Jump to content

Gweiloman

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    6,278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Gweiloman

  1. 6 hours ago, Lacessit said:

    If one was to replace every ICE in Australia with an EV, it would reduce CO2 emissions by a mere 9%.

     

    EV's are good for city environments, by reducing air pollution.

     

    The simple fact is we are still reliant on fossil fuels for two-thirds of our electricity generation, EV's are a drop in the bucket in comparison.

    Could it be because they burn a lot of coal there? The less coal that is burnt, the higher your percentage would be, wouldn’t it?

  2. 7 hours ago, vinny41 said:

    When the number of deaths and serious injury increase to an unacceptable level due to extreme  acceleration

    Expect that manufacturers will be required to mandatory apply a change to all existing and new vehicles to limit the  extreme  acceleration on EV's

    Extreme Acceleration Is the New Traffic Safety Frontier

    The electric vehicle revolution has also helped deliver a new golden age of automotive horsepower — and safety regulators aren’t ready for it

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-01-06/welcome-to-the-age-of-extreme-acceleration

    So it looks like, apart from being a 3rd world country, the drivers in the US are not exactly competent either.

    • Confused 2
    • Haha 2
  3. 7 hours ago, ExpatOilWorker said:

    Accelerating, but using the brakes??

    GLsypFBWMAEHkx_.jpeg

    If I were living in America, I probably wouldn’t buy an EV either. Rubbish products, no Chines made EVs available. Poor charging infrastructure, crap maintenance (with the possible exception of Tesla supercharges), unreliable electricity generation. Power outages when too hot or too cold.

    • Confused 1
    • Thumbs Up 1
    • Haha 1
  4. 18 hours ago, Presnock said:

    The switch to EV in the US reportedly has already hit the brakes as Americans are used to climbing into their vehicle and driving for hours without having to stop except for maybe a "pit stop" and the EV's just cannot do those long trips YET.  Also the cost of vehicles is becoming difficult for many as wages have not come up to the losses due to inflation and housing is much more expensive than ever before with taxes being increased to pay for all the illegals pouring in.  Once people realize the pollution costs of the materials needed for the EV's they will shudder to think they bought into this by the big $$$$ companies.  Just like Big Pharma - over 500 new billionaires duirng the COVID pandemic and people are still paying for that.  Now we are learning that foods can prevent and cure illnesses instead of drugs and medicines and have no harmful effects on the human body.  Again we were led stray by the Big $$$ companies.  China meanwhile is trying to cover the world with their EV's...should be interesting anyway in my opinion.

    The poor performance of EV sales in the US has been well documented and discussed. Very simply, inferior products at exorbitant prices. Add to that, poor charging infrastructure. It’s a no brainer.

    • Like 1
  5. 3 hours ago, Schnicnac said:

     

    Haven't seen Russia or China shipping troops thousands of kilometers from their shores to search in vain for nuclear weapons or fighting another system, but rather engage in disputes with neighbors which is pretty more common than you may think.

     

    Since the end of Britain's 99 year lease in 1997 China has re-exercised control over the whole of Hong Kong and two years later Macau, nothing new about it. Actually by just looking at a map you may find out they are located at the Southern tip of Guangdong, write and speak Chinese 🙂If you think about it, the Qing had been pretty generous to even give Britain such a long lease after being defeated in wars against state sponsored drug trafficking.

     

    And last but not least, even the Republic of China on Taiwan (yes that's the formal name) happens to have maritime disputes in the South China Sea overlapping for example with those of the Philippines as it conflicts with their not 9 but 11 dash line. So what are we going to do about it? 🙂

    +1.

    Conflicts in the South China Sea is a regional matter. Pretty much all affected countries have territorial disputes. China, PH, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam. But of course it suits the western narrative that it’s only China that is the aggressor. I remember a time when France, UK, Ireland and a few other countries were also having disputes with regards to the fishing waters. These disputes are best solved with diplomacy, not military conflict as espoused by the greatest war monger of them all.

    • Agree 1
  6. Coming back on topic, I doubt any ASEAN country with the possible exception of PH would want NATO here. 
     

    PH is probably the most corrupt country in SEA. The current president is the son of the second most politician the world has ever seen. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree and undoubtedly, the US has all sorts of unsavoury information on him.

     

    Japan might want NATO to protect it from China. China will never invade but Japan will always fear that China might take revenge for all the unspeakable evils that Japan has committed against China over the past few centuries. This is a country that will never feel peace until they acknowledge and apologise for their crimes against humanity.

     

    Korea might want NATO as protection against that unstable man to their North. I can understand that but if one believes in miracles, then a reunification will bring peace to the peninsula.

     

    Australia is just being dense. Due to its geographical location, it is pretty much un-invadable (if there’s such a word). All that Aussie Aussie Aussie oi oi oi and Vegemite has irreversibly reduced their collective IQ 9just joking).

     

    As for the US, of course they want it. Conflict and instability is what the country thrives on and for the real masters, the MIC, this is just good business.

    • Agree 1
  7. 5 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

     

    Yea because Hong Kong really wants to be part of China. It shows how influenced you are by Chinese propaganda. Didn't you mention you are living in China? Why did China have to use force in Hong Kong?

     

    6 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

     

    Putin didn't want to play by the rules. He didn't want to go through the normal NATO membership application process like other countries. That already shows his attitude. The funny thing is he said he wanted to be treated equally. But what he asked for is the exact opposite. He has a twisted mind. Of course NATO wouldn't accept him under the given circumstances and the history of Russias threat to the west.

     

     

    You are confusing cause and reaction. The US isn't putting troups somewhere because they think it's funny. They put them in response to a threat. China has threatened Taiwan before the US ever helped Taiwan. The origin is the Chinese civil war which made the old Chinese government flee to what is now Taiwan. The US has an agreemend to defend Taiwan. Nobody is threatening or thinking about invading China. China is on the other hand threatening Taiwan with invasion and recently has several times violated Taiwans sovereignty regarding their airspace.


    And I’m the one influenced by propaganda? Lol. With the exception of a few irrelevant island states, the whole world, including the US recognises Taiwan as part of the People’s Republic of China. Tell me, how can you violate your own airspace?

     

    The losing Kuomintang army under CKS retreated to Taiwan. If Taiwan was a sovereign state, then that would mean that the KMT invaded another country, won’t it?

     

    • Like 1
    • Confused 2
×
×
  • Create New...