Slashdot Mirror
Norway Agrees On Banning New Sales Of Gas-Powered Cars By 2025: Report (electrek.co)
If you live in Norway, an all-electric future is likely closer than you think. The country's four leading political parties have agreed to a plan to stop selling gas-powered cars by 2025, according to a report. Electrek reports: The four main political parties, both from the right and the left, have agreed on a new energy policy that will include a ban on new gasoline-powered car sales as soon as 2025 -- making it one of the most aggressive timeline of its kind for such a policy. What's probably most remarkable here is that Norway is currently one of the world's largest Oil exporters.Tesla CEO Elon Musk was rather pleased with the announcement. He said, "Just heard that Norway will ban new sales of fuel cars in 2025. What an amazingly awesome country. You guys rock!!"
Who's volunteering for point?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Or is this one of those "diesel and CNG don't count as gas" sort of deals that lets them play propaganda games?
It's not exactly brave to give up cars when you have flying reindeer to rely on.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
They'll pull their cars with reindeer?
Chances are this goal may incentivize companies to resolve this challenge? Also, given Norway is a large oil producing country, we may simply see oil being redirected to other needs, rather than eliminated completely and as an energy source?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Of course, the electricity will come from renewable energy, from a country that's one of the leading hydroelectric-powered countries in the world.
Here, fixed that for you. What kind of idiot would burn an export article for expensive electricity in Norway?
Ezekiel 23:20
Norway, North Pole, what's the difference?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
that aren't banned thinks it's a great idea. How about letting his cars win on value instead of legislation?
So there will be a ban on "new" gas powered cars. But what about older, used cars? I'm thinking the Norwegians will go the way of the Cubans, and develop ways to keep the older cars running as long as possible. In Havana, you can see running examples of the best that Detroit produced in the 50's. Ingenuity, duck tape, chewing gum and chicken wire keep them running. I'm guessing that the Norwegians can pull off that feat, as well.
Plus, the Norwegians are super cool, brave, daring and unafraid. What do you cook for Christmas dinner? Toss a frozen Butterball in the oven? Norwegians skewer a sheep's head on a pike in their backyards, and cook it with a flame thrower. Supposedly, the eyes of the critter taste the best.
I would not mess with those folks. In other news, the Norwegians have wisely invested their oil fortunes for future generations. Unlike some Gulf states, who build fancy hotel palaces.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
For a relatively small Nordic country, Norway have been pretty smart. When the North Sea Oil business started up, Norway taxed the profits just like the UK did, but unlike the UK, which squandered the proceeds in the 1980s and 1990s, Norway invested all their tax revenue in a Sovereign Wealth Fund (basically like an investment portfolio for the entire country). That fund is no performing so well that the per-capita tax burden in Norway is much lower than it would. Have been had Norway followed the UK's short-sighted approach.
They have excellent roads and infrastructure and the potential for cheap renewable energy. If anyone in Europe can make that happen, Norway can....
Norway is the 10th largest oil exporter. So this is kinda like saying "I will not drive a petroleum-powered car anymore. Instead I will drive an electric car paid for by money I made selling petroleum to you so you can drive your petroleum-powered cars."
If they were really against oil as an energy source, they would stop drilling for it and selling it.
What's probably most remarkable here is that Norway is currently one of the world's largest Oil exporters.
They also have plenty of hydroelectric power, so they can basically power themselves sustainably while selling all the oil. Talk about winning the geographic lottery.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
It will be interesting to see how this works, if they pull it off at all and how much it costs them. I predict one of two things will happen:
A) It will work pretty well in Norway, and half of Slashdot will spend far too many words arguing why it can't work in their country.
B) It will completely and utterly fail in Norway, yet half of Slashdot will spend far too many words arguing why it'll definitely work in their country.
Can just a few of us agree now that however this turns out in Norway, it'll be a pretty good indication of how well it might work elsewhere?
Of course there is a third possibilty of how it might turn out:
C) They do it, at an additional cost of 40,000USD per vehicle over the vehicle's life.
If that happens, there may be somewhat reasonable debate.
Internet speed.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
There is no North Pole Death Metal...There is, however, a LOT of Norwegian Death Metal.
That or they will just jam a gas generator on a trailer or in the luggage rack of the electric car or something.
Something like this
http://autoweek.com/article/ca...
Delaware...learned something new today
Did you read the article?
