Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 27

Thread: EU Green Deal - New ICE cars banned by 2035

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    360

    EU Green Deal - New ICE cars banned by 2035

    EU Green Deal visionary and realistic for climate.

    In order to reach Carbon Neutral goal by 2050, ICE cars need to cease production by 2035. If we don’t do the same we’ll simply be left behind.

    Will drivers get burned by EU ban on ICE cars?

    European Union officially proposes ban on internal combustion engines from 2035

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    2,453
    I think this actually came about because a green group sued the German govt about it's climate change targets and won, as the measures fell far short of the targets needed to achieve net 0% by 2050.

    German Court Orders Revision Of Climate Act To Ease Burden On Younger Generation : NPR
    2005 D3 TDV6 Present
    1999 D2 TD5 Gone

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    17,513
    Internal combustion engines will not be banned - only those burning fossil fuels. Just watching a Youtube channel at the moment where JCB tractors in the UK have come to realise electric is not an option for their heavy tractors (will need 8 tonne of batteries for a 4 hour run time then pulled off the job to recharge) so they have developed ICE hydrogen engines for their heavy machinery and prime movers.

    So ultimately I think the automotive will bypass pure electric cars once hydrogen is freely available and go for hydrogen fuel cells with an alternative being ICEs running direct on hydrogen.

    Garry
    REMLR 243

    2007 Range Rover Sport TDV6
    1977 FC 101
    1973 Haflinger AP700
    1971 Jaguar V12 E-Type Series 3 Roadster
    1957 Series 1 88"
    1957 Series 1 88" Station Wagon

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Knaresborough North Yorkshire UK
    Posts
    1,236
    Hydrogen electric or ICE is the future. Battery has a 10 or 15 year horizon before being obsolete due to range limitations and recharge time and problems with how green the electricity is plus problems with battery manufacture and disposal. It will have an ongoing place in the market but as a niche player for specific purposes

    Most hybrids actually are more polluting in real world conditions than a petrol powered alternative so the solution does not rest there either

    Already seeing cabs in London moving to hydrogen as the battery cars spend too much time off the road being recharged and the high cost of the vehicle itself makes it difficult for the economic case to stack up without very significant government subsidies

    For the last 30 years the breakthrough in battery technology for both range and recharge time have been just around the corner with plenty of headlined about breakthroughs with them not stacking up in real life

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    360
    The problem with Hydrogen is clearly fuel manufacture, transport and storage.

    Manufacturing hydrogen fuel uses the electricity which could also be used to power an EV. So it’s double fuel use; + storage and transport of hydrogen fuel is difficult; + distribution network is expensive and way behind EV.

    EV’s aren’t perfect either but as fossil fuel powered ICE’s are phased out, EV’s will be the domestic vehicle of choice.

    Not a bad summary by Which Car (attached), although the assertion that average motorists are not interested in the environmental reasons for adopting renewable energy powered vehicles is typically out of touch. Cost of ownership is a major factor, but the majority of motorists after 2035 will be a new generation leaving primitive oil guzzlers in their wake for personal environmental reasons including clean air and anti-noise pollution, as much as reducing global warming. Not to mention the clear performance advantages of EV’s over ICEV’s.

    Hydrogen cars versus EVs: What’s right for Australia?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Knaresborough North Yorkshire UK
    Posts
    1,236
    Hydrogen does not require transport. Is made on site using wind and solar electricity and water. Produced as required to keep fuel station tanks full then drawn off as vehicle needs it

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    360
    Quote Originally Posted by 3toes View Post
    Hydrogen does not require transport. Is made on site using wind and solar electricity and water. Produced as required to keep fuel station tanks full then drawn off as vehicle needs it
    Sounds simple but...

