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?
As soon as I can buy a used EV for less than $4000, get 10 years out of it with no major repairs, fully recharge at every current gas station in the country in less than 5 minutes you can ban them.
so….around 2080 ya reckon? lol
Don't forget, need to be able to refill on the road with an electric-jerry-can in 2 minutes, both for extended range and for rescue.
And not have range degrade as the batteries wear.
Best way to be environmentally friendly is to extend the use of things as long as possible.
EV's produce F**KTONS of toxic unenvironmentally friendly byproducts. Go see how a battery is made and how much toxic byproducts is produced. Lithium mining and refining is very damaging to the environment. That's not even talking about the toxicity in mining rare earth minerals.
Again best way to reduce your carbon footprint and to be more environmentally friendly is to NOT consume. By buying a new EV and dumping your ICE before it's end of life is silly.
However when my current ICE dies, I'll buy an EV.
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?
Do you accept offsets and CCS?
All you leafy green soy brains with more money and arrogance. Never thinking about the battler. Wish I could afford an electric car.
FIrst of all, just because an EV car doesnt have smoke coming out the back doesnt mean it doesnt consume OIL during its lifetime.
All cars, are made of metal, plastics and other materials, which all require enormous amounts of fossil fuels. Its a known fact that over half the FOSSIL FUEL cost for environment is not the driving, its the manufacturing.
Those mines all run on OIL, the factories that make batteries for EV cars also run on various fossil fuels. So technically both are terrible for the environment, as both require enromous amounts of FF. All resources that come from a mine share this cost. When OIL goes up, the price of gold goes up and mines cut down on mining, a large component of the cost of any metal or other resource is directly related to the OIL cost used to make it happen.
Secondly EV batteries are not recycled, thats a fact.
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56574779
"Currently, globally, it's very hard to get detailed figures for what percentage of lithium-ion batteries are recycled, but the value everyone quotes is about 5%," says Dr Anderson. "In some parts of the world it's considerably less."
The truth is recycling batteries is a very costly, and battery technology is also changing quite regularly which also means the batteries of today will have components that are mostly useless when they reach the age of retirement. We all know for example how battery technologies for electronics have charged, we have all seen NiMH, then LIPO, LIFE and countless others.
The real question is what will happen to all these TOXIC batteries. Batteries in all forms are TOXIC, go read the components in each of them and please dont give me a silly answer that its all Lithum because they arent. What will happen when there are millions upon millions of tonnes of batteries from all sorts of EV vehicles.
The real answer is not to replace ICE cars with EV cars, the real answer is to cut down on CARs in all forms. People working from home is a start, there are many other examples.
As a mechanic my job would be obsolete without internal combustion cars
A good way to care for the environment is to have less children. Less population = less pollution.
not according to economics, negative birth rate is bad, capitalism yo
Why would you take advice from economists ?
Are they your mum or dad or friends ?
Do they really have tyour best interests at heart ?
Do economists recommend free healthcare or more holidays or clean air ?
No they are not your friend, they dont give a shite about you or anybody else.
They are cold greedy heartless barstards who couldnt care if you die, and they certainly are not known for telling teh truth.
perhaps you would care to move to a 3rd world country and enjoy their care free economies and carefree no healthcare
@monkeyfood: I suppose you enjoy the economics that have made house prices jump by a factor of 10x over the past 20x.
Thats mostly thanks to policies and actions from people listening to economists and those types.
Most of your human rights, like free healthcare, holiday pay, and more did not come economists.
You really have no concept of what economists have given you and taken.
They always want to drive down your pay, take away your workers rights, just ask the employees of Twitter…
Don't know if you're sarcastic or serious.
its a no-brainer. the top 2 countries in the world have 3 billion between em…
What's the issue though?
@franco cozzo: shouldn't population density rather than total population be the criteria?
Total population compared to land mass you're spreading that population over is a more representative criteria if you're considering impact globally.
I assume you're pretty outraged at Singapore for example?
