By what year, should all fossil fuel passenger vehicles be banned from use on Australian public roads?
So that is both new & used vehicles
Doesn't include freight trucks, mining vehicles or trains (in this poll).
For those who choose 'Never' - do you accept the relevant science of the health effects of airborne carcinogens/pollutants from vehicle exhaust? Do you accept the science of anthropogenic global warming?
You read through all of my replies on this forum? Sounds like you got triggered by something I said.
Also, thanks for the compliment. My natural state is what you consider trying, appreciate it.
Ah, you're one of them neglected types searching for attention. Carry on.
I voted "never" based on current infrastructure and tech. I believe in climate change and doing what we can to safeguard the environment. I would happily switch my daily driver to an electric vehicle for driving around town. However both the infrastructure and tech just isn't there yet to replace a 4wd (offroad) or someone touring with a caravan. I hope it is one day.
So it sounds like your answer is "yes, but only when the infrastructure and tech" is ready.
And you think that time will be…. "never"???
There needs to be an option that ensures lower income people can still access affordable vehicles for transport. With this in mind ICE vehicles should be phased out but not banned.
No new ICE cars from 2035 perhaps. By the time the last ICE vehicles are getting long in the tooth there should be plenty of affordable and more robust EV options available.
There are classic Australian cars out there that are driven on the road worth over 500k. I answered never as I have a couple of cars with sentimental value in storage and I do intend to (restore in one case and) drive them.
I think we should follow many other countries in banning the purchase of new ICE vehicles by say ~2035, to send the right signals to everyone involved in relevant industries to start preparing for change. Ideally sooner of course.
I suspect we almost won't need to ban usage at that point, as the vast majority of people will simply want to switch to electric vehicles as they continue to become better than ICE vehicles in every way possible.
Banning cruise ships and petrol powered personal/passenger water craft would have a greater impact on saving the environment.
Lol, how would you power them?
Sure, ban those AND new ICE cars. Not sure why you're talking about it like we can only ban one?
I believe they should never be banned but rather transitioned to a permit system. Similar to how club reg vehicles are permitted to use the roads. IMO I'd like to continue driving a petrol car on the weekends and something more efficient on the weekdays.
The goal should be to drive a car that is proven to be better for our environment and that includes the whole life cycle.
Never ban fossil fuel cars. Once alternative fuelled car tech is more mature it should naturally phase out less efficient Fossil fuelled cars. When the tech makes sense and is cost effective people will transition across.
Sinking lid approach is the way Iād go.
Could comfortably ban sale of new fossil fuel cars within the next few years, like Europe is. Then itās just a matter of seeing it flow through the market.
Trying to force existing cars off the road could do more harm than good, given the not-inconsiderable carbon cost of car production.
Never…. but eventually they will need to tax the shit out of them so that they become non-viable as a method of primary, private transport.
For, excessive noise, excessive pollution etc..
It's happened in the past and will probably happen again. I get that people want to drive vintage and historic cars, but it will become a luxury for a rare few to do so, kind of like seeing a horse and carriage.
Before you start thinking how to charge all your electric cars how about you think where you get all the copper and lithium to actually make them.
Ludicrous!! Never ++++
Let's crush our cars after 5 years so have to get the latest technology so we get the latest in fuel / battery efficiency. What a joke. People don't understand how much energy and Earth's finite resources are used to create the latest vehicle in the first place!!!!!!
I drive a 22 year old vehicle that I've owned for 19 years. I saved the planet more than a lot of other Australians!!
lets buy our way out of climate change!!!
it aint gonna be cheap….but we can do it if we all do our part!!!
No one banned horse and carriage, it just got replaced over time, same thing will happen with the fossil fuel engine. EV will just because the norm over time.
When petrol stations start closing and you need to drive 10km->20km->30km… just to fill up.
Cars will naturally die off.
Much like the IQ of the people buying them.
