3 ms·

"from 2035 new cars and vans must not emit any CO2" Wont this effectively kill any ICE vehicle? Biogas, ethanol, HVO diesel, etc.

spacephysics 3y ago
Yes, but as per usual this will most likely get pushed once the date gets closer, as I doubt the EU member states will all have the electric infrastructure for these vehicles. However could be wrong, as there’s much more public transit in those countries so we’ll see.
esteth 3y ago
Yes
jackmott 3y ago
[dead]
NikolaNovak 3y ago
I don't fully understand these proclamations. Can we really actually electrify everything, everywhere, by then? And what about long distance travel and haul? EV still seem somewhat of a niche in that they have clear restrictions and constraints.
- Fordec 3y ago
  Europe has a much more fleshed out freight rail system and the vast majority of European countries have ocean access, so long range haul can be done by the cheapest form of transport of all, boat.
  - xaedes 3y ago
    It is estimated that the full electrification of all railway tracks in Germany will be completed not earlier than 2070. But maybe I am confusing "Deutschlandtakt 2070" and the electrification of the tracks.
    - nforgerit 3y ago
      Never heard that "Deutschlandtakt 2070" (lol) depends on electrification of all railway tracks, to be honest. Would be interesting to read up on that, so if you have a source, I'd be glad to read it!
    - tcfhgj 3y ago
      yeah, you are; however given the zero amount of interest shown on focusing on the train system by the department for mobility, doesn't give much hope it's going to happen before 2070... they want to build more and bigger high ways such that there is less traffic jam, thus less emissions, which is just hilarious.
      - c00lio 3y ago
        Problem is, Germany is in a central location in Europe. Lots of east-west and north-south transit going through. That transit has to use the autobahn, for various reasons. One is the EU: forcing them to use railway loading (such as in Switzerland) isn't possible due to the EU demanding free transit. Making transit on the autobahn prohibitively expensive by fees isn't possible, because the EU can and will veto higher fees or special transit fees. Changing status quo in the EU isn't possible, because all Germany's neighbours will veto. Second is technical: Railways aren't standardized. Track width changes towards the east. Train station platforms and tunnels are different width and height per country, your load will bump into stuff unless you do lowest-common-size (which is smaller than a normal 20ft/40ft container crosssection, so non-viable). Signaling is different in each and every EU country. Rolling stock for goods transport is usually decades old and doesn't support any of the necessary modern safety standards like ECTS that are used on new tracks and cross-border. So you would have to have huge reloading terminals on each railway track and each border. Or you would have to modernize the railway system across Europe. Huge costs and lack of current demand create a chicken-egg-scenario here. Also, reloading creates delays, which the current just-in-time logistics are allergic to. Third is domestic: There is also non-transit traffic, where origin or destination is somewhere in Germany. Those will still have to use roads, because the country doesn't have a dense-enough railway network. And building a sufficiently dense one would take forever, if at all possible. New construction is usually extremely expensive, delayed or stopped due to environmental/noise/landmark protection reasons (usually NIMBYs successfully abusing those regs). Only possibility is small extensions, such as "make this road/track/... a little wider", because it is already there which makes arguing against it on the aforementioned grounds harder. So we maybe will debate if railways ever will take off and then just extend the autobahn. Because there is actually no other choice.
  - sidewndr46 3y ago
    you do realize boats burn bunker right? One of the worst kinds of fuel. It's definitely not carbon neutral either.
    - Fordec 3y ago
      As much as I prefer electrification, EUs policy on this front is clear. The shipping industry is one of the cited primary motivators for the EUs current Hydrogen infrastructure initiatives, such as the "Fit for 55" program. Just as the EU are making moves on de-carbonizing road infrastructure, you do realize that people are thinking about the maritime aspect also? These net-zero 2050 commitments include maritime transport.
- jackmott 3y ago
  [dead]
- burkaman 3y ago
  > Can we really actually electrify everything, everywhere, by then? Probably not, which is why that quote is only about "new cars and vans". If that is achieved, most vehicles on the road will still be emitting CO2.
ikt 3y ago
it's worded so that synthetic zero emission fuels can still come along and save the ice engine which is what mercedes etc are hoping for
- tcfhgj 3y ago
  and porsche
Fordec 3y ago
So be it.
nforgerit 3y ago
Yes but make no mistake: German car manufacturers will make the German governments lobby for whatever they find value in when time goes by. They've recently invented the funny term "Technologieoffenheit" as an abstract concept to allow for "whatever the market decides" which sounds good but completely ignores, e.g. that they won't have enough renewable energy to produce zero-emission e-fuels/hydrogen at a scale big enough to achieve reasonable consumer prices for usage in cars. AFAIK anything that is based on organic matter can only be net-zero and potentially drives out potentially more important food. Not sure yet what this "strategy" leads to if not more populist politics.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  Err, whatever the market decides, isn’t that what we’ve had in the US forever? It works for some thing but we don’t seem to be the leaders as far as fighting climate change goes.
- tcfhgj 3y ago
  > . that they won't have enough renewable energy to produce zero-emission e-fuels/hydrogen at a scale big enough to achieve reasonable consumer prices for usage in cars. which then means that "everyone" is still using ICE cars, which can't be driven climate neutral. The the lobby will again cry that it is impossible that we move everything to electric instantly and/or e fuels can't be afforded by the poorest. The result will be that climate goals regarding ICE cars will be watered down again, and the government will subsidize e fuels. Regarding food: just kill more rein forests in brasil, which we are already doing anywasys (we produce bio gas from plants (1/30 area efficiency of photovoltaics while eroding the ground) and add bio fuel already to fossil fuels (which btw. hardly improves the impact on the environnment -> a bit less theoretical emissions while way more air pollution)

spacephysics 3y ago

Yes, but as per usual this will most likely get pushed once the date gets closer, as I doubt the EU member states will all have the electric infrastructure for these vehicles. However could be wrong, as there’s much more public transit in those countries so we’ll see.

esteth 3y ago

Yes

jackmott 3y ago

[dead]

NikolaNovak 3y ago

I don't fully understand these proclamations. Can we really actually electrify everything, everywhere, by then? And what about long distance travel and haul? EV still seem somewhat of a niche in that they have clear restrictions and constraints.

