Guest essay by Eric Worrall
h/t Dr Willie Soon / Steve Milloy – the Italian government has proposed plans to subsidise sales of electric cars, by taxing sales of gasoline and diesel cars.
Italy proposes measures to spur sales of low-emission cars
DECEMBER 5, 2018
MILAN/ROME (Reuters) – Italy plans to offer subsidies of up to 6,000 euros ($6,800) to buyers of new low emission vehicles and will increase taxes on new petrol and diesel cars, two government officials said on Wednesday.
Concerns over climate change are pushing European lawmakers to tighten emissions regulations, but the car industry says that would harm its competitiveness.
Italy’s Lower House Budget Committee approved an amendment to the 2019 budget introducing a bonus for people who buy a new electric, hybrid or methane gas-powered car from Jan. 1, 2019.
If approved, the incentives will run until 2021 and total up to 300 million euros a year.
…
“It will become more and more attractive to buy less polluting cars,” said Infrastructure Undersecretary Michele Dell’Orco and Industry Undersecretary Davide Crippa in a statement.
Dell’Orco and Crippa are both members of the anti-establishment 5-Star Movement which is keen to phase out fossil fuels and promote the use of electricity generated from renewable sources.
…
This move seems quite a political gamble for the 5-star movement.
In March this year the anti-EU 5-star movement rode a wave of populist outrage against illegal immigration, to topple establishment parties and win control of the government.
Drastic action to reduce pollution might play well in the cities – large Italian cities like Rome sometimes suffer severe air pollution. But a lot of poor Italians likely won’t be able to afford a new electric vehicle, even with the subsidy. With the limited battery life of electric vehicles, there doesn’t seem much point buying a second hand electric vehicle.
Electric vehicles might also increase risk to life for Italian drivers during winter. Mountainous areas of Italy can experience harsh winters, with deep snowfall and life threatening cold. Batteries don’t work well in severe subzero conditions, and batteries are a bad option for drivers stuck in the snow, who need their vehicle’s heater to stay warm.
At the start of this year parts of the Italian Alps were buried under snow.
Extreme amounts of snow (2-3 m) in Cervinia, Aosta Valley, NW Italy (2000 m) today, Jan 9! Over 10 000 people are reported to be stranded due to extreme amounts of snow. Report: Maurizio Bedon / Meteo Triveneto – Segnalazione in tempo reale. pic.twitter.com/uq67gTY6LZ
— severe-weather.EU (@severeweatherEU) January 9, 2018
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It won’t produce a cent of new revenue, just the infinite repair of old cars.
they are banning old cars from the roads. You cannot enter Paris in a car over 10 years old
I can see Chicago trying that one. Meanwhile, I drive a 1994 sedan and a 2005 SUV.
I drive a 2007 Mercedes, runs great, but I also live in The People’s Republic of California.
So maybe I’ll be banned from entering LA & SF. What pity.
LOL
I drive a 1991 BMW 325i which I maintain myself (here in the DPR CA), and it routinely passes the ridiculously stringent emissions testing. So, as I see it … I am 1,000x the conservationist as my Tesla-driving neighbors (yes, I live in THAT kind of a neighborhood). And my 5-speed 325i is a kick in the pants to drive … because I actually LIKE driving … unlike the computer-driven Miss Daisy passengers.
This Italian proposal? To use a favorite “green” word … it’s “unsustainable”.
I worked with a guy from Chicago several years ago on a traveling test team. He still drove what he called his ‘city car’. It was about 15 years old. He kept the drive train in excellent shape but the body was nothing but dents. It didn’t have a smooth door or quarter-panel on it. When I asked him he said even the Chicago taxi cabs gave him right-of-way.
And the extra added benefit of being undesirable by auto thieves
This might pose a dilemma when the current crop of electric vehicles begins to age-out in 4 years.
And there goes tourism. France is big on nuclear power, time for the yellow cake powered Citroen
How French. Let them eat yellowcake (NH4)2U2O7.
In a certain neighbourhood in Calgary, there are two or three Tesla sedans. One of my colleagues who lives there says that the grid is so overloaded that he gets brown-outs when two Tesla are plugged in at the same time. I have not verified his story, but he has been a reliable professional to date.