    Hydrogen disadvantages

    • Infrastructure is virtually non-existent. This is hydrogen’s Achilles heel, for meaningful adoption of hydrogen cars won’t happen until there’s a sizable network of refuelling stations in place for the public to use. The amount of investment required to establish and maintain that network will be staggering for the following reason:
    • It requires special storage, either needing to be contained at massive pressure or extremely low temperatures. That makes transportation difficult, although CSIRO research into chemically transforming it into liquid ammonia indicates the problem of distribution might be able to be overcome in the near future.
    • Right now, commercial-scale hydrogen generation is done by reforming methane or natural gas with steam. Even cracking water into its base hydrogen and oxygen components is hardly a green process if it’s done with regular power grid energy – not to mention the power required to compress the gas to a pressure where it contains enough energy to drive a car a meaningful distance. For those that think hydrogen is a more eco-friendly option than a mains-charged electric car, they may want to take a closer look at hydrogen’s supply chain first.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Yass NSW
    Posts
    4,467
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudHeadTed View Post
    EU Green Deal visionary and realistic for climate.

    In order to reach Carbon Neutral goal by 2050, ICE cars need to cease production by 2035. If we don’t do the same we’ll simply be left behind.

    Will drivers get burned by EU ban on ICE cars?

    European Union officially proposes ban on internal combustion engines from 2035
    We won't be left behind, there is no vehicle industry here, regardless of what the EU do our vehicle supply largely comes from elsewhere. It would be mere tokenism for Australia to ban ICE anyway, but i'm sure it would keep the green fringe happy.
    Go home, your igloo is on fire....
    2014 Chile Red L494 RRS Autobiography Supercharged
    MY2016 Aintree Green Defender 130 Cab Chassis
    1957 Series 1 107 ute - In pieces

    Assorted Falcons and Jeeps.....

  9. #9
    NavyDiver's Avatar
    NavyDiver is offline Very Very Lucky! Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,662
    Quote Originally Posted by 101RRS View Post
    Internal combustion engines will not be banned - only those burning fossil fuels. Just watching a Youtube channel at the moment where JCB tractors in the UK have come to realise electric is not an option for their heavy tractors (will need 8 tonne of batteries for a 4 hour run time then pulled off the job to recharge) so they have developed ICE hydrogen engines for their heavy machinery and prime movers.

    So ultimately I think the automotive will bypass pure electric cars once hydrogen is freely available and go for hydrogen fuel cells with an alternative being ICEs running direct on hydrogen.

    Garry
    Agree - the EU, Canada, Japan and the US are about to put a real reason why to move and some of it by 2026!.

    Copy and paste from an investment rubbish site. NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE. Companies mentioned DO NOT MAKE MONEY Penny dreadfulls! DYOR and if you invest never listen to others especially me!

    
    The EU. "The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, just released, means that trade and exports will now be on the menu in international climate negotiations. From 2026, emissions created through the production of any goods exported to the EU will be slapped with a tax equivalent to the EU carbon price – about $90 per tonne, or four times the price in our own carbon market.By itself, the EU’s CBAM will only affect a small amount of Australia’s exports. But it’s just the first of many climate trade dominoes to fall. Once the European Commission irons out the details, it will pave the way for others to implement their own carbon border taxes. Japan and Canada are working on similar mechanisms to the EU, and US Democrats announced plans for a “polluter import fee” this week, too."
    
    With Canada, Japan, US and others - Australia -"As more countries price emissions both domestically and at the border, our exporters will take a double hit if we continue to lag behind our peers on emissions reduction"
    
    Happily Hazer can be here there and anywhere for Hydrogen, CCS as a profitable side gig as Graphite. On Graphite and the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms we are likely to see in from 2026 at possibly $90 per tonne will make Hazer carbon Negative Graphite at least $90 per tone cheaper and mined graphite!
    Some parts of the mining sector are trying to move from the massive emissions they make. Not picking on just using Quantum Graphite Limited as an example.
    
    Quantum Graphite Limited (Mikkira Graphite Deposit /Uley Graphite Mine- Port Lincoln) It is possibly "one of the largest coarse flake graphite deposits in the world"
    "Quantum Graphite has entered a transformational joint venture agreement with The Sunlands Company to manufacture thermal energy storage battery cells, or “TES”, utilising graphite sourced from its Uley 2 deposit on the Eyre Peninsula in South Australia. Sunlands will contribute processing technologies and flake specifications for the final product, with the 50-50 partnership aiming to break into the burgeoning renewable power generation market." The mines carbon foot print may be average-
    
    "A 2019 feasibility study envisaged an eight-year first-phase mining operation based on Uley 2 reserves alone, with a graphitic carbon grade of 11.89 per cent per annum at 84 per cent recovery.Capital costs came in at about A$80m for the 500,000 tonne per annum operation, with $207 million total undiscounted cash flow forecast for the life of mine.Subsequent stages of mining are planned for the existing resources and areas Quantum is drilling."
    
