Cool pics!

They can’t stop progress, but they can undermine it, and with such calamities…

A book I recommend is Empires of Light. It gets into the politics and the money men. If Edison had his way we would have DC current only with underground wiring.

https://hub.zilla.tech/photo/b823367fa7e5a08c35098b4eb6707264b99da46cd9f3d8b3a747de1a9bc06c4f-1.png

@Waitman Gobble It seems that Edison was very pleased that Morgan had closed Tesla's projects. It's funny that the oil industry also unceremoniously buried the Edison electric-transport industry in the similar style.

@ivan zlax Дык, что посмеешь, то и пожмёшь)))

Very interesting. I especially like the lady on electric scooter.

@Chiara 🏵 This scooter not look as electric, pay attention to the exhaust pipe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoped
But

an electric version was also available with a motor on the front wheel.

Oh, sorry...I read on Wikipedia air-cooled, 4-stroke. I thought it was electric, looking at the title "1916 electric scooter, Lady Norman on her scooter"...😊 Anyway, I love it. I often take one (modern one) in my car...

@Chiara 🏵 Sorry, that was my mistake. I fixed this comment later.

Thank you, no problem, here is mine.My

I like Electric mobility, when it's possible. It's amusing and it means a significant reduction of CO2-emissions.

@Chiara 🏵

significant reduction of CO2-emissions.

That's a moot point. Since the production of storage batteries is a very harmful industry, and much of the electricity is still produced on our planet from the burning of hydrocarbons. Well, and if you have your own wind turbine or solar panels - look at what materials they were made of. Perhaps an equivalent portion of burnt coal would make less exhaust than producing a single windmill.

Yes , moot indeed ...

Since the production of storage batteries is a very harmful industry, and much of the electricity is still produced on our planet from the burning of hydrocarbons.

@ivan zlax, I think what you are saying is disinformation promoted by the fossil fuel industry. They do not want more people to be free of their products. See the research at the link below. EVs are not perfect, but they are better. :-)

https://www.ucsusa.org/clean-vehicles/electric-vehicles/life-cycle-ev-emissions#.XBEOSanLfeo

@Ted

I think what you are saying is disinformation promoted by the fossil fuel industry.

No, it is not. For example look to the another side of biodiesel. This is one of many examples.
Reduction of species diversity depends little on the quality of energy exploitation (environmentally friendly  exploitation / non-ecological), it is more dependent on the very fact of exploitation.
@Ted, and how/where do you get electricity?

@ivan zlax, it appears you did not read any of the information at the link I posted. Electric vehicles do not run on biodiesel. As for your question about where I get my electricity, see my profile address and compare it with the map in the article from the Union Concerned Scientists. Once again, I will repeat that EVs are not perfect, but they are better than gasoline vehicles.

EVs are not perfect, but they are better than gasoline vehicles.👍😊

@Ted

it appears you did not read any of the information at the link I posted.

True. It was national data, it is very biased, hides cryptocolonial ties. Does not take into account planetary interests. My filters cuts it. These data do not take into account that the materials for the vehicles themselves, on chemicals and rare metals for such high-tech production are obtained only at the expense of the power of US aircraft carriers.

Electric vehicles do not run on biodiesel.

I know, it was another example.

compare it with the map in the article from the Union Concerned Scientists

I look to your profile and compare it but can't understand how/where do you get electricity, sorry. Please, explain.

I will repeat that EVs are not perfect, but they are better than gasoline vehicles.

I did not say that it is not. But it is not necessary to exaggerate the production of new things. In my opinion it is better to improve old things. For example, to make hybrids from single-drive gasoline cars. In my opinion, this whole topic with the purchase of new cars is the work of engineers on planned obsolescence.
@spacedream

How N Tesla did get his electricity? he didn't burned anything!

Unfortunately, i do not know how he did it. I do not know how to do the same.

I have a friend who is a mechanic, and converts diesel engines to operate on biodiesel. He says the cars have to be older than a certain year, maybe 1998? I'm guessing.. There is a point when the computerized controls intentionally prevent the cars from running biodiesel. It's political, according to him. He drives from Vancouver to San Diego (about 1600 KM) to see his daughter often, he says it costs him about one dollar in fuel. But he's usually driving rough looking Volkswagens. Whenever he sees one for sale he buys it and converts it.

@Waitman Gobble

He says the cars have to be older than a certain year, maybe 1998? I'm guessing..

Depends on the country of production, as far as i know. One my australian friend has an 80s japanese Toyota 4x4 with more than 2 million kilometers run. In the photo the car did not look rusty, in good condition.

@Ted Please also consider the pollution worn-out batteries bring into the environment. As soon as the whole cycle is considered without the uneasy exclusions, green technologies appear to be the dirtiest at the moment. Atom is the cleanest one. Sorry, but it's true. Don't be fooled by politically engaged sources. Nor take advertisements as a proven source.
Are EVs worse for an environment at the moment than legacy ones? Yes.
Shall we stop progressing in this area? Nope. But we have to think how to make them cleaner.

