The next administration needs to mandate the big American auto companies produce more EVs in more models in order to save them from the irrelevance they seemingly desire and arguably deserve.
The big winner from the Iran war thus far --- China.
Whether Israel is a real winner is yet to be determined.
There is no significant, strategic benefit to the USA despite spending at least $50 billion thus far --- not counting the cost of inflated fuel prices.
> Last week the German automotive trade body said restructuring in the industry and new investment was paying off, as every second electric car sold in Europe was now made in Germany.
i rarely (as a 12 year ev driver) see discussions mention you just get multiple times more distance per dollar, as a consumer, with an EV over ICE. (and i like both....it's just what i have measured having both)
Exactly, electricity generation is already diversified, so it naturally gets somewhat shielded from shocks. Energy companies can burn wood if they get truly desperate, but I can only fill up my car with gasoline.
What? Where? In face that statement is not true pretty much everywhere. 50% of electricity in Hungary is nuclear. 80% in France. 50% coal in Poland, 30 % solar in Spain.
It's not about price; it's hedging against the very real risk of petrol rationing and shortages. An EV can charge from any source, and in Europe a lot of power is sourced from non-oil sources
If you have an internet connected charger, which is standard in some countries, you can be decoupled from gas prices long before the gas gets phased out of the grid by charging when the grid is cheap and clean, even if gas is still being used for peakers. A simple timer will also often do the job, but you get even lower prices if you help the grid out by letting it dictate the exact time to start charging.
I'll bet your math conveniently ignores the fact that the supply of petroleum is inherently limited and subject to disruption for political and other "non-material" reasons..
The mandates won't fix the fundamental physical & material problems so I'll repeat what I said. EVs are never going to work at the scale of ICEs, the numbers don't work out. Regardless of any political "incentives", there is only a finite amount of copper & only finitely many cars that can be made w/ that amount of copper which has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources.
> Regardless of any political "incentives", there is only a finite amount of copper & only finitely many cars that can be made w/ that amount of copper which has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources.
> the numbers don't work out
What are the numbers? Are we running out of any of those? Are we not recycling enough materials?
Copper is a widely recycled metal. Is there not enough copper on earth to replace all ICE cars with EVs? Can you post some sources? And those numbers you keep talking about so I can verify if your calculator is working alright.
I already posted the link. You are welcome to verify the details for yourself by following up on what you take to be articles of faith. The burden of proof is on you to explain why the numbers actually work.
There is only a finite amount of aluminum and iron.
There is only a finite amount of everything on this planet my dude.
> has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources
Technically speaking these don't always have to be entirely non-renewable processes. But let's also think: when the copper windings on some EV's motor are toast it can be recycled pretty much infinitely. How many times does that gallon of gasoline get recycled?
Seems strange to have the copper be the thing so uniquely focused on.
You're so focused on like 200lbs of copper that will be in the car the entire life of the car and can then be recycled after the life of the car, being so extremely concerned about how its such a finite resource. Meanwhile you just ignore than a 25mpg ICE car over a 200,000mi life will burn ~48,600lbs of gasoline, none of which is recoverable, and is also a finite resource.
Which one should we me more concerned about using up? The one that's easily recyclable or the one that's not and will be consumed >240x as much?
> Current copper resources are estimated to exceed 5,000 million tonnes
That's ~50 billion EV cars worth of copper we roughly know about. There's probably more than that out there, we just haven't found it yet. It also just ignores all the copper we've already mined and is in the circular economy.
I've watched plenty of youtube videos, I'm not gonna watch a 10 minute video from somebody I've never heard of and treat is as a good source. It's bad form to post that here multiple times instead of just citing whatever actual published sources.
Especially when EV vehicles are already working and taking over the market.
> Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and a Strategic Partner at Cottonwood Venture Partners, an investment firm focused on technological advancements in oil and gas production
The next administration needs to mandate the big American auto companies produce more EVs in more models in order to save them from the irrelevance they seemingly desire and arguably deserve.
The big winner from the Iran war thus far --- China.
Whether Israel is a real winner is yet to be determined.
There is no significant, strategic benefit to the USA despite spending at least $50 billion thus far --- not counting the cost of inflated fuel prices.
> Last week the German automotive trade body said restructuring in the industry and new investment was paying off, as every second electric car sold in Europe was now made in Germany.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/apr/20/electric...
China has been winning since Trump took office second time. They are winning by doing... nothing :)
Well, we stopped hearing about the files. That's kinda a benefit to some people?
I wonder what way of thinking these people exercise. They think electricity prices are somehow shielded from price going up?
i rarely (as a 12 year ev driver) see discussions mention you just get multiple times more distance per dollar, as a consumer, with an EV over ICE. (and i like both....it's just what i have measured having both)
ICE cars use energy from close to 100% oil. As long as your electrical grid is more diverse than that, you're already better off.