Ridiculous question. I forget where it was now, Canada or America probably… saw a story in the last couple of weeks, it now costs more to recharge an EV than filling up with petrol. In another recent story government told people (I think it may have been one of those shitholes like CA) to only recharge late at night because they feared the grid would crash. Yet another story I saw showed a car park with about 30 recharge stations where all but a couple were broken. Then another one where one person plugged in, went to work, next person pulls in, removes the charge cable from car #1 to put into hers. So person #1 will come out at the end of their work day and find they can't get home because their car isn't charged enough.
The population of just ONE American STATE of California is over 39Ā million. The population of our entire COUNTRY is just 26 million. But it gets worse. The landmass of just California = 423,970km2, and the landmass of all of Australia = 7,668,000 km2. So we have only two-thirds the population of ONE US STATE, in our ENTIRE COUNTRY, but with people spread out over an area 18 times larger.
So imagine how much worse-off we'll be transferring their problems, then the installation and maintenance costs here to Australia, which will of course require government grants to be "viable" (which they never will be) because they will require ever-more taxes to maintain, which requires more work by and less food/homes/things for us, then higher recharge costs as well (like us paying tolls for roads our taxes already built - which they keep charging even after it's repaid) to keep it all running (which as I showed above are already becoming more expensive than just using petroleum).
Next add on the skyrocketing roadside assistance costs having all EV cars will cause. Plus several times higher roadworthy inspections, insurance, and repairs because EVs require highly trained electrical engineers and technicians due to the possibility of deadly electric shock, with specialised proprietary diagnostic equipment - then inflate those costs due to our huge distances of vacant land between heavily-populated ones.
Forget the family holiday in a caravan for a start. An EV powerful enough to pull it will cost more than a house, 6 months wages to repair and get towed back to the rat race cities if it breaks, and either a bus/train to get your family home, or else a hotel while an electrical engineer brings $1000+ of parts on the Ghan and spends 3 days diagnosing the fault + you pay for his accommodation, food, overtime, and travel both ways…
And "Oh I'll just keep or rent a diesel 4x4 for that…" is a fantasy, because you forget that fuel either won't be available, or if it is, will cost 7x more PER TANK than it used to because it's now a rare commodity.
But that's what "they" all want. They state it openly in their books and brainwashing and manipulation of our grubberments. They want us all poor, owning nothing, renting everything from them, eating bugs while they dine on angus steak, we stay packed into heavily populated areas like rats/sheep so they can monitor and control us, fining us if we spend too much of OUR money, cutting fertilser quotas so farmers produce 40% less food making it nonviable to continue, so forcing them to sell their farms to the grubberment, introduce climate lockdown driving quotas which if you go over you're NOT PERMITTED TO DRIVE OUT OF YOUR SUBURB… Conspiracy? NOPE, REALITY! It's all being pushed or happening RIGHT NOW…
Right now they are laughing how their fertilser restrictions in Canada will force 3,000 farmers to sell their farms to the grubberment. Imagine government, who can't organise a profitable chook raffle or build a road (note: WITH OUR TAXES) without then charging us even more to use it… in charge of 3000 food-producing farms. Food is going to cost at least several times prices today. And THEY will decide what we're permitted to eat, because THEY decide what to grow.
In 2024 in Oxford England they're going to "trial" a climate lockdown plan (which means they plan to make it mandatory - probably across the entire country). They will FORCE all residents with cars to register their number plate in order to leave town past cameras, which "allow" them to travel outside their "permitted zone" by car only twice a week. If they leave town more than twice they will hit with heavy fines.
And anyone who thinks this isn't where we're heading here too, THEY are the ones drinking government coolaid. The same climate/bugs/carbon/cow farts/rising sea levels and all their other COMPLETE PSEUDOSCIENCE HORSESHIT is being indoctrinated throughout every "democratic" western nation via the scum in government and their lap dogs in the media. They tell us of this stuff, we warn others of it, then ignorant idiots mock, and then guess what - it HAPPENS… So we say, "See? It happened." and then the fools go, "Yeah but because you told me what they told you would do still means you're on the coolaid. Besides it didn't affect me all that much and the other things they say they're going to do will never happen." Sigh! You said that about the LAST thing.
