When Does it Become Cost Prohibited?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Around here (New England) diesel ran about 10-20% above gasoline. Given higher caloric density it was less expensive to use diesel than gas even with higher initial cost for the engine. A few years ago Europe started to convert away from diesel for land transport. (They had a greater %age of diesel cars than us to start). So European demand for road diesel has fallen. However with the advent of Covid the price of diesel c/w gas has risen faster. This trend is markly accelerated since Putin’s war. Don’t understand why.
 
ASD
A general thought already mentioned by many ----

As much fun as a cruise to AK and fishing is to many of us, staying South is not unappealing either. You could easily use that new genset, anchor out a lot and have a ball staying in BC.

We've worn ourselves out catching fish in BC, with lots of productive fishing spots to try out especially once North of CC. By doing this you could easily save several $000 on fuel costs.

But if you're fuel challenged for a round trip from a US fuel fill, a few hundred gallons in a cockpit bladder would ease the pain of BC fuel costs. Keep your speed to less than 8 knots and maybe you could get your range up to 800+ miles.
 
Agree with SC. As a fallback position from going to SE AK, the central and North BC coast is great, especially on the outside from Klemtu to Prince Rupert.....Estevan, Campania, SW of Gil Island just to name a few spots. Lots to see and the fishing has always been good for us in past years.
 
Think about the total cost to own your boat and then evaluate the fuel cost. OK in my case I tend to use professionals to do most of the work on the boat so this costs way more than the fuel does, even at $6/gal.
 
Crew wanted! No pay. Long hours. Miserable working conditions.
 

Attachments

  • Green Power.jpg
    Green Power.jpg
    58.5 KB · Views: 21
Between fuel prices and the squeeze these new Marina organizations are putting on boaters, there is a faction of us that will have to stop boating or change our expectations. Dockage is climbing because demand is up. The Baby Boomers keep coming and boaters with deep pockets will keep businesses like Safe Harbor and others in profits. No one is building new marinas to improve supply so demand is king.
 
Between fuel prices and the squeeze these new Marina organizations are putting on boaters, there is a faction of us that will have to stop boating or change our expectations. Dockage is climbing because demand is up. The Baby Boomers keep coming and boaters with deep pockets will keep businesses like Safe Harbor and others in profits. No one is building new marinas to improve supply so demand is king.

Don't worry, the recession is coming. There will be plenty of boats on the hard in a few years.

Ted
 
I look at the cost of diesel fuel a bit differently.

I am always amazed at how inexpensive fuel (gasoline, diesel, petrol) is, once you consider it has taken hundreds of millions of years to produce the raw product.
Then it has to be extracted from up to 10,000 feet under the ground. Then it is shipped around the world, and refined in a 200 million dollar refinery, then delivered to your local neighborhood.

People complain about paying $5/gallon for it, when they pay more for a bottle of water.

We've had it for too cheap too long.
He has a point. Consider what you pay for a litre, (or quart, if you're US), of milk. Yet the cows produce it almost for free, and it does not take much processing. And yes, compared to fuel, the price of the bottled water at the supermarket is ridiculous..!
 
He has a point. Consider what you pay for a litre, (or quart, if you're US), of milk. Yet the cows produce it almost for free, and it does not take much processing. And yes, compared to fuel, the price of the bottled water at the supermarket is ridiculous..!

Yet the cows produce it almost for free, and it does not take much processing.

You need to buy some dairy cows and I would be happy to help you do that if for no other reason than the entertainment value of watching you give it a go.....
 
Yet the cows produce it almost for free, and it does not take much processing.

You need to buy some dairy cows and I would be happy to help you do that if for no other reason than the entertainment value of watching you give it a go.....
No need to go that far. I know exactly what is involved in the process klee wyck. I grew up on a farm and was milking them by hand by the age of ten, and with machines by the age of thirteen. I'm aware the cost of the farm running, plant, machinery, fodder, farmer's time, etc is not inconsiderable. But the point is well made that we pay much more per volume for virtually any other fluid other than fuel - even in places other than the US and Arab states that produce most of the oil.
 
..You need to buy some dairy cows and I would be happy to help you do that if for no other reason than the entertainment value of watching you give it a go.....
Spare a thought for "almond milk" producers. Imagine having to work your way through hundreds of trees squeezing "milk" out of almonds grown thereon, twice a day lest the nursing or pregnant almonds become painfully distended with "milk".
 
