America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

EU formally bans new ICE vehicles, aims to slash emissions from trucks and buses

The European Union has put its stamp of approval on a reworked law yesterday banning all new sales of ICE vehicles from 2035. Meanwhile, the European Commission has also proposed new targets to cut CO2 emissions from city buses and trucks from 2030 and onward. Here’s the latest.

The landmark bill regarding ICE vehicles, which was approved last year but still needs to go through one more round of approvals in March, officially bans the sale of all new petrol and diesel vehicles in the entire 27-country bloc. This latest revision signed yesterday, according to Reuters, sees a 55% cut in CO2 emissions for new cars sold from 2030 versus 2021 compared to the previous target of 37.5%.

Of course, there are a couple of caveats: For one, the law only addresses new cars, not the second-hand market, meaning that a brand-new ICE vehicle bought in 2034 will still be legal to drive in 2035 and onward. Given the life cycle of most cars is about 10 to 15 years or so, that’s not good news when it comes to meeting climate goals. The final deal also includes a workaround for smaller carmakers producing less than 10,000 vehicles a year to meet weaker targets until 2036.

While there has been pushback from the auto industry over the past year, most European car manufacturers are already on board with plans to heavily invest in electrification, including Volkswagen’s commitment to only produce electric cars in Europe from 2033. Others, such as Bentley, Mercedes-Benz, Ford, and Jaguar, have already begun shifting their global production strategies toward an all-electric future.

The European Commission has also turned its eye toward cutting greenhouse emissions from the transport section, with an aim to phase in stronger CO2 emissions standards for all new heavy-duty vehicles, including city buses and long-haul trucks, and gradually shift to zero emissions in the coming years. The plan, announced yesterday, suggests a 45% emissions reduction from 2030, then 65% emission reduction from 2035, to 90% from 2040. Yet, the plan is a tad more aggressive for city buses, requiring zero-emissions standards by 2030.

As is, heavy-duty vehicles account for more than 6% of total EU greenhouse gases and more than 25% of all greenhouse gas emissions from road transport.

It’s early days for the proposal, with legislators already debating the potential loss of employment for hundreds of thousands of people in the ICE industry and the rising electricity costs, with centrist and conservative leaders asking for a rethink of the truck ban.

Brew is happy that the LEFTY EU central planners have the scheme to decide for the proles what they can buy and drive.
The government knows best.

https://youtu.be/7T0mqEz3AAk

Actually I am trying to keep this tread to the topic of EV's and the future - not politics. True enough that mandates are part of that, but we should be evaluating these things on their merits.

Some here see the subject as purely political. And so their opinions are driven by what they see as the "left" or "Right" political goals. So a pod cast or opinion talk shows are the source of "truth" to them. Rather than just researching the facts and making a proper value judgement for themselves.

Elon Musk (Tesla) - a noted conservative - is doing more than any other American to push the EV agenda. But I don't care about his politics. I just appreciate the ground breaking technology of his cars and manufacturing processes.





Anyway the politics are moot, but the coming wave of new tech is not. Name your favorite car company, and odds are they have an EV, or a few in the works.

Talking about upgrades...er recalls I mean...safety schmafety





Tesla is recalling nearly 363,000 vehicles with its “Full Self-Driving” system to fix problems with the way it behaves around intersections and following posted speed limits, according to a NHTSA filing Thursday.

The 'recall' includes certain 2016-2023 Model S, Model X, 2017-2023 Model 3, and 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles

The FSD Beta system may allow the vehicle to act unsafe around intersections, such as traveling straight through an intersection while in a turn-only lane, entering a stop sign-controlled intersection without coming to a complete stop, or proceeding into an intersection during a steady yellow traffic signal without due caution.

In addition, the system may respond insufficiently to changes in posted speed limits or not adequately account for the driver's adjustment of the vehicle's speed to exceed posted speed limits.

