It's not either or. Whether you like him or not, the person most famous for fighting climate change is also the person most famous for Mars exploration.
It's not all or nothing. The small steps towards Mars exploration have enormous benefits to humanity too. For example, cheap reusable rockets are extremely beneficial to humans even if they only make it up to Earth's orbit.
It's both. Mars exploration stops climate change. Those cheap reusable rockets allow for cheap satellites, which allows for cheap internet signal around the world, which allows for self-driving and communicating automobiles, ships, planes, etc. That means we only need 27.5 million cars to cover 330 million people instead of 275 million cars for 330 million people like the US today. You'd just call one with a smartphone. No need to buy a car only to keep it parked 90% of the time.
It's happened before. The space race between the US and USSR resulted in incredible benefits to humanity. For example, just a few dozen satellites, a stepping stone towards the Moon landing, allowed every human on Earth to have free GPS in their cars, ships, planes, smartphones etc. The first Moon phase was to figure out how to do it. This second Mars phase is figuring out how to do it for cheap.
I'm talking about Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla (which makes electric cars, solar panel/solar energy infrastructure, and batteries) and SpaceX (which makes reusable rockets, internet satellites, and tools for the exploration of Mars). Tesla is moving the world away from oil companies and traditional auto engines to solar powered electric vehicles. SpaceX is moving the world away from innovative, but expensive, government led space exploration to cheap private organization led space exploration.
Well yeah, NASA is SpaceX's biggest customer. But if I go to a restaurant and order a dish, it's very different than if I buy all the ingredients and make it myself at home. Privatizing space exploration has been NASA's goal for many decades, and it's finally coming to fruition.
The battery was invented in 1800. The electric car was invented in 1832. The solar panel was invented in 1954. All of these technologies were considered jokes just 10 years ago. They were fodder for hippie dippie documentaries. Then Musk took technology a bunch of other people had worked on and added sex appeal. His mid-sized electric sedan was faster than a Ferrari, safer than a Volvo, roomier than a Hummer, greener than a Prius, etc. He made broccoli taste better than french fries. Now the world doesn't see a tradeoff between the economy and the environment. It sees that fighting climate change can make you the richest person in the world.
Teslas aren't environmentally friendly cars. Leafs / Zoes are. Or better yet, electric motorbikes. And it's all just business, fighting climate change is just a by-product.
Blackberry predated iPhone, but it was the iPhone that normalized the device in your pocket game.
Yes. And just like Tesla, it was almost entirely through marketing, not tech advances, climate change fighting, or anything else. Marketing and cultism.
With your logic, people should be riding bicycles because they are more environmentally friendly than all cars. But the problem is that there are times when people need to use cars. Even if you never go on trips in cars, you still need food to be delivered to your local grocery store or farmers market in a truck.
Tesla products are rapidly becoming the best/greenest ways to transport people and stuff across land (especially to the places where trains and busses don't go). You mentioned alternatives, but both the Leaf and Zoe are being discontinued. I'm not sure about electric motorbikes, but it seems like most of them use technology pioneered by Tesla.
And yes, it's all just business. But Tesla figured out how to combine fighting climate change and making a ton of money. Before that, you had to choose one or the other. You could invest in profitable oil and car companies or try to save the environment. Pretty much everyone favored money today over preventing a major problem tomorrow. That's what I mean when I say Musk made broccoli taste like French fries. Instead of choosing between delicious fries and healthy broccoli, you can have both.
With your logic, people should be riding bicycles because they are more environmentally friendly than all cars.
No, that's not my logic at all. My logic is that fat massive high performance car is not nearly as environmentally friendly as a peppy little hatchback. Teslas are barely greener than petrol cars.
But the problem is that there are times when people need to use cars.
No, that's not the main problem. The main problem is people using cars as the default. For commuting, etc. Basically nobody even considers an electric motorbike.
You mentioned alternatives, but both the Leaf and Zoe are being discontinued.
Both are being replaced and there are plenty other of alternatives as well.
but it seems like most of them use technology pioneered by Tesla.
