Why the current environmental Fad is absurd

[Pagafyr]

Now, on the flip side of things, I'ma say this. My best friend works for Tesla's Solar division. One of the really cool ideas that they are implementing in areas that will volunteer for it, is Communal Charging. (Thats not the actual name, I don't remember what he said it was called).

But yeah, basically... have extra solar panels installed on your property. Your neighbors, do the same thing. And then you're all connected to a micro-grid. The excess power goes into the grid, and stays there for the houses that aren't getting enough, or saved up for cloudy/rainy bad weather days.

Very cool idea.

 

Elon Musk's Sister is a member of a team making solar windows

[StormWolf01]

 

Now, on the flip side of things, I'ma say this. My best friend works for Tesla's Solar division. One of the really cool ideas that they are implementing in areas that will volunteer for it, is Communal Charging. (Thats not the actual name, I don't remember what he said it was called).

But yeah, basically... have extra solar panels installed on your property. Your neighbors, do the same thing. And then you're all connected to a micro-grid. The excess power goes into the grid, and stays there for the houses that aren't getting enough, or saved up for cloudy/rainy bad weather days.

Very cool idea.

 

Elon Musk's Sister is a member of a team making solar windows

 

Oh? So you'd have to pay a lot more to replace your windows when the neighborhood kids break one out playing streetball?

 

HAHA no, I'm just kidding around. That is actually REALLY cool. Thanks for sharing that and bringing it to my attention Pagafyr! :) :) :)

[Pagafyr]

 

 

Now, on the flip side of things, I'ma say this. My best friend works for Tesla's Solar division. One of the really cool ideas that they are implementing in areas that will volunteer for it, is Communal Charging. (Thats not the actual name, I don't remember what he said it was called).

But yeah, basically... have extra solar panels installed on your property. Your neighbors, do the same thing. And then you're all connected to a micro-grid. The excess power goes into the grid, and stays there for the houses that aren't getting enough, or saved up for cloudy/rainy bad weather days.

Very cool idea.

 

Elon Musk's Sister is a member of a team making solar windows

 

Oh? So you'd have to pay a lot more to replace your windows when the neighborhood kids break one out playing streetball?

 

HAHA no, I'm just kidding around. That is actually REALLY cool. Thanks for sharing that and bringing it to my attention Pagafyr! :smile: :smile: :smile:

 

 

Wouldn't it be amazing if the see through sheet of solar power collecting material on your glass window could keep the pane of shattered glass from spilling into your room and making a big mess to clean up?

 

If only we could just pull out the entire window pane still attached to the solar collector's see through sheet, using an adhesive thinner to release the solar see through sheet from the broken glass to safely put shards of broken glass into a waste can, and after the new window pane is installed re-stick the solar collector's see through sheet on the new window pane?

 

That would be so nice!

[StormWolf01]

 

 

 

Now, on the flip side of things, I'ma say this. My best friend works for Tesla's Solar division. One of the really cool ideas that they are implementing in areas that will volunteer for it, is Communal Charging. (Thats not the actual name, I don't remember what he said it was called).

But yeah, basically... have extra solar panels installed on your property. Your neighbors, do the same thing. And then you're all connected to a micro-grid. The excess power goes into the grid, and stays there for the houses that aren't getting enough, or saved up for cloudy/rainy bad weather days.

Very cool idea.

 

Elon Musk's Sister is a member of a team making solar windows

 

Oh? So you'd have to pay a lot more to replace your windows when the neighborhood kids break one out playing streetball?

 

HAHA no, I'm just kidding around. That is actually REALLY cool. Thanks for sharing that and bringing it to my attention Pagafyr! :smile: :smile: :smile:

 

 

Wouldn't it be amazing if the see through sheet of solar power collecting material on your glass window could keep the pane of shattered glass from spilling into your room and making a big mess to clean up?

 

If only we could just pull out the entire window pane still attached to the solar collector's see through sheet, using an adhesive thinner to release the solar see through sheet from the broken glass to safely put shards of broken glass into a waste can, and after the new window pane is installed re-stick the solar collector's see through sheet on the new window pane?

 

That would be so nice!

 

Hmmmmm.

This definitely is not my field, so this is just a wild-haired idea. I dunno if it would/could work.

But.....

I'm wondering.

Can those solar collectors be attached to say... a thin sheet of bullet proof glass?

[ScytheBearer]

Green energy sounds great. Who doesn't want a clean environment? Who doesn't want to ensure that we have clean water and air for ourselves and the creatures we share this little planet with?

 

I want these things.

 

However the current push for green isn't about any of that. How do I know? Because it ignores the one thing that causes severe pollution.

