Sonori

Personally, i’d recommend Perun’s excellent video on the topic of your curious on the present state of nuclear deterrence, though it is several months old at this point.

I feel like the primary problem here is just that detecting pedestrians and figuring out how they are going to is actually one of thouse problems that is just very hard for computers. Obviously it’s not impossible to do at all, but it is difficult to do reliably, especially once one considers the risks of false positives as well as negatives.

It is definitely concerning though that these systems are being pushed and marketed beyond their actual capabilities though. Some proper truth in advertising law might actually help here, and of course in an ideal world this would be an open source project with all the major automakers and academics contributing.

Key word was cheaply, current costs if synthetic fuels are two to four times the current market rate at best, not available to the public, and heavily limited in their inability to scale within the necessary timeframe.

Any vehicle’s metal components can be scraped and recycled, and if your talking about component reuse EVs have far, far fewer consumable parts as compared to ICEs. While you can rebuild an engine with all new consumables, we’ve also been rewiring motors for just as long, and indeed the motor has far fewer wear items that require a rebuild in the first place. Indeed given the thriving conversation space and its demand for EV parts, they are often more recycled than all but classic models of ICE. EV batteries have proven trivial to recycle, and the frame and such are practically identical to ICE versions.

The majority of plastics are single use and a landfilled, and are just as prevalent in ICE’s as EVs.

The higher rate of write offs for minor incidents is consistent across many new vehicles, and is more a case of insurers lacking a large dataset from which to draw stats from than any inherent technological factor.

We can cheaply recycle gasoline now?

Not exclusively, but unfortunately in North America a lot of marketing has been put into maximum range, and so lithium iron phosphate is still in the minority of market volume becuse of the thirty percent volume penalty. Things are better in China with the larger focus on budget options, and they even have a sodium vehicle now on the market, but to my knowledge lithium cobalt still makes up the majority of North American EVs, in volume sold if not in models.

Who need the Saudi’s when Canada is the fifth largest oil producer in the world and shares the majority of its infrastructure with first place just down south.

I’d argue that the techs been here for at least a decade. In modern production EVs the only negatives are that while on a road trip you have to stop every two and a half hours for a whole twenty minutes and arguably price, through the latter is mostly just a North American thing. Better a minor inconvenience now than a perfect solution after the last coral dies.

As for mining, Australia’s lithium mines arn’t much different than any other major mines, much less the drilling and fracking needed to supply the constant consumption of gasoline and diesel vehicles.

As much as trollybuses and overhead electric trains are definitely the best solution for urban and suburban transportation, where they can and do bear cars even from a speed, comfort, and convenience standpoint, we can’t reasonably expect to relocate everyone in Canada to urban areas, and even if we did you would still need hundreds of thousands to millions of vehicles for transport, delivery, emergency, etc.

Even the small “carless” villages of Switzerland still need custom small electric vehicles, and Canada requires far longer ranges than small villages that were never connected to the road network.

As long as any of that holds true, your going to need smaller than bus vehicles, and battery electric remand the best option, and thusly I would argue that they are indeed a climate solution. Not the solution, but a solution. We could never replace what has been the foundation of the industrial world with a single alternative. There is simply too much that would need to be covered for a one size fits all solution.

Actually it seems to be one of the more talked about aspects, right after the local environmental costs of mining in some poorer countries, dispite being one of the easiest to solve.

You drop EV batteries into a dielectric bath industrial crusher and get thousands of dollars of absurdly high grade lithium-cobalt ore out of it. While there are hard questions that industry has not put much public press into answering, especially when it comes to environmental concerns, in this case the reason is that it’s actually pretty trivial to deal with.

Given that lead acid batteries have a ninety seven percent capture rate dispite only being worth a few dozen dollars at most, we can expect higher rates with the far more valuable EV batteries. Lithium is infinitely recyclable after all, and for all the failings of the free market when it comes to keeping personal electronic’s batteries out of landfills I doubt you need much overarching regulation to get people to take the five to seven thousand dollar payout from recycling in this case.

The reason we don’t see high recycling rates currently in the space is that despite worries that the batteries would degrade to the point of uselessness after a few short years, the vast majority of EVs are still on the road and looking to have a longer average lifespan than gasoline vehicles. On top of that there are a lot of applications which want the reuse them and there is a reason that reduce, reuse, recycle are in that order.

And of course, any talk of the environmental impacts of EVs has to be caveated by the fact that 60 to 70 percent of an EVs emissions cost comes from the power grid itself, which is rapidly changing as renewables push out more expensive coal and natural gas. Of the remainder, most of it is in mining the raw material for the battery itself, which as mentioned only has to be paid once before it is recycled for quite potentially forever.

Unlike a gas car which on average produces more than twice their weight in co2 every single year it’s on the road, an EVs emissions break even after only two to four years, after which that car and its future descendants will continue to just go mile after mile without contributing to gobal environmental collapse.

While things like more of Vancouver’s trolleybus network would obviously be best, given the population densities involved as well as the housing shortage we’re not going to be able to replace all cars in North America on the timelines the laws of physics demand we meet, and it’s important to keep that in mind when discussing it.