/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15570087
Who said it was about improving the environment? Making everyone drive a leased electric car is about improving the bottom line.

You're right, cars are incompatible with environmental goals and we need to encourage public transit

>>15570096
I agree. People who live inside urban areas should be banned from driving cars.

>>15570087
same phenomenon where dummies thought the v*ccine will stop the pandemic overnight even after the first data came in
we're so boned

>>15570087
What's with middle aged women and these dogs? It's usually this breed too (not sure of the name).

>>15570087
>screenshot of an ifunny post of a screenshot of a twitter post

Begone, boomer.
The embodied energy of an EV doesn't even approach the energy that an ICE vehicle expends in its lifetime. EVs are simply much more efficient in turning energy into locomotion than even the best ICE engine

>>15570087

>>15570087
Cry more "environementalists"

I drive my electric truck and run over your tiny fag beetle car.

>>15570087
>The amount of fuel it takes to create an electric car is more than an ICE vehicle consumes during it's lifetime
That claim seems dubious given how much that amount of fuel would cost even in china.

>>15570275
fuel costs in the third world where lithium is mined is cheap

>>15570096
As are meat-based diets, separated living spaces, A/C and notions such as freedom of movement.
Encouraging won't do anything. Force is necessary. We must force people onto a bug-based diet, into shared living spaces, we must dismantle A/C units and put an end to holiday culture.

>>15570638
>mining a few kilos of lithium consumes dozens of tons of fuel
you're delusional
>RGAYS

>>15570667
I don't think you properly appreciate the low fraction of usable metal in ore and the energy necessary to open-pit mine it and then render it.

>>15570087
Now i know why they hate carbon tax
It would actually penalize EVs

>>15570672
>>15570232

>>15570087
Whoa, now I am convinced. Individual motorised vehicles simply suck and collect dust 99% of the day. We should invest in rail infrastructure.

>>15570682
Who's "they"? Also, it wouldn't. See the data in >>15570232 instead of some blue tick on Twitter.

>>15570218
>embodied
The batteries in an EV need to be replaced every 10 years even when well maintained, its not embodied in the vehicle like a well maintained combustion engine in embodied in an ICE vehicle.

>>15570232
Seems like that just ignores where the fuel comes from to recharge your EV every night.

>>15570087
What’s your source? Is it literally just this screenshot?

>>15570702
The data in >>15570232
Has nothing to do with my contention that commies hate carbon taxes because it would penalize EVs

>>15570706
I am sure you did your due diligence.

>>15570087
Because ICE vehicles doesn't pollute when we fabricate it lol

>>15570087
Uhh yeah and how much fuel does it take to create an ICE car?

>>15570871
You don't have to basically keep re-manufacturing those cars every 10 years as the batteries become weak and unusable requiring 1000 pounds of new battery.

>>15570879
>ICE cars don't need battery changing
lol

>>15570872
>we need to convert to something new and everyone needs to buy new cars because it pollutes the exact same amount
This is not the EVs sales pitch, its suppose to save the environment, not just make us upgrade from something bad to something else just as bad with a shorter life cycle.

>>15570880
With ICE cars its not usually more economically viable to just buy a new car rather than replace the battery because its more like 20 pounds than 1000 and it only runs the alternator rather than everything degrading over time.

>>15570881
Who are you quoting? It pollutes less because it requires less fuel to run. are you stupid?

>>15570885
It doesn't though since you just get your fuel over lossy transmission lines to batteries that quickly degrade in quality.

>>15570887
It does though. It literally uses less and produces less pollution.

>>15570889
It uses just as much energy to move the same amount of weight, if not more thanks to transmission losses, and the pollution is just out of sight/out of mind rather than not existing.

>>15570890
>and the pollution is just out of sight/out of mind rather than not existing.
No, it isn't.

>>15570895
Yes it is because it is at the mines and power facilities rather than coming out of your exhaust plus you are lugging around heavy partially discharged batteries all the time instead of losing weight and becoming more fuel efficient as you consume liquid fuel.

>>15570897
>false equivalence
The pollution due to mining is not the same as what comes from your exhaust. It's potentially worse even.

>>15570898
It is definitely worse, lithium is far more finite than oil, the mining process leave lakes of acid behind that last for decades and you have to use millions of gallons of water that end up polluting the water supply.

>>15570898
Mining is so much worse than combusting fuel, these people are delusional political avtivists.

