Winners only.

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

The EROI factors in the overall impact on the environment.
Like people bitching about the CEO of Goodwill getting paid millions: He gets paid millions because he is worth it in the big picture.
Solar impacts the environment, but less so overall than say, coal or oil.

There's actually some interesting solar projects in Boulder CO, where the solar farm is combined with a regular farm, which helps keep plants from receiving too much sunlight and helps reduce water usage and iirc there was a benefit to the panels themselves - maybe lower temps. Anyway you can look it up.

We should probably bulldoze the whole project, afterall it was funded by evil gov't subsidies and as we all know such subsidies only hold back advancement in the private sector - just ask The Independence Instititute or any other neo-con think tank. Better yet ask Elon Musk. Can you imagine how awesome Tesla's would be if it weren't for gov't interference? If it weren't gov't meddling in solar, we'd probably already be ~100% solar.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

You really think electric cars only exist because of government interference?

Nope I think we'd have the most awesomest electric cars ever if it weren't for gov't subsidies. Actually, I like your word better - interference. Afterall a subsidy is there to encourage a behavior or investment, etc. Interference is a much term as it captures the fact that gov't $$$ is indeed holding back technological advancement.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Duplicate post. Stupid intrawebz!!!!!!!!

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Government money doesn't flow equally so it

Duplicate post. Stupid intrawebz!!!!!!!!

Right, almost as bad as spellcheck

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Environmental Damage

web.mit.edu

More right wing nonsense

I'd say a more accurate way to address this issue isn't by claiming that going green is destroying the environment, but rather that when we engage in these mining activities with little or no environmental oversight, the environment (and people) pay a heavy toll to increase profits. Just like fossil fuels, just because it's the cheapest/most profitable solution doesn't make it the best solution.

Also keep in mind when you're quoting Harvard, this is a place that produces many a CEO, CFO, COO, etc of these very organizations that engage in these polluting activities.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

I'm not against alternatives...as it stands right now they're really no better for the enviroment...once a way to mine rare earth or an alternative is found...it's just trading off one pollutant for another...and I don't hate electric cars...except I'm too old to figure out how to wire a 400 Amp alternator to one

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

'In the hands of tyrants and benevolent dictators alike, AI surveillance is the ultimate means of repression and control, especially through the use of smart city/safe city platforms, facial recognition systems, and predictive policing. These technologies are also being used by violent extremist groups, as well as ***, child, drug, and arms traffickers for their own nefarious purposes.

China, the role model for our dystopian future, has been a major force in deploying AI surveillance on its own citizens, especially by way of its social credit systems, which it employs to identify, track and segregate its “good” citizens from the “bad.”

Social media credit scores assigned to Chinese individuals and businesses categorize them on whether or not they are worthy of being part of society.'

Digital Authoritarianism: AI Surveillance Signals the Death of Privacy | By John & Nisha Whitehead

Governments and corporations alike have heedlessly adopted AI surveillance technologies without any care or concern for their long-term impact on the rights of the citizenry. Indeed, with every new AI surveillance technology that is adopted and deployed without any regard for privacy, Fourth...

www.rutherford.org

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I'm not against alternatives...as it stands right now they're really no better for the enviroment...once a way to mine rare earth or an alternative is found...it's just trading off one pollutant for another...and I don't hate electric cars...except I'm too old to figure out how to wire a 400 Amp alternator to one

Trading off one for another but with an overall reduction in pollution seems a far better plan than no change at all.
Big picture thinking.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Big picture... none of us will be in the painting. None of these "changes" will benefit any of us. People are still laboring under the delusion that government has our best interest in mind. This government is packed full of corrupt politicians and every one of them have a goal. To get as rich as they can. Everyone arguing about who's party is better is pretty stupid when you get down to it. "My side is better than your side because I get to choose what kind of crumb they toss me". I guess if you are happy with crumbs there is no reason question either side or demand they work for the people and not the other way around.

If you want everyone to transition to a different energy source than fossil fuels then the obvious solution is to deplete the fossil fuel source. Pump as much oil as we can get out of the ground, flood the market with it and use it until it is gone. Once it's gone, it's gone. There will be no choice but to have a different energy source. Think of the money that could be made. The government can remain corrupt and rich and we all can drive our cars and trucks for pennies on the dollar with low cost foods in every store.

No... we can't do that. There is a frog in the Amazon that will go extinct if we do that

The earths temperature will rise by 2 degrees on average!!

The ice caps will melt causing an abundance of water!!!!

Are you people telling me that we have people who can make viruses that can kill millions of people but we have no one who can focus on and develop a clean/cleaner running combustion engine? What would cost less, creating a super clean burning engine or transitioning completely away from internal combustion?

Hey fellas... what are you going to use to power the charging stations for the electric cars?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Big picture... none of us will be in the painting. None of these "changes" will benefit any of us. People are still laboring under the delusion that government has our best interest in mind. This government is packed full of corrupt politicians and every one of them have a goal. To get as rich as they can. Everyone arguing about who's party is better is pretty stupid when you get down to it. "My side is better than your side because I get to choose what kind of crumb they toss me". I guess if you are happy with crumbs there is no reason question either side or demand they work for the people and not the other way around.

If you want everyone to transition to a different energy source than fossil fuels then the obvious solution is to deplete the fossil fuel source. Pump as much oil as we can get out of the ground, flood the market with it and use it until it is gone. Once it's gone, it's gone. There will be no choice but to have a different energy source. Think of the money that could be made. The government can remain corrupt and rich and we all can drive our cars and trucks for pennies on the dollar with low cost foods in every store.

No... we can't do that. There is a frog in the Amazon that will go extinct if we do that

The earths temperature will rise by 2 degrees on average!!

The ice caps will melt causing an abundance of water!!!!

