Germany Will Block Europe's Gas and Diesel Ban Unless Synthetic Fuel Is Allowed

Burned: Germany will block Europe's gas and diesel ban unless synthetic fuel is allowed

Carbon-neutral fuel doesn't contribute new greenhouse gases.

Carbon neutral liquid fuels may put a spanner in the works to those who want us all to bow down to solar powered cars, to the exclusion of everything else.

The European Union has proposed rules that will effectively end the sale of new gas and diesel-powered cars in 2035, but Germany wants to keep internal combustion alive in the electric age.

The country's transport minister, Voker Wissing, said it won't back the proposal unless engines burning carbon-neutral synthetic fuels, known as e-fuels, are allowed.

"The EU Commission should propose regulation that allows combustion engines to be registered after 2035, if they can verifiably only be fueled with synthetic fuels," he told reporters in Berlin.

Synthetic fuels are being developed that are created using water and carbon captured from the atmosphere, so they don't contribute any additional greenhouse gases when burned.

German automaker Porsche is set to use an e-fuel in the Porsche Mobil 1 Supercup racing series this year.

It's produced by Highly Innovative Fuels in Punta Arenas, Chile, in a pilot factory powered by wind turbines that the automaker has invested in and has been demonstrated in a production 911 that was able to use it without any modifications to its engine.

It costs $45 per gallon to make today, but the price is expected to drop to $8 by 2026 and continue to be reduced from there. Conventional gasoline currently sells for around $7 per gallon in Germany.

Comments

  • +2

    I agree but only because you used the word Porsche

    • -3

      R U Okay ?

  • +1

    It's porsche A

    • +1

      That's like saying you are Ledfhut sixx

      • -4

        you obviously need help if you can’t even understand the topic. It’s okay go talk to your doctor.

        • You are talking him too seriously, he’s just trolling..

  • +8

    Stopped reading when I put together the L plate trolling, the Culture Wars angle and the link to Fox News. Also, the mod intervention to make the whole thing appear less hysterical.

  • +1

    Who needs the sun when you can just suck carbon out of the air and burn it?

  • +5

    Here's the truth about synthetic fuels: they're always coming, they're always just around the corner, and they always cost more than established fuels. But trust us, real soon now we'll solve the problem. Honest. Just give us more money.

    I've been following bio and synthetic fuel trials for over 15 years, and the promises keep piling up with nothing to show for it. The feedstock is always far more expensive than just using fossil fuels. Far cheaper and easier to just dig fuel out of the ground. We're not talking about recycling old chip shop oil to run a few diesel cars. Anyone can do that. We want real results on how to power millions of vehicles.

    "It costs $45 per gallon to make today, but the price is expected to drop to $8 by 2026 and continue to be reduced from there."

    Fine. Show me synthetic fuels pulled from the atmosphere at $8 per gallon and we can talk. Up until that point, the promises are all hot air without any substance.

  • Furthermore, Germany seems to be the spiritual home of synthetic fuels.

    Despite having very limited access to traditional liquid fuels before and during World War 2 German scientists, via the Fischer–Tropsch process, was able to provide the Luftwaffe with a significant proportion of the higher octane fuels needed to keep operational, despite being largely cut off from significant amounts of natural crude oil feedstocks.

    The Allies belatedly worked out that by consistently bombing the synthetic refineries, they could starve the Luftwaffe of this fuel.

    It should be no surprise that the latest synthetic liquid fuel advances would come from Germany.

    • Hanging out for an AMG that runs on Fanta and Pervitin.

  • +2

    Fox News? Really?

    • +2

      9 posts above, I linked to a Google search result to where the same article as I posted at #1 was also posted elsewhere:

      https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=Germany+Will+Bl…

      Like, the Wall Street Journal f'rinstance:

      https://www.wsj.com/articles/germany-italy-signal-they-could…

      You really need to sharpen up.

      • +5

        You need to look outside the bubble of fox propaganda.

        Yes, synthetic fuels will have their place. No, they wont become mainstream because they are wasteful in an energy sense. An EV is over 80% energy efficient at its worst. An ICE is under 30% efficient at its best.

        • -2

          He is definitely been ‘indoctrinated’ by Fox! Cannot believe how gullible some can be.

      • +3

        You're a bit of an angry (profanity) aren't you? Should expect as much from someone who puts their car as their display pic and posts links to Fox news.

        • Is that you Harold Scruby?

