4 ms·

"forget that Musk and Tesla are the sole reason we have had the progress and momentum towards actually greener technologies" There are many things, that come t

"forget that Musk and Tesla are the sole reason we have had the progress and momentum towards actually greener technologies" There are many things, that come to my mind with this statement, but I will just say, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Because yes, he did gave momentum to the conservative car makers to get them to move their asses. But cars are only responsible for a tiny fraction of CO2 - and the whole green technology was kind of a thing before, with lots and lots of research about it all around the world. And implementing that research. Long before Musk was known outside a small bubble. It is just, that we are increasingly starting to see the effects of climate change that makes people act. I respect Musk for what he contributed. But I feel that glorifying him in this way, puts down all the other work in a unbalanced way. "Bezos is literally the greedy avatar of Edison in this race, who's only advances are only made through parasitic monopolies, tyranny, and his own ego." And I really hate to defend Bezos, but I do not think the success of Amazon comes out of a parasitic ego. But rather smart and efficient logistics. Incorporating robots and automatisation wherever possible. While exploiting the workforce, yeah, but Musk has not really a great record in that realm either.

admax88qqq 5y ago
> But cars are only responsible for a tiny fraction of CO2 Road vehicles account for 5% of global CO2 emissions. That's not a tiny fraction IMO. It's not huge, but road transportation alone (not counting shipping) account for 5X as much CO2 aviation. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport
- hutzlibu 5y ago
  In the context of the statement, ("sole reason..") I call it tiny. I mean cars are very visible, so any movement there helps with the public image that things can change. But he still was only one player in a comparitivly small segment, when green technology is so much bigger than just "cars". And "green cars" was and is much more than just "Tesla".
  - fshr 5y ago
    1 guy out of billions of people dealing with one 20th of the problem? That’s not tiny.
  - bradknowles 5y ago
    Transportation is not just cars. However, if you can force a break in one area, that frequently opens up opportunities in others. And such is the case here. But Tesla is not just going after cars. They’re going after the whole energy production/transportation complex, which really is the biggest single contributor to greenhouse gases. It just so happens that cars was the weak point that could be most easily attacked, and Tesla went for it. But there is much more on the table than just cars.
    - hutzlibu 5y ago
      "But there is much more on the table than just cars." There is. And I do consider Tesla to be a driving force for necessary revolutionary change. I just do not agree, that they are the sole reason we had the change and momentum we are witnessing.
  - admax88qqq 5y ago
    Does he deserve credit for all green technologies? Certainly not, but its disingenuous to say that cars account for a "tiny fraction" of CO2. Before Tesla, "green cars" were basically hybrids like the Prius. Tesla legitimized purely electric cars as an actual alternative.
- shaklee3 5y ago
  Considering teslas are only sold in a few countries, and by far mostly in the USA, that number is likely more like 0.1%
  - DougN7 5y ago
    Yes but you show any other individual doing more? Musk deserves some well earned credit here.
  - admax88qqq 5y ago
    Can't get from 0% to 5% without first hitting 0.1%
kumarvvr 5y ago
When you say tiny fraction, do you take into account the total carbon emissions for the life of the car? Direct emissions are in single digits, but what about decades of maintenance that requires oil changes, parts production, transmission changes, etc? An EV is much simpler than an ICE vehicle, has lesser metal and requires fewer moving parts. Metal production is highly carbon intensive. Not to mention recycling and reusing.
- fock 5y ago
  a car which was specced for 80km/h and head-to-head collision with similar cars would save even more metal/ressources. As well as leaving out stuff like: AC, car-grade entertainment computers (look at SV superfunds sites for how great chip production is), electrical seat-actuation, windows and ...
mhotchen 5y ago
I did some sleuthing recently because I am quite sceptical about the whole "burn rocket fuel to go to space during a climate disaster" thing and found a study indicating that the current trend is going to cause more damage than CFCs. "Future ozone losses from unregulated rocket launches will eventually exceed ozone losses due to chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, which stimulated the 1987 Montreal Protocol banning ozone-depleting chemicals, said Martin Ross, chief study author from The Aerospace Corporation in Los Angeles" "If left unregulated, rocket launches by the year 2050 could result in more ozone destruction than was ever realized by CFCs." I think their, and the government's, motivations should be under heavy scrutiny right now. They're both externalising costs. The damage needs to be priced in. I think there's a lot of untapped research to be explored for alternative ways of lobbing things in to orbit. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331153014.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331153014.h...
csomar 5y ago
> But cars are only responsible for a tiny fraction of CO2 I mean, yeah, if every billionaire tackles a fraction, then we saved ourselves? > I respect Musk for what he contributed. But I feel that glorifying him in this way, puts down all the other work in a unbalanced way. The thing is, beyond this HN bubble, most people need a leader of some sort. He takes credit for everything (and also the blame if things go wrong). I'd have a more funnier persona than Elon, but his cyberpunk style sells me too. > While exploiting the workforce, yeah, but Musk has not really a great record in that realm either. No one and no country does.

