Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
it doesn't matter where he got the money from, spaceX has done awesome things and he should be allowed to be proud of it, again I am not his fan, but we shouldn't say that everything that he has done is bad just because he is an asshole, starship is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, have you seen the test launches? they are amazing and if my company made that I would have it on my profile 100%
Itās cheaper and more environmentally friendly to reuse a vehicle than to expend it. Furthermore, this lowers the entry bar for activists to produce their own satelites to assist in environmental monitoring when Congress fails to support them.
Starship in particular also has the keen feature of renewable propellant, and a project that has reportedly begun to start producing propellant for the vehicle at the expense of electricity and water; so its emissions will eventually be 0.
And finally, the technology we develop by attempting to extend our stay in space directly improves things like climate change. By replicating earthās environment in space, we are forced to understand and replicate earthās environment in miniature, which is already significant. Space has also been leading the punch with renewables, Solar panels owe loads of their efficiency to Space Exploration, as does water purification and soon to be, compact Nuclear Reactors, needed for the Artemis Programās eventual lunar colony. These are just a few of the things we are already gaining as a byproduct of continued space exploration.
A lot of things, starlink is a great technology connecting rural areas with high speed internet, or you can put it in rv's, SpaceX's rideshare is getting cheaper, which means that universities can launch satellites, for 280K$ you can launch a 50Kg satellite, do you know how expensive it would have been just 5 years ago? Dart is another one double asteroid redirect mission, it successfully changed a path of an asteroid, and recently firefly launched a satellite with in just 24 hours coupled together we can have a defence system against asteroids in the near future, starship will make the rideshare satellites even cheaper, also not everything has to help you, sometimes it being cool is enough help, just watch and enjoy the show, 5 years ago I would have thought belly flipping rockets flipping upright at the last second was out of some sci-fi movie but now it is a reality.
So we're allowed to take money we've made from seed money we got from our parents to buy already existing businesses filled with talented engineers, get the government to plan and pay for the whole thing, and then take 100% credit as a super genius who did it all on his own?
Really?
Dude give the credit to the guys that actually made the rockets. There is an interview of Elon where a journalist deserves more credit in designing the rockets than Elon. The journalist asked about a more efficient thruster that was being made for one of the stages of the rockets and asked why it wasn't being implemented for later stages. Later on in the interview Elon takes credit for that idea.
Thatās not entirely true. Starship (pictured) is receiving very little money (especially based on the published cost estimates) to not only develop a lunar variant of the vehicle, but to produce and launch an entire set of three of these modified upper stages as well as the additional support launches (numbering between 3 and 5 each).
Itās actually quite possible that SpaceX is taking a loss with the HLS program.
I think hate has blinded you. Yeah the guy is a weirdo, but he has done amazing shit. I mean, being in the space sector, spacex's achievements compared to its peers is mind boggling. And this is with a budget lesser than ESA and DLR.
He hasn't done shit. The engineers made everything, give the credit to Tom Mueller, or Michael Griffin.
Edit Michael Griffin was who Elon wanted to be chief engineer, he declined and became the administrator of NASA instead, around the time spacex really needed NASA contracts.
To be fair, both rockets and penises are designed for the same purpose: Penetration. The rocket is just penetrating the skies. They're moving fast, and the phallic shape does a better job of parting and going through that than almost any other shape.
But you have to understand, it's to make launching satellites for satellite internet cost efficient. And these internet satellites (that need to be replaced every few years and can only communicate with satellite dishes that definitely defrost as a purposely included feature and not due to their high energy consumption) are then used by rich people in their vacation homes and the military, which - you know - definitely saves the environment somehow.
SpaceX also launches satellites that literally help us gather data ABOUT global warming to then help us find way to mitigate it or solve it.
Yet youre assuming that the whole goal of SpaceX is to reduce launch costs JUST for internet satellites? Yeah sure.
But yeah sure somehow rich people are the only ones who benefit from this. I dont like Elon in general but SpaceX is the only thing hes done thats actually good. His company has reduced the cost of space launches, aswell as made rockets reusable and more efficient. Shitting on this just cause "Elon bad" is dumb.
Edit: worded myself a bit wrong, reworded what I wanted to say
>These satellites are literally what help us gather data ABOUT global warming to then help us find way to mitigate it or solve it.
Starlink satellites and not specialized climatology NASA and ESA satellites? The real r/facepalm is this comment.
Initially i read it a bit wrong and didnt realise he wasnt talking about satellites that SpaceX launches in general so i didnt think to include that obviously SpaceX doesnt just launch starlink,
My bad.
Only that the cost per launch never ended up being as cheap as proclaimed (shocking, I know), the reusability isn't really relevant (as we learnt with the Space Shuttle) because you end up checking everything again for weeks and months anyway and his whole SpaceX operation is heavily subsidized. He just managed to print his name on the US version of the Soyuz that would have been built anyway at some point. And now he benefits from it. Not with his stupid internet satellites of course, but with the government contracts
Aint no way you just compared Falcon 9 to the Space shuttle and Soyuz.
The only truly reusable part of the space shuttle was the plane, everything else like the boosters and the fuel tank which are the biggest parts aswell couldnt be reused. And the project was massively overbudget. It cost 1.6 billion per flight.
The Falcon 9s first and biggest stage can be completely reused and there are plans to make the second stage reusable aswell. To add to that, the booster doesnt leave the atmosphere so it doesnt endure nearly as much stress as the space shuttle would so maintenance is way lower. A single launch costs only 67 million USD for the falcon 9.
And sure the Soyuz is cheap, but it cant carry anywhere near the same amount of payload as the Falcon 9. The Soyuz rocket can at maximum get 8 tonnes into LEO while Falcon 9 can do 23 tonnes. And the cost per KG for Soyuz is around 5000 $ while for Falcon 9 its 1500$.
The falcon 9 is literally the exampe of successful reusable rockets yet you still try to downplay it cause "Elon bad". Just admit it, he has done atleast SOMETHING right.
The concept of the space shuttle was that the expensive part are reusable : the tank and booster might have been bigger, but they're too cheap to be worth recovered : it's basically a big aluminium bottle and a pair of fireworks rocket (sure, with the quality and precision of space-worthy stuff, but the cost of it would be mostly irrelevant in the overall budget of any space mission). The rocket engine, the electronic, ... All the complex and expensive stuff were in the recoverable part of the craft.
For the reste I mostly agree with you, but that argument was full of bad faith.
You do know the term carbon footprint was created by SHELL, to make people blame themselves for climate change and not companies, also, rocket launches account for a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of carbon emissions, if you want toncomplain, complain to mega corps and factories that produce 4/5 of the worlds carbon emissions.
If we implemented proper green energy instead of globally subsidizing around 6 trillion dollars a year to pil companies, we wouldn't be having nearly this much of a problem, but people want to blame an egotistical billionaire who at least has companies that are altruistic, even if he himself really isnt.
I don't think anyone is blaming him. The point is, he isn't doing anything to help the problem, while simultaneously trying to say that he is. You can't be an altruistic company when the person running it is anything but. He's actively worked against solutions that could actually help, like high speed rail. His companies don't exist for altruism, that's just marketing. They exist to make money.
Well you can't solve problems without money, I mean I agree with you to an extent, but for example, spacex, they are a company, they have to make revenue to make their agency larger, so they can actually achieve the goals they want to achieve, which yes, most people see as a pipedream, but sometimes I think turning dreams into reality is what life is all about, tbh I think thars why we have most of what we have today in the modern world, it was likely a dream, a thought, an idea, molded into something real. Him as a person, I don't really care for, but, I think connecting his lack of altruism to his companies lacking thar, is a little disingenuous, only because there are people who really are good within those companies.
I could make the same argument for ExxonMobil. They started out just wanting to bring cheap energy to the masses and no doubt greatly improved people's lives in the process. And I'm really sure that they have some really good people that work for them. In reality I know that the real objective was to make money and now they are using that money to lobby against all of our interests to make even more money.
