Expert prognosis for the planet

[Irace86.2.0]

A new way to extract lithium might be on the horizon, greatly speeding up the process, making it cheaper and making it greener with an area that is fractions of the size of lithium pools.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

...I read today that the US is recycling like 5% of plastic. .

You seem to miss the major point of this article, at least as I see it. It isn't that "people" aren't recycling but that the process doesn't exist to recycle most plastic in any meaningful way. Ultimately, we need to either ban plastic or fix the recycling issue on a much grander scale.

It also has nothing to do with "coal rollers" or whatever stereotype you choose to use to add a little "us vs them" to your argument. There are stupid people on the extremes of any global level discussion, but alienating persons that are just left or right of middle (which is 95% of reasonable people in the world that actually get stuff done) is not going to help any argument.

[Wally86]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

You seem to miss the major point of this article, at least as I see it. It isn't that "people" aren't recycling but that the process doesn't exist to recycle most plastic in any meaningful way. Ultimately, we need to either ban plastic or fix the recycling issue on a much grander scale.

It also has nothing to do with "coal rollers" or whatever stereotype you choose to use to add a little "us vs them" to your argument. There are stupid people on the extremes of any global level discussion, but alienating persons that are just left or right of middle (which is 95% of reasonable people in the world that actually get stuff done) is not going to help any argument.

[Arthur-A]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Peterson has some good points and some bad points. He tends to fall apart talking about areas outside of his expertise and trying to play to conservative talking points when he self-confesses to not being a republican. This happens when he talks about climate change or religion. He tries to attack it with the same level of argument, but he lacks the expertise or doesn't have the science to back up theologic claims, so he goes off-kilter, and he falls apart straining to make an argument that sounds as rational and grounded in truth.

Oil is finite, so moving to renewables is necessary. Climate change, pollution, destroying habitats, killing off species, over-fishing, etc...these aren't made up. These are real issues that humans are causing or greatly accelerating. I read today that the US is recycling like 5% of plastic. The world seems to be going to shit real fast and all one side wants to do is put their head in the sand and be bitter about sacrificing the ability to coal roll on people. I just don't get it.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...021-greenpeace

On a side note: I've never cared for him reading his own essays. It just doesn't flow.

I barely know who this guy is, I just stumbled upon his this video initially I thought that it's another egghead spewing typical bs like "OMG praise my climate change/absolutely stop eating meat/wash no more that once a week/stop driving a car" - that kind of bullshit. And I was quite surprised that there's someone who actually stood up for real people and the struggles they have. And the points he made are very reasonable and I'm pretty sure resonate with a lot of people.

Sacrificing a decent quality of life for some pseudo "good" cause is ridiculous. And again, those who spew that bullshit they ain't gonna sacrifice shit. They want to continue using all the benefits of civilization while some obedient fools would flush their wellbeing down the toilet. Well, that's what those sick scumbags dream about.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

and be bitter about sacrificing the ability to coal roll on people. I just don't get it.

Lol, how does coal rolling have anything to do with it? By the way, it doesn't seem like you're eager to get rid of your dirty ICE cars and be more "environmentally conscious", aren't you?

PS: About "muh science dude". Scientists absolutely cannot be bought, like it never ever had happened. All those scientists writing articles stating that smoking is good for you in the 40s-50s is just some fantasy, yeah.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

You seem to miss the major point of this article, at least as I see it. It isn't that "people" aren't recycling but that the process doesn't exist to recycle most plastic in any meaningful way. Ultimately, we need to either ban plastic or fix the recycling issue on a much grander scale.

It also has nothing to do with "coal rollers" or whatever stereotype you choose to use to add a little "us vs them" to your argument. There are stupid people on the extremes of any global level discussion, but alienating persons that are just left or right of middle (which is 95% of reasonable people in the world that actually get stuff done) is not going to help any argument.