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedestrian_Council_of_Australi…

          Not that I need to get your approval or guidance, but what sort of avatar would you suggest, considering that you don't have one at all?

          And again, I did provide a means to access other news sources covering the same news item.

          • +3

            @Leadfoot6: What an odd quip to make because I made a comment about your DP, lol.

            I did provide a means to access other news sources

            yeah but only after you were called out for putting forward Fox as your first choice, which anchors your position and what everyone is thinking of you. Your responses to people in this thread just further cements the view of what type of person you are.

        • Mitsubishi Magna, she's a beautiful thing.

  • And Germany will scream it from the centre of Poland !!!

  • +2

    Nobody cares if carbon neutral energy is in electric or liquid form, literally nobody.
    Sorry, some huckster trying to sell liquids will care.
    There are good reasons combustion is desirable for high energy applications like air travel and I suppose rally car races or other remote travel.
    Fine.
    The issue is decarbonising the vast bulk of energy use, and then offsetting the last bit.
    It isn’t hard to understand unless you want to fabricate confusion.

    • -5

      The sky is not falling.

      Get over it.

      • +4

        Says the guy scared that they may have to drive an electric car…

        • +1

          If someone wants to FORCE me to own/drive one then certainly I will object.

          I believe in choice.

          • +2

            @Leadfoot6: Oh noes!! The sky is falling!!! THE SKY IS FALLING!!!

            It's ok to be scared of change and things you dont understand… Petrol and petrol powered vehicles are still going to be around for a very long time.

            • +1

              @pegaxs: Why would I not understand?

              I sold cars for 15 years.

              I raced them…..I learned to fix them.

              I am one of 2 worldwide moderators on an automotive forum.

              I would perceive I am older than you and have been a car enthusiast since I obtained my licence in 1978.

              Being forced into something when there is no need is the issue, not because I am of limited understanding.

              • +4

                @Leadfoot6:

                I am one of 2 worldwide moderators on an automotive forum.

                Please tell me this is a Magna forum

                • @brendanm: No.

                  The Magna forum, that I was not a moderator of, closed down in 2021.

                  • @Leadfoot6: What forum is it?

                    • @brendanm: Why would you like to know?

                      • @Leadfoot6: Curiosity. Wondering why you had an avatar of a Magna.

                        • @brendanm: Because I have owned it for 8 years this month.

                          • +1

                            @Leadfoot6: Why would you have a Magna if you're loaded from selling used cars in the 80s, and have had a heap of cool cars and raced a bunch of stuff? Just trying to wrap my mind around it.

                            • @brendanm: I didn't start selling cars 'till September 1996 at Thomson Ford Parramatta.

                              In the 1980's I was working as an accountant, which is what I obtained my degree in.

                              But accounting is not much fun.

                              Cars are.

                              Is there any other details that you need?

                              • @Leadfoot6: Yeah, why do you have a Magna?

                                • +1

                                  @brendanm:

                                  1. Australian made with very good spares availability even at 19 years old this year.

                                  2. All Wheel Drive - the driveline is largely inherited from the EVO range - bulletproof.

                                  3. 6 Cyl. 4 door 5 speed automatic with a 3.8l(replacing the original 3.5) engine transplant from the "380".

                                  4. All the comforts with superb reliability(only once was the car unexpectedly sidelined when the 3 year old replacement alternator failed this time last year).

                • +4

                  @brendanm: It's a forum of him and one other guy who is also a mod.

                  • @Protractor: Your protractor is calibrated incorrectly.

                    I am merely a member of that forum, as I have the 380 engine transplanted into my car.

              • @Leadfoot6: Only "Sold" them??… I've serviced and repaired them for the last 30+ years, and that includes racing them and pit crewing for some very large sprint car and speedway teams.

                LOL @ moderator… Ok. You know anyone can be a moderator right? And moderating is about controlling spam, trolls and idiots right, not about knowledge. You think Hamza or Alvian know more about the inner workings of cars than I do?

                Sooo… you got your license from 3~5 questions asked by a copper at the station as he watched you do a quick lap up and down the street. (and you only beat me by about 12 years on that one.) But I didn't need to wait to get my license to be a car enthusiast. Automotive has always run deep in my family. I've got photos of me sitting on my dad's race bike at Oran and Amaroo parks from the early 70's. I have always been around cars and motorcycles and racing. Some of my earliest memories (the ones I still have) are of me, with my family, up on the hill at Bathurst watching the Castrol 6 hour motorcycle races, or helping my dad in the pits at Oran park or at the speedway working on his TQ.