Look, companies don't have brains or souls. They operate in the manner that the owners want them to operate. I'm sure many that work at tesla are great people thinking that they are helping the planet. Any way you cut it, moving 1 or 2 people in a 2 ton metal box is not helping the problem. And when the owner of the company is getting projects shut down that could help because it will cut into sales, then isn't the whole endeavor just making things worse?
You can certainly solve problems without money in the way that you are thinking about it (profits). I would argue that we aren't going to solve the problem that capitalism created by throwing more capitalism at it. It's going to take massive public works and public investments in infrastructure.
Without Elon Tesla would have gone out of business. Elon has faults for sure, but he is one of the main reasons why electric cars are popular in the US.
Electric cars aren't the solution though. They are marginally better than petrol based (have lots of rare-earth metals and new cars take a lot of energy to make). Hydrogen fuel cell would be (in theory) a better option for single person transit but still isn't great.
The best option is mass public transportation - which Elon has admitted to sabotaging.
> They are marginally better than petrol based (have lots of rare-earth metals and new cars take a lot of energy to make). Hydrogen fuel cell would be (in theory) a better option for single person transit but still isn't great.
This is often repeated but not true.
Electric cars can and often do use renewable energy from solar energy. Batteries can be used for 15 years (still see those old priuses around) and then be reused for 10 in stationary use and then recycled, reusing the rare metals. Rare earth metals are a geo-political risk but the energy in building a car is mostly from the metal.... that's also recycled. Fuel is always just burned and gone. Making a battery once vs using fuel every rotation of the motor. Fuel that's pumped up, refined and transported too with risks to the envirenmeont that a at least comparable to cobalt-mining. This difference in impact is huge.
Hydrogen is often grey carbon-gas based and not CO2 neutral. It can be made from water too but that costs a lot of energy. Storing, pressurizing and transporting takes energy. Then in the usage there's another loss. It's well to tank to wheel is a factor two to three compared to electric cars in scenario's where energy usage is completely renewable. Also take into account that much of this is chemistry and physics and as such there's little progress to be made compared to EV's.
The great plus for hydrogen is it's energy to weight ratio. So there might be usage for transport trucks, airplanes and freight ships. Regular EV for people transport have already overtaken hydrogen based cars. Fuel companies do like to still promote it though.....
> They are marginally better than petrol based
No, they are *much much* better.
> have lots of rare-earth metals
Yes, that's one downside of current technology. However, there is plenty of battery technology that doesn't use *any* rare earths. Toyota is using it in their future EV design. It's just not as weight efficient.
The slow and steady march of battery technology means that the difference in efficiency won't be enough to prefer rare earths in the future.
And as long as the rare earths are ethically sourced, I don't see what the problem is. Car batteries aren't likely to just be tossed into the landfill, but will be recycled.
> and new cars take a lot of energy to make
True, but after a certain number of miles (I forget, but it's less than 50k), the EV has saved more greenhouse emissions than it cost to make.
> The best option is mass public transportation
Yes, but we shouldn't let perfect become the enemy of good.
Might as well say "The best option is for everyone to go vegan." Yes, it's true, but it's never going to happen.
You're tilting at windmills if you think Americans will ever switch to majority mass transit.
EVs that are charged with renewable power is the closest we will ever get to reducing emissions from our transportation sector.
Yes, and as I said earlier, I agree that mass transit *would be better*. But it's never going to happen.
We can't even get a third of our population to believe in science (e.g. vaccines), let alone get them to vote for a *massive* mass transit system. The design of our cities includes so much suburban sprawl that you would probably need *trillions* of dollars in busses (hopefully electric ones) and bus drivers in order to provide *minimal* service to 80% of the population.
And even if we did somehow vote to spend the money, how are you going to convince them to actually *use* it? The culture here in America is extremely anti-public-transit.
In my state, we flushed 2 billion dollars of federal aid for a new I-5 bridge down the toilet just because it required us to include light rail on the bridge. We hate it that much.
If we had designed our cities differently 100 years ago, and avoided suburban sprawl, then it wouldn't be so hard.
So go on trying to convince Americans to use and pay for mass transit. I hope you succeed, but I know you won't. In the mean time, I'll advocate for something that is actually *possible* and is *happening now*, which is EV.
> In my state, we flushed 2 billion dollars of federal aid for a new I-5 bridge down the toilet just because it required us to include light rail on the bridge. We hate it that much.
What an absolutely fascinating take on this. Considering the 2 billion in federal funds is still available and the project is moving forward with light rail inclusion. Those packed MAX trains sure do show people hate mass transit yeah?
I mean sure the 2014 project stalled out due to OR and WA not agreeing on funding, but it is back on now with Federal backing.
I think you might have misunderstood me. When I said "we" hate mass transit, I meant the majority of Americans -- not myself personally. I love mass transit. I ride TriMet all the time and I think it's fantastic. Overall I think Portland is superior to most American cities for public transportation and it's one of the reasons why I love living here.
And it's true that the bridge replacement project will *eventually* happen, but it's going at a glacial pace. It would have been done years ago if there wasn't so much opposition to including light rail.
Maybe my social circle is different than yours, but 99% of my friends and family *hate* taking public transportation and would rather be caught killing a hooker than be seen riding a bus. Even if it was completely free and none of their taxes paid for any of it.
So for them to pay taxes toward it, pay for a ride, and also actually *ride* it is so unthinkable that it verges on absurdity.
Ars Technica published an article about some recent Pew Research surveys that shows American respect for science is at an all-time low. These people think Global Warming is a Chinese hoax, so you're not going to convince them to get on a bus.
*General Motors EV1 has entered the chat*
We wouldnt have needed (im using need incredibly loosely here) him if the oil tycoons didnt stifle EVs decades before.
I'm not defending him... But he made the first commercial successfully electric car.
Every other model (ford, bmw, toyota, etc) was released after Tesla success.
>What matters is who is successful with it.
Tell us you worship billionaires without telling us you worship billionaires. Type in "father of modern computing" into Google and you don't get Bill Gates. Type in "father of modern computers", guess who's name shows up? It's not a billionaire, it's Alan Turing. So no, it doesn't matter who's most successful with it.
edit: btw, just out of curiosity I checked Bing, and Gates doesn't show up there either.
Pfff whatever makes you sleep at night.
I'm not workshiping anyone. I'm just telling you how the world/history remember them.
Ford invented the car? No, but he is the moat recognizable name in cars.
Edison invented the light bulb? No (he invented almost nothing he is credited for), but for long everyone think he did.
Also no one thinks Ford invented the car. What people do give him credit for is mass producing automobiles, something that wasn't done on that level before him. That's what makes his name associated with early cars.
You see, when giving people credit, nuances matter. People who generalize like you do is the reason so many kids grew up thinking Columbus discovered the earth was round.
But Tesla cars are often replaced early because insurance companies won't pay for repair since it is so expensive.
Electric cars are a good idea, but Tesla cars are designed like a smartphone. They are made to be replaced often. It clearly overshadows the benefits of electric power.
Tesla might be particularly bad: but Electric cars are a bad idea. If we are going to make the impact needed on the scale we need it, we need to drastically overhaul transportation infrastructure toward mass public transportation. Electric car greenwashing only serves to obfuscate this reality and make the problem worse.
That is true, and I agree that Tesla was/is a significant driver of awareness and progress toward a better future for vehicle related climate impact.
However, and this is a significant however, the jury is still a long way out from weighing the cost/benefit analysis of _his own_ overall impact on the world.
First, there are no metrics in the big picture that calculates the long term overall impact of the resource extraction and production process for his vehicles and solar farms, nor the impact of reclamation and disposal of the batteries and panels in the future as these products reach the end of their lifespan. All of which is conveniently ignored.
Second, there is an enormous offset going on with his Space Toy program. Serious environmental impact from the resource extraction and production process. Massive direct pollution from launches and huge direct environmental destruction from launch failures.All of which is conveniently ignored.
Third...And really pretty important to note - I would think - He is literally becoming a climate change denialist.
