A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
Recently I saw this report from the management consulting firm A. D. Little
referenced in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.:

http://www.adlittle.us/uploads/tx_extthoughtleadership/ADL_BEVs_vs_ICEVs_FINAL_November_292016.pdf

The report claims that BEVs have only a slight margin over ICEs in terms of
greenhouse gas reduction (23%) and that BEVs are significantly more
polluting overall.  To quote the WSJ article:

"... its total “human toxicity”—mainly due to heavy metals and
graphite—will be three to five times greater."

I don't know anything about ADL's reputation, but this analysis appears to
be strangely biased.  For instance my conversion's LiFePO4 cells don't
contain ANY heavy metals, but the catalytic converter in my gas car
definitely does contain platinum and palladium (which are obtained via
notoriously polluting mining operations...)

So two questions for the list:

Is there a reputable source that would refute this analysis?

Is there something I don't know about ADL's motivations for smearing EVs?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161211/442de931/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
According to this Wikipedia article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_D._Little

A.D.Little was bought by Paris-based Altran Technologies in 2002.

"Under Altran's ownership, Arthur D. Little rebuilt its core practices
in oil and gas, telecommunications, automotive and manufacturing and
chemicals and reopened its US offices. Arthur D. Little continues to be
active and recognized for its expertise in areas combining aspects of
technology, innovation, and strategy."

In my opinion, that pretty much sums it up.

Peri

------ Original Message ------
From: "Joe Fields via EV" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc:
Sent: 11-Dec-16 3:29:34 PM
Subject: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

>Recently I saw this report from the management consulting firm A. D.
>Little
>referenced in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Holman W. Jenkins,
>Jr.:
>
>http://www.adlittle.us/uploads/tx_extthoughtleadership/ADL_BEVs_vs_ICEVs_FINAL_November_292016.pdf
>
>The report claims that BEVs have only a slight margin over ICEs in
>terms of
>greenhouse gas reduction (23%) and that BEVs are significantly more
>polluting overall.  To quote the WSJ article:
>
>"... its total “human toxicity”—mainly due to heavy metals and
>graphite—will be three to five times greater."
>
>I don't know anything about ADL's reputation, but this analysis appears
>to
>be strangely biased.  For instance my conversion's LiFePO4 cells don't
>contain ANY heavy metals, but the catalytic converter in my gas car
>definitely does contain platinum and palladium (which are obtained via
>notoriously polluting mining operations...)
>
>So two questions for the list:
>
>Is there a reputable source that would refute this analysis?
>
>Is there something I don't know about ADL's motivations for smearing
>EVs?
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161211/442de931/attachment.htm>
>_______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
Also:
In 2001, ADL wrote a Philip Morris-funded report saying that smoking can
help Czech economy:Public Finance Balance of Smoking in the Czech
Republic
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Finance_Balance_of_Smoking_in_the_Czech_Republic>.

Cheers

On 12/11/16 6:40 PM, Peri Hartman via EV wrote:

