I think the Stinger will be my last car

I'm totally ambivalent on this scenario; because it is the intent of the automobile industry to see all EVs in the next two decades at the latest. Will they succeed? That depends on how efficient and practical EVs can be made. Given the incentive of profits, I won't be surprised if they come up with the tech to self-charge on the go and do it indefinitely. That would be the end of ICE except for the special interest nich.

I believe the auto industry's embrace of EV's coincides with the massive amounts of govt subsidies they get to pursue EV / renewables. Take away those EV subsidies and roll back the massive tax on gas, and I don't believe we even be having a discussion about it.
To paraphrase Charlton Heston: "You can take away my gas-guzzlin', fume snortin' GT2 when you pry away my detonator-shaped keyfob from my cold, dead fingers!" (wish I could fit that on a bumper-sticker)
 
I believe the auto industry's embrace of EV's coincides with the massive amounts of govt subsidies they get to pursue EV / renewables. Take away those EV subsidies and roll back the massive tax on gas, and I don't believe we even be having a discussion about it.
To paraphrase Charlton Heston: "You can take away my gas-guzzlin', fume snortin' GT2 when you pry away my detonator-shaped keyfob from my cold, dead fingers!" (wish I could fit that on a bumper-sticker)

sure we would, without proper carbon catching tech on vehicles it doesn't matter if gas was free. The cost of combustion is far more than what you pay at the pump.
 
______________________________
sure we would, without proper carbon catching tech on vehicles it doesn't matter if gas was free. The cost of combustion is far more than what you pay at the pump.
Is "cost is far more" a global warming assertion? I say that a warmer earth is a good thing. Keep the current ice age dying, and prevent the next one, indefinitely. Meanwhile, smog is at an all time low because of cleaner burning engines. So that much regulation is for a good cause.
 
Is "cost is far more" a global warming assertion? I say that a warmer earth is a good thing. Keep the current ice age dying, and prevent the next one, indefinitely. Meanwhile, smog is at an all time low because of cleaner burning engines. So that much regulation is for a good cause.
................are you seeing whats happening in NorCal Merlin ???
 
From interior to exterior to high performance - everything you need for your Stinger awaits you...
Considering how much energy we use in the US, the insane number of cars on the road, coal plants, etc, our air is probably some of the cleanest air on this planet. The regulations in place do us a great deal. Does it REALLY need to be better!? Currently I have a Stinger GT in the garage along with my Camaro SS. Both require premium fuel. I also drive a modified Jeep that burns 14mpg on a good day. I never drive easy or care about fuel efficiency. I can't imagine constantly worrying about getting 1 or 2 more points better on my MPG gauge. What a stress. The way I look at it, fuel is comparatively cheaper here in the US, so why not burn it and enjoy it anyway!? I feel I can get away with saying that here on a sports car forum! :p

I do like that EVs are becoming an option for the enthusiasts that do enjoy it. Maybe it is not fair to label them as a green alternative (maybe not yet anyway) but just another power option to consider when buying a new car. There used to be rotary engines, steam powered cars, and there was even a jet-turbine car! But guess which one has stood the test of time..!

I don't think I'll ever buy an electric car. IMO, we have these fuels that contain an incredible amount of energy, and we have a lot of it. We as a civilization have worked very hard over the last century to refine its use, extracting it, and controlling it into the atmosphere. It would be dishonoring to all that hard work and development. It is a system that works great as it is. And it will last a very long time.
 
Is "cost is far more" a global warming assertion? I say that a warmer earth is a good thing. Keep the current ice age dying, and prevent the next one, indefinitely. Meanwhile, smog is at an all time low because of cleaner burning engines. So that much regulation is for a good cause.
.................and I'm getting into the rake business too :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
 
Is "cost is far more" a global warming assertion? I say that a warmer earth is a good thing. Keep the current ice age dying, and prevent the next one, indefinitely. Meanwhile, smog is at an all time low because of cleaner burning engines. So that much regulation is for a good cause.

What's your field of study? If it isn't something to do with atmospheric science or ecology, wouldn't you agree that your opinion on whether or not a warmer earth is good for the earth is, well, baseless? There are thousands of studies on the subject by experts in the field, a planet warming at the current rate unchecked will absolutely decimate global ecosystems. Plants and animals can't evolve fast enough and die off which completely disrupts local ecosystems and can cause them to collapse. We're currently in an extinction event (the Holocene extinction), caused by human activity, and a warming climate caused by green house gas emissions is only making it worse. We've literally already killed HALF the world's animal population in the last 50 or so years.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/scie...t-finds/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.21d37a467d5f

and if you don't care about the ecosystem and the planet surviving for future generations, there's also the very real cost of health issues caused by air pollution, here's just one very small aspect of it.
This Hidden Price of Air Pollution Is Costing the US Billions of Dollars

