• Vub@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    So even on Lemmy people defend Tesla because “why not protest against coal” and “but this is EV”. Sigh.

    People DO protest against coal, and to a much larger extent.

    Tesla is a shitty scam company which deserves nothing but bankruptcy. Their factory is destroying huge areas in Brandenburg and uses massive amounts of water in an area where there is severe drought. Brandenburg even has deserts forming for those who are unaware. Even if you would accept Tesla, the factory is placed in the worst place possible.

    Apart from the environmental aspects, the company is famous for being atrocious regarding workers rights. That crypto bro scam firm should just get the hell out.

    • return2ozma@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      81
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Climate protesters have expressed concerns about Tesla’s plans, which entail cutting down approximately 250 acres of forest in a rural community of fewer than 8,000 residents near a nature conservation area.

      • SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Should be noted that basically all of that forest is a tree farm monoculture.

        Now they moved to protesting the water usage of the factory, which is high, but quite low compared to other industries and farms in the area.

        I mean, fuck cars in general, but protests that focus on bullshit facts are not helping the cause.

        • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          4 months ago

          The water usage is a huge issue. The region has suffered a severe drought from 2018-2022. There is some issues with a chemical bubble in the ground that require a careful and coordinated pumping by all water utilities and well operators in the area to not suck it into the aquifer.One water utility had to deny all building permits for new houses, schools, businesses because Teslas water consumption capped the legally and sustainably permittable water extraction in the area.

          There was a huge shitshow around the permits Tesla gained with direct political interference from the state government to overlook legal requirements in particular in the context of water. Tesla is fighting to deny access for the water utility to the chemical analysis of the water they extract at their wells.

          There is a risk that Tesla could permanently destroy the water supply for hundreds of thousands of people if they are not made to observe the legal requirements and cooperate with other stakeholders for water in the region.

        • mister_monster@monero.town
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          4 months ago

          Well that’s a big problem nowadays isn’t it? They’re stated problem is an excuse. They’re not protesting due to this impact or that impact, if they were they wouldn’t be wishy washy about which thing they don’t like. If you ask me, they’re protesting Musk but pretending it’s about something more substantial.

          • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            Your not wrong, everyone hates musk and the fact that the project received absurd amounts of tax funding. But thats not a secret, if you actually look at the protests, they are openly anti capitalist and anti car in general. The media just likes to focus on the environmental arguments to make the protest look silly.

            • mister_monster@monero.town
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              I dunno, I think protesting cars and capitalism is sillier than protesting environmental destruction. But even then, using environment issues disingenuously to agitate against capitalism is the MO of the left, and it has to be that way because nobody would buy their garbage otherwise. That’s why they’re constantly accusing their opponents of ulterior motives, it’s projection, they can’t imagine a world in which someone’s stated motives are their actual motives because they’re compulsive liars.

        • JustTesting@lemmy.hogru.ch
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 months ago

          In addition to other answers, keep in mind that Tesla gets credits relative to how far below the average carbon footprint their cars are and sell those credits to manufacturers of cars with more emissions. So in a way a part of the reduced liferime emissions are “gone” before the cars drive for the first time

        • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Highly doubtful. EVs still have a high footprint, especially those obese ones that we’re making in the West.

          • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            They have a large footprint of creation. Their footprint over their lifetime is net negative when measured against direct alternatives.

            • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              4 months ago

              Measured against ICE cars. Actual direct alternatives are public transport, bikes, and micro cars. And you’re also assuming they’re driven that long before the person buys another car.

              • Telodzrum@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Those are indirect alternatives. A direct alternative serves the exact same function.

                It doesn’t matter if that person buys another car; it matter is the EV stays on the road. They do.

                • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  They do serve the exact same function. And no, they don’t stay on the road. The batteries degrade, die and aren’t replaceable due to proprietary designs. There’s already plenty of dead EVs.

        • slurpyslop@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          if there were some figures i could fiddle to fit that narrative, do you think that would mean that cutting down 250 acres of forest would actually be worth it rather than a convenience somebody has gussied up as “necessary” because it would make them a profit?

      • Fallenwout@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Go protest to the people who give the permit to cut down those trees, those are the problem. If tesla listen to the protest, another company is going to cut those trees.

        If that area is marked as forest instead of industry/residential, no one can cut it, end of thread.

        But as usual, protestors are barking up the wrong tree (pun intended)

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Are these the same German protestors who advocated for shutting down nuclear power plants?

    • cygon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It’s a battery factory that was built there despite environmental concerns.

      I think the main things that attracted the ire of environmentalists are:

      • When the building permits were still being negotiated, Tesla just started clearing land illegally
      • A battery factory requires lots of water, this one was built in a region already low on groundwater
      • There have been several instances of spilled chemicals
      • The sewage coming out of the factory has been contaminated (phosphorus and nitrogen) beyond allowed thresholds for two years
      • The local water supply company is reportedly near its limit, but Tesla wants to expand the battery factory and clear additional land

      .

      But the situation is a bit muddy. Early protests around 2021…2022 often had a share of far right wingnuts trying to recruit people. That’s lessened, though. This specific protest was definitely swelled in numbers by the factory expansion and land clearing plans, but is also part of a planned day of protests by the “Disrupt Tesla” group. They have a web presence here: https://disrupt-now.org/en/.

    • can@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      EVs are a good next step but they still use tires that break down leaving microplastics in the environment and a study showed they may even leave more.,

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        It doesn’t have to stay that way, and probably won’t. Batteries improve by 5-8% per year. We’re also reaching the point where, with better charging infrastructure, we don’t particularly need longer range. Weight can go down rather than range going up.

        There’s no reason EVs have to be heavier than ICE cars, and they probably won’t be in the next few years.

  • juicy@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is dumb. We need to build, build, build if we’re going to avert catastrophe. We need to build electric vehicles, batteries, solar panels, wind mills, electric transmission lines, grid storage, synthetic fuel plants, nuclear power plants. We will fail if people wring their hands over every new construction project. That forest won’t mean shit if the ocean boils.

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ah yes the mindset that got us here, lets solve the problem we got by not showing any restraint as a society, by just building even more shit we dont actually need.

      Half the things in your list are completely unnecessary for avoiding climate catastrophe and only serve the purpose of further increasing our energy and industrial greed.

  • 3volver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    27
    ·
    4 months ago

    Just move the factory to China. 🤡

    Where are these protesters against all the coal power plants in Germany? Probably enjoying the warmth of their cozy houses in winter.