>>15570903
You also have to mine combustible fuel, retard

>>15570898
>It's potentially worse even.
Yes, but like I said, it is out of sight out of mind, so people are less likely to care when the pollution is happening in some south american country than when it is happening on the road in front of their house.

>>15570910
Oil mining is not nearly as destructive or resource intensive as lithium mining.

>>15570897
>Yes it is because it is at the mines and power facilities
No, it isn't, because those can be renewables.

>>15570901
>It is definitely worse, lithium is far more finite than oil, the mining process leave lakes of acid behind that last for decades and you have to use millions of gallons of water that end up polluting the water supply.
All mining does this. Are you saying we shouldn't be mining metals?

>>15570914
Lithium is not renewable.

You are responding to a bot

>>15570913
Of course, it's much worse.

>>15570916
Lithium doesn't get burned for energy, retardo.

>>15570915
We shouldn't be burning metals like lithium for fuel.

>>15570919
Yes it does, that is exactly what happens when you use it in batteries and need to replace them every few years.

>>15570920
This is obviously a bot

>>15570924
I accept your concession, you are right the argument might as well been crafted by a verbal genius algorithm.

>>15570096
Yes but we need to shut down illegal immigration first and create a white ethnostate because blacks are incompatibile with public transit. Illegals are too big of an environmental disaster as the equivalent of the entire population of Wisconsin cross the border every year.

>>15570913
Well, the lithium doesn't heat out planet.

>>15570096
Public transit requires all of that naughty stuff too, we need to END civilisation if we truly want to save le peckin environment.

There are paid fossil fuel shills on /sci/

>>15571034
I think it's worse. I think it's actual psy-op victims who do this for free. I would have at least a little bit of respect if they were paid shills. What they're doing is evil and dangerous, but everyone's gotta eat, right? But they do it do no good reason whatsoever.

>>15570087
Rowan Atkinson says that in their current manifestation EVs are a scam.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiga3atlTRs

>noooooo you are a paid shill, evs are the future
>OOOOOh I'm footuring

>>15571034
Is it possible that the government doesn't have our best interests at heart? Could some group have a financial interest in promoting the green agenda? Perhaps multiple competing agendas have shills here. The political/corporate establishment seem pretty on board with divesting away from coal and ICE vehicles. The money seems to be behind that side rather than big oil. We're only moving in one direction which means the financial impetus is unbalanced. The government has proven to be antithetical to the public good and will easily exchange stability and progress for short term profit. It all comes down to how much you trust the system to put the greater good before the individual good. In America that idea makes you literally Hitler from the left wing and a dirty communist by the right wing.

>>15571109
>Could some group have a financial interest in promoting the green agenda?
Yeah, that must be it. Less consoomerism is driven by financial interest, but the shills who tell us to burn more oil here surely aren't motivated by financial interests.
I hade /pol/tards so much. They're like 1% short of realising who is fucking them, only to turn on the wrong people in the last second.
No, you motherfucking retard, the "green agenda" is not the one trying to sell you shit that you don't need and destroys the planet.

>>15571109

>>15570087
>otherwise sensible post
>includes nuclear power as evil bad polluting energy

>>15570232
can't help but notice no data on what "lifecycle" means in this graph. Does it take in to account that those lithium batteries last 5 years tops before they need to be recycled?

>>15570096
This.

>>15571031
Doesn't matter as long as it's significantly more ecological friendly. You are missing the scale, if we cut use of all these stuff by half or more it's still huge win.

>>15570650
That's not necessary.
People living separately doesn't matter as long as they don't spread over huge area that involves huge infrastructure. Just make some residential blocks.
A/C isn't that bad if you run it off nuclear for example.
Freedom of movement is necessary for society to function.
Bug diets are also not necessary, if you make people switch to chicken and fish instead of beef it will already be more than enough.

>>15570934
So be it. I live in pure white country and public transport is great. I don't think I will even buy a car in my life to be honest.
Japan has it even better when I visited them. All it takes is just homogeneous country and culture of respect and hygiene

>>15570901
>lithium is far more finite than oil,
Lithium isn’t rare retard. The only bottle neck right now is refining. The retards that are saying we're running out of lithium are the same retards that were saying we wouldn't have any oil by the 2000s

>>15570087
Everything in the OPs picture is fake and made up numbers, you'd think it was a gold mine with such economics

>>15571939
The OP says it can take 500-900 gallons of fuel, worth close to $2000, to produce 25 pounds of Lithium worth around $500. Completely made up production figures

>>15571982
The petroleum shills on the board will pretend they didn't see this.

