12 ms·

Porsche, Ferrari e-fuel push at heart of EU engine debate

53 points by hammock 4y ago

rob74 4y ago
https://archive.is/PT5tJ https://archive.is/PT5tJ
PaulHoule 4y ago
That Fischer-Tropsch technology has been a bridesmaid but not a bride for a very long time. It requires a huge machine to produce a modest amount of fuel because the chemical reactions that build up molecular chains and break them down are carefully balanced so the reactor is doing numerous wasted chemical reactions that will be undone. It’s one of the few cases where iron is a workable catalyst but the yield is so bad people have scoured the periodic table for alternatives for 75+ years. There is no doubt it will make good fuel for F1 engines and even for the change-averse aviation fuel market. The best use case today is the US Navy wanting to make e-Fuel from seawater, fuel, and nuclear energy which will help carriers keep their air wing fueled without slowing down to take on fuel from a tanker. Most of the serious work on synthetic fuels for ground transport has centered around single-entity fuels such as hydrogen, ammonia, 1-butanol, dimethyl ether, etc. I’d guess though if you can afford a legacy Ferrari you can afford to fuel it with FT gasoline.
- Loic 4y ago
  Shell is already selling GTL diesel in Germany. It is their "high performance" diesel because the FT reaction is providing a nicely controlled distribution of linear paraffines. So, they boost their normal diesel with a bit of GTL produced diesel.
  - ComputerGuru 4y ago
    Do you know what the cetane number for both the original GTL diesel and the blended mix they sell are? (Trying to quantify the performance claim - not that cetane alone does that, of course.)
    - Loic 4y ago
      The wikipedia page about the cetane number is giving the answer[0]: 63 (GTL) vs. minimum of 51. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetane_number#Typical_values https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetane_number#Typical_values
  - rasz 4y ago
    If you are after more performance out of a diesel look into LPG augmentation. >30% power boost, cleaner burn and fuel cost savings. On big farmer machines ROI is one season.
- moremetadata 4y ago
  I'm reminded of the synthetic diamond process [1] and the industrial demand for perfect diamonds, cut to order exceeded the perfection nature's diamond mines could never deliver. So with todays digital technology, instead of the analogue world of the 1920's, it would seem the Fischer-Tropsch[2] process has every chance of succeeding on an undustrial scale, bringing vehicle fuel to inhospital regions of the planet, and yet the nuclear industry with notably scaled down nuclear reactors or Small Modular Reactors [3] could be the saviour of the automotive sector, something the Germans have experience of as well, if stuxnet [4] and Iran are anything to go by. I still dont know why we dont bury nuclear waste using a convergent boundary [5] from plate tectonics. Its all ultimately come from core of this planet, why not return it to the core for the ultimate form of recycling, like much of our landfill waste, and man made waste. I sometimes think environmentalists and politicians want us to live in our waste. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond#High_pressure,_high_temperature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond#High_pressur... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_proces... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_boundary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_boundary
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - magic_hamster 4y ago
    This is the first time I hear this idea to use convergent boundaries to bury anything. It's interesting! However, to my layman understanding, when discussing nuclear waste we need to be precise. If the containers break or leak in an undesirable place (or depth) without us having any access to it or being able to fix it, I imagine it could become quite the catastrophe. And the pressure and sheer power tectonic plates can apply, to my understanding, far exceeds anything we can build. So how is it possible to safely bury radioactive waste in convergent boundaries?
    - PaulHoule 4y ago
- jabl 4y ago
  If we're talking about fuel for gasoline engines, probably the Bergius process would be more suitable, as that produces fairly high octane gasoline. It was extensively used by Nazi Germany for producing aviation gasoline, FWIW. Fischer-Tropsch, while more widely known, is better for producing diesel and turbine type fuels. Though the same basic objections you present are there for the Bergius process as well, capital intensive and consumes a lot of energy, so hard to imagine such fuels being economically viable.
  - ComputerGuru 4y ago
    Curious because Porsche no longer makes any diesel engines. I don’t know about Ferrari but I assume they’re gasoline-only.
    - jabl 4y ago
      TBH, probably a lot of the non-expert literature seems to use FT fuels as a synonym for any kind of synthetically produced liquid hydrocarbons.
