Someone is lying about electric cars on the internet

May 11, 2016 5:03 PM

theshopliftingseagull

Views

292367

Likes

23735

Dislikes

729

Lately this set of images has been circulating:

Why golly, that does look bad, doesn’t it? Know what? Someone is a f#@%ing liar. Because the top picture is a copper mine

That top image is, in fact, a mine. It’s a copper mine. This particular mine is BHP’s Escondida Mine, one of the 10 largest in the world.

Before this continues, to repeat … that’s a copper mine.

In 2015, we used about 19 million tons of copper. Getting that copper out took digging big holes in the ground, just like the one in that first picture. It also involved using millions of pounds of blasting agent, carrying rock to crushers, spraying that crushed rock with millions of gallons of sulfuric acid, then letting the resulting toxic sludge sit around in leach fields to extract the copper.

How many times has someone approached you and warned you that copper is a bad thing and that you shouldn’t use it? I’m willing to bet that number is zero.

On the other hand, the world produces about 650,000 tons of lithium each year. Lithium exists mostly in the form of concentrated salts. Almost all that lithium—greater than 95 percent of it—is produced through a process of pumping underground brine to the surface and allowing it to evaporate in big pans. It’s separated from the brine using electrolysis.

There’s nothing you would think of as mining. No blasting. No trucks driving around carrying loads of crushed rock. No sprays of sulfuric acid.

This is a lithium salt flat

This is a brine pool for extracting lithium. (Uyuni salt flats, Bolivia)

The primary sources of lithium are from the Atacama Desert in Chile, and the Uyuni salt flat in Bolivia. These are two of the deadest places on Earth. It’s not exactly that nothing lives there, but … In 2003, a team of researchers published a report in the journal Science in which they duplicated the tests used by the Viking 1 and Viking 2 Mars landers to detect life, and were unable to detect any signs in Atacama Desert soil in the region of Yungay.

Not all of the Salar de Atacama (the big Atacama salt flat) is this dead. There are some pools there with very salt-resistant shrimp, and weirdly enough flamingos come to this desolate, otherwise empty place. So you know what they did? They made the area where the flamingos go a national reserve (the Los Flamencos National Reserve.) It’s both desolate and lovely. They don’t extract lithium there.

Now, it’s a safe bet that someone, sometime has told you that lithium mining is awful. That it requires big holes like that one that was used to make the copper pipes, and copper wires, and copper electronics you use every day. Someone told you that, even though it’s not true.

Why did they tell you that? Because someone knew just enough to know that lithium is used in electric car batteries, and that someone was enough of a dickweed to want to make electric cars look bad. Even though they knew they were lying.

This is a NASA photograph of the Atacama salt flats. Those blue rectangles are basins where lithium is extracted from brine.

Now, about those oil sands

“Oil sands” is is one term for them. The phrase you hear more often is actually “tar sands.” Why? Because what’s in those sands isn’t nice, fluid oil. It’s sticky, thick, blocky and solid. If you cut a chunk of it, oil doesn’t pour out. It’s just stinky black sand.

And getting oil out of the tar sands? That’s not done with a neat little well. There are two primary ways of extracting oil from tar sands. One is to force steam into the sands through a series of horizontal wells. Then another series of wells is drilled to extract the oil freed by the steam. And all it takes is about 1,500 cubic feet of natural gas to make the steam that drives out a single barrel of oil.

But that steam extraction? It accounts for a small fraction of the oil extracted from the Athabasca tar sands.

Most of it comes from a process that looks like this

And like this:

Gosh, you know what that looks like? Mining. That’s what. There’s the blasting, the trucks, the crushing, and then a mixture of hot water and caustic lye (sodium hydroxide) is added. It’s all mixed up into a black, sandy paste, then the paste is piped over to a plant where it gets churned until the oil floats to the top. Then the oil gets sent down some fine pipeline (Keystone, anyone?) while the remaining muck is dumped. It takes about two tons of sand to make a single barrel of oil.

So … yeah. That’s the truth. That’s what lithium “mining” is like. That’s what oil sands “extraction” is like.

That’s how stupid this meme is.

Now, it’s the internet, people. Play nice.

Article by Mark Sumner
sauce:
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/5/6/1524012/-Someone-is-lying-about-electric-cars-on-the-internet?detail=email&link_id=9&

Cat tax

The only lithium i extract is from Kurt cobain

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The "oil sands" where I live have reclaimed every site the have been to FYI.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

As a diesel mechanic with multiple mates working in multiple mines, can confirm mining for coal, ore, copper, gold, is rather destructive.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I drive an electric car charged by the solar panels on our roof. Please let me know how that's worse than ordinary cars.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

What about the new Graphene batteries OP?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

10 years ago | Likes 531 Dislikes 16

https://i.imgur.com/Ofd6v2u

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

Yes

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Nah, it's killed me since I lit it.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Inconceivable!

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

this is what that same oil sands location looks like today http://imgur.com/drC57ry

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I pictured you yelling every word as I read this.

