Electric cars are so heavy that a gasoline car doesn’t have a chance against it in a car crash, making electric cars a safety hazard. Batteries are heavy.
Take the GMC Hummer EV as an example. The Edition 1 version, which has several batteries for additional driving range and power, weighs over 9,000 pounds. That’s roughly three times the weight of a Honda Civic.
According to insurance claim statistics, in terms of crash safety, that extra weight actually helps people inside electric vehicles. They don’t have large metal engines, giving passengers in the cabin more cushioning, but it’s bad news for people they hit, says CNN based on insurance reports.
THEY ARE MORE DANGEROUS
Global Insurance Company says electric cars are more dangerous than gasoline-powered cars. They blame the incredible damage they cause on incredible acceleration and the increased weight. They will lead to increased pedestrian deaths says a Swiss insurance company. This was determined during crash tests.
“A look at the accident statistics of AXA Switzerland shows that drivers of electric cars cause 50 percent more collisions with damage to their own vehicles than those of conventional combustion engines,” the insurance giant said in a German-language statement titled, ominously, “AXA Crash Tests 2022 — More collisions and new risks from e-cars.”
The company attributed the higher damage from crashes to what it called “the overtapping effect” that causes electric cars to accelerate far faster than their conventional counterparts using the same amount of force on the acceleration pedal. The “overtapping effect” is “likely to be the reason for the increased claims frequency for high-performance electric cars,” the company added.
“Most electric cars, especially the powerful ones, have a very high torque, which is immediately noticeable when you tap the power pedal. This can result in unwanted, jerky acceleration, which the driver can no longer control,” said Michael Pfäffli, head of accident research at AXA Switzerland.
An article in the Atlantic expresses concerns for bicyclists and walkers.
Deaths among both pedestrians and cyclists recently reached 40-year highs in the U.S., and researchers have found vehicle size to be a cause. Bigger cars pose greater danger because of their height, which expands blind spots and makes the vehicle more likely to strike a person’s torso instead of their legs, and because of their weight, which adds force in a crash and elongates braking distances.
Autoblog said researchers had found a direct correlation between pedestrian fatalities and the weight of the offending vehicle. Equally troubling, the blind spot in front of hulking pickup truck hoods can be up to 11 feet longer than that of sedans, according to a recent Consumer Reports study.
The insurance industry, however, sees EV pilots tending to have cleaner driving records than their petrol-powered peers; specifically, they speed less and log fewer miles. A 2020 study from the Highway Loss Data Institute found that electric vehicles were tied to roughly 20% fewer claims than similar vehicles running on gas. However, the severity of their claims was slightly higher.
But what happens if everyone has an EV, as is the plan? That will take in people with bad driving records.
SO WHAT?
However, the findings don’t stop the push since they cause lower emissions. [If you die for lower emissions or have higher insurance costs, so be it?]
Roads will also need to be restructured to handle the weight.
Doug Mensman, Director of Transportation for the City of Los Angeles, said to include that in the budget.
“If it is going to have to be just additional or more frequent infrastructure maintenance or reconstruction,” he said, “then that may be the price that we, as a society, decide that we’re willing to factor into future budgets to get these benefits.”
Is the science settled? Do people really know that reduced carbon emissions will mean a hill of beans? We’ll have to wait a hundred years to see. Since we’ll all be dead, we won’t be able to hold anyone accountable. The fact that electrifying everything means we are wholly reliant on Maoist China doesn’t seem to bother anyone, and that bothers me.
That being said, EVs are very cool, but maybe we shouldn’t try to force everyone to have one? The one-size-fits-all could be the problem here.
You can comment on the article after the ads and subscribe to the Daily Newsletter here if you would like a quick view of the articles of the day and any late news:
So we can save the environment and get rid of fossil fuels by driving
electric cars, right?
Read this.
SUBJECT: BATTERIES
Tesla said it best when they called it an Energy Storage System. That’s important.They do not make electricity– they store electricity produced elsewhere, primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas-powered plants, diesel-fueled generators or minerals. So, to say an Electric Vehicle (EV) is a zero-emission vehicle is not at all valid.
Also, since twenty percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fire plants, it follows that forty percent of the EVs on the road are coal-powered, do you see? If not, read on.
Einstein’s formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-driven automobile a mile as it does an electric one. The only question again is what produces the power? To reiterate, it does not come from the battery; the battery is only the storage device, like a gas tank in a car.
