Westerman Slams Sec. Buttigieg Over EV Subsidies: 'You Need To Go Back And Look At The Physics’ 

He "slammed" him by asking an incendiary question, interrupted the answer to that question, and ended his speaking time before the question could actually be answered

​@@fungeneernice

4:45

Agree 👍

Welp Forbes Family has pushing their staff produce clips they simply can't deliver.

You got a pointer to the unedited?

Forbes has become one of the most biased sources of news out there.

But we all know and understand how efficient/inefficient and how harmful fossil fuel usage is going into the (far) future. This is out in the open. Literally, we as humans smell and see our gas lawnmowers, vehicles, and boats spew this "efficiency" out into the air we breathe. It is the EV argument that is trying to mask over it's "efficiency".

@@chex4214 Nope. For 13 years now I've driven much more efficiently using clean, green, free sunshine from my roof.

​@@Yanquetino Not quite all duckies and bunnies. If the argument is carbon neutrality... there is a period of a few years to offset emission generated during construction of the panel. A trivial detail, but when things go to scale stuff like that matters. Beyond that though, the are a huge number of logistical concerns with overnighting the EV thing. Biggest of which? Our grid simply can't handle it right now. People deal with brownouts when it gets hot in most of the country. If you burden the grid with a few hundred million motors on top of that? If you look at energy demands of human society (fed from all sources, chemical/renewable, etc) motors are the lions share of the pie chart. So the reckless expedition of that? Not good. Not everyone can just install solar panels on the house they don't own. Buying the EV itself? They're really expensive if you want a car that has range or utility (this is especially important when we start talking about commercial use). My personal concern with them? The battery science isn't there yet for me. Thermal runaway. VCEs. Their discharge cycles are pretty well quantified in about how many you'll get out of them and they're incredibly expensive to replace. I'd like see more of them on the road, but I'm an Electrical Engineer so I consider all the angles when it comes to stuff like this.

@@joshualinker5800 Nobody says it's all "duckies and bunnies." Still, we cannot keep burning fossil fuels. What EV has you taken for a nice, long test drive? What DID you like about it?

@@Yanquetino I like their acceleration, but I am nothing if not practical and it has to be asked. Are EVs ready for the average consumer? The short answer is no. Cost. Reliability. Grid. Safety. I agree alternative solutions need to happen, but rushing 'innovation' often results in catastrophic results. If it isn't done properly it will fail and people could get hurt in many ways.

What climate change?

its not helping

I hope you are referring to the Thorium MSR nuclear programs. Nuclear is the only path to energy independence. The USA has one of the largest thorium deposits in the world.

Energy independence? by using American Lithium 😂😂😂

I am percent sure that Joe doesn't drive... well I hope so

this reads strangely, correction it does not read at all

Where the hell is Massie he is the only one in that room full of fools that can put Pete into his place

@@leweezo33 You do realize that trump doesn't drive either?

@@brianbarefoot6574 Well yeah. I doubt he has driven in decades. The best analogy I can come up for these 2 guys is. You have 1 guy who drivethrough a outdoor mall and not realize it and you have the other guy who would drive through a outdoor mall on purpose

The old guy is closer to reality. #1 there is no such thing as an EV engine, its just an electric motor. The pollution happens before. Moving towards Nuclear is the only way to make Pete right. ( I am a renewables expert)

@@rob8224-x4h Thank you. There is no such thing as an EV engine. Funny how the libs like to mock people for being unintelligent, and yet they don't actually know what they are talking about. Such a simple thing, and yet, impossible to ignore due to their arrogance and ignorance.

You're blind

@@olbricky6824 And you are brainwashed. What's your point?

@@rob8224-x4h Not you are not lmao

Yeah let's pretend that ever changing regulations are not turning the screws on people that currently prefer ICE,

@@bartwilliams4478 because they aren’t. Where is the regulation making it harder to buy an ICE? Show me exactly how less oil is being produced? Hint we are producing more oil than ever and export the excess. If Keystone were built, first of all it would transport Canadian oil for export, it would do nothing for energy in this country. In fact the line that travels from Superior Wisconsin to the gulf carries more oil thanks to upgrades than a fully operational Keystone XL.

@@derekpopp7546 purposely creating costly fuel , seeking all ev manufacturing 2035

@@redrustler1 The ban so far has been overseas, primarily in the Scandinavian countries. Several European countries already have terminal dates for ICEs, starting with public transportation.

@@derekpopp7546 Some states have future cut-offs of *new* ICE sales (like 2035). We export some grades of crude that we're not set up to refine, but we import grades we like, and have been a net importer of crude every year since 1945.

question, storing those energy causes more emission than directly using fossil fuel

Just go back to horse and buggy. But then again the Climate Activists will just claim that horse farts are producing too much greenhouse gases.