>>15570901
> lithium is far more finite than oil
Isn't it like the third most abundant element in the universe?

>>15570703
>>15570879
>>15570884
>>15571701
Where did this meme come from? You would need major work on your ICE after 250,000km but the average Tesla battery still holds more than 90% of its capacity.

>>15570087
I don't believe it.

>>15571991
The usable fraction in your average patch of dirt is minuscule, and the most economically useful ores aren't very high quality either.

>>15571994
>remaining battery capacity over 100%
huh ?

>>15570092
No it's not.
It's about control. You will only be allowed to drive so far. You will only be allowed so much car use.

There is a reason the American car culture and roads were synonymous with freedom.
>the open road
With gasoline and a motor car you can go fucking anywhere and never/rarely have to stop.
Not to mention that gas is explosive in power and the possibilities are endless for the person to actually improve their life using it.

They want you on the grid, they want you controlled. Money is part of the control mechanism. It's not the goal.

It may be a bit outdated as I did these calculations some 2 years ago but apart from Y now being more popular than Corolla I don’t think much has changed. They still would be the most popular vehicle for each propulsion type.
Full carbon footprint estimations - no skipping manufacturing steps (like resource extraction), grid losses etc. All the way from the mine, till end of use - I had to omit end of live due to no sufficient data on recycling/safely retiring battery EVs - but I sincerely doubt that a gas car would be more problematic to retire or recycle than a battery EV.
>thrust me, I’m an engineer

>>15572016
NTA but the 100% mark is probably just the arbitrary target for a brand new battery and some end up having slightly more capacity due to manufacturing quirks

>>15572118
>I had to omit end of live due to no sufficient data on recycling/safely retiring battery EVs
That gives a huge advantage to EVs and they still lost. Amazing.

>>15572152
I think the most interesting take I had from this is how bad coal/fossil fuels power plants are. The only place where EV almost breaks even near the end of lifecycle is France, which gets most of its energy from nuclear power plants. On the other hand, in places where coal absolutely dominates (Poland, China) EV is the more polluting one even during its operation.
Some will probably soon point out that it’s unfair to compare these two specific cars - but in my opinion simply taking the most generic/popular one from each category is the best, most objective and holistic way. I think it best represents each kind of propulsion without analyzing whole (or most) market and then averaging the results - I obviously didn’t have time for that.
Another thing that I found out but didn’t put in those graphics is that any additional equipment results in large amounts of emissions. A top trim luxury ICE SUV or sedan is about as bad to manufacture as the model Y is.
All in all, if truly lowering the emissions was the goal, cars should be smaller, lighter, more aerodynamic, with less equipment and luxury features. Powered by a small ICE, optionally with a light hybrid system. Built to last long and be easily reparable. In other words, exactly the opposite of the way current automotive market is heading.

>>15572019
>they want you on the grid, they want you controlled
Okay, go refine and make your own gasoline. I'll wait.

Meanwhile EV owners can propel themselves entirely with energy they produced themselves with solar panels and windmills

>>15572199
>Okay, go refine and make your own gasoline. I'll wait.
Diesel engines can be run on frying oil and light gas engines can be run on the methane from decomposing compost or gasified wood.

>>15572201
Only ancient disels without ECUs. Nobody's actually going to all this trouble to fuel their car because it costs more than just buying gasoline.

Meanwhile real people are charging their EVs with locally produced solar/wind energy that would otherwise go to waste. It's practical and self sufficient

>>15572204
>locally produced solar/wind energy that would otherwise go to waste
lol

>>15572016
Some EV batteries have emergency reserve capacity

>>15572199
>Meanwhile EV owners can propel themselves entirely with energy they produced themselves with solar panels and windmills
Congratulations, your movement radius is 150 miles if you’re lucky. So independent.
You can convert even many modern gas cars to run on ethanol. Conversion is quite simple, reflash ECU (or plug in a kit) and change the fuel lines. It’s done often for sports mods, as it provides some benefits over running on gas. Making ethanol is something you can easily do yourself on large enough scale.
As for the Diesel - modern ones cannot directly run on things like vegetable oil (fuel injection system won’t work for higher viscosity fuel) - but there still are some old ones on the market you can buy and have for some bad scenario.

>>15572118
How do you explain your results being so different from pic ?
https://climate.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2020-09/2020_study_main_report_en.pdf

>>15570910
Lol. Lmfao.