> According to this Wikipedia article
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_D._Little
>
> A.D.Little was bought by Paris-based Altran Technologies in 2002.
>
> "Under Altran's ownership, Arthur D. Little rebuilt its core practices
> in oil and gas, telecommunications, automotive and manufacturing and
> chemicals and reopened its US offices. Arthur D. Little continues to
> be active and recognized for its expertise in areas combining aspects
> of technology, innovation, and strategy."
>
> In my opinion, that pretty much sums it up.
>
> Peri
>
> ------ Original Message ------
> From: "Joe Fields via EV" <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Cc:
> Sent: 11-Dec-16 3:29:34 PM
> Subject: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report
>
>> Recently I saw this report from the management consulting firm A. D.
>> Little
>> referenced in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Holman W.
>> Jenkins, Jr.:
>>
>> http://www.adlittle.us/uploads/tx_extthoughtleadership/ADL_BEVs_vs_ICEVs_FINAL_November_292016.pdf 
>>
>>
>> The report claims that BEVs have only a slight margin over ICEs in
>> terms of
>> greenhouse gas reduction (23%) and that BEVs are significantly more
>> polluting overall.  To quote the WSJ article:
>>
>> "... its total “human toxicity”—mainly due to heavy metals and
>> graphite—will be three to five times greater."
>>
>> I don't know anything about ADL's reputation, but this analysis
>> appears to
>> be strangely biased.  For instance my conversion's LiFePO4 cells don't
>> contain ANY heavy metals, but the catalytic converter in my gas car
>> definitely does contain platinum and palladium (which are obtained via
>> notoriously polluting mining operations...)
>>
>> So two questions for the list:
>>
>> Is there a reputable source that would refute this analysis?
>>
>> Is there something I don't know about ADL's motivations for smearing
>> EVs?
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL:
>> <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161211/442de931/attachment.htm>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
ADL is an obvious think tank. I don't know for sure if they are biased but I have never seen a serious research paper list car and driver magazine as a source. I suspect oil company funding.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 11, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Joe Fields via EV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Recently I saw this report from the management consulting firm A. D. Little
> referenced in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.:
>
> http://www.adlittle.us/uploads/tx_extthoughtleadership/ADL_BEVs_vs_ICEVs_FINAL_November_292016.pdf
>
> The report claims that BEVs have only a slight margin over ICEs in terms of
> greenhouse gas reduction (23%) and that BEVs are significantly more
> polluting overall.  To quote the WSJ article:
>
> "... its total “human toxicity”—mainly due to heavy metals and
> graphite—will be three to five times greater."
>
> I don't know anything about ADL's reputation, but this analysis appears to
> be strangely biased.  For instance my conversion's LiFePO4 cells don't
> contain ANY heavy metals, but the catalytic converter in my gas car
> definitely does contain platinum and palladium (which are obtained via
> notoriously polluting mining operations...)
>
> So two questions for the list:
>
> Is there a reputable source that would refute this analysis?
>
> Is there something I don't know about ADL's motivations for smearing EVs?
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161211/442de931/attachment.htm>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
An prime example of the misinformation presented in this
_non-peer-reviewed_ report shows up on page 7, where the report states:
"Survey data reveals that BEVs are driven an average of 27% fewer miles
per year than comparable ICEVs, but BEV owners still travel the same
total miles as their ICEV counterparts. 6 "

     Looking up the sited report in footnote #6, "Plug-in vehicle road
tax report", it gives zero information about ICEV's or the ICEV annual
miles driven. It is entirely about PIHEV"s and BEV's with no mention
_whatsoever_ of ICEV's. The source and nature of their ICE vehicle
annual miles is conspicuously absent. I wanted to know:  What type of
ICEV's are included? Over-the-road trucking perhaps?

     The authors go on to assume, without supporting data, that the EV
owner would need "make up" these "lost" EV miles using public
transportation or a rental car. This conjecture by the authors has no
basis in reality. I don't drive my EV any less that I used to drive my
ICE. When my wife and I drive together, or when we have both cars to
choose from, we preferentially drive the EV, instead of our Prius. Why
wouldn't we? It is cheaper to drive. The EV clocks more miles than the HEV.

     I also guffawed at figure #3, Its shows a number days lost for the
replacement battery for the BEV, but neglects the 4 or5 lead acid
starting batteries the ICE will have to replace over its lifespan, that
will likely cost a day each to replace. Where is the time lost for ICE
repairs in this graph, like the catalytic converter, exhaust system, oil
changes, tune-ups, fuel system, etc.?

     The report was written by a person that has never driven an
electric car for any length of time, obviously.

     I guess this is how "fake news" originates.

Bill D.


On 12/11/2016 8:12 PM, paul dove via EV wrote:

> ADL is an obvious think tank. I don't know for sure if they are biased but I have never seen a serious research paper list car and driver magazine as a source. I suspect oil company funding.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Dec 11, 2016, at 5:29 PM, Joe Fields via EV <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Recently I saw this report from the management consulting firm A. D. Little
>> referenced in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.:
>>
>> http://www.adlittle.us/uploads/tx_extthoughtleadership/ADL_BEVs_vs_ICEVs_FINAL_November_292016.pdf
>>
>> The report claims that BEVs have only a slight margin over ICEs in terms of
>> greenhouse gas reduction (23%) and that BEVs are significantly more
>> polluting overall.  To quote the WSJ article:
>>
>> "... its total “human toxicity”—mainly due to heavy metals and
>> graphite—will be three to five times greater."
>>
>> I don't know anything about ADL's reputation, but this analysis appears to
>> be strangely biased.  For instance my conversion's LiFePO4 cells don't
>> contain ANY heavy metals, but the catalytic converter in my gas car
>> definitely does contain platinum and palladium (which are obtained via
>> notoriously polluting mining operations...)
>>
>> So two questions for the list:
>>
>> Is there a reputable source that would refute this analysis?
>>
>> Is there something I don't know about ADL's motivations for smearing EVs?
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>> URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161211/442de931/attachment.htm>
>> _______________________________________________
>> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>>
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
> http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
> Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
> Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

