SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
To spur the adoption of electric vehicles and ultimately help clean up the environment, Ireland may ban the sale of purely internal-combustion-powered cars. This prohibition could take effect by 2030.
According to RTE, Ireland's National Public Service Broadcaster, the new law is expected to be published early next year [meaning 2020]. It will be bundled into Climate Action Amendment Bill 2019, which will probably be further tinkered with by a range of government departments.
Over the next decade, leaders of Ireland want at least one-third of its vehicle fleet to be electrically operated. Furthermore, by the year 2050, the government is aiming to make the nation carbon-neutral, an impressive and ambitious goal. Naturally, the transportation sector is responsible for a large amount of pollution. In 2018, it reportedly accounted for more than 20 percent of Ireland's emissions, so any reductions here can make a big difference.
If all goes according to plan, some 936,000 electrified vehicles will be on Ireland's roads by 2030. Making things a little easier, this total includes both pure EVs as well as hybrids.
(Score: 2) by SomeGuy on Friday January 03 2020, @12:38PM (11 children)
And in totally unrelated news, Ireland's government will be receiving huge fucking kickbacks from electric car manufacturers. Then in 2050 everyone will be up to their neck in dead batteries that no one can seem to get rid of, if for no other reason than it now takes hours to fully re-charge their toy electric cars to move shit around.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @01:31PM (5 children)
Uh huh. The same way that the US is currently up to their neck in dead cell-phone batteries, I presume? Or perhaps, the Irish may get rid of their car batteries the same way the US can get rid of their cell-phone batteries?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @02:08PM (4 children)
> Or perhaps, the Irish may get rid of their car batteries the same way the US can get rid of their cell-phone batteries?
By dumping them on third world nations, poisoning their populace? Not really a viable long term solution, especially as those third world nations have started rejecting our rubbish already.
The issue of disposal of batteries (with all their toxic materials) is not a small issue. Unlike fuel tanks, which generally last the life of the car (and the cars range is constant throughout its life), BEVs have their "fuel tank" as a consumable item, whose range reduces with age.
A car may go 30+ years with the same range and fuel tank, but a BEV will need at least 2 (possibly 3) entire battery replacements in that time, assuming the car itself lasts that long. A fuel tank is just a steel can that can be easily recycled. Batteries are not so simple, and need specialist recycling and disposal.
So far phone batteries are supposed to be recycled, but most of them end up in landfills in Africa or the far east. If we assume that one day 90% of vehicles will be BEVs, that is a magnitude more batteries that need to be handled, along with the costs involved to do it without harming the environment,
(Score: 2) by exaeta on Friday January 03 2020, @03:27PM (1 child)
If only we had chemsits who could recycle the batteries!
Oh that's right, chemistry has become collateral damage thanks to the war on drugs.
The Government is a Bird
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @07:46PM
(Score: 1, Troll) by Phoenix666 on Friday January 03 2020, @03:40PM (1 child)
Sure it is. They have high birthrates. That's a dick answer, but for all the far nastier shit we've been dumping on them for decades already it hasn't slowed them down much.
It's nastier to recycle lithium ion batteries than the lead acid batteries, creosote-soaked ties, and asbestos we've already been dumping on them for 70 years?
A wise Soylentil said it some time ago, but it was something to the effect of, "today's landfills will be tomorrow's source of raw material." It's very smart, and, I believe, prescient.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @04:19PM
> Sure it is. They have high birthrates. That's a dick answer, but for all the far nastier shit we've been dumping on them for decades already it hasn't slowed them down much.
Yes, but at the same time they were willing to accept that in return for money. However now they seem to be changing their tune. So either more money will be needed, or you will have to force them to take it against their will.
> It's nastier to recycle lithium ion batteries than the lead acid batteries,
Yes it is much nastier to recycle lithium ion compared to lead acid. Lead acid is very easy to recycle, and its something like 90% recyclable. As a result it is the one battery technology that is widely recycled the world over. I mean, it is literally lead plates and acid.
> creosote-soaked ties,
Those seem to just be dumped, not much we can do about that. However that is an old technology that is no longer used. We would be mad to consider it now as a new technology. We are however, considering using Lithium batteries as a new technology, and it would be wise to not replace the mistakes done with creosote asbestos.
> and asbestos we've already been dumping on them for 70 years?
Asbestos isn't recycled to my knowledge. It is a naturally occurring mineral. As such the usual thing to do there is to bury it (ideally in the same mine it was originally taken from). Same thing as with creosote. It is an old technology we don't use anymore, not a new one we are considering.
> A wise Soylentil said it some time ago, but it was something to the effect of, "today's landfills will be tomorrow's source of raw material." It's very smart, and, I believe, prescient.
That solely depends if the energy required to extract, separate, recycle and refine the stuff in landfills (in a non environmentally damaging way) is worth it. Most of the time it isn't, and it is unlikely to ever be unless we reach some serious critical juncture where we just cant get the resources any other way. Chances are going to war to take others resources will be more cost effective than mining landfills, so they will be piling up for a long time.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @03:00PM (4 children)
The other fun thing about the Irish....they're a net importer of electrical energy, currently from the UK national grid, but planning to slurp down that lovely electricity from French nuclear powerstations via a dedicated link sometime this decade.
Having family connections to Ireland, and hearing their stories about the state of their current infrastructure, especially in the more rural parts, all I'm saying is 'good luck with implementing the charging point network..'
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday January 03 2020, @03:46PM
I know that Denmark has been getting more and more of its power from wind, so I went looking for what the level in 2019 was and found an article [nasdaq.com] from NASDAQ that said the country got 47% of its power from wind last year. That's huge.
The same article said Ireland came in second with 28%. That's also huge. I'm guessing that they could probably catch up to Denmark and both could grow their wind capacity even more. Their solar potential probably isn't great, but it's possible between greater efficiencies, better storage, and a collection of other renewable sources they can meet their needs domestically.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @05:05PM (2 children)
And where were they getting the gasoline from? I must have missed them being a exporter of oil products.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @07:19PM (1 child)
The points being made were
i. Ireland can't generate enough electricity for their current needs, let alone support this electric car wankery, so they import it from the UK.
ii. Their current infrastructure is, as a relative said, 'feckin shite'.
Further to point i., also take into account the fact that 40 odd percent of their current domestic electric generation comes from burning imported natural gas, mostly from Scotland....alas, being dragged bawling out of the EU by the sassenachs...so their costs will be going up if they need to rely on that source short/long term.
As to the petrol they're currently consuming..sure, they import, but search on Ballyroe oil, I hear the Chinese are interested, and as the Irish are proven whores when it comes to foreign investors and their money, one wonders how long their moral opposition to exploiting fossil fuel sources will last.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 04 2020, @04:47AM
The point you're missing is that whether they import oil or they import electricity, they're importing energy. The whole point of them importing electricity isn't particularly relevant to the use of electric cars, unless the main reason for doing so is to for energy independence. The US doing it would make a certain amount of sense as the US could generate a ton of electricity and probably enough to be energy independent for the long term.