European Union aiming to ban new combustion engine cars starting 2035

Daniel Sims

Posts: 758   +29
Staff
In brief: As the climate crisis grows ever more urgent, several governments worldwide have recently pledged to stop the sale of new gas-powered vehicles in the 2030s to lower CO2 emissions. The European Union is the latest body to introduce such plans.

This week, the European Council and the EU Parliament agreed on a proposal to ban the introduction of new internal combustion engine cars and vans starting in 2035. The two groups expected to adopt the new rules soon.

The proposal's first step will be to reduce CO2 emissions from new cars by 55 percent compared to 2021 levels and new vans by 50 percent before 2030. The EU hopes to accomplish the task by tightening emissions regulations to convince manufacturers to make more low-emission and zero-emission vehicles.

Manufacturers can earn loosened targets if enough of their new vehicles are low-or-zero-emission. The rules increase that minimum goal to 25 percent of cars and 17 percent of vans until 2030. Automakers will receive fewer emissions credits for introducing CO2-reducing innovations.

The EU hopes the proposal will spur further development of cheaper electronic vehicles, more carbon-neutral fuels, and other zero-emissions innovations. Exceeding emissions limits will incur a penalty of €95 per gram of CO2 per kilometer over the limit for a given year. Small-volume manufacturers that sell at most a few thousand vehicles a year, like Ferrari or Aston Martin, are exempt from the new rules until the end of 2035.

In the US, three states --- Massachusetts, New York, and California --- want to stop putting new gas-powered vehicles on the road by 2035. Other countries, including Japan, China, the UK, and Germany, are looking to enact similar measures. Norway and South Korea have higher goals that set the ban deadline to 2025.

According to the UN, such drastic steps may be necessary to avert the worst consequences of climate change. A recently-released UN environment report says there is no longer a viable path to limiting global temperature increases to 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures.

Current policies put us on course for a 2.8C increase by 2100, while the latest pledges from governments and other organizations will only cut that back to 2.4C or 2.6C. Cutting emissions by 2030 will require transformations across the entire global economic system.

Permalink to story.

 

Neatfeatguy

Posts: 1,094   +2,020
There's no way demand for batteries for EV cars will be able to be kept up with in such a short timeframe. Nor will the electrical grid be able to be improved upon for the high demand of extra electricity.

This is a pipe dream that's not going to end well. Ideally a dead line should be out to 2050...I could see nearly 30 years down the line having things setup correctly to handle the gradual change over from ICE to electric, but not 13 years (well, 12 years from now seeing as how 2022 is dang near over).
 
R

Red34jfp

This is a pipe dream that's not going to end well.
It does not really have to end well. Europe is a continent of octogenarians, do you think that we'll rebel against what our EU bureaucrats have decided for us? People will give up on cars and mobility and we'll go back to the Middle Ages, it's as simple as that, at least for us. I'm more concerned about the rest of the world, to be honest.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 749   +620
The EU (especially western Europeans) along with their UK allies deserve every bit of misery they get this winter. That bunch cries day in and day out about their electricity bill in regards to Nvidia and Intel yet they go out of their way to literally kill themselves off like some third world craphole who's energy policies are influenced by a teenage middle school dropout from Sweden.


 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,257   +4,397
Ok I'm going to guess or preempt what's going on with a couple things

1) Given the time this was posted this is likely to be seen by mostly American audiences first so, give it a few hours and check back tomorrow when the Europeans get a chance to see and tell you that yes: It is possible.

Mostly because unlike the US and large parts of Canada, lots of European cities are not just vast oceans of asphalt as far as the eye can see that are desgined to pretty much force you to own a car. Public transport and even just biking around is a) Infintively less likely to kill you and b) Way more likely to actually be enough for most people without owning a car.

2) The issue is that even if you disagree and want to somehow talk over Europeans who are doing fine without cars, people are not understanding than 2035 is already 15 years too late at this rate.

So if we're going to have to move around in bikes and reserve cars for people who truly need them like people with disabilities or the other option is JUST DIE do you guys get that there's really no option but to go carbon free at this point?

3) And just for the black flag folks out there: No I don't think that even immediate policies (Let alone policies for over 10 years into the future) will do anything to even slow down climate change and what we would need to be urgently talking about is degrowth and in a radical fashion.
 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 749   +620
Ok I'm going to guess or preempt what's going on with a couple things

1) Given the time this was posted this is likely to be seen by mostly American audiences first so, give it a few hours and check back tomorrow when the Europeans get a chance to see and tell you that yes: It is possible.

