What's the problem with electric vehicles

[Las Palmas]

11 hours ago, Shahpor said:

This article gives a good idea of what can be done with used batteries.

https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/ev-battery-recycling-what-happens-to-dead-batteries

This is very beautiful, if it was not from somebody that are very much pro EV cars.

The mentioning of VW part-recycling is as trustworthy as when VW said that diesel cars pollute very little. Or as when they tried to hide it when revealed.

That the black powder is containing the valuable minerals all together mean that somebody competent will have to separate them into useful products. A competent chemist will hardly do it free of charge and who will know how much energy that will use.

All the not really needed materials will be dumped as nobody want to pay for something used if new can be bought cheaper.

[toffee_pie]

Net Zero is going to turn the entire of the UK into ULEZ zones - nothing is as it seems out there but people are too easily mugged off on a diet on trash tv, social media, tik tok and Instagram.
Climate Change, how better to get control of people than convince them that the planet is crashing and burning and our very existence is at stake.

If you rolled the clock back to 2017 and never turned on the news for the next 6 years you wouldn’t know of a climate emergency, you wouldn’t know of a virus wiping out the world, you wouldn’t know Putin was bombing the west.

[toffee_pie]

16 hours ago, dutchie01 said:

Sorry, i wasnt paying attention, i thought the thread was about electric cars and what is wrong with them etc. We are just in the beginning of EVs

I’m sorry, it’s about EVs and what is wrong with them - you can’t mention them without everything else happening can you – ulterior motives as it were.
 It’s pretty obvious from your comments you are fully behind the science. Can I ask you two simple questions? 

Lithium Batteries - in what way do you think making EVs full of these things is good for the environment? take your time and give me some reason. keep in mind the average EV has 400kg of batteries, some of the larger cars you are talking up to 500/600kg of lithium cells - that is for a solitary EV. 

What is your though process that makes them so good and second why do you need to spend huge sums of money to get into EV ownership - forget company incentive schemes and they exclude most ordinary people and most people don’t have access to them

[The-Acre]

17 minutes ago, toffee_pie said:

Net Zero is going to turn the entire of the UK into ULEZ zones - nothing is as it seems out there but people are too easily mugged off on a diet on trash tv, social media, tik tok and Instagram.
Climate Change, how better to get control of people than convince them that the planet is crashing and burning and our very existence is at stake.

If you rolled the clock back to 2017 and never turned on the news for the next 6 years you wouldn’t know of a climate emergency, you wouldn’t know of a virus wiping out the world, you wouldn’t know Putin was bombing the west.

That's why my main source of news these days is uk column, independent and without an agenda, apart from truth of course! 

[Shahpor]

2 hours ago, Las Palmas said:

This is very beautiful, if it was not from somebody that are very much pro EV cars.

The mentioning of VW part-recycling is as trustworthy as when VW said that diesel cars pollute very little. Or as when they tried to hide it when revealed.

That the black powder is containing the valuable minerals all together mean that somebody competent will have to separate them into useful products. A competent chemist will hardly do it free of charge and who will know how much energy that will use.

All the not really needed materials will be dumped as nobody want to pay for something used if new can be bought cheaper.

I'm sorry but this is a very strange reply to my post.

Firstly, Carwow are interested in selling you cars through their site - In fact, I bought mine via them - and as far as I am aware, aren't pro or con anything in particular.

Second, your view that anything VW says is automatically untrustworthy based on one example is complete nonsense.  It also doesn't take into account the very obvious fact that they are building it right now!

https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/07/volkswagen-breaks-ground-on-first-of-six-battery-factories/

As for asking for examples (in your previous post) of current recycling/reusing EV batteries:

https://www.hydro.com/en/media/news/2022/europes-largest-electric-vehicle-battery-recycling-plant-begins-operations/

https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/08/ev_batteries_solar_storage/

Lastly, you keep going on about how EV batteries are going to be an ecological disaster when the fill up the landfills, but you haven't made mention of the fact that Lithium Ion Battery have been used for decades on all sorts of other applications, so where are all these batteries going?

https://ecotreelithium.co.uk/news/lithium-batteries-uses-and-applications/

As you can see, 14 different industries currently use these batteries with cars being only 1.  Also, 3 out of the largest 10 producers of Lithium Ion batteries are using them for personal technology devices (including the phone you are using):  Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba.

Now, I know this is going to come across as a Linas type post (sorry @Linas.P 🙂) but I do feel that your post demonstrates an unwillingness to accept anything that doesn't align with your point of view and is somewhat insulated in its thinking.

[Linas.P]

45 minutes ago, Shahpor said:

I'm sorry but this is a very strange reply to my post.

Firstly, Carwow are interested in selling you cars through their site - In fact, I bought mine via them - and as far as I am aware, aren't pro or con anything in particular.

