Comments by "MacAdvisor" (@MacAdvisor) on "Out of Spec Reviews" channel.

For the Love of G-D and all things holy, could you pease STOP BURYING THE EFFING LEDE. All the caveats and parentheticals in stating your conclusions swamp the conclusions. Stop it. Say the limitations AFTER you've told the story and made your point. Put your geekdom away and be a showman.
1
@garrysorbie1948 No ifs, and, or buts about it, we are going electric. We will build the chargers as we going.
1
@warpedone4963 "How much land is needed for the wind turbines or solar panels." An insignificant and trivial amount. There are some 3.7 million square miles in the US. One square mile will deliver
1
@mikesimmerson8331 Complete the scenario. As prices go up, new production comes online to meet increased demand lowering prices. Demand for electricity is higher today than 100 years ago, but it far cheaper in constant dollars than in 1920.
1
@AkioWasRight Yeah, Germany is not having any problems with their fossil fuels right now as they try to stop importing Russian supplies. Lithium, like most materials that experience a surge, has seen an increase in price. However, as used in batteries, it is fully recyclable and we are moving to batteries that don't use it.
1
@Noneyabiz001 You will. The question is not if, but when. 15 years from now, the problem getting fuel, the high cost, the ease of electrics, and the regulatory burden will force all but the super rich to convert.
1
@warpedone4963 They could use the roofs of the 60,000 homes to provide the vast bulk of the power for those homes. They could also use nuclear power. They could build a damn. They could use geothermal. They are many, many alternatives.
1
@Nathan-xx5wt Both are useful and should be used. Just recently, March 29th, wind turbines generated more electricity in the US than was provided by nuclear and coal power, than 2,000 gigawatt-hours.
1
@waynerenee3809 Industry existed long before fossil fuels and will exist long after its use is discontinued. The government won't "force" you, though it most certainly could, it will simply make using fossil fuels ever more uneconomical. There are Amish who still plow their fields with horses, but that isn't what modern farms do. They will all convert to EVs as EVs become the more economical choice.
1
@waynerenee3809 Really? Coal has been used since 1200? Really, oh wow. I didn't know. Of course I know that and, yet, it is still used today. The widespread and increasing use of coal by an ever growing population supportable by the industrial revolution is why we can trace the climate change issue to fossil fuels. The temperature changes follow the rise in CO2 in the air following the increasing use of coal. Man has burned wood before that. The problem happened when we reached the point we were releasing more CO2 than we were sequestering. At first, the difference was small and relatively trivial, but by the previous century, it was significant and increasing almost asymptotically. That we do burn coal doesn't mean we should be. We need to move to the post industrial economy based on electricity created by renewable and green generation sources.
1
@waynerenee3809 "You people"? You mean us informed, science-based involved voters who are trying to save the planet? Yes, since before even 1962's The Silent Spring, I've been warning about environmental dangers.
1