>>15571026
Does oil? Tell me, if you were to have lithium powered mining equipment, and lithium powered steel mills to provide the materials and batteries for this equipment, what would the planet look like in order to support this?

>>15572265
NTA but I trust anon more than someone talking their book
Would be a major happening if he btfoes the governmenr however

>>15570087
True and real. Global warming is scam only morons believe.

>>15572240
>Making ethanol is something you can easily do yourself on large enough scale.
it can be done easily even on a small scale. even more efficient vacuum distillation is possible for anyone to put together. people have been distilling hooch since the 1500s or so

Electric cars are cringe
They're worse than what we already have

>>15572019
>>It's about control. You will only be allowed to drive so far. You will only be allowed so much car use.
>
>There is a reason the American car culture and roads were synonymous with freedom.
Kek like all murifats you think history started in 1945. The reality is that this liberal elite has been in charge since 1649 and their Commonwealth, and their mores have not changed one bit since then.

breaking news:
-it is the bourgeois revolutionaries who created classical liberalism, in order to promote a society based on commerce and atheism by killing kings and priests
-it is the bourgeois revolutionaries who created new liberalism, in order to promote a society based on commerce and atheism by killing kings and priests

isnt it weird normies cant see the same people created the two political poles that normies fight for?

And guess what:classical liberalism started 3 CENTURIES AGO. NOT DECADES, FUCKING CENTURIES.
democratic republics were build by the bourgeois revolutionaries precisely to have a confluence between merchants (in finance and entertainment) and bureaucrats, ie they are both members of the bourgeois caste.
the dichotomy classical-new liberalism is completely fake in the first place. historically,
-rightists= monarchists
-leftists = republicans
guess what happens to the right when there is no more king because the bourgeois killed him. the answer is that the right becomes the left and there is only the choice between bourgeois and bourgeois lol and the bourgeois revolution is achieved whose only goal was dodging monarchist taxes........hmmmmmmmmmmmmm
it's like the ''''''''''''''''''''american people'''''''''''''''''''''' was a just gimmick to seize power and create a society based on global mercantilism...
rebels without a cause...
when you don't have enough problems in your life,
you latch on to any sort of issue you can think of,
just in order to feel fulfilled and respectable

>>15570120
women love
-alcohol
-sex
-money
-gossip
-public posturing

that's all. Women don't even love their kids. Kids are jsut a tool for them in order to smother them and delude themselves they are not loathsome.
When women dont have kids, they get dogs, to play the devoted mother with them.

>>15572466
>I trust anon
Lol

>>15572953
when get dogs, they fuck them

>>15570705
see "feedstock and fuel"

>>15572986
>feedstock
?

>>15570087
Already debunked.

I don't even like driving, build more rail and hire guards to keep the ghetto out.

>>15572951
>all this to not refute the green text at all

>>15572953
>>15572968
No one have ever gotten less combined vagina than these two.

>>15572195
Global warming is fake and plants love CO2, however cars are still retarded and we need urban light rail everywhere but only if black people dont get to use them. We need to encase black people in cement and toss them in the marianas trench, then to build ample urban light rail and interurban maglev. Also its not racist just common sense.

>>15570087
>Source: ifunny.co

>>15573473
>attacking the source
AKA confirming that you can't attack the information presented because its all true

>>15573758
>ifunny.co

>>15573764
>ignorance confirmed

>>15570087
yeah, most "green" tech is CO2 embezzlement

>>15573270
>cars are still retarded and we need urban light rail everywhere
so you're one of those libtard faggots who got brainwashed by the amount of anti car videos that are all over youtube these days

>>15570218
>Lithium mines itself, obviously.
Please consider doing the world a favor.

>>15574994
No, i just went to europe and saw how good it is. Its extremely comfortable. Particularly in places like Berlin that are saturated with trains, it almost felt like i could blink and jump across the city. Only problem is neggers but Berlin was not like that yet and neither was Holland.

>>15575061
>>15574994
Ill go on about the benefits of trains and i challenge you to refute then:
Immune to traffic jams
Far faster than cars both in cities and in travel between cities
Don't have to drive
Don't have to deal with car repairs or insurance
Dont need to find parking spots
They go almost everywhere that cars can go i.e to wherever the government has placed roads they have also placed trains.
Cars still exist so you can still get a car for that trip to the wilderness you will never do.
Cars can coexist with trains.
Trains go to 99.9% of the places cars go.
Trains take off cars from the road so as a driver you should support other people getting on trains so you get the streets for yourself.
Kill niggers.

