The "Green New Deal" has a number of economic and environmental costs that proponents prefer to ignore. Given the push for conversion of internal combustion-driven vehicles to electric vehicles, this is a prime candidate for exposing these costs.
• EVs cost significantly more than gas- or diesel-powered vehicles. Although costs likely will decrease, a large number of U.S. families cannot afford to purchase an EV, even with the federal subsidy.
• The rush to convert to EVs will have a strong, negative effect on the electric grid — a grid that already has major problems.
California, which has recently dictated that no gasoline/diesel vehicles can be sold in the state after 2035, is proposing that EVs cannot be charged between the hours of 4 and 9 p.m. because the grid cannot handle the increased demand. The potential problems resulting from such a prohibition are endless.
People are also reading…
• The range of EVs is another problem. Although the range is likely to increase, thousands of recharge stations must be built and who pays for these? Obviously, it will be the taxpayers. Related to this, who pays for the electricity used by these stations?
• Construction and upkeep of our streets and roads is funded, in large part, by taxes on gasoline and diesel. As the demand for these fuels decreases, what source of funds will replace these taxes. Incidentally, EVs do cause wear and tear on streets and highways, but do not contribute to the costs of upkeep pr construction.
• EVs [and many electrical machines] are powered by lithium batteries which leads to two problems. More than 80% of lithium sources are controlled by China. Given the current political situation, this could quickly become a major crisis.
We are not prepared to dispose of or recycle lithium, a metal that can have toxic consequences.
In the rush to push this agenda of eliminating petroleum-powered vehicles, advocates have ignored these costs.