EU Lawmakers Approve Effective 2035 Ban on New Fossil Fuel Cars (reuters.com) 196
The European Parliament on Tuesday formally approved a law to effectively ban the sale of new petrol and diesel cars in the European Union from 2035, aiming to speed up the switch to electric vehicles and combat climate change. From a report: The landmark rules will require that by 2035 carmakers must achieve a 100% cut in CO2 emissions from new cars sold, which would make it impossible to sell new fossil fuel-powered vehicles in the 27-country bloc. The law will also set a 55% cut in CO2 emissions for new cars sold from 2030 versus 2021 levels, much higher than the existing target of a 37.5%. "The operating costs of an electric vehicle are already lower than the operating costs of a vehicle with an internal combustion engine," Jan Huitema, the parliament's lead negotiator on the rules, said, adding that it was crucial to bring more affordable electric vehicles to consumers.
Wrong way to do it (Score:4, Interesting)
Just publish a schedule for gas/diesel tax hike. Let say you start at current level and raise the tax by say, 2/L every month. After 10 years, you have to pay an extra 2.40 EUR per L. Most people will have switched by then. But if they don't, then I guess this will give the government plenty of money to build solar pants, capture carbon and plant trees, so it's a win in both cases.
Re:Wrong way to do it (Score:5, Informative)
The EU cannot rule on taxation in the single member states.
Re: (Score:2)
well don't they have some directives like minimum VAT of 15% and such? Couldn't they mandate a minimum tax on gas as well?
Re:Wrong way to do it (Score:4, Interesting)
Just publish a schedule for gas/diesel tax hike.
A ratcheting fuel/carbon tax is the best solution economically but is politically unpopular.
People prefer that what they want is completely unavailable rather than available at a higher cost.
It is similar to how people accept that gasoline is unavailable after a hurricane, but are enraged if an entrepreneur brings in a tanker truck and "profiteers" by selling at a higher price. Most people prefer to do without than to even have the option of paying more.
So gasoline will be banned rather than taxed because people are not rational.
Re: (Score:2)
That way poor people who use cars at the end of their economic life get fucked.
This way they can run down old petrol cars and long before 2050 they will see the price hikes for synth fuel coming and have time to switch.
Re: (Score:2)
That way poor people who use cars at the end of their economic life get fucked.
This is a feature, not a bug.
I don't see why people with old cars would have a grandfathered right to pollute forever while those getting a new car would need to pay more for EV.
Some poor people will crash their old car and will need to buy a new one. So on the used car market, low gas price combined with new car ban would artificially raise prices on ICE cars. We want people to stop burning gas, so the rational way to do it is to increase the price until people switch.
Re: (Score:2)
That way poor people who use cars at the end of their economic life get fucked.
This is a feature, not a bug.
I don't see why people with old cars would have a grandfathered right to pollute forever while those getting a new car would need to pay more for EV.
Some poor people will crash their old car and will need to buy a new one. So on the used car market, low gas price combined with new car ban would artificially raise prices on ICE cars. We want people to stop burning gas, so the rational way to do it is to increase the price until people switch.
Politics is the art of not doing things in a horrendously unpopular way. If your policy screws over poor & middle class folk to help the environment the result will be that you're voted out of office and the policy never happens.
Besides, the rational way to reduce CO2 is to do whatever is needed to reduce CO2. Mandating news cars are EVs does this.
Re: (Score:3)
Politics is the art of not doing things in a horrendously unpopular way. If your policy screws over poor & middle class folk to help the environment the result will be that you're voted out of office and the policy never happens.
First, I am not a politician. I will not refrain to say what is, in my opinion, the best idea just because it is not popular.
Besides, the rational way to reduce CO2 is to do whatever is needed to reduce CO2. Mandating news cars are EVs does this.
My point is that the government doesn't know what is the most efficient way to reduce CO2. We should put a price on carbon, and then let the market decide whether it's better to switch to EV, turn off fossil fuel electric plants, live in small apartments closer to work, stop flying, or whatever combination of these.
Also, not all people have the same needs and priority. Someone driving
Re: (Score:2)
What do you mean? Electric power or fossil fuel power?
Re: (Score:3)
Question: Are there ANY current EV's out on the market now, that do NOT have external access to your car?
