One Third as Far

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Scientific American has made an astounding discovery about vehicles that aren’t capable of being driven very far because they don’t go very far – and take a palsifyingly long time to get going again. It is that they are driven about a third less far than vehicles that go much farther and take almost no time to get going again.

The magazine – which like Dr. Fauci is very sciencey – published a “study” that “found” (it must have taken some looking) that “gas vehicles were driven 62.4 percent more than EVs between 2016 and 2022, based on odometer readings.”

You don’t say? 

Wonder why that could be . . . ?

The “study” goes on to note – ruefully – that most owners of vehicles that don’t go very far and take very long to get going again – own another vehicle that can (and doesn’t). That is, a car that isn’t a battery-powered device.

This very much concerns Scientific American. Leftists are always very “concerned.”

Guess why?

The environmental impact of EVs could be overestimated if electric cars aren’t being relied on by high-mileage drivers or used as daily drivers for multi-vehicle households.”

What is meant by that is that the “emissions” of the gas that feeds plants and thereby causes oxygen to be “emitted” for us to breath aren’t being reduced sufficiently for the sciencey solons of Scientific American.

Which is just terrible.

But Scientific American is right about the “environmental impact” of the Soviet-style government pushing of electric vehicle manufacturing.

The “environment” is greatly “impacted” by the fouling of millions of gallons of water leaching lithium for EV batteries and the laying waste of hundreds of acres of land for those toxic waste sites. Lithium, by the way, is both scarce and non-renewable. Once used up, it’s gone. And unlike oil, there’s not much available.

The “environment” will also be very much “impacted” (like Elvis’ colon) when millions of tons of toxic-waste-laden EV used-up EV battery packs (typically about 800-1,000 lbs. each) are dumped into landfills.

Open pit mining in Third World countries for cobalt – itself a very nasty material – also “impacts” the “environment.”

But never mind that.

Scientific American has the answer! “Get more EVs into the hands of people who drive a lot.”

After you’ve cleaned up the coffee you probably just spilled all over your keyboard after having read that, read this (after putting your coffee down so you don’t spill it again):

Used car buyers, however, could turn this trend around. Right now the U.S. has a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices). Higher-mileage drivers could benefit greatly from lower operating and maintenance costs while also benefiting the environment if they considered adopting a used EV—and especially if, in doing so, they took an older, higher-polluting vehicle off the road.”

I know; it takes a few minutes to reboot the ol’ noggin after reading something as sciencey as the foregoing.

Yes, indeed . . . the U.S. does have “a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices).” If the “U.S.” – an abstract rhetorical device – can be coherently said to have anything at all.

Anyhow, it begs a question. Why is it that there is “a large fleet of lightly used EVs available for sale (and at rather competitive prices)”?

Could it possibly be due to the previous owners having figured out that the battery-powered devices they bought don’t go very far and take very long to get going again – and decided this was too much hassle and dumped their devices? And why are the prices for these dumped devices “rather competitive” when the prices for used vehicles that aren’t devices aren’t?

It is a very tricky, very sciencey question.

But the answer – after much study – probably has to do with people not wanting to buy used devices that don’t go very far and take very long to get going again. Particularly because the batteries that power these devices are used. And used batteries hold less charge – on their way to holding none. Rendering the device incapable of going at all. And the cost of replacing that battery with a new one to power the inert device is not “rather competitive.”

Scientific Americans says “The impact of the used EV market can’t be understated.” And that’s certainly true – as used and unwanted and so unsellable battery powered devices with wilting batteries accumulate and languish on used car lots all around the country – alongside the brand-new EVs that are accumulating and languishing on dealership lots all around the country.

Scientific American says nothing about the potential “impact” of this on the car industry. Or on the economy – that is to say, on all the people whose livelihoods depend in one way or another on the manufacture and sale of cars  – after the car industry collapses as a result of being pushed, Soviet-style, to build as many battery-powered devices as can be shipped (but not sold) as the factories can churn out.

It is analogous to the useless (because unnavigable) White Sea Canal that Stalin ordered dug back in the ’30s. Never mind the “impact” – including an estimated 100,000 dead laborers, leaving aside the “environment.”