 

Planned Obsolescence

 

Our manufacturing and our entire civilization is based on this. The reasoning is that to keep the gears running in the economy, consumers need to be forced to upgrade. What would Ford do if they built a car that lasted 50 years and never broke down? They would be collectors items for sure and Ford would be out of business (probably). Manufacturing and our economic model needs to be completely redone.

 

So if we rejected Planned Obsolescence, it would greatly reduce pollution, it would also give people a lot of free time to live thier true lives.

 

Greed is the mission. Not any environmental issue.

 

Planned Obsolescence is in everything. Even the roads we drive on are designed to require repair and replacement for this very reason. It is the elephant in the room.. following the whims of the "green" zealots will make us less free with no change in our climate trajectory.

 

So what you are saying in your over-modulated way is that because there is a problem with modern business models, we can simply ignore the dangers from global warming caused by burning fossil fuels. We needn't worry about melting glaciers, warming oceans, increased fire danger, increased storm severity, etc because if we simply make our toys last longer, the problems will all go away. Really?

 

Build in obsolescence is a scapegoat. Given the pace of technological advancement, obsolescence isn't built in, it is technologically inevitable. Horse drawn buggies and ox drawn wagons are obsolete, not because they were manufactured to become obsolete, but because another technology came along and made the buggy and wagon obsolete. The same can be said of tube radios, which were made obsolete by transistor radios, not because tube radios were designed to be obsolete, but because a better technology supplanted them. The war club was made obsolete by the sword, the blacksmith hammer by the power forge, the mortar and pestle by the mill, not because these technologies were designed to be obsolete, but because something better, easier, faster, simpler came along. "Built in obsolescence" should more appropriately be called "rapid technological advancement".

 

But, alas you took the easy way out. Blaming manufactures for the environmental issues and labeling them greedy is easy, lazy, and false. Denigrating the very real issues facing the environment is easy, lazy and false. Pointing at civilization and blaming them for the worlds issues is easy, lazy, and false.

 

The truth is, the real problem with the environment and most of the worlds other problems is something which nobody wants to face, let alone solve (either personally, or collectively)\. Simply put, there are too damned many human beings on this planet. Like a virus in a petri dish, we are polluting our environment with our waste and that behavior has a predictable consequence. We humans will eventually render our species, and many other species, extinct. That, my bombastic MrJoseCuervo, is the true elephant in the room.

Edited September 18, 2022 by ScytheBearer

[MrJoseCuervo]

So what you're saying is. We should continue our business model, even though it is the driving force behind the pollution issue and just get rid of people.

 

Sorry, but I value life over your portfolio.

[Guest deleted34304850]

i blame the republicans. if it wasnt for them it'd all be okay.

[StormWolf01]

 

Green energy sounds great. Who doesn't want a clean environment? Who doesn't want to ensure that we have clean water and air for ourselves and the creatures we share this little planet with?

 

I want these things.

 

However the current push for green isn't about any of that. How do I know? Because it ignores the one thing that causes severe pollution.

 

Planned Obsolescence

 

Our manufacturing and our entire civilization is based on this. The reasoning is that to keep the gears running in the economy, consumers need to be forced to upgrade. What would Ford do if they built a car that lasted 50 years and never broke down? They would be collectors items for sure and Ford would be out of business (probably). Manufacturing and our economic model needs to be completely redone.

 

So if we rejected Planned Obsolescence, it would greatly reduce pollution, it would also give people a lot of free time to live thier true lives.

 

Greed is the mission. Not any environmental issue.

 

Planned Obsolescence is in everything. Even the roads we drive on are designed to require repair and replacement for this very reason. It is the elephant in the room.. following the whims of the "green" zealots will make us less free with no change in our climate trajectory.

 

So what you are saying in your over-modulated way is that because there is a problem with modern business models, we can simply ignore the dangers from global warming caused by burning fossil fuels. We needn't worry about melting glaciers, warming oceans, increased fire danger, increased storm severity, etc because if we simply make our toys last longer, the problems will all go away. Really?

 

Build in obsolescence is a scapegoat. Given the pace of technological advancement, obsolescence isn't built in, it is technologically inevitable. Horse drawn buggies and ox drawn wagons are obsolete, not because they were manufactured to become obsolete, but because another technology came along and made the buggy and wagon obsolete. The same can be said of tube radios, which were made obsolete by transistor radios, not because tube radios were designed to be obsolete, but because a better technology supplanted them. The war club was made obsolete by the sword, the blacksmith hammer by the power forge, the mortar and pestle by the mill, not because these technologies were designed to be obsolete, but because something better, easier, faster, simpler came along. "Built in obsolescence" should more appropriately be called "rapid technological advancement".

