Are We Knowingly Living a Lie?

[Instructor]

Obviously, you have never been to an iron ore mine or steel mill.
The same can be said for Lithium, but there appears to be So much less of it to mine. Incredibly nasty stuff to mine and process.

True.

 

[Instructor]

I give it two more pages, if the thread doesn’t lose steam by then. If it hasn’t become a train wreck by that point I will be sincerely impressed. Heck, a significant portion of the American population won’t admit climate change is a real thing because of politics.

It’s an interesting topic. Best of luck.

Donald Trump, Joe Biden, blah blah blah blah blah.... LOL...

 

[Steve]

Then I think we should pick a day, shoot all the lawyers and politicians, then sit around a campfire smoking doobies and figure it out.

I’ll bring the marshmallows. Somebody bring beer.

I'll dust off the Sex Pistols vinyl, so we have some appropriate music.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Here in the U.K. we’re suffering from floods with many people’s lives being devastated as their homes flood with sewage-tainted water. And yet building contractors continue to plan housing estates on river flood planes or areas that are likely to become flood planes as rainfall increases. Knowing this, families still buy these doomed properties. Why can’t we build houses on ’stilts‘ like the do in other countries?

Is it the, ‘well it won’t happen to me’ phenomenon or are people just deluded?

See my previous comment that most humans are booger-eatin' morons. They touch wet paint when there is a wet paint sign. They touch electric fences to see if they're energized. If you put a photo of a diseased human lung on a pack of cigarettes, they compare notes to see who got the most disturbing photo on theirs.

 

[Steve]

True.

Finding other, better technologies and a sincere emphasis on recycling the lithium batteries will be pretty important. We've done a bad job so far, but I'm somewhat optimistic about where things are headed. As long as there's money in it, there's incentive to continue to innovate.

New advances in recycling of lithium-ion batteries

Learn about the latest advancements in lithium-ion battery recycling technology in this article. Discover a new approach for direct recycling that could make it possible to repair and reuse depleted batteries at a lower cost. Understand the challenges still facing the industry and the potential...

www.cas.org

 

[Steve]

See my previous comment that most humans are booger-eatin' morons. They touch wet paint when there is a wet paint sign. They touch electric fences to see if they're energized. If you put a photo of a diseased human lung on a pack of cigarettes, they compare notes to see who got the most disturbing photo on theirs.

I think that some humans are booger-eatin' morons, but not most. My complete WAG would be more like 1/3rd of humans are idiots.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I think that some humans are booger-eatin' morons, but not most. My complete WAG would be more like 1/3rd of humans are idiots.

You're an optimist. I am not.

 

[HighKick]

AFinding other, better technologies and a sincere emphasis on recycling the lithium batteries will be pretty important. We've done a bad job so far, but I'm somewhat optimistic about where things are headed. As long as there's money in it, there's incentive to continue to innovate.

New advances in recycling of lithium-ion batteries

Learn about the latest advancements in lithium-ion battery recycling technology in this article. Discover a new approach for direct recycling that could make it possible to repair and reuse depleted batteries at a lower cost. Understand the challenges still facing the industry and the potential...

www.cas.org

Much of the irony here is the recycling process relies heavily on years old technology. And it doesn't appear this will change.

 

[Steve]

Much of the irony here is the recycling process relies heavily on years old technology. And it doesn't appear this will change.

"And it doesn't appear this will change." Is that just pessimism, or can you share some more about why you think things aren't likely to change? Don't get me wrong, I think it's fair to say that there needs to be a carrot and stick approach to move corporations and governments in the right direction. But EVs and the global demand for LI batteries has exploded, and so far the drive in innovation has been to increase performance and capacity of the batteries... not so much on longevity or recycling. From what I've read, it actually does appear that the lack of past momentum with regards to recycling is improving.

https://www.cas.org/sites/default/files/documents/%7B653f1a27-cad6-41ad-b065-c6e0bfb38ebf%7D_CASGENENGWHP100560220101-LIB_Recycling-White-Paper.pdf

 

[HighKick]

"And it doesn't appear this will change." Is that just pessimism? I think it's fair to say that there needs to be a carrot and stick approach to move corporations and governments in the right direction, but from what I've read, it actually does appear that the lack of past momentum is improving.

