You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
2
WeedleTLiar on scored.co
11 months ago2 points(+0/-0/+2Score on mirror)2 children
I'm generally in agreement with this, but there are a few weak arguments.
None of these technologies *consume* copper or nickel, so the "next generation" can recycle the last generation. Not sure how this works for lithium but we haven't even begun global scale lithium production.
Which leads me into the next point. Yes, nickel and copper aren't being produced at a rate sufficient to develop the whole world but "we need 13,000 years of lithium production at the current rate" is a meaningless statement when considering we barely scratch the surface of lithium mining today. Even existing resources can increase production if prices rise, which he mentions, so this isn't that great a point. Coupled with space-based mining, which will likely start coming online in the next 20 years, this worry is pretty moot, except for the ridiculous "all electric by 2030" timelines they're pushing. We won't have finished the planning stages for the infrastructure required to support our *current* EVs by 2030.
I'd also point out that we'll *never* develop "the whole world". You can't even fit all the Indians onto trains, let alone find parking for all of them. Densely populated countries like India and China will never develop to the point that even a significant minority of their population will own cars.
The biggest argument for me is economic; no one can afford electric cars. The cheapest ones are still like buying a BMW or Mercedes and there's no resale value, outside of recycling the copper when prices spike, maybe. They only last around 10 years anyway. They will never take off outside of rich Liberals, no matter what the governments try.
11 months ago3 points(+0/-0/+3Score on mirror)1 child
Betting on space mining actually being economical in 20 years is retarded. We're not building a space elevator any time soon. The biggest issue we have anyway isn't so much that there isn't enough copper in the solar system, but that our energy stores generally are already tanking when it comes to energy return on investment. Right now the only way to get more copper, lithium, etc. is to burn a hell of a lot of diesel fuel to run mining trucks, drill rigs, and so on.
Global oil production has been bouncing around the same levels for nearly a decade now. We can produce more but it is vastly more expensive than in the past, and that just basically kicks the can down the road. Nuclear is the only real replacement energy source, but you run into the problem of fuels. Nuclear can keep your lights on but it's not fueling that mining equipment, nor the transportation without completely replacing tremendous parts of our logistics infrastructure.
Fossil fuels were a gift, and we need to use that to bootstrap us up into a more long term nuclear/solar future. Instead we are using that boon to create infinite blacks and pajeets, not to mention a sea of consumer garbage.
> Right now the only way to get more copper, lithium, etc. is to burn a hell of a lot of diesel fuel to run mining trucks, drill rigs, and so on.
Exactly. It would be more "carbon-neutral" to not pursue EVs at all than to burn all these fuels mining for the resources, let alone actually assembling the damn things.
> Instead we are using that boon to create infinite blacks and pajeets, not to mention a sea of consumer garbage.
Agreed. We're doing it all wrong, yet ZOG cheers and subsidizes it all.
> None of these technologies consume copper or nickel, so the "next generation" can recycle the last generation.
No, you misunderstand. The study concluded there isn't enough copper to replace every current ICE vehicle with an EV. Also, what about all the other devices and buildings that need copper? There isn't a mature, established pipeline for properly recycling batteries and all the materials in EVs, mostly because it's still cheaper to mine virgin materials than to reclaim them.
> They only last around 10 years anyway.
Try closer to seven, which is the limit of any EV battery out there. In any case, EV buyers aren't changing their behaviors and keeping their EVs the decade they should for it's production to be carbon-neutral. They're still living the same entitled lives and buying new cars every three years like they always have and, in turn, contributing to wasted energy and resources to keep their entitled asses driving the "latest and greatest."
But you're right that EV's have no resale value, as the people who want EVs only want to be seen in new cars, and the people shopping for used cars don't want luxury car repair bills that come with EVs. Many car dealers and wholesalers are now also refusing to take them on trade, which is why Tesla has now finally started to do just that as many of their repeat customers have been unable to dump their old Tesla on anyone else.
EV's a huge fucking joke and I can't wait to laugh when it's all over.
None of these technologies *consume* copper or nickel, so the "next generation" can recycle the last generation. Not sure how this works for lithium but we haven't even begun global scale lithium production.
Which leads me into the next point. Yes, nickel and copper aren't being produced at a rate sufficient to develop the whole world but "we need 13,000 years of lithium production at the current rate" is a meaningless statement when considering we barely scratch the surface of lithium mining today. Even existing resources can increase production if prices rise, which he mentions, so this isn't that great a point. Coupled with space-based mining, which will likely start coming online in the next 20 years, this worry is pretty moot, except for the ridiculous "all electric by 2030" timelines they're pushing. We won't have finished the planning stages for the infrastructure required to support our *current* EVs by 2030.
I'd also point out that we'll *never* develop "the whole world". You can't even fit all the Indians onto trains, let alone find parking for all of them. Densely populated countries like India and China will never develop to the point that even a significant minority of their population will own cars.
The biggest argument for me is economic; no one can afford electric cars. The cheapest ones are still like buying a BMW or Mercedes and there's no resale value, outside of recycling the copper when prices spike, maybe. They only last around 10 years anyway. They will never take off outside of rich Liberals, no matter what the governments try.
Global oil production has been bouncing around the same levels for nearly a decade now. We can produce more but it is vastly more expensive than in the past, and that just basically kicks the can down the road. Nuclear is the only real replacement energy source, but you run into the problem of fuels. Nuclear can keep your lights on but it's not fueling that mining equipment, nor the transportation without completely replacing tremendous parts of our logistics infrastructure.
Fossil fuels were a gift, and we need to use that to bootstrap us up into a more long term nuclear/solar future. Instead we are using that boon to create infinite blacks and pajeets, not to mention a sea of consumer garbage.
Exactly. It would be more "carbon-neutral" to not pursue EVs at all than to burn all these fuels mining for the resources, let alone actually assembling the damn things.
> Instead we are using that boon to create infinite blacks and pajeets, not to mention a sea of consumer garbage.
Agreed. We're doing it all wrong, yet ZOG cheers and subsidizes it all.
No, you misunderstand. The study concluded there isn't enough copper to replace every current ICE vehicle with an EV. Also, what about all the other devices and buildings that need copper? There isn't a mature, established pipeline for properly recycling batteries and all the materials in EVs, mostly because it's still cheaper to mine virgin materials than to reclaim them.
> They only last around 10 years anyway.
Try closer to seven, which is the limit of any EV battery out there. In any case, EV buyers aren't changing their behaviors and keeping their EVs the decade they should for it's production to be carbon-neutral. They're still living the same entitled lives and buying new cars every three years like they always have and, in turn, contributing to wasted energy and resources to keep their entitled asses driving the "latest and greatest."
But you're right that EV's have no resale value, as the people who want EVs only want to be seen in new cars, and the people shopping for used cars don't want luxury car repair bills that come with EVs. Many car dealers and wholesalers are now also refusing to take them on trade, which is why Tesla has now finally started to do just that as many of their repeat customers have been unable to dump their old Tesla on anyone else.
EV's a huge fucking joke and I can't wait to laugh when it's all over.