So every little minor step in that direction they discount, excuse, and mock, UNTIL WE REACH IT - then it's just "normal" - but the NEXT thing we warn you of, which the same evil people implementing it TOLD US they were going to do, who said and did all the previous things we warned about, you discount that too.
How to stop it? STOP BUYING EVs for one. If manufacturers can't sell them… they stop making them.
…best comment ive read here for a very very long time. excellent stuff.
see also smart cities tech currently being rolled out in melb and bris
That's just.. like.. your opinion, man.
No, that's just… like… their PLAN, man.
e.g. https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-oxford-climate-lockdowā¦ - Note they "debunk" it by saying it's "not a climate lockdown plan" (because gullible people only read headlines)… but then they cite all the hallmarks of a climate lockdown plan, lol.
To ensure energy security this winter, Switzerland could become the first country to limit the driving and use of EVs, German daily Der Spiegel reports, citing multiple media reports on the Swiss four-stage action plan to avoid blackouts.
Driving EVs could be banned in Switzerland unless in cases of "absolutely necessary journeysā in stage three of the power conservation plans. The country also plans a stricter speed limit on highways in the recently proposed action plan, which has yet to be adopted.
….climate lockdowns / restrictions incoming
@franco cozzo: LOL. Well look at that…
When are people going to wake up. There's only a FEW of them and BILLIONS of us. If we just say "NO" they lose. Oh they may make it difficult for a while, drive petrol prices up like they're doing, put in cutoff dates by which we "must" buy an EV, drive food up and tell us to stop eating meat, etc… but if people find ways around it that PUNISH the BUSINESSES, if we ride a bike or get a bus instead of buying their EVs, raise chickens and rabbits instead of eating their disgusting printed meat and bugs… then manufacturers will be SCREAMING at government to change their foolish plans because they're revenue doesn't get replaced - it just stops.
Oh and what I said above was either Canadian or Netherland farms. I forget which but they're both as bad as each other. One country calling their farmers "polluters" and the other is throwing cash at them for their lost production from fertilser reduction. A one-off welfare payment doesn't change the fact there's 40% less food for people to eat. (Or 40% less people eating.)
@[Deactivated]: …dutch farmers. 30% of farms to be eliminated
….new zealand is applying punitive taxes on beef because….methane
…..eat ze bugs, own nothing, be happy
They took 22 years to ban leaded petrol after starting to phase it out. Let's assume the similar with unleaded petrol. So call it 2040ish.
Can we ban pokies first plz?
advertising second
Pokies and sports betting.
is a life without the sound of an internal combustion engine as you cruise through the country roads on a weekend really a life worth living?
thats if you have enough carbon credits to be allowed to go for that drive!!!
Sarcasm? Or serious?
Ban private jets.
I don't think they will need to be banned. EVs (BEV or FCEV or whatever) will just become more common.
The normal lifecycle of cars will occur and ICE replacements will not be ICE.
When you support go green. Do you really know who manipulated this, and whatās the real purpose behind this? And, do you know how is the electricity generated? Omg, left just go nuts these days.
Unless we go nuclear, no.
If electric cars are a better alternative a ban isn't required. People will phase them out organically over the average lifetime of a vehicle.
If solar is a better alternative no subsidies required. What do you say, it's too expensive now? Well…
It's good to think of the environment but let's not get to extreme. Let's not do a Liz Truss on this. Anything drastic will bring a huge meltdown of economy, social and environmental factors.
We should probably follow Europe's example so we can piggyback on their EV industry.
I'm driving a 22 year old car right now. So no, they shouldn't be banned but as many have suggested, ban the sale/production of them by at least 2030 imo.
FYI I was surprised at how bad batterys are for the Environment. A lithium electric vehicle battery weighs about 1000 pounds.
Such a battery typically contains about 25 pounds of lithium, 30 pounds of cobalt, 60 pounds of nickel, 110 pounds of graphite, 90 pounds of copper, about 400 pounds of steel, aluminium, and various plastic components.
From these figures and average ore grades, one can estimate the typical quantity of rock that must be extracted from the earth and processed to yield the pure minerals required to produce an electric vehicle battery.
