Europe Parliament accelerating transition to Electric Cars

[Jtalk4456]

https://euobserver.com/environment/143015

TL:DR the European Parliament has voted in a rule for making stricter CO2 regulation along with having an incentive for manufacturers that make 35% of their sales be in ZEV's (Zero Emission Vehicles). There was already a goal and restrictions in place, but this ruling took it up a notch

TL:DR: I think this is a very good thing. Even if you don't care about global warming, pollution is still a thing.

MEP=Members of the European Parliament. 

 

Some Quotes:

Quote

 

Cars and vans sold in the EU in 2030 should on average emit 40 percent less carbon dioxide (CO2) than they will in 2021, the European Parliament decided in a vote on Wednesday (3 October).

MEPs said that by 2025 the emission levels should already be 20 percent lower than in 2021.

 

I'm glad someone is not just waiting for things to happen slowly but recognizing change can haoppen much quicker with regulation

Quote

 

On Wednesday, MEPs went along with the commission's proposal to introduce a 'bonus system' for car makers whose fleets reach a certain percentage of electric vehicles or other zero-emission and low-emission vehicles (ZLEVs). But the parliament increased the figures.

They adopted an amendment which said car companies whose new sales in 2030 consisted of 35 percent ZLEVs, should be allowed to miss the CO2 target by up to five percentage points.

The 35 percent by 2030 reference point – called a 'benchmark' in the proposed legislation – would be preceded by a 2025 benchmark of 20 percent ZLEVs.

Additionally, the parliament said that the system should work both ways, and that it should be a 'bonus-malus' system.

In other words, if a car maker does not produce enough ZLEVs to reach the benchmarks, it will have to reduce more CO2 emissions than the 30 percent target.

 

honestly a bit confused on this one. if a company is making 35% ZLEV's and following that better practice, why would they be also failing on their CO2 emissions?

I think the punishment is very important though

Quote

 

"The good old combustion engine car that served us so well for 130 years is ready for a well-deserved retirement," said Dutch liberal MEP Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy.

"If in Europe we want to build tomorrow's car, we have to develop it much more quickly than we are doing now. Market forces as we have seen are not sufficient. The legislators should help," he noted.

Gerbrandy was one of the authors of a damning parliament report about the Dieselgate scandal. Several of Tuesday's speakers were members of the inquiry committee into the widespread emissions cheating by European carmakers.

"If the European Union really wants to compete with China, then our producers should offer enough low-emission and zero-emission cars," said Mark Demesmaeker, a Belgian MEP who sits with the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group.

 

A-Freaking-MEN!

 

While there was some opposition from members on the right, 

Quote

the amendments tabled by MEPs from the ECR and the centre-right European People's Party (EPP) – respectively the largest and third-largest groups in the parliament – were all defeated, often by a narrow margin.

 

[Sakkura]

It's a nice sentiment, but it isn't a decision like this that will actually make anything happen. We need some real action to achieve the goal.

[Drak3]

RIP decent European vehicles. It's been a nice 30 some year run.

[Razzy_85]

They need to start building a tonne of Nuclear reactors hell of alot more quickly across europe!

[Vode]

Where does the electricity come from?

 

As long as we burn coal for electrcity this is a ridiculous effort. Dumb as hell.

 

Not even talking about the batteries, which are an environmental disaster on their own.

[Vode]

1 minute ago, Razzy_85 said:

They need to start building a tonne of Nuclear reactors hell of alot more quickly across europe!

They scale back on Nuclear power. Burn coal instead. LOL

[RejZoR]

We aren't ready yet. Electric cars may work great in California, but over here where we have temperatures even below -10°C during winters and sub or around zero temperatures for several months, batteries are far from efficient. And while range is somewhat better now, charging isn't. Petrol engine needs 5 minutes for a refill to 100% with included time spent for payment and they can be "charged" all over the world without any complications. Charging an EV takes more than half an hour even on the fastest charging units. Assuming you even find one that isn't occupied. Then you have to deal with 500 providers each using its own dumb system of payment through complicated app systems. Imagine placing a 60 year old person in position of using an EV when they get scared by slightly more modern controls on a freaking washing machine. I don't like the way they are pushing these charging stations and I'm a tech geek, expecting normies to embrace it is next to impossible. It just won't work.

