Current Events > Fossil-fuel vehicles to vanish in 8 years

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://business.financialpost.com/news/transportation/fossil-fuel-vehicles-will-vanish-in-8-years-in-twin-death-spiral-for-big-oil-and-big-autos-says-study-that-shocking-the-industry

@Antifar

bump

This is good if it comes about.
---

i dont see 99% of the vehicles currently in operation being out of commission in a mere 8 years. that would require everyone who currently owns a car to get a new one, which is expensive and not everyone can afford that.
---

I'll keep an eye out for when my car mysteriously vanishes from my car port
---

I'm trying to get my truck to last another 10 years though
---

Giant_Aspirin posted...

i dont see 99% of the vehicles currently in operation being out of commission in a mere 8 years

Did you read the first sentence of the article? It's talking about vehicles being sold. There will still be fossil fuel vehicles on the road, at least until gas stations are rapidly replaced with charging stations.

8 years is a really optimistic goal. Gonna be a debbie downer but even if you manage to replace every single consumer vehicle I think many trucks will still be running fossil fuels which is what uses the most of it anyway.
---

lmao, them and what army? Ain't taking my car.
---

plus, there's all those cargo ships with diesel engines laying about
---

I'll keep an eye out for when my car mysteriously vanishes from my car port

Iunno isn't that what was gonna happen once production of self-driving cars increases?
---

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

That means that electricity comes from dirty sources. That doesn't mean that electric cars are dirtier. The solution is to find better ways of generating electricity.

Clad posted...

says-study-that-shocking-the-industry

Is this some kind of clickbait ad?
---

This sounds unrealistic
---

ChromaticAngel posted...

I think many trucks will still be running fossil fuels which is what uses the most of it anyway.

I think water travel actually causes the most emissions (e.g., naval destroyers etc)

I cant' remember where I saw that though
---

8 years is way too bold of a prediction to take seriously.

I'd say realistically 20 years.
---

weapon_d00d816 posted...

8 years is way too bold of a prediction to take seriously.

I'd say realistically 20 years.

Some CEman said 20 years guys, pack it up. Let's go home!

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

coal is rapidly losing ground to electricity from Solar and Wind. Nuclear is better than coal as well. Tokamak I think managed to get a few minutes of energy-surplus fusion reactor as well. Burning shit is on the way out. Once fusion takes off, we'll be living in a world where the "waste" we produce for generating energy is actually just helium.
---

Clad posted...

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

That means that electricity comes from dirty sources. That doesn't mean that electric cars are dirtier. The solution is to find better ways of generating electricity.

that's arguably the most moronic argument i see coming out of the anti-environmentalism crowd

"hurrrrrrrr but things that use electricity are inherently anti-environment because most electricity comes from coal" like are you fucking seriously i can't
---

Giant_Aspirin posted...

Clad posted...

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

That means that electricity comes from dirty sources. That doesn't mean that electric cars are dirtier. The solution is to find better ways of generating electricity.

that's arguably the most moronic argument i see coming out of the anti-environmentalism crowd

"hurrrrrrrr but things that use electricity are inherently anti-environment because most electricity comes from coal" like are you fucking seriously i can't

What?

Is it true that in Los Angeles you will get fined if you drive a car older than 15 years old?

It's like the SMOG law or something.

Clad posted...

Giant_Aspirin posted...

Clad posted...

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

That means that electricity comes from dirty sources. That doesn't mean that electric cars are dirtier. The solution is to find better ways of generating electricity.

that's arguably the most moronic argument i see coming out of the anti-environmentalism crowd

"hurrrrrrrr but things that use electricity are inherently anti-environment because most electricity comes from coal" like are you fucking seriously i can't

What?

the post you responded to is moronic.
---

Solar and wind are an interesting prospects but they take up a lot of space so I dunno if it's really gonna be able to match scale.
---

Saxon posted...

Is it true that in Los Angeles you will get fined if you drive a car older than 15 years old?

It's like the SMOG law or something.

I know someone tried to pass a law like that in Oregon but the penalty started at 10 years old. It got shut down because it came off more as a poor people tax.
---

I think coal is actually cleaner than natural gas thanks to the EPA or something

idk man
---

DevsBro posted...

Solar and wind are an interesting prospects but they take up a lot of space so I dunno if it's really gonna be able to match scale.

Move solar technology into the Sahara desert and other large deserts. And/or into space. Once we figure out efficient and safe ways to transfer electricity from solar panels across massive distances and store large amounts safely, we won't need a lot of solar panels to power the entire planet.

Balrog0 posted...

I think coal is actually cleaner than natural gas thanks to the EPA or something

who said anything about natural gas though?

DevsBro posted...

Solar and wind are an interesting prospects but they take up a lot of space so I dunno if it's really gonna be able to match scale.

There's nuclear energy, which is far cleaner than coal and produces reliable amounts of energy compared to solar and wind. The issue is good luck getting the average person be okay with building NUCLEAR power plants.
---

Tmaster148 posted...

DevsBro posted...

Solar and wind are an interesting prospects but they take up a lot of space so I dunno if it's really gonna be able to match scale.

There's nuclear energy, which is far cleaner than coal and produces reliable amounts of energy compared to solar and wind. The issue is good luck getting the average person be okay with building NUCLEAR power plants.

Aren't most people okay with it nowadays?

Transmission over thousands of miles would be very inefficient and dangerous.
---

DevsBro posted...

Transmission over thousands of miles would be very inefficient and dangerous.

Which is why I said - "Once we figure out efficient and safe ways to transfer electricity from solar panels across massive distances and store large amounts safely, we won't need a lot of solar panels to power the entire planet."

Clad posted...

Tmaster148 posted...

DevsBro posted...

Solar and wind are an interesting prospects but they take up a lot of space so I dunno if it's really gonna be able to match scale.

There's nuclear energy, which is far cleaner than coal and produces reliable amounts of energy compared to solar and wind. The issue is good luck getting the average person be okay with building NUCLEAR power plants.

Aren't most people okay with it nowadays?

Not really. A lot of people don't like the word nuclear and don't want to build nuclear power plants over that. The other issue is many people who are okay with building nuclear power plants, don't want those plants built near them. So there's the issue of where do you build it if no one wants it near them.
---

lol I even read it and forgot by the time I posted.

Though that to me sounds more like an if (a really big if) than a when.
---

Clad posted...

Giant_Aspirin posted...

Clad posted...

Saxon posted...

Electric cars are technically dirtier for the environment than gas powered.

Most electricity comes from burning coal.

That means that electricity comes from dirty sources. That doesn't mean that electric cars are dirtier. The solution is to find better ways of generating electricity.

that's arguably the most moronic argument i see coming out of the anti-environmentalism crowd

"hurrrrrrrr but things that use electricity are inherently anti-environment because most electricity comes from coal" like are you fucking seriously i can't

What?

He might need a nap. Discussion tires him out.

As it stands right now, there's a lot of energy and waste generated from making the cars, and requires several years for the benefits to finally take over, especially in regions of the world where coal, gas and other non-renewable energy sources are prominent. Thankfully, energy technologies are improving at incredible rates, so we're getting closer to truly environmentally friendly transportation. Will that happen in 8 years? Hard to say.
---