@SBOB: to me it feels like the total population growth worldwide over the last century and in particular the last half century just cant be sustained…simple as that really.
the graphs are pretty telling:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1006502/global-populatio…
as for singapore….cant say ive thought about it too much. bit too busy & high density for my taste…could never imagine living in that type of city
the graphs are pretty telling:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1006502/global-populatio…
agreed, but if i showed similar graphs for things like
CO2 emissions (that rise with population rise)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/264699/worldwide-co2-emi…
ocean temps (that rise with CO2 emissions rising)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/736147/ocean-temperature…
or a cute little cartoon drawing to illustrate similar hockey swing upticks in temperatures
https://xkcd.com/1732/
would your views on "just cant be sustained" be similarly reflective….
@SBOB: https://eos.org/science-updates/new-perspectives-on-the-enig…
I like the part where scientists are confused/can’t use the facts to suit the usual narrative
shouldn't population density rather than total population be the criteria?
No, why should it? Not like it matters where the greenhouse gas emissions comes from. If Australia's makes up 1.2% of emissions, then anything we do can only reduce the global emissions by up to 1.2%. At the rate the global population is increasing, any personal change someone makes seems negligible.
At the rate the global population is increasing, any personal change someone makes seems negligible
I'm glad you agree that more pressure should be put on industries and government to make true meaningful impact into emissions reductions :)
@SBOB: Lol, I never said that.
If I did believe in the climate change sham/hoax, I'd probably just do the rich people tactic where you convince others to lower their emissions and continue to go on your merry way.
@ozhunter: Exactly.
With taht logic then why not just do a shit on the couch next time you visit your friends house.
I mean you are only one person it hardly makes a difference.
I mean you are only one person it hardly makes a difference.
You talking from experience?
@ozhunter: You are the one who said the original quote…
Im simply trying to show that your statement is foolhardy on so many levels. Sad thing is you dont see that you are the loser by continuing the car everything lifestyle.
Australian citizens already have a negative growth rate/fertility below ~2.
We're still growing enormously year on year due to massive immigration.
The countries people are immigrating from are pumping out kids.
We go and bomb and destabilize those countries, making them bigger shitholes and then brain draining them to our country.
Population decrease is not something any of our leaders want in the short/mid term.
Have you seen how many Teslas are on the road? A ban isn't necessary. EVs are taking over anyway. Just let it happen.
Banning is a silly concept and will never achieve mass success.
If you want fossil fuel vehicles reduced substantially, you need to have the government make charging infrastructure affordable, ubiquitous and reliable. You also need to make electric vehicles cheap and affordable with a wide range of reliable options. The cheapest car needs to be electric, the $20-40k range needs to be electric packed with a range from small compacts to SUVs.
Until that happens, fossil fuel vehicles will never be replaced.
Look at this graph of our power generation over the last week: https://opennem.org.au/energy/au/?range=7d&interval=30m
If we want to phase out coal, then we should be planning and building at least 10GW of nuclear generation right now.
Even with that we will still be burning a lot of coal during the night.
Global warming is hogshit.
Where will climate concerns rank when nuclear missile buttons start getting pushed?
The science of global warming - any facts?
The input of new users on a bargain forum where their first post is on topics such as this….is always interesting.
why do you need to look up people profiles before commenting…? its so cheap. do better spongeypants
you don't need to lookup profiles to see a new user.
Perhaps those that return with new accounts need to be less ashamed or secretive of their past profiles.
Or are you in favour of users having multiple profiles and shadow posting?
@SBOB: so hilarious…take your foruming prettty darn seriously eh spongeypants?
getting all columbo on their ass!
I'm against banning of the ICE.
Let the market decide… If Australians really are so concerned about using fossil fuel, the market will adjust by itself and phase out the ICE. No need to go dictating to other people what they have to buy.
And also, with a ban you'll be driving up fuel costs for the cars currently on the road, forcing a massive segment of the population to buy a new car when they otherwise wouldn't. That's counter-intuitive and worse for the environment.
….good comment. much the same….dont see the point of scrapping a perfectly good vehicle just to buy another. that certainly wont be doing the environment any favours!
Years ago i read a review looking at the total environmental impact of new vs old cars, and they concluded (to paraphrase) that basically it's still better to keep driving the 25 year old V6 clunker around with terrible fuel economy, then to buy a new fuel efficient hybrid. People that buy a new car every 10 years using environmentalism as an excuse are deluding themselves.
