Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030 • Hacker News Board

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#321

Post by stephengillie » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 12:45 AM UTC

farrisbris wrote: post #205

jimmaswell wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is a tax a subsidy if you personally find it too low? I find it completely worthwhile "subsidizing" personal vehicles. Everything else just feels oppressive in comparison (barring scenarios like bicycling being faster than the gridlock in Manhattan). Quality of life seems much better to me not being forced into transit or having to bike everywhere, so it makes sense to me for the government to invest in it. How big w…

Subsidizing personal vehicles sounds completely insane and irresponsible to me. The problem is that everyone ends up with their own vehicle and this gridlocks any road in/out of a city. Which ~big city in the world does not have trafic problems? And what is the average passenger count in those cars. One bus can replace MANY cars. But for some reason i cannot comprehend taking the bus or train seems oppressive to some…

Taking the light rail from Renton to Seattle costs twice as much (or more) than gasoline to drive there. And takes 3 times as long. Not including parking.

And the train doesn't run on Saturday nights, so if you want a fun night in the city, you're driving anyway.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#322

Post by bcheung » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 12:48 AM UTC

I have a hard time believing that the vast majority of cars won't already be 100% electric by then. Also, I doubt there will be nearly as many personal cars and that there will be much more ride sharing and public transportation options.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#323

Post by skookumchuck » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:27 AM UTC

netcan wrote: post #65

At the start, I thought these announcements and laws (eg Scotland) to ban ICE vehicles by 20XX were cheap politics. A promise Someone Else will deliver later, with credit due to you now. I've come around though. I think all the bastardized carbon accounting, market based solutions are on average quite bad. The idea of a neutral, "market decides" policy is a myth. These things are complex, and that compmexity is an op…

Bans are economically inefficient because they allow for zero flexibility. There will always be cases where an ICE is more appropriate, and it's very costly to try to lobby for an exemption.

A carbon emissions tax is the right solution. Just keep raising it until one gets the effect wanted - a wholesale switch to electric.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#324

Post by skookumchuck » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:36 AM UTC

eanzenberg wrote: post #99

netcan wrote: post #65

At the start, I thought these announcements and laws (eg Scotland) to ban ICE vehicles by 20XX were cheap politics. A promise Someone Else will deliver later, with credit due to you now. I've come around though. I think all the bastardized carbon accounting, market based solutions are on average quite bad. The idea of a neutral, "market decides" policy is a myth. These things are complex, and that compmexity is an op…

Unfortunately, production of cars (and consumerism in general) is extremely bad for carbon emissions and for the environment. Carbon emissions from the production of 1 car generally rival the lifetime emissions from the tailpipe [1]. If you have no choice but to replace an old car for new then sure, get a more efficient one. If you're replacing cars every 3 years like an average westerner, given the age of cars I see…

Which is why the "Cash for Clunkers" program was a giant environmental disaster. There's no way the fuel efficiency gains made up for the fuel burned manufacturing the car.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#325

Post by rb666 » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:40 AM UTC

This is really the only, and best, solution. It's simple and clear. Car manufactures cannot get around it with their bag of tricks. Plus, 12 years is a long long time.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#326

Post by tlb » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:41 AM UTC

skookumchuck wrote: post #324

eanzenberg wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, production of cars (and consumerism in general) is extremely bad for carbon emissions and for the environment. Carbon emissions from the production of 1 car generally rival the lifetime emissions from the tailpipe [1]. If you have no choice but to replace an old car for new then sure, get a more efficient one. If you're replacing cars every 3 years like an average westerner, given the age of cars I see…

Which is why the "Cash for Clunkers" program was a giant environmental disaster. There's no way the fuel efficiency gains made up for the fuel burned manufacturing the car.

