Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Plugin Hybrids not as clean as claimed.

Greenpeace meanwhile describes PHEVs as "the car industry's wolf in sheep's clothing".

"They may seem a much more environmentally friendly choice," says Rebecca Newsom, the pressure group's head of politics, "but false claims of lower emissions are a ploy by car manufacturers to go on producing SUVs and petrol and diesel engines."

Driver behaviour
Transport and Environment's analysis says a key problem with plug-in hybrids is that so many owners rarely actually charge their cars, meaning they rely on the petrol or diesel engine.

Another is that many plug-in hybrid models include design features that automatically turn on the petrol/diesel engine at start-up on a cold day, or will kick in that engine if driver accelerates hard.

Plug-in hybrids are a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'
 
The climate crisis is a national security threat to the US. We already see the effects | Sherri Goodman and Kate Guy

Climate change is not a distant problem for future generations to worry about. Instead, the dangers of climate change are touching the lives of more Americans with each passing day. As the historic wildfires, hurricanes, floods, heatwaves and storms hitting the country this summer demonstrate, these crises are getting more frequent and more intense as the global temperature rises. Scientists tell us that the longer we delay transitioning to a clean, renewable economy, the more intense the impacts and the closer we come to reaching dangerous climate tipping points.
 
Scientists tell us that the longer we delay transitioning to a clean, renewable economy, the more intense the impacts and the closer we come to reaching dangerous climate tipping points.
To use the term of the day, that is 'under-played.'

Tipping points are already dialed in. Extreme events are already dialed in. Worsening of extreme events and more tipping points are already dialed in.

Current stupidity is just making things that much worse, and sooner.
 
y'all Californians owe us some lost production...

Screen Shot 2020-09-16 at 1.04.22 PM.png
Screen Shot 2020-09-16 at 1.03.09 PM.png
 
Concentrated population density creates many of it's own problems. The answer is not to pack more and more people into less and less space.

Central NY is clearly not central NYC.
I disagree. Manhattan residents have some of the lowest climate impacts - despite mostly pretty old housing stock - and Northern climate.
Density creates problems for sure with air quality but when you look at global issues, it is generally positive.
But there is a huge divide between building in far flung rural wooded areas and Manhattan.
And generally, humans living in density create a substantially lower impact. You may not like that answer but I think it is hard to refute.

I assume central NY is Ithaca area. I went to Cornell and I remember it was called that. Horrible climate impact generally. Cold, old housing stock, drive everywhere, poor solar potential. When I see what some rural folks do up there - between heating the house and driving - I feel like the best answer is depopulation of those areas. Already happening of course because of little jobs and weather. It is just really hard and expensive to make that lifestyle reasonable from a climate perspective.
 
Last edited:
  • Love
Reactions: nwdiver
Central NY is clearly not central NYC.
I disagree. Manhattan residents have some of the lowest climate impacts - despite mostly pretty old housing stock - and Northern climate.
Density creates problems for sure with air quality but when you look at global issues, it is generally positive.
But there is a huge divide between building in far flung rural wooded areas and Manhattan.
And generally, humans living in density create a substantially lower impact. You may not like that answer but I think it is hard to refute.

I assume central NY is Ithaca area. I went to Cornell and I remember it was called that. Horrible climate impact generally. Cold, old housing stock, drive everywhere, poor solar potential. When I see what some rural folks do up there - between heating the house and driving - I feel like the best answer is depopulation of those areas. Already happening of course because of little jobs and weather. It is just really hard and expensive to make that lifestyle reasonable from a climate perspective.

I can't find it now but I read a few years ago that cities are one of the greatest 'inventions' in terms of protecting the environment. The Pros FAR outweigh the cons.

Looks like carbon emissions are roughly ~halved if you live in a city vs suburb.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SmartElectric
It is just really hard and expensive to make that lifestyle reasonable from a climate perspective.
Actually it's not. Solar is growing in the area, and there is a large push for heat pumps. Commutes are short and traffic is minor, even in the "big city" of Ithaca. Rural areas don't create a heat island the way cities do, and less strain on sewage or aquifers. Not to mention the rural areas produce the food. Also plenty of studies show better mental health for those living closer to nature vs the concrete jungle. A city is an unnatural man made concentrator of pollutants of all types. CO2 is not the only emission of concern. You may have heard the phrase "The solution to pollution is dilution". Don't know how long ago you were at Cornell but I suspect it was back when winters were harsher here. Population levels are stable and the local economy is good, contrary to your claims. No one is rioting in the countryside.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: traxila and mspohr
You may have heard the phrase "The solution to pollution is dilution".

Usually when I've heard that it's a bit tongue in cheek;

Cities are able to have more advanced sewage treatment and other resources.

Think of how many families you can fit in a high rise. Imagine how much land that would require if they weren't stacked one on top of the other.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SmartElectric
Northern hemisphere breaks record for hottest ever summer

This summer was the hottest ever recorded in the northern hemisphere, according to US government scientists. June, July and August were 1.17C (2.11F) above the 20th-century average, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (Noaa).

If we have four more years of Trump’s climate denial, how many suburbs will be burned in wildfires, how many suburban neighborhoods will have been flooded out, how many suburbs will have been blown away in superstorms?” Biden asked. “If you give a climate arsonist four more years in the White House, why would anyone be surprised if we have more of America ablaze … when more of America is under water?”
 
Usually when I've heard that it's a bit tongue in cheek;

Cities are able to have more advanced sewage treatment and other resources.

