• over_clox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    75
    ·
    1 year ago

    The climate hasn’t changed, the humans have changed.

    We had electric cars over 100 years ago, and surprise surprise, those things didn’t explode into hellfire.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The climate is only changing because the humans are rapidly changing.

        Name me one other species that refines and burns gasoline, diesel, etc…

        If humans had never interfered, the climate would be much more stable.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        39
        ·
        1 year ago

        Good, my confusing comment got you to thinking about these sort of things…

        Now reverse my comment to back before the industrial/oil age, if humans hadn’t mucked so much with nature, we wouldn’t be anywhere near this predicament we seem to be in today…

          • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            My thoughts exactly. The first two comments directly contradict each other immediately. “The climate isn’t changing” … “the climate is only changing because of humans”

            I think they think this is some deep and profound personal insight that the rest of us just can’t comprehend.

        • Holzkohlen@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Feels like you are going to propose developing a time machine instead of just doing literally anything else about it.

          • over_clox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nobody has to develop a time machine to learn knowledge of the past, they’re called books.

            Humans successfully lived over 100,000 years without massive industry or vehicles or anything like that.

            Best invention I’ve seen in the past 200 years is the bicycle. Try riding one instead of driving a car once in a while, or God forbid, try walking every now and then.

            Then maybe you’ll be making a difference.

            • Cabrio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Nobody has to develop a time machine to learn knowledge of the past, they’re called books.

              Humans successfully lived over 100,000 years without massive industry or vehicles or anything like that.

              Best invention I’ve seen in the past 200 years is the bicycle. Try riding one instead of driving a car once in a while, or God forbid, try walking every now and then.

              Then maybe you’ll be making a difference.

              Why are you deleting your comments? Cowardice getting the better of you?

              • over_clox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’d rather not argue with folks, plain and simple. I deleted my comments because I have nothing more to say.

                You have a good day stranger.

                • Cabrio@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Cool, next time think that first, save us the trouble of putting you in your place.

                  • over_clox@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No no, I’m reminding you that we’re all in the same place. You are just as much a part of the problem as every other human.

                    And hell, the government mandates that you must have electricity, running water, air conditioning, etc, to even have a child.

                    All artificial requirements, bestowed upon us by greedy government and corporations that insist humans can’t live naturally and coexist with nature.

              • over_clox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                If you’d like to have a civilized discussion, that’s cool.

                I don’t think the climate would be changing all that much if humans had never interfered. We humans are our own problem. We created this energy consumption issue, no other creatures on the planet do that or even seem to need that.

                So, if human revert to monke, maybe the world can heal itself…

        • Cabrio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Good, my confusing comment got you to thinking about these sort of things…

          Now reverse my comment to back before the industrial/oil age, if humans hadn’t mucked so much with nature, we wouldn’t be anywhere near this predicament we seem to be in today…

          You dropped this.

    • Cabrio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The climate hasn’t changed, the humans have changed.

      We had electric cars over 100 years ago, and surprise surprise, those things didn’t explode into hellfire.

      • over_clox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Congratulations, you express a deliberate point to resurrect an argument which I already dropped and deleted.

        No joke though, lead acid batteries don’t explode like lithium ion batteries. Hell I’ve never seen one explode in my life.

        How is this new tech safe in any way? They gotta clear out 50+ feet away from a burning lithium ion powered vehicle.

        Even apartment complexes don’t allow electric bicycles inside, they don’t want their complex burning down ya know.

        Back to my OG point, we humans created these dangerous chemicals. Maybe we should analyze ourselves and realize we are the problem.

        • Cabrio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d rather not argue with folks, plain and simple. I deleted my comments because I have nothing more to say.

          I thought this was your point, now go delete these comments too since we already know you don’t actually value anything you say.

          • over_clox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You troll much?

            I don’t even have a car, done put over 50k miles on my bicycle, and worn through countless pairs of shoes in my day.

            You can drop this ‘argument’ any time you want.