10 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 2

I read it in Lewis Black's voice

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

+1 cause most people think their oil is miraculously pumped out of the ground with little environmental damage. Very informative.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

Man, I didn't think I'd see a cat run over on imgur today . . .poor kitty

10 years ago | Likes 705 Dislikes 15

Some of us like getting drunk and watching the game, others like getting drunk and playing halo

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I am not sure which part of the post to feel most infuriated at.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Seriously. Trigger warning your shit OP.

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 2

Joke?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 9

Yes. This isn't Tumblr.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

I was just wondering, guys...imma cry now...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

By an evil electric car on top of that! Full of lithium... probably

10 years ago | Likes 229 Dislikes 0

Fucking brilliant...

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I bet that lithium was taken from the lithium mine in the picture. These liberals are fucking savages.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Lithium extracted from mines that are harsh on the environment.

10 years ago | Likes 45 Dislikes 0

By forced cat labor.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

That is indeed a shame, dressing a cat up in a blue suit, making it wear a hat.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Jul 28, 2016 10:04 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

laaaaame

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

Upvoting for best pic.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

and upvoting again!

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

You don't like hockey either?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Tailings from lithium carbonate are terribly huge and toxic, sorry. Like it or not, nothing comes with no impact.

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 8

But some things definitely come with less.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

Brain: jump in that lithium pool. Body: why? Brain: you gotta

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

A car is a big item with lots of materials. If you are buying a new car, it uses resources to create and then to fuel.

10 years ago | Likes 32 Dislikes 1

plus most of those resources are recyclable.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

And copper is one of those resources.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

But fuel (energy of various kinds) was also used to extract, create and form those resources into what is now your car.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Totally! But it's used to make every new car. The impact the fuel used after does matter

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

TL; DR - Bolivia has gigantic cellphone and laptop battery-puddles.

10 years ago | Likes 66 Dislikes 6

And Toyota owns most of it.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They'll soon need some freedom too I'm sure.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

That stuff is good for bipolar too

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Pretty misleading post actually. http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But I--- I mean they need it!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The picture painted by daily kos is as deceptive as first pic. google: lithium extraction toxic?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So the top picture is a copper mine?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

The article was a little ambiguous on that.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Coltan (columbite–tantalite) look it up; mined by children; destroying the Congo and in just about every electronic device in your home.

10 years ago | Likes 81 Dislikes 7

My social teacher just asked us to read about this.... weird man

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And the miners kill and eat gorillas on their mining expeditions!

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Right! I mean you cannot post on Imgur without being part of the problem. So let's calm down and take a real look at everything.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

My thoughts as well Its not those demanding it thats the problem its how its supplied, and how it is in that example is a fucking disgrace.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Prius batteries are made of a nickel based compound. Nickle is extremely dirty to mine. Lipo is used in some electric cars. Like the Tesla

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

Theres also the fact that a car will drive 100k+ miles on a battery. For perspective, 100k miles at 30mpg requires 175 barrels of oil.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 4

another factor, EV motors last longer than typical 150k car (3k hrs@50mph). plus there is less wear &tear. IMO EVs sans battery cud do 300k.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You're taking the battery as a power source, instead of storage. You still need to power it somehow. And solar isn't exactly a magic bullet.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Certainly not, but generating electricity continues to become more and more efficient. Even today its far cleaner than burning gasoline.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And on average, burning gasoline is the high mark of it. Unless you're really well invested, or already nuclear, you have a long wait ahead.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

About 31 gallons of gas per barrel. 100k / 30(mpg) = 33,000 gallons. More like 1000 barrels of oil for 100k miles.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

You made two mistakes. Mistake 1, theres about 19 gallons of gas from a 31 gallon barrel. Mistake 2 is math. Check your numbers.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

so 19 gallons, I'm still closer than yours. My math is estimated but accurate.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

100,000 miles on 30 mpg... 100,000/30=3333 gallons. 3333 gallons/19gallons per barrel = 175 barrels.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You missed a decimal Im assuming. Probably did 100,000/3 instead of 30.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

There's a lot of copper in electric cars.

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 9

You'll never get me copper!!!

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

There's a lot of copper in normal cars too

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 2

True, but electric engines are made from a lot more copper.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

But yet copper is recyclable.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

as in regular cars plus its recyclable! burnt gas OTOH just keeps sitting in atmosphere.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

there's a lot of copper in most houses as well.

10 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 1

Protip: tear the copper pipes out of your walls for liquor money.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Stop environmental destruction! Tear down houses!

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Sadly copper is required for literally anything with electronics, including gas-powered cars. You're missing the point.

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 4

It's not required, there are more conductive metals out there, it's just the cheapest. But I know what you meant.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

^indeed. +1 for clarity

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I only use electronics made with melted down swords from the Bronze Age.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 1

Epic

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Too bad you use oil once and re-use lithium over and over and over and over and over and over.......