Second, your view that anything VW says is automatically untrustworthy based on one example is complete nonsense.  It also doesn't take into account the very obvious fact that they are building it right now!

https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/07/volkswagen-breaks-ground-on-first-of-six-battery-factories/

As for asking for examples (in your previous post) of current recycling/reusing EV batteries:

https://www.hydro.com/en/media/news/2022/europes-largest-electric-vehicle-battery-recycling-plant-begins-operations/

https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/08/ev_batteries_solar_storage/

Lastly, you keep going on about how EV batteries are going to be an ecological disaster when the fill up the landfills, but you haven't made mention of the fact that Lithium Ion battery have been used for decades on all sorts of other applications, so where are all these batteries going?

https://ecotreelithium.co.uk/news/lithium-batteries-uses-and-applications/

As you can see, 14 different industries currently use these batteries with cars being only 1.  Also, 3 out of the largest 10 producers of Lithium Ion batteries are using them for personal technology devices (including the phone you are using):  Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba.

Now, I know this is going to come across as a Linas type post (sorry @Linas.P 🙂) but I do feel that your post demonstrates an unwillingness to accept anything that doesn't align with your point of view and is somewhat insulated in its thinking.

huh?! How did I got involved into that? But as I was summoned I will use this opportunity to put my 2p worth opinion... 😄 

First of all, I think there is difference between "lying" and being biased. So VW is biased on this topic and therefore cannot be trusted, because what they say will be filtered trough half-truth, economical-truth, cherry picking facts etc. 

It is true that lithium batteries can be reused, but as well that they are very difficult to recycle. Yes examples you provided are possible considering they are currently niche in automotive market, but if they would ever become the only way of propulsion this simply not going to be true anymore. There are simply limited amount of unique uses for used cells and they will inevitably clog landfills. I mean current "re-use" cases are equivalent to those people who have build hotel in old 747... or some university campus in California used old wind turbine blades in their exterior design. Likewise - old car engines were used as a table stands etc. Point is - these are niche use cases which are only sustainable for the niche waste problem. There are simply not many people who will have skill, time and desire to break old BEV packs to convert them into Solar Power storage facility... this is niche of a niche of a niche use-case. We can't use all old planes for luxury hotels in the jungle, and we can't use all wind turbine blades as exterior features, and we can't use all old engines as table stands... likewise when we have large enough pile of lithium cells we will not be able to just to turn them in jewellery or back-up packs for solar panels. And by the way - using the cells that way only prolongs their useful life for couple more years, they still die eventually and need to be dealt with. 

Yes - many different industries use lithium batteries, but car manufacturing requires ridiculous amounts of it and of the batteries, so lithium consumption is up 5-fold since 2010 and 30-fold since 2000. And yes sure Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba may be some biggest manufacturers of lithium batteries... FOR CAR INDUSTRY... That Samsung made lithium Battery - it does not mean it goes into smartphone. Panasonic is Tesla supplier for example. 

I don't think it is doom and gloom like John suggested, but it isn't rosy either... I think it will be OK if BEVs remains ~10% of car market, but anything more than that and we will have huge problems to deal with. 

As such I always said we should prioritise Lithium for small city cars, no more than 100 miles range, small batteries i.e. use BEVs where they are most beneficial. As far as I am concerned - long-range 200miles+ (or maybe it is better to cap it at the Battery size) BEVs should be BANNED, because in my opinion their use does not benefit the environment and they operate in the environment where they have least benefit. Honda E + grant to install charger within London congestion charge zone is great idea, Tesla Model X Long Range Tri-Motor monstrosity in Shropshire is a crime against humanity.  

 

[Shahpor]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

huh?! How did I got involved into that? But as I was summoned I will use this opportunity to put my 2p worth opinion... 😄 

Say his name and he shall come... 🙂

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

Yes - many different industries use lithium batteries, but car manufacturing requires ridiculous amounts of it and of the batteries, so lithium consumption is up 5-fold since 2010 and 30-fold since 2000. And yes sure Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba may be some biggest manufacturers of lithium batteries... FOR CAR INDUSTRY... That Samsung made lithium battery - it does not mean it goes into smartphone. Panasonic is Tesla supplier for example. 

I stand corrected.  Thanks for the info.

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

As such I always said we should prioritise Lithium for small city cars, no more than 100 miles range, small batteries i.e. use BEVs where they are most beneficial. As far as I am concerned - long-range 200miles+ (or maybe it is better to cap it at the battery size) BEVs should be BANNED, because in my opinion their use does not benefit the environment and they operate in the environment where they have least benefit. Honda E + grant to install charger within London congestion charge zone is great idea, Tesla Model X Long Range Tri-Motor monstrosity in Shropshire is a crime against humanity.  

 

Whilst I agree with the sentiment in general, there are a few specific changes I would suggest perhaps.  First, since ranges are extending quite a bit, I think 200 miles is quite stingy 🙂 Encouraging more urban use is certainly a good idea though.  As for banning, I think it should be weight and size limited rather than range.  Otherwise, you might end up with this monstrosity which weights over 4 tons!

