This discussion has been around since the Prius and it's not something that'll probably go away any time soon. There's no telling how much lithium and other rare earth metals are really out there, and they're part of the reason space mining is being looked at, but hopefully the recycling process for them gets better and better.
Wouldn't that also prompt discourse in the change of manufacturing industries to be more "green". Granted, the materials for manufacturing are like to come from Earth no matter what for the foreseeable future. Space mining seems like a stretch in terms of the time table for climate change. Would you be willing to recommend an article on the topic?
Behold the Friedman Doctrine. No less than Saint Milton himself argued that corporations have an ethical responsibility to not only prioritize profits over all else, but to flagrantly disregard everything but profit as the corporation has no mechanism of social governance. Friedman held that it was the responsibility of government to reign in corporations, and if government happened to be flat-footed and shitty at it that didn't prove that the system was flawed, it proved that society doesn't really want, you know, clean air.
Funny to see this in a car thread, but it was the Dodge Brothers 100 years ago that fought for profits over all else. Was reading up on that case over the vacation.
That's a decidedly rosy portrayal of Henry Ford and a decidedly uncharitable portrayal of the Dodge brothers. Realistically, the decision was "you don't get to fuck over minority shareholders just because they're minority." The Dodge brothers made parts for everybody but Ford promised them a piece of the company if they stopped making parts for everybody else. So they did. Then, when they'd been making Model T engines for 10 years without making as much money as if they'd never started working for Ford at all, they had to take Henry Ford to court to compel him to use some of his capital surplus to fucking pay them back. When Ford lost he shipped a judgement's worth of parts to his dealers - collect, invoice due on receipt - and said "fuck you, you have a service department now, also, blame the Dodge Brothers because they're evil." There's a real temptation to paint Ford as a humanitarian. He wasn't. He was a fascist who understood the cult of personality.
The way I explain it to people? Ford was Steve Jobs, but with cars. And for those out there thinking that the "he was a fascist" is inflammatory? He was a fascist He worked with the Nazis all the way until 1941. This included the use of POW's and slave labour. The reason I point to this case is that I watched something on that evil twisted ass Carl Ichan over the long slog at home. He touted this case as his starting point to stand for the poor billionaire investors who where so ever wronged by the regulations and unions. Icahn is now on the Trump team to advise on regulatory and labour reform. That makes him deplorable number what? 10,000 or so?There's a real temptation to paint Ford as a humanitarian. He wasn't. He was a fascist who understood the cult of personality.
Ahhhh... So that's Icahn's view of the Dodge Brothers ruling. It seemed an awfully... corporate interpretation for you to hold. And considering Icahn is basically the poster boy of "fuck you I won't do what you tell me" when it comes to boards, I can totally see it being his. I wouldn't have drawn the parallel with Steve Jobs, personally. But then I thought about it a little and I see your point.
I know of two companies that are pursuing space mining relatively agressively.
Based on math here, a Falcon 9 launch generates 242,000 kg of CO2. Based on numbers here, that's the equivalent of flying a 747 for eight hours. I mean, holy fuck. A funny little tidbit in this book is that each of the engines in this produces more horsepower than all the engines in this. I was thinking a rocket launch was a preposterous amount of emissions and that they'd have to be accounted for when doing the environmental calcs on any space mining, but instead I just convinced myself of the appalling amount of energy we burn every day just... like facebooking and shit.
I don't know enough about rocket science (okay, I don't know anything about rocket science) to know how legit these two companies are. However, the fact that a) they both seem to have long term goals and a map to get there and b) don't really seem to be trying to get a lot of media attention and making wild claims, makes them seem very legit. It'll be interesting to see where they stand five, ten, and twenty years from now.
By and large your can predict corporate behavior by asking a deceptively simple question. 'Will this decision make the corporate entity money?' If there's no profit motive, there's no survival-incentive to warrant a change.Wouldn't that also prompt discourse in the change of manufacturing industries to be more "green".
Was afraid such disenchanting, predictable behavior happening on the side of the corporate world. It's not very creative... no, just not helpful in the long run. From the "Trump and the Carbon Lobby" piece of the mentioned article. Just finding a better option seems to be quite the task, but makes it all the more exciting seeing Elon Musk take 'em to task.For high-carbon industries to continue to be attractive investments, then, they must spin a tale of future growth. They must make potential investors believe that even if there is a Carbon Bubble, it is decades away from popping — that their high profits today will continue for the foreseeable future, so their stock is worth buying.