T O P

Electric vehicles are a fad and are not the future of travel. There isn't enough lithium to go around.

Electric vehicles are a fad and are not the future of travel. There isn't enough lithium to go around.

babno

Granted there isn't enough lithium to replace all cars with lithium battery EV's now, but that's not the only way to make an EV. Hydrogen has potential, and we're innovating new solutions all the time. Just because it's not a reasonable possibility in the present doesn't make it a fad or impossible to implement more widely in the future.


thepyrodex

Just look at how far we've come in 50 years? In 1979 we had the CitiCar back in the era of lead acid batteries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citicar Now we have the Tesla with lithium batteries. Give it more time and it'll be even more impressive. I'm a muscle car guy with 2 mustangs (66 & 03 GT centennial) but electric cars are the future. More powerful, quieter, faster, full torque at 0 RPM etc.


fike88

I want your cars


thepyrodex

Thank you, the 03 GT was built (by me) for autocross racing too lol Stupidly fun until the money runs out!


Subzeb8

Electric cars are the present AND future.


thepyrodex

They are not quite here yet they are a good daily driver or commuter but I can't exactly take a road trip conveniently in a Tesla right now from New York City to LA I can do that easily in a gasoline car As soon as they get the charge time down a bit more and get it to around 10 minutes for a full charge maybe 15 then we'll be there We're close though They also assume you have a convenient charging location or a garage that you can park it in to charge it they're just isn't enough quick charge stations around otherwise yet I still like them


Subzeb8

Yeah that was a pretty basic Nirvana Fallacy by the OP.


[deleted]

[удалено]


yee2446

Happy cake day.


TorontoMon22

Horse riders said the same things about the combustion engine when it came out.


Fearless_Survey7497

horses are renewable.


0701191109110519

Doubt it


Subzeb8

Doubt…history?


Tango-454

\+1 upvote


IanArcad

The left's energy & economic policy boils down to "send multinationals to strip mine developing countries for resources and set up factories in places with no human rights and environmental protections while importing illegal immigrants to take the few jobs the working class has left" and yet they think they're the good guys. What a propaganda victory.


Subzeb8

Source?


IanArcad

Seriously? Turn over your computer and look for the "made in China" label. That's my source.


Subzeb8

I don’t get it. Capitalism is what moved labor overseas, not “leftists”. Honestly, if anything, it was rightists.


IanArcad

Clinton re-aligned the Democratic party to support the financial industry and trade with China and then Gore pushed for Green Energy which is a wealth transfer from the existing energy infrastructure to a new one based on overseas mining and manufacturing.


Subzeb8

Are we just going to pretend we don’t produce green tech in America and that we don’t get fossil fuels from overseas, or…?


IanArcad

What green tech do we produce in the USA? I'm not aware of any. For energy, most electrical generation came from US sources (coal mostly). If we had the natural gas pipeline to Canada we could convert everything to natural gas which has far less pollution, Co2, etc, and is cheaper overall and we could run it for 100 years. Instead we'll have to buy much more capital intensive equipment from China.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Believer109

Idk about rails. That would be extremely expensive to engineer. What *might* work is how trolley systems are powered by overhead cables. Many roads even in rural America have overhead power lines, but this would still pose enormous engineering challenges. Possible, though.


CaptUncleBirdman

1. The technology isn't ready for rural areas now, that doesn't mean it never will be and 2. Lithium batteries aren't the only way to power an EV and will probably be replaced in the next decade or so.


Subzeb8

I mean, rural areas have electricity. I’m not sure why the OP thinks they don’t.


CaptUncleBirdman

The concern is that people who live in rural areas travel further day to day and also need to be able to drive to cities. If you live in the city the chances of you needing to go to a rural area is low. Which is why I claimed that the battery technology will soon account for that extra range and the rural argument will be moot.


Subzeb8

Are rural dwellers commuting hundreds of miles a day each way?


CaptUncleBirdman

No, they're doing it a few times a year. The frequency is irrelevant.


Subzeb8

If it’s only a few times a year, then what’s the issue?


CaptUncleBirdman

If they're doing it at all then their car needs to be able to do it without undue inconvenience. If their new EV is going to require them to borrow a car every couple months then they're going to say F that and they're going to go buy an ICE car. It's not a measure of "could this technically work" it's a measure of "will people put up with this".


