Products > Dodgy Technology

Ecology vs Disposable Electronic Cigarette

<< < (12/14) > >>

BrokenYugo:

--- Quote from: IDEngineer on March 28, 2024, 08:28:45 am ---Back on the whole "disposable vs. make it last" question: One aspect often forgotten is the rapid pace of tech advancement. There's no point in making something better, or more repairable, or longer lasting if it's rendered obsolete quickly.

Example: The media almost daily reports how unhappy the greenies are that existing ICE cars are so reliable and last so long, because they see that as delaying their complete replacement by EV's. With that kind of mindset, short-term thinking and throw-away mentality is a unavoidable.

If the state of the art in PC's or cellphones radically improves in 12-24 months, what motivation is there to keep old equipment running? Yes, this argument doesn't apply to all products but it does to a very large segment of the commercial economy.

--- End quote ---

In this case the cartridge based vape/ecig system has had a defacto standard connector ("510 thread") for about a decade.

NiHaoMike:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 28, 2024, 08:14:22 am ---I doubt junk food taxes would work. There's already a sugar tax on soft drinks over a certain percentage of sugar, but the manufactures simply replaced some of the sugar with artificial sweeteners, which aren't proven to be any more healthy or result in weight loss. Food is already processed enough. I doubt anyone wants it to become more artificial to circumvent taxes.
--- End quote ---
Then just ban or massively tax the artificial sweeteners and other problematic additives as well.

--- Quote ---The driving test is already difficult enough as it is. There's a computer based simulator and written exam as well as the practical test. A big weakness is, foreigners from countries with less stringent driving tests can come here and drive on an international license, but I doubt the government will stop that.

--- End quote ---
The US really needs to get up to that level.

--- Quote from: IDEngineer on March 28, 2024, 08:28:45 am ---Example: The media almost daily reports how unhappy the greenies are that existing ICE cars are so reliable and last so long, because they see that as delaying their complete replacement by EV's. With that kind of mindset, short-term thinking and throw-away mentality is a unavoidable.

--- End quote ---
That's certainly a common "complaint" with the Prius. While it can be upgraded to a PHEV, how many actually want to spend thousands on an upgrade for an old car?

Andy Chee:

--- Quote from: Zero999 on March 28, 2024, 10:51:15 am ---I don't smoke myself, but am biased towards libertarianism and as fewer laws as possible.

--- End quote ---

In jurisdictions with socialised healthcare e.g. UK, it is incumbent upon the government to reduce the cost of treating smoking related diseases. So in that circumstance it makes rational sense for governments to do all they can to reduce smoking rates in the community.

SiliconWizard:

--- Quote from: IDEngineer on March 28, 2024, 08:28:45 am ---Back on the whole "disposable vs. make it last" question: One aspect often forgotten is the rapid pace of tech advancement. There's no point in making something better, or more repairable, or longer lasting if it's rendered obsolete quickly.

Example: The media almost daily reports how unhappy the greenies are that existing ICE cars are so reliable and last so long, because they see that as delaying their complete replacement by EV's. With that kind of mindset, short-term thinking and throw-away mentality is a unavoidable.

--- End quote ---

That is a good point, and a very problematic one leading to a "green" paradox: you're mentioning the ICE -> EV transition, but of course you realize the same will apply from one generation of EV to the next. The next gen will probably be much more "environmentally friendly" in isolation, for instance the batteries, and that will trigger the replacement of the whole EV park in the same way. That's unreasonable.

The solution to this is quite simple though: do the maths, and do them honestly. Check what is worse, over the lifetime of the vehicles, between keeping a vehicle that runs perfectly fine but is a bit more polluting, vs. one that is less polluting but will have to be manufactured from scratch, and the associated cost of dismantling the old ones.

In other words, our decisions should be rational and, as much as possible, without any conflict of interest.

TLDR; it won't happen.

NiHaoMike:

--- Quote from: SiliconWizard on March 30, 2024, 10:11:49 pm ---That is a good point, and a very problematic one leading to a "green" paradox: you're mentioning the ICE -> EV transition, but of course you realize the same will apply from one generation of EV to the next. The next gen will probably be much more "environmentally friendly" in isolation, for instance the batteries, and that will trigger the replacement of the whole EV park in the same way. That's unreasonable.

The solution to this is quite simple though: do the maths, and do them honestly. Check what is worse, over the lifetime of the vehicles, between keeping a vehicle that runs perfectly fine but is a bit more polluting, vs. one that is less polluting but will have to be manufactured from scratch, and the associated cost of dismantling the old ones.

--- End quote ---
Isn't it that modern EVs are already pretty close to the theoretical maximum efficiency? In that case, there wouldn't be a whole lot of improvement replacing an EV with a newer one.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod