- Joined
- 8 June 2008
- Posts
- 13,136
- Reactions
- 19,332
Our of this slightly out of subject outburst, an interesting pointAnd we are buying fighter jets and billions of submarines..so sad
I think you are vastly over stating the risk to public charging, if fuel stations can survive your vandals there is no reason public chargers can’t.My dear VC,
Stealing cable and break down of society to the point of being unable to charging cars in public spaces or in the street does not require a Mad Max world.
It is now in South Africa, Paris suburbs and half of inner city, main cities in France, most parts of UK key cities ,most of Africa and I would dare say a lot of US cities. Gas lighting?
Just need to travel outside of cruises and DisneyWorld
Yesterday a 70y old grannie got stabbed to death in a Redbank car park by a new import..it is coming ..I do not see why in 20y, Australia will be different from the EU as a society: same causes, same results
Until you can match the speed of fuel refill for EV, it will remain a major issue which will become more and more critical
And I would think if we have no more petrols at the pumps, you will certainly not be cruising around with your EV for long, recharged or not
PS but I agree on the abysmal state of Australian fuel reserves....
That’s not an argument against EV’s, that’s an argument for Tesla, their super charging network is the best.In the meantime in the Real World
Long queues, broken chargers are causing headaches for road-tripping EV drivers
Charger anxiety replaces range anxiety for the growing number of electric vehicle users relying on slow infrastructure.www.abc.net.au
Granted and putting the environment aside for a sec, how an EV can be realistically used by the end user surely plays into the better or not equation.Electric Cars may not be the peak of technology, but they are certainly better than petrol cars.
Watch this short video, all the links to the science mentioned in the video is in the description.
Yes, getting the battery materials has an impact, but it is less than the life time impact of a petrol car, and those battery materials can be reused and recycled, so it is a moot point.
Why is biodiversity essential for limiting climate change?
When human activities produce greenhouse gases, around half of the emissions remain in the atmosphere, while the other half is absorbed by the land and ocean. These ecosystems – and the biodiversity they contain – are natural carbon sinks, providing so-called nature-based solutions to climate change.
Protecting, managing, and restoring forests, for example, offers roughly two-thirds of the total mitigation potential of all nature-based solutions. Despite massive and ongoing losses, forests still cover more than 30 per cent of the planet’s land.
Peatlands – wetlands such as marshes and swamps – cover only 3 per cent of the world’s land, but they store twice as much carbon as all the forests. Preserving and restoring peatlands means keeping them wet so the carbon doesn’t oxidize and float off into the atmosphere.
Ocean habitats such as seagrasses and mangroves can also sequester carbon dioxide from the atmosphere at rates up to four times higher than terrestrial forests can. Their ability to capture and store carbon make mangroves highly valuable in the fight against climate change.
Conserving and restoring natural spaces, both on land and in the water, is essential for limiting carbon emissions and adapting to an already changing climate. About one-third of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions needed in the next decade could be achieved by improving nature’s ability to absorb emissions.
Putting aside arguments about climate change itself, it wasn't the only reason for EV's being seen as desirable however.EV is but a very small part of the world's reaction to tackling climate change
Electric vehicles will need 'battery passports' to enter EU from 2027
Battery passports will be mandatory for electric vehicles sold in the European Union from February 2027 to provide greater visibility of what has gone into them and where it has come from.
The digital documents will be linked to the VIN and a QR code that, when scanned with a digital device, will reveal detailed information about the sources and nature of the raw materials prior to manufacturing, along with post-manufacturing details, such as capacity and condition.
The move is part of the new EU Battery Regulation, which requires the battery or vehicle manufacturer (depending on who produced the battery) to disclose the carbon emissions from production and gradually include greater proportions of recycled materials in the run-up to 2035, when the EU will ban sales of new ICE cars.
From that site and Position Paper blurbBattery Passport Content Guidance
Achieving compliance with the EU Battery Regulation and increasing sustainability and circularity.
Who would've thought we'd need a passport for a car battery. With all the stipulations and requirements of said battery, I'd imagine there'd have to be an exception in wartime?Content requirements of the EU Battery Passport
Recommendations to the European Commission by the Battery Pass Consortium
This document addresses clarification needs and presents recommendations by the Battery Pass consortium on battery passport content requirements as laid out in the EU Battery Regulation. It builds on our insights in the Battery Passport Content Guidance and is directed towards the European Commission incl. related institutions such as the JRC.