"gasoline-powered car sales (diesel or petrol) "
The same way they always have?
Are you implying that electric cars don't do well in the cold? Because if you are, you're misinformed. Li Ion based batteries do poorly in heat, but the cold doesn't bother them anywhere near as much as the heat does. Also, Tesla basically has a cooling/heating system just for the batteries to keep them at an optimum temp.
Norway already has the highest number of electric vehicles per capita in the world -- mostly Teslas... and the people love them.
Norway will abandon gas-powered cars, probably in favor of electric cars. Of course, the electricity will come from fossil fuels burned in power plants, from a country that's one of the leading oil producers in the world. The decision makes the environmentalists happy without accomplishing anything of value.
Read my post above: 95% of Norway's electricity is hydroelectric. Putting up some windmills, photo voltaic infrastructure and maybe another dam will provide the necessary electricity for transportation.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
The same way they always have?
Are you implying that electric cars don't do well in the cold? Because if you are, you're misinformed. Li Ion based batteries do poorly in heat, but the cold doesn't bother them anywhere near as much as the heat does.
A lot of people get the idea that cold weather kills batteris because that's when they seem to fail. Heat has been killing the thing for a long time before the actual failure point.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Business man who opened up all of his patents to his competitors and whose competitors are all currently engineering all-electric vehicles as well is happy because it's the right thing to do. If you think Telsa will be the only all-electric car company by then, you're misinformed.
All cars are going hybrid or electric-only soon -- though a few companies are still toying with hydrogen fuel cells. Those hydrogen powered vehicles are still on the drawing board as the only commercially successful ones were large passenger buses, and they're still not very well designed.
If its just "new petrol and diesel car sales" does that mean they will ban used car sales? Used car imports? This seems like one of those loopholes that could possibly be widely exploited if it was allowed.
The other thing I would wonder about is what the math is on electric consumption. Do they have a major electricity surplus or will they have to think about increasing electric rates or build new power generation facilities to handle the increased load?
Did you read the article?
What fun is that? It interferes with the bubble's structure.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You're thinking of the Sami ;)
As far as the Nordics go, Norwegians are the "nouveau riche". They weren't very wealthy, then happened to come into a lot of money and aren't always clear on what they should do with it. The sort of people who would break from lunch in a boardroom to go cross-country skiing. I live in Iceland and it seems everyone here has some sort of story about how they or a friend or a company or NGO or whatever were just given things by Norway for some reason or another - ambulences, a helicopter, boots, you name it.It seems everyone, except some Swedes, likes the Norwegians.
For the others:
Sweden has the reputation of being trendy, extremely liberal to the point of social experimentation, and a bit metrosexual. The sort of place where even if you got mugged by a Hell's Ångel, it'd be by someone named Sven who makes his own scented beard oil, wielding a designer knife and riding on a Husqvarna because it's better for the environment than a Harley and, you know, they make the best sewing machines....
Danes tend to fit German stereotypes better than the Germans do. They also have a reputation for cheap beer (by Nordic standards - although it tends to be the Nordic equivalent of Budweiser) and casual (if sometimes unintended) racism.
The Finnish stereotype is often of someone who's depressed, tough, and loves vodka and saunas. But not knowing any Finns, I have no clue as to the accuracy of the stereotype.
Icelanders tend to be like your laid back cousin who is always coming up with these crazy schemes to make money and dismissing any criticism of them as needless pessimism, constantly getting in trouble, but picking himself up and trying again. Icelanders throughout history have wavered between "We're proud and independent, don't even think of trying to control us!" and "Um, hey, could someone, um, come and help us fix this giant mess we've made for ourselves?" The whole country was founded based on the concept of achieving independence from Norwegian rule, then a couple hundred years later basically invited Norway in to stop them from killing each other.
The Faroes... everyone seems to forget that they exist, even Danes (they're a country in the Danish realm). When Danes remember that they exist, it's usually in the context of debt. To Icelanders, the Faroe Islands are that place where a family would put their trampoline on the roof because it's the only land flat enough for it, and where the signs are so hilarious that it seems that the language was intentionally designed as a prank. For example, read as Icelandic, this sign tells people it's permissible for them to utilize vaginas after October 15th and, while it might be tempting to use them earlier, not to; this one asks if you're a penis; while this one offers cultural "fucking tours" led by "Skúli the Fucker".