tomw
Although "fake news" has recently been noted by some media outlets, it has been around for decades. The first organized effort in the U.S. began with Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew.  Bernays coined the term "public relations" because he said "propaganda" had negative connotations. Conservative segments of industry have built up a widespread network of PR firms such as Hill and Knowles which specialize in misrepresentation to spread doubt on science which negatively effects profits, and think tanks such as the New Enterprise and Marshal Institutes over the last 30 years. The concerted effort of these has created an alternative reality for those who believe them. They work closely with media outlets to give them reports that are publication-ready, so they go right into the media as-received from the think tank with no critical review, saving the media companies the "trouble" and cost of investigative reporting at the cost of the truth.

Bernay's efforts are detailed in this BBC special:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s

Don't be put off by the melodrama of the beginning with Sigmund Freud and yelling crowds, the film is very informative.

Expect to see much more of this on EVs now that the Koch brothers have started funding an effort against them.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
On 11 Dec 2016 at 22:41, Bill Dube via EV wrote:

>  I guess this is how "fake news" originates.

You could say that, but the term "fake news" is just a new name for an
ancient problem: propaganda.  Wealthy and influential people and
institutions don't take well to change when it might affect their profits.  
Any time you pursue something contrary to their interests, you'll eventually
get slammed with propaganda.  

Don't forget that a couple of fairly well-known and extraordinarily well-
heeled billionaires, whose money is partly in oil, have recently begun
dumping dollars into a campaign explicitly designed to keep people burning
oil in their ICEVs and NOT buying EVs.  Plenty of "researchers" are happy to
take some of their money to de-educated the public about EVs.

In the EV world this is nothing new, nor is the wide publicity it's given.

In 1995, Science magazine published a Carnegie Mellon University report
claiming that (among other things) lead release into the environment was 60
times as high from a GM Impact prototype (later the EV1) as from a 1970s
ICEV burning leaded gasoline!  

They came to this bizarre conclusion by assuming the most pessimistic values
for every possible variable -- battery cycle life, range per cycle, energy
use per mile by the EV, total amount of lead in the battery, amount of
recycled lead used, and many more.

This study was published despite the fact that had never been peer-reviewed.
It was also widely quoted in the mainstream media, including the New York
Times.  

The Times should have known better.  So should have Science.  And most
definiely CMU, which was, and is, a respected university.  But when 13
million bucks (almost $21 million in today's money) lands in your lap to pay
for such a study, as it did for CMU, that can be mighty tempting.  

I'll bet you can guess where that grant money came from.

Lead is no longer much of a factor in the attack on EVs, but The anti-EV
forces will always find something to beat us up on.  They're masters at
finding ways to bend statistics to suit their pre-ordained conclusion.

The folks most susceptible to their propaganda are those who are least
educated. Well, guess what -- the education quality in the US is in decline.
Propaganda also spreads with lightning speed today, thanks to uncritical
sharing on social media.  

Still, let's be blunt here: ignorant people by and large never have been and
probably never will be interested in EVs.  It's the well educated who are
already open to them.  Luckily, educated people are the ones most likely to
listen when you rebut propaganda with facts.

Unfortunately the EV movement still has limited resources to counter this
garbage -- and as usual, the bad guys have a LOT of money behind them.  

David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by tomw
Yes, we likely will see more fake news or misinformation about EVs. The
best, in my opinion, is to educate people. Be conspicuous. Tell people
the facts when you can. Don't put more attention on pieces of fake news.

And, yes, fake news has been around for a while. I suspect you can go
back to the origin of humanity. The big difference is social media. It
allows spreading info amazingly quickly and based on popularity, not
substance.