On the subject of lithium ion recycling and 2nd use, this article actually covers the issue well:

https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/18618/why-battery-recycling-is-critical-to-overall-ev-success

As you can see, there is a situation brewing wherein the cost of the raw materials will go up to the point where it is commercial preferable to recycle batteries.  There is also the geo-political implications, such as the US not wanting to import these minerals from certain foreign powers.  Lastly, scaling up production of recycling/repurposing Battery plants is significantly quicker and easier than a new mining operation, which, according to the above article, takes on average 16.5 years.

So, the question becomes, if it is quicker, easier (practically and politically) and cheaper to reuse/recycle batteries than mine new minerals, why wouldn't you do it?  The by-product being that is it helps with the environmental issues as well.

[Linas.P]

15 minutes ago, Shahpor said:

Say his name and he shall come... 🙂

I stand corrected.  Thanks for the info.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment in general, there are a few specific changes I would suggest perhaps.  First, since ranges are extending quite a bit, I think 200 miles is quite stingy 🙂 Encouraging more urban use is certainly a good idea though.  As for banning, I think it should be weight and size limited rather than range.  Otherwise, you might end up with this monstrosity which weights over 4 tons!

On the subject of lithium ion recycling and 2nd use, this article actually covers the issue well:

https://electronics360.globalspec.com/article/18618/why-battery-recycling-is-critical-to-overall-ev-success

As you can see, there is a situation brewing wherein the cost of the raw materials will go up to the point where it is commercial preferable to recycle batteries.  There is also the geo-political implications, such as the US not wanting to import these minerals from certain foreign powers.  Lastly, scaling up production of recycling/repurposing battery plants is significantly quicker and easier than a new mining operation, which, according to the above article, takes on average 16.5 years.

So, the question becomes, if it is quicker, easier (practically and politically) and cheaper to reuse/recycle batteries than mine new minerals, why wouldn't you do it?  The by-product being that is it helps with the environmental issues as well.

Yes... banning may be too strong of a language... discouraged probably more appropriate. Sure have a Tesla Model X or Hummer, but every 10Kw over 50Kw Battery size will be extra £100 on annual road tax and no EV benefits what so ever, no grands and all that. So Tesla is 100Kw, meaning £500 a year, Hummer is 200Kw... that will be £1500 a year just in road tax. As well I would bar them from SORN, because unlike ICEVs the pollution is built into the Battery, so it does not matter if it is one the road or not on the road it has already polluted.

But do you realise what it means for "recycled lithium to be economical"? Yes I agree with you - eventually raw material cost will be so high that it will start making sense to recycle rather than mine... But that will mean the cars will be only for elites... because much of current BEV trend is fuelled by dropping cost of making batteries, despite lithium price already climbing. The only reason £30k BEVs exists is because currently we are in good place in terms of batteries manufacturing being efficient and material price still being reasonable, but if we had to use recycled lithium the cost BEVs will be like £100k+ for entry level ones. 

[Las Palmas]

2 hours ago, Shahpor said:

Second, your view that anything VW says is automatically untrustworthy based on one example is complete nonsense.  It also doesn't take into account the very obvious fact that they are building it right now!

https://techcrunch.com/2022/07/07/volkswagen-breaks-ground-on-first-of-six-battery-factories/

As for asking for examples (in your previous post) of current recycling/reusing EV batteries:

https://www.hydro.com/en/media/news/2022/europes-largest-electric-vehicle-battery-recycling-plant-begins-operations/

https://www.theregister.com/2023/02/08/ev_batteries_solar_storage/

Lastly, you keep going on about how EV batteries are going to be an ecological disaster when the fill up the landfills, but you haven't made mention of the fact that Lithium Ion battery have been used for decades on all sorts of other applications, so where are all these batteries going?

https://ecotreelithium.co.uk/news/lithium-batteries-uses-and-applications/

As you can see, 14 different industries currently use these batteries with cars being only 1.  Also, 3 out of the largest 10 producers of Lithium Ion batteries are using them for personal technology devices (including the phone you are using):  Panasonic, Samsung and Toshiba.

Not all VW claim is nonsense. Not all any factory say about their products are 100% correct. I have been in Sahara in a very old Beetle.

LiIon have been around a long time and not really a major disaster. Then they were not bonded like the gigantic car batteries in almost impossible to dissolve glue as they were before only used in tiny size and were not made to be shaken around like batteries in a car should be able to. That glue and many other items in the Battery packs are not going to be reused.

[Las Palmas]

16 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

But do you realise what it means for "recycled lithium to be economical"? Yes I agree with you - eventually raw material cost will be so high that it will start making sense to recycle rather than mine... But that will mean the cars will be only for elites... because much of current BEV trend is fuelled by dropping cost of making batteries, despite lithium price already climbing. The only reason £30k BEVs exists is because currently we are in good place in terms of batteries manufacturing being efficient and material price still being reasonable, but if we had to use recycled lithium the cost BEVs will be like £100k+ for entry level ones. 

