Greenwashing: All you need to know

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Take this short quiz to see how much you remember from this video: quizwithit.com/start_thequiz/1694038558467x520962300978453200

[@Juliaan_2007]

hi

[@allanjmcpherson]

Also, always remember that the greenest choice is almost always not to buy. Reducing and then reusing what you already have are far greener than buying a new "green" option. If you do need to buy, getting something used is greener than buying new. In all these cases, the vast majority of emissions and other pollution have already happened.

[@Llortnerof]

First question one should ask before any purchase anyway: Do i actually need this? You're not saving anything by buying something needlessly.

[@curtisblake261]

The "don't buy" choice is great. When I do buy, my lazy choice is to avoid anything liquid. Water is heavy and it takes a lot of energy to get those products to market. I buy dry and use boiled tap water when I can. Okay, that's a lie. I cheat sometimes, but mostly. My water philosophy is in denial about fruits and vegetables.

[@montgomeryscot6623]

So true, and so far removed from how the consumer machine pushes us.

[@destructionman1]

Well the greenest choice is to die, just sayin.

[@allanjmcpherson]

@@destructionman1 sure, but do you actually have something useful to say?

[@fabkury]

Sabine's ability to inform and clarify humiliates mainstream media organizations. How does she do that? I answer: first she thinks carefully, then she speaks her thoughts. So much needed today and always. Thanks, Sabine 👏👏👏

[@andrewruiz7894]

I think she's right in line with mainstream media. Talking about trans ppl. Saying fossil fuels are causing all our problems. Never giving an opposing view. In which there are many. I want both sides. Sabine is entertaining enough to watch. So I do.

[@tofu-munchingCoalition.ofChaos]

​@@andrewruiz7894"Both" sides? What both? Why are there only two sides? I can think of many different value systems. Not just two. And does "side" only include different values so that we come to different rational conclusions based on facts or do you want a "side" that articulates something different to a factual and rational consideration, too?

[@soufianebellahbib7808]

MERCI 👏🏿👍🏿💚🌴☀️

[@Mareczekw30]

Sabine doesn't scream. I mean this literally and figuratively. She just speaks calmly and without emotional outbursts. It reminds me someone explaining rules of board game.

[@whyamiwastingmytimeonthis]

@@andrewruiz7894do you also want “both” sides’ opinion on earth’s shape maybe? Or maybe “both” sides’ opinion on some little mustache guy’s actions in 1930s Germany?

[@Mareczekw30]

I explained my friends so many times, that organic and eco labels mean nothing(or very little). Nobody listens. I'm biotechnology engineer, I know biology and chemistry but noooo, yoga instructor knows better.

[@DreadX10]

Yoga-instructor tells them what they want to hear; you (try to) tell them what they don't want to hear. Wizard's first rule (Terry Goodkind): People will believe a lie, either because they want it to be true or they fear it to be true. This falls in the first category. Now, do we have to become just as good at lying as the greenwashers or do we need to put the fear of science into the gullables..... And how do we do that last bit?

[@xerr0n]

went to a business class with an orchard grower, she told us that eco and organic in her field meant that she just couldn't use around half of the *icides available.

[@ogi22]

In our particular case (Poland) it's much more religion classes at school than any other single science classes. And also a way of teaching, government interventions in education and so on. It is a very sad situation. @DreadX you said it nicely. We have to do the same what US did in 60ties - make science and education trendy. But that's a role of a wise government. To bet on development. A very difficult thing to do. Yet there is a hope still, because of people like Sabine and many other science educators. Let's hope that big business model of KZbin will not force them out of this platform.

[@h-z1218]

In the EU at least, we have well enforced regulation about the criteria that organic labeled food/agriculture has to fulfill. And as far as I know EU-organic agriculture is significantly better for biodiversity and sustaining healty soil. Still not perfect, as some problematic stuff is not banned, but much better than conventional. The only critics I have heard about organic, is that it is not healthier and not better for the climate, but that's not what the organic label is for.

[@Mareczekw30]

@@h-z1218 honestly my problem with whole eco/organic is price and quality. The nutritional value is most of the same(examples: eggs, root vegetables like carrot or callery), taste is just an opinion. Then eco/organic stuff is 50% more pricy or even more.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

Apple may look good on that chart, but what that chart does not take into account is repair. Repairing most things, especially electronics, is always much more environmentally friendly than making a new one, even if the new one hypothetically was made from 100% recycled materials. Repair often uses just a tiny fraction of the materials and energy needed to manufacture a replacement of the entire device. Apple makes the repair of thier products unnecessarily hard by restricting replacement parts, schematics and software that are needed for repairs. Apples anti repair lobbying efforts damage repairability of many products beyond the Apple ecosystem.

[@macki-1]

Perhaps, even more important than the issue of repairs is the well established practice in the tech industry of the "programmed obsolescence" of their products.

[@albal156]

The EU is forcing them to be better about this though it seems which is good.

[@fonkyfesh-old]

same is true for cars, it's way better to drive a car for another 5 years than to buy a gimmicky hybrid

[@TheDanEdwards]

My 20 year old original PowerBook still works. My 17 year old iMac still works. So go ahead and complain about repairs, but also consider life-time of products.

[@ulti-mantis]

@@TheDanEdwards That just means that Apple made durable stuff 17 years ago, not that they still do. A LOT can change in a company in that time.

[@dj_laundry_list]

My favorite one is "No chemical additives"....meaning that they don't put any pure substances in

[@CAThompson]

Also, *EVERYTHING is chemicals*. 🙃

[@Llortnerof]

"So it's a bottle of vacuum?" I wonder if anybody is selling 100% organic tablesalt. And what exactly it is they are actually selling. I also love when they put "vegan" labels on things that are naturally entirely made without animal parts. Like olive oil.

[@baironbreak]

Trans fats free bottled water....

[@ryuuguu01]

I don't put any chemicals in the software I develop. Should I add an irrelevant label about that?

[@Lazdinger]

Oh man, I remember a few years ago seeing a screenshot of the comments section of a fb group promoting some kind of “natural” product and a clever young lady asked “does it contain _dihydrogen monoxide_ ?” To which the response was something to effect of: “No, absolutely NO chemicals.” I don’t know if that actually happened but still pretty good haha

[@nagualdesign]

"Fibbing" is not an outdated term. It's been in common use for a very long time, like most words, but remains in common use.

[@livebungusreaction]

Eh not too much still common enough but most people honestly don’t use it anymore

[@maleahlock]

It's outdated where I'm from.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

You don't see it on the internet a lot.

[@robinhood4640]

@@maleahlock I grew out of fibbing years ago, I'm now a liar, but children are still fibbers.

