Skip to content

YIKES: The Three Big Problems with EVs that Make Them Incredibly Inconvenient

There are certain problems with EVs that the powers that be don’t particularly want you thinking about, particularly now that high gas prices have people looking at electric vehicles when they wouldn’t otherwise be looking at anything other than a normal car.

For example, they can’t drive as far as many combustion-powered vehicles, even electric trucks have trouble towing compared to their combustion-powered counterparts, long fill-up times can be dangerous and make road trips a pain, and during something like a hurricane or flood, the charging stations are a major net negative.

And those aren’t even the three big issues that an excellent recent article by Eric Peters Autos focused on. According to Peters, who seems to have focused on the three main issues relating to consumer convenience when it comes to electric vehicles, those three problems with EVs are that 1) you can’t fast charge an EV at home, 2) a fast charge of an EV is never a full charge of that EV, and 3) the farther you drive the thing the shorter the service life.

The first problem is that the fast charges can’t happen at home. Peters, writing on that, said:

Practically every article gushing about EeeeeeeVeeeeeees will report on the fact that it is possible to “fast” charge an EeeeeeeeeeeVeeee in about 30 minutes. Some will gushingly report that – soon! – you’ll be able to do it in less than 15 minutes. What they never tell you is that you cannot do this at home. Because private homes do not have the capability to “fast” charge an EeeeeeVeeeee. The very “fastest” you can charge an EeeeeeeeeeVeeee at a private home is in around eight-nine hours, on a 240 volt (dryer-type) outlet.

You will never be able to “fast” charge an EeeeeeeeeVeeeee at home. Not without completely rewiring the home to commercial-grade capacity. This means you will always have to drive to wherever the “fast” charger is – and wait there. This means spending time getting to (and from) the “fast” charger. Which means spending more time “fast” charging. Thirty minutes to “fast” charge” ends up being that plus however long it took to drive there, plus the wait there.

So, in other words, it’s significantly less convenient than the powers that be would have you believe. Instead of filling up in just minutes, you better have time to let it fill up overnight, otherwise you’re either not driving or going to have to rely on a “fast” charger.

But the convenience problems don’t end there. The related, next one that Peters brought up is that those fast chargers they go on and on about is that the fast chargers don’t actually charge your car up all the way. Thanks to the limitations on the batteries, you’ll only get an 80% charge out of one of those. Peters, writing on that, noted:

Whenever you read an article gushing about EeeeeeeeeeeVeeeeees and the miracle of taking at least five times as long to “fast” charge it vs. the five minutes it takes to refuel a non-EeeeeeeeeVeeeeeeee, you will never encounter the disclaimer that the “fast” charge is only 80 percent charged. In other words, you end up with 20 percent less charge than a full charge, which means 20 percent less range . . . which means having to stop (again) 20 percent sooner.

Do you believe gun control is unconstitutional?(Required)
This poll gives you free access to our premium politics newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The reason why you cannot – well, should not – “fast” charge an EeeeeeVeeeee to fully charged is because it is hard on the battery, which is the most expensive part of an EeeeeeeeeeeVeeeeee. There is also an increased fire risk. So EeeeeeeeeeeeVeeeeeees (and “fast” chargers) are set up to deliver 80 percent charge “fast” – and the rest, slow.

Speaking of batteries, that brings us to the third big convenience problem with EVs which is that the more you drive the thing the more you wear out the battery (and those batteries are hugely expensive to replace). Peters, writing on that big issue, said:

If you drive an EeeeeeeeVeeeeee to the limit of its range, you will have heavily discharged its battery pack. If you want the battery pack to last you should avoid doing this, because regularly discharging a battery is likely to reduce the life of the battery. Meaning, its capacity to hold the charge (and so, deliver the range) it advertised when new. This is why hybrid cars are designed to always keep the battery partially charged. Even so, a hybrid car’s battery pack eventually loses its capacity to hold charge and must be replaced.

But EeeeeeeeeVeeeeees have no gas engine on board to keep the battery from being heavily discharged. This presents a paradox: If you use the EeeeeeeeeVeeeeee’s advertised range you are reducing the battery pack’s service life. Put another way: The EeeeeeeeVeeeeeee’s advertised range is functionally about 30 percent less-than-advertised, if you want to avoid having to spend 30-50 percent as much as the EeeeeeeeeeeeeVeeeeee itself cost you on a replacement battery pack before it is time to replace the EeeeeeeeeeeVeeeeee, itself

There are some good things about EVs to be sure. The acceleration on a Tesla is like nothing else and is incredibly fun. The self-driving features are awesome, particularly the aspects of it that help you navigate parking lots or take your hands off of the wheel for a minute.



But there are huge problems with them too, problems that need to be recognized but that the big car companies pushing these things seem to want to downplay. So now you know: there are some big convenience problems with EVs that you might not have heard or thought about.