Peri

------ Original Message ------
From: "tomw via EV" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc:
Sent: 12-Dec-16 6:38:24 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

>Although "fake news" has recently been noted by some media outlets, it
>has
>been around for decades. The first organized effort in the U.S. began
>with
>Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew.  Bernays coined the term
>"public
>relations" because he said "propaganda" had negative connotations.
>Conservative segments of industry have built up a widespread network of
>PR
>firms such as Hill and Knowles which specialize in misrepresentation to
>spread doubt on science which negatively effects profits, and think
>tanks
>such as the New Enterprise and Marshal Institutes over the last 30
>years.
>The concerted effort of these has created an alternative reality for
>those
>who believe them. They work closely with media outlets to give them
>reports
>that are publication-ready, so they go right into the media as-received
>from
>the think tank with no critical review, saving the media companies the
>"trouble" and cost of investigative reporting at the cost of the truth.
>
>Bernay's efforts are detailed in this BBC special:
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s
>
>Don't be put off by the melodrama of the beginning with Sigmund Freud
>and
>yelling crowds, the film is very informative.
>
>Expect to see much more of this on EVs now that the Koch brothers have
>started funding an effort against them.
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/A-D-Little-EV-vs-ICE-report-tp4684797p4684809.html
>Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at
>Nabble.com.
>_______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
 
I think trying to turn this into a class issue is  not only counterproductive, but inaccurate.  Big money is going into EVs, so you can't make the "little guy" argument. These folks can just as easily come up with fake studies, too, or provide misinformation.(it's also no secret that I think that some on this list provide their share or misinformation - wealth not needed!)
I haven't read the study, but like any fake news there's frequently a kernel of truth someplace upon which gets built some absurd conclusion.
If you want to go down the rabbit holes, try first looking at GREET study numbers for GHG emissions for 100% coal sources. I don't think that that there are even states that have 100% coal-fired power, and those with large amounts have been working on shifts to nat gas, but that may be where they are getting the numbers. BTW, I disagree with the characterization that a 23% reduction in GHGs is trivial.
Going down another rabbit hole, look at recent California data on ZEV and PHEV use. Though I didn't see anything like what the ADL study has been reported to allege for BEVs in the presentation that I saw, some of the PHEV data was of concern in terms of electric versus ICE miles.
Though perhaps they got their data from places completely different!

Sent from AltaMail


 From: EVDL Administrator via EV <[hidden email]> To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report Date: 12/12/16, 7:04 AM

 
On 11 Dec 2016 at 22:41, Bill Dube via EV wrote:
 
>  I guess this is how "fake news" originates.
 
You could say that, but the term "fake news" is just a new name for an  
ancient problem: propaganda.  Wealthy and influential people and  
institutions don't take well to change when it might affect their profits.  
Any time you pursue something contrary to their interests, you'll eventually  
get slammed with propaganda.  
 
Don't forget that a couple of fairly well-known and extraordinarily well-
heeled billionaires, whose money is partly in oil, have recently begun  
dumping dollars into a campaign explicitly designed to keep people burning  
oil in their ICEVs and NOT buying EVs.  Plenty of "researchers" are happy to  
take some of their money to de-educated the public about EVs.
 
In the EV world this is nothing new, nor is the wide publicity it's given.
 
In 1995, Science magazine published a Carnegie Mellon University report  
claiming that (among other things) lead release into the environment was 60  
times as high from a GM Impact prototype (later the EV1) as from a 1970s  
ICEV burning leaded gasoline!  
 
They came to this bizarre conclusion by assuming the most pessimistic values  
for every possible variable -- battery cycle life, range per cycle, energy  
use per mile by the EV, total amount of lead in the battery, amount of  
recycled lead used, and many more.
 
This study was published despite the fact that had never been peer-reviewed.  
It was also widely quoted in the mainstream media, including the New York  
Times.  
 
The Times should have known better.  So should have Science.  And most  
definiely CMU, which was, and is, a respected university.  But when 13  
million bucks (almost $21 million in today's money) lands in your lap to pay  
for such a study, as it did for CMU, that can be mighty tempting.  
 
I'll bet you can guess where that grant money came from.
 
Lead is no longer much of a factor in the attack on EVs, but The anti-EV  
forces will always find something to beat us up on.  They're masters at  
finding ways to bend statistics to suit their pre-ordained conclusion.
 
