Paris to ban all petrol and diesel cars by 2030

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

An interesting move. The car manufacturers will be pleased of that goes through. On the other hand is that a necessity in the long turn, anyway. France has already the answer for the question where the energy for the increased demand should come from: Nuclear power plants.

Paris to ban all petrol and diesel cars by 2030

The timeline is too ambitious. This will end up getting repealed

 

[Bleipriester]

An interesting move. The car manufacturers will be pleased of that goes through. On the other hand is that a necessity in the long turn, anyway. France has already the answer for the question where the energy for the increased demand should come from: Nuclear power plants.

Paris to ban all petrol and diesel cars by 2030

The timeline is too ambitious. This will end up getting repealed

We will see.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If the batteries are insufficient, the infrastructure should provide the means for an easy exchange at the former patrol stations. This could be faster than refueling.

How much do these batteries cost?

In an exchange system you will not own the battery.

I bought a car with an expensive battery included.

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In an exchange system you will not own the battery.

I bought a car with an expensive battery included.

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

In France? Unlikely.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I bought a car with an expensive battery included.

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

In France? Unlikely.

In France, mostly nuclear.
I'm more interested in the US.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

In France? Unlikely.

In France, mostly nuclear.
I'm more interested in the US.

Okay. It's definitely a more than fair point. The tech holding this back is chiefly battery technology first, power generation second.

 

[Political Junky]

An interesting move. The car manufacturers will be pleased of that goes through. On the other hand is that a necessity in the long turn, anyway. France has already the answer for the question where the energy for the increased demand should come from: Nuclear power plants.

Paris to ban all petrol and diesel cars by 2030

Good move.

 

[Bleipriester]

In an exchange system you will not own the battery.

I bought a car with an expensive battery included.

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I bought a car with an expensive battery included.

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

 

[Bleipriester]

That´s not the point. Your car surely does not support a quick battery change, anyway. If cars and charge stations support the exchange, it will be a minute to do. There could also be a flat rate ensuring cheap driving. The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things.

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How are the battery stations going to recharge the depleted batteries?

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

 

[Bleipriester]

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

I only didn´t deny the possibility of coal plants supplying e-cars.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

So they sound like quacking ducks. Water energy alone killed more people than nuclear energy, by the way.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply. But it´s a non topic. You stop, eject the empty battery, get a full battery and you start.

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The batteries will be connected to an energy supply.

Like a coal burning power plant?

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

For example.

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

But not all. And there are strong arguments on both sides of that one.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But you said, "The hardest to convince of the environmental necessity will be coal rolling Americans who insist on their right to do bloody stupid things"

So your plan could lead to more coal usage. Right?

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

But not all. And there are strong arguments on both sides of that one.

If you have a list of the ones who support nuclear, please post it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.
Making enough renewable energy sounds unrealistic, coal and gas are quite dirty and limited and nuclear energy is the most suitable solution. More efficient methods are being developed, in a few decades the country could be supplied by a few subterranean plants.

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

But not all. And there are strong arguments on both sides of that one.

If you have a list of the ones who support nuclear, please post it.

A list? What a silly request. But the tide is turning a bit on this front, as more environmental groups come to the support of nuclear power, with this shift primarily driven by concerns about climate change. Even the Greenpeace director changed his stance. Over time, even more will come into the fold. That doesn't mean nuclear plants will suddenly be built, and nobody appears to want to build them and take responsibility for them. heck, we tried giving away free money and government backed loans to people to build them ....no takers. Maybe that will change over time, too.

Interesting read:
An Open Letter to Environmentalists on Nuclear Energy

Professor Barry W. Brook, Chair of Environmental Sustainability, University of Tasmania, Australia. [email protected]

Professor Corey J.A. Bradshaw, Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change, The Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Australia. [email protected]

 

[otto105]

It will never happen. Once they get close to that year and 99% of all vehicles still run on fossil fuels, they'll get bitch slapped back into reality.

Are you from the 1950's and hoping for the new Cadillac?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

It´s still better when the polluters are out of town.

Pollution is fine if you can outsource it?

nuclear energy is the most suitable solution.

Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse.

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

But not all. And there are strong arguments on both sides of that one.

If you have a list of the ones who support nuclear, please post it.

A list? What a silly request. But the tide is turning a bit on this front, as more environmental groups come to the support of nuclear power, with this shift primarily driven by concerns about climate change. Even the Greenpeace director changed his stance. Over time, even more will come into the fold. That doesn't mean nuclear plants will suddenly be built, and nobody appears to want to build them and take responsibility for them. heck, we tried giving away free money and government backed loans to people to build them ....no takers. Maybe that will change over time, too.

Interesting read:
An Open Letter to Environmentalists on Nuclear Energy

Professor Barry W. Brook, Chair of Environmental Sustainability, University of Tasmania, Australia. [email protected]

Professor Corey J.A. Bradshaw, Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change, The Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Australia. [email protected]

A list? What a silly request.

Because you can't think of any either.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"
Environmentalists who say CO2 is the worst thing ever, say nuclear is worse."

Some, not all.

Most. That's why you never hear any environmentalists pushing nuclear to reduce CO2.

But not all. And there are strong arguments on both sides of that one.

If you have a list of the ones who support nuclear, please post it.

A list? What a silly request. But the tide is turning a bit on this front, as more environmental groups come to the support of nuclear power, with this shift primarily driven by concerns about climate change. Even the Greenpeace director changed his stance. Over time, even more will come into the fold. That doesn't mean nuclear plants will suddenly be built, and nobody appears to want to build them and take responsibility for them. heck, we tried giving away free money and government backed loans to people to build them ....no takers. Maybe that will change over time, too.

Interesting read:
An Open Letter to Environmentalists on Nuclear Energy

Professor Barry W. Brook, Chair of Environmental Sustainability, University of Tasmania, Australia. [email protected]

Professor Corey J.A. Bradshaw, Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change, The Environment Institute, The University of Adelaide, Australia. [email protected]

A list? What a silly request.

Because you can't think of any either.

yes, that seems to be a favored tactic of self-soothing on here... "Provide me list of links, or it's false"... not rational thinking. yes it's a silly request, as I am not demanding you take my word for it.

Yes, the environmental community -- at the very least, those who speak for the major organizations -- is moving toward supporting nuclear power, due to the climate change crisis. it' s a simple fact, and i cannot for the life of me figure out why it throws you into a tizzy.