Nope, I didn’t miss it. I can’t really see how that could be your conclusion from what I said unless you were projecting. This is old news that I’ve brought up before in this thread, as it pertains to China no longer accepting our garbage to recycle. The problem is the infrastructure continues to be abysmal despite the fact that China’s import ban was at the end of 2017, which is the point of the article. And the article misses the point that many plastics are recyclable, but unfortunately, it isn’t profitable to recycle all plastics, so despite the recycle symbol, most plastic would be discarded, even if we had the infrastructure. What’s worse, we don’t even separate and store the plastic that isn’t profitable or that is profitable for future use when we have the infrastructure or when those plastics become profitable; we just throw it all in landfills. This entire system is crap, and I agree that we need to move away from plastics, which is why I posted multiple videos about plastic alternatives in this thread, such as using fungus. Check them out.

I don’t think I’m alienating moderates by calling out the side with the vast majority of deniers. They need to fix their own because it is far from a 95% being reasonable situation. Peterson’s suggestion that this transition will be at the expense of our standard of living is there to fear monger, which is ironically in stark contrast to his previous statements in other interviews when he talks about the hardships and sacrifices of previous generations who built this country, yet now that it is our time to rebuild this country better, he is whining that “how much are we made to suffer for it” because “stuff is more expensive now,” yet his analysis is that green technology is at fault when it is multifactorial, the most significant of which is post-pandemic corporate greed and not green technology.

I live in an area of California with plenty of hicks and conservatives, where coal rolling is a daily occurrence and where I see keyed EVs and Priuses and blocked charging stations regularly. At campus, a Mustang MachE is keyed with a sticker over the engraving saying “Please be nice.” I’m curious if other states are even worse. There is a guy with a fifteen foot sign on his property saying, “Let’s Go Brandon” and another on his barn facing the opposite direction. There is a lot more I see on the regular on the back of cars and trucks. I don’t see the same on the other side. Ironically, the side saying EVs shouldn’t be forced down people seem to be actively trying to make owning an EV miserable for those who choose to own them.

https://www.americanprogress.org/art...17th-congress/

https://climatecommunication.yale.ed...-data/ycom-us/

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Nope, I didn’t miss it. I can’t really see how that could be your conclusion from what I said unless you were projecting....

I don't think I was projecting, and I stand by my statement recognizing it's possible I misread you and what seemed to be you pointing to people that don't "recycle" versus the issue is on the end of doing something with the material.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I don’t see the same on the other side...

Then you aren't looking is all I can say. Watch an episode of The View when a Conservative is on, or watch "protests" that aren't really anything but paid professional protesters yelling stupid slogans. You'll see it.

Ultimately in the end extremism and threats will get neither side anywhere.

I live in the middle of "redneck/hick country" and the actions you point to are rarely seen IRL here. There are always exceptions (particularly when the cameras are rolling) but for the most part we get along.

You and I typically can have a reasonable debate even though you are maybe 15 yards left of the 50, and I'm 10 yards right of 50. That's the way it should be. We just need to both watch the ones behind us!

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Arthur-A

I barely know who this guy is, I just stumbled upon his this video initially I thought that it's another egghead spewing typical bs like "OMG praise my climate change/absolutely stop eating meat/wash no more that once a week/stop driving a car" - that kind of bullshit. And I was quite surprised that there's someone who actually stood up for real people and the struggles they have. And the points he made are very reasonable and I'm pretty sure resonate with a lot of people.

Sacrificing a decent quality of life for some pseudo "good" cause is ridiculous. And again, those who spew that bullshit they ain't gonna sacrifice shit. They want to continue using all the benefits of civilization while some obedient fools would flush their wellbeing down the toilet. Well, that's what those sick scumbags dream about.

Well, it isn't pseudo. He isn't a climate scientist. He isn't an economist. He is a psychologist. He has zero expertise in the area. He is making claims that he doesn't back up in any way. He says we have to sacrifice our standard of living to move to green technologies, but he does nothing to say that this is happening or that it will happen. He is making a correlation to recent events without demonstrating causation. Irregardless, he is often quoted talking about the hardships of past generations and the sacrifices they made to build our standard of living today, yet now he is whining that this generation needs to make sacrifices for the future of the country and world. This doesn't make sense. He is special pleading.

Originally Posted by Arthur-A

Lol, how does coal rolling have anything to do with it? By the way, it doesn't seem like you're eager to get rid of your dirty ICE cars and be more "environmentally conscious", aren't you?