Mostly because unlike the US and large parts of Canada, lots of European cities are not just vast oceans of asphalt as far as the eye can see that are desgined to pretty much force you to own a car. Public transport and even just biking around is a) Infintively less likely to kill you and b) Way more likely to actually be enough for most people without owning a car.

2) The issue is that even if you disagree and want to somehow talk over Europeans who are doing fine without cars, people are not understanding than 2035 is already 15 years too late at this rate.

So if we're going to have to move around in bikes and reserve cars for people who truly need them like people with disabilities or the other option is JUST DIE do you guys get that there's really no option but to go carbon free at this point?

3) And just for the black flag folks out there: No I don't think that even immediate policies (Let alone policies for over 10 years into the future) will do anything to even slow down climate change and what we would need to be urgently talking about is degrowth and in a radical fashion.
Degrowth? What is this 'degrowth' you speak of? Is this something akin to allowing millions of third world economic migrants into the EU .. is that the 'degrowth' you speak of.

btw the Dutch being the Dutch are already on it. They're preparing (grooming) their people to start eating insects just like their UN masters instructed them.



 

NicktheWVAHick

Posts: 422   +796
So many of them (esp the elderly) will freeze to death this winter that it will be a moot point. Once the Great European Winter of Death is over, there will be plenty of electricity and EVs for everyone who survives. Enjoy!
 

Plutoisaplanet

Posts: 892   +1,423
Ok I'm going to guess or preempt what's going on with a couple things

1) Given the time this was posted this is likely to be seen by mostly American audiences first so, give it a few hours and check back tomorrow when the Europeans get a chance to see and tell you that yes: It is possible.

Mostly because unlike the US and large parts of Canada, lots of European cities are not just vast oceans of asphalt as far as the eye can see that are desgined to pretty much force you to own a car. Public transport and even just biking around is a) Infintively less likely to kill you and b) Way more likely to actually be enough for most people without owning a car.

2) The issue is that even if you disagree and want to somehow talk over Europeans who are doing fine without cars, people are not understanding than 2035 is already 15 years too late at this rate.

So if we're going to have to move around in bikes and reserve cars for people who truly need them like people with disabilities or the other option is JUST DIE do you guys get that there's really no option but to go carbon free at this point?

3) And just for the black flag folks out there: No I don't think that even immediate policies (Let alone policies for over 10 years into the future) will do anything to even slow down climate change and what we would need to be urgently talking about is degrowth and in a radical fashion.
All the alarmist talk about how our planet is doomed is ridiculously foolish. You have to realize that humanity thrives even at the most extreme of climate situations. Russia has absurd winters and the middle east has extreme summers. In the worst possible situation, humanity will continue on. We can grow food in nearly every climate, and the entire earth is not going to transition to the worst possible climate globally (Antarctica).

Anyways I actually find it funny that your claim is that we needed to go carbon-free two years ago and now the consequence is certain death in the foreign future. Of course that’s after decades of other alarmist climate disaster predictions that failed to come true, and yet this is another completely unprovable apparently life-or-death “theory” you insist on.

And by the way before you claim that I’m a science denier or something, I’ve been driving an EV for 7 years. I just don’t buy into the conspiracy theory that we’re all dead in 2050, nor do I think we need to be required to stop buying gas vehicles in order to change over into a mostly carbonless emitting society in 20 years.
 

shark975

Posts: 108   +126
It's interesting that electric vehicles cant win in the market so leftists have to ban the competition. anyway like most environmental regulations the result here will be more expensive cars, families will afford fewer cars, and more poverty. look in usa where EV's typically run 50-60k and up, a large premium on more efficient and less polluting ICE vehicles.
 

psycros

Posts: 4,571   +6,884
Meanwhile, China and India will keep on laughing all the way to the bank. They'll have to cross over 20 miles of toxic garbage to do it, but they couldn't care less.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,910   +3,219
TechSpot Elite
And just for the black flag folks out there: No I don't think that even immediate policies (Let alone policies for over 10 years into the future) will do anything to even slow down climate change and what we would need to be urgently talking about is degrowth and in a radical fashion.
Actually, and I'm prepared for my fellow left leaning Democrats to blast me, but there are actually very strong reasons for optimism. Certainly we have all heard the small studies over the last year or so that confirm that. But this article is a long, fact filled look at the past, present, and future of climate change. And what we have done to greatly brighten the outlook. I hope all who comments for or against it at least reads it first.
After a thorough read, I am convinced we have a very good outlook if we keep it up.


