CONTEXT
-
@c_merriweather @adriano @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva @benroyce I bought a nissan leaf 2013 about half a year ago. less than 70k km on the odometer, 90% original battery capacity. Cost me 4.5k. Saved me over 1k in gasoline so far
I think people aren't looking enough at the second hand EV market tbqh, which I get is scary cuz batteries and all, but that's not nearly as bad as it's been once. I kinda wish battery replacement services were more prevalent, because I know I you can triple the kWh.
Folks like me don't have $ to buy "new" cars, EV or not. Survivor's benefits are at poverty level.
-
Folks like me don't have $ to buy "new" cars, EV or not. Survivor's benefits are at poverty level.
@c_merriweather @anthropy @adriano @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
sure but that's a different problem
massive subsidies for EV purchase would help
-
Folks like me don't have $ to buy "new" cars, EV or not. Survivor's benefits are at poverty level.
@c_merriweather At that income level, these problems are best solved through clean public transport. I know it's very hard to achieve in the USA outside large cities, but that's happening right now here in Santiago de Chile: the bus fleet is modernizing with electric vehicles which are also much more comfortable. @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva @benroyce
-
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @anthropy @benroyce @blogdiva
I’m sorry Ghost, you’re wrong. You’ve been mislead by oil companies to confuse things like power and energy.
Try this video. But stop at the end-credits: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtQ9nt2ZeGM
For the rest of my people, watch the post-roll and put it on loop.
have watched that video. nowhere in it does he actually address the environmental destruction that comes from exponential growth extracting, aluminum, copper, silver, nickel, and lithium.
To extract and purify the resources is necessary to transform power generation requires destroying the planet in the process.
The resource extraction and refinement industry is no different than big oil.
-
@c_merriweather At that income level, these problems are best solved through clean public transport. I know it's very hard to achieve in the USA outside large cities, but that's happening right now here in Santiago de Chile: the bus fleet is modernizing with electric vehicles which are also much more comfortable. @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva @benroyce
@adriano @c_merriweather @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
as an american, i envy the commitment to mass transit in other countries. the usa is really pathetic on this topic
-
have watched that video. nowhere in it does he actually address the environmental destruction that comes from exponential growth extracting, aluminum, copper, silver, nickel, and lithium.
To extract and purify the resources is necessary to transform power generation requires destroying the planet in the process.
The resource extraction and refinement industry is no different than big oil.
Furthermore, he uses a false equivalence between lead recycling in lead acid batteries other technologies like PV or wind turbines.
These are not equivalent artifacts in terms of recycling. Building panels or turbines from new resources is less expensive than using recycled resources.
Extracting one material from these devices, usually precludes extracting other materials from these devices.
-
Folks like me don't have $ to buy "new" cars, EV or not. Survivor's benefits are at poverty level.
@c_merriweather @adriano @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva @benroyce I 100% get how tough that is, I've been there too. But these days second hand EVs are as cheap as normal cars, with less maintenance and fuel costs. only issue is range on those older models but if you don't need more than 100km between charges they're more than fine. And for less than 500 you can build an offgrid solar setup to charge it a bit with (2.5kw panels + offgrid inverter + 500Wh battery). I wish I had this back then tbh
-
@adriano @c_merriweather @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
as an american, i envy the commitment to mass transit in other countries. the usa is really pathetic on this topic
@benroyce On the other hand, if they get it done in large metropolises like NYC, it will do *a lot*, I think. @c_merriweather @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
-
Furthermore, he uses a false equivalence between lead recycling in lead acid batteries other technologies like PV or wind turbines.
These are not equivalent artifacts in terms of recycling. Building panels or turbines from new resources is less expensive than using recycled resources.
Extracting one material from these devices, usually precludes extracting other materials from these devices.
On top of this, you cannot build solar panels without burning down old growth forest because you need the carbon from them in order to manufacture PV. This is one reason why Chinese PV are so inexpensive. They burn up tons of carbon and tons of old growth forest in order to manufacture these things..
The blind assertion that this is somehow less damaging is an assertion made without evidence.
-
@benroyce On the other hand, if they get it done in large metropolises like NYC, it will do *a lot*, I think. @c_merriweather @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
@adriano @c_merriweather @anthropy @GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva
as previous resident of midtown manhattan, and now living way out in western new york, you don't have to convince me
-
On top of this, you cannot build solar panels without burning down old growth forest because you need the carbon from them in order to manufacture PV. This is one reason why Chinese PV are so inexpensive. They burn up tons of carbon and tons of old growth forest in order to manufacture these things..
The blind assertion that this is somehow less damaging is an assertion made without evidence.
So I’m going to ask you how tens of thousands of hectares of the natural do you think we can afford in order to not burn fossil fuels?
Fundamentally the mistaken assumption is that we can burn as much energy by changing our energy source and it will all work out.
This assertion is made without consider to whether or not the conversion itself can be born without killing the environment, so much that the outcome is no different than continuing to burn fossil fuels.
-
So I’m going to ask you how tens of thousands of hectares of the natural do you think we can afford in order to not burn fossil fuels?
Fundamentally the mistaken assumption is that we can burn as much energy by changing our energy source and it will all work out.
This assertion is made without consider to whether or not the conversion itself can be born without killing the environment, so much that the outcome is no different than continuing to burn fossil fuels.
Too much is too much. This is the fundamental point nobody is willing to come to terms with seemingly.
It’s a transition in the same outcome is not transitioning. The solution is not to keep burning fossil fuels. The solution is to cut back..
There is no other choice, but to get rid of cars, for example
-
@blogdiva @ArchaeoIain @jwcph @benroyce
that’s right. Capitalism is the global supply chain. To break capitalism, de couple from the global supply chain. This is the most important problem to address.
@GhostOnTheHalfShell @blogdiva @ArchaeoIain @benroyce OK, all of that is just fucking nonsense - but at least we agree that capitalism has to go. I'll leave it at that.
-
@benroyce@mastodon.social
We don't know the average life expectancy of EV batteries yet, but if they are sub-10 years, then the EV will never reach the green payoff.
Now comes the real meat of this discussion energy production emissions. Yes hydro-electric dams produce more harmful emissions than we previously thought, but that is for the first 20ish years as the vegetation in the resivoir degrades
3/?
@dnkboston@apobangpo.space @GhostOnTheHalfShell@masto.ai @blogdiva
