Elon Musk Environmental Claims: 'Done More Than Any Human on Earth'

1. 85

   GA Andersonposted 7 months ago

   In an interview, Musk says Tesla has done more to help the environment than any other company, and as leader of that company, he has done more to help the environment than any other human on earth.
   
   Relative to reducing fossil fuel pollution and renewable energy products, the numbers say he's not exaggerating: an X clip (55 seconds)
   
   When asked about power and influence he says he is concerned with the reality of "goodness," not the perception of it. His business history supports that.
   
   His recent 'Polaris Dawn' space flight accomplished amazing private space enterprise milestones, the likes of which haven't been seen since our moon landing.
   
   He should be getting invitations to the White House, but instead, they criticize him for a dumb tweet that he deleted.
   
   GA

   replyreport
   1. 87

      Sharlee01posted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Elon Musk’s statement about caring more about the reality of "goodness" than how it looks suggests to me, that he focuses on doing real good, rather than just trying to seem good. He’s more interested in making a real impact with his actions, even if people don’t always agree or see it right away.
      
      In his business history, Musk has shown that he prioritizes long-term goals, like developing electric cars or space travel, even when others doubt him.  In my view, this means he’s not too worried about being popular or even getting invited to the White House. —he cares more about actually achieving results that benefit people in the long run.  Besides, if Trump wins, it's being bandied about that he will have a job at the WH.
      
      "He should be getting invitations to the White House, but instead, they criticize him for a dumb tweet that he deleted."
      
      Does that surprise you? I'd be willing to bet that Musk ranks second on the list of least-desirable figures among some Washington elites.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

         Yes, he is second on the list.
         
         GA

         replyreport
   2. 70

      Ken Burgessposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Another sign we are in a time where our media/politics makes it so that right is wrong, wrong is right, heroes are made into villains and the villains into heroes.
      
      I look at the list of those standing up and raising an alarm... there are plenty of note from Eric Weinstein to Elon Musk.   But the fact that people that I thought highly of BEFORE they chose to stand against the 'establishment'... the likes of Musk, and Tulsi Gabbard whom I supported as a Democrat Candidate for President (the world would be such a better place today under her leadership rather than the corrupt cronies we have running the show now).
      
      Before America went insane in the last 4 years... Tulsi Gabbard and Elon Musk were people to admire and look up to.  They still are.
      
      Which means what they are standing against is worth taking note of.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

         I skipped the political part and instantly flashed to Readen Steel. But instead of steel, it's rockets. I'll probably spend the next hour reimagining the story with Space X and current 'administrations.'  ;-)
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Ken Burgessposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            The major difference between the two, there was no looming end-of-civilization war looming in the background... at least I don't recall that.

            replyreport
            1. 85

               GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

               Yep, but there was an end-of-American society doom looming — relative to us Americans. It's a same-same thing.
               
               GA

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  Ken Burgessposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                  Well, we have that aspect of end-of-America society looming, I give you that.
                  
                  But in addition, we have end-of-civilization wars on the front and back burners right now... this adds a dimension that was lacking in Rand's works.
                  
                  Anyways... we have a couple months more to get it out of our system before any such discussion or debate will be too dangerous to have:
                  https://x.com/dbenner83/status/1836132944672358524

                  replyreport
   3. 60

      Willowarborposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      "He should be getting invitations to the White House, but instead, they criticize him for a dumb tweet that he deleted."
      
      He deserved the criticism, it was irresponsible.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

         He did, it was irresponsible. He realized that and deleted the post and explained that he was joking. The point was that the administration doesn't say anything about his string of nation-enhancing (world & civilization-enhancing(?)) successes but issues a criticism about a dumb tweet that was quickly deleted.
         
         GA

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Ken Burgessposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            The current Administration considers him a problem, he will be targeted by the Administration after the election should Harris win.
            
            Since he bought Twitter and exposed the Twitter Files (Hunter Biden Laptop and FBI censorship) he has been Public Enemy #2.
            
