Electric Cars Require Fewer Jobs to Build

Unemployable.

I've been in traffic court three or four times in the past decade, only ever saw a person argue their way out of a speeding ticket...one time. because he brought several pieces of hard evidence and print outs that there was missing/obscured sign-age in the area.

Just talking or begging or arguing without some kind of tangible evidence of a concrete plausible mistake or error on the state or the officer's part seems to get nowhere.

s now) and matching upgrades to the entire power grid - at huge public expe nse.

."

needed, by equating kWh per gallon of gas to electrical power saying they " assume" EVs are four times more efficient thermally...

riven. Most EVs get 4 to 5 mi/kWh, the rest is trivial. I did this once a while back, but here it is again.

of electricity were generated at utility-scale electricity generation facil ities in the United States."

la model 3 which is also not a bad number for the Nissan Leaf I believe. T his value will improve as batteries and motors and electronics improve.

The mile/kWh assumption is questionable. Quite a lot of the gasoline now be ing burned is burnt in larger (and heavier) cars than the Tesla 3, and the ir air resistance and rolling resistance (heat generated by the deformation of the tyres as they go round) means that they need more kWh per mile.

Light commercial vehicles do more miles per year than private cars, and tha t's probably enough to account for the difference between the Slate's 1111 TWh and your 805 TWh.

It is comforting that your completely independent estimate is only 30% lowe r than the Slate's figure. t makes Phil estimate of something roughly an or der of magnitude higher even less plausible.

r 4 times now)" which is clearly different from the Slate's figure.

he third world where Phil lives it's a different issue.

Australia is an advanced industrial country. Life expectancy here is higher than in the US - we are fourth on the international league table and the U S is thirty-first.

It's also got marginally higher CO2 emissions per head - 16.2 metric tons p er head per year - than the US or Canada at 15 and 14.9 tons per head respe ctively.

In that sense it is depressingly first world.

on.

Not in the bits where I lived from 1971 to 1993.

I've heard guys in tech complain that they don't want to work in an office with women because they cause "too much drama."

...

As unemployable as most 76-year-olds, unfortunately. I do get very occasional job interviews, but you do have to be the only possible candidate to get hired at my age. I've got specialised skills, but it's been a while since I exercised them for money.

try

eas I

ed

ere.

i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has littl e incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue summo ns. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, ther e is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions they don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

cop. How is this different?

Who has to go to court for camera offenses, the driver or the owner?

Do they have good footage of the driver's face?

ny

ng

by a

Exactly, guilty until proven innocent.

Who cares, the judge would just say "Your car doesn't seem to have been reported stolen lately so if someone else was driving your car at the time feel free to have them re-reimburse you"

It's a civil infraction, not even a misdemeanor, nobody in the WORLD got time to listen to you present goofy arguments to the court like you are Perry Mason.

I've seen so much footage of absolutely terrible drivers who shouldn't be on the road or who are clearly drunk out of their gourd blast thru red lights narrowly missing hitting other cars on those replays, just in the few times I've been in traffic court, that at least in my area I can't say I get too worked up about them not getting a proper Perry Mason jury trial vs. just getting billed a hundred bucks automatically every time they do that.

I got nailed by a red light cam one time in my life, there were a number of people in court the last time that had like six in a single month! Goddamn!

e on.

Maybe where you lived they didn't watch football. Every group in which I'v e discussed EV charging they talk about how during the commercial breaks th e tea kettles all come on at once and the grid dips nearly to the point of blacking out.

All I can do is report the facts as provided by the people who live in the UK. Who am I to challenge their facts no matter how implausible they sound ?

Clearly the UK and Australia have a woefully inadequate electrical infrastr ucture and will never be capable of widespread EV adoption.

Someone pointed out to me that it is impossible to build enough EV fast cha rging to allow trips since the towns in between the major destinations don' t have enough capacity to build the required charging facilities. I don't recall the town names, but it looks like Tarcutta is about the only place i n the middle to put a charging station between Sydney and Melbourne. Not m uch of a town.

Yeah, looks like Australia is screwed for at least a hundred years.

to try

nd

ideas I

sued

hat

red

here.

.. i.e. not at every intersection. Usually they are used at trouble spots.

a profit sharing basis with the local jurisdiction. So the company has lit tle incentive to be accurate, rather they have every incentive to issue sum mons. There is no police officer reviewing anything. More importantly, th ere is no accuser to question in court. In fact, in many jurisdictions the y don't even give you a trial, it's a hearing with a review board.

a cop. How is this different?

lol! That's a great court system you got there. "I don't care if you are guilty or not. You are the one I have in front of me!" Reminds me of Oliv er Twist.

LOL... here it is a bit more important. Loosing you license to drive is n ot a trivial matter and tickets result in points toward exactly that, loosi ng your license.

I'm willing to believe you are not accurately representing the matter where you live.

Oh, I don't doubt America will become a tyranny; Americans prefer to ignore large ones at their doorstep in preference to hunting for tyrannical dust-bunnies under the bed

If the Federal government can find perfectly adequate legal justification for regularly dumping water on prisoner's faces upside down then I'm pretty sure a state government can find legal justification to not care whether a traffic cam had a good view of a driver's face.

I'm definitely curious as to where you believe that line of reasoning with respect to "you can't really be sure it was me driving the car, can you" would lead if presented in an actual traffic court and I'd like to know if you try it, though.

Don't know how to impress on you the concept of "They don't care, dude..." vis a vis the court system and that someone might not-steal your car and then run it through red lights five times and cause you to lose your license

State governments don't have any ability to make broad law-enforcement policy decisions like that and force every police department in the state to obey them.

America has thousands of different police departments that operate mostly autonomously and they all have their own policies and rules, it's not uncommon to see police cars with logos from five different police forces sitting next to each other at the coffee shop. State police, local police, county sheriff's office, National Park service police, Amtrak police, etc. every one of them has the legal authority to cuff you and arrest you

The state government can decide what the state police do. The bulk of purists are carried out by local police. I don't think local police have ever all agreed in unison to not _ever_ do it, in any state

Well, here they have to be calibrated and certified. There is no reason to assume that they e.g. indicate more speed than there really is, to then issue more tickets. Furthermore, 5% is subtracted from the indicated value as an allowance for any error before calculating the fine.

Here the owner of the car is responsible for such offenses and it is not important who drove the car. But you can present evidence that the car was stolen or rented to someone else at the time the offense was made.

Because there are other aspects to it. Chasing such people on the public roads seriously endangers other people who are not involved at all. Sometimes it is done in criminal cases, but not for traffic offenses.

I hear that in the USA people are even begging to keep their guns, that does not make it a reasonable thing. Of course there are always cases where people run away that maybe could have been caught, but does that offset the cases where innocent people were hurt or their property damages because of a mad car chase?

In fact, more and more traffic cams have license plate recognition and they also flag stolen cars and searched criminals.

Sure it happens that people are caught who have collected like 50.000 in traffic fines and have not paid them, but it is not so easy to get away with them. Most irresponsible drivers are not criminals in a stolen car, they are just salesmen in a hurry to the next appointment. (let's leave it in the middle what they are selling)

Unbelievable story, do you really think that those who watch football drink tea, more likely they drink beer :-)

I do not believe that the UK network is in so bad condition that fetching the next beer can from the fridge and hence turning on the fridge lamp would cause harm to the network :-).

A few decades ago I heard a story from some steam power plant operators who were watching some of those decade long running TV-series episode and when it was nearing the end, the operators turned up the steam, pressure, so that they could respond to the increased kettle loading when the episode had just ended.