  - jgamman 4y ago
    you want to turn coal into gasoline? i think most people consider use of FT fuels as an approx. neutral carbon emissions assuming clean energy source. >>The process involves the hydroliquefication of brown coal, also known as lignite, into crude oil.
    - jabl 4y ago
      No, I don't wanna turn coal into gasoline; we should try to reduce the net addition of CO2 to the atmosphere, not increase it further. AFAIU the Bergius process can use any source of carbon, doesn't need to be coal. The reason Nazi Germany used it for aviation fuel was that it apparently produces a lot of aromatics, whereas FT tends to produce more straight alkanes which are fine for diesel or jet fuel but have very poor octane rating. Though the lots-of-aromatics approach to increasing octane might not be compatible with current day pollution specifications.
trabant00 4y ago
Leaving exotic sport cars aside Europe will not be ready for the ban of new ICE cars in 12 years. Most consumers can't afford an EV, the electricity production is not there yet, the distribution grids are undersized, a lot of people living in old apartment buildings that can't support many chargers, a lot of people park on the street, so on and so forth. When the ban hits the price of second hand ICE cars will explode. This will mean in practice that a lot of people will not be able to afford a car any more. Now this might be a feature, not a bug, depending on how you look at it.
- MrMan 4y ago
  bullshit fantasy
- xwdv 4y ago
  It’s a feature. Europe of all places can tolerate a society of minimal private car ownership.
  - TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
    Europe in cities? Maybe. Europe overall? Absolutely not.
    - kybernetyk 4y ago
      Didn’t you know? For the typical HN poster living in SF or NYC Europe is a 15 minute walkable Utopia where no one pays for health care.
  - expertentipp 4y ago
    Ermm.. no. The cars will simply become luxury for few and the remaining precariat will pay per minute. Cars themselves are a valid concept.
  - richrichardsson 4y ago
    In towns/cities, yes. Rural Europe is a disaster if you don't have a your own transport, as either there is no public transport, or it's atrocious (eg. 2 buses a week in some places).
paganel 4y ago
This, among other things, will be the death of this trade union. The technocrats in Brussels are way out of their mind if they think the average European citizen will be able to afford purchasing a new EV in 10 years, and then to purchase a battery/a new EV every other 8-10 years. And then they'll complain of how come the "populists are taking our votes!".
- nine_k 4y ago
  Let's very optimistically imagine that the cost of batteries will go down 75% (4 times) down in 12 years, given the current massive efforts in this area. Will it make new EV cars massively cheaper? I think it's very improbable. Will it make replacing worn-out batteries economically viable? I think there is hope.
  - maccard 4y ago
    12 years is a long time. 12 years ago, the $30k nissan leaf had a range of 85 miles in a 24kWh battery. A 2023 nissan leaf is $28k, with a 200+ mile advertised range and a 40kWh battery. If you're willing to inflation adjust a little, a $38k nissan leaf today comes with a 60 kWh battery. 12 years before that, we're talking about cars getting 30mpg running on Petrol/Diesel, and we were on euro 2 standards. 12 years is an eternity in technology.
    - TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
      12 years regarding infrastructure is nothing. Just a blip. And you want to significantly increase consumption of electricity, while not building any new power plants, nor upgrading grid.
      - rconti 4y ago
        The parent post made absolutely none of the claims you assert they "want".
        4y ago
TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
In Venezuela cars are not depreciating [0], because there is no supply of new cars from outside. That's what is going to happen with Europe. People will be driving in 30+ years old cars, because nobody won't be able to afford new cars. And OEM manufacturers are aware of this problem [1], but has no solution for it. Everyone started making BEVs, so cost for resources went up. And there is no reason for it to go down. [0] https://www.automotive-fleet.com/157233/market-snapshot-venezuela-fleet-market https://www.automotive-fleet.com/157233/market-snapshot-vene... [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/stellantis-warns-of-car-market-collapse-if-evs-don-t-get-cheaper https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/stellanti...
- rob74 4y ago
  That problem will probably solve itself once gasoline becomes so expensive (because of it becoming a niche product, because of rising taxes, or both) that nobody will be able to afford it anymore - except maybe drivers of 30+ year old Porsches or Ferraris...
  - TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
    Why it should, when there will be demand for it? Last time when French were trying to raise taxes on gas, it ended with Yellow vests riots.
