Replacing thermal cars (VT) with electric cars (EV) is a nuclear war against the environment and a royal road to making us dependent on a foreign power. Plus, a big attack on our wallets.
Our ecological 'Statement of Faith': On this blog we strongly advocate 'REAL ecology' and ardently oppose the ecology of 'useful idiots' (for more, read our post 'REAL ecology versus ecology useful idiots').
The political scam
China finds itself in the eye of the storm given that: 1. Internally, there is an accelerating economic crisis; 2. Externally, the West (EU, United States, United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Australia) is increasingly suspicious of China; therefore, there are less and less Western investments and more and more exit plans. In ambush, India is working hard to take its place as the 'workshop of the world' and the 'young hopefuls' with teeth that scratch the floor (Vietnam, Thailand, Morocco, Mexico, Tunisia, Turkey etc.) who want them -even a piece of the 'cake'.
Let's be very clear!
Convince the West to go 'all-electric' (that is to say: the political, energy and technological change which aims to replace fossil fuels with electricity as part of an energy transition - source : Wikipedia) is the solution found by China to halt the growing weakening of its economy and to make us dependent on them . T he current movement to replace VTs with EVs is the key element, because our dependence on them starts from here. How? Firstly, that the number of Chinese EVs sold to Westerners is increasing dramatically thanks to the low prices that they allow themselves to charge, being enormously subsidized by the State. Second, that around 80% of EV batteries are made in China today. And as they hold a virtual monopoly (let's say 90%) on the metals essential for electric batteries and on the 'rare metals' essential for electric motors, any producer who is not Chinese must go through them to obtain them. . Both today and tomorrow. Conclusion: the path to 'all-electric' is about 90% dependent on China. And know that Europe was almost 50% dependent on Russian gas and oil when Putin believed he could attack Ukraine with complete impunity. So, do you think about what we can expect from the Chinese Dictator (Xi Jinping) if we become 90% dependent on them?
Greens – the spearhead of China
To achieve this, China is using environmental movements in two directions. 1. Promote EVs and, generally, 'all electric'. It was a win, because the EU decided to ban the sale of VT from 2035 and the Biden administration has already started to implement an 'all-electric' policy (copiously mocked by Donald Trump who amuses his public imagining how the United States will wage war using electric tanks, 'environmentally friendly').
2. Contest by all possible means (demonstrations, ZAD, legal action, etc.) any project that directly or indirectly affects essential components for VE in order to delay implementation, or even cancel them altogether. Just one example: the Imerys group announced its desire to exploit a lithium deposit on the Beauvoir site in Allier (France). The ecologists are already getting into battle gear, because lithium is an essential metal for the EV battery, so the future career will endanger our Chinese dependence on it.
The EV battery – big ecological scam
If you believe even for a second that an EV battery is something environmentally friendly, you are very wrong. That's why:
1. Battery manufacturing
The EV battery is around 40% of the price of the car – which means that it is the heart of it. Today, we use the Lithium – ion battery, which is made up of the following metals: lithium, cobalt, nickel, manganese and graphite (source: https://mobiliteverte.engie.fr/conseils-et-actualites/vehicule-electrique /composition-batterie-voiture-electric.html ). The extraction of these metals takes place mainly in China (lithium, manganese, graphite), Congo (cobalt), South Africa (manganese), Chile and Argentina (lithium), Indonesia, Philippines and Russia (nickel). Countries which do not, in fact, apply any ecological standards and where there is no respect for the environment and biodiversity. Obviously the extraction of these metals is an “ecological bomb” of… nuclear proportions. That is to say: for the environment, each quarry in China and South America is the equivalent of Hiroshima plus Fukushima (or Chernobyl, your choice), while in Russia and Africa, it is the equivalent from Hiroshima plus Nagasaki plus Fukushima. And again, metals extracted elsewhere are transported to China in dilapidated boats (ten times more polluting than an oil tanker). Once arrived in China, the metals are treated to put them in a state to be integrated into the battery. Each processing plant is an 'ecological bomb' equivalent to all the nuclear tests carried out by the United States, Russia and France combined (if you have any doubts about what we write here, remember that we, the authors of this blog, we lived until we were 19 in Ceausescu's Romania, the equivalent of today's China). From here our conclusion: the production of batteries for EV is a nuclear war that is being declared against the environment and biodiversity.
2. Battery recycling
A battery can withstand between 100,000 and 150,000 charge/discharge cycles. However, it must be recycled. You can well imagine that we are not going to recycle them in the West, because the operation will cost a "crazy amount of money" (thank you, Mr. Macron for allowing us to quote you) because of the investment necessary to protect the environment and the biodiversity. On the other hand, we are going to throw them in Africa (most likely) where each recycling site is, in turn, another ecological bomb of… nuclear proportions (post to come on our blog 'How French/European ecologists are destroying the environment in Africa'). In addition, we will let Chinese companies take care of recycling. Why Chinese? Because they have every interest in recovering the metals to keep their quasi-monopoly. But also, because ecologists attack any Western company that does not respect ecological standards elsewhere. On the other hand, Chinese companies (as a general rule, any company outside the EU) do not fall into their line of fire. Why? Because ecologists never attack puppeteers!!
