SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Amsterdam's head of transport has announced plans to ban petrol and diesel cars in the city by 2030.
The clean air action plan aims to make the Dutch capital a "world leader in emission-free transport".
Transport chief Sharon Dijksma said residents "live a year less on average due to dirty air" and that the plan should "prolong the health of the average Amsterdammer by three months."
But the plan has already incited strong reactions in the Netherlands with one motoring organisation branding it "bizarre" and wondering how normal people would afford electric cars.
The plan, which would be applied 20 years before the Paris Agreement aims to slash greenhouse gas emissions, would require up to 23,000 electric charging points by 2025. The city currently has 3,000.
(Score: 2) by The Shire on Tuesday May 07 2019, @05:03PM (6 children)
The liberal public seems to have this misconception that if you drive an electric car you no longer produce CO2 to get to work. All you're doing is moving that production from your car to the power plant that's generating that electricity.
Additionally, it actually generates MORE CO2 because while a power plant has efficiences of scale, transmission of that power to charging stations results in a LOSS of efficiency. And there is a second loss of efficiency in charging and discharging the batteries.
The CO2 angle only works if all the power necessary to juice the entire public comes from renewables like solar and wind, but that's simply not possible unless we also warmly embrace and fast track nuclear, the only reliable non co2 producing energy source. I'm all for this, but the same people who want to ban combustion engines also blindly reject their only hope for the future - nuclear.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Pino P on Tuesday May 07 2019, @05:33PM (4 children)
Citation needed that the "LOSS of efficiency" due to "transmission of that power to charging stations" is large enough to outweigh "efficiences of scale".
(Score: 3, Informative) by Dr Spin on Tuesday May 07 2019, @05:57PM (3 children)
Citation Needed
I worked for years on home energy saving systems here in the UK. The relevant information from government statistics is that 30% of electrical energy is lost in the distribution network. And the UK is a very compact country.
The efficiency of a gigantic gas turbine (with all associated equipment) compared to a large diesel engine (500HP truck engine) is an improvement of about 10%. An electric car is probably marginally better than a truck engine - but the battery and charging system contribute to additional losses of about 20%.
You are welcome to look for the data yourself. Scientific journals and promotional material is readily available - and Google is your friend (OK, maybe not that friendly).
Forget the citations: Solar power and Wind power are probably not very efficient - but the raw energy is free, and there is NO CO2 or NOx.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07 2019, @06:20PM (1 child)
But is it more compact than The Netherlands?
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Wednesday May 08 2019, @07:28PM
is it more compact than The Netherlands?
More or less the same in terms of population density (excluding Wales and Scotland - we Londoners always exclude them). Just not as flat.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Wednesday May 08 2019, @04:52PM
For the moment, let's go with your claim of 10% loss in efficiency from using a portable diesel engine compared to 30% electrical transmission losses and 20% battery losses. But an electric vehicle's power train is also mechanically simpler than that of an internal combustion engine vehicle. How much power is lost in an automotive transmission? In addition, electric vehicles are more likely to incorporate regenerative braking than ICE vehicles. How much energy is lost to braking in city traffic?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 07 2019, @09:14PM
But if you can't see it, it didn't happen. When production moved to third-world countries, children were made to work, and many died but since that is so far away you can't see it therefore it didn't happen.
Also, cheap oil being drilled in far away places and the poor oil-rich countries invaded to take their oil; but since it is far away and no one saw it, it didn't happen.
If you were to see how chickens are raised to be killed (and to lay eggs) you would stop consuming poultry. Same for beef. But those making money know these things and have adjusted their businesses to keep it all hidden.