Not if you do insane things like forcing people to stop cooking with gas or forcing pizza parlors to cook pizza with electricity - ick. I am 100% behind minimizing pollution and I abhor our overuse of plastic packaging. When my daughter was in the "Barbie" phase, I flatly refused to buy packages that contained a hundred tiny pieces of stuff, where each was made of plastic and then individually lassoed with plastic and stapled to a cardboard backing. Not only did it aggravate me to have to take it apart, it aggravated me permanently because the tiny pieces ended up all over the house. OK, maybe the cat had something to do with that. It wasn't all my daughter's fault.
I am also 100% against reducing my standard of living to that of peasants of the 17th century or even current day Afghanistan. There are very efficient types of energy available today. Natural gas and nuclear are two of them. Fleet vehicles like the PO and city vehicles can use natural gas. Relatively inexpensive with good distribution systems already in place. These vehicles come home at the end of a shift and so there is no problem with refueling them. And unlike EVs, they still work in the winter in northern climates. We don't need to ra** the earth for the metals needed to make batteries. We don't need to rebuild our roads and bridges to handle vehicles weighing twice as much as they were built to handle. We don't have to figure out how to efficiently recycle used batteries. Do some research. Find out how many EV charging stations the government has built with the ~8 billion dollars they were allocated during the past 3 years. Compare that to the number built by Tesla and at what cost.
Our electric grid is the most vulnerable part of our infrastructure. An enemy can send us to the dark ages in an instant and you probably think all vehicles should be electric. I guess you live a life where you can just skip going to the office or taking the kid to the doctor's if the power company shuts off the power to your EV charger because there is a heat wave or something happened to their energy source. Well, like it or not, electricity is currently primarily generated by coal and natural gas and some oil. Someday, solar and wind would become more efficient but TODAY, as we speak, nuclear could easily fill the gap - except that it takes more than a decade to get a new plant approved so I guess you'll have to ride your bike for a few years. Unless we can figure out a better way to distribute electricity, we need to generate it as close to where it is used as is feasible. How close to a coal fired plant are you willing to live? Small nukes have gotten feasible and very safe. The accident in Japan a few years ago was totally preventable. All the Japanese had to do was to tell the world what the problem was and help would have arrived immediately to prevent the leak. The further the distance electricity travels, the more of it that gets lost. So it is a very inefficient fuel in that regard. Also, generating it closer to where it is used, minimizes the damage that terrorists or enemies or even natural disaster can do to the country at large. Instead of taking out 5 power plants, terrorists have to take out 100 and destroy thousands of miles of power lines rather than just a few major ones.
Our goals are actually very much in sync. What deviates is how we think the problems should be solved.
www.foxnews.com
