I wish for the responsible judges, politicians and CEOs to get spat in the face by their own children for being the disgusting vile pieces of shit that they are. Sadly, too often, the apple does not fall far enough from the tree.

Adding extra electricity consumption means in short run burning more coal and gas. They are the ones that can be ramped up / ran more hours.

I think that’s only gas plants, that can react dynamically to changes in the grid?

I think what we need is consumer electronics that can tolerate more variation in the grid power supply - e.g. a laundry machine that runs on 80% voltage just as well, but then takes a bit longer to finish.

Nuclear power plants are only preferable to burning fossil fuels, and only when run by responsible entities (i.e. not by humans ;) - definitely not by profit-oriented corps) - I hope we can transition to enough wind, water & solar power, but we definitely need to cut down on energy consumption.

As I was saying in my first comment: If energy is produced by renewable sources, then they can be clean, so there’s no argument here.

Re:

https://www.sustainabilitybynumbers.com/p/lithium-electric-vehicles

1. the article focuses on lithium, which is not the only problematic material used in electric batteries
2. the first source I checked (on total lithium in the world) was offline, so I could not confirm my suspicion that the author was talking about the total amounts including those inaccessible in the Earth’s mantle
3. the author admits herself that we have “enough lithium for decades to come”, which is in-fucking-credibly stupid, because this planet has been around for billions of years, and one of the biggest flaws of mankind has been to empty a natural resource over a few decades “coz profits”. Creating a demand for a resource that would only make it last a few decades would create another clusterfuck like all the wars and blood shed over crude oil. As a matter of fact, for mining conditions, we already have this clusterfuck, if you look at e.g. how cobalt is mined in the “democratic” republic of Congo

Finally, like I asked another commenter: could you provide a source on EV batteries made without rare earths?

By the way - sodium requires salt, and that’s also limited on Earth. Knowing mankind, we’d extract locally (desalinification hurts the ecosystem there) and dump waste locally in another location (again, hurting the ecosystem).

My overall point is: the world’s car market is just too big and we need to shrink it, but mankind as a whole is too fucking selfish and stupid and short-sighted to accomplish that, and I WISH time will prove me wrong on that.

1. Solar panels need to run for a couple of years before they produce net energy considering the energy invested into production

2. Source on battery production being less reliant on rare earths?

3. Speak English, please - I am not looking up abbreviations to argue with you

4. See my other reply here: https://lemmy.world/comment/12349903 Efficiency of an electrical car is better, but absolutely not “incredibly” better, as per the numbers I checked while writing that comment

5. How much cleaner EVs are, depends on the source of energy mix (which at charging stations outside your home, you can hardly control) - if renewable energies are used, they are certainly cleaner. If fossil fuels are used, they are at best (not counting the waste from battery production and disposal) as much cleaner as the efficiency improvement (which is about 40% over Diesel engines, by what I calculated from sources that were acceptably credible for writing an internet comment as opposed to a scientific paper)

6. I was not speaking about “mineral” resources, I was speaking about mineable rare earths. Because there are plenty in the Earth’s mantle, but we can’t get to those.

7. Again, source please on how EVs do not need rare earths for batteries

8. Agreed for the time being, but if research allows to improve the process for generation of hydrogen, it could be a cleaner combustion fuel

In summary: I am not arguing for combustion cars, I am arguing against EVs not for individual use cases, but as a “this solves all problems with combustion engines” - because it is not a solution applicable to the world market for personal mobility.

The best solution is a proper public transportation system - good bus connections and trains that can operate “by wire” without the need for batteries.

First things first: Yours is a straw-man argument. I said that electric cars are not “green energy” because it matters how the energy is produced. You, however, argue for the better efficieny vs. combustion engines. I did not even MENTION combustion engines. So watch your tone, dumbass :p /s

Regarding your straw-man, I’ll bite:

Efficiency of an electric car is up to 65% including losses when charging. Efficiency of a Diesel powered car is up to 45%. Producing a liter of diesel costs about 1.13 times as much energy as is contained in a liter of Diesel fuel, which - even assuming 100% efficiency on winning that energy - is further bringing down the efficiency to 45% * (1 / 2.13 ) = 21% (one unit gained per 2.13 units invested). A coal power plant is at best reaching 45% energy efficiency, bringing the overall efficiency of an electric car down to 65% * 45% = 29.3%. That makes an electric car operating on coal generated electricity about 29.3% / 21% = 1.395 or about 40% more efficient than a Diesel powered car.