When a mania combines with authoritarianism, you get projects like that.

And we’re getting it good and hard, again.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

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!)

If you like items like the Keeeeeeev T shirt pictured below, you can find that and more at the EPautos store!


  1. Electric cars don’t get driven more because of two reasons. First, they can’t because they are recharging. Second, most are owned by people who have 3-4 other cars that aren’t electric so they are a toy.

    Electric cars for the masses aren’t happening. They just can’t and they won’t.

  2. isn’t it an oxymoron to think high mileage drivers can/should drive EV’s? They just can’t. Not enough time in the day/week. Maybe that will be their next propaganda. “you don’t need to sleep 6-8 hrs a night. Nor should you drive more than 4 hrs a day.” or shit like that……….

  3. I would say that the thinking reflected in the “Scientific” ‘Murican should have be read under a black light with a bong burbling in the background but, that would be an insult to pot smokers.

  4. Eric – most science magazines are caught up in current cultural trends of EVs and global warming, which has led to a revolt – much like the Protestant Reformation in science – to fight back against the mainstream stalwarts of science bought out by special interests.

    It so bad, that if Dr. Fauci and Al Gore started shoveling money to Scientific American they would be proving Covid19 is causing flat earth.

    Mainstream science still hasn’t figured out the Darwinian impossibility that a hominid swinging through the trees would not lose it’s fur in an ice age. All of human evolution has been encompassed by the ice age which started 2.6 million years ago, and all primates have fur – except us – who also have this mysterious 46 chromosome count, while our cousins have 48.

    The only mammals without fur live in the ocean or underground. Science can’t handle religion nor can it handle in your face evidence, humans are naked in an ice age! So they ignore it and come up with faux explanations.

    One thing is for sure, the more PhD’s behind an article, the more the bullshit is Piled High and Deep.

  5. Let’s build electric cars and see if they sell, if they don’t, they can pile up and wait until they do sell.

    Just keep doing the same thing over and over again, see how it works out.

    Might have to give them away to get people to drive them. The expected result ain’t there. If you want to have EV’s for transportation, the EV has to be free, it might work out for the better, maybe.

    If you can spend eight trillion dollars to bomb everybody into submission, you can spend money on EVs and can afford to give them away.

    You will get the same result, they will be abandoned, the EV will wear out just like any other crazy thing on the planet. Machines don’t last, they are abandoned. In Alaska, they’re all over the place. In Montana, scrapyards are full of abandoned trucks and trailers. I’ve seen a line of abandoned trucks a half a mile long.

    You can rob the abandoned vehicle for parts, tow it to the garage, strip it down, you can make a lot of money. If it’s dead on the road, the tow truck will be there. Of course, you do the legal part first, then go for it. Clear the title, part it out. Joe the Mechanic also owned a tow truck, abandoned cars on the road always get towed. Part of the car bidness.

    Happens all of the time, in Afghanistan, all kinds of military vehicles were abandoned.

    When a tractor broke down in a field in Russia, the wild-eyed communist just left it sitting there. Didn’t bother to check the oil. They’re always pulling that stuff. Solzhenitsyn wrote all about it in his gulag book, if IIRC..

    Wrecked and ruined infrastructure in Gaza is about the same, the analogy works there.

    Dump the lithium batteries in the ruins, the heat can purify the now poorest place on earth to a heavenly state of bliss.

    Time to quit while they are behind. We all know who they are, I think.

    • It reminds me of the ‘rent-a bicycle’ grift that went on in Europe & Asia just a few years back. All it ultimately resulted in was literally mountains of scrapped bicycles, & stolen money.
      The same happened in Houston & other U.S. cities with those goddamned electric ‘rental scooters’!

      • An armed robber robbed Joe’s gas station one day, Joe thought he was going to be killed. You just never know what might happen while working to make a living. Crime is one of the dangers of being in business. He lived to tell the story.

        The police did catch up with the criminal and that was that.

        The rest of the story.

  6. One third as far, and will you really be able to charge at home during high grid loads?

    This came to me from the utility co. PSE (Puget Sound Energy) the only game in town for many of us in WA:

    “ Get paid to save energy with PSE Flex

    Don’t forget to enroll in one of our Flex programs before Dec. 31 to earn a higher reward!