 

I've spent quite some time thinking of going EV and the more I was digging, the more I wanted to stick with petrol powered car.

[Imbellis]

As long as the origin of the power is still creating CO2, as with around half the power produced, electric vehicles mean little besides the location where the fuel is burnt.

 

The petrol engine doesn't need a retirement. Perhaps adaptations, but it has places where electric isn't viable.

[williamcll]

Give me more EV discounts and I'm game.

[Shally]

7 minutes ago, Imbellis said:

As long as the origin of the power is still creating CO2, as with around half the power produced, electric vehicles mean little besides the location where the fuel is burnt.

 

The petrol engine doesn't need a retirement. Perhaps adaptations, but it has places where electric isn't viable.

That's true. But I think the whole point is to remove dependencies on fossil fuel, and likely once cars are all electric at least some of the power will be clean energy. It's a step in the right direction to say the least

[Dissitesuxba11s]

Can the infrastructure of more rural countries handle this change? A farmer in a rural area might not be up to letting go of their diesel truck that's been working since the 80's.

 

Also, typo in the title.

[Commodus]

Can we please stop with the myth that there's no point to EVs until the power sources are clean?

 

There are multiple studies showing that EVs are still greener overall, even in countries where the vast majority of the energy is 'dirty.'  And more importantly, it's incredibly short-sighted to say we shouldn't promote EV adoption until most energy is clean.  Do you really think that renewable energy development is frozen in time?  That we won't shift primarily to renewables over the next few decades?  To bring up the colloquialism, don't let perfectionism be the enemy of good.  We won't achieve meaningful emissions reductions by waiting until everything is ideal to do something; we will by taking gradual steps forward.

[Drak3]

10 minutes ago, Imbellis said:

As long as the origin of the power is still creating CO2,

CO2 isn't the problem. CO and Nitrous Oxides are.

 

CO2 is benefitial to plant life, and of the green house gasses, CO2 is the one that doesn't warrant caring about.

 

And guess what catalytic converters on gassers and newer Diesels do: convert CO, hydrocarbons, Nitrous Oxides into water, inert Nitrous, and CO2.

[yian88]

WTF kind of laws? they just simply vote emissions should be % percent lower in upcoming years? based on fucking what?  if we dont have the technology to improve that much how can they vote such laws.

[EPENEX]

Electric vehicles might be nice there, but where I live we have something called winter where it gets below -20 F every year. I would much rather have a car that runs on gas.

[asus killer]

this "you have to sell cars that emit only x%" has been going on in Europe for a long time now, still the only thing it achieved was for manufacturers to cheat the tests and because EU has so much manufacturers it really doesn't control as it should. This is just more pointless nonsense.

 

43 minutes ago, Razzy_85 said:

They need to start building a tonne of Nuclear reactors hell of alot more quickly across europe!

don't you mean more renewable sources of power using wind and solar for example. Why would anyone build nuclear reactors? to help the nuclear industry lobby

[Gawron10001]

Electrics Veihicles will push ppl to install their own solar panles, or wind farms because this will be cheaper than charging your car at work or charging stations where price for charge will increase since there will be more EV

[D13H4RD]

Don't know how to feel about this.

 

Don't think the whole world is ready just yet

[cj09beira]

37 minutes ago, Vode said:

Where does the electricity come from?

 

As long as we burn coal for electrcity this is a ridiculous effort. Dumb as hell.

 

Not even talking about the batteries, which are an environmental disaster on their own.

you are forgeting a huge thing, on cars the efficiency we get from the engines is a lot lower than what we can get if there are no weight and size restrictions, so even if the electricity came mostly from coal it would still be better than using petrol.