The folks most susceptible to their propaganda are those who are least  
educated. Well, guess what -- the education quality in the US is in decline.  
Propaganda also spreads with lightning speed today, thanks to uncritical  
sharing on social media.  
 
Still, let's be blunt here: ignorant people by and large never have been and  
probably never will be interested in EVs.  It's the well educated who are  
already open to them.  Luckily, educated people are the ones most likely to  
listen when you rebut propaganda with facts.
 
Unfortunately the EV movement still has limited resources to counter this  
garbage -- and as usual, the bad guys have a LOT of money behind them.  
 
David Roden - Akron, Ohio, USA
EVDL Administrator
 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
EVDL Information: http://www.evdl.org/help/ 
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =  
Note: mail sent to "evpost" and "etpost" addresses will not  
reach me.  To send a private message, please obtain my  
email address from the webpage http://www.evdl.org/help/ .
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
 
 
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub 
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org 
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/ 
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.evdl.org/private.cgi/ev-evdl.org/attachments/20161212/b925f08c/attachment.htm>
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list
Peri,
The other (sad) element in the explosion of fake news is that people
share something that gives them the desired feeling, without any regards
for facts (that is why the "word of the year" is: post-truth) and even
when people have zero knowledge on the subject they will confidently
share what they see as the solution. Just yesterday I responded to a
woman confidently stating that there is not going to be global warming,
because the Carbon Monoxide level is rising and with it rising, sunlight
gets reflected out of our atmosphere and due to the cooling, land will
get covered in snow and the more snow, the more sun radiation will be
reflected away so it escalates the cooling of the Earth.
I was tempted to confirm that rising CO levels will indeed stop global
warming, but not for the reason she quoted. Instead I suggested that she
probably meant CO2 and then I repeated established science showing the
warming effect of high CO2 levels as well as the disturbing effects that
high CO2 levels has as direct effect on living things, such as loss of
concentration - at increasing CO2 levels we will actually not be able to
function as well as at the CO2 level that we were designed for, so this
goes way beyond the global warming and ever-weirder weather and affects
us directly.

BTW, this was in response on an article about Solar Activity and because
this subject is easily confused, people were discussing that low solar
activity means that the earth will get colder, without realizing that
the activity that is discussed is the amount of sun spots (magnetic
activity on the sun surface, causing ejection of mass from the sun and
Northern Lights) but with very little impact on sun light radiation, so
virtually no impact on the Earth climate...

But you won't believe how misguided some people can be in their
ignorance of science, while at the same time being overly confident
about their opinion.
There is actually a meme about this problem and it goes like this:
Why are stupid people so sure about everything while intelligent people
doubt so much?
I think that rhetoric question captures very well the disaster that
social media has become for a lot of areas where opinion counts more
than facts, but shouldn't.

Cor van de Water
Chief Scientist
Proxim Wireless
 
office +1 408 383 7626                    Skype: cor_van_de_water
XoIP   +31 87 784 1130                    private: cvandewater.info

http://www.proxim.com

This email message (including any attachments) contains confidential and
proprietary information of Proxim Wireless Corporation.  If you received
this message in error, please delete it and notify the sender.  Any
unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of any part of
this message is prohibited.


-----Original Message-----
From: EV [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Peri Hartman
via EV
Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 7:46 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

Yes, we likely will see more fake news or misinformation about EVs. The
best, in my opinion, is to educate people. Be conspicuous. Tell people
the facts when you can. Don't put more attention on pieces of fake news.

And, yes, fake news has been around for a while. I suspect you can go
back to the origin of humanity. The big difference is social media. It
allows spreading info amazingly quickly and based on popularity, not
substance.

