If government invested in a renewables program by installing charging stations almost equal to the amount of fuel servos we have, and heavily incentivise electric vehicles we would see a major transition without car manufacturers shoving corruption in our faces and money towards lobby groups.
Unlikely. Car manufacturers donβt particularly care how youβre going to charge it. Thatβs a you problem not a them problem.
Theyβre resisting because Oz has been a place they can dump polluting cars that are cheap to make. The big markets like EU and California have mandated EVs, if they can delay the cutoff here it buys them time to do the ramp ups they should have been doing for a decade.
Toyota in particular is the worst culprit, they spent a lot of money in the US trying to prevent ICE being banned, because they bet on hydrogen and lost, now theyβre doing exactly the same delay tactics here.
Thanks for the input. I hope I was at least making sense previously even though it was more of a utopian society that weβd probably get to see something like that.
Iβm not having kids, but Iβd like for the youth of today to grow up in a more eco friendly lifestyle without the need for gas in the future.
Youβre not wrong that more chargepoints help, it reduces EV resistance and range concerns, and hence helps consumers be willing to buy EVs.
It wonβt stop legacy ICE lobbying to delay mandatory cutoff on ICE sales.
They (collectively) have $trillions invested in ICE factories and engine designs etc that become valueless when ICE are banned. As VW found out leveraging existing factories is ineffective, you need to build for EV manufacture, which means billions in written off assets and years of delay for legacy auto.
If they can convince any market to delay the ban thatβs literally dollars in the bank and bonuses in pocket.
Car manufacturers donβt particularly care how youβre going to charge it
Bullshit. Of course manufacturers are concerned about charging networks. If you canβt charge their car you wonβt buy their car.
they bet on hydrogen and lost
How so? Hydrogen hasnβt been banned anywhere. Thereβs still a lot of implementation problems but itβs a pretty neat tech. Thereβs 3x huge solar projects going ahead in West Aus to crack water and produce hydrogen.
Thereβs also a few green hydrogen hubs planned for Qld as well.
https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/albanese-splashes-70m-on-qld-green-hydrogen-20230114-p5ccjn
BEVs are a greenwashing scam. They are frankly just a ploy by corporations to be dependent on their product just like we are to oil. In fact, itβs even worse since it is part of the Chinese governmentβs agenda to of dominating the car industry. Much of what we hear may legitimately be propaganda from the Chinese government.
Toyota is fundamental correct in their assessment. The BEV is destined for failure since it has no purpose but the serve some specific group or interest. As a result, theyβve invested in alternative ideas such as hydrogen cars. Instead of being the curve, they are likely far ahead of it. It is everyone else that wasting all of their resources on a dead-end.
What nonsense.
Battery power is a technology that is continuing to grow with billions being poured into it from every industry imaginable.
The only people who want garbage like hydrogen are those who want to maintain the status quo of fuel being supplied by a few big producers at a pump.
They are funding charging stations, and the networks are pretty decent now for long trips.
Thereβs still holes that need filled in, especially when you get away from population centres and main roads, but you can drive from Port Douglas in far north Queensland to Adelaide in any new EV.
Adelaide to Perth is currently a no. Thereβs a 2000km stretch with one fast charger. Not impossible, but it means several days of slow charging along the route.
Whereβs the consumer incentive to go green? The wait time on a hybrid toyota is 2 years. Mazda and Kia both have hybrid or in some cases plugin hybrid of their flagship SUVs, but not available in Aus. A plug in hybrid Outlander costs you 25k ontop of a standard petrol outlander. I WANT to do the right thing, but Iβm not given the choice.
Having recently had an outlander as a hire car overseas Iβm amazed that anyone would willing subject themselves to one as a daily driver. What an absolute peice of shit lol. For the money of the flagship PHEV outlander, you could get an EV6 or Tesla model 3.
Anyway the actual green decision is to drive less and use alternatives more. However thatβs not an option for some.
This is how free markets work. Increased demand for certain variants of a product will inflate the price of that product accordingly.
It is worth contemplating that due to some manufacturers complete disregard for the environmental damage from mining Cobalt and Lithium (as well as the societal damage from Conflict Mining), a large EV may be more destructive than a modern ICE vehicle.
As long as corruption is rewarding, this wonβt change.
Hopefully the politicians can do the right thing for once rather than being corrupt arseholes. Certainly plenty of previous examples of our pissweak pollies letting βindustryβ dictate what suits them instead of the public.
Iβd like to see average fleet sales emissions ramping to zero by 2030.
They will see the Earth scorched along with everything that walks, crawls, flies, swims or grows here before they give up their lucrative gig at the omnicide factory. Irredeemable.