SCALING UP TO THE PROVINCIAL (AND NATIONAL) GRID: ELECTRIC CARS TAKE A LOT OF POWER.
HOW IS THIS ALL GOING TO WORK AND WHAT WILL IT COST, IF EVERYONE DRIVES AN ELECTRIC CAR?
How much will it cost to ~~double the electricity generated – to double the number of power stations, double the HV transmission system and double the local LV distribution system, essentially re-wiring the entire country to accommodate electric vehicles.
Have our brilliant politicians thought of this, and if so, where are the studies and cost estimates?
There is a parallel to grid-connected wind power – add one wind turbine to the grid and no problem – add many and big-problem – the intermittency of wind power means that ~100% spinning reserve (backup power) is required to compensate for ups and downs in wind speed – essentially a duplication of capital and a gross misuse of funds. Our politicians did not see that disaster when they promoted wind power – what are the chances they haven’t got around to addressing a ~~doubling of electricity capacity for electric cars?
Nah… the story is bbb-bb-b-bûllsnot.
People — and I am not saying you — have a tendency toward being “innumerately gullible”. An at-home Tesla charger of the “vampire tap”¹ variety takes about 35 amps at 240 volts. About the same as an electric laundry dryer.
Now think that through: how would a pair of Tesla’s, “on the grid” in a neighborhood, charging at full rate, be more inclined to suck-the-grid to a brownout, than a pair of Amana electric dryers? In the same houses?
One could argue that the dryers wouldn’t be on for hours-at-a-time. Right! But then, isn’t the power grid rated to handle hundreds, if not thousands of dryers, air conditioners (summer, huge suck), large refrigerators, walls and walls of large-screen TVs, and more?
There’s another way of calling bbb-bb-b-bûllsnot on the brownout premise: the home’s “fuse-box” (electric breaker panel). The national electrical code is FULL of protections, protection-of-protection, and “belt and suspenders” dual and triple protections of everything going on in domestic, commercial, industrial and institutional power delivery, metering, amperage limiting, and so forth.
In other words: you simply can NOT draw more power than the code-limited breaker-box is designed to deliver. If you Tesla 35 amp high-performance 240 volt “appliance plug vampire” charger is on a 40 amp (typical) breaker, well … its going to only draw 35 amps. Not 40. Not 45. Not 60, 100 or more. Likewise, the aggregate of ALL the little breakers in that electric breaker panel is almost always well above the “master breaker” for the house. Because the whole house is rated less than the aggregate of all the SAFE LOADING MAX lines it feeds to. So, if like us, you only have a 60 amp master breaker for the house, but we have 12 breakers, all either 15 amp, 20 amp … or in one case 30 amp, the aggregate is well over 60 amps.
And sure enough, on a hot summer day, we simply cannot run — as a household — the outside pad mounted HVAC, the microwave, a hairdryer, and the oven (electric). it blows the main breaker, though none of the individual line breakers are even close to their operating limit.
See?
And to that point, the power company in turn delivers power to our house on a wimpy feeder cable, rated at about 100 amps (I checked); we only have a 60 amp breaker due to code, and the fact that the “box” itself is rated for 60 aggregated amps. The pole … has a transformer … which powers no fewer than 8 houses (I counted). Uniquely, it is not on a standard grid (where there are many transformers spread out powering the 120–0–120 domestic overhead grid line), but all by itself. With binoculars, I confirmed that it is rated at 150 kVA. Which at 240 volts secondary is 600 amps of total load that all 8 houses in aggregate might ask of it, before it is “beyond spec”.
So again — how would a pair of 35 amp Tesla chargers cause our very limited 8-house “grid” a brownout?
It would have to be the case that ALL of the households were significantly using greater than 80 amps each. And then yes… potentially a low-voltage situation might arise. The transformer’s own pole-mounted 10 amp breakers might blow. But that’s not a brownout. Its a blackout.
And it has NEVER happened (that way).
Just saying,
GoatGuy
You hope it would only be a brownout, (er, local blackout.)
It is NOT 2 Tesla chargers.