 

But, alas you took the easy way out. Blaming manufactures for the environmental issues and labeling them greedy is easy, lazy, and false. Denigrating the very real issues facing the environment is easy, lazy and false. Pointing at civilization and blaming them for the worlds issues is easy, lazy, and false.

 

The truth is, the real problem with the environment and most of the worlds other problems is something which nobody wants to face, let alone solve (either personally, or collectively)\. Simply put, there are too damned many human beings on this planet. Like a virus in a petri dish, we are polluting our environment with our waste and that behavior has a predictable consequence. We humans will eventually render our species, and many other species, extinct. That, my bombastic MrJoseCuervo, is the true elephant in the room.

 

OK. So.

I agree, and I disagree.

First, I don't think that you're understanding what is implied by "planned obsolescence". Auto manufacturing companies (they're not the only ones, but they're the first to pop into my head) literally have teams of very highly paid Research and Development staff whose job it is: is to design parts that will fail after 3 years, X amount of mileage, etc. But... design parts that are meant to fail.

This little corner of the corporate world, just in the mass manufacturing of those parts... highly contributes to massive harm to the ecology. Strip mining, for the metals used in those parts. The gas used by the machines doing it and the smog released from those same machines (usually taking place in countries that have fewer emissions laws). All the fuel used to power the electrical turbines used to power the machines that do the actual manufacturing process, all the gases released during smelting processes.

It goes on and on.

Are they the sole, or major contributors? Of course not. But. They're NOT helping.

 

I think, and agree with what you were saying, falls more into the realm of "evolutionary obsolescence". All technology will evolve as newer and better comes along. It's the nature of the beast.

 

 

Ok so here's something that's been bashing around the insides of my brainpan lately. And it's something that I don't know if a lot of the "save the planet" types take into account. Especially with the war that our current administration is taking on, with the oil companies.

Plastic.

Yeah, it's absolutely hell on the environment, and on the ecology. But.

As of right now, it is an extremely necessary evil.

Where does plastic come from? It's from a byproduct of oil.

Without plastic, we do not have about 90% of the technology used in hospitals. We don't have bags of blood to use for blood infusions, or plasma to be used for surgical operations. We don't have the machines used to extract those needed fluids from donors. We also don't have the items used to keep the equipment sterile (plastic bags or containers) prior to their use. Or containers that are used afterwards, to prevent any kind of biological agents from possibly escaping.

Biological containment. Just the areas where infectious diseases are researched contains massive amount of products create from oil byproduct.

Yeah. Sadly, in the present, plastic is very much a necessary evil. Therefore, Oil is very much a necessary evil.

 

But again, WHY is that a necessary evil? Human need. (Sorry Jose.)

I am by no means saying that we need to start purging our current population. But.

We do need to start taking into serious account, and start planning on just how massively our population grows.

[ScytheBearer]

 

 

Green energy sounds great. Who doesn't want a clean environment? Who doesn't want to ensure that we have clean water and air for ourselves and the creatures we share this little planet with?

 

I want these things.

 

However the current push for green isn't about any of that. How do I know? Because it ignores the one thing that causes severe pollution.

 

Planned Obsolescence

 

Our manufacturing and our entire civilization is based on this. The reasoning is that to keep the gears running in the economy, consumers need to be forced to upgrade. What would Ford do if they built a car that lasted 50 years and never broke down? They would be collectors items for sure and Ford would be out of business (probably). Manufacturing and our economic model needs to be completely redone.

 

So if we rejected Planned Obsolescence, it would greatly reduce pollution, it would also give people a lot of free time to live thier true lives.

 

Greed is the mission. Not any environmental issue.

 

Planned Obsolescence is in everything. Even the roads we drive on are designed to require repair and replacement for this very reason. It is the elephant in the room.. following the whims of the "green" zealots will make us less free with no change in our climate trajectory.

 

So what you are saying in your over-modulated way is that because there is a problem with modern business models, we can simply ignore the dangers from global warming caused by burning fossil fuels. We needn't worry about melting glaciers, warming oceans, increased fire danger, increased storm severity, etc because if we simply make our toys last longer, the problems will all go away. Really?

 

Build in obsolescence is a scapegoat. Given the pace of technological advancement, obsolescence isn't built in, it is technologically inevitable. Horse drawn buggies and ox drawn wagons are obsolete, not because they were manufactured to become obsolete, but because another technology came along and made the buggy and wagon obsolete. The same can be said of tube radios, which were made obsolete by transistor radios, not because tube radios were designed to be obsolete, but because a better technology supplanted them. The war club was made obsolete by the sword, the blacksmith hammer by the power forge, the mortar and pestle by the mill, not because these technologies were designed to be obsolete, but because something better, easier, faster, simpler came along. "Built in obsolescence" should more appropriately be called "rapid technological advancement".