Very much correct. When materials are no longer available reusing the old will be needed. That points to the fact that batteries like they are made now is in no way the solution to store power. When something needed is no longer there something else will be needed.

water Ò hydrogen Ò water Ò hydrogen Ò water Ò hydrogen Ò water Ò hydrogen Ò water Ò hydrogen Ò

does not seem to me to suffer from that problem.

Battery cars are for those having own charging station home and when politicians find out they need tax money some will be taken from owners of whatever is available and if most of what is available in cars will be EV cars, that will be that, then.

[Mr Vlad]

Some very interesting points. The one that got me tho is the glue that bonds the carcass of the Battery pack. I've not read too much into Battery recycling but the way technology is moving I personally think in a few years it will become relatively easy.

Now what's wrong with electric cars. Does anyone remember a TV programme a few years back where this Welsh firm converts classic cars to electric? Well I really liked that programme and how it was done. He's got a YouTube channel now and the last one was OMG EVangelistic. He asked the question how long does it take to fill up an EV compared to a petrol car? He first did an average calculation on how many miles a week does a car travel. Then with that figure calculated how much fuel needed at an average mpg. They then went to a petrol station and times how long to put enough petrol in and pay for it. Under 5 minutes. Now then back to the workshop the guy then said start the stopwatch when I first touch the charge lead. 4 seconds later he said there you go. 4 seconds to fill up. The rest of the rest of the time whilst it's charging is free time.

Now is that oh so ruddy stupid nonsense or what. Just goes to show the utter blinkeredness of some so called experts.

[Steven Lockey]

On 2/16/2023 at 7:25 AM, Las Palmas said:

The mining is an issue. Destroying the earth is more than that. Has nothing to do with oil drillings at all. There is no balanced or good way of drilling after something that eventually will no longer be there when all used up, and that is completely not needed. Only fools and horses believe that batteries are the good environmentally safe way to power vehicles transporting all of us and the items we think we cannot live without.

Yep and if we move to electric cars, we have to drill a lot less oil. 
Also unlike oil, lithium and cobalt can be recovered when the Battery is dead and made into new batteries. 
All in all, its a net gain. 

 

Quote

They can recycle part of the materials at extremely high use of energy and polluting water while doing that. Most of the materials (that are or rare earths, just materials bonding the heavy batteries together, which is most of it) are not being reused, just thrown away.

Over 95% with little pollution currently. They have literally said the only thing that is stopping them at the moment is there aren't enough old
EV batteries at the moment to build a factory that would benefit from economies of scale. 

EVs aren't a perfect solution, but at the moment they are the best one for most cars. If you need extreme long range or are extremely weight
sensitive, hydrogen is currently a better answer.

[Linas.P]

@Shahpor And... yes I know how it sounds... you tell people recycling is possible, then they move goal posts and says "yes but!".

However, it is like that - it is not moving goal posts, BEVs as a SOLE solution for all personal transportation is ludicrously bad idea with our current technology! Maybe once we have aluminium-sulphur batteries, maybe once we have solid state with graphene, maybe once we have nuclear fusion... maybe once we have some technology which makes them really universally applicable and generally green they will be okey, but they are NOT okey now.

This is why Toffee rants about it as well... the whole move towards BEVs is communists who call themselves neo-liberal idea. They always hated cars and the freedom it gives to individual, for long time they were looking at all excuses of how to deprive people from this and now they using climate change as excuse to achieve it. I am going into full conspiracy mode here - but the way the plans are outlined and with technology we have today "going BEV by 2030" means end of personal transportation, the car ownership will be as such like in soviet-union in 70s... most people won't be able to afford cars, they will have to be rationed and sure police, ambulance will have cars, the politicians will have cars with chauffeurs and there will be limited number of elites who will be able to get them as well, there will be public cars maybe, like taxis and some limited share schemes. Is this future we want? 

And you know there is whole argument - yeah but we need to make sure we leave the planet "for our kids" (aka "future generations")... but I would say there should be balance - sure protecting planet is important, but we should remain human and live decent lives as well. I am not going to spend rest of my life walking or being squeezed like ant in stinky public transport so that future neo-nazi-communist karen with pink hair could enjoy sunshine.

