
“You're stealing our water”: Germans protest against Tesla gigafactory - hhs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tesla-gigafactory-germany-protests/youre-stealing-our-water-germans-protest-against-tesla-gigafactory-idUSKBN1ZH0KM
======
IfOnlyYouKnew
Living across the street from the old factory in Berlin that was going to
house a Google office until the local anti-gentrification movement started to
protest, I'm not surprised. If you build a factory around here, with as much
publicity as Tesla gets, you are going to see protests. There are probably two
rare species of mosquitos being released in that forest _right now_.

But just the existence of opposition isn't very meaningful. Of a few million
people, _some_ will oppose manna raining from heaven.

Does this have a chance to derail the project? Absolutely not!

Germany is getting quite nervous of its car industry doing an impressive 4-way
re-enactment of Nokia's fate, and a significant Tesla presence is just about
the best thing imaginable. The local politicians here in Berlin and
Brandenburg (the state surrounding Berlin that includes the actual factory)
are even more motivated, because it (still) lacks industry. Not one of the
top-30 public companies in Germany is located in the east, for example.

It's also important to mention that the concept of "protests" has significant
different meaning here than elsewhere, especially the US: A protest is seen as
one method/venue/institution among the many that make up "civil society". It
carries no connotation of lawlessness[0], and any average citizen, even the
blandest centrist, will attend many protests during their life. It's often a
social event as well, and can include entertainment, somewhat similar to
parades in the US.

0: some specific protests, like May Day, tend(ed) to involve some violence.
But these number in the single digits, while there are 15 protests per day on
average, just in Berlin.

~~~
vanusa
_Of a few million people, some will oppose manna raining from heaven._

As much as these companies may try to present them that way - these factories
they build are not "manna raining from heaven."

 _A significant Tesla presence is just about the best thing imaginable._

We get that there are potential benefits to bringing a major manufacturer to
the area. So do the people protesting, I hope you realize.

The question is whether these companies are willing to pay the true price for
the resources they need. And whether they're willing to respect the
environment (and yes, regulations) in doing so. Or whether they expect some
kind of a free free ride.

Quite often, the it's the latter that seems to be the case.

~~~
IshKebab
> these factories they build are not "manna raining from heaven."

He wasn't actually saying that though. Read it again - his argument was
basically "some people always complain _even if there 's nothing to complain
about_, therefore you can't learn any information from the fact that some
people are complaining"

~~~
IfOnlyYouKnew
Indeed, thank you for!

------
evanlivingston
Tesla has an long uphill battle trying to get it's factory built in Berlin. I
also feel they're probably underestimating the seriousness with which Germans
take their worker's rights.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Germany has little choice. Their economy is heavily dependent on their auto
industry, which will contract as EV demand scales up. Of all automakers, I
would think Tesla would be the least impactful based on their experiences at
Gigafactory 1.

[https://finance.yahoo.com/news/declining-car-sales-help-
driv...](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/declining-car-sales-help-
drive-162158679.html) (Declining Car Sales Help Drive Germany Toward
Recession)

[https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/tesla-impact-
report-2019.pdf](https://www.tesla.com/ns_videos/tesla-impact-report-2019.pdf)
(Tesla 2018 Impact Report)

~~~
maxerickson
Your theory is that any EV builder willing to work in Germany will get to
dictate terms?

That seems unlikely given the wealth and industrial base devoted to the
automotive industry there.

~~~
toomuchtodo
My theory is that Tesla is the least worst auto manufacturing partner Germany
could work with (there are always compromises that must be made), and has the
power to go elsewhere if desired (several other EU countries have been very
vocal in their demand for a Gigafactory; China bent over backwards to provide
financing to Tesla for Gigafactory 3 at very favorable terms, I could see
something similar in the EU considering their negative interest rate
environment). Whomever has the least to lose wins. Tesla is proven and has
been derisked. I also think Tesla would be receptive to minimizing their
environmental impact to the site, given their mission and marketing (see my
link to Tesla's impact report in above comment).

Does Germany want to be included in the next chapter of automotive mobility?
That's up to them. Otherwise, take a trip to Flint, MI to see what the
alternative path is (auto centric, of course). It's in Tesla's best interests
to be a good corporate citizen, and they (in my opinion) walk the walk. Any
environmental impact issues will be resolved and Gigafactory 4 construction
will move forward.

Disclaimer: Have toured Fremont and Gigafactory 1 facilities, TSLA investor,
all that jazz

