33 ms·

It's great news in the sense that this new energy storage and EV production capacity is (part of) our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate ch

It's great news in the sense that this new energy storage and EV production capacity is (part of) our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate change. It's terrifying because we (in the West) can't seem to motivate ourselves to do anything like this on the same timescale, and nations that suffered similar disparities in industrial capacity (not to mention energy production) haven't done well in the past.

greenthrow 2y ago
Western country populations seem to be willfully falling for obvious fossil fuel propaganda over and over again. Future generations will rightfully curse our names. (Including today's children.)
- _carbyau_ 2y ago
  Sadly it comes down to "Show me the money." I vote for change, but I don't have the money to buy electric. Even running costs don't make the difference when it comes to multiple tens of thousands of dollars in purchase price. I'd love to "care for our environment by buying an electric car". I can't afford to.
  - aurareturn 2y ago
    Affordable EVs are a solved problem. China has solved it. The world responded by putting up tariffs.
    - XorNot 2y ago
      I already own a car. An affordable EV is a thing I'll buy in like 15 more years when my already 20 year old Toyota finally dies maybe. If I bought it sooner, then my car would just go into the second hand market and do the same thing. "Affordable" isn't changing anything: I don't need another car, and I'm not going to prematurely crush mine into a cube.
      - phatfish 2y ago
        I drive very little, so having a fossil car sitting in the drive is more carbon efficient than buying a new EV that had to be built and shipped. Somone who drives a lot may be able to scrap their fossil car, buy a new EV and start saving on carbon emissions in a much shorter time than me.
tomcam 2y ago
Of course we can motivate ourselves. But they're acting like we did in the 1800s through the mid 1900s. They just build anywhere no matter what. They have no interest in dealing with environmental concerns. The officially released pollution levels in China are mind-boggling and they still do not represent how bad it really is. You think US manufacturers wouldn't be delighted to just buy a few hundred acres land and start building stuff? They'd do it in a heartbeat. For better and for worse, it is not a level playing field. Conforming to government regulations over here is stifling for a 100-house development in Arkansas, but it's almost impossible in California, Illinois, or New York. Now imagine what it's like to build a huge factory. It is nearly impossible to get permission, and inspections, endangered wildlife concerns, waste removal, etc. handled in under 5-10 years.
- soperj 2y ago
  > Now imagine what it's like to build a huge factory. It is nearly impossible to get permission, and inspections, endangered wildlife concerns, waste removal, etc. handled in under 5-10 years. This explains why the Tesla gigafactory in Nevada (announced in Sept 2014) still isn't operational...
- robwwilliams 2y ago
  Counterpoint: See the speed with which Colossus has been (is being) assembled in Memphis Tennessee. Yes, on an existing industrial site but this is still one damn impressive accomplishment. https://www.servethehome.com/inside-100000-nvidia-gpu-xai-colossus-cluster-supermicro-helped-build-for-elon-musk/ https://www.servethehome.com/inside-100000-nvidia-gpu-xai-co...
  - HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
    A data center is much easier than building an industrial factory
    - throwaway2037 2y ago
      This seems like an apples to oranges comparison. They are completely different. Can you provide some specific examples?
harrall 2y ago
The bread and butter of progress is competition and I think a lot of American companies “won” like Boeing or Intel in the 90s and no one else could compete. Unfortunately winning is disastrous because it makes you complacent. Perhaps the most flagrant and dumbest example is Internet Explorer 6. I do not approve of raising tariffs on foreign vehicles because it will dull our edge in the long term. Protectionism is a short term bandaid.
- robwwilliams 2y ago
  Intel was famously not complacent. Perhaps a long lapse starting a decade ago. But even then “complacence” was not the problem. Ditto for Boeing. Managerial focus on just milking the cow has been the fundamental problem: and they milked frantically—not complacently.
  - ahartmetz 2y ago
    One could perhaps say that short-termism is complacency about the future.
  - ZeroGravitas 2y ago
    I can't tell if I'm missing sarcasm here but ... Intel was paying customers Billions a year not to use their competitors products in the early 2000s. So not complacent about breaking the law to stifle competition but also complacent about actually building competitive chips that could win in the market.
- azinman2 2y ago
  Tariffs are a good way to ensure you still have a domestic capability. If Germany/korea/japan/China outcompete all US auto makers and they die, along with it goes a ton of jobs, manufacturing knowledge & capacity, cultural influence, an ability to keep capital flowing domestically, downstream suppliers, and ability to change factories from autos to military equipment in wartime. If China just keeps taking industry, then all we have left is an outpouring of all capital and a bunch of “content creators” left. Not a good prospect. US auto companies already try to compete globally in situations with/without tariffs. That provides plenty of competition too.
throwawaymaths 2y ago
> our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate change The US and EU are long off-peak carbon emissions (emissions even decreased during the Trump administration I, even using a trendline ignoring COVID). The biggest emitter right now is China, and it's emissions are growing not shrinking, and a considerable amount of that (including 90% of the worlds new coal plants) goes to projects like this.
- Aeolun 2y ago
  Kinda, but we’re not really in a position to blame them right? To some extend, sure, but that’s easy to say when you’ve already got yours.
  - nradov 2y ago
    What does blame have to do with anything? Emissions are emissions.
    - Aeolun 2y ago
      The tone of the message feels kinda like ‘China bad, look at all those emissions’ It’s possible that was not the intent.
    - triceratops 2y ago
      Exactly: emissions are emissions. Reducing our own is just as good as other people reducing theirs. Plus then we can credibly badger others about their emissions, show them how to do it, and impose tariffs and sanctions when they don't.
- matthewdgreen 2y ago
  China is building more renewable energy than the rest of the world combined. At this point there is no “let’s just reduce our emissions by 30% or so and hope things work out” plan that’s compatible with stopping worst-case outcomes, there is only a “let’s replace every single energy and fuel source with non-emitting ones on a ridiculously short timescale” plan. Insofar as we have a chance of doing that, it’s because of what China is doing right now. To the extent that they’re using fossil fuels to build the infrastructure for this renewable tech, I’m completely fine with that. That’s much better than using it to build iPhones or consumer nonsense. Insofar as they’re building a renewable grid backed by modern dispatchable coal and they’re also building out massive storage manufacturing capability and their emissions are on track to decline, I’m also fine with that. ETA: China’s emissions appear to be peaking and entering a structural decline. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2453703-clean-energy-rollout-means-chinas-emissions-may-have-peaked/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2453703-clean-energy-ro...
pbmonster 2y ago
> It's terrifying because we (in the West) can't seem to motivate ourselves to do anything like this on the same timescale The sad thing is, we still can if we want to. When Russia throttled down the natural gas pipelines into the EU, it took them mere weeks until the first new floating natural gas terminal was put into operation. And they've collectively dumped an astonishing number of new terminals into the North Sea since then, all at the same time. Germany alone spent $6B in infrastructure investments before that first winter without Russian gas. We could if we wanted to. But by and large, we don't want to.
lm28469 2y ago
> It's great news in the sense that this new energy storage and EV production capacity is (part of) our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate change. How so ? There are 1.4b vehicles on earth, petrol or batteries it just doesn't work out, especially if we keep using 2000-3000kg metal boxes to move 80kg meat bags 1hr a day and let them rot in a parking for the remaining 23 hours. Not even talking about the fact that cars are but a fraction of the problem anyways

