More Green to be “Green”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Green New Deal isn’t just an attack on driving. It’s also an attack on mowing – and growing.

On everything that gets done using equipment powered by internal combustion – which results in the production of carbon dioxide, the bogeyman of our time.

This includes lawn mowers – and hay balers.

There are electric versions of the former but not of the latter. And electric lawn mowers – like electric cars  – only go so far and then take an awfully long time before they can go anywhere again. Longer, actually, than EVs – which can be “fast” charged in about 30-45 minutes . . . if you have access to a 240 volt charger.

But electric lawn mowers (and trimmers) charge up the old-fashioned way, on standard 120 volt household current – like portable drills.

Which takes hours.

You could run an extension cord and avoid losing charge – and so, having to recharge. But what if you have to mow more than a quarter-acre or so? That’s going to take a long extension cord.

The Green New Deal is as much an assault on rural living – and farming – as it is on driving, the cost of which will go up by 30-50 percent if people are forced to buy only electric cars and the much-promised (but yet to be delivered) “breakthrough” in battery technology that will supposedly reduce the cost of electric cars by 30-50 percent and so make EVs cost-equivalent with non-electric cars doesn’t happen.

It certainly hasn’t happened yet.

As a point of comparison, the least expensive EV on the market is the Nissan Leaf, which stickers for just under $30,000.

By $10

Its base price is $29,990 – which sounds better than $30,000. Which is about twice the cost of a Nissan Versa Note, the automaker’s otherwise similar economy hatchback.

That’s for a Leaf with a best-case range of 150 miles.

Italicized because EV range is much more variable than the range of IC cars – because everything that’s powered in an EV – including power accessories such as the AC and heater – is powered by the battery pack and so draws down the battery pack’s charge.

Also, batteries are greatly affected by extremes of heat and cold – as EV owner n the Midwest discovered last winter during a cold snap. The advertised range of their EVs plummeted by as much as 40 percent just from the cold. You’d have to have a leaking gas tank to have a similar problem with a non-electric car.

The EV range problem wouldn’t be such a big problem were it not for the EV recharge problem – which imposes a time cost on the EV owner, even if a “fast” charger is available.

Nissan offers a Leaf with more range – 226 miles – for several thousand more ($36,650). This version of the Leaf goes about half as far as any current non-electric economy car (most can go 400 miles or more on a tank) and costs about $20,000 more than the price of a non-electric economy car such as the Versa Note ($15,650).

Will similar costs be imposed on outdoor power equipment – and farm equipment – in the name of the Green New Deal?

if so, eating is also going to get a lot more expensive. Unless, of course, an exemption is given to heavy farm equipment as well as to the heavy trucks that deliver the food.

Cows, too.

These emit a lot of carbon dioxide – and there’s no way to reduce their “emissions” without reducing the number of them. This will mean either fewer steaks – or much more expensive steaks.

Maybe, like electric cars, steaks will be something for the rich only.

That’s how future – our present – was portrayed back in the 1973 dystopian film, Soylent Green. A steak was as much a luxury as a private car – or a private apartment. The cattle – who ended up being processed into Soylent crackers – lived a life of austerity.

Green New Deal proponents don’t mention any of this, of course – for the obvious reason that most people aren’t going to knowingly vote themselves into poverty – much less starvation.

Instead, they imagine a utopian future of electrified everything that costs them nothing -either in money or time – to solve a problem that’s as hyped as the solutions to it.

There’s got to be some kind of way out of here . . . said the joker to the thief.

But maybe not.


  1. If only AOC were as cute as the cartoon girl depicted in Garrison editorial.

    She does have a decent rack and body. Trouble is, she also has a MOUTH, and doesn’t use it PROPERLY…

  2. “the production of carbon dioxide, the bogeyman of our time.
    This includes lawn mowers – and hay balers.”

    Everyone always forgets cement manufacturing … for which there is no alternative. Can’t get cement from wind, or solar, or nuclear (and you can’t have any of those — particularly nuclear — without cement).
    Does the AOC’s green new deal eliminate buildings … ANY buildings?

  3. $20 grand for an extra 76 miles per charge?!?!?

    Remember we’re just getting started with all this nuttiness. There’s a new measure for power generation that’s snuck into the milieu known as “home.” You’ll see it referenced in most renewable generation, as in “The new solar plant can provide power for 4,000 homes.” That sounds like a lot until you start looking around for a definition of exactly how much electricity the average home uses, and how variable that number can be. When I lived in poorly insulated apartments with electric baseboard heat it was nothing to see a wintertime electric bill of $250 a month. Now that I’m in a well insulated 1400 sq ft home (much larger than any apartment I’ve lived in) with gas heat I rarely see an electric bill higher than $50 and that’s with a chest freezer and a fair bit of electronics and computing equipment running 24/7. How many “home” does it take to run a computer data center? A cell tower? A cable system? A recycling plant? An Amazon warehouse? A hospital? Never mind a manufacturing facility like a tank factory or long range radar installation (seems like war is on the horizon, and it won’t be won on renewables).

