Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Enlightened-Beaver t1_itv5vfw wrote

Reply to comment by NekuraHitokage in Move over, diesel: Ohio gets ‘first of its kind’ renewable gas station by redingerforcongress

It’s a major improvement. Just because something is not a perfect solution does not mean it isn’t a valid solution. The world isn’t that binary

7

NekuraHitokage t1_itv88w9 wrote

I never said that either, we are at a point where this is becoming binary. This is one issue of many and it's swiftly put itself in that corner. To think I think so generally when speaking on one issue is silly.

0

Enlightened-Beaver t1_itv9zb1 wrote

You literally said “it is not a solution”, when in fact it is very much a valid solution which significantly improves our carbon emissions. It’s not a perfect solution, but if we only pursued perfect solutions our society would grind to a halt. Perfect solutions hardly exist.

For example, if you think electrifying everything is the ideal solution you may want to look at the environmental and human rights impact of lithium and cobalt mining.

2

NekuraHitokage t1_itvam65 wrote

It is absolutely not! It is a stopgap at best. It is kicking the can down the road. It is a delay, not a solution. A solution ends the problem. Removing combustion from the energy equation solves the global climate change problem. Not changing what we're combusting... Unless we can perfect hydrogen, but well... I think we'd sooner see nuclear/solar/wind EVs and energy focus as a solution to global climate change. Move away from throwing carbons into the air at all.

Solutions as imperfect as you'd like them, exist. This is not a "solution."

0

Enlightened-Beaver t1_itvbg9v wrote

So your solution is to electrify transportation. I’d be curious to know what your thoughts are on lithium and cobalt mining and how that fits into your perfect solution?

1

NekuraHitokage t1_itvc4k1 wrote

I said "as imperfect as you like" didn't i?

Those impacts are local, not global. It is a solution to global climate change, not local mudslides and other shit.

I agree that nothing is perfect. I disagree that this is a "solution." It is a bridge as others I agree with have said and it is not "clean."

2

Enlightened-Beaver t1_itve7t7 wrote

Ah I see, so because it’s not your backyard getting wrecked by lithium and cobalt mining and not your family being exploited in slave labour to mine it it’s “out of sight and out of mind” right?

Typical.

1

NekuraHitokage t1_itvhwqd wrote

No. If they wanted to frack my back yard to prevent the world from catching on fire, i might have some problems with the process of fracking and mining needs its own regulations, but at least my driving to my 9 to 5 isn't leading to global extinction. I never said the prectices in mining were great, I'm speaking of the broad spectrum impact on the earth and humanity as a whole.

I also happen to agree mining conditions are terrible and that can be done better too. That isn't the discussion at hand. The discussion is whether this is "clean" or a "solution" and it is neither when other actual solutions exist.

How can you in one breath defend this as great yet imperfect then turn around and make such an accusation when I offer another imperfect, yet non extinction event forming solution.

Did i say it was perfect? Never made the claim. But it at least damages a country side and not the entire atmosphere and is a solution to global climate change. How the people in those mines are treated is an entirely different subject and one I happen to think needs fixing as well. You are making a lot of assumptions.

2

Keeperofthe7keysAf-S t1_itwv73y wrote

Also that mining can actually be done better, and batteries are recyclable so you get a really long life out of those metals, while you're never going to make fossil fuels not pollute in extraction, production, and consumption.

Earlier I said no one was suggesting Methane to run all vehicles on, but you found the idiot arguing against EVs so maybe I shouldn't say that lol.

1