He has a point. Consider what you pay for a litre, (or quart, if you're US), of milk. Yet the cows produce it almost for free, and it does not take much processing. And yes, compared to fuel, the price of the bottled water at the supermarket is ridiculous..!

It's an easy quip to make (look how expensive water is!) but I have to disagree. I buy bottled water at Costco, mainly for convenience, not because I don't like my tap water. Forty 0.5L bottles for about $5 or about $0.95/gal. I don't drink much milk and buy about 1/2 gal week for two of us at approx. $4.50/gal. Neither milk nor water is free. They have to be sourced, packaged, delivered, and sold at retail for a profit. ( I don't think cows are cheap to own, all things considered).

But I buy a lot more gas each week than milk and water. Also the amount of gas or energy that people consume is pretty fixed. You can make small changes, but the overall demand is mostly fixed and the volume is much higher than milk and water which I could stop completely if I wanted. Bottom line, I don't think it's a great comparison. I also don't agree that just because US fuel has historically been cheaper than in many other countries, we should stop complaining and be happy to pay more.
 
The price of some of those items varies widely by location. NEtrawler58 mentioned $4.50/gal for milk. Around here, a gallon of milk isn't much over $2. We have more dairy farms in the area than some other places and land for a farm is relatively cheap here, so costs to get the milk on a store shelf are much lower, keeping the cost down.
 
When I was a kid [late 50's, early 60's]... milk was 5 quarts for a dollar. Gallon gas was 29 +/- cents per gallon. Diesel 19 +/- cents per gal. Brand new 1968 Oldsmobile Cutlass S Convertible cost $2,875 +/- [I well remember when mom got her first new car ever - and, she loved it!]. In 1960 a used 1952 Ford Sunliner Convertible was $250 [I was there when dad paid cash for it at Sturdivant's used car auto lot]. And, oh yeah global population count, then... Three [3] Billion +/-

That's a few of my clear memories. Oh yes... one more: House values increased as super slow pace and a house was to live in - not paint and flip at obscene profit levels.

Soooo... figuring the timespan of 1959 to 2022 [63 years] what's the outcome, the significance to yesterday prices as compared to todays? Well... think of it this way..63 years before 1959 it was 1896. No cars, no planes, no phones, no radios, no TV's - well, you get the picture. And, oh yeah global population count, now... Eight [8] Billion +/-

Now look into the future: Say... just 20 years from now [2042] I'll be 90 and you'll be ??. Let your mind wander how things will have changed [i.e., be]!

IMO: Global change during the next 20 years will eclipse the volume and scope of change that occurred in the last 63 years... which eclipsed the change over the previous several hundred years.

In other words: Human race is constantly [forever - in terms of humanity's existence] compressing civilization's advancement time schedules. Well... the human race and civilization can withstand this. However, planet Earth's Natural System absolutely cannot!

Think about it! :facepalm:

PS: Due to a climate warmth reduction business of mine; I am often in contact with climate engineers, climate scientists, climate physicists, Chemist Ph.D.'s, University Professors, Sandia National Labs and inventors of atmospheric CO2 separators. I feel that I can guarantee... Earth's Natural System is in deep trouble for maintaining human living conditions over the long run [i.e., within this century].
 
I'm guessing you didn't really take the time to read my post. I never said there is anything wrong with a company making a profit. I'm not an oil or gas expert, but I can make a reasonable assumption that the cost of crude oil is one of many cost components that go into producing gas. So you may make an assumption that if oil doubles so should gas and maybe much of the public does as well. But if that's not the truth and oil companies are doubling the price of gas when their production costs have gone up 20%, then they are price gouging and taking advantage of the situation. You can argue that any company should be able to charge whatever the market will bear and maximize their profits, but some items like food and energy should be regulated. (And I happen to hate govt regulation!)


So, who said their costs only went up by 20%? And is you're selling a widget and your production goes up, there is some economy of scale and likely you'll produce the product for less. And, perhaps that's the time to keep the price up to make up for previous or future losses. And the oil companies don't set the price of oil any more than they set the price of gas at the pump.
 