                And no one is forcing you to do anything (The sky is falling!!!) Fossil fuel powered vehicles will be around long after you have passed onto another realm. I bet your grandfather said the same thing when cars were new and they were telling him that they were going to replace his horse and buggy… "I'm a horse enthusiast, no one is going to force me to drive no car!" or "I'll buy a car when I can feed it hay and water… to hell with this petrol stuff!!"

                • @pegaxs: So, your emphasis was servicing.

                  Mine was selling them, which is a much more lucrative profession than fixing them, especially with used car commission rates being what they once were.

                  When this dropped significantly in the 2000's due to the internet/computers for price comparison, I gradually gave it away.

                  Yes, I agree it is easy to get a drivers licence.

                  It was much harder, and vastly more expensive, to get my pilots licence(1989).

                  P.S. Which automotive forum are you a moderator of?

                  Which CAMS afilliated car club were you the initiator of?

                  Mine was the Macquarie University Auto Club in the mid 1980's after being an active member of the Holden Sporting Car Club and the Volvo Sporting Car Club in the early 1980's.

                  I purchased from the president of the HSCC and future President of CAMS his LJ GTR-XU1 mit turbo charger, one of the earlier(aftermarket) turbocharged cars in use at the time.

                  This time included regular competition in club level events.

                  I've done my fair share of repairing.

                  I tried to upload an image of me at Oran Park South from 1981 in my white LJ Torana, but was unable to do so.

                  EDIT: I have now changed my avatar image to show my first LJ Torana.

                  P.S. Did I mention that I competed in the NASTRAK(Nascar) Star Search driver competition in 1990 at Calder Park Thunderdome, ranking 49th out of 500?

                  My motorsport involvement decreased as my aviation involvement increased.

                  • +2

                    @Leadfoot6: ok but I've clocked about 5 hours in GT7

                    • @ThithLord: Do you have any actual track time?

                      Name your best F.T.D. at what ever track(s) you competed at.

                    • @ThithLord: I've got about 100 in Forza, but 5 or so years ago. Yours is more recent, but I have more hours, so I'm not sure which of us is cooler?

                      • @brendanm:

                        so I'm not sure which of us is cooler?

                        Mine 'cos I'v ebeen playing GT7 on PS VR2 and it's absolutely a blast

                  • @Leadfoot6:

                    So, your emphasis was servicing.

                    No, servicing is only one aspect of what I do. And I did sales for a while as well… Didn't pay as much and there was this nagging feeling I got at night time trying to sleep after spending a whole day ripping people out of their hard earned that I just couldn't stomach for too long. (ie: I grew a conscience.)

                    Yes, I agree it is easy to get a drivers licence.

                    Especially back in 1978… And who would have guessed a pilots license was harder to get…

                    Which automotive forum are you a moderator of?

                    Again, pointless. When was the last time that anyone here said "Leadfoot6 will be along soon to help…" I literally had to turn off my private messaging because of the amount of questions I was getting about people's cars and their traffic fines.

                    As I said, moderators are moderators. They can teach monkeys to moderate (no offence, mods). Hell, they can teach AI to moderate. Moderator =/= knowledge. It just means you usually know the guy who is in charge and you greased him up enough to get a job helping them remove bad comments, NOT because you know about cars. It's like saying the accounts lady at work is an expert on cars because she sees invoices for spare parts all day and fixes the mechanic's time sheets…

                    Which… blah blah blah irrelevant attempt at big noting/humble bragging.

                    Irrelevant. This, mixed with the right-wing news source just sounds like typical boomer spiel.

                    You dont need to be an "automotive expert" to start a car club. Added to that, the rest of what you said just sounds like shit you made up and think no one will verify. They wont, because they dont give a shit, because it's pointless waffle and off topic attempt to appear more of an "automotive enthusiast" but just comes off as a boomer who had lots of spare cash laying around… (when houses were $19,000 and a brand new family Falcon was $1,890…)

                    Anyone can start a car club and apply for CAMS affiliation. The same with pilots licenses, anyone can apply for one and attend the classes and do the lessons (if the have the money, that is). It's like me quoting my CASA drone license. It's pointless and has nothing to do with your irrational fear of EV's and the whole "sky is falling" comment you accused someone else of making when it is you who is fearing the sky is falling… (They can take mae car! But they kae never take muh PETROL!!!!"