    I don’t have a grass lawn, but if I did I would probably consider an electric mower just for the convenience factor. My lot isn’t very large and a couple of extension cords could easily cover the area. But a battery powered mower makes very little sense. I tried out a lithium battery powered string trimer. It would drain down after about 10 minutes of use. Batteries were 60% of the cost, so buying more batteries wasn’t worth it, especially since they were incompatible with my power tools and other products. I could probably build a few batteries with hobby style battery packs, but why bother? Besides it would be a pretty difficult task to 3D print up adapter brackets that fit. Instead I just got a trimmer that uses an extension cord (for 1/2 the price) that works much better, has no problem covering the landscape and much more power.

    That also reminds me of another problem: Vendor lock in. Several people have mentioned removable battery packs for electric cars. That’s a horrible idea! Every company would have their own battery pack standard. In fact, they’d probably have a different battery pack for every model. We all know the dance with power tools. You buy a drill. They up-sell you all the other devices that battery will work with (which happen to conveniently come only from that brand’s tool lines), so you pick up a few more tools and an extra battery or two, and the high speed charger station (with that cool job site radio pre-tuned to the classic rock station). Soon you’re into the company for hundreds of dollars. Then after about 2 years the LiPO cells start failing (they all do, even if you don’t use them). Time for new batteries… uh oh! They have a new battery that won’t fit the old tools. But maybe they sell an adapter plate. So do you buy adapter plates for all the tools, all the batteries, or for each man? You’re a cheap f*** so better just get one and swap it around. “Where’s the damn adapter plate? Who was in here using my tools and didn’t put the adapter plate back?” No matter what you’ll end up with 4-5 different chargers, all of which are similar but incompatible. How is that scenario going to work with electric cars? Better factor in the size and quality of the dealer network if you hope to use an electric with swappable batteries.

  4. What gets me is this… the more CO2 in the atmosphere, the greener the planet will be. The Earth’s foliage is increasing. Another piece of evidence that the ultimate goal is control.

  5. Eric can you imagine construction sites using battery powered front loaders, cranes and cement trucks? Should be great for creating more labor opportunities as you sit and wait for them to charge twice a day because they were burned down.

  6. I’d like to see all who support the crazy bitch be taken off into the Rockies or the mountains in Idaho where NOBODY lives…..on the grid. Wish em good luck, wait a week and ask the few survivors(they’d have no idea to make shelters or even get water)if they want to stay.

    The very few who live in places such as that know well what being off the grid, off the roads and off the land of plenty know what they’re doing. Probably they’d wish they had more ammo if this group found them. Maybe they’d like to live “Lord of the Flies” or “Hunger Games” with them not being the “chosen ones”. I’d do everything I could to make it happen for them.

    No, the best idea is to send them to Nigeria. That’s the epitome of Trump’s “shithole country”. Shit everywhere and nothing to eat but each other where the warring groups celebrate killing their enemies by eating them.

  7. There’s too much confusion, I can’t get no relief.
    I’m fairly well convinced I’m not from this planet, and I want to go home.
    More and more often, I am completely astonished at how utterly stupid people can be. Even if CO2 output could raise the temp several degrees, instead of the fictitious 1-2 degrees the alarmists claim, it would beat the hell out of starving/freezing to death. Democracy is NOT the solution it’s advertised to be, as a person can be smart, but people are typically morons.

    • “I’m fairly well convinced I’m not from this planet, and I want to go home.”

      Me too.

      At times I get pretty deep into various space alien stories. I consider them to be primarily science fiction but they are presented as theories and facts from people who had experiences. In one set of these stories Earth is a prison planet for souls that have committed various violent or political crimes in other places in the universe in other lives. If that’s true I guess I know what sent me here, wrong think.

    • JWK, Outside in the cold distance, a wildcat did growl. Two riders were approaching and the wind began to howl.

      And so it begins here where I am. Made it to 92 but it will be 40 tonight and a high of 51 tomorrow. Be back to nearly 90 in 2 days. If you don’t like the weather in west Texas, just wait a little while.

      Deer will be moving like crazy this afternoon.

  8. Eric,

    “ The cattle – who ended up being processed into Soylent crackers – lived a life of austerity.”

    I prefer abject penury to austerity. You can choose to be austere. You can’t really choose to NOT be turned into a cracker.

    Word of the day boys and girls is entomophagy.

    Just think of the amendment to the Pure Food And Drug Act. Only changing one word.

    More to less.

  9. Hear of the Rimac C_2Two ,,,, No? The electric car for the average guy at $2 million. 1914 hp,,, 258 mph,,, 0-60 in 1.85 seconds! (Can a human handle that acceleration ??) Claims it can go 400 miles on a fillup that takes under 30 minutes.
    Almost sounds to good to be true. Maybe Eric can test drive one….. 🙂

  10. Eric,

    I’ve actually read through the GND. It’s only 14 pages, so it doesn’t take that long. The good news is that the GND is a road map, a blueprint, a skeleton, if you please. The good news is that the GND doesn’t mandate anything by itself. The bad news is that it’ll need “enabling legislation”; the skeleton will need muscle on it, which will come in the form of new laws to make the GND come to life, as it were.