This consultation Impact Analysis represents the second and final phase of consultation about the design of a new vehicle efficiency standard for Australia. As many readers will be familiar with, long standing Australian Government policy is that substantive regulatory decisions should be accompanied by an impact assessment (previously known as a Regulation Impact Statement, or RIS).
In this paper, we have set out the Government’s proposed policy position in relation to the design and introduction of an Australian New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES). Following this consultation, Government will decide on the design of the NVES and final Impact Analysis will be developed.
In this introduction we set out:
- the structure of this document
- the questions we want to ask you
- background, the process to date and next steps
1. Well 5 years into Tesla ownership, and 50,000 km on clock This end user is very happy with the car and it’s suits my life perfectly.1. Granted and putting the environment aside for a sec, how an EV can be realistically used by the end user surely plays into the better or not equation.
2. Not so such a moot point because as I understand it, the current technology for recycling lithium, due to its reactive nature, is complex and costs more that actually mining the stuff.
3. No doubt in the decades to come the point will be moot but for me in the here and now, owing an EV is not a viable option.
4. From a broader view, EV is but a very small part of the world's reaction to tackling climate change, global warming or whatever woke word is touted as the newest buzz word. This rush into the EV Green Transistion appears to me to be just that, a rush, headlong into appeasing who and what?
5. IMHO, the world should be focusing more on biodiversity because this old gal of ours called Mother Earth has been around for 4.5 billion years or so and thus, she knows a thing or two about dealing with greenhouse gases.
From the UN Org:
Biodiversity - our strongest natural defense against climate change
Article reads in part. (my bolds)
Indeed so let's start with train and buses.Putting aside arguments about climate change itself, it wasn't the only reason for EV's being seen as desirable however.
Ability to use energy resources other than oil and the elimination of exhaust fumes in urban areas where the original reasons half a century ago and which have remained at least somewhat relevant ever since. Mainstream concern about climate being somewhat more recent than those other issues as a reason to pursue electrified transport.
If it is for our own good"On the weekend the Federal Government announced it would consult with industry and the wider community on its proposed New Vehicle Efficiency Standard (NVES).This consultation sets out the Federal Government's preferred model to calculate the Efficiency Standard for new motor vehicles sold in Australia (passenger and light commercial vehicles). Essentially manufacturers will need to meet an average emissions target over their entire fleet, and will earn credits for being below, and pay a penalty if above.It is clearly one of the most important decisions in Australia's automotive history."With cost of living front of mind for all households, the Motor Trade Association has reminded decision makers that affordability will remain one of the top considerations for Australians when purchasing their next vehicle."
Only think 3 and 6 are biased/wrong but agree on the others, just do not force the wrong solution to real issues while pretending to solve another non existent problem(CO2).1. Well 5 years into Tesla ownership, and 50,000 km on clock This end user is very happy with the car and it’s suits my life perfectly.
2. well there isn’t very much lithium in a lithium battery, but like anything costs go down as scale rises, as the fleet of EV’s age we will get more batteries to process and costs will drop.
3. it probably is viable, you might just have a bunch of misconceptions, what about you life do you think makes an EV unviable for you?
4. even with out global warming we have to wean our selves off petrol at some point, may as well start the process now, especially because the cars are great cars, and don’t pollute the air in our cities.
5. the earth can definitely handle more carbon dioxide, it’s been much higher before, but it’s whether our human species and the economy we have built can handle it. I mean the earth doesn’t care if any one species survives, the Dino’s were taken out by a meteorite but the earth survived, but it wasn’t good for the Dino’s.
6. Bio diversity is t going to fix us releasing millions of years of carbon back into the atmosphere in 100 years.
Well it will certainly make ICE cars deare.,If it is for our own good
Indeed, that is the whole purpose so my comment .Well it will certainly make ICE cars deare.,
So in a way it is for our own good, E.V prices will look better.
How can 3 be biased or wrong, it’s based on Cratons lifestyle and he hasn’t answered the question yet.Only think 3 and 6 are biased/wrong but agree on the others, just do not force the wrong solution to real issues while pretending to solve another non existent problem(CO2).
I agree with the boss of Airbus, when he said that the ultimate argument for green energy is that.Well it will certainly make ICE cars deare.,
So in a way it is for our own good, E.V prices will look better.
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?