Paris Plans to Banish All but Electric Cars by 2030

[Verge]

Maybe we will no longer own the vehicles. There will just be pick up points and you pay a yearly subscription or pay per mile to Amazon or somesuch. The more I think of it I think this is the only way it could possibly work.

Car ownership is dead.

Maybe we will no longer own the homes? We will have little temporary places that you sleep in for a set period of time, and then you can move onto a different place.. or stay there. We can call them apartments.


Home ownership is dead.

 

[Rahh]

Meanwhile the rest of France:

 

[daglesj]

Maybe we will no longer own the homes? We will have little temporary places that you sleep in for a set period of time, and then you can move onto a different place.. or stay there. We can call them apartments.


Home ownership is dead.

Lol, no you'll be given a corporate home by your employer and you can be thrown out with a moments notice onto the street unless you work 18 hours a day for minimum wage and provide the corporation with children as new employees.

Meat for the grinder.

But seriously I think going forward a lot of the things we take for granted like cars will be taken over by standardisation and corporate ownership.

Enjoy that v8 Hellcat while you can. It could be gone in 30 years.

 

[Sikkyu]

Except "France could close 'up to 17' nuclear reactors by 2025"

All cars are electric but all new power plants are coal.

ok

 

[ymer]

So what's gonna happen to all the used gas cars? are they gonna sell them to a poor country?

 

[raz-0]

China, France, Norway, the domino pieces keep falling. Old geezers continue to sit on their front lawns, shaking their canes at gravity.

There's a huge gap between saying you will do this and doing it. If you look at what was done in China or France, technically California did it with their zero emissions vehicle regulatin some time ago... It just didn't work and they had to walk it back.

And ignore the carbon footprint created by mining the materials to build them also.

At least in the case of France, their primary concern isn't global warming, but their health care system expenses vs. particulate pollutants. Paris adds on to that cultural preservation as the pollutants from their largely diesel vehicles is rough on their old architecture.

 

[daglesj]

At least in the case of France, their primary concern isn't global warming, but their health care system expenses vs. particulate pollutants. Paris adds on to that cultural preservation as the pollutants from their largely diesel vehicles is rough on their old architecture.

Yeah you'd be amazed at how much of the world isn't made from plasterboard, plywood and zinc cladding less than 10 years old.

 

[Hallucinator]

You can't hack old time cars.

But those new all-electric cars loaded with hi-tech gadgets?

Good luck.

 

[bbartlett]

China, France, Norway, the domino pieces keep falling. Old geezers continue to sit on their front lawns, shaking their canes at gravity.

Nothing say progress like your government telling you "Buy a new car or go to jail."

Hippies used to be all groovy, but they're slowly transforming into the totalitarians. What a strange world.

 

[/dev/null]

Maybe we will no longer own the vehicles. There will just be pick up points and you pay a yearly subscription or pay per mile to Amazon or somesuch. The more I think of it I think this is the only way it could possibly work.

Car ownership is dead.

I drive 20k miles a year, sometimes more, and that is mostly commuting. I hope car rental is cheap & it comes in stick

 

[fuzzylogik]

Pretty sure Hydrogen is just too expensive to make in large quantities. Otherwise, I'm a little disappointed it didn't take off.

Seems like it would be easier/cheaper to figure out how to make the most plentiful resource on the planet into hydrogen over trying to expand (or rather, create) reliable, cheap "clean energy" and amazingly fast charging batteries and places to do it. *shrugs*

oh wait. figuring that out might actually help with that too. lol.

 

[LMT MFA]

How are they gonna enforce that? Police pull you over because you are driving a gas car? I'll keep my gas-guzzler V8 until I die.

Uh, yeah, exactly, just like they would for any other banned type of vehicle.

And you can keep it as long as you want, but if it's forbidden to operate on certain sections of road, you won't be driving it there.

 

[LMT MFA]

You people are severely overreacting, this is one city, not a country. This will only be a start, you'll have plenty of time to use up your busted ass petrol cars before any even remain for sale.