As CNBC notes, only Tesla owners who have the company’s premium FSD driver assistance system installed in their cars can join the FSD Beta program. That option now costs $15,000 up front or $199 per month in the U.S. today. Owners must obtain a high driver-safety score, as determined by Tesla software that monitors their driving habits, and maintain it to get FSD Beta access.

Tesla is expected to fix the issue through an over-the-air software update, free of charge, by April 15, the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said.

Definitely. The word “recall” for an over-the-air software update is anachronistic and just flat wrong!
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) February 16, 2023

TSLA slid into the red after the headlines hit, but for now the selling is modest in context...

Finally, we note that the NHTSA documents say Tesla is doing the recall but does not agree with an agency analysis of the problem.

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/tesla-recalls-over-360000-full-self-driving-vehicles-plans-ota-update-fix





It's official...Tesla is now the new Prius of the road. Toot Tooty...that's not a good thing either.

You only wish - in your sad little dreams - that you had the Full Self Driving package.

Combustion Going Bust: Global Phase-Outs Of Gasoline Cars

The European Union last week approved a law that will ban the sale of combustion engine cars in its member states from 2035.

For Germany and Italy as well as for Romania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic and Hungary, the new bill sets a first deadline for the sale of gasoline-powered cars.

However, as Statista's Katharina Buchholz reports, the current governments of the former two countries, however, have already spoken out against the ban - calling into question the timeline of the phase-out that climate scientists call absolutely necessary, but that could also face delays.

Infographic: Combustion Going Bust: Global Phase-outs of Gasoline Cars | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

Other European Union countries had already embraced the phase-out of gasoline cars: The Netherlands, Belgium's Flanders region, Sweden, Greece and Slovenia are all looking to end the sale of gas-powered cars even earlier, between 2029 and 2030.

The only country in the world beating this is Norway, an electric mobility pioneer from outside of the European Union, where around 80 percent of new cars sold are already fully electric and 100 percent are scheduled to be in 2025.

Similarly, voluntarily formed blocks of uniform vehicle standards could be dissolved in the U.S. over the issue of combustion engine cars.

California in August set a phase-out date for new sales of these vehicles, also for 2035, and while 17 states had previously tied their vehicle standards to California's under the Federal Clean Air Act, several now want out. The states going along with California's decision (or expected to do so shortly) are Washington, Oregon, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Vermont and Delaware— - fewer than half of California's former allies.

While hybrids were initially expected to be phased out as well in California, some advanced hybrids with large battery power will now be allowed. Other nations treating hybrids favorably in their phase-outs are Canada, Slovenia, Singapore and Japan,but most nations want them gone also by the time their ban date comes up.

Sri Lanka, on the other hand, has been setting the toughest goals of any country, issuing not just a phase-out of new gasoline car sales, but a full road ban for combustion engine cars, tuk-tuks and motorcycles by 2040. But the country has also attracted international attention in the recent past for issuing sweeping legislation whose implementation proved problematic. For some smaller countries without their own carmakers or their subsidiaries, a gas car phase-out can actually be easier to implement in some ways. Cape Verde, which along with many other nations around the globe signed the COP26 declaration to ban the sale of new combustion engine cars by 2040, internally set the goal to achieve this feat even earlier, by 2035. To do so, it would merely have to ban the import of gas-powered cars by that date.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/combustion-going-bust-global-phase-outs-gasoline-cars

What is this??? Second thought? Whatever happened to just jumping without looking??? Guess the fools rushing in should've waited for Simon to "say" its okay. LMMFAO...so predictable. All socialist ideals are.

No no. Pollution is not a problem. Global warming is the existential threat. EVs are good for global warming, bad for pollution. Once we fix the climate we will go back and fix the pollution.

As long as that EV battery pollution doesn't poison his HUT, Brewha don't care.

You could run for office this that kind of speech.

You got Rays vote already….

The problem with coal is not mining it. The problem with gas and oil is not drilling for it.
These things have a minimal impact on the local area where they occur - but not a good one, granted.

