Government ban on new petrol and diesel cars pushed back to 2035

Yep, and at the start of Covid people who pointed out the inevitable consequences on the poorest in the world of closing down the global economy for 18 months were castigated. Our actions may well have just shifted the death tole from rich countries to poor countries. In general terms we may have saved the lives of fat old people by causing the death of undernourished poor people. We spent trillions saving the fat old people but won't spend a few billion saving the undernourished poor people.
Increases in conflict can also be linked to our actions to stop the Covid pandemic.
Agree 100%
The same applies to Climate Change. It's based on science, not politics or a liberal/conservative split, and science always leaves room for those who ask questions.
Hmmm.
It's been about politics for a long time.
Al Gore first said "the science is settled" in 1992. He repeated that in 2013.
There has been a hell of a lot of science since, yet the politicians pretend otherwise.
 
The government got their fingers rapped by the EU over their plan to outlaw the sale of new petrol and diesel cars in 2030. The EU said that this proposal would be anti competitive and the government must now wait for the EU ban which will come into effect 2035.
It was ridiculous and unrealistic anyway for the government to be jumping ahead of EU since ireland doesn't even have a car industry so where we're all the cars for this going to come from.
Also the car industry is struggling to produce new cars anyway whether electric or conventional in the UK last year they only produced 70 000 new cars whereas in 2019 they were producing 300,000. Now some of this brexit related but its also a Europe wide issue given that some of the supply chain that was being produced in Ukraine has been destroyed
Visits to South Africa Ontario Canada and Beijing China the last while. Sorry to say Paddys efforts to be the best boy in the class are a total waste of time. Four and five litre vehicles spewing out emissions everywhere. Cart before the horse job. Emissions from vehicles. Every second product wrapped in plastic in supermarket.
Only way to address these issues is at production level not throwing it onto the ordinary Joe .
 
Visits to South Africa Ontario Canada and Beijing China the last while. Sorry to say Paddys efforts to be the best boy in the class are a total waste of time. Four and five litre vehicles spewing out emissions everywhere. Cart before the horse job. Emissions from vehicles. Every second product wrapped in plastic in supermarket.
Only way to address these issues is at production level not throwing it onto the ordinary Joe .
The cars in "South Africa Ontario Canada and Beijing China" don't pollute my local town at school run time. Irish cars do. Reducing local air pollution would be a big positive.

Can't understand the mindset that would be against such a move.
 
The cars in "South Africa Ontario Canada and Beijing China" don't pollute my local town at school run time. Irish cars do. Reducing local air pollution would be a big positive.

Can't understand the mindset that would be against such a move.
Think your missing my point. Anyone with any sense wants emissions reduced. Its how best to make this happen.
Top down not bottom up.
 
The cars in "South Africa Ontario Canada and Beijing China" don't pollute my local town at school run time. Irish cars do. Reducing local air pollution would be a big positive.

Can't understand the mindset that would be against such a move.
That can be solved by school buses and active travel for children, eamon Ryan talks alot about that anyway those issues should be solved at the local level not the macro level. School drop off and pick ups are a major cause of traffic congestion in there own right
 
It's been about politics for a long time.
It's been politicised for a long time but that's not the same thing.
Al Gore first said "the science is settled" in 1992. He repeated that in 2013.

There has been a hell of a lot of science since, yet the politicians pretend otherwise.
There's been a hell of a lot of science since then but no compelling evidence that human activity is not causing the climate to change at an unprecedented and unsustainable level.

What isn't being discussed properly, in my opinion, is whether population reduction in the next century will fix most of the problem on its own, what the role of nuclear power should be or what the impact of currently poplar methods of decarbonisation will have on the poorest billion on the planet.

What we have now are politically and ideologically motivate solutions to a scientific problem.
 
Think your missing my point. Anyone with any sense wants emissions reduced. Its how best to make this happen.
Top down not bottom up.
Missing the point? Your point was why should we do anything when country X is doing nothing. Correct? Well I gave a good reason why we should do something.

