Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 352 posts

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#261

Post by rowanG077 »

pjc50 wrote: post #258
rowanG077 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Millions of people die or they are out of Jobs? What a hard choice to make. The consideration shouldn't be "but what about the economy?". It should be what if we don't do it.

Covid has absolutely shown that there are a lot of people who prioritise "the economy" over even quite a lot of deaths.

I would say the opposite actually. We have chosen quite drastic measures in many countries for a relatively small number of deaths. Global warning is not 1% dies. It very well could be 90% and we return to pre-industrial levels of civilization.

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#262

Post by DoingIsLearning »

feralimal wrote: post #209
acallaghan wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change and coronavirus isn't some masterplan created just to incovenience you . You're a person out of 7 billion other people on this planet, our collective actions have consequences. You can't see your cells, smell or see carbon monoxide, or touch the other planets - yet you trust that you have red blood cells, CO gas kills you in your sleep, and that mars is made from rock. You've been told this as well by…

Climate change and coronavirus are pretexts for the rollout of a technocratic system. They are geopolitical stories to get our buy in to all they have planned for us. This can be seen in the way all our governments are acting in tandem. We have a 'new normal', 'build back better', etc. Klaus Schwab lays out the plans in detail if you want to know what's coming up. What happened to 3 weeks to flatten the curve? We're…

> But what if that is a fake story to frame our situation in order for us to subscribe to the plans

Ask yourself who stands to benefit by keeping the current status quo?

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#264

Post by feralimal »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #262
feralimal wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Climate change and coronavirus are pretexts for the rollout of a technocratic system. They are geopolitical stories to get our buy in to all they have planned for us. This can be seen in the way all our governments are acting in tandem. We have a 'new normal', 'build back better', etc. Klaus Schwab lays out the plans in detail if you want to know what's coming up. What happened to 3 weeks to flatten the curve? We're…

> But what if that is a fake story to frame our situation in order for us to subscribe to the plans Ask yourself who stands to benefit by keeping the current status quo? https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382

Its far, far bigger than that.

And you do realise that the BBC was created to be a propaganda delivery vehicle? That you couldn't get a job there unless you had been screened by MI5? That they gave out free TVs to ensure good take up of their propaganda?

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#265

Post by Gibbon1 »

djmobley wrote: post #244
barnacled wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that autonomous cars vastly far away despite all the hype by silicon valley. They still cannot deal with edge case scenarios at all well and are far from being proven to be safe. Relying on this being in place by 2030 + lifetime of 2nd hand cars is a huge gamble. See https://blog.piekniewski.info/2020/03/01/av-safety-myths-and... and his blog in general for a more in-depth analysis of the situation. It's likel…

I don’t disagree, but I wouldn’t describe it as a “huge gamble.” People would just need to continue owning electric/second-hand ICE vehicles and, in the case of electric vehicles, find ways of charging them away from their homes. When autonomous vehicles become widely available (2030, 2040, or whenever), I think many would decide owning an expensive, depreciating asset they only use sparingly is more hassle than it’s…

> owning an expensive, depreciating asset they only use sparingly is more hassle than it’s worth.

Appears though that electric cars are likely to be far more durable than gasoline powered cars and cheaper. In ten years a EV will probably cost 80% what a gasoline powered car would and will last 30 years not 15. Cost of ownership over the life of the car would then be 40% of a gasoline car is today. Less considering maintenance and fuel.

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#266

Post by johnday »

CalRobert wrote: post #104
physicsguy wrote: post #31

Many, many houses do not have anything other than on-street parking here. Since 2012 I've lived in 5 houses, and three of them had no driveway. I'm currently buying a house which has no drive way, with no way of fitting one. Apparently 1/3 houses have only on street parking. Unless they also provide huge, huge grants to rapidly implement dense onstreet charging, and fast, this is a pipedream and will end up getting p…

Perhaps we should stop letting individuals appropriate public space for storage of their private property, and charge market rate for the land used by parking, thereby encouraging people who are not car dependent to buy houses such as yours instead of demanding a public handout for vehicle storage? (The High Cost Of Free Parking explores this issue in depth)

What about houses which are not within walking distance of amenities, and do not have room for off-street parking? That's a large proportion of suburban (or even urban) housing in the UK.

