• 0 Posts
  • 89 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: October 19th, 2023

help-circle
  • Well that’s not the type of emotional argument that I was referring to lol. I don’t know why you would think I’m talking about myself. I don’t own a car.

    I’m just trying to understand others that don’t live like me in order to find the necessary compromises. Because that’s what needs to happen in a democracy.

    I understand that you’re desperate but not much good will come out of that emotion. It’s not that people are evil and care about nothing and that this is the reason why they don’t act in a meaningful way. This line of thinking is just plain wrong for the vast majority of the population. Yes, people are also lazy but they also have many many everyday problems and can’t make changing their lifestyle right here right now their top priority. Yes we have to fight for changes, in the media, on the policy level and also make the good alternatives a good deal to choose. But that won’t happen with accusations and self-righteousness, I’m sorry.


  • You can try to teach people what a good consumption decision is w.r.t. global change. But it won’t work in 99% of cases. People are often emotionally attached to their way of living and many have tied a part of their identity to it.

    I don’t care about what counts as excuses because there is no ethical consumption in capitalism. What I care about first and foremost is reducing GHG emissions effectively, within the system that we’re currently living in. And for everything else you have to offer people real alternatives if you want them to change their behaviour. And changing that behaviour will not come true by only making factual arguments but by understanding people’s emotions and identities and accounting for those in your argument. It’s clear that people in rural communities (and a large share of the population lives there) will drive cars for many years to come and these cars have to be EVs.


  • Achso. Und ein Protest gegen eine E-Auto-Fabrik statt gegen die Verbrenner-Produktion bei Porsche oder Audi ist natürlich gar nicht selbstgerecht und naiv?

    Klar ist das allein nicht die ultimative Lösung, aber EVs werden einfach benötigt. Eine auto-zentrische Infrastruktur baut man nicht von heute auf morgen um. Wo sind denn die Lösungen der Demonstrierenden? Wie stellen die sich das vor inh. 10 Jahre die Kapazität des Bahnsystems zu verdoppeln? Des ÖPNV? Viele Menschen sind einfach auf ein Auto angewiesen und werden es noch lange sein. 58% der Bevölkerung wohnen in Städten unter 50k Einwohner, sprich: In der Provinz. Da wird es immer Anwendungsfälle für Individualverkehr geben und bis man den öffentlichen Verkehr flächendeckend als Alternative anpreisen kann (das also kein persönliches Opfer ist, weil man doppelt so lang unterwegs ist) wird noch viel Wasser den Rhein runterfließen. EVs werden einfach benötigt, sie passen perfekt zur Dekarbonisierung unseres Stromsystems, können als dezentrale Speicher genutzt werden und reduzieren die GHG Emissionen effektiv.

    Also ja: Natürlich ist der Gedanke hinter diesem Protest unterkomplex.



  • Well it’s baffling to me to have “pollution” as the first point of that list. It’s just beyond my comprehension how one could state that a non-combustion car doesn’t help with pollution problems. Yes alright, there’s still microplastics… But hey, please visit a city like Beijing and tell me again that EVs don’t combat pollution on a massive scale.

    It’s nice to be critical and yes, cars are shit for our society. Nevertheless our society has been built around them and people will drive cars. They might do so less in 50 years but right here right now with the way society is organised EVs do definitely play an important part in reducing emissions. Change takes time. And people like the ones protesting against the Gigafactory prefer to ignore this context. To me this line of thinking is naive to say the least and can also be seen as self-righteous and delusional by those for whom no alternative is available now. Lecturing people about their lifestyle is not going to change anything.














  • Stupid at this point in humanity’s history? Why should it be stupid to make it cheaper to fly payloads into space when we have unprecedented demand for renewable energy? Without interference of the atmosphere we could harvest solar energy much more efficiently and reliably.

    We are likely to see a space elevator build in 100 years and it will be a good thing for humanity. For example we’ll be able to remove nuclear waste from earth and send it away for good with negligible costs.

    These are just two economic examples. From a scientific perspective cheap space flight is valuable because it enables a lot of advances, like the next generation of space telescopes, working as interferometers without atmospheric disturbances.

    So I think it’s everything but stupid for humanity to expand it’s space operations if this is accompanied by meaningful regulations. The latter of course will require a lot of energy to achieve.