I mean, is the company/govt able to at any time access your car via cellular/wireless or whatever, without the owner's explicit permission?
I'm worried that this will allow govt control of your vehicle.
This could not only be used to track you...but also, if ever a social credit system is implemented in countries....you have a back social credit score, they turn your car off and no
Re: (Score:2)
It's a thought that crossed my mind the other day....and given how much the govt seems to want to more and more intrude into our personal lives, it gave me pause and thought I'd start asking folks.
It'll happen faster than that. (Score:5, Interesting)
There is going to be a far more rapid change over in gas-to-EVs than people realize. Because gas cars need gas.
Right now the biggest and most reasonable argument against EVs is that the public fast charging infrastructure is still lacking seriously. Even in high density places, its not nearly as easy to find a charger as it is to find a gas pump. Most EV drivers are home owners that can just plug in at home (which is fine).
But as more and more chargers are built, and more and more drivers switch to electric, pretty soon that equation is going to flip. Gasoline fueling service is actually VERY expensive and very high risk for gas stations. Insurance for gas stations is very expensive because gasoline is a regulated hazardous material. Stations make almost no money on gas sales. So, as people switch to electric, fewer and fewer people are going to be filling up and going to gas stations. The expensive and risky nature of gas sales is going to cause a LOT of stations to cut their costs and pull their tanks.
By 2030, it is going to be as hard to find a gas pump as it is to find a charger today. Which is going to accelerate consumer's switch to electric.
Re: (Score:3)
Savvy gas pump owners would prepare for this by installing EV chargers where they have pumps now.
Less savvy will go broke.
Re: (Score:2)
Riiigt because you can totally make enough revenue to operate a filling station with six or so pumps that people spend 5-10min at today with the same number of chargers but people spending 30-40min parked at them. That totally washes...
If those places can make enough money - what it will mean is driving EVs is MUCH more expensive than gasoline was for the consumer.
Re: (Score:2)
Gasoline is mostly a loss-leader intended to get people to go into the store and buy snacks, cigs, beer, and lottery tickets.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about the EU but in the US this is mostly not the case.
You frequently see a cash price that is lower than the credit price. Some of that is due to merchant fees but the cash price is the loss leader because you have to come in to pay.
The credit / pump price - is usually about %2 contribution margin - depends on the merchant fees associated with the consumers card. However it generally represents a consistent reliable stream of profits all day long with very little interaction by the station ope
Re: (Score:3)
> I don't know about the EU but in the US this is mostly not the case.
That is absolutely the case in the US [nbcnews.com]. The profits on fuel at most stations is in the low single digits percentages at the best of times. Basically no station could afford to stay open if they didn't sell other goods and services.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Read what you wrote there - the PROFITS are in the low ...
Which is what I stated about 2%.. Profit is still profit there are plenty of stations all over that don't have a store attached. I agree most do, and yes they would very much like you take them up on their cash price where they might make no profit or even take a small loss but have the opportunity to sell you chips and soda at an 80% profit, but they absolutely are in the black on selling pump gas to most consumers.
They won't be if you spend 40min t
Re: (Score:2)
> Read what you wrote there - the PROFITS are in the low ...
On the fuel itself, "at the best of times" because sometimes they are literally selling it at a loss.
But the profits on the fuel rarely cover the ancillary costs like rent, utilities, payroll, maintenance, etc. You might make a few cents a gallon over what you buy it for but that alone usually isn't enough to stay in business. Hence, most gas stations have mini-marts or fast food on the property as their main source of income. A typical gas stat [omegawv.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Riiigt because you can totally make enough revenue to operate a filling station with six or so pumps that people spend 5-10min at today with the same number of chargers but people spending 30-40min parked at them. That totally washes...
This was a good line, years ago when you first said it, but on new cars with new chargers you'd have an 80% charge in 10 minutes. I suspect a lot of people will just charge to 50% and go.
Re: (Score:2)
I do a lot of work at gas stations. You would be surprised at how long many people leave their cars sitting parked at the pump while they go inside. It's reasonably common for the clerk to have to ask people to move their car because they have been blocking the pump for too long.
What are they doing in there for that long? I don't want to know.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now they are.
I'm pretty sure as interest and adoption of EVs grows, you're going to find companies starting to work with apartments, parking lot and business owners to start having on-street EV charging options.