Lithium brines typically contain less than 0.1 percent lithium, meaning some 25,000 pounds of brines to get the 25 pounds of pure lithium. Similarly cobalt ore grades average about 0.1 percent, nearly 30,000 pounds of ore per battery. Nickel ore grades average about 1 percent, thus about 6000 pounds of ore per battery. Graphite ore is typically 10 per cent, thus about 1,000 pounds per battery. Copper at about 0.6 percent in the ore, thus about 25,000 pounds of ore per battery.
In total then, acquiring just these five elements to produce the 1000-pound EV battery requires mining about 90,000 pounds (over 40 tonnes) of ore.
It only gets worse.
When accounting for all the earth moved (i.e. the materials first dug up to get to the ore), one battery requires digging and moving between 200,000 and 1,500,000 pounds (or between 90 and 680 tonnes) of earth per battery.
Note these figures donāt include the vast quantity of materials and chemicals used to process and refine all the various ores.
They donāt count other materials used when compared with a conventional car, such as replacing steel with aluminium to offset the weight penalty of the battery.
Also excluded is the non-battery, electrical systems used in an electric vehicle. These add substantially to the environmental footprint as they use 300 percent more overall copper compared to a conventional vehicle.
And there's no mention of the coal mined to produce the energy for charging an electric vehicle overnight.
On top of that, these batteries end up in landfill, harming the environment and leaching toxic leachates into the groundwater.
You could have just linked to the article you copied that from
https://www.manhattan-institute.org/mines-minerals-and-greenā¦
Which one possibly wouldn't consider a non biased source of information
That not where i got the info from. Looks like its in many articles.
I guess you dont believe the info then if you consider it biased. In reality all info is biased.
one time we had house and cart now we have cars that take fuel it will most like be over time remove them.
are you advocating for electric horse & carts? ….this seems counter productive?
There has to be a mix of ICE,EV & Hydrogen vehicles.
Obviously answered never because its just not possible to dump all the current vehicles by 2050 even considering we're still selling new cars for a number of years still. Its worse for the environment if we need to dump all the current cars and get new alternative fuel vehicles vs just ban sale of new fossil fuel cars and gradually transition as the available stock and market shifts.
Best we can do is ban sale of new fossil fuel vehicles maybe by 2030 at the earliest to let the electric market develop.
I don't think the use of ICE will be banned in the next 50 years. The economics will be the deciding point. If electric vehicles through market forces become affordable AND practical for the majority of road users, the market will do the work. In that scenario, manufactures would only provide new ICE to market in limited circumstances, because profit would dictate it and eventually historic ICE road users would be mostly enthusiasts.
Once the bottom end of the market are not forced to buy and maintain ICE vehicles due to affordability, basically people with money who "like" them will be filling up at limited suppliers for significant cost as a hobby, having to fund the supply arrangement via extensive per unit cost.
Banning the use does not work unless your funding the users into the solution, that's not a concept that would function in this country any time soon.
2023 and let the grid overload š„š·
Lets go back to horse and carriage.
Banning should not be necessary. Best possible solution is to let them be phased off naturally. For example, in future it may be cheaper to buy an EV over an ICE car. Easier to find a fast charger than a servo. It will just make more sense to drive an EV.
Banning electricity generation using fossil fuel may be a much better idea instead.
Wow! I knew there would be some resistance, but heck, I didnāt expect this level of selfishness.
In a way forums are a good thing because the anonymity allows the collective ugliness of society to be exposed.
And hence, I return to my topic post that got removed for ātrollingā - why do conservative voters have children (when they donāt give a shit about their future)?
We're all just a bunch of science deniers
And hence, I return to my topic post that got removed for ātrollingā - why do conservative voters have children (when they donāt give a shit about their future)?
Could have been an interesting topic. Should have just ask why anyone has children.
We're all just a bunch of science deniers
Bravo. A conservative that can admit it. Admission is the beginning of healing.
you arent the sharpest tool in the shed, eh bruv?
@franco cozzo: "You might have an education, but I have a degree from the University of Life. And, and, and, I have street smarts!!"