>>15575086
>Don't have to drive
i prefer to drive, why would i want to ride in a vehicle piloted by a unionized diversity hire who knows that he can't be fired even if he gets caught smoking crack on the job?

>>15575086
>Far faster than cars both in cities and in travel between cities
This isn't even true in Europe.

>>15575125
Which part of it?

>>15575128
>el goog map accuracy
lol all they do is scrape posted departure and arrival times based on the ideal schedule.

>>15575122
>i prefer to drive,
You can drive while trains still exist. Berlin has cars. Holland has cars. Try a better argument now.

>>15575135
What's your argument then? If you want to ride in a train then you can pay for it. No skin off my back. It's your money.

>>15575133
They are accurate at least in northern europe.
In urban travel they are at least 10 times faster in rush hour since they are immune to traffic while the roads turn into 2 km/h parking lots

>>15575136
>If you want to ride in a train then you can pay for it.
I could say the same about your beloved roads. Im forced to use them and pay for them. Why cant the government build trains? Ill pay my share for it by buying tickets

>>15575143
>I could say the same about your beloved roads. Im forced to use them and pay for them.
If you don't use roads, you aren't taxed for them. Roads are paid for by a gasoline tax (or by private money for private roads).
>Why cant the government build trains? Ill pay my share for it by buying tickets
You can pay for your share out of your own pocket if you want trains. Right now where I live the subsidy costs the government $250 per rider. People like you are forcing me to pay for trains that nobody wants.

>>15575148
>f you don't use roads, you aren't taxed for them.
I use roads because im forced to use them. If there were trains i would use the train instead and pay for it.

>>15575143
>government should build free shit for me
>>>/pol/

>>15575151
Why don't you pay for a train then? Collect investments from concerned citizens just like yourself. There's nothing stopping you. That's how all of the major train lines were built historically.

>>15575148
>Right now where I live the subsidy costs the government $250 per rider. People like you are forcing me to pay for trains that nobody wants.
I dont have a problem with train fare being high enough to pay for the real cost. It isn't true that most people dont want trains.
Im not asking you to pay for them or to stop driving. Thing is you want more drivers so that we get to pay for your road, if the amount of drivers halved then you would have to pay twice as much for roads and thats why you want everyone enslaved to a road with no alternatives ever approved.
I can't "free market" my way to work in a train that hasnt been built, retard

>>15575160
>Thing is you want more drivers so that we get to pay for your road, if the amount of drivers halved then you would have to pay twice as much for roads and thats why you want everyone enslaved to a road with no alternatives ever approved.
The trainfag exposes himself via projection.

>>15570650
>Encouraging won't do anything. Force is necessary. We must force people
What's different about this than say the catholic church performing inquisition?

>>15570087
Cars are death traps for retards incapable of recognizing their own mortality due to sub 80 iq.

It's always weird how these arguments completely ignore that standard ICE cars ALSO require materials and metals to be produced and shipped to location.
Like, I had someone try to argue once that my fucking bicycle of all things wasn't environmentally friendly because it had rubber tires and an aluminum frame and that made it just as bad as a car.
You mean the tires on my bicycle that are 1 inch wide and my frame that contains a whopping 12 kg of aluminum?
And retards just slurp this kind of biased comparison up without even fucking thinking t\for themselves.

>>15575210
>It's always weird how these arguments completely ignore that standard ICE cars ALSO require materials and metals to be produced and shipped to location.
Most metal in an ICE car is recycled, since it's plain steel and aluminum. The excessive use of rare earths and lithium in an electric car is where the huge environmental toll comes from.

>>15575213
But recycling steel also requires a lot of coal or gas. Maybe the best would be to not consoom so many cars.

>>15575224
Recycling steel is done with an electric arc furnace, which is powered by the mains and is highly efficient. I agree about consooming though. We should stop "cash for clunkers" type programs and get rid of the government regulations that force people to get rid of their old cars to consoom newer electric models.

>>15575224
Recycling steel is done with an electric arc furnace, which is powered by the mains and is highly efficient. I agree about consooming though. We should stop "cash for clunkers" type programs and encourage people to drive older cars for longer by relaxing emissions regulations and lowering gasoline taxes or providing full rebates for older model years.