    With our new PSE Flex programs, you can get paid to help ensure reliable energy access for our region during periods of high demand.
    Flex Smart: Enroll a qualified smart thermostat and save energy automatically.
    Earn $75 per device ($50 after Dec. 31) for Google Nest, ecobee, Honeywell Home, Amazon, or Sensi
    Earn $30 per device ($20 after Dec. 31) for Mysa or Sinopé
    You’ll earn even more for ongoing participation, and PSE will adjust your thermostat by a few degrees on especially hot or cold days, or “Flex events,” when we use more energy to heat and cool our homes.”

    Holy moly! How many people really understand what they’ve signed up for with that “smart” thermostat? Good luck charging your EV during a “Flex Event”.

    • I agree, Sparky, and herein is the problem with the sheeple’s brains:
      You don’t ‘save energy’ any other way except to NOT USE it. Moreover, productive energy usage is always at a much higher rate than energy production, otherwise, no WORK would be accomplished.
      This is basic physics, unalterable by gimmicks, legislation, or any ‘crisis’ one might wish to use to warrant the current grift & tyranny at play.

      Energy storage devices, and regulatory usage are like abstinence, both get diminished & wasted when unused, and regulation of when how, & where is contrary to its very nature of existence and/or functionality.

    • That was a big story a couple of years ago in Denver. Seems a bunch of people didn’t read the fine print in the EULA for their “free” smart thermostats they got from Xcel Energy. When it got cold and the bid/ask price on gas and electricity got too high for Xcel to maintain their margins, they dropped everyone’s temperature to compensate.

      A smart thermostat is a great way to manage heating bills, if your expectations are low and you’re in charge of it. I figure I save about 5% or so over a dumb ‘stat, only because when I’m not home it will let the temperature drift lower than if the place is occupied, and I can anticipate coming home and let it ramp up while I’m in route. More insulation is almost guaranteed to be a better investment before you update the thermostat.

      But I also have control over it, unlike the deals you can get from utilities.

      • Hi RK,
        Our gas company did the same thing, free “smart” thermostats which had to be connected to WiFi in order to be “free”. No thanks; I’ll keep control of my home temperature all by myself. I regularly get letters chiding me for using more gas than my more “efficient” neighbors. Well TS, I’m old and can afford to pay the bill so I choose to be comfortable for my remaining days in my own home. Fortunately they don’t have “smart” gas meters yet because I would surely be rationed.

        • They are all using the same playbook! I also get the “you’re using more than the average of your neighbors” Notice the psyop re: the word “neighbors” – oh my, I’m a bad neighbor, I’m not doing my part!
          F them, I worked to be reasonably comfortable in retirement. Heat to 72 in the winter, cool to 76 in the summer.

          Also what has stuck with me since the Jimma Carter ‘put on a sweater speech’ in the 70s, the sad tale shortly after an old couple found dead in their home from slow onset hypothermia. Turned the heat down and paid the ultimate price.

          • Its physically impossible for anyone with IQ over 100 to die of hypothermia in US in 2023.

            Do we really need to put ourselves in circumstances which could invite death by exposure in 2023 ?

            What is the use of those who would do so to themselves or society ?

        • I get those “you use more energy” letters too. NEVER MIND my house is a good third larger than most of my neighbors, so even if I have the temp the same as theirs, I am going to use more.

          But no matter, I am a greedy pig for having more space, I suppose.

