EU Reaches Deal To Ban Sale of New Combustion-Engine Cars By 2035 (aljazeera.com) 124
The European Parliament and EU member countries have reached a deal to ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans by 2035. From a report: European Union negotiators sealed on Thursday night the first agreement of the bloc's "Fit for 55" package set up by the Commission to achieve the EU's climate goals of cutting emissions of the gases that cause global warming by 55 percent over this decade. The European Parliament said the deal is a "clear signal ahead of the UN COP27 Climate Change Conference that the EU is serious about adopting concrete laws to reach the more ambitious targets set out in the EU Climate Law." According to the bloc's data, transport is the only sector where greenhouse gas emissions have increased in the past 30 years, rising 33.5 percent between 1990 and 2019. Passenger cars are a significant polluter, accounting for 61 percent of total CO2 emissions from EU road transport.
Not gonna happen (Score:1)
The easy thing about politician's job is they think by making law, they make things happen. But you can only legislate outcomes to a degree and the more it goes against reality, the worst it will end up.
We really won't be able to have only EVs by 2035 for a myriad of reasons. Some about the amount of lithium are here.
The other is the grid. And by the state of european electricity these days, it just means they're gonna jump to coal to power much of it.
Re: (Score:3)
"What good is electricity to the home?"
"Senator, in 20 years, you'll be taxing it."
Re: (Score:2)
> The easy thing about politician's job is they think by making law, they make things happen
Why don't they just make crime illegal?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As of today, costs are estimated at approx $113 billion, with no segments even remotely ready to go online. So fifteen years? that's nothing.
Power and distribution (Score:5, Insightful)
Without cheap Russian gas, EU is already having energy generation problems. Makes me wonder where both the raw power for the increased demand for electric vehicles, -and the distribution network for same- is coming from. I presume not nuclear power plants...
The demand for power distribution components (transformers, etc) is going to increase significantly with all the growth in demand for electricity, particularly for electric heating (replacing gas/propane/oil and even coal) and vehicle charging. What's the distribution of chargers required for a mostly-EV fleet in ~15 years? What's the peak demand on local power stations for those chargers? How many new distribution lines and stations will be needed? Probably an investment opportunity, methinks.
Re: (Score:3)
I am sure there is some interesting analysis to be done on how dropping Russian oil imports is affecting the energy transition in Europe. I think it is actually accelerating it.
Saudi Arabia, while not antagonistic, is not exactly cooperative in easing this gas crunch either. I hope I live to see them go broke instead of pissing away a trillion dollars [aljazeera.com] of gas money pried from our wallets.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, did I say to invade them and steal their oil? No. They can gouge us, and we can build solar and wind and dump their asses.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, did I say to invade them and steal their oil? No.
I would be fine if MBS were to die in a culvert like some of his contemporaries, but I agree they are unlikely to be invaded.
Re: (Score:1)
When is market rate the same as gouging?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
solar and wind is NOT going to solve the problem. Nuclear energy will go a lot further to providing the required energy to "decarbonize" society.
Re: Power and distribution (Score:2)
They donâ(TM)t charge marker rates. Heard of OPEC? They use their size and and their cartel membership to set the market rates that they want. These days there are some limits because things like oil sands become more viable, but make no mistake, they could also push prices down if they wanted. So yes, greedy bastards. And people who buy huge gas guzzling vehicles are giving our wealth away to them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Huh... That explains all the SUVs I see driving around the cities of Europe, of course. (Rome, Vienna, Munich, Toulouse, Arles, Nimes, Narbonne, etc, in the last 2 years.)
(It's not that I oppose the growth of EVs. I just don't see any evidence the system has been thought through. It's not like the EU authorities that issues these mandates has actual operational responsibility for national power grids...)
Re: (Score:2)
Rome, Vienna, Munich, Toulouse, Arles, Nimes, Narbonne
Yeah, none of the above cities have high density housing, urban planning regulations that require facilities & amenities to be within easy travel distance, & extensive, coordinated public mass-transportation systems that run on electricity, do they?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Super fun nice people! Just please excuse the long history of continental wars, multiple genocides, that whole colonize and rape the planet thing and the post colonial mess they left behind intentionally creating national borders which forced warring tribes together.
I mean other than fucking up the planet for hundreds of years yes lots of nice fun people and warm culture!
Unlike those dumb bastard fucks in middle America who just want to be left alone. Bad people! Really bad!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you have something to say?
*crickets*
Ok then, thanks for wasting precious bits.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I can't image how replacing fuel burning cars with more efficient electric ones could reduce fuel demand. And adding a whole bunch of batteries certainly isn't going to help any.