I also find the howling against the oil companies interesting. Their stock prices have done very poorly compared to most stock sectors over the past 10 to 20 years, for various reasons so I am not trying to oversimplify a complex subject. They are finally catching a break, so good for them. And yes, the analogies people are making about the unit cost of oil compared to other consumable fluids are correct.

I am 100 percent in favor of alternate energy sources. Anyone who is not has their head in the sand. The reality is, it takes time for this transition. We live in Hydrocarbon world not just for our fuels, but our everyday living items that are made out of this stuff including our boats, cars, houses, and every day products.

SeeVee, I often don't agree with many of your posts and that is fine, but I think your past 2 posts on this subject have been dead on.
 
Last edited:
Funny, here in the heart of Ag country, the price of a gallon of milk (most places) and a gallon of gas are just about exactly the same lately. About $3.69 a gallon.
 
I also find the howling against the oil companies interesting. Their stock prices have done very poorly compared to most stock sectors over the past 10 to 20 years, for various reasons so I am not trying to oversimplify a complex subject. They are finally catching a break, so good for them. And yes, the analogies people are making about the unit cost of oil compared to other consumable fluids are correct.

I am 100 percent in favor of alternate energy sources. Anyone who is not has their head in the sand. The reality is, it takes time for this transition. We live in Hydrocarbon world not just for our fuels, but our everyday living items that are made out of this stuff including our boats, cars, houses, and every day products.

SeeVee, I often don't agree with many of your posts and that is fine, but I think your past 2 posts on this subject have been dead on.

:thumb::thumb:
 
I am 100 percent in favor of alternate energy sources. Anyone who is not has their head in the sand. The reality is, it takes time for this transition. We live in Hydrocarbon world not just for our fuels, but our everyday living items that are made out of this stuff including our boats, cars, houses, and every day products.

While I so want to do something on all our commercial buildings and our home, I'm dealing with 20 year paybacks still and now a state changing the rules on fuel buyback by FPL.

However, we are now buying all hybrid cars for our businesses. Trucks and other still waiting. However, here's an interesting article on auto comparisons for the average commuter.

Sun Sentinel compared costs of running the various vehicles types at a Vehicle Cost Calculator website operated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

These comparisons confirmed what consumers might suspect: Fully electric vehicles are cheapest to operate.

Using the Vehicle Cost Calculator, we compared the cost to drive four 2021 sedans, each rated slightly more than 200 horsepower, in city conditions for a week. To keep the comparison simple, we assumed that gas would cost $4.30 a gallon and that none of the travel would be on highways. We assumed that each car would travel about 200 miles, or 28.6 miles a day.

Also, we assumed that the vehicle would be charged at home at prevailing residential utility rates (currently about 12 cents per kilowatt hour). Using charging stations located along highways can be much more expensive and significantly increase costs.

Here are the results:

The all-electric Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus rear-wheel drive was by far the cheapest vehicle to run, with an annual fuel (or electricity) cost of $281 a year, or $5.40 a week.

A plug-in hybrid, Honda Clarity, was second-cheapest, with an annual electricity cost of $363 or $6.99 a week. Because this plug-in hybrid can run on electricity for 47 miles before switching to gas-engine mode, no gasoline was consumed in our example.

A traditional hybrid, Toyota Avalon XLE Hybrid, cost considerably more to drive. The Avalon used 4.7 gallons of gas, or $20 worth, each week, increasing the annual fuel cost to $1,041 for 242 gallons. Still, the electric motor helped the Avalon achieve a stellar 43 mpg.

Finally, the gas-only Lexus ES 250 consumed eight gallons a week, or $34.40 worth. Over a year, that’s 416 gallons at an annual cost of $1,791. Fuel efficiency fell to 25 mpg, still better than many of the cars, trucks and vans on the roads today.

Now I'll convert to our choice on Honda's. I'll compare Clarity to Accord Hybrid to Accord Gas.

Clarity starts at $33,740. Using numbers above $363 per year for fuel.

An Accord Hybrid starts at $27,320. Using the numbers, the Accord gets 47 mpg in town would use slightly less gas in the example, for annual fuel of $970.

An Accord Gas starts at $26,120. It gets 30/38 mpg so in the same scenario would use $1,500 of fuel.

Now, clearly distances change things. However, the scenario above matches our business use well. That says for about $600 for hybrid (more items standard so less than the $1100) we save $500 a year on fuel. We could spend another $4000 or so and save another $600 a year. Since we keep company cars only 5 years we don't do that. That's why we're buying Honda Accord Hybrids and Honda Insight Hybrids which are smaller and get 55/49 mileage.