Greenland often fits in lists of Nordics because it's in the Danish realm, but it has little in common culturally. Greenland seems to want little to do with Denmark, while Denmark seems to have the primary goal of dragging out any independence movement as long as possible so it can profit as much from Greenland's resources in the interrim.
Anyway, that's your stereotype guide to the Nordics.
Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
Can just a few of us agree now that however this turns out in Norway, it'll be a pretty good indication of how well it might work elsewhere?
The major disadvantages of electric cars at this point are political - at least in the US.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
They're doing what the Saudis are doing, laying the groundwork for the post-fossil fuel age. The Koch Brothers may be funding psuedoskepticism, and there may be lots of people who believe AGW is an evil lie designed by Satan and/or Communists, but countries like Norway and Saudi Arabia, major oil producers that they are, know very well that sooner or later, and likely sometime after the middle of this century, the Age of Oil is going to come to an end.
Norway is also one of those smarter states who has been stowing away oil revenues, unlike, say Venezuela and Alberta, and the Saudis are following suit with their own sovereign wealth fund, the largest in history.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You're not seriously suggesting they're going to stop pumping and selling oil to other countries that are still guzzling it, right?
I have no idea how this will work in Norway, but here in the US, such a plan would have to include a hell of a lot of exceptions for people and situations in which an electric vehicle won't work. My next car may be all electric since I never drive far, but my brother's family routinely drives rather long distances to visit their in-laws, and my parents drive across several states a few times a year. At the moment, EVs simply don't have the range to travel hundreds of miles in a single day, nor the capacity to haul all of them over a mountain range with all their gear.
Hopefully manufacturers will eventually get the range to a reasonable "all day driving" distance (even Teslas aren't quite there, and everyone else is laughably far behind them), but they're not really there yet. That more or less excludes anyone who wants to be able to take long road trips with their vehicles.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
I don't know about Norway but personal automobiles wouldn't work in the US without the huge amount of cost externalizing we do. That's why "clean" coal went away. The damage to people's health and well being gets picked up by the gov't and individuals instead of car companies (to say nothing of the massive infrastructure and the wars fought for cheap oil). Take that away and it's too expensive for anyone but the richest to drive ICE vehicles.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
This is especially wrong as in Europe the word "gas" means just that, gas. Ie, LPG or CNG. In Poland, around 15% of cars use LPG.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Of course, the electricity will come from renewable energy, from a country that's one of the leading hydroelectric-powered countries in the world.
Here, fixed that for you. What kind of idiot would burn an export article for expensive electricity in Norway?
What, you've never seen "Jurassic Park"? Dinosaurs *are* renewable.
Where I am it goes down to -35C.
I am told that EVs handle this temperature just fine, because they use EVs in Norway.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
It might work in Norway, but I wouldnt take that as granted that its a good indication of success elsewhere - here in the UK, such a decree would destroy new car ownership for a good portion of the public. Why? Because a good portion of the UKs population live in cities in housing with no offstreet parking, no guaranteed parking space onstreet and very poor public transport - to get to my local hospital from my previous house would be two bus changes and a trip time of over an hour, or 15 minutes by car.
Its just not practical to expect this type of housing to support a method of travel which requires dedicated charging spots, because then you are reliant on third party locations providing those spots. Cant charge at home, after all (typically its difficult enough to park on the same street).
Hopefully manufacturers will eventually get the range to a reasonable "all day driving" distance
You mean, like, by 2025?
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
So they'll be driving DIESEL cars?
Mush! Two dogs try to pull a car uphill in West Sussex]
Norway's geography and population distribution is ideally suited for hydroelectric, so they get most of their electricity that way. Whether they import or export, and their cost, depends on recent rains. During the rainy season of years with lots of rain, they have plenty of inexpensive electricity. They export a small amount of electricity during those times. During the drier months and during years with less precipitation, electricity is more scarce and more expensive. They import electricity during this time.
Powering passenger cars, but not busses, trucks, etc would require increasing electric capacity by about 30%. I don't know that they could increase hydro by that much. They would probably import much of the electricity needed for cars from neighboring countries. Because this would increase the market rate in neighboring countries, those other countries would effectively absorb some of the cost (by paying higher electric bills).
We see from this story that the political support in Norway is so much that they are REQUIRING electric cars. Not encouraging them, but requiring them. Certainly that's a HUGE political advantage, right?
Therefore, if it turns out to be a huge failure, that's not because of political opposition, but due to some other problem. So we can agree that if it fails in Norway, you'll need to reconsider your current thinking, correct?
