Its working!
How about coal? Maybe bankrupting all bucket manufacturers?
These are real results from crazy crazy people in power.
Surprised that more countries are not just doing a global push for more or total EV vehicles and banning ICE vehicles because of the fallout of the fuckhead who went to war, not war, with Iran.
edit I'm not just talking about EV vehicles but more adoption of solar panels, wind mills, geothermal power plant, etc.
Okay I'm sorry to be that guy, but wind mills are used to grind stuff, like grains into flour. You mean wind turbines/generators.
the only place where you can get green tech that's both scalable and affordable like this is china and the entire global north and its periphery is united in preventing this green tech from getting into our hands to various levels.
You need the appropriate grid overhaul I would imagine to be able to sustain a sudden spike in EV adoption.
That electricity has to come from somewhere and that somewhere usually means fossil fuels or coal that's transported on similar tankers that are also caught in the metaphorical and literal crossfire.
Solar adoption is already at an all-time high and accelerating, but that's not equally available everywhere.
I'm no expert in any of this stuff, it's just how I understand it from an armchair perspective. Feel free to chime in.
OTOH, even coal powered electricity is significantly less polluting than ICE cars, both in terms of co2 and in terms of not spewing particulates out in people's faces.
That's always how it is though? Can't have EVs because not enough electricity, won't build green electricity because not enough EVs.
The EVs are there for anyone to buy at this point, though plug-in hybrids are currently the best option.
You can do short commutes on battery power alone and you have an IC engine ready when needed.
Also if we force all EV manufacturers to adopt a standard for homes to be able to use their cars as back-up power, or generally for the grid to be able to utilize plugged-in EVs with over 80% capacity to feed back into the grid when required, that could solve most of the problems but it soulds like a nightmare to implement from an engineering standpoint.
Edit: this post describes the benefits and challenges.
I dunno. Straight up hybrids are superior to ice vehicles, but plug in hybrids seem super niche.
I rented a jeep 4xe and the battery only mode would only go about 10-20 miles - I'm not super far from work, but it's still double that range. And the default software mode was to consume all the battery then only recharge like a normal hybrid (e.g. keeping the battery at basically empty).
Plus the mileage wasn't much better because it was lugging around the battery pack.
Best option by what metric? Plugin hybrids come with a unique set of issues that neither EV nor pure ICE have. Exactly because you'll do all your short commutes on battery.
Exhausts literally rust through because they don't get used enough to clear out all the condensation that develops. Flooring it when you need to accelerate suddenly will cause a cold ICE to come on and take a heavy load without the oil being warmed up, etc.
I'm considering a few too, but I'm not exactly going to pretend they don't have whole new issues.
Even with transmission losses and even if you powered them solely with fossil fuels, aren't the electric drivetrains and power plants still so much more efficient that you still reduce fossil fuel use by burning it at a power plant instead of ICE motor?
With all the oil burning from both the Iran war and Russian invasion, I doubt that optimism, but it just a gut feeling seeing these videos of huge flames and smokes. I hope they are right 🤞
Most of that oil would've burned anyway, just a little bit at a time, inside a combustion chamber, after being refined and distributed somewhere.
When an oil pipeline or well catches fire, it burns in a spectacularly dirty way, but the net CO2 emissions in the atmosphere is actually reduced from shutting down that facility so that it can't process and export as much oil anymore. Meanwhile, the logistics and pricing effects probably destroy demand, so that the world as a whole burns less oil afterward.
Historian: donald trump made the EU arm up, the green transition go up, removed dependency of oil and gas, ...
Ghost of donald: so people remember me for doing good?
Historian: what a shit head he was, if only he knew how we despise him. If we even remember him.
Hopefully it will be his wasting legacy.
Would be similar to how no one thinks of Nixon as the EPA/clear air & water guy or the war on cancer guy.
Well, yeah. Who knew it would be American imperialism that turns the tide on fossil fuels?
In all seriousness, everyone has known that this is necessary for this system to continue, so it was inevitable that there'd be a shift. They're squeezing it while they can.
I imagine analysts have identified that building an economy that is dependent on a resource like oil or gas comes with drawbacks and that the oil and gas lobby has access to the worlds militaries which may be used to mitigate those drawbacks.
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.