People complaining about this don't realize how old they're getting, complaining about progress. Or maybe they finally care about something enough to become the grumpy old man, angry at the youngsters for taking away what was cool to them. The type of people they used to laugh at when it wasn't their stuff changing out from under their asses.

Either way, in the long run, getting rid of combustion engines is the way forward, and if electric isn't the best option, something else will come along.

 

[Rebel44]

How are they gonna enforce that? Police pull you over because you are driving a gas car? I'll keep my gas-guzzler V8 until I die.

Enforcement is super easy - cameras reading license place and connected to DMV database. After that just send everyone who was caught a letter informing them about their €500 fee for entering no ICE zone.

 

[NeoNemesis]

Seems like it would be easier/cheaper to figure out how to make the most plentiful resource on the planet into hydrogen over trying to expand (or rather, create) reliable, cheap "clean energy" and amazingly fast charging batteries and places to do it. *shrugs*

oh wait. figuring that out might actually help with that too. lol.

It isn't hard to turn water into hydrogen and oxygen. The problem is that it takes more energy than it produces.

What we really need is nuclear fusion.

 

[gamerk2]

whatever happened to hydrogen full cells?

Lack of infrastructure. Toyota was the only one really pushing it, and they can't build a hydrogen infrastructure alone. Everyone else went electric, so electric wins by default.

 

[gamerk2]

Yes there are three main barriers with electric cars IMO.

1. Infrastructure to charge and power.

2. Time to charge. If you can't do it in 2-3 minutes...not going to work. You'll have to have charging points for 1000+ cars on a major highway if it takes longer than 15 minutes rather then 6 pumps.

3. Ultimate range before having to 2. I think 400 miles on a charge needs to happen ASAP.

I think the best we'll be able to do unless some quantum leap in this tech happens is aim for 75% of vehicles to be hybrids (the other 25% all electric) by 2050.

1 is easily solvable; every gas station becomes a fast-charge electric charging station. Right now, Tesla is trying to do it all themselves, but that causes its own problems. Retrofitting gas stations is the "best" solution, since that solves the location problem in one go.

2 is a problem with current tech (15 minutes), though it's likely charging stations (see 1 above) become eateries or other hospitality venue in order to eat the time. Not ideal, but not a massive limitation when you consider 2 only becomes a problem on long trips where you'll probably want a break anyways.

3 is not a problem; we're already straddling 300 miles per charge at the high end, which is what gas powered cards were getting before tighter fuel standards went into effect a decade or so ago. More is obviously better, but as long as we get around 300 miles per charge, there isn't a limitation. Of course, this assumes problems 1 and 2 are addressed first.

 

[naib]

1 is easily solvable; every gas station becomes a fast-charge electric charging station. Right now, Tesla is trying to do it all themselves, but that causes its own problems. Retrofitting gas stations is the "best" solution, since that solves the location problem in one go.

#1 isn't easily solvable... making every petrol station a recharge station only address the point of refuelling & that is "easily solvable". Getting the electricity from the grid to these station where such a draw never existed is the problem with infrastructure.
For the UK generation needs to double, overheads need to double, substations need to double. THIS is the infrastructure that needs to be addressed. THIS is infrastructure that has not been touched since the 50's in the 1st world countries. THIS is infrastructure that will take a lot of time, resource and public debt (assuming there is an appetite for it).

The point of consumption equally cannot be solved until #2 is solved. Lets say everyone doubles down and essentially exposes a 10kVA charging point at 115V,60Hz just chucking high current at the batteries to charge fast. ... but 5years later there is a massive breakthrough and it is found that a certain battery charges a lot quicker at higher voltage, higher frequency ALOT more efficient ... then what.
All these cars have also got to agree on a standard for the charging port instead of this constant "not invented here, get royalties"

#1 and #2 are not trivial when economics are taking into account.

#1 should have started 10years ago

 

[daglesj]

#1 isn't easily solvable... making every petrol station a recharge station only address the point of refuelling & that is "easily solvable". Getting the electricity from the grid to these station where such a draw never existed is the problem with infrastructure.
For the UK generation needs to double, overheads need to double, substations need to double. THIS is the infrastructure that needs to be addressed. THIS is infrastructure that has not been touched since the 50's in the 1st world countries. THIS is infrastructure that will take a lot of time, resource and public debt (assuming there is an appetite for it).