Basically the general business model of "we'll do everything and pay you a small cut of the revenue". Apartment building owners would like it as they
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:3)
On street charging round where I live in London is often via lampposts. I suppose the switch from sodium bulbs to LED ones has freed up some capacity. No digging up the street required, just use the existing infrastructure. That said, there are also a lot of dedicated charging points being installed on the streets too. More than half of new car registrations in London are now for EVs.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure someone will come up with on-street options.
That handwaving is kind of the problem...
We are hearing all about the end of fossil fuelled cars, with bans on new sales etc coming thick and fast.
What we aren't hearing about are the solutions needed to make this work - everyone is expecting EVs to come down in price, and I agree that they probably will. But the infrastructure is a problem and currently there are no solutions in sight.
Take for example this area of Norwich, UK: https://www.google.com/maps/@5... [google.com]
Go take a look at that Google Maps link.
Note t
Re: (Score:2)
Take for example this area of Norwich, UK: https://www.google.com/maps/@5 [google.com]... [google.com]
There's a saying in statistics: "The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'."
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world, bullshit statements count for nothing.
And in the statistics world, anecdotal data counts for nothing.
Re: (Score:3)
In Norway they install rows of chargers all down the street. They are operated by a card that bills the energy to the user's home electricity supplier, so they are cheap to use.
It's an investment, but were street lights and pavements.
Re: (Score:2)
The large majority of car drivers don't have the option to charge at home: they live in an apartment building and the car is parked in the street.
There isn't enough total on-street parking for this to be true.
Apartments or houses [Re: It'll happen faster...] (Score:2)
The large majority of car drivers don't have the option to charge at home: they live in an apartment building and the car is parked in the street.
Inaccurate.
In the US, 78 million households are homeowners; 44 million households are renters.
https://ipropertymanagement.co... [ipropertymanagement.com]
Even in the state with the largest percentage of the population living in apartments buildings (NY), only 24% of the population lives in apartments.
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
Not in Europe, either, although it's a little closer. In the European Union as a whole, 53% of people lived in houses and 46% of people lived in apartments.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda... [weforum.org]
Re: Apartments or houses [Re: It'll happen faster. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of petrol stations are in places where EV drivers won't want to use them. Drivers want them either on highways for long journeys, or at places where they intend to linger for a while. Petrol stations in urban areas, and away from other things of interest, are going to struggle to convert over.
My suspicion is that in the UK the government will simply allow millions to not have access to cheap home charging, forcing them to use those converted petrol stations and other expensive outlets.
Re:It'll happen faster than that. (Score:5, Informative)
This is something that ICE owners struggle to understand. EV charging is nothing like buying gasoline.
I do 99% of my charging in my garage while I'm sleeping.
The other 1% is at a supercharger on I-5, halfway between SF and LA, in the parking lot of a nice restaurant.
I never ever need to use a charger at an urban or suburban location where most gas stations are.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This is something that ICE owners struggle to understand. EV charging is nothing like buying gasoline.
I do 99% of my charging in my garage while I'm sleeping.
The other 1% is at a supercharger on I-5, halfway between SF and LA, in the parking lot of a nice restaurant.
I never ever need to use a charger at an urban or suburban location where most gas stations are.
This is something EV owners struggle to understand. Not everyone has a garage or even a consistent place to park
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
+1. MOST cars are not garaged. There are 5 outside at the house next door to me, for example.
If the people next door to you have houses, but nevertheless park their cars outdoors because their garage is full of junk, maybe they should clear out their garages.
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:2)
I used to live downtown Toronto. Most people didnâ(TM)t have a garage and parked on the street. Plenty of snow heaps and banks along the streets too. Donâ(TM)t assume housr owners have a garage or even any space on their property for parking.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As for long trips: yeah, I do a long trip maybe once a month or so. I don't drive eight hours straight without a break, though, so I just charge when I take a lunch or dinner break. Again: no wasted time.
Re: (Score:2)
I have to agree with the original poster. Until I got an electric vehicle, it didn't occur to me how much time I would save by not have to factor in "oh, I have to stop to get gas" when I go out. Except for long trips, I start out already charged, and spend zero time getting gas.
As for long trips: yeah, I do a long trip maybe once a month or so. I don't drive eight hours straight without a break, though, so I just charge when I take a lunch or dinner break. Again: no wasted time.