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

You could technically insert yourself into the carbon cycle through gasification/liquefaction and reuse the carbon from the oil

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

v

10 years ago | Likes 812 Dislikes 26

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Jan 22, 2018 8:37 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

v

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

been awhile @IAlwaysUpvoteDeanWinchester @IAlwaysUpvoteSupernatural @thedeanwinchester @thadeanwinchester @DeanAndIDoShareAMoreProfoundBond

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I just can't resist upvoting that wink

10 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 0

Thank you. v

10 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 0

Make more winks means more upvotes for you.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Fucking mobile won't let me access all of my gifs to share more of my glorious winks. https://imgur.com/PrJs3x8

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

In case you needed some more /a/P5aLq

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

*wink*

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I love him

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

*Sigh* Two things I can't resist: Upvotes and Dean Winchester.

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 0

Well, you've got good taste.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sploooooosh n pie

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Have to give Sammy some love too.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Good on you, OP. Preach

10 years ago | Likes 75 Dislikes 20

Just wait until you google "Oil Sands sulfur pyramid". Its terrifying.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Pshhh... Next your going to tell me jet fuel can't melt steel beams smh

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

The sad fact is that most of the electricity the planet uses is made by burning coal. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

You do Know how much pollution coal plants produce right? Cus as a union boilermaker I do. And with scrubbers n bag houses it's not alot

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If I recall correctly, wasn't the average production around 1kg CO2 per kWh? Oil is a bit less, and nuclear power is like 48g per kWh.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

In Norway over 90% (don't remember the exact value) of the energy comes from hydropower plants. Sadly this is not possible everywhere

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Somewhere between 97-99%. But 50% of our power usage comes from other countries with non-renewable power, like Russia, Denmark etc. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sooooo, copper bad. We should start advocating to stop copper use.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 3

Using copper for things lends itself to monetary value, which is exploited by tweakers stealing it and selling it as scrap to buy meth. QED

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That particular copper mine is an acid leech mine - which while not a great method is not the usually primary method of copper extraction.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper_extraction_techniques <- In-situ is however the primary method in the US, at least since the 1920's

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The acid leaching method is actually 100% contained and only practiced in a very small percentage of mines

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But copper can be recycled with relative ease. So it's not the worst medium. That would be plastics, which are difficult to recycle.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

But this argument pits the two industries against each other while only looking at vehicles. What about all the other things we use oil for?

10 years ago | Likes 108 Dislikes 11

It isn't really an argument about the industries as a wholes (fossil vs electric), but about the mining of their resources.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then the comparison still isn't equal. I'm looking at the vast amount of products from oil. Lithium is fairly specific is it not?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fair point. Lithium is just one of many required for a battery.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Far as I've read in this post it does not argue anything, it's simply and plainly shown the two are grossly misrepresented.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Like the synthetic plastics utilized in making those electric cars.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oil is used because it's still so abundant and cheap. Eventually synthetic fuel will become viable if we still need petroleum products.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Oil can be replaced by alternatives, such as bioplastics and other uses. Granted, that's going to take upwards of 20 years.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

If we cut vehicles out of the picture (including ships and semis) we use a lot less oil.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

If we quite breeding like catholic rats so many problems would stop.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

if we had started 40 years ago like we were told to, it would have been all over by now.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

THANK YOU. And if said Oil Sands don't get back up and running shortly, we will start to find out what happens when we run low on oil...

10 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 9

its already happening and even the government knew about it for decades. remember all those wars in the last century?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

It's a finite resource, EVERYONE knows.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No we won't. Saudis are keeping the price low to put the sands out of business.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Saudi production has stayed constant, the increased production comes from american shale reserves being opened up with fracking.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just this time the Saudis aren't cutting their production to keep prices high.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

At current crude prices, we could quite safely just not extract for awhile. There's no money to be made at this price.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Tough times for us in the O&G industry right now.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Adapt or die.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

No reason to do tar sands at all. We absolutely must not burn the oil we already have in proper reserves.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 5

If global warming is to stay below 2 deg (which will still give huge problems), at least 1/3 of known oil reserves must stay on the ground.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

That is not an issue, primary oil extraction only recovers 10-20% of oil reserves. The best enhanced techniques can bring that up to 50%.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Um, sad news, but according to what I read that line is supposed to be less than 2 degree, and according to NASA on 3/03/16, we just 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

*must stay unburnt. Petrol isn't the only product of oil refining.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Good point. I'd still suggest to hold off on the tar sands, since it costs so much environmental destruction, and we have large oil reserves

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

We're still running a few *MILLION* barrels a day in excess supply vs demand, with reserves of billions. It's not an immediate concern.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Oh for sure, not that I want it to get there either, would just go a long way to showing how much we ALL rely on oil is all I meant.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

(I'm pro oil, but I'm also pro alternative, namely because our economy is already fucked enough as it is and removing oil won't fix it atm)

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 3

That's exactly how I identify as well! As an Albertan, it's hard as fuck to explain that to anyone...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Also I don't think they have an electric car that can tow my fifthwheel.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

They can if they want. The problem with electric cars is the battery not the engine power. Batteries are too damn big to be practical.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Also as someone who works in a battery shop, they are too fucking expensive.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, torque isn't an issue with electric motors. Why do you think almost every modern locomotive is a diesel electric or regular electric.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Elon is currently being a godsend in that area though.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

+1 for a very informative piece, I hate that picture, its a complete misdirection.