    - martin_a 4y ago
      French are always protesting, that's not a really good measurement.
  - kybernetyk 4y ago
    When fuel becomes this expensive food will become unattainable for most people. Or we somehow miraculously create magic batteries to power commercial transport. The problem with cities will solve itself: no one is going to live in a concrete desert where simple food is too expensive.
dinkblam 4y ago
lets look at the numbers: around 65 million new cars are sold per year. toyota/vw do 10m each year each. sales of super sports cars (ferrari, mclaren, lamborghini) combined are less than 20k units per year. so, only one in 3.000 cars is a super sports car. additionally those cars usually do extremly low mileage of less than 1000km per year. you'd be very hard pressed to find a used ferrari with more than 30k kilometers, even when looking for very old ones so if we combine the rough numbers (1/3000 the volume, 1/10 the mileage, 5 times the consumption) we arrive at the conclusion that only 0.016% of the car emissions come from super sports cars. the number is so low it is basically meaningless, especially since private transport is not a huge percentage of emissions to begin with. for the climate it would be better to upgrade a single old tanker or steel factory than to outlaw combustion V12 sports cars. forcing niche manufacturers to EV-only is not about the climate, it is about jealousy and malevolence, as is most of politics.
- lotsofpulp 4y ago
  Which is why the right way to do this is to increase taxes on fossil fuels to the point that it makes financial sense to upgrade an old tanker of steel factory or buy an electric car.
  - DeRock 4y ago
    People are terrible at doing total cost of ownership budgeting, and will be swayed by a cheaper price upfront. You need to provide the economical incentive (or regulation) when the car is bought to counteract it.
    - lotsofpulp 4y ago
      Car sellers will advertise it, and in the worst case, the government can keep jacking up fossil fuel taxes so that if people did not learn arithmetic in elementary school, they will learn it within a couple years of owning the car.
    - danans 4y ago
      > People are terrible at doing total cost of ownership budgeting, and will be swayed by a cheaper price upfront. All people don't behave this way. People with limited incomes who drive cars generally are very careful about upfront and operational costs. That's why they are the primary buyers of small (mostly used) gasoline powered vehicles. They nearly all have a sense of what kind of MPG they can afford to get. This is because they have higher energy burden. The people who make the choice of buying an inefficient (usually larger) car are usually buying more expensive cars, and are those who have enough income that energy costs aren't a significant burden for them. New and used EVs aren't yet affordable for the former group, but when that happens, lower income people will make pretty rational choices about operational costs.
nomercy400 4y ago
How about treating these kind of cars as a separate class? Sure, you can have an ICE car, but it is not allowed in cities, and you pay a ton of taxes each year.
maxdo 4y ago
make it purely economical: If the car cost $150k+ make it even with rocket engine, unless it safe. Let them pay heavy tax for a "benefit" of emitting stinky gas everywhere around, make a lot of noise everywhere they go. if there is no car on the market within 15% price range of gasoline one, e.g. the cheapest options, allow them to sell gasoline. review every year, profit. With this schema, you can ban any car that is within range of $50k to 150$k easily with no harm to anyone in 2025.
foxes 4y ago
F*ck cars. Luxury car brands do not deserve any special treatment. As for all the same tired debates on HN about cars, it is so simple. Average people in the city do not need a car if the city is properly and humanely designed. Yes some workers, industries and people outside cities still require vehicles, that is not the debate. Majority of urban life should be free from pointless poisonous car driving. Luxury SUVs and sports cars are definitely something that could be curtailed.
Justsignedup 4y ago
I personally think efuels are a good idea, it'll create infrastructure needed to support ALL the legacy cars that will continue to exist in the used market at 2035. They can do an efuel phase-out over the next few years banning all combustible sales including used cars by say 2050.
dzonga 4y ago
the EU trying to regulate everything out of existence sucks big time. why not just double the taxes on carbon fuels . if a gallon of hydrocarbons cost 4EUR make it 7EUR. so people who wanna drive v6 / v8 engines can continue doing that as a hobby. i'm sure the hydrocarbons being burned by average joe in his mustang and rich jill in her ferrari over the weekend. are just minuscule compared to the hydrocarbons released by aviation, military and industry. if alternative fuels work and allow engines to be loud then let it be. we only live one life.