You are so right, we should let the market decide. Just think of the dictatorship that requires people to drive on the left and stop at traffic lights.
Let the market decide.
What about the freedom to drink ?
Let the market decide if you want to drink and drive, thats your god given right.
I think your analogy broke.
And because ?
the good old global warming scam
…funny how they never postpone wars for climate change, eh?
https://www.weatherzone.com.au/vic/melbourne/melbourne
Global warming doesn't apply to us here in Melbourne so why should we change to EV's?
whats …'warming'?
Dunno, but its the complete blutty opposite what's actually happening.
ICE won't be banned off roads, the gov wouldn't be able to afford a buy-back scheme for that to happen.
manufacturers will just phase out daily commuter ICE and transition to alternative fuel options. ICE will have less options and more expensive, they'll become a collector's car as a vintage/antique/sports car.
there will be an extremely painful transition period. commuters will drive ICE until it becomes uneconomical to do so from extra carbon taxes, high petrol prices, expensive maintenance, etc.
as for EV, i don't believe they are the future. hydrogen fuel cell engines like the Toyota Mirai is interesting
There are enough nutjobs and corruption that it wouldn't surprise me if lawmakers do eventually ban fossil fuel vehicles. Green for green.
If that happens, be prepared for all consumer goods to double or triple in price due to the massive increase in transport costs, then stuff like food to double again. You think electric farm vehicles are a good idea? hahaha
Then a big volcano eruption will occur causing that awful co2 to spew out, and maybe to offset that we should ban husbandry, or maybe just human children. Anything to save the planet, right!? Or we'll just tax birth more heavily.
….why isnt anyone concerned about the effects of war and the military industrial complex on climate change?
i thought we were supposed to be at a critical point in our planets history….?
our leaders seem to be leading us into a global conflict and not a peep from the politicians environmentalists or media in relation to this?
meanwhile were supposed to ditch our petrol cars and gas heating…..wtaf???
Hybrid electric cars are the way of curved 3d tvs
Pass that by me again, this time in English.
Lol what. How?
Best of both worlds. Plug in Hybrids availability would be better.
Isn't it worst of both worlds?
When you are running on batteries you are lugging around an ICE.
When running on petrol you are lugging around batteries.
Its amazing how many people dont realise the real priblem is people think and require cars for any little thing in their life.
THey also dont realise they are being robbed of the most precious thing they have - their time. Commuting and travelling cost most people 2 to 4 hours a day, thats lost time.
Over a week thats equivalent to a day, over a year thats 2 months of completely lost time. Over a lifetime thats well years.
The smart thing is to look at alternatives, like remote working and so on, and please dont tell me plumbers cant do remote work, becaus ei never claimed they could. Just saying there are many who can and there are many solutions for many of societies problems that dont require travelling like a prisoner.
I accept the sciences, but I also recognise that our country(/world) is not at a point where renewable energy is affordable for the median economic working class.
Until robust renewable energy sources are available, and heavily subsidised at that, we will be reliant on fossil fuels.
Electric cars are significantly more expensive and the batteries don't last forever, the battery's are a substantial portion of the vehicles cost/value right now.
In the late 1800s, we had functioning electrical cars and public transport. In an engineering sense, the technology hasn't fundamentally changed since then as we've only seen incremental efficiency increases.
Know why that stopped?
Because petrol was far superior in every way. Energy dense, cost efficient and TRANSPORTABLE
Our industrial society depends on it, if not for primary production and transportation alone
I cannot foresee any government being able to update infrastructure enough to move enough electricity required to run the whole society, and I definitely can't see them generating enough electricity without coal, nuclear and gas. Did you know each street only has the infrastructure to charge 2x Tesla's at once, generally speaking?
We can't even get good internet around the place
Why ban them when carbon neutral synthetic fuels might extend the life of perfectly good cars today. Seems reckless to the environment to just dump a bunch of fossil fuel powered cars that are still being manufactured for expensive new electric cars.
They don’t really need to be banned - they will just become insanely expensive to run and service the old dinosaur.
