Clearly, "yes".

And when the government stops paying people $7500 to buy electric/hybrid...

http://insideevs.com/us-federal-7500-ev-credit-expiry-date-by-automaker-estimates/

But surely this road that we seem to be heading down, means that these EV/Hybrid vehicles will become cheaper, due the economy of scale i.e. mass producing things makes them cheaper. So there will be no need for any sort of subsidizing.

There seems to be a very narrow minded thought process going on here.

You find that Resistance in most circles when a paradigm shift is approaching. The human ability to ignore the obvious and tell ourselves, convincingly, that nothing is wrong, happens to be why I had no shortage of clients when I was a therapist. Most people sitting on my couch were there because something in their life or circumstance had changed and they were fighting the new normal with the usual amount of success you'd expect from shouting at the rain..

Thank you very much for that insight and, view point from the other side of the Therapist's couch. Very enlightening. I'd better keep my shades on thought .

"So there will be no need for any sort of subsidizing"

"Need" has nothing to do with subsidizing big business. Money, in the form of bribes, buys subsidies. Those subsidies may be called tax breaks, but they are specific to the purchaser's industry.

Energy subsidies - Wikipedia

Senate rejects amendment to end tobacco farm subsidies | TheHill

To restate a point SolarEagle made. How much more grid capacity would be required?

Very well and succinctly said.

Is not hydrogen liquid electricity and is the fuel cell vehicle (FCV) already dead? Could an internal combustion engine run off of hydrogen? .... Interesting times for sure, maybe Nostradamus could tell us better.

Unless we develop 'nukeaway' (Mork + Mindy) and generate all our electricity with nuclear power, we're just moving the pollution from one place to another.

Maybe it's better to have the emissions in an area of low population - except for the population who moved there to get away from the pollution.

How is gasoline/diesel manufactured? How is gasoline/diesel conveyed to the gas stations?

It's all a matter of which is the most efficient method and least polluting?

It's pointless being a blocker and, saying the infra-structure's not in place, to support this change. DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Oh I forgot, this will never take place in our current political environment, until it becomes financially viable. And that decision will be made by the parasites.

But then again there's probably somebody out there, to debunk this pollution thing. As it's not effecting us and, there's no global warming.

Let's just stick our heads back in the sand and, worry about it when it's too late.

The future looks bright, that's why I've got to wear shades.

So true

^{Knowing full well, that there are those who NEED an occasional target, at which to spit... here goes:}

as stated in #2

"It's foolish to try and force the issue...but that's never stopped them before"

There exist those ("in power") who love freedom and liberty, and there are those who seek (more) power and control.

Those who seek more power and control can only achieve it through tactics that will chip away at freedom and liberty, and, they will use whatever means suits their purpose; even if it means concocting a grandiose, world-wide-scheme of lies and nonsense (encouraging and using others who will buy-into their foolishness).

I contend that sooner-or-later, the war-on-cars will be stifled, "moot",

by development of, and {"_{^{much akin to Moore's Law, with regard to electronics}}"} shrinking-of technologies <"similar"> that will bring-to-bearable-levels any-and-all-emissions, which will even extend the usable lives of those subterranean and subsea oilfields, ALL-OF-WHICH were laid-down in that single/catastrophic event... not near so-long-ago as we've been lied-to, in recent decades.

"As long as the earth endures, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night will never cease."

_{Gen 8:22}

[ ^{_{Feel free to spit, now, ye generation of vipers}}...]

Just to be clear I understand; are you claiming that the oil fields were created in a single catastrophic event?

Does that go for all hydrocarbons? Do you believe these were all laid down in place by a single catastrophic event? Coal and tar pits as well?

....and the evidence of plants and animals long extinct that are found in coal and tar pits?

wrt your bottom line, I don't believe that I ever stated that, exactly.

[[ please do not put any words in my mouth, so to speak, and I shall return the favor.]]

You are most certainly intelligent enough to understand the concept of the two, principal, over arching "world views". And then, certainly, the fact that when virtually any evidence is looked at, by two different persons, through the "lens filters" of those two worldviews, different results (each result being totally, undeniably acceptable, to the brain receptors of each individual) will inevitably be reached. ("yes?")

I *do* fervently believe that the multitudinous polystrait fossils, all over the world (especially those trees, standing straight through two separate coal seams, previously having been declared to be "millions of years apart", in the so-called geologic column), are God's evidence left for those who believe in His view... ((as are the bunch of human artifacts, that have been found buried deep in those coal seams)).

... and, I believe likewise of the oil fields. THEY our evidence, crystal clear, of the wondrous, "Garden of Eden" *type* of world that existed before the great flood.

Until (modern) geologists and archaeologists STOP discovering evidence that conclusively supports the *history*, as recorded throughout the Scriptures... ((as if it might be possible for them to do otherwise))... I, for one, shall continue to live in the glory and grandeur, and in awe of, His Creation.

