611
submitted 10 months ago by lntl@lemmy.ml to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml

German energy giant RWE has begun dismantling a wind farm to make way for a further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia.

I thought renewables were cheaper than coal. How is this possible?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 125 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Ban straws! (even though disabled people need them and they create negligible pollution)

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

Reduce your carbon footprint! (even though its a term we invented ourselves to shift responsibility to you, while we fly our private jets around creating more pollution than you ever could in 10 lifetimes)

Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don't want to pay to actually recycle it)

All equates to

Look the other way while we continue to rape the planet and blame it on you!!!

Never forget - capitalists (and the governments they're co-dependent on) only want more money, they don't car about you or me or the planet, only about themsleves and the numbers in their accounts, and they will never willingly stop doing whatever it takes to make more.

[-] napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de 51 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

While I partly agree with your argument at the end of your comment, I think your examples are really unfitting.

Only single-use plastic straws are banned. There is also an exemption for straws that are necessary for medical reasons. The needs of disabled people are included in the exemption. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-003536-ASW_EN.html

If people buy a new car, the old one (if still functional) typically enters the second-hand market, not the landfill. There is no reason why this would be different if the new car is an electric vehicle.

The carbon footprint is a perfectly fine concept on its own, the problem is just that some people shit on it with their private jets, which are a legitimate concern. Some people also argue that "most of the pollution is done by corporations, not individuals", completely ignoring the fact that these corporations only do it while producing goods for the people. That does not mean that we can just blame the people for it, but everybody has the responsibility to vote for policies that keep the corporations in check.

Recycling is really bad in some countries, but works pretty well in others. For example in Germany 56% of plastic waste is recycled, 44% burned. 90% of paper is recycled. https://www.quarks.de/umwelt/muell/das-solltest-du-ueber-recycling-wissen/#l%C3%B6sung4

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago

We've made electric powered airplane jet turbines. If the rich want private jets, we should require those to be EVs. I don't give a shit that the tech is untested, and neither do they judging by that "submarine."

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago

The problem is we are only talking about a small fraction of the trash. >90% of waste is industrial waste, of that a third is just from Construction/Demolition.

Consumers can recycle everything, but it won't make more than a 10% impact. We need to start forcing industry to recycle and we can start with concrete. 8% of all global emissions are from concrete production, that's not even accounting the energy to haul it around. We have the ability today to use concrete to make down cycled products on site (road base, filler, non structural blocks, etc) eliminating transportation and other impacts. But few even consider it, companies and customers don't want to wait the extra day that it takes, and it's not always profitable either.

[-] mineapple@feddit.de 1 points 10 months ago

I doubt your numbers are factual. Depending on the industry, you'll have very specific, non mixed waste materials, which would be way easier to recycle than mixed trash from households.

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I just had to do a project on this for work and almost if not all of those numbers most likely came from the EPA's site from the studies they reference. Other sources, including international sources are similar, I have no reason to doubt the veracity or the figures.

When rereading your comment I get the impression you think I am saying only 10% of industrial waste is recycled. That is not that statement, the statement is simply 90% of waste in landfill is industrial.

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works -5 points 10 months ago

Do you think cars are immortal, and are just passed on from owner to owner for all eternity?

[-] napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de 3 points 10 months ago

No? Nobody thinks that?

My comment was just a response to the following:

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

...which for some reason suggests that the introduction of electric cars leads to premature scrapping of existing cars - which is bullshit.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 3 points 10 months ago

Only East German ones. Then the pigs eat some rotten parts off of them, and the remainder is reassembled into fewer cars. The circle of life. The last people on this planet will still be driving a Trabi.

[-] lntl@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

Cuban cars are

load more comments (40 replies)
this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
611 points (82.9% liked)

World News

31452 readers
990 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS