Paris to ban all petrol and diesel cars by 2030

[martybegan]

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.

No, renewables are very realistic, and will deliver the electricity at a far cheaper price than nuclear without the build in hazards of nuclear.

Except when it's dark out, raining, or calm.

Working on being stupid? Even as we post, grid scale batteries are being installed in many systems. As more people get into that business, and the competition comes online, then we will see wind and solar as 24/7 sources of power. That will work, even in the home, as there are now reasonably priced homes battery storage systems for sale.

Tesla is sending hundreds of Powerwall batteries to Puerto Rico — here's how the rechargeable battery works

And a taste of the future;

Nature Power 1,800-Watt Indoor/Outdoor Portable Off-Grid Solar Generator 240 Emergency Kit-40413 - The Home Depot

Then again, why the need for laws banning other types, or declarations by governments about banning other types?

When they put inline the grid scale battery big enough to power NYC for a week or so without further inputs, get back to me.

Because ICE's produce pollution and CO2. And we now have a better way.

As for you other nonsense, you know full well that the purpose of the grid scaled batteries will be overnight, and leveling out the input from renewables. No one ever suggested powering a whole city by them for a week at a time. Another really stupid comment by a really stupid "Conservative".

Not a better way, because you have to force it on people. Haaaaaaccccckkkkk.

And night isn't the only issue, calm is, overcast is. The entire Country isn't San Diego, dippy.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Relying too much on electricity is going to lead to problems.

What happens when a CAT5 hurricane or a tornado wipes out all those windmills you people want? Losing power will be bad enough but losing all transportation will be even worse.

I mean if you need an ambulance don't you want it to be able to get to you if the power is out for days or weeks?

My, my, so the present grid system in Puerto Rico did better? And we have windmills that have survived hurricanes and hurricane force winds just fine.

https://www.quora.com/Could-wind-turbines-withstand-Category-5-hurricanes

Wind turbines aren't perfect. Perhaps one of the most widely shared pictures in December of 2011 and early 2012 was this one from the Ardrossan wind farm in Scotland during a wind storm where the wind velocity reached 161 mph (260 kph). One of the thirteen wind turbines had a problem with its hurricane mode and failed spectacularly. The rest were online shortly after the wind died, unlike the Hunterston Nuclear Reactor, which was offline for 54 hours after power lines to it blew down, leaving thousands of Scots freezing in the dark.

Yeah and no big deal since a fraction of our power is wind generated but when we have the 100% you want we'll have to wait and see.

buried nuclear reactors and burying all our power transmission lines would be the most reliable system in any weather

LOL And we can all pay for the five fold increase in power costs that would involve. Nukes simply are not a viable option.

Says you.

But then again you can't seem to envision nuclear power being generated in other than old outdated light water reactors

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL Tacoma, Washington. Friend put solar on an east facing roof, not the optimum situation. That was six months ago. Has not paid an electric bill since, and just received $250 from the utility.

 

[martybegan]

LOL Tacoma, Washington. Friend put solar on an east facing roof, not the optimum situation. That was six months ago. Has not paid an electric bill since, and just received $250 from the utility.

And I'm sure you are selling a bridge in Brooklyn as well...

 

[Old Rocks]

Relying too much on electricity is going to lead to problems.

What happens when a CAT5 hurricane or a tornado wipes out all those windmills you people want? Losing power will be bad enough but losing all transportation will be even worse.

I mean if you need an ambulance don't you want it to be able to get to you if the power is out for days or weeks?

My, my, so the present grid system in Puerto Rico did better? And we have windmills that have survived hurricanes and hurricane force winds just fine.

https://www.quora.com/Could-wind-turbines-withstand-Category-5-hurricanes

Wind turbines aren't perfect. Perhaps one of the most widely shared pictures in December of 2011 and early 2012 was this one from the Ardrossan wind farm in Scotland during a wind storm where the wind velocity reached 161 mph (260 kph). One of the thirteen wind turbines had a problem with its hurricane mode and failed spectacularly. The rest were online shortly after the wind died, unlike the Hunterston Nuclear Reactor, which was offline for 54 hours after power lines to it blew down, leaving thousands of Scots freezing in the dark.

Yeah and no big deal since a fraction of our power is wind generated but when we have the 100% you want we'll have to wait and see.

buried nuclear reactors and burying all our power transmission lines would be the most reliable system in any weather

LOL And we can all pay for the five fold increase in power costs that would involve. Nukes simply are not a viable option.

Says you.

But then again you can't seem to envision nuclear power being generated in other than old outdated light water reactors

Plenty of people putting in wind and solar in Texas. Voluntarily. None putting up new nukes. Wonder why?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I think the policy will work fine in French cities and for travel between cities. Already, one has no need for a car when in those places.

