1059
Not happening, dude
(slrpnk.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Apr 2024
1059 points (100.0% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
26781 readers
2666 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Isn't this why we should embrace EVs and other cars that can use renewable energy so we don't have to worry about the middle east and other petrostates?
Evs make us reliant on lithium which just shifts the problem to another country. Additionally - the infrastructure is not there for evs.
I think the best alternative right now would be biodiesel hybrids and straight biodiesel vehicles and FUCKING SMALLER VEHICLES
Public transportation.
The less of our lives we have to buy the less critical supply chain there is to “defend”
It's not that easy. Sprawl needs to be addressed. Our cities are build around cars. You can't slap a few busses in a town expect shit to work.
I work an hour away from my home. I would take a train but there isnt one that is reliable or cheaper than driving.
Having a light rail system that connected the east coast would take centuries unless the government acted with unprecedented action and speed even then it would be decades.
I'd love more public transportation yes.
I am saying right off the bat I think biodiesel would be a more viable alternativ as it could be relatively easily adopted as the infrastructure is already in place.
Edit - I was probably a bit verbose when I wrote this. Clearly it won't take centuries. Decade or two at the most
Edit two: I was also misinformed about biodiesel - thanks for the helpful information, I appreciate it.
Yeah, I dunno if it realistically takes that long. We pivoted from a world where cars didn't broadly exist and public transit in the form of trams and trains was extremely common, to one where cars were hyper-dominant, in like, less than a quarter century, with nothing but publicly targeted corporate propaganda, huge amounts of government lobbying, and a post-war economy. The thing we lack isn't really the ability to rapidly construct a large level of infrastructure, the thing we lack is the political will to make it happen. Most infrastructure needs to be rebuilt to be maintained like every 25 years anyways. I dunno, 25 years seems like a pretty fast turnaround time to me, in the grand scheme of things, especially when you consider how gradually it can be done just by changing zoning laws or engineering standards and practices. I mean, centuries? That seems extremely hyperbolic.
I would just remove one word from everyone you wrote. "Unprecedented"
Look up how much time it took to build the initial interstates. Same shit in Canada and the Trans-canada highway. It didn't take centuries to build, it won't take centuries to fix either.
Your are right. I was extra when I wrote that. I will make an edit.
The best solution right now is to build out public and alternative transit. Busses, streetcars, lrt, greenways, woonerfs, etc are far superior and cheaper than anything we could figure out for cars.
Biodiesel is not a good option imo the NOx emmisions are generally significantly higher. Also most of the oil thats used to create biodiesel is not sourced responsibly. The production procces also still creates toxic waste although usually less than normal diesel.
Source: i just wrote a report on this if you're really interested. i can dig through my sources lmk
I'm mostly worried about the huge area consumption, tbh? Like, if you would replace all fossil oil with biodiesel, how much agricultural area would you need? Probably more than we have, I'd have to look it up, but it's a lot for sure.
Biodiesel is not meant to replace all fossil oil and will never do so. But if you were to do so (with current oil sources) it would probably leave you with little agricultural land left. You could use algal bioreactors instead those dont take up any agricultural land but are very expensive to operate. You would also still need to grow energy crops for the production of alcohol needed for the transesterfication step.
Fuck yeah in interested change my wrong ass and uninformed opinions.
How about better public infrastructure, like trains and tramlines? They don't require lithium, and are fully electric.
Yes, we are all in agreement on this.
Accu trains and buses are also interesting for public transport. For trains it’s interesting for sections that can’t get electrified yet due to tunnel/bridge heights etc
Batteries are still better because they can be recharged without oil or extra pollution.
You cant recharge an ICE engine without more pollution and oil
'Other Country' being mainly China, which happens to sit on most of the lithium deposits on Earth if I am not mistaken.
Also to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. I remember a few years back a report of huge lithium deposits being found there but uh... yeah good luck with running that operation.
