Is the improvement that they are less polluting generally, even if they aren't that much better (if at all) for carbon emissions when you look at the whole manufacturing cycle and generation/supply of the charging electricity?Broadly agree.
They are an improvement over combustion but nowhere near as good as your bicycle
I’m talking specifically about the green side of it.
and we didn’t mention “recycling “
It's going to be fineThat's great, but hopelessly one sided, how about you compare to what goes into sourcing the metals in a ICE, along with the extraction and processing of the oil required for fuel, then compare with the above.I’m talking specifically about the green side of it.
Here’s an example:
View attachment 4995
This is a CAT994A.
It burns approximately 1,000 litres of fuel in 12 hours, moves approximately 250 tonnes of dirt to extract the materials needed to make ONE Tesla battery.
To make each battery, you need to treat:
- 12 tons of brine for lithium,
- 15 tons of ore for cobalt
- 3 tons of ore for nickel,
- 12 tons of ore for copper
And move 250 tons of the earth's crust.
For just - one - battery, which has about:
- 12 kg of lithium
- 30 kg of nickel
- 22 kg of manganese
- 15 kg of cobalt
- 100 kg of copper
- 200 kg of aluminum, steel and plastic
And people still believe in "zero emissions" when they drive their electric cars.... ,
On the road, electric is much less polluting (especially if the national energy infrastructure continues to move to renewable).
Hang on, don’t be so defensive. I was asking a question as it seems like a lot of effort man power and resource used just to make a battery. So you’re agreeing with what I’ve copied and pasted but you’re saying that it should be compared to what we do now. Ok, maybe a fair comment but what you’re saying is it takes shit loads more effort, man power and resources to make the vehicle that is used to source the materials to make the batteries. Sounds to me like it gets even crazier
But isn’t dirty diesel a con? I thought the myth was built around the French labelling it dirty and sticking extra tax on it and with technology today a lot of engines are pumping out cleaner air that they’re sucking in. (Ok I guess the starting point of the air they’re sucking in makes a difference) the problem is though, the same folk that are telling us to get greener are the ones who are driving around in big cars and flying here there and everywhere on private jets and taxing the fuck out of everything labelling a green tax which doesn’t go back into researching sustainable alternatives. Public transport is a joke. We’ve moved from 7:30 to 4:30 or 9 to 5 jobs to a three shift system 24/7 where in many cases public transport won’t get you to work or get you home. We were told to get on our bikes and look for work (taking a job farther away from home) and then they wonder why folk think it’s another con.
The last point you made is dead dead relevant. The shift of wealth from those Middle Eastern countries and those who have interests in them, the fall out won’t be pretty.
What’s putting your head anywhere near exhaust fumes got to do with anything?
It’s absolutely the point. Because if they con you about one thing to raise or introduce “green taxes” that isnt spent on “green” things then why should we trust them regarding anything else on their green agenda? Until they start being honest in what they say and how green taxes are spent then I’ll carry on as normal.