... when Norway is not part of the EU?
Either way, I'm ready.
Have gnu, will travel.
I suspect, it being the EU, that it just means that buying a gas powered car only requires a brief trip into Sweden. Or Finland.
While I support the policy, I dislike the approach.
Democracy is when the Sovereign People makes choices, not when politicians agree in their back and offer no political choices. Such long term policy could have been settled by a referendum
Why did you post this? No relevance to tfa.
Can't tell if trolling or serious... Electric cars have a slightly lower range in the cold, but perform just fine. They're not powered by lead acid batteries.
Then you just need a mayor like the one we had in my city
from having some parking lots before he was mayor to parking lots everywhere
Now you add chargeable electric points in the parking lots and problem solved
> Are you implying that electric cars don't do well in the cold? Because if you are, you're misinformed. Li Ion based batteries do poorly in heat, but the cold doesn't bother them anywhere near as much as the heat does. Also, Tesla basically has a cooling/heating system just for the batteries
By installing a battery heater in their California model cars, is Tesla implying that li-ion batteries don't do well in the cold? If they are, they're misinformed - or you are.
The chemists who make the batteries say that lithium-ion loses 40% of it's capacity at -4F and shouldn't be subjected to any lower temperature even when not being used.
Well Norway still hunts whales. So I imagine they'll ramp that industry back up. Diesel? No, we freakin' run on whales!
Li Ion based batteries do poorly in heat, but the cold doesn't bother them anywhere near as much as the heat does.
I've used Li-ion batteries in a lot of product designs, and generally you shouldn't charge them below 0degC, and you shouldn't discharge them below -20degC. Keep in mind these aren't likely the same as the ones used in modern EVs, but I can't seem to find a source for that specifically...
As an aside, the only batteries I've found that are able to work reliably at -40degC are pure lead spiral wound (note: not lead-acid). The -40degC requirement is standard for outdoor industrial applications in Canada, and I imagine Norway would be similar.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Switching cars from gasoline to diesel isn't going to make any difference.
People can use bicycles in winter. People already use hybrid/electric cars in Canada and in other countries with cold seasons.
What's the point of your comment again? You've never seen snow in your life or something?
What about vehicles that run on diesel, or alcohol, or natural gas?
I'm willing to bet that the 'resolution' is like a lot of resolutions - full of sound and fury, but set so far in the future that it can be quietly 'forgotten' by everybody but a few extremists, and the new administration, not feeling bound by what their predecessors promised, can either disclaim the resolution or push it back. "Sorry, technology didn't progress quite as fast as they hoped".
There will probably also be huge gaping loopholes. To use the USA as an example, "commercial trucks" were, and in many cases still are, exempt from some of the more stringent pollution and mileage requirements.
One problem that this caused is that the mileage requirements actually drove more people to drive trucks - that could have the abilities they were looking for. So in some ways, the EPA requirements actually drove increased gasoline usage, because the different layers of regulation drove some people to drive less fuel efficient vehicles.
I don't read AC A human right
A lot of people get the idea that cold weather kills batteris because that's when they seem to fail. Heat has been killing the thing for a long time before the actual failure point.
Indeed, cold weather tends to preserve them.
However, sufficient cold will temporarily reduce the power of the batter, while heat will permanently reduce it, it's just that the temporary loss is greater than the permanent. Doesn't help that you need more power to start a cold engine.
So you could, theoretically speaking, ship many 'failed' batteries that are a decade old from Alaska, where they can no longer start a car at -40, down to where it never gets below 0, and get at least a few more years out of them.
I don't read AC A human right
So they want to mandate lesser "cars" for their citizens while letting their nomenklatura drive actual cars? So far, about anything affordable to the average person trends towards golfcart size, as opposed to usable size. Of course, exotics and other vehicles meant for "betters" are untouched.
Not surprised given that it is the technocratic EU, where you accept what your "betters" give you and don't question their sins - unless you want to be smote from the Earth as an enemy of mankind.
But don't let a little truth get in the way of your narrative.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Had they stopped selling oil, you would them claim they are patronizing importer countries by not letting them make the "incorrect" decision to keep using oil. Conveniently, you would be able to accuse them of a moral failing no matter what choice they made.
Or maybe they recognize that in some areas it is easier to convert to non-gas infrastructure than others and that it is reasonable to convert in the easier places first while continuing to use gas-powered cars in other areas.