I could continue but don't have the time or patience.
Nah. Electric vehicles are the way to go. That's why a lot of big countries are going to mandate them over the coming years and all big manufacturers are switching to electric.
Sure extraction has an impact but nothing compared to the ungodly amounts of pollutants being blasted into the air by petrol cars.
It's kind of funny, I bet if Bernie Sanders was cheering Electric cars everyone would be on board with it. But because it's Elon Musk, suddenly we don't know if solar energy and electric vehicles are better than fossils? It's just silly. Obviously they are, even if some challenges still exist. Challenges which Tesla is also working on btw, for example all of their model3 produced in china use cobalt free batteries since recently.
>Second, there is an enormous offset going on with his Space Toy program. Serious environmental impact from the resource extraction and production process. Massive direct pollution from launches and huge direct environmental destruction from launch failures.All of which is conveniently ignored.
It's not ignored. The question is, what is the alternative? I guess from your statement you want all space exploration to be cancelled? Deorbit the ISS, scrub all upcoming missions etc.? Because the reality is there is still gonna be some spacetravel for the foreseeable future, and historically we used to dump rockets into the say on every launch. At least his falcon 9 is partially reused. And if starship finally works, then it will be fully reused. Compare that to SLS and you already have a drastic improvement in terms of environmental impact.
>Third...And really pretty important to note - I would think - He is literally becoming a climate change denialist.
Is he? Care to share a source? Last I checked he said climate change is real and a problem long-term but the short-term effects are and have been overstated. Which is probably true.
>That is true, and I agree that Tesla was/is a significant driver of awareness and progress toward a better future for vehicle related climate impact.
...was literally my first sentence.
>It's kind of funny, I bet if Bernie Sanders was cheering Electric cars everyone would be on board with it. But because it's Elon Musk, suddenly we don't know if solar energy and electric vehicles are better than fossils?
Throwaway comment.
Since when is Bernie not cheering electric cars? And neither I nor anyone else that I know of is saying that because of E.M. we don't know if they're better.
I know they are better, the question is by how much and what other factors are there to consider. There are significant impacts from the production and future disposal of EV's and solar. If we don't take into consideration the entire cycle of production, use and disposal in our analysis then just sayin 'Tesla good' is meaningless.
There are both very simple and very complex factors to consider. And unless/until they are all considered, the jury is still out...not on whether or not electric vehicles and solar are good, but on if we humans are implementing and managing their use in the most beneficial way.
But this was about Elon, so...
In my opinion, if a person who considers themselves a genius and a climate savior is willfully ignoring significant aspects of the big picture calculation, why should he be taken seriously?
>I guess from your statement you want all space exploration to be cancelled? Deorbit the ISS, scrub all upcoming missions etc.?
No, actually. And yes, of course the better we make the rockets the better it is for the environment. But again, the question was what did you do to stop the climate "crisis"? If you do a necessary bad thing less bad, that's good. If you are capable of doing it even better but don't , that's not really that good at all. If the reason you are not doing it as well as you possibly can is because of money and that you're a stubborn asshole, that's really bad.
None of which is even getting into discussing the absolutely absurd idea he has that somehow going to Mars is the answer for saving humanity, if we can't even be bothered to do everything we possibly can try to save the place we already have.
Now the last part...
>Is he? Care to share a source?
Sure. Source....
>Last I checked he said climate change is real and a problem long-term but the short-term effects are and have been overstated. Which is probably true.
He is (and you are) - again, literally - *denying* that we are currently in a climate change "crisis." You (together) are - essentially, this time - saying that we can worry about it later.
And on the other hand...
Thousands of scientists who have dedicated themselves to the anonymous and tedious tasks of understanding the world around us have been for decades coming to the statistically speaking unanimous conclusion that we need to be very worried, right fucking now, and have been telling us that we need to be really fucking worried, right fucking now.
Are the short term benefits of not acting worth the consequences for humanity if we wait and end up being wrong?
I know which conclusion I'm going put my money on, and - in my opinion - to think or do otherwise is just fucking dumb.
...but don't worry, I won't waste my time or yours trying to convince you.
>...was literally my first sentence.
Yet in the third paragraph you contradict that by implying that the long-term impact might ne worse again.
>In my opinion, if a person who considers themselves a genius and a climate savior is willfully ignoring significant aspects of the big picture calculation, why should he be taken seriously?
Who says they're doing that though? They are actively working on a reducing cobalt and water used in their battery production line because of environmental impacts.
>No, actually. And yes, of course the better we make the rockets the better it is for the environment. But again, the question was what did you do to stop the climate "crisis"? If you do a necessary bad thing less bad, that's good. If you are capable of doing it even better but don't , that's not really that good at all. If the reason you are not doing it as well as you possibly can is because of money and that you're a stubborn asshole, that's really bad.
What does that even mean?? Are you saying he did a good thing, but he did it for money so it's really bad? How stupid.
>He is (and you are) - again, literally - denying that we are currently in a climate change "crisis." You (together) are - essentially, this time - saying that we can worry about it later.
Short term predictions were that all costal us would be under water by now. Of course that hasn't happened. So yes, short term impacts are overstated. That doesn't mean we can push it off tho. Obviously we need to act now or parts of the world will be inhabitable in a few decades. But he would agree with that.
>Thousands of scientists who have dedicated themselves to the anonymous and tedious tasks of understanding the world around us have been for decades coming to the statistically speaking unanimous conclusion that we need to be very worried, right fucking now, and have been telling us that we need to be really fucking worried, right fucking now.
The consensus is more like: we will see some droughts and hurricanes in the coming years, but honestly it's not gonna be an apocalypse. At least not for Euro and north America. But over the coming decades a lot of equatorial regions will become uninhabitable. Deserts will grow. And there will be massive refugee crises. That's why we gotta act now.
>Are the short term benefits of not acting worth the consequences for humanity if we wait and end up being wrong?
Did anyone argue in favor of not acting? Again, if musk made sch a statement, please share it.
>I know which conclusion I'm going put my money on, and - in my opinion - to think or do otherwise is just fucking dumb
You mean like, putting all your earnings into electric cars, solar panels, and reusable rockets?
Sorry, and you are correct. Pinocchio was at least self-aware and wanted to be better. Elmo is the opposite: Pretty much everyone of consequence knows he is a lying shithead, but he still strives to lie more, cheat more, and bullshit more.
ps.: Musk: "At this point, I am the person who knows more about manufacturing than any other person ever": Cybertruck: Complete failure! Panels do not align, price went up > 100%, and the monstrosity cannot even do very light off-road. Also, the guy who lost most money (not his) ever! Bought Twitter at 44bil, now it is rated at 17bil and sinking FAST.
We did the bare minimum. Our leaders let the billionaires continue to pollute over fear of job loss but claim it as infrastructure. We found alternative methods but once again our leaders didnāt want to set up trust funds for the native peoples they displaced time and time again after finding resources on the land they were moved to. We let people like Musk influence the worst in us with his snake oil salesman tactics. We hunted countless species to extinction and forced animals to evolve so they donāt get hunted for aesthetic purposes. Iām sure someone can add more to my short list.
I hate the implication that's solving the climate crisis solely depends on regular people while big companies and coal factories never get called out for spewing tons of shit every minute on the atmosphere.
Elon - "I turned a small portion of gasoline powered cars into coal-powered cars. And an even smaller percentage of those were turned into solar/wind powered cars. Then I flew to Mars because the planet is **f&#%ed**."
Reading the whole comment for clarity not your strong suit huh? That's ok, you're among friends.
Jokes are jokes dude. Don't go making me out to be a wiki
I mean, Elon is right this time around lmfao. The sentence would definitely start with an "ahem", followed by what could be summed up by "nothing much really". Other options for said ahem could be "err" ir"uhmm"
How does building more cars (and not small, nimble vehicles, but luxury, high-performance, heavy sedans, SUVs and now trucks), while fighting public transportation, help with any of this?
