Ban sales of gas-powered cars?

Some states in USA and some countries are planning to ban sales of gas-powered cars. Electric cars need to be recharged from electrical systems that can break down. Some public chargers may not work. Batteries in electric cars may cause fires. Batteries in E-bikes and E-scooters may cause fires. There was a TV show where the bad guys caused total electrical blackouts in the whole world and people couldn't restore electricity. I think that hybrid cars are better because they can be designed so that they run on batteries in cities and run on gas on highways between cities.

 

the law only prevents sale of brand new ones, old ones will still work and you can still buy used rebuilt etc.

 

I'm not sure how feasible it really is, but what's stopping someone from using their personal solar panel to charge their car? You wouldn't be limited exclusively to someone else's electrical system or a public charger. If you have a large-enough hill or power to physically push, you can also regen-brake charge your battery to an extent. You could DIY some hydro-power ordeal if you have a flowing water source nearby, and even use a treadmill to generate DC to something in a pinch. There even seems to be resources about taking a house ceiling fan and turning it into a wind turbine

I can't just create gasoline (afaik) in a reasonable manner and would need to always source it from someone.

As for fires; we can improve the tech to make it less-likely. I'm not sure how frequently electric cars burst into flames because of the battery, but I imagine they only do in-case of a manufacturing defect in the battery, or direct-damage to it. Wouldn't gas-powered vehicles have the same potential though?

I think it would be good to ban gas-powered vehicles in order to get more EVs on the road in order to improve the tech. There's also hydrogen-powered vehicles; I'm not too familiar with them or what at-home options for re-fueling are, but there's this portable solution seemingly that can do a fuel cell refuel with about 4 gallons of water to 300 miles: https://www.pdcmachines.com/simplefuel/

 

Where are you going to put all the dead batteries?

Who are you going to buy the solar panel from?



Who's going to supply the New/cheap electrical grid that it takes to charge all these vehicles?

 

Nothing - I do this.

I also got a parallel hybrid because the infrastructure isn't all there yet. For example, there are a zillion chargers at the airport, but they're invariably full. If I didn't have a gas backup, I'd be stuck (I have given my charger to some battery-only vehicle owners more than once because they drove themselves too low and I happened to be in the garage and recognized what they were looking for. Teslas will route you to high-voltage places to top off for 20 minutes or so if you plug in your destination. If I'm low on juice, I just hop onto the petrol and don't have to wait like that. All of my driving except long drives out of town are on battery.

 

It gona happen at some point, soon later reality of anything gas power by fossil fuels is gona set in... hopefull before it to late

Tesla wanted to give world free clean power, it was shut down by JP Morgan when he found out tesla want to give for free, this was proven to do able 60 years, and we just great around to again. Gas companies want nothing to do with anything this stuff less they can profit from it

The earth has magnetic field we could get power from.

 

It is called "green washing", making people believe that EV is the best solution and not accepting, or bashing other solutions.
And a lot of people fall for that and just repeat whatever others made them believe.
And when this trend comes with political traction, well we all know how this works.

Here in Europe, there is a lot of uncertainty regarding hybrids, specifically the LPG /petrol ones.
Things is, for a relative period there was a push for that and EU had an agreement subvention for this type of fuel LPG. Cheap to extract, burns cleaner and more environmental friendly (relatively).

Now, with this clown war, all is forgotten and suddenly the EV is the only solution, and gas and diesel vehicles are living on borrowed time.

Does the average Joe knows how exactly lithium is extracted? Or nickel? Does the average Joe have a clue about how much land mass has to be unearthed, moved and manipulated to extract those metals?
Or how toxic the lithium large shallow pools/fields are?
Guess not, lots of people will listen or absorb whatever's on the agenda of the current propaganda, without the curiosity to find out the whole information, contrast that with whatever they listened to and a lot of common sense.

But I'll stop here, because it will become a mess, involving political and fuel in a debate is a perfect recipe for lot of ugly discussion.

 

Electrical systems can brake down and so can fuel pumps at petrol station which use electricity.