https://www.cas.org/sites/default/files/documents/%7B653f1a27-cad6-41ad-b065-c6e0bfb38ebf%7D_CASGENENGWHP100560220101-LIB_Recycling-White-Paper.pdf

You could say I am pessimistic or more accurately a sceptic. Lithium is the currently prescribed technology. It is hot and trendy, kind of the way wind and solar was. The big difference is the manufacturers are pushing the technology instead of government and investors. This is encouraging.
It appears there are other technologies that are much cleaner and closer to a true zero impact solution, if the technology can be figured out. That may not be in our lifetime but I do feel it will be a game changer, moving away from battery technology. And I think the shift happen in a much shorter window of time compared to the inception of the first internal combustion engines to widespread battery usage.

 

[Steve]

You could say I am pessimistic or more accurately a sceptic. Lithium is the currently prescribed technology. It is hot and trendy, kind of the way wind and solar was.

Wind, solar, and hydroelectric are all still very viable ways to produce electricity. The challenge with these vs something like coal is that wind, solar, and hydro power aren't as responsive to our immediate needs. What I mean is, if you need more electricity to meet high demand in the evening when most people are at home using their electricity, you can just burn more coal to produce more energy. But you can't do that with wind... the wind blows when it blows, and the sun shines when it shines.

The solution is energy storage... figuring out ways to throttle the energy that is produced other than by burning coal. The pickle here is that the most obvious way to do that is by using LI batteries.

So, the value of clean energy is, in part, dependent on continued innovation in energy storage... producing it while demand is low, and storing it so that it can be consumed later, when demand is high.

The big difference is the manufacturers are pushing the technology instead of government and investors. This is encouraging.
It appears there are other technologies that are much cleaner and closer to a true zero impact solution, if the technology can be figured out. That may not be in our lifetime but I do feel it will be a game changer, moving away from battery technology. And I think the shift happen in a much shorter window of time compared to the inception of the first internal combustion engines to widespread battery usage.

Manufacturers' incentive is monetary. I agree that this is encouraging... and if you read the white paper I linked to, they also acknowledge the importance of some kind of economic incentive. But historically, government plays a huge role in innovation, through subsidies and regulatory oversight... the carrot and the stick.

And where we can agree is that LI batteries aren't a long term, indefinite solution. They are a stop gap, because ultimately, they still rely on a non-renewable resource. We're just trading coal and oil for lithium and other heavy metals. But private industry won't go there themselves unless there's a buck to be made... and we can trust them to go only as far as is in the best interest of their bottom line.

 

[Instructor]

Wind, solar, and hydroelectric are all still very viable ways to produce electricity. The challenge with these vs something like coal is that wind, solar, and hydro power aren't as responsive to our immediate needs. What I mean is, if you need more electricity to meet high demand in the evening when most people are at home using their electricity, you can just burn more coal to produce more energy. But you can't do that with wind... the wind blows when it blows, and the sun shines when it shines.

The solution is energy storage... figuring out ways to throttle the energy that is produced other than by burning coal. The pickle here is that the most obvious way to do that is by using LI batteries.

So, the value of clean energy is, in part, dependent on continued innovation in energy storage... producing it while demand is low, and storing it so that it can be consumed later, when demand is high.



Manufacturers' incentive is monetary. I agree that this is encouraging... and if you read the white paper I linked to, they also acknowledge the importance of some kind of economic incentive. But historically, government plays a huge role in innovation, through subsidies and regulatory oversight... the carrot and the stick.

And where we can agree is that LI batteries aren't a long term, indefinite solution. They are a stop gap, because ultimately, they still rely on a non-renewable resource. We're just trading coal and oil for lithium and other heavy metals. But private industry won't go there themselves unless there's a buck to be made... and we can trust them to go only as far as is in the best interest of their bottom line.

The rapid improvement of battery technology is a great prospect for future of mankind. Once they can make stable, quick charging, easily recyclable batteries that do not end up in landfills we will make a quantum leap forward globally. It's a technical problem and humans are good at technical problems. Given time and motivation we tend to solve them. I believe the motivation is there.

 

[Gyakuto]

I think that some humans are booger-eatin' morons, but not most. My complete WAG would be more like 1/3rd of humans are idiots.

There are very few complete idiots, most are stupid in specific aspects: racists, flat earthers, anthropomorphic climate change deniers, alien abductees, conspiracy theory believers, criminals, religious zealots etc. But outwith these area they appear and function completely normally.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

There are very few complete idiots, most are stupid in specific aspects: racists, flat earthers, anthropomorphic climate change deniers, alien abductees, conspiracy theory believers, criminals, religious zealots etc. But outwith these area they appear and function completely normally.

I will go along with that. Let me say that in my opinion, very few human beings prioritize the survival of the species over their own short-sighted and selfish desires. All creatures strive to survive. But humans are capable of understanding a direct threat to the survival of our species and intentionally choosing not to take action.

I quite honestly believe that if we were to discover a comet heading right for us, guaranteed to wipe out human life on the planet, and we had years of advance notice, we'd deny it existed, deny it could hurt us, argue over methods of addressing it, obfuscate to cause blame to be placed on others, insist it was the will of a superior being, tell lies to each other about how much we cared about the problem whilst collecting money from groups against doing that very thing, try to figure out ways to make money or have sex based on manipulating the facts, kick the can down the road, and ultimately blame each other as we died. We're stupid that way. Viciously stupid. Aggressively stupid. Stupidly stupid. We absolutely deserve what we have coming. And in your heart of hearts, you know it's true.

 

[Gyakuto]

In the South West of Britain (considered the most lovely part of the U.K. 🤔…’a turd rolled in glitter’) House building companies are protesting and threatening legal action because they are being made to pay to liberate and maintain the equivalent area of land elsewhere plus 10%. They can pay farmers to do this for them. They are having to minimise the impact of their building on rivers streams etc with regards sewage and silt but doing so half-heartedly.

This is reluctant green washing and points to the attitudes our industries have towards reducing environmental impact of their business.

 

[Gyakuto]

I will go along with that. Let me say that in my opinion, very few human beings prioritize the survival of the species over their own short-sighted and selfish desires. All creatures strive to survive. But humans are capable of understanding a direct threat to the survival of our species and intentionally choosing not to take action.

I quite honestly believe that if we were to discover a comet heading right for us, guaranteed to wipe out human life on the planet, and we had years of advance notice, we'd deny it existed, deny it could hurt us, argue over methods of addressing it, obfuscate to cause blame to be placed on others, insist it was the will of a superior being, tell lies to each other about how much we cared about the problem whilst collecting money from groups against doing that very thing, try to figure out ways to make money or have sex based on manipulating the facts, kick the can down the road, and ultimately blame each other as we died. We're stupid that way. Viciously stupid. Aggressively stupid. Stupidly stupid. We absolutely deserve what we have coming. And in your heart of hearts, you know it's true.

View attachment 30575

Haven’t you seen the unexpectedly excellent Netflix film, ‘Don’t Look Up’?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Haven’t you seen the unexpectedly excellent Netflix film, ‘Don’t Look Up’?

No, but I've heard of it. I don't watch TV. Haven't for decades now.

 

[isshinryuronin]

a significant portion of the American population won’t admit climate change is a real thing because of politics.

Climate change has been happening for a billion years or more. Over the recent past millions several episodes of glacial ice ages have come and gone. The main question is if humans are superimposing additional stimuli on this natural cycle in any meaningful way. When talking of cycles of 10 to 50 thousand years, one must be cautious when making claims based on just a century or two of industrialization.

 

[Gyakuto]

No, but I've heard of it. I don't watch TV. Haven't for decades now.

Oh Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill! Some of the weirdest people I know don't watch TV and thus aren’t engaging in social comparison and their ideas become skewed. Please don’t tell me you watch Youtube clips instead! I always watch a ‘news opinion‘ programme where the public can phone in on topical subjects. I do this to monitor the attitudes and ideas of the ‘average Joe’ following Sun Tsu’s advice to ‘know the enemy’.

Get yourself a telly and start watching ‘Love Island‘ and ‘Rupaul’s Drag Race’.

 

[geezer]

Thanos was way too soft. What if we knocked the world population down to about a quarter of billion. Heck that's more than we had during the height of the Roman Empire. Then we'd have plenty of resources, could maintain a highly cultured civilization and our impact on the environment would be far less so the natural world could thrive.

I'll do my part. Next pandemic, I'm not wearing a mask!