3 ms·

> reads veiled de-development. > If you don't like what electricity is being used for, argue for specific regulation to make it more expensive. That reads lik

> reads veiled de-development. > If you don't like what electricity is being used for, argue for specific regulation to make it more expensive. That reads like veiled de-development. How do you reconcile saying both those things?

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
De-development is saying we have to e.g. stop driving cars. Regulations that make dirty power more expensive are the likes of a carbon tax, which you can avoid while still having a car by getting an electric car and charging it from solar panels.
- bombcar 2y ago
  The cars is a perfect example. Many people who want there to be much fewer car miles in toto will argue they're polluting, but will also not want anything that makes them not polluting - because they're not actually arguing for pollution reduction, they're arguing against the car. Same with this, I feel. It's not anti-pollution, it's anti-AI.
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    You cant make a car not pollute. Even EV pollutes the local neighborhood. Ever notice how tires and the stains on the curbs and the black soot you wipe off the window sills are all the same color? How tires get bald? You are probably breathing tire right now. It is probably getting on your plate of food and you are eating tire.
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      I feel like this is just making the point. Originally cars ran on leaded gasoline, which was very bad. But we didn't ban cars, we got unleaded gasoline. Then they were emitting too much in terms of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, so we got low-sulfur fuels and catalytic converters. Then it was brake dust from friction brakes, but now hybrids have regenerative braking. Then it was CO2, so we got electric cars that can be charged purely from the sun -- they can emit less CO2 than most mass transit systems despite the lower passenger density because transit systems regularly use diesel buses or locomotives or run after dusk on electricity generated from coal and natural gas because they don't have internal batteries that can charge exclusively from the sun. Somebody is going to invent some tires that last for 800,000 miles because they're made of something with such high internal cohesion they never get bald, or erode into something already commonly found in nature, and then people would find something else to complain about. And then someone would solve that too.
      - kjkjadksj 2y ago
        You are right, we will get bailed out by some yet uninvented technological solution and never face consequences for our own hubris. The climatologists are handwringing as you suggest because the solution is surely around the corner in the mind of some broccoli headed teen developed on a tick tock attention span. The ship will sail quite smoothly into the future. We have never been wrong before.
        AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        Your complaint was about tires, which is a much smaller problem than the ones that have known solutions, and one that has plausible solutions because it's a normal materials science problem. "Climatologists" are talking about CO2, which is the thing we already have everything we need in order to solve. You use electric ground vehicles, charge them with solar panels or nuclear reactors. Use synthetic or biofuels for aircraft. Switch to electric heat pumps to heat buildings. This isn't a matter of "we don't know how to do it" or "the only option is to reduce energy consumption", it's only a question of whether people are willing to adopt these things fast enough, because adopting them faster sometimes costs more in the short-term. So that's still a thing we actually have to do, but it isn't really a question of what to do, only a question of how to get people to do the known thing.
- TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
  Practically speaking, poor people can't just get an electric car.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    You can get a used Nissan Leaf or Chevy Spark for around $4000. "Poor people can't afford electric cars" was from when the only electric cars were newer cars. That was a decade ago, it's not true anymore.
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      > You can get a used Nissan Leaf or Chevy Spark for around $4000. With how much life left on its battery before it needs a $10k+ replacement?
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/21/surprise-nissan-leaf-batteries-last-much-longer-than-expected/ https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/21/surprise-nissan-leaf-ba... : > In fact, many EV batteries may outlast the vehicles they are installed in, then enjoy a second life in a stationary storage application before finally being recycled, according to EVANNEX. “At the end of the vehicle’s life — 15 or 20 years down the road — you take the battery out of the car and it’s still healthy with perhaps 60 or 70% of usable charge,” Thomas said. Meanwhile the battery replacement cost isn't $10k+. Nissan dealers charge $5500 for a new battery. Refurbished batteries are available for as little as $1000, with the obvious trade off that you'll have to replace it again sooner, but $1000 for another 3-5 years (with the option to do it again) could be a better choice for an older car than $5500 for another 10-15 years, depending on how much value you place on the inconvenience of disassembling your car to put it in again.
    - TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
      I looked in to this every year for the past five years, and the sub AU$10,000 - AU$15,000 Leafs are generally not worth the effort.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago

De-development is saying we have to e.g. stop driving cars. Regulations that make dirty power more expensive are the likes of a carbon tax, which you can avoid while still having a car by getting an electric car and charging it from solar panels.

bombcar 2y ago
The cars is a perfect example. Many people who want there to be much fewer car miles in toto will argue they're polluting, but will also not want anything that makes them not polluting - because they're not actually arguing for pollution reduction, they're arguing against the car. Same with this, I feel. It's not anti-pollution, it's anti-AI.
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  You cant make a car not pollute. Even EV pollutes the local neighborhood. Ever notice how tires and the stains on the curbs and the black soot you wipe off the window sills are all the same color? How tires get bald? You are probably breathing tire right now. It is probably getting on your plate of food and you are eating tire.
  - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
    I feel like this is just making the point. Originally cars ran on leaded gasoline, which was very bad. But we didn't ban cars, we got unleaded gasoline. Then they were emitting too much in terms of sulfur and nitrogen oxides, so we got low-sulfur fuels and catalytic converters. Then it was brake dust from friction brakes, but now hybrids have regenerative braking. Then it was CO2, so we got electric cars that can be charged purely from the sun -- they can emit less CO2 than most mass transit systems despite the lower passenger density because transit systems regularly use diesel buses or locomotives or run after dusk on electricity generated from coal and natural gas because they don't have internal batteries that can charge exclusively from the sun. Somebody is going to invent some tires that last for 800,000 miles because they're made of something with such high internal cohesion they never get bald, or erode into something already commonly found in nature, and then people would find something else to complain about. And then someone would solve that too.
    - kjkjadksj 2y ago
      You are right, we will get bailed out by some yet uninvented technological solution and never face consequences for our own hubris. The climatologists are handwringing as you suggest because the solution is surely around the corner in the mind of some broccoli headed teen developed on a tick tock attention span. The ship will sail quite smoothly into the future. We have never been wrong before.
      - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
        Your complaint was about tires, which is a much smaller problem than the ones that have known solutions, and one that has plausible solutions because it's a normal materials science problem. "Climatologists" are talking about CO2, which is the thing we already have everything we need in order to solve. You use electric ground vehicles, charge them with solar panels or nuclear reactors. Use synthetic or biofuels for aircraft. Switch to electric heat pumps to heat buildings. This isn't a matter of "we don't know how to do it" or "the only option is to reduce energy consumption", it's only a question of whether people are willing to adopt these things fast enough, because adopting them faster sometimes costs more in the short-term. So that's still a thing we actually have to do, but it isn't really a question of what to do, only a question of how to get people to do the known thing.
TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
Practically speaking, poor people can't just get an electric car.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  You can get a used Nissan Leaf or Chevy Spark for around $4000. "Poor people can't afford electric cars" was from when the only electric cars were newer cars. That was a decade ago, it's not true anymore.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > You can get a used Nissan Leaf or Chevy Spark for around $4000. With how much life left on its battery before it needs a $10k+ replacement?
    - AnthonyMouse 2y ago
      https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/21/surprise-nissan-leaf-batteries-last-much-longer-than-expected/ https://cleantechnica.com/2022/09/21/surprise-nissan-leaf-ba... : > In fact, many EV batteries may outlast the vehicles they are installed in, then enjoy a second life in a stationary storage application before finally being recycled, according to EVANNEX. “At the end of the vehicle’s life — 15 or 20 years down the road — you take the battery out of the car and it’s still healthy with perhaps 60 or 70% of usable charge,” Thomas said. Meanwhile the battery replacement cost isn't $10k+. Nissan dealers charge $5500 for a new battery. Refurbished batteries are available for as little as $1000, with the obvious trade off that you'll have to replace it again sooner, but $1000 for another 3-5 years (with the option to do it again) could be a better choice for an older car than $5500 for another 10-15 years, depending on how much value you place on the inconvenience of disassembling your car to put it in again.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 2y ago
    I looked in to this every year for the past five years, and the sub AU$10,000 - AU$15,000 Leafs are generally not worth the effort.