In the rural regions and travel between and among them, I cannot say. I suppose it could work out well, but for it to do so, there must be some combination of the following advancements in transportation technology and/or energy delivery:

• a faster way to recharge batteries
• batteries with greater energy capacities
• a power network whereby cars draw electricity from "third rails" of sorts embedded in the pavement or running above the pavement (as trolleys used to).

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.
Also, home recharging over night is a fantastic solution, even if it takes ours.

Did I miss a major development in automotive technology? Have the French invented nuclear powered cars?

Electric energy has a source and it must be sufficient also in case dozens of millions of cars are being electrified. If the source is nuclear and it will be nuclear in France, then the cars are nuclear powered. 70 % of France´s households heat with electric energy, they are nuclear powered households.

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?

Much more today than they will even in 5 years. And those cheaper batteries will be more energy dense, and charge much faster. And you assholes will still be standing beside the road, yelling "get a horse". LOL

And those cheaper batteries will be more energy dense, and charge much faster.

Hopefully they'll be recharging them faster using something reliable like coal, nat gas or nuclear.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

And those stinking automobiles will never replace the horse, either. LOL You 'Conservatives' are so fucking stupid.

Cars didn't need government mandates to replace horses, it happened because the car was a superior product.

Electric Vehicles are not superior to ICE vehicles except in very limited situations.

Really? Now I suppose that you are going to tell me that you can make your own fuel for an ICE. And that your Corvette can beat a top end Tesla S to the speed limit. And haul 5 people around in comfort. Now that there are an increasing number of EV's at several price levels, you are going to see more and more people buying them. In five years, there will be batteries that will extend the range to the equal of the ICE's, out perform the ICE's, and charge almost as quickly as the ICE's can fill up. Range and cost are all that is preventing the EV from taking over the market.

Range and cost are all that is preventing the EV from taking over the market.

Oh, is that all?

I'm glad that will be a simple fix for EVs.

 

[Bleipriester]

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.

Probably true. People simply don´t agree to electric cars. There was a large program in Spain that featured large savings for people that buy an e-car but the sales remained two-digit. The government must provide the means for the development, it cannot order a development it doesn´t control.

The sales remained two digit? Well, I suppose they could go to one three digit number, but only one. You cannot get more than 100%.

As a total, not percentage. But I was wrong because of old news that wasn´t updated. Despite a bonus of 6400 Euros, only 122 e-cars were sold in Spain in the first six months. So, it´s three digit, indeed.

Here´s a source:
Elektroautos trotz Prämien in Europa nicht sehr gefragt

 

[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.

Not at all. The reason is that the technology of the renewables has become cheap enough that fossil fuels and nuclear will be priced out of the market. And the renewables do not have the hazards that are inherent in nuclear.

Excellent news.
That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

yes, that seems to be a favored tactic of self-soothing on here... "Provide me list of links, or it's false"...

You think some support nuclear. Good for you.

I'll know they're serious about CO2 when they finally do support nuclear.

it' s a simple fact, and i cannot for the life of me figure out why it throws you into a tizzy.

Why do you feel their supposed evolution would throw me into a tizzy?
If they finally got a clue, it would be a first.
Their current hysterical idiocy amuses me.

"I'll know they're serious about CO2 when they finally do support nuclear."

Which, of course, is just an absurd standard you contrive in a backward think to somehow justify goofy stuff you plan to say in the future.

The idiocy of environmentalists and scientists amazes you, eh? Well, that settles it. We need to book speaking engagements for you at every major scientific environmental and scientific society on the planet, so that you can educate them all.

Which, of course, is just an absurd standard

CO2 is gonna destroy our civilization.....kill all the animals and all the people.....

Okay, let's build more nuclear power plants

We can't do that, they're too dangerous......

There is an absurd standard here, it's not mine though.

Why the fuck should we build more nukes? Their electricity is very expensive. And they are very expensive to build. And have never lived up to their promises. In the meantime, solar and wind are being installed by giga-watt in first, second, and third world nations. Solar and wind only require a grid as infrastructure. No pipelines and railroads required, just a location with wind, or sunshine. As the grid scale batteries come online, both will be 24/7 for power. No nukes needed.

Why the fuck should we build more nukes?

Don't you want reliable, baseline power to recharge all those EVs?

Their electricity is very expensive.

If we use a standard design and end all the bullshit lawsuits, the price would come down.

And have never lived up to their promises.

Lasting twice as long as intended.........will wind and solar installations do the same?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

LOL Tacoma, Washington. Friend put solar on an east facing roof, not the optimum situation. That was six months ago. Has not paid an electric bill since, and just received $250 from the utility.

How much did his installation cost?
What was his previous annual spending on power?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Relying too much on electricity is going to lead to problems.

What happens when a CAT5 hurricane or a tornado wipes out all those windmills you people want? Losing power will be bad enough but losing all transportation will be even worse.

I mean if you need an ambulance don't you want it to be able to get to you if the power is out for days or weeks?