Fordec 3y ago
Europe has a much more fleshed out freight rail system and the vast majority of European countries have ocean access, so long range haul can be done by the cheapest form of transport of all, boat.
- xaedes 3y ago
  It is estimated that the full electrification of all railway tracks in Germany will be completed not earlier than 2070. But maybe I am confusing "Deutschlandtakt 2070" and the electrification of the tracks.
  - nforgerit 3y ago
    Never heard that "Deutschlandtakt 2070" (lol) depends on electrification of all railway tracks, to be honest. Would be interesting to read up on that, so if you have a source, I'd be glad to read it!
  - tcfhgj 3y ago
    yeah, you are; however given the zero amount of interest shown on focusing on the train system by the department for mobility, doesn't give much hope it's going to happen before 2070... they want to build more and bigger high ways such that there is less traffic jam, thus less emissions, which is just hilarious.
    - c00lio 3y ago
      Problem is, Germany is in a central location in Europe. Lots of east-west and north-south transit going through. That transit has to use the autobahn, for various reasons. One is the EU: forcing them to use railway loading (such as in Switzerland) isn't possible due to the EU demanding free transit. Making transit on the autobahn prohibitively expensive by fees isn't possible, because the EU can and will veto higher fees or special transit fees. Changing status quo in the EU isn't possible, because all Germany's neighbours will veto. Second is technical: Railways aren't standardized. Track width changes towards the east. Train station platforms and tunnels are different width and height per country, your load will bump into stuff unless you do lowest-common-size (which is smaller than a normal 20ft/40ft container crosssection, so non-viable). Signaling is different in each and every EU country. Rolling stock for goods transport is usually decades old and doesn't support any of the necessary modern safety standards like ECTS that are used on new tracks and cross-border. So you would have to have huge reloading terminals on each railway track and each border. Or you would have to modernize the railway system across Europe. Huge costs and lack of current demand create a chicken-egg-scenario here. Also, reloading creates delays, which the current just-in-time logistics are allergic to. Third is domestic: There is also non-transit traffic, where origin or destination is somewhere in Germany. Those will still have to use roads, because the country doesn't have a dense-enough railway network. And building a sufficiently dense one would take forever, if at all possible. New construction is usually extremely expensive, delayed or stopped due to environmental/noise/landmark protection reasons (usually NIMBYs successfully abusing those regs). Only possibility is small extensions, such as "make this road/track/... a little wider", because it is already there which makes arguing against it on the aforementioned grounds harder. So we maybe will debate if railways ever will take off and then just extend the autobahn. Because there is actually no other choice.
- sidewndr46 3y ago
  you do realize boats burn bunker right? One of the worst kinds of fuel. It's definitely not carbon neutral either.
  - Fordec 3y ago
    As much as I prefer electrification, EUs policy on this front is clear. The shipping industry is one of the cited primary motivators for the EUs current Hydrogen infrastructure initiatives, such as the "Fit for 55" program. Just as the EU are making moves on de-carbonizing road infrastructure, you do realize that people are thinking about the maritime aspect also? These net-zero 2050 commitments include maritime transport.
jackmott 3y ago
[dead]
burkaman 3y ago
> Can we really actually electrify everything, everywhere, by then? Probably not, which is why that quote is only about "new cars and vans". If that is achieved, most vehicles on the road will still be emitting CO2.

ikt 3y ago

it's worded so that synthetic zero emission fuels can still come along and save the ice engine which is what mercedes etc are hoping for

tcfhgj 3y ago
and porsche

Fordec 3y ago

So be it.

nforgerit 3y ago

Yes but make no mistake: German car manufacturers will make the German governments lobby for whatever they find value in when time goes by. They've recently invented the funny term "Technologieoffenheit" as an abstract concept to allow for "whatever the market decides" which sounds good but completely ignores, e.g. that they won't have enough renewable energy to produce zero-emission e-fuels/hydrogen at a scale big enough to achieve reasonable consumer prices for usage in cars. AFAIK anything that is based on organic matter can only be net-zero and potentially drives out potentially more important food. Not sure yet what this "strategy" leads to if not more populist politics.

bee_rider 3y ago
Err, whatever the market decides, isn’t that what we’ve had in the US forever? It works for some thing but we don’t seem to be the leaders as far as fighting climate change goes.
tcfhgj 3y ago
> . that they won't have enough renewable energy to produce zero-emission e-fuels/hydrogen at a scale big enough to achieve reasonable consumer prices for usage in cars. which then means that "everyone" is still using ICE cars, which can't be driven climate neutral. The the lobby will again cry that it is impossible that we move everything to electric instantly and/or e fuels can't be afforded by the poorest. The result will be that climate goals regarding ICE cars will be watered down again, and the government will subsidize e fuels. Regarding food: just kill more rein forests in brasil, which we are already doing anywasys (we produce bio gas from plants (1/30 area efficiency of photovoltaics while eroding the ground) and add bio fuel already to fossil fuels (which btw. hardly improves the impact on the environnment -> a bit less theoretical emissions while way more air pollution)