>>15571197
>Less consoomerism
It requires much more consoomerism to convert the current infrastructure to an EV based one instead and you still have to consoom the electricity and you just end up having more parts to replace and consoom in the future when dealing with massive battery packs.

>>15571697
Its not like they are still trying to clean up the mess left behind at chernobyl or anything.

>>15571920
>Lithium isn’t rare
Its more rare than oil.

>>15571994
Now do what happens after 5 years instead of implying it is more related to distance driven.

>>15575251
Luckily you don't need to burn lithium to run an electric car.

>>15575258
Tell that to the car lots that keep catching fire and have to burn for days because the local fire department isn't equipped to deal with lithium fires.

>>15575139
I live in 2 million European city and it’s not true in my case. Public transport takes 2x as long to arrive and is much less comfortable than driving a car. The only benefit of public transport is that it is cheaper but I personally value my time and comfort too much.
Long distance travel is even worse. If I want to visit my parents or grandparents, I spend 5 hours driving at economical speeds. Train takes anywhere between 10 and 24 hours depending on current schedule. It’s basically an option only if you absolutely can’t drive.
I’ve spent my fair deal of time in trains and buses before I was of legal age to get a driver’s license. Not once have I used public transport since.

>>15572199
Ok, go manufacture your own solar panels and windmills without making emissions. I'll wait.

>>15575266
>the car lots that keep catching fire
ICE is 20 times more likely to catch on fire
just because Business Insider reports on every single Tesla that ever caught on fire doesn't mean it's common

>>15570092
>Who said it was about improving the environment?
I cant recall how exactly it happened, but in the early 10's Tesla Inc began receiving rather large sums of environmental credits, investments etc. While I didn't see it in the agenda when I first invested I can surmize it must've looked like stupidity to say something like 'actually we have no idea the environmental impact of our overseas production, data veracity of supply chain edges is always a veracity issue, dont give us free money" than to just nod and accept the money. Expediancy than, perhaps turned the crutch into pillar. Corpo-Industrial-Political interests aligned the positive media spin droned, the revolving doors whirled and the stocks waved higher

>>15575423
Its also 1000x more likely to be easily put out, they keep reporting on them because they keep thinking the fire is extinguished until they move it and the entire salvage yard burns down when it reignites.

>>15575252
Charging cycles are equivalent to distance driven, I can't see why it would magically degrade over time when its not used.

>>15575429
>they keep thinking the fire is extinguished until they move it and the entire salvage yard burns down
In your head it's real.

>>15575580
I don't mean to enable the oil shill, but you could argue that thermal cycling throughout the 5 years is different wear from charge cycles. In reality this graph includes both, of course.

>>15575597
I would have thought that expansion and contraction from temp change would be very minor indeed, but I am not an expert on lithium batteries, It would certainly be less than heat-based mechanical engines like the ICE, but then again pistons and cam-shafts are likely less delicate than batteries.

>>15575266
The lithium doesn't evaporate when burned. the battery can still be recycled after

>>15575580
>I can't see why it would magically degrade over time when its not used.
You don't understand why because you're ignorant of all the relevant facts

>>15575580
>I can't see why it would magically degrade over time when its not used.
Are you seriously pretending batteries sitting on a shelf don't have an expiration date?

>>15572536
He means on a large enough scale to rely on it for fueling your vehicle.

>>15572199
*uses diesel, fuels it with farmer's biofuel*
Whoops, just fucked your globohomo plan into the dirt. Perhaps you should stop being a controlling narcissist and leave everyone be.

>>15577757
I always wonder why biofuels aren’t pushed. They literally have negative carbon footprint, as only a portion of the carbon the plant binds from air is converted by it into oil.

>>15578248
You're still laboring under the false assumption that the goal is to solve real problems.

Mass transit and walkable cities is how you actually dent energy demand related to transportation. EVs are just virtue signalling.
And for any car manufacturer, be it EV or ICE, their dream will always be to pave the entire planet and fill every available space parking lots.

>>15578248
Yeah, sure lets just destroy every natural ecosystem on Earth, kill off every wild animal and deforest everything so you can drive to work. The problem is that biofuels have a MASSIVE impact on the environment in other ways, when we can just solve the problem by removing cars from the road. Also biofuels skyrocket food prices because you're using land to make fuel instead of food which people need.