  7. It is my humble opinion that us boomers are of the last generation who took science and technology seriously, with a hunger to know how and why things work as they do. Us boomers had electrical and mechanical systems that we could work on and improve ourselves. Basic scientific principles were taught in school and reinforced with hands-on experimentation.
    In today’s climate (and the climate of two previous generations) experimentation on the level of the 1950s and 1960s is seen as “too dangerous”. I can remember the chemistry sets of the day being sold with toxic compounds which could be used for nefarious (and fun) purposes. Such sets are banned today.
    Today’s prime example of the public’s scientific stupidity being pushed by political considerations is that of electric vehicles, most people (even supposedly “educated” types) enthusiastically jumping on the bandwagon despite the major deficiencies and problems these vehicles have.
    Let’s look at the technical side of electric vehicles vs. ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicles. Range is a large factor in the desirability of ICE vehicles vs. today’s electric vehicles. One can fuel up an ICE vehicle in approximately five minutes and be on his way.
    Not so for electric vehicles. Quite often electric vehicle charging stations are few and far between, which contributes to “range anxiety”. For short hops and city driving, electric vehicles can be an ideal solution, but for extended “road trips” forget it.
    Electric vehicle batteries lose power even when the vehicle is not in use. (This is akin to a gasoline vehicle with a leaky gas tank). Add to that, cold weather and the use of accessories (air conditioning, heat, lights, etc) will reduce range considerably. Electric vehicles may be somewhat suitable for a California climate, but will fail in sub-zero Michigan winter snow and ice.
    Batteries can be charged only to 80% of full capacity as overcharging will reduce battery life considerably. “Fast charging” is also detrimental to battery life. It’s all about time and convenience vs. battery life.
    Gasoline and diesel fuel has an large energy content (density) in a small package, something that, in their present stages of development, electrical vehicles cannot achieve.
    Let’s make a comparison…gasoline contains approximately 33.7 kwh per gallon. A gallon of gasoline weighs approximately 6.1 lbs. The typical ICE vehicle can hold about 15 gallons of gasoline with a weight of approximately 90 lbs. total, with a total energy content of approximately 500 kwh.
    High-end electric vehicles have an energy capacity of approximately 120 kwh. This is equal to less than four gallons of gasoline. The typical electric vehicle has a 75 kwh battery pack, equivalent to approximately 2 ½ gallons of gasoline.
    Keep in mind that the battery pack weight is well over 2000 lbs (1 ton) and still has a limited energy capacity compared to gasoline. The typical electric vehicles weighs approximately 2 ½ tons (5000 lbs.), having to haul around a heavy battery pack. This also contributes to “wear and tear” on other automotive systems such as brakes and tires. (Yes, I am aware that regenerative braking exists and is a part of electric vehicle technology).
    From an environmental standpoint, lithium is nasty stuff, reacts with water violently and is much more volatile than gasoline. Electric vehicle accidents are much more hazardous than those of ICE vehicles. Water cannot be used to put out a lithium battery pack fire.
    Yes, gasoline is dangerous, but we have learned to control it and live with it successfully for over 100 years.
    Most of today’s generation do not understand scientific principles; hence the enthusiasm for electric vehicles which are “not yet ready for prime-time”. The inability of today’s generation to understand basic scientific engineering principles is responsible for their gullibility and ignorance.

    • Exact;y. Stupid people are easy to control, limiting their mobility & self-defense capabilities. It’s class slavery, disguised as anything & everything but.

    • A properly equipped 5.5 gal VP Racing container can be emptied into that govt mandated 7/8″ fuel restrictor orifice in under two minutes without spilling one tiny drop.

  8. In General Aviation we have a phrase ‘letting the airplane get ahead of you’. It’s a phase you DON’T want to hear from your instructor because it means your flying skills are sadly lacking & still borderline lethal.
    As mentioned in regard to “DR” Fuck-Me, I read 10 different online sources outlining his fraudulent & illegal fuckery which clearly indicated he was personally responsible for the creation and ‘escape’ of COVID-19, among other shitty, illegal things he had done since the early 1980’s. I found this info online in less than 30 minutes in MARCH 2020!

    Where the FUCK are people’s brains anymore? Why the Hell are people lagging on reality like they are in a 1990’s ‘chat room’ using a dial-up modem? For nearly TEN YEARS this EV scam has infected people like some viral brain-eating parasite. Actual science has become Scientology, a Goddamn cult of raving dumb-fucks!

    Ever single response to ever single fucking wild-hair up their collective fucking asses has been totally irrational, followed up with Tyrannical GovCo Enforcement. Fankly, I’m all for just taking these fuck-tards’ heads of with a howitzer, and starting with a clean slate.