In actual use, we've reduced our gas consumption by nearly 50%, even including employee's personal use of the cars, so doing better than the above numbers. To me, this is a big breaking point where electric is making sense both ecologically and financially. Bring the Clarity price down by $2200 or so and we'd be using them.

Ford is doing amazing things with their E-Transport and other vehicles, if they could only get the parts to produce them. Mercedes a bit behind. We have delivery vans and would love to see electric make sense for them.

So many people yelled it would never happen when it just wasn't happening yet. However, when we get serious, we slowly make progress. Now need to speed it up. Our first great example was catalytic converters and better fuel economy and had we not made those moves, most of our largest cities would be nearly uninhabitable from the smog today. The auto switch is happening. Trucks next. Boats later. And I'm so hopeful we'll hit the magic to make solar on every home and business practical. I'm pleased to see some movement on large retail stores. We do have a couple we're putting them on.
 
While I so want to do something on all our commercial buildings and our home, I'm dealing with 20 year paybacks still and now a state changing the rules on fuel buyback by FPL.

However, we are now buying all hybrid cars for our businesses. Trucks and other still waiting. However, here's an interesting article on auto comparisons for the average commuter.

Sun Sentinel compared costs of running the various vehicles types at a Vehicle Cost Calculator website operated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

These comparisons confirmed what consumers might suspect: Fully electric vehicles are cheapest to operate.

Using the Vehicle Cost Calculator, we compared the cost to drive four 2021 sedans, each rated slightly more than 200 horsepower, in city conditions for a week. To keep the comparison simple, we assumed that gas would cost $4.30 a gallon and that none of the travel would be on highways. We assumed that each car would travel about 200 miles, or 28.6 miles a day.

Also, we assumed that the vehicle would be charged at home at prevailing residential utility rates (currently about 12 cents per kilowatt hour). Using charging stations located along highways can be much more expensive and significantly increase costs.

Here are the results:

The all-electric Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus rear-wheel drive was by far the cheapest vehicle to run, with an annual fuel (or electricity) cost of $281 a year, or $5.40 a week.

A plug-in hybrid, Honda Clarity, was second-cheapest, with an annual electricity cost of $363 or $6.99 a week. Because this plug-in hybrid can run on electricity for 47 miles before switching to gas-engine mode, no gasoline was consumed in our example.

A traditional hybrid, Toyota Avalon XLE Hybrid, cost considerably more to drive. The Avalon used 4.7 gallons of gas, or $20 worth, each week, increasing the annual fuel cost to $1,041 for 242 gallons. Still, the electric motor helped the Avalon achieve a stellar 43 mpg.

Finally, the gas-only Lexus ES 250 consumed eight gallons a week, or $34.40 worth. Over a year, that’s 416 gallons at an annual cost of $1,791. Fuel efficiency fell to 25 mpg, still better than many of the cars, trucks and vans on the roads today.

Now I'll convert to our choice on Honda's. I'll compare Clarity to Accord Hybrid to Accord Gas.

Clarity starts at $33,740. Using numbers above $363 per year for fuel.

An Accord Hybrid starts at $27,320. Using the numbers, the Accord gets 47 mpg in town would use slightly less gas in the example, for annual fuel of $970.

An Accord Gas starts at $26,120. It gets 30/38 mpg so in the same scenario would use $1,500 of fuel.

Now, clearly distances change things. However, the scenario above matches our business use well. That says for about $600 for hybrid (more items standard so less than the $1100) we save $500 a year on fuel. We could spend another $4000 or so and save another $600 a year. Since we keep company cars only 5 years we don't do that. That's why we're buying Honda Accord Hybrids and Honda Insight Hybrids which are smaller and get 55/49 mileage.

In actual use, we've reduced our gas consumption by nearly 50%, even including employee's personal use of the cars, so doing better than the above numbers. To me, this is a big breaking point where electric is making sense both ecologically and financially. Bring the Clarity price down by $2200 or so and we'd be using them.

Ford is doing amazing things with their E-Transport and other vehicles, if they could only get the parts to produce them. Mercedes a bit behind. We have delivery vans and would love to see electric make sense for them.