It is 8 houses times 2 Tesla chargers. Plus uncles, aunts, sisters and brothers, parents and children coming over at one time. All needing recharging time “to get back home” after the holiday. It is 160 cities times 16000 neighborhoods x 8 houses times 2 Tesla chargers per house.
And yes, many of those houses WILL be running the dryer, the heater, the air dryer, the stove and the air conditioners at the same time. Not all of course. But many will.
Tesla – any all-electric vehicle available – is a politically-paid answer to a political problem created to make an energy problem worse. Because the politicians and the academic bureaucracies demand more power for themselves. And less power for the people.
Thank you GoatGuy for your comments.
I’ve wired a large addition to a house and had it code-approved. I also analysed and repaired a serious electrical problem last month at my friend’s home in Thailand – my first diagnosis was correct, a periodic short in the panel that would have burnt down a wooden house – fortunately, houses there are made of concrete.
In the bigger picture, I accurately predicted the current green energy debacle in a written debate published in 2002. So my track record is pretty good to date.
My friend who spoke about the Tesla problem is an honorable guy, and not a bullsh!tter. I would be pleased to introduce you, except that he is a very large man, easily offended by false accusations, and he might pound you into the ground like a tent peg. In contrast, I am a gentleman and reject violence in all its forms – including calling good people bullsh!tters. 🙂
Your comments do not resolve my concerns – if everyone drives electric cars then the grid will need a lot more power – maybe double or more generation and transmission capacity. Older neighbourhoods may need to have distribution systems re-wired.
Your analysis did not address these concerns – it really only discussed whether brown-outs (or black-outs) could occur. Your argument seems to say that theoretically, brown-outs cannot occur in the grid – that black-outs must occur instead. So the word “brownouts” must have been invented by people who just “imagined” that their lights dimmed.
Goat guy,
You assume that the power company can supply the maximum rated power of the distribution system. It can’t. If the capacity of any element of the local distribution is marginal, voltage droop will occur. You correctly point out that a few Tesla chargers should not be terribly significant (by the way, 50A chargers are available if you spend the $ for a service upgrade), but the addition of multiple large loads for hours at a time could certainly stress undersized local distribution infrastructure.
“but the addition of multiple large loads for hours at a time could certainly stress undersized local distribution infrastructure.” Klingon59
Many businesses in our area are required to use “demand metering”. The “demand charge” is often much higher than the usage charge. The reason for demand metering is to fairly charge businesses for the very high cost of upgrading the distribution system for higher demand.
This demand charge is calculated by multiplying wattage by the power factor. Transformers used in chargers typically have high impedance especially at lower loads which results in poor power factor so the increase in amperage in utility lines may be much higher that a resistive load such as a heating element using the same amount of wattage. So the effect of electric vehicle chargers on the electric grid may be much greater than what the wattage suggests. Utilities may need to switch to demand metering for homes charging electric vehicles.
But then there is always the hack that will try to use Duct Tape to keep his main from tripping
Too bad they switched from screw-in fuses to breakers. The screw-in fuses were easy to fix if you blew the fuse and found yourself without a spare. A penny under the fuse would work every time!
“Tesla charger of the “vampire tap”¹ variety takes about 35 amps at 240 volts. About the same as an electric laundry dryer.”, goatguy.
You are correct that two Tesla chargers are not going to cause a brown-out, but 35 amps at 240 volts is 8,400 watts. Most 240 volt electric dryers have heating elements around 5000 watts, which run only a fraction of the time and motors which draw just a couple hundred watts while they are running.
The best part of a Tesla in Calgary is that almost all of our power is from either coal or natural gas. All an electric car will do in Calgary is transfer the emissions to the edge of the city where the electrical generation happens. When talking about CAGW, that doesn’t help. It would help reduce air pollution in the city, but Calgary really doesn’t have a air pollution problem to speak of.
That dryer only pulls that kind of current when the motor is starting up and the heater is on.
The heater does not run full time once the dryer gets up to temperature.
That Tesla pulls those amps continuously for hours.
Mark W.
In southeastern Michigan,
when a Tesla is on the grid, charging,
it is a “65% coal car” — DTE energy
uses coal for about 65% of it’s electric power
(2017 data).
