108

tl;dr: The claimed range is 50% higher than the worst assumptions for battery production, and 500% higher than the best assumptions. But it's not an apples to apples comparison. Carbon emissions from battery production The range of values estimated for emissions from battery production varies widely in the literature: In an answer on Sustainability.SE I ...


67

In addition to all the other great answers there is one very important fact that's always ignored in these comparisons (Google translation, lightly corrected by me): The total emissions of petrol and diesel are sugarcoated in this example. For oil extraction, refinery and transport on tankers, in pipelines and trucks 44 kWh of energy was used for ...


34

Leaving aside the fact that termite CO2 production is on few, if any, secondary school syllabuses, its more complicated than that. Termites are not burning fossil fuels. The carbon they produce comes from decomposing wood. This carbon came from the atmosphere, and as the wood rots this carbon will wind up back in the atmosphere whether termites eat it or ...


26

As the top answer to this related question states, plants in general are oxygen neutral. In other words, whatever oxygen is emitted today will be emitted as CO2 later. So what really matters from a climate perspective is CO2 storage, not oxygen emission. That said, short-term oxygen emission is apparently difficult to measure, but it is largely a function ...


20

IVL, the source of the 150 to 200 kilograms of CO2 figure, recently published a new study that ended up with a much lower estimate: 61-106kg per kWh of battery capacity, depending on the energy sources and efficiencies of different manufacturing plants. "[This] puts it much more in line with other studies."1 Reasons for the difference: The new study ...


15

"To me this seems complete nonsense." As it does to anyone that looks any further than the company's own advertising. McGill University's Office for Science and Society ("Separating Sense from Nonsense") has a report on the magnetic laundry device. The two key points are that the patent has nothing to do with whether the device actually does anything ...


11

tl;dr: There was a 4% increase in CO2 emissions from the residential sector due to demand for natural gas for heating. When adjusted for temperature, there was a decrease of around 1.5% Residential emissions The UK's open government data website provides annual data on greenhouse gas emissions by sector. In February 2020, the latest statistical data was ...


10

The Food and Agricultre Organization of the United Nations (FAO) track cereal production (which is an interchangeable term for grain production). In their November 2019 Cereal Suppy and Demand Brief they list the production figures for the past three years, and estimates for this year. The footnote #1 explains "Production data refer to the calendar year of ...


10

This posted article from May 2019 discusses the claim and its origins. The idea that there are only 100 harvests left is just a fantasy Despite dozens of headlines quoting these predictions, surprisingly only one peer-reviewed paper from a scientific journal is ever cited as evidence to back them up. This 2014 study from the University of Sheffield ...


8

TL;DR: It's an estimate (by Prof. Chris Dickman) of how many mammals, birds, and reptiles were affected by bushfires. There's multiple reasons to believe it underestimates the affected population, but there is some debate as to how many of the affected animals would end up killed as a result. University of Sydney Prof. Chris Dickman used 2007 animal ...


7

If I'm allowed a little pun on this, it seems the press release uses an America-first definition of environment. This is a study of water use for power generation in the US. Despite the shift in source of energy generation, a majority of electricity generation in the U.S. still derives from watercooled systems. Approximately 40% of the total water withdrawn ...


3

Two great other answers that still miss a few points. The claim as such is whoefully ambiguous in the original, and thus there are difficulties in translating it; and interpreting it. Schon ein einziger Dürresommer in Europa 2018 führte dazu, dass die Getreideernte in diesem Jahr weltweit den Bedarf nicht mehr deckt (noch gibt es aber Reserven). As OP ...


2

This is a weird claim. Unproven. Unfounded. Alarmist. Wrong. Meant to imply climate change is there with one drought summer in Europe already lead to rising food prices and hunger? Global supplies of major cereals have exceeded total consumption in recent years, leading to a significant build-up of inventories and much lower prices in international ...


2

No. There's the calculator from Finnish climate change panel at https://www.ilmastopaneeli.fi/autokalkulaattori/ Unfortunately, the calculator is in Finnish, but the tool has quite good defaults. The vehicle 1 is a gasoline powered car (Bensiini), and the second vehicle is a pure electric vehicle (Sähkö) with a battery size of 42.1 kWh. The life cycle ...


1

Doesn't take much to make hash of this claim. Price is a function of demand, which the OP specifically referenced, and most of the other answers fixated on supply. Bread prices were well under-inflation in 2018 (0.6%) and at about inflationary rates in 2019 (2.3%) in the United States for example, providing ample evidence that demand remained either lower ...


1

Claim is not true. Widely exaggerating the situation in 2018, very misleading for the results in 2019, linking up a weather event to climate change influencing markets when the data doesn't really support this. For the global level. The impact of a single bad European harvest summer was quite noticeable,and is cited by the FAO as such, in conjunction with ...


1

I think the premise is a bit backwards here. The most direct and shortest answer is: No, it does not depend on so much artificial fertilizer. "A uses B" is not the same as "A depends on B". The plants are not going to die if they have no synthetic fertilizer applied. 1) Non-synthetic fertilizers could be used. There is nothing to cite here, as that would be ...


1

No. The pure reason why some areas (with a particular set of meteorological and soil conditions) nurture trees (and establish themselves as stable forests) is because they are in general more efficient photosynthesizers (on a spatial basis) in that area. That is just pure survival of the fittest. To validate my claims, isolating "plants" from the whole ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible