Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

What Are You Tired of People Trying To Convince You Is Great?

Rubato said:
The methods that don’t produce greenhouse gasses don’t offer enough capacity compared to the more harmful methods. And that skews even more as you have more EVs on the road.
Click to expand...

I'm still confused by the point you're trying to make. Electricity production methods and EVs are two different discussions. EVs are unquestionably better for the environment than gas cars.

As for electricity production methods, it really depends on how they're implemented. For example, when it comes to solar, you don't even need a big power plant to produce energy. There are plenty of areas in the U.S. that get sufficient sunlight year round such that every house could be equipped with solar panels and a battery and be just fine. Between use of different methods (e.g., solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, geothermal), we absolutely could cut down greatly on fossil fuels, and in some places even eliminate the need for them. Money and lobbying is the reason we haven't moved in that direction not some insurmountable technological barrier with alternate methods.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
Huh? What do you mean?

Are you arguing that methods of producing electricity that don't involve creating greenhouse gases are not better than the alternative?



You can make similar arguments against coal and oil. That doesn't change the fact that EVs don't constantly spew pollution into the air the way that gas cars do.
Click to expand...

The sheer amount of damage done to the planet to mine lithium alone ain't worth it.

For every ton of lithium mined 15 tons of carbon emissions are produced and it requires over 130,000 gallons of water. One ton of lithium produces only 100 EV batteries, which means that for us to hit one million EV cars in just the US we'd be responsible for 150k tons of carbon emissions and would need to divert 1.3 billion gallons of water to that mining process.

The shit will fuck up the environment wherever it's mined. The scale of damage to the environment is crazy and that's just for lithium, there's a number of rare earth minerals needed for EV's like neodymium, samarium, and terbium not to mention the other minerals/elements needed for the batteries like cobalt, manganese, nickel, and graphite.
 
konceptjones said:
The sheer amount of damage done to the planet to mine lithium alone ain't worth it.

For every ton of lithium mined 15 tons of carbon emissions are produced and it requires over 130,000 gallons of water. One ton of lithium produces only 100 EV batteries, which means that for us to hit one million EV cars in just the US we'd be responsible for 150k tons of carbon emissions and would need to divert 1.3 billion gallons of water to that mining process.

The shit will fuck up the environment wherever it's mined. The scale of damage to the environment is crazy and that's just for lithium, there's a number of rare earth minerals needed for EV's like neodymium, samarium, and terbium not to mention the other minerals/elements needed for the batteries like cobalt, manganese, nickel, and graphite.
Click to expand...

Cool, now do the same analysis for oil/coal.
 
Rubato said:
My workout is terrible if I can’t get a good meal in me first
Click to expand...

That’s probably true, but I been programmed since I was in basic to do my workouts first thing in the morning when I’m at my “weakest” and hungry.

But that post workout shit/shower/breakfast be havin me feeling energized for the rest of the day.

But say on like a Sunday where I get a big breakfast soon as I wake up… I have the itis til damn near 2pm
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNS
The Lonious Monk said:
I'm still confused by the point you're trying to make. Electricity production methods and EVs are two different discussions. EVs are unquestionably better for the environment than gas cars.

As for electricity production methods, it really depends on how they're implemented. For example, when it comes to solar, you don't even need a big power plant to produce energy. There are plenty of areas in the U.S. that get sufficient sunlight year round such that every house could be equipped with solar panels and a battery and be just fine. Between use of different methods (e.g., solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, geothermal), we absolutely could cut down greatly on fossil fuels, and in some places even eliminate the need for them. Money and lobbying is the reason we haven't moved in that direction not some insurmountable technological barrier with alternate methods.
Click to expand...
You might wanna read the thread title again
 
Rubato said:
You might wanna read the thread title again
Click to expand...

I didn't quote the thread title. I was responding to your claim that EVs aren't better for the climate than gas cars. They absolutely are even when considering factors outside of emissions.

3e8e53c3e8d99a057c62f6122103d626.jpg
 
The Lonious Monk said:
Cool, now do the same analysis for oil/coal.
Click to expand...

For what? Oil and coal are going to be what powers those EV's going forward until we decide to make the switch to full-on nuclear power. And because of the strain charging those EV's is going to put on our already fragile ass power grid we're going to need upgraded infrastructure, which means more oil and coal for energy to manufacture, transport, and install said infrastructure.
 
konceptjones said:
For what? Oil and coal are going to be what powers those EV's going forward until we decide to make the switch to full-on nuclear power. And because of the strain charging those EV's is going to put on our already fragile ass power grid we're going to need upgraded infrastructure, which means more oil and coal for energy to manufacture, transport, and install said infrastructure.
Click to expand...

lol Look at the chart I posted in the post right above yours. Even with those considerations factored, EVs are still way better than gas cars. Also, I don't even know what you mean about the strain of charging EVs. I have an EV and solar panels at my home. Even with having to charge the car, I still produce a surplus of energy every day. I'm not saying infrastructure won't need to be changed, but that needs to happen anyway because America's infrastructure in general is shitty.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
lol Look at the chart I posted in the post right above yours. Even with those considerations factored, EVs are still way better than gas cars. Also, I don't even know what you mean about the strain of charging EVs. I have an EV and solar panels at my home. Even with having to charge the car, I still produce a surplus of energy every day. I'm not saying infrastructure won't need to be changed, but that needs to happen anyway because America's infrastructure in general is shitty.
Click to expand...

And those solar panels just magically form or is there power needed to build them?

Also, not everyone can afford solar panels and they're not even viable in about half of the country, like here in Michigan. Northern states that can go for long stretches of overcast skies, diminished sunlight hours, rain/snow are not really suitable for solar; you get shit returns on it and in this state it could take over a decade to break even. Shit, we can go a whole summer without seeing the sun here making it take even longer to recoup (that was one of the reasons MC Serch's wife demanded they leave Detroit; we had a whole summer with only a few days of actual sunlight).
 
konceptjones said:
And those solar panels just magically form or is there power needed to build them?

Also, not everyone can afford solar panels and they're not even viable in about half of the country, like here in Michigan. Northern states that can go for long stretches of overcast skies, diminished sunlight hours, rain/snow are not really suitable for solar; you get shit returns on it and in this state it could take over a decade to break even. Shit, we can go a whole summer without seeing the sun here making it take even longer to recoup (that was one of the reasons MC Serch's wife demanded they leave Detroit; we had a whole summer with only a few days of actual sunlight).
Click to expand...

You have to use power to create the components needed to build and maintain fossil fuel based infrastructure too. The pollution that comes with solar panel production doesn't come anywhere near the improvement you make by cutting down on burning fossil fuels.

lol Also, you do realize that overcast days are not night time right. My panels still collect energy even during on cloudy days, and still manage to wind up with a surplus even on those days. Your point is valid though. Solar energy is not as viable in some places as it is others, but that's why mixed production exists. Even if we're not in a position where we could eliminate using fossil fuels, we could greatly reduce their use. That's being done in other countries right now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top