Would it work if we had hydrogen tanks and electricity for electric cars was generated from that at the stations? Or even better have a hydrogen fuel cell car.

Electric car can work as a battery for your house, so charge it at night and use it if electricity prices are too high during the day or there is a power outage.

I have solar panels on the top of this house. Cars we have both use petrol. No plans to change my car to electric anytime soon because of bad range/offroad capability or high price. Having small electric car to replace our Yaris might be good, but it's not used that much so absolutely no point in that.

Next cars we are going to buy will be hybrid, hydrogen or fully electric. We do not change our cars very often...

 

The worse part is that production of new ICE cars still dwarfs electric ones to this day, despite what all the advertisements on TV would like to make people think.

Notice the current worst drought in Europe in a century? Most likely it will no longer be the worst one next year, and next year...
Humanity is heading towards the edge of a cliff at full speed, doing very little to nothing to try to stop... oh well, it was nice (not really) knowing you all.

 

Hybrids are a viable stopgap for a while.

 

We have a group of physicist/scientific in France that stated that to be on track for the "Paris Agreement" we would need the kind of slowdown of activity that happened during COVID for around 30 years.

During COVID global C02 emissions dropped 5%.

In Europe we don't have petrol or gaz, but we have some of the best knowledge regarding nuclear plant on the planet, the way forward is clear, it's nuclear and renewable in every direction possible.

 

I admit I have no idea how lithium and nickel are extracted, but I (with limited research) figure it's either comparable or less-impactful than processing gasoline. Batteries are everywhere, so we're gonna need the lithium, nickel, and whatever else for batteries regardless of the popularity of EVs. Gas goes in cars and gets expelled to the air. I can't reasonably use gas to power my house, and I certainly can't produce it. I can reasonably use batteries to power my house and car and off-grid with renewable energy though.

Since cars can also use batteries, it seemingly makes more sense to put efforts into obtaining materials for more batteries and R&D to make the entire process less-impactful. There are still people that prefer ICE for non-environmental reasons (gotta love the people rolling coal and loud mufflers in a city), and these people likely aren't going to switch to EVs unless it's the only option.

Battery-tech can be improved. What else can be done with gas and ICE to make it less-impactful?

 

It's a thinly veiled threat to try and push people in to buying EVs and it has nothing to do with 'saving the planet' and everything to do with driving the economy by force change in an industry that has an established and working product.

How do you get people to take a product that they have, that works and does the job well and by they have no real reason to change it and then force them to go out and buy a replacement product that is not only more expensive but also not as good as the product they are replacing?

Ask them
Tell them
Make them

You ask them, look we need to save the planet, go buy an EV and you'll be helping to do that. Yes it's more expensive, doesn't go as far and takes much longer to refuel but please do it please, we're asking nicely.

You tell them, look you aren't buying EVs so we are going to introduce new ULEZ that are free for EVs but expensive for ICE, we'll make refuelling your ICE more expensive and we are going to do everything to make them as hard and pricey to use, look we telling you the only solution is to buy an EV

You make them, we're going to ban the sales of all ICE 2030 so TS you don't have an option now, we are making you buy one.

The issue is that the wheels are starting to fall off this. I believe Germany has already pushed back their removal of all new ICE sales to 2035. The UK government is sticking to their guns for now but I suspect that by mid 2027 a similar delay will be announced here too. More so given what we are about to face this winter with a combination of fuel, gas and electric prices and supply.

Nuclear was reclassified as a 'renewable' earlier this year I believe.

Synthetic fuels, it's not new tech it just fell by the wayside. Porsche released a statement last year stating that they had been working on synthetic petrol, the net result being that it produced half the emissions of current petrol and required no modification of a modern ICE engine to use.
The issue is that we now have an established industry that is now so heavily invested in this dead end EV tech that hardly anyone is going to want to spend time and money investing in something different.

