Electric Cars are more environmentally friendly MEME

>Someone told me that electric cars are more environmentally friendly.

Someone does not know how lithium is extracted.

Other urls found in this thread:

cleantechnica.com/2016/05/12/lithium-mining-vs-oil-sands-meme-thorough-response/
epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data
australian-lithium.com/
youtube.com/watch?v=CzmAcMEed5c
youtube.com/watch?v=PQUf3nL9sjg
plugincars.com/tesla-roadster-battery-life-study-85-percent-after-100000-miles-127733.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Are you arguing that the lithium production produces more pollution than every vehicle burning fossil fuels? Or just that it makes a big hole in the ground?

No hes shilling for ozone killing fossil fuels because, like niggers and women, he has no concept of the future beyond 5 minutes from now.

His claim is that a big whole in a barren desert somehow affects the environment more than the oil mine in the forest that was once glacier land.

>t a big whole in a barren desert

It's obvious the next superbowl arena.

>>t a big whole in a barren desert
Theyll probably just abandon it and let it turn into a shitty lake thats toxic, or a garbage dump and then when it fills up in a few years theyll turn it into a golf course.

Just because you cannot see the damage doesn't mean it's not there. Emptying underground oil reserves can have terrible consequences even if we cannot see them from the site at ground level.

>ozone killing fossil fuels
Plez read this

Thats not Alberta though. Thats Saskatchewan.

Can you post a source comparing stats instead of some 9gag meme

don't forget charging batteries takes electricity that probably comes from burning coal.

why are the czechs shitposting now?

This.

The duck is your point?

Yes, but that's not really an argument against electric cars. We could get that electricity from nuclear if there was just enough public demand/awareness to build new reactors.

>nearby coal plant supplies my area with majority of power
>nearby dam supplies power
>Georgia Power literally cites no instances of a petroleum powered plant within 30 miles of me

Yes, it is more environmentally friendly in my case. Plus I'm encouraging the use of coal and not petroleum or natural gas. We have TONS of fucking coal.

you retards

Lithium extraction and all industrial mining is definitely pretty bad for the Earth, but CO2 causing the atmosphere to heat up is WAY FUCKING WORSE. It will actually destroy society before the end of the century if we don't change our ways. The only way to do that is to electrify everything, and then change our source of electricity to sustainable sources like wind and Solar. You can't effectively transition to renewables if all the cars are still running on and homes are still heated with fossil fuels; you have to convert those systems first. Think for a fucking second.

either serious or $.02 has been deposited into your account.

Or nuclear using LFTR.

Fossil fuels don't destroy the ozone numpty. Cfc gases do that

Fossil fuels can create a runaway greenhouse effect

1 big coal furnace with steam turbines, chemical and particle filters is still more efficient and less polluting than 10 000 internal combustion engines with catalysts in varying states of maintenance...

Nuclear isn't the solution, because it still requires a power grid, which is vastly more vulnerable to the extreme weather conditions we're already seeing from climate change. Think of the money that we could save if didn't have bajillions of miles of powerlines connecting residential homes that get damaged in storms. If everyone had their own solar or wind installations, or at least smaller regional grids, we'd save so much just on maintenance alone.

Most people DO NOT KNOW how or where most things they are consume come from.

>assumption

Cars are worsening air quality in major cities, people get cancer and lung issues because of that, i think the point of electric cars is to reduce the NOx and CHx first since they are the ones that fuck your respiratory system.

A battery still requires energy coming from a non renewable souce producing energy connected to the grid. The process wastes up until 70% of the original amount of rotational energy produced by the turbines involved, vs the 0% wasted by the internal combustion engines you find on your cars.
Wind turbines are a meme, solar is still way too inefficient, except for molten salt solar powerplants. Nuclear fusion is the way, we could have TOKAMAK type reactors if we didn't have all that obscene amount of shilling made by the oil industry.
>t. engineer

>but CO2 causing the atmosphere to heat up is WAY FUCKING WORSE.
This hypotheses was not scientifically proven. And electric cars have more overall CO2 emission. Expensive things = more CO2 emission, this is how economy works.