greenthrow 2y ago

Western country populations seem to be willfully falling for obvious fossil fuel propaganda over and over again. Future generations will rightfully curse our names. (Including today's children.)

_carbyau_ 2y ago
Sadly it comes down to "Show me the money." I vote for change, but I don't have the money to buy electric. Even running costs don't make the difference when it comes to multiple tens of thousands of dollars in purchase price. I'd love to "care for our environment by buying an electric car". I can't afford to.
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Affordable EVs are a solved problem. China has solved it. The world responded by putting up tariffs.
  - XorNot 2y ago
    I already own a car. An affordable EV is a thing I'll buy in like 15 more years when my already 20 year old Toyota finally dies maybe. If I bought it sooner, then my car would just go into the second hand market and do the same thing. "Affordable" isn't changing anything: I don't need another car, and I'm not going to prematurely crush mine into a cube.
    - phatfish 2y ago
      I drive very little, so having a fossil car sitting in the drive is more carbon efficient than buying a new EV that had to be built and shipped. Somone who drives a lot may be able to scrap their fossil car, buy a new EV and start saving on carbon emissions in a much shorter time than me.

tomcam 2y ago

Of course we can motivate ourselves. But they're acting like we did in the 1800s through the mid 1900s. They just build anywhere no matter what. They have no interest in dealing with environmental concerns. The officially released pollution levels in China are mind-boggling and they still do not represent how bad it really is. You think US manufacturers wouldn't be delighted to just buy a few hundred acres land and start building stuff? They'd do it in a heartbeat. For better and for worse, it is not a level playing field. Conforming to government regulations over here is stifling for a 100-house development in Arkansas, but it's almost impossible in California, Illinois, or New York. Now imagine what it's like to build a huge factory. It is nearly impossible to get permission, and inspections, endangered wildlife concerns, waste removal, etc. handled in under 5-10 years.