                    My motorsport involvement decreased as my aviation involvement increased.

                    My automotive involvement has never decreased since about the age I could walk…

                    Anyway, your whole rant sounds like a "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy.

                    "You're not really an automotive aficionado unless you're the moderator of at least 2 automotive forums, started at least 3 car clubs, bought an old race car off a guy named 'Trevor', have your pilots license and sold cars for a living. I'm the only true aficionado"

                    I own a Fiat 500 and an old Ducati… does that at least give me some points?

                    Name your best F.T.D. at what ever track(s) you competed at.

                    Why? So you can make up some "one up, I'm better than you" fictional story about how you lapped around there faster in your old HQ Holden that you made in your back shed out of old beer cans and a stick welder with a bloke named "Brocky"??

                    • @pegaxs: Jealousy.

                      Why would I need to make things up?

                    • +1

                      @pegaxs: I never drove a HQ Kingswood on the track.

                      But I did pit crew for one.

                      My friend died acting as a flag marshal.

                      He built the roll cage for my Datsun 240K that I used to undertake my observed practice day(racing licence) at Eastern Creek.

                      Out of respect for him and his wife, I won't link to the page relating to him.

                      Again, I don't need to make "stuff" up.

                      I have never said I drive a Ferrari(or Porsche - like what this thread partly relates to), I do not live in a mansion, I don't have a lot of money in the bank, my car is 19 years old, I am not "God's Gift to Women", I have never been a champion athlete, never been academically brilliant, just competent with the required study, I live in a 62 year old house.

                      Is there anything remarkable in these things?

                      Anything to boast about?

                      I just do the things that I have been interested well enough and to earn my living from an activity that really needs an outgoing personality.

                      I don't have that either…..just my enthusiasm..

                      You are just angry because I won't get on board with the EV thing.

                      • +1

                        @Leadfoot6:

                        You are just angry because I won't get on board with the EV thing.

                        It’s not that. It’s the misinformation you keep spouting.

                    • @pegaxs: If, as you say "Anyone" can do this & that, well, how come you have not done them?

                      Put your money where your mouth is.

              • @Leadfoot6: If you ‘obtained’ your licence in 1978, that makes you just out of ‘Kindy’!

          • +2

            @Leadfoot6:

            If someone wants to FORCE me to own/drive one then certainly I will object.

            I believe in choice.

            Quite the hypocrit aren't you? Up until EVs hit the market, you were FORCED to drive an ICE car. You did not have a choice.

            • +1

              @bmxr: At least I can spell.

              And I am being forced to subsidise EV's.

              I don't want to.

  • I'm working on a dog poo-powered car. Your dog craps in one end. Torque comes out the other end.

    It's environmentally friendly as long as you're not within 20 metres of the exhaust.

    • Let us all know how you get on with that.

      But being related to dogs, won't it just want to chase it's own tail, & go around in circles?

  • +1

    Synthetic fuels sound cool. If they can make them work in the next 2-3 years at a cost comparable to petrol, then that is great. Particularly if they are compatible with existing combustion engines. It makes sense for the EU to allow synthetic fuel powered vehicles if the technology eventuates. So I think Germany’s position is reasonable. Electric will always have a place. It’s a great technology with many advantages besides environmental.

  • LOL @ foxnews… yep, you lost me at that point and I can safely disregard anything else in the post or that article.

    in a pilot factory powered by wind turbines

    Wow, if only there was just another way we could use the power generated by turbines to power our cars without all this mess of growing crops, harvesting, processing, refining, distilling, storing, pumping, transporting, storing, more pumping… Like, if there was a way to just go from turbine, to say, a sub station and then a cable to your house…

    • +1

      If Fox News said the world is ‘flat’, he would more than likely believe them.

  • +2

    Twice now, I have had to point out that other news sources, not owned by or otherwise associated with Fox, are covering this story.

    And I imagine that part of the reason the synthetic fuel currently costs so much is the allocated cost of building the wind turbines.

    • +2

      Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp.

      • +1

        Yes, it might be.

        I have not checked.

        But there are many other news sites running the article.

        Mr. Murdoch does not have an "exclusive" on it.

  • Stunning Rupert Murdoch deposition leaves Fox News in a world of trouble

    Media mogul’s admission in Dominion Systems election case that he let cable network broadcast falsehoods stuns observers

    Yeah soz

    • +1

      Is the news article linked to even indirectly related to synthetic fuels or transport in any form?

