kublikhan wrote:Wow. So first you make a claim that I had a "serious flaw in the way I am interpreting the statistical data."
Thats because there is a serious flaw in the way you are interpreting the statistical data.... actually, there are two flaws---- one serious methodological flaw and one blind spot.
I've already gone through this in the context of my reply to you in my post above but I didn't want to make a big deal about how you are misinterpreting the data so I just quietly discussed the data.
But I guess for some reason you want me to spell it out for you.
OK....I'm happy to go through this again if it will help you in some way.
There are two problems with the way you are interpreting the S & P data on EV vs. ICE vehicle scrappage.
First, you seem to think the S & P data on scrappage of EVs vs. ICE vehicles actually is a valid comparison of the scrappage rate of EVs vs. ICE vehicles. In fact, as I discuss in the text of my reply to you above, this comparison is flawed in terms of its methodology because the two populations are not controlled to be as similar as possible so other variables can be ruled out as causes of the difference between ICE and EV scrappage rates.
The problem arises because the ICE vehicle population is much older than the EV vehicle population. In order to do a valid statistical comparison of ICE vs. EV vehicles you would have to start by deleting all the scrappage rate data for older ICE vehicles, and just compare the scrappage rate for the relatively new EV fleet of cars vs. a selected subset of the ICE vehicles that are the same age as the EV vehicles. Only after this can a valid statistical comparison between EV and ICE vehicle scrappage rates for vehicle populations with similar characteristic (i.e. similar age profiles) be done.
I discussed this issue in my post above....apparently you didn't see or didn't understand it. This issue has important consequences, i.e. you were blind to the way this issues affects the data. Because older vehicles have higher scrappage rates, removing the older ICE vehicles and just comparing EV vehicles with ICE vehicles of the same age would lower the ICE scrappage rate even further.
In other words.....EV vehicles, according the S & P data, have a HIGHER scrappage rate than ICE vehicles. BUT in order to do a valid statistical comparison you have to be comparing two populations that are identical in every way except for the items being compared. This could easily be done by excising the older ICE vehicle data, and just comparing the population of young EVs to an ICE population with the same age characteristics.
AND, no doubt the scrappage rate for young ICE vehicles would be even lower then for the entire population, meaning ICE vehicles are even LESS likely to be scrapped than EV vehicles then the S & P data shows.
And that is pretty remarkable.
EV boosters have gone on and on for years claiming EVs are "sustainable" and don't need repairs and would outlast the primitive ICE cars. But the data says this claim about EVs is bogus and designed to dupe people, as Rowan Atkinson would say. The actual data show EVs are scrapped and taken off the roads at a MUCH HIGHER RATE than ICE vehicles, i.e. they are less sustainable.
I hope this helps!
Ok, but is that graph based on a statistically valid test?Cheers!
PS: Its silly for you to be upset if I edit my posts.
Everybody at this site edits their posts when there are typos or other boo-boos in a post. Thats what the edit function is for.