See my last post, but it is worth noting that diesel modifications are an issue:

Tampering can cause a vehicle to emit hundreds to thousands of times more pollution than it otherwise would. Recent EPA investigations indicate that controls on over 500,000 diesel pickup trucks, or about 13% of those registered that were originally certified with emissions controls, have been fully removed or deleted through tampering. The excess NOx emissions from these vehicles is the equivalent of adding 9 million trucks to our roads.

A "full delete" of the emission controls on a modern heavy-duty diesel pickup truck can cause it to emit as much harmful pollution as 300 trucks with fully functioning emissions controls!

https://cleanairnortheast.epa.gov/tampering.html

My wife and I both live within 4 miles of work. I drive around 3k miles a year on a car with a full sized cat and a 4 cylinder. My wife's Audi gets 26mpg, which is 30% better than the median truck, and she drives around 5k miles a year. We will be buying EVs once we move out of our apartment into a house, at least for her, and definitely for me if we had a decent commute where it makes sense.

https://gizmodriver.com/average-and-...pickup-trucks/

Originally Posted by Arthur-A

PS: About "muh science dude". Scientists absolutely cannot be bought, like it never ever had happened. All those scientists writing articles stating that smoking is good for you in the 40s-50s is just some fantasy, yeah.

I think you should get your facts straight instead of suggesting conspiracy theories. The efforts of the tobacco industry to dissuade the public from accepting the scientific consensus that smoking caused lung disease almost exactly parallels the efforts made by climate deniers and the supporting industries of those deniers to dissuade the public from accepting the scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming/climate change. Your example doesn't support your belief that 97% of climate scientists are bought and paid for by "green" corporate interests, especially when scientists have been warning about human emissions affecting climate since 1896, but it does support the fact that one side has used the 3% of climate scientists who are unconvinced or unsure to create "conflict" about the consensus, even using the strategy of taking the few vocal climate deniers, or worse, doctors and scientists in unrelated fields to propagate a false narrative that there is disagreement.

Read the history...sounds familiar? This is literally a playbook for climate deniers and backers of the oil industrial complex.

In this way, the tobacco industry managed to sustain the widespread perception of an active and highly contested scientific controversy into the 1960s despite overwhelming evidence and scientific consensus that smoking caused serious disease.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3490543/

[Arthur-A]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

My wife and I both live within 4 miles of work. I drive around 3k miles a year on a car with a full sized cat and a 4 cylinder. My wife's Audi gets 26mpg, which is 30% better than the median truck, and she drives around 5k miles a year. We will be buying EVs once we move out of our apartment into a house, at least for her, and definitely for me if we had a decent commute where it makes sense.

Yeah, typical "rules for thee but no for me". It's only 4 miles, get rid of your cars and ride a bicycle, if you care about environment so much.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

We will be buying EVs once we move out of our apartment into a house, at least for her, and definitely for me if we had a decent commute where it makes sense.

Yeah, something something lithium mines, something something leaving irreversible damage on the mining site. Something toxic batteries that cannot be recycled. Something something child slave labor on the lithium mines, well I guess you don't care about that one, dang.

Wait, a house? A house? So, you're planning to occupy all those extra sqr ft with a backyard all by yourselves? That's a huuuge carbon footprint, smh.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

I don't think I was projecting, and I stand by my statement recognizing it's possible I misread you and what seemed to be you pointing to people that don't "recycle" versus the issue is on the end of doing something with the material.

I read today that the US is recycling like 5% of plastic.

I didn't say that people in the US aren't throwing recyclable goods in recycle bins, and although I didn't specify US recyclers specifically in the above quote, that is what the article says that I linked below my statement, yet again, you seem to be saying I was referring to individuals and not the industry even when I posted the article. That is projecting when you are reading what you want to read. If you reread what I wrote and linked, it is hard to make the conclusion you made, especially in relation to everything else I have said in this thread, much of it, you have participated in.

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Then you aren't looking is all I can say. Watch an episode of The View when a Conservative is on, or watch "protests" that aren't really anything but paid professional protesters yelling stupid slogans. You'll see it.