Animal agriculture is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than all transportation combined. Passenger vehicles are small fish.

reddit
megareddit

>we could have TOKAMAK type reactors if we didn't have all that obscene amount of shilling made by the oil industry.
>he thinks corporations would not use fusion themslves to grab porfits

Lithium is mainly extracted in Africa though, and nobody gives a shit about what happens to that continent or its inhabitants.

Are you serious?
you do know that human CO2 emission is not a major factor that effects Global temperature.

lol you fat shit I don't reddit

>2016
>being this ignorant

Theres a handful of mines like that in the world.

And prob only one oil field like that in the world.

This is what oil fields really looklike.

>0% wasted in IC engines
>engineer
okay buddy my school taught a 23% energy efficiency limit for spark ignition and a 40% energy efficiency limit for compression ignition(diesel)

Burning coal at a big power plant is way more efficient and environmentally friendly than a bunch of little inefficient motors making power. In Europe, this would actually really help the environment because polluting diesel cars are popular. However, Elon musk said if we want to remove our dependence on fossil fuels for cars and homes (natural gas), we must increase energy production by a factor of 3. I really don't see that happening without nuclear reactors, but retards will still get the govt. to spend billions on shit like solar and wind plants while nuclear research funding is in the shitter.

Wind and solar are a joke right now. If you wanted to switch to all electric everything and you use Elon musks estimate that we must increase electricity production threefold, that would require so much money compared to nuclear. Solar also takes up a ton of space in the desert. A lot of these renewable power plants rely on a backup fossil fuel power plant that does work whenever conditions aren't optimal. While nuclear has its drawbacks, if we actually spent money researching it, once fusion becomes viable we will have no drawbacks except cost when compared to fossil fuels. While fusion seems impossible, that is only because we are spending less on it than 1978. We will never achieve fusion at this rate. Even China and France are dumping money into fusion, it is sad that USA, the inventor of nuclear reactors, is currently getting lapped by fucking France in their development.

Humans have massively increased the CO2 level higher to than it ever was.

...

>LOOK!
>HOLE = BIG
>THEREFORE, BAD

*zzzzz*

Ah, yes, the response of someone who truly has no argument.

> LE PLEBBITS LOL

humans have increased atmosphereic CO2 levels by 7%. CO2 leves are not the hightest they "ever were."
you keyboard scientists are just silly.

kys that is a cooper mine. fucking piece of shit.

cleantechnica.com/2016/05/12/lithium-mining-vs-oil-sands-meme-thorough-response/

Tried verifying that 51% of global greenhouse emissions are due to livestock and their byproducts

The supplied source from the epa does not exist. According to them ~3% of US emissions and ~9% of global emissions are from livestock. 14% from transport.
>epa.gov/ghgemissions/global-greenhouse-gas-emissions-data

Oh truly they were of Reddit,
And I said on to those POLacks:
Want not to respond to false pictures, and want not the attention of these migrants. For, they shill not for the lulz, nor for the shekels, but for smugness.

Let their bread stale, molder and fade.

I said rotational energy available to the shaft in ICEs vs the rotational energy transferred from turbine in energy plants.
I could get pedantic and talk about how much rotational energy gets wasted by attrition but fuck you

Those methane models are too linear to express the impact of all cows. They assume grain feeding occurs from birth to slaughter and that grass/feed/grain has zero impact as it decomposes naturally.

Grass fed and pastured animals sequester carbon - the methane produced by the gut bacteria in their stomachs is a portion analogous to decomposition of grass.

>doesn't even try to mention nuclear
Kys

Although that's not a lithium mine. Copper I think.

Australia and Chile produce roughly 75% of the world's lithium.
They only use that method in a handful of areas.
australian-lithium.com/

Actually got redpilled about this last night talking by a friend who designs sub stations for my state's major electricity provider. In his opinion, the most viable, environmentally-friendly alternative to fossil fuels is hydroelectric.

>wind and solar
nice memes.

