I drive a pretty basic Honda Civic – the most complicate part is the AM/FM Radio / CD player.
The vast majority of routine maintenance items are for things that both ICE and EV’s have. Wind shield wipers, tires, suspension, windows etc.
This is a claim that many EV fans make. Unfortunately real world data does not support this fantasy either.
That “complicated” engine will outlast your EV’s battery and will cost a lot less to replace when it does wear out.
Your maintenance savings are for the most part completely imaginary. Your gas savings are entirely from the fact that you aren’t paying any taxes to support the roads you are using.
Yes, the EV guys are currently “free riders” on the system us ICE people pay for.
If EVs ever penetrate as much as the fanboys hope there will inevitably be an avalanche of new taxes on them.
Someone has to pay for the roads boys.
Yep. Fuel Duty and Vehicle Excise Duty (Road Tax) brought in £37 billion to the UK Treasury in 2019-20. EVs are currently exempt from paying these.
Minor typo I think
”… hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) and electric vehicles (EVs) “saved about 690 million gallons of gasoline.”
” … so only about a third of that apparent savings is a real reduction in fossil fuel use, the equivalent of maybe 130 million gallons.”
Should be 230 million gallons.
Great analysis as usual though. Best to you Willis.
True, fixed, thanks. I hate typos.
w.
Willis, you state:
“… our insane Governor’s response is to forbid selling gasoline-powered cars after 2035 …”
Last I heard, he was only going to forbid the sale of new gasoline-powered cars after 2035. I don’t know if he is going to try to do that via an Executive Order, or get the compliant legislature to pass a bill. Best would be to put it on the ballot.
Otherwise, a great article. Keep ’em coming.
A lot of people, and especially climate alarmists, have zero appreciation for the scope of what’s involved to switch off fossil fuels. One would think anyone who has ever driven a car on an American highway might get it, but nope.
Willis,
Nice article. Have enjoyed your work for years. There might be another simplified comparison to “drive” the point home even more. Since 61% of the power on the electric grid is from fossil fuels, each KWh of electricity used by an electric car in America would emit on average a certain amount of CO2 from the energy source. It is not clear to me that with all of the inefficiences in the distribution and use of that electricity in an electric car, that CO2 emissions would be reduced that much. I mean that is what all the screaming by the worshipers at the altar of global warming is about….the devil gas CO2. If you start with a comparison of what it takes to put shaft HP to the wheels so it is an apples to apples comparison. The steps would look something like: coal, natural gas—>power plant—> step up transformer—-> high voltage power line—> substation to medium voltage—>distribution to local pole—> final voltage (120,240)—> rectifier to convert to DC—> losses to charge the battery—> losses to discharge the battery—> losses to variable frequency drive—>losses to electric motor to convert to shaft HP. All those inefficiences add up and may produce a suprising answer for the greens.
Nothing surprises the greens, least of all facts.
Unless we can stop the insane war on fossil fuels, it is going to bankrupt us all, driving energy costs through the roof, leaving low-income people shivering in the winter, and denying poor countries the energy they need to escape grinding poverty.
There’s only one solution. Go woke with Tyler-
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/other/i-identify-as-rich-satirical-clip-highlights-the-struggles-within-the-rich-identifying-community/ar-AA14XduY
This is certainly reminiscent of Warren Buffet’s statement that the only reason to build wind farms is to harvest the subsidies.
I like the background pictures on the graphs above. Battery powered electric vehicles (BEV) have been sold to the public as high technology. But, they actually are from the early 20th Century.
In the 1910s my Great-grandmother owned a BEV automobile. So did Mrs. Henry Ford Sr. At that time about one third of the vehicles on the road were BEVs.
They were very popular with women such as my Great-grandmother and Mrs. Ford because ICE vehicles had to be started by hand cranking the engine which was taxing and dangerous. The built in electric starter motor was invented in 1911 and incorporated into production vehicles beginning with Cadillac.