            • Cabrio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You stupid much? You’re still going. Why would I drop an argument you said you were leaving? Jog on sunshine, I’m happy to stick around and berate you for your wilful stupidity.

              • over_clox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Will you just shut the F up? I still can’t figure out if I’m signed into Lemmy or not…

                This is literally a Jerboa Lemmy test message.

                • Cabrio@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Will you? You said you would like 4 messages back, I’m just wondering how long you’ll stupidly keep replying like the moron you are.

    • nitrolife@rekabu.ru
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      34
      ·
      1 year ago

      Where should the energy for electric vehicles come from? of course, I understand that living somewhere in Europe, you can talk about wind turbines, solar panels and everything green. But if you live in a region where, if the heating is turned off, you can freeze to death in less than a day, you start looking at wind turbines and solar panels with irony.

      And I don’t really understand, besides, how exactly replacing some energy emissions in random places with other emissions in random places will greatly help to cool the planet.

      • dcat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        45
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        in norway all the power is hydroelectric, and it’s been that way for the past 100 years.

        and i don’t understand how wind turbines, solar panels, or “everything green” is somehow exclusive to europe.

        • nitrolife@rekabu.ru
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          20
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I really don’t understand the topic well, but I searched the Internet and indeed wind generation is possible. but there is still no solar generation due to too short daylight hours. as for hydroelectric power plants, they are already around. I did not think that they are considered green, given that they require flooding of huge territories.

          UPD: also, for any large wind generation, forests will most likely have to be cut down.

          • dcat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            whaaat?! we have to flood areas for hydroelectric? and cut down forests for wind generation?! oh well, then that’s it, it’s settled.

            guess we should just go back to burning coal then.

            • nitrolife@rekabu.ru
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Why you? I was talking about my geographical area. And we don’t build any wind turbines, we just use nuclear and hydroelectric power plants. although, of course, we mainly use thermal power plants.

              Climate is a planetary-scale problem, so it is impossible to build environmentally friendly energy production on one side of the earth in the hope of overcoming warming. Maybe my English is not good enough. This is my third language, so I’m really sorry.

      • MajorMajormajormajor@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nuclear energy is the solution, even though it’s the boogeyman thanks to smear campaigns. Coal plants release more radiation than nuclear plants.

      • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        replacing some energy emissions in random places with other emissions in random places will greatly help to cool the planet.

        We’re not talking a 1:1 moving emissions around with electrifying everything. Even if the local grid is 100% fossil fuels a large stationary fossil fuel powered plant running 24/7 can be more efficient per unit of fuel than thousands of tiny little poorly maintained gasoline engines in vehicles, especially when the car’s engine spends so much of its time far outside of it’s most efficient ranges (idling, speeding, going up hills, etc.) Not to mention how capturing polutants at the plant is far more doable than capturing polutants from every single car.

        And even if you don’t believe the green arguments, electric cars are just plain cool! They cost a few dollars per full recharge to charge compared to $30-50 per gas tank, they often regulate their internal temperature while charging so no waiting ages for the car to warm up first thing in the morning while you scrap ice off the windows, and who doesn’t love the instant insane torque that an electric motor provides? Lower maintenance costs, longer lifetimes of individual vehicles (especially as battery technologies continue to improve by leaps and bounds) plus idling is basically free so drive-thrus, listening to music while parked and stop go traffic wastes way less gas. Regenerative breaking not only provides some free charge to the motors but also spares your breaks so they last way longer. The list of benefits goes on and on

        • nitrolife@rekabu.ru
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          They cost a few dollars per full recharge to charge compared to $30-50 per gas tank

          In my region full car fuel by gasoline cost 20$ and full electrocar recharge cost 14$. Not so much economy.

          they often regulate their internal temperature while charging so no waiting ages for the car to warm up first thing in the morning while you scrap ice off the windows

          If I drop electric car as my usual car on a field on nowhere I can’t go anywhere in the morning. If I drop my electric car on parking that costs recharge more than gasoline for usial car.