Also it's debatable how carbon negative biofuels actually are once you consider that the more you farm land, the more it releases CO2 into the atmosphere from destruction of trapped carbon. It's projected that it would take at least a decade of using 100% biofuel to go carbon neutral, and it's likely impossible to actually be "carbon negative"

>>15578521
>the more you farm land, the more it releases CO2 into the atmosphere from destruction of trapped carbon
Climatologists fear the carbon cycle.

>>15578248
>as only a portion of the carbon the plant binds from air is converted by it into oil.
uhuh, and where does the rest of the plant go to? Outer space? 20 miles deep underground and sealed off? Because if not either of those, then it just goes back into the cycle

>>15578635
The organic soil layer gets deeper every year

>>15579144
Thats still carbon cycle.
Have you ever heard how black science man and his legion of TV science superstars say that all atmospheric oxygen comes from photosynthesis on an ancient atmosphere that was just as rich but in CO2?
Imagine an atmosphere with enough CO2 to create 21% atmospheric oxygen. Thats a lot of carbon.

>>15579551
>Imagine an atmosphere with enough CO2 to create 21% atmospheric oxygen. Thats a lot of carbon.
Actually, where does our oxygen come from? Is it all from primordial CO2? Was our atmosphere 21% of CO2? What percentage of the carbon is bound in fossil fuel reserves and what percentage is in soil/plants accessible to the carbon cycle? Or is it bound in stuff like limestone?

>>15577757
Do the math on how much land you'd need to run your car for a year, then multiply that by every car on the road.

>>15577757
Enjoy getting completely fucked by the government if they ever catch you. A friend of mine occasionally did this, ran into an inspection and had to pay not only the tax he dodged for the tank but for every kilometre the car ever drove. They said they couldn't know if he ever paid tax, so they assumed something like 6 litres per 100km and he had to pay for 150,000km. RIP

Do as I said, then.

>>15578248
Because it doesn't scale. You could never satisfy the demand. It's a good thing for stuff like construction machines, tractors or other areas, but not for everyone to commute to work.

>>15570087
>The amount of fuel it takes to create an electric car is more than an ICE vehicle consumes during it's lifetime. There is no way that electric cars improve the environment, they're worse that ICE cars.
5 seconds google

nobody wants to buy electric cars

>>15580025
>i found fake news greentard propaganda on google
omg ur so smart

>>15580404
I'd buy one if they make it not catch fire

>>15570087
This is a lie.

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths#Myth1

>>15581138
>no u
(You)

>>15570087
EVs are about improving MY environment, MY air quality, MY noise pollution, MY energy independence and MY driving experience.

It is not about YOU, if you don't want to sell coal then don't. If you don't want to sell Lithium then don't. When you quit the market then that will just allow our own domestic green industries and sustainable mining practices to be competative which is what we really want. At the end of the day my country keeps its skies clear and its rivers clean while 99% of the plastic trash in the ocean only has Chinese writing on it. This is their affairs and keeping our own environement clean is our affair.

All else is some form of duplicitous grift from have nots.

>>15570650
Or you could just let the population decline as it naturally does while keeping migrants out.

Why "force" people to live worse lifestyles under ever decreasing resources? Do billionaires really need more money?

>>15581482
>Do billionaires really need more money?
They are competitive with each other, money is how they keep score

>>15581482
Because they want to establish a sort of two tier society with an elite and a devolved subhuman race one that could never pose a threat to their existence

>>15581475
Holy based.

>>15581138
>Imagine being this retarded

>>15570087
>unnecessary capitalisation of common nouns
>nickle
Dogshit post written by a semi-literate idiot. The Mediterranean herb goes in all fields.

>>15570087
Correct. The only possible way to slash carbon emissions is to remove vehicles from the road. I would go so far as to outlaw their manufacture/use at some point.

>>15570650
Well, there's been a lot of research into reflective paints which can cool.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDRnEm-B3AI

Theoretically all you'd need is some more modern, updated designs of passively cooled buildings. I'm personally fond of the Indian "jali" which was used as sort of an outer wall for passive cooling. It was common in Islamic/Indian architecture.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jali

Then you just use reflective paint combined with a Jali type structure and realistically lower ambient temperatures in buildings to comfortable levels even in 100 degree weather. Biggest problem is that you'd have to make all the structures out of stone or brick, no wood. Wood's a shit insulator. Only other problem is that you'd have to move most heat generating appliances, mainly your fridge, in a way to prevent it from putting out heat inside the building. That would probably entail putting the heat evaporation coil on the outside of your house. Fully passively cooled houses are possible, though in the US they'd probably only be viable in the western states, as they're much drier and don't get that cold in the winter, which makes these passive cooling more effective.