So many people yelled it would never happen when it just wasn't happening yet. However, when we get serious, we slowly make progress. Now need to speed it up. Our first great example was catalytic converters and better fuel economy and had we not made those moves, most of our largest cities would be nearly uninhabitable from the smog today. The auto switch is happening. Trucks next. Boats later. And I'm so hopeful we'll hit the magic to make solar on every home and business practical. I'm pleased to see some movement on large retail stores. We do have a couple we're putting them on.

So the logical question then becomes, at what point and how do they tax electric cars to make up for the lost revenue from gasoline and diesel road tax?

The other point to make is that your comparisons are based on fuel prices within the last 90 days. Utilities lag behind in raising their rates. But as as the price of natural gas increases, so will the cost of electricity.

As we becoming increasingly larger electricity users will home consumption go to a tiered schedule like many municipal water bills where the rates increase as you consume more per month? Will you pay a higher rate or will offsets not be allowed during periods when solar energy isn't produced?

Ted
 
For the road tax thing, in states with inspections it's easy. Drop fuel tax entirely and charge based on mileage driven with a modifier for vehicle weight (to account for heavier vehicles causing more road wear). If they're doing inspections, grabbing the mileage is probably already happening, so minimal overhead.
 
So the logical question then becomes, at what point and how do they tax electric cars to make up for the lost revenue from gasoline and diesel road tax?

The other point to make is that your comparisons are based on fuel prices within the last 90 days. Utilities lag behind in raising their rates. But as as the price of natural gas increases, so will the cost of electricity.

As we becoming increasingly larger electricity users will home consumption go to a tiered schedule like many municipal water bills where the rates increase as you consume more per month? Will you pay a higher rate or will offsets not be allowed during periods when solar energy isn't produced?

Ted

All good questions for which I have no answers. Obviously, fuel taxes would have to be recovered at some point by other means. Taxes on charging on the road might be part of it, but if all vehicles were fully electric, much more would be required. The increased electric consumption should in theory make the cost per kw lower, but we all know theory and reality are far different, but hopefully reductions would be enough to afford taxes.

I have experience with every imaginable means of billing electric including tiered and peak usage. As to periods of time, solar production is when our current systems are most challenged.

I don't have all the answers, but continue to evaluate based on current situations. I do believe we're moving rapidly on autos and even those who aren't thrilled about it will end up without a choice. I think we're moving extremely slowly on houses and commercial buildings and alternate resources there. I think what we're really waiting for is the next jump in solar technology or reduction in cost. The electric savings if every big box store had solar would be huge. They could supply themselves and so very many homes and businesses. They're moving to try it, but they're doing so without a payback that makes financial sense for them. A huge stumbling block is the rate to be paid by the grid provider to them for their electricity.

As to boats, we're years and years away, but recreational vessels are still a small part of the overall consumption.
 
For the road tax thing, in states with inspections it's easy. Drop fuel tax entirely and charge based on mileage driven with a modifier for vehicle weight (to account for heavier vehicles causing more road wear). If they're doing inspections, grabbing the mileage is probably already happening, so minimal overhead.

So you think that all the states with large volumes of out of state through traffic are going to be happy only collecting tax on vehicles tagged in their state?

Think it's more likely that every car will pay lots of tolls with a system like EZpass.

Ted
 
While I so want to do something on all our commercial buildings and our home, I'm dealing with 20 year paybacks still and now a state changing the rules on fuel buyback by FPL.

However, we are now buying all hybrid cars for our businesses. Trucks and other still waiting. However, here's an interesting article on auto comparisons for the average commuter.

Sun Sentinel compared costs of running the various vehicles types at a Vehicle Cost Calculator website operated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

These comparisons confirmed what consumers might suspect: Fully electric vehicles are cheapest to operate.

Using the Vehicle Cost Calculator, we compared the cost to drive four 2021 sedans, each rated slightly more than 200 horsepower, in city conditions for a week. To keep the comparison simple, we assumed that gas would cost $4.30 a gallon and that none of the travel would be on highways. We assumed that each car would travel about 200 miles, or 28.6 miles a day.

Also, we assumed that the vehicle would be charged at home at prevailing residential utility rates (currently about 12 cents per kilowatt hour). Using charging stations located along highways can be much more expensive and significantly increase costs.