    As the man once said, the devil is in the details. What details will the GND have once the blueprint has been “built out” with the subsequent enabling legislation? What form will that take? Will it require EVs? As of right now, it just says we’d like to clean up emissions; we’d like a cleaner environment. What is unanswered as of yet is HOW will we do that? How ill emissions be cleaned up, reduced, or eliminated?

    BTW, a fast EV charger, such as the Tesla Supercharger, uses 480V, not 240. 240 would be used in your house. A 240 VAC system could be used as a public charger, but it wouldn’t be fast; depending on the state of charge when you plug in, you’ll be there hours. At home, charging an EV with 120 VAC will take 8-10 hours, whereas a 240 VAC charger will cut that approximately in half, maybe a little more. It’s not a fast charger, per se, but it’s fast enough to make sure your EV will be fully charged in the morning; even if you get home late for some reason, you’ll be able to fully charge the EV using 240 VAC, whereas using 120 VAC will be cutting it close.

  11. If environmentalism restricted itself to truly caring for our natural resources, I would have no problem with it. However, with the secret science and questionable funding that these environmental groups possess taints the whole barrel. It turns out that many claims that environmentalists make have no basis in fact and are not based on good, honest, scientific investigation. This is why environmental scientists have to hide their data, as it does not fit their agenda. A good example of this is the so-called global warming crap, now renamed climate change. For one, the climate is always changing. The East Anglia emails in which data was purposely falsified by climate scientists comes to mind. Not only that, the climate scientists purposely installed temperature monitoring sensors in cities, contrary to manufacturers recommendations and good scientific practices, in asphalt-covered parking lots, and other heat sink areas in order to prove their (faulty) hypothesis. This is scientific dishonesty at its worst.
    It turns out that the solar system is in a cooling cycle due to decreased solar activity. There are two long-term solar cycles that reinforce themselves when in phase and cancel themselves out when out-of-phase. Look up the Maunder minimum. There are no SUVs on Mars or other planets, yet they are also experiencing the same solar variability.
    Environmentalism has been the method used to impose communist principles on western society, especially in the USA.
    Environmentalists are not content with promoting clean water, air and land, but are hell-bent on controlling human behavior, and yes, promoting extermination plans for much of humanity as these anointed types consider mankind to be a pestilence (except for themselves) to be reduced in population by any means necessary.
    Environmentalists HATE the God-given concept of private property and have imposed government-backed and enforced land use controls on private property owners without compensation, clearly an unconstitutional taking of private property. If environmentalists want to control land use, let them purchase it themselves, not by government force. Today the only method of negating government-imposed land use restrictions is shoot, shovel, and shut up.
    If environmentalists had their way, the earth’s human population would be reduced by approximately 90%, with the remainder to (be forced) to live in cities, in soviet-style high rise apartments, utilizing bicycles, buses and trains for transportation. The use of automobiles and access to pristine wilderness (rural) areas would be off-limits to us mere mortals, and would only be available for these anointed environmentalists.
    The endangered species act is another abuse of environmentalism. Species are always changing, to adapt to their environments-survival if the fittest. In fact, the hoopla over the spotted owl (that placed much northwest timber land off-limits to logging) turned out to be nothing but scientific misconduct and arrogance. There are virtually identical species in other parts of the northwest.
    More scientific malpractice occurred when government biologists attempted to plant lynx fur in certain areas to provide an excuse for making those areas off-limits for logging or development. Fortunately, these scientists were caught, however, no punishment was imposed.
    In order to promote the false religion of “global warming” aka “climate change”, NASA “scientists” purposely installed temperature sensors in city parking lots and roads contrary to good scientific principles and practices in order to “skew” the “global warming” results.
    In a nutshell, today’s environmentalism IS communism like watermelon-green on the outside and red (communist) on the inside.
    It is interesting to note that communist and third-world countries have the WORST environmental conditions on the planet. Instead of the USA and other developed countries spending billions to get rid of that last half-percent of pollution, it would behoove the communist countries to improve their conditions first. Here is a question for you environmentalists: Why is there a push for restrictive environmental regulations, but only on the developed first-world countries, and not the gross polluters such as India and China?

    • Good comment, anarchyst.
      True and honest environmentalism ought to consist of a single concept: “Don’t shit where you eat.”
      With a corollary that you shouldn’t shit where other people eat, either (unless you’re at war with them).
      And with the possible addendum of preserving some places where you neither shit nor eat, nor live, etc.

      Also, the IPCC’s b.s. was never limited to model-“tweaking” and misplacement of thermometers. The raw data, especially from the first 60+ years, came “pre-skewed” and now does not exist (Phil Jones filed his “data” in a circular file, and ALL warming arguments are based on a handful of papers he published in the 70s & 80s).

  12. All of this talk about reducing CO2 is getting nuts! A large portion o f the population has been indoctrinated into accepting the lie that a natural element is detrimental to the environment. It will not be long before some one from UNCLE will be arguing that people are the main source of CO2 and thus need to be eliminated. I wonder how many of the “greenies” will be first to do their part ??


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here