That explains why 75% to 80% of the dozens
of Tesla’s I’ve seen on the road in Michigan
are painted black, like coal — the owners want
everyone to know they’re driving a “coal car”.
Its hard to comprehend that this is the same genetic line that produce Michelangelo and Galileo.
Remember how long the Cubans kept their old cars going.
Remember how long the Çubans kept their old cars going.
Nothing has changed in Italie. The ‘NEW’ Italian government is in the same Rothschild NewWorldOrder bandwagon as the old one.
Don’t trust any politician who has fight Climate Change in her/his/its etc propaganda.
All eventually done by fiat I suppose
I can’t work out whether you meant the legal term, the car company or that was an extremely clever play on words…
A lot of commentators like to denigrate fiat currency, such as die-hard goldbugs.
Still that M5S greenie faction should look at Paris – gilets jaunes anyone? Giacche gialle?
Leo: You are a party pooper.
Birdy: rim shot.
We in france already pay upto 10300euro in co2 sales tax as well as 20% VAT
No wonder the French are rioting.
And, French law forces drivers to purchase that yellow vest @ur momisugly approximately €120 each. People are not allowed to exit stalled, disabled or just plain stopped cars on roads unless they wear that vest.
Which goes a long way to explain why the protests centered wearing those yellow vests.
Is that required for any driver, or just for professional drivers?
Every car
Even if you are just passing through the country
Oh! Don’t forget you have to carry 2 working breathalysers!
The same in Italy, you are forced to have at least a yellow fluo vest in every car. And you are forced to wear it, if you have to dismount from the car in the event of a failure at the vehicle…
10300euro in co2 sales tax
Please explain.
I once thought that a VAT made better economic sense than income tax but now I’m not so sure. The countries using VAT have not grown much. USA with no VAT has done better.
Because the VAT is stacked on every step of the way! If you buy a car, you pay the VAT to the company that assembled it, again to the company that stamped the fender, another one to the company that painted it, another company to the mill that rolled the steel into sheet, another… Catching on, yet? When you buy a complicated item, you have paid that VAT many times over.
Second problem, most countries that have a VAT also have an income tax. So the stagnant economy is largely a product of the overall, total tax level, not necessarily the way that it is collected.
I myself would favor a federal sales tax, but only if there is an instant switchover from the income tax to the sales tax. Never give government another tax stream, they’ll only abuse it!
Some countries also have a wealth tax. It used to be 1% so a friend told me.
The problem is that countries with high VAT usually also have high income tax. It’s taxes, taxes, taxes all the way down.
When I lived in the UK years ago, I worked out that if I bought gas I was effectively paying about 600% tax: buying one pound’s worth of fuel required my employer to pay me about seven pounds. Because income tax, ‘national insurance’ (aka stealth income tax), gas tax, VAT and whatever other taxes I’ve forgotten.
So it’s no surprise that growth is poor in countries with VAT. When the government is taking more than half of every extra pound you earn in some tax or another, there’s very little incentive to work harder to earn more. Why would you, when you’re just a slave to the government at that point?
But people vote Big Government for the FREE stuff.
A disaster in the making.
Good those Italians helping to further discredit the green con.
Someone has to do it.
What staggers me is that there are still people out there who think the concerns over toxic air and climate change are all some big ‘con’ or conspiracy, in lieu of hard evidence otherwise. Just how stupid do people have to be to continually deny there’s a crisis?
There is an incredible crisis of stupid people causing a crisis by creating a present problem trying to “fix” a future problem that does not exist. Their response (your response!) is responsible for the deaths of millions, the harm to 7 billion over the next 100 years to “prevent” a problem that won’t be “fixed” by the solutions you cry for! Your much vaunted “precautionary principle” causes guaranteed harm to everyone (except politicians!) and prevent “tremendous benefits now” to try to prevent “low-probability of little problems” many years from now.
Will,
What con or conspiracy? With 23,000 folks now in Katowice perpetrating a UN sponspored high profile public event, conspiracy isn’t the word you were searching for.
As for “hard evidence” do you mean that the Arctic Ocean ice is gone? Do you mean there are Palm trees in Scotland? Perhaps, snow is a thing of the past?
