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

311–320 of 352 posts

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

#311

Post by adrianN »

barnacled wrote: post #296
adrianN wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't see streets filled with chargers because almost nobody has an EV yet. Just like you didn't see many gas stations providing unleaded fuel two years before catalytic converters became mandatory.

It's funny because I actually remember the unleaded/leaded transition and petrol stations were stocking it very early on. The equivalent simile here would be if unleaded was going to be made mandatory in a year and basically 3 petrol stations in the UK stocked it. The govt are going to make these cars mandatory soon. London is the ideal place to do this due to infra + rich people with EVs (more than you might think,…

That wasn't the case in Germany. Unleaded fuel actually was available only in a handful of gas stations until shortly before the transition.

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

#312

Post by tankenmate »

CalRobert wrote: post #308
Hamuko wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps we should stop letting individuals appropriate public space for storage of their private property Are you arguing for getting rid of apartments?

Not at all! I just think yop've no more right to store your car on the public street than you do a hot tub, piano, etc.

There are about 7 million houses in England without some form of off street housing. Changing that will take far more work that wiring up ~2M lamp posts.

Also, to ban all parking on public roads is also infeasible aside from the houses with parking issues. Most city centre businesses would vehemently oppose such a move without replacement parking which would cost far far more money from the public purse.

So although I'm quite happy for people to have opinions, the consequences of enacting this opinion would be a greater waste of public resources than just allowing people to park on the side of the road (in most cases).

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

#313

Post by physicsguy »

rangibaby wrote: post #291
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…

I live in urban Japan and outside my window there are zero cars parked on the street because every car is required to have a registered parking space within 2km of its owners’ residence.

Yeah, but it was a policy enacted in 1962 when car usage worldwide was a fraction of what it is now. Can an elected government impose such a policy today? I don't see it as being politically realistic.

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

#314

Post by jbob2000 »

PJDK wrote: post #118
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…

I recently got a Tesla while living in London with no off street parking. I had the same basic concerns, and only went ahead because I knew I'd be moving somewhere with off street parking within a few months. But it actually turned out to be a complete non issue. My usage pattern (short occasional trips around town to shops etc and regular long trips to Bristol and back) could be handled entirely by stopping off for…

For the monthly cost of your Tesla, you could probably take a taxi/uber everywhere you needed to go. You can afford 20 cab rides at $40/ride per month, totaling $800/month.

Do you take your car out more than 20 times a month?

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

#315

Post by feralimal »

feralimal wrote: post #268
Ixio wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

aaand here's the link, sorry!

editorial in the BMJ about covid: https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425

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

#316

Post by ryandrake »

black_puppydog wrote: post #99
echelon wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Start by implementing a odd/even rule for license plates in big cities, even full bans on weekends. > - Tax and/or de-subsidize the meat industry. And just like that, you've been voted straight out of office. Better luck next life connecting to the electorate. You can't do those things. Humanity is a distributed consensus problem. Climate change presents an interesting change in the fitness landscape topology ahe…

Then humanity is clearly headed off a cliff in that landscape. Which, by the way, has been signaled to everyone for decades now. Just our political processes have not allowed those signals to reach "the economy" and we seem to be unable to act on anything that isn't felt by the economy. Which, I might add, is not a god-given fact, but rather a political choice. Anyway, we will have a cliff. And it will have been anno…

> Which, by the way, has been signaled to everyone for decades now.

That's part of the problem. The general public have been hearing it for decades now, and are probably just sick and tired of hearing about it. As far back as I can remember, it's been nothing but "Nuclear weapons are gonna kill us all" "Acid rain is gonna kill us all!" "Smog is gonna kill us all!" "Drugs and crime are gonna kill us all" "The ozone hole is gonna kill us all!" "Global warming is gonna kill us all!" "Terrorism is gonna kill us all" "Climate change is gonna kill us all!" Yet, here we are, still going on towards these various cliffs. I can at least put myself in the general public's shoes for a bit and empathize with their crisis fatigue. Economic crises are felt immediately--you lose your job. It's no surprise that it's politically easier to favor economics over other crises that are perpetually happening Real Soon Now.