And besides as covered 100 times - cars aren't even an issue (not the biggest one anyway). How about we figure nuclear fusion for once? We been on the moon because we wanted to, we created nuclear fission and atom bomb (WITH 1940s TECHNOLOGY)... I reckon we can figure out nuclear fusion as well. I just can't see it being larger project than Manhattan... if we really care that much about the planet, then why don't we take SERIOUS step to fix it. Nuclear fusion... unlike stupid renewables and BEVs are silver bullet. Why? because that makes energy not only carbon neutral, but as well cheap and practically endless... So for example things like carbon capture becomes feasible, things like hydrogen powered vehicles becomes feasible, synthetic fuels becomes feasible... and all in all it is pretty much like "having your cake and eating it too". I know it sounds ridiculous, but endless clean and cheap energy would allow us to continue living as we do today, without sniffing each other armpits like apes in public transport and without worrying what our actions does to the environments, because we can run carbon capture 24/7 and set CO2 level (or level of any other gas) to any level we want... like a massive A/C for the planet, we can set it precisely as we want it. So let's stop listening 15 year olds and maybe assemble international team of scientists to figure out the actual solution, give them 1% of global GDP (that is $1Trillion) we would not even feel a difference! and within 5-10 years I am sure we will have workable solution.  

25 minutes ago, Mr Vlad said:

Now is that oh so ruddy stupid nonsense or what. Just goes to show the utter blinkeredness of some so called experts.

It is honestly perverse... some people have reach such a level that they are beyond saving and this is very true when it comes to BEVs... for one to believe BEVs are good idea requires complete rethink of priorities and expectations and create alternative reality to justify all the issues and then disregard them. 

Like in your example - they set their minds in the box and for them it makes sense, but one literally has to screw his own mind for this to work. 

[Mr Vlad]

Right. I've just spent a ruddy good hour watching one of the best YouTube videos. I've posted from this guy recently. A Porsche Cayman EV owner. Please DO watch this video. Yes it's just shy of an hour But it's got some excellent points and not just about EV ownership. 

Get ya pop and popcorn at the ready and enjoy.

 

 

[dutchie01]

14 hours ago, Steven Lockey said:

Yep and if we move to electric cars, we have to drill a lot less oil. 
Also unlike oil, lithium and cobalt can be recovered when the battery is dead and made into new batteries. 
All in all, its a net gain. 

 

Over 95% with little pollution currently. They have literally said the only thing that is stopping them at the moment is there aren't enough old
EV batteries at the moment to build a factory that would benefit from economies of scale. 

EVs aren't a perfect solution, but at the moment they are the best one for most cars. If you need extreme long range or are extremely weight
sensitive, hydrogen is currently a better answer.

I think that the best solution for long distance cruising through Europa at the moment is old fashioned diesel but certainly not Hydro as there is nowhere to fill it up.

Battery recycling is mandatory by law since 2006 and is also happening with the liion batteries from electric cars but as you say there arent enough old ones yet. Nevertheless car manufacturers are investing heavily in this to be ready. They are trying to control the entire process from raw material mining to Battery production to recycling. Securing supply, controling cost, sustainability and reputation as main reasons.

Example is Mercedes investing billions in Indonesia in mining and they have already buit a recyclingplant in Germany. Apart from the manufacturers there is a string of recyclingcompanies already active throughout Europe. The Battery is currently the most expensive part of the car so that value secures good business in recyclingactivities

https://group.mercedes-benz.com/company/news/recycling-factory-kuppenheim.html

 

 

 

[toffee_pie]

People just are unaware of the money exchanging hands - the Putin war is more Bs and more skullduggery to control people and get 2030 objectives met - have you noticed how this war occurred soon after the mass vaccination programme - what better way to disguise vaccine related deaths than create a war and blame evil Putin - as outlandish as it seems there no stopping Governments now in what they are doing.  Is Putin blowing up Paris next week? Apart from covering Covid it also is ushering in the net zero narrative, food shortages, energy crisis, cost of living crisis and crashing global economies – very useful excuse to bring in a new digital currency and getting your brain set for the future

Removing voting rights was the first step to let all this stuff occur Khan wants to extend the ULEZ zone to cover the entire of London by August, some councils are pushing back. The skullduggery is for all to see but nothing is being done.  Govs have had plans with auto companies years ago, no question about that -high level discussions to ban the sale of the cars they have made since the 1800s– can you imagine the bods in the meeting, 

sorry stop making cars?  Yes, that is correct you will make us Electric Cars
Electric Cars? 
Yes – that is correct, its for the environment
Environment? 
Yes, we will use Net Zero narrative
Net Zero? 
Don’t worry, leave that to us

[The-Acre]

9 minutes ago, toffee_pie said:

People just are unaware of the money exchanging hands - the Putin war is more Bs and more skullduggery to control people and get 2030 objectives met - have you noticed how this war occurred soon after the mass vaccination programme - what better way to disguise vaccine related deaths than create a war and blame evil Putin - as outlandish as it seems there no stopping Governments now in what they are doing.  Is Putin blowing up Paris next week? Apart from covering Covid it also is ushering in the net zero narrative, food shortages, energy crisis, cost of living crisis and crashing global economies – very useful excuse to bring in a new digital currency and getting your brain set for the future

Removing voting rights was the first step to let all this stuff occur Khan wants to extend the ULEZ zone to cover the entire of London by August, some councils are pushing back. The skullduggery is for all to see but nothing is being done.  Govs have had plans with auto companies years ago, no question about that -high level discussions to ban the sale of the cars they have made since the 1800s– can you imagine the bods in the meeting, 

sorry stop making cars?  Yes, that is correct you will make us Electric Cars
Electric Cars? 
Yes – that is correct, its for the environment
Environment? 
Yes, we will use Net Zero narrative
Net Zero? 
Don’t worry, leave that to us

I could have written that myself, and probably just like you I would receive flack for it!