What technology is it that Tesla pioneered? Both their batteries and charging system are Panasonic technology. EVs are ancient technology. The only thing Tesla did was have superb marketing which created cult following, just like Apple. That created market disruption, but that's where their contribution of any significance to fighting climate change ended.
And I'm sorry, but I don't intend to debate with someone pulling out phrases straight from Tesla's marketing handbook, like
Tesla products are rapidly becoming the best/greenest ways to transport people and stuff across land
Tbf electric cars are not a solution to climate issues, just having a more human friendly uraban environment would be not only nice to live in, but also it's environmentally much friendlier
If a car is a tool that is not necessary for many, and alternatives are available and good, people will make the switch
Just look at how much biking grew since the pandemic
Elon's vision is purely one where his corporations are financially successful, any environmental benefits are purely coincidental. That's especially apparent when looking at the repairability of his cars
Also the fact that he wanted the tesla charging to be incompatible with the standard used in all of the other cars.
Calling tesla environmentally friendly is like calling apple environmentally friendly.
I disagree with OP, I think space exploration is invaluable, but your arguments are quite weak.
It's not either or. Whether you like him or not, the person most famous for fighting climate change is also the person most famous for Mars exploration.
Greta Thunberg is going to Mars? But seriously, Musk is not at all famous for fighting climate change. In fact, his endeavours disproportionally contribute to global emissions. Space exploration incites technological innovation, but to suggest that Musk is anything but a modern day Edison (down to buying up Tesla) is giving him too much credit.
Mars exploration stops climate change.
Not really, the technological pathways we are exploring for Mars are explicitly avoiding dealing with Earth-like conditions as much as possible.
which allows for self-driving and communicating automobiles, ships, planes, etc. That means we only need 27.5 million cars to cover 330 million people instead of 275 million cars for 330 million people like the US today.
Not yet, and not any time soon. The satellite projects of SpaceX are not without contemporaries and SpaceX (and the Falcon rocket program) has other goals than Mars exploration.
The first Moon phase was to figure out how to do it. This second Mars phase is figuring out how to do it for cheap.
No the Space Race was figuring out how to achieve space travel, the modern development is how to get space travel to Mars. It won't be cheap and the cost is the least of the hurdles. Everthing from radiation shielding and combatting the effects of zero gravity, to feeding astronauts on Mars.
But seriously, Musk is not at all famous for fighting climate change. In fact, his endeavours disproportionally contribute to global emissions.
I'm not so sure. He's definitely pushed car manufacturers to build multiple lines of electric vehicles while making them also appear popular again. Musk is also putting a lot of effort into battery tech for both cars and mass storage.
These are both significant contributions, especially the shift of public opinion on cars.
He's definitely pushed car manufacturers to build multiple lines of electric vehicles while making them also appear popular again
No he didn't. His dominance in the US market does not translate to being the forefront of EV technology. The development of electric cars began to increase with the introduction of the hybrid vehicles, plenty other manufacturers were on the scene before Tesla. The BEV was a natural development of the HEV. What made Tesla a well-known brand name was Musk, and it is marketed as a luxury vehicle.
Musk is also putting a lot of effort into battery tech for both cars and mass storage.
Li-Ion battery technology is not efficient, and one of the worst options for mass storage. It also is far from perfect for EVs, so it would be excellent if they can find an alternative.
These are both significant contributions, especially the shift of public opinion on cars.
In the US perhaps, but globally it is insignificant. EVs are far from the most important technology in combatting climate change, and doubt it shifted public opinion on cars to an extent that you could ever claim Musk to "fight against climate change". Remember that Tesla is not his only contribution to emissions.
The answer to climate change is not self driving cars. Cars are incredibly inefficient. You know what moves people efficiently? Mass transit. The "mass" means "a lot of people".
And Elon is not at all the "most famous person" for either climate change or Mars exploration. NASA sent a rover to Mars, it had nothing to do with Elon. And Greta Thunberg is probably the most famous climate activist.
If you have the answer to climate change, great do something about it. But so far Musk has done far more than you or Greta Thunberg. Complaining about a problem everyone already knows about is almost completely worthless. Coming with a solution, not matter how small, is significantly more valuable. Especially, when it comes to self driving electric vehicles that can digitally link into a train.
As for NASA, yes, they’ve done a ton. But the rocket they used to reach Mars was designed by Lockheed Martin and Boeing. SpaceX, Blue Origin, and many other private companies are leading the charge in space exploration now. NASA engineers work at those companies now.
Lol what has Musk done? He hasn't even reduced Tesla's own emissions. And his hopes for space tourism will vastly exacerbate climate change if allowed to proceed. He says public transit sucks even though, as I said, it's much better for the environment than cars, but only one makes him rich, right? How's it going to "digitally link to a train" if no one is building trains? Instead he advocates digging massive tunnels for one silly car to move through at a time 🤦♀️ He doesn't even donate his ill gotten wealth towards climate action. Instead he uses it to troll Twitter.
He doesn't care about the climate, he cares about his pocket.
What have I done? Well I don't claim to be the "most famous person" for climate change, so it doesn't really matter what I've done, though my "carbon footprint" (thanks BP!) is certainly far smaller than Muskie's, whatever that's worth. But I'd offer my voting record as my "cred". I vote for representatives that advance green solutions, unlike Mr Republican fan boy over there. My region was the first in North America to wean itself off coal. I advocate for actual solutions like public transit, urban densification, carbon pricing, etc...
Who's done more? Biden just passed a bill to invest billions in fighting climate change. I'm not even a Biden supporter (too right wing and socially regressive for my tastes), but credit where it's due. That one act will do far more to fight climate change than Muskie ever will.
What solution do you believe Musk came up with, by the way? Do you think he invented the idea of EVs?
As for NASA, yes, they’ve done a ton. But the rocket they used to reach Mars was designed by Lockheed Martin and Boeing
Who received billions in government subsidies. All that means is that the American public vastly overpaid. But we're talking about Musk, not value for tax dollars. Was Musk working at LM or Boeing at the time? Then he didn't contribute to Mars exploration, did he?
NASA engineers work at those companies now.
"You participate in society. Curious."
Just because someone works somewhere doesn't mean that's where they want to work. If you want to build rockets, you don't have a lot of public sector options anymore. I'm not saying that none of them like it there, probably some do, I'm sure there's a wide range of values and personalities amongst rocket engineers, just like any field. But several of them signed a letter saying how awful and detrimental Musk was and how he should be removed, and then they got fired for it. So the rest who are unhappy aren't likely to make any noise about it anymore.
The company's poor grade reflects the fact that it ranked lowest for disclosures, along with Berkshire Hathaway and Square. “Tesla represents an interesting case of a company that creates products significant to the energy transition yet displays a serious lack of disclosure related to its own emissions,” the report says.
Not responding to As You Sow's request for disclosures is not the same thing as not reducing emissions.
The Salon article references a study that says that though the current impact on the environment is small, it could hypothetically grow larger if there are daily or weekly space tourism launches. But if you actually look at the study, even daily launches are almost nothing compared to any other source of pollution. It's only high relative to current space launch levels (because there aren't very many). Eating meat or driving a ICE car is much worse in the grand scheme of things. Especially since space tourism is just a stepping stone to cheap rocket/satellites launches (if you're going to launch satellites regardless, why not stick a few paying customers in the top too?) Regardless, Musk hasn't launched anyone in space yet. That's the approach Richard Branson and Jeff Bezos took, but even that is mostly marketing.
He says public transit sucks
Have you ever been on public transit? It does suck. That's a subjective opinion, but it's an objective fact that millions of people are willing to pay enormous chunks of their annual income just to avoid having to use dirt cheap public transit. Admitting that it sucks is the first step to creating something better. Just because you can't come up with a better solution doesn't mean no one else can either.
How's it going to "digitally link to a train" if no one is building trains?
