1 week you mean

efdd for me, they have the best ideas for EU reforms in mind

btw since you mention climate control, i do wonder how many votes the greta propaganda of the last months will generate
instead of talking about actual environmental protection we get the climate church



dont you consider yourself to be on the left? great idea to artificially put yet another strain on people with low and medium income for a problem that you cant solve with money

This post was edited by ampoo on May 19 2019 09:48am

We're voting this thursday, the 23rd.

On the carbon tax, it would be fine if it works out in the way where you tax people who pollute the most and just redistribute that money across all citizens equally.

Of course, poorer people are hit by some parts of the carbon tax (they can't afford electric vehicles yet, old diesel/gas cars will likely cost more). On the other hand, taxing kerosene and shipping fuels would mostly affect those who earn more. Owning more carswould also be more expensive.

This post was edited by balrog66 on May 19 2019 09:54am

electric vehicles are a joke

and lets be real, no state and not the EU will "redistribute that money across all citizens equally", what you pay is gone
its ridiculous to punish the people making 1,2k a month and can barely afford their 10 year old car to get there

as i said, money wont solve the problem

Electric vehicles are becoming less and less of a joke as time goes on. I'm fairly convinced that at least half of all vehicles will be electric in the coming decades.

If we were to burn all the gasoline used by cars to generate electricity and deliver that to their electric vehicles, it would be tens of percents more efficient than just having ICE's burn the fuel. It's the simple reality. Not to mention that autonomous vehicles are far easier to make if they're electrically powered.

About the redistribution: I'm not saying the EU should handle the taxes, I'm saying that the EU should mandate member states to enact and collect these taxes.

well, everyone with the slightest clue knows that electric vehicles are pretenders
your charge density is limited by default and we are approaching that level
studies show that the environmental argument is questionable at best
barely anyone has a clue how many resources you need to even produce the batteries
recharge time is ridiculous, range is trash, electricity supply also a question mark since providing an even higher demand with renewable energy 24/7 is simply impossible
what happens if dozens of millions of cars are plugged in at 6 pm?
the list goes on

these cars are fancy vehicles to drive in the city and thats it, chemical energy is better in any regard
hydrogen is the future or we might as well stick with oil
autonomous vehicles are a fantasy for decades to come and maybe many people just dont want it?

in places like germany you dont even have a phone signal everywhere and people talk about autonomous driving
nice joke

and what would you do with these taxes? the problem i mentioned above for example wont be solved by collecting extra money

european citizens already pay obscene amounts to their states, there is no justification whatsoever to add more

There is every justification as the costs to the environment haven't been priced in for decades if not centuries. This needs to happen right now.

On the electrical cars: Friend of mine has a model 3, superchargers basically mean you get 80% of range in like 30 mins. If you're doing long haul, you're going to take breaks every few hours anyway. Low-cobalt batteries are becoming more and more common, and even though energy density won't get (much) higher, both production cost and the resources required will simplify over time. And yes, our energy generation will have to match consumption, which is not unfeasible (especially if we use hydrogen for the more sensible application, as a storage method instead of a fuel).

It is in no way impossible to adjust our grids to the new draw of charging vehicles.

the answer will stay the same, producing lithium is rather difficult and uses shitloads of energy
unless somebody reinvents science the main production method will stay the same and it needs a high energy supply 24/7 plus lots of chemicals
it is a so called "critical element" by the way, which means that it is not exactly abundant

low cobalt batteries are good news for safety, because the cobalt used is the main reason these things can explode and burn down while loading
however the alternatives are not as convenient to use

80% of an already poor range in 30 minutes....
reminds me of a nice report in the media recently where a guy tested the audi "e-tron", a high end electric car
long story short, for over 100k€ and a 800 kilo battery you cant even make the 300km trip from hamburg to berlin

not to mention that the batteries will lose a lot of their capacity before they even become effective
electrical energy is not meant to be stored in high quantities, thats why our power supply works the way it does
you produce the energy you need at the exact same time

might as well buy a horse or a good bicycle instead

This post was edited by ampoo on May 19 2019 12:36pm

I'll be voting for either Change UK or the lib dems. The latter are part of ALDE but I'm not sure which EP Change will be part of.

Frans Timmermans? Serieus?

for our eu friends