      • Hi gtc,
        No you’re not missing a few brain cells, the problem is you have functioning ones. I’ve felt the same way sometimes; want to bang my head against a wall in frustration over the abject stupidity of the average human. They believe the lies of a few people with fancy titles while ignoring the actual facts that are everywhere to see. Truly isa cult.

    • If anyone is remotely interested, here are some GA examples that are best summed up by aviator Juan Brown:

      The first are what I consider 2 aviation representations of my above rant regarding people (or societies) that actually create their own dilemmas, and then react with lethal consequences:

      The third example is how only a hand full of people in society are actually on top of things and have the skills to know when an actual emergency exists, and how to respond without killing themselves or others:

      And btw, this is WHY we don’t have flying cars!

  9. “Scientific” American stopped being “Scientific” about 1980. They’ve been just “Tech propaganda” American for about 40 years.
    Those morons supported ‘global warming’ lies and COVID lies, and vaccine lies.
    Boycott their rubbish.

  10. Scientific American should rather be “concerned” about how EV manufacturers collectively refuse to fix the range, charging time and pricing problems that have plagued EVs for more than a century, and the reasons why EV manufacturers do so.

  11. Was Scientific American one of many media outlets that pushed absolute nonsense about COVID & COVID jabs? We’ve heard endless propaganda about how one who got vaxxed WOULDN’T get the dreaded ‘Rona, the unvaxxed faced a “Winter of severe illness and death” (Joe Biden’s claim from 2021), natural immunity was a dangerous conspiracy theory, the “vaccines” only worked if everyone took them, etc.

  12. These PHD (Piled High & Deep) scientists are buffoons and there are too many morons who believe everything they proclaim despite the contradictory evidence. Common sense these days is becoming exceedingly uncommon and should be considered a super power in todays “Idiocracy”.

  13. “Scientific American” isn’t scientific any more, it’s woke. Just like every other legacy magazine — National Geographic, Popular Mechanics, Atlantic, Smithsonian, etc.

    They’re all run by soys, queers and women with degrees from the “right” colleges but they don’t actually know shit from shinola.

    SA is currently run by a chick who used to work for the Washington Post and Slate:

    • I used to subscribe to some of those magazines, but gave them up when it seemed like every other article was about “climate change” or some other idiotic drivel. Nat Geo had (and to a degree still does) beautiful photography, but that alone cannot make it appealing.
      It’s a shame, as these used to be good and enjoyable magazines.

  14. Scientific Americlown’s EeeVee fanboi John Paul Helveston, gleefully proclaiming that lightly-used EeeVees are available at ‘rather competitive prices,’ evidently assumed that no one would actually click his supporting link.

    But that’s a very bad bet with reference-checking, original-source compulsives like myself. Here’s what his link actually says, right in the subhead:

    Electric vehicles are the worst at holding their value

    Obviously this malign, bow-tied, frayed-collar tout, catapulting his Woke propaganda from his suspiciously yellow-stained ivory tower in academia, takes us for simps and suckers.

    This way to the egress, folks!‘ — P T Barnum

    • That one link sums it up. A single paragraph of word-salad that means absofuckinglutely nothing, erudite gibberish to stupify the sheeple.
      It doesn’t take a college degree, let alone a PHD to understand that necessity is, or rather WAS, the mother of invention. This Helveston guy is just another useless, overqualified grifter.
      They are all hearing voices, more specifically “if you build it, he will come”. What a load of irrational, ignorant bull shit!

      • This John Helveston jackass isn’t even sharp enough to spell check his f-ing resume. It says he was a Postdoctoral Fellow at the “Institute for Sustainable Eergy [sic], Boston University (Boston, MA).” It’s “energy,” John; with an “n” in the word.

        Oh, and here’s his most recent “peer reviewed” woke publication:

        Evolvability Analysis Framework: Adding Transition Path and Stakeholder Diversity to Infrastructure Investment Decisions.

  15. We have waited for the development of better batteries for years. If Scientific American is any indication of our scientific competency, we’ll be waiting a while longer.

  16. Here I thought this was going to be an article about dollars…

    Maybe EVs are the automaker’s attempt at “shrinkflation,” reducing the amount of a product (often without decreasing the package size) instead of increasing the price. Works great for Nabisco and Frito-Lay, why not GM?