10 years ago | Likes 3013 Dislikes 35

"Informative". OP lied about the lithium mining process. Lithium from brines is <50% not >95% as he claims.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I can't be 100% sure... But I think that 'oilsands' image is Isengard... The oilsands are basically a giant polluted, cesspool...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

They're much better recently. They've made considerable progress reducing the need for tailing ponds.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Have you noticed how you can usually tell an internet meme is dishonest if it comes across as really condescending to the target audience?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The post itself uses obsolete information to bash the oil sands, though. Modern organic extraction with solvent recycle is MUCH neater.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I use sodium hydroxide every day to etch propeller blades. Not the nicest stuff but also not that bad. I imagine there's far worse in mining

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I downvoted, then read the post. Upvoted now

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

alot of copper in electic cars... just saying

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This post isn't much better. http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Some electric vehicle manufacturers, like Tesla, use AC induction motors, which have no magnets.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hopefully that's the future.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

While slightly less efficient, induction motors are significantly cheaper. It seems likely more companies will go this route.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also Lithium is very recyclable as I understand. That's why you should properly dispose of all of your lithium batteries.

10 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

you need a lot more upvotes

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

It's just so wrong.. So many people will do absolutely no research on this and continue spreading lies

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

Whoever started it likely has a cellphone and a laptop.. Which are probably the two biggest destinations of lithium batteries.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Also I'm pretty sure the oil pic is a fracking oil well, rather than a tar sand facility.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I'd say SAGD. And by the surroundings, definitely could be Northern Alberta

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

@OP it gets worse. Google "Oil Sands sulfur pyramid". Its terrifying. Google images gives a good sense of scale.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Idiots and ignorants don't fact-check their sources, though.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I guess not entirely when you consider electric cars need lots of copper wiring.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So do regular cars. Anything w/ electronics.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

which is recyclable, as opposed to fuel.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

WHERE ARE ALL THE ANGRY PEOPLE?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Who would be stupid enough to even fall for it -.-

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

not many when looking at it with full attention but most people rarely do. unfortunately such ppl is what these things are designed to sway.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It was shared by my cousin on fb who also tends to share a lot of bullshit

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Even if it were true, it does not prove anything.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In addition this post does not clarify that harmful rare earth mineral mining IS done for electric cars and cell phones.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

The location of these mines are, for the majority, in northern china and mongolia.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Which isn't any worse or better than oil extraction just an alternative way to fuck up our planet.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

If you're talking about the cat being horribly mutilated by the remote controlled car, he survived the little battler...

10 years ago | Likes 60 Dislikes 1

That is the rare cat-a-pillar feline. When cut in half it make a duplicate self.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Cat always wins

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

As for John Deere

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I approach the entire internet as if it was 'misdirection'.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

If more people were like you, my friend...

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

It's a little more than just a misdirection I think

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

When I saw the top picture I thought it was a sarcastic joke. @OP going to such lengths to disprove it made me think it's serious.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And with misdirection you mean blatant lie?

10 years ago | Likes 398 Dislikes 5

'Alternative fact,

9 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You mean the lying in this post? I live in Alberta, and the lies that are being spread are ridiculous, take In-situ, it is NOT a "tiny"

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 13

What did @OP lie about exactly? Everything seems to check out from where I'm standing.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Saying a tiny fraction, 47%, in 2010, is not a tiny fraction, that's almost 50%! By now it's surely over 50, maybe even 60%

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

he meant missed erection.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It's misdirection. There are open pit mines and SAGD (pictured) for oilsands operations. Oil too deep, use SAGD. (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 3

If its shallow, use open pit mining. Which ever is more cost effective. Did you know the Alberta oil sands have been leeching into the(2/3)

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

Athabasca River since before oil co. were up there, and that mining parts of the oil sands is reclaming the land and cleaning the river. :O

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 2

The industry also does a lot of work in land restoration to make it more productive and create habitats after the "oil" had been extracted.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

fraction, this is easily verifiable on Wikipedia, 47% in 2010 was in-situ, and it's only increasing. The DailyKos is far from impartial.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 11

But its on the interwed (of lies)

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

M8 he took the b8

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not pictured: the coal mine that feeds the powerplant to charge the electric car.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Fun fact, those are coal powered cars for the most part. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of electric cars I want more Nuclear to help.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

local power co. (SMUD) gives option to pay for wind/solar power sources, so charging an electric car with that; no coal. Agree nuclear too.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If it is an option where you live, but considering how small of the total power wind/solar is its more likely coal

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Wish people would understand that Nuclear Energy is the future if we ever want to leave this planet!!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I will never get why people still think nuclear power is a good idea...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Honestly it's the future if we want to stay as well. Cleanest, safest, most cost effective. US has not approved one in over 20 years.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Your statement is also frighteningly true! It's literally the only energy source that when operating properly has ZERO negative effects!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The only person I know that has an electric car pays a premium to ensure his power is 100% renewably sourced.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Fun Fact: Just 160 giant container ships (of the 6,000 that exist) produce more pollution than all of the cars in the entire world.