          Warming up the cabin also exists in my anti-theft system, just press the button while drinking tea before leaving.

          and who doesn’t love the instant insane torque that an electric motor provides?

          The moment to achieve which you need to warm the battery in advance for as much as 2 minutes and return to recharge in half an hour? In normal mode, this is no different from the average gasoline car, like Honda for example. I have a motorcycle for speed.

          Lower maintenance costs, longer lifetimes of individual vehicles

          I have 15 years old Honda Accord, and I payed nearly 16 000 $ on maintenance for all 15 years. Tesla model S cost me 85 000 $ for new car if I want by it and nearly 70% of that every 5 years because battery capacity will degrade and need replace. This not look like an lower maintenance cost.

          plus idling is basically free so drive-thrus, listening to music while parked and stop go traffic wastes way less gas. Regenerative breaking not only provides some free charge to the motors but also spares your breaks so they last way longer.

          The average mileage for me is 200 kilometers. In one day. And if I want to visit my parents, then 800 kilometers in one direction along the highways without recharge stations. ,Saving on idling, but the need to buy a generator for $ 1,500 just to visit your parents? I’d rather overpay for not to stand in the middle of nothing at -35 degrees for a few hours without working conditioner just to be able to drive on.

          All change by regions. I can buy 95 gasoline per 0.6$ for liter. Electric cars will extreme hard try for enter to market.

          UPD:

          Not to mention how capturing pollutants at the plant is far more doable than capturing pollutants from every single car.

          The irony is that transport throws out more factories, only if you count cars, ships and all other transport. If we count only private cars, then factories still emit more, even despite all the tricks of filtration. This, of course, does not mean that you should not try to reduce emissions. The main thing is that such dirty gasoline cars should not be replaced by a new conglomerate of factories.

      • TommySalami@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And I don’t really understand, besides, how exactly replacing some energy emissions in random places with other emissions in random places will greatly help to cool the planet.

        There’s some truth to this, but it’s hard to argue electric cars aren’t a marginal improvement (especially as “green” energy becomes more prevalent). The key is also using this time to improve public transportation, and making adjustments that eliminate unnecessary travel (e.g. work from home). If nothing else it’s a step in the right direction considering the massive cultural shift that’s already underway.

        • nitrolife@rekabu.ru
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I wrote a little bit about something else.

          The law of conservation of energy always applies. If the wind rotates the windmill, then the energy of the wind force is converted into the energy of rotation of the windmill, and the wind energy reserve decreases.

          I have not found a single study on the impact of the global installation of wind turbines on wind roses around the world. Accordingly, I just can’t understand why this energy is considered “green”. Then the gasoline generator is quite environmentally friendly until the number of generators reaches a critical level.

          Moreover, the consequences of even a slight change in the wind rose are much more catastrophic than the pollution of the planet with carbon dioxide. For example, such as you see in the picture in the post.

      • lemmychatwitpeeps@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Nuclear, but the climate people are too big of pussies to push for it. Can’t have the peasents enjoying cheap energy!

        • thisNotMyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nuclear has always been expensive af. It’s just “cheap” because all the real costs are not carried by the providers, but the states. Try getting an insurance for a nuclear power plant, have to find a solution for the waste. Besides that just take a look at the French: having to shut down mamy of their nuclear power plants, because the rivers don’t have enough water to cool them down these days. On the other hand renewables, that are much faster build and way cheaper, are amortized after a few years.

        • Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          Honestly, I’m at the point now that I believe that if you follow the money and memes, you’ll find the oil industry pushing the anti nuclear ideas. The anti nuclear environmentalists being useful idiots to them.

          That being said, even if you can’t use green energy everywhere isn’t an excuse to use it everywhere it could be used. At the very least, it would buy use more time to figure out more solutions. The people who are saying that EVs don’t help because our electricity is primarily from gas and coal are deliberately leaving out the fact that the demand and infrastructure of solar and wind are also rising. Not having EVs would only lessen the demand and makes me suspicious about the origin of that meme as well.