The point of consumption equally cannot be solved until #2 is solved. Lets say everyone doubles down and essentially exposes a 10kVA charging point at 115V,60Hz just chucking high current at the batteries to charge fast. ... but 5years later there is a massive breakthrough and it is found that a certain battery charges a lot quicker at higher voltage, higher frequency ALOT more efficient ... then what.
All these cars have also got to agree on a standard for the charging port instead of this constant "not invented here, get royalties"

#1 and #2 are not trivial when economics are taking into account.

#1 should have started 10years ago

Yeah can you even imagine if Apple made a car and changed the charging port/connector every two years?

These are all standards that are going to have to set and agreed for 50 years or more.

 

[naib]

Yeah can you even imagine if Apple made a car and changed the charging port/connector every two years?

These are all standards that are going to have to set and agreed for 50 years or more.

please dont... that would give me nightmares. This is my area of expertise and the one thing I despise is these artificial incompatibilities

 

[Deleted member 93354]

whatever happened to hydrogen full cells?

Several problems.

1. They are really expensive. The only truly effective fuel cells have large amounts of platinum.
2. The electron transfer barrier of the fuel cell fouls with time. So fuel cells do have to be replaced.
3. There's no infrastructure in place for hydrogen fuel.

 

[Dayaks]

Several problems.

1. They are really expensive. The only truly effective fuel cells have large amounts of platinum.
2. The electron transfer barrier of the fuel cell fouls with time. So fuel cells do have to be replaced.
3. There's no infrastructure in place for hydrogen fuel.

Hydrogen is apparently still alive and strong from an R&D standpoint. I work for a distributor and we have an engineer assigned just to supporting hydrogen companies. Not something I'd care to be around personally... he talks about 30-60k PSI.

 

[dangerouseddy]

obviously it'll work out to be no cars for the surfs and rocket travel for the rich by 2040.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

You people are severely overreacting, this is one city, not a country. This will only be a start, you'll have plenty of time to use up your busted ass petrol cars before any even remain for sale.

People complaining about this don't realize how old they're getting, complaining about progress. Or maybe they finally care about something enough to become the grumpy old man, angry at the youngsters for taking away what was cool to them. The type of people they used to laugh at when it wasn't their stuff changing out from under their asses.

Either way, in the long run, getting rid of combustion engines is the way forward, and if electric isn't the best option, something else will come along.

No. We were once young too. And hindsight into our own past behavior has taught us "Just because it's new doesn't mean it's better." There's a reason why younger adults upgrade more often, trade in their car more often, eat out more often, finance more often.

We look back as we grow older and realize "We don't need new. What we have is fine." The same thing happened with our parents. And the same things will happen with you. It's not a knock on the younger generation. It's just the way things are.

 

[M76]

All cars are electric but all new power plants are coal.

ok

What? Like those are the only two options. Nuclear or coal.

Meanwhile the rest of France:

Yeah that's a typical french vehicle endulging in a typical french hobby.
Meanwhile the co2 pollution of the us is still four times as much for every person.

 

[naib]

No. We were once young too. And hindsight into our own past behavior has taught us "Just because it's new doesn't mean it's better." There's a reason why younger adults upgrade more often, trade in their car more often, eat out more often, finance more often.

We look back as we grow older and realize "We don't need new. What we have is fine." The same thing happened with our parents. And the same things will happen with you. It's not a knock on the younger generation. It's just the way things are.

 

[naib]

Meanwhile the co2 pollution of the us is still four times as much for every person.

orly... is this one of those meme's that america is bad?
I have already posted in this thread but apparently the actual true is too much to swallow
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_...n-global-co2-emissions-2016-report-103425.pdf

Changes in largest emitting countries In summary, the six largest emitting countries/regions in 2015 were: China (with 29% share in the global total), the United States (14%), the European Union (EU-28) (10%), India (7%), the Russian Federation (5%) and Japan (3.5%) (Figure 2.2). Regional CO2 emission trends differed strongly between countries, in particular, between the top six emitting countries and the European Union, which accounted for two thirds of total global emissions. In China and the United States, emissions decreased (by 0.7% and 2.6%, respectively) after a slight increase (0.9%)

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Hydrogen is apparently still alive and strong from an R&D standpoint. I work for a distributor and we have an engineer assigned just to supporting hydrogen companies. Not something I'd care to be around personally... he talks about 30-60k PSI.