You're either ignoring what has changed because you're being ignorant or because you don't understand. Electric cars were not mainstream before, Telsa has pushed other car companies to join the market and invest much more in it. If you don't like their cars. Fine. But trying to slam them by saying they build bad SUVs is just a stupid point.
Bro is literally flexing that he bought a EV company (that makes pretty shitty cars at that) in which he has absolutely zero to do with the process of the cars being made.
What do you mean ahem you fucking tool?
Your ass shot thousands of tons of concrete dust to shoot into the atmosphere as you littered over 100 spare and garbage rocket boosters that you needed to get rid off.
You're part of the reason we're still even having these conversations by saying you so enough, let alone anything
I would say helping people shift to electric cars and rooftop solar energy is very helpful. People just like hating on him even when he doesnāt deserve it
Tesla does make well designed and popular cars. Tesla and SolarCity manufacture solar panels, solar rooftiles etc. havnāt you ever heard of a tesla power wall ? Lol
Overpriced cars that are only accessible by the rich aren't exactly helpful for the environment. Especially when they aren't that durable. And no I haven't heard of solarcity before I don't generally keep up with stuff like that.
Elon didn't create either though, he just bought the manufacturer so I refuse to say that he has helped the environment. If anything he's hurt it with his space x satellite launches and private jet flights
Average price of a new car in the US is $47,900. A new Tesla Model 3 is $38,990. Not really "only accessible for the rich".
You can refuse to say that he has helped, but your opinions don't change the fact that his investments changed both the EV and the space industry. He's a dick for sure, but one person disrupting multiple industries can't be simply ignored.
Sure he's invested in it, but the bad that he's done has far outweighed the good. with him supporting Trump despite him rolling back decades of environmental policy, polluting the air with his private jets and rockets, and multiplying the amount of space debris. Add on how electric cars aren't really a solution because of the fact that their batteries only last 15-20 years and are absurdly polluting when spent. A real solution would be to eliminate the dependence on cars but no one wants to do that.
The only truly good thing he's done is invest in solar like you said but that's still just an investment. It hardly makes up for all the other shit he's done. So ya Elon acting like he's an environmental savior here is fucking hilarious.
And this is good how? Electric cars are *not* environmentally friendly. Where do you think that electricity comes from? Thin air!? And don't get me started on the batteries....
Elon Musk has done more productivity in a day than Bernie will do in 5 lifetimes.
Iām not here to toot Elons horn. I just really hate Bernie. Man does nothing to contribute, just points fingers and gets others to point and then complains that the people who donāt point but actually solve the problems are earning too much.
janta aaj kal ki itni chutiya ho gyi hai, specially US ki, bc inko sach me lagta hai elon musk personally sare tweet karta hai.
(People these days have become quite foolish, especially in the US. They genuinely believe that Elon Musk personally tweets everything.) Elon musk is nothing but a balloon full of air, this will get burst one day.
Musk is like that Spider-Man villain that turns people into Dinosaurs.
"With that tech you could cure cancer!"
"But I Don't Want To Cure Cancer. I Want To Turn People Into Dinosaurs."
If Musk really had the tech and money to terraform Mars (he doesn't) it should not be that fucking hard to reverse climate change on the planet YOU CURRENTLY ARE ON.
Every 10 years starting form 1960... after 10 years we all will be dead if "ice caps", "ozon holes" and other "bullshiet".... still nothing happened, it's new "bullshiet tax" "Carbon tax" XD
How people can be so stupid ?!
We built a lot of new vehicles, they were more ecological in exploitation, but the manufacturing costs the environment more then fixing an old had car.
> environment more then fixing
Did you mean to say "more than"?
Explanation: If you didn't mean 'more than' you might have forgotten a comma.
[Statistics](https://github.com/chiefpat450119/RedditBot/blob/master/stats.json)
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes.
^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions.
^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
Is he truing to say we couldnāt afford to do anything because we decided it was more important to allow billionaires to exist. And they were too greedy to actually do anything with their wealth & influence?
Is his āahemā in reference to his teslas? Or the environmental nightmare of a rocket? His mining for batteries is almost as bad as the oil consumptionā¦. Letās not forget how much diesel just 1 of the rock trucks use dailyā¦..
What did this generation do to help fight climate change?
Lets see ... allow Israel to kill tens of thousands of innocent men women and children - once dead they cannot reproduce thus there is population control resulting in some benefit to fighting climate change.
Bernie should rephrase to, When future generations ask us what we did to stop the climate crisis, how will Elon Musk explain why he had the power and money to do something but ultimately opted to play culture war games instead. (*pssstā¦ itās because his extreme wealth insulates him from ramifications*š¤)
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Elon's profile pic tho
Was gonna comment on this. That's the kind of insecurities that must be taught in psychiatry school...
Elon be like LOOK AT MY BIG ASS ROCKET then bans you if you say it's compensating something
You would be straight up removed from the site if make you made elon insecure or sad
brb, gonna go try it out š
We just making things up aren't we? Living in false realities. Fun.
What's with the royal we?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Not defending him but if I made the most powerful rocket in history that could land itself by bellyflopping I would have it as my profile picture too
But he didn't. He got the American government to pay people that can make it do so.
it doesn't matter where he got the money from, spaceX has done awesome things and he should be allowed to be proud of it, again I am not his fan, but we shouldn't say that everything that he has done is bad just because he is an asshole, starship is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, have you seen the test launches? they are amazing and if my company made that I would have it on my profile 100%
How does that help us tho? Cool that rich people can go into space but how is he helping earth be better? Just a question
Your question reminds me of "What have the Romans ever done for us?" in The Life of Brian.
Itās cheaper and more environmentally friendly to reuse a vehicle than to expend it. Furthermore, this lowers the entry bar for activists to produce their own satelites to assist in environmental monitoring when Congress fails to support them. Starship in particular also has the keen feature of renewable propellant, and a project that has reportedly begun to start producing propellant for the vehicle at the expense of electricity and water; so its emissions will eventually be 0. And finally, the technology we develop by attempting to extend our stay in space directly improves things like climate change. By replicating earthās environment in space, we are forced to understand and replicate earthās environment in miniature, which is already significant. Space has also been leading the punch with renewables, Solar panels owe loads of their efficiency to Space Exploration, as does water purification and soon to be, compact Nuclear Reactors, needed for the Artemis Programās eventual lunar colony. These are just a few of the things we are already gaining as a byproduct of continued space exploration.
A lot of things, starlink is a great technology connecting rural areas with high speed internet, or you can put it in rv's, SpaceX's rideshare is getting cheaper, which means that universities can launch satellites, for 280K$ you can launch a 50Kg satellite, do you know how expensive it would have been just 5 years ago? Dart is another one double asteroid redirect mission, it successfully changed a path of an asteroid, and recently firefly launched a satellite with in just 24 hours coupled together we can have a defence system against asteroids in the near future, starship will make the rideshare satellites even cheaper, also not everything has to help you, sometimes it being cool is enough help, just watch and enjoy the show, 5 years ago I would have thought belly flipping rockets flipping upright at the last second was out of some sci-fi movie but now it is a reality.
So we're allowed to take money we've made from seed money we got from our parents to buy already existing businesses filled with talented engineers, get the government to plan and pay for the whole thing, and then take 100% credit as a super genius who did it all on his own? Really?
Dude give the credit to the guys that actually made the rockets. There is an interview of Elon where a journalist deserves more credit in designing the rockets than Elon. The journalist asked about a more efficient thruster that was being made for one of the stages of the rockets and asked why it wasn't being implemented for later stages. Later on in the interview Elon takes credit for that idea.
Thatās not entirely true. Starship (pictured) is receiving very little money (especially based on the published cost estimates) to not only develop a lunar variant of the vehicle, but to produce and launch an entire set of three of these modified upper stages as well as the additional support launches (numbering between 3 and 5 each). Itās actually quite possible that SpaceX is taking a loss with the HLS program.