For all envirofags who still aren't convinced EVs are bullshit: This is where the electricity comes from to charge the cars.

Neat. I don't think anybody gives a shit though, because only faggots want to stop eating meat.

yea that is a copper mine. Its called Chuquicamata.

This is how the new project will look.
youtube.com/watch?v=CzmAcMEed5c

youtube.com/watch?v=PQUf3nL9sjg

And Chile don't really care about "muh lithium".

If we subsidized wind and solar the way we subsidized fossil fuels I'd bet you anything we could innovate solar and wind to be as efficient and fossil fuels. People are so short-sighted about this...

>Muh construction materials is exactly the same as fuel sources meme
FUCKING. KILL. YOURSELF. So god damned tired of this shit meme from oil shills.

he's retarded, it's nuclear

you realize that, more or less, all the energy on Earth comes from the Sun, right?

That oilsand site is likely deserted since the barrel prices dropped

Oh boy, the faggots that blame everything on anything animal related.

oh no! nuclear power plants spewing smog creating water vapor!

Run for the shelters!

the pollutants generated by producing billions of batteries for billions of electric cars would be almost as damaging to the environment, probably moreso actually, as the pollutants for the equivalent amount of fossil fuel required to power the same number of cars, yes.

No good place to store radioactive waste.

Pretty severe case of non argument.

Are you kidding? In deep salt mines it would be fine, but idiots keep saying "well, well WE NEVER KNOW FOR SURE!"

>It will actually destroy society before the end of the century

The Jews will have done this far before the end of the century.

Random trivia; Theres life in the deep around hydrothermal vents where the sun rays don't reach

Nature is bretty cool

lol, I get it, say "nice memes" and then tell ME that I'm not arguing my point. Fucking die.

This just isn't anything. Pollution from mining isn't going to cause the sea levels to rise, or the seasonal and weather patterns to disrupt, or habitat collapse. It's certainly bad, but negligible compared to climate change.

wtf i hate elon musk, still.

i hope the guy builds a nice little community off the grid where he and all his little nerd buddies can sit around a bonfire and sing kumbaya with the coyotes.

>mine lithium in Bosnia
>transport lithium to factory in Indonesia for refining
>transport refined lithium to factory in Europe for battery production
>transport lithium batteries to factory in target market for implementation in f.e. a Tesla car

vs

>drill oil
>transport through pipelines to cracking facility
>transport oil-derived product by truck to service station, by pipeline to houses, airports, etc.

Also, the whole point of killing the oil industry is to kill our industry, to make living more expensive and to monopolise transportation by making you reliant on Uber, on Ford's electric car rental scheme they've got planned, on Tesla's similar scheme, etc.

Not even getting into the farce that is global warming.

I don't have to. Someone who thought solar and wind would be viable anytime soon are probably hopeless.
Someone who uses the argument "BUT LIKE MOST TYPES OR ENERGY COMES FROM THE SUN BRUH" is most certainly hopeless.

OP's post and pic is satire. nobody on here is that stupid.

i still don't understand why a lot of Sup Forums hates clean energy.

No you imbecilic slav, that's not an oilsand quarry, this is one.

Still potential for leekage. Not to mention possibility of meltdowns at the plants themselves. How is this better than hydroelectric?

How can you be so shortsighted? Fossil fuels are on the way out. The trends are pretty clear. The oil market is in trouble because of decreasing demand and the demand for renewables continues to rise.

How do you think electricity is made. That place you plug your car into, is fed by a huge fire burning fossil fuels. It literally puts out the same amount of carbon.

not taking into account vehicle based lithium batteries are designed to last 10 years before needing to be replaced.

plugincars.com/tesla-roadster-battery-life-study-85-percent-after-100000-miles-127733.html

Because hydro is not available anywhere.

And honestly putting the waste fuel on the fun would still leave room for people to say "well it COULD leak, somehow"
Reality is in some place the chances would be negligible.

Still not an argument for wind or solar. Sad.

Most lithium comes from Afganistan mountains?

that's wrong, and I am sure thunderf00t could explain why that is better than me.