Not surprising. H2 is one of the most used compounds in chemistry.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Touche...


But case in point: New technology isn't always a blessing:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazin...the-smartphone-destroyed-a-generation/534198/


https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose...k-employees-floor-plan-hq-spaceship-aapl.html

And while facebook messenger and facebook are super awesome for keeping up with your friends, they do spy on everything you do. And what will they do with that information?
Do you want a public company knowing that you regularly used drugs in your 20's when a potential employer can hire a private firm to data mine your information after it's sold?


https://www.fastcompany.com/4045145...abits-to-figure-out-which-ideas-to-steal-next


You think, "But a huge public company would never release that information" - said Equifax/NSA.

There are still very significant problems with electric cars that prevent significant adoption rates:

1. Lithium source (mining sources and refining)
2. Power delivery and source of that power
3. Range and charging time.
4. Cost

 

[M76]

orly... is this one of those meme's that america is bad?
I have already posted in this thread but apparently the actual true is too much to swallow
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/news_...n-global-co2-emissions-2016-report-103425.pdf

Do you even read what you cite?

CO2 / cap in 2015

US: 16.1
EU: 6.9

Change in CO2 / Cap 1990-2015

US: -19%
EU: -25%

Yeah that's something to be proud of.

Mentioning another problem (China) doesn't change the fact that compared to EU the US is still looking pretty bad.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

Do you even read what you cite?

CO2 / cap in 2015

US: 16.1
EU: 6.9

Change in CO2 / Cap 1990-2015

US: -19%
EU: -25%

Yeah that's something to be proud of.

Mentioning another problem (China) doesn't change the fact that compared to EU the US is still looking pretty bad.

There's something else not mentioned here: The US economy is 10x's larger than the world's second largest: China. That means we manufacture a lot more.

The Paris accords were really unfair because Europe manufactures less than the US by far and as a result, it's easier to cap Europe's production. The Paris Accord made it a lot more expensive to manufacture stuff here in the USA. So I can understand why a number of US businesses were less then pleased with the agreement.

As always, you need to look at both sides of the argument to make a decision.

 

[M76]

There's something else not mentioned here: The US economy is 10x's larger than the world's second largest: China. That means we manufacture a lot more.

The Paris accords were really unfair because Europe manufactures less than the US by far and as a result, it's easier to cap Europe's production. The Paris Accord made it a lot more expensive to manufacture stuff here in the USA. So I can understand why a number of US businesses were less then pleased with the agreement.

As always, you need to look at both sides of the argument to make a decision.

We're not making a decision we're looking at emissions. It was a conscious decision by the US to not lower emissions by the same degree as the EU. It is in fact the reason the production capability is higher, because less strict regulations make it possible to manufacture cheaper. There are no free meals. The EU produces less partially because of the restrictions it imposes on itself.

 

[Deleted member 93354]

We're not making a decision we're looking at emissions. It was a conscious decision by the US to not lower emissions by the same degree as the EU. It is in fact the reason the production capability is higher, because less strict regulations make it possible to manufacture cheaper. There are no free meals. The EU produces less partially because of the restrictions it imposes on itself.

I'm not sure I buy that argument. Loosely translated it means, "We want to have a cleaner environment, so our company will intentionally sell less stuff made here" I know VW wouldn't be on that list of companies. ;-)

At the end of the day, it just means more companies will make stuff in china. So the Paris accord really doesn't solve the problem. (That is IF CO2 is actually a problem)

 

[naib]

Do you even read what you cite?

CO2 / cap in 2015

US: 16.1
EU: 6.9

Change in CO2 / Cap 1990-2015

US: -19%
EU: -25%

Yeah that's something to be proud of.