Science deniers are everywhere lol. Don't agree with the method on how to accomplish something; of course they're a science denier š
Lefties hate science when it contradicts with their ideology š
@ozhunter: Peer reviewed research disagrees with you.
(NB: Facebook & TikTok isn't a substitute for scientific peer review)
warning: virtue signalling OD!!!!
go live you your life and leave others to their own delusional internet SJW
Isnāt virtue signalling what conservatives do every Sunday morning?
i dunno…youd have to ask them?
@Boogerman: speaking of magical thinking….how many genders are there? can a man be a woman? can a man become pregnant?
@franco cozzo: Do you carry a copy of Genesis chapters 1 & 2 on you, as a reminder of how failed scientific peer review is…?
And do you read it to your children at the end of a long day goat herding?
@Boogerman: sure! would you like to subscribe to my youtube channel? i also have an onlyfans too if your that way inclined?
why do conservative voters have children
Other than the scare mongering about how itās the end of the world. Look at some facts:
Highest rate of crop growth
Longest life expectancy in his piety with the Highest population in history and still growing
Planet greener than ever before
Which part is bad again, other than āTheoriesā?
When did Facebook become a substitute for scientific peer review?
Which cloud do the magical thinkers believe the old grey bearded man lives on now?
So based on those facts we should be actively aiming to further increase the overall global temperature to further increase worldwide life expectancy and crop production?
Rather than slow and reduce global temperature rise we should be petitioning to raise it faster.
#facebookscience
Based on those facts and historical data; what we as humans do on this planet seems to be of very little to no relevance on climate
I cringe at this OPs delusion. Take comfort in knowing you're not the only one that's been mindfckd by a deceitful agenda hellbent on reorganising society for their own maniacal means.
Well said!
I'm surprised 146 people here responded with anything other than Never.
Has anyone else seen the āfieldsā of solar panel appearing in SE QLD and no doubt elsewhere? Driving near Toowoomba last year,in our dirty diesel (with its DPF further reducing efficiency) and caravan in tow, cresting a hill and seeing fields of black glass, solar panels in every direction, stretching toward the horizon! Shock, horror.
These are massive installations and works still in progress, still expanding in size.
Not a blade of grass or tree to be seen for kilometres in every direction. Lost food production. Animal habitat gone. I imagine the reflected heat from the black glass panels would do little to reduce atmospheric warming. And fossil fuel production requirements involved involved in the production process must be immense.
If this is what going green entails, then we are in a lot of trouble.
We have massive amounts of land, and large portions of that aren't suitable for food production… Using them for solar farms seem more beneficial than a hill just covered in grass.
Or do you find open cut coal mines more visually appealing?
Indeed. I don't know if DJM noticed, but most of Australia is unsuitable for agriculture. If more than 0.001% of Australia's landmass is currently dedicated to solar farms, I'll eat my mouse.
That may be true but this is, or rather was, agricultural land. It seems you guys are simply content to swap one obscenity (open cut) for another (fields of glass).
@DJM: If the value of the agricultural land for producing food exceeds its value in producing renewable power, I'm sure the decision will be made to remove the panels when their useful lifespan has expired.
Try rehabilitating an open cut mine back into agricultural land. A little more difficult and costly.
So why Simpson desert still not covered by solar panels then? The answer is simple - where there's no people or industry there's no need for electricity generated by those panels.
All of this could have been avoided too. We have the cleanest and most stable resource for power generation already that will last near on forever, yet they won't entertain its use.. We just export it intead… Everybody should be asking WHY IS THIS SO???? Instead, we destroy most valuable land and uglify the surrounding landscape. It just sickens me.
https://www.solartrustcentre.com/blog/many-solar-panels-needā¦
Just look at that image. So much agricultural land wasted.
Apart from soil retention most grasses are invasive species. IE pests. Do you grow food in your yard? or do you spend day after day growing grass?
Simple and obvious answer: Never.
Once electric vehicles become cheap enough, and people discover the joys of refueling your car at home using energy that falls on the roof, there will be mass adoption. No need for a ban.