My, my, so the present grid system in Puerto Rico did better? And we have windmills that have survived hurricanes and hurricane force winds just fine.

https://www.quora.com/Could-wind-turbines-withstand-Category-5-hurricanes

Wind turbines aren't perfect. Perhaps one of the most widely shared pictures in December of 2011 and early 2012 was this one from the Ardrossan wind farm in Scotland during a wind storm where the wind velocity reached 161 mph (260 kph). One of the thirteen wind turbines had a problem with its hurricane mode and failed spectacularly. The rest were online shortly after the wind died, unlike the Hunterston Nuclear Reactor, which was offline for 54 hours after power lines to it blew down, leaving thousands of Scots freezing in the dark.

Yeah and no big deal since a fraction of our power is wind generated but when we have the 100% you want we'll have to wait and see.

buried nuclear reactors and burying all our power transmission lines would be the most reliable system in any weather

LOL And we can all pay for the five fold increase in power costs that would involve. Nukes simply are not a viable option.

Says you.

But then again you can't seem to envision nuclear power being generated in other than old outdated light water reactors

Plenty of people putting in wind and solar in Texas. Voluntarily. None putting up new nukes. Wonder why?

It's no mystery.

Warren Buffet said it himself

The only reason to invest in wind is the government subsidies

 

[Weatherman2020]

I want to see all of the extension cords and rolling blackouts in 2030 from the lack of available electricity.

 

[polarbear]

I want to see all of the extension cords and rolling blackouts in 2030 from the lack of available electricity. View attachment 154620

In 30 years nobody will admit they ever said it. Just like they deny today that 30 years ago they predicted global cooling.

 

[polarbear]

I want to see all of the extension cords and rolling blackouts in 2030 from the lack of available electricity. View attachment 154620

As if all the business operators in Paris would go along with loosing out on all these customers that a ban on (gas engine) cars would prevent from shopping in the city because a socialist bitch wants international attention.
Anne Hidalgo

She has been a member of the Socialist Party (PS) since 1994, previously serving as former National Secretary for Culture and Media

 

[usmbguest5318]

I think the policy will work fine in French cities and for travel between cities. Already, one has no need for a car when in those places.

In the rural regions and travel between and among them, I cannot say. I suppose it could work out well, but for it to do so, there must be some combination of the following advancements in transportation technology and/or energy delivery:

• a faster way to recharge batteries
• batteries with greater energy capacities
• a power network whereby cars draw electricity from "third rails" of sorts embedded in the pavement or running above the pavement (as trolleys used to).

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.
Also, home recharging over night is a fantastic solution, even if it takes ours.

Did I miss a major development in automotive technology? Have the French invented nuclear powered cars?

Electric energy has a source and it must be sufficient also in case dozens of millions of cars are being electrified. If the source is nuclear and it will be nuclear in France, then the cars are nuclear powered. 70 % of France´s households heat with electric energy, they are nuclear powered households.

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?

Much more today than they will even in 5 years. And those cheaper batteries will be more energy dense, and charge much faster. And you assholes will still be standing beside the road, yelling "get a horse". LOL

And those cheaper batteries will be more energy dense, and charge much faster.

Hopefully they'll be recharging them faster using something reliable like coal, nat gas or nuclear.

What they need to be doing is finding ways to draw energy from somewhere for free. Tesla was on the track to figuring out how to draw energy directly from the Earth and deliver it to the stuff that needed it, like homes and other buildings. Of course, once one can draw energy directly form the Earth, one doesn't have much need for a power company, which is quite likely why nobody's bothered to figure out how to do it. <sigh>

 

[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.

Not at all. The reason is that the technology of the renewables has become cheap enough that fossil fuels and nuclear will be priced out of the market. And the renewables do not have the hazards that are inherent in nuclear.

Excellent news.
That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates.

"That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates."


Suuure, right after we do so for fossil fuels.

 

[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.

Not at all. The reason is that the technology of the renewables has become cheap enough that fossil fuels and nuclear will be priced out of the market. And the renewables do not have the hazards that are inherent in nuclear.

Excellent news.
That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates.

"That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates."


Suuure, right after we do so for fossil fuels.

Darn those oil companies, deducting expenses in order to calculate profit. DERP!
Just ending mandates would cripple most "renewable" energy companies.

 

[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.

Not at all. The reason is that the technology of the renewables has become cheap enough that fossil fuels and nuclear will be priced out of the market. And the renewables do not have the hazards that are inherent in nuclear.

Excellent news.
That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates.

"That means we can eliminate all renewable subsidies and mandates."


Suuure, right after we do so for fossil fuels.

Darn those oil companies, deducting expenses in order to calculate profit. DERP!
Just ending mandates would cripple most "renewable" energy companies.

You characterization of fuel subsidies tells me you dont have a clue what you are talking about.

 

[boedicca]

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

I must admit to being quite amused at all the smug Smart Car morons having to get rid of their stupid little half cars.