It’s interesting that one rarely hears about “alternative” fuels now that we are being herded into having no alternative . . . to “electrification.” This tells us that the point of the thing was always the elimination of alternatives.
Every rent-seeking business desires exactly that.
Recall the words of John D. Rockefeller, who infamously said that “competition is a sin.” The government agrees. It is why the government does not allow it – as regards itself. There is no alternative to it. One size-force-fits all. Corporations – which are creatures of the government that have come to own the government – like that very much as well. It is why they are “all in” on “electrification” – and the elimination of alternatives to it. For they control and profit from it.
What do you suppose it will cost to buy an EV when there is no alternative to buying (and using) EVs? How much do you suppose electricity – to feed the EV and to heat your dinner and your home – will cost when there is no alternative “fuel” available to apply cost/convenience pressure?
The intention – the final goal – ought by now to be as obvious as the intention (and final goal) as regards “masks” and those drugs they’ve been pushing as the sole alternative, too.
If you need more clarity consider the way alternatives such as hybrids and high-efficiency diesels have gone from being cheered and promoted to pariahs (in the case of diesels) and dismissed (in the case of hybrids). How much have you heard, for instance, about the just-redesigned Toyota Prius? As opposed to how much you have been hearing the latest six-figure EV like the GM Hummer or Tesla’s Cybertruck?
The new Prius averages close to 60 MPG and can probably reach that if driven gently. It can go 600-plus miles in between fill-ups and it can be filled up in about three minutes since its tank holds just 11 gallons of gas.
Its base price is also just $27,450 – or about $20k less than a base model Tesla3.
In other words, it is one Hell of an alternative to the Tesla3. Many more people could afford this alternative – and be freed from being tethered not just to a power cord but also a seven-year debt load. You can see why such alternatives are not wanted. Are being inveigled against as being less than “zero emissions.”
They are nearly “zero emissions” cars – and that is said to be not quite “clean” enough. It is a claim of the same species as the ones made three years ago about a “deadly virus” with an infection fatality rate of less than 1 percent for most healthy/not-elderly people. The actual threat is immaterial in both cases. It is the vehicle for the propagation of hysteria – for the purpose of control, facilitated by consolidation; i.e., the elimination of alternatives.
This could be achieved by leaving Toyota free to lighten up the car rather than being obliged to pork it up out of necessity – so as to “comply” with one-size-force-fits-all “safety” standards that have nothing – nothing at all – to do with whether a vehicle is safe to drive. A 1970 VW Beetle was – is – perfectly safe to drive. If you crashed it, your risk of being injured or killed would probably be higher than it would be if you were driving a new Jetta – but that doesn’t mean the Beetle is likely to crash.
You merely assume more risk if you crash.
Shouldn’t people be free to choose that . . . alternative, if it saves them money? If it suits them – rather than someone else?
If Toyota were free to focus on economy rather than compliance, it could have built a Prius that weighed closer to 2,000 pounds, like the economy cars of the Alternative Days – and that would have probably allowed for 70 MPG or even better than that. Along with even-closer-to-zero “emissions,” too.
Have you heard anything about the Mirai? Probably not – and for the same reasons. This Camry-sized (and so family-sized) sedan burns hydrogen – an alternative fuel that produces “zero emissions,” unless you count water vapor. The hydrogen isn’t actually burned, either. It is used to power fuel cells that, in turn, power the electric motor that turns the rear wheels. It has a range in excess of 400 miles and costs about the same as entry-level electric car like the Tesla3, a Civic-sized sedan that is too small to serve as a family car.
How about the L1? This was a diesel-electric hybrid VW was developing. It averaged 150 miles-per-gallon.
There are – there could be – a slew of such alternatives and (if they were available, if they were encouraged rather than discouraged) there would be cheaper electricity and EVs, too – because there would be competition and because there would be less pressure on limited supplies of the one-size-force-fits-all fuel, electricity.
Having alternatives is good for everyone – but very bad for the relative handful of someones pushing for the one-size-force-fits all “solution” . . . to a problem that doesn’t exist.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)