53 points by hammock 4y ago

https://archive.is/PT5tJ https://archive.is/PT5tJ

That Fischer-Tropsch technology has been a bridesmaid but not a bride for a very long time. It requires a huge machine to produce a modest amount of fuel because the chemical reactions that build up molecular chains and break them down are carefully balanced so the reactor is doing numerous wasted chemical reactions that will be undone. It’s one of the few cases where iron is a workable catalyst but the yield is so bad people have scoured the periodic table for alternatives for 75+ years. There is no doubt it will make good fuel for F1 engines and even for the change-averse aviation fuel market. The best use case today is the US Navy wanting to make e-Fuel from seawater, fuel, and nuclear energy which will help carriers keep their air wing fueled without slowing down to take on fuel from a tanker. Most of the serious work on synthetic fuels for ground transport has centered around single-entity fuels such as hydrogen, ammonia, 1-butanol, dimethyl ether, etc. I’d guess though if you can afford a legacy Ferrari you can afford to fuel it with FT gasoline.

Loic 4y ago
Shell is already selling GTL diesel in Germany. It is their "high performance" diesel because the FT reaction is providing a nicely controlled distribution of linear paraffines. So, they boost their normal diesel with a bit of GTL produced diesel.
- ComputerGuru 4y ago
  Do you know what the cetane number for both the original GTL diesel and the blended mix they sell are? (Trying to quantify the performance claim - not that cetane alone does that, of course.)
  - Loic 4y ago
    The wikipedia page about the cetane number is giving the answer[0]: 63 (GTL) vs. minimum of 51. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetane_number#Typical_values https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetane_number#Typical_values
- rasz 4y ago
  If you are after more performance out of a diesel look into LPG augmentation. >30% power boost, cleaner burn and fuel cost savings. On big farmer machines ROI is one season.
moremetadata 4y ago
I'm reminded of the synthetic diamond process [1] and the industrial demand for perfect diamonds, cut to order exceeded the perfection nature's diamond mines could never deliver. So with todays digital technology, instead of the analogue world of the 1920's, it would seem the Fischer-Tropsch[2] process has every chance of succeeding on an undustrial scale, bringing vehicle fuel to inhospital regions of the planet, and yet the nuclear industry with notably scaled down nuclear reactors or Small Modular Reactors [3] could be the saviour of the automotive sector, something the Germans have experience of as well, if stuxnet [4] and Iran are anything to go by. I still dont know why we dont bury nuclear waste using a convergent boundary [5] from plate tectonics. Its all ultimately come from core of this planet, why not return it to the core for the ultimate form of recycling, like much of our landfill waste, and man made waste. I sometimes think environmentalists and politicians want us to live in our waste. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond#High_pressure,_high_temperature https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_diamond#High_pressur... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_process https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer%E2%80%93Tropsch_proces... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_boundary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_boundary
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- magic_hamster 4y ago
  This is the first time I hear this idea to use convergent boundaries to bury anything. It's interesting! However, to my layman understanding, when discussing nuclear waste we need to be precise. If the containers break or leak in an undesirable place (or depth) without us having any access to it or being able to fix it, I imagine it could become quite the catastrophe. And the pressure and sheer power tectonic plates can apply, to my understanding, far exceeds anything we can build. So how is it possible to safely bury radioactive waste in convergent boundaries?
  - PaulHoule 4y ago
jabl 4y ago
If we're talking about fuel for gasoline engines, probably the Bergius process would be more suitable, as that produces fairly high octane gasoline. It was extensively used by Nazi Germany for producing aviation gasoline, FWIW. Fischer-Tropsch, while more widely known, is better for producing diesel and turbine type fuels. Though the same basic objections you present are there for the Bergius process as well, capital intensive and consumes a lot of energy, so hard to imagine such fuels being economically viable.
- ComputerGuru 4y ago
  Curious because Porsche no longer makes any diesel engines. I don’t know about Ferrari but I assume they’re gasoline-only.
  - jabl 4y ago
    TBH, probably a lot of the non-expert literature seems to use FT fuels as a synonym for any kind of synthetically produced liquid hydrocarbons.
- jgamman 4y ago
  you want to turn coal into gasoline? i think most people consider use of FT fuels as an approx. neutral carbon emissions assuming clean energy source. >>The process involves the hydroliquefication of brown coal, also known as lignite, into crude oil.
  - jabl 4y ago
    No, I don't wanna turn coal into gasoline; we should try to reduce the net addition of CO2 to the atmosphere, not increase it further. AFAIU the Bergius process can use any source of carbon, doesn't need to be coal. The reason Nazi Germany used it for aviation fuel was that it apparently produces a lot of aromatics, whereas FT tends to produce more straight alkanes which are fine for diesel or jet fuel but have very poor octane rating. Though the lots-of-aromatics approach to increasing octane might not be compatible with current day pollution specifications.

