Climate Change

[Mofro261]

It's not like there aren't smart people who have been working on these issues for 10-20+ yrs.

Active work ongoing to replace cobalt and nickel with manganese and titanium since 2014. Disordered rock salt cathodes now becoming scalable and new techniques reduce energy demands during production.

New tech from Oakridge Labs funded by DOE that simplifies cost and complexity of Li and Co recovery during battery recycling.

Sodium and Calcium can replace lithium (prolly not in EV's due to the charge/size ratio advantage of Li+ for compact battery) but as storage capacity at home or at source generation where space in less an issue and due to the cheap cost of both.

All of these will likely hapen in the next 10 yrs.

[muted reborn]

I have a hard time thinking the mining industry is any more trustworthy. In fact, they have a long track record of being anything but.

Yeah I don't trust their numbers at all on how much water they will need, which is over 9 billion gallons per year, in a famous basin that obviously doesn't have extra water to give. Their pumping method is unproven tech too.

Wayne county leased them almost a billion gallons though recently: https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/new...hium-project/#

[xyz]

That's ridiculous. When the cigarette execs all publicly denied a link between smoking and cancer, that was what we should expect? These guys have known for decades. They are all criminals, worse than the cigarette guys . They should not be allowed to get away with it

When it's discovered a product or behavior, is proven to be cause irreparable harm, that knowledge should lead to action. Not - they're making money so don't expect any response.... Especially an existential threat that affects every living thing on earth

Again. You can’t expect oil companies to declare themselves criminals, turn themselves in and shut down. They are operating within the current law. It’s up to law makers to make them criminals. So blame your hero Joe Biden, not oil companies.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Garfield3d]

Again. You can’t expect oil companies to declare themselves criminals, turn themselves in and shut down. They are operating within the current law. It’s up to law makers to make them criminals. So blame your hero Joe Biden, not oil companies.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Certainly they don't need to go to jail, but oil companies should make good-sense measures to ablate their carbon footprint and sequester their production more effectively. Not sure why you're always all-in on the all-or-nothing statements when describing this area.

[xyz]

Not sure why you're always all-in on the all-or-nothing statements when describing this area.

Are you reading what I’m responding to? How can I not be binary?






Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[BCMtnHound]

With respect to O&G and mining companies, I am with xyz and trackhead here. These companies are about money. Nothing else. They will not sacrifice a dime of their profit for the greater good, no matter the long term cost to the world. And if they do give up cash, it’s to pay off, ..err, lobby, ‘honest’ politicians.

It’s up to the public to use less of their product and drive investment elsewhere. As long as we continue demand, they will be more than happy to provide and shed not one tear for the future of their progeny let alone ours.

[p.blz]

Oops post

[WMD]

Of course oil companies are resisting change at all costs. Oil production is their sole mandate. Expecting them to change is like expecting Apple to cancel the iPhone.

Who gave them this "mandate?" If you are talking about shareholders, does that mean that if people are financially supporting ("investing" so as to make a profit) sex traffickers, the sex traffickers have a mandate to continue?

[xyz]

Who gave them this "mandate?" If you are talking about shareholders, does that mean that if people are financially supporting ("investing" so as to make a profit) sex traffickers, the sex traffickers have a mandate to continue?

Yes. Shareholders. Of course. The difference here is that oil and gas production is legal and sex trafficking is not.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[Flounder]

I am in agreement that mining for minerals for EVs should be heavily monitored and done in as safe a way as possible. What I’m a little confused about why so many people that focus on the issues with resources required for EVs completely ignore the issues related to oil and gas production.

Between the environmental destruction and social/political issues it’s not like gas is some pristine trouble free resource. The Middle East is a mess because a small group control immense wealth from oil and instead of sharing and bettering their country, they keep their people in poverty and convince them it’s America and Israel why their lives are shit.

I know it’s Canada but you can’t tell me this is a better alternative. At least include scenes like this and the myriad of oil spills into the conversation.