Think of how many families you can fit in a high rise. Imagine how much land that would require if they weren't stacked one on top of the other.

That's the point. With low enough population density septic systems passively treat sewage with no energy input, unlike massive sewage systems, which require energy and can and do get overloaded and fail.
Another stark contrast between urban and rural is the impact of disease such as Covid. NYC was hit hard while this area has had only had 2 deaths, patients imported from NYC.

Regarding CO2, as we move towards decarbonization of the energy supply the CO2 "impacts" of rural life vs urban move to zero.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mspohr
Don't look away now: are viewers finally ready for the truth about nature?

“We are facing a crisis. One that has consequences for us all. It threatens our ability to feed ourselves, to control our climate. It even puts us at greater risk of pandemic diseases such as Covid-19,” he warned in Extinction: The Facts on BBC One primetime,
We were experiencing this on the West Coast. I’m an avid gardener and it was obvious that the plants, insects and birds all took a significant hit. There’s been no sun and ash falling everywhere for over a week. My crops basically stopped producing and the pollinators disappeared. September used to be the absolute best time for gardening, cool nights, warm days, maximum harvest, etc. Now the only benefit has been an excellent time to transplant all of my fall/winter crops (cilantro, lettuce, bok choy, collard greens, beets, carrots, etc) because of the lack of sun. In my 50+ years of experience in this area gardening has changed significantly, to the point where it’s close to my short experience in Texas. Flowering crops are becoming more and more difficult to grow, less productive and flavorful, more diseases, requiring more sun/wind protections. Leafy greens are still growing fine, but the season has been extended to 11 months, now only limited by sunlight in the winter and heat in summer.
 
Have you calculated how many panels you would need to heat an average central NY home in addition to powering an average EV commute in the winter? (I have 48 in NC and still can't cover winter entirely)
Water treatment is a pretty small issue compared to space conditioning. And septic systems fail.
But - the warming does certainly help reduce the load and makes life more enjoyable up there.
I happen to live in an area filled with "central NYers". Former Binghamton residents mostly. Western NY also well represented. Lets not pretend Ithaca is repeatable and typical.
This thread is "Global Warming" so CO2 (and methane) are really the primary issues.
As far as Covid - urban then rural - like every pandemic in history. But you still will probably have advantage there (educated population helps).
Ithaca would not exist as it does without the NYC area. NYC would do just fine without Ithaca. So saying your Covid case was from NYC is interesting. When I was at Cornell, 40% of students were from NYC area - I doubt that has changed much.
We are all in this together. I would live in Ithaca in a second - doesn't have the population to support my profession. Doesn't change that the rural areas - particularly North - use more carbon and have greater impact in general.
 
Doesn't change that the rural areas - particularly North - use more carbon and have greater impact in general.
Once we remove carbon from the equation, which is the goal, what greater impacts do rural areas have, other than lower concentrations of all pollutants, lower impact on aquifers, lower disease transmission rates, and better mental health?
Also, only 25% of Cornell students come from NY State, and only a percentage of those are from NYC, so if your claim was ever accurate, which I doubt, it has in fact changed quite a lot. Ithaca would be fine without NYC. University Facts | Cornell University
 
  • Like
Reactions: mspohr
Was 50% when I was there. But that was undergrads - who pay - so that is fairly relevant. Wonder if that number was all students as grad students seemed to come from further away. And certainly - dynamics could have changed (as I suppose my information could be wrong).
And I did mean the NYC area which is 80% (rough guess) of the state population. And would of course count a lot of the NJ and Conn folks. And to be fair - not me - but a lot of the money came from NYC.

"once we remove carbon" - is that happening in your lifetime? It isn't in mine. The path to removing it is harder in rural areas.

As far as mental health - that isn't at all true in NC in my experience. But I suppose it depends on what you look at. Now this could be lack of MH resources and I am sure there are studies that say the opposite but there is nothing quite as definite as suicide or as authoritative as the CDC.

CDC quote - "Suicide rates are higher in rural America than in urban America. The gap in suicide rates between rural and urban areas grew steadily from 1999 to 2015."

Ithaca is probably not considered rural. And like I said, not repeatable. We can't have elite 160 year old universities in 99% of rural areas.

"Lower impact on aquifers" - are you sure about that? Wouldn't almond consumption (and food consumption in general)be the most relevant? Do Manhattan folks water their lawn? (I use Manhattan as an extreme example - not repeatable in the US either). Most aquifer issues are depletion and perhaps farming/fracking contamination. Those things have little to do with where people live - except fracking and people living in old SFH in the North. Now if everyone had an organic garden on their 2 acres living in rural areas and not eating meat - yep, we could reduce farming issues. That isn't going to happen.

There are 330 million folks roughly in the US - would it really help the environment out if we spread them equally over the entire US? That would "lower all pollutants"? There would be lower disease transmission rates and better air quality - because dilution does help. But less overall impact on the environment - not by most measures.

We got on this tangent about building in fire prone rural areas.
 
The tipping points at the heart of the climate crisis

The Greenland ice sheet is one example of a tipping point. It contains enough ice to raise global sea levels by seven metres, if it were all to melt. And it is prone to runaway melting.

As well as the Greenland ice sheet, the Antarctic ice sheet is also prone to unstoppable collapse – as is the Amazon rainforest, which could die back and be replaced with grasslands.

The most worrying possibility is that setting off one tipping point could unleash several of the others, pushing Earth’s climate into a new state that it has not experienced for millions of years.