And that's wonderful. Would you feel differently if you could not charge at home?
Re: (Score:2)
Sometime in the future we will need to expand the charging infrastructure, but RIGHT NOW there is plenty of market available for the people who DO have a place to charge.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now somewhat less than 1% of the cars on the road in the US are electric.
Sometime in the future we will need to expand the charging infrastructure, but RIGHT NOW there is plenty of market available for the people who DO have a place to charge.
And that's fine. The EV powertrain makes a lot of sense for people that can charge at home.
For everyone else it's a problem and trying to force them to use something that doesn't work for their situation is nuts.
As for me, I'd consider an EV when one of my ICE cars dies, but I'm a good mechanic and keep cars a long time. My daily driver is a 1999 SUV with 340k miles, I also have a 2002, 2010, and 2011. I can easily get a solid used car cheap and run it for a decade or more. For me buying a new EV is lik
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:2)
I want one in the street, next to my apartment building. Not gonna happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of petrol stations are in places where EV drivers won't want to use them. Drivers want them either on highways for long journeys, or at places where they intend to linger for a while.
That was true, but it isn't anymore. Fast charging to 80% is getting faster and faster every year. People will be stopping to charge for 10 minutes, and then continuing on their journey. So they won't care that it is in the same place where they stop in an ICE car.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you insane? You want to connect high-voltage wires inside underground fuel tanks? Do you know what would happen?!?11
Re: (Score:2)
> By 2030, it is going to be as hard to find a gas pump as it is to find a charger today.
What makes people stop browsing Slashdot and other media sites nowadays is the absurd hyperbole that people spew here on comments and articles.
There will be a hundred+ million gas using cars in Europe in 2030. Battery technology alone prevents EV growth - you don't even have the minerals required for a SINGLE GENERATION of EV vehicles globally much less the hundreds of millions of cars you need to replace. Right now
Re: (Score:2)
Then you're forgetting things like how Porsche has been developing, for years, effectively carbon neutral eFuel and they estimate in a few years it'll be as "expensive" as normal fuel.
The BEV fanbois will not be happy. Carbon neutral fuels will reduce the need for chargers, and the only way to get more chargers is to force people to drive BEVs.
Environmentally it is a great idea though. Keep all the current ICE cars on the road as long as possible.
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I also prefer mechanical watches, but I own smartwatches also. I'm under no illusion which ones will still be around decades from now though.
The people I know with BEVs are every bit as materialistic as anyone. They will still buy or lease a new one every 3 or 4 years. Hopefully used EVs will eventually be as available and serviceable as older ICE cars are today. If they end up worth more for their batteries than they are as cheap transportation (or if battery replacement is too expensive for low income
Re:It'll happen faster than that. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is going to be a far more rapid change over in gas-to-EVs than people realize. Because gas cars need gas.
Maybe in Europe, but here in the USA I'm pretty sure we'll be hanging onto our gasoline powered cars far longer than anybody but the poorest of countries.,
Everything in the USA is political and both parties take steps all the time to cause outrage amongst supporters of the other party. I live in a state where the larger areas support the Democrats and the smaller towns, of which we have many, support the Republicans. At lot of people I know in the small towns probably drive less than 10 miles (16km for you metric folks) per day, yet you would not believe the rants and raves I see no Facebook from them about how the evil government is going to force them go to electric cars. They got on a long car trip (300 miles or 480 km) once every 3-5 years but they act like they need to drive 600+ miles (that's 960+ km) every day and they will be destroyed if they have to get electricity to do that. So the people who honestly could right now benefit the most from EVs are the most resistant to having them and because culture wars are unfortunately a winning political position in the USA, every time some left wing state like New York or California threatens to make gasoline cars extinct in the next decade, that just encourages Republican controlled states to overreact. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Floria or Texas actually pass a law making it illegal to operate electric charging stations that the public can use. So I'm pretty sure some percentage of our population will be hanging onto their gasoline powered cars for decades to come, no matter how expensive they get to operate.
Re: (Score:2)
There is going to be a far more rapid change over in gas-to-EVs than people realize. Because gas cars need gas.
