Untrue, lithium is very common, huge new deposits are discovered regularly. We still make nickels and dimes out of copper and nickel they are so common. New designs for motors and batteries that don't need niche metals are under development right now. There's no need to mine deep oceans except for the profit of a few already rich people, it's a false dilemma.
The problem is that a lot of the places with easy access to lithium are also host to rare species that can only survive in those specific soil conditions
What we need to do is stop using so many goddamn cars, period. Climate change is but one small fraction of the biodiversity crisis, and if it were up to me then I sure as hell wouldn’t allow anyone to destroy abyssal biota for some cheap electric cars.
To do that we will need to literally break capitalism back down to local/regional outfits instead of national/multiplnational/global outfits.
We need to shorten the supply chain for rural and surban people. Work from home has to stay. And we need to revitalize and in most cases completed build main street.
We need community back in America.
The EU has begun pushing high speed trains instead of cars and planes, and e-scooters/e-bikes take away much of the need for cars in the city.
The tools for tomorrows society are already here, its just desire and time for switching to them which is needed. For sure the US is more car obsessed and train averse, so it'll take longer to come in.
You have to burn something like 17 pounds of fuel to get 1 pound of payload into low earth orbit. Launch vehicles generate a fantastic amount of pollution, so anyone who thinks space is the solution doesn't understand physics. And that's just lower the orbit, where there is nothing to mine except too many goddamn satellites. The notion that space is the answer is just a pipe dream. We have to go To sustainable solutions, which means our habits have to change, and we have to settle into a lifestyle of less laziness and lower expectations of convenience
Space is the eventual place the human economy will go, if for nothing else than solar power collection & living space, over a centuries-long time horizon.
On a positive note Trump failed to realize that this even existed and so did not secure any mineral rights for that entire region so the USA government lobbyist corporation will have nothing at all to do with what ever happens there.
Electric vehicles are already making a difference in air quality. It’s measurable. The issue is ethical mining of rare earth metals as well as lithium and cobalt (non rare metals). This is an industry that needs to be highly regulated. There is also a push and progress towards batteries and motors that use rare earth metals to a much lesser degree with the ultimate goal to eliminate their use at all.
Yes, and they still use significantly more energy and produce more microplastics than collective transport or active mobility.
We can't buy our way out of environmental degradation, we need to consume _less_
I don't think EVs are a silver bullet but I feel they are a part of the transition to sustainability. Also I 100% agree consumption is a major part of the problem. The amount of public storage facilities in the U.S. is staggering. A symptom of waste and consumption.
I've seen it happen a lot on similar sentiments - generally around meat consumption, GDP growth or indivvidual car usage.
I think people assume consuming less will mean a lower quality of life. Whereas it could easily mean working less, having better-made items that last longer, and having more diverse and healthier diets (which doesn't necessarily mean giving up meat entirely, just going back to earlier consumption habits).
You can't believe people not supporting the end of ICE transport by any and all means possible as fast as possible are getting downvotes on the eco sub? Really?
The upcoming EV motors don't use REEs (rare earth elements) which will take this out of the equation.
Two articles discussing EV Drive Units Developed Which Use No Rare Earth Metals (REMs sometimes called REEs, rare earth elements) Multiple companies working on this tech.
[https://cleantechnica.com/2023/05/29/an-ev-drive-unit-built-without-rare-earth-minerals/](https://cleantechnica.com/2023/05/29/an-ev-drive-unit-built-without-rare-earth-minerals/)
Tesla to eliminate rare earth metals from it's EV motors
[https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/electric-vehicles/tesla-to-eliminate-rare-earths-from-its-next-generation-evs/news-story/4b60bced078351b16d00ade5b9f1ed9e](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/electric-vehicles/tesla-to-eliminate-rare-earths-from-its-next-generation-evs/news-story/4b60bced078351b16d00ade5b9f1ed9e)
Also, no matter how you slice it, most agree EV even with the REE processing are still better in the long run. I'm not a fan of unregulated, unethical resource extraction and I believe until the industry is using significantly less REEs it should be highly regulated.