Considering how much energy we use in the US, the insane number of cars on the road, coal plants, etc, our air is probably some of the cleanest air on this planet. The regulations in place do us a great deal. Does it REALLY need to be better!? Currently I have a Stinger GT in the garage along with my Camaro SS. Both require premium fuel. I also drive a modified Jeep that burns 14mpg on a good day. I never drive easy or care about fuel efficiency. I can't imagine constantly worrying about getting 1 or 2 more points better on my MPG gauge. What a stress. The way I look at it, fuel is comparatively cheaper here in the US, so why not burn it and enjoy it anyway!? I feel I can get away with saying that here on a sports car forum! :p

I do like that EVs are becoming an option for the enthusiasts that do enjoy it. Maybe it is not fair to label them as a green alternative (maybe not yet anyway) but just another power option to consider when buying a new car. There used to be rotary engines, steam powered cars, and there was even a jet-turbine car! But guess which one has stood the test of time..!

I don't think I'll ever buy an electric car. IMO, we have these fuels that contain an incredible amount of energy, and we have a lot of it. We as a civilization have worked very hard over the last century to refine its use, extracting it, and controlling it into the atmosphere. It would be dishonoring to all that hard work and development. It is a system that works great as it is. And it will last a very long time.

our air is cleaner than many other countries, but that's pretty relative isn't it? Dirty is still dirty, even when you compare it to something dirtier. 200,000 people die a year from air pollution, in THIS country, I don't know about you but I don't really feel like that is acceptable.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231013004548
 
................are you seeing whats happening in NorCal Merlin ???
Of course. Who isn't? The last massive fire (during the summer) saw smoke from it as far as the Atlantic coast; here in the Valley you couldn't see across from the east to the west mountains. On the worst days you couldn't see the mountains on either hand from the middle of the Valley.

But, and this is a key point, it is all Medía hype that makes it into a global warming assertion. The number of dead and missing is mostly because people live where the fire risks are great. People didn't used to live out there, now they do. Fires and Cali go together and always have. Some years are worse than is typical. There are long cycles too. The entire SW region was much wetter during the 20th century than is typical. Trees in AZ increased tenfold because there was enough water. Now, they have been dying off, back to the normal density. Geological time is not human time. And we get caught. Look at the cliff dwellers: all gone long before white people started in on them. Of course, all of this archeological stuff is arguable. That is the point: making dogmatic assertions based on a few decades of dedicated climate research is no basis for accuracy or confidence; especially when politics take over the debate.
 
I can't imagine constantly worrying about getting 1 or 2 more points better on my MPG gauge. What a stress.
When you are stuck in traffic, idling at lights, it can be a bit of fun distraction. When you can't go fast, try for a new PR in mpg average.
 
______________________________
From interior to exterior to high performance - everything you need for your Stinger awaits you...
What's your field of study? If it isn't something to do with atmospheric science or ecology, wouldn't you agree that your opinion on whether or not a warmer earth is good for the earth is, well, baseless?
Hell no! Warm is good, freezing cold is BAAAAAAD.

The earth thrived on NO ICE for millions of years, fecund with giant animal life and thick forestation, etc. We don't need no stinkin' ice caps or glaciers. How fast the ice vanishes is the "Chicken Little" (the sky is falling) aspect that is pushed to gain control of the Megayooge Oil Corporations; no government likes competition! There is a lot of groupthink going here too. As someone, a veritable sage, on here said a few days ago: individuals can be very smart; but large groups of people are often dangerously, frighteningly stupid. Just look at the stupid stunt in London a few days ago. The pictures, the quotations of inane even vapid "reasoning". Perfect groupthink on full display.

We've literally already killed HALF the world's animal population in the last 50 or so years.
That has zero to do with climate change. Human population is exploding. If we numbered say 1.5 billion and held steady, the earth would still be largely wilderness and pristine. It isn't climate, it is human exploitation.

and if you don't care about the ecosystem and the planet surviving for future generations, there's also the very real cost of health issues caused by air pollution, here's just one very small aspect of it.
We don't have an air pollution issue in the US. China, India, et al. the developing countries, have little to none regulations over their smog producing industries. They have catching up to do.

200,000 people die a year from air pollution, in THIS country, I don't know about you but I don't really feel like that is acceptable.
I'm sorry, I am not buying that at all. Other factors exist before air is considered. Fix those, and air is eminently liveable. Those 200K will die from lung complications of one sort or another anyway, or live stressed lives at the very least. We are very adaptable on average. Extreme weaknesses exist in any population. They are in the extreme minority. And we all die. If we die of complications due to physical weaknesses, don't blame the air for that.
 