The grid, infrastructure and EV market won't even be close to ready by that time. The mineral supply and availability is grossly insufficient to supply enough batteries to achieve it and anyone that can do basic arithmetic can see that. Only one major country going fully battery powered will exhaust global supplies of heavy metals and minerals needed.
I frequently use an ebike and it's a fantastic way to get around. If the govt were serious about reducing carbon footprint they are a much easier device to create at scale that could replace a lot of car traffic. But Australia's laws, particularly NSW are very prohibitive, restricting both power output capability and practicality
Its even simpler than that the problem is most people are blind.
Firstly requiring the masses to travel 2 - 4 hours a day to work is stupid.
Many can and should work from home. For starters less cars and trains and metros means less money wasted on roads, tunnels and metros, those billions of dollars and all that infrastructure also costs pollution. Setting Concrete contributes 10% of all the worlds carbon releases.
Companies should be penalised for making employees travel big distances its plain stupid. The companies of course dont care that you or me wasted 20 hours a week, they arent paying for it. Banks for example dont care, they send people all over sydney for example when they could just as easily make them work in branches far closer to their home.
Companies like Uber and other gig jobs shoul dbe banned, they are dehumanising and are creating an underclass of under paid people who tomorrow will be sad, hungry and broken. Secondly all that bad food creates more burden on medicare and enormous amounts of rubbish.
Ban plastic. All that one time use rubbish costs OIL to make, and OIL to transport to waste and so on.
Kids should goto their local school down the road. Please dont give me they are going to a better school, because that also means for that one kid to win that means another loses. Invest in teachers going or living near their students it makes for a better, fairer education for everywhere, and it also means kids get more time to be kids.
Perhaps do some research on the amount of mining required to produce your “green” EV. Not to mention the diesel burned to ship your car from China or Europe.
It’s moral posturing at its best.
There’s not a lot of greenness about EVs once you add in how the EV is actually made and what it’s made of.
I voted never.
EV leave a bigger footprint then a new economical V8 that is designed to run on 4cyls under no load
This is not true
It is. They only catch up after around ~30,000km (from memory, somewhere in that region) travelled, but rolling off the factory floor EVs start with a much bigger CO2 footprint than ICE vehicles due to manufacturing
@MindGrenadius: Then when you need a new battery it is all reset again, mining enough lithium and other rare earth minerals not to mention the footprint of transport + manufacturing is equal to driving a V8 for 200k kms
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?
Lol as if you have to ask, obviously it's no
Modern ice vehicles are pretty advanced technology and with the use of catalytic converters the airborne pollution form the exhausts is neglible. You should be more worried about the effects of your local charcoal chicken or a neighbour doing a bbq if you are into these petty things
What a stupid bloody take. Go and read about the composition of car exhausts. Even if they were 1/100th as polluting as a charcoal chicken (they are not), you don't have 100 charcoal chickens going past you every few minutes
100 charcoal chickens going past you every few minutes
Hmm, the stuff of dreams.
They can ban them ONLY when Mr. Fusion conversion units are readilly available, to all, at an afordable price.
They are already 7 years late.
you still need to generate the 1.21 gigawatts somehow tho
Oops don't move to Sweden.
when EV cars became affordable like petrol cars (from $20kish) then petrol cars can be banned
All fossil fuel cars need to be banned immediately.
The government should provide at least a 50% rebate for everyone to buy an EV, up to $50,000.
There is no reason to stick with expensive polluting fuels that keeps costing over $2 a litre.
Surely people aren’t foolish enough to pump more money into the coffers of multinational oil conglomerates and their rich executives?
Interesting read, still a bit of a cheat for the guy using the EV, being able to use the other car in Hay to get to his hotel and have dinner while his car charged and then presumably be taken back to it.
Hard to balance the extra wait times to fatigue and risk of accidents as not everyone's the same, some are tired just driving to work, others can drive all day.
It would have been interesting if he was waiting for other chargers along his route (the future expectation that EVs are everywhere).
The Rich Rebuilds video recently (https://youtu.be/eosf7CeSGyA) was interesting, specifically about the EV divide or areas that EVs aren't a thing and chargers are few and far between. Its not like he's anti-EV either, but yes there is always an angle for entertainment but he did make a few good points.