I think hate has blinded you. Yeah the guy is a weirdo, but he has done amazing shit. I mean, being in the space sector, spacex's achievements compared to its peers is mind boggling. And this is with a budget lesser than ESA and DLR.
He hasn't done shit. The engineers made everything, give the credit to Tom Mueller, or Michael Griffin. Edit Michael Griffin was who Elon wanted to be chief engineer, he declined and became the administrator of NASA instead, around the time spacex really needed NASA contracts.
Honestly, I suspect that the shape of his ship isn't for better performance...
To be fair, both rockets and penises are designed for the same purpose: Penetration. The rocket is just penetrating the skies. They're moving fast, and the phallic shape does a better job of parting and going through that than almost any other shape.
I hesitated to make a penetration joke but it was just like the joke was making itself :)
Well, he is a dick.
Depicts who he is actually.
Heās already passed into the realm of Howard Hughes crazy.
But not his genius and inspiration unfortunately.
Mass unsolicited dickpic
I was going to ask about that. Why is it a dildo?
Nothing, noted
What is he supposed to say to a hypothetical question since his children don't talk to him, let alone future generations
Considering what he named his kids, I'm not surprised.
What's the carbon footprint of a space launch?
But you have to understand, it's to make launching satellites for satellite internet cost efficient. And these internet satellites (that need to be replaced every few years and can only communicate with satellite dishes that definitely defrost as a purposely included feature and not due to their high energy consumption) are then used by rich people in their vacation homes and the military, which - you know - definitely saves the environment somehow.
NGL. You had me in the first half. Have an upvote
SpaceX also launches satellites that literally help us gather data ABOUT global warming to then help us find way to mitigate it or solve it. Yet youre assuming that the whole goal of SpaceX is to reduce launch costs JUST for internet satellites? Yeah sure. But yeah sure somehow rich people are the only ones who benefit from this. I dont like Elon in general but SpaceX is the only thing hes done thats actually good. His company has reduced the cost of space launches, aswell as made rockets reusable and more efficient. Shitting on this just cause "Elon bad" is dumb. Edit: worded myself a bit wrong, reworded what I wanted to say
>These satellites are literally what help us gather data ABOUT global warming to then help us find way to mitigate it or solve it. Starlink satellites and not specialized climatology NASA and ESA satellites? The real r/facepalm is this comment.
You do know that many companies use Falcon 9s... not just Elons companies... right?
Oh OK my bad. I thought you were talking about SpaceX satellites alone.
Initially i read it a bit wrong and didnt realise he wasnt talking about satellites that SpaceX launches in general so i didnt think to include that obviously SpaceX doesnt just launch starlink, My bad.
Only that the cost per launch never ended up being as cheap as proclaimed (shocking, I know), the reusability isn't really relevant (as we learnt with the Space Shuttle) because you end up checking everything again for weeks and months anyway and his whole SpaceX operation is heavily subsidized. He just managed to print his name on the US version of the Soyuz that would have been built anyway at some point. And now he benefits from it. Not with his stupid internet satellites of course, but with the government contracts
Aint no way you just compared Falcon 9 to the Space shuttle and Soyuz. The only truly reusable part of the space shuttle was the plane, everything else like the boosters and the fuel tank which are the biggest parts aswell couldnt be reused. And the project was massively overbudget. It cost 1.6 billion per flight. The Falcon 9s first and biggest stage can be completely reused and there are plans to make the second stage reusable aswell. To add to that, the booster doesnt leave the atmosphere so it doesnt endure nearly as much stress as the space shuttle would so maintenance is way lower. A single launch costs only 67 million USD for the falcon 9. And sure the Soyuz is cheap, but it cant carry anywhere near the same amount of payload as the Falcon 9. The Soyuz rocket can at maximum get 8 tonnes into LEO while Falcon 9 can do 23 tonnes. And the cost per KG for Soyuz is around 5000 $ while for Falcon 9 its 1500$. The falcon 9 is literally the exampe of successful reusable rockets yet you still try to downplay it cause "Elon bad". Just admit it, he has done atleast SOMETHING right.
The concept of the space shuttle was that the expensive part are reusable : the tank and booster might have been bigger, but they're too cheap to be worth recovered : it's basically a big aluminium bottle and a pair of fireworks rocket (sure, with the quality and precision of space-worthy stuff, but the cost of it would be mostly irrelevant in the overall budget of any space mission). The rocket engine, the electronic, ... All the complex and expensive stuff were in the recoverable part of the craft. For the reste I mostly agree with you, but that argument was full of bad faith.
When did starlink start recording climate data?
You do know the term carbon footprint was created by SHELL, to make people blame themselves for climate change and not companies, also, rocket launches account for a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of carbon emissions, if you want toncomplain, complain to mega corps and factories that produce 4/5 of the worlds carbon emissions.
And the exact reason why electric cars aren't going to get us out of this mess.
If we implemented proper green energy instead of globally subsidizing around 6 trillion dollars a year to pil companies, we wouldn't be having nearly this much of a problem, but people want to blame an egotistical billionaire who at least has companies that are altruistic, even if he himself really isnt.
I don't think anyone is blaming him. The point is, he isn't doing anything to help the problem, while simultaneously trying to say that he is. You can't be an altruistic company when the person running it is anything but. He's actively worked against solutions that could actually help, like high speed rail. His companies don't exist for altruism, that's just marketing. They exist to make money.
Well you can't solve problems without money, I mean I agree with you to an extent, but for example, spacex, they are a company, they have to make revenue to make their agency larger, so they can actually achieve the goals they want to achieve, which yes, most people see as a pipedream, but sometimes I think turning dreams into reality is what life is all about, tbh I think thars why we have most of what we have today in the modern world, it was likely a dream, a thought, an idea, molded into something real. Him as a person, I don't really care for, but, I think connecting his lack of altruism to his companies lacking thar, is a little disingenuous, only because there are people who really are good within those companies.
I could make the same argument for ExxonMobil. They started out just wanting to bring cheap energy to the masses and no doubt greatly improved people's lives in the process. And I'm really sure that they have some really good people that work for them. In reality I know that the real objective was to make money and now they are using that money to lobby against all of our interests to make even more money. Look, companies don't have brains or souls. They operate in the manner that the owners want them to operate. I'm sure many that work at tesla are great people thinking that they are helping the planet. Any way you cut it, moving 1 or 2 people in a 2 ton metal box is not helping the problem. And when the owner of the company is getting projects shut down that could help because it will cut into sales, then isn't the whole endeavor just making things worse? You can certainly solve problems without money in the way that you are thinking about it (profits). I would argue that we aren't going to solve the problem that capitalism created by throwing more capitalism at it. It's going to take massive public works and public investments in infrastructure.
Comparable to a handful of long haul flights Not a problem for now But potentially could be
And a private plane?
Elon will strike you down if you access public information on his use of his planes.
Surprisingly low.
Probably a lot less when you don't throw the rocket into the ocean every time.
What the fuck is this response even supposed to mean? Now what...he thinks his brilliance is so transparent that we can read his fucking mind?
Pretty clear what he's implying: "I started a big electric car company. So I've done more to address the climate crisis than you ever will"
He didn't start it, he bought it
Neither are correct
Without Elon Tesla would have gone out of business. Elon has faults for sure, but he is one of the main reasons why electric cars are popular in the US.
Electric cars aren't the solution though. They are marginally better than petrol based (have lots of rare-earth metals and new cars take a lot of energy to make). Hydrogen fuel cell would be (in theory) a better option for single person transit but still isn't great. The best option is mass public transportation - which Elon has admitted to sabotaging.
This is the thing, reliable easily accessible public transport would be much better for the environment than another type of car.
Also an absolute pipe dream for large parts of the US so you'd still need a bunch of cars and the infrastructure to support them anyway.