[@mettattem]

I think op was in fact fibbing about well… fibbing😆

[@_aullik]

no animals were harmed during the making of this film.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

I'm pretty sure Sabine killed some singe celled animals or maybe even killed multicellular members of the animalis kingdom.

[@pizzaiolo181]

That carton of eggs would beg to differ

[@CAThompson]

@@pizzaiolo181 Not if those eggs weren't fertilised.

[@aniksamiurrahman6365]

What's the fuss about animals? Plants are alive and are probably more important than animals.

[@raythevagabond3724]

@@aniksamiurrahman6365 Well, most plants won't be available for long or many generations without the animals who are pollinators. And even the dung of other animals support the microorganism in the soil which support the plants. So, maybe the fuss about the animals could be that they are part of the circle of life and maybe none of the components of this circle is "more important" ... just a thought.

[@fazerjohn]

My favourite greenwashing claim was on a box of dog poo bags I bought on the internet last year, which was boldly branded as "Reusable".

[@flagmichael]

Eww....

[@Umski]

Well they could be I suppose 🤷‍♂️😂

[@legostone4776]

Apple as an example: They may present themselves as nice, but as long as the company prevents its products from being repaired, it is a good example to divert attention from the actual topic. Every defective device is replaced by a new one, which is a disaster considering the abundance of resources that are necessary for a smartphone and cannot be recycled. If an IPhone could be repaired instead, Apple would only need to produce two thirds of the IPhones, with the corresponding positive effects on the eco-balance, but nobody talks about that! But instead Apple builds a few wind turbines and does next level greenwashing . The next example at Apple would be the thing with the USBs. If they really took environmental protection seriously, they wouldn't have fought the EU regulation so hard. I don't want to claim that Apple's competitors are better. What always distinguishes Apple from the competition is that they present themselves better than they are in all aspects!

[@jannikheidemann3805]

Apple is also a trendsetter for many anti repair "innovations" or for removing headphone jacks for example, requiring wireless headphones with hard to replace batteries of themselves. An iPhone 4 with an wired headphones used one battery. An iPhone 12 with AirPods uses three additional batteries, two for the ear pieces and one for the charging case and AirPod batteries are even harder to replace than that of the iPhone itself. And now other manufacturers are doing the same, causing further harm to the environment!

[@JonoConstantini]

All true, repairability and fewer required batteries are important issues, but I‘d like to add that in my experience Apple products last very long. As the performance of consumer electronics has plateaued somewhat, Apple‘s long-term software support makes it possible to use the iPhones and iPads for five to six years, no problem. Computers even longer. In my family I see a quicker turnaround rate with Android devices. Of course you have to take care of your device (what the hell do people do to lightning cables?!) and yes, you can of course change an iPhone-battery at an Apple store - it‘s expensive, but still cheaper than buying a new phone of similar performance.

[@duncan.o-vic]

They are also responsible for stalling inovation for profits and selling gimicks as features.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

@@JonoConstantini Interesting, what kind of software issues is your family experiencing that make it necessary to replace the physical device? In theory, software, being digital, should not degrade like hardware does due to wear, if you don't change it. Updates that bloat the software and make a phone slower have been an issue, but that is an issue not unheard of with Apple.

[@traumflug]

@@JonoConstantini For older Android devices, there are third party operating systems solving the problem of lacking manufacturer updates. There's CalyxOS and LineageOS which offer up-to-date Android versions for older phones. It's genuine Android, so user experience is about the same. If you also care about your privacy, there are iodéOS and DivestOS. These are also based on Android, but parts sending your data to Google servers are removed. Which means, a few things stop working and need a different app. Which is the better choice depends on how much you value your privacy. The hardest part: making people recognize that one needs no new device just to get a new operating system. For many, hardware and OS are "the same".

[@misterlyle.]

Sabine Hossenfelder is wonderful. There are additional, easy tips to remember if you want to contribute to an improved environment. Here are a few: ✦ Buy a better quality product that will last. Too many cheap things end up in the trash. ✦ Buy LED lighting fixtures; they require much less electricity to operate and are supposed to last a long time. ✦ Maintain optimal comfort at home in the space you use, not necessarily the entire house. A small ceramic heater, for example, is both efficient and safe. ✦ Learn about local recycling, and participate in the program. Learn which things they want and what will contaminate the recycling stream. ✦ Avoid packaging that isn't accepted for recycling. Around here for example, the local recycling operation has no buyers for styrene products, or for plastics without a recycling code number.

[@sapinva]

Most recycling streams flow into landfills. Glass is easy to recycle, but not cost effective. Most plastic can not be recycled and eventually ends up in the ocean.

[@Julia68yt]

I remember a "labeling" news story from a while back. Some shirts were labelled as "made in germany" or similar - even tho they were clearly shipped from China. The manufacturer/seller twisted their way out of this because it was technically true. The label itself, on which "made in germany" was printed, was indeed a german product. The shirt it was sewn into was not 🤐

[@SabineHossenfelder]

ha 😅

[@CAThompson]

😕

[@Exgrmbl]

well if Germany continues down the rabbit hole, "made in Germany" won't even be worth faking anymore.

[@VelvetCondoms]

That is a problem here in the US as well. Companies will fake manufacturing products here.

[@CAThompson]

@@VelvetCondoms A way of showing how much of any given food or drink products ingredients were grown, processed and packed had to be created because of the issue of companies misrepresenting products as locally made and where the ingredients came from in Australia.

[@bradpalmer2914]

You know you have made a good video when Google slaps a context warning on the page. The way I treat green claims is I start from a position of 'They are all telling lies' and see if they can convince me that I am wrong

[@PinataOblongata]

No. They put that warning on everything and anything containing anything to do with climate change whatsoever, not just videos supposedly speaking truth to power, or however you are viewing it.

[@michaelpiper4067]

This is healthy cynicism that seems to be well-informed by the reality that by default companies care more about strategies to sell us more stuff rather than strategies to reduce their impact on the environment.

[@Peleski]

I'm not sure the content warning is an indicator of anything, other than machine reading detected certain keywords in the video

[@arctic_haze]

This video is actually environmentally friendly in the sense that it warns us against corporations trying to sell us things under false green guise.

[@absstevens7464]

It actually doesnt warn us against corporations, it more says corporations are really honest but they might get things wrong because, hey, it's all so complicated and the poor things are just getting confused and ultimately it is you the consumers who are to blame. I have some sympathy for the latter point but the first point is risible.

[@arctic_haze]

@saelesbonsazse9919 Nonzero but my point is that it is still worth it.

[@marcdraco2189]

@@saelesbonsazse9919not even close to the amount of hot air that Thunberg woman generates.