@spacedream Thanks for special links. I will look all of this.

The link I posted has research which examines the LIFE CYCLE impact of gasoline cars vs. electric cars, and since none of you who criticize EV seems willing (or able) to read the text at the link, I will quote the first part here. If you read nothing else, please notice the very last paragraph.

Since we first published our State of Charge report in 2012, the environmental benefits of electric vehicles (EVs) have continued to grow. Two-thirds of all Americans now live in areas where driving an EV produces fewer climate emissions than almost all comparable gasoline and gasoline hybrid cars—a fact attributable to more efficient EVs and an increasingly clean electricity grid.

But what are the global warming emissions of electric cars on a life cycle basis—from the manufacturing of the vehicle’s body and battery to its ultimate disposal and reuse? To answer this, the Union of Concerned Scientists undertook a comprehensive, two-year review of the climate emissions from vehicle production, operation, and disposal. We found that battery electric cars generate half the emissions of the average comparable gasoline car, even when pollution from battery manufacturing is accounted for.

All vehicles experience three distinct life stages: manufacturing, operation, and end-of-life. Each stage is linked with carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions—but those emissions differ between gas-powered cars and electric cars.

Both types of vehicle begin in much the same way. Raw materials are extracted, refined, transported, and manufactured into various components that are assembled into the car itself. Because electric cars store power in large lithium-ion batteries, which are particularly material- and energy-intensive to produce, their global warming emissions at this early stage usually exceed those of conventional vehicles. Manufacturing a mid-sized EV with an 84-mile range results in about 15 percent more emissions than manufacturing an equivalent gasoline vehicle. For larger, longer-range EVs that travel more than 250 miles per charge, the manufacturing emissions can be as much as 68 percent higher.

These differences change as soon as the cars are driven. EVs are powered by electricity, which is generally a cleaner energy source than gasoline. Battery electric cars make up for their higher manufacturing emissions within eighteen months of driving—shorter range models can offset the extra emissions within 6 months—and continue to outperform gasoline cars until the end of their lives.

i've lived downstream of a few auto manufacturing plants and the tap water has each time been dangerous to drink. environmental impacts are often externalized – including mining of uranium ore for nuclear power production – to communities of color or to nations exploited for natural resources.

retrofitting older vehicles with cleaner power is always going to have a lower negative environmental impact than new car production.

mass production itself needs minimizing.

@❦ CRIME LICH ❦, I definitely agree that we ought to reuse as much as possible of what already exists. That is the best strategy.

BUT, some people will still buy new cars, and in light of this reality, it makes better sense environmentally to build new electric vehicles than gasoline vehicles. It's not the BEST use of resources, but it is BETTER than making more conventional vehicles.

By the way, in 2016 I bought a two-year-old short range EV. It was very cheap to buy and it costs very little to operate. The car I sold when I bought my used EV was a 30-year-old Honda (Acura) Integra, so I know something about getting long service from a car. The guy who now owns my old Honda has restored it, and it now looks like a five-year-old car in very good condition.

I completely agree, @spacedream. That is a great idea, and I certainly hope more people do this.

I am also with Space dream. There is no perfect solution. There are better ones than the current "norm" though. Take the best fit for you.

I am also with @spacedream .

There are no perfect solutions just better choices.

@spacedream thanks for your links.

Also please clarify. Are you against me commenting on your posts? Do you want to maintain only one-way communication?

#newearth is speaking about such technologies https://youtu.be/Ssv4J6Sd6bw?t=2192

@manu mano It looks like a newage fiction: mixing everything in one pile. The technologies described in this post are not ancient (maybe old, but not ancient), such technologies has the smallest relationship to the megaliths of the stone age and vimanas.

So, if we were taking humanity's future seriously we should be pushing for auto-factories to stop producing new cars and start working as old car converters on a massive scale.

@Trocatintas Unfortunately, with capitalism and free market, this is extremely disadvantageous.

Capitalism is at odds with taking humanity’s future seriously.

@Ted This is only from the perspective of a worker. From the position of a capitalist, the future is modeled quite specifically (the most popular type of scifiction today is cyberpunk).
There are many humans who are satisfied with capitalism. And what's more, they will do everything to preserve this order.
I will correct a little so that there are no contradictions: capitalism is at odds with taking species diversity future seriously.

But the survival of humanity may well depend on a certain diversity of species. We are now slowly killing our planetary life support systems.

@Ted Capitalism manifestate that the survival of any human may well depend on amount of bio-survival tickets (money).

By the way, even the inspired newagers, who are planning to escape from this planet, are primarily interested in bio-survival tickets.

In the end, those "bio-survival tickets," without the accompanying bio-diversity support systems, will be revealed as worthless.