      I don't think so.

      • +1

        If you're daft enough to trust fox news, yes - it is related

        • -1

          How?

          • +3

            @Leadfoot6: fox promotes anything that gets them money. They shows have been legitimately called entertainment and not news because their content is not truthful and found as such by courts. They’ve been caught in lies in this latest case. How would you expect them to be objective in any way?

            • -2

              @Euphemistic: Possibly because Fox out rates their competitors…..and apparently their lead is increasing.

              Fox must not be doing something that is causing viewers/readers to shy away from the alternatives.

              Here is a non-Fox source:

              Fox News Dominates Cable Ratings For Seventh Consecutive Year—And Gained Viewers While Competitors Plummeted
              Carlie Porterfield
              Forbes Staff
              I cover breaking news.
              Follow
              Dec 15, 2022,02:13pm EST
              Updated Dec 15, 2022, 03:51pm EST
              TOPLINE Fox News Channel was the most-watched cable television network in the nation for the seventh consecutive year in 2022, according to Nielsen Media Research data, in a year competitors saw their viewership fall.
              Protestors Call On Advertisers To Pull Their Ads From Fox News
              Traffic on Sixth Avenue passes by advertisements featuring Fox News personalities, including Bret … [+]GETTY IMAGES
              KEY FACTS
              Fox was the top cable network in both primetime and total day viewers this year, the network said citing Nielsen data, averaging 2.3 million viewers during weekday prime time slots.

              Those figures far exceeded rivals MSNBC and CNN, which each netted an average of 1.2 million and 730,000, respectively (all three major networks saw a decline in viewership compared to the previous year).

              Fox counted an average of 1.4 million day viewers in 2022, representing a 3% increase compared to 2021, while MSNBC saw 733,000 and CNN had 568,000, which were both down 35% compared to the previous year.

              The most-watched cable show was Fox’s The Five, which had an audience of 3.4 million viewers and is the first non-primetime program to rank first in total viewers for the year.

              BIG NUMBER
              92. That’s how many of 2022’s top 100 cable news shows were Fox programs, according to Nielsen.

              NEWS PEG
              Earlier this year, Fox News Media president Jay Wallace said the network continues to dominate other outlets thanks to its on-air talent and knowing its audience. “A lot of people out there are producing for Twitter — and I’m not saying Twitter isn’t a tool. But some people think Twitter is what everyone is talking about and is the only thing that’s out there,” Wallace said. In January, Fox marked its 20th year as the top-watched cable news network for the first month of the year. Fox News first began to dominate competitors in that measure in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to the network.

              TANGENT
              Fox is facing a billion-dollar lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems over allegations the network knowingly pushed false information that linked the company’s machines to widespread election fraud.

              KEY BACKGROUND
              Fox is just one part of billionaire Rupert Murdoch’s media empire that also includes the The Wall Street Journal and The Times of London. Australian-born Murdoch inherited a newspaper in Adelaide, Australia, at age 22 when his father, a former war correspondent, died. Murdoch acquired smaller outlets across Australia and New Zealand before expanding into the U.K. and the U.S. Murdoch founded Fox News in 1996. His publications are known for having a conservative tilt. Murdoch’s son, Lachlan Murdoch, is the CEO of Fox Corporation.

              FORBES VALUATION
              We estimate Murdoch and his family are worth $16.9 billion.

              Follow me on Twitter. Send me a secure tip.
              Carlie Porterfield
              Carlie Porterfield
              Follow
              I am a Texas native covering breaking news out of New York City. I was previously an editorial assistant at the Forbes London bureau. Follow me on Twitter @reporterfield.

              Editorial Standards
              Print
              Reprints & Permissions

              https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2022/12/15/fo…

              I quoted the full article just in case any "smart…." wants to accuse me of "manipulation" or similar.

              • +3

                @Leadfoot6: Most watched does not equal most accurate.

                • -1

                  @Euphemistic: More people than not seem to think so.

                  Of course, if you have such a thirst for "the truth", why not set up your own news network.

                  Oh wait, didn't Pravda already try that?

                  "The newspaper was an organ of the Central Committee of the CPSU between 1912 and 1991.[3]"

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pravda

                  • +2

                    @Leadfoot6:

                    More people than not seem to think so.