I have no problem traveling hundreds of miles a day in my electric car (a Tesla). While it adds time, it's not a huge amount since that time can often be spent doing something useful while the car charges. The Tesla superchargers tend to be located at places where there are plenty of amenities available. In my trip from the Bay Area to Seattle charging added maybe 4 hours to my trip. During the stops I often would grab a bite to eat or shop. Often the car was ready to continue before I was. In their cross-country trip they spent roughly 20% of the time charging and the other 80% of the time driving.
Long trips are getting easier and easier as more and more superchargers are installed. The newer cars also charge faster than mine does and have a longer range.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Airstream did a test with being towed by the Model X. While the range was reduced, it wasn't a huge amount, something like 30% reduction in range. By the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range.
The nice thing with electrics is they have an insane amount of torque that puts diesels to shame.
As it is, I'm taking my model S camping next week out in the middle of nowhere. While I'm not towing anything, I have no problem getting there and back. Hell, I decided to go up early and stay at a nearby tiny hotel for a night until the rest of the group arrives. I asked about a 220v outlet and they said they have a tesla charger there, and it is literally in the middle of nowhere. The closest town has a population of 500 and most of the roads in the county aren't paved. It won't even add a significant amount of time charging to reach there, and no, I don't even need to charge at the hotel.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
Market economies tend toward monopoly in the absence of regulation.
The "Norway’s four main political parties" are actually two major political parties two minor ones. AND it turns out the two major ones are saying that they haven't actually agreed to the press. What we are left with is: "two minor political parties want to ban pertrol and diesel cars by 2025 and two major ones are at the very least discussing it"
Being a part of the EEA, Norway is practically a part of the EU. It still has to implement EU regulations (minus the ones regarding agriculture and fishing), but doesn't get to have representatives in the EU parliament.
Remember that cars don't feel the wind chill. -35 in absolute terms is unusually cold in the places in Canada where people actually tend to live.
But not knowing any Finns, I have no clue as to the accuracy of the stereotype
That's what Finns are known for, nobody knows them... including other Finns (and yes, I am a Finn).
You're funny.
Norway gets its electricity from hydropower. We started building out hydropower long before we found oil. Yes, we export oil. We're also an exporter of clean hydropower.
"Rune Kristian Viken" - http://www.nwo.no - arca
They're doing what the Saudis are doing, laying the groundwork for the post-fossil fuel age. The Koch Brothers may be funding psuedoskepticism, and there may be lots of people who believe AGW is an evil lie designed by Satan and/or Communists, but countries like Norway and Saudi Arabia, major oil producers that they are, know very well that sooner or later, and likely sometime after the middle of this century, the Age of Oil is going to come to an end.
Norway is also one of those smarter states who has been stowing away oil revenues, unlike, say Venezuela and Alberta, and the Saudis are following suit with their own sovereign wealth fund, the largest in history.
To add to your excellent post:
“The Stone Age did not end for lack of stone, and the Oil Age will end long before the world runs out of oil.” -- Sheikh Zaki Yamani, Saudi Arabian oil minister '62-'86
8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
Danes tend to fit German stereotypes better than the Germans do. They also have a reputation for cheap beer (by Nordic standards - although it tends to be the Nordic equivalent of Budweiser) and casual (if sometimes unintended) racism.
I must protest. We are not nearly as humorless as the typically dour Germans, and we are much much worse drivers. And while our basic cheap beer is a bit shitty, most people stick with the premium and micro brews.
Stereotypical Danes, from the perspective of a Dane: Beer-drinkin', pork-eatin', kamelåså-speakin', always complainin', thinkin' we're the center of the universe.
Also, we love Norwegians and even though we publicly make fun of the Swedes, they are our brother people forever, and we will not tolerate any outside shittalking of Sweden. Only we and the Norwegians are allowed to do that.
Eat the rich.
Just a small point, but Denmark is losing money on supporting Greenland. Indeed the deal between them is that Denmark pays some fixed stipend, then receives half the income from resources, as long as the latter is smaller than the former.