Ultimately in the end extremism and threats will get neither side anywhere.

I live in the middle of "redneck/hick country" and the actions you point to are rarely seen IRL here. There are always exceptions (particularly when the cameras are rolling) but for the most part we get along.

You and I typically can have a reasonable debate even though you are maybe 15 yards left of the 50, and I'm 10 yards right of 50. That's the way it should be. We just need to both watch the ones behind us!

Whatch the Wham Bam Tesla Cam YouTube channel and you will get a lot of videos of Teslas being keyed, kicked or in some other way vandalized for just existing. I haven't seen lifted trucks getting the same treatment.

Meanwhile, as I demonstrated in the links I provided, this isn't a two sided issue with extremists on either side. There are always extremists on either side, but the rejection of the basics is all on one side, and it isn't an insignificant number from that side. From that perspective, the right is far more out of touch from reality than the extremists on the far left calling for truly radical changes. The right sees any suggestion to tackle this issue as radical, which really shows the problem with their base. As Arthur brilliantly pointed out, the efforts from the right to deny climate change is a playbook passed down from the tobacco industry and has been played out to a T.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Arthur-A

Yeah, typical "rules for thee but no for me". It's only 4 miles, get rid of your cars and ride a bicycle, if you care about environment so much.

Now you are just making insensible statements while ignoring where the vast majority of the problem stems from. You attacking the size of my carbon footprint, which is much smaller than most, doesn't refute the fact that the world needs to lower its greenhouse gas emissions.

Originally Posted by Arthur-A

Yeah, something something lithium mines, something something leaving irreversible damage on the mining site. Something toxic batteries that cannot be recycled. Something something child slave labor on the lithium mines, well I guess you don't care about that one, dang.

Wait, a house? A house? So, you're planning to occupy all those extra sqr ft with a backyard all by yourselves? That's a huuuge carbon footprint, smh.

Watch some of the videos posted about lithium alternatives like sodium/sulfur batteries, or about car batteries being recycled or used for grid storage. Your statements seem antiquated. The people making these points never actually care about the issues they bring up, as they continue to buy polluting products or buy products from child labor. Look up sodium sulfur batteries or other technologies on the horizon that I posted in this thread that solves those issues

Planning on something in the 1200 sqft range with new green tech and a backyard for growing our own veggies. I pay extra and opt in for energy sourced from green technology. We buy organic from sustainable farming. I'm not living in a mud hut and biking to work, but I'm doing my part.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

I didn't say that people in the US aren't throwing recyclable goods in recycle bins, and although I didn't specify US recyclers specifically in the above quote, that is what the article says that I linked below my statement...

OK, I'll take you at your word, but all of us read things and interpret in our own way, that isn't projecting that's thinking.

The one thing I'll add is this isn't a "USA" problem, its an industry problem. If we really want to fix this we need to do what I suggested, ban plastic, or give the industry the option to develop something that has a 90 - 100% proven recyclable rate in say, 10 years. It's been done with products in the past (banning).

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Whatch the Wham Bam Tesla Cam YouTube channel and you will get a lot of videos of Teslas being keyed, kicked or in some other way vandalized for just existing. I haven't seen lifted trucks getting the same treatment.

No thanks. I have zero trust in any site that specializes in these type of events, regardless of subject. Too easily staged (by either side) for the point of monetization or propaganda. Not all of it is "fake news" but a high percentage is.

Originally Posted by Irace86.2.0

Meanwhile, as I demonstrated in the links I provided, this isn't a two sided issue with extremists on either side. There are always extremists on either side, but the rejection of the basics is all on one side, and it isn't an insignificant number from that side. From that perspective, the right is far more out of touch from reality than the extremists on the far left calling for truly radical changes. The right sees any suggestion to tackle this issue as radical, which really shows the problem with their base. As Arthur brilliantly pointed out, the efforts from the right to deny climate change is a playbook passed down from the tobacco industry and has been played out to a T.

We are delving into politics here so I'll disengage with this:

For every January 6th there is a Portland Siege
For every Second Amendment Radical there is a Defund the Police protestor
For every climate change denier there is a shut it all down, give it back to the earth extremist.