By the beginning of the 1920s starters were in almost all new ICE vehicles. And the superiority of the ICE technology drove BEVs into specialized niches such as warehouses, mines, and golf courses.
I agree that all EV subsidies should end.
EVs will eventually replace ICE vehicles, providing idiotic Leftist governments stop trying to impossibly replace fossil fuel, nuclear and hydro power with wind and solar.
EV technology is now far superior to ICE in performance and manufacturing.efficiency. and the gap will continue to widen as robotics and battery technology continue to improve.
My EV is amazing, and I’ll never buy another ICE car again when I have supercar performance for 1/20th the cost…
Until they can get battery range to 500 miles, charging times down to 5 minutes, eliminate the battery degradation that occurs at both high and low temperatures and keep electrics from self igniting, EVs will never be more than a niche vehicle.
There is no evidence that any of those things are going to happen.
BTW, if you select your vehicle based solely on it’s 0 to 40mph rating, then you are probably still a teenager.
Mark-san:
350 miles is more than enough.
Many people love fast cars, which doesn’t make me a teenager…BTW, it’s 0~60mph in 2 seconds, not 0~40mph.
if you’ve never gone 0~60 in 2 seconds,mtrynit. it’s an exhilarating experience.
15 minutes of TESLA supercharging gives 200 miles—range isn’t a problem for current EVs.
There are also the advantages of: no oil changes, no spark plugs, changing out clutches, differentials, transmissions, head gaskets, fuel injectors, and 2,000 parts other parts that wear out or break in ICE cars, very low running and maintenance costs, massive trunk room, no transmission hump inside the cabin, a very quiet ride, etc.
Perhaps the biggest advantage for EVs is that they only have 14 major components during assembly, while ICE vehicle have thousands.
Eventually, EVs will be 100% assembled by robots (now 90%) and ICE manufacturers will be out of business as EV manufacturers won’t have the UAW Sword of Damocles hanging over them..
If they’re so dang wonderful, why do they have to be subsidized to sell?
w.
I agree with you, Willis-san!
End all EV subsidies and let the market pick winners and losers, and the speed of adoption of new technologies.
Never leave it to government hacks who will invariably get it wrong.
Can’t tell from your name if you are in Japan or not but it was interesting in their Commentary on EVs, 30th Jan 2022, the IEA said
In Japan EV sales barely increased with market share remaining below 1% over the last three years
Dave-san:
Yes, I do live in Japan.
Tesla has about a 70% market share of the Japanese import EV market and their sales are doubling every year.
Hybrids are still the fastest growing market segment but will eventually transition to 100% EVs.
Most people are NOT like you. Both our Honda SUVs only have 350 mile range, (Pilot and CRV), and never needed more. We always stop every 200 miles or so for a quick break, (which is every 3 hours of driving.)
It doesn’t make sense to make an electric car with a 500 mile range when most ICE cars can only do about 350 miles anyways. (Although an electric truck should have 500 mile range minimum, if you want to pull a trailer).
When we stop we don’t just fill up but take a bathroom break and grab a beverage. Always about 15 to 20 minutes, not much different than the time to recharge a Tesla on a supercharger.
Willis,
It could be argued that all of the electricity for charging EVs is fossil fuel sourced.
EVs are an incremental load on the grid which does not arise with ICEs. In most places all of the available zero-CO2 power is always maxed out as it is prioritised onto the grid (exceptions are places like France and Norway). So the incremental load of an EV will be met by the incremental producer – probably gas, possibly coal.
It could be argued that all of the electricity for charging EVs is fossil fuel sourced.
It could be so argued, and the argument would be wrong. In the U.S., roughly 30% of the electricity comes from non-fossil sources: nuke, wind, hydro, solar. Where I live, only 3% of our juice comes from fossil fuels.
