Combustion-engine ban widely shunned despite impressive successes in reducing emissions

[Redaktion]

A recent study indicates that a ban on combustion engine vehicles in city centres may be part of the best solution to climate change, but a European survey found that policies banning combustion-engine cars were the likely to be accepted.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Combustion-engine-ban-widely-shunned-despite-impressive-successes-in-reducing-emissions.814677.0.html

[ariliquin]

This article makes no sense, it is pitting one approach against another when all of the approaches discussed are more validly understood as positively contributing to an overall strategy to reduce harmful emissions together.

This article leads to questions like should we reduce bike paths in favour of subsidising electric vehicles? No, both approaches are needed, there is more benefit in a combined approach than any single approach.

[julian.vdm]

This article makes no sense, it is pitting one approach against another when all of the approaches discussed are more validly understood as positively contributing to an overall strategy to reduce harmful emissions together.

This article leads to questions like should we reduce bike paths in favour of subsidising electric vehicles? No, both approaches are needed, there is more benefit in a combined approach than any single approach.

Thanks for the comment. That's not what the article intends to convey. In fact, the implication is that solutions other than electrification may be better options, because they are more widely accepted than ICE car bans.

I've added a paragraph to clarify that the results of the Clean Cities Campaign point to a combined solution as optimal.

[Ian]

Seems the people suggesting this must first put up and explain why the price of goods will go.up

[Trews]

I think EV's are def part of a better future, but i think the government mandates for it are just way too aggresive for no reason. It makes it a lot harder for the avg person to conform to, which makes sense why theres so much pushback. I think it would be best if it was advocated for but have a little more lenience on what ICE engines are allowed to be sold, and determine what a proper sales path for ICE products should look like

[Krystal cane]

All we are doing is trading off one for another. It still takes very hazardous mining to get the required materials to make the battery. The long term solution for disposal of the batteries is still not there. The fact if everyone got a EV there is not enough electricity to charge them all .that means more fossil fuels to make the power. And no one I know is happy to put a electric plant near there home of or the wires to get that ultra high voltage to a neighbor substation.
We need clean burning smaller cars not just electric cars you think are helping the environment with.

[NikoB]

A deliberate lie of the "greens". Emissions are reduced only locally. In rich countries, in cities. Where dirty production is concentrated, everything is as before. And the planet is common.

When the "greens" move the production and disposal of batteries to the Moon, then I will have no complaints against them. If the price of the electric car is adequate, and the power reserve is at least 800 miles without recharing

[Hotz]

A deliberate lie of the "greens". Emissions are reduced only locally. In rich countries, in cities. Where dirty production is concentrated, everything is as before. And the planet is common.

That exactly.

[A]

Thanks for the comment. That's not what the article intends to convey. In fact, the implication is that solutions other than electrification may be better options, because they are more widely accepted than ICE car bans.

I've added a paragraph to clarify that the results of the Clean Cities Campaign point to a combined solution as optimal.

The real problem is communication, everyone tries to make it simple without details, and the fossil fuel industry uses this to their advantage to make it sound much harsher than it actually is

I think EV's are def part of a better future, but i think the government mandates for it are just way too aggresive for no reason. It makes it a lot harder for the avg person to conform to, which makes sense why theres so much pushback. I think it would be best if it was advocated for but have a little more lenience on what ICE engines are allowed to be sold, and determine what a proper sales path for ICE products should look like

The government mandates are far from being aggressive for no reason.

The politicians/media for it just want to pretend it is aggressive to make it sound like they are doing something. And the politicians/media against it double down on pretending how aggressive it is to spread FUD

To date, most of the so called bans have been on new cars(not used), and do not completely ban ICE as they allow PHEVs(Plugin hybrids) which have gas engines.

At best, some contemplated bans of ICE use in city centers, but again a PHEV can work for that just fine

All we are doing is trading off one for another. It still takes very hazardous mining to get the required materials to make the battery. The long term solution for disposal of the batteries is still not there. The fact if everyone got a EV there is not enough electricity to charge them all .that means more fossil fuels to make the power. And no one I know is happy to put a electric plant near there home of or the wires to get that ultra high voltage to a neighbor substation.
We need clean burning smaller cars not just electric cars you think are helping the environment with.

What nonsense are you talking about? The mining for the battery is no more hazardous than the mining for the ICE car drivetrain or the oil you burn. But the difference is the battery lasts decades while the oil is burned. The battery then has a 2nd life as battery storage for decades, then the battery is recycled

Yes, recycled. The notion that we don't have long term solution for disposal of the battery is nothing more than fossil fuel industry propaganda aimed at people who live under a rock. Tesla even breaks down how much batteries they recycle every single year in their impact report (Of course there are many 3rd party recyclers like Umicore, Kingsbury, Redwood and etc). And with US IRA giving tax credits for recycling and counting the batteries recycled towards domestic content requirements. The EU even requires a % of all batteries to be made of recycled material by law

[NikoB]

And it is a proven fact that electric cars, due to their significantly higher starting weight with a heavy battery, destroy roads much faster. And because They have more torque, they wear out the tires and the road faster when starting quickly.

Therefore, the transport tax on owners of electric vehicles should be 2-3 times higher. About the same as for cars with 600 hp+.