[WMD]

Yes. Shareholders. Of course. The difference here is that oil and gas production is legal and sex trafficking is not.



Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

That's not a mandate, that's an investment. Doesn't matter if it's legal or not, both are investments. Society approves of one of these activities (for now), but not the other. But that still doesn't make it a "mandate."

Definition from Oxford Languages:
Mandate
man·date
/ˈmanˌdāt/
noun
noun: mandate; plural noun: mandates
1. an official order or commission to do something."a mandate to seek the release of political prisoners"
2. the authority to carry out a policy or course of action, regarded as given by the electorate to a candidate or party that is victorious in an election."a sick leader living beyond his mandate"

[Bunion 2020]

It’s up to the public to use less of their product and drive investment elsewhere.

Only way that happens is if alternatives are cheaper than fossil fuels. Only way that will happen is if O&G pays for the full impacts of their products. That HAS to mean an end to O&G Gubamint subsidies as well as a charge for the carbon they release.

Given the bitching about 5 dollar a gallon gasoline (< expensive than in 1978 dollars) what politicians have the courage to enact a carbon tax?

[WMD]

I am in agreement that mining for minerals for EVs should be heavily monitored and done in as safe a way as possible. What I’m a little confused about why so many people that focus on the issues with resources required for EVs completely ignore the issues related to oil and gas production.

Between the environmental destruction and social/political issues it’s not like gas is some pristine trouble free resource. The Middle East is a mess because a small group control immense wealth from oil and instead of sharing and bettering their country, they keep their people in poverty and convince them it’s America and Israel why their lives are shit.

I know it’s Canada but you can’t tell me this is a better alternative. At least include scenes like this and the myriad of oil spills into the conversation.

Absolutely! Air pollution, mostly from burning fossil fuels, kills 8-10 million people a year globally. Spills do horrible environmental damage, as does mining, drilling, and processing fossil fuels.

An all electric future with 100% clean energy would see mining burden decrease by 80%. We must do this mining better, and of course we need to figure out recycling . But, mining better is possible - we can decrease environmental and human impacts. The problem with fossil fuels is they are being dug up to burn them. You always need more because you burn them and it isn't possible to eliminate their environmental and human harms.

[xyz]

Only way that happens is if alternatives are cheaper than fossil fuels. Only way that will happen is if O&G pays for the full impacts of their products. That HAS to mean an end to O&G Gubamint subsidies as well as a charge for the carbon they release.

Given the bitching about 5 dollar a gallon gasoline (< expensive than in 1978 dollars) what politicians have the courage to enact a carbon tax?

Why should oil and gas companies pay for it? Climate science has been known for decades now yet governments and society lined up everyday to guzzle fossil fuels. We are to blame just as much as them. We benefited with a kick ass lifestyle, they benefited with profits.

Governments can obviously choose to end subsidies to oil and gas. But that’s up to them, in the mean time we can’t expect oil and gas to refuse it.

As for a carbon tax. My province has had one for 15 years. Emissions continue to grow, beyond population growth. There just aren’t practical alternatives in place. So the tax is just a tax not an incentive. It was advertised as revenue neutral for a while, to sell it but eventually that was rolled back and it’s just a tax now. But they have set some of that money aside for low carbon initiatives. I personally applied for a grant at my last job. We received over 1M for reducing our emissions. The project had a killer business case too so we were mostly motivated by that. We would have done it regardless of the subsidy or not.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[WMD]

Why should oil and gas companies pay for it? Climate science has been known for decades now yet governments and society lined up everyday to guzzle fossil fuels. We are to blame just as much as them. We benefited with a kick ass lifestyle, they benefited with profits.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

This "we are to blame as much as them" is complete bullshit. The fossil fuel industry killed public transportation in many cities, and they worked hard to kill electric vehicles for decades. It isn't our fault that there aren't better alternatives- it's theirs. You can't blame people for not making better choices when they don't have better options. And fossil fuel companies have been killing other options for decades. It's part of their business model.