[[ PS: I shall think everyone in advance, to NOT try and put me in a box, of worshiping a God who is deserving of the caricatures thrown at Him by the likes of Dawkins or George Carlin. The one true God, deserving of all mankind's worship, IS, in fact, omniscient, omnipotent, omni-present, and He (who created everything in the first place), "stretches out the heavens", while at the same time "holding all things together".]]

"Cheers", and blessings to one and all.....

I was asking questions, not assigning assertions. It was not clear to me but did seem from what you wrote you were revealing a belief (among others) that all the various hydrocarbons deposits were laid down quite suddenly fairly recently, i.e. within the last 10,000 years or at least an order of magnitude thereof.

You still haven't made that really clear. I think that is what you are stating. Is that correct?

If that is essentially correct,

...how do the odd skeletons (animals different from examples we have today) that keep being dug up at the La Brea tar pits fit into your view? Were these skeletons laid down in the tar in the same event, or where there animals similar but definitely distinct from those today , that fell into the pits?

.

....what about the forms that appear to be plants and animals related yet distinct from plants and animals today that are found within the coal? How did those get in there?

.

On your note of a petrified tree crossing several strata...

...that seems much more problematic for the idea that is was all laid down in a recent event than a view that allows enough time and some occassional energetic mixing of layers.

Re:

"...all the various hydrocarbons deposits were laid down quite suddenly fairly recently, i.e. within the last 10,000 years or (thereabouts)...Is that correct (_{what I believe})?"

The Pits (1910 Photo) first opened to 'public-visitation' in 1952 (being the only Museum in Hancock Park).

I wasn't born until "54... but spent my earliest years (up to age 10) living in Rialto, just a Sunday-after-services drive to the museum...(!)

One thing that seems curious to me (now) is that of the 60+ pits excavated, more than 50 were totally unproductive.

ALL of the fossils recovered thus far have come from about a dozen dig-sites.

THAT leaves all-kinds-of-room for speculation as to why the poor critters seemed to "favor" these particular 'ponds'...(?)

In my "mid-later" years (the late '80s), I had occasion to 'participate' with a fellow who led a second-life as an amateur paleontologist. We had to agree to disagree on the actual age of the bones, whilest making some fiberglass replicas {for museums}.

Insofar as How? all of the plants/animals/insects etc. found their way into the tar-pits; (^_"Gee"), I wish that I could give you the answer that you would like to hear.

As for myself, my faith has had me quite well 'riveted' to a different arena of inquiry, for some time now. Being "where I am", spiritually, I am totally free from any need to inquire-into "controversial subject material", trying to figure-out HOW things in the past MUST have occurred, in the *absense* of a supernatural creator.

Thus [my best response] IF a search for such answers WAS "in-my-crosshairs", I (personally) would avoid seeking answers from the folks at Berzerkely [or any other such institution that has devoted itself ("head-over-heels") to ^_pushing the religion of evolution].

Instead, my search would begin with sites such as this one (below), and, "move-about-from-there":

La Brea Tar Pits: Evidence of a Catastrophic Flood

["Edit"/PS: yes, that is my younger self on the couch, trailer...]

Okay.

When you brought up 'laid down in a single recent catastrophic event', I thought for a moment I was fortunate enough to actually be talking to ome of the people who believes dinosaur fossils were planted by God as a test of faith to weed out the true fanatics from those give serious consideration to empirical evidence.

I have heard people like that exist, but I haven't ever witnessed one personally. I think it would be fascinating get a little insight into what a belief in a supernatural being that is actively attempting to trick believers into becoming nonbelievers (as to orthodoxy) by planting false evidence that couldn't ever be discovered to be a fraud.

.

I'm still not sure how you would explain even plant fossils in coal with your idea about very recent single event deposits, but I don't think you are one of those people worshiping a trixter god either.

.

Thanks for tollerating my inquiry,

[^self-OT'd] Re: "Thanks for tolerating my inquiry" ...

"No-such-thanks-necessary"... ... I invite 'any-and-all' interrogations regarding *any* aspect of my 'beliefs' ... the only "caveat" being that I do not purport myself to be a 'great theologian'... and as such, will (when a question calls for same) defer-to the "most appropriate answer that I know of", already given by someone far more qualified than myself¹, such as (one of my favorites), a <7_minute video response given to an atheist-scientist, wherein Ravi refers-to John Polkinghorne , among others...

His ideas (together with my dad's²) have rather "guided-my-thinking" for quite awhile, now.

¹ - there are already far-too-many so-called "preachers of the Word" out there, totally unqualified and unsuited to the task. And (it surely goes without saying), there are all-too-many people who refer to themselves as "followers", who have no 'compass' whatsoever. These types of people do far more harm than good, when they open their mouths, and fail to give (as Peter exhorts us), a suitable reason for their faith... {or worse, as some, not all, televangelists do, "turn people away from our Redeemer" BY pushing their own, faulted agenda(s)...}

² <more about him, later...I have more-or-less "held-back", til now>

One thing that seems curious to me (now) is that of the 60+ pits excavated, more than 50 were totally unproductive.

