Richard Clement’s letter regarding LCC’s raffle of an electric bike raises valid questions, but he paints with broad strokes while the devil is in the details. True, electric bikes are less “clean” than walking or muscle-powered bicycles, but they are not, as Clement suggests, motorcycles. No noise, no carbon emissions (other than manufacture). Electric vehicles are stepping stones toward cleaner transportation systems, but only when charged from clean energy like tidal, geothermal, or hydro. Charging via coal-fired power plants or corporate mega-solar, wind or biomass only shifts environmental damage and pollution to different locations (see the documentary Planet of the Humans, suppressed by “green” billionaires, and GrayZone.com article Sept. 7, 2020).
The problematic need for lithium in electric vehicles, including exporting unregulated mining to undeveloped countries, may soon be resolved by direct extraction from seawater and recycling lithium batteries (Science July 13, 2020). But low-tech practical solutions to the climate crisis like Paul Hawken’s Project Drawdown – biochar, no-till agriculture, protection and restoration of forest, grassland, tundra and ocean communities, etc. – offer the greatest promise.
Clement portrays LCC as anti-mining. What we oppose is tailings from high-sulfide mines leaching heavy metals, the equivalent of millions of leaking car batteries, into salmon rivers.
Before mining, sources of metals like scrap yards, landfills, old tailings piles, pennies, and urban e-waste like cell phones should be “mined” (Environmental Science and Technology April 4, 2018). Visit lynncanalconservation.org for further ideas. Non-vitriolic debate welcomed.
Eric Holle