>>15571718
The entire concept of AC is completely retarded.
>oh hey lets just spend inordinate amounts of electricity to constantly pump heat out of structures
There's a good reason your AC is by FAR the biggest electricity user in your house, by far. I think the past 50 years have shown that it's infeasible to built thousands of nuke plants just to feed America's electricity addiction, and how would we power the rest of the planet with it? It's just a shit idea. It's just not a good use for a plant which we would end up spending billions on to make and decades just to construct. Not including the amount of maintenance.

>>15584828
The electricity usage is not as much of a problem as electricity production. Nuclear and (some) green energy do not harm the environment that much.

>>15584861
You say electricity production isn't the problem so why should we risk it? What we should do is adapt, try to use as little electricity as possible, the maybe, maybe if nuclear/renewables ever catch up we can go back to how everything is now.

Conversely if that isn't true, and nuclear/renewables can't actually physically replace fossil fuels with how much electricity we use now, then they'll be forever stuck playing catch up and carbon emissions will still explode, which is basically the exact situation we're in now.

>>15579934
You didn't read the rest of the thread. If you're using biofuels it's because the government has outlawed cars. It will be more practical to run an ICE than an EV in that situation.

>>15584874
Because there is only so much you can convince people to do or care about, so better to target the things that will yield highest results with least cost/resistance.

>>15579934
hang on, are you confusing red diesel with biofeul? Surely the kike scum in government can't be claiming you owe them tax on the fuel you created.

All the more reason for the lynching and torture of everyone who works for government. Death to them and their families!

>>15584797
I read something about treated wood that absorbed heat and emitted it to reduce temperature locally
They took wood and purified it of all colourants or something

>>15584861
Nuclear IS a green, renewable energy source. Don't let globohomo faggots gaslight you into thinking otherwise.

>>15584898
I associate green energy with scams and hidden pollution. Nuclear is none of these.

>>15585062
It's green by the true definition of being a renewable and environmentally friendly energy source. It also makes retards seethe when you call it green and then explain why it's more environmentally friendly than solar and wind so that's a fun bonus.

>>15585137
>makes retards seethe
I don't think that the people telling you that you don't know what "renewable" means are the retards in this story. But please enlighten us what you think "renewable" means, maybe you can interpret the ridicule as seething and feel better.

>>15585150
Looking at the actual definition, I guess the word "recyclable" fits better since it's not based on an infinite resource. The point I'm trying to make is that most greentards have this idea of nuclear energy that you take some uranium and use it once and then throw it away when the reality is that it can be reused many times in different types of reactors, each time depleting it further until it's too depleted for current reactor technology to make use of it. It's not one-and-done like burning gas, for example.

>>15585347
>you take some uranium and use it once and then throw it away
But that's how it's done in real life, isn't it? I think France can reprocess spent fuel from LWRs. Without knowing I'd guess that the US and Russia also have a facility for this, but by far most countries literally do what you said: use the fuel until it doesn't work anymore and then throw it away.
>the reality is that it can be reused many times in different types of reactors
What types of reactors are you talking about and how many of them are real? There's a lot of fancy tech, but the actual market is rather boring.
>It's not one-and-done like burning gas, for example.
Yeah, it's more like eating the chicken, cooking the bones to make broth and then throwing rice in the empty-but-wet pot to get some of that flavour. And like with real chicken, most people just throw away the bones.

>>15585384
>But that's how it's done in real life, isn't it?
No lol. Only the USA throws away fuel (because of government interference).

>>15571050
Just like BTC? If it helps; why not consider the long term goals in juxtaposition to their short term obstacles of public perception to be similar in function to that of crytpocurrencys beginnings and long term goals?

An alternative to something so effectively crucial to manufacturing standards around the world isn't something you can phase out and inplement at the same fucking time. This anti-left OPEC peddler shit hasn't aged a day and it's impressive.

>>15585384
Look up breeder reactors, it's a pretty interesting topic. There's a variety of types and some of them are in use today. People typically think of light water reactors which do extract a comparatively small amount of energy and can't reuse the spent fuel, but the technology in the space has progressed well past that. The amount of energy we can extract from a given amount of fuel is MUCH higher now and still has room to improve.

>>15581475
That would have worked if not for the open borders, otherwise you constantly create a crisis and experience the consequences