[@absstevens7464]

@@arctic_haze but the video isn't worth it because she isn't warning us against corporations but asking us for our sympathy at how difficult it is for corporations! Which by the way is bullshit, corporations know exactly what they are doing and are far from confused!

[@szaszm_]

@@absstevens7464 She didn't ask for sympathy, simply described how corporations work. She also described one of the end results of that, the misleading green labels. You can hate corporations, but that doesn't change a thing, so I see no point in that. Some corporations may be misleading intentionally, others may be confused and just going on the beaten path, but it doesn't really matter when it comes to the outcome. To change them, you can vote with your wallet, or lobby for regulations, and that's about it.

[@levbobrov1398]

My favorite is "recyclable". It's great because it allows the company to shift the burden (i.e. to do nothing), while still making the product look kinda good. Most of those product are not really recyclable -- nobody recycles them.

[@FranciscoJG]

Sabine, THANK YOU for also guiding to a better approach! So many people just stop at the "pointless button", which is the worst consequence of greenwashing.

[@rtbinc2273]

My advise for Green-washing is always buy lower down the production ladder. Don't buy canned carrots, buy carrots. There are a series of interwoven issues: buy down the ladder means you have to do more work. This is considered menial, or women's, work so we are taught not to do it and it makes more economic sense to do the most specialized profitable work possible and let someone who is menial do the chopping of carrots. Instead of a person you often have large machines in factories chopping the carrots. The carbon footprint of the can of carrots is much larger than yours. Chopping carrots really isn't that much fun, but you can learn to do it well. It takes some thinking. But, once you learn and get a few tools you can make a carrot, parsnip and fennel slaw which is really very nice. Another way to avoid green washing is to avoid "True Believers" who often lack perspective. Plastic shipping bags were cheap, effective and per bag had a lower carbon footprint than any paper bag - any they were reusable. They are resealable because they are next to indestructible, no now they are everywhere hanging off every third tree. So now they are bad and paper bags are good again. Just because someone has the best of intentions doesn't mean they are right. IMHO the same is for electric cars. Tesla is getting dinged for wildly overstating their range. The lifespan of a L-Ion battery seems to be a lot less than advertised - gee would a car company lie?. So are they bad? NO. What we have to realize is that we don't need a general purpose engine. We can pick the right drive train for the job. What works well for me in NYC may not be a good choice for someone in Texas where the corner store is an hour away, on the corner. Here in NYC Hybrids are the rule for Taxi's and car services. They like Plug Ins, but since the cars are run almost 24-7-365 you don't have a lot of charge time, but a little helps. They use a lot less gas and you can smell the difference walking past them. You walk up Broadway, which is as choked with traffic as it says, and you walk past a bunch of Hybirds and the exhaust fumes are just not there. They are quiet. Delivery trucks. Same thing. Pickups in Montana? Maybe not. European readers should remember the the USA's population density is *Lower* than the Faroe Islands. So if you're in Europe you have to remember NYC is that biggest City in New York State. The second biggest is Buffalo wihich is about 400 miles driving distance, about the same as London to Glasgow, or a bit less than Paris to Marseilles. That's not leaving New York State. True Believers are looking for the perfect answer, we really need logs of good answers we can use right now.

[@nataschabaunse9151]

You are the ONLY one who questions EVERYTHING about current affairs that's on my mind! I'm so glad for your work! Thank you 😊. I don't think it's worth consuming main stream media anymore, they aren't talking about the obvious subjects but try to distract us from what is really going on.

[@patrickwalsh2361]

You’re looking great Sabine and I love your videos. Especially the environmentally informative ones. Keep them coming please.

[@firelow]

"organic foods" is a great example of greenwashing, all foods are organic except for maybe salt

[@filiecs3]

But Himalayan pink salt I bought says "certified organic"!!!

[@nahoj.2569]

it drives me crazy when corporations or ppl try to greenwash meat and dairy. Livestock is impossible to make green, and that grass fed bs is even more harmful than FACTORY FARMS. this should be obvious given that factory farms are made for efficiency and minimum expenses, which results in less land and food used per kg of meat.

[@wake_for_go-ug8ol]

True

[@overtimesquared]

I’ve always tried to think for myself the best I can. But, if I were to give up thinking for myself, I might let Sabine think for me.

[@CAThompson]

How is that a problem? 😸

[@HxTurtle]

that you said nicely 👍

[@Apeiron242]

Careful. She's not as objective you might think. Many of her videos have a strong political slant.

[@HxTurtle]

@@Apeiron242 in genuinely curious: into which direction?

[@CAThompson]

@@Apeiron242 Due to her observations of the effects those politicians, parties and policies. Much of what she covers is directly affected by political decisions.

[@usmanshahid8069]

As a renewable energy engineer, I have to admit that, unfortunately, the same applies to renewable energy sources like wind and PV as well. They are not nearly as environment-friendly as the average person thinks.

[@mv80401]

The question to ask is: On what scale? Compared to what? Well, compared to fossil fuels: Production, refining, shipping, distributing, and finally burning of fossil fuels - a one time use, to be repeated in necessarily inefficient (~20!%) engines. Wind and solar clearly aren't all 'clean' but for one there is room for improvement, and for another their environmental 'debit' is amortized over fucking decades, not minutes as in combustion.

[@usmanshahid8069]

@@mv80401 I can answer your questions in some amount of detail afterwards but before I do so, I would just like to say I don't think you realize that ramping up the generation 'capacity' of renewable energy sources necessitates increased consumption of fossil fuels to fill in for their rather long periods of inactivity. Their intermittent nature makes them highly unreliable as stable sources of energy. I can't even count the number of times I have had to wait for months (not days or weeks but months!) to commission a windfarm controller simply because there wasn't enough wind. Germany (where I currently) live is a perfect example (a cautionary tale, in fact) of such a policy. Just want to mention that I haven't even enumerated the practical environmental downsides of an increased reliance on renewable energy souces like PV and wind for energy generation.

[@tiagotiagot]

Being better than the alternative is already a huge improvement

[@PinataOblongata]

@@usmanshahid8069 PV and CST offsets the time when the wind does not blow, and so does the wind simply blowing ESLEWHERE. Obviously that works the other way, too, with wind offsetting the time there is low irradiance. Then there's battery systems for storing energy while it's being generated and dispersing it during dunkelflaute. There's also the fact that not everywhere is like Germany - I live in Western Australia and probably PV alone, with some battery storage here and there, could meet all our needs. Lastly, there are other sources to firm renewables that aren't fossil fuel driven, like pumped hydro and nuclear. If you are really what you say you are, you should know all of this...