@@KINGCOBRA304 citations please.

@@convinceme6676 you need citation on wether converting electricity to other form then back looses energy? are you lost?

@@KINGCOBRA304you didn’t say there were energy losses; you said they cause more emissions. There are no emissions to store energy. There’s very little energy losses storing DC power in DC batteries. In other forms of energy storage there will be losses; but no more than the loses in heat by internal combustion engines.

Where will all the millions of tons of plastic and rubber used everyday all over the world for everything come from? The world cant function without it. Recycling isn't going to keep up with the demand.

You've only owned it for 4 years. How can you possibly say it's the most reliable car you've ever owned unless you only hold on to Cars for 4 years. That's nothing and the ev unless you're about to hit 80k hasn't even reached the offset point for production yet

I owned an EV 125 yrs ago, didn’t work out

Between me and my wife, we’ve owned 4 Teslas for several years - a Model 3, two Model Ys, and a Model X. We’ve road tripped them across the entire United States with absolutely no issues. We most recently drove the Y Performance and X Performance from the East Coast, to Las Vegas in about 5 days. No rush, just stopping to visit family and tourist sites. A gas vehicle is not needed and we will never go backwards to gas.

​@@johndailey2323 and how's it going to be for the next owner who had to replace the batteries? Look at the acres ov EV taxis in France? that are just setting because it's too expensive to replace the battery.

​@@QuintanBrassfieldmind if I asked what you what those four cars cost when you bought them?

Why is efficiency a primary concern? The whole point is that EVs can be powered by electricity that can be produced via non-carbon-emitting methods, which is already 40% of all energy production and growing rapidly. Fuel efficiency is irrelevant once you stop using fuel as a source of energy. Nevertheless, I'd say that just a 10%-15% difference in overall efficiency is very promising considering that the combustion engine has had over 120 years of optimization and EV tech has just started to be usable this decade. It is very likely it will end up being a lot more efficient.

@@Oersted4 do you know why we still use hydrocarbon as our primary source of energy?

@@Oersted4 renewable is only 9%, 9% for nuclear and the rest is carbon. charcoal, gas and petroleum are all carbon

@@KINGCOBRA304 Westerman says it is 40% (6:06), I'm not sure if that's correct, but he is motivated to understate it, so it's probably not less.

@@Oersted4 www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ he made a mistakes but that was easy to know

Coal plants are 33% efficiency. ICE engines are 40% I am seeing 7% difference.

@@Npc733T ICE engines aren't 40% efficient. The best ICE engines can't get to 40%, and most of them are much lower, as the Congressman acknowledged. The whole debate is bizarro though, because it seemed to presume that the carbon footprint of getting the gas into an ICE engine is 0.

​@ChristopherSmithGPlus lol yupp whats the carbon footprint of building an electric car vs a gas car?

Once the first fleet of elecric cars are done. Should they then ban making new electric cars. As to be beneficial to the environment you should only maintain and never replace.

Carbon is the agent of life in this world

To the science illiterate sure. lol.

Mr. Butt-Egg was an EEOC hire.

The secretary is way smarter and knows what he is talking about these republican Congressman is fishing in a dry pond.

As usual we have well-trained but feral conservatives barking bogus narratives andf under the delusion they are "competent" to determine if someone is qualified when he needs a recipe to boil water.

Actually, Mercedes have made an EV with 745 miles of range which means you could do Florida to California in less than four charges. Maybe even three charges, given than it has solar panels along the roof of the car. Even going at a consistent 70mph it would take you 38.5 hours, which realistically means you'd need about three overnight stays, which is plenty of time to recharge. With fast charging and a smaller range car, you'd still be back on the road in roughly the right amount of time it takes to have a recommended length break when driving long distances

wtf are either of them the federal government's responsibility?

Republicans don’t like govt getting involved in private companies affairs and they hate regulation. In capitalism, companies should be handling their own quality issues

@@branchingoutnurseries4403 now that the Supremes invalidated rules and regulations of agencies not approved by congress the government has no responsibility. However, they are subsidizing the purchase of EVs through a tax deduction that cost $1 billion dollars, balance that against $22 billion that went to oil and gas. Again, Republicans are not good at math, 22 is much bigger than 1. Maybe get rid of the oil subsidy, they seem to be making lots of money.

@derekpopp7546 not sure where you got your information, but it's complete garbage and your understanding of the oil and gas "subsidies" is the same.

The GQP is the swamp.

neither are democrats

Say NO to subsidies. And "congress" sending our $$$$$$$$$$$ overseas. DEFUND congress.