From my view, they are equal, opposite and mostly wrong on both sides.

Ultimately in the end, we are once again at an agree to disagree point. I enjoy the debate though, and I learned something from it.

[Irace86.2.0]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

OK, I'll take you at your word, but all of us read things and interpret in our own way, that isn't projecting that's thinking.

The one thing I'll add is this isn't a "USA" problem, its an industry problem. If we really want to fix this we need to do what I suggested, ban plastic, or give the industry the option to develop something that has a 90 - 100% proven recyclable rate in say, 10 years. It's been done with products in the past (banning).

I agree, but I don't know if the semantics of calling this an industry problem versus a US problem is necessary or that it even makes sense. I only specified that the US recycles 5% of plastic because that is what the article says. Ultimately, like you said, it won't be up to the markets and industries to choose to recycle more based on the profitability of recycling. It will be up to the government to invest in recycling plants and penalizing or incentivizing industries to move away from plastics that can't be recycled, but again, we produce far more recyclable trash at profitable levels than what we recycle, and the citizens are sorting recyclable goods far more than what can be recycled because we lack the infrastructure. Why? Because we were shipping our waste to China, so when they stopped in 2017, we had to find alternatives and start building a recycling infrastructure here, but then the pandemic happened, so now it has been five years, and we are only recycling 5% of plastic, which is abysmal when Germany is recycling 56.1% of ALL waste.

https://www.nspackaging.com/analysis...ing-countries/

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

No thanks. I have zero trust in any site that specializes in these type of events, regardless of subject. Too easily staged (by either side) for the point of monetization or propaganda. Not all of it is "fake news" but a high percentage is.

It is literally just videos from Teslas cameras getting into wrecks, catching funny behavior or seeing odd things, catching people vandalizing Teslas while in sentry mode, flashing the camera, picking their teeth in the mirrors, etc. It isn't fake news. The only time there is a news clip is when a video someone submits has an actual news story showing a man or woman being arrested after vandalizing the cars. Most of it is just dash cam footage.

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

We are delving into politics here so I'll disengage with this:

For every January 6th there is a Portland Siege
For every Second Amendment Radical there is a Defund the Police protestor
For every climate change denier there is a shut it all down, give it back to the earth extremist.

From my view, they are equal, opposite and mostly wrong on both sides.

Ultimately in the end, we are once again at an agree to disagree point. I enjoy the debate though, and I learned something from it.

Yes, there is a radical 1% on either side, but there also is a different in the middle like you didn't say, "For every evolutionist, there is a young earth creationist, or for every spherical-earther, there is a flat-earthed." Why? Because one is making a sane position and the other is making in insane position, instead of two people making insane positions or extreme positions.

Listen, voting records and multiple polls show objectively that you can't just dismiss this saying 95% of us are on board or in agreement because that's just not the case. Closer to 30% of Americans are not on board, and 52% of republicans in the house and 60% of republican senators outright deny humans are causing climate change, but there are zero democrats doing the same. This is a remarkable conclusion, and it creates problems for finding solutions to the issues we are facing from emissions to even things like recycling. Only 6% of republicans voted for the infrastructure bill, but 97% of democrats voted for it (the hold outs wanted the Build Back Better bill too), and it provides grants for recycling, recycling batteries, eduction about recycling, among other things. I have yet to see a republican created and party backed bill, but maybe I missed it. I have seen many bills like the one below shot down by republicans. You mention having the government ban or change the industry. How do you propose that happens?

https://www.epa.gov/rcra/bipartisan-...ste-management

https://sungazette.news/republicans-...ecycling-pile/

[Irace86.2.0]

@Arthur-A

This is a nice summary on current sodium-ion batteries. Sodium sulfur batteries are a big deal too:

Here is some tech talk on lithium-sulfur batteries:

Alternative to battery storage technology for storing green energy that is far cheaper, longer lasting and more green than lithium ion batteries.

Alternative to lithium mining that is greener and faster without the water usage and leaching issues:

[Arthur-A]

I'll believe it when I'll see a real mass produced car with this tech. Why not?