2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

5555555555555555555

Without oil based plastic your precious smartphones and computers would not exist.

You don't understand the topic at all. Smartphones and computers NEED lithium, THIS PART CAN NOT be replaced by fossil. 

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

5555555555555555555

Without oil based plastic your precious smartphones and computers would not exist.

Nobody on the planet has said to stop using oil. Just to stop burning it.

 

15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

5555555555555555555

Without oil based plastic your precious smartphones and computers would not exist.

Ever heard of bioplastic? Besides non oil, bioplastic requires less energy than conventional oil based plastic. Produce less carbon dioxide during production. Save the world mate.

19 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Fossil can't replace Lithium, in smartphones and computers. Seemingly you don't understand this.

Seemingly you don’t understand that without fossil, your luxury lifestyle would be that of handmade transportation wooden vehicles, wooden communication bullhorn devices and a lot of walking and relying on your commodities to be delivered by horseback. With eight billion people on the planet, realistically, achieving a carbon neutral planet is at least 300 years. The utopia delusional dream is way premature and the only result is a dystopian quagmire. 

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

Ever heard of bioplastic? Besides non oil, bioplastic requires less energy than conventional oil based plastic. Produce less carbon dioxide during production. Save the world mate.

I think plastic needs to be banned for most cases anyway. The amount of plastic produced should be minimal and virtually absent for home consumer use.

1 minute ago, novacova said:

Seemingly you don’t understand that without fossil, your luxury lifestyle would be that of handmade transportation wooden vehicles, wooden communication bullhorn devices and a lot of walking and relying on your commodities to be delivered by horseback. With eight billion people on the planet, realistically, achieving a carbon neutral planet is at least 300 years. The utopia delusional dream is way premature and the only result is a dystopian quagmire. 

What you are suggesting is that because oil still has uses, removing 99% of the problem is pointless.

35 minutes ago, novacova said:

Seemingly you don’t understand that without fossil, your luxury lifestyle would be that of handmade transportation wooden vehicles, wooden communication bullhorn devices and a lot of walking and relying on your commodities to be delivered by horseback. With eight billion people on the planet, realistically, achieving a carbon neutral planet is at least 300 years. The utopia delusional dream is way premature and the only result is a dystopian quagmire. 

You are of topic, this is about a lithium find which is used by smartphones and computers.

59 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

You don't understand the topic at all. Smartphones and computers NEED lithium, THIS PART CAN NOT be replaced by fossil. 

They also need plastic. That part can not be replaced by lithium.

 

8 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

You are of topic, this is about a lithium find which is used by smartphones and computers.

Entirely on topic IMO. Without fossil fuel mankind would never have been able to invent smart phones or computers.

IMO everything we have now is reliant on oil to make and transport.

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

They also need plastic. That part can not be replaced by lithium.

 

The article is NOT about a plastic find. Yeez, no sense to communicate with you. 

Just now, FritsSikkink said:

The article is NOT about a plastic find. Yeez, no sense to communicate with you. 

Have a nice day.

On 9/18/2023 at 8:23 PM, placeholder said:

YSE Study Finds Electric Vehicles Provide Lower Carbon Emissions Through Additional Channels

With new major spending packages investing billions of dollars in electric vehicles in the U.S., some analysts have raised concerns over how green the electric vehicle industry actually is, focusing particularly on indirect emissions caused within the supply chains of the vehicle components and the fuels used to power electricity that charges the vehicles.

But a recent study from the Yale School of the Environment published in Nature Communications found that the total indirect emissions from electric vehicles pale in comparison to the indirect emissions from fossil fuel-powered vehicles. This is in addition to the direct emissions from combusting fossil fuels — either at the tailpipe for conventional vehicles or at the power plant smokestack for electricity generation — showing electric vehicles have a clear advantage emissions-wise over conventional vehicles.

https://environment.yale.edu/news/article/yse-study-finds-electric-vehicles-provide-lower-carbon-emissions-through-additional

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-27247-y

You didn’t read or didn’t comprehend the article of projection study. But you do conflate way to the left of things. Here are some facts to chew on, then predictably you’ll scrounge for any conflated partial truth and rearrange the facts, as usual and expected.

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367285651_Lifecycle_carbon_footprint_comparison_between_internal_combustion_engine_versus_electric_transit_vehicle_A_case_study_in_the_US

 

So after crunching the numbers it’s about 139000km before a ev becomes carbon neutral. Over all approximately 7% decrease in carbon emissions of a ev from cradle to grave. On the grand scale of things barely a dent at the cost of economic plundering. 

On 9/18/2023 at 8:19 PM, placeholder said:

Care to share your source for that claim? This isn't the fiction forum.

 

"Any alleged factual claims must be supported by a valid link to an approved credible source."

https://aseannow.com/forum/158-world-news/

Really? While you constantly posted inaccuracies and retrofitted nonsense, get off it and show us some objectivity 

On 9/15/2023 at 10:18 AM, placeholder said:

It's also a matter of comparative harm. What does more harm? Extracting lithium or extracting fossil fuels? Fossil fuels do harm twice. First in their extraction and then in their combustion. And their combustion is harmful both to human health and in it's contribution to climate change. Lithium for EVs is now recyclable. What's more, the quality of recycled lithium carbonate is actually superior to the chemical when used for the first time.

In addition to which, new less harmful ways of extracting lithium are being developed.

The harm is economic plunder imposed on the poorest on earth for a minuscule 7% difference of emissions, do you really want people to suffer economically for your pseudo feel good politics? Get real and wake up.

6 hours ago, khunJam said:

The harm is economic plunder imposed on the poorest on earth for a minuscule 7% difference of emissions, do you really want people to suffer economically for your pseudo feel good politics? Get real and wake up.

I'm sure you wouldn't have offered that 7% if you didn't have facts to back that up. What's your source for that claim?