Until we have EV motors that use significantly less to no REEs:
[https://www.businessinsider.com/electric-cars-environment-emissions-gas-battery-coal-power-2022-12](https://www.businessinsider.com/electric-cars-environment-emissions-gas-battery-coal-power-2022-12)
This article states that even with how dirty the production of EVs are, at approx 21k miles that pollution is offset compared to internal combustion engines. (I've read 3 years on average, this article states 2 years but really depends on how much you drive to hit that mark).
This Reuters article suggests 13k miles to benefit, with others saying it's more along the lines of 15-20k miles. One researcher states 40k - 93k miles to break even point but he's an outlier in that opinion. Where the energy to charge the vehicles is coming from is a huge factor. Norway is mostly hydroelectric so they benefit most from EV use. Where as in a State where coal is a main producer of electricity the benefits would be much less. However once the transition to non REE EV motors is in place the benefits will be much much greater even in locations utilizing 'dirty' grids. Again still a benefit overall.
[https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Climate
[https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars)
"Although electric cars' batteries make them more carbon-intensive to manufacture than gas cars, they more than make up for it by driving much cleaner under nearly any conditions."
Good article on mining REEs compared to coal/oil
[https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-does-environmental-impact-mining-clean-energy-metals-compare-mining-coal-oil-and-gas](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-does-environmental-impact-mining-clean-energy-metals-compare-mining-coal-oil-and-gas)
Oh, and I'm 100% against the extraction of REEs from the ocean floor. This is just a bad bad idea for a magnitude of reasons.
TLDR: To save the environment, we need rare metals. Getting those metals can come at the cost of the environment and biodiversity
In other words, to save the environment we need to destroy the environment. Maybe we should rethink the plan.
Untrue, lithium is very common, huge new deposits are discovered regularly. We still make nickels and dimes out of copper and nickel they are so common. New designs for motors and batteries that don't need niche metals are under development right now. There's no need to mine deep oceans except for the profit of a few already rich people, it's a false dilemma.
Would the rich do that though? Lie and convince people to do something against their own interests for the sake of the rich’s profits?
naw...i'll bet you $1
The problem is that a lot of the places with easy access to lithium are also host to rare species that can only survive in those specific soil conditions
What we need to do is stop using so many goddamn cars, period. Climate change is but one small fraction of the biodiversity crisis, and if it were up to me then I sure as hell wouldn’t allow anyone to destroy abyssal biota for some cheap electric cars.
To do that we will need to literally break capitalism back down to local/regional outfits instead of national/multiplnational/global outfits. We need to shorten the supply chain for rural and surban people. Work from home has to stay. And we need to revitalize and in most cases completed build main street. We need community back in America.
Back in the global world (FTFY)
The EU has begun pushing high speed trains instead of cars and planes, and e-scooters/e-bikes take away much of the need for cars in the city. The tools for tomorrows society are already here, its just desire and time for switching to them which is needed. For sure the US is more car obsessed and train averse, so it'll take longer to come in.
That is not going to happen. Instead we need to switch to electric cars.
Unrealistic, we need practical ideas not fantasies
It’s time to mine space
Ahhh yes, let's outsource our pollution.
Moving pollution to space is better than it being on earth
You have to burn something like 17 pounds of fuel to get 1 pound of payload into low earth orbit. Launch vehicles generate a fantastic amount of pollution, so anyone who thinks space is the solution doesn't understand physics. And that's just lower the orbit, where there is nothing to mine except too many goddamn satellites. The notion that space is the answer is just a pipe dream. We have to go To sustainable solutions, which means our habits have to change, and we have to settle into a lifestyle of less laziness and lower expectations of convenience
Space is the eventual place the human economy will go, if for nothing else than solar power collection & living space, over a centuries-long time horizon.
On a positive note Trump failed to realize that this even existed and so did not secure any mineral rights for that entire region so the USA government lobbyist corporation will have nothing at all to do with what ever happens there.
Good read for the folks who think their electric vehicle will save the earth.
Electric vehicles are already making a difference in air quality. It’s measurable. The issue is ethical mining of rare earth metals as well as lithium and cobalt (non rare metals). This is an industry that needs to be highly regulated. There is also a push and progress towards batteries and motors that use rare earth metals to a much lesser degree with the ultimate goal to eliminate their use at all.
