170
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
170 points (100.0% liked)
World News
22096 readers
98 users here now
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
- Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
- Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
- Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
- Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
For US News, see the US News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Sorry to say this to you, since you seem to take it somewhat personal, but it's evident we need to stop both SUV's and bunker oil.
I agree industry needs to step to it's game. But frankly, so do you. Battling climate change is a painful.
Your talking to one of the extremely few people in my county who have managed to offset the majority of their carbon emissions via renewable resources.
Despite my utility and local government making that process a complete pain in my ass.
And Despite my utility and local government essentially ruining any hopes of an ROI by exorting me with extra fees. (To offset me not buying their energy)
My suv which has practical purposes here is not the problem.
Willing to be your average lawnmower pollutes more...
Don't get me wrong: I seriously applaud your efforts. Like you say, we all need to do more like you.
But push comes to shove, you also need to change your SUV for an EV. All SUVs need to go. Especially since station wagons have the same utility, and are generally safer on the road.
Lots of people use specific types of vehicles for specific types of work.
There's no one vehicle that will work for everyone.
I'm not the guy you were conversing with but in my line of work I need to haul lots of items often, and sometimes for long distances. That means I need cargo space, so either an SUV or a Truck.
I need to deliver those items or transfer those items across long distances, If I need to stop and recharge an electric vehicle 2-3 times that means my one day trip all of a sudden turns into an overnight stay in a hotel. I can't get my work done if all of a sudden a one day job turns into a two day job.
I can't afford to buy a new car. Public transportation in the US basically doesn't exist, and riding a bike is a death sentence here. Buy me an EV and I'll gladly drive it though :)
Edit: Also, I'd have nowhere to plug in the vehicle charger since I don't have a garage where I live :/
This is not what this article is about though. They targeted huge cars in one of the most affluent areas in one of the biggest cities in Germany. We have very reliable public transport and about two days of snow per year. It is totally unnecessary to drive an SUV here. I do understand some people needing a big car for work but ferrying your kids around is easily managed using public transport here.
You're right that this post is not about the US and is specifically about Hamburg, but many of the comments here seem to imply that this is a wider reaching sentiment. The reality is that many people can't afford to change their vehicle, either due to financial reasons (their SUV or other vehicle is old and not going to get much from an exchange) or due to their lack of time. Going after random people in one city in Germany is not going to have the effect that they're hoping for. It will cause outrage, which might be the goal, but the target will be the activists, not the car manufacturers.
What is generating the power for that EV. What about the materials mined to make that EV? What happens to the battery once it can no longer hold a sufficient charge?
EVs are not green until the at the very least the energy being produced to power them is green. Which in almost all cases it is not. IMO it's much more productive to focus on transforming our energy grid to renewables than to worry about SUVs.
From MIT:
Also this says "on average gasoline cars" now I'd have to look at the data to be sure but an "average" gas powered car is generally going to be a lot bigger (SUVs, pickup trucks) and less fuel efficient than the smaller cars that most EVs are.
So we're comparing larger vehicles most likely, to smaller ones, and still EVs producer greater than 50% of the CO2 emissions that ICE cars do.
This blame the consumer game is old. It's been the same playbook for decades. Shift the responsibility to the consumer instead of regulating corporations.
We need to stop falling for the bait and switch and instead of demanding that people stop buying fuel inefficient vehicles, maybe we should just regulate them out? (And in many ways the world already is with the MPG and other requirements for new vehicles.)
That's a very selective quote .. https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/are-electric-vehicles-definitely-better-climate-gas-powered-cars
In fact, the article only really talks about Lithium Ion batteries too, and new technologies are rapidly being released (such as the CATL batteries)
In fact, many regions in other countries literally are 100% renewable now (Tasmania in Australia as an example). And, most EV owners here in Australia likely own solar panels. The MIT article is literally mainly focused on US (and if the republican's stay out of power, things will likely only swing further in the green direction).
Same thing happened in Australia. We had an idiot as a Prime Minister, but voted him out, and things have rapidly changed now.
Don't get me wrong: I seriously applaud your efforts. Like you say, we all need to do more like you.
But push comes to shove, you also need to change your SUV for an EV. All SUVs need to go. Especially since station wagons have the same utility, and are generally safer on the road.
Oh, I would love an EV.
Don't get me wrong. But, for a EV with the room I need for the activities we perform, it's extremely cost prohibitive.
Just now, the wife hauled two dog kennels with dogs. German Shepards. Those aren't going to fit in a car... unless wagons make a comeback.
Also, Lithium batteries (process of obtaining Lithium) is pretty bad for the environment, and generally involves slave labor. As well, size, capacity, and cycle durability aren't the best.
Lots of alternatives and prototypes are being worked on, and when that problem is solved by replacing Lithium with a cheap, affordable, durable replacement with enough energy density- EVs will be everywhere.
As is though, replacing the 30,000$ battery pack every decade or so is no Bueno.
Until then though, our daily driver is a small car. Suv is used to haul stuff and kids.
I don't see any eco-pirates boarding cargo ships and confiscating their fuel, do you? Seems to me that only working-class people are targeted by these so-called “activists”, and not anyone who actually has the power to change anything.
Honestly, this smells like a false-flag operation meant to discredit environmental activism by painting activists as criminals.
Here's an example of Greenpeace blocking a russian liquid natural gas tanker from reaching port in Finland from September of last year, and here's an example of Greenpeace activists boarding a container ship containing paper to protest deforestation from November of last year, here's another example of the same group boarding a heavy lift vessel to protest offshore oil drilling from January of this year, and here's an example of some scamps vandalizing a wal-mart heiress's yacht from earlier this month.
You're absolutely right, that activists boarding ships or otherwise vandalizing them gets way less press and markedly less discussion than this protest has. Why do you think that is?
Because those actions affect people with power, not the powerless general public.
Yeah, it probably sounds cynical, but I agree with you there. When there are successful actions that make powerful people uncomfortable, those power people successfully repress news coverage of those actions.
Do they need to repress anything, or do people just not care? The yacht news was shared on here, I was literally in that thread. After 2 days, it had less than 60 upvotes and about 10 comments.
In one day, this post is already near 200 upvotes and has 148 comments.
But I guess let's just keep pretending we're all angles and that the 1% and leading class are acting in complete isolation. Let's just keep pretending they are the only problem.
People only care when something might affect them directly, and people messing with theirs cars seems a lot closer to a possible reality to them then being affected by climate change. Which is why everyone claims to want for there to be action to stop climate change, but they are incredibly stubborn about having to change anything about their way of life.
News coverage isn't the goal. Coercing the rich to change their ways is the goal. Because only the rich can change anything.
Besides, if one does not see certain actions, those actions might as well not be happening at all. If only there was a way people who cause the greatest harm to control what gets reported in mainstream media, effectively shifting people's attention away from the harmful practices of their businesses..