I am sorry that all of animals decided not to die in the same spot.

We have similar trees in clay mines in Scotland, the roots and the branches millions of years apart. Our guide made no comment on the trees that stood tall for millions of years, just that occasionally they get loose and come crashing into the cavity excavated for the clay - watch out for falling trees!

"all lies and jest till a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest"

Solution holes and breccia pipes are pretty common especially in karst topography. These dissolution collapse holes can have very steep walls, be very deep often crossing layers deposited over long periods, and often transport living organisms from that present time down to a place favorable for preservation. It is quite common for small animals to have fallen in and even very large trees could fall in, roots and all...and often remain oriented vertically.

Sum the combustion energies of the diesel and gasoline used for transportation in a day. Convert it to KWH. Expect peak charging load to be at night when other grid demands are at a minimum. Consider a further 10 percent reduction of grid loading due to reduced and increased efficiency of lighting. Consider the impact of point of use (solar) production and on site storage to further offset grid demands.

It's a problem that can be solved.

Combustion energy NEEDS to go away. Our planet is no longer supporting an adaquate rate of photo-synthesis to support our oxygenic redox processes. Humankind is in trouble, we did it, and the rate of our consumption is going to be curtailed; with or without our effort.

I agree that our reliance on fossil fuel for an energy source has to eventually go. But in one form or another combustion is here to stay, at the very least for the sake of making good cuisine.

I know the math just don't want to research the variables of how many cars in how many countries and the average miles driven per day by each car and the average mpg per car. I just intuitively know that it translates to one hell of a number of kwh. I also know that the only renewable worth a damn or dam is hydro to insure a meaningful efficiency at power generation and a reliable day and night source. Wind is not a very efficient generator and not all that reliable and solar is less efficient and even less reliable or available due to either clouds or nighttime. Most electric vehicles rely on fossil fuel either as coal, oil or gas to supply the recharge. Most of those plants are around 40% efficiency or less. Nuclear is not very efficient and puts a lot of heat out into the atmosphere or water. Basically the future may be in fuel cells. The Japanese already have small residential units and are putting them into cars and fork lifts. The efficiency of a fuel cell is often in the 60 to 80% range and by utilizing the waste heat to heat hot water tanks or the house or even provide a/c via lithium bromide units the overall thermal efficiency can be up to 90%. The only environmental output is water vapor and heat. The PEM units using natural gas as a fuel are using membranes that are constantly being improved. Peak loading at night, as you mention, doesn't speak way for the use of solar as a supply. Wind often can be less at night since the temperatures tend to even out and there are less thermals causing wind. So until fuel cells become more available and economical or until major sources of electric power generation come on line, the good old ICE will hang around for awhile despite whatever laws the attention seeking politicians pass.

I work for a man that builds high performance engines, 70 k + for events like the Baja race, and his son Chris is always showing me how his dad is tweaking ice, to produce more horsepower. His area of industry is very strong. From all appearances, it will need to take a monumental difference to change an entire way of life.

In 1808 François Isaac de Rivaz designed the first car powered by an internal combustion engine fueled by hydrogen. Why didn't we end up following this route??

This is just a case of history repeating itself. Approximately 100 years ago the internal combustion engine vehicle became available to the masses. If you look back at that monumental change in history, the exact same fears, resistance, arguments and discussions took place. The reality of it all, is that it was probably a much bigger blocker/hurdle to overcome. As none of the infra-structure was in place to begin with.

So we can all argue/discuss, until we're blue in the face (shout at the rain). Change will not suite everybody and, we'll probably have very little say in it anyway.

Of course the ICE is on borrowed time, we all are on borrowed time. Nonetheless I will be surprised if the transition away from the ICE happens in my lifetime. I will be equally surprised if a purely battery driven electric motor becomes the predominant propulsion source in the future.

I suspect a hybrid design of battery, electric motor, and an on the move charging system using a more efficient but lower peak power than an ICE will provide enough power to cruise and charge. The vastly higher energy densities of chemical fuels will forever surpass any battery technology but the the frugality of dynamic braking recharging a battery. Maybe in the future the charging engine will be a Sterling engine, small gas turbine or other engine design optimized to handle the gradual loads of a charge circuit.

Short answer: yes. I'm an old hot rodder and love ICE, but electric cars are coming like gangbusters. Most of us drive less than 50 miles/day, and range is already over 200 for most OEM electrics. We charge at home overnight or at work. A "supercharger station" costs only about $5k vs $$$ for a gas station. And the autonomous and Uber revolutions in how we get about are a great fit with electric. Our kids will go to museums to see ICE cars that were noisy and smelly and you actually had to steer yourself!