Nov 18, 2022·edited Nov 18, 2022Liked by Emily Atkin
I think his promotion of cryptocurrencies would be another climate negative against Musk and that it's worth noting how Tesla's history of violating environmental regulations and resistance to measuring the carbon emissions of its manufacturing footprint complicate the idea that it is an unambiguous leader on climate issues.
Musk is a malignant narcissist. I used to be a fan boy until I actually started paying attention to the way he manages people. He chews them up and spits them out.
Longtermism values ther very long term future over today. This means if some crisis (like global warming) is considered bad but will not wipe out humanity, it's not worth addressing. Because: trillions and trillions of people will live in the far future. So it's better for Musk to spend his money on colonizing Mars, which will help spread to many more planets in the far future.
So I don't think Musk cares he is judged on his actions today. He just does not care about people suffering today and all that.
I hope some of the sheen is starting to wear off with Elon Musk as he apparently runs Twitter into the ground. Even within the sphere of electric vehicles, it's not like he invented the idea. Tesla is the biggest player, for sure, but the idea that Musk is some revolutionary genius seems woefully overstated.
The aggregate of your reporting on Musk Mania is impossible to ignore. My family went from two cars to one Tesla in service to climate solutions. Much as I've liked the car, I'm disgusted by the megalomaniac at the helm. Time to replace it with a car company founded on better values and more stable leadership.
Musk is living proof that people can have too much money. Imagine spending $44 billion just so that you can destroy a social media site................
Electric cars are a bridge solution. Much of the current land use in the U.S. does not work for walking and biking. Nor can it be served with public transportation. Until we change land use electric cars are a lesser evil.
Further, General Motors has been working on electric cars for decades. They are also in the process of producing cars and trucks for a variety of needs and price points. (Disclosure, I own an electric car, a Chevy Bolt. I bought it because I wanted a car made in the U.S. with union labor. This excluded all of the expensive Teslas.)
Since you couldn't quantify the negatives in terms of climate, as long as Tesla is part of the Musk climate equation, it's a net positive. It is not even close.
Tesla, the company Musk turned into such a phenomenal success that even Toyota admits they can't compete, is full of bright talent committed to a sustainable energy largely free of fossil fuels. Every auto company, power company and oil company is reacting to the Tesla juggernaut.
I despise his latest sophomoric, misanthropic online persona and question some of his motives but the climate will react little to Twitter nor Boring nor SpaceX. Our immediate needs are keeping FF in the ground. Each Tesla, GM, Panasonic, CATL, etc, battery plant is an oil field taken offline.
At some point I would like to read your take on the recent investor presentation by Tesla which strives to do precisely what I think you advocate; end FF for energy and transport.
I'm honored to be quoted in the second paragraph, and I agree with many of the negative points made here. I'm also troubled by Elon's veer toward the political right and agree that he can be fairly accused of narcissism. But ad hominem accusations demand a nuanced look at the person. We are all stuck behind our personal windows through which we see the world, and formed (damaged) by our life experience up to the present moment. Most importantly, understanding peoples' perspective and what motivates them should always be the foundation of assessing their behavior. In Musk's case, I accept his self-admitted place on the autism spectrum (from an evidence perspective, it explains much of his behavior). Not that I expect anyone to pity him. I'm just interested in having an evidence based view when it comes to the behavior of powerful humans.
Today your newsletter started out by stating 'Chevron’s sponsorship has not appeared in any Semafor climate newsletters since those articles were published.' I get the Semafor Flagship daily newsletter. Chevron sponsors it, and their ad regarding use of methane from cattle as an alternate fuel was featured all week. I haven't bought a cow yet, but I emailed my concern about their being used as a vehicle for greenwashing yesterday. I got a response today thanking me for input.
The Punchbowl newsletter from Jake Sherman, Anna Palmer and John Bresnahan now features Chevron's spiel about peanut shells and other sustainable sources of carbon fuels. I emailed them yesterday but have not heard back.
I think his promotion of cryptocurrencies would be another climate negative against Musk and that it's worth noting how Tesla's history of violating environmental regulations and resistance to measuring the carbon emissions of its manufacturing footprint complicate the idea that it is an unambiguous leader on climate issues.
