Noam Chomsky
Mark Kingwell
Naomi Klein
Arundhati Roy
Evelyn Lau
Stephen Lewis
Robert Fisk
Margaret Somerville
Mona Eltahawy
Michael Moore
Julius Grey
Irshad Manji
Richard Rodriguez Navi Pillay
Ernesto Zedillo
Pico Iyer
Edward Said
Jean Baudrillard
Bill Moyers
Barbara Ehrenreich
Leon Wieseltier
Nayan Chanda
Charles Lewis
John Lavery
Tariq Ali
Michael Albert
Rochelle Gurstein
Alex Waterhouse-Hayward
face it ELECTRIC VEHICLES (EVs) ARE EVIL
by
DAVID SOLWAY
______________________________
David Solway is a Canadian poet and distinguished essayist (Random Walks). His editorials appear regularly in PJ Media. His monograph, Global Warning: The Trials of an Unsettled Science (Freedom Press Canada) was launched at the National Archives in Ottawa in September, 2012. A CD of his original songs, Partial to Cain, appeared in 2019. His latest book of essays, Crossing the Jordan, is now available.
The technology
behind the production of EVs, which I regard as EVil,
is in my estimation at least 10 years away from perfectibility.
Meanwhile, EVs comprise a technical hazard, a convenience
disaster, an energy cannibal, a financial liability,
and a moral ignominy.
As the Western
Standard reports, in Canada, “Big money —
something like $52 billion in tax-payer dollars have
been allocated to over 13 projects in the form of investment
tax credits, production subsidies, and other supporting
mechanisms, according to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.”
Enacting an authoritarian policy, the federal government
is pilfering tax revenues to fund the production and
sale of EVs, subsidizing companies that have no accountability
and buyers who have no practical sense.
What this
means is that people who have no love for EVs but prefer
to drive internal combustion engine (ICE) cars are subsidizing,
through their government-funneled taxes, those who have
opted for EVs. Once again, we observe the travesty of
bureaucratic heavy-handedness and government overreach.
Additionally,
Dan McTeague, president of Canadians for Affordable
Energy, reminds us that when there is enough demand
for a product, supply will soon follow. “In the
case of EVs, however, the federal government is operating
under the assumption that if you somehow create a supply,
that will inspire a demand.” This rowback of economic
principle never works.
Just as
bad or worse, according to research specialist at Suncor
Energy Joseph Fournier, “There is no energy transition
in Canada.” In a 2022 report titled "The
$2 trillion transition," the Royal Bank of Canada
stated that power generation must increase by 50% over
the next decade, if rolling blackouts are to be avoided.
The same is certainly true in the U.S. and other Western
nations. Relying on a radically insufficient infrastructure
and the crippling inadequacy of the electrical grid
is reckless in the extreme.
To begin
with, “Grid infrastructure is not cheap,”
warns Rupert Darwall in Green Tyranny: Exposing
the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex.
Complicating the issue, a decarbonized energy generator,
bringing “wind and solar intermittency, unpredictability
and variability” in its train, renders the power
supply not only unaffordable and insufficient, but wholly
unreliable, “reversing the logic of the Industrial
Revolution.”
According
to the Ontario IESO (Independent Electricity Systems
Operator), there is “insufficient time to plan,
acquire and build the new generation and transmission
infrastructure necessary to replace the natural gas
generation” in order to meet current EV replacement
targets. The resource shortfall may be insurmountable
as demand will outstrip supply by a significant margin.
There are
moral problems as well. Writing in American Thinker,
Henry Pierson points out that “half of the world's
supply of cobalt comes from the Democratic Republic
of Congo,” which uses child labor, and that the
necessary rare earth elements are almost entirely mined
and refined in China, the world’s greatest polluter.”
EV manufacture depends on slavers and polluters. Meanwhile,
China proceeds to glut the Western EV markets while
filling Democrat Party coffers in the U.S.
The technological
side of the affair is no less troubling than the ethical
and merits considerable attention. It is enough to put
paid to the entire enterprise. Lithium-ion batteries
represent a key technology that governments believe
may enable mandated transitions to electric vehicles
in many countries worldwide. But there remain several
outstanding issues with lithium technology, including
lifespan, cost and availability, battery performance
at the extremes of ambient temperature, and the environmental
impacts associated with the disposal of lithium battery
components, whose toxic leakage can contaminate the
soil and water table, as well as marine life. There
is no such thing as the clean disposal of batteries.