    "The mining sector itself will also face pressure from governments, investors, and society to reduce emissions. Mining is currently responsible for 4 to 7 percent of greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions globally. Scope 1 and Scope 2 CO2 emissions from the sector (those incurred through mining operations and power consumption, respectively) amount to 1 percent, and fugitive-methane emissions from coal mining are estimated at 3 to 6 percent. 1 A significant share of global emissions—28 percent—would be considered Scope 3 (indirect) emissions, including the combustion of coal."
    
    My thought are that Quantum and other Graphite miners face a known and foreseeable carbon emission risk as decarbonization shift demand for key minerals which in Graphites case, the Hazer produces Graphite as a salable resources in a manor making clean and C02 negative and effective permanent proven Carbon Capture and Storage. This clear advantage for Hazer stands out as no other method I can see can equal
    
    Lock down Number 5 in Dry July- Doh- Have a great weekend all

  10. #10
    Homestar's Avatar
    Homestar is offline Super Moderator & CA manager Gold Subscriber
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Sunbury, VIC
    Posts
    18,795
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudHeadTed View Post
    Sounds simple but...

    Hydrogen disadvantages

    • Infrastructure is virtually non-existent. This is hydrogen’s Achilles heel, for meaningful adoption of hydrogen cars won’t happen until there’s a sizable network of refuelling stations in place for the public to use. The amount of investment required to establish and maintain that network will be staggering for the following reason:
    • It requires special storage, either needing to be contained at massive pressure or extremely low temperatures. That makes transportation difficult, although CSIRO research into chemically transforming it into liquid ammonia indicates the problem of distribution might be able to be overcome in the near future.
    • Right now, commercial-scale hydrogen generation is done by reforming methane or natural gas with steam. Even cracking water into its base hydrogen and oxygen components is hardly a green process if it’s done with regular power grid energy – not to mention the power required to compress the gas to a pressure where it contains enough energy to drive a car a meaningful distance. For those that think hydrogen is a more eco-friendly option than a mains-charged electric car, they may want to take a closer look at hydrogen’s supply chain first.
    Point 1 - Same for battery EV's - infrastructure virtually non existent and VERY expensive to put in. EV's are in the same boat - until you can drive anywhere and get a charge, they won't become as popular as they need to be - chicken and egg for both techs. Remember when people said LPG would never take off because the infrastructure wasn't there? I do - it wasn't that long ago in the grand scheme of things.
    Point 2 - So do all fuels - This would be a non issue by the time the infrastructure is being planned and rolled out and this is being shown in the pilot plants and outlets being built at the moment.
    Point 3 - EV's are horrible for the environment too in virtually every respect you've pointed out - dig up the planet for toxic metals to make the batteries, charge them with coal fired stations, etc. Greener production of Hydrogen is becoming big business and while I agree most at the moment isn't close, the fact is can be produced using fully renewable energy is a big plus IMO.

    I could point out many disadvantages to battery EV's but I'm not anti them - I think there's place for a mix of Battery EV's, Hydrogen Fuel cell EV's and Hydrogen powered ICE vehicles - I think we'll see all 3 of these proliferate in coming decades as they all have pro's and con's depending on what you need the vehicle to do. Cars are very different to trucks and Ag gear - the bigger stuff is likely to go to Hydrogen ICE longer term - these engines are already out there and being developed same as the other technologies are.

    For a 2 car family I could eventually see an battery EV as the second car/run around being charged from the home solar/battery setup and a Fuel cell EV towing the caravan on holidays, etc for the range and convenience. I don't see battery tech being able to make many more great leaps to be able to compete on the distance/cost issues - the energy density of lithium is about as good as it gets so it's really all about improving the tech around this - we're not going to see another quantum leap like we did from lead acid to lithium.


    1977 101 FC - 'Chucky'
    1986 Classic RR - 'Thing'
    1977 Jaguar XJ6

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Search AULRO.com ONLY!
Search All the Web!