~~~
aguyfromnb
> _It 's in Tesla's best interests to be a good corporate citizen, and they
> (in my opinion) walk the walk._

In which way are Tesla considered "good corporate citizens"? They are anti-
union, not paying taxes in Nevada, being sued for racist environment in their
factories, not fulfilling their obligations in Buffalo. I don't even feel like
looking up other ones.

They'd be lucky to be called "average" corporate citizens. Can you give
examples of how they are "good"?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Sure. They invest in electric mobility when it’s the hardest path forward.
They aren’t perfect, no corporation is, there is always room to do better
(Legacy automakers have had the same racism issues in their facilities; I can
point to the Ford stamping plant in Northern Indiana and public documentation
of it occurring there). Compared to VW and Dieselgate, they’re saintly. VW
should’ve been dissolved for what they did. But Tesla using tax subsidies in
Nevada and not meeting Buffalo inventive targets? Absolutely minor issues.

~~~
aguyfromnb
> _Compared to VW and Dieselgate, they’re saintly._

Your baseline for being a "good" corporate citizen is "better than VW"? That's
a low bar.

The fact that you can point to 2 or 3 different analogues for corporate
misdemeanor proves my point. Tesla is one company.

> _But Tesla using tax subsidies in Nevada and not meeting Buffalo inventive
> targets?_

It's not about "using subsidies". It's about making promises tied to those
subsidies and not fulfilling them. Tesla is in tax arrears in Nevada. How is
that possible for such a successful company? That money pays for services the
company and employees uses. Is that something a "good corporate citizen" would
allow to happen?

What about violating labour laws? Securities fraud? SWATing a whistle blower?

I will ask you this plainly: why are Tesla getting loans from a government
running internment camps, and telling us "China is the future"? Musk wouldn't
sit on a commitee with Trump, but will take his business to China? Is this
_really_ something a "good corporate citizen" would do? This is an obvious
line in the sand to me and many other people.

Again, I make no claims that Tesla are necessarily better or worse than the
next company. but you referred to them as "good corporate citizens". Attitudes
like "you can do anything you want as long as it's in the name of being green"
are going to seriously harm the climate change conversation in the long run.

------
BelleOfTheBall
While the water issue is, indeed, quite serious, I'm not exactly sure why the
'increased traffic on highway' is so much of a concern that it's raised in the
same article. Yes, traffic will increase because more people will be coming to
newly created job opportunities. I suppose some of the worries might be due to
the equipment being moved by big trucks which could inflict infrastructural
damage but this is solvable.

------
diminish
I'm curious how German engineering and the Tesla's american engineering will
work together. Especially in light of the Opel & Focus experiences.

~~~
oblio
Opel and Ford Germany are pretty successful...

------
kken
These are just your run off the mill NIMBYs. Many of those are way past their
employment age, just take a look at the pictures. There was also a
counterprotest.

------
C14L
There also were protests in favor of Gigafactory 4:

[https://twitter.com/Gf4Tesla/status/1218566354116149254](https://twitter.com/Gf4Tesla/status/1218566354116149254)

[https://twitter.com/Gf4Tesla/status/1218526931655761920](https://twitter.com/Gf4Tesla/status/1218526931655761920)

------
djohnston
Tesla should just build another factory in China. Why bother w manufacturing
in the EU?

~~~
electriclove
They need one in the EU for tariffs and shipping costs. But I agree that they
should also build another factory in China. Keep showing the world how it can
be done if all parties are committed.