Mentioning another problem (China) doesn't change the fact that compared to EU the US is still looking pretty bad.

did you even read it?
I never mentioned China, you did.
what you wrote EXACTLY was..

Meanwhile the co2 pollution of the us is still four times as much for every person.

That is a piss-poor sentence. four times as much.... compared to what? Per capita America is chucking out ~17tonnes per capita in 2017 ... EU is chucking out out ~7tonnes per capita.

That isn't 4x .
Are you comparing to India then sure America is chucking out 4x per capita

 

[Deleted member 93354]

.

That isn't 4x .
Are you comparing to India then sure America is chucking out 4x per capita

You might have a point. The primary fuel source for home heat & cooking (among the poor) in Indian homes is dung. And that produces a lot of nasty stuff when burnt, including CO2

My god my head is full of useless $hit information.

 

[naib]

There's something else not mentioned here: The US economy is 10x's larger than the world's second largest: China. That means we manufacture a lot more.

The Paris accords were really unfair because Europe manufactures less than the US by far and as a result, it's easier to cap Europe's production. The Paris Accord made it a lot more expensive to manufacture stuff here in the USA. So I can understand why a number of US businesses were less then pleased with the agreement.

As always, you need to look at both sides of the argument to make a decision.

The Paris accord is a crock of shite.
Everyone rags on Trump for pulling out when Obama "agreed" to it in 2015. Congress never ratified it and had no intention of ratifying it.
Since 2005 the EU and USA have been decreasing the amount emmsions & this was before the Paris accord. India and China have been ramping theirs up.

Actually go and read the accord and the agreement that India and China were given
Paris climate deal however is bad...
1) China can carry on INCREASING emissions for 13years
2) India can carry on but also will be paid BILLIONS from other signatories
3) Solar cells, a significant place where green generation will come from is a booming Chinese industry...
3a) rather than fostering local manufacturers of solar, short-term pushes require buying panels from China, panels manufactured using increase in coal to smelt silicon.

Equally what has gender got todo with climate:

Acknowledging that climate change is a common concern of humankind, Parties should, when taking action to address climate change, respect, promote and consider their respective obligations on human rights, the right to health, the rights of indigenous peoples, local communities, migrants, children, persons with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations and the right to development, as well as gender equality, empowerment of women and intergenerational equity,[/quoted]
Seriously it is a crock of shite! EU and US were already decreasing. The paris accord was constructed to stop China and India and that includes allowing them to increase while at the same time EU+US are to pay them for the privilege

great deal for china and india. Retarded deal for EU and US yet all the bleeding hearts are going on about the climate is going to fail because america pulled out. Read the accord, read the side deals, read the actual emmision data.

 

[naib]

You might have a point. The primary fuel source for home heat & cooking (among the poor) in Indian homes is dung. And that produces a lot of nasty stuff when burnt, including CO2

My god my head is full of useless $hit information.

Also the population is rediculously large compared to america so the "per capita comes down"

 

[LMT MFA]

No. We were once young too. And hindsight into our own past behavior has taught us "Just because it's new doesn't mean it's better." There's a reason why younger adults upgrade more often, trade in their car more often, eat out more often, finance more often.

We look back as we grow older and realize "We don't need new. What we have is fine." The same thing happened with our parents. And the same things will happen with you. It's not a knock on the younger generation. It's just the way things are.

I'm hardly the "younger generation", but what we have is not fine, and we do need new, especially in automotive. The only reason people are speaking up is worries about "muh freedumbs" (not limited to the US) and "don't tell me what I can't have".

Both ways of thinking will be obsolete before you know it. People will still drive for fun, it'll just be "different", which always takes getting used to.

 

[aShrubbery!]

HAHAH very funny!!

Now think as hard as you can about this simple question, "what would the world look/be like if the USA never existed"?

American Indians would still freely roam the land. Mass slavery to America would not have have happened. No nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, since there would have been no attacks on a non-existing Pearl Harbor.. an so on and so forth.
All in all, that kind of argument is stupid, since the US has contributed both good and bad to world History. And I am sure most people would only consider the good.

 

[aShrubbery!]

whatever happened to hydrogen full cells?

I smoked them!!!