admax88qqq 5y ago

> But cars are only responsible for a tiny fraction of CO2 Road vehicles account for 5% of global CO2 emissions. That's not a tiny fraction IMO. It's not huge, but road transportation alone (not counting shipping) account for 5X as much CO2 aviation. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport

hutzlibu 5y ago
In the context of the statement, ("sole reason..") I call it tiny. I mean cars are very visible, so any movement there helps with the public image that things can change. But he still was only one player in a comparitivly small segment, when green technology is so much bigger than just "cars". And "green cars" was and is much more than just "Tesla".
- fshr 5y ago
  1 guy out of billions of people dealing with one 20th of the problem? That’s not tiny.
- bradknowles 5y ago
  Transportation is not just cars. However, if you can force a break in one area, that frequently opens up opportunities in others. And such is the case here. But Tesla is not just going after cars. They’re going after the whole energy production/transportation complex, which really is the biggest single contributor to greenhouse gases. It just so happens that cars was the weak point that could be most easily attacked, and Tesla went for it. But there is much more on the table than just cars.
  - hutzlibu 5y ago
    "But there is much more on the table than just cars." There is. And I do consider Tesla to be a driving force for necessary revolutionary change. I just do not agree, that they are the sole reason we had the change and momentum we are witnessing.
- admax88qqq 5y ago
  Does he deserve credit for all green technologies? Certainly not, but its disingenuous to say that cars account for a "tiny fraction" of CO2. Before Tesla, "green cars" were basically hybrids like the Prius. Tesla legitimized purely electric cars as an actual alternative.
shaklee3 5y ago
Considering teslas are only sold in a few countries, and by far mostly in the USA, that number is likely more like 0.1%
- DougN7 5y ago
  Yes but you show any other individual doing more? Musk deserves some well earned credit here.
- admax88qqq 5y ago
  Can't get from 0% to 5% without first hitting 0.1%

kumarvvr 5y ago

When you say tiny fraction, do you take into account the total carbon emissions for the life of the car? Direct emissions are in single digits, but what about decades of maintenance that requires oil changes, parts production, transmission changes, etc? An EV is much simpler than an ICE vehicle, has lesser metal and requires fewer moving parts. Metal production is highly carbon intensive. Not to mention recycling and reusing.

fock 5y ago
a car which was specced for 80km/h and head-to-head collision with similar cars would save even more metal/ressources. As well as leaving out stuff like: AC, car-grade entertainment computers (look at SV superfunds sites for how great chip production is), electrical seat-actuation, windows and ...

mhotchen 5y ago

I did some sleuthing recently because I am quite sceptical about the whole "burn rocket fuel to go to space during a climate disaster" thing and found a study indicating that the current trend is going to cause more damage than CFCs. "Future ozone losses from unregulated rocket launches will eventually exceed ozone losses due to chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs, which stimulated the 1987 Montreal Protocol banning ozone-depleting chemicals, said Martin Ross, chief study author from The Aerospace Corporation in Los Angeles" "If left unregulated, rocket launches by the year 2050 could result in more ozone destruction than was ever realized by CFCs." I think their, and the government's, motivations should be under heavy scrutiny right now. They're both externalising costs. The damage needs to be priced in. I think there's a lot of untapped research to be explored for alternative ways of lobbing things in to orbit. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331153014.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331153014.h...

csomar 5y ago

> But cars are only responsible for a tiny fraction of CO2 I mean, yeah, if every billionaire tackles a fraction, then we saved ourselves? > I respect Musk for what he contributed. But I feel that glorifying him in this way, puts down all the other work in a unbalanced way. The thing is, beyond this HN bubble, most people need a leader of some sort. He takes credit for everything (and also the blame if things go wrong). I'd have a more funnier persona than Elon, but his cyberpunk style sells me too. > While exploiting the workforce, yeah, but Musk has not really a great record in that realm either. No one and no country does.