Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should we penalise those who drive electric cars? Watch

    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Considering how electric cars cause more air pollution, should we penalise those who drive them?
    Pretty much all questions are answered in this video:
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    No
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    No, instead penalise the energy corporations that produce the electricity, and encourage the building of more nuclear power stations, as well as more solar and wave power.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Community Team
    The use of rare earth minerals for batteries is a serious issue. But fossil fuels are also running out.

    We are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Blondie987)
    No
    Why? They do more damage, and so they should be taxed more.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by LordMallard)
    No, instead penalise the energy corporations that produce the electricity, and encourage the building of more nuclear power stations, as well as more solar and wave power.
    Solar and wave power, currently, are not worth using. As of now, only nuclear is, however our government is always hindered by green protesters who do not support the idea of going green.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    For what? Being too badass?

    (Tesla :love: )
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    They're ignoring many of the ways to make them less polluting in the long term eg. using CO2 scrubbers, domestic renewable sources, biofuels, fission, fusion, increases in battery technology, superconductor electricity conduction(if viable), other ways to get energy from fossil fuels(can't remember the details). They also seem to be ignoring fuel transport. It's also very focused on the US, so I'd be interested to see the comparison with other countries, particularly those that rely heavily on methods other than fossil fuels.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Student403)
    For what? Being too badass?

    (Tesla :love: )
    For being bad for the environment.
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Group Staff
    (Original post by balanced)
    Solar and wave power, currently, are not worth using. As of now, only nuclear is, however our government is always hindered by green protesters who do not support the idea of going green.
    Oh yeah, the government has really been handicapped. It's not like they've just approved a new multimillion nuclear plant construction project and extended the operating life of all our existing plants by half a decade. Yep, clearly the greens have forced their hand.
    • Political Ambassador
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by morgan8002)
    They're ignoring many of the ways to make them less polluting in the long term eg. using CO2 scrubbers, domestic renewable sources, biofuels, fission, fusion, increases in battery technology, superconductor electricity conduction(if viable), other ways to get energy from fossil fuels(can't remember the details). They also seem to be ignoring fuel transport. It's also very focused on the US, so I'd be interested to see the comparison with other countries, particularly those that rely heavily on methods other than fossil fuels.

    We have a similar usage of renewables, but were closing down nuclear plants and now rely on diesel generators as our renewable resources are not supplying us with enoguh electricity. What we need is nuclear energy, however the opposite is happening. Luckily, however, we are flooded with oil to power greener conventional cars.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    Solar and wave power, currently, are not worth using. As of now, only nuclear is, however our government is always hindered by green protesters who do not support the idea of going green.
    Solar panes can be put on the roofs of buildings, as there they don't take up valuable space. I agree that the technologies need to be improved. Build more nuclear, tax coal power stations. Also, more competition is needed in the energy sector.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    The coal powered car argument is flawed because not every country gets the majority of its power from coal. The only legitimate argument aimed at electric car ownership is the tax argument.

    Given the today unfathomable charges that happened to the world infrastructure when electricity and the use of cars becamse wide-spread, a shift a way from coal power is comparatively minor.
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Puddles the Monkey)
    The use of rare earth minerals for batteries is a serious issue. But fossil fuels are also running out.

    We are stuck between a rock and a hard place.
    We should probably make the distinction here between oil and other fossil fuels and even then we should make the distinction between what is recoverable and what will be recoverable in the future.

    In essence we are centuries away from actually running out of fossil fuels. Coal reserves globally are huge and oil reserves are conventionally running short but technology has enabled new and much deeper deposits to be found.

    The main arguments for moving away from fossil fuels are environmental, cost related and somewhat related to energy independence (though on the other hand you have things like the planned European supergrid).
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LordMallard)
    Solar panes can be put on the roofs of buildings, as there they don't take up valuable space. I agree that the technologies need to be improved. Build more nuclear, tax coal power stations. Also, more competition is needed in the energy sector.
    The problem with saying more competition is needed is that government is almost going out of their way to prevent it, energy is not a free market.

    Firstly you have the fact that government has decided it wants nuclear at a cost of billions (instantly taking small business out the equation and so reducing the level of production competition) because it doesn't trust the private sector to meet demand and also because it looks good to voters. Secondly though you have a mirade of environmental regulation increasing the cost of coal which the market has deemed the most efficient fuel source so instead of a small firm being able to produce coal powered energy they have to go for more expensive options to which they may lack the capital.

    Unfortunately as things stand we are not going to get cheap energy anytime soon.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    The problem with saying more competition is needed is that government is almost going out of their way to prevent it, energy is not a free market.

    Firstly you have the fact that government has decided it wants nuclear at a cost of billions (instantly taking small business out the equation and so reducing the level of production competition) because it doesn't trust the private sector to meet demand and also because it looks good to voters. Secondly though you have a mirade of environmental regulation increasing the cost of coal which the market has deemed the most efficient fuel source so instead of a small firm being able to produce coal powered energy they have to go for more expensive options to which they may lack the capital.

    Unfortunately as things stand we are not going to get cheap energy anytime soon.
    Cheap energy does seem a long way off.

    There are some interesting ideas here:

    http://www.johnpenrose.org/index.php...s-a-enterprise

    http://www.johnpenrose.org/images/wedeservebetter.pdf
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by balanced)
    Considering how electric cars cause more air pollution, should we penalise those who drive them?
    Pretty much all questions are answered in this video:
    Blame their existence on the green police
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    No
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    We should be investing in the technology of hydrogen powered cars that have 0% emissions.
    Electric cars use electricity which is made by fossil fuels so it doesn't really solve anything. They also tend to have a crap battery life meaning that you have to charge it often. My mate had to charge his roughly every 60 miles and commuting to and from work with stand still time too. Still cheaper than petrol though the price is coming down.

    http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-e...rogen-cars.htm
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Yea so basically it comes down to how the the electric is produced....


    Also I don't think the new batteries coming out even use lithium


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brexit voters: Do you stand by your vote?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.