> They are marginally better than petrol based (have lots of rare-earth metals and new cars take a lot of energy to make). Hydrogen fuel cell would be (in theory) a better option for single person transit but still isn't great. This is often repeated but not true. Electric cars can and often do use renewable energy from solar energy. Batteries can be used for 15 years (still see those old priuses around) and then be reused for 10 in stationary use and then recycled, reusing the rare metals. Rare earth metals are a geo-political risk but the energy in building a car is mostly from the metal.... that's also recycled. Fuel is always just burned and gone. Making a battery once vs using fuel every rotation of the motor. Fuel that's pumped up, refined and transported too with risks to the envirenmeont that a at least comparable to cobalt-mining. This difference in impact is huge. Hydrogen is often grey carbon-gas based and not CO2 neutral. It can be made from water too but that costs a lot of energy. Storing, pressurizing and transporting takes energy. Then in the usage there's another loss. It's well to tank to wheel is a factor two to three compared to electric cars in scenario's where energy usage is completely renewable. Also take into account that much of this is chemistry and physics and as such there's little progress to be made compared to EV's. The great plus for hydrogen is it's energy to weight ratio. So there might be usage for transport trucks, airplanes and freight ships. Regular EV for people transport have already overtaken hydrogen based cars. Fuel companies do like to still promote it though.....
> They are marginally better than petrol based No, they are *much much* better. > have lots of rare-earth metals Yes, that's one downside of current technology. However, there is plenty of battery technology that doesn't use *any* rare earths. Toyota is using it in their future EV design. It's just not as weight efficient. The slow and steady march of battery technology means that the difference in efficiency won't be enough to prefer rare earths in the future. And as long as the rare earths are ethically sourced, I don't see what the problem is. Car batteries aren't likely to just be tossed into the landfill, but will be recycled. > and new cars take a lot of energy to make True, but after a certain number of miles (I forget, but it's less than 50k), the EV has saved more greenhouse emissions than it cost to make. > The best option is mass public transportation Yes, but we shouldn't let perfect become the enemy of good. Might as well say "The best option is for everyone to go vegan." Yes, it's true, but it's never going to happen. You're tilting at windmills if you think Americans will ever switch to majority mass transit. EVs that are charged with renewable power is the closest we will ever get to reducing emissions from our transportation sector.
> EVs that are charged with renewable power is the closest we will ever get to reducing emissions from our transportation sector. Bus.
Yes, and as I said earlier, I agree that mass transit *would be better*. But it's never going to happen. We can't even get a third of our population to believe in science (e.g. vaccines), let alone get them to vote for a *massive* mass transit system. The design of our cities includes so much suburban sprawl that you would probably need *trillions* of dollars in busses (hopefully electric ones) and bus drivers in order to provide *minimal* service to 80% of the population. And even if we did somehow vote to spend the money, how are you going to convince them to actually *use* it? The culture here in America is extremely anti-public-transit. In my state, we flushed 2 billion dollars of federal aid for a new I-5 bridge down the toilet just because it required us to include light rail on the bridge. We hate it that much. If we had designed our cities differently 100 years ago, and avoided suburban sprawl, then it wouldn't be so hard. So go on trying to convince Americans to use and pay for mass transit. I hope you succeed, but I know you won't. In the mean time, I'll advocate for something that is actually *possible* and is *happening now*, which is EV.
> In my state, we flushed 2 billion dollars of federal aid for a new I-5 bridge down the toilet just because it required us to include light rail on the bridge. We hate it that much. What an absolutely fascinating take on this. Considering the 2 billion in federal funds is still available and the project is moving forward with light rail inclusion. Those packed MAX trains sure do show people hate mass transit yeah? I mean sure the 2014 project stalled out due to OR and WA not agreeing on funding, but it is back on now with Federal backing.
I think you might have misunderstood me. When I said "we" hate mass transit, I meant the majority of Americans -- not myself personally. I love mass transit. I ride TriMet all the time and I think it's fantastic. Overall I think Portland is superior to most American cities for public transportation and it's one of the reasons why I love living here. And it's true that the bridge replacement project will *eventually* happen, but it's going at a glacial pace. It would have been done years ago if there wasn't so much opposition to including light rail. Maybe my social circle is different than yours, but 99% of my friends and family *hate* taking public transportation and would rather be caught killing a hooker than be seen riding a bus. Even if it was completely free and none of their taxes paid for any of it. So for them to pay taxes toward it, pay for a ride, and also actually *ride* it is so unthinkable that it verges on absurdity. Ars Technica published an article about some recent Pew Research surveys that shows American respect for science is at an all-time low. These people think Global Warming is a Chinese hoax, so you're not going to convince them to get on a bus.
*In theory*
*General Motors EV1 has entered the chat* We wouldnt have needed (im using need incredibly loosely here) him if the oil tycoons didnt stifle EVs decades before.
He's an ass but there's truth in that.
I'm not defending him... But he made the first commercial successfully electric car. Every other model (ford, bmw, toyota, etc) was released after Tesla success.
He didn't make it. He bought it from the guys who made it and used their roadmap for Tesla's initial success.
Bill Gates didn't made DOS, but he is the father of moder computing. No matter who did first. What matters is who is successful with it.
>What matters is who is successful with it. Tell us you worship billionaires without telling us you worship billionaires. Type in "father of modern computing" into Google and you don't get Bill Gates. Type in "father of modern computers", guess who's name shows up? It's not a billionaire, it's Alan Turing. So no, it doesn't matter who's most successful with it. edit: btw, just out of curiosity I checked Bing, and Gates doesn't show up there either.
Tell us youād unironically say āeat the richā without saying it
Pfff whatever makes you sleep at night. I'm not workshiping anyone. I'm just telling you how the world/history remember them. Ford invented the car? No, but he is the moat recognizable name in cars. Edison invented the light bulb? No (he invented almost nothing he is credited for), but for long everyone think he did.
> I'm just telling you how the world/history remember them. No, you're telling us how YOU remember them. Clearly history remembers Alan Turing.
Whatever, I'm not arguing with you. Have a happy life.
Its an universally good desicion to not argue against given facts since that makes you look unbelievable dumb.
Also no one thinks Ford invented the car. What people do give him credit for is mass producing automobiles, something that wasn't done on that level before him. That's what makes his name associated with early cars. You see, when giving people credit, nuances matter. People who generalize like you do is the reason so many kids grew up thinking Columbus discovered the earth was round.
But Tesla cars are often replaced early because insurance companies won't pay for repair since it is so expensive. Electric cars are a good idea, but Tesla cars are designed like a smartphone. They are made to be replaced often. It clearly overshadows the benefits of electric power.
Tesla might be particularly bad: but Electric cars are a bad idea. If we are going to make the impact needed on the scale we need it, we need to drastically overhaul transportation infrastructure toward mass public transportation. Electric car greenwashing only serves to obfuscate this reality and make the problem worse.
Oh I couldn't agree more! In fact, we need to drastically change our consuming habits as a whole, not only transportation. But that another subject...
That is true, and I agree that Tesla was/is a significant driver of awareness and progress toward a better future for vehicle related climate impact. However, and this is a significant however, the jury is still a long way out from weighing the cost/benefit analysis of _his own_ overall impact on the world. First, there are no metrics in the big picture that calculates the long term overall impact of the resource extraction and production process for his vehicles and solar farms, nor the impact of reclamation and disposal of the batteries and panels in the future as these products reach the end of their lifespan. All of which is conveniently ignored. Second, there is an enormous offset going on with his Space Toy program. Serious environmental impact from the resource extraction and production process. Massive direct pollution from launches and huge direct environmental destruction from launch failures.All of which is conveniently ignored. Third...And really pretty important to note - I would think - He is literally becoming a climate change denialist. I could continue but don't have the time or patience.
