NASA’s incredible new solid-state battery pushes the boundaries of energy storage: ‘This could revolutionize air travel’::“We’re starting to approach this new frontier of battery research."

  • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do you have a source for thinking that over the lifespan of the vehicle, that an EV is worse for the environment than a gasoline powered vehicle? Because I have multiple studies referenced in this article from the EPA stating the exact opposite.

    The advantage of using an electric powertrain over any other is that the energy can be produced by any source of energy. Yes, right now, a lot of that’s coming from coal and natural gas, but even then, those power plants are WAY more efficient than the gas engines in cars and produce FAR less greenhouse gases source. Also, as countries transition from coal and gas to solar, wind, geothermal, and most critically and hopefully nuclear, the way the energy makes it from the earth to our cars can remain the same: the power grid.

    Also, if everyone buys used cars, then that’ll solve the problem? Where do you think used cars come from? You think we should just keep making ICE vehicles and burning shit when we have plenty of new technologies which are being developed at breakneck pace that could actually make a huge difference in reducing emissions?

      • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t give a shit what the founder of Greenpeace or someone who has published books thinks. I care about scientific studies. I’ll be here to review them if/when you care to actually contribute to this conversation with verifiable facts, rather than just things you remember.

          • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            In general, sure, books can be great. When it comes to nonfiction, they need to be based on repeatable science (AKA studies). I don’t think it’s a huge ask to bring some facts to a conversation about science.

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Patrick Moore denies climate change so he has zero credibility. Alex Epstein is a philosophy and computer science major. Neither of those people have credibility in the topic. I would suggest you find some others who have at least an inkling of credibility.

          • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            There is no trust required in science. That’s the whole point of a study in that it lays out the methods used so others can replicate the methods to see if they arrive at the same conclusion.

            Shocking (not really) that you’re willing to listen to these two authors who aren’t doing studies in this field and by your own admission, one of which just “been to the arctic,” as if that makes them credible.

            Nobody’s calling you a heretic here; we’re encouraging you to provide peer-reviewed studies that refute the claims we’re making which are backed up by peer-reviewed studies. It’s an apples to apples conversation that you’re trying to force oranges into.

            Also, I was raised a Christian and learned to see through the bullshit being fed to me because I learned to read studies and understand they’re the only way to know what’s actually true. We can only build upon testable, repeatable science.

            I strongly disagree with your assertion that the earth will be around just like it is for a long time. We’re seeing climate changes come along A LOT sooner than predicted even just a decade ago. This is no time to be a conservative when it comes to the climate.

      • Cubes@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The same Patrick Moore who thinks that it’s okay to drink weed killer? Leaving aside his insane stances on climate change, the guy is obviously a crackpot and it’s wild that he is taken seriously by anyone.