No, you can smash a petrol tank day and night and the fuel will do nothing. You can have a puddle of petrol on the floor and it won't do a thing. For petrol to do something it needs an ignition source and even when it does ignite it burns in a controlled manner and can be extinguished easily and will then again return to doing nothing until another ignition source is applied to it

You smash a battery though and what you now have is a potential time bomb that could go off at a moment's notice. You just need to do enough damage to a single cell to cause a short and you have a potential thermal run a way which will engulf a bus in 30 seconds and what's worse is that you need special fire fighting equipment to bring it under control and even when the fire is out their is always the risk that it could reignite.

To put it in simple terms NO gas-powered vehicles do not have even close to the same potential.

 

For me, the way some countries have been handling this situation of gas powered cars it`s so stupid it hurts.

I don`t have anything against electric cars, and i have no problem recognizing their advantages over petrol cars, but they are not the magical solution some people want to believe and banning gas powered cars is just a political move so people can pretend they are doing something about the environment, while much worse things continue to happen.

Who cares if the pollution from airplanes and ships is growing like crazy or that people are mining and doing other stuff that creates tons of polution without any need, no, what matters is the polution by gas cars, everything else is fine...

Basically, this is a silly witch hunt were everyone has already decided gas cars are a product of the devil and need to be exterminated.

Also, if people are really interested in the polution created by cars, then the solution is not replacing them by electric ones, it`s investing seriously in good and affordable mass/public trasnportation systems so we don`t have to use cars so often.

 

The lack of charge points (which are blocked for hours as well so a HUGE amount will be needed), huge recharge time inconvenience, weight and cost of batteries, safety of batteries and major cost increase are the killers atm.

Why on earth more effort wasnt put into Hydrogen as a fuel ...
No need for charge points and fuel delivery is as fast as petrol.
No batteries other than maybe one for basic systems.
This would fit current infrastructure easily, gain acceptance far faster, be safer, more economical and reduce cost substantially.

Oh and reduce particulate from tyre wear, which is a very bad factor on EVs, because without the huge battery packs vehicles will be so much lighter.

 

What if we all switch to bicycles instead? If you don't have a payload beyond yourself, you probably shouldn't be using a powered vehicle at all, unless you're physically ill or disabled. Or maybe a Flintstones-type vehicle could be produced

 

The energy has to come from somewhere, whether oil and gas is being burned in a car or in a powerplant , it makes little difference, until alternative energy supplies are established that can replace oil and gas, You're simply passing the blame around, most emissions don't even come from vehicles. There is also the issue of the power grids of the world being completely unprepared for such power demands, and charge times.

Spoiler

You have to change where the energy comes from, then moving to electric makes sense, other wise you're just moving pieces around on a board. unfortunately there is no alternative form of electric power generation that can be scaled up quickly enough to meet the demand other than oil /gas/coal, wind and solar definitely help, but they cannot replace it due to the intermittent nature of them. The question I would ask is whether the extra efficiency of gas and coal electrical plants and the electric cars + supplemental power from renewables, is enough to overcome transmission losses(20-25%), or will it be equal or less efficient than just burning the gas in the car.

It would have been great if we had a bunch more nuclear plants built right around now, but they aren't here and they won't be here for a long time.

 

You should try Archeage. You can do a gender change and go to the salon. It's literally named those.

 

As you correctly said, they are planning. And I'm pretty sure it will not happen as fast as they would like or want. There is no hardcoded deadline yet and there is a reason for it. Nobody can see so far into the future. The year 2035, which is cited the most by some brainwashed clerks, is simple nonsense.

 

Adding to this:

James May of Top Gear UK test drove a fully fledged Hydrogen car in LA, the Honda FCX Clarity.
Series 12 episode 7 in 2008.
It was first showcased in 2007, 15 years ago!
He loved it and felt it was ready for mainstream use.


In 2017 the Toyota Mirai was analysed and proved only 10% more expensive to run in fuel cost than an efficient petrol engine.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/motors/how-much-does-a-hydrogen-car-cost-to-run-a3595841.html

Rising fuel prices should make this the better option in fuel cost.
And overall has less weight and manufacturing cost than a petrol or electric battery car.