Maybe in Europe, but here in the USA I'm pretty sure we'll be hanging onto our gasoline powered cars far longer than anybody but the poorest of countries.,
Everything in the USA is political and both parties take steps all the time to cause outrage amongst supporters of the other party. I live in a state where the larger areas support the Democrats and the smaller towns, of which we have many, support the Republicans. At lot of people I know in the small towns probably drive less than 10 miles (16km for you metric folks) per day, yet you would not believe the rants and raves I see no Facebook from them about how the evil government is going to force them go to electric cars. They got on a long car trip (300 miles or 480 km) once every 3-5 years but they act like they need to drive 600+ miles (that's 960+ km) every day and they will be destroyed if they have to get electricity to do that. So the people who honestly could right now benefit the most from EVs are the most resistant to having them and because culture wars are unfortunately a winning political position in the USA, every time some left wing state like New York or California threatens to make gasoline cars extinct in the next decade, that just encourages Republican controlled states to overreact. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Floria or Texas actually pass a law making it illegal to operate electric charging stations that the public can use. So I'm pretty sure some percentage of our population will be hanging onto their gasoline powered cars for decades to come, no matter how expensive they get to operate.
Some people in the USA don't like being told what to do or say. But no state will ban public chargers, why would they? .
From the Texas department of transportation: https://www.txdot.gov/discover... [txdot.gov]
Florida is funding charging stations: https://www.fdot.gov/planning/... [fdot.gov]
And don't forget Texas is one of the biggest producers of renewable energy in the world.
Stop demanding that everyone do what you want, it's really annoying. People will buy EV's when they want one. I doubt I will ever want an electric motor
Re: (Score:2)
Some people in the USA don't like being told what to do or say. But no state will ban public chargers, why would they?
Because they're reactionary idiots in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry?
https://jalopnik.com/north-car... [jalopnik.com]
Stop demanding that everyone do what you want, it's really annoying. People will buy EV's when they want one. I doubt I will ever want an electric motorcycle though, it's just not the same.
Too bad. Sometimes it's necessary to accelerate this process because we can't wait until every single boomer and gen-xer dies on their own.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people in the USA don't like being told what to do or say. But no state will ban public chargers, why would they?
Because they're reactionary idiots in the pocket of the fossil fuel industry?
https://jalopnik.com/north-car... [jalopnik.com]
Stop demanding that everyone do what you want, it's really annoying. People will buy EV's when they want one. I doubt I will ever want an electric motorcycle though, it's just not the same.
Too bad. Sometimes it's necessary to accelerate this process because we can't wait until every single boomer and gen-xer dies on their own.
The proposed bill in your article isn't about banning EV chargers, it says:
(1) Where private businesses provide free chargers there should be cost disclosure such that customers know how much they are paying to provide other customers free electricity
(2) If public money is paying to give some motorists free electricity then they should provide free gas too
So it's just about who is paying for the "free" electricity and who benefits. It's not going to go anywhere anyway.
As for t
Re: (Score:2)
Some people in the USA don't like being told what to do or say. But no state will ban public chargers, why would they? .
From the Texas department of transportation: https://www.txdot.gov/discover... [txdot.gov]
Florida is funding charging stations: https://www.fdot.gov/planning/... [fdot.gov]
And don't forget Texas is one of the biggest producers of renewable energy in the world.
Stop demanding that everyone do what you want, it's really annoying. People will buy EV's when they want one. I doubt I will ever want an electric motorcycle though, it's just not the same.
When confronted with news that gas stoves caused respiratory illness (so maybe they should be banned in the future) Florida's governor literally exempted them from sales tax [yahoo.com].
If he was around when they found the link between smoking and cancer he'd probably create a "free smokes for students" program for schools.
Don't underestimate the potential for irrational harmful backlash.
Re: (Score:2)
When confronted with news that gas stoves caused respiratory illness (so maybe they should be banned in the future) Florida's governor literally exempted them from sales tax [yahoo.com].
If he was around when they found the link between smoking and cancer he'd probably create a "free smokes for students" program for schools.
Don't underestimate the potential for irrational harmful backlash.
The stove thing is a non-issue. One CPSC commissioner overstepped and pissed people off. From https://www.eenews.net/article... [eenews.net] :
The hand-wringing began earlier this week when one CPSC commissioner, Richard Trumka Jr., said he is considering new regulations on gas stoves, including a ban.