I think the motivation was reducing pollution. A small minority of badly running cars emit most of the particulate and nitrogen oxide pollution. In certain areas like Los Angeles in the 1980s, smog (caused by nitrogen oxides) was killing people, and removing a few clunkers made a significant difference.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#327

Post by skookumchuck » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:42 AM UTC

amluto wrote: post #115

munificent wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it seems to me that if you tax emissions strongly and uniformly enough, then at some point it has to have an impact. One way to look at that is that you're saying any market-based solution strong enough to be effective is indistinguishable from an outright ban. We could, for example, discourage smoking by putting a $500 tax on each pack of cigarettes. But at that point, you may as well stop pretending and ban it ou…

> One way to look at that is that you're saying any market-based solution strong enough to be effective is indistinguishable from an outright ban. I'm not sure I agree. I could easily imagine a range of carbon taxes applied to vehicles where most, but not all, users would switch to electric. There could easily be people who like taking long trips far from major roads and are willing to pay a large premium to do so. >…

> equally

Implies everyone is in the same situation. This is never true. For example, in WW2 we had gas rationing. You got a fixed amount of gas, regardless of how much driving you needed to do. The result was a black market in gas, where those who didn't need all their alotment sold it to those who did (at black market prices, of course, since this was illegal).

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#328

Post by skookumchuck » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:46 AM UTC

maxxxxx wrote: post #94

NickM wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think all the bastardized carbon accounting, market based solutions are on average quite bad. I'm curious, do you think the whole idea of a market-based solution is bad, or do you just think that actual real-world implementations have been lacking so far? I mean, it seems to me that if you tax emissions strongly and uniformly enough, then at some point it has to have an impact. I think existing schemes have just be…

"I'm curious, do you think the whole idea of a market-based solution is bad, or do you just think that actual real-world implementations have been lacking so far?' My theory is that the people push for market based solutions the most are usually the same people that are against regulations and taxes so whatever they come up with will usually be very weak. They certainly won't support taxation of carbon emissions to t…

I'm one of those people that push for market based solutions. I also support taxation to the degree that it is effective. So your theory is not supported by evidence.

I also support the idea of reducing other taxes in concert, so the tax is revenue neutral.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#329

Post by SECProto » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 1:48 AM UTC

stephengillie wrote: post #313

SECProto wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe and Japan both use smaller engine sizes, increasing fuel economy pretty drastically compared to North America. Especially when your average speed might be 80 km/hr, rather than 80 miles an hour. I don't know if their different testing regimes reflect that (maybe). Anecdote: several years ago, I got the lightest, smallest-engined, most-efficient car I could find here in Canada, a Toyota Yaris. And using a calcu…

A Toyota Camry Hybrid will get better MPG with a 2.5 liter engine, and give more space for passengers and cargo, than the Yaris. Also it has EV-like torque.

My relatives drive a Camry Hybrid, and I've used it a fair bit. It certainly does have better torque, and slightly better real world mileage (5.5 litre/100km for the Camry, vs my Yaris at 6.0 litre/100km). It also drives more comfortably on the highway. It's less affected by wind/passenger weight, though downshifting to 4th has never been an issue for me.

However, as a sedan, I strongly dispute the "more space for passengers and cargo". The trunk is larger in the camry, but has severe limits that the Yaris, a hatchback, does not. Carrying a mini fridge, for example, is out of the question in a Camry, but easy in a Yaris (as long as you only have 1 or 2 passengers). Also, the camry has better rear-seat leg room, but much less height, such that my head (185cm) touches the roof in the back seats. Finally, the Yaris has better clearance for rough roads, and much better turning radius and visibility for city driving. (Oh, and my cost after 150000km, including purchase, fuel, and oil changes, is just approaching the purchase price of a Camry Hybrid)

I wish the Yaris Hybrid, available in Japan, was available in North America.

Re: Denmark to ban petrol and diesel car sales by 2030

#330

Post by ioquatix » Thu, Oct 04, 2018, 2:09 AM UTC

kalleboo wrote: post #198

hydrox24 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (the car tax is) paid for by people in suburbia who _have_ to own a car to survive. I have been wondering for a little while now if the extreme libertarian position on private roads has been vindicated. I am not sure yet, but it seems possible where once it was ridiculous. Starting with (let us say) World war two, cities and states built out substantial, publicly funded roads and road networks in order to connect u…

Japan has a majority- privatized highway network, funding it requires tolls way higher than would be politically feasible in any western country. Gas and tolls make taking the bullet train cheaper for some distances if you're alone (the equation changes if you load up your family). I live here and have to pay the tolls but I still prefer it from a "user pays" justice POV. It doesn't have to be privatized though - Sin…

As a recent example, the cost to travel by train into Tokyo from Narita cost me about ¥800, but the tolls from driving cost about ¥2000. So, if you travel with 3+ people in a car, it's cheaper to drive, provided you already own a car.