There's been a lot of talk of the environmentalist "degrowth" agenda where, even though they can only say contradictory things about how they feel about human prosperity (similar to how they've been saying that only censorship can preserve free speech), it seems pretty clear that environmentalists don't want people to have easy energy, food choices or material things. Yet this is ironically tied in with some of the largest new infrastructure plans ever conceived of. These are ironically a form of growth, being forced upon us by the de-growth crowd. I think there is more than one logical flaw present here. Aside from there not being enough lithium on earth to make most of these ideas even theoretically viable, the economic implications of practically free energy, were it to ever happen, are actually pretty staggering. If energy were essentially free, how would the government stop everyone from mining cryptocurrencies, growing hydroponic stuff in every nook and cranny or just straight up excavating under any land in the middle of nowhere that they can buy? The truth is that unlimited clean, free energy idea would ultimately not be very environmentalist at all because free energy would free people to wreck physical havoc on their environment in countless ways. IMHO I don't think anyone who has thought this through, which doesn't seem to be many people, actually intend for energy to be free. There is a sort of Don Quixote thing going on where people are attacking the windmills of "carbon" production, which then sends them after the golden goose of free energy, which is not something that is intended to happen.
Yeah, it's quite stupid to think that carbon is somehow causing the Earth to increase in temperature. The Church of Global Warming is all about controlling people's actions and killing them off ("overpopulation" "problem").
Lithium is a transitional technology. Toyota is saying they have something better. Even if they don't, a better battery is on the way, and it doesn't use lithium. Not sure where you got the idea energy would be free..
I understand why you might think that but your probably need to separate environmentalists from democrats in your mind. There are plenty of environmentalists who are critical of the democratic party agenda du jour.
Can you tell us what that better battery is? I'll believe it when I see it. The context here is that battery technology went largely unchanged for decades before the lithium battery arrived on the scene, it doesn't appear to me to be a field where advances are steady or guaranteed.
