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, Interesting) by mcgrew on Friday January 03 2020, @12:32PM (10 children)
Sometimes science reality comes before the fiction is finished. I'm working on a story right now called Red Barchetta, and one of the elements of that story is all the cars are electric, fossil fuels are illegal, and any burning needs an expensive government permit.
It's about someone whose uncle gives him a 2001 Ferrari Barchetta that's well over a century old.
Isaac Asimov wrote a story named Sally about an antique self-driving car. It's set in the year 2020. Then there's Blade Runner...
Carbon, The only element in the known universe to ever gain sentience
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @02:03PM (6 children)
> 2001 Ferrari Barchetta
Now that is my dream car! Good taste! Alas already they are more than a quarter million pounds. Far outside my affordability, and not getting any cheaper :-(
Good luck with the story!
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Friday January 03 2020, @08:53PM (4 children)
mcgrew is writing a story based on a Rush song.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @09:15PM (3 children)
Which itself is based on a story from 1973 :-)
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Saturday January 04 2020, @12:34AM (2 children)
Is it now? I did not know that.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Saturday January 04 2020, @12:55AM
That is what I know. The original story can be read here: https://www.mgexp.com/article/nice-drive.html [mgexp.com]
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday January 04 2020, @03:15PM
Yes, they are both correct.
Carbon, The only element in the known universe to ever gain sentience
(Score: 3, Funny) by webnut77 on Saturday January 04 2020, @02:00AM
Wow, 125 tons. I'll bet that takes a lot of road to bring it to a stop.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @05:43PM
Wow you must have so much insight. Like WOW!
(Score: 2) by bart9h on Sunday January 19 2020, @02:03PM (1 child)
You mean the Rush song Red Barchetta [wikipedia.org]?
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Monday January 20 2020, @07:08PM
Yes.
Carbon, The only element in the known universe to ever gain sentience
(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.
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Friday January 03 2020, @01:50PM (7 children)
So, are trains getting a pass because they're mostly diesel/electric hybrids already?
I don't believe that there are viable hybrid solutions yet for heavy trucks, let alone all-electric. There were a few press announcements regarding concept vehicles [duckduckgo.com] a couple of years back, but not much adoption so far. Heavy transport is going to have to step up in a big way to make that deadline.
Who knows, 10 years is a long time. It would be nice to see cleaner trucking become the norm.
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @02:17PM (4 children)
Thing is, trains are already pretty dang efficient*.
As with all things, you go after the worst offenders first.
*https://truecostblog.com/2010/05/27/fuel-efficiency-modes-of-transportation-ranked-by-mpg/
(Score: 2) by legont on Friday January 03 2020, @06:02PM (2 children)
I call it BS. If trains were more efficient, they would be cheaper than say buses.
Similarly, electricity is and will for a log time be more polluting than oil. The current plan is simply exporting pollution. By 2030 the importers will refuse to accept it and then we'll have the real crisis.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Friday January 03 2020, @08:57PM
Buses, like all road transport get the massive subsidy from taxpayers because guess who pays for the roads?
In contrast railway companies build their own tracks.
(Score: 2) by mcgrew on Saturday January 04 2020, @03:19PM
Trains are run by electric motors powered by a diesel generator because internal combustion engines don't have enough torque to pull a train.
Carbon, The only element in the known universe to ever gain sentience
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Saturday January 04 2020, @12:21AM
Did your link ignore the fact that dietary Calories are actually kilocalories? I think their math may be off...
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @02:19PM
I believe the main problem is the extra weight of the batteries + motors in a hybrid is less efficient than just having an ICE.
For urban cars, where the majority of their life is stuck in traffic, the weight penalty makes sense, because you can run full electric with the engine off while sitting in a jam, reducing emissions. Engines are least efficient at idle (excepting Diesels here) so it is an emissions "easy win" with all those cars just idling every day.
However heavy trucks tend to do long steady miles at cruising speed. They don't slow down or stop unless they have to, so the weight penalty is not worth the benefits of being a hybrid.
The one place in trucking that has seen adoption of batteries rather than ICE is in the Auxiliary power unit (APU) which powers the cab/air con when the truck is parked with the main engine off. These used to be small diesel engines that can off the main tanks, but more and more are converting to battery APUs.
Trucking is all about efficiency, whoever can transport the most with the lowest costs (including fuel) makes the most money, so as a general rule they will only adopt a technology if it really improves their transport efficiency.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @05:45PM
You ever heard of trams?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @03:04PM (3 children)
If manufacturers keep making ICE then there may not be enough electrics to satisfy demand, furthermore those unsold ICE cars are wasted.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Friday January 03 2020, @04:52PM
> If manufacturers keep making ICE then there may not be enough electrics to satisfy demand,
I don't see why. it isn't an either/or setup. The technology is different enough that a factory set up for making ICE cannot just switch to making electric motors and battery packs. Generally these will be outsourced to suppliers, who will specialise in their respective technologies
> furthermore those unsold ICE cars are wasted.
A ban on selling pure ICE vehicles is as good as a ban on manufacture. Furthermore there is an issue of Jurisdiction. Ireland (for example) has little to no car manufacturing, its all made by other companies. You can't enforce a ban on manufacturing in another country, but you can ban the sale on your territory, forcing them to either give up on your market, or produce what you want.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @10:11PM (1 child)
> there may not be enough electrics to satisfy demand
Why do you think there will be a lot of demand?
If we remove Tesla (nearly all their cars are in luxury price range) and look at the other electric cars what jumps out is that resale value is very low. To me this says that the buyer of a new Nissan Leaf (for example) is buying some green "cred" while the demand in the used market just isn't there (check craigslist prices in SF or LA where most of these have been sold). Once all the people willing to pay extra to appear "green" have their cars, I wonder who is going to buy all the new electric cars that are starting to come on the market?
A recent entrant into US market is the Audi battery electric (also in luxury price range), which hasn't sold very well at all in it's first year, dealers are stuck with their stock all around the country.
(Score: 2) by Unixnut on Saturday January 04 2020, @01:26AM
> If we remove Tesla (nearly all their cars are in luxury price range) and look at the other electric cars what jumps out is that resale value is very low.
For one, Tesla exists primarily to make money by selling carbon credits. As I understand it, the government allocates a fixed number of "Carbon credits" to each vehicle manufacturer every year. Those manufacturers who produce lots of cars (or cars that put out a lot of CO2) will run out credit, requiring them to purchase more from those who have used less.
A BEV car company will also be allocated these credits, but as their cars are considered "zero emissions", by virtue of ignoring externalities, they have a surplus of carbon credits, that they sell to the other manufacturers. However, In order to qualify said BEV company has to actually produce a BEV, no matter how crap. Hence Musk essentially trolling people with the CyberTruck. It matters not one bit if it is a expensive pile of crap that barely anyone buys. It exists, it is available for sale, so they can claim their carbon credit. I would not be surprised to find out that Tesla knocked up the CyberTrack over a weekend because they found out a rule change will allow carbon credits to be claimed for trucks next.
(fun fact, the carbon credits allocated decrease every year. Squeezing the companies. I believe the anticipation of that future squeeze is why Tesla stock is so highly valued. With time, those carbon credits will be worth more and more, assuming governments don't stop with the carbon credit scam, which is unlikely as it is essentially an indirect tax on living).
With that in mind, you have to consider that the entire EV market is essentially artificial. Forced into existence by government decree and subsidy/tax breaks. Sales are good as long as the government is paying, but once they subsidies stop (or are reduced) demand tanks (as seen in Norway and China from what I remember).
It does not surprise me that second hand EVs are not really wanted. The second hand market is very different. Things like virtue signaling "eco credentials" is not high on the list. That is for people with more money than sense. Likewise many EV owners buy it as a second/third car.
Second hand buyers usually are looking for one car to do everything, and look at practicalities and value for money. Something that will last long, and be easy/cheap to fix and keep running.
EVs don't fit that. For one, unlike ICE vehicles, EV range decreases with age and battery wear. Buying a second hand EV is like buying a second hand phone. You don't know (a) how much capacity/range the battery it actually has left, and (b) for how much longer it will have that range. Batteries tend to degrade rapidly in capacity towards their EOL, leaving the owner with a dead lump of metal unless they spend a huge sum on a new battery pack. That is a very large risk to take.
Also they need specialist maintenance and servicing that can't be done by just anyone (forget shade-tree mechanics completely) , then consider that the cars are built to be as light as possible in order to not waste what little energy they have, making them flimsy and prone to wearing out fast, and thirdly they are markedly worse than what they replaced (in range, refuel time and cost).
There was no need to subsidise the ICE car when it came into existence. Quite the opposite, governments tried to restrict and tax it to death but demand was too strong. It was so much better than horses, the steam car and the BEVs of the age.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Friday January 03 2020, @03:47PM (1 child)
So good, the electric car.
So clean, the electric car.
So cheap, the electric car.
In fact it is sooo objectively better than the ICE that, fuck the market, we force you to buy it.
It's just a marketing ploy to sell hybrids, therefore making cars more costly to own and operate.
I am all for electric city cars, ban on SUVs and heavy vehicles from the city (so that you own it only if you need it), and research on alternate fuels and electric storage. But it's not what's happening with this kind of laws.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @07:45PM
Something is wrong with your brain.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 03 2020, @11:39PM (1 child)
The same country which let developers build endless suburbs before the financial crisis of 2008. Suburbs which remained empty, like ghost cities in China, and which government was forced to start bulldozing over? Yeah those motherfuckers truly care about the enviornment...
(Score: 2) by Webweasel on Saturday January 04 2020, @02:01PM
Man you should read up on gas subsidies then.
Farmers were paid so much that they bought gas heaters (Big things, look like jet engines) and burnt as much as possible, because they made money!
Priyom.org Number stations, Russian Military radio. "You are a bad, bad man. Do you have any other virtues?"-Runaway1956
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Saturday January 04 2020, @06:49PM
Why wait til 2030?
Why not 2025?