I know that a couple of semi-apologists here will probably dismiss my comment, but this is just another round in a long-running, well-funded anti- EV campaign.
It follows an early example set in 1995 by the infamous Carnegie Mellon study. That formerly respected institution sold its prestigious name to produce a bizarre screed claiming that lead battery powered EVs would produce 60 times the lead emissions of ICEVs. Science Magazine also gave up its reputation to publish the study. So did the New York Times, which put it on the front page. The study's 3 authors reached this conclusion by making every worst-case assumption possible: Understating typical specific energy for lead batteries (18 Wh/kg!) Overstating the typical lead battery mass in EVs (> 1500kg!) Understating battery cycle life Overstating lead mining emissions (using 49 year old data) Understating lead battery recyling percentage Overstating battery recycling lead emissions Assuming that lead batteries would always power EVs Neglecting lead battery use in ICEVs So who did Carnegie Mellon and Science sell out to? Surprise, the study was funded by Mobil Oil and other petroleum companies, and reached the precise conclusions the funders requested. Despite many articles thoroughly debunking the study's conclusions, it just won't go away. It was quoted again and again through the late 1990s and even into the 2000s. In fact, when the lead author of that study, "environmental economist" Lester B. Lave, died in 2011, his Carnegie Mellon obituary outrageously repeated - quite reverentially - the same bogus conclusions from the same bogus 1995 study. Here we are now, in the Nth verse of this dissonant old song. There are countless foundations and think tanks worldwide (especially concentrated in the US) funded by oil wealth. This is part of their funders' long term strategy. They're patient, and they intend to win. They consider it an investment. And they have plenty of money to invest in it. Rupert Murdoch's media outlets always salivate over their "findings." He controls hundreds of media operations worldwide, and that makes him a high- wattage amplifier for anti-EV propaganda. Few media people have done more to thwart environmental progress in English speaking nations than Rupert Murdoch. Hell has a special high-temperature spot reserved to sanitize him when he arrives. In case you'd like to know what media outlets to boycott, Murdoch's major outlets include the following. This is based on the latest information I have. Some of this may have changed by now, so corrections are welcome. Fox TV (News, sports, business, network) National Geographic (!) The Wall Street Journal Barrons Marketwatch The New York Post In the UK and Australia Murdoch fully or partially controls: Sky UK Limited Sky News of Australia The Sun The Times The Australian The Daily Telegraph Herald Sun Courier Mail Business Spectator Murdoch also has full or partial interests in: carguide.com HarperCollins Publishers Hulu SKY Italy SKY Germany TATA SKY (Asia) David Roden, EVDL moderator & general lackey To reach me, don't reply to this message; I won't get it. Use my offlist address here : http://evdl.org/help/index.html#supt = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = All we learn from history is history repeats. -- Andrew Ratshin = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = _______________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub ARCHIVE: http://www.evdl.org/archive/index.html INFO: http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