“Research indicates that emissions from gas stoves can be hazardous, and the CPSC is looking for ways to reduce related indoor air quality hazards,” Chair Alexander Hoehn-Saric said in a statement. “But
Re: (Score:2)
When confronted with news that gas stoves caused respiratory illness (so maybe they should be banned in the future) Florida's governor literally exempted them from sales tax [yahoo.com].
If he was around when they found the link between smoking and cancer he'd probably create a "free smokes for students" program for schools.
Don't underestimate the potential for irrational harmful backlash.
The stove thing is a non-issue. One CPSC commissioner overstepped and pissed people off. From https://www.eenews.net/article... [eenews.net] :
The hand-wringing began earlier this week when one CPSC commissioner, Richard Trumka Jr., said he is considering new regulations on gas stoves, including a ban.
“Research indicates that emissions from gas stoves can be hazardous, and the CPSC is looking for ways to reduce related indoor air quality hazards,” Chair Alexander Hoehn-Saric said in a statement. “But to be clear, I am not looking to ban gas stoves and the CPSC has no proceeding to do so.”
But Trumka’s comments reflect the views of a single commissioner on a five-member panel, no other member of which supports regulating, let alone banning, gas stoves. The four other commissioners did not support Trumka’s motion during an October commission meeting to direct agency staff to start a gas stove rulemaking (Greenwire, Jan. 10).
More research is certainly needed, but if the evidence is clear that they're causing respiratory illness then banning new gas stoves should be on the table.
But that misses the point of my comment.
The evidence indicated that gas stoves were causing illness (in children!!).
So DeSantis responded to this by turning it into a culture war issues and subsidizing the purchase of gas stoves.
In other words, he is literally sacrificing the health of children for perceived political benefit!
So, it is really unreasonabl
Re: (Score:2)
> But no state will ban public chargers, why would
> they?
I'm not sure if public chargers are in the crosshairs next; but the red states are vehemently opposed to electric cars. Tesla's drawn-out (I'd downright comical how many people in the old Deer Creek HQ refused to relocate; forcing muck to keep it open.) move to Texas is more than a little ironic; because Texas won't actually let him sell Teslas there. You can get them. But you have to jump through loopholes where you technically "buy" one in
Re: (Score:2)
They're pretty expensive now, but you're right, they are not going anyplace, for as long as we have politicians who are interested in being re-elected.
I live in an inner suburb of a medium-sized city. It is very walkable by U.S. standards, and I live only 5 miles from my workplace.
Yet, between my wife and I, we drive WELL over 1000 miles a week during the school year.
There is no other way our children can play competitive sports.
I also work about 50 hour weeks during basketball season and MUCH more during
Re: (Score:3)
Yet, between my wife and I, we drive WELL over 1000 miles a week during the school year. ...
I also work about 50 hour weeks during basketball season and MUCH more during the rest of the year.
Well there's your problem. Driving 140 miles a day is insane, as is working 50+ hours. What the hell dude.
Re: (Score:2)
I might well think that if I were the only one, but I don't know a lot of people who don't drive WAY more than they'd prefer, nor for that matter who don't work way more than they'd prefer.
Without a usable car, the responsibilities don't go away; they simply become nearly impossible to fulfill.
Re: (Score:2)
Okay... well first... your kids will grow out of this so let's suppose someone 10 years from now is trying this.
As the network effect for gasoline cars breaks down, it will be harder to find gasoline stations (leading to range anxiety), gasoline will be much more expensive as less of it is produced (so figure on $6 per gallon so easily $200 a week on gasoline alone-- $10,000 per year), and young mechanics won't be becoming ICE auto repair people- so it will get harder (and more expensive) to get maintenance done.
And once 2/3 of the population is off ICE vehicle, they'll stop subsidizing them (to the tune of 6 *trillion* dollars per year). At that point, only rich people and hobbyists will be able to own and operate ICE cars because a gallon of gasoline will cost about whatever the minimum wage (so $12 per gallon today).
According to projections in the US there will be 275 million ICE cars on the road in 2030. You and I will be gone before what you describe comes to pass.
Re: (Score:2)
I think the home charging is going to be a biggest issue in the medium term. Public fast charging is an issue right now, but can be pretty easily resolved. Norway seemed to have done that mostly. Will cost some money but just put just put some chargers every 50km of highways and we're done. The fast food restaurants must be thrilled about it.