soperj 2y ago
> Now imagine what it's like to build a huge factory. It is nearly impossible to get permission, and inspections, endangered wildlife concerns, waste removal, etc. handled in under 5-10 years. This explains why the Tesla gigafactory in Nevada (announced in Sept 2014) still isn't operational...
robwwilliams 2y ago
Counterpoint: See the speed with which Colossus has been (is being) assembled in Memphis Tennessee. Yes, on an existing industrial site but this is still one damn impressive accomplishment. https://www.servethehome.com/inside-100000-nvidia-gpu-xai-colossus-cluster-supermicro-helped-build-for-elon-musk/ https://www.servethehome.com/inside-100000-nvidia-gpu-xai-co...
- HeatrayEnjoyer 2y ago
  A data center is much easier than building an industrial factory
  - throwaway2037 2y ago
    This seems like an apples to oranges comparison. They are completely different. Can you provide some specific examples?

harrall 2y ago

The bread and butter of progress is competition and I think a lot of American companies “won” like Boeing or Intel in the 90s and no one else could compete. Unfortunately winning is disastrous because it makes you complacent. Perhaps the most flagrant and dumbest example is Internet Explorer 6. I do not approve of raising tariffs on foreign vehicles because it will dull our edge in the long term. Protectionism is a short term bandaid.

robwwilliams 2y ago
Intel was famously not complacent. Perhaps a long lapse starting a decade ago. But even then “complacence” was not the problem. Ditto for Boeing. Managerial focus on just milking the cow has been the fundamental problem: and they milked frantically—not complacently.
- ahartmetz 2y ago
  One could perhaps say that short-termism is complacency about the future.
- ZeroGravitas 2y ago
  I can't tell if I'm missing sarcasm here but ... Intel was paying customers Billions a year not to use their competitors products in the early 2000s. So not complacent about breaking the law to stifle competition but also complacent about actually building competitive chips that could win in the market.
azinman2 2y ago
Tariffs are a good way to ensure you still have a domestic capability. If Germany/korea/japan/China outcompete all US auto makers and they die, along with it goes a ton of jobs, manufacturing knowledge & capacity, cultural influence, an ability to keep capital flowing domestically, downstream suppliers, and ability to change factories from autos to military equipment in wartime. If China just keeps taking industry, then all we have left is an outpouring of all capital and a bunch of “content creators” left. Not a good prospect. US auto companies already try to compete globally in situations with/without tariffs. That provides plenty of competition too.

throwawaymaths 2y ago

> our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate change The US and EU are long off-peak carbon emissions (emissions even decreased during the Trump administration I, even using a trendline ignoring COVID). The biggest emitter right now is China, and it's emissions are growing not shrinking, and a considerable amount of that (including 90% of the worlds new coal plants) goes to projects like this.

Aeolun 2y ago
Kinda, but we’re not really in a position to blame them right? To some extend, sure, but that’s easy to say when you’ve already got yours.
- nradov 2y ago
  What does blame have to do with anything? Emissions are emissions.
  - Aeolun 2y ago
    The tone of the message feels kinda like ‘China bad, look at all those emissions’ It’s possible that was not the intent.
  - triceratops 2y ago
    Exactly: emissions are emissions. Reducing our own is just as good as other people reducing theirs. Plus then we can credibly badger others about their emissions, show them how to do it, and impose tariffs and sanctions when they don't.
matthewdgreen 2y ago
China is building more renewable energy than the rest of the world combined. At this point there is no “let’s just reduce our emissions by 30% or so and hope things work out” plan that’s compatible with stopping worst-case outcomes, there is only a “let’s replace every single energy and fuel source with non-emitting ones on a ridiculously short timescale” plan. Insofar as we have a chance of doing that, it’s because of what China is doing right now. To the extent that they’re using fossil fuels to build the infrastructure for this renewable tech, I’m completely fine with that. That’s much better than using it to build iPhones or consumer nonsense. Insofar as they’re building a renewable grid backed by modern dispatchable coal and they’re also building out massive storage manufacturing capability and their emissions are on track to decline, I’m also fine with that. ETA: China’s emissions appear to be peaking and entering a structural decline. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2453703-clean-energy-rollout-means-chinas-emissions-may-have-peaked/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/2453703-clean-energy-ro...

pbmonster 2y ago

> It's terrifying because we (in the West) can't seem to motivate ourselves to do anything like this on the same timescale The sad thing is, we still can if we want to. When Russia throttled down the natural gas pipelines into the EU, it took them mere weeks until the first new floating natural gas terminal was put into operation. And they've collectively dumped an astonishing number of new terminals into the North Sea since then, all at the same time. Germany alone spent $6B in infrastructure investments before that first winter without Russian gas. We could if we wanted to. But by and large, we don't want to.

lm28469 2y ago

> It's great news in the sense that this new energy storage and EV production capacity is (part of) our best chance to avoid catastrophic outcomes from climate change. How so ? There are 1.4b vehicles on earth, petrol or batteries it just doesn't work out, especially if we keep using 2000-3000kg metal boxes to move 80kg meat bags 1hr a day and let them rot in a parking for the remaining 23 hours. Not even talking about the fact that cars are but a fraction of the problem anyways