No it has to be Jeannie
View attachment 15447

Oh ya... Why should I have to choose? I'm thinkin' that with Gilligan and The Professor workin' on that coconut-power radio the whole episode... me, Ginger, and Mary Anne would have plenty of time to get to know each other. :devil:
What's your field of study? If it isn't something to do with atmospheric science or ecology, wouldn't you agree that your opinion on whether or not a warmer earth is good for the earth is, well, baseless? There are thousands of studies on the subject by experts in the field, a planet warming at the current rate unchecked will absolutely decimate global ecosystems. Plants and animals can't evolve fast enough and die off which completely disrupts local ecosystems and can cause them to collapse. We're currently in an extinction event (the Holocene extinction), caused by human activity, and a warming climate caused by green house gas emissions is only making it worse. We've literally already killed HALF the world's animal population in the last 50 or so years.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/scie...t-finds/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.21d37a467d5f

and if you don't care about the ecosystem and the planet surviving for future generations, there's also the very real cost of health issues caused by air pollution, here's just one very small aspect of it.
This Hidden Price of Air Pollution Is Costing the US Billions of Dollars



our air is cleaner than many other countries, but that's pretty relative isn't it? Dirty is still dirty, even when you compare it to something dirtier. 200,000 people die a year from air pollution, in THIS country, I don't know about you but I don't really feel like that is acceptable.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1352231013004548

Yes, we should conserve and consume our natural resources wisely, but please. Humans are not a pestilence upon Mother Earth. The sky is NOT falling. The earth is, what, 4.5 billion years old? There's been a atmosphere and climate for 3+ billion. And, the climate has been changing since... there's been a climate. Just 12,000 years ago - yesterday, in geologic time - where I sit here in Michigan, there was a glacier a mile thick. (BTW - the earth's crust here is still slowly rebounding from the released weight.) It covered most of the northern hemisphere. Humans alive then roamed and subsisted on what little meat they could hunt and huddled in caves for warmth. Then, the globe started warming (long before I was burning 93 octane in my Stinger). The warming led to agriculture, to technology, and... to civilization. So yes - global warming can be a great thing. (and we could use a little right about now - it's been 10 degrees below normal for the last month! :confused: )

As I understand it, Co2 is about 400 parts-per-million of the atmosphere. Best guess is that we humans contribute 15ppm, nature accounts for the other 385ppm. Sorry, I'm not feeling too guilty yet.

Yes, I am a proud skeptic. When the people who go around scaring the be-Jesus out of the population are the same ones who stand to make great personal financial and political gain from controlling us and taxing us for the weather, I call BS! And yes, I have read plenty about the 'studies' on the issue: "100% of climate scientists who live a very comfortable lifestyle on grants to study the problem of global warming agree that global warming is a problem that requires further study." (Actually one of the best/most-entertaining things I read on AGW was the novel "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton. He personally was all-in on AWG. He did exhaustive research for the book. He then realized that most of it was hype, ala 'State of Fear'. I recommend it. It's about 15 years old now but still rings true. The story is not that great, but the points are well made and are supported by a huge bibliography of about 200 sources.)
 
As I understand it, Co2 is about 400 parts-per-million of the atmosphere. Best guess is that we humans contribute 15ppm, nature accounts for the other 385ppm. Sorry, I'm not feeling too guilty yet.

X2. We as humans on this planet are very very small. I have heard that the entire world's population when standing front to back, shoulder to shoulder, would fit within the city limits of Los Angeles. We are not going to affect this massive planet whether we burn fossil fuels or drive electric cars. Wouldn't it be funny though if in hundreds of years from now, we write history books that say "Humans were in danger of global warming, but they converted to electric cars, and they saved the planet!" I guess we'll never know.

I will admit, I am surprised at the 200,000 deaths, but with any article, there are probably other factors, health considerations, geological, etc that may skew the results depending on the target audience. And, I agree, better would be great. But, never will everyone be happy. I'm proud to live in this country regardless, and proud to put 93 octane in my cars and drive wherever I want to go, whenever I want, in comfort and style. Most of human civilization can not do that. We (as members of this forum) are extremely lucky, how can we complain!? Life is good. :thumbup:
 
30 years ago in LA you couldnt see further than a half mile down the road due to smog .................where did it go and how ......................are you really saying that the emmission control standards for autos and emitting Industries implemented didnt do anythging ??
 
From interior to exterior to high performance - everything you need for your Stinger awaits you...
Wasnt Miami supposed to be underwater in the 90s? Global warming is junk science.
 
______________________________
It is groupthink on a global scale. Irrational. I saw an ad out of the UK by pro warmists, where deniers, or even skeptics, are blown to smithereens. It was meant to be macabre and funny, to put across the point that denial is as worthy of death as the death to the planet that deniers are condemning us all to. It went too far by more than a skosh. And it showed up the moral bankruptcy of those who get entrenched in groupthink and attack "the others".
 
Ha!! The same car I have now!! Thats what I'll be driving in 2025.....only 7 years away.
 
Back
Top