That can be solved by school buses and active travel for children, eamon Ryan talks alot about that anyway those issues should be solved at the local level not the macro level. School drop off and pick ups are a major cause of traffic congestion in there own right
It's not just school traffic that causes pollution. There will always be traffic. Zero tailpipe emissions traffic will preferable. Why not aim to be best in class as opposed to following someone else's time frame? We were to the fore on the smoking ban (despite protestations) and wouldn't it be better for our quality of life if we were able to move to lower emissions vehicles.
 
It's not just school traffic that causes pollution. There will always be traffic. Zero tailpipe emissions traffic will preferable. Why not aim to be best in class as opposed to following someone else's time frame? We were to the fore on the smoking ban (despite protestations) and wouldn't it be better for our quality of life if we were able to move to lower emissions vehicles.
Because doing so makes us far more vulnerable to international energy supply disruption. It requires a doubling of our electricity generation capacity or a far bigger increase in our electricity imports (through one and soon to be two interconnectors). The former requires massive investment and the latter is strategically moronic.
 
Because new EV's are more expensive than new ICE cars and so a ban on new ICE cars will push up the price of second hand cars.
That and the inevitable supply chain issues. A modern car manufacturing plant costs around €8 billion to build. That doesn't include the necessary improvements to the local infrastructure.
 
Shortage of raw materials for EVs. ICE no longer allowed to be sold. Limited number of EVs available. People hold onto cars longer. Lower sales of new cars. Fewer cars being traded in.
 
Missing the point? Your point was why should we do anything when country X is doing nothing. Correct? Well I gave a good reason why we should do something.
Yes, rich industrialised countries like ours should be leading the way.
 
Because new EV's are more expensive than new ICE cars and so a ban on new ICE cars will push up the price of second hand cars.
That and the inevitable supply chain issues. A modern car manufacturing plant costs around €8 billion to build. That doesn't include the necessary improvements to the local infrastructure.
right now maybe, and spec for spec the price difference tends to be a lot lower, we just dont have a lot of 'cheap' evs yet, but im sure they will come. You are projecting 12 years into the future.
 
right now maybe, and spec for spec the price difference tends to be a lot lower, we just dont have a lot of 'cheap' evs yet, but im sure they will come. You are projecting 12 years into the future.
Good point. I still don't see the supply chain being in place though. There's hundreds of billions of embedded capital, not to mention millions of skilled people and hundreds of millions of hours of troubleshooting, know-how and engineering in a sector that has evolved over the last 100 years. I just don't see it all being changed over to EV's in 12 years. I'm sure it will come, but not that quickly.
 
Good point. I still don't see the supply chain being in place though. There's hundreds of billions of embedded capital, not to mention millions of skilled people and hundreds of millions of hours of troubleshooting, know-how and engineering in a sector that has evolved over the last 100 years. I just don't see it all being changed over to EV's in 12 years. I'm sure it will come, but not that quickly.
Sure but the main difference is the engine, still will have 4 wheels, 4 tyres, suspension, body parts etc it's not that different.
 
Sure but the main difference is the engine, still will have 4 wheels, 4 tyres, suspension, body parts etc it's not that different.
The engine and drivetrain are different and they are the most design and engineering demanding, so is quite a bit of the rest of it, but yes, it's not like they are starting from scratch.
 
right now maybe, and spec for spec the price difference tends to be a lot lower, we just dont have a lot of 'cheap' evs yet, but im sure they will come. You are projecting 12 years into the future.
I think the production issues resulting from covid lockdowns and ukraine war will last long into this decade. I think the car companies will focus on getting their conventional car production back up to pre covid levels, new cars are more expensive now therefore it makes most sense to sweat their existing production runs as they are so expensive to install anyway.

For PR reasons they will also be upscaling their electric car program but a lot slower than governments expect because setting up new production lines is a very expensive business. This is a completely different scale of production than producing smartphones or computers. You need heavy engineering facilities, steel smelters, aluminium suppliers, plastics etc on a large scale. They are very difficult prospect for a new start up which explains why tesla is the exception in the car production business.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top