3. EV Charging
We are told that an EV is not polluting when it is operating. This is a lie of omission, because they consume electricity. Electricity that must be produced, transported and put into the EV battery And if we have a few tens of thousands of EVs, we can, let's say, get by with what we have today. But tomorrow, there will be hundreds of thousands, even millions of EVs (if people fall for the trap and swallow everything that the media campaigns and leaders goaded by environmentalists tell them). Which will mean that we will need a lot more electricity. Alas, this cannot be done by an operation of the 'Holy Spirit' to be ecological. On the other hand, this involves massively increasing production (i.e. more power plants), the transport network (plus cables and electricity pylons) and an almost infinite number of charging stations. Unfortunately, we cannot put the terminals either in trees or in a wheat field, but on a concrete base whether in a city or on the side of a highway. In conclusion, we are going to focus on preserving the environment and biodiversity when there are millions of EVs. Or maybe that explains why ecologists want to kill agriculture (read our post 'The' ecology kills agriculture'): to be able to replace agricultural crops with crops of wind turbines and voltaic panels (to produce more electricity) and terminals to recharge EVs
Battery life - the biggest scam
UFC Choisir (an association which aims to inform, advise and defend consumers) carried out a study on 20 EV brands. The result is overwhelming: a difference between 10% and 34% gap between autonomy given by producer and the autonomy obtained when driving in real conditions. And yet we are talking about 'prudent' driving. If the driving is 'sporty', the gap increases. And even more so if we play music, use GPS, etc. What about charging the smartphone or turning on the air conditioner (cool in summer, heat in winter)? Forgotten, unless you want to 'fill up' every 100 km or less. And the figures above are only for Western EVs. You can imagine that it is even worse for Chinese EVs.
The price scam for EV charging
Today, refueling an EV costs 13 euros at home, 29 for normal charging and 35 for fast charging (source: www.blog.evbox.com ). Let's say these are the maximum values and on average the numbers above are reduced to half. However, in terms of distance, we need, on average, two 'fulls' for a VE to travel the same distance as a VT does with a 'full'. Today, we get by cheaper with an EV because around 80% of the cars on the roads are VT and at least 50% of the price of diesel/petrol goes into the state coffers (which is what is not the case with electricity to charge an EV which is not yet taxed). But let's take the case where there will be only 40% of VTs on the roads, the rest being EV. Diesel/petrol consumption will have fallen by half, which means that state tax revenues will also drop in the same way. manner. Do you doubt what action the State will take to preserve this income? Certainly, it will heavily tax electricity to charge EVs. Consequently, the more EVs there are, the more the price of a 'full' one will rise. And, when the number of EVs exceeds the number of VTs, we will pay much more to 'fill up' for an EV than for a VT
We pay to be fooled
But do you know what’s so aberrant? That we pay 'crazy money' for that. There are very generous subsidies for purchasing an EV (in France, the State pays 3,000 euros for a legal entity and between 4,000 and 7,000 euros for an individual to purchase an EV; other subsidies are added thousands of euros paid by regions, departments, other local authorities). Subsidies financed through rates and taxes that we all pay conscientiously to finance a foreign power and to better destroy the environment and biodiversity.
The future is pretty dark
We are told that they are working hard to find more powerful, more environmentally friendly battery product solutions (using less of the above metals) etc. It's true, but... it's easy to spend a few tens of millions of euros/dollars to find technical solutions. It is afterwards that the back of the hand hurts: to apply these solutions in mass production, billions and billions of euros/dollars must be invested. And, no, the big Western producers will not do it (while the Chinese will not have the interest to do so, of course). For two reasons: 1. Market shares will gradually decrease in favor of Chinese EVs (see above) and they will still depend on China for metals and 'rare earths'; 2. 'The scandal of the century'.
'The scandal of the century'
We showed you above that EV battery range, as advertised by manufacturers, is a huge lie. And what's more, EV is also an ecological scam. Sooner or later, complaints will be filed in court and judgments will be rendered.
Most likely scenario: 65-70%
Big law firms - the sharkiest sharks - have already started preparing concrete and marble files in view of the battery autonomy scam. Around 2026 (the time to have strong evidence, testimony from recognized experts, seriously damaged people, solid legal arguments, etc.) cases will arrive before the judges. But not just any judge, no. Through 'major maneuvers', it will be the most legalistic judges, those who eat, drink and breathe laws and see nothing other than the law, who will be responsible for judging these cases. And towards the end of 2028, judgments with fabulous compensation will begin to fall. At the same time, there will also be cases accusing VE's ecological scam. Even if the compensation and repercussions will perhaps be lower, they will be added to those mentioned above to dig deep the grave of VE.
Unlikely scenario: 25-30%
There will only be the legal aspect of the 'battery autonomy scam', not that of the ecological scam. The grave of the VE will be dug but not so deep as above.
Unlikely scenario: 0-5%
There will be no judgments against EVs (neither in relation to the battery range scam nor in relation to the ecological scam). The VE will continue its path to establish itself and replace the VT in the future
Coming soon, the post: 'How French/European ecologists are destroying the environment in Africa'. Subscribe (at angelogeorge988@gmail.com) to get it straight away once it's published.
Comments