Quote:
Originally Posted by sachinshastry This propaganda seem to have spread well all over the internet. I wonder why people are so concerned over "human rights" only when it comes to battery production, whereas totally ignore it when it comes to oil extraction. As wocanak has pointed out, the quantity of the rare earth metals used in a NMC battery is less (around 20kg for a 40kwh pack) . LFP batteries contains no nickel and cobalt.
Coming to oil, has it not caused countries to go to war with each other? Its also a well known fact that some countries have been using the oil money to sponsor anti-social and anti-national activities all around the world. Many oil rich countries are also put under sanctions due to various geo political complications. Rich oil companies have been involved in lobbying the governments in many poor countries to exploit the resources despite people's opposition there. Oil spills causing damage to marine life is well known. So does this not have detrimental effects on water, biodiversity and human rights? Why treat EV as a villain and oil as a saint in terms of ethical sourcing? The problem lies in supply chain which needs to be sorted out in both. But branding EVs as evil for it is not justifiable.
Sorry for going off the topic, but just wanted to talk about this, as I see every Youtube video these days against EVs seem to show only one side of the story and completely ignore the other. It seems as if straight out of a "toolkit". |
I've taken the time to delve into the research myself, which surprisingly or incidentally happens to be part of my profession. Currently, I'm unraveling the battery supply chain for a European company and unearthed some uncomfortable truths. I've encountered similar findings with other materials, and recently it was cotton which we're all sporting this summer. To claim some authenticity of the work, luckily the reviewers have solid backgrounds, some even belonging to top global organization, who are validating the work. Additionally, certain American and European nations are now taking action, banning imports of products, including fruits and flowers, associated with environmental and social concerns, nor quitting to consider it because they hurt someone for oil or gunpowder in the past. And the best part? They're not making these decisions based on some random YouTube video or WhatsApp rumor.
Its absolute speculation to think human rights were thrown aside for oil, and there's been enough noise about it. But I do think it never got the "green" stamp like REs and EVs are getting. In fact most minerals and metals, be it the steel, aluminum or copper or others, are all under scrutiny for a while now over their environmental and social impacts. So whats the difference here for EVs to get popular - Its the time and hypocrisy that is being pulled out when are labelled as friendly.
LFPs still roll with lithium and other components, bringing their own bag of problems like trashing the environment and local indigenous communities. Whether it's flamingos taking a hit in Argentina or the dirt-digging in Congo and Zimbabwe, it's a mess. Talking about the hype over EV minerals, the catch is not all components that go in a battery cell are on limelight like the cobalt or nickel got for obvious reasons. Other minerals ain't innocent either; they've stirred up their own share of civil and cold wars. Infact much of the ancient wars are for few popular minerals. Lobbying, wars, pollution etc. - these are battles some big organizations have been fighting against for a while. Oil gets slapped with the terrorism label when it sparks conflict, while EVs get this soft "green" or "blue" tag to brush off the mess they create?
The damage oil does to marine life has always been known, with plenty of voices speaking out against it. You can find info on it with a quick Google search. Here's a couple of quick examples:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...1462962100102X https://www.worldwildlife.org/threat...as-development
Instead of fixing the problem, labeling batteries or renewables as the solution is where things get messed up. It paints them as people and planet friendly without really looking at their impacts on the ground. Today, you may find such labels on your apparels, stationary and even on mud burnt bricks too. Should we ignore them because we didnt see such tag for oil at a fuel station?
State-sponsored CL and FL isn't being tolerated anymore, thanks to a lot of effort from organizations. It's not just about oil or EV minerals; it's happening with cotton, cocoa, and many other products too. People and nations are waking up to it now. The hype is getting high unlike past and its apparently in the EV era. Just because something bad happened on one thing in the past doesn't mean we should let it go for other in the future.
My apologies too for the off topic.