The-sky-is-NOT-falling.jpg
 

toooooot

Posts: 1,828   +984
It seems like there is no concrete proof that our grid can take all the electric cars to charge.
I laughed when there was no sun in Cali and they had shortage of electricity.
I mean do people even think?
If there is a shortage of batteries, car prices will skyrocket.
Do they not realize how many people will not be able to afford a car at all?
I mean people who pay taxes and support the system. Why are you r***ds
risk like this?
Why not do it slowly while monitoring everything to avoid pitfalls?
Lets start with reliable electricity production. And I dont mean solar panels which dont work when there is no sun or wind turbines which dont work when there is no wind.
We have not solved the problem with electricity, not enough.

 

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 749   +620
Actually, and I'm prepared for my fellow left leaning Democrats to blast me, but there are actually very strong reasons for optimism. Certainly we have all heard the small studies over the last year or so that confirm that. But this article is a long, fact filled look at the past, present, and future of climate change. And what we have done to greatly brighten the outlook. I hope all who comments for or against it at least reads it first.
After a thorough read, I am convinced we have a very good outlook if we keep it up.


The-sky-is-NOT-falling.jpg
The same NYT who brought us Jussie Smollett, the Covington Catholic high school kids, Kyle Rittenhouse and Russia collusion hoax just to name a few.
 
Last edited:

m4a4

Posts: 3,179   +4,265
TechSpot Elite
Did I miss a breakthrough battery tech get announced that replaces lithium batteries? Or are politicians these days (and the people who elect them, assuming they're not appointed) really that dumb?

And on a similar topic, was there some breakthrough renewable energy tech (not nuclear, because god forbid we do something smart) that makes energy generation make sense for their power grids?

It all sounds like hasty "feel good" policy that will screw the majority of people over in the long run.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,910   +3,219
TechSpot Elite
The same NYT who brought us Jussie Smollett, the Covington Catholic high school kids, Kyle Rittenhouse and Russia collusion hoax just to name a few.
And 130+ Pulitzer's, 75+\- George Polk awards.
And, I know you didn't read it.


Not to mention, Rittenhouse should possibly be in jail and Russian collusion is a long-proven fact.
 
Last edited:

AlaskaGuy

Posts: 749   +620
Yeah, I forgot you are a "one bad apple spoils the bunch" kind.
So long as the apple isn't in your bushel.

And I'm right on russian collusion. Unless you have one of your grand schemes that shows proof otherwise, which I would love to hear.
The only ones colluding with Russia ...



 

Kam7r

Posts: 169   +340
There's no way demand for batteries for EV cars will be able to be kept up with in such a short timeframe. Nor will the electrical grid be able to be improved upon for the high demand of extra electricity.

This is a pipe dream that's not going to end well. Ideally a dead line should be out to 2050...I could see nearly 30 years down the line having things setup correctly to handle the gradual change over from ICE to electric, but not 13 years (well, 12 years from now seeing as how 2022 is dang near over).
I'm not entirely sure about that, in France we're about to open the biggest Lithium mine in the whole continent, we have new big @ss nuclear reactors in construction and don't forget that we have a really big public transportation to the point I didn't needed a car for 10+ years... I'm not quite fond of politicians and I'm normally really suspicious about them but I think this may be possible to manage... time will tell
 

Fearghast

Posts: 594   +541
I wonder how it will affect hybrids ... it seems only plugins with range roughly 100 km will be able to survive, and that would be really bad news for gas prices.
I certainly do not oppose the idea, I myself am already driving something like that, but for most of the people in my city, it is certainly not realistic in terms of 10 or even 15 years in the future.
It is possible, no question about it, but that possibility depends on unlimited cash to build insane infrastructure ... and that is just not realistic.
It's a good plan ... for someone with a steady salary and their own garage or a parking spot with an outlet.
 

NumberSix

Posts: 193   +304
In the UK the laughing stock of the world that is Boris Johnson brought in a ban on new fossil fuel cars from 2030. The charging infrastructure here isn't the best (but is improving) but the real problem is the massive lack of off street parking in the UK, how are these people supposed to charge their cars?

Synthetic petrol is here now and just needs a massive ramp up in production to lower the cost, the cars run on it without modification and the infrastructure is already in place.
 

scavengerspc

Posts: 2,910   +3,219
TechSpot Elite
The only ones colluding with Russia ...



I gave you a like. How could I not?

The first link was from 2015, about a story from 2013.

Link 2 was from 2017 about the speech he gave in 2010.

Link 3? The story was from 2012.

All three were from when Russia was a rival and not an enemy, or yet committing crimes against civilians. Or stealing land.

Im wondering if we should talk about the Kushner $2 Billion investment from the Saudis? How much of that was his to keep?
 
Last edited:

ScottSoapbox

Posts: 445   +809
Germany does not have enough power this winter to heat everyone's homes.

If that doesn't wake the German people up to how destructive the current "green" EU policies are, I don't know what will.
 
Last edited: