¿Donde esta la biblioteca?

The most pro-nature approach I can think of is to use farmland for fuel production (a hectare of corn produces 20 MWh/ha/y in bioethanol), convert 3% of it to PV (700 MWh/ha/y) and restore 97% of it to its natural state while still harvesting the same amount of energy. In the US that could be 40 million acres restored to nature. You can improve farming methods for actual food production, but none of that will beat millions of acres of land not being used for farming at all. Another, much more effective measure would be to reduce meat consumption to, again, render millions of acres of farmland ready for renaturalization.

And like I said, vast amounts of farmland are for fuels, not for food. So effectively harvesting energy like PV, just much slower, much less efficient and much worse for the ground and fauna.

Farming is much worse for land than PV. PV is almost as good as leaving it untouched, while farming ruins biodiversity through monoculture, nitrate and phosphate pollution, and possibly pesticides.

Large-scale ground-mounted PV is fine and people need to get over it. If you are in the mood to publicly advocate for more environmentally friendly land use, go and protest the grotesque waste of land for crops like corn and sorghum used to produce bioethanol fuels.

Wonder how it turned

I’d say alcohol might be the root cause for the sleeping issues.

I don’t know and I don’t remember. I was replying to the ‘people from the EU’ bit, as it does not seem correct to me.

From EU, got nothing

Correct, it’s a fact

My comment is not about what people claim about EVs but how they actually are.

https://youtu.be/CTV-wwszGw8?t=797

YES, can’t believe I forgot that point.

This is a general complaint about vehicles, not necessarily EVs

Yes, that’s like the whole point of my post, being E doesn’t fix 90% of the issues caused by individual motorised transport vehicles. And city planning can’t do anything about these inherent issues either, they can merely decide to make good, sustainable cities or car friendly cities. Good city planning policies stand in direct contrast to the amount of cars expected to be driven.

And I’m saying this not to shit on EVs, they must clearly replace ICE vehicles as soon as possible, but to warn that they will not fix the unsustainable state of affairs in transportation. Loads of people appear to actually believe they do and that’s sort of dangerous. We’re not gonna fix jack shit if we just transition these vehicles to being electric while further increasing car dependency and sprawl. We’re gonna make it even worse.

The problem with EVs is that in almost all ways other than local pollution they are just as bad as ICE vehicles. They

• need massive amounts of asphalted space for roadways and parking
• use this space very inefficiently and cause traffic congestion at any given spike in traffic
• drive urban sprawl and thus make housing less sustainable (more sewage,water supply, electric supply, heating, roads/person required)
• urban sprawl stretches everything far apart and makes public transit much less feasible so people who can’t drive cars struggle to get places, for example kids can’t walk to school or take public transit, instead must be driven
• are loud (because tyres rolling is the driving source of noise)
• are dangerous to pedestrians and cyclists
• their dangers and tendency to cause traffic congestion inhibit other, more efficient and sustainable modes of transport so that when not regulated properly, they take over all of the streetscape as is evident in most western places