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

#317

Post by ainiriand »

bvcvbuiy wrote: post #94
ainiriand wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many things that can be done, in this very same moment. The problem is the high cost in political resources that no one is willing to pay. Some examples: - Start by implementing a odd/even rule for license plates in big cities, even full bans on weekends. - Tax and/or de-subsidize the meat industry. - Incentivize the installation of wind or other renewable energies. Energies with no CO2 emissions, like nucl…

This is your own agenda and I am pretty sure implementing these solutions does not cost you much personally. What cost have you chosen to bear ? Do you exclusively use public transport ? Have you banned planes from your life ? Home delivery (the last mile is the one that creates the more pollution) ? What share of your revenue do you give to plant trees ? > You need to send signals like this to the market well in adv…

I gave some examples of things that come to mind to me, some of them cost very little. I am sure that the big impact does not come just from actions like the ones I mentioned but from small changes that accumulate.

One thing is for real, every one of us could be doing more. It is not enough to just delegate this problem to someone else, politician or otherwise.

I know that it is very hard to change habits, more so when you are not seeing the outcome. But in the end it is just about doing what you believe is fixing the problem, not delegating.

Somehow I see a finger pointed at me, telling me to do more. The finger should be pointed at each and one of us, telling us to do more, and vote better.

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

#318

Post by DoingIsLearning »

feralimal wrote: post #275
DoingIsLearning wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I've expressed my position. That this is a captured system, owned by large corporations. That education, science, government, media - all of it is captured and bent towards the will of those few who own the large corporations. If you can't see how the world is being co-ordinated now, I don't think you ever will. If you are a top elite, and own almost everything, even banks, even the Federal Reserve (and it is private…

The gap that separates us is too wide. The only thing I can suggest is this, please watch Adam Curtis's documentary 'Hypernormalisation':

https://vimeo.com/191817381/comments

(Watch at your own risk, be aware it is a BBC propaganda piece.)

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

#319

Post by hokkos »

ppf wrote: post #259
hokkos wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check this site https://climobil.connecting-project.lu It has better back-of-the-envelope maths than you could do, it use peer reviewed lifecycle data, take into account real world tank-to-weel CO2 emission from cars where NEDC and WLTP underestimate them massively, well-to-tank emission to make and transport petrol, lifecycle batteries, glider, engine and also the future decarbonation of the electric grid. It shows…

Great, thanks. I just compared my family car to a somewhat equivalent EV, and it takes 40,000km to break even in CO2 emissions. This is very much in line with my original point (and my "back of the envelope maths"). In the online calculator you linked, I assumed a car life of around 150,000km, as the longevity of mass-produced EVs is yet to be determined. It also addresses none of the additional points in my original…

In my country, France, it is a 4.5 times reduction, grid will continue to decarbonate, electric car have less moving part and their engine is not a self destructing explosive one, batteries max cycle continuously extends, also batteries CO2e/kWh will continue to reduce as their is better industrial process and the electric grid is being decarboned and mining vehicles switch to electric, also we continue to use less minerals to store a kWh.

Also we can both buy less car, drive less km and switch to electric when a car is needed but use more the one car with car sharing infrastructure.

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

#320

Post by ppf »

hokkos wrote: post #319
ppf wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, thanks. I just compared my family car to a somewhat equivalent EV, and it takes 40,000km to break even in CO2 emissions. This is very much in line with my original point (and my "back of the envelope maths"). In the online calculator you linked, I assumed a car life of around 150,000km, as the longevity of mass-produced EVs is yet to be determined. It also addresses none of the additional points in my original…

In my country, France, it is a 4.5 times reduction, grid will continue to decarbonate, electric car have less moving part and their engine is not a self destructing explosive one, batteries max cycle continuously extends, also batteries CO2e/kWh will continue to reduce as their is better industrial process and the electric grid is being decarboned and mining vehicles switch to electric, also we continue to use less m…

You have a 75% nuclear-powered grid in France, so yes, that probably does work out. It is also the only practical solution if we want EVs.

I really don't buy the whole "electric cars have less moving parts" argument. As I said in my original comment - how many cars get scrapped or sold due to electrical issues, compared to ICE issues? You should know, in France ;) Replacing mechanical moving parts with integrated circuits that have features on the nanometer scale that must not move, and putting them in the harsh automotive environment, is not a step forward in reliability.

I understand that technology and processes will improve, but that's not really a good argument to invest in the technology today. Maybe I should wait, and buy an EV in a few years or decades, when the environmental impact is a lot less.

Post reply on HN