Another
major concern is safety. Lithium battery electrolytes
typically consist of 10 to 20 liters of an organic carbonate
mixture containing ~1 Molar dissolved LiPF6 salt (lithium
hexafluorophosphate, mainly used as lithium-ion battery
electrolyte). Quantities of electrolyte will vary according
to the EV model and the type of battery cell in use
— cylindrical, pouch, prismatic — but the
figure quoted is a standard approximation. Organic carbonates
are flammable and present significant risks should they
overheat in a process called thermal runaway. Moreover,
LiPF6 is highly reactive to water; exposure to even
low levels of humidity from the atmosphere leads to
the formation of several chemical byproducts including
hydrofluoric acid (HF), a residue produced when LiPF6
comes in contact with water or humidity.
HF is an
extremely toxic and dangerous chemical, which can also
be easily volatilized. It corrodes internal battery
components and degrades battery electrolyte stability.
It poses a serious risk, as large amounts of highly
dangerous HF gas (including hydrogen cyanide, sulphur
dioxide, and methane) can be released in lithium battery
fires, as was the case recently in South Korea where
a lithium battery fire killed 22 people, almost instantly,
due to thermal runaway of these hot lethal gasses.
In the automotive
industry, HF has been referred to as “the chemical
hazard hiding in electric and hybrid vehicle batteries.”
For this reason, great care has to be taken in the construction
and usage of lithium batteries to keep the electrolyte
extremely dry and avoid any contact of the electrolyte
with the atmosphere. A reliable way of neutralizing
the threat has yet to be discovered.
EVs suffer
from a number of additional problems that render their
success extremely unlikely. These common deficiencies
include limited travel range; long recharging periods;
a paucity of recharging ports; high unit price, steep
repair costs, and extortionate insurance rates; fire
department upgrades; prohibitive cost of battery replacement
(upward of $20,000); negligible resale value; and damage
to tires, roads, bridges, etc. due to excess weight.
The necessary rare earth metals, such as lithium, cobalt,
graphite, nickel, and palladium, are labor-intensive,
inherently noxious and exorbitantly expensive to extract.
The good
news, Chris Queen reports for PJ Media, is
that the EV fad appears to be dying out, and “auto
manufacturers are beginning to adjust to the market.”
Ford Motors, for example, is “backing away from
EVs” and reconditioning an EV plant to build high-demand
Super Duty trucks. Ford loses approximately $50,000
for every EV it sells. Nissan didn’t do much better,
its EV earnings having dropped 99% in the first quarter
of the year.
Stephen
Green, citing the Wall Street Journal, celebrates
General Motors’ decision to delay (perhaps indefinitely)
the new Buick EV and a new electric truck factory.”
Hertz Global Holdings has also seen the light, selling
off 20,000 EVs from its fleet owing to weak demand and
high repair costs. And as the Financial Post reports,
“Volkswagen cuts EV output in Germany as demand
craters.” The time has plainly come to end EV
mandates and wasteful subsidies and incentives.
While most
of our political leaders, to put it bluntly, are absolute
chumps and globalist hacks who have little knowledge
of either economics, technology, or business, Donald
Trump is a rare exception. He understands the multiple
downsides associated with electric vehicles. In his
address at the Republican National Convention in Milwaukee,
he vowed to “end the electric vehicle mandate
on day one.” The choice should be up to the consumer
rather than compelled by government fiat. The move,
he said, would save “the U.S. auto industry from
complete obliteration, which is happening right now,
and sav[e] U.S. customers thousands and thousands of
dollars per car.”
It would
also, we might add, go a long way toward saving the
environment for, as we have seen, EVs are overall polluters.
As noted, they are not eco-friendly, despite what the
propaganda industry would have us believe. Donn Dears’
eye-opening book Clean Energy Crisis: The Challenge
of Replacing Fossil Fuels points out that the EV
manufacturing process produces 46% of carbon emissions,
while ICE vehicles produce 26%. Whatever way one looks
at it, there is no upside to the EV craze.
According
to the president of the Global Automakers of Canada
David Adams, billions in subsidies plus private investments
“have set such large-scale projects in motion
already, and this is part of the reason it’s too
late to turn back now…The die is cast.”
Adams, however, may be blowing smoke. Corporate receivership
and national default are the more likely prospects.
Myth and reality are incompatible partners. A scalable
model for a large consumer market is turning out to
be a mirage. The market cannot sustain government-mandated
folly and corporate fantasy. The collapse can’t
come too soon.