CreateDebate


Debate Info

1
1
Now what libs Back to oil bront
Debate Score:2
Arguments:4
Total Votes:2
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Now what libs (1)
 
 Back to oil bront (1)

Debate Creator

brontoraptor(28861) pic



The minerals used to make electric car batteries are finite & in limited supply

Typically, the battery being utilized by an electric car is made up of lithium. And the problem is that this particular raw material also happens to be a limited natural resource. Because of this, an increase in demand for lithium by car manufacturers is also driving its price up. At the same time, there are also other rare minerals that are used in electric cars. These include praseodymium, lanthanum, dysprosium, and neodymium. All of these are also particularly hard to source. Because of this, their price might go up and further increase the starting price of an assembled electric car.

https://www.hotcars.com/24-things-wrong-with-electric-cars-millennials-choose-to-ignore/4/?v=6&n=f

Now what libs

Side Score: 1
VS.

Back to oil bront

Side Score: 1
1 point

The same as the minerals needed to make nuclear reactors. I read in a journal a few weeks ago that if the entire world was powered by nuclear fission, we would run out of usable uranium in about 40 years: and we would have, on average, a serious nuclear disaster every month. Not to mention the risk of proliferation of nuclear weapons. Likewise, nuclear fusion really isn't a feasible energy source for the same reasons: the minerals required to house the reactors are finite.

Electric cars are, admittedly, at very best a temporary solution, but they're still much less environmentally damaging than fossil fuels.

I think that biological (bacteria-driven) batteries are the future. There are bacteria that can turn light into heat and chemical energy, which can be used to drive steam turbines and create electricity. Bacteria that literally use sunlight to perform binary fission.

Side: Now what libs
MrLimeInHD(3) Clarified
0 points

Actually electric cars are more environmentally damaging than petrol cars (Diesel can go) when you compare the CO2 in the long run compared to a petrol car, think of all the refining, production of the batterys for only to last 10 years max then what on earth do they do to the batterys after, take the i8, yea i love it, looks awesome, but if theres the slightest problem with the battery pack they replace the whole unit! Even Jeremy Clarkson said it in a old Top Gear Episode that the CO2 made is more than a petrol car, they even took a piece of scrap Prius round there test track Vs a M3 & the M3 was more efficient in terms of fumes.

Supporting Evidence: M3 V Prius (youtu.be)
Side: Now what libs
Hootie(451) Clarified
1 point

Actually electric cars are more environmentally damaging than petrol cars

No they aren't. That would defeat the entire purpose of inventing electric cars in the first place.

Electric Vehicle Benefits

EVs can also reduce the emissions that contribute to climate change and smog, improving public health and reducing ecological damage. Charging your EV on renewable energy such as solar or wind minimizes these emissions even more. See the difference in emissions between a conventional vehicle and an EV using the calculator on the right.

https://www.energy.gov/eere/electricvehicles/electric-vehicle-benefits

Side: Now what libs
1 point

I noticed that Hootie chose not to participate in this debate.

Side: Back to oil bront