- Joined
- 8 June 2008
- Posts
- 13,246
- Reactions
- 19,549
For info, my dad was mixing vegetable oil in Europe straight from the bottle into his diesel small car.not for green reason but just because bulk cooking oil was cheaper than diesel at the pump in europe.was mixing it as pure oil could cause problem in winter there.Yes, it was a diesel conversion.
It would be virtually impossible to run fish and chip oil in a petrol engine.
Mick
Yes, it was a diesel conversion.
It would be virtually impossible to run fish and chip oil in a petrol engine.
Mick
Iconic is in the eye of the beholder.Sounds like a very expensive exercise in killing an iconic Aussie car, oh well horses for courses.
Just like investing, need a good eye, decent judgement and some luck.Iconic is in the eye of the beholder.
I have never considered the statesman an iconic Aussie car, but hey I am sure there are people who do.
Mick
Since it's a waste product something has to be done with it and burning sure beats pouring it down the drain etc.In burning, it releases CO2 into the atmosphere, but somehow is carbon nuetral.
I almost read it until i saw it was a link to the Guardian.
A couple of factoids...
1. Norway, a major oil and gas exporter, needs to sell over 100 barrels of oil (which emits 40 tonnes of CO2) to pay for the tax breaks it gives EVs to avoid one tonne of CO2.
2. Norway’s electricity is almost completely clean thanks to hydro power, so the CO2 avoidance costs will be higher in other countries.
3. Norway does not subsidise BEVs. Instead, BEVs can avoid almost all the taxes and fees levied on regular vehicles.
4. Norway needs high taxes across the economy to finance public spending amounting to more than half of GDP.
5. Electric cars are exempt from two big up-front taxes: 25% VAT and a large additional tax dependent on the weight and CO2 emissions of the vehicle.
hope this helps...
Nah. The question being addressed was "How effectively has Norway encouraged the move to clean, renewable energy based, cheaper electric cars ?" And indeed regardless of where the information was sourced, the facts remain the same. Strong public policy strategies and clear incentives to go electric.I almost read it until i saw it was a link to the Guardian.
A couple of factoids...
1. Norway, a major oil and gas exporter, needs to sell over 100 barrels of oil (which emits 40 tonnes of CO2) to pay for the tax breaks it gives EVs to avoid one tonne of CO2.
2. Norway’s electricity is almost completely clean thanks to hydro power, so the CO2 avoidance costs will be higher in other countries.
3. Norway does not subsidise BEVs. Instead, BEVs can avoid almost all the taxes and fees levied on regular vehicles.
4. Norway needs high taxes across the economy to finance public spending amounting to more than half of GDP.
5. Electric cars are exempt from two big up-front taxes: 25% VAT and a large additional tax dependent on the weight and CO2 emissions of the vehicle.
hope this helps...
In Australia politics would most likely argue that as being a subsidy.Norway does not subsidise BEVs. Instead, BEVs can avoid almost all the taxes and fees levied on regular vehicles.
When you consider GST in Norway is 25%.In Australia politics would most likely argue that as being a subsidy.
Right or wrong I'm not judging, just observing.
Stop giving them ideasWhen you consider GST in Norway is 25%.
If 90% of their automobiles are E.V's that shortfall in revenue that they used to get on the sale of ICE cars, has to be made up somewhere, so there is some cross subsidy going on to fill the gap.
We obviously need to increase our GST, so we can take it off some things and make them a lot cheaper. ?
New Data Confirm the Consumer’s Increasing Preference for Battery Electric Vehicles |
I don't think it'll be long before there'll be a dedicated thread to 'Autonimous Vehichals' .Not specific to electric vehicles, but I don't think that there are many ICE self driving cars around.
It’s carbon neutral because when you burn it you release co2 into the atmosphere, but it’s co2 that was originally pulled out of the air when the canola oil was originally grown.I have a few problems with this article.
Firstly, it calls the unit a carbon neutral charger.
These sort of statements puzzle me because the generator burns the oil from the deep fryer.
In burning, it releases CO2 into the atmosphere, but somehow is carbon nuetral.
Secondly, the article states that it will take about 20 litres of used cooking oil to charge a car.
At that rate they are going to have to sell hell of a lot of chips to generate sufficient capacity to charge more than 1 car per day.
It says the unit cost $75,000 and was crowd funded.
Why would they not put a series of solar panels with batteries to run the remote charger?
I may be wrong, but I seem to recall the last time I drove through there, the Caiguna roadhouse already has a solar panel array to supply the roadhouse with electricity
Just does not make a lot of sense to me.
Mick
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?