            If they didn't need Space X and Starlink for their efforts against Russia he probably would be in far worse shape now than he is.

            replyreport
   4. 85

      tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Deleted
      1. 85

         tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

         I don't know enough about the details of Musk to be an expert such as Ken and yourself. However, I kind of 'feel' there was some ego there. Don't get me wrong he deserves credit where credit is due and in the distance I greatly admire him and give him respect.
         
         However, with the reasoning, we can go back to Ben Franklin having the greatest impact on the environment in the field of electric cars since he is given credit for the discovery of electricity. Or, William Morrison who built the first electric car in 1891 or German Andreas Flocken building one 1888.
         
         But, today, I will take Musk's word for it he has made the biggest contribution with electric cars due to his 'company'. But, the 'company' making the greatest contribution to the environment leaves me with questions.
         
         How do you measure that? Lowering green gases? Lower gas consumption? Lower hazardous waste from the industry? Or . . .
         Which one is given the greatest priority? Or, are they measured as a collective?
         
         As far as him being made out to be villain I guess it depends on what one reads or hears. A YouGov poll (2023) indicates 53% have a favorable view of him, though I imagine a lot of the influence is due to Twitter now 'X'
         
         2nd graph at . . .
         https://today.yougov.com/politics/artic … ougov-poll
         
         "When asked about power and influence he says he is concerned with the reality of "goodness," not the perception of it. His business history supports that."
         
         Goodness? What does that mean? Is it a question of morality as in good and evil? Does that mean power and influence result with a measure of goodness? Can the result be a negative number?
         
         Yeah, yeah I am overthinking a curse at times of myself.

         replyreport
         1. 85

            GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            Your "reasoning," relative to Franklin and Morrison, is about the ideas of electricity and EVs, Musk's point is about the reality of action.
            
            It seems reasonable to say that reducing fossil fuel use and dependency and harnessing renewable energies are the most impactful aspects of climate-change damage. Both seem to be the world's focus. Especially our administration's.
            
            In that aspect, Musk's statement is clearly (arguable?) correct: In 2023 the Tesla Y was the best-selling car in the world. Meaning Tesla has had the most impact in reducing ICE (Internal Combustion engine) pollution. In that same year, Tesla sold more EVs than all US companies combined.
            
            Follow that with Tesla's lead in commercial (and residential) battery storage — "Megapacks." which are capable of being backup power sources that can support commercial utility demands, etc., and his claim—as an individual, seems valid.
            
            Relative to the YouGov poll, once again, the point was to the administration's view of Musk, not the public's.
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 85

               tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

               Okay . . .

               replyreport
         2. 85

            GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

            Yes you are and yes it can be. ;-)
            
            GA

            replyreport
            1. 85

               tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

               Thanks for the confirmation, though unsure if it is biased

               replyreport
               1. 85

                  GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                  If there is a bias, it's a pro-Tsmog one. Your "Okay . . " response feels like you saw my initial response as a criticism. It wasn't intended as such.
                  
                  GA

                  replyreport
                  1. 85

                     tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                     hmmm . . . I use okay 'usually' as a response saying 'agreed', yet hesitantly while not to what specifically. In other words, some of what that reply is to I am pondering because of the 'over thinking' curse I bear. Alas, the liberties us old guys and gals have, don't you think?
                     
                     Now, even with that reply above I could go off on a tangent pondering 'liberty' with an emphasis on negative and positive liberty.
                     
                     "Negative liberty is the absence of obstacles, barriers or constraints."
                     
                     "Positive liberty is the possibility of acting — or the fact of acting — in such a way as to take control of one’s life and realize one’s fundamental purposes."
                     
                     Positive and Negative Liberty by Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Revised Nov 19, 2021 originally published Feb 27, 2003)
                     https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/libe … -negative/

                     replyreport
                     1. 85

                        GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                        You're doing it again.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                        1. 85

                           tsmogposted 7 months agoin reply to this

                           Yup!! Ain't life grand?

                           replyreport
2. 68

   IslandBitesposted 7 months ago

   This is cute.

   replyreport
   1. 85

      GA Andersonposted 7 months agoin reply to this

      Guessing games are dangerous, what is "cute"?
      
      Ga

      replyreport