Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday December 12 2019, @11:51AM   Printer-friendly
from the worlds-first-commercial-electric-beaver dept.

The Guardian is reporting;

The world's first fully electric commercial aircraft has taken its inaugural test flight, taking off from the Canadian city of Vancouver and flying for 15 minutes.

"This proves that commercial aviation in all-electric form can work," said Roei Ganzarski, chief executive of Australian engineering firm magniX.

The company designed the plane's motor and worked in partnership with Harbour Air, which ferries half a million passengers a year between Vancouver, Whistler ski resort and nearby islands and coastal communities.

The recycled 62-year-old de Havilland Beaver seaplane is designed for short hops of 160 km or less, which represents the majority of Harbour Air flights. They're looking to save millions on costly maintenance and downtime. Harbour Air hopes to convert most of their airplanes after certification.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday December 12 2019, @06:41PM (1 child)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Thursday December 12 2019, @06:41PM (#931478) Journal

    But as prices rise, it makes alternative energy sources (such as solar) that much more economically viable.

    If the goal is to makes prices rise then we have the perfect tool at our disposal: tax the crap out of it.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2019, @06:21AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2019, @06:21AM (#931651)

    This doesn't achieve anything for numerous reasons.

    1) Localized to a single nation. The sharp increases in the coming years will be coming from nations that would not voluntarily damage themselves - China and India in particular.

    2) Limited support. Many would oppose giving a government trillions of dollars. Earmarks change as soon as the government wants some (see: Alaska Permanent Fund [wikipedia.org]). Even of those that think they support a carbon tax, many would find themselves quickly backpedaling when prices at the pump double or triple and they're constantly reminded that they can solve this problem by simply rolling back the tax. It's like war - people tend to support it when it's glamorized and promises a quick victory. When the reality of it kicks in, support plummets.

    3) Open to lobbying. Even if the tax did pass, it's something that can simply be rolled back or undermined by lobbying. Our politicians are for sale, and the price is far less than the resources available to fossil fuel industries. This process is made much easier by #2 and #4.

    4) Petrodollar. Going to abbreviate this one to keep this post succinct, but the US economy is heavily 'subsidized' by the global fuel economy. This is a big part of the reason we talk a big game on terms of reducing emissions but do pretty much nothing.

    5) Loopholes. The carbon taxes that have come close to passing were 'revenue neutral.' That means the government imposes a carbon tax on the fossil fuel industry while giving them benefits and tax reductions in other fields such that it's effectively revenue neutral. In other words, it has 0 effect. And as it's chipped away it will result in a 'carbon tax' gradually turning into a defacto tax-break for fossil fuel industries. There's a reason Exxon has been one of the more vocal advocates for a carbon tax.