Exactly, electricity generation is already diversified, so it naturally gets somewhat shielded from shocks. Energy companies can burn wood if they get truly desperate, but I can only fill up my car with gasoline.
What? Where? In face that statement is not true pretty much everywhere. 50% of electricity in Hungary is nuclear. 80% in France. 50% coal in Poland, 30 % solar in Spain.
You should reread their post. You're proving their point.
It's not about price; it's hedging against the very real risk of petrol rationing and shortages. An EV can charge from any source, and in Europe a lot of power is sourced from non-oil sources
In places where electricity generation is primarily nuclear, solar, hydro, wind, or geothermal? Yeah pretty much.
In most countries electric utilities have either regulated rates or are public-owned. They don't increase prices willy-nilly.
If you have an internet connected charger, which is standard in some countries, you can be decoupled from gas prices long before the gas gets phased out of the grid by charging when the grid is cheap and clean, even if gas is still being used for peakers. A simple timer will also often do the job, but you get even lower prices if you help the grid out by letting it dictate the exact time to start charging.
No. But there is more control than with petrol. An if you have more charger, could balance charginf during off-peak cheaper hours.
Can't do anything about petrol. Pay or gtfo.
These are just flashes in a pan. The material math for EVs is not viable.
I'll bet your math conveniently ignores the fact that the supply of petroleum is inherently limited and subject to disruption for political and other "non-material" reasons..
It's not a political statement, just basic physics & chemistry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEkIh2PcSYE
Your own YouTube link refutes your conclusion. in the first few sentences he states “The problem is not with EVs it’s with mandates”
EVs are fine,
yes they are still limited in some cases.
The mandates won't fix the fundamental physical & material problems so I'll repeat what I said. EVs are never going to work at the scale of ICEs, the numbers don't work out. Regardless of any political "incentives", there is only a finite amount of copper & only finitely many cars that can be made w/ that amount of copper which has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources.
> Regardless of any political "incentives", there is only a finite amount of copper & only finitely many cars that can be made w/ that amount of copper which has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources.
> the numbers don't work out
What are the numbers? Are we running out of any of those? Are we not recycling enough materials?
Copper is a widely recycled metal. Is there not enough copper on earth to replace all ICE cars with EVs? Can you post some sources? And those numbers you keep talking about so I can verify if your calculator is working alright.
I already posted the link. You are welcome to verify the details for yourself by following up on what you take to be articles of faith. The burden of proof is on you to explain why the numbers actually work.
> there is only a finite amount of copper
There is only a finite amount of oil as well.
There is only a finite amount of aluminum and iron.
There is only a finite amount of everything on this planet my dude.
> has to be extracted & processed using non-renewable resources
Technically speaking these don't always have to be entirely non-renewable processes. But let's also think: when the copper windings on some EV's motor are toast it can be recycled pretty much infinitely. How many times does that gallon of gasoline get recycled?
Seems strange to have the copper be the thing so uniquely focused on.
You're so focused on like 200lbs of copper that will be in the car the entire life of the car and can then be recycled after the life of the car, being so extremely concerned about how its such a finite resource. Meanwhile you just ignore than a 25mpg ICE car over a 200,000mi life will burn ~48,600lbs of gasoline, none of which is recoverable, and is also a finite resource.
Which one should we me more concerned about using up? The one that's easily recyclable or the one that's not and will be consumed >240x as much?
https://internationalcopper.org/sustainable-copper/about-cop...
> Current copper resources are estimated to exceed 5,000 million tonnes
That's ~50 billion EV cars worth of copper we roughly know about. There's probably more than that out there, we just haven't found it yet. It also just ignores all the copper we've already mined and is in the circular economy.
I don't think "material math" applies to things that are huge luxury/status symbol purchases. Otherwise we'd all be driving 2005 corollas.
And as status-symbol or identity statement, being anti-oil (or anti beholden on America, Russia, Iran, etc) seems like a pretty good one.
I am not making any political statements, it's all basic physics & material science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEkIh2PcSYE
I've watched plenty of youtube videos, I'm not gonna watch a 10 minute video from somebody I've never heard of and treat is as a good source. It's bad form to post that here multiple times instead of just citing whatever actual published sources.
Especially when EV vehicles are already working and taking over the market.
The man in the video has a history of questionable claims, for some fairly obvious reasons:
https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/
> Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and a Strategic Partner at Cottonwood Venture Partners, an investment firm focused on technological advancements in oil and gas production
Edit: Just checked the guidelines so: Man, what a terrible person. I hope he steps on a lego block.
There was no physics in that. It was 10 minutes of incoherent rambling.
How do people find this convincing? Is it a new fashion?
Geez, Hillsdale College. Worldwide authority on all economics from the theological perspective. Congrats on picking information sources.
Do the math & then post your own video to explain why he's mistaken.