10 years ago | Likes 295 Dislikes 31

In what time frame? This fact lacks vital context

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thankfully it's easy to fix: Stop buying so much shit you don't need! (not you in particular, all of us)

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

That is so ignorant and you have no idea how much the maritime industry stimulates economy. Greater than 90 percent.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Well if you enjoy receiving goods, don't bitch about it. Source: I work in the port with containerships.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The ships are also working to run on natural gas and some even plug into electricity in port.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And meat production produces much more than both of those.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

it's in their own interest to safe fuel tho

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Think about how much pollution would be produced if each container was attached to a truck and driven across the world. Ships r beder

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 4

Yea, we should really drive trucks from China to the US.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Fresh Air, Yo! Terry Gross is my spirit animal

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

For clarity, you're not talking about CO2, right? You're talking about smog, particulates other side-reaction pollutants?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Here's the solution to the problem...annihilate 3/4 of the current population. Source for all problems is us humans.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 2, 2022 8:03 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

That will never happen. They will use solar for some functions but a majority are going to natural gas.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Solar power is not a viable option for container ships. If all of the area of a large container ship were 100%efficient solar panel >

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

And the sun were directly overhead at the equator, then the ship would have 1/4 of its current engine's power.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

To save any for night-batteries, it would have to putt around at 3-5 knots, which just does not work.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You will quite simply never have solar powered ships! They require a staggering amount of energy every day, hense the massive fuel burn

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The only electric ships that exist now are nuclear powered. You'd have to pave the ocean in solar cells to provide enough energy!

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Methinks the statistic may be more honest, or at least telling, if you took it by mass of the transported cargo, though.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That's not a very fun fact.

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

Speak for yourself.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And per ton hauled, large ships are the most fuel efficient vehicles on the planet.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 2, 2022 8:02 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

You don't have clean air? Where do you live? 19th century London? China??

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

As an economist: this statement is straight-up knee-jerk bullshit. This is not how income distribution works at all.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Well what part are you disagreeing on? The first or latter statement? (or mayhaps both...?). Personally I'd like both...but problems I guess

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The problem is that if every country produced all the items it needed in-country, a lot of nations economies would collapse.....

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Simplest example; Japan makes a lot of cars. But they have little natural resources. So they import most of the materials needed....

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Container ships are not the only ships that burn bunker oil. Worse than burning bunker oil or tar though is coal , and we burn more of that.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My boss is working on outsourcing some stuff to china. I instantly thought of this.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They burn fuel that is basically the shit left over from oil refining. It's so thick *you could walk on it.* They warm it up and burn it.

10 years ago | Likes 129 Dislikes 6

Old Saint Joe!

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

....paper... Paper....PAPER!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I swear to god I didn't think anyone would get that reference. So glad I was wrong; imgur's the best.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Good ol' Bunker C.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

That tragic moment when you run out of kerosene and have to use diesel to clean up an HFO spill in the engine room....

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Hey, that's the same stuff Union Pacific gas turbines burnt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTELs

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And because they're ships that operate across oceans, you can't regulate their emissions once they're out to sea in international waters.

10 years ago | Likes 98 Dislikes 8

Yes you can, Google MARPOL and the IMO. Trust me, HFO is nasty, nasty shit but it is still regulated

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 1

Its 15 ships and its based nitrogen oxide and sulphur oxide emissions, not CO2.

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 4

So... nothing I said was incorrect. Got it, thanks.

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 7

Well......

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

your honour, he headbutted me in the fist with his face is also correct,

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

In a lot of ports nowadays, all vessels must either burn low sulfur HFO or diesel in order to reduce emissions

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Ports are not international waters. Ships wait 200 miles off-shore for their turn to dock because they're not regulated out there.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

The anchorage for Aqaba, Jordan is like 1000 ft from the pier

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

You are so stupid. Anchorages are a few miles out not hundreds.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Negative, I'm a marine engineer and every anchorage I've ever had to wait in is maybe 1-2 miles off shore tops

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

More pollution is misleading. That's only true for one pollutant in particular. They don't even come close for gross CO2 production.

10 years ago | Likes 85 Dislikes 4

Yeah exactly sulfur pollutants! It is not misleading, it is pollution. 37 times all of the cars in the world! YELLING. sorry got worked up

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

Co2 is far more of a concern

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Still though.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 29

No, that's not "still though", that's "Oh, you're correct, my 'fun fact' was misleading bullshit, just like OP was on about."

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 3

It's not bullshit.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 14

Well, let's review: Your statement makes a very wide and false claim based on one very narrow counterfact. Therefore: Misleading bullshit.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 5

You are aware that CO2 is not the only pollutant, right?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

Was that meant to be a reply for the other guy?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Low sulfur bunker fuel produces 25,000 lbs of CO2 per 1,000 gallons of fuel .That 1,000 gallons is roughly 4 tons of fuel, and large...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

ships can burn upwards or 14 or more tons of fuel in an hour. That's a lot of CO2 per ship per hour.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

But they replace thousands of trucks/trains/planes for transportation. Proportionally, they are eco friendly compared to the alternative.