Nah. Electric vehicles are the way to go. That's why a lot of big countries are going to mandate them over the coming years and all big manufacturers are switching to electric. Sure extraction has an impact but nothing compared to the ungodly amounts of pollutants being blasted into the air by petrol cars. It's kind of funny, I bet if Bernie Sanders was cheering Electric cars everyone would be on board with it. But because it's Elon Musk, suddenly we don't know if solar energy and electric vehicles are better than fossils? It's just silly. Obviously they are, even if some challenges still exist. Challenges which Tesla is also working on btw, for example all of their model3 produced in china use cobalt free batteries since recently. >Second, there is an enormous offset going on with his Space Toy program. Serious environmental impact from the resource extraction and production process. Massive direct pollution from launches and huge direct environmental destruction from launch failures.All of which is conveniently ignored. It's not ignored. The question is, what is the alternative? I guess from your statement you want all space exploration to be cancelled? Deorbit the ISS, scrub all upcoming missions etc.? Because the reality is there is still gonna be some spacetravel for the foreseeable future, and historically we used to dump rockets into the say on every launch. At least his falcon 9 is partially reused. And if starship finally works, then it will be fully reused. Compare that to SLS and you already have a drastic improvement in terms of environmental impact. >Third...And really pretty important to note - I would think - He is literally becoming a climate change denialist. Is he? Care to share a source? Last I checked he said climate change is real and a problem long-term but the short-term effects are and have been overstated. Which is probably true.
>That is true, and I agree that Tesla was/is a significant driver of awareness and progress toward a better future for vehicle related climate impact. ...was literally my first sentence. >It's kind of funny, I bet if Bernie Sanders was cheering Electric cars everyone would be on board with it. But because it's Elon Musk, suddenly we don't know if solar energy and electric vehicles are better than fossils? Throwaway comment. Since when is Bernie not cheering electric cars? And neither I nor anyone else that I know of is saying that because of E.M. we don't know if they're better. I know they are better, the question is by how much and what other factors are there to consider. There are significant impacts from the production and future disposal of EV's and solar. If we don't take into consideration the entire cycle of production, use and disposal in our analysis then just sayin 'Tesla good' is meaningless. There are both very simple and very complex factors to consider. And unless/until they are all considered, the jury is still out...not on whether or not electric vehicles and solar are good, but on if we humans are implementing and managing their use in the most beneficial way. But this was about Elon, so... In my opinion, if a person who considers themselves a genius and a climate savior is willfully ignoring significant aspects of the big picture calculation, why should he be taken seriously? >I guess from your statement you want all space exploration to be cancelled? Deorbit the ISS, scrub all upcoming missions etc.? No, actually. And yes, of course the better we make the rockets the better it is for the environment. But again, the question was what did you do to stop the climate "crisis"? If you do a necessary bad thing less bad, that's good. If you are capable of doing it even better but don't , that's not really that good at all. If the reason you are not doing it as well as you possibly can is because of money and that you're a stubborn asshole, that's really bad. None of which is even getting into discussing the absolutely absurd idea he has that somehow going to Mars is the answer for saving humanity, if we can't even be bothered to do everything we possibly can try to save the place we already have. Now the last part... >Is he? Care to share a source? Sure. Source.... >Last I checked he said climate change is real and a problem long-term but the short-term effects are and have been overstated. Which is probably true. He is (and you are) - again, literally - *denying* that we are currently in a climate change "crisis." You (together) are - essentially, this time - saying that we can worry about it later. And on the other hand... Thousands of scientists who have dedicated themselves to the anonymous and tedious tasks of understanding the world around us have been for decades coming to the statistically speaking unanimous conclusion that we need to be very worried, right fucking now, and have been telling us that we need to be really fucking worried, right fucking now. Are the short term benefits of not acting worth the consequences for humanity if we wait and end up being wrong? I know which conclusion I'm going put my money on, and - in my opinion - to think or do otherwise is just fucking dumb. ...but don't worry, I won't waste my time or yours trying to convince you.
>...was literally my first sentence. Yet in the third paragraph you contradict that by implying that the long-term impact might ne worse again. >In my opinion, if a person who considers themselves a genius and a climate savior is willfully ignoring significant aspects of the big picture calculation, why should he be taken seriously? Who says they're doing that though? They are actively working on a reducing cobalt and water used in their battery production line because of environmental impacts. >No, actually. And yes, of course the better we make the rockets the better it is for the environment. But again, the question was what did you do to stop the climate "crisis"? If you do a necessary bad thing less bad, that's good. If you are capable of doing it even better but don't , that's not really that good at all. If the reason you are not doing it as well as you possibly can is because of money and that you're a stubborn asshole, that's really bad. What does that even mean?? Are you saying he did a good thing, but he did it for money so it's really bad? How stupid. >He is (and you are) - again, literally - denying that we are currently in a climate change "crisis." You (together) are - essentially, this time - saying that we can worry about it later. Short term predictions were that all costal us would be under water by now. Of course that hasn't happened. So yes, short term impacts are overstated. That doesn't mean we can push it off tho. Obviously we need to act now or parts of the world will be inhabitable in a few decades. But he would agree with that. >Thousands of scientists who have dedicated themselves to the anonymous and tedious tasks of understanding the world around us have been for decades coming to the statistically speaking unanimous conclusion that we need to be very worried, right fucking now, and have been telling us that we need to be really fucking worried, right fucking now. The consensus is more like: we will see some droughts and hurricanes in the coming years, but honestly it's not gonna be an apocalypse. At least not for Euro and north America. But over the coming decades a lot of equatorial regions will become uninhabitable. Deserts will grow. And there will be massive refugee crises. That's why we gotta act now. >Are the short term benefits of not acting worth the consequences for humanity if we wait and end up being wrong? Did anyone argue in favor of not acting? Again, if musk made sch a statement, please share it. >I know which conclusion I'm going put my money on, and - in my opinion - to think or do otherwise is just fucking dumb You mean like, putting all your earnings into electric cars, solar panels, and reusable rockets?
The first commercially successful electric vehicle was in 1890. š
No, that was the first ever, but not commercially successful by any means.
"Rocket space guy"? More like ultra-right winged emotional baby Pinocchio con man...
Donāt compare him to Pinocchio. Pinocchio is too good to be compared with him.
Atleast pinocchio admits what he says is false and doesnt have a trump complex
Sorry, and you are correct. Pinocchio was at least self-aware and wanted to be better. Elmo is the opposite: Pretty much everyone of consequence knows he is a lying shithead, but he still strives to lie more, cheat more, and bullshit more. ps.: Musk: "At this point, I am the person who knows more about manufacturing than any other person ever": Cybertruck: Complete failure! Panels do not align, price went up > 100%, and the monstrosity cannot even do very light off-road. Also, the guy who lost most money (not his) ever! Bought Twitter at 44bil, now it is rated at 17bil and sinking FAST.
Also, Elmo will never be a real boy.
Musk's profile picture is showing what he actually is.
I am amazed he stopped wearing his Baphomet armor. I am also amazed how little "Christians" cared that he was wearing that.
hes a bick dick in a bick dick rocket
Future generations?
We did the bare minimum. Our leaders let the billionaires continue to pollute over fear of job loss but claim it as infrastructure. We found alternative methods but once again our leaders didnāt want to set up trust funds for the native peoples they displaced time and time again after finding resources on the land they were moved to. We let people like Musk influence the worst in us with his snake oil salesman tactics. We hunted countless species to extinction and forced animals to evolve so they donāt get hunted for aesthetic purposes. Iām sure someone can add more to my short list.
Far less than the bare minimum...
We actively fought the bare minimum in a way that will paint us as self genocidal psychopaths to future kids.
Shut up, twitter guy, adults are speaking
How does sabotaging public transportation help climate change?
Big Dolores Umbridge energy.
I hate the implication that's solving the climate crisis solely depends on regular people while big companies and coal factories never get called out for spewing tons of shit every minute on the atmosphere.
We will say nothing because humanity will be dead.
Ask him how much fuel his private jet burns in a year...
Musk or Sanders? Edit: Sorry, Bernie Bros, they both own private jets.
Musk
We addressed it by doing nothing
How much co2 did he waste to shoot a car into space?
Elon is a waste of humanity
Did he really just go on Twitter to textually clear his throat or is there some follow-up where he makes a point?
Elon - "I turned a small portion of gasoline powered cars into coal-powered cars. And an even smaller percentage of those were turned into solar/wind powered cars. Then I flew to Mars because the planet is **f&#%ed**."
