4 ms·

> If we want to decrease our impact on the environment we need to stop using so much energy and so many resources, period. That is fundamentally false. Energy

> If we want to decrease our impact on the environment we need to stop using so much energy and so many resources, period. That is fundamentally false. Energy austerity is the road to poverty and more environmental damage. Not to mention war. > Chasing the next miracle cure Nobody is claiming any miracles. > we can easily run down that path picking up all the ecological damage of lithium mining and new manufacturing only to find that there are new problems and we're not much better off, we simply have different problems and a similar level if environmental damage as if had we stayed on the original path. Sure, but we can also do basic research on the subject. Then make reasonable choices about that. And that's what happened. Lithium mining is not nearly the problem some of the propaganda suggest. At worsts its like other mining. Mostly its better. The total lithium amount needed is tiny even if you think all cars are going to be lithium batteries. Lithium mining is a drop in the bucked compared to iron and friends. > I also hope we don't stick to a consistent growth of 2-3% in annual energy consumption, its no coincidence that number matches GDP targets and its unsustainable. Its not unsustainable actually. What you are really arguing actually is 'why should people in India and China be rich, it would be much better if they were poor'. Are you gone determine what is 'rich enough' and when people should stop? Is Europe to rich already? Are you gone tell poor Americans 'sorry, you can't use more energy'. Energy poverty isn't the solution to anything.

_heimdall 3y ago
> That is fundamentally false. Energy austerity is the road to poverty and more environmental damage. Not to mention war. Who said anything about austerity? Its only austerity of an authority forced reduced consumption on the people, I'm arguing that we should make that choice individually because it'd the right thing to do. > Nobody is claiming any miracles. Anyone claiming that wind and solar can replace fossil fuel use at the current rate of power consumption is claiming a miracle cure. Most models and targets aim for storage capacity as little as 8 hours, well below even the 3 day target that is often recommended in residential applications. A large-scale grid can't depend on a single night's worth of reserve capacity. > Lithium mining is not nearly the problem some of the propaganda suggest. At worsts its like other mining. Mostly its better. The total lithium amount needed is tiny even if you think all cars are going to be lithium batteries. If its similar to or only a bit better than current mining, isn't that a problem? As far as I'm aware we aren't only causing environmental damage via our use of consumable fuels, mining practices today also cause serious issues and destroy plenty of ecosystems. If you think that isn't actually a problem worth solving I'd be interested to hear more. > What you are really arguing actually is 'why should people in India and China be rich, it would be much better if they were poor'. > Are you gone determine what is 'rich enough' and when people should stop? Is Europe to rich already? You seem to be responding to something I never said. I never said anything about relative wealth, only about growth targets for gross domestic product. Your GDP can grow 2% whether you are starting out poor or rich. My argument is that we continue to use more energy at a similar rate to GDP growth. Natural resources are limited and our impact on the environment cannot follow limitless growth. Are you proposing that we can continue to use 2-3% more energy forever in perpetuity without consequence? If so please share more about how that would work. If not, then I guess we agree it isn't sustainable and can't go on forever.
defrost 3y ago
You're correct that lithium mining is digging holes in the dirt, much like iron ore. That is not the problem. The issue is concentrate processing, to get useful elements from the "dirt of interest". That concentrate processing involves large quantities of sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid, sodium hydroxide, and other fun agents and also requires long term storage of waste waters (with aforementioned acids) and storage of low-level radioactive waste. This is the reason that Lynas was asked to leave Malaysia and why they are seeking other locations. > Lithium mining is a drop in the bucked compared to iron and friends. Apples, oranges, and a clear sign you're not familiar with the details of both. FWiW I worked decades as an exploration geophysical surveyor, contributed to the seeting up, running, and sale of the world's largest commercial mineral intelligence database, visited many mining and processing operations aboout the globe. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/malaysians-divided-on-radioactive-waste-from-aussie-miner-lynas/11434122 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/malaysians-divided-on... An Australian mining company has been told to "get lost" and "go back to Australia" amid an ongoing row over hundreds of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste piling up in Malaysia. https://www.australianmining.com.au/a-big-win-for-lynas-in-malaysia/ https://www.australianmining.com.au/a-big-win-for-lynas-in-m... https://www.australianresourcesandinvestment.com.au/2023/02/20/solution-emerges-for-lynas/ https://www.australianresourcesandinvestment.com.au/2023/02/...

_heimdall 3y ago

> That is fundamentally false. Energy austerity is the road to poverty and more environmental damage. Not to mention war. Who said anything about austerity? Its only austerity of an authority forced reduced consumption on the people, I'm arguing that we should make that choice individually because it'd the right thing to do. > Nobody is claiming any miracles. Anyone claiming that wind and solar can replace fossil fuel use at the current rate of power consumption is claiming a miracle cure. Most models and targets aim for storage capacity as little as 8 hours, well below even the 3 day target that is often recommended in residential applications. A large-scale grid can't depend on a single night's worth of reserve capacity. > Lithium mining is not nearly the problem some of the propaganda suggest. At worsts its like other mining. Mostly its better. The total lithium amount needed is tiny even if you think all cars are going to be lithium batteries. If its similar to or only a bit better than current mining, isn't that a problem? As far as I'm aware we aren't only causing environmental damage via our use of consumable fuels, mining practices today also cause serious issues and destroy plenty of ecosystems. If you think that isn't actually a problem worth solving I'd be interested to hear more. > What you are really arguing actually is 'why should people in India and China be rich, it would be much better if they were poor'. > Are you gone determine what is 'rich enough' and when people should stop? Is Europe to rich already? You seem to be responding to something I never said. I never said anything about relative wealth, only about growth targets for gross domestic product. Your GDP can grow 2% whether you are starting out poor or rich. My argument is that we continue to use more energy at a similar rate to GDP growth. Natural resources are limited and our impact on the environment cannot follow limitless growth. Are you proposing that we can continue to use 2-3% more energy forever in perpetuity without consequence? If so please share more about how that would work. If not, then I guess we agree it isn't sustainable and can't go on forever.

defrost 3y ago

You're correct that lithium mining is digging holes in the dirt, much like iron ore. That is not the problem. The issue is concentrate processing, to get useful elements from the "dirt of interest". That concentrate processing involves large quantities of sulphuric acid, hydrochloric acid, sodium hydroxide, and other fun agents and also requires long term storage of waste waters (with aforementioned acids) and storage of low-level radioactive waste. This is the reason that Lynas was asked to leave Malaysia and why they are seeking other locations. > Lithium mining is a drop in the bucked compared to iron and friends. Apples, oranges, and a clear sign you're not familiar with the details of both. FWiW I worked decades as an exploration geophysical surveyor, contributed to the seeting up, running, and sale of the world's largest commercial mineral intelligence database, visited many mining and processing operations aboout the globe. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/malaysians-divided-on-radioactive-waste-from-aussie-miner-lynas/11434122 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-22/malaysians-divided-on... An Australian mining company has been told to "get lost" and "go back to Australia" amid an ongoing row over hundreds of thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste piling up in Malaysia. https://www.australianmining.com.au/a-big-win-for-lynas-in-malaysia/ https://www.australianmining.com.au/a-big-win-for-lynas-in-m... https://www.australianresourcesandinvestment.com.au/2023/02/20/solution-emerges-for-lynas/ https://www.australianresourcesandinvestment.com.au/2023/02/...