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

You're saying that it would be worse if we transported goods across the Pacific Ocean with trucks. I agree, that would be a bad idea.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 2

Going 5 miles by sea uses less fuel than going 1 mile by land, per pound. There are cases where we can choose which we use.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Bronson gets it. Ships, despite their CO2 emissions, are the most efficient form of transport we have, per mile.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 2, 2022 8:03 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

The very large diesel engines are ships are by far the most thermodynamically efficient combustion engines, though. They outperform (1)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

cleaner fuels like road diesel, or especially biodiesel, synthetic diesel, and diethyl ether, they wouldn't have this problem. (4)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

all electric vehicles when you factor in electrical generation losses. The problem with ships is not the engines. It's the fuel. They (2)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

whole marine mechanic workforce. Permaculture/appropriate technology principle #1: Small and slow solutions. How little can you change (6)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Likes post about bs meme...in turn makes bs argument ant ships. Dur.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That would be a MUCH more genuinely sustainable solution that scrapping and rebuilding all those excellent engines and retraining the (5)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Prolly cause the main exhaust from cars are CO and water vapor

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also the main exhaust from ships. They get stuck with shittier fuel, so a higher % of their emissions are other things, though.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I spoke to Dr. Corbett of U of Delware the other day. He's the originator of that quote, and he told me he was misquoted and it's not true.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

get stuck with the fuel small, land diesels can't handle and/or that population centers won't tolerate. If we switched them to (3)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

while getting maximum improvement? (7)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Jan 23, 2018 4:59 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

power in that. If tar sands and fracking become less viable, either due to supply problems or political pressure, renewable fuel (2)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

cultivation can coproduce syngas and charcoal. The syngas can be converted to ultra clean synthetic diesel, while the charcoal can be (7)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As military vehicles, life-necessity delivery trucks, fire trucks, ambulances and ships run on it, and it's the most efficient by far. (4)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

batteries at night. There are carbon neutral and even net-carbon-negative ways to produce replacement diesel. Coppice and bamboo (6)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The ships we're running still work. Their engines still work. The workers who know those engines still work. There's a LOT of economic(1)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Putting PV cells on ships for daytime power assistance is well and good, but that big marine diesel engine is MORE efficient than (5)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

replacements will get more widespread. Diesel is both the easiest and the most worth doing, because it's the most essential (3)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

buried forever in the ground, meaning 60% of the CO2 photosynthesized from the cultivated plants is now buried where it belongs. (8)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm a mining engineer in Canada where copper and oil are our main focus, pm me if you have any questions needing more explanation

10 years ago | Likes 797 Dislikes 12

Let's say we all of the sudden have the technology to make oil (and copper, I suppose) entirely obsolete--much cleaner, cheaper alternative1

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

Would you be willing to give up your job?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

Luckily with my schooling I would never be without work, every mine that now needs to be closed would require engineers for the reclamation

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You have the perfect username

10 years ago | Likes 191 Dislikes 1

Hahahahaha thanks :)

10 years ago | Likes 39 Dislikes 0

You guys recruiting any of us poor oil workers who have been laid off? :D

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They got approved to increase production so need more truck drivers so check that out, not sure if they're still looking

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We have hired quite a few from the coal mines that all closed haha, pretty sure mount polley was hiring truck drivers a little while back

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Hehe dont hold a truck license, im a mechanical technician. How are Canadian firms for hiring foreign nationals by the way? 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I know the American ones are an absolute pain in the ass, im an EU citizen, also held a Russian visa. 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Goodluck getting a job in Canada without a license

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Can copper melt steal beams?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

only when it reaches 911 degrees fahrenheit

10 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 2

That's 488.33 Celsius for non-"Freedom Eagles"

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

How do I escape the oilfield?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

That depends on your current situation within the oilfields

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I work at Coal Valley and TekCoal Alberta. Do you see any mines opening in the near future?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Mines in general? Or are you referring to coal mines?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How much fresh water does it take to extract the oil from the sand? I think, and it's been a long time, fresh water consumption is enormous

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It doesn't necessarily have to be fresh water, all they really need water for is to make steam and cause the bitumen to become less viscous

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Then it can be separated from the sand allot easier

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I hope you're not affected by the fires!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My dad is a supervisor at kearl lake for imperial oil and they've entirely shut down production and are currently focusing on the well being

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of the people in northern Alberta rather than the oil

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm raising a pint of Colorado Toffee Porter for you and your old man.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I actually worked at one of the only mines in canada that used sulphuric acid leaching of copper so feel free to ask about that method

10 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

... Timmins? :D

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Haha nope it was in BC

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Poo! I'll meet an Imgurian friend one day!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I try to tell people mining is a temp land use --> reclamation. But. Whats the long term plan there? Carbonates to acidic waters apply?