Fossil fuel companies have also known the truth about fossil fuels causing irreparable climate change for more than half a century. What did they do with this knowledge? They spent millions of dollars a year to hide it and even created disinformation campaigns so the public wouldn't understand the truth. You can't blame the public for not realizing they were being misled. That is all on the fossil fuel industry and why there are lawsuits springing up everywhere to hold them accountable for the damages.

As for carbon taxes - they are too low to actually make a difference almost everywhere they've been put in place. Why is that? Pressure and lobbying from the fossil fuel industry of course.

Of course it is their fault.

[Bunion 2020]

You have already showed me you are not worth my time. Fuck off please.

[k2skier112]

Again. You can’t expect oil companies to declare themselves criminals, turn themselves in and shut down. They are operating within the current law. It’s up to law makers to make them criminals. So blame your hero Joe Biden, not oil companies.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

You're just an ignorant POS huh? Biden really? I'm no fan boi of Biden, but fer fucts sake douche nozzle, you think the POTUS controls oil companies, LOLOLOLOLOL

Every politician from both sides of the isle has taken massive campaign contributions from oil companies. "Hero", my gawd yer dumb, your bias is showing

[k2skier112]

You have already showed me you are not worth my time. Fuck off please.

Me too, biased morons are a waste of time and space

[Core Shot]

Why should oil and gas companies pay for it? Climate science has been known for decades now yet governments and society lined up everyday to guzzle fossil fuels. We are to blame just as much as them. We benefited with a kick ass lifestyle, they benefited with profits.

Governments can obviously choose to end subsidies to oil and gas. But that’s up to them, in the mean time we can’t expect oil and gas to refuse it.

As for a carbon tax. My province has had one for 15 years. Emissions continue to grow, beyond population growth. There just aren’t practical alternatives in place. So the tax is just a tax not an incentive. It was advertised as revenue neutral for a while, to sell it but eventually that was rolled back and it’s just a tax now. But they have set some of that money aside for low carbon initiatives. I personally applied for a grant at my last job. We received over 1M for reducing our emissions. The project had a killer business case too so we were mostly motivated by that. We would have done it regardless of the subsidy or not.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

Quoting.
Since the last two posts were xyz igonore

This post is cogent. And articulate. Reducing our effect on the planet is complicated.

[Trackhead]

I am in agreement that mining for minerals for EVs should be heavily monitored and done in as safe a way as possible. What I’m a little confused about why so many people that focus on the issues with resources required for EVs completely ignore the issues related to oil and gas production.

My stance is I'm hoping for a thoughtful approach to mining, recycling of EV, in an effort to do it right the first time. Yeah, oil is a mess, literally and figuratively. The Valdez oil spill and countless others. Pollution from fracking, etc.

Lithium, cobalt, and other elements for batteries could be the new gold rush, and when money is involved, safety and the environment typically are the last thought.

[xyz]

This "we are to blame as much as them" is complete bullshit. The fossil fuel industry killed public transportation on many cities, and they worked hard to kill electric vehicles for decades. It isn't our fault that there aren't better alternatives- it's theirs. You can't blame people for not making better choices when they don't have better options. And fossil fuel companies have been killing other options for decades. It's part of their business model.

Fossil fuel companies have also known the truth about fossil fuels causing irreparable climate change. What did they do with this knowledge? They spent millions of dollars a year to hide it and even created disinformation campaigns so the public wouldn't lnn no own the truth. You can't blame the public for not realizing they were being mislead. That is all on the fossil fuel industry and why there are lawsuits springing up everywhere to hold them accountable for the damages.

As for carbon taxes - they are too low to actually make a difference almost everywhere they've been put in place. Why is that? Pressure and lobbying from the fossil fuel industry of course.

Of course it is their fault.