Subzeb8

Why not just take a bus, train or plane? Or rent a car? I don’t know anyone who buys a car based off of maybe needing to drive it across country as quickly as possible.


CaptUncleBirdman

I'll just take those one at a time... 1. If a bus is even available (unlikely) nobody wants to use that. They're slow, inconvenient, have no privacy, and you can't haul things with them. 2. Trains are bad for the same reasons as busses except they're even more rare. 3. One of the big reasons a rural resident may travel to the closest major city is to access an airport. Their little town of 900 people does not have a commercial airport. AND they have all the problems as trains and busses except speed. And on top of that, you're not selling this at all. Why would they put up with the annoyance of figuring all this out if they could just buy an ICE car and have all of their potential problems solved? And it's not "maybe needing to travel". Going to the nearest city is a consistent need that happens semi regularly. No offense at all but do you live in the US? I've been assuming that but given the arguments you're making its sounding a bit like you might be living in Europe, where your points would make a lot more sense.


Subzeb8

Why would someone live hundreds of miles away from a city and NEED to go to the city often? If I needed to go to Chicago, I wouldn’t live in Des Moines. I guess I’m just not seeing how an electric car with a 300+ mile/charge isn’t enough for rural dwellers.


Subzeb8

Kind of weird to cry over what mining lithium does to the Earth while ignoring the much worse impact of mining fossil fuels (while hand-waving it away anyway). Then you complain about the lack of charging stations, even though more are being made and the fact that you can just plug an electric car into a normal outlet if you forget to charge it at home. And then you claim rural America doesn’t have electricity or something? Not sure what point you were going for there. Batteries can be made with other material besides lithium, so don’t worry about technology not pushing forward. Also pretty weird how you fret about the limit supply of lithium while ignoring that fossil fuels are limited as well. Let’s go one step further by pointing out that fossil fuel extraction is extremely damaging to the environment and THEN it gets burned, leading to more environmental damage all while being non-renewable. If someone suggested this technology nowadays, it’d be laughed out of the boardroom. We just keep doing it because the infrastructure is in place but, with rising costs and slowing demand, will be phased out. > There's a reason the used car market is insane right now. People like gasoline. Or because used cars are about a third of the price (or less) than new and people don’t have money to drop of a new car that loses half its value the second you drive it off the lot.


snoozeflu

[just simply plug it into a normal outlet](https://i.imgur.com/E1ckkN1.png). This is never going to work out if every automaker uses their own type of proprietary charger plug. No one wants to carry around a trunk full of different plugs and adapters like they have to do [with Apple products](https://i.imgur.com/9Av0EAP.png).


Subzeb8

Why would you need a “trunk full of different plugs and adapters” when you’re only driving one car? Every car can use a regular outlet as well. Don’t shill for Big Oil.


IanArcad

The World Bank backs up everything OP is saying about mining: [The Growing Role of Minerals and Metals for a Low Carbon Future (English)](https://documents.worldbank.org/en/publication/documents-reports/documentdetail/207371500386458722/the-growing-role-of-minerals-and-metals-for-a-low-carbon-future) > the technologies assumed to populate the clean energy shift (wind, solar, hydrogen and electricity systems) are in fact significantly MORE material intensive in their composition than current traditional fossil-fuel-based energy supply systems > Our analysis in Chapter 2 indicates a rapid rise in demand for relevant technologies and corollary metals between reaching a 4DS and 2DS climate objective. __Relevant metals demand roughly doubles__ for wind and solar technologies, but the most significant upsurge occurs with energy battery storage technologies—__more than a 1000 percent rise for metals required__ for that particular clean energy option.