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Alot of rock is naturally acidic once exposed to oxygen so really it's no worse to put acid on it than it is to just leave it to create acid

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I believe down in the US they use another method where instead of excavating the rock they instead inject the acid into the ground

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The entire process is extremely well contained and eventually you're left with rocks that now no longer contain copper

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So a mine isn't necessarily open to the idea of wasting acid because in turn they're wasting copper that is recoverabke

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Every last drop of acid is collected from the waste dump because now in that acid are microscopic copper that we want to recover

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Strategically placed and liquid always wanting to flow to the area with less pressure

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Lots of testing has been done on this method and proven that no acid is able to actually escape the contained areas to do the wells being

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And have hundreds if not thousands of wells that in turn pump the acid back out of the ground now containing the minerals that are wanted,

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Are there regulations like America in helping fix the land. how costly and how long does it take for the land to heal.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes definately, you need to have a plan in place prior to even starting the mine, and the process is usually in place the entire life

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The mine I work at has three resident bears and a cow calf moose, whenever they're spotted work in their area is shut down for the time bein

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

thanks for the info.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Anytime :)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Trees, top soil, grass, wildlife, lakes, creeks are constantly being built and planted throughout the mine life

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

is 2 tons of tar sand = 1 barrel of oil true? A cubic yard of dry sand is more than 1 ton... So seems impossible.

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

the oil is filling the gaps between the sand grains

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

My google research says that 4000lbs of sand yields about 250lbs of oil.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Science!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah its definitely true, it's the bitumen that you want to extract from the tar sand so it depends on the percentage of bitumen present

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

most oil sands will present 70-80% bitumen volume in one tonne of tar sand, which is required for one barrel of oil so its an accurate fact

10 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

How do I hide a body?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It'd be extremely easy to hide a body in a tailings pond, or even in a tailings dam. Just one more benefit of mining

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As a mining engineer (though not working as one), what do you think about the current state of the industry?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It happens, I remember when it happened in early 2000's. It'll pick up again, the industry is related to the dollar so much and vise versa

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Interesting. Would a background knowledge in geotechnical engineering help at all?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

God i hope so, i work in the Bakken shale play and things are really getting tight for us down in the states.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

When the industry picks up again it'll be very good for people in the industry such as you and I as companies will be in a demand for us

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Something most don't realize is right now Canadian mines are actually making more money due to currency and selling to the states and asia

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

What pollutes more? The copper extraction or oil?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Now that's a question, I think what people don't realize is alot of pollution tied to the oil industry is more so the companies that use oil

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

To create their own products, these massive factories create the worst pollution and it's just blamed on oil and then generalized to mining

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

A thing that would interest me: could mines in general be powerd by electricity alone? I'm thinking electric trucks and so on.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Would that even be efficent? Sorry if my english sounds weird, I'm not a natice speaker.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Doesn't the refining of sulfurous bitumen release sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, posing long term health risks?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Pfff don't tell me how to live my life. If I have questions I'll ask them right here, right out in the open. Deal with it.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Is this all true?

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A man is interested in your information. A man says you should make a post with this information in it.

10 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 1

that post would be massive haha, I made a post for an AMA about mining but I never make it out of usersub, people are very uneducated about

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 0

mining and Id really like to do my best to change that and open the eyes to how serious mining companies actually are about the environment

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

I believe that. For the most part although I'm sure there are exceptions. But some things are inherently harmful to the environment... (1/?)

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

You could be the most conscientious person around but if you're job is to blast things out the ground, just exactly how (2/?)

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Quite frankly, I don't believe you. Not after the hellhole of a mess they've made in my country.

10 years ago | Likes 0 Dislikes 3

How many mines are in canada and where are the centralized? what is the avg. % of land used by such, and are they open mines or like coal

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Engineer not a statistician

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

well then u can probably answer 2/4 of them

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

BC-Gold/Copper/Coal/Silver/Platinum

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Northern Canada-Diamonds/Gold/Coal

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

My boyfriend is working at Ekati Diamond mine right now. I keep trying to get him to steal me an uncut diamond but no dice.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sask-potash

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Maritimes-Nickel/Zinc

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Ab-Oil sands

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Copper mines are almost always open pit and usually also have molybdenum, gold, silver, and platinum present with the copper

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Majority of mines in eastern Canada are underground mines, coal mines depend on the method of removal of the coal so is underground or open

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

As for types of mine it actually depends on 1.the ore body type 2. the location of mine and 3.the type of material being mined

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Cool thanks for the info

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

As an Albertan: Athabasca oilsands extraction = "World's largest crude oil cleanup operation." Rebrand that shit. :D

10 years ago | Likes 57 Dislikes 3

*the size of England.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Cleaning the Athabasca river since starting operations"

10 years ago | Likes 31 Dislikes 1

Has the Athabasca river been subjected to many breaches or contamination from oilsand operations? Sincerely, uninformed Alberta tradesman

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

It was contaminated long before operations began. 60 years ago locals couldnt eat fish from the athabasca

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Sadly you'll never be able to know the truth is much a situation, very well the river could be contaminated just do to the oil being present

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

or it could very well be from the actual oil industry, but good luck getting anything from one of the wealthiest industries in the world