But in the EU, 50% of the population lives in apartment buildings [europa.eu]. Some of them might have garages but others, like mine, don't. And you'd have to electrify all street
Re: (Score:2)
Because gas cars need gas.
Yes. And as long as cars need gas, there will be gas stations. There may not be one every few blocks like there is now, but they won't be hard to find. Fewer stations will reduce competition and may increase profit margins. I plan to be driving a gas powered car for decades to come, and not being able to find a gas station is not at all on my list of concerns.
By 2030, it is going to be as hard to find a gas pump as it is to find a charger today.
Gas stations have the huge advantage of already existing. Much easier to close an excess than to build out a shortage.
Re: (Score:2)
> the public fast charging infrastructure is still lacking
> seriously.
This... exactly this. My last car purchase would have been a Model 3, or maybe a Y. EXCEPT for the fact that I rent. So I can't modify and upgrade the wiring in the garage for a home charger. If the government had required gas stations to add superchargers previously, I would already be driving an electric. I expect my current car to last me until after I've bought a house of my own. So barring unforeseen circumstances, my nex
Re: (Score:3)
https://www.edmunds.com/electr... [edmunds.com]
Unless of course, you need a truck that can pull your 22' travel trailer uphill, both ways, with a -30 degree F headwind, without having to stop for 700 miles between charges.
Re: LOL no (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how there is such a long waiting list for nearly EVERY EV and dealers are adding huge markups over MSRP when no one is buying them?
Re: (Score:2)
There are no EVs even remotely close to that price
A Chevy Bolt starts at around $27k. Not quite the same but getting closer every year. In 5-7 years? Be silly to not think we will start to see price parity more by then with increased production. Are you really willing to bet against it?
There's also a lack of affordable used EVs
Tesla used prices just took their biggest drop ever over the past few months. An EV used market still does not really exist but in 5 years?
On top of that lithium cannot exactly be found under every rock
It actually literally can, not that it's easy to mine always but thats a bit of a silly statement.
no reason to assume that lithium mining will keep up with demand
No reason to think it also wouldnt
Re: (Score:2)
What a remarkably cogent argument. It was full of data, and your position was well supported with facts...oh wait, no you just made one statement, and said if you don't agree with me you're wrong. Truly the height of internet discourse, th
Re: (Score:2)
There are issues besides price. For instance, not all of us have sufficiently flexible schedules as to be able to just lose an hour to charge, or even to be able to remain in any single place that has a charger long enough to fully charge. As I've stated elsewhere, a hybrid could work for me (and for countless other people in the U.S. of whom this is true) but a BEV could not, not even if you paid us to drive one.
This may be less of a problem elsewhere in the world, but it will be a huge problem almost ev
Re: LOL no (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Citation needed. I have heard that claim about BEVs but it didn't stand up to fact checking.
Re: (Score:3)
don't think for second electricity prices, or at least transmission prices are not going to go WAY up as this transition happens
Nope. Electricity prices are likely to fall. EV charging gives electric utilities a nighttime market for otherwise underutilized capital. Profit attracts investment in new capacity.
PV panels are already cheaper than grid electricity in many places and getting even cheaper. So if utilities try to raise prices, their customers will cut them out by installing even more rooftop panels.
Re: (Score:2)
don't think for second electricity prices, or at least transmission prices are not going to go WAY up as this transition happens
Nope. Electricity prices are likely to fall. EV charging gives electric utilities a nighttime market for otherwise underutilized capital. Profit attracts investment in new capacity.
PV panels are already cheaper than grid electricity in many places and getting even cheaper. So if utilities try to raise prices, their customers will cut them out by installing even more rooftop panels.
Not sure where you get any of this. I've seen no credible projection of electricity prices over the next few decades that show them doing anything but skyrocketing unless there are massive, massive subsidies. Even if you buy into the idea that battery prices are going to drop an order of magnitude or more, and transmission upgrades are suddenly going to become easy-peasy instead of the multi decade hellscape of NIMBY fights that they are now, the practical reality is we're talking about replacing the enti
Re: (Score:2)
I will concede the parent poster *may* be correct on a large enough time horizon because night time charging and the ability to use cars for grid stabilzation as sources rather than syncs during peak load could generate some economy.