[Linas.P]

36 minutes ago, toffee_pie said:

People just are unaware of the money exchanging hands - the Putin war is more Bs and more skullduggery to control people and get 2030 objectives met - have you noticed how this war occurred soon after the mass vaccination programme - what better way to disguise vaccine related deaths than create a war and blame evil Putin - as outlandish as it seems there no stopping Governments now in what they are doing.  Is Putin blowing up Paris next week? Apart from covering Covid it also is ushering in the net zero narrative, food shortages, energy crisis, cost of living crisis and crashing global economies – very useful excuse to bring in a new digital currency and getting your brain set for the future

I have different view on that... you see - war actually started in 2014, we in the west just forgotten about it after first few years... because we were pre-occupied with our bullshaite problems and more interested in what celeb bang what celeb than people literally dying in the war in Europe... 

Is invasion related pandemic? Yes... absolutely! Let me explain - ruzzia starts wars when the energy prices are high, have always done so historically... and they always lose wars when energy prices goes down and their economy stalls. What happened towards the end of pandemic? You guessed it - energy prices were record high due to demand picking-up and supply slowing down. So I do believe putka has included it in his calculation and he thought "west won't do anything, because they are too much energy dependant and they already have high inflation and they will not risk 1. sanctioning ruzzia 2. prolonging the war by supporting Ukraine... ohhh and MASSIVE 3. Ukraine won't fight anyway, so by the time it is taken in 3 weeks, west won't even be able to agree what to do about it!". Clearly he was wrong on all 3 counts and to large degree third point was most important, if Ukraine would have folded in 3 days or weeks and there would be new puppet government west would have done nothing, there would be no reason to do anything, because Ukraine itself would declare that no harm was done? So what would you sanction ruzzia for? As Ukraine lasted long enough, that basically became impossible for west to ignore and sanctions and weapon deliveries followed. 

Are there hidden motives in the west? Ohhh... no doubt, west is clearly a kind of proxy now (it isn't really a proxy war, but it would take long time to explain why not)... however one very clear motive is to disarm ruzzia... and OHH BOY it is working. The deal we are getting by supplying Ukraine cannot be matched ever... it is literally the best deal west ever had against adversary... West pledged ~£40bn last year - this is drop in the bucket! Pledged does not mean it was delivered and not everything was military equipment anyway... delivered estimates fluctuates ~15-25bn... but even that is highly misleading because this is "replacement cost". Except when one delivers Marder which was decommissioned and would have costed £100k to dismantle and calculated £14million replacement cost for Puma... clearly that doesn't make sense... and what was achieved with these literal bread crumbs of military equipment? $1 trillion loss of military equipment for ruzzia, they lost half (1500) of their entire tank fleet, 6500 IFVs... they lost more tanks and IFVs than UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain has combined! Not to mention they pretty much lost their entire professional army.

Let just think for a second - why do we have military in Europe? Honestly only reason is ruzzia? Who else we planning to fight? So draining our sole enemy makes a lot of sense... It is win-win... and that is why this war will continue... and to be fair we can do more, but I think our overlords have cynically calculated that winning too quickly may not destroy sufficient numbers of ruzzian equiptment, whereas keeping it on "slow burning" mode and not making ruzzia feel like it is impossible to win and withdrawing will result in them eventually putting more and more equipment into the fight... sort of sunken cost fallacy... and it seems it is working. It will be historically known as biggest trap in military history... or... well... there will be nobody to write that history anyway... but make no mistake - it is 100% ruzzian fault!

The energy companies profiteering is another matter and that is our government corruption problem, not war and not ruzzia. Energy prices already dropped to pre-war levels... so why we still paying £1.50 for petrol and record high prices for gas? Because friends of our government are making killing profiteering!

[First_Lexus]

Pretty sure he articulates a lot of what has been discussed on this thread already. It does feel as though there is something of a backlash underway…

 

[Las Palmas]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

I have different view on that... you see - war actually started in 2014, we in the west just forgotten about it after first few years... because we were pre-occupied with our bullshaite problems and more interested in what celeb bang what celeb than people literally dying in the war in Europe... 