[@usmanshahid8069]

​@@PinataOblongata God, there are so many flaws in your argument that it would take pages to respond to all of them. :) First, I don't need to explain my credentials to anyone. Suffice it to say, I am well-qualified to answer all your points in detail - I have an MSc. in power engineering from one of Germany's top technical universities and have worked at a 300 kW coal test rig as an intern (along with my 8+ years experience in the renewable energy field) but due to space and time constraints, I'll keep my response short. Your basic assumption is that power being generated elsewhere will be able to compensate for the inactivity of renewable energy sources. You cite PV as an example but it's equally as intermittent as wind. In a lot of places, the low wind season coincides with winter. How are you going to expect PV to compensate for low wind output? No battery system is capable of large amounts of energy storage for long periods of time. And our batteries (as well as PV cells) at the moment are composed of substances that are either toxic or difficult to mine or difficult to dispose off (in an environtment-friendly manner) or a combination of all three. Batteries have a finite lifespan and their performance progressively deteriorates over time even before they have reached the end of their life. Perhaps you would be comfortable sending them off to underdeveloped countries for disposal since then it wouldn't be your problem anymore. That would still not be good for the planet as a whole. I don't blame you because to an average layman, a mixture of different renewable sources seems like a perfectly good solution - until and unless you actually have some real-world experience with them.

[@hp127]

I am sick of all the commercials nowadays: marketing nowadays is not about the (proposed) qualities of the product itself but about the socio-political views of the company that makes them.

[@ottomol5647]

Exact!!!..... It`s all about CONTROL....FEAR.... DOMINANCE... POWER.... AND SO ON...

[@charles.e.g.]

Yet another fantastic video, Sabine. More and more, I find myself looking forward to Saturday mornings, because I know I will be greeted by you and another exploration of a fascinating topic. Your content is consistently extraordinary, and I am consistently grateful to you for creating all of it. ❤

[@jamesgrover2005]

I agree but 'fibbing' on the scale was really just up from 'white lies', green washing on the other hand is up there with 'lying b'stards'.

[@breezy5797]

About how most people don't actually buy eco-friendly products, I think a lot of that has to do with cost. From what I see in stores in America, where I'm from, these products tend to be considerably more expensive and, if applicable, will contain less than the eco-unfriendly alternatives. I educate myself in climate science, I try to encourage others to look into it and inform those who are interested in listening to me, but I physically can't afford to commit to a completely climate-friendly lifestyle. I just have to wonder how much of a factor this is for people, as I know I'm not the only one. I've also noticed it has made some of my peers feel hopeless, or even resent popular climate-activists because "they *do* have the money to make change but are preaching to those who are struggling paycheck to paycheck". I can relate to the feeling of hopelessness and I can totally understand the perspective of seeing these people as know-it-all celebrities, especially since some of them *are*.

[@Lazdinger]

Great video! Sabine is a G. I would add _repairability_ as a virtue. I don’t claim to know absolutely every single implication but it would be nice if people could keep their electronics around for longer.

[@Hup.]

Absolutely! It's so dumb that companies like John Deere and Apple have used proprietary software to make it impossible to repair the physical products we bought and own!

[@oleksiysokolov3510]

Totally agree. I hated so much to buy a new motor block for a food processor just because of a failed tiny plastic coupling sleeve, that I got around to make a drawing and 3d print one for myself.

[@stevea4868]

Back in the old days (analog, mechanical) many of us could either fix things ourselves or find a repair shop to do it. Good luck trying to repair anything with a chip in it.

[@Lazdinger]

@@oleksiysokolov3510 nicely done!

[@TheTransporter007]

You're the only person whose video sponsorship I would actually trust, and that's saying something. I'll be sure to check them out after the video.

[@paxesmab]

Blame the consumers that can barely keep affording to live, the companies that profit billions have to lie to us. Hire a sociologist to help with those reflections Sabine, this is a social phenomenal, not a scientific one and it shows you didn't have the best script. Love your work!

[@bartroberts1514]

End consumers in no nation are responsible for more than 25% of national fossil emissions. The rest? Business, Institutions, Governments: BIG emitters. Why draw attention to 25% of the issue and fail to mention the 75% end? And in 25 nations, the world's largest fossil producers responsible for over 99.7% of emissions, that ratio of end consumer emission to total emissions is closer to 1:20. Looking at you USA, Russia, China, India, Canada, Germany..

[@ruudvdlinden]

Great that you've added examples of companies that actually walked the walk. Maybe we need to start a hall of fame for these companies. They get free PR and people will know that they're actually putting in the work.

[@tubeyk7100]

Hallo Sabine. May I say how much I appreciate what you do for me and so many others? You educate. You entertain. You enlighten. I’ve always had a passion for understanding the world we live in (and therefore not theoretical physics) and by listening to you my knowledge continues to grow and you make learning so much fun. Talking of which, I’m not fibbing when I saw that your humour just cracks me up. I’m always laughing out aloud when you make your humorous comments. They are so funny and natural. Next time you make a witty remark, be assured that I will be very much enjoying it when I view your episode. Thanks for all the work and creativity you put into your channel. You are the best! o.s. You are #1 on my list of interesting people I’d like at my next barbecue, but it’s always terrible weather when I plan said barbecue.

[@aretorta]

It's nice to see organizations like Planet Wild cropping up. I currently support a similar one called Mossy Earth.

[@Taomantom]

as an old American dude: Your reaction to the word "fibbing" made my day! I have always loved that word and threw it at my kids quits often. 😎

[@charliehubbard4073]

As another American, I'll even go so far as to say the word is still in common use here. Not as common as "lying", certainly, but it doesn't sound out of place when you hear it (or is that just me?)

[@montgomeryscot6623]

@@charliehubbard4073 Ditto in Australia.

[@gatensio]

Ah yes... Apple. The leader of the antirepair trend in computing surely is green.

[@ChielScape]

Imagine thinking Apple is even slightly eco friendly when they're one of the most egregious cases of producing e-waste by locking everything out of everything else whenever they feel like they can sell more shit that way, which is generally always.

[@xerr0n]

its a great example of fibbing

[@pontiuspilates]

Chinese brands are worse. The literally print e-waste. They don't have certified services, so their products don't end up refurbished.

[@user-rh8hi4ph4b]

"They lie to us because we want them to lie to us / because we believe it." "You can't blame the companies because they don't know what to do either." How about, instead: "You can't blame the consumer because they don't know better, and are viciously taken advantage of by dishonest, lying companies." ?