The problem with coal, gas, and oil is BURING them.
Because if produces large, global amounts of carbon dioxide. A “green house gas” that causes the earth to retain more of the suns heat rather than reflecting it back into space.

The elements you mention above are metals - they are not buried into the atmosphere. Metals are relatively easy to recycle.




If it makes you feel better, fusion reactor designs (there are a few) are starting to pan out. Lots to read about improvements beyond the Tokamak design.
And you really need to be able to handle fusion, if you hope to master Star Trek type reactors….Li2 notwithstanding.

But doesn't mining for the ore and refining the ore of these metals require energy and create green house gases? Guess you overlooked that part of it.

Recycling: Metallic Cu is rather easy to recycle (energy wise) while the others are not so much.

Nuclear energy: I'm 100% on board that the US should start building new plants and tapping into this source of energy. Fusion reactors are at least one or two generation away assuming we put in the time and resources needed to make it get there. I'm confident that we can get there and it will be a turning point of human evolution/progress.

Re: dilithium crystals... we could probably buy them on e-bay along with a set of dungeons and dragons dice

Is uniformed outrage when the military gets pissed?

And a lot of dead leaf blowers and lawn mowers...

And Somalis... no body ever thinks about the Somalis...

The United States Postal Service (USPS) announced plans to purchase thousands of electric delivery vehicles from Ford Motor Company. The move is part of the USPS's efforts to 'greenify' 75% of its fleet over the next five years.

USPS awarded a contract to purchase 9,250 Ford E-Transit Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs). The first delivery of the EV mail trucks will begin in December of this year.

"These domestically sourced vehicles will be 100 percent electric and are part of the 21,000 COTS vehicles included in the Postal Service's vehicle acquisition plan announced in December 2022. The Ford E-Transit BEVs are manufactured in Kansas City, Missouri," USPS wrote in a statement.

In addition to the 9,250 EV mail trucks, USPS awarded contracts to three suppliers for the purchase of 14,000 charging stations to be installed at mail facilities.

"We are moving forward with our plans to simultaneously improve our service, reduce our cost, grow our revenue, and improve the working environment for our employees. Electrification of our vehicle fleet is now an important component of these initiatives," Postmaster General Louis DeJoy said in the statement.

The contract is a significant pivot for USPS, which had announced early last year that it would replace its 30-plus-year-old fleet of mail trucks with gasoline-fueled models made by Oshkosh Corp. That would've disappointed the Biden administration, which has been attempting to electrify the federal government's fleet of vehicles. USPS has the nation's largest federal fleet.

After facing criticism from some members of Congress and receiving a $3 billion funding boost from the Biden administration's Inflation Reduction Act, the postal service changed its approach in December. The organization then announced a new plan to acquire 66,230 electric delivery vans by 2028, costing $10 billion.

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/usps-purchases-ford-ev-vans-electrify-nations-largest-federal-fleet


Quick...do the math...how much do the vehicles cost that we all had to pay for?

Those EV Fords...powered by???


https://www.theblaze.com/news/us-postal-service-to-purchase-evs-from-ford-after-automaker-signs-deal-with-chinese-battery-firm




Yeah...definitely no quid pro quo here, right Hunter?

So...you're the sucker that bought a $150,000.00 electric toothbrush that makes fart noises?

Clarkson would fit right in here.

Calling others morons while demonstrating that he as not a clue....

The average EV has about 8 kg (18 Lbs) of lithium in it. Just imagine the huge cost of shipping 18 pounds overseas!
He prolly lives in a moat.

That guy couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

But abrasive rage sell to so, so many people.
But being pissed at a Prius??
He needs to get a life.

Not caring about the party line, I would agree that there are legitimate critical things to say about EV’s. But mining metal and moving them from one country to another is nothing new. Besides, they mine lithium here in Texas with new mines opening as we speak. This is just misinformed angst. 18 Lbs per car Gene. Making an issue out of it looks like misinformation to me.

Now, the elephant in the room is government mandates - 12 years out in a few states and no were else - pizzing people off because they don’t understand them.

There is a “good life” to be had by being a talking head string anger wherever one can find it. No doubt.






Don’t worry about EV mandates. Sooner or later, you’ll want one.
Just squat and watch.

How much ore needs to be dug up to create your 18 lbs of Li. How much energy (burning fossil fuels) does it require to refine that ore into a usable form? What's your cost benefit analysis on this? Asking for a friend...

(Here's your chance to provide real world and respectable sources to defend your thesis and your position).

I've said it time and time again, I'm not anti "green energy" or against working toward "cleaner" energy but to date the pie in the sky fantasy of being carbon neutral and a promise of self sustainable, renewable energy is pipe dream.

There is no technology on the horizon that gets us there in my our life time much less the mandated year of 2035 or whatever number they pull out of their a$$. Do we stop trying? Nope. But until we have a few that are viable and within our grasp, cutting the umbilical cord from well established and reliable sources of energy using government mandates is not the way to go.

Don't get me wrong, EV's have their niche for some areas and for some people. The same goes for solar and wind energy but to pretend they are truly green and clean... or even cleaner than current fossil fuel technology (in the holistic view, soup to nuts).... that's 100% false.

I'm smiling at the red herring of lithium mining.
You don't have an issues with mining and refining iron or aluminum, making plastics - but LITHIUM!! Oh no! Not even 1% of a cars material.
Who told you this was a real concern - cause they lied to you.



"pie in the sky"???
How about a car in the drive way and solar panels on the roof?
I have no idea why you are convinced there are no "viable" technologies out there. honestly. You can buy them - today. Really.

And since every major vehicle manufacturer is going electric - or going all electric - I think there will be lots of choices 12 years from now.




They are far and away cleaner. Hanging you hat on fact they are "not perfectly green" is just nay saying.

An angle nobody saw coming.





It's a surprise that Reuters has published an article revealing that the electric vehicle revolution might not be as environmentally friendly as automakers claim. Furthermore, a scratched or slightly damaged battery pack could lead insurance companies to scrap the entire car.

"We're buying electric cars for sustainability reasons," Matthew Avery, research director at automotive risk intelligence company Thatcham Research, said.

Avery pointed out, "an EV isn't very sustainable if you've got to throw the battery away after a minor collision."

A Tesla battery pack costs tens of thousands of dollars and represents a large percentage of the vehicle's price tag. Insurance companies have found that it's uneconomical to replace battery packs if damaged.

Many automotive manufacturers, including Tesla, have made battery packs a structural part of the car to reduce cost products but have shifted costs to consumers and insurers when batteries need to be replaced.

Unless carmakers produce more easily repairable battery packs, there will be a growing number of low-mileage EVs scrapped after collisions.

"The number of cases is going to increase, so the handling of batteries is a crucial point," said Christoph Lauterwasser, managing director of the Allianz Center for Technology, a research institute owned by Allianz.

According to Lauterwasser, the production of EV batteries results in significantly higher CO2 emissions compared to conventional fossil-fuel models. Therefore, if these batteries are discarded with low mileage, it undermines the goal of promoting environmentally-friendly practices.

"If you throw away the vehicle at an early stage, you've lost pretty much all advantage in terms of CO2 emissions," he said.

Sandy Munro, head of Michigan-based Munro & Associates, which analyzes vehicles and advises automakers on how to improve them, said the Model Y battery pack has "zero repairability."

"A Tesla structural battery pack is going straight to the grinder," Munro said.

So much for the EV revolution and the green "circular economy" touted by carmakers, politicians, NGOs, and climate activists... These EVs appear even worse for the environment when compared with traditional petrol-powered vehicles.

https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/not-esg-friendly-insurers-junk-entire-evs-minor-accidents

They said they didn't care about the environment anyways.

Tesla isn’t that user friendly to repair if any damage is done, been watching Rich Rebuilds for quite some time.