• kemsat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think it’s dumb that we’ve got plans to phase out personal gasoline vehicles, but we don’t have plans to electrify the industrial sector or the transportation industries.

  • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    At least for Germany that’s not the whole picture.

    They banned the sale of cars that have a combustion engine running on fossil fuel starting from 2035. Semis running on Diesel are fine*. Special equipment for agriculture (harvesters, …) can still run on anything*. If your engine runs on alcohol it’s fine too**.

    * might change in the future.
    ** Just give me a sip from your fuel tank.

  • Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    As an Australian I don’t find this beautiful at all 😠 We only have a single tiny territory (our equivalent of America’s DC) with any phase out plans. Our government is just so incredibly beholden to fossil fuel interests. It’s incredibly frustrating.

    But Japan is one that surprises me, considering how slow their domestic industry has been to adopt electric cars compared to China and Korea. I thought they were going in on hydrogen, despite it not really making serious progress.

    (Although an obligatory !fuckcars@lemmy.world and reminder that even EVs are terrible for the environment and are much worse societally than public transport and bikes.)

    • TheOakTree@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t really believe in the hydrogen car solution, but I did have the chance to ride in a very nice hydrogen car in Korea and wow… it was a very smooth ride.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s definitely not a complete scam tech, and it will likely have its place. It’s just not especially feasible at the same scale that battery electrics are.

    • null_dot@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah this really sucks.

      Especially the proliferation of American style ute’s in recent years, like we’re the only two places in the world that will tolerate the emissions.

      I’m also surprised about China, not for any other reason than their track record on pollution hasn’t been great.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m not particularly surprised about China. They’re making big advances in this area. Their continued growth in carbon emissions is alongside growth in renewables because their total energy usage is growing insanely fast.

        With cars specifically, think about cars you’ve seen on the road here in Australia. Of the EVs, where have you seen them from? Apart from Teslas, the vast majority I’ve seen have been either Chinese or Korean.

      • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        They introduced regulations that fossil fuel motorcycles were only allowed every other day. Electric mopeds were allowed any day.
        Most mopeds in Chinese cities are electric ones now. Out in the sticks you’ll still find combustion ones.

        But they seriously needed that. The smog in the cities back then were live-threatening.

      • Alex@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        China have some very big cities and the pollution alone has been causing lots of health related problems. They have an incentive to migrate to EV’s on those grounds alone.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m also surprised about China, not for any other reason than their track record on pollution hasn’t been great.

        That’s because they’re not deinstitutionalizing like Europe, and in fact their industry is still growing. A lot of European advances in reducing pollution came because they simply exported it elsewhere.

  • cron@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 days ago

    Its sounds odd for me that some countries plan banning fuel-powered cars in ~30 years.

    Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t think there is much left to ban by then.

    • argon@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      It promotes investing into electric cars tight now. Without the bans, some investors might be hopeful to still profit beyond the 30s. But with the ban, it’s clear for all investors to invest in electric cars.

      • cron@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        True, but why set a limit in 30-40 years?

        Thats a whole generation, most people that work today will be retired by then (hopefully).

        30 to 40 years ago, lead-free fuel, catalytic converters, airbags, and ABS became more common and started to become standard.

        • slazer2au@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because it is a useless gesture.

          A polly knows they will likely not be in power when they set the target so when time comes their party can say ‘see we had a plan but you voted us out of office so we couldn’t act on it and the people you voted in didn’t follow through with our plan.’

    • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I can see how hybrids will probably be a thing for a very long time, for people in very cold and remote places.

      But yeah, the EV revolution is a fact. For any country that has proper electric infrastructure and who doesn’t have protections for legacy car manufacturers, EV’s are cheaper and have lower operating/maintenance costs.

      • MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        In Canada, the gas model is ~$20,000 the hybrid is ~$30,000 and the electric model is ~$40,000. I keep hearing that EVs are supposed to be cheaper, but I haven’t seen it yet.

        • alvvayson@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          Due to protection against cheap Chinese cars.

          In China, you can get an EV below $10K.

          For countries without domestic car manufacturers,.Chinese EV’s are by far the cheapest cars to import.

        • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Because you don’t take the money saved over time into consideration and if you look at the Niro it’s closer to 6k each step (the aren’t a ton of models that offer each variations either so your comment is kinda misinformation).

          • MacroCyclo@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            I’m talking about the Hyundai Kona, I think. I definitely agree that they are cheaper to run. I’ve heard before too that they are cheaper to produce, but haven’t seen any evidence of it so far.

            • lime!@feddit.nu
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              the main hurdle, other than the obvious one that the more performance drive trains require conflict minerals, is one of upsell. customers expect evs to be more expensive, so lower trim levels are not available for the electric version.

              the peugeot e308 has the same price increase.

              also, engineering a car for multiple drive trains is more expensive to begin with.

    • br3d@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      A target that is more than 2 election cycles away isn’t a serious target - it’s a way of looking like they’re doing something without doing so

      • bstix
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        Long term planning is for letting the industry change before a ban is necessary.

        It’s working just fine. Manufacturers are changing to EVs to avoid being caught in a future ban. Like OP said, there won’t be anything left to ban, because the politic is successful.

        A shorter scope wouldn’t be as successful. If they banned fossil cars tomorrow, people would still drive them and the police couldn’t do anything but fine people all day long. It would also result in a massive opposition potentially postponing the decision indefinitely. It would probably also be in conflict with other laws in several countries. An immediate ban might infringe on the right to property or such.

        • br3d@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t mean a distant 2080 target means the fleet won’t shift - I just meant it’s a sign of political cowardice which doesn’t really benefit anyone, not least because, as you say, manufacturers need a stable predictable environment

      • Alex@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The target doesn’t mean nothing happens until then. Car dealerships in the UK have a maximum quota of ICE cars they can sell before being hit with additional costs. That quota is decreasing over time until we reach the “ban” date.

  • litchralee@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 days ago

    A small note: political subdivisions of countries are not highlighted in the map, but are mentioned in the source Wikipedia article. This would include the dozen or so US States that accede to the higher emission standards and phase-out plan of California.

    • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      You’ll need time to upgrade the infrastructure and for car makers to switch their products. That usually takes a decade.

      • prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Faster if they’re forced.

        I’d push for now new models made with gas engines, force them to sell remaining stock and pivot their current designs to utilize electric motors.

        The real issue would be the infrastructure / utilities upgrading, but also … if they were forced instead of given special privilege.

        🤷

        • Krik@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          This won’t work. A new car easily takes 5 years to develop. A new charging pole might only take 2-3 years to build (don’t forget all the necessary tape) but large scale electric infrastructure can’t be upgraded that fast. You might need another power plant, new power poles all over the country, new substations*, … Then there are the legal challenges and the NIMBY crowds. The to-do-list is long and some entries are mindbogglingly expensive, complicated or both.

          • The big transformer stations are incredibly expensive and sometimes take a whole year to build. You can’t crank them out by the thousands.

          Don’t get me wrong I want to switch to all electric transportation as early as possible too. But you have to accept that some steps just take time.