[@MCsCreations]

Thanks for all the info, Sabine! 😊 At home, as I've been cooking, we've been eating lots of fresh vegetables. And my mother does composting as well. And we collect recyclables as well, they collect every Wednesday here. But, honestly, I don't think it's going to be enough. We need new and better technology. Fast. Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊

[@sylviaelse5086]

A problem with net-zero is that it does not scale. We cannot all install solar panels to generate electricity during the day, and then use electricity generated from fossil fuels at night, and claim we've achieved net-zero. Displacing fossil fuelled generation during the day is better than nothing, but it's a really low hanging fruit.

[@kedrednael]

How could anyone claim net-zero has been achieved in your example? Fossil fuels are still being burned. I don't think anyone is doing that. The problem of energy storage to achieve renewable energy at night etc is much talked about nowadays.

[@jannikheidemann3805]

What does scale is if you during the night use wind power that is often available during the night and if it isn't, than you could burn gas produced using surplus renewable energy from the times and places that have an overproduction of energy. It's for example hard to run powerlines from the Sahara to Berlin to use the solar power there, but transporting methane liquefied using solar energy in a ship powered by wind and methane to be distributed in the german gas pipe network is more feasible.

[@nahoj.2569]

nuclear

[@sylviaelse5086]

@@kedrednael Yes, it is much talked about.

[@sylviaelse5086]

@@nahoj.2569 Yes, nuclear is a solution. But if we use that, then the solar panels are largely a waste of effort.

[@xyzero1682]

I can't wait to hear Sabine talk about the LK-99 "super conductor".

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Yes, will talk about it on Wednesday, working on it as we speak!

[@494ihi]

they wont get nobelprice for that but only for a real theory of making superconductors of differnt matrials if they have one - I just saw on video on "they get nobleprice" for lk-99

[@jamesdriscoll_tmp1515]

No resistance from me ⚡

[@xerr0n]

nah, from what ive seen of it its not convincing and useless, no resistance at 70 mA up to 95C. a whole whopping 70 milliAmps.

[@Elo-hv3fw]

@@xerr0n ?

[@MaryAnnNytowl]

Thank you very much for this. A couple of things I'd add: Always consider that the least waste possible is much better. For example, bar shampoos & conditioners and sheet laundry soaps (both of which I use). And @ 13:51 I use Ecosia rather than Google for ANY searches.

[@ThelemicMagick]

Great video again! I'd like to add to be aware of '100% biologic/ecologic' labels. In contrary to popular belief, these products are usually *less* climate friendly.

[@nahoj.2569]

it drives me crazy when corporations or ppl try to greenwash meat and dairy. Livestock is impossible to make green, and that grass fed bs is even more harmful than FACTORY FARMS. this should be obvious given that factory farms are made for efficiency and minimum expenses, which results in less land and food used per kg of meat.

[@samgragas8467]

Things like grass-fed beef or ecological beef are actually bad for the enviroment, it reduces efficiency compared to industrial animal farming. Also, palm oil is very climate friendly.

[@nahoj.2569]

it drives me crazy when corporations or ppl try to greenwash meat and dairy. Livestock is impossible to make green, and that grass fed bs is even more harmful than FACTORY FARMS. this should be obvious given that factory farms are made for efficiency and minimum expenses, which results in less land and food used per kg of meat.

[@larry785]

Most all the ads on KZbin are companies that want to install solar panels on your house for free - problem is they hook you - asking you to sign over your home as collateral, to pay for it.

[@k.taylor3526]

Thank you for yet another well researched and informative video! I joined Planet Wild and told them you sent me!

[@DeimosSaturn]

It's all pretty standard marketing and advertising. They don't lie, they just bend the truth. Every sales job teaches you this stuff. once you become conscious of it, you see it in everything and then you just get depressed.

[@dennismorris7573]

Excellent discourse and training in analytical thinking, Sabine. Something that I have taught in my ethics courses at university. Love your videos! Vielen danke!!

[@robindude8187]

I... don't really worry about this. The main reason I don't is that electricity production and transportation account for about half of all carbon emissions. Me getting a product that produces 50% less carbon is meaningless. You mentioned not sweating the small stuff, and that's exactly what all this is focused on. If companies go carbon neutral, then my spending habits won't need to change because the companies will change it, and my buying actually green products won't have enough of an impact, it's the lobbies and people running the companies that do so. Plus, honestly, I'm poor. Not homeless, obviously, but I don't have extra money to spend on the more expensive eco-friendly products. Or extra money to spend on much of anything. I routinely have to ask my family for financial help just to get _bad_ groceries.

[@tedwalford7615]

I saw in my store toilet paper labeled as being a "100% recycled" product. I mean, I try to do my part, but I draw the line at using recycled toilet paper.

[@martynspooner5822]

I love Sabine's vids, I learn so much and she nearly has a British sense of humour. And that's not a fib.

[@amorphant]

"Fibbing" was commonly used in some parts of the US a few decades ago. That verb form in particular was used more than others. You didn't hear "fib" often, but would hear things like "He's fibbing," "Are you fibbing?" etc.

[@alexandrascherer5463]

That's a good one! Thank you, Sabine & Team!

[@vulcan4d]

Companies should be fined a huge sum for lying.

[@stickinthemud23]

It’s always good to have confirmation that one’s sugar is fat free. 😮

[@Ultracity6060]

I was so confused by this video at first, but thankfully KZbin added some context from the UN. Phew! Now it all makes sense.

[@RayRay-cq5ky]

Wait, people don't say "fib" anymore? ...am I old?

[@wayn3h]

They definitely do.

[@RayRay-cq5ky]

@@richard_d_bird ok thank you I will save my mid life crisis for next year

[@rustysawblade2591]

I have a bottle of flash in the bathroom that proudly declares on the front that it contains "plant based ingredient" (not a typo, there's no S on the end of "ingredient") as far as I can tell, the only plant based ingredient is lavender. Smells nice enough.

[@curtisblake261]

I eventually got to 0% meat, but I can't attest to how I got there. Probably some combination of avoidance and climate concerns for future generations. Or maybe just because as I got older, I gave up everything I used to enjoy. I don't miss any of it. Note to self: re-read Siddhartha .

[@BigZebraCom]

It's not that easy bein' green Having to spend each day The color of the leaves When I think it could be nicer Bein' red or yellow or gold Or something much more colorful like that It's not easy bein' green It seems you blend in With so many other ordinary things And people tend to pass you over Cause you're not standing out Like flashy sparkles in the water Or stars in the sky [Bridge] But green's the color of spring And green can be cool and friendlylike And green can be big like an ocean Or important like a mountain Or tall like a tree

[@JohnnieHougaardNielsen]

Shopping advise #8: Consider if you really need to buy it, at-home recycling is quite effective.

[@ProgressiveMastermind]

Helping PLANET WILD already since recently 🙋‍♂️

[@latifoljic]

I usually try these things in order 1) go without it 2) forage it 3) buy local and biodegradable 4) buy biodegradable 5) buy local 6) shoplift

[@TLguitar]

So Adobe Premiere is artifical coloring and GMO-free?

[@danchisholm1]

thanks sabine - we appreciate what you cover.

[@maverick_monkey]

This is a great overview of the topic! Thank you:)

[@SkipMichael]

Packaging is my biggest concern. Companies that use excessive packaging to either show off their product or protect are causing more pollution. We the consumer have no say or control over packaging.

[@mobo8933]

Pls make a video on the new room temp superconductor LK -99. Love your vids

[@Tag-Traeumer]

In Switzerland, sugar beets were washed green. Sugar beet farmers put up billboards at the edge of their fields claiming that sugar beets are good for combating global warming because they absorb more CO² from the atmosphere than forest of the same area. 😐

[@ff-qf1th]

"Calling them zero emissions is fine, calling them zero pollution is greenwashing" - I would actually argue both *can* be greenwashing, because selective presentation of the truth can be used dishonestly. By advertising the fact that they are zero emissions, a clever use of rhetoric can imply there is not a trade-off while telling no outright lies.

[@alexofbree5278]

Regardless off the pollution of production, zero tailpipe emissions is still Very important. I work as a delivery driver and our vans Stink with toxic gas coming out of the exhaust. The best part is Ford doesn't understand that putting the tailpipe right under the back door that you open the most can suck exhaust fumes into the van, resulting in it getting trapped in the vehicle while the driver(myself) may have to have the windows closed for the sake of not melting do to extreme heat waves, or protecting myself from gold ball size hail in the middle of July... It also helps to reduce the amount of smog over residential zones (if we could actually reduce the number of ICE engines below 80%)

[@haint7709]

The "yeah but" argument is often used to delay any change and to confuse the issue. Just look at the likes of both comments. It obviously works. It did for cigarettes.

[@petersilva037]

reality: If your only criterion is GHG emissions, everyone who drives a vehicle a lot should switch to EV's ASAP. I find arguments against EV's based on pollution to be mostly meritless and counter-productive. If you plan to get around on a bike, or are able to get by with transit good for you, that is healthier for the planet and yourself, and I applaud you. I live in the asphalt deserts of north american suburbs, a car is not optional. When people say "battery production pollutes" it is invariably an element of a worse mis-calcuation. They use that as a reason to justify to keep driving their old gas car as long as possible. The reality is that for (on average) every two years you drive your old gas car, you pollute the equivalent of a new EV. So if you keep it for 10 years, you have polluted 4x more than getting a new EV would have. Also,. the carbon footprint of battery production is also amenable to reduction.... with 75% reduction being a current industrial target ( www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/the-race-to-decarbonize-electric-vehicle-batteries ) Today, we say that the payback period is about 2 years, so once the current target is reached, it should be about 6 months, vs. a 10 year lifetime... in other words a battery electric vehicle is currently 4x cleaner for the environment, and heading towards 16x less carbon emisisons... and it is not clear that there isn't an upper limit. If you need a vehicle, this is still the best environmental answer by far, and getting better over time.

[@rudyberkvens-be]

Everybody can now order a video from Sabine by sponsoring her.

[@badkarm4]

I have to now clam , just cause Im fuck?

[@badkarm4]

Sabine? She sounds good? She isn't she already said that ..

[@badkarm4]

Fib

[@msromike123]

So most of these companies making "green" products are just slapping a regressive tax that effects low income single parents the most (as an example.) I think a mother riding the the bus to 3 part time jobs doesn't really want to pay "extra" to keep the planet "green." Greener Hershey's chocolate kisses seems like the sin of irrelevance to me. These videos on environmental issues are great. What I would like to see is someone analyzing where the most good can be done far a given amount of tax expenditure. For instance if we are going to regressively tax people that eat chocolate (by implementing "green" chocolate production methods) very limited benefit, then why not just tax the chocolate directly and then use those funds in a cost effective manner to work on a problem that really does matter?

[@barbaraseville4139]

Bjorn Lomborg has a video on exactly that.

[@PAtrickGold]

My thoughts? My first effort to be enviramental friendly was: "Stop buying stuff that will shortly end up in the basement or attic." Green labeled or not, buying less things, in my opinion is the best way to reduce your carbon footprint. It helped me to work less days/hours and doing more stuff I really like, now finding out I earned at least twice the amount of money I actualy needed for living. ☺ To my advantage, I like biking a lot. The gained spare hours I spent on my bike helped me to get physically in better shape. In manager-talk: A win-win situation! (Disclaimer) If the better physics make me live twice as long as I would before, the "carbon footprint gain" could be reduced dramatically. 🤔

[@Thomas-gk42]

Yes, right 😊

[@europaeuropa3673]

Great video. I read all nutritional labels before buying. Next, I determine the Car/Fiber ratio. If Carbs/Fiber is greater than 5, I put it back on the shelf. I avoid products with a lot of ingredients and with higher amounts of added sugar. For example I usually avoid products with > 5 grams of added sugar, usually 1-4 grams of added sugar is enough. The German products at Aldi stores here in the states have too much added sugar, so I avoid them. However, the Lindt & Sprungli chocolate has 1-4 grams added sugar, which is more to my liking. My motto is: Health Care is Self Care. You are your best doctor. Avoid highly processed foods and go for whole foods like nuts, fermented cabbage, kale, beet root, quinoa, beans, sardines, wild caught Alaskan salmon(no farm raised salmon).

[@randreas69]

The first thing I'll note is if it says per-serving or per-100g. It depends if you'll decide to gobble up a whole muesli pack for breffast, or a single serving.

[@europaeuropa3673]

@@randreas69 most most of the time it's per serving.

[@bakslashr]

How the hell is Apple eco-friendly when you there is no cost efficient repair for any of their products, and they instead push you to upgrade instead. They fight "right to repair" tooth and nail. Not buying it.

[@stormx2827]

Another video where Sabine attempts to cover something outside her area of expertise and falls flat on her face. More physics videos please.

[@stevenschmidt7819]

If Mark Twain had been alive to know about Bernays he probably would have said "Lies, damn lies, statistics, and Advertising"

[@NeonVisual]

Avoid the green water.

[@Chris-hx3om]

Love the bottom up approach. I think the best example I saw of this was a video (search youtube) called 'How wolves changed the course of a river.'

[@marcfruchtman9473]

If Carbon Dioxide emissions were actually the driving force for climate change, it would make a difference... but they don't. One can look at carbon dioxide levels and glacial ice ages to see the proof that carbon dioxide levels are not the driving force for climate change. I am all for reducing pollution emissions, but carbon dioxide is not one of them. If carbon dioxide was the cause of so much heat, then explain the ice ages when there was much more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. We should focus on real issues that matter such as making the recycle label actually mean that the product can be easily recycled. Making sure garbage collection companies actually perform the recycling of the trash in a much better way, and not offload the duty of sorting trash to the human, but rather the garbage company itself.

[@montgomeryscot6623]

"Big companies are ...... run by normal people" That's a bold assertion.

[@curtisblake261]

Cute that Sabine had to look up "fib". Reminds me of the time I tried to order a meatless breakfast in Bielefeld-- it does exist BTW-- and I swear I was using the right words from my German-English dictionary. Finally, I relented and said "Big Breakfast" and the whole joint sprang into action to get me one of those. Then I gave back the meat portion. Or maybe I ate the whole thing as a non-committed vegetarian at the time. The aroma was probably very enticing. In fact, I'm still remembering it. Where was I? Oh yeah, don't eat meat, it's not eco friendly.

[@jamoR72]

The corporations pass the blame to the consumer when the manufacturers are the ones responsible. Why cant consumers stop this? LOBBYING

[@justlisten82]

Your hair looks nice! Thanks for the great video as always. Wishing you a wonderful day 😊

[@IARRCSim]

7:30 the animation with the math is funny. She shows it like deciding to go eco-friendly or which eco-friendly labels to use is a complex math problem.

[@eonasjohn]

Thank you for the video.

[@Charity4Chokora]

First person to say first 😂

[@redoscar540]

Sabine, you are such a breath of fresh air. Live long and prosper!

[@Thomas-gk42]

Thanks a lot for bringing up that interesting and important topic. You are totally right.

[@dj_laundry_list]

I'm going to make a bot that leaves that comment on every one of her videos

[@judithflow3131]

I deliberately ignore all eco-labels, and only care about price and quality. It's not just about the simplistic greenwashing some companies do, but more because there is usually more than one trade-off to consider. I *prefer* old fashioned lightbulbs over led-light to light my house. Why? Because I hardly have the lights on during summer, but a lot more during winter. The heat generated by simple lightbulbs then is not wasted to me, it means my central heating doesn't have to work as hard as it has to with led-lights, and the amount of heat generated by lightbulbs is significant, and localized on where I am within the house, because that's where I have the lights on. I also developed a preference for oil-based paint. It simply looks better, it's shine is more lustrous, but it's also more durable. And although water based paints may be better bio-degradable (debatably, the choice is either durability or biodegradability, the two are mutually exclusive), the production of the two different types of paints is similarly polutive. Overal, the best ways to reduce your ecological footprint, is still to prefer locally produced products over products from the other side of the world, encourage companies to limit the amount of packaging materials to a minimum (I certainly never asked for multiple layers of plastic wrappings around a couple of apples), and be sensible about waste disposal. (re-use old bags, don't throw empty cans or bottles on the street, seperate waste where available). And no, I don't need a new pair of jeans every week, I wear 'till it's worn out.

[@ShinyRayquazza]

Heating with lightbulbs is just electric resistive heating, which is way less efficient than a heat pump system. You should really just upgrade your lights and let your central heating do what it's designed to do.

[@compostjohn]

Shopping Rule Number One - Don't buy it - unless you really really need it. Not consuming something is always better than consuming something even if it is said to be 'green' or eco friendly. No carbon emissions is better than low carbon emissions. I appreciate this is a radical approach, and yes we have to live, eat, etc.... but it's always good to ask the question 'Do I really need this?'

[@xuzeh]

What a teacher Sabine is! I really wish I could, someday, talk to her about Maxwell equations, Fourier Series and Laplace transform 😊 (yes, I am autistic)

[@rajsexton4334]

I dont generally "leave a comment in the section below" (ok, so this is my 1st and perhaps only time), but I wanted to THANK YOU(!) for what you do. Your humorous approach and brilliant content/ commentary is awesome. Blessed be.

[@vanshankguitars]

Same thing can be said of individuals (politicians and actors come to mind) who fly and/or use fossil fuel guzzling luxury yachts to attend "green" conferences that could be attended over Zoom and then claiming that the buy offsets. Not producing the "pollution" in the first place would go much further to maintain credibility in my opinion.

[@disklamer]

Watching this video increased my footprint

[@dennisconley5068]

I'm all for products that are environmentally friendly, but part of reducing the carbon footprint is making stuff repairable. The carbon footprint to build all new is much larger than to build a repair part. The incremental carbon savings between a new item and the older item seldom offsets the initial carbon footprint of the new item.

[@junkerzn7312]

Whenever you see "Natural Flavors" in a product's ingredient list, maybe consider running away. This is an umbrella term that simply means the chemical soup representing that ingredient was originally produced from natural ingredients, except probably hundreds of different ones that were very heavily processed and refined and for all intents and purposes might as well be exactly the same as the chemicals listed on many products. Except not quite as clean.

[@birricforcella5459]

The problem with companies is the same as with owls and cats - some of the worst predators are the most attractive

[@olik136]

It would be interesting to know how much a higher price of a product indirectly makes it less eco-friendly because of the energy I have to put into earning the money for it. Seems very hard to factor in everything relevant here- but there must be some kind of correlation. Let's just say I buy an electric car which costs 10k€ more than a petrol car. Now I have to earn those 10k by working more- and working more costs more energy and resources maybe even in the form of having to travel more with that car.. having to buy a new one earlier..

[@t16205]

Not to mention how eco unfriendly electric cars are. They weigh twice what a normal car does, and subsequently leave more rubber along the road. Rubber pollution is way worse than co2 and causes cancer. Dont even get me started on pollution from the manufacturing process (which is usually powered by coal), or the fact that people who buy these cars are supporting slavery and child labor in Kongo. Electric cars also have only half the life expectancy of a petrol or diesel car, meaning you will have to buy atleast two electric cars to replace one combustion driven car. That is, IF the owner is super good in taking care of the battery. But yes, go on saving the environment by making it worse, and making everyone miserable in the process.

[@KarmicBeats]

This video has given me an idea for marketing my meditation videos. I can honestly advertise that my meditation videos are environmentally friendly. They will not clog landfills & have little (though not 0) carbon footprint. They also do not contain any GMOs, added sugars or chemicals with big names. 😎

[@Rastlov]

Voting is the only hope we have of making a difference. Anything else is like trying to prevent sea level rise by going to the beach with a liter bottle and filling it up to bring home.