Are you people telling me that we have people who can make viruses that can kill millions of people but we have no one who can focus on and develop a clean/cleaner running combustion engine? What would cost less, creating a super clean burning engine or transitioning completely away from internal combustion?

Hey fellas... what are you going to use to power the charging stations for the electric cars?

Our electrical grid isn’t ready for all EV’s. 1 EV car charging is more than 25x the electrical pull of your fridge.

Not to mention how incredibly stupid and inefficient it is to charge cars over the power grid; massive amount of losses and inefficiencies.

 

[YourNameHere 10+ year member]

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Big picture... none of us will be in the painting. None of these "changes" will benefit any of us. People are still laboring under the delusion that government has our best interest in mind. This government is packed full of corrupt politicians and every one of them have a goal. To get as rich as they can. Everyone arguing about who's party is better is pretty stupid when you get down to it. "My side is better than your side because I get to choose what kind of crumb they toss me". I guess if you are happy with crumbs there is no reason question either side or demand they work for the people and not the other way around.

If you want everyone to transition to a different energy source than fossil fuels then the obvious solution is to deplete the fossil fuel source. Pump as much oil as we can get out of the ground, flood the market with it and use it until it is gone. Once it's gone, it's gone. There will be no choice but to have a different energy source. Think of the money that could be made. The government can remain corrupt and rich and we all can drive our cars and trucks for pennies on the dollar with low cost foods in every store.

No... we can't do that. There is a frog in the Amazon that will go extinct if we do that

The earths temperature will rise by 2 degrees on average!!

The ice caps will melt causing an abundance of water!!!!

Are you people telling me that we have people who can make viruses that can kill millions of people but we have no one who can focus on and develop a clean/cleaner running combustion engine? What would cost less, creating a super clean burning engine or transitioning completely away from internal combustion?

Hey fellas... what are you going to use to power the charging stations for the electric cars?

And so when the government is involved in something good, we do the opposite because the government is far from perfect?

Good plan, except it’s awfully similar to that “Defund the police because some cops ****” bullshit.

Charging electric cars. If it’s cheaper per mile to charge and power a car than to use gas, the upstream costs are lower. This means less natural resources used, no?
Less resources used = less pollution = a good thing.

The idea of “I’ll be dead in 50 years, so why should I GAF?”is exactly why we have toxic dumps, cancer towns, Michigan water, etc. Maybe if we were a little less facking selfish than our forbears, the world will be better for our progeny.

‘Funny how people who are worried about abortion being “wrong” will not give a fvck about the future they create for those fetuses, huh?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

And so when the government is involved in something good, we do the opposite because the government is far from perfect?

What good are they doing?

Good plan, except it’s awfully similar to that “Defund the police because some cops ****” bullshit.

I don't see how.

Charging electric cars. If it’s cheaper per mile to charge and power a car than to use gas, the upstream costs are lower. This means less natural resources used, no?
Less resources used = less pollution = a good thing.

Who said it is cheaper per mile to charge a car? Where is the power coming from to charge the car? Fossil fuels.

The idea of “I’ll be dead in 50 years, so why should I GAF?”is exactly why we have toxic dumps, cancer towns, Michigan water, etc. Maybe if we were a little less facking selfish than our forbears, the world will be better for our progeny.

Michigan is a crap state anyway. Less selfish? How about we just be smarter than our forbears? Should we give them the fish or teach them to fish?

‘Funny how people who are worried about abortion being “wrong” will not give a fvck about the future they create for those fetuses, huh?

I don't give two shits about abortion. My only feeling is if it's her body her choice then it needs to be her money 100% that pays for it.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Trading off one for another but with an overall reduction in pollution seems a far better plan than no change at all.
Big picture thinking.

Overall? You obviously haven't looked at it from mine to disposal...it's just a different pollution but as long as you can stand on spin you're good....

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

What good are they doing?
Making big business reduce the pollution they create seems to be good.
Telling big business it is bad to put poison in our food is a good thing.
Public safety such as firefighters and police are pretty good.
Military seems to do good for out country.


I don't see how.
You are of the opinion that since the gov't does SOME things poorly, they are of no use at all.

Who said it is cheaper per mile to charge a car? Where is the power coming from to charge the car? Fossil fuels.
The average car got just under 26 miles to the gallon in 2021, according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). GasBuddy estimated the national average price for gas on March 11 at $4.34 per gallon. That means it costs about 17 cents to drive one mile in an average gas-powered vehicle.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) estimates the average electric vehicle has a 66-kilowatt-hour battery and can go about 200 miles per full charge. The agency conducted a study of electric vehicle owners’ charging habits that found owners pay an average of 15 cents per kilowatt-hour to charge the battery. That means it costs roughly 5 cents to drive one mile in an electric vehicle.
Not always from fossil fuels. Solar provides about 40% of power now. Regardless, fossil fuel CAN be used with different efficiencies to accomplish the same task. A model T versus a Toyota Camry.

Michigan is a crap state anyway. Less selfish? How about we just be smarter than our forbears? Should we give them the fish or teach them to fish?
"Michigan is a crap state anyway", so let's just poison the shit out of it? You basically LIVE the idea of being self-centered and a hypocrite.
Figuring out how to do things more efficiently and with less destruction of the environment IS being smarter than our forebears. Teach them to fish does nothing if we kill all the fish.

I don't give two shits about abortion. My only feeling is if it's her body her choice then it needs to be her money 100% that pays for it.
We had this argument already. You don't "give two shits about it", except for the two shits you give about it. Either you have an opinion or you don't. You do. And your opinion is that Medicaid pays for abortions, when I proved to you that it doesn't. But that's a different argument.
I was only referencing the abortion thing to show how people apply beliefs selectively in order to maintain their narrative.