Environmental Downside of Electric Vehicles


Nice cross-post. Kinda like spamming the board.
 
Boy-hitting-pinata-GettyImages-473042962-589010355f9b5874ee94dc8a.jpg
 
Where they gonna put all them batteries in that go bad?
 
Their comeuppance is coming. :omg:

Revelation 11:18
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.
Yeah, wrath from an mythical god is coming to get people who don’t want to burn up the planet.

Is he a white god born in a colored society by virgin birth?
 
Yeah, wrath from an mythical god is coming to get people who don’t want to burn up the planet.

Is he a white god born in a colored society by virgin birth?
The first part of the wrath is the tribulation, which will be the natural consequences of our actions, both against the earth and against each other. God, in the person of Christ, will appear later with the Godly wrath. :omg:
 
The first part of the wrath is the tribulation, which will be the natural consequences of our actions, both against the earth and against each other. God, in the person of Christ, will appear later with the Godly wrath. :omg:
Okay sure, but is he a white god born by virgin birth in a brown society around the winter solstice or not?
 
Okay sure, but is he a white god born by virgin birth in a brown society around the winter solstice or not?
He was Jewish, born in a Jewish society, possibly in the early fall or spring. Two versions in "Battle Hymn" refer to his birth,

"In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born..."
"In the beauty of the autumn Christ was born..."

In the beauty of the winter doesn't appear in the song.
 
Where environmentalists go wrong, however, is to think tradeoffs are unique to nuclear power and fossil fuels. The fact is, all energy production comes with tradeoffs, and proponents of so-called “green energy” have a nasty habit of overlooking these tradeoffs.

Your neighbor with a “green means go” sign in his yard might point out that your F-150 guzzles a gallon of gasoline for every 25 road miles, but he probably ignores that it took tens of thousands of pounds of CO2 emissions to produce the battery that charges his Tesla. (And don’t even tell him where the cobalt in the battery comes from.)

Your aunt might proudly talk about the new solar panels on her roof, but probably doesn’t know that even on utility scale solar power has a carbon footprint higher than nuclear power, or that solar panels produce literally tons of toxic waste.

Your niece at Columbia might talk about how important it is to become a “zero emission” economy. But she probably doesn’t realize the environmental costs, let alone the economic ones, of getting there—which include mining 34 million metric tons of copper, 50 million tons of zinc, 40 million tons of lead, 5 billion tons of iron, and 160 million tons of aluminum (give or take).

The point is clear: all energy production comes with tradeoffs.


 
Their comeuppance is coming. :omg:

Revelation 11:18
And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great; and shouldest destroy them which destroy the earth.

It sure would be nice if the agw deniers would realize that in some cases, if they are people of faith, their God probably doesn't want us to just sit around and let it all burn.
 
He was Jewish, born in a Jewish society, possibly in the early fall or spring. Two versions in "Battle Hymn" refer to his birth,

"In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born..."
"In the beauty of the autumn Christ was born..."

In the beauty of the winter doesn't appear in the song.

Was the Battle Hymn written approximately contemporaneously with Christ's birth?
 
Where environmentalists go wrong, however, is to think tradeoffs are unique to nuclear power and fossil fuels. The fact is, all energy production comes with tradeoffs, and proponents of so-called “green energy” have a nasty habit of overlooking these tradeoffs.

Your neighbor with a “green means go” sign in his yard might point out that your F-150 guzzles a gallon of gasoline for every 25 road miles, but he probably ignores that it took tens of thousands of pounds of CO2 emissions to produce the battery that charges his Tesla. (And don’t even tell him where the cobalt in the battery comes from.)

Your aunt might proudly talk about the new solar panels on her roof, but probably doesn’t know that even on utility scale solar power has a carbon footprint higher than nuclear power, or that solar panels produce literally tons of toxic waste.

Your niece at Columbia might talk about how important it is to become a “zero emission” economy. But she probably doesn’t realize the environmental costs, let alone the economic ones, of getting there—which include mining 34 million metric tons of copper, 50 million tons of zinc, 40 million tons of lead, 5 billion tons of iron, and 160 million tons of aluminum (give or take).

The point is clear: all energy production comes with tradeoffs.


We already know the cost of legacy fuels.
 
Where environmentalists go wrong, however, is to think tradeoffs are unique to nuclear power and fossil fuels. The fact is, all energy production comes with tradeoffs, and proponents of so-called “green energy” have a nasty habit of overlooking these tradeoffs.

Your neighbor with a “green means go” sign in his yard might point out that your F-150 guzzles a gallon of gasoline for every 25 road miles, but he probably ignores that it took tens of thousands of pounds of CO2 emissions to produce the battery that charges his Tesla. (And don’t even tell him where the cobalt in the battery comes from.)

Your aunt might proudly talk about the new solar panels on her roof, but probably doesn’t know that even on utility scale solar power has a carbon footprint higher than nuclear power, or that solar panels produce literally tons of toxic waste.

Your niece at Columbia might talk about how important it is to become a “zero emission” economy. But she probably doesn’t realize the environmental costs, let alone the economic ones, of getting there—which include mining 34 million metric tons of copper, 50 million tons of zinc, 40 million tons of lead, 5 billion tons of iron, and 160 million tons of aluminum (give or take).

The point is clear: all energy production comes with tradeoffs.


And it would be a good idea if those tradeoffs were addressed objectively and with accurate data. Your list is nothing but anti-EV scaremongering. The production of that gas powered F-150 did not take place without CO2 emissions, drilling for oil, mining metals, toxic production waste and all the rest. No one has ever contended that the production and use of a Tesla EV or any other EV would take place with zero GHG emissions or zero environmental cost. That makes your argument a straw man fallacy. The total GHG emissions saved by the use of EV versus ICE powered vehicles are substantial.
 

Forum List

Back
Top