It's not that either. It's just a class project. They made a car that captures more carbon than it emits.

It's incredibly cynical to think that this project was used to get money instead of teach students and build their skills. Sure, nothing here is all that useful and practical. But maybe one of these students will go on to create something that is.

And like, they accomplished it as freaking undergrads from scratch. It's not like this can't ever be improved upon.

Considering US companies sell only trucks, vans, SUVs and sports cars, it’s not surprising. I don’t want an SUV. I love the old full size sedans. I got 25mpg in my old Town Car.

There is no possibility of a civil war, any suggestion otherwise is either foreign propaganda or right wing propaganda.

[removed]

Zero Emission Mobility

Yeah ok sure.

They are trying to make cars energy efficient but it won't happen. That's not how physics works. We need public transportation, THATS the solution. And we don't need to attach a carbon vacuum in the front of it either.

The continued global rise in sales of SUVs pushed their climate-heating emissions to almost 1 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2022, according to the International Energy Agency.

The 330 million sport utility vehicles on the roads produced emissions equivalent to the combined national emissions of the UK and Germany last year. If SUVs were a country, they would rank as the sixth most polluting in the world.

Climate campaigners are increasingly concerned about the impact of SUVs. The vehicles are larger and heavier than regular cars and use on average 20% more fuel. The increased number of SUVs in 2022 were responsible for a third of the increase in global oil demand.

Purchases of SUVs have soared in recent years, rising from 20% of new cars in 2012 to 46% of all cars last year, the IEA reports. The rise continued in 2022, includes significant growth in the US, India and Europe, despite the overall number of cars sold falling slightly.

I don't think it's meant to be a sellable product, the undergrads built something for a resume. It got attention and some big company will hire them now.

[deleted]

144 **MINUTES**, not **HOURS**. And to save you the math, that is out of 525,000 minutes per year. literally measured in hundredths of a percent.

The environmental impact of switching from an ICE to an EV is literally hundreds to thousands of times greater than the impact of having versus not having this carbon sequestration device.

It takes 100 similar improvements just to get to rounding error!

​

What's next? A nickel per hour increase to minimum wage to help the poor?

It’s very much a two step forward one step back situation. Yes, there has been some recent regression in the tolerance of trans people, but it’s still significantly more tolerant than 40 years ago. This is pretty much par for the coarse when pushing society forward. When you make a change that 90% of the population agree with, the other 10% is going to kick up a fuss.

There will always be ups and downs, but the overall trend line is undeniably positive.

I’m not sure a good argument can be made that the US is any more politically unstable than it was 50 years ago. People do tend to have short memories for the turmoil of days gone by.

Perhaps "marketing" was the wrong word and "promotion gimmick" would be correct.

The point is that it's a pointless, dead-end feature that was only implemented to generate superficial interest.

I don't really judge. Reasearchers / universities / etc. also constantly have to make use of hype to get grants / funding etc. But this is really pointless bait.

We'll see.

Rather, you'll see.

Sure, but what if the next government is authoritarian fascist and forces even the most liberal states and areas to comply with things such as abortion bans, don't say gay et cetera? I frankly don't think this can be dismissed.

Yeah, no country is perfect, but, by just about all metrics, Scandinavia (along with Switzerland) is probably the best place to be.

Study the fall of the Roman Empire if you want an answer to that.

I second this. Canada (but not southern Ontario).

Certain states are literally having republicans legalize child labor and ban contraception while trying to ban gay marriage or simply being transgender.

Meanwhile cost of living crisis just keeps worsening. Yeah it sure is going great.

Idk, I think the concern over the US demise is greatly exaggerated. If you look at demographics, which is going to be what wrecks most industrialized countries in the coming decades, we’re going to be fine.

We are also completely food and energy secure, which is even more important than demographics. Many nations can’t boast this.

Yeah we have our political issues. But the thought that we’re more divided now than in the 1960s is laughable. Most of it is online and perpetuated by bloviating talking heads. Rise of radical political movements that are armed and angry? Sure. Is that bad? 100%. Has this been an issue before? Absolutely.

Also the US can’t really Balkanize at this point. Not like we could 100 years ago. The divide isn’t north vs. South, it’s rural vs. urban. This issue touches every state. You walk out side of NYC, you’re in GOP land. Set foot in Milwaukee Minnesota, you might as well be in a frigid LA.

I’m convinced that most people that are calling for or are worried about a civil war are terminally online or LARPing.

With the math you provided earlier, it should be equivalent to driving 144 hrs less for every car. It doesn't seem like much, true. But when combined with every vehicle also producing 0 emissions and consuming 0 gas in the hypothetical where all vehicles are EV, it then contributes to negative emissions. This sort of regulation in a vacuum does not make much of an impact. It requires other changes. But 100 of these incremental improvements would make a difference.

Life is basically as good as it’s ever been in recorded history, significantly better than it was 100 or even 50 years ago, and getting better at an accelerating rate. (Because it’s the internet i want to clarify that i say that completely without sarcasm)

>"cars are part of the solution"

I mean zero carbon emitting cars are at least a part of the solution. Personal vehicles are far too efficient for many applications to ever be fully replaced. On top of that the world isn't going to perform 50 years-worth of public transport infrastructure construction in the next 10 years.

So yeah, electric cars / trucks are one part of the sustainable future we want to target (of course the smaller part of it they are the easier some things like city management, waste management etc. become).

It's just that this gimmick solution in the article makes no sense.

It isn't a "marketing gimmick", it was done by students. Like, they built it with parts that they could use in other projects once they tore it down...

Exactly. AI solving repetitive tasks for litigation will be in benefit of Lawyers. What you are missing is that an attorney gets paid to make decisions and signing his endorsement of such decisions.

If any, it’s paralegals and other staff working under the supervision of lawyers are the ones who are in trouble, not lawyers themselves.

It doesn’t matter if the machine solves the problem. Cutting the middle man will be a pain in that case… because this middleman so happens to be the one passing and interpreting the LAW (not to mention that this are the guys who are the most likely choices for president, and not just in the US)

AI can make robots better at existing jobs. Currently robots of any kind (roombas, factory arms, childrens toys, etc) are all programed with specific tasks. AI has the potential to allow the robot to identify if something went wront or perform new tasks. It has potential for sure. I just dont when itll happen