-
Adversity temporarily visits a strong man but stays with the weak for a lifetime. -
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
Three Republican supporters from Trump-backing Florida complex The Villages arrested for voter fraud
The three have been accused of voting more than once in the 2020 electionsComment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
... or much lower cost via clean energy wind, solar, tidal, nuclear & hydro-electricity.
This is why it is urgent for the planet, not just the USA, to transition away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible.
President Biden's "Build Back Better" plan will get America there much faster by making big investments in clean energy sources.Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
The claim: Average electric car requires equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge
The Biden administration has pledged to work towards decarbonizing the U.S. electricity grid by 2035. And the recently passed $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill provides funding for more electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure.
However, a claim that electric cars require an inordinate amount of oil or coal energy to charge has appeared on social media.
“An average electric car takes 66 KWH To charge. It takes 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil to make 66 KWH,” read a Dec 1 Facebook post that was shared nearly 500 times in a week. “Makes absolutely no sense.”
This claim is in the ballpark for the coal comparison, but the math on the oil usage is wildly inaccurate.
And the actual source of energy used to charge an electric car is dependent on the energy mix in the local electricity grid. Most U.S. grids are powered by multiple sources of energy, including renewables such as solar and wind.
Post misrepresents fuel required to charge electric car
It would take roughly 70 pounds of coal to produce the energy required to charge a 66 kWh electric car battery, said Ian Miller, a research associate at the MIT Energy Initiative. That's about 15 pounds less than is claimed in the post.
The oil number is much farther off.
While the post claims that it takes six barrels of oil to charge a 66 kWh battery, Miller said the amount is closer to 8 gallons — the equivalent of 20% of one barrel of oil.
He said both of his estimates account for energy lost when fossil fuels are converted into electricity.
"I think the most important question is, 'How do EVs and gas cars compare on emissions per distance?'," said Miller. "In the US, using average electricity, EVs produce roughly 100 grams of CO2 per mile."
He said this is more than 60% less than a typical gasoline-powered car that gets 30 mpg. Such a vehicle produces roughly 280 grams of CO2 per mile.
"If you switch to an electric vehicle, even if you're using fossil fuels (to charge), it's just simply not true that you'll be using more fossil fuel," said Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who studies the environmental impact of energy systems.
However, she emphasized electric cars in the U.S. are not typically charged using only energy from coal or oil.
The U.S. electricity grid relies on a diversity of energy sources, of which oil and coal together make up about 20 percent, according to a DOE spokesperson. This amount is likely to continue to drop as renewable energy proliferates in the U.S.
"Switching to an electric vehicle means that you can use other sources, including less carbon-intensive natural gas, and even less carbon-intensive electricity sources like nuclear, solar and wind energy, which also carry with them health benefits in the form of reduced air pollutant emissions," said Trancik.
Our rating: Partly false
Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim that the average electric car requires the equivalent of 85 pounds of coal or six barrels of oil for a single charge. The claim is in the ballpark on coal consumption, as an MIT researcher estimates that around 70 pounds. But the oil usage is only about 8 gallons, which is 20% of one barrel. And the actual sources of energy for an electric car vary depending on the energy mix in the local electric grid.
Our fact-check sources:
- Department of Energy spokesperson, Dec. 8, Email exchange with USA TODAY
- USA TODAY, Dec. 8, More electric vehicles, modern buildings: Biden aims to cut federal greenhouse gas emissions by 65%
- Shutterstock, accessed Dec. 8, Electric vehicle changing (sic) on street parking with graphical user interface, Future EV car concept
- Argonne National Laboratory, June 2021, Assessment of Light-Duty Plug-in Electric Vehicles in the United States, 2010 – 2020
- EIA, accessed Dec. 8, Units and calculators explained
- Department of Energy, accessed Dec 8, Alternative Fuels Data Center
- The White House, April 22, FACT SHEET: President Biden Sets 2030 Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Target Aimed at Creating Good-Paying Union Jobs and Securing U.S. Leadership on Clean Energy Technologies
- Jessika Trancik, Dec. 9, Phone interview with USA TODAY
- USA TODAY, April 22, At Earth Day climate summit, Biden promises 50% reduction in US greenhouse emissions
- USA TODAY, Nov. 5, 'A monumental step forward': Biden hails House passage of $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill
- Ian Miller, Dec. 9, Email exchange with USA TODAY
- EIA, July 28, Renewables became the second-most prevalent U.S. electricity source in 2020
Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
I am boycotting this thread started by SSG and will post only in slim's "Let the truth be known" thread. Please join me in never posting in this thread again. It was started by SSG and all he does is post leftwing BULLSHIT.Adversity temporarily visits a strong man but stays with the weak for a lifetime.Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
... the very title of the thread "Let the Truth be Known" is a con for the gullible to trade fake news. It functions more like a Parler site on CTN.
I lost interest in it months ago.Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
I still enjoy debunking all the crap that Slim posts and wait for the silence instead of acknowledgement that maybe he was wrong. LOL
Slim and Phil NEVER admit they may have been wrong about something. They just ignore it hoping no one noticed. It is truly funny.Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
Cheney EXPOSES Fox Hosts and Donald Trump Jr. On The Capitol AttackComment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
Glad that a true Republican like Cheney has the integrity to point out Trump is at war with the rule of law and constitution.
Really, Trump only became a republican when he realized no democrat would vote for him.
Cheney's integrity and commitment to the constitution, even though her party shuns her, is refreshing.Comment
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
Conspiracy to obstruct Congress and its Constitutional duties. It's a federal crime.Comment
-
-
Re: The Shining City Upon a Hill
FDA says abortion pills can be sent by mail
The US Food and Drug Administration announced Thursday that it is lifting a requirement that patients seeking medication abortion had to pick up the medication in-person, instead allowing pills to be sent by mail.
The move comes as the Supreme Court is poised to undo its abortion rights precedent.
Relaxing the federal restrictions on medication abortion is one thing that the Biden administration could do to mitigate the fallout from a Roe v. Wade reversal, but red states are already on the march to counteract what the federal government has opted to do.
"The FDA's decision eliminating its unnecessary in-person requirement did not come a moment too soon," ACLU attorney Julia Kaye said in a statement after the FDA's decision was announced.
Medication abortion, in which a pregnancy is ended in a two-pill process, has become a prevalent approach to terminating a pregnancy. Both sides of the issue see it as the next frontier in the fight over abortion access, as they wait to see how the Supreme Court decides a Mississippi case where the justices are reexamining the precedent laid out by 1973's Roe v. Wade decision.
The FDA first approved the drug mifepristone -- when coupled with the drug misoprostol -- for abortion use in 2000. The introduction of medication did not immediately revolutionize access to abortion the way some reproductive rights advocates had hoped. But use of the method has steadily grown and it now makes up more than half of the abortions that occur before nine weeks into pregnancy, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Over time, the federal government has tweaked some of the federal rules around medication abortion use, but abortion rights proponents contend that the FDA was not keeping pace with what they say evolving science was showing about the safety of the method.
The coronavirus outbreak and how the pandemic expanded the use of telehealth only exacerbated those concerns among abortion rights advocates, who obtained a court order last year requiring the FDA to temporarily lift restrictions that prohibited abortion seekers from obtaining the pills by mail. In April, the Biden administration voluntarily lifted the prohibition for the duration of the pandemic, while indicating in a separate case that it was conducting a full review of the regulations.
"Covid just gave us this kind of natural experiment to demonstrate that no, in fact, there is no medically justifiable reason to require patients to come into a clinic and pick up a pill that they are going to turn around and take at home," said Kristen Moore, the director of the Expanding Medication Abortion Access Project.
Major medical groups like the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists have backed the safety of medication abortion, and ACOG is among the organizations in favor of relaxing the regulations.
While the FDA is permanently ending the in-person pick-up requirement for the pills, it is retaining other regulations that reproductive rights advocates had argued should be lifted.
The FDA is keeping a requirement that abortion patients sign an additional form for a medication abortion. It is also continuing to require that clinicians pre-register with a manufacturer of the drug before they can prescribe it.
Kaye, of the ACLU, said in her statement Thursday that the FDA's decision was "critical progress" but "far from complete."
... great news for women being granted their wish to control their own bodies and their future from unwanted pregnancies and misguided politicians.Comment
Comment