Beyond-Time

Beyond-Time t1_jegq5ku wrote

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/24/1123564599/chile-lithium-mining-atacama-desert

This area is largely uninhabitable for people, has few wildlife (note: not 0) and is not suitable for growing crops or housing any reserves. It's about as environmentally friendly as it gets. Now, if you consider evaporating water off of brine in a high altitude, uninhabitable desert as environmentally destructive, and would use the same term for destroying forests with much bio-diversity, than the term is meaningless.

Point being, this is where a large chunk of the worlds lithium comes from and it's a desert, and I would consider it non-destructive.

7

Beyond-Time t1_jeeuqro wrote

In their current state, you aren't pulling any significant amount of weight any significant distance in any reasonable time with that. Not to knock EV bikes, I think they're great. But this isn't that move away from lithium that other other guy spoke about. If this process is as good as the article states it to be, then we might never really need to move away from lithium for a very long time.

2

Beyond-Time t1_j9sn1vm wrote

23

Beyond-Time t1_j9ag2cv wrote

California, due to their climate, is the perfect place to grow many crops. The amount of food produced there is unbelievable, and the water is important in that respect. I'm sure there's much waste but most people who want to divert water away from California simply don't understand the vast amount of the country's food that is produced there. 75% of Arizona shouldn't exist if you want to talk about water use.

12

Beyond-Time t1_j970pgd wrote

Perhaps. I've grown tired of every revolutionary technology disappearing because it's too expensive, material intense, or impractical. I tend to forget that yes, some do, in fact, make it into production devices.

−1

Beyond-Time t1_j96i0m5 wrote

155

Beyond-Time t1_j20haig wrote

"I don't condone hitting as a means of discipline as there are better ways to get your point across"

Who are you trying to fool? Hitting is not an answer to unruly children, and they don't always listen to reason. Why are you acting blind to my post?

4

Beyond-Time t1_j1zjsna wrote

It's clear you don't have children. I don't condone hitting as a means of discipline as there are more effective ways of getting your point across. If you think all kids can just be told, or understand reason, you are way off the mark. Rude awakening when/if you do end up having kids.

−12

Beyond-Time t1_ispcbhe wrote

It is a non-issue. The vaults currently in service have had little to no issue containing the waste, simple as. This is indisputable, no matter how much you drink the BP/Shale kool-aid. Now, when you compare the relative effects of nuclear waste storage and ash pits and CO2 release from fossil fuels, you'd probably not comment on the topic again. Nuclear is the way forward.

1

Beyond-Time t1_isokwf0 wrote

Nuclear waste storage is a non-issue. I am impressed how well the oil and natural gas companies have made people hate nuclear when it is quite literally the best base-load, 0 carbon emission energy we can get.

5