  17. Purchases are a personal thing. People buy what is palpable and important to them.
    The positives of EVs are touted as saving on maintenance and gas. and “the environment”.

    “The environment” is an abstract, so not really a selling point, other than the good feelings obtained through virtue signaling.

    What is left is cost. Do EV’s really save you money long term? Hard for a buyer to calculate. They do see the cost they will have to pay. Auto purchases are definitely a time preference buy. How much is it now, or how much is it per month?

    The negatives from a scientific perspectives would also be touted along side the “positives”, which they are not. Why are the negatives ignored? Because this is an agenda, not disinterested science.

    • For commuting and city driving, if you have good access to charging (such as your home), EVs can make a lot of sense. Most commuters go the same distance five days a week, rarely deviating from the schedule. If you can afford a vehicle dedicated to commuting an EV might be just the ticket, just from a routine maintenance standpoint.

      Of course that’s if the overall product is reliable…

      • EVs still take a lot of time to charge, and actually take a lot longer to charge for those who charge at a level 2 charger at home compared to a level 3 charger at a charging station. And contrary to what appears to be popular belief, charging times are not affected by whether the driver of the vehicle is sleeping during charging, so the condescending “you charge while you sleep” bromide is not applicable here (in fact, that statement is a insult).

        • If you only drive 60 or so miles round trip charging is a matter of just topping off. Instead of going from 25% to full, you’re only going from 80% or more to full. That can be done fairly quickly in a heated garage with 30A 220 charging. This also helps keep the battery in better condition, so it might last longer too.

          Downside is that if it is your only vehicle you’ll have to better manage range when you deviate from the normal daily commute. Range anxiety is not what you want on a weekend trip or other attempt to unwind and relax.

          And maybe that’s all part of the plan. Stay in your place, work and be productive, but then be afraid to explore or enjoy the world around you. It wasn’t very long ago that people didn’t get paid time off, and had no access to transportation, so a treat was to visit Central Park or Coney Island on the weekend. Travel was for the idle rich, as was escape to the Catskills or the Hamptons. Cheap transportation brought exploration to the masses, and the rich have been trying to put everyone back in their cages ever since.

          After all, when anyone with a few thousand dollars can climb Mt Everest, it’s no longer an accomplishment.

          • Charging is already ridiculously slow, and becomes even slower when the battery hits 80 % charge. The idea that it is possible to charge a battery “fairly quickly” from 80 % to 100 % is far-fetched – it will certainly take a lot longer than five minutes, and will probably be painfully slow.

  18. ‘When a mania combines with authoritarianism, you get projects like that.’ — eric

    Science — real science — flourishes only when free inquiry is possible.

    Galileo’s iconoclastic heliocentrism almost got him killed. When van Leeuwenhoek discovered spermatozoa in 1677 with a microscope, he was obliged to specify that the sample resulted from coitus with his lawful spouse — a claim which we, noting van Leeuwenhoek’s hairy hands, may doubt.

    Doctrinaire leftism has intruded not only into supermarket-checkout popular-science rags such as Scientific Americlown, but more worryingly into medical journals such as The Lancet, as it pimped covid ‘vaccines’ and censored their dangers.

    This is not a minor matter: as freedom of inquiry evaporates, so does any prospect for the US to continue leading the world in science.

    Despite its professed concern for the proletariat, Leftism ultimately leaves them barefoot, penniless and hungry. And even as it impoverishes them, it punches down at the white precariat, blaming them for their plight — as in this neocon-penned essay in the WSJ, just forwarded to me by a liberal Democrat correspondent:

    ‘No, We the People want to hear more from that Marjorie lady about … how vaccines are what gave them lumbago.’ — WSJ, flacking for Pfizer

    Smash the Lügenpresse.

    • [but more worryingly into medical journals such as The Lancet, as it pimped covid ‘vaccines’ and censored their dangers.]

      And not a one of those Mf’ers from top to bottom has been brought to justice. And now they’re injecting school children and babies with barely a peep from the slaves. Pumping shots that they, clowngress and most gov trash exempted themselves. When a species fails to protect its young……. it’s over.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here