Technology

59708 readers

5537 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

141

Biden Administration Is Said to Slow Early Stage of Shift to Electric Cars (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 9 months ago by L4s to c/technology

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Biden Administration Is Said to Slow Early Stage of Shift to Electric Cars::The change to planned rules was an election-year concession to labor unions and auto executives, according to people familiar with the plan.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Given I'm not sure if you mean 'the problem of rampant consumerism' or 'not solving the problem via rampent consumerism' I'll put up thoughts on either front.

On the first, a sizable part of that could be reduced by returning to a 'buy it for life' mindset in our society. I always like to use an example of Grandma's kitchen table. Some people have the nice oak piece that's been passed through a few generations, scuffed and stained maybe, but as solid as ever. Many now though obtain the cheapest particle-board garbage they can from the local Walmart and see it as normal to have to replace it after a couple years. That disposable lifestyle doesn't help anyone other than the retailers and producers of cheap useless junk, nobody is going to be looking to build family memories at some glorified card table.

On the second, no, people buying for the sake of buying isn't going to solve things, but at least we can make the choices available less destructive overall. In some cases 1000 small actions are just what's needed of no one thing can do it all.

[–] Wooki 0 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes to both and more.

We need laws to change the consumption and waste and subsequent damage problems. No more stuff because it’s built poorly, intentionally so you buy more stuff to only end up in the water, air, & ground.

Laws that reward repairs let alone legalise it. No more replacements.

Laws that change the grids energy production.

Laws that make corporations liable for damages on a global scale so the costs outweigh the risk and harm can be unwound with the cost recovered.

We dont need more stuff. We need EVs just to replace the current broken stuff and even then only if it cant be fixed (that means using carbon reduction like catalytic converters on steroids). Its to consider all the carbon creation chains for stuff. From digging it up, to its waste, and recycling.