Tobberone

u/Tobberone@slrpnk.net
0 posts · 56 comments

Recent posts

No posts.

Recent comments

It's banning new sales. Not pre-existing cars. Besides, used BEV prices are coming down too with 6 year old cars just coming down below 10k€. That's kinda important, as 2020 saw a big uptick in number of available models and cars sold.

So given that, why aren't you asking for a beat* up ICE-car today for anyone that can't afford one but needs one today?

And if you really need a car, you probably drive quite a bit and if so, you really should look at EVs anyways since the running costs are a good deal lower.

The negative reactions might be because your wording, to me, is a bit flame batey, as if this is a given negative.

As for non-EU manufacturer being able to invest in production equipment Europe might need if push come to shove on places not easily destroyed by the assumed enemy producing European designs? And in the process incentivise other countries to buy non-american equipment?

If a good chunk of the global military complex seems about to change supplier, I'd bet big on getting to be picked as the supplier of choice!

In a strictly economics/geopolitical view: It's a loan program, so long term it is net positive on interest alone. If the money is used to procure eu-made equipment, as is implied, it will bring manufacturing to EU and finance European R&D as well (where not säl of it will be used in only military applications) Short term it might affect the speed of rearmament which would be bad in an armed conflict. On the other hand, a bigger market will allow bigger investments, which might add production capacity sooner, so it might not add as much time as feared.

In short, it seems to achieve what the tariffs what touted to accomplish without all the drama and negatives associated with tariffs.

Morally it depends on your opinion of a states right to defend itself.

This is Swedes, after all. Sweden started development on its system in the 1500s and has had plenty of time inveloping and complicating the system since. Heck, I've tried to get through the zoning process for 4 years now...

But I digress, there are those saying we will be able to fast pace building new nuclear as well, so clearly there are some severely delusional people here as well...

Not touching AI, but for transport having 1 furnace will be more efficient than having 3000, so even in the US it would be a net positive.

As for China? They are installing more renewables than the rest of the world together atm. Sure, that can be said about any type of electricity generation idea, but they install more renewables than non-renewables too. I'd say they seem to be on target...

This is no seven graders perspective. This is an adult lamenting what he believes is the seven graders only interest in life.

An article about how tech has failed students to learn or not fulfilled its promise of instant knowledge and automation for all would be interesting. Which parts of learning does tech actually cater to and make it easier? What role should it have in a classroom and what are the keys to making it successful in learning?

None of that was part of this article, though.

Err... Not that i condone censorship (as long as it isn't about hurting others), but for me the thought corridor and censorship situation in the US erodes the soap box this grand stand is made from. Add to this that the reason for the grand stand is because it is American companies being censored, rather than the fact that companies are being censored it further tarnish position of the ranter.

I don't know, I feel like there are no right choices here. Regardless of your position it is open for attack, and as that, taking a position at all is admirable. I just wish it was more clear that free speech was the sole issue.

on *Permanently Deleted* · c/buyeuropean · 2 pts · 326d

I would have thought15 hours/day for charging should be enough? What am I missing in this equation?

In the south of Sweden there is a big push for fast chargers for heavy transport, but the work is hampered by the limited power available south of Gävle. North of that though, power is plentifull, so that at least, isn't an issue.

on *Permanently Deleted* · c/buyeuropean · 2 pts · 326d

Aye. But I'm still happy those aren't ICE-only. It still speaks of a shift and it adds up in volume. Ironically, the 2 leading nations are both oil producers.

China is at 50%+ BEV this year for new sales. That's an eighth of the regrowth of fossil fuel this year, just in China. It will take some time, but it is happening.

What will happen on the fossil fuel market in Norway in five years? All of a sudden, the newest fossil fuel car is 6 years old. Where will they get fuel? Sure, in Oslo there will be some petrol stations to find yet. But what about in the scarcely populated half of Norway which is north of Trondheim? In an ironic twist, electricity will be the abundant, safe and available option. Ironic because that has been the argument against BEV for so many years. "Where will I find chargers up north?".

In a few years, chargers will be everywhere. Petrol will be in the big cities only.

Setting aside ideologies and with a focus on what customers want.

That's the problem right there. 2035 is not about what the customer wants, it's about regulation. Customers would prefer not to change at all, but that's not an option.

Well, unlike the customers that wouldn't mind testing a totally new car manufacturer nobody has heard of that has been spawned from a cut throat market with little to no guarantee the manufacturer will still be in business next year. Except those people which are totally unimportant for anyone who wants to try something new in the market...

on *Permanently Deleted* · c/buyeuropean · 3 pts · 334d

Aye, even Norway with EVs at 98%+ of new car registrations is at more than about 20% of total number of vehicles.

Having said that, I'm still glad that the EV share at the German market is increasing. And I do wonder how many read the title as anything other than "of new car sales market"