Asklemmy

43958 readers

1066 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

369

"If you tell a lie big enough and tell it frequently enough, people will eventually come to believe it". What is an example of this happening today? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 11 months ago by Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

541 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I would really rather that these were actual examples, and not conspiracy theories. We all have our own unsubstantiated ideas about what shadowy no-gooders are doing, but I'd rather hear about things that are actually happening.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

To get anywhere close to the grid being considered decarbonised (I'm ignoring carbon capture here because that's not going to happen at any meaningful scale unless we geoengineer shit) all of the materials, all of the manufacturing and all of the building and maintenance would have to be run on renewable energy. Like from the mines of Australia over to all of the plants in china to assembly, for every component.

And to have it make any difference at all, you have to do it within the next 30 or so years. And then there's still the tyres, also you gotta do the entire shit again for the very climate friendly processing of building roads that withstand cars for give or take a season, extra challenge mode due to the increased weight of EVs. And also then there's still the tyres.

hopefully the battery tech and infrastructure investments will help pave the way to better solutions.

We've already got those, it's called trains and bicycles, former have been EVs for like a century

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

While I understand that, you've also described the supply chain of building an ICE vehicle, extracting and refining fuel, transporting fuel etc.
Even if the EV suppli chain is currently terrible, that's because regulations haven't caught up yet. It was the same with oil extraction, "why pipe it when you can just have a river of crude oil" mentality. And hopefully regulations are faster to be enforced.
Anyway, if the end result of a given supply chain is something that goes on to produce less pollution, then that is progress.

And yes, public transport is always going to be better. Especially if they aren't ICE.
Even EV mopeds are great. And the amount of electric bicycles I've seen going around is encouraging.

I agree EVs aren't going to save the planet. But they are progress, and you can't convince me that we should continue using fossil fuels for personal transport.

[–] 7bicycles@hexbear.net 1 points 11 months ago

I'm not arguing pro ICE cars over EV cars, I'm arguing against cars, be they EV or ICE