Is invasion related pandemic? Yes... absolutely! Let me explain - ruzzia starts wars when the energy prices are high, have always done so historically... and they always lose wars when energy prices goes down and their economy stalls. What happened towards the end of pandemic? You guessed it - energy prices were record high due to demand picking-up and supply slowing down. So I do believe putka has included it in his calculation and he thought "west won't do anything, because they are too much energy dependant and they already have high inflation and they will not risk 1. sanctioning ruzzia 2. prolonging the war by supporting Ukraine... ohhh and MASSIVE 3. Ukraine won't fight anyway, so by the time it is taken in 3 weeks, west won't even be able to agree what to do about it!". Clearly he was wrong on all 3 counts and to large degree third point was most important, if Ukraine would have folded in 3 days or weeks and there would be new puppet government west would have done nothing, there would be no reason to do anything, because Ukraine itself would declare that no harm was done? So what would you sanction ruzzia for? As Ukraine lasted long enough, that basically became impossible for west to ignore and sanctions and weapon deliveries followed. 

Are there hidden motives in the west? Ohhh... no doubt, west is clearly a kind of proxy now (it isn't really a proxy war, but it would take long time to explain why not)... however one very clear motive is to disarm ruzzia... and OHH BOY it is working. The deal we are getting by supplying Ukraine cannot be matched ever... it is literally the best deal west ever had against adversary... West pledged ~£40bn last year - this is drop in the bucket! Pledged does not mean it was delivered and not everything was military equipment anyway... delivered estimates fluctuates ~15-25bn... but even that is highly misleading because this is "replacement cost". Except when one delivers Marder which was decommissioned and would have costed £100k to dismantle and calculated £14million replacement cost for Puma... clearly that doesn't make sense... and what was achieved with these literal bread crumbs of military equipment? $1 trillion loss of military equipment for ruzzia, they lost half (1500) of their entire tank fleet, 6500 IFVs... they lost more tanks and IFVs than UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain has combined! Not to mention they pretty much lost their entire professional army.

Let just think for a second - why do we have military in Europe? Honestly only reason is ruzzia? Who else we planning to fight? So draining our sole enemy makes a lot of sense... It is win-win... and that is why this war will continue... and to be fair we can do more, but I think our overlords have cynically calculated that winning too quickly may not destroy sufficient numbers of ruzzian equiptment, whereas keeping it on "slow burning" mode and not making ruzzia feel like it is impossible to win and withdrawing will result in them eventually putting more and more equipment into the fight... sort of sunken cost fallacy... and it seems it is working. It will be historically known as biggest trap in military history... or... well... there will be nobody to write that history anyway... but make no mistake - it is 100% ruzzian fault!

The energy companies profiteering is another matter and that is our government corruption problem, not war and not ruzzia. Energy prices already dropped to pre-war levels... so why we still paying £1.50 for petrol and record high prices for gas? Because friends of our government are making killing profiteering!

nuclear fusion - nuclear fission

Source of energy with potential to solve all energy needs.

Possibly a way to make stupid people they need so much more energy to do so many things and get so much not at all needed. Just think of why we need so much energy to transport stupid thing of ridiculously poor quality around the world.

Fusion has been tested and found possible. Producing more energy than put into producing the energy.

Nuclear power like in nuclear plants around the world is in itself not more dangerous than many other things we play around with.

In hands of wrong people it is as dangerous as much other.

Your thinking is almost as unsympathetic as mine. That you think politicians from many different places can agree on as much as you seem to think is where our thoughts about politicians' brains differ.

Lucky circumstances can sometimes make fools react almost intelligently.

[Linas.P]

38 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

That you think politicians from many different places can agree on as much as you seem to think is where our thoughts about politicians' brains differ.

ohhh... I have no hope for that happening, indeed politicians won't agree on anything... nevermind something important! I am just saying that is what rational race of intelligent beings would do (clearly majority of humans are neither)!

Imagine "disaster" when politicians realise that energy is almost free and clean and we can do carbon capture and THERE IS NO WAY TO SCREW EVERYONE with extortionate taxes! What a "disaster"! It is much better to create waste, pollute everything, destroy environment, destroy countryside with wind gazzillion wind turbines and then tax the poor for existing and make them live like animals... that sounds like plan they can agree on. Nuclear fusion - clean and endless source of energy sounds like too good to be necessary!

I am just saying it is ridiculous that BEVs are presented as "solution" despite cars being minor contributor and despite all the damage making them does... not to mention how much worse they are compared to what we already have in terms of utility and overall result of taking freedom away from masses. And secondly - if we could harness power of nuclear fission with 40s technology, if we could land on the moon with 60s technology... then with technology of 21s century we certainly should be able to figure out how nuclear fusion works... instead of playing with stupid BEVs and carbon taxes. 

[dutchie01]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

I have different view on that... you see - war actually started in 2014, we in the west just forgotten about it after first few years... because we were pre-occupied with our bullshaite problems and more interested in what celeb bang what celeb than people literally dying in the war in Europe... 