                    I’m not sure that’s a good thing, just means the brainwashing is going as planned

                • @Euphemistic: if he takes his news from Fox, he certainly has issues.They are known to push out false agendas etc….

            • @Euphemistic: How about a source covering the same matter from Bloomberg.

              https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-01/eu-seeks-…

              Would that be acceptable?

              "and was a candidate for the 2020 Democratic nomination for President of the United States."
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg

          • +2

            @Leadfoot6: big woosh moment for you my dude if you can't connect those two very close together dots.

            • @coffeeinmyveins: I think you may be cross eyed.

              Using the " ctrl f " function on The Guardian article linked to using respectively the search terms "fuel" or "synthetic" or "Germany" gives no results.

              Therefore, a reasonable person would conclude that the Fox News article and The Guardian article have almost nothing in common.

              I am reading them both on my computer.

              That is about the strongest connection that I can make.

              P.S. If I submitted the "clap trap" that you just have in one of my university essays as justification, at least at the time when I went to university, I would have seen red marks all over the page.

              Although, maybe the modern day "woke" universities encourage such nonsense these days.

              • +2

                @Leadfoot6: Boomer tries to shut down discussion by playing woke card.

  • +4

    https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/germany-asks-eu-wiggle-… - A much better article.

    The EU has already passed the law, Germany won't block anything. However the law contains a provision about how CO2 neutral fuels can be used and Germany has asked the EU to define what those rules will be.

    In other words, it's a boring story where Germany asked the EU to clarify the rules. However right wing journalists tried to spin it as a fight on electric vs petrol cars because they're stupid hacks who aren't interested in reality.

    • +1

      Confected outrage fuels the culture wars. In a (small) way it's the most sustainable thing they're doing, I guess.

  • -2

    Surely now I can obtain absolution for my mortal sins by previously linking to a Fox News article?

    The following news source, dealing with the exact same subject material, is published by a crowd called "Clean Energy Wire".

    06 Jan 2023, 13:15 Sören Amelang

    "Germany to subsidise development of e-fuels with €1.9 bln package"

    https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germany-subsidise-devel…

    • +3

      You fronted up with a FoxNews article and when you got called on it, hunted around for some other sources (that up until that point in time you hadn't read).

      Unless there's a "Hey I found Non-Fox articles later" award I'm not aware of, I don't see why you think you're absolving yourself of a shitty choice in journalism.

    • +1

      fox may have reported what is happening but they’ve put an anti-climate spin on it and stretched the truth. the link posted by freefall shows the fox spin.

    • +3

      The only sin you've committed is you're really bad at this trolling thing. We get it, you're a petrol car nut and you hunt around for information that supports your world view and regurgitate it like it's actually going to convince anyone. Your entire post history is trolling on solar panels and EVs, don't you have anything else to say?

      Do you actually know what's going on here? Have you read the legislation and the proposals on the law, or read what the parties involved are saying? Germany is investing in carbon neutral petrol which is not a fossil fuel, so they want clarification on whether they'll be allowed to make cars that runs off. That's it.

      • -2

        It means that there are viable alternatives to sunshine/wind.

        Not that they are reliable alternatives anyway.

        Just ask Saint Greta, where she was arrested protesting the reopening of coal mines in Germany, needed because the sun is not actually shining bright enough, and the wind is not blowing strong enough.

        HOW DARE YOU ARREST ME.

        • +3

          Really really bad at this trolling thing. It's not a viable alternative, we can't biofuel our way out of climate change. And nothing will stop you paying $10 a litre to run your ICE car in 20 years, you just won't be able to buy a new ICE car unless you're spending $500k on a hybrid targeted at rich (profanity).

          There are also plenty of papers and plans developed by Australia's various energy bodies on how we're going to transition to a green grid, but I'm going to take a guess and assume you haven't read those either.

          • -2

            @freefall101: I read all the time how I am forced to pay higher taxes to subsidise the "green revolution", or whatever you want to call it.

            Blackout Bowen(federal) and Matt Kean(NSW state) tells me I must obey.

            • +1

              @Leadfoot6: Why not join in then? The electricity from my roof is tax free, you're paying 44c per litre then another 10% GST on your petrol. You could pay a lot lower tax if you wanted to.

              You've been subsidising the oil industry for years that pays basically no tax here, got sweetheart deals on land purchases and oil rights only for them to jack the price up whenever they can. If taxes are your concern then you should be all over the green revolution.

Login or Join to leave a comment