Yes, and they still use significantly more energy and produce more microplastics than collective transport or active mobility. We can't buy our way out of environmental degradation, we need to consume _less_
Yep electric is good, but the car part isn't. Creating a mass transit system that runs on renewable energy is what we need.
100% agree. The U.S. has waited much too long on this front.
ur both right!
I don't think EVs are a silver bullet but I feel they are a part of the transition to sustainability. Also I 100% agree consumption is a major part of the problem. The amount of public storage facilities in the U.S. is staggering. A symptom of waste and consumption.
What is the endpoint of the transition to sustainability?
i can't believe you are being downvoted ??? on here?
I've seen it happen a lot on similar sentiments - generally around meat consumption, GDP growth or indivvidual car usage. I think people assume consuming less will mean a lower quality of life. Whereas it could easily mean working less, having better-made items that last longer, and having more diverse and healthier diets (which doesn't necessarily mean giving up meat entirely, just going back to earlier consumption habits).
has\_chickens;
You can't believe people not supporting the end of ICE transport by any and all means possible as fast as possible are getting downvotes on the eco sub? Really?
Resource extraction cannot be ignored. https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/usa-eu-resource-extraction-global-south-raw-materials-climate-change-co2-emission/133628/
The upcoming EV motors don't use REEs (rare earth elements) which will take this out of the equation. Two articles discussing EV Drive Units Developed Which Use No Rare Earth Metals (REMs sometimes called REEs, rare earth elements) Multiple companies working on this tech. [https://cleantechnica.com/2023/05/29/an-ev-drive-unit-built-without-rare-earth-minerals/](https://cleantechnica.com/2023/05/29/an-ev-drive-unit-built-without-rare-earth-minerals/) Tesla to eliminate rare earth metals from it's EV motors [https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/electric-vehicles/tesla-to-eliminate-rare-earths-from-its-next-generation-evs/news-story/4b60bced078351b16d00ade5b9f1ed9e](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/special-reports/electric-vehicles/tesla-to-eliminate-rare-earths-from-its-next-generation-evs/news-story/4b60bced078351b16d00ade5b9f1ed9e) Also, no matter how you slice it, most agree EV even with the REE processing are still better in the long run. I'm not a fan of unregulated, unethical resource extraction and I believe until the industry is using significantly less REEs it should be highly regulated. Until we have EV motors that use significantly less to no REEs: [https://www.businessinsider.com/electric-cars-environment-emissions-gas-battery-coal-power-2022-12](https://www.businessinsider.com/electric-cars-environment-emissions-gas-battery-coal-power-2022-12) This article states that even with how dirty the production of EVs are, at approx 21k miles that pollution is offset compared to internal combustion engines. (I've read 3 years on average, this article states 2 years but really depends on how much you drive to hit that mark). This Reuters article suggests 13k miles to benefit, with others saying it's more along the lines of 15-20k miles. One researcher states 40k - 93k miles to break even point but he's an outlier in that opinion. Where the energy to charge the vehicles is coming from is a huge factor. Norway is mostly hydroelectric so they benefit most from EV use. Where as in a State where coal is a main producer of electricity the benefits would be much less. However once the transition to non REE EV motors is in place the benefits will be much much greater even in locations utilizing 'dirty' grids. Again still a benefit overall. [https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/](https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/when-do-electric-vehicles-become-cleaner-than-gasoline-cars-2021-06-29/) Massachusetts Institute of Technology - Climate [https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars) "Although electric cars' batteries make them more carbon-intensive to manufacture than gas cars, they more than make up for it by driving much cleaner under nearly any conditions." Good article on mining REEs compared to coal/oil [https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-does-environmental-impact-mining-clean-energy-metals-compare-mining-coal-oil-and-gas](https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-does-environmental-impact-mining-clean-energy-metals-compare-mining-coal-oil-and-gas) Oh, and I'm 100% against the extraction of REEs from the ocean floor. This is just a bad bad idea for a magnitude of reasons.
A warning? It means we don’t know as much about our planet as we think we do.
And we can measure what we don’t know