trabant00 4y ago

Leaving exotic sport cars aside Europe will not be ready for the ban of new ICE cars in 12 years. Most consumers can't afford an EV, the electricity production is not there yet, the distribution grids are undersized, a lot of people living in old apartment buildings that can't support many chargers, a lot of people park on the street, so on and so forth. When the ban hits the price of second hand ICE cars will explode. This will mean in practice that a lot of people will not be able to afford a car any more. Now this might be a feature, not a bug, depending on how you look at it.

MrMan 4y ago
bullshit fantasy
xwdv 4y ago
It’s a feature. Europe of all places can tolerate a society of minimal private car ownership.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
  Europe in cities? Maybe. Europe overall? Absolutely not.
  - kybernetyk 4y ago
    Didn’t you know? For the typical HN poster living in SF or NYC Europe is a 15 minute walkable Utopia where no one pays for health care.
- expertentipp 4y ago
  Ermm.. no. The cars will simply become luxury for few and the remaining precariat will pay per minute. Cars themselves are a valid concept.
- richrichardsson 4y ago
  In towns/cities, yes. Rural Europe is a disaster if you don't have a your own transport, as either there is no public transport, or it's atrocious (eg. 2 buses a week in some places).

paganel 4y ago

This, among other things, will be the death of this trade union. The technocrats in Brussels are way out of their mind if they think the average European citizen will be able to afford purchasing a new EV in 10 years, and then to purchase a battery/a new EV every other 8-10 years. And then they'll complain of how come the "populists are taking our votes!".

nine_k 4y ago
Let's very optimistically imagine that the cost of batteries will go down 75% (4 times) down in 12 years, given the current massive efforts in this area. Will it make new EV cars massively cheaper? I think it's very improbable. Will it make replacing worn-out batteries economically viable? I think there is hope.
- maccard 4y ago
  12 years is a long time. 12 years ago, the $30k nissan leaf had a range of 85 miles in a 24kWh battery. A 2023 nissan leaf is $28k, with a 200+ mile advertised range and a 40kWh battery. If you're willing to inflation adjust a little, a $38k nissan leaf today comes with a 60 kWh battery. 12 years before that, we're talking about cars getting 30mpg running on Petrol/Diesel, and we were on euro 2 standards. 12 years is an eternity in technology.
  - TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
    12 years regarding infrastructure is nothing. Just a blip. And you want to significantly increase consumption of electricity, while not building any new power plants, nor upgrading grid.
    - rconti 4y ago
      The parent post made absolutely none of the claims you assert they "want".
      - 4y ago

TheLoafOfBread 4y ago

In Venezuela cars are not depreciating [0], because there is no supply of new cars from outside. That's what is going to happen with Europe. People will be driving in 30+ years old cars, because nobody won't be able to afford new cars. And OEM manufacturers are aware of this problem [1], but has no solution for it. Everyone started making BEVs, so cost for resources went up. And there is no reason for it to go down. [0] https://www.automotive-fleet.com/157233/market-snapshot-venezuela-fleet-market https://www.automotive-fleet.com/157233/market-snapshot-vene... [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/stellantis-warns-of-car-market-collapse-if-evs-don-t-get-cheaper https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-29/stellanti...

rob74 4y ago
That problem will probably solve itself once gasoline becomes so expensive (because of it becoming a niche product, because of rising taxes, or both) that nobody will be able to afford it anymore - except maybe drivers of 30+ year old Porsches or Ferraris...
- TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
  Why it should, when there will be demand for it? Last time when French were trying to raise taxes on gas, it ended with Yellow vests riots.
  - martin_a 4y ago
    French are always protesting, that's not a really good measurement.
- kybernetyk 4y ago
  When fuel becomes this expensive food will become unattainable for most people. Or we somehow miraculously create magic batteries to power commercial transport. The problem with cities will solve itself: no one is going to live in a concrete desert where simple food is too expensive.