It’s actually Argentina and Chile, which tips that calculus in our favour given they’re friendly western developed nations.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/lithium-reserves-by-country
Oh shoot, my info is out of date!
Thank you for the correction =)
Edit:
Potential downside: All of the lithium in Argentina goes into battery banks for bitcoin mining operations.
Their inflation rate is now around 300%, great job President AnCap.
Maybe you confused it with rare earths? China dominated that market.
But reserves don’t matter that much for market domination. Actual production and how much you control production of other countries does.
That’s probably the more important part.
I'm a big fan of hydrogen for stuff like cars. Install more than enough solar or hydro or whatever, then use the surplus energy to create hydrogen cells that can be stored long-term, so that the hydrogen itself is also created with clean, renewable energy, usable on demand.
I love hydrogen, but it's a bit of a pain in the ass to transport and store.
And only 30% efficient vs 80% for batteries.
How do you figure energy extraction of both are comparable metrics?
Unless you produce hydrogen from fossil fuels, you'll have to take energy into account as long as we don't have massive overproduction (which we're far, far away from). By using the less efficient process, you'll keep us reliant on fossil fuels for a longer amount of time.
I mean it's just not generally energy efficient compared to batteries, and the majority of hydrogen tends to come about as a byproduct of, I think it's propane and natural gas extraction and production. Electrolysis is pretty far off from being an effective competitor to batteries. I do still think that theoretically the specific energy is high enough that it doesn't really matter, since that seems to be like the major limiting factor keeping electric from going mainstream, and me personally, I would probably also use the oxygen made by electrolysis for some cool rocket fuel cars, also cutting down on the lack of , but everyone's against that because "The cars would explode you psycho/moron!" and other stupid idiot considerations that I don't care about. But yeah, generally we don't have enough of an energy excess to be able to run cars off of it in a reasonable way. Energy density still sucks also, but then, it's not like modern cars tend to really use a lot of their space anyways, so I don't think that matters too much.
biofuels like ethanol? less efficient and more expensive, unfortunately.
Oh no! No the third most abundant element in the universe! WTF are we gonna do? Use another metal with a large valency shell that makes it ideal as a dense storage medium for electrons? the horror
Hey friend. For context I meant lithium from other countries.
Bikes, bike infrastructure, and ebikes are about as carbon efficient as you can get without just straight up walking.
But they're not really feasible for most people because few cities have enough protected bike lanes and sensible zoning to let it happen.
So we have much easier options.
Natrium is up and comming.
Yeah, EV's are not, in themselves, the cure for our environmental woes. Too much electricity is still generated from fossil fuels for the carbon footprint to actually be diminished much and the environmental toll of mining for lithium also needs to be factored in. BUT, at the very least, it removes some dependence on oil in particular, where coal and natural gas are other forms of fossil fuels used to generate electricity. If nothing else, it takes some pressure off very specific regions, pressure which has contributed to invasion, war, international manipulation, extreme politics and oligarchies. It spreads the sources for resources around further.
Also it moves the burning of gas from millions of these poorly efficient vehicles to a single much more efficient power plant.
Well, yes, but also the efficiency of the EV's will factor in as well. Less efficient EV means more power draw for the same miles. But with things like regenerative braking and no idling, even the least efficient EV is probably more efficient then the most efficient gas powered car.
Though you can also reach that with a hybrid system like it’s done in trains. Recuperate through breaking, run motor at maximum efficiency and store excess energy.
Nuclear gang rise up.
They’ll go for lithium or rare earths
America always finds a reason for war. Shooting people is a national sport and too deeply ingrained in american culture.
I think it's naive to think that the imperial core will stop with the needless wars simply because oil is no longer the hot commodity. There's always perverse interests to use the military for power projection and resource control.
Under your current voting system, this will never change.
I for one, refuse to be shipped off in our generation's tribute to America. Our government (Australia) is still the US' vassal state.
Yes. Glad somebody else gets it.