21–30 of 142 posts
This is hypocrisy Norwegian economy is heavily driven by oil industry. Instead of planning to phase out oil they just makes these ineffective policies. People are going to buy big electric cars even with VAT.
This is hypocrisy Norwegian economy is heavily driven by oil industry. Instead of planning to phase out oil they just makes these ineffective policies. People are going to buy big electric cars even with VAT.
VAT on EVs isn’t the only mechanism, there is also a one-time toll related to vehicle weight in the works.
Fantastic news! EVs already have escape velocity in Norway to replace ICE cars, and incentivizing more walking and cycling not only promotes more efficient modes of short distance travel, but makes the population healthier. Over reliance on cars kills us slowly via lifestyle degradation.
Living in or around city spaces raise my blood pressure to unsafe levels. It only takes living a couple weeks in a quiet place to bring my blood pressure come back down to healthy levels. It doesn't matter how much I walk or bike in a city. No amount of exercise or stress management techniques brings my blood pressure back down.
I will continue to live at edge of cities because I do need some of the medical services found in them but, living in them, well that's saying I'm ready to die.
There is a very clear flow chart * Walk Else * Take Bicycle Else * Take Electric Bike or Fixed Track Public Transport Else * Use Electric Automobile or Bus Else * Use Fossil Fuel Automobile or Airplane Subsidies, incentives etc must align with this flowchart. EV is seen as a savior for economies and urban structures that are not viable to start with
- Carpool
- Bus
- Train
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of Oslo the infrastructure is built with car reliance deincentivizing cars and incentivizing walking and bikes won’t make much difference. Instead they should be making public transport more attractive. Walking and biking is not exactly ideal in harsh weather.
Winter isn't a legit excuse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
There is a very clear flow chart * Walk Else * Take Bicycle Else * Take Electric Bike or Fixed Track Public Transport Else * Use Electric Automobile or Bus Else * Use Fossil Fuel Automobile or Airplane Subsidies, incentives etc must align with this flowchart. EV is seen as a savior for economies and urban structures that are not viable to start with
I'd imagine there should be a few more bullet points somehow between automobile and airplane: - Carpool - Bus - Train
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of Oslo the infrastructure is built with car reliance deincentivizing cars and incentivizing walking and bikes won’t make much difference. Instead they should be making public transport more attractive. Walking and biking is not exactly ideal in harsh weather.
Winter isn't a legit excuse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
Fantastic news! EVs already have escape velocity in Norway to replace ICE cars, and incentivizing more walking and cycling not only promotes more efficient modes of short distance travel, but makes the population healthier. Over reliance on cars kills us slowly via lifestyle degradation.
Don't fucking “incentivize” alternatives to the five-seater. Architecture it. Make more of the urban area car-free.[1] Make other modes of transportation superior except for things like emergency care.
Am I holding my breath for cheap bus fares and actual bikelanes? Not exactly. The usual fare is to keep maintaining and upgrading the road network with only automobiles in mind and then act surprised when people keep choosing the mode of transporation that the infrastructure was built around.
Cheaper EVs was a nice way to pander to the middle class. There is less of a reason to pander to people who either don't own a car or can't afford the more expensive (at least back then) EVs. That's why there is less of a chance to see cheaper bus fares.
> EVs already have escape velocity in Norway to replace ICE cars, and incentivizing more walking and cycling not only promotes more efficient modes of short distance travel, but makes the population healthier.
> Over reliance on cars kills us slowly via lifestyle degradation.
Many people who work in Oslo can't afford to live in Oslo (I'm sure many can relate). Then they get stuck in traffic for hours a day because many others, you know, live outside of the bikeable/walkable core. Commuting home from perhaps a sedentary job. Then this gets labeled as a matter of lifestyle. What the hell?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Winter isn't a legit excuse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU
Norway is not Netherlands. Try biking in -20 C and go shopping for a family on a bike. Where I live bike paths are not regularly cleared they can get icy and dangerous. Public transport is the way to go. Biking can complement when and where possible. I say this as a person who commutes to work with bike everyday.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway doesn’t decide to phase out oil, consumers do. The world needs 100 million barrels a day. We are at peak coal too. https://www.iea.org/news/global-coal-demand-set-to-remain-at...
That’s not exactly true. When the Russian gas stopped the adoption of renewables accelerated in Germany and other places in Europe. If oil is phased out people will adapt. Most of Norwegian oil customers are in Europe so switching to renewable energy and phasing out oil is doable. Instead Norway wants to explore oil in the arctic.
Norway on the other hand has more oil than it could ever use, as well as hydropower.