In the meantime as YOU state the cost of replacing all this infrastructure both rapidly and in a highly competitive environment and the cost of ramping up generating capacity to replace all the energy currently use in automobile transportation will be absolutely HUGE if its suc
Re: (Score:2)
Renewables are cheap as shit when they're actually available, which isn't great for powering a factory but fine for charging cars that sit idle 99% of the time.
Instantly converting all vehicles to EV would only increase total energy consumption by around 30% so if it can be spread around off-peak, it would hardly require any massive infrastructure upgrades. There's an Engineering Explained video on YT that goes over all this math.
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:2)
Re: It'll happen faster than that. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's plenty of time. (Score:5, Insightful)
Look at what happened when more stringent fuel economy limits were put in place. The whole industry went from "can't be done", to 'no problem", to "strategic advantage". 12 years is more than enough time, given the current state of things.
Re: (Score:2)
Umm
dunno if you've looked at the average American vehicle's fuel economy, but it's not always very good . . . ? Maybe in the EU you have less people driving around massive trucks. But I see plenty of people over here still driving hulking vehicles that easily average less than 20 MPG. The small sedans/hatchbacks getting 40 MPG or more are a dying breed in this market.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, I did. But if you include all of the old vehicles on the road, you're missing the point, which is about innovations to drive up economy.
https://www.energy.gov/eere/ve... [energy.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
I'm mostly looking at newer vehicles here.
Re: (Score:2)
dunno if you've looked at the average American vehicle's fuel economy, but it's not always very good
Only because in their infinite wisdom, the fuel economy rules don't apply to trucks and SUVs lol.
But the market mechanism does work. The higher fuel taxes in EU (as well as CO2 taxes in some countries) increase the demand for fuel efficient cars, and guess what, the top selling car is the Golf and not an enormous truck.
Re: (Score:2)
The vehicle mix has shifted radically though. We have so few new sedan hatchback buyers that most of the fuel efficiency improvements have in that sector go unrealized by the market as a whole.
I can go to the dealership right now and get a nice small sedan that'll average 40 mpg or better in mixed use that's a lot nicer and safer than an old civic cx or what have you, but not many people are making that choice. They want a crossover getting less than 30 mpg or an suv getting maybe 20-25.
Re: (Score:2)
Only because in their infinite wisdom, the fuel economy rules don't apply to trucks and SUVs lol. But the market mechanism does work. The higher fuel taxes in EU (as well as CO2 taxes in some countries) increase the demand for fuel efficient cars, and guess what, the top selling car is the Golf and not an enormous truck.
That is not the free market, that is the hands of government tipping the scales market. Half the vehicles on the road here are trucks, and any government that moves to penalize people for that choice will not be a government for very long. As it should be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You missed my point. Those are problems, true. If given no other choice, industries will find solutions. If the problems were easy it wouldn't take 12 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Guess? That's all the vehicle most people need. Besides, your desire for an overpowered luxury grocery getter is not more important than the general desire to not burn more fuels than necessary. My 2019 Toyota Camry Hybrid SE gets a little over 40mpg, at 200 hp, and it's probably unreasonably extravagant.
Re: (Score:2)
:) I know what country you hail from.
No more internal combustion ?!? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nuclear power (Score:4, Insightful)
Even if that weren't complete nonsense, switching all our gas cars to EVs powered by coal-burning power plants would still produce a significant carbon reduction from what we have today.
Re: (Score:2)
Time to start building nuclear power plants. If they go with one of the modular designs ...
Number of modular reactor designs licensed for commercial use: 0.
Re: (Score:2)
Jokes on them, if they wait too long there won't be a petroleum industry left willing to serve them or the people of the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
yes, I care to:
Simon Michaux
https://www.simonmichaux.com/g... [simonmichaux.com]
Mark Mills
https://www.skagenfunds.is/top... [skagenfunds.is]
Aurore Stephant
https://www.systext.org/node/1... [systext.org]
Have a nice read...
Re: (Score:2)
I have been reading these doomsday prophecies for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
It won't destroy Europe; it will just make Europeans poorer, while increasing the gap between the hoi-polloi and the aristocracy.
Re: (Score:3)
Hey Cletus, isn't your sister waiting for you in your prepper bedroom?
Re: (Score:2)