Your other visions are not reasonable either:
Toxic air => See Great Smog of London, or Donora Death Fog (Pittsburgh)
Climate Change => See The Younger Dryas, or Holocene climatic optimum
Now, what exactly are you upset about?
Toxic air is only a problem in really big cities without modern pollution controls.
There is no evidence that Global Warming is a crisis, or will ever be.
How long are you going to deny the science Will?
Will,
there is no climate change crisis,
but there is a DING DING DING bat crisis.
Why don’t you investigate that?
Rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic to make a well known phrase…
In “The Peter Principle” one of the signs that an employee or official has risen to his level of incompetence is the utter irrelevancy syndrome
Unable to actually solve any of the real issues of Western Society, especially its economic ones, focus is directed towards the faux issue ‘climate change’. Along with LBGT politics and making laws that define telling idiots that they are, as a ‘hate crime’.
Probably easier to get past the people than a fuel tax a la Macron (who has capitulated but is now facing follow up strikes and demonstrations).
Unfortunately for Italians there are an awful lot of Fiats on Italian roads, a marqué not renown for reliability and longevity, so keeping old cars going for a couple more years might prove expensive and difficult.
Unfortunately Macron has not capitulated, he has just postponed the tax increases for 6 months, maybe he thinks people will get bored of the issue in the meantime.
frank0
It’s just 6 months to design a method whereby they can introduce it by stealth.
Look up the definition of face saving move.
Macron has now conceded that the tax will not go ahead at all.
http://joannenova.com.au/2018/12/the-vast-social-and-political-earthquake-that-started-in-france-first-mass-uprising-against-eco-elitism/
More likely it was Minister Philippe who said no tax is worth the security of the country.
The gilets jaunes will not accept crumbs though.
Is that the same Italy that is sliding into recession with the same political party scrambling to understand government and the economy and EU financial policy constraints?
Meanwhile back in Poland they will be arguing that these taxes/Subsidies are not high enough. interesting that this Greenblob CO2 Meme is now becoming a political hot potato as the consequences start to bite.
Watch this space.
That is correct the emissions GAP report has various numbers for a Carbon tax thrown around and what is clear is the public won’t wear it. So they have lots of funny fluffy stories about how they might make it politically acceptable it is rather amusing.
When most politicians are now days being elected based solely on their Party affiliation, their good looks and/or popularity, ……….. instead of ….. their educational expertise, common sense thinking, logical reasoning abilities, intelligent deduction capabilities and honesty, …… one should not expect their government to be concerned about their best interests.
Saving the world… one tax increase at a time.
+10
Another silly example of gesture politics. the total financial commitment translates into just 50,000 cars/year as Italy buys around 2 million cars/year it represents 2.5% of vehicles purchased will be subsidised and 97.5% of new vehicle owners will pay for the privileged to use electric.
There are roughly 37 million cars on Italy’s roads so after the period of support for electric cars ends in 2021 the uplift in such vehicles on Italian roads will represent around 0.4% of the stock on the roads.
Did someone suggest this was a big initiative?
What I want to know is how is Italy going to subsidize all the new infrastructure and power plants that will be needed to charge all those electric car batteries? Or are those new transmission lines, substations and power plants just going to appear by magic?
Originally the mafia was a poor farmer’s response to taxes.
Me thinks that those guys play with fire. namely the one of burning sponsored electric cars.
There is another solution that no one bothers to consider. Italy has some great engineering achievements including car designs. Why is the new generation of Italians not being challenged to emulate those from their past to address the problem of the design of more efficient and cost effective vehicles not needing a subsidy? Not only will this costs the state nothing but if successful will provide Italy with a valuable new export item. This would be a win-win.
Living in Italy part time, I can tell you that almost everything there is beautiful, but pretty much none of it works very well, if at all. I include people in that, unfortunately.
Try buying a Ferrari or Lamborghini, and paying to maintain it for a few years if you want proof. Buying Italian designed cutlery will also be proof.
In a similar vein, I had a teacher in high school who opined that only Porsche mechanics should be allowed to own Porsches as they spent so much time in the shop.
Didn’t they buy diesel because it was less pollution…and now they are going to tax them for it
Diesel less polluting you gotta be kidding?