Here are the results:

The all-electric Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus rear-wheel drive was by far the cheapest vehicle to run, with an annual fuel (or electricity) cost of $281 a year, or $5.40 a week.

A plug-in hybrid, Honda Clarity, was second-cheapest, with an annual electricity cost of $363 or $6.99 a week. Because this plug-in hybrid can run on electricity for 47 miles before switching to gas-engine mode, no gasoline was consumed in our example.

A traditional hybrid, Toyota Avalon XLE Hybrid, cost considerably more to drive. The Avalon used 4.7 gallons of gas, or $20 worth, each week, increasing the annual fuel cost to $1,041 for 242 gallons. Still, the electric motor helped the Avalon achieve a stellar 43 mpg.

Finally, the gas-only Lexus ES 250 consumed eight gallons a week, or $34.40 worth. Over a year, that’s 416 gallons at an annual cost of $1,791. Fuel efficiency fell to 25 mpg, still better than many of the cars, trucks and vans on the roads today.

Now I'll convert to our choice on Honda's. I'll compare Clarity to Accord Hybrid to Accord Gas.

Clarity starts at $33,740. Using numbers above $363 per year for fuel.

An Accord Hybrid starts at $27,320. Using the numbers, the Accord gets 47 mpg in town would use slightly less gas in the example, for annual fuel of $970.

An Accord Gas starts at $26,120. It gets 30/38 mpg so in the same scenario would use $1,500 of fuel.

Now, clearly distances change things. However, the scenario above matches our business use well. That says for about $600 for hybrid (more items standard so less than the $1100) we save $500 a year on fuel. We could spend another $4000 or so and save another $600 a year. Since we keep company cars only 5 years we don't do that. That's why we're buying Honda Accord Hybrids and Honda Insight Hybrids which are smaller and get 55/49 mileage.

In actual use, we've reduced our gas consumption by nearly 50%, even including employee's personal use of the cars, so doing better than the above numbers. To me, this is a big breaking point where electric is making sense both ecologically and financially. Bring the Clarity price down by $2200 or so and we'd be using them.

Ford is doing amazing things with their E-Transport and other vehicles, if they could only get the parts to produce them. Mercedes a bit behind. We have delivery vans and would love to see electric make sense for them.

So many people yelled it would never happen when it just wasn't happening yet. However, when we get serious, we slowly make progress. Now need to speed it up. Our first great example was catalytic converters and better fuel economy and had we not made those moves, most of our largest cities would be nearly uninhabitable from the smog today. The auto switch is happening. Trucks next. Boats later. And I'm so hopeful we'll hit the magic to make solar on every home and business practical. I'm pleased to see some movement on large retail stores. We do have a couple we're putting them on.

This whole charade is so baffling to me since 2/3 of what fuels these plugins that charge these vehicles is the same fossil fuels that we are burning in our combustion engines.
How is that a step up in sustainability or a step down in cost?
Someday perhaps, but we really need to focus effort on converting the grid before this is very exciting to me.
 
South Dakota depends almost entirely on the state sales tax for core revenue (in normal times, I'm not talking about recent tidal waves of fake federal money). When consumer spending started to move significantly to online sales, fiercely low-tax South Dakota led the national push and US Supreme Court litigation to assess sales taxes on online sales, even though almost zero state services or benefits were involved or provided to facilitate the transactions. My point is, if cars ever do trend significantly to EV, the states will never let the revenue slide. They'll adjust tax policy to maintain the revenue streams, whether it's mileage based instead or whatever it takes.
 
This whole charade is so baffling to me since 2/3 of what fuels these plugins that charge these vehicles is the same fossil fuels that we are burning in our combustion engines.
How is that a step up in sustainability or a step down in cost?
Someday perhaps, but we really need to focus effort on converting the grid before this is very exciting to me.


And, I read a stat the other day. Hey, its on the internet so it must be true, right? :) The stat said 500,000 pounds of the earth has to be dug up to get enough lithium, nickel, copper, etc. for a single Tesla battery. Probably exageration but there is still a point in there somewhere.

I want the move to electric to be true. I think many do. B&B's analysis points out its close to being true. But I do think that in addition to the math, we do have to look at the negative stuff about it squarely in the eye. Solve that too, and not just the math. Ruination of a lot of ground to solve the air isn't necessarily a step forward. Could be, if addressed. Won't be addressed if it isn't acknowledged.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom