I don't know if he's obsessed by oil. So far when a president invaded a country because of it's oil, it always went with a cover story to justify it. Now the (cover) story provided by Trump is oil, so it may be possible it was all just to get the Nobel prize. As trinkets are all he cares about. Now it looks like he wants what I want when playing hearts of iron: make all the continent mine.
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
642 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
78923 readers
3283 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
One is an energy and material source. The other is neither and is simply storage.
Why would you compare them?
Because batteries are a point of tension in the adoption of some electricity-centric techs. Electricity production can be done in many different ways already (unless you suddenly decide to 100x the demand for shit and giggles), but a lot of applications requires batteries, which makes them some sort of choke point for adoption. Making them better, more accessible, cheaper, more friendly on the environment ease that.
The comparison is also on one end of the world focusing on the dying down side of things, while the other end is (allegedly) looking forward.
That's why they're compared.
That's nice. Now run a modern civilization of 10 billion (upcoming) with only electricity.
Those Chinese seem to be some decent forward thinking blokes. Nothing like I was led to believe by west
EVs alone have major grid balancing potential. You can get home batteries for under $100/kwh in US right now, and cost of EV batteries have always been lower due to bulk/contract purchases. At $100/kwh, even from grid TOU use power, you can time shift profitably for just 1c/kwh before financing costs, but before resilience/backup benefits from batteries.
Solar is by far the cheapest way to charge those batteries, where home solar without monopoly persecution from utilities, as in Australia, can be extra affordable. But even before abundant solar is permitted in our countries, or even net metering, simply having TOU rates that are cheap at night allows for enough arbitrage for when TOU rates are high. Where some EVs are $300/kwh to $500/kwh for the entire car, TOU rates can allow for arbitrage that pays for whole car.
What sorts of batteries are around that price per kwh? Genuinely curious, been thinking about adding batteries but can't justify the costs I've seen
Oil is the longest word he can spell without spellcheck.
Yes, China has very purposefully put itself at the forefront of the first technological revolution of the 21st century and done this at multiple levels (solar panel production, battery tech, EVs)
Meanwhile the American elites have decided that 19th century technology is were they want to be. Well, that and dead ending killing the country's lead in the Tech revolution by going down a branch with no future in the form of LLMs and making everybody lose trust in keeping their data in anything owned by American companies.
And, of course, the crooked politicians here in Europe are actually following America more than China in this.
And, of course, the crooked politicians here in Europe are actually following America more than China in this.
That is much less the case then it might appear. Out of the Top10 largest EV makers three are European(Volkswagen, BMW and Stellantis). When you look at wind, Europe has a few of the largest companies in the world. Europe is also basically the only place even attempting to compete with China in batteries, since Trump cut US support for that industry. There are plenty of more niche industries as well, in which Europe has some very strong companies.
It is a lot more complex than "Europe is actually following America more than China in this".
Europe have very limited lithium deposits compared to China. Europe is trying to be as self sustaining as possible, especially now that the US have shown themselves to be a highly unreliable partner.
So exchanging one dependency for another is a poor lateral move at best.
You can't just start digging up the entire ground and make car batteries out of all lithium you find.
European universities all over are researching alternative battery technology that doesn't rely as much on lithium.
None of that is true. There is lithium everywhere, Germany just found 45 million tonnes of it. People have been digging up the entire ground for oil for 200 years.
You can research all you want, but the periodic table is not changing, and Chinese R&D is decades ahead of the West.
Yeah, they just found it late last year. And still working out how they should bring it up. They've made estimates on the amount, i'm not qualified to verify their estimates.
If they can actually bring it up we have security in the materials required to make the research worth it.
But no, we have not dug up all of the ground to get oil. Oil is a lot more liquid than lithium ore. We can pump up the oil without having to excavate the entire surrounding area.
I'm not saying that to defend oil. But the funny part about it is that if they had dug up all of the ground to get it, they would have found their lithium deposits sooner. Because they found it in an oil-field.
You can research all you want, but the periodic table is not changing, and Chinese R&D is decades ahead of the West.
What does that even mean? Do you have any idea how long ago it was since we found the last naturally occurring element? Should we have just stoped all research I the early 1900's because "the periodic table is not changing". Dumbest shit I've heard all years. And yes, I did hear about Trumps email to Norway. You still win.
Adding to your comment: Lithium brines are extracted through drilled wells, it's not always ore.
Thank you. I didn't know that.
You can research all you want, but the periodic table is not changing, and Chinese R&D is decades ahead of the West.
Yeah, well, there's no Oil in Europe either, so ICE cars are even worse for a self-sustaining Europe (at least Lithum is only consumed once for an EV car, whilst Oil is consumed all the time for ICE cars)
If Europe can constantly source Oil from abroad to keep ICE cars going, I'm sure it can also source (a far lower quantity of) Lithium from abroad to make cars that can then run on electric power produced right here in Europe.
Your entire "argument" is one big cherry picked excuse.
I'm not arguing for oil. Yet the current production costs for lithium batteries, compared to their lifecycle, rivals that of combustion propulsion. That doesn't mean we should stop researching and finding better methods. But it's far from as "environmentally" friendly as you think it is.
Oh, and Europe have oil. Plenty of it. Where would you like start? The coast outside Norway? The vast natural gas reserves in western Russia? The ocean outside of Scotland, maybe it just happenes to be a shit ton of oil under Greenland which is 100% unrelated to why Trump wants to own it.
I'm still not arguing for or against oil. I'm saying Europe isn't following the US, and Europe isn't interested in following China either. Europe is interested in carving out sustainability for themselves without US or China.
there's no Oil in Europe either
Confused European noises
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/crude-oil-production?continent=europe
Yeah, well, there’s no Oil in Europe either,
C'mon. I'm a dumb American, but even I know without looking it up about Norway's vast petroleum production as well as the North Sea petroleum platforms off the coast of Scotland.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›