There are two orders of batteries, rechargeable, and single-use. The most common single-use batteries are A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, and lantern types. Those dry-cell species use zinc, manganese, lithium, silver oxide, or zinc. Rechargeable batteries only differ in their internal materials, usually lithium-ion, nickel-metal oxide, and nickel-cadmium. The United States uses three billion of these two
battery types a year, and most are not recycled; they end up in landfills. California is the only state which requires all batteries be recycled. If you throw your small, used batteries in the trash,
here is what happens to them.
All batteries are self-discharging. That means even when not in use, they leak tiny amounts of energy. You have likely ruined a flashlight or two from an old, ruptured battery. When a battery runs down and can no longer power a toy or light, you think of it as dead; well, it is not. It continues to leak small amounts of electricity.
As the chemicals inside it run out, pressure builds inside the battery’s metal casing, and eventually, it cracks. The metals left inside then ooze out. The ooze in your ruined flashlight is toxic, and so is the ooze that will inevitably leak from every battery in a landfill. All batteries eventually rupture; it just takes
rechargeable batteries longer to end up in the landfill.
In addition to dry cell batteries, there are also wet cell ones used in automobiles, boats, and motorcycles. The good thing about those is, ninety percent of them are recycled. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to recycle single-use ones properly.
But that is not half of it. For those of you excited about electric cars and the green revolution look at batteries and also windmills and solar panels. These three technologies share what we call environmentally destructive embedded costs.
Everything manufactured has two costs associated with it, embedded costs and operating costs. I will explain embedded costs using a can of baked beans as my subject. In this scenario, baked beans are on sale, so you jump in your car and head for the grocery store. Sure enough, there they are on the shelf for $1.75 a can. As you head to the checkout, you begin to think about the embedded costs in the can of beans.
The first cost is the diesel fuel the farmer used to plow the field, till the ground, harvest the beans, and transport them to the food processor. Not only is his diesel fuel an embedded cost, so are the costs to build the tractors, combines, and trucks. In addition, the farmer might use a nitrogen fertilizer made from natural gas.
Next is the energy costs of cooking the beans, heating the building, transporting the workers, and paying for the vast amounts of electricity used to run the plant. The steel can holding the beansis also an embedded cost. Making the steel can requires mining taconite, shipping it by boat, extracting the iron, placing it in a coal-fired blast furnace, and adding carbon. Then it’s back on another truck to take the beans to the grocery store. Finally, add in the cost of the gasoline for your car.
A typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds, about the size of a travel trunk. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200
pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic. Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells.
It should concern you that all those toxic components come from mining. For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of orefor the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper. All told, you dig up 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery.”
Sixty-eight percent of the world’s cobalt, a significant part of a battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls, and they employ children who die from handling this toxic material. Should we factor in these diseased kids as part of the cost of driving an electric car?” And the Chinese just bought most of these mines!
California is building the largest battery in the world near San Francisco, and they intendto power it from solar panels and windmills. They claim this is the ultimate in being ‘green,’ but it is not! This construction project is creating an environmental disaster.
The main problem with solar arrays is the chemicals needed to process silicate into the silicon used in the panels. To make pure enough silicon requires processing it with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, trichloroethane, and acetone. In addition, they also need gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium-diselenide, and cadmium-telluride, which also are highly toxic. Silicone dust is a hazard to the workers, and the panels cannot be recycled.
Windmills are the ultimate in embedded costs and environmental destruction. Each weighs 1688 tons (the equivalent of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron,
24 tons of fiberglass, and the hard to extract rare earths neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last 15 to 20 years, at which time it must be replaced. We cannot recycle used blades. Sadly, both solar arrays and windmills kill birds, bats, sea life, and migratory insects.
There may be a place for these technologies, but you must look beyond the myth of zero emissions. I predict EVs and windmills will be abandoned once the embedded environmental costs of making and replacing them become apparent. “Going Green” may sound like the Utopian ideal and are easily espoused, catchy buzzwords, but when you look at the hidden and embedded costs realistically with an open mind, you can see that Going Green is more destructive to the Earth’s environment than meets the eye, for sure.
One of the best comments I have read at this site. Thoughtful, balanced, fair and super informative. Could be an e3xcellent article all by itself.
Like a gas pain, EV cars will pass. You really have to be a special kind of stupid if you can’t figure it out. Go ahead, downote me. I don’t really care.
And their added weight on the same footprint of 4 tires adds to the normal wear of our roads.
EVs aren’t going to solve anything. That should be obvious to all by now.
More BS, if you can’t handle the car at full power, then take it out of ‘sport mode’ and ride it in normal mode. Grow up people. Oh it goes so fast,then don’t step on the ffn pedal so hard, derp!!