Reader Question: EVs and H2 Tech?

Here’s the latest reader question, along with my reply!

Donald asks: I agree EVs are a con. Not mentioned in your article is the energy needed to create batteries, the fact they are toxic when they wear out, and the fact they last only about 7 years and are expensive to replace. I also want to point out my suspicion that the EV industry are purposefully preventing the ascendancy of H2 fuel cell technology. Imagine the # of jobs created to roll out H2 fuel nation wide. It’s expensive at the moment but I think that’s largely because people like Musk are preventing serious R&D to improve the tech and lower the price.

My reply: I like that H2 technology would address the range/recharge (the waiting to recharge, specifically) problems and I don’t doubt that anything that might be practical as well as affordable (which is part and parcel of practicality) is likely being stymied or simply ignored.

A very good example of this being “locomotive-like” hybrids such as the discontinued Chevy Volt, which had a gas engine but – as in a locomotive – its role was to generate electricity when necessary while the electric motors provided the locomotion. This was – is – a brilliantly practical as well as affordable idea that solves the electric car problems of limited range/long recharge times as well as high cost while also eliminating any reasonable “concerns” about carbon dioxide or other “emissions,” all of those being if not quite nil certainly irrelevant as regards air quality or “climate change.”

The Volt could go weeks without using any gas and so created no gasses. Yet it also did not limit the mobility of its owner, as politically correct electric cars do.

It’s all so stupid – and evil. It makes my teeth ache…

. . .