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Yes, although the major unabated concern right now is the leakage of Napthenic acids into the watershed. Difficult to deal with.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

What happens to the sand that's extracted? Can it be used in cement or concrete?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

unrelated but not: in coal mining we do one of three things 1. Underground mines would pump or dump waste into abandoned portions of...1/2

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

..the mine. 2. You make a giant hill (like a mountain compared to the flat land around it) with the waste and cover it with top soil so..2/3

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

that grass would grow on it. 3. Open (strip) mines, once the coal was taken out of an area they would dump the slurry in the pit and bury it

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Dec 1, 2025 1:47 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Someone has to do it, and take the heat that working in mining comes with, but nobody else can better the industry standards

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Dec 1, 2025 1:47 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Hardrock mining tailings ponds are able to house healthy fish and even drink, so i don't see why we can't get oil tailings to that point

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

it's things like this that are why I chose mining engineering, I want to make scientific advances for our environment to lessen our footprin

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I respect this immensely. Keep fighting the good fight.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sadly we are currently unable as miners to ever get a full recovery of a mineral, so usually 90-97% is recovered, so in oil that small (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

amount of oil left in the sand makes it hard to use for other reasons, so the sand is sent to Tailings to be contained until we can one day

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

hopefully develop a way to re-mine tailings and remove 100% of the product, some older mines are now having their tailings re-mined today

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Truth be told. Probably none of this stuff is really good for the environment, but at least electric cars don't spew even more crap.

10 years ago | Likes 75 Dislikes 12

The most environmentally friendly car is whatever you already own.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 10

Explain to me your logic here. You're making a blanket statement with factual evidence. How does that hold up?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Yeah, I may have been a little vague. My point was that the environmental price of a new car is almost always worse then continuing using (1

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

That makes a lot more sense.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

agreed, people forget about the manufacturing process from start to finish and how much it consumes.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

your current car. No matter how efficient the new car or inefficient the old one, the cost of manufacturing outweighs any positives. (2

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

thing never gets mentioned is that lithium once mined can be recycled! dead batteries are a very high quality ore. oil just stays in air :-(

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 2

Depends on how the electricity is generated. If it's generated in coal plants, it's actually worse for the environment than gas powered car.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Imparting energy into that lithium through electric recharging may involve not-exactly-clean combustion-powered electrical generation.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Big power plants are more efficient. Woudlnt need to burn as much coal/oil to power the same number of cars.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 23, 2022 7:20 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Yep. You know, we both got downvoted... dont know why.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Neither do I. This is what my masters was on. You are both correct.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Still, what are the tires made of? How are parts transported and manufactured? Electric cars still need oil...

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

We meed oil like we need parents. To provide support until we are good on our own. Then they need to butt the fuck out.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

The old needs to end so there is space for the new, unless the old works better. And oil is not a better option.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I've read a 10year comparison between a hummer and a prius, from production to disposal of the cars where all together the prius did more 1.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 8

environmental harm than the hummer and the main reason was the problematic disposal of the batterys iirc.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 7

disposal is an ongoing problem, if there was half the funding going into battery research as goes into alt-hydrocarbon harvesting (1)

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

like tar sands we would have a lot of more chemically friendly and cheaper batteries at production level already for now it's prototypes (2)

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

The NiMh batteries should be 100% recyclable without much effort, they are full of high value metals and relatively easily seperated

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 0

except flooded lead-acid batteries are more efficient than NiMh and are more commonly used. That and NiMh is not Prius standard

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

some are Lithium Ion.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Flooded lead acid aren't more efficient in terms of charge and particularly not for discharge in an EV application, and you need 100's of lb

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The power stations still supply power to electric cars (they need to be charged) so the net benefit to the environment is minimal

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 14

Not really. The big plants are more efficient, so less equals more.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A decent coal plant is ~60% efficient, a car engine is around 10%, the total energy efficiency for the electric car is higher even with 1/

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

fossil sourced power and the intrinsic grid losses by ~2x, in terms of NOx and particulate emissions its *way* better, small engines suck 2/

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

basically

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Some parts of the world produce their electricity without oil, gas, or coal.

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 5

Very very few, and those that do don't really use cars that much anyway.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 18

You are correct, but the children don't want to hear that.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 6

Eh, you get used to Imgur self censoring against anything, opinion or fact, that is against its very particular worldview.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

France? they get most of their power from nuclear sources

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Which is the only legitimate alternative (save location dependants like geothermal and hydroelectric) to fossil fuels - but (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Germany and Canada don't use cars much?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

Canada gets 36% of its energy from oil, 28% from coal, & 24% from gas.Tho it's admirable they're trying to go green, they aren't succeeding.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Dude, we moved a church to mine brown coal. http://bashny.net/uploads/images/00/00/45/2014/03/07/fa273dff2e.jpg

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The only countries not dependent on fossil fuels for electricity ATM are Norway and Iceland, thanks to hydroelectric and geothermal.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Germany got 35% of its power from Oil, 24.6% from coal :O. Checkmate.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2