Re: (Score:2)
The EU gas crisis is nearly over. The storage tanks are full to capacity, the mitigations are in place, the alternative sources have been secured.
EVs are ideal for a grid with a large amount of renewable energy, as they can charge when excess is available. Many governments are already requiring new chargers to have smart features that can take advantage of that, to enable demand shaping.
From TFA - Greenpeace says it's not enough (Score:4, Insightful)
From the TFA: “The EU is taking the scenic route, and that route ends in disaster,” said Greenpeace EU transport campaigner Lorelei Limousin. “A European 2035 phase-out of fossil fuel-burning cars is not quick enough: New cars with internal combustion engines should be banned by 2028 at the latest,” she said.
Greenpeace says you have six years to stop selling all gas-powered cars. Yeah, that's realistic - while Asian countries keep on building coal-powered plants and thanks the EU for giving them cake while they eat their own.
EU leaders still need to make those tough phone calls to Delhi and Beijing: "Share the weight of this environmental challenge - or else." (Moscow probably wouldn't even take the call...)
Re:From TFA - Greenpeace says it's not enough (Score:5, Informative)
https://www.bbc.com/news/busin... [bbc.com]
Coal, of course, sucks. Yet: Yes, Electric Cars Are Cleaner, Even When The Power Comes From Coal [forbes.com]
Re: (Score:1)
It's easier when you start with very little to switch to a new thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Or else what? Or else nothing.
Oh wait. Several Europeans already answered this.
"Or else I shall taunt you a second time."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Greenpeace, of course, is the reason WHY we are still addicted to fossil fuels, 80 years after the first chain reaction was demonstrated.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It's always "but China". Thing is China is well ahead of its agreed climate goals. It's just that as a national that is still industrializing they are on the up side of the curve. They will peak much, much lower and sooner than Europe and America did, and then fall more rapidly too.
You can't expect them not to industrialize and not adopt a higher standard of living. You can expect them to do better than we did though, and they are.
In fact a lot of the coal plants in China got mothballed because there was so
I'm sorry sir (Score:1, Insightful)
We can't move our troops to the east to counter the Russian army because our troop transports are still charging.
And they're bombing our fixed electricity distribution infrastructure with dirt cheap drones barely a notch above strapping industrial explosives to a toystore airplane.
Thing about liquid fuels is that in an emergency a winter storm (nevermind a war), you can move them long distances by truck, train, or underground pipeline.
If the power distribution system goes down, then everyone is really up th
Re:I'm sorry sir (Score:4, Insightful)
I wasn't aware the government transported troops in consumer automobiles.
Re: I'm sorry sir (Score:1)
The infrastructure that makes refined petroleum products available on every street corner is what subsidizes the military's ability to fill up their tanks.
Take away the civilian demand and up goes the military's cost. Right now it's the equivalent of them using commercial workstations at their desks. Take it away and it'll be like them using PDP 11s...in 2022.
A mixed bag and a story (Score:2)
I mostly agree with these points, but wouldn't a counterpoint of sorts be that by 2035, as far as disaster scenarios go, a lot of houses would have solar and thus be able to charge, even if not as fast...
Also related to your point about being able to transport gas, a story I remember reading a year or two ago was from a Tesla owner in New Orleans after a hurricane (I forget which one, the most recent on there I think).
He stated that an electric car was really great to have in a situation like that where the
Re: (Score:1)
So when the grid goes down they also go down.
Re: (Score:2)
Most solar setups are grid tied because it isn't economical to also buy batteries and run off gried or hybrid. So when the grid goes down they also go down.
You're a bit out of date here, these days if you are in the market for a solar roof, you're probably buying a battery too. Whilst it's true not every controller can run in off grid mode but it's become more common than it used to.
One of the results of the poor prices for feed in tariffs has been that the year on year ROI for buying a battery has risen and that most of the day you're better off storing it and using it yourself than selling it. This is particularly the case in Europe where the price of gas an
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
And that would be without converting any land from other uses such as food or animal feed croplands. Due to the hardiness of oilcane it might even free up more land for food crops.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in South-America, lots of gas stations carry alcohol from sugar cane as a fuel. Cars that run on it have distinct smell, run less efficient and require more engine maintenance than engines in standard ICE cars do.
Paraguay does not have that much sugar cane, Brazil has a much larger sugar cane industry. It is a more popular fuel in Brazil.
Just some observations made over the years.
Norway is doing it by 2025 (Score:2)
Tricky Balance (Score:2)
Yes, we need to switch to them but if we go too fast there is
Re:Norway is doing it by 2025 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard several people explain away Norway's success with EVs as "oh they have a lot of money". Kind of but not that much more than the rest of Western Europe? And none of what you say is unique to Norway.