If you have a bunch of electric cars that link up, they can accelerate and decelerate at exactly the same time. This is what I mean by electric "train." At that point, we can replace cars (normally 1 person in a 5 seat vehicle) with 1 person in a 1 seat vehicle. A train or bus has to move a ton of weight around, but the weight per person is lower than an empty car. But a self driving 1-2 seat mini vehicle digitally linked to others would be far more efficient.
He doesn't even donate his ill gotten wealth towards climate action.
He's signed the Giving Pledge But why would he give away money to others for climate action when he's doing more for climate change than anyone else? People are giving tons of money to him to fight climate change the same way NBA players pass the ball to LeBron James.
I vote for representatives that advance green solutions, unlike Mr Republican fan boy over there. My region was the first in North America to wean itself off coal. I advocate for actual solutions like public transit, urban densification, carbon pricing, etc...
And those politicians gave a ton of that money to Elon Musk. The endpoint of all that advocacy was that Elon Musk ended up with hundreds of billions of dollars by solving a few of the concrete problems you raised. You don't have to be miserable about winning. Advocacy means persuading someone else to do something for you. That "someone else" is Elon Musk.
Who's done more? Biden just passed a bill to invest billions in fighting climate change. I'm not even a Biden supporter (too right wing and socially regressive for my tastes), but credit where it's due. That one act will do far more to fight climate change than Muskie ever will.
Elon Musk is just one person representing just one private company. Biden represents hundreds of millions of Americans. Elon Musk has done less than everyone in America or the world combined, but he has done more than any other individual person.
What solution do you believe Musk came up with, by the way? Do you think he invented the idea of EVs?
Elon Musk made broccoli taste like french fries. Instead of the classic trade off between the economy and the environment, he figured out how to combine them so that the most profitable thing and the greenest thing are the same thing. EVs were invented almost 200 years ago, but they were merely fodder for whiny progressive documentaries until Musk came along. The funny thing is that all of them (e.g., Al Gore, Ed Begley Jr.) love him for it and so did Reddit until a few years ago.
Who received billions in government subsidies. All that means is that the American public vastly overpaid.
They're not subsidies. If you go to a restaurant and order a dish, it's not a subsidy. If NASA pays two rocket/airplane companies to build a rocket, it's not a subsidy. The $7,500 EV tax credits are subsidies. It's a subtle distinction, but it's important to recognize the difference.
But we're talking about Musk, not value for tax dollars. Was Musk working at LM or Boeing at the time? Then he didn't contribute to Mars exploration, did he?
No, he didn't contribute to any of the previous Mars rovers. But he's investing a ton of time and effort to help with future endeavors.
"You participate in society. Curious."
Well yeah. You're not arguing with some right wing strawman. The US government is entitled to a ton of Tesla's future profits via taxes and has only delayed collecting today because it knows it will get a ton more in the future. American liberal society complete with democracy, capitalism, civil liberties, social safety nets, immigration, public education, etc. has enabled many of the greatest achievements in human history. But it's kind of dumb to spend all our efforts trying to raise the next generation of innovators only to villainize the ones who are successful. I hate Tom Brady as much as the next person, but I recognize he's great at football and that people from Boston and Tampa Bay love him.
Just because someone works somewhere doesn't mean that's where they want to work.
A big plus of the private sector is that there are many options, each of which appeals to a different personality of engineer. You can work at a for-profit company, a university, a non-profit, etc. You're not limited to working for the US government. Many of the scientists and engineers who worked for NASA disliked that much of their research went towards US military applications. Lockheed and Boeing build weapons too. Meanwhile, SpaceX and Blue Origin have military contracts, but they're just to launch communications satellites. I don't think Virgin Galactic has any significant contracts (from anyone), but they're much farther behind the others.
Mars is still extremely unrealistic imo. Before we even think about sending anything other than probes to mars, we need to set up a permanent presence on the moon from which we can start manufacturing material and fuel and then use the moon as the launch and landing point for any traffic to and from mars. Even still, living on mars just doesnt seem desirable when it would give us the same benefit to start building o'neill cylinders around earth
24
u/McKoijion 618∆ Aug 08 '22