@@rahkinrah1963 Subsidies are not uniformly bad. Sometimes they are useful to get new types of industry off the ground, which can be good for the long term economic growth of the country. However, if we're still subsidizing industries 150 years after their inception, then it is no longer about growth, it's about graft. Also, sending money and aid to Ukraine is all about the economic future of the US. Ukraine is known as the breadbasket of Europe and they have a huge economic impact on Europe. If Russia takes Ukraine, Europe could easily be plunged into a recession and if Europe goes, the US could be dragged along with it.

Subsidizing fossil fuels, insured every taxpayer gets a break on energy Cost to include reducing inflation on harvesting production delivery, and assists in the production of thousands of derivatives from the processed fuels, you can't say that for EV Subsidizing

@@bartwilliams4478 The point is, they have had more than 100 years to figure out how to male a clear (unsubsidized) profit. I will concede that as the government changes regulations and standards, that there is new development required and I think it is fair for that to be subsidized. Probably not billions, though. I think the US government makes excuses to subsidize any industry where we compete against other countries that subsidize that industry. However, if you think that is OK for fossil fuels and ICEVs, then it surely is ok for EVs, where China has more than twice the global marketshare than the US due to government subsidization. Within the next ten years (probably sooner) EVs will be cheaper, more reliable, more environmentally friendly, and have ranges of 1200 miles or more. If given a choice between that and a ICEV... on the other hand, I have a friend who still uses an old Motorola flip phone...

And you're ignorant of the cost benefit ratio of fuel subsidies, no comparison. Fossil fuel wipes the floor to EV Bullshit!

Pete does spit, not a swallower

I won't.

I'm driving an EV in New Hampshire and I had no problem last winter with temps around zero for several days. Sure the range is less in the winter with a cold battery, but it was still around 170 mi. which is fine for my driving habits. I have solar panels and charge at home so no strain on the grid. Charging stations and a more robust grid are on the way and will catch up. We as a society have to wake up to the problems with the pollution and diminishing supply of fossil fuels.

Yeah from my experience with my 2 EV’s it’s about 20% less range in winter. Worth remembering gas cars also lose range in winter! At 20 degrees F a gas car gets 15% less mileage than it would at 77 degrees F.

Our grid is so aged it is going to fail as heat spikes in summer are doing in Texas. The whole thing needs a revamp yet they want to add more to that old grid. 😂

@@nancykraus5127 Two things that are really stressing the grid are AI computing and Bitcoin processing. Huge server farms are being built in rural areas. I suspect they are using a lot more power than EVs and not doing anything to help the environment.

@@bobswitzer4384 that is hilarious. The US Gov estimates for bitcoin mining operations, the total power requirement of all US based mining operations: "0.6% to 2.3% of all United States electricity demand in 2023". "Total electricity consumption by EVs in 2023 was 7.6 million MWh" or ~1.94%.

And running circles around him.

If he’s an engineer, then he needs to give his degree back. I’m an engineer and it’s simple to calculate the efficiency of ICE vehicles vs EV’s. Even with the current grid sources EV’s are 51% efficient, while ice vehicles are 30% efficient.

@@dc14522 These efficiencies in the vehicle degrade dramatically in a short time span. Increasing the grids capacity will not change any vehicles efficiency...EVER. The grids capacity has nothing whatsoever to do the efficiencies in any vehicle be it EV or ICE. As an engineer, you should know that and might want to consider turning in your degree. Also, the conversion math from electric to gasoline or diesel if you want to make that argument can take into account many factors depending on the one doing the math and what they choose to include in that calculation. As it has been said in the past, math can make it possible for an elephant to hang from a cliff with its tail wrapped around a daisy. Moving further, new battery cell modules cost 1/4 to 1/2 the cost of the entire vehicle and begin failing in 8 years and usually need completely replaced in 12 years. In many cases this happens far earlier. The repair costs on anything on any EV are insane. The resources needed to produce them are dirty heavy metals and mined in large part through slavery. Their reliability and range in cold temperatures is horrible. Hills and mountainous terrain are a very big problem for range as well. Mix that with cold and you're better off walking. The re-energize time is ridiculous compared to ICE refuel time and the battery stations are always broke down. The real kicker is less fortunate peoples' tax dollars are used as subsidies for the much wealthier people to own these abominations at discount. The blind, ignorant, egotistical sanctimony it takes to overlook that alone is disgusting. Take from the poor to alleviate some rich yuppie from having to fully pay for their annoyingly priced social status statement. Real nice. If they were all they were cracked up to be, no gimmicks in the form of rebates or subsidies would be needed. They would simply sell themselves but that just simply isn't the case.