I think climate change is real and I really want to own an EV ASAP, but the technology just isn't there at the moment. Too expensive, range on the cheaper vehicles is 230km (real world), and the problem of battery degradation still remains. Today's $60k EV will be worth a small fraction of that in 8 years time.
You're forgetting one very simple thing though. Current housing trends are shifted towards urbanization and high rise chicken coop-style living and you don't have energy that falls off the roof unless you live in a penthouse there.
So answer Never is correct, just not for the reasons you think.
I spoke to one of the people who designs roads in Brisbane city. He was very clear that they have 0 means to fix traffic congestion. Make bigger roads? more people buy cars. The only way to reduce cars is with busses and trains. With increased urbanisation I dont think people will have cars. I think more and more busses is the only way forward. And ofc being nicer to bus drivers! Can we get a woot woot for the bus drivers!!
I'll consider it when the elite have private jets banned as well and China and other countries adhere to the same rules we are expected to. Until then, no.
….and what about the military industrial complex?
seems like the war machine never gets a mention when it comes to 'climate change'
That's a pretty good point. I admit I hadn't considered that either and you're right there's a massive use of resources in play there of course. My beef is they expect the little people to give up things in life but those that push this narrative very very rarely do themselves and are just hypocritical mouthpieces pushing a narrative.
Steam engines were never banned but replaced over time. The same will occur ONCE! electric and battery system reach sufficient development such as charging, distance and price. Doing so before hand will penalise the lower and middle income which is typical of the selfish.
Same as banning a renewable native forestry industry in Australia in favour of clear felling rainforests overseas.
Currently we import 6 billion dollars of raw timber and that is increasing every year and that doesnt included all the processed timber felled as well.
But thats typical of the naive left who get a fuzzy feeling thinking their saving the world but there actions have other serious ramifications and damage the environment not just from clear felling but from the cost of bringing the goods all the way here from overseas.
It's only a matter of time before electric cars are cheaper than ICE cars not only to run, but also to purchase. Right now you'd need to spend $20-40k more upfront to get an electric car, and then it's cheaper to run. This puts a lot of people off. When it gets to being the same price, or only $5k more, and cheaper to run, then the dominoes will start falling and electric cars will take over.
Once the economies of scale flip to electric cars, running an ICE car will become even more expensive. Less ICE mechanics = more expensive to service. Less petrol stations. Less parts availability. Eventually ICE cars will be slow clunky luxury items compared to electric cars.
So right now the gov should be focusing on tax breaks for electric cars or taxes on ICE cars to bring the prices to parity to get the economy switching faster.
NZ has had larger tax breaks for electric cars for years and you can really notice it in terms of charging infrastructure vs Australia. We're really quite behind in that aspect and it's all because of the gov not pushing it harder.
The LNP is big into donations from fossil fuel and car dealerships, zero incentive.
Plus, scomos specific brand of pentecostalism believe that enriching themselves through planetary destruction is a) Proof of gods blessing (prosperity gospel) b) part of gods plan to bring about judgement (the apocalypse).
This sounds silly and conspiratorial, but this is literally the talk I've heard from people involved in scotts brand of pentecostalism. Modern religious conservatism is a planetary death cult.
Damn that explains a lot and is bat shit crazy.
They're only cheaper to run if you charge them from your own solar. If you have to charge them from the grid and pay for it while living in apartment it's not that much cheaper.
I guess that depends on where fuel is at too. I'm currently getting reemed about $160/week with diesel at $2.29/L, VS $100ish when it was $1.50/L last year. If fuel stays high and power normalises back down then it'd be cheaper.
If they do a government buy back scheme of the same amount of how much I paid for my new ute (Diesel) and I can get the same specifications on an EV, that I currently have, and that they guarantee/ensure I have enough charging stations for the places I go, in the next day, or two, I'd jump at it, I'd be the first to sign up, till then, there is no further discussion to be had……. Unfortunately
Never. Let them go the way of the steam train - a novelty enjoyed by a select few when the fuel and maintenance infrastructure has virtually disappeared.
Every one of your replies on this forum is you just trying to desperately sound clever. Give it a rest mate, no one cares.