Peri

------ Original Message ------
From: "tomw via EV" <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Cc:
Sent: 12-Dec-16 6:38:24 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] A. D. Little EV vs ICE report

>Although "fake news" has recently been noted by some media outlets, it
>has
>been around for decades. The first organized effort in the U.S. began
>with
>Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew.  Bernays coined the term
>"public
>relations" because he said "propaganda" had negative connotations.
>Conservative segments of industry have built up a widespread network of

>PR
>firms such as Hill and Knowles which specialize in misrepresentation to
>spread doubt on science which negatively effects profits, and think
>tanks
>such as the New Enterprise and Marshal Institutes over the last 30
>years.
>The concerted effort of these has created an alternative reality for
>those
>who believe them. They work closely with media outlets to give them
>reports
>that are publication-ready, so they go right into the media as-received

>from
>the think tank with no critical review, saving the media companies the
>"trouble" and cost of investigative reporting at the cost of the truth.
>
>Bernay's efforts are detailed in this BBC special:
>
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJ3RzGoQC4s
>
>Don't be put off by the melodrama of the beginning with Sigmund Freud
>and
>yelling crowds, the film is very informative.
>
>Expect to see much more of this on EVs now that the Koch brothers have
>started funding an effort against them.
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/A-D-Little
-EV-vs-ICE-report-tp4684797p4684809.html

>Sent from the Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list archive at
>Nabble.com.
>_______________________________________________
>UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
>http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
>Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
>Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)
>
>

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
Read EVAngel's EV News at http://evdl.org/evln/
Please discuss EV drag racing at NEDRA (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NEDRA)

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Garlow sez A. D. Little report is wrong

brucedp
This post has NOT been accepted by the mailing list yet.
In reply to this post by Electric Vehicle Discussion List mailing list


[ref
http://electric-vehicle-discussion-list.413529.n4.nabble.com/A-D-Little-EV-vs-ICE-report-tp4684797.html
]


http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-better-case-for-electric-vehicles-clean-greenness-1481918181
A Better Case for Electric Vehicles’ Clean Greenness
My electric car gets its power from solar panels on my roof and wind power at night. Zero CO 2 .
Dec. 16, 2016  OPINION,LETTERS

Far be it for me to challenge Arthur D. Little’s claim that my electric car “will cost its owner $20,816 more to own and operate (over its life cycle) than a comparable gas-powered car” (“As Al Gore Told Donald Trump . . ., [
http://www.wsj.com/articles/as-al-gore-told-donald-trump-1481326892
]” Business World, Dec. 10, by Holman Jenkins, Jr.). I must be missing something. To lease an electric car is $80 a month (Ford Focus). California sent me a check for $2,500. I received the charger free (a $1,000 value), and so far this year I’ve saved $1,200 in after-tax fuel costs, while charging off the grid at $.09 per kilowatt-hour. Fossil fuel in California is approaching $3 a gallon. Did I mention the lack of maintenance costs that used to run me about $250 every time I had to take it to the dealer, plus the downtime at the dealership? I haven’t sent one cent to foreign countries that don’t like us, and I’ve added no carbon emissions to the atmosphere to poison the air for future generations. I’d relish the chance to run the ownership costs of a fossil-fuel vehicle to those of an electric car with Arthur D. Little.

Tom C. Johnson
San Francisco


Mr. Jenkins asserts that electric cars emit only 23% fewer greenhouse gas emissions than gasoline cars. My electric car gets its power from solar panels on my roof and wind power at night. Zero CO 2 . And I’m not alone. Fully one-third of electric vehicle owners do this in California.

Charlie Garlow
Silver Spring, Md.
[© 2016 Dow Jones]



http://www.electronicsweekly.com/blogs/mannerisms/yarns/transistor-making-best-left-jewellers-2016-12/
Transistor-Making Best Left To Jewellers
9th December 2016  David Manners

The founder of Sprague Electric, Robert Sprague, had a brother, Julian, who was made vp of sales.

Unlike his visionary, risk-taker brother who wanted to grow the company, Julian was a risk-averse, profit-oriented person.

He hated his brother’s foray into semiconductors when Sprague licensed Bell’s point contact transistor in 1952.

So Julian hired Arthur D Little to look at the initiative.

“Transistors are so complicated and small,” reported Arthur D Little, “that they are a job for watchmakers, not for Sprague Electric Company.” ...
[© 2016 Electronics Weekly]



http://ethw.org/Sprague_Electric_Company
Sprague Electric Company
...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_C._Sprague
... With advances in transistor and integrated circuit technology (later computer chips) ... Sprague Electric components had a long history of name recognition, quality and brand loyalty ...




For EVLN EV-newswire posts use:
http://evdl.org/evln/


{brucedp.0catch.com}