Has anyone or any company ever manufactured a 100% “green” EV?. I mean every material, part, panel, glass, plastic, rubber, bearings, motors, circuits, PCB’s, tech, satnav, entertainment, climate control, carpets, seats, seatbelts,lights, brakes, steering, suspension, drivetrains — every part of the car, made only from 100% “certified” renewable energy? And the car assembled in a 100% renewable powered factory? And then tested for crash compliance in a 100% renewable powered crash test facility?
No oil or grease either so no lubrication of moving parts allowed.
Think about bringing an EV to production in a 100% de-carbonized world? Then charging only from 100% renewable energy. — Then you will have a true “green car” And you could drive your green car around, and feel good that you have done your bit to save the planet —– or you could walk..
RV’s worked out years ago to simply use standard 30 and 50 amp household sockets. These are available at tens of thousands of campsites. It takes so long to charge might as well camp overnight.
So the EV industry comes along and invents new incompatible plugs.
I prefer real-world discussions, so here goes.
The typical EV these days has a 65 kWh battery (on average), and the owner will typically charge 80% of that (call it 50 kWh) on a 240v/32A circuit. The circuit will run at 80% of rated capacity, making it 240v/25A, or 6 kW per hour. Thus, a typical charge will rake 8-1/3 hours.
Increase that to a 50A circuit (running at 40A) at 240v, and the charge time will drop to about 5 hours. These times are further reduced by more powerful chargers running at higher voltages and amperages, but whether those are applicable depends on the EV’s on-board equipment.
That example of home charging is from 10% to 90% charge which would be very rare for us city folk. We fill up our ICE vehicles once a week, (with similar range), and also plug them in at night, (in the winter, so they start in the morning). So taking a few seconds to plug in an EV nightly to top up the charge, would actually be way easier and quicker than going to a gas station, wait in line for a pump to be free, then standing five minutes in the cold to refuel, and then wait in line to pay the cashier, then heading back home. (Yes, it will costs a couple thousand dollars upfront for that convenience and savings.)
(You can set the charging app to stop the charge at 80% to ensure you get the “one million miles” out of your battery, which would last most people a lifetime. Both our 2003 Honda SUV’s have 250,000 km each for a total of 500,000 km over 20 years which is about 300,000 miles. 60 years of driving from age 16 to 76 would be 900,000 miles.) 1 Million Miles on a Tesla
Price out a 100 feet of 50 Amp cable and connectors to charge your EV. Forget catalytic converters. The big money will be in stealing EV extension cords.
The vast majority of EVs are charged in garages at home on at 240v, 32A circuits, the same as electric clothes dryers. Yes, there are exceptions, but I’m talking about the rule. A 50A extension cord costs about $4.25 per foot.
It’s a big world. People so all kinds of things. I’m sure there are some people who use a 100-foot, 50A cord, but they’d be outliers.
a short message from an EV driver. I got no tax credit on my last EV. I paid a lot of money for the car. I don’t care what you drive as long as it doesn’t stink and you don’t open up the exhaust.
The tax credit is a political party thing. Worthless as a policy but then can you name something else the government does…I’d gladly see them support nuclear energy production.
Don’t blame EV cars for energy policy, You can blame unscrupulous politicians and unobservant voters.
If you have a garage the ev driving experience is pretty good. thanks for your time.
btw, Willis are you back on twitter yet?
I’m definitely not blaming EVs for anything, it is, as you say, politicians, voters, and climate alarmists doing the damage.
As to Twitter, not reinstated yet. I’ve read that they had ~ 60k suspended accounts. After the first week they’d reinstated ~ 12,000 of them. I figure they’re doing them either in order of size, or in order of longest suspended first mended … and either way I’m near the end of the list.
Ah, well. The most important lesson I learned in 20 years of living on remote tropical Pacific islands is:
“The universe truly doesn’t give a damn what I want to have happen next.”
Once I accepted that, my life got a whole lot better.
Thanks for your concern.
w.
I don’t care what you drive as long as it doesn’t stink and you don’t open up the exhaust.
Translation: If I don’t see the smokestack, it’s all good.