[@andygoldensixties4201]

There is no reason at all, Dr. Hossenfelder, to be unconfortable. Words may count less then walks, but we appreciate "good words" when they come from a competent scientist who's always honest in her reviews and credible in her own choices. I would like to see one of your next videos treat the issue about the terrifying amount of energy that is wasted in apparently "clean" activities such as crypto money mining or A.I.

[@RWBHere]

There's another aspect to greenwashing, which I'll call 'juggling with figures', or simply, 'obfuscation'. My wife bought some cleaning products online recently which were claimed to contain much lower levels of 'harmful ingredients'. They were significantly more expensive than the standard products. The catch was that they were all diluted with much more water, and the detergents had Sodium Chloride added to them to make them more viscous. So the shopper is spending more money on buying less, whilst not ,helping the environment' in any meaningful way. Big brand washing powders have been loaded with Calcium Carbonate and bonemeal for at least 50 years. One conglomerate in particular sells washing powders which contain less than 16% of active ingredients (detergents, bleaching agents and brighteners). The detergent is perhaps 5% of the mixture. The rest of the contents of the large, heavy box is bonemeal and chalk filler. (That's one reason why your washing machine hoses clog up with greyish debris.) Unsurprisingly, the manufacturer claims that their products contain very low percentages of 'harmful ingredients'. Those chemicals are guaranteed to be substantially less than 16% of the washing powder! A similar scam happens with some 'low calorie' food products. For example, a type of bagel which was supposedly endorsed by a well-known dieting corporation claimed '30% less calories!, (sic), but when inspected, they turned out to weigh half as much as the standard item, whilst the calories per gram were substantially higher. Basically, the shopper is paying more money, to buy more air, in a product which is made from inferior ingredients. Then there are 'gluten-free' foods which are allowed, by law, to contain up to 1% gluten by weight. Skin products are another huge swindle. We found a container which had contained a quite expensive 'environmentally friendly moisturiser'. My wife had bought it, and had never opened the container properly or used any of it. Yet the container was empty, apart from a very thin layer of greyish dust in the bottom. Out of curiosity, I added enough deionised water to fill the jar, and left it until the next day. Sure enough, the jar was found to be full of a whitish creamy 'moisturiser, albeit with almost no perfume. The perfume would have evaporated away along with the original water. The grey dust must have been something like wallpaper paste powder, which is extremely hydrophilic. Keeping on your toes with the claims made by many companies can be quite difficult to maintain.

[@truecerium4924]

Another good example is "ocean plastic". It became popular with the discovery of the North Pacific garbage patch => "plastic island"; plastics are being recovered from our oceans but consumer good makers are riding on that wave: sneakers are being advertised as "made from/with ocean plastic". Checking the fine print reveals that a) the material used is not "ocean plastic but "ocean bound/river plastic" and b) only 10% of the material of the sneakers are linked to that

[@truecerium4924]

@-SabineHossenfelder Da fühle ich mich sehr geehrt, dies von dir 😃

[@flymypg]

First step: BUY LESS! This starts with products have less wrapping or boxing (for the same size or purpose), taking time to consider the actual future waste stream impact of the wrapping and the product itself. The carbon impact of manufacturing is important, but effective management of the waste stream is often more important, especially for complex products like electronics. Consider repairing or updating a product before replacing it, or buying used instead of new. Second step: Buy in volume. A single large container is MUCH easier to recycle than many smaller containers, as the large container is easier to pull from the waste stream and identify for proper recycling. Plus, that single large container likely uses less total packaging than the many smaller ones. An example is dish soap, where I store the gallon jug, and for daily use employ a small reusable squeeze bottle. Personally, I tend to look at the manufacturing climate impact (the "upstream" impact) only AFTER looking at the impact of using the product and the subsequent waste ("downstream") impact. I also ask if I should purchase the product in the first place! This perspective leads me to choose durable products over disposables. This also affects where I shop: While I strongly prefer to support local retailers, if they don't sell the product I need, I'll use Amazon in a heartbeat. And when I do shop locally, I try to combine trips to reduce my total miles driven: Amazon delivery is FAR more fuel-efficient and environmentally positive than driving to just buy the item locally (unless trips are carefully combined). The decision process can be agonizing. For example, I still drive an ICE vehicle, a 2012 Mazda 3 hatchback with the efficient Skyactiv ICE drivetrain. When I bought it new, it was the most efficient ICE vehicle available (new or used) that met my key transportation needs, and it continues to perform very well 11 years later. I wanted an EV back then, but there were none available that met my needs, and there were no hybrids that did either. Beyond this, at the time the grid was still fairly dirty, so I didn't want to increase demand, and home solar wasn't an attractive option at the time (for multiple reasons). I made the commitment that this would be my last ICE vehicle. I didn't expect to wait for over a decade, but I'm SO GLAD I did! I have preordered an Aptera (and am also an investor). I am eagerly awaiting news of Aptera closing its next funding round to build and operate its first production facility. The Aptera ticks every one of my boxes: - Why put solar on my home before putting USEFUL solar on my vehicle? In SoCal, the Aptera's solar panels will yield up to 40 miles of range EVERY DAY. I rarely drive further. My projections are that I would need to charge from the wall at most once every three months (for normal daily driving, excluding trips). - Why buy a vehicle with high drag? Most current vehicles use 60% of their propulsion energy at highway speeds simply to move air out of the way. The slippery Aptera cuts total drag at least in half. To reduce rolling resistance, Aptera has only 3 wheels, where eliminating the weight of a wheel and its suspension further reduces vehicle weight. - The low weight and low drag combine to minimize the propulsion needed to obtain the desired performance: The motors and the battery shrink by at least HALF for the SAME range. And having half the battery further reduces weight, starting a virtuous circle of overall efficiency. - Half the battery also means half the conflict minerals. Imagine if any other EV company announced they had reduced their Cobalt and other problematic mineral use by half? You get the idea. Beyond all the above, the Aptera cargo volume is massive for its size. I prefer to carry my triathlon bike inside my vehicle with both wheels attached, which was one of the key criteria that led me to select my Mazda 3. My bike also fits in the back of the Aptera, and there is a video online of me putting my bike inside of one of the early Aptera prototypes. Yes, I bring my bike with me when I shop for a new vehicle!

[@johntheux9238]

If it's cheaper it requires less resources. Just buy the one that's cheaper.

[@designtechdk]

If it’s cheaper, then it was cheaper to produce. That doesn’t mean it required less resources.

[@johntheux9238]

@@designtechdk It means less human labor so less a**holes driving in their Lamborghini.

[@maleahlock]

​​@@johntheux9238No, it usually means more unethical working conditions and exploitation by the people in lamborghinis.

[@johntheux9238]

@@maleahlock That's still less people in lamborghinis per bottle of shampoo.