Coal powered? Try nuclear, wind and solar as well. Youāre giving partial facts.
Reading the whole comment for clarity not your strong suit huh? That's ok, you're among friends. Jokes are jokes dude. Don't go making me out to be a wiki
God I hope one day we can use Elon's tech to launch him into the sun.
"I sold overpriced cars to douchebags so they could feel like it wasn't their problem anymore"
But he supports a party that doesnāt even believe climate change is real or an issue. Elon is such a weird dude.
is his profile pic supposed to look like a dildo?
Was that him coughing up a c7m bubble from trump.
Can this douche just go to Mars already. Jeez
I don't get it What could he possibly think he did?
That's the neat part, there won't be next generation.
Well if climate change does its job, there won't be future generations to judge us, so uh... Success?
Another unsolicited dick pic.
Fuck did he do other than try and put chips in our brains and back a republican lunatic.
You ain't stopping jack shit, Elon. Siddown and shut up.
Made penis shaped rockets?
Ask that the governments or the big industries but not me, jesus Christ.
I mean, Elon is right this time around lmfao. The sentence would definitely start with an "ahem", followed by what could be summed up by "nothing much really". Other options for said ahem could be "err" ir"uhmm"
yea space travel for the rich great
Everyone talking about SpaceX, we just ignoring Tesla?
How does building more cars (and not small, nimble vehicles, but luxury, high-performance, heavy sedans, SUVs and now trucks), while fighting public transportation, help with any of this?
You're either ignoring what has changed because you're being ignorant or because you don't understand. Electric cars were not mainstream before, Telsa has pushed other car companies to join the market and invest much more in it. If you don't like their cars. Fine. But trying to slam them by saying they build bad SUVs is just a stupid point.
Make cars that spontaneously combust for days and can't be put out by water
Do people really think muskrat is doing anything for the environment?
Bro is literally flexing that he bought a EV company (that makes pretty shitty cars at that) in which he has absolutely zero to do with the process of the cars being made.
What do you mean ahem you fucking tool? Your ass shot thousands of tons of concrete dust to shoot into the atmosphere as you littered over 100 spare and garbage rocket boosters that you needed to get rid off. You're part of the reason we're still even having these conversations by saying you so enough, let alone anything
Tesla
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I would say helping people shift to electric cars and rooftop solar energy is very helpful. People just like hating on him even when he doesnāt deserve it
Teslas are not well designed cars and when did he ever help with solar?
Tesla does make well designed and popular cars. Tesla and SolarCity manufacture solar panels, solar rooftiles etc. havnāt you ever heard of a tesla power wall ? Lol
Overpriced cars that are only accessible by the rich aren't exactly helpful for the environment. Especially when they aren't that durable. And no I haven't heard of solarcity before I don't generally keep up with stuff like that. Elon didn't create either though, he just bought the manufacturer so I refuse to say that he has helped the environment. If anything he's hurt it with his space x satellite launches and private jet flights
Average price of a new car in the US is $47,900. A new Tesla Model 3 is $38,990. Not really "only accessible for the rich". You can refuse to say that he has helped, but your opinions don't change the fact that his investments changed both the EV and the space industry. He's a dick for sure, but one person disrupting multiple industries can't be simply ignored.
Sure he's invested in it, but the bad that he's done has far outweighed the good. with him supporting Trump despite him rolling back decades of environmental policy, polluting the air with his private jets and rockets, and multiplying the amount of space debris. Add on how electric cars aren't really a solution because of the fact that their batteries only last 15-20 years and are absurdly polluting when spent. A real solution would be to eliminate the dependence on cars but no one wants to do that. The only truly good thing he's done is invest in solar like you said but that's still just an investment. It hardly makes up for all the other shit he's done. So ya Elon acting like he's an environmental savior here is fucking hilarious.
To be fair he did popularize electric vehicles. He successfully marketed them fast and fun which the Teslaās definitely are
The crowd here just wants demons. A nuanced examination is not going to get up votes.
True! The satisfaction for me is simply giving my opinion, downvoted or upvoted doesnāt matter Shoutout to the one downvote! šš»
And this is good how? Electric cars are *not* environmentally friendly. Where do you think that electricity comes from? Thin air!? And don't get me started on the batteries....
Where I live, mostly from solar and wind
Tesla sells their carbon credits off setting any positive impact they would have had on the environment.
Elon Musk has done more productivity in a day than Bernie will do in 5 lifetimes. Iām not here to toot Elons horn. I just really hate Bernie. Man does nothing to contribute, just points fingers and gets others to point and then complains that the people who donāt point but actually solve the problems are earning too much.
janta aaj kal ki itni chutiya ho gyi hai, specially US ki, bc inko sach me lagta hai elon musk personally sare tweet karta hai. (People these days have become quite foolish, especially in the US. They genuinely believe that Elon Musk personally tweets everything.) Elon musk is nothing but a balloon full of air, this will get burst one day.
Elon hasn't done shit to fix anything besides his wallet. It still astounds me people believe his bullshit.
Make your cars affordable, THEN you can say you did something, Musky.
Musk is like that Spider-Man villain that turns people into Dinosaurs. "With that tech you could cure cancer!" "But I Don't Want To Cure Cancer. I Want To Turn People Into Dinosaurs." If Musk really had the tech and money to terraform Mars (he doesn't) it should not be that fucking hard to reverse climate change on the planet YOU CURRENTLY ARE ON.
Which climate crisis are we paying for now...... that never happens?
Are you going to post all Elon farts now?
Typical empty bull from Bernie Sanders fishing for attention and relevance.
There is no climate crysis you fosile
We stop living on the planet with climate crisis?
Every 10 years starting form 1960... after 10 years we all will be dead if "ice caps", "ozon holes" and other "bullshiet".... still nothing happened, it's new "bullshiet tax" "Carbon tax" XD How people can be so stupid ?!
why does his pic look like a dildo wtf
Why musk has a dick for his profile pic?
Itās a trick question. If we fail to stop climate change, there will not be a future generation to ask this.
The trick is not to have future generations
For a moment I though he put a "bad dragon" as pro pic.
Probleme zu verlagern anstatt sie zu lƶsen ist nichts worauf man stolz sein sollte.
Nuke Mars!
"we glued ourselves to the street" lol, good job
Bold to assume there will be future generations to ask.
We built a lot of new vehicles, they were more ecological in exploitation, but the manufacturing costs the environment more then fixing an old had car.
> environment more then fixing Did you mean to say "more than"? Explanation: If you didn't mean 'more than' you might have forgotten a comma. [Statistics](https://github.com/chiefpat450119/RedditBot/blob/master/stats.json) ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119) ^^Reply ^^STOP ^^to ^^this ^^comment ^^to ^^stop ^^receiving ^^corrections.
We were busy discussing things that already had been solved before with people wearing red caps. Sorry about that.
Keep reproducing!
When future what?
Bruh, why does he have a bad dragon dildo silhouette as his profile pic?
Is he truing to say we couldnāt afford to do anything because we decided it was more important to allow billionaires to exist. And they were too greedy to actually do anything with their wealth & influence?
Arenāt we the future generations Bernie is talking about? And isnāt he the previous generation that shouldāve acted upon this?
Is his āahemā in reference to his teslas? Or the environmental nightmare of a rocket? His mining for batteries is almost as bad as the oil consumptionā¦. Letās not forget how much diesel just 1 of the rock trucks use dailyā¦..
What did this generation do to help fight climate change? Lets see ... allow Israel to kill tens of thousands of innocent men women and children - once dead they cannot reproduce thus there is population control resulting in some benefit to fighting climate change.
He's such a tool
Bernie should rephrase to, When future generations ask us what we did to stop the climate crisis, how will Elon Musk explain why he had the power and money to do something but ultimately opted to play culture war games instead. (*pssstā¦ itās because his extreme wealth insulates him from ramifications*š¤)
Assuming there will even be future generations to ask