Hacker News Reader

Comment by giantg2 | Hacker News Reader

I don't know that I would use Telsa as an example. Sure, they are replacing fossil fuels with renewables, but I see this as trading one dirty commodity for another. Lithium mining is environmentally damaging and the impact will likely get worse as demand increases. So maybe a step in the right direction, but definitely not a true solution.

View on HN

Tesla is actually a good example assuming that you believe that lithium mining is better than coal mining or at least an equivalent problem.

Tesla's utility-level batteries (MegaPack) make wind and solar projects more economically feasible since any excess wind can be stored instead of being sold at negative rates when its not being used. These batteries will allow the replacement of many coal-powered generator plants since those are typically used for peak times when we need more energy. They're responsible for pushing the electric car revolution forward (making it fashionable), which is forecasted to lead to less peak energy usage and a more balanced usage during non-peak hours (since people will be charging their cars at home after hours). In theory, this reduces the need to make upgrades to the US electricity distribution network and we should lose less energy transporting it. This also reduces the need for oil, and could prevent more wars in the middle east (since their major resource is less valuable)

I can agree that the view of whether something is helping or not could be subjective.

That's not necessarily true about the infrastructure. The estimate I saw said if all the gas cars were replaced with electric ones then the infrastructure would have to double or triple depending on how much off-grid equipment is adopted. I know my house would need an upgraded connection to handle a 50amp charger. I'd probably need a whole extra line and panel if we needed to charge 2 or three cars at once.

I was actually thinking about the long-distance transmission lines, but that's a good point about potentially needing to upgrade local lines. As a non-EV owner, I can't discuss much but I was under the impression that you could just plug in to a normal wall socket for a slow charge. I suspect that you're referring to the Level 2 quick charging station. If that's the case, that would certainly impact you depending on how old your house is and whether you're running your own solar panels

FYI, if you have a source, I'd be interested in reading about it.

I can't find the original article I saw this in (8 or so yrs ago), but here's one that talks about some of the infrastructure sizing issues (45 vs 100 kVA). The second one talks about current grid storage/production and the need for increased capacity.

Good news is that we are nowhere close to the breaking point, but the numbers in the article are way less than if all (or even half of) cars were replaced with EVs. It should take a long time to get to that level of adoption anyways.

At least for me, I would want access to fast charging options, whether in homes or at dedicated stations for trips. The 8 hour charge is great for daily usage though. I wonder how that time can hold up as the range gets longer (increased capacity with same 15 amp wall plug).

https://www.fleetcarma.com/ev-clustered-charging-can-problem...

https://techxplore.com/news/2020-07-influx-electric-vehicles...

Thanks for adding the sources. I'm 80% sure that The Grid [https://www.amazon.com/Grid-Fraying-Between-Americans-Energy...] had discussed electric cars helping solve some of the distribution/transmission problems, but that was from the view of the large power companies, not the smaller local munis (and maybe paired with smart meters? It's been a while since I read it). However, after reading the two articles you cited, it's actually just moving the bottleneck and in the wrong direction to a point where it's harder to manage changes.

Not sure why people are downvoting this.

It isn't a matter of belief - lithium mining hardly qualifies as mining environmentally compared to other methods including oil wells and ore mining of various methods. There is a lot of misinformation and FUD involving Lithium Mining.

It involves brine pools in salt plains. Water usage is the only real concern. Not to be ignored but it won't leave any superfund sites, cancer hotspots, turn rivers dead but colorful with tailings, or oil spills.

Actually it will kill/impact aquatic life up to 150 miles downstream. That brine you talk of is not just sodium chloride, but many types of salts, acids, and other contaminants or processing agents. The reason they aren't Superfund sites is because they exist in less developed nations that dont have the same laws.

It's probably a step in the right direction, but I'm looking forward to supercapacitors or alternative battery tech.

A gas car dumping CO2 into the atmosphere contributes to climate change all over the world. Is it fair to the rapidly disappearing Maldives that Americans like gas guzzlers? Hell no. They get all the externalities of worldwide CO2 emissions, even though the Maldives is a tiny producer of carbon. That's not fair.

However, if a Lithium mine in South America opens, and it wrecks and pollutes the land, the same place that bears the costs (the pollution) also gains the benefits (the jobs/revenue from the Lithium). At the very least, it's more fair.

Sort of, the runoff ends up in the ocean, which would be a global concern too.

Wouldn't that depend on how far inland the mine is? Certainly, mining operations tend to pollute groundwater, but I wouldn't expect that a mine that's more than a few miles inland would significantly pollute the ocean via runoff.

True that it must be relatively close. It's about a 150 mile downstream impact. They also use fossil fuels in the extraction and processing, so it would still impact those islands anyways. It's still a step in the right direction but I can't wait to see economical super capacitors or alternative batteries (love those kinetic/gravity ones for grid storage).

There is no non environmentally damaging solution, really, and there probably never will be.

Steps in the right direction are all we can ever take.

Asteroid mining might be a bit of a solution to this resource extraction problem, but not really.

Fair. But I do think "better = good". It fits my main query of 1. Well funded 2. Trying to solve meaningful problems

Yeah, they are better than some places. I should probably go back to the main thread an see what others suggested. I wasn't able to think of any for-profit organizations whose mission it is to fix a world problem and goes beyond just being a tagline.

Yea, neither could I. Hence the thread. It really does feel like the worlds greatest minds are all just busy trying to find creative ways to sell ads and it's kinda sad.

Seems like half the posts on the thread have devolved into Tesla debate (partially my fault, sorry). I looked through the suggestions and don't really like or agree with many. That 80000hours.org site looks like it has some good info though.

Yea, it's my fault for providing that example.. wish I could edit the main thread to change the examples. Really just care about surfacing the big investments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com