By: Gen Z Conservative

1 thought on “YIKES: The Three Big Problems with EVs that Make Them Incredibly Inconvenient”

  1. Tesla said it best when they called it an Energy Storage System. That’s important.
    So we can save the environment and get rid of fossil fuels by driving electric cars, right?
    Read this.
    SUBJECT: BATTERIES
    Tesla said it best when they called it an Energy Storage System. That’s important.
    They do not make electricity– they store electricity produced elsewhere, primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas-powered plants, diesel-fueled generators or minerals. So, to say an Electric Vehicle (EV)
    is a zero-emission vehicle is not at all valid.
    Also, since twenty percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-firehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSm7bjGjEwMd plants, it follows that forty percent of the EVs on the road are coal-powered, do you see? If not, read on.
    Einstein’s formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-driven automobile a mile as it does an electric one. The only question again is what produces the power? To reiterate, it does not come from the battery; the battery is only the storage device, like a gas tank in a car.

    There are two orders of batteries, rechargeable, and single-use. The most common single-use batteries are A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, and lantern types. Those dry-cell species use zinc, manganese, lithium, silver oxide, or zinc. Rechargeable batteries only differ in their internal materials, usually lithium-ion, nickel-metal oxide, and nickel-cadmium. The United States uses three billion of these two battery types a year, and most are not recycled; they end up in landfills. California is the only state which requires all batteries be recycled. If you throw your small, used batteries in the trash, here is what happens to them.
    All batteries are self-discharging. That means even when not in use, they leak tiny amounts of energy. You have likely ruined a flashlight or two from an old, ruptured battery. When a battery runs down and can no longer power a toy or light, you think of it as dead; well, it is not. It continues to leak small amounts of electricity. As the chemicals inside it run out, pressure builds inside the battery’s metal casing, and eventually, it cracks. The metals left inside then ooze out. The ooze in your ruined flashlight is toxic, and so is the ooze that will inevitably leak from every battery in a landfill. All batteries eventually rupture; it just takes rechargeable batteries longer to end up in the landfill.
    In addition to dry cell batteries, there are also wet cell ones used in automobiles, boats, and motorcycles. The good thing about those is, ninety percent of them are recycled. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to recycle single-use ones properly.
    But that is not half of it. For those of you excited about electric cars and a green revolution, I want you to take a closer look at batteries and also windmills and solar panels. These three technologies share what we call environmentally destructive embedded costs.
    Everything manufactured has two costs associated with it, embedded costs and operating costs. I will explain embedded costs using a can of baked beans as my subject. In this scenario, baked beans are on sale, so you jump in your car and head for the grocery store. Sure enough, there they are on the shelf for $1.75 a can. As you head to the checkout, you begin to think about the embedded costs in the can of beans.
    The first cost is the diesel fuel the farmer used to plow the field, till the ground, harvest the beans, and transport them to the food processor. Not only is his diesel fuel an embedded cost, so are the
    costs to build the tractors, combines, and trucks. In addition, the farmer might use a nitrogen fertilizer made from natural gas.
    Next is the energy costs of cooking the beans, heating the building, transporting the workers, and paying for the vast amounts of electricity used to run the plant. The steel can holding the beans is
    also an embedded cost. Making the steel can requires mining taconite, shipping it by boat, extracting the iron, placing it in a coal-fired blast furnace, and adding carbon. Then it’s back on another truck to
    take the beans to the grocery store. Finally, add in the cost of the gasoline for your car.
    A typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds, about the size of a travel trunk. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells.
    It should concern you that all those toxic components come from mining. For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery.”
    Sixty-eight percent of the world’s cobalt, a significant part of a battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls, and they employ children who die from handling this toxic material. Should we factor in these diseased kids as part of the cost of driving an electric car?” And the Chinese just bought most of these mines!
    I’d like to leave you with these thoughts. California is building the largest battery in the world near San Francisco, and they intend to power it from solar panels and windmills. They claim this is the ultimate in being ‘green,’ but it is not! This construction project is creating an environmental disaster. Let me tell you why.
    The main problem with solar arrays is the chemicals needed to process silicate into the silicon used in the panels. To make pure enough silicon requires processing it with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, trichloroethane, and acetone. In addition, they also need gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium-diselenide, and cadmium-telluride, which also are highly toxic. Silicone dust is a hazard to the workers, and the panels cannot be recycled.
    Windmills are the ultimate in embedded costs and environmental destruction. Each weighs 1688 tons (the equivalent of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass, and the hard to extract rare earths neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last 15 to 20 years, at which time it must be replaced. We cannot recycle used blades. Sadly, both solar arrays and windmills kill birds, bats, sea life, and migratory insects.
    There may be a place for these technologies, but you must look beyond the myth of zero emissions. I predict EVs and windmills will be abandoned once the embedded environmental costs of making and replacing them become apparent. “Going Green” may sound like the Utopian ideal and are easily espoused, catchy buzzwords, but when you look at the hidden and embedded costs realistically with an open mind, you can see that Going Green is more destructive to the Earth’s environment than meets the eye, for sure. We have been lied to and hoodwinked all through two years of this so-called pandemic. A lot of people, like the supreme liar Fauci and others should be in jail.

    P.S. Lithium-ion battery fires are almost impossible to extinguish.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.