Are we helping in the fight against climate change or just indulging our love of toys (er technology)?

[f1eng]

Really I don’t think we will do enough to avoid catastrophic population collapse as the climate changes.
The question is when and which species thrive in the conditions extant - there will be some, obviously. The whole idea of “save the planet” is daft, the planet continued to evolve after the dinosaurs it will do so again after the humans, who are too greedy and selfish to successfully save themselves IMHO.

In order for us to do enough the sort of cut backs necessary are more than most people are prepared to do.

I have cut back by 50% or so but I am retired, most of my contemporaries have been banjaxed by believing the propaganda funded by the Global Climate Coalition for the last 30 years which has been funding the tiny number of climate change sceptical scientists to write articles and do speeches to drown out the actually far more credible ones. They aren’t going to do anything of any consequence.
Most western architecture is ludicrously energy inefficient and that won’t get fixed quickly.
I could go on with lots of other examples of things that obviously should get done that won’t.

Sponsored

 

[Jhenson29]

Also, get smaller vehicles. SUVs (especially the ones in the US) are not useful for most.

I live in the middle of the US where every other vehicle is a big truck. My wife always makes fun of them for driving these big truck around everywhere with no cargo. Ever. Like walking around with an empty suitcase all day.

I have an SUV, but I use it for work frequently and have to pack tools and parts. I use to do this with an A3 and it always felt like I was failing a game a Tetris.

 

[ben1]

Combine your Taycan with a roof full of solar panels + home battery. Depending on your climate and how much you drive, you should be able to drive 100% clean 8 to 12 months per year.

 

[B61]

Combine your Taycan with a roof full of solar panels + home battery. Depending on your climate and how much you drive, you should be able to drive 100% clean 8 to 12 months per year.

Aptera.
driven by sun.
https://aptera.us/

since i’m not an engineer, i wouldn’t be comfortable with ”electric-plant” few inches over my head….

 

[Jhenson29]

Aptera.

That thing is wide AF.

2,235 mm (88 in)

 

[Kayone73]

My supervillain sounding take:
1. Population reduction especially in overcrowded developing nations
2. Drastic reduction of resource consumption (both corporate and population consumption)

 

[ben1]

Aptera.
driven by sun.
https://aptera.us/

since i’m not an engineer, i wouldn’t be comfortable with ”electric-plant” few inches over my head….

Since you have a battery in your car, there is no need to carry the solar panels with you. You can install the solar panels on the roof of your house.
I work from home every other day, so I have time to recharge the car during the day when the sun is shining.

 

[B61]

I live in a valley where is not enough sunny hours, so no sollar panels for me.
btw: arround 45% of electricity in our country comes from our nuclear plant, about 20% from hydro, same from coal, the rest comes from solar (and few % from wind).
my supplier sells only from nuclear, so i’d say that i;m green even without mamba green

 

[B61]

That thing is wide AF.

2,235 mm (88 in)

Yep, made in USA…for USA wideness

 

[TDinDC]

I can’t use solar panels either as I live close to the woods and my house is surrounded by tall trees. Well, I guess I could cut all of the trees down so that I could get enough sunlight for solar panels to power my sports cars, televisions, electronics, gadgets . . .

 

[TaycanHero]

My issue with climate change - which absolutely is happening - is the obsession with CO2, where there are far more damaging pollutants that humanity produces, but that get little focus. Climate science is enormously complex and almost impossible to empirically prove anything.

However, humanity 100% should reduce its CO2 emissions, but likewise NASA has shown that there has been a vast "greening" of the planet for decades where the Earth adapts. It's plant food. The seas also act as important CO2 sink.

So I don't think this blind obsession on CO2 is the right focus. Instead we should look to renewable/biodegradable technology not just for fuels, but for everything.

I shudder at the volume of rubbish that gets dumped at sea and landfill. From household waste to toxic chemicals, radioactive waste to hard plastics.

And therein lies the biggest issue I see with manufacturing from EVs to fuels, to footwear or the packaging your cereal is in:

The toxic or unrecyclable materials that are produced, and yet there doesn't appear to be much done to address that issue. The planet cannot deal with those pollutants effectively, however, it can deal with CO2: more flora grows, which consumes it.