Believer109

>Kind of weird to cry over what mining lithium does to the Earth while ignoring the much worse impact of mining fossil fuels Modern fossil fuel mining has minimal environmental impact compared to lithium mining. This is an objective fact. > Then you complain about the lack of charging stations Not complaining, pointing out that they're completely impractical for many applications. Especially in rural areas because of the distance between points and extended travel times (aka you need bigger batteries, aka more lithium, and more charging stations). >And then you claim rural America doesn’t have electricity or something? I didn't claim anything like this. Now you're just being disingenuous. See above. >Also pretty weird how you fret about the limit supply of lithium while ignoring that fossil fuels are limited as well. It's not the fact that there is a finite limit. It's the fact that the lithium supply is many orders of magnitude too small to accomplish what fossil fuels currently accomplish and can continue to accomplish into the future. The supply of oil is **not** low, for the record. Next time bring facts.


Tango-454

Don't bother talking to that man, he is a troll


I_Looove_Pizza

Notice how you provided sources for your arguments but this troll won't provide any sources for theirs? Don't waste your time on users like that


Subzeb8

>Modern fossil fuel mining has minimal environmental impact compared to lithium mining. This is an objective fact. Source? >Next time bring facts. You broke my irony meter!


[deleted]

[удалено]


Believer109

Bring facts and sources. I did.


Subzeb8

The problem is they only “researched “ a couple points to support their preconceived notion.


Unfilter41

Source: just Google it


ThatAquariumKid

u/RemindMe 24 hours


PaperBoxPhone

You are assuming that lithium is what will be used in batteries in the future, we dont know what it will be.


Believer109

For right now lithium batteries are what electric vehicles are using, as well as most other consumer devices now. You can't bank on finding a replacement. That's not a solution for moving on from fossil fuels.


PaperBoxPhone

There already are replacements like fuels cells, but lithium is just the best right now. If we start to run out, they will find something new, or improve on the old. "Necessity is the mother of invention"


Subzeb8

So what are fossil fuel companies banking on to replace their limited supply?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Subzeb8

> Electric is the future, but you can feel free to fight it all you like. Correction: Electric is the *present* and future.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Believer109

>In the rural south...most rednecks are close minded This is what is wrong with you arrogant folk.


Not_C24H27N5O9_Free

Most Rednecks are not open to LGBTQ+ folk, not open to interracial marriage, not excepting of Muslims. There are exception but the majority do not


Fearless_Survey7497

in all fairness, basically everyone is intolerant of someone.


onlywanperogy

Most are not open to LGBTQ+/IR marriage. And I assume you meant "accepting" of Muslims; rational opposition is to Islam, not Muslims, and quite rightly. Are you unaware of the "accepting" nature of Islam? Try selling LGBT in Muslim majority countries, you likely end up dead.


Not_C24H27N5O9_Free

Islam is a good religion along with Christianity and Judaism.


Believer109

First of all, the term "redneck" is offensive. Who/what group of people are you even referring to? Second, so what? Muslims aren't **accepting** of the acronym people either. What does that have anything to do with anything?


Not_C24H27N5O9_Free

Redneck is dumb, southerners. Not all southerners, just the dumb ones. Also, I know muslims who support LGBTQ+ people


[deleted]

[удалено]


Believer109

Oh look some anti-American hate. We didn't invent pollution. You just come off as jealous and ungrateful with your moaning.


Stunning_Chest_1255

Well deserved hate. You didnt invent polution, so what? you sure as fuck promote it. And i dont come out as what you say. Ungrateful of what? Jealous of what? Being a poluting entitle asshole? Nah.


Believer109

Hate is rarely deserved. How come you aren't angry at China? The world's top polluter...? The US is one of the least polluting developed countries actually. Yet you seem to blame the US for everything. Like a child does. Jealous of the US being #1 in virtually everything that matters. Jealous you don't get to live in the US. Ungrateful for the freedoms you have as a result of US actions and ungrateful for all the science and technology that the US has developed and your country has benefited from with no R&D. Have a nice life, foreigner.


SomeLakitu

To be fair, the chinese population is about four times as big as the USA's. They would be the top polluters even if it's individuals polluted less than the USA's, so it's not a fair comparison.