And this does NOT include that electrical vehicles are - due to the weight of batteries - around 50% heavier than combustion engine cars, and that battery life is much shorter and then generates a lot of electronic waste.

Accordingly:

The dirtiest, least efficient coal power plant is still IMMENSELY more efficient than a car combustion engine

Not true. Numbers for the most efficient coal power plants are just about equal with the efficiency of the best Diesel engines. But even moderate Diesel engines stay around 40% efficiency, whereas coal plants can be in the 30%-40% range easily.

When you don’t have to make your energy generating device mobile, you can get a LOT more power from your fuel.

1. generally, larger generator = better efficiency, yes, however:
2. see above: this does not necessarily hold true when the batteries increase the total weight of your car by 50%

While - all things considered (I honestly did not expect the production of Diesel to be quite so energy-inefficient) - electric cars fare better if driven at constant speed (or with good energy recuperation mechanisms on braking) and not taking into account the battery life, energy investment into that and chemical waste produced on production / disposal, they are far from getting “a LOT more power” from an “IMMENSELY more efficient” power plant.

Maybe spend some time learning about a subject before you make claims about it. There’s less chance of looking like an ignorant fool that way.

Likewise.

There are a lot of reasons WHY news agencies disproportunatly show the downsides of green energy

Electric cars are not “green energy” - that’s utter bullshit.

1. the energy consumption of electric cars is about as clean as the power plant that produced said energy - if that happens to be a fossil fuel plant, it’s dirty as fuck, just with the pollution in a different location from where the car is driving If you have renewable energy, then yes, they can be cleaner, but:

2. we don’t have enough (mineable) rare earths to replace even a sizeable fraction of the world’s car market with electric vehicles

Just because everything that can happen, will happen in the multiverse theory, doesn’t make this a possibility. This was never on the table - that would just require way too many unlikely particle decay events ;)

haha - what a dumb insecure little pathetic fuck of a nazi dipshit…

I love the reporter not letting it go so the little manchild is losing it.

*nucular. It’s (pronounced) nucular :D

I was thinking figuratively of the UK as a person, and of persons as bipeds…

Because the amount of organizations needing data backups / protection far exceeds the amount of available qualified IT personnel. So instead of training themselves, they hire morons who say “sure I can do your IT”

ah right - forgot UK still has one foot in the medieval ;) thanks for the clarification!

Thank you for the summary! I found myself in OP. I am eating mostly vegan, and I have a cat, and I believe people who force a vegan (or even vegetarian) diet on their cats need mental help.

CPS is? City Prosecutor … ??

as to 1) - that’s judged differently in Germany - in part to protect victims of domestic violence who will often “change their mind and not want to” press charges after filing an initial report.

2. in that case, yes - but again, if it’s a criminal offense, the victim has an obligation to testify, even if they have no interest

3. I have no idea how the funding of our judicial branch looks like atm

Assuming the only evidence for physical assault isn’t just the victims statements (but even then), I feel that both crimes are currently being ignored.

To go back to the example of Germany: If you accuse someone of a crime (directed against your physical well-being or property) here, towards authorities (e.g. police) and then say “but I don’t want to press charges”, that no longer matters - they are obliged to record a report of a potential criminal offense and leave it to a judge to decide on how to proceed.

Isn’t having knowledge of a felony enough for a public prosecutor to indict someone independent of the victim?

That’s how it works in Germany at least - if the authorities get information about a criminal offense, they are obliged to start a criminal investigation. A victim not pressing charges only matters in terms of a civil lawsuit.

Don’t waste my time with your bigotry and shortsighted dumb comments.

Palestinians don’t accept that the borders change and still want all of Israel.

“Palestinians” here is a useless generalization, because it lacks a quantifier. Certainly some do, and just as certainly not all do.

You underestimate the amount of brainwashing going on. When two people brought up in entirely different parts of the world, all other circumstances identical, are exposed to two completely different systems - they can often believe opposite things to be true, despite no person being intrinsically more or less good or bad than the other.

Also, generalization is a BIG problem the moment you use it as prejudice against individuals before knowing them. As a matter of fact, judging individuals based on generalizations is - the moment the generalization is applied to an ethnicity - equal to racism.

I meant that thanks to abstract art we’re willing to forgive “image glitches” in art by deep learning models.