Couldn't fix potholes....but got re-elected. Derp

Nobody cares.. EV’s been around since 1900, big deal, I got a golf cart, same thing

With Wessermans logic we don’t need to include the screws in our combustion engine. With Wessermans logic we don’t need buckles on our seatbelts and with Wessermans logic my taxes aren’t necessary

EV’s been around since 1900, nobody wanted them

I'm not in love with the billions of dollars we fork over to the most profitable industry in human history but I'm really sick of paying well over $3 a gallon for almost all of Sleepy Joe's reign of error. We are a long way from full electric transportation and shoving it down our throats is no way to convince American citizens to get on board with the coming transition.

You are sure about that. I guess the making of the batteries in the places where the materials is not a big deal because it is NIMBY.

@@pyreneesfarm7818 very sure. Look up tax breaks for oil companies. And hopefully technology will take us away from the exploitation of kids for battery raw materials. But then again, we all wear clothes made by them.

@@stevewilliams3087 child labor wasn't the point he was making. It was the extremely toxic, pollution producing mining of Cobalt and Lithium among other minerals needed for battery production. "Besides the deleterious impact cobalt exposure has to human health, cobalt mining's toxic byproducts devastate landscapes, pollute water, and contaminate agriculture."

Please donate your brain to science so we can figure out what went wrong.

@@ultrastoat3298 WHAT BRAIN??....THE WORM ATE IT

Not going to whine about all of the forgiven corporate "loans" the last president gave out to business owners for covid? Of course not. Marjorie Taylor Greene alone got over 183,000.00 in PPP loans forgiven by the last president. Conservatives will pretend to be fiscally conservative when they don't have power, but have no issues with the fact that 1/3rd of our national debt was accrued during Trump's presidency. It rose by 7.8 trillion, which is enough to pay every American around 23,500.00.

You obviously didn't go to college

@@Michelle-bn1fu college is a acam

Wrong.

You did vote but you voted for the losing side. That's how it works.

Was?

Who the congressman? Because his were wrong and based on wrong assumptions.

OK, you have my permission not to have one. I don't want an EV today, but I suspect 5 years from now, I might change my mind. There is a new battery technology that is going into production this year that more than doubles the range of most EVs and there are other technologies that are promising 4x the range in the next few years. When there is a car that I can plug into my garage and then drive 1200 miles and it has fewer moving parts so it is more reliable and it makes driving safer because it's smarter than me... I will probably be ready to have one. I was not an early adopter for cell phones either, but eventually there was an inflection point where my lifestyle demanded that I adopt.

No problem, but I do. Under some circumstances they make sense.

Well you’ll get what manufacturers , make. As the rest of the world is moving to electric, why do you think they’ll have special models just for America. ?Refining oil to gasoline will also get expensive for just one market. The iPhone 15 now has a USB-C cable, because the 27 EU countries decided they had enough of different types of cables, for electronic devices. So apple decided it was best to have just one cable worldwide, than one for European countries and one for elsewhere.

Too bad because EVs will be the majority of sales by 2030

Fine. Don't buy one.

whole admin is

Pete Buttigieg is one of the most knowledgeable secretaries I've ever seen.

Sure....

@@cosmiclightning4723 And takes " maternity "leave .

@@waldoparsnip1025taking maternity leave is important additionally his babies were having serious health issues. Pete was still handling his job responsibilities.

Technology is not there or mindset is not there?

Lol, yes they do

My family has 4 Teslas… I got my first 6 years ago. The tech is way ahead of anything with a gas engine. We’re never going back. And btw, EV sales keep going up.

Hahaha! Americans don’t want these noisy contraptions that are scaring the horses, the technology is not there yet! Americans don’t want these expensive toys, all they’re good for is play pong, and doing easy arithmetic problems! The technology not there yet! Vietnam is building an EV automobile plant in Raleigh, NC! The technology not there yet! Sorry, to wake you up, but the future is happening! By 2035, that smart phone in your hand, will be in your skull! Hands free! Just “think” a phone call or Google search! The Technology not there yet!💥👍😂

Yet millions are sold each year with increasing sales. Facts are stubborn things.

then don't force EV talking points down their throats. People are less receptive when you force feed them.

We fight because fools in high office are trying to ban diesels to promote these c&ap EVs. When you stop coercing people to buy evs we'll stop hating them.

@@shawnsb7583 That’s why the “engineer “ was so lost. The EV has clear environmental impacts, but the fact is that my Tesla is the most FUN TO DRIVE car I have ever owned. The EV challenge now is one of marketing rather than engineering. Pete understands that!