Is invasion related pandemic? Yes... absolutely! Let me explain - ruzzia starts wars when the energy prices are high, have always done so historically... and they always lose wars when energy prices goes down and their economy stalls. What happened towards the end of pandemic? You guessed it - energy prices were record high due to demand picking-up and supply slowing down. So I do believe putka has included it in his calculation and he thought "west won't do anything, because they are too much energy dependant and they already have high inflation and they will not risk 1. sanctioning ruzzia 2. prolonging the war by supporting Ukraine... ohhh and MASSIVE 3. Ukraine won't fight anyway, so by the time it is taken in 3 weeks, west won't even be able to agree what to do about it!". Clearly he was wrong on all 3 counts and to large degree third point was most important, if Ukraine would have folded in 3 days or weeks and there would be new puppet government west would have done nothing, there would be no reason to do anything, because Ukraine itself would declare that no harm was done? So what would you sanction ruzzia for? As Ukraine lasted long enough, that basically became impossible for west to ignore and sanctions and weapon deliveries followed. 

Are there hidden motives in the west? Ohhh... no doubt, west is clearly a kind of proxy now (it isn't really a proxy war, but it would take long time to explain why not)... however one very clear motive is to disarm ruzzia... and OHH BOY it is working. The deal we are getting by supplying Ukraine cannot be matched ever... it is literally the best deal west ever had against adversary... West pledged ~£40bn last year - this is drop in the bucket! Pledged does not mean it was delivered and not everything was military equipment anyway... delivered estimates fluctuates ~15-25bn... but even that is highly misleading because this is "replacement cost". Except when one delivers Marder which was decommissioned and would have costed £100k to dismantle and calculated £14million replacement cost for Puma... clearly that doesn't make sense... and what was achieved with these literal bread crumbs of military equipment? $1 trillion loss of military equipment for ruzzia, they lost half (1500) of their entire tank fleet, 6500 IFVs... they lost more tanks and IFVs than UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain has combined! Not to mention they pretty much lost their entire professional army.

Let just think for a second - why do we have military in Europe? Honestly only reason is ruzzia? Who else we planning to fight? So draining our sole enemy makes a lot of sense... It is win-win... and that is why this war will continue... and to be fair we can do more, but I think our overlords have cynically calculated that winning too quickly may not destroy sufficient numbers of ruzzian equiptment, whereas keeping it on "slow burning" mode and not making ruzzia feel like it is impossible to win and withdrawing will result in them eventually putting more and more equipment into the fight... sort of sunken cost fallacy... and it seems it is working. It will be historically known as biggest trap in military history... or... well... there will be nobody to write that history anyway... but make no mistake - it is 100% ruzzian fault!

 

Good post Linas. Putin invaded Crimea in 2014 and the west did nothing so he propably thought he could replace the Ukrainian government within 3 days and the west would again do nothing. How different did it go. The Ukrainians showed true spirit from the beginning and the Russian army was exposed as a total clown show. The Russian imperialistic agression cannot be tolerated what if Ruzzia wins? Poland next? Moldavia? The Baltics? Time is running out for the Putin regime and Russia has lost the war already with the west united as never before Sweden and Finland joining Nato and Russia turning into the pariah of the world for decades to come.

Ukraine on the other can become an economic powerhouse after the war. There was already massive production of car parts and many manufacturers had factories there. 

[Mr Vlad]

You know what. Mentioning the invasion of Ukraine. A country my mother came from and I have quite a lot if family there. Ivecresd a few threads in this thread I started and read with utter disgust. Get this subject out of my thread and start your own totally misguided misinformed and disgusting thread elsewhere. You really Have PI##ED me off. 

I've lost cousins in this effin invasion.

[toffee_pie]

if people only ever listen to the BS they are told they wont know any different will they.

May 23, 2022 “Ukraine needs funding of at least 5 billion US dollars a month”, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a video address to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Reuters reports.

He demanded a complete cessation of trade relations with Russia, a complete withdrawal of foreign business from the country and again called for maximum sanctions, including the imposition of an oil embargo.

Ukrainian fighters defending the Azovstal metallurgical plant in Mariupol, who surrendered to Russian forces, will be tried in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, its leader Denis Pushilin was quoted as saying by Interfax. An international tribunal is planned to be organized on the territory of the DPR.

Davos..... this is the source of the skulduggery going on, Zelensky gets around $5MN a month in salary, what president of any nation gets this money.

Reuters (and Getty Images) seem to be the main  beneficiaries of this war - I look back to the Bush Iraq war - that happened.

[DavidCM]

5 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

Pretty sure he articulates a lot of what has been discussed on this thread already. It does feel as though there is something of a backlash underway…

 

Agreed Ed.

The presenter needs to calm down a bit.A combination of his weight,blood pressure and a diet of chocolate hob nobs will mean he won't be around long enough to enjoy his Aston/Ferrari or indeed a milk float.