The biggest irony for me, is if we addressed pollution in all its forms - and we have a big enough population of reasonably intelligent people to achieve it - the climate will sort itself out. It has after all always changed, and whether humans existed or not, Earth would continue cycling through very cool periods and very hot periods. It is not for humanity in its arrogance to try and control that process.

However, the outcome of reducing all forms of pollution means less CO2! If something is biodegradable, it usually finds some equilibrium with everything else in its environment.

But alas, humans will always pollute their environment and there is only so much that can be done. This move to EVs is positive, but therein lies another problem: the production of batteries is hugely damaging to the environment.

The only solution if we are absolutely serious about climate change is simple: extinction.

Then no human being can be accused of polluting the planet and changing the balance of the biome or atmosphere.

Even Neanderthals produced CO2, so how far should our species regress before we can progress?

If we accept an outcome of life is pollution, and tackle it in all its forms as much as we can - while eliminating corruption, cronyism and greed that means we cannot work together effectively - perhaps then we can move into a brighter future that isn't so doom and gloom about things our flawed species can do little to nothing about.

 

[TDinDC]

I don’t understand those who oppose renewables and fighting pollution. Regardless of causes (or existence) of climate change, being efficient and clean seems like a massive win, and the countries who get there first will benefit the most.

 

[nickmdp]

I don’t understand those who oppose renewables and fighting pollution. Regardless of causes (or existence) of climate change, being efficient and clean seems like a massive win, and the countries who get there first will benefit the most.

Absolutely. There's so many people convinced that complete capitalism is the solution to all problems, and that regulations only get in the way of honest hard working people trying to build their own companies so they can hire other hard working people. The sad reality is that in many cases those same people are the ones that need the most help to prevent corporations from crapping all over their communities.

What gets me the most is that in the worst case scenario we will end up with a slightly cleaner and safer world, and spent billions/trillions of dollars developing new technologies, getting more young people interested in STEM, and creating an industry that will help balance out any truly crazy shit we decide to pursue in the future that might fuck up our planet. The opportunity cost is that we'll maybe not have brain implanted cell phones for 30 years instead of 10. I think I can handle all that.

 

[AHayat]

Interesting article here: https://apple.news/AEJNZII-9Rampp5YCsoYn5g

When my twin boys attended the British School of Washington, they were taught that ICE cars were bad and electric cars were good. They decided that they were against my 911 and in favor of my Tesla. I tried to explain that this was a myth, and that those who were serious would focus on efficiency and reducing all energy consumption (e.g., reducing consumption of all types by walking and, when that’s not possible, focusing on weight and sources of energy for transport). I love EVs, but I’m not not at all convinced that they are the solution. I would like to see vehicles that are very efficient and light, and that were really powered by renewable sources that do not create waste through creation and consumption. But, of course, like nearly all of us, I’m a hypocrite as I love my toys just like everyone else. Any thoughts on how we can convince Porsche and other houses to give us both fun vehicles that are efficient and sustainable so that we are can really be part of the solution instead of just marginally part of the solution?

A bit of both, neither claims being entirely true or false

 

[B61]

There's so many people convinced that complete capitalism is the solution to all problems,

Well, without capitalism, we wouldn’t drive Taycans, right?
you see, I lived under communism for 30 years, and believe me, it was much worse not only from ecology point od view. Now, 30 years later, our rivers are clean, air is clean… and in short: life is better.

speaking about climate changes: imo, they are natural, they comes in cycles while media are making catastrophic news and manipulates citizens all over the world.
i may agree that plastic/toxic vastes are huge problem and population growth too much, but higher temperatures (and co2) is not suvh a big deal as business oriented environmentalist are convincing us…

btw: just few days ago, I read some articles/reports about hot summers…back in 1905.
there were days with 38-40 degrees Celsius… and last week, we had 35-37.
so, my point is, that one hundred years is acutally nothing for the nature.

Sponsored