1. It costs about $2000 to get your license in the first place. I think that's actually more, nowadays.
It costs around 2000EUR if not more to get a license in Germany too [medium.com]
2. Then, on top of that, gas is about $10 - $11 a gallon in Norway
Looks like it was around $10 in July. Well, was around $9 in my Cent
Well, if they really mean it... (Score:3)
Then despite Putin-driven challenges and cash being diverted into short-term solutions, this could be a strong signal for all the energy supply chain - from electricity generation (renewables, even nuclear) - to get their act together. Of course this would be need to be supported by attractive feed-in tarifs for people installing batteries and solar power at their places of residence, forcing new-builds to have the most useful facilities in terms of energy capture, usage and storage and all the lovely new cars being able to plug into a smart grid and pick up the slack when everyone starts cooking at the end of the movie.
Possible? Yes
Likely? Nope
ahhhh BREXIT (Score:1)
Re:ahhhh BREXIT (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's put things in "perspective" (Score:2, Interesting)
If all the money that's currently invested in investigation, maintenance, bribing, overpricing, etc. the fossil fuels were invested in electrical batteries, the ban would have zero impact even if it was as early as 2025.
So here are my "additional" postulates that IMHO I think EU should have also enforced:
First, orce car makers to build "electrical motor" kits to convert current car models from fossil to electric.
Second, I'd also ban the "hybrids" too.
Third, start building new solar oven centrals and nuclear
Re: (Score:2)
Thermal solar power is no longer economical after the drastic drop in photovoltaic prices.
Re: (Score:2)
The solar oven I meant, it's as of today, the only economical one (thus why I mentioned too), for example Ouarzazate (the best solar as of today) which generates 510 MW. Obviously, it pales in comparison with Kashiwazaki-Kariwa (the best nuclear) which generates almost 8,000 MW... and nuclear in general (the Ouarzazate would be only bigger than the 5 worst nuclear ones...)
Nevertheless, nuclear energy is still the cleanest of them all when taking into account energy generated per waste (and with modern subte
Re: (Score:2)
OK, I'm just saying nobody is building new thermal solar plants any more because it no longer makes sense to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, they are.
Spain just opened a new one in August.
(and copy-paste...)
Greek PPC Renewables invited bids from contractors to build a solar power plant with an installed capacity of 550 MW, the biggest in Greece.
In Serbia, Fintel Energia and MK Group are developing a 660 MW agrisolar project, which will combine crop production with electricity generation, and in Croatia, El Sun Energy plans to build a 950 MW solar power plant.
In France, a 1 GW solar power project is under way, while a power plant with 3,5 mi
Re: (Score:2)
Spain just opened a new one in August.
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
Greek PPC Renewables invited bids from contractors to build a solar power plant with an installed capacity of 550 MW, the biggest in Greece.
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
In Serbia, Fintel Energia and MK Group are developing a 660 MW agrisolar project
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
El Sun Energy plans to build a 950 MW solar power plant.
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
In France, a 1 GW solar power project is under way
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
a power plant with 3,5 million solar panels and a nameplate capacity of 1.35 GW is being installed in Turkeyâ(TM)s Konya province, south of Ankara.
Photovoltaic, not thermal.
combustion engines (Score:2)
You can run piston engines and gas turbines on hydrogen. Some existing engines may need some modifications though.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The efficiency is terrible. Honda and GM partnered to make practical fuel cells. But the cars are still stupidly expensive. Hydrogen still makes little sense in most cases.
Re:combustion engines (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It is difficult to transport. It leaks out of any container you put it in.
That's why the bulk of hydrogen transportation is eyed of in ammonia form.
No problem is insurmountable.
Not all ideas are good ideas either, let's be clear about that, and consumer hydrogen vehicles fall in the not good idea category, though not necessarily for the reasons you list, but rather: We have better options for consumer vehicles.
Re: (Score:2)
But the electricitry net (Score:2)
There are never going to be enough powerlines to get that power from the coal plants to the car.
Powerlines not a problem [Re:But the electrici...] (Score:4, Interesting)
There are never going to be enough powerlines to get that power from the coal plants to the car.
For the foreseeable future, most electric car charging will be at night. are sized for the daytime usage peaks; there is plenty of excess transmission capacity at night.
Power lines are simply not the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
What do you see where you are? (Score:2)
It snows where I live. Is everyone going to have to dig out their car and their charger? If they're 80?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I see enviro-nazis and fake green politicians being lit on fire. it's okay, they're biofuel.
Then a more sensible building out of non-polluting power plants first, and gradual change of electrical infrastructure over a few decades.