...

Meanwhile, actual oil sands site.

What we need is more nuclear.

kek, *not available everywhere

take a look at where rare earths come from, that's way worse. Doesn't mean fossil fuels are any better though. Like said, as long as we don't have other viable options nuclear would be the way to go. Ironically that way has been blocked by politicians that nowadys shill for "renewable" energys fearmongering for decades. Now that people believe nuclear powerplants poison the air they breathe it's not really an option anymore, eventhough things like IFRs are incredibly safe and clean.

So let's say we bam all petrol, diesel, kerosene and other oil products.

What's going to mine the lithium?

The real issue is humans

Have you ever looked at large cities or highways? The fuck man they completely destroyed half of the livable land with concrete

t. space nigger

probably pic related. But nobody talks about completly banning fossil fuels, just drastically reducing their usage.

Our CANDU's are pretty safe. But the all mighty lesbian of Ontario decided we needed more renewable.
Few years later, electricity prices doubled, and for what? 5% renewable (excluding pre existing hydro).
Heard it's bad in New Istanbul, are the rumors true?

>make everything electric
>then use the methods of generating electricity that have some of the lowest efficiency to supply all that demand

wew lad

even modernized soviet RBMKs are pretty save. The advantage of IFRs is the on-site electrorefining and them being useless for producing weapons grade Uranium/Plutonium making it unproblematic to export them to almost all countries (and easier to push it through in first world nations because the muh nuclear weapons argument doesn't work).

Germany's fucked in terms of nuclear power. What remains will be shut down in the next 6 years, reasearch funding for fission powerplants dried up decades ago. The green party menace hit us hard. Our renewables work decent, but we got no means to store them meaning we export power when they operate close to their peak and import power when there's no wind/sun. We're basically using our neighboring countries as buffer. They are quite pissed over it and some are thinking of implementing laws that restrict that.

Our reactors were/are quite save, the belgians and french still operate ancient shit just across the border. And since we are shutting down nucler powerplants usage of brown coal is going up to satisfy our energy needs.

Also the whole renewable energy shit (state sponsored) is so expensive that energy prices went up by almost 50%. They need to exclude companys that need much power (like aluminium and steel production) because they'd go bankrupt in a month. So in the end it's the small man that pays for this shit.

you forgot the part where these methods aren't producing power reliably all the time and we got no means to store power on a larger scale effectively.

>As of 2015 most of the world's lithium production is in South America, where lithium-containing brine is extracted from underground pools and concentrated by solar evaporation. The standard extraction technique is to evaporate water from brine. Each batch takes from 18 to 24 months.

Tidal generators are the way of the future.

For coastal cities, maybe.

Remind me why there isn't a company selling container sized, safe and transportable 10mw thorium reactors? Was it all bullshit?

are you trying to fucking tell me milk comes from massive open lithium mines?

don't be such a stupid twat

Small scale reactors, probably. Thorium reactors overall aren't.

better to pollute the earth once (making electric cars) than to pollute it repeatedly (owning fossil fuel cars)

not an argument

Thwn you obviously know little about mining

This can be changed, bad shitposting

You also know little of mining

But solar is becoming rapidly more efficient. Also what are two-stage catalytic converters?

>This thing is bad therefore this other lesser bad thing is negligible
Nice fallacy you've got there

>humans have increased the CO2 to higher than it ever was
Well goddamn, you realise there's 3.5, debatably 4 billion years of life on this planet? CO2 and other greenhouse gasses have been far higher that what they are now in the past. Any argument over that topic is irrelevant though because there are also other factora that change over time which impact upon the severity of high greenhouse gasses

From a long term perspective we won't be burning coal to power cars.

This guy gets it. Batteries aren't environmentally friendly in the slightest

Currently EVs are only good from the perspective that regular ones burn fossil fuels. Considering catalytic converters, where electricity comes from and how batteries are made EVs still have a long way to go to actually be environmentally friendly. At the moment they're just trophy purchases for vanity purposes