Oil and the future

Skybird · 03-13-22, 11:01 AM

Nothing wrong in going electircal, I only strongly queston the strategy run by now to get maintain "electromobility", which imo is probaly the stupidiest way in which it could be done. I also question the strong trend for planned economy, and centralised command economy that comes dressed as "ecology friendly" and "electricty-supportive" policy.

We also should be honest, electromobility is not free of ecological costs either. Mining some of the base ressources needed for producing batteries and electric sysstem and cars and engines, is amongst the dirtiest businesses we run. The calculations the advertsising shows to convince sceptics of how much better it is, ecologoically, than gas-driven cars, are very questionable imo, and to say they do not convince me would be an understatement.

You want to reduce mankind's ecological footprint it leaves on the planet? Start with realising that there are too man consumers of thigns and stuff.

WE ARE TOO MANY (tm).

A global population not bigger than 1 to 1.5 billion, maximum. Not before then does it make sense to talk about real longterm strategies. 8 Billion? 12? 14 billion? Forget it.

03-13-22, 11:01 AM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,778 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Nothing wrong in going electircal, I only strongly queston the strategy run by now to get maintain "electromobility", which imo is probaly the stupidiest way in which it could be done. I also question the strong trend for planned economy, and centralised command economy that comes dressed as "ecology friendly" and "electricty-supportive" policy. We also should be honest, electromobility is not free of ecological costs either. Mining some of the base ressources needed for producing batteries and electric sysstem and cars and engines, is amongst the dirtiest businesses we run. The calculations the advertsising shows to convince sceptics of how much better it is, ecologoically, than gas-driven cars, are very questionable imo, and to say they do not convince me would be an understatement. You want to reduce mankind's ecological footprint it leaves on the planet? Start with realising that there are too man consumers of thigns and stuff. WE ARE TOO MANY (tm). A global population not bigger than 1 to 1.5 billion, maximum. Not before then does it make sense to talk about real longterm strategies. 8 Billion? 12? 14 billion? *Forget it.* __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.