~~~
8bitsrule
Sure, seems like BASF was welcome in Shanxi after Toms River. Always easy to
export the problem to sacrifice-areas. /s

------
rainyMammoth
Interesting to see the PR greenwashing marketing claims of Tesla clashing with
their real life polluting activities.

~~~
speedgoose
Good luck explaining to the average Tesla driver that his cars did pollute a
lot.

I tried to explain once that the "zero emission" label on the Nissan Leaf is
misleading because building a car makes emissions.

I do think electric car are a good solution where developing public transports
would have a higher (environmental) cost, but building cars pollutes.

~~~
gambiting
"I tried to explain once that the "zero emission" label on the Nissan Leaf is
misleading because building a car makes emissions."

I don't know why anyone would ever think the "zero emissions" label applies to
the manufacture of the car. *obviously" it only means the car doesn't emit
anything when moving, that's what it's about.

~~~
speedgoose
That's your opinion but anyway a Leaf will still emit when it's moving.
Indirectly with the production of the energy, which can be very low in
countries such as France or Norway, and directly with brakes dust even though
the electric regen reduces that a lot, and particles from the tires.

~~~
brianwawok
Tire particles are emissions? When I walk are my shoe particles emissions? My
skin shedding?

~~~
klyrs
Yes, those are particulate emissions. Your skin biodegrades quite readily so
it's not much of an issue. Leather-soled shoes could be a tradeoff that I'm
unprepared to compute... but yes even your shoes pollute, if to a lesser
degree than a motor vehicle.

When it snows, do you notice that slush turns black? Much of that is shredded
tires; that ends up polluting our waterways or (hopefully) burdening water
purification plants.

~~~
perl4ever
What does this have to do with comparing a Leaf to non-BEVs? Is there some
reason why the tires would be significantly more or less polluting?

~~~
klyrs
It has everything to do with the "zero emissions" claim, and nothing to do
with a comparison.

~~~
perl4ever
If _nothing_ has zero emissions, then the phrase "zero emissions" would have
no use whatsoever, so applying a context where nothing has zero emissions is
internally inconsistent. It can't be a null phrase and not a null phrase at
the same time.

If _something_ has zero emissions, but it's not a BEV, then maybe you should
say what and why the correct definition excludes BEVs.

~~~
klyrs
> If nothing has zero emissions, then the phrase "zero emissions" would have
> no use whatsoever

Yes, that's the ideal: don't claim that you've achieved the impossible. I
don't want to see folks marketing "perpetual motion" machines for the same
reason.

For a detailed comparison:

[https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-
exhau...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297889793_Non-
exhaust_PM_emissions_from_electric_vehicles)

Seems fair to call these vehicles "zero exhaust." Electric rail vehicles have
extremely low emissions -- if the rails and wheels are carbon steel without
added heavy metals, then the direct emissions are relatively benign. Maglev
vehicles are even better -- but even so, there's friction with air, moving
parts such as doors and lynch pins. Still not zero.

~~~
perl4ever
Perhaps you should explain further the distinction you are making between
emissions and exhaust, and why it is correct, and why everyone else should
adhere to it.

But I stand by my previous comment - you can't treat a phrase or term as
meaningless just because you refuse to acknowledge the context.

~~~
klyrs
The EPA[1] defines particulates produced by tires and brakes as emissions, and
lists exhaust as one kind of emission. Exhaust[2] is a term used to describe
the gas byproduct of a combustion engine. The "context" is a category error
mistaking a part for the whole.

[1]
[https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents...](https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/sbai_pres.pdf)

[2]
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_gas](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_gas)

~~~
perl4ever
I'm not an expert in environmental regulations, but designations like ULEV and
ZEV seem to come from California and not the Feds.

So in my opinion, this is where the context is being misapplied - you want the
CARB terminology to match the EPA. Neither one was handed down on stone
tablets though.

------
symplee
Would it be possible to build a floating (or submerged) factory in the ocean?
Far enough from shore but linked to a coastal city via a "boring company"
tunnel. And thus be outside of any political jurisdiction.

~~~
chrisseaton
> And thus be outside of any political jurisdiction.

Are you going to have your own navy and marines to defend yourself?