 

But, alas you took the easy way out. Blaming manufactures for the environmental issues and labeling them greedy is easy, lazy, and false. Denigrating the very real issues facing the environment is easy, lazy and false. Pointing at civilization and blaming them for the worlds issues is easy, lazy, and false.

 

The truth is, the real problem with the environment and most of the worlds other problems is something which nobody wants to face, let alone solve (either personally, or collectively)\. Simply put, there are too damned many human beings on this planet. Like a virus in a petri dish, we are polluting our environment with our waste and that behavior has a predictable consequence. We humans will eventually render our species, and many other species, extinct. That, my bombastic MrJoseCuervo, is the true elephant in the room.

 

OK. So.

I agree, and I disagree.

First, I don't think that you're understanding what is implied by "planned obsolescence". Auto manufacturing companies (they're not the only ones, but they're the first to pop into my head) literally have teams of very highly paid Research and Development staff whose job it is: is to design parts that will fail after 3 years, X amount of mileage, etc. But... design parts that are meant to fail.

This little corner of the corporate world, just in the mass manufacturing of those parts... highly contributes to massive harm to the ecology. Strip mining, for the metals used in those parts. The gas used by the machines doing it and the smog released from those same machines (usually taking place in countries that have fewer emissions laws). All the fuel used to power the electrical turbines used to power the machines that do the actual manufacturing process, all the gases released during smelting processes.

It goes on and on.

Are they the sole, or major contributors? Of course not. But. They're NOT helping.

 

I think, and agree with what you were saying, falls more into the realm of "evolutionary obsolescence". All technology will evolve as newer and better comes along. It's the nature of the beast.

 

 

Ok so here's something that's been bashing around the insides of my brainpan lately. And it's something that I don't know if a lot of the "save the planet" types take into account. Especially with the war that our current administration is taking on, with the oil companies.

Plastic.

Yeah, it's absolutely hell on the environment, and on the ecology. But.

As of right now, it is an extremely necessary evil.

Where does plastic come from? It's from a byproduct of oil.

Without plastic, we do not have about 90% of the technology used in hospitals. We don't have bags of blood to use for blood infusions, or plasma to be used for surgical operations. We don't have the machines used to extract those needed fluids from donors. We also don't have the items used to keep the equipment sterile (plastic bags or containers) prior to their use. Or containers that are used afterwards, to prevent any kind of biological agents from possibly escaping.

Biological containment. Just the areas where infectious diseases are researched contains massive amount of products create from oil byproduct.

Yeah. Sadly, in the present, plastic is very much a necessary evil. Therefore, Oil is very much a necessary evil.

 

But again, WHY is that a necessary evil? Human need. (Sorry Jose.)

I am by no means saying that we need to start purging our current population. But.

We do need to start taking into serious account, and start planning on just how massively our population grows.

 

 

Just a couple things, based on vocabulary and word meanings, since you brought it up. Given that our use of words reflects the accuracy of our thinking, words and their usage is important.

 

"Built to fail" is not the same as "built to be obsolete". Automobiles may be designed to fail, but they are not designed to be obsolete. There will be another automobile coming off the assembly line right now, now, now, now ... . And there are plenty of replacement parts for broken pieces. A broken tail light does not make my truck obsolete.

 

Evolutionary change occurs over long periods of time because the changes take a long time to get fixed into a product. The four barrel carburetor was an evolutionary change to the automobile, but it did not make the the automobile obsolete. But the automobile made the wagon and buggy manufactures go out of business, as their vehicles were now obsolete. The cell phone was a technological change which made the wall phone in grandma's kitchen obsolete, but dead batteries do not make the cell phone obsolete.

 

So check the precision of your usage of vocabulary, as it demonstrates the precision of your thinking.

 

[HeyYou]

Car companies make parts that are designed to last as long as the warranty. After that, they don't care any more. They also only stock parts for 'old models' for about ten years. Given the complexity of todays automobiles, (as opposed to those in the 70's, and earlier) a vehicle can become 'obsolete' simply because you can't get parts for it any more. If a critical part fails, for instance, a 30 dollar crankshaft position sensor, something your engine absolutely needs to run, and you can't get a replacement part, you vehicle just became a paper weight. This is already happening today..... and on vehicles that aren't even ten years old yet. (I'm lookin' at YOU dodge)

 

I suppose thought, that doesn't technically make that vehicle 'obsolete'.... or does it?

 

Thing is, the car companies WANT you to replace your car every few years. Keeps them in business. The dealers, on the other hand, want you to FIX your car, as that is where the bulk of their money comes from.