They meant that diesel produces less CO2 per mile.
Michael in Dublin…When has common sense ever featured in Government decisions? Governments have never won wars, they just lose at a slower rate than their enemy. Much the same with the peace. France hopes Germany crumbles first. Italy hopes the Greeks will fall apart first. Germany wants to crush Britain as they have lost every war against them. It is a race to the bottom. When all else fails… Blame Trump. It works in the USA.
Dump that City of London zero-sum mantra, Win-Win is the only show in town, from China. And it is engraved on the wall of the UN – The Treaty of Westphalia.
Fix It Again, Tony (FIAT)
When Italians were migrants, all went To NY .
Today they are giving Brussels a bigger headache than Brexit. In the middle of this hard-ball, when some try such a tax one must suspect sabotage. Talk about wrong timing – it was likely in the works with Macron’s schedule.
Ever since eons car manufactures have been competing to make the most salable cars, which goes for fuel economy too. So, the young generation of Italian engineers are guaranteed already doing their best.
I have another solution to the pollution from cars in Rome and other congested cities. As far as I remember, you would once have to buy an LPG driven car if you lived in Moscow. I do not think it is in force any more though.
I used to have a Land-Rover that was converted to run on LPG, and it worked perfectly, even down to -25C. Okay, you could always smell when you drove behind an LPG car, it smelled like cauliflower, but the real pollution was way less than with petrol.
The headline is:
From the story we have:
The story doesn’t talk about a $6800 tax, it talks about a $6800 subsidy for electric vehicles.
I was putting together quotes to rebut that, but you are quite right. The articke ‘blurb’ is once again* bass ackwards.
*I had issues with another post yesterday.
Thank you for that clarification, commieBob. It puts a very different, if still unpalatable, complexion on things. If I happened to be a dealer, I’d make it very clear on the sticker how much of the price for the ICE vehicle was due to making life easier for some greentard.
It’s not about ‘making life easier for greentards’ (no need to be so condescending)
It’s about realising a simple fact and that’s that even the dirtiest EV with the least efficient batteries, powered entirely by coal electricity, is still cleaner than the most efficient combustion engine we have today.
We need more people switching to electric. This is a simple irrefutable fact, if you care to research the science from a reputable source and not some FUD fake news site.
You really need to grow up. Calling names because you disagree with people who actually care about the lung health of next generations of people and our planet does not make them a tard.
If you don’t like the way a government is handling or forcing EV transitions on you, blame that government. Don’t blame the people who care because they clearly see the bigger issue.
Actually, the bigger issue is that CO2 is not dirty. It is not a pollutant. It will not cause catastrophic global warming.
The folks you think are seeing the big picture are actually deluded, not to mention arrogant.
“lung health of next generations of people”
Emissions from gasoline engines aren’t a health problem except in a few cities where air gets trapped for long periods, like LA. Bosch’s forthcoming tweaks on diesels will cut their NOx emissions drastically.
The claim that EV’s are cleaner than other cars has been refuted so many times that only the hopelessly delusional still spout it.
The only advantage is that what little pollution there is happens somewhere, which convinces the SJWs that either isn’t happening, or it’s happening to people who deserve so it doesn’t count.
So once again I see D. J. Hawkins makes a completely baseless claim, whose only meaning is, CAGW is happening and you’re all stupid not to see that, which is clearly a troll because it never bothers to respond to any of your enlightenments, and y’all are falling for it. Give it a rest and don’t reply, and we’ll all have more fun reading the rest of the comments.
Junior, you need to tighten up your reading comprehension. No one here familiar with my posts would mistake me for a CAGW lunatic.
To be paid for out of extra taxes on ICE cars and trucks.
The actual number for the headline is somewhere in “surcharge of up to 3,000 euros”.
They’ll need a couple hundred new Nuclear plants real soon if the goal is “carbon reduction” via electric cars. Minus nuclear power, carbon consumption goes up…NOT DOWN…due to all the inefficiencies of coal or gas generated electricity and power transmission and electric car inefficiencies.
But that isn’t really their goal, is it?