@@mikecuthbert2505 why should tax payers fund your fun? makes no sense.

@@Juventinos What?? You think the government should continue to subsidize oil and gas production to fund YOUR fun?😟

@@mikecuthbert2505 how's subsidizing gas cars? are you on drugs?

@@Juventinos if you subsidize the fuel, you’re subsidizing what it fuels!

Other normal things like PREGNANT MEN and MAN BREAST FEEDING**

@@stilleatn4969 His partner loudly protested,"Don't flush it, it has my eyes "

It's okay you two, no need to be scared. I'm sure you'll have a safe place to hide.

Conservative males sure are obsessed with Pete and his husband. That's totally not gay at all. 😂😂

Just like an engineer-brief, concise, and to the point.

He’s a bad engineer because his numbers are wrong. If he is a CE they should revoke his PE. And there was no physics in his statement.

Truth over science, eh?

9% would be HUGE. 0.9% is still less than 1%.

Because he can’t.

STOP YELLING! So you want Buttigieg just totally control the port workers and port authority! Isn’t that Socialism? Maybe just fire all the longshoremen, like Reagan did to the Air Traffic Controllers in the ‘80s! I thought Republicans were for small, non-regulating government!😂

You got all that from a 6 minute clip?? You say he bungled the train wreck?? No mention of how regs were relaxed under Trump?? You don't say HOW Pete bungled it, or is that just your go-to, easy response? If the Repubs don't like how it's being handled, can you tell me their way to change what to do going forward---or just complain without answers of their own---except, of course to 'slash regulations'. THAT's the Republican answer to everything, then when things go south they go to the blame game.

Turn off the caps lock, gramps. You look unhinged.

So, you want a big government solution for a labor problem between a workforce and a private corporation. You must be a socialist. Funny how the anti government crowd wants government to step in when they might be inconvenienced but yet the rest of the time scream about government overreach. You know what the Republican solution is to labor disputes is? Fire them, and then the entire port shuts down until they can hire and train new workers. All the while the ships are lining up.

Should government really be dictating terms of a labor agreement between an employer and employees? Talk about big government, socialism. If there is a strike, the President could invoke Taft Hartley and force them back to work.

Looks like another conservative confusing his "feelwings" for facts. LOL

How much is the mining for the materials for the batteries going to increase when cruise ships and cargo ships and all other types of equipment start using them? We are trading fossil fuels,which we will NEVER stop relying on because nearly everything made today has plastic and rubber in it and the world at present can't function without it, for stripping the earth of materials for the batteries and using millions of gallons of diesel every year to do it. Why are there still remote EV charging stations that are powered by diesel or propane generators if solar and other energy is so much more efficient?

@@troyjanise9051 You assume, like most anti-EV people, that battery technology is done and will not advance in efficiency under increased demand. I, for one, reject that assumption. On the other hand, what new efficiencies of fossil fuel have been demonstrated???

@@mikecuthbert2505 well, every year, ICE engines get more efficient with different technologies. Toyota has shown their R&D on ICE engines including ones that burn alternative fuels like hydrogen. You know Hydrogen...the most abundant element in the known universe? The energy source of the Sun? Of which the only byproduct of burning it is water.

Yep, I do. Smarter in every way.

You do know, the budget is there for the chargers, it’s doesn’t mean the whole budget was spent on 7 chargers.

@@stevewilliams3087 I feel sad for you. If you can't run the department of transportation you can't run the country! He is a DEI hire. He didn't earn it.

@@alanfairbrother890 how do you know that for sure? The Face Nation hosts was practically laughing at him! 😂

@@michellewilson6249 laughing at the rate of implementation,l. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️ But if you’re fighting with states and districts with officials opposed to EVs , it’s certainly going to take longer, while you wait for them to catch up with the rest of the world.

You don’t seem to know how EVs work, with your 15min whizz you get a fill for 100s of miles then another top up at the next whizz or food stop. But for most people extreme long drives are once twice a year

@@alanfairbrother890 ev's are toxic and unsafe

I own an EV and put it on to charge every time I get home; I don't have a problem with insufficient charge for the next day. I drive past gas stations and smile at how much time and money I'm saving not lining up for expensive gas.

The last time I stopped to charge on a roadtrip this month, it took 15 minutes and 51 seconds -just right to take a whiz.

@@Yanquetino those opposed to EVs are the ones who don’t own one and believe all the negative stories about them. Or those who did buy one and had a negative experience, usually the ones who bought the wrong car for their needs, and probably didn’t have access to home charging.

@@Johnedwardpeterson And you, too, totally ignore the fact that EV science is

we already have hybrids. The Prius is the best selling one.