Nah. It’s governments fault. They let oil and gas influence policy. They didn’t implement a carbon tax. They subsidize oil and gas. Governments let them do it all.

The way I see it, if a politician is caught on the take by a special interest group, who do you blame? I blame the politician.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[WMD]

xyz - you are a shill for the fossil fuel industry. You use their basic model of attempting to create doubt to slow action on climate change.

You once asked how you could be a shill for fossil fuels when you support nuclear energy. Here's how:

Building new nuclear plants takes on average around a decade. Technology for small modular plants is not yet proven. Fission has been a decade away for many decades. There are very few plans to build new nuke plants right now. So, a big build out of nuclear energy would take many decades, keeping is stuck with fossil fuels for decades.

During this time the fossil fuel industry will continue to push carbon capture and sequestration as a viable option so they can continue burning mg fossil fuels. Carbon capture on power plants has not worked well to date, so delaying a transition from fossil fuels buys time to try to get this technology to work better. CCS also is very expensive. Nuclear energy is also expensive and makes fossil plants with CCS look more reasonable price-wise.

Wind, solar, and battery prices have fallen rapidly over the past few decades to where they are cheaper than fossil fuels almost everywhere. With further adoption of renewables, prices will continue to fall due to learning curves. Supporting nuclear at the expense of renewables disrupts, or at least slows, those learning curves, keeping the cost of renewables from falling further, and making fossil fuel prices seem reasonable.

So yeah, supporting nuclear is absolutely in line with supporting the fossil fuel industry.

I'm not personally opposed to nuclear as long as it is in addition to rapid build-out of renewables.

[WMD]

Nah. It’s governments fault. They let oil and gas influence policy. They didn’t implement a carbon tax. They subsidize oil and gas. Governments let them do it all.

The way I see it, if a politician is caught on the take by a special interest group, who do you blame? I blame the politician.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

This is a joke. If the mob bribes policemen to look the other way, it is only the policemen's fault? Those doing the bribing shouldn't be blamed at all? Wow.

The Sacklers lied about Oxycontin and said it wasn't addictive. Patients believed them and wanted the drug as it helped them with pain. Doctors believed them and prescribed it to patients as they wanted to help the patients. Purdue Pharma paid experts to make up fake studies showing their product wasn't addictive. Does Purdue have no culpability for any of this? Regulators approved the drug based on these lies. Purdue no doubt bribed some people to grease the skids on this approval. Purdue is not culpable for any of this? Only the regulators, doctors, and patients are to blame? Wow again.

Saying the liars and cheats aren't responsible would be laughable if the consequences weren't so high.

[xyz]

Thanks for replying with information rather than a personal insult.

I agree wind and solar are cheap at generating power and can be constructed quickly.. It’s just the storage. The capacity factor of wind and solar suck and that will never meaningfully change. They also don’t work well at all latitudes and locations. Batteries are not cheap enough yet. Not even close. They just can’t be scaled up provide the capacity of nuclear without costing trillions. Leaving us relying on gas base load. Pumped hydro works in theory but in practice it’s limited.

And It’s only fair to give nuclear technology the same potential as battery.

Wind and solar remain an ideology rather than a real solution to me. I’d rather go full blast nuclear. Starting now.

Fission will remain 10 years away for eternity.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[WMD]

Thanks for replying with information rather than a personal insult.

I agree wind and solar are cheap at generating power and can be constructed quickly.. It’s just the storage. The capacity factor of wind and solar suck and that will never meaningfully change. They also don’t work well at all latitudes and locations. Batteries are not cheap enough yet. Not even close. They just can’t be scaled up provide the capacity of nuclear without costing trillions. Leaving us relying on gas base load. Pumped hydro works in theory but in practice it’s limited.

And It’s only fair to give nuclear technology the same potential as battery.

Wind and solar remain an ideology rather than a real solution to me. I’d rather go full blast nuclear. Starting now.

Fission will remain 10 years away for eternity.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

More bullshit and lies. Go fuck yourself