By their own inflated numbers, these extremely costly efforts will reduce global temperatures by less than 0.1C by 2100.
No, the real goal is political power grabbing…with the ultimate goal being international socialism/communism.
It is very stange that when the great Decarbonizer himself, Dr. Schellnhuber CBE (dubbed by QE personally for this wisdom) states in very clear English the goal being 2 billion people, some hear socialism?
Note the population is now 7billion, 5billion being inconvenient, for such decarbonizers.
This decorated gentleman wrote the German “Great Transformation” and the Pope’s Ode to Gaia, Laudato Si.
Very odd.
“It will become more and more attractive to buy less polluting cars,” actually means, “It will be more and more attractive to buy fewer cars.”
In the Netherlands the same amount of 6000 euro is proposed for 2021. But there are some doubts, which is why the talks take longer than expected.
One of the leaders of the coalition partners (Buma from the CDA) recently said that the people need to have a vote in climate measures proposed by the government. People should agree and be prepared to pay for climate measures. He also proposes to invite people that have critics on climate measures to take part in the talks about the measures. A new sound.
Sources (sorry in Dutch):
https://nos.nl/artikel/2261387-iedereen-aan-de-elektrische-auto-6000-euro-subsidie-in-2021.html
https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/buma-laat-gele-hesjes-meepraten-over-klimaatbeleid~b97fe79d/
“Concerns over climate change are pushing European lawmakers to tighten emissions regulations.” LOL! We have passed the point of no return.
THE SKY IS FALLING – A history of the point of no return (or The Tipping Point)>
“The point of no return. Robin McKie, The Guardian, Dec2, 2018:
As the UN sits down for its annual climate conference this week, many experts believe we have passed the point of no return …
HELLO- Haven’t we heard this before?
Wasn’t this it? Amitabh Avasthi, Science, March 17, 2005:
Climate’s Point of No Return … Models suggest that, regardless of human intervention, the oceans will keep fuelling global warming and sea levels will continue to rise … (for) 100 years.
Or this? Michael McCarthy, The Independent, January 16, 2006:
The world has already passed the point of no return for climate change, and civilisation as we know it is now unlikely to survive …
Or this? Ross Gelbspan, Grist, December 11, 2007:
Beyond the Point of No Return. It’s too late to stop climate change … Leading scientists — including Rajendra Pachauri, head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, British ecologist James Lovelock and NASA scientist James Hansen — have declared that humanity is about to pass or already has passed a “tipping point” … (for) global warming.
Or this? Gwynne Dyer, Straight.com, July 27, 2010:
We are passing the point of no return on climate change.
Or this? Brad Plumer, The Washington Post, November 10, 2011:
When do we hit the point of no return for climate change? … Around 2017.
Or this? David Perlman, sfgate.com, June 7, 2012:
Warming nears point of no return
Or this? Peter Walker, The Independent, December 1, 2016:
Climate change escalating so fast it is “beyond point of no return”. New study rewrites two decades of research and author says we are “beyond point of no return”.
Sorry, folks. You can expect alarmist headlines for at least 17 more years. Science Daily, August 30:
If governments don’t act decisively by 2035 to fight climate change, humanity could cross a point of no return after which limiting global warming below 2C in 2100 will be unlikely …”
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/cutandpaste/still-no-closer-to-point-of-no-more-headlines-saying-weve-passed-the-point-of-no-return/news-story/758077f244e6fae0920364886b0fdcf6 (paywall)
Headline hype sells “clicks”….
Electric automobiles need a $13,600 (6,800 subsidy and a 6800 competitor penalty) advantage on top of punitive fuel taxes throughout Europe just to compete, then. Just for less utility (mobility, flexibility, space and weight carrying capacity) and a promise to make weather better.
Sadly, I’m going to take advantage of this subsidy. I feel that for me, an EV is appropriate, since I will use it for a few months every year and mostly for short journeys, and I have a garage with electricity.
I object to the principle, but will pocket the subsidy.
Now I just need to find a really nice convertible EV to replace my beautiful (and Italian designed) Volvo C70…
(I know beautiful and Volvo are rarely appropriate in the same sentence without a negative modifier, but the C70 truly is imho, at least in maroon with white interior)