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#267

Post by feralimal »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #242
feralimal wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No I don't think it means people will suffocate. I'm saying that carbon dioxide should help trees grow. That we have a natural buffer against too much. Did you know that some farms, pump carbon dioxide into their greenhouses to improve their crop. It seems self-evident that any extra would be mopped up by trees, bushes etc in the wild. I hear what you are saying about snow and your experience. But you should also ask…

> It seems self-evident that any extra would be mopped up by trees, bushes etc in the wild. This is factually incorrect. Please stop spreading lies. [0] You are absolutely failing to realise the rate at which we are pumping CO2, NO2 and SO2 and other gases into the atmosphere. > Did you know that some farms, pump carbon dioxide into their greenhouses to improve their crop. Did you know that humans are going to get co…

So much trust in the stories you are provided.

Even though it doesn't tally up with what you see.

I see a wonderful world. You see a world that you yourself are killing.

But even accepting the stories, science etc we are given, the top 100 corporations are responsible on their own for 70% of the emissions. Why don't we make this issue completely disappear in the easiest way possible, by banning those corporations only from any polluting? Job done.

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#268

Post by feralimal »

Ixio wrote: post #216
feralimal wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough. But I don't trust. Can I know? If I cannot know, I will not trust. To trust would weaken me, and empower those who hide information to hide even more. This is where we are. I do live in a zero trust world. I trust government and corporations least of all. Individuals I have much more time for. Although zero trust was disconcerting at first, I also find it liberating. I know that there is lots I do not kn…

Do you grow your own food ? Where does your zero trust end ? Science is very difficult to cheat on such high visibility issues. There is a huge scientific consensus on climate change, from experts of all countries and diverse backgrounds. For it all to be a huge conspiracy seems like a pretty big leap of faith, that they are genuine is a simpler explanation.

Science is incredibly easy to cheat. Everyone is silo'd and beholden to funding.

That very few people speak up about it (why would they, when their jobs are at risk) means nothing.

A really good example of someone speaking up, from a 'trusted' organisation, is this editorial in the British Medical Journal.

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#269

Post by DoingIsLearning »

feralimal wrote: post #264
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what if that is a fake story to frame our situation in order for us to subscribe to the plans Ask yourself who stands to benefit by keeping the current status quo? https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-53640382

Its far, far bigger than that. And you do realise that the BBC was created to be a propaganda delivery vehicle? That you couldn't get a job there unless you had been screened by MI5? That they gave out free TVs to ensure good take up of their propaganda?

Here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil_climate_change_cont...

You have 119 sources to choose from at the bottom of the page, but perhaps anything that doesn't align with your dogmas is a propaganda piece.

Social media and Murdoch's media conglomerates were probably the biggest and most succesful propaganda machines of modern society. You might want to check what are the information sources you do trust. I am not sure I can help any further

Re: Britain to ban new petrol cars and vans by 2030 on road to net zero emissions

#270

Post by barnacled »

dazc wrote: post #201
perfunctory wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is utterly ridiculous. I live in the UK and have been renting for many years, I've lived at 15+ addresses and not at a single one could I have powered the car from home. Not one. Oh boy. I just picture someone from the early 20th century riding a horse and complaining about not being able to tank a car for the lack of gas stations.

But you don't have to charge the car from your house, just as you don't need to have your own personal petrol pump. So rather than being utterly ridiculous, it just requires a different mindset and acceptance that many more charging points will be available in the next ten years than there are currently.

Apples and oranges really - the difference in time at pump vs time charging is orders of magnitude. In order for this to work you'd need vast numbers of charging points and the entire electrical grid to be upgraded. This is not something the govt or commentators appear to mention very often.

It'd truly be one of the biggest infrastructure projects the UK has ever seen and likely run into the £100's of bns. The disruption would be like nothing ever seen before (you can't just upgrade substations or dig up basically every residential street in the country without disruption).

I think many like to comment on this from the position of being one of the few who owns an electric car and has the luxury of finding places to charge. That does not scale without truly colossal infrastructure changes.

Post reply on HN