Going for cars with toxic batteries and 3.5 year carbon debt right out of the gate is stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
It snows where I live. Is everyone going to have to dig out their car and their charger? If they're 80?
It snows where I live too. People have to dig out their car when it's snowing, even if they're 90 (and somehow driving).
And we can just run fucking extension cords if necessary. It's not the end of the world. Unlike climate change.
Re: (Score:2)
And we can just run fucking extension cords if necessary.
No good in the rain. I assume you don't live in a large city with cramped street parking.
Re: (Score:2)
I see that most cars are not in garages. That would mean chargers and wiring all over the place. Centuries-old villages with cobblestone streets are going to look funny.
It snows where I live. Is everyone going to have to dig out their car and their charger? If they're 80?
Well, those streets already have petrol-powered cars parked in them. And they already have electric street lighting that uses wires. Furthermore, those centuries-old villages presently have garish modern petrol stations in in them. It's not like these villages are museums - people live and work in them today. And if it snows, you need to dig a petrol car out too, just like an EV. If an EV is plugged in though, you could at least turn the heater on while it's parked, and not deplete the battery.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An electrical socket can be discreetly tucked away on a wall, post or bollard. So yes, I do think that electrical charging will be more visually appealing than a big petrol station forecourt.
Of course, not every jurisdiction will have "nice" charging points, but at least it *can* be done. And if you're plugging into the charger every night to top up before tomorrow's commute, it doesn't even need to be a particularly high current outlet.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
By 2035 (Score:2)
The electric car is going to be so cheap, charge so quickly, and run so cheaply, that buying an ICE will be viewed to be about as insane as buying a horse to get around today would be. Their "deadline" is smoke and mirrors, its going to happen much more quickly than that, without their "help", and probably the couldn't stop it if they wanted to.
Re: (Score:2)
I want some of what you're smoking.
Re: (Score:2)
Weed?
I don't know what looks so unbelievable to you. A Bolt EUV [chevrolet.com] costs as much as a higher trim Corolla Cross [caranddriver.com], is 2 seconds faster 0-60, and is cheaper to run.
Its charging is pretty slow compared to competitors but I think we can extrapolate that this will be improved in 13 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is smoke and mirrors by the politicians to make it look like they're doing something.
Ban touch screens (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Good idea. You can manipulate buttons without looking, volume controls and tuning controls too. But you have to look at a touch screen, which means you aren't looking at the road.
Two more (Score:2)
I'm open minded though. Maybe one day they will make a fun, affordable BEV. Not seeing any indication of that right now though (and before you dissent note that numbers do not a f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not impressed (Score:2)
What is needed is to ban the sale of ALL NEW DOMINANTLY ROAD-BASED LICE vehicles by 2030, and require HICE/EV for all off-road VEHICLES.
Look, there is a good need for HICE on off-road vehicles, BUT, there is absolutely no need for that any vehicle that is dominantly road based. And there is NO need for any LICE, even now.
Re: (Score:2)
there is absolutely no need for that any vehicle that is dominantly road based. And there is NO need for any LICE
I'm fine if my vehicles prefer BSDM. Not my thing but not my place to dictate either.
It is much easier (Score:2)
For example, to ban heavy luxury SUVs which weigh more than 2000 kg. Quite a few influential people may own them.
Consider what the real effect will be (Score:3, Insightful)
The real effect of this will be something that is not acknowledged. It will be a very large reduction in car ownership and use. This is obvious if you consider the basic facts about EVs. They are much more expensive, they take far longer to fuel, their range is limited (especially when heating or A/C is used).
Put it all together and you are not going to see the current patterns of use.
Look at any gas station in a reasonably busy location, there is a constant stream of vehicles coming in and out. That's fine when it takes 5 minutes. When it takes a half hour, its not going to happen any more.
People will charge at home? Maybe, but in the UK at least their charger will be on a dedicated smart meter, so you don't get to charge when you want, it will be turned off in peak periods because... at the same time as they are banning ICE cars they are also converting power generation to wind and solar, which guarantees short supply of existing requirements, and even more so for the increased demand from EV charging.
The current price of an EV in Europe compared to the same model with ICE is about 150%. People are not going to be willing or able to buy them.
And then you have range. Its true that the average trip length is fairly short, but take away the ability to go on occasional longer trips and you remove one reason people own cars. The longer trips are rare but are an important part of the buying motive. And the range issue means more frequent fuelling, which in turn interacts with the length of time that takes.
So what will happen?