Musk is a malignant narcissist. I used to be a fan boy until I actually started paying attention to the way he manages people. He chews them up and spits them out.
So apparently Musk is into longtermism, see https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longtermism
Longtermism values ther very long term future over today. This means if some crisis (like global warming) is considered bad but will not wipe out humanity, it's not worth addressing. Because: trillions and trillions of people will live in the far future. So it's better for Musk to spend his money on colonizing Mars, which will help spread to many more planets in the far future.
So I don't think Musk cares he is judged on his actions today. He just does not care about people suffering today and all that.
I hope some of the sheen is starting to wear off with Elon Musk as he apparently runs Twitter into the ground. Even within the sphere of electric vehicles, it's not like he invented the idea. Tesla is the biggest player, for sure, but the idea that Musk is some revolutionary genius seems woefully overstated.
The aggregate of your reporting on Musk Mania is impossible to ignore. My family went from two cars to one Tesla in service to climate solutions. Much as I've liked the car, I'm disgusted by the megalomaniac at the helm. Time to replace it with a car company founded on better values and more stable leadership.
Elon's unhinged leadership is problematic. I try to support CLIMATE in elections, shopping, eating, & investing.
Musk is living proof that people can have too much money. Imagine spending $44 billion just so that you can destroy a social media site................
Electric cars are a bridge solution. Much of the current land use in the U.S. does not work for walking and biking. Nor can it be served with public transportation. Until we change land use electric cars are a lesser evil.
Further, General Motors has been working on electric cars for decades. They are also in the process of producing cars and trucks for a variety of needs and price points. (Disclosure, I own an electric car, a Chevy Bolt. I bought it because I wanted a car made in the U.S. with union labor. This excluded all of the expensive Teslas.)
Since you couldn't quantify the negatives in terms of climate, as long as Tesla is part of the Musk climate equation, it's a net positive. It is not even close.
Tesla, the company Musk turned into such a phenomenal success that even Toyota admits they can't compete, is full of bright talent committed to a sustainable energy largely free of fossil fuels. Every auto company, power company and oil company is reacting to the Tesla juggernaut.
I despise his latest sophomoric, misanthropic online persona and question some of his motives but the climate will react little to Twitter nor Boring nor SpaceX. Our immediate needs are keeping FF in the ground. Each Tesla, GM, Panasonic, CATL, etc, battery plant is an oil field taken offline.
At some point I would like to read your take on the recent investor presentation by Tesla which strives to do precisely what I think you advocate; end FF for energy and transport.
I'm honored to be quoted in the second paragraph, and I agree with many of the negative points made here. I'm also troubled by Elon's veer toward the political right and agree that he can be fairly accused of narcissism. But ad hominem accusations demand a nuanced look at the person. We are all stuck behind our personal windows through which we see the world, and formed (damaged) by our life experience up to the present moment. Most importantly, understanding peoples' perspective and what motivates them should always be the foundation of assessing their behavior. In Musk's case, I accept his self-admitted place on the autism spectrum (from an evidence perspective, it explains much of his behavior). Not that I expect anyone to pity him. I'm just interested in having an evidence based view when it comes to the behavior of powerful humans.
a succinct, informative, comprehensive assessment, Emily. Thank you!
Today your newsletter started out by stating 'Chevron’s sponsorship has not appeared in any Semafor climate newsletters since those articles were published.' I get the Semafor Flagship daily newsletter. Chevron sponsors it, and their ad regarding use of methane from cattle as an alternate fuel was featured all week. I haven't bought a cow yet, but I emailed my concern about their being used as a vehicle for greenwashing yesterday. I got a response today thanking me for input.
The Punchbowl newsletter from Jake Sherman, Anna Palmer and John Bresnahan now features Chevron's spiel about peanut shells and other sustainable sources of carbon fuels. I emailed them yesterday but have not heard back.
I knew he was an overrated narcissist, but I'm still surprised at just how *fast* he's wrecking Twitter.
Hoping this puts a dent in the annoying fanboy-ism in a lot of tech spaces.
Is Musk letting his solar division die away? https://electrek.co/2022/11/10/tesla-cancels-solar-projects-scales-back-division/