5 ms·

If you'd read the article you'd see they're arguing for decreasing car dependence whilst simultaneoisly making all new cars BEV. How you can manage to construe

If you'd read the article you'd see they're arguing for decreasing car dependence whilst simultaneoisly making all new cars BEV. How you can manage to construe that as a bad thing is baffling. To use your analogy it's like attacking someone who wants to stop the arsonist while the firefighters do their job instead of building a new water reservoir.

Retric 4y ago
There are many many reasons to reduce our dependence on cars such as reducing particle emissions from tire and break wear, lithium mining is again hardly worth discussing. Lithium mining is ~4 orders of magnitude less harmful than ICE engines. Perhaps someone could have improved the situation by rearranging deck chars on the titanic into a more aesthetic pattern, but it’s not the kind of thing that deserved their attention.
- defrost 4y ago
  Consuming less is still by far the best approach, better city layouts and greater public transport, etc. As for the Lithium production figures: > Let us consider, for example, electric cars. To give an idea of this effect, producing a battery weighing 1,100 pounds emits over 70% more carbon dioxide than producing a conventional car in Germany, according to research by the automotive consultancy Berylls Strategy Advisors. https://phys.org/news/2023-01-paradox-lithium-net-zero-emissions.html https://phys.org/news/2023-01-paradox-lithium-net-zero-emiss... which to be sure isn't a full life cycle comparison .. but let's be very clear, the full G20 country demand for an electric future creates an unreasonably high demand on copper and rare earth mining and directly impacts all manner of marhinalised people - the US has a $64 billion copper reserve in Arizona on sites considered sacred by Native American tribes. https://resolutioncopper.com/ https://resolutioncopper.com/
  - Retric 4y ago
    > better city layouts and greater public transport Those are useful for other things, if you want smaller batteries add in road charging. Just don’t wait for perfection when you can dramatically improve things today. > 70% more carbon dioxide than producing a conventional car in Germany Only today. Manufacturing currently produces carbon dioxide due to things like a fossil fueled electric grid not as an inherent part of the process. Fixing the grid is also required.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      There's no need to 'wait for perfection' to stop legislating bigger cars and higher car modeshare. We can push for sane streets and phase out ICEs at the same time.
      - Retric 4y ago
        Updating cities alone is not enough to remove the need for long range batteries. It’s also a really slow and expensive process.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago
        You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. The reality is the only thing stopping most trips from being made in a light vehicle is the unchecked externalities from the large ones. And only one long range vehicle is 'needed' per household
        Retric 4y ago
        Most households don’t always take long trips to the same places especially when you’re talking long trips in terms of small EV batteries. I am all for improving cities, but just as a baseline not everyone lives in cities. Any long term plan needs to consider everyone not just people who live in dense enough areas public transportation is a clear win. Sure, ban cars in the center of cities, just don’t expect that to change how large most people want their car’s battery to be. This article and discussion is doing the thing where you exaggerate a small problem to promote something that’s almost but not quite entirely unrelated to it. If you want people to use small batteries in EV’s electrify roads so people can travel on them without using a battery. If you want to reduce the need for cars do that, but don’t pretend lithium mining somehow requires changing cities. Because arguing from a false premise weakens your argument when people see through it.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago

Retric 4y ago

There are many many reasons to reduce our dependence on cars such as reducing particle emissions from tire and break wear, lithium mining is again hardly worth discussing. Lithium mining is ~4 orders of magnitude less harmful than ICE engines. Perhaps someone could have improved the situation by rearranging deck chars on the titanic into a more aesthetic pattern, but it’s not the kind of thing that deserved their attention.

defrost 4y ago
Consuming less is still by far the best approach, better city layouts and greater public transport, etc. As for the Lithium production figures: > Let us consider, for example, electric cars. To give an idea of this effect, producing a battery weighing 1,100 pounds emits over 70% more carbon dioxide than producing a conventional car in Germany, according to research by the automotive consultancy Berylls Strategy Advisors. https://phys.org/news/2023-01-paradox-lithium-net-zero-emissions.html https://phys.org/news/2023-01-paradox-lithium-net-zero-emiss... which to be sure isn't a full life cycle comparison .. but let's be very clear, the full G20 country demand for an electric future creates an unreasonably high demand on copper and rare earth mining and directly impacts all manner of marhinalised people - the US has a $64 billion copper reserve in Arizona on sites considered sacred by Native American tribes. https://resolutioncopper.com/ https://resolutioncopper.com/
- Retric 4y ago
  > better city layouts and greater public transport Those are useful for other things, if you want smaller batteries add in road charging. Just don’t wait for perfection when you can dramatically improve things today. > 70% more carbon dioxide than producing a conventional car in Germany Only today. Manufacturing currently produces carbon dioxide due to things like a fossil fueled electric grid not as an inherent part of the process. Fixing the grid is also required.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    There's no need to 'wait for perfection' to stop legislating bigger cars and higher car modeshare. We can push for sane streets and phase out ICEs at the same time.
    - Retric 4y ago
      Updating cities alone is not enough to remove the need for long range batteries. It’s also a really slow and expensive process.
      - Schroedingersat 4y ago
        You're doing that thing where you pretend one person needing something somewhere invalidates improving anything for anyone anywhere else. The reality is the only thing stopping most trips from being made in a light vehicle is the unchecked externalities from the large ones. And only one long range vehicle is 'needed' per household
        Retric 4y ago
        Most households don’t always take long trips to the same places especially when you’re talking long trips in terms of small EV batteries. I am all for improving cities, but just as a baseline not everyone lives in cities. Any long term plan needs to consider everyone not just people who live in dense enough areas public transportation is a clear win. Sure, ban cars in the center of cities, just don’t expect that to change how large most people want their car’s battery to be. This article and discussion is doing the thing where you exaggerate a small problem to promote something that’s almost but not quite entirely unrelated to it. If you want people to use small batteries in EV’s electrify roads so people can travel on them without using a battery. If you want to reduce the need for cars do that, but don’t pretend lithium mining somehow requires changing cities. Because arguing from a false premise weakens your argument when people see through it.
        Schroedingersat 4y ago