There will be very large lifestyle changes. This is something that the green activists either out of dishonesty or ignorance never admit. The usual implication is that in the green utopia, life is going to continue as normal. Its just that there will be no boilers, there will be heat pumps. There will be no ICE vehicles, but there will be the same number of cars, and they will be EVs. There will be plenty of electricity, it will just come from wind and solar. There will be the same malls, and there will be the same goods in the shops, and the suburbs will be just like they are now...
No, none of that. Forecasting the social and economic changes this all will bring is very difficult. But I guess some things are clear. One, it will lead to greatly prolonged life of existing ICE cares. Two, it will produce great political resistance. Three, it will impact the less well off far more than the relatively rich. Four, over a long time, its going to produce large changes in where people live and work and where business locates. If you cannot get the staff, because they cannot drive to you, you are going to move.
I guess the underlying unavoldable thing will be far fewer cars. How much fewer? Dunno, but I am guessing about 20-30% of current levels.
[The other great lie-by-implication is that if the West, which does about 25% of global CO2 emissions and falling, does drop its emissions in this way, it will have some material effect on global warming. It cannot, as long as China, India and the rest continue to emit and to increase their emissions as they are doing, and as they have stated they will do. This is basic math.]
Re: (Score:2)
You're almost definitely completely wrong. EVs are already not much more expensive, can charge fast enough that it's not an issue and the range is good enough for 80% of use cases. I'm certain in another 13 years none of this would be a concern at all.
Feel free to reply to this in 13 years if I'm wrong.
If you're right though and car ownership decreases? Great! We need more walkable cities, no idiotic commutes to the office, and more public transport anyway.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
In the UK the Corsa EV sells for 29k Sterling. The gasoline version starts at about 16-18k.
No, EVs are no longer cheaper to run. In fact the cost of refuelling, given current power pricing, is probably slightly higher for the EV. That is private house supply. Refuelled from public charging points its definitely higher.
The problem with the length of time taken to charge is not what one does while its happening. The problem is that it limits the number of vehicles that can get charged in a given amount o
Re: (Score:2)
For some reason you're taking the current situation and assuming that nothing can change in 13 years.
I don't know what the market is like in the UK or why it's like that. The Chevy Bolt costs more or less the same as a Corolla cross in decent trim:
https://www.chevrolet.com/elec... [chevrolet.com] https://www.caranddriver.com/t... [caranddriver.com]
Because the batteries are the expensive part of EV and powerful complicated ICE engines are more expensive than little 1l 3 cylinders, the difference is lower for more expensive cars tool.
No, EVs are no longer cheaper to run. In fact the cost of refuelling, given current power pricing, is probably slightly higher for the EV. That is private house supply. Refuelled from public charging points its definitely higher.
Yes the e
EU jumps out of airplane... (Score:2)
...while it's still inventing the parachute. Good luck.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
At least 2035 is a far more realistic goal than 99% of other harm-peddlers.
Re: exactly! (Score:1)
Re: exactly! (Score:2)
> batteries prove to NOT work
In other news, the earth is flat and the moon is made of GruyÃre cheese.
Re: (Score:2)
Once they destroy the gasoline/diesel engines, and batteries prove to NOT WORK, most people will have to walk, ride bicycles, take a bus or train (which isn't that bad if you live in a city).
Kind of like Obama took everyone's guns away.
Re: (Score:2)
Some faces deserve some spite.
Re: (Score:1)
And that is ten years too late, you stinky, cancerous bastard.
Billions & billions [Re:Invest in miners boys. (Score:5, Informative)
If y'all had any idea how much raw material (copper, lithium, silver, nickel, tin) is required to replace all new cars with electric, vs how much is actually mined each year, you would all shit yourselves.
Not really. silver is the only one on that list that is actually rare, and there just isn't that much silver used in electric vehicles. The rest are currently experiencing a supply bottleneck, but that's only because until recently, nobody needed large amounts; it's not because they are particularly rare. And several dozen new mines are coming on line, including in the U.S. Thacker Pass, expected to begin producing by 2023 (not to mention that the Silver Peak lithium mine expects to double production capacity by 2025.
We are talking the need to not only increase mining made 5-10x what it is now,
Billions of tons of coal are mined per year. The increase done by mining lithium from evaporite deposits is not going to "increase mining 5-10x"; it will not even be enough to be detectable in the noise.
but because of the urgency you can't be careful about mining and we'll have to see giant strip mines set up in as many places as possible to meet demand.
If you're worried about "giant strip mines" you should be out there protesting coal, not lithium. Remember that part where I mentioned billions of tons? That's the "giant strip mines" you're talking about.
Re: (Score:2)
I stand by everything I said.
The shortages you are so concerned about are transient. And your pretended concerns about "strip mining" need to be addressed to coal mining, not lithium mining.