Should we penalise those who drive electric cars? Watch

balanced
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
Considering how electric cars cause more air pollution, should we penalise those who drive them?
Pretty much all questions are answered in this video:
2
reply
Blondie987
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
No
0
reply
LordMallard
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report 3 years ago
#3
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.
5
reply
Puddles the Monkey
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
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.
2
reply
balanced
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#5
(Original post by Blondie987)
No
Why? They do more damage, and so they should be taxed more.
1
reply
balanced
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#6
(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.
1
reply
Student403
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
For what? Being too badass?

(Tesla :love: )
4
reply
morgan8002
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
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.
1
reply
balanced
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#9
(Original post by Student403)
For what? Being too badass?

(Tesla :love: )
For being bad for the environment.
0
reply
Dez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
(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.
0
reply
balanced
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#11
(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.
0
reply
LordMallard
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
(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.
0
reply
Gwilym101
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
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.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(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).
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
(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.
0
reply
LordMallard
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
(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
1
reply
TheHelpfulMan
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(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
0
reply
IYGB
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#18
Report 3 years ago
#18
No
0
reply
NekoAngel13
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
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
0
reply
paul514
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#20
Report 3 years ago
#20
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
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (153)
59.53%
No I haven't decided yet (59)
22.96%
Yes but I might change my mind (45)
17.51%

Watched Threads

View All