32 minutes ago, Imbellis said:

As long as the origin of the power is still creating CO2, as with around half the power produced, electric vehicles mean little besides the location where the fuel is burnt.

 

The petrol engine doesn't need a retirement. Perhaps adaptations, but it has places where electric isn't viable.

see above

 

 

there is one thing i would like to point out though, europe is so focused on "renewable sources" that they mostly gave up on nuclear, which i think in the end will be the best source because every renewable source means messing with our planets natural ecosystems, dams prevent normal water flow, solar panels prevent heat from going into the earth, wind generators slow wind down, the effect might be small now but as we need more and more energy the effect on the planet will increase, while with nuclear reactors we can take a lot of energy from a very small amount of matter, and with reactors like the molten salt reactors, safety is no longer a problem, all this renewable energy also makes electricity here be extremely costly, if you have the average cost per country and compare it with how much of the energy is renewable you can easily see that the more renewable there is the costlier it is, partly because of most renewable energies being quite random in their production meaning extra power must always be on standby 

6 minutes ago, asus killer said:

this "you have to sell cars that emit only x%" has been going on in Europe for a long time now, still the only thing it achieved was for manufacturers to cheat the tests and because EU has so much manufacturers it really doesn't control as it should. This is just more pointless nonsense.

 

don't you mean more renewable sources of power using wind and solar for example. Why would anyone build nuclear reactors? to help the nuclear industry lobby

nuclear isn't as bad or at least it doesn't need to be and "renewable" isn't as good as it sounds 

[Master Disaster]

56 minutes ago, Jtalk4456 said:

https://euobserver.com/environment/143015

TL:DR the European Parliament has voted in a rule for making stricter CO2 regulation along with having an incentive for manufacturers that make 35% of their sales be in ZEV's (Zero Emission Vehicles). There was already a goal and restrictions in place, but this ruling took it up a notch

TL:DR: I think this is a very good thing. Even if you don't care about global warming, pollution is still a thing.

MEP=Members of the European Parliament. 

 

Some Quotes:

I'm glad someone is not just waiting for things to happen slowly but recognizing change can haoppen much quicker with regulation

honestly a bit confused on this one. if a company is making 35% ZLEV's and following that better practice, why would they be also failing on their CO2 emissions?

I think the punishment is very important though

A-Freaking-MEN!

 

While there was some opposition from members on the right, 

 

Interesting no one ever considers where exactly the electricity they're charging their vehicles with actually comes from....

 

[asus killer]

2 minutes ago, cj09beira said:

 

nuclear isn't as bad or at least it doesn't need to be and "renewable" isn't as good as it sounds 

nuclear is cancer, there's the potential for a disaster and the waste problem. You are from Portugal if you had a nuclear accident there in such a small country you would all end up refugees in Spain.

I did not understood the part of the renewables, what's the downside? care to elaborate

[Sakkura]

36 minutes ago, Dissitesuxba11s said:

Can the infrastructure of more rural countries handle this change? A farmer in a rural area might not be up to letting go of their diesel truck that's been working since the 80's.

 

Also, typo in the title.

This is about new vehicles, not existing ones. Old fossil fuel vehicles might actually become more valuable as new ones can no longer be purchased.

[orbitalbuzzsaw]

I read "European parliament accelerating" and was like oh fuck. Anyone else?

[G27Racer_188]

24 minutes ago, Gawron10001 said:

Electrics Veihicles will push ppl to install their own solar panles, or wind farms because this will be cheaper than charging your car at work or charging stations where price for charge will increase since there will be more EV

And what will the government do if people start making their own electricity? They will put a tax on it, so you will have to pay tax, because you are not buying their electricity directly. 

 

Aaaand there goes your cheaper option.

[Drak3]

6 minutes ago, G27Racer_188 said:

And what will the government do if people start making their own electricity? They will put a tax on it, so you will have to pay tax, because you are not buying their electricity directly. 

 

Aaaand there goes your cheaper option.

Yeah it'd be fairly easy to circumvent that tax.