Believer109

[Polluting the world's oceans](https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5abe4d6c70e8026873259030/1552845293923-HU28K8O2UCKTEKK888K6/ke17ZwdGBToddI8pDm48kJjBvpm9vGDmRBry8vP91MJZw-zPPgdn4jUwVcJE1ZvWQUxwkmyExglNqGp0IvTJZamWLI2zvYWH8K3-s_4yszcp2ryTI0HqTOaaUohrI8PIByOxrBRGUqo15uukdMRyVREDdlLL1fyr7u8C8AgdINIKMshLAGzx4R3EDFOm1kBS/chartoftheday_12211_the_countries_polluting_the_oceans_the_most_n.jpg) [More oceans](https://cdn1.i-scmp.com/sites/default/files/styles/1200x800/public/2014/12/30/backpage-infographic-1230-1.png?itok=yidu49Sd) [Pollution based deaths, running neck and neck with India](https://ceoworld.biz/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/10-countries-with-the-highest-number-of-pollution-related-deaths-in-the-world-infographic.png) [Coal pollution too](https://cms.qz.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/coal-polluters.jpg)


SomeLakitu

Wow. That is a *way* bigger difference than I expected. That's worrying.


Stunning_Chest_1255

Chinese arent in this thread, and even less to say "fuck it". You are just pull whataboutism and the blame is well deserved. You live in a world of lies you created to shield yourself from criticism. Minus Australia, no others western nation polutes more than the US, and again Australian arent here to say "fuck it" USA is 1st in only two things. Military spending and adult who believe angels are real. You arent first in freedom. You arent first in education. You arent innovation. You ate the nationalist propaganda fruit. Im glad im not American and i dont have anything to thanks you for. People like you are one of the biggest threat to mankind.


Believer109

> USA is 1st in only two things. lmfao Most preserved land. Most top-ranked universities. Most patents applied for and granted annually. Highest GDP. Largest total economy. Fastest rate of technological innovation, especially green technology. Best medical schools in the world. First in space technology by miles. And yes, first in military power and projection. Jealous much?


Stunning_Chest_1255

Not really because none of it is true. You barely have half the gdp of Luxembourg for example. But that was some nice display of fragility. Anyway, the world needs to get rid of people like you if it wants to survive and that will be my pleasure to watch you go extinct


Northern5

What's wrong with not living in a big city and being prepared? It's you who live in big cities that are going to die in the SHTF. I'm not American, I'm Canadian, but I don't get why you have so much hate for America. The U.S isn't the biggest polluter. The ecosystem has been on "the verge of collapse" for decades now, decades ago they said we had twelve years left. I'm not denying climate change but it's over-exaggerated. It is a problem but still. The climate has also been changing for billions of years, way before humans.


Stunning_Chest_1255

🤮 Climate change denier


Northern5

I'm not a climate change denier actually.


yee2446

that’s why we are developing GRAPHENE batteries. Takes much less material for equivalent size. Charges faster and discharges slower.


thymeraser

I think we should be looking at all technologies and using a mix of them. It is unlikely that one single technology is the answer for everything. Also, no discussion about saving the planet can really be held unless we also discuss population growth and control.


conordmcp

There are also not enough fossil fuels to go around. Why don’t you come up with a green alternative?


Elevator_Operators

[You're arguing against electric power for the same reasons why fossil fuels are *actually* being phased out.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwMPFDqyfrA) Look at the market and amount of service stations/range available for gasoline 100 years ago. We've made greater strides in infrastructure for quick charging now, than the petroleum industry did when it was the only option. Electric power is *objectively* better, being more efficient, magnitudes more reliable, more powerful (especially torque), and cheaper for the consumer in terms of servicing and operating cost. In 10 years we'll be exceeding the best IC has ever had to offer, with all of the above benefits.


Believer109

You ignored every argument in the OP regarding lithium supply limits and environmental damage and instead created your own argument that you felt like arguing. To make enough electric vehicles you need more and bigger batteries, for which you need more lithium. Fossil Fuels are **not** in any danger of running out. Lithium is. Try to pay attention.


Elevator_Operators

There are billions of dollars being invested annually in not only making current battery chemistry more efficient (and it has done so at a frankly amazing rate), but in finding alternatives. EVs are the future. Pretending they are not is frankly insane when the writing is so clearly on the wall. [edit - should also point out that lithium is the 25th most abundant element on Earth, and lithium cells are also increasingly more recyclable every year. We are not running out]


Believer109

> There are billions of dollars being invested annually ...and there has been annually for more than a decade. While it has improved batteries they actually end up using more lithium in the process.