dinkblam 4y ago

lets look at the numbers: around 65 million new cars are sold per year. toyota/vw do 10m each year each. sales of super sports cars (ferrari, mclaren, lamborghini) combined are less than 20k units per year. so, only one in 3.000 cars is a super sports car. additionally those cars usually do extremly low mileage of less than 1000km per year. you'd be very hard pressed to find a used ferrari with more than 30k kilometers, even when looking for very old ones so if we combine the rough numbers (1/3000 the volume, 1/10 the mileage, 5 times the consumption) we arrive at the conclusion that only 0.016% of the car emissions come from super sports cars. the number is so low it is basically meaningless, especially since private transport is not a huge percentage of emissions to begin with. for the climate it would be better to upgrade a single old tanker or steel factory than to outlaw combustion V12 sports cars. forcing niche manufacturers to EV-only is not about the climate, it is about jealousy and malevolence, as is most of politics.

lotsofpulp 4y ago
Which is why the right way to do this is to increase taxes on fossil fuels to the point that it makes financial sense to upgrade an old tanker of steel factory or buy an electric car.
- DeRock 4y ago
  People are terrible at doing total cost of ownership budgeting, and will be swayed by a cheaper price upfront. You need to provide the economical incentive (or regulation) when the car is bought to counteract it.
  - lotsofpulp 4y ago
    Car sellers will advertise it, and in the worst case, the government can keep jacking up fossil fuel taxes so that if people did not learn arithmetic in elementary school, they will learn it within a couple years of owning the car.
  - danans 4y ago
    > People are terrible at doing total cost of ownership budgeting, and will be swayed by a cheaper price upfront. All people don't behave this way. People with limited incomes who drive cars generally are very careful about upfront and operational costs. That's why they are the primary buyers of small (mostly used) gasoline powered vehicles. They nearly all have a sense of what kind of MPG they can afford to get. This is because they have higher energy burden. The people who make the choice of buying an inefficient (usually larger) car are usually buying more expensive cars, and are those who have enough income that energy costs aren't a significant burden for them. New and used EVs aren't yet affordable for the former group, but when that happens, lower income people will make pretty rational choices about operational costs.

nomercy400 4y ago

How about treating these kind of cars as a separate class? Sure, you can have an ICE car, but it is not allowed in cities, and you pay a ton of taxes each year.

maxdo 4y ago

make it purely economical: If the car cost $150k+ make it even with rocket engine, unless it safe. Let them pay heavy tax for a "benefit" of emitting stinky gas everywhere around, make a lot of noise everywhere they go. if there is no car on the market within 15% price range of gasoline one, e.g. the cheapest options, allow them to sell gasoline. review every year, profit. With this schema, you can ban any car that is within range of $50k to 150$k easily with no harm to anyone in 2025.

foxes 4y ago

F*ck cars. Luxury car brands do not deserve any special treatment. As for all the same tired debates on HN about cars, it is so simple. Average people in the city do not need a car if the city is properly and humanely designed. Yes some workers, industries and people outside cities still require vehicles, that is not the debate. Majority of urban life should be free from pointless poisonous car driving. Luxury SUVs and sports cars are definitely something that could be curtailed.

Justsignedup 4y ago

I personally think efuels are a good idea, it'll create infrastructure needed to support ALL the legacy cars that will continue to exist in the used market at 2035. They can do an efuel phase-out over the next few years banning all combustible sales including used cars by say 2050.

dzonga 4y ago

the EU trying to regulate everything out of existence sucks big time. why not just double the taxes on carbon fuels . if a gallon of hydrocarbons cost 4EUR make it 7EUR. so people who wanna drive v6 / v8 engines can continue doing that as a hobby. i'm sure the hydrocarbons being burned by average joe in his mustang and rich jill in her ferrari over the weekend. are just minuscule compared to the hydrocarbons released by aviation, military and industry. if alternative fuels work and allow engines to be loud then let it be. we only live one life.