You've got it backwards. The mineral law stipulates that Greenland gets 100% of the royalties on mineral extraction up to 500m krónur without reduction in the block grant, then everything after that is shared depending on a contract that both parties have to approve - aka Denmark won't approve unless there's something in it for them. Greenlanders were quite unhappy with the arrangement, but it's the way it is. As "Denmark-Greenland in the Twentieth Century" observed, "This arrangement shows a considerable Danish political and economic interest. Not only would the activity be under close observation, but also the Greenlanders would not be allowed to have the entire surplus if there really was something to earn." And with Greenland being one of the world's great untapped mining frontiers with vast deposits of many valuable minerals, yet only having a tiny population, you don't see how that is just a weeeeeee bit advantageous to Denmark?
If you think they're a burden, let them go. They want to leave, overwhelmingly. Over 3/4ths voted for independence in the last referendum. If you think they're a burden, then let them be free like they clearly want to be.
Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
You just need to spend more time in transport of the four-wheeled variety rather than the two-wheeled variety ;) Seriously, is there any other country in the world, with the possible exception of the Netherlands, as bicycle-obsessed as Denmark?
Out of curiosity, what do Danes generally think of Icelanders? Here the views of Danes are mixed. Most views are positive, sometimes very positive with a certain population, but you also find some people who really dislike Danes due to the country having been treated like a colony for so long and a view that many Danes still are of the same mindset (for example, those who come to Iceland and insist on speaking Danish). Former Reykjavík mayor Jón Gnarr's standup routine about Denmark is a more extreme case of that perspective, but it's not rare to see a lower-key version of it. But, most Icelanders aren't like that, I wouldn't say... as you may notice, you usually get lots of votes from Iceland in Eurovision, even though we rarely get as many back ;) And lots of of Icelanders go to Denmark for school or whatnot, or just for several weeks to get wasted and go to parties (among the latter group, I find that they often come back injured for one reason or another ;) )
Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
You say "dour" as if it is a bad thing.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
I primarily transport myself by car, secondarily by public transport and occasionally by bicycle. It's true that we are horrible cyclists, but our driving is equally shitty.
I can only speak for myself and the people I know, but we generally like the Icelanders as much as the other Nordic peoples, but I'll admit that we don't think about Iceland or the Faroe Islands nearly as much as we think of and interact with Norway and Sweden. So maybe on the same level as Finland? We don't quite understand you 100%, but we think you have cool cultural stuff and your countries is fascinating and beautiful.
We did do some really shitheel things in the past, like forcing the Danish language on everyone and not giving you proper autonomy, but I don't think you'll be able to find very many Danes who disagree that we did some bad shit in the past.
Personally, I love all the Nordic countries, and I kinda wish we could create a Common Nordic Region or something of that nature, with Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Scotland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Finland and possibly Estonia as well. We have so much shared history and cultural commonality that it would make for a really strong union.
Eat the rich.
I'm not sure it *has* to buy dirty electricity, I believe there's some credit trading involved as well from which Norway profits.
Ezekiel 23:20
This winter, in the Laurentians, 150 km up north of Montréal, -29C in the evening/night was common. And there is a lot of people enjoying the winter sports in Laurentian, lots of people moving around between hotels and restaurants at these temperatures.
Remember the year 2000? They promised us flying cars. They delivered the PT Cruiser...
We'd be totally into a common nordic region. You may have heard about the on-again/off-again EU/Euro struggle here. We're such a tiny market and have such a tiny currency that we end up paying a big premium for everything we do - for example, interest rates on home loans are always several percent higher than on the mainland. But the EU and euro don't always have the most solid of reputations. The US dollar would be a strong currency, but nobody here wants that. There was some looking into the Canadian dollar but it never really went anywhere. A closer political and monitary union with the other nordics, however, would be very popular. Heck, there's even a small movement here to outright be annexed by Norway ;)
Haha, you remembered Estonia! ;) I feel bad for them, so wanting to be looked on as another Nordic but never getting any attention... they even named their national airline "Nordica" ;) But they need to fix that flag first....
Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
Business man who opened up all of his patents to his competitors and whose competitors are all currently engineering all-electric vehicles as well is happy because it's the right thing to do. If you think Telsa will be the only all-electric car company by then, you're misinformed.
No-one thinks that Musk will be the only guy making electrics, but as he is coming from behind in the competition to make cars it suits him to have the race effectively stopped and restarted with himself allowed to catch up with his competitors.
As for "What an amazingly awesome country. You guys rock!!", it is not "absolutely amazing", nor "rocks" just to ban something. You need to be creative to deserve that sort of praise.
Airstream did a test with being towed by the Model X. While the range was reduced, it wasn't a huge amount, something like 30% reduction in range. By the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range.
The assumption that "by the time they phase out ICE vehicles, EVs should have plenty of towing capacity and even greater range" is a HUGE assumption. Battery technology hasn't progressed much over the last decade. We have used different materials to decrease charging times, but battery capacity has changed very little. The only reason why battery life has been getting better for electronics is because we have been able to continually improve energy efficiency and shrink circuits (which made room for bigger batteries in the same form factor). I just don't see this happening for EVs.
The nice thing with electrics is they have an insane amount of torque that puts diesels to shame.
As it is, I'm taking my model S camping next week out in the middle of nowhere. While I'm not towing anything, I have no problem getting there and back. Hell, I decided to go up early and stay at a nearby tiny hotel for a night until the rest of the group arrives. I asked about a 220v outlet and they said they have a tesla charger there, and it is literally in the middle of nowhere. The closest town has a population of 500 and most of the roads in the county aren't paved. It won't even add a significant amount of time charging to reach there, and no, I don't even need to charge at the hotel.
And if the charger is broken down? It's not like a fellow camper can run to the gas station to pick up a battery for you, but they can do that with gas. You would have to call roadside assistance and they would have to send out a mobile charging truck, if such a thing exists, or tow your car to the nearest charge point. It appears that Tesla does not support charging from a portable generator, so that option is out.
Personally, I would have a lot of concerns with camping, etc. in the middle of nowhere with an EV. You wouldn't be able to be spontaneous. You would have to plan around charge stops and each stop would require significant down time.
If they can build an EV with enough range and with alternative methods of charging (i.e. solar, generator, etc.) I would be interested. I'm just being realistic that an EV has too many drawbacks in regards to camping and towing to remote areas in the US and Canada.
Did you read the article?
It turns out that the article is incorrect. The bill was proposed by a minority party and was voted down.
It's like doing a movie review from the scraps on the cutting room floor that never made it into the film.
D) The bill didn't pass in the first place.
Shame on the submitter and the editor that let it through.
With respect, if you are going somewhere relatively remote in any sort of vehicle you have to make some sort of preparations in case it ends up completely immobilised.
You're right, it's only -25C pre-windchill.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
With their car? As long as you keep the batteries warm it shouldn't be an issue. For gasoline cars you already get a different edition for arctic climates, I'm not sure why this shouldn't be possible with EV.
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
In Norway, 400 kilometers is "all day driving". Literally - it came as something of a surprise after arriving there and having to drive from Oslo to Bergen. Took 8 hours and we drove "highway" (lol) all the way. A highway in Norway is something where you move from curve to curve, and you actually have two whole lanes so you don't need to wait until the opposing cars are gone before you can use the road. At least, not all the time.
I think a Tesla is uniquely suited to Norway: lots of very cheap hydro-electric power, which they sell but could also use themselves. Lots of money to subsidize the transition. Lots of money for building new infrastructure. I'm quite jealous :)
Therefore, by the (faulty) logic you're using, you're just a cow with a keyboard - osu-neko (2604)
This also happened within just the catagory of pickup trucks. The EPA (and NTSB?) has more stringent requirements for lighter trucks and the result has been that there are no light trucks; they are effectively illegal. So people who would have gotten by with a light truck that has a higher MPG have to buy a heavier truck with a lower MPG.
A neighbor and I both had late model GMC Sonomas but he sold his a couple years ago and bought the truck that replaced the Sonoma. I got to inspect it pretty carefully and the only practical difference is that it is about 500 pounds heavier.
You say "dour" as if it is a bad thing.
I pictured this as voiced by "Droopy".
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Part of reason Norway can be generous with social benefits is that has been a mini-OPEC in profiting off its large oil reserves. It has taxed and investing a large sovereign wealth fund. So if Norway goes all EV it just offshores its CO2 to oil consuming countries. They are not the first in doing such. The US cleaned up its air polution in part to offshoring dirty manufacturing to China, now a highly polluted country.
You might want to check up on Sweden. HA is run by immigrants. The liberals want to have sex with the corpses of their relatives and pets. Everyone is a rapist and/or terrorist and the police is scared to leave the police stations. Sweden is like a country the anti Christ would build.
Have you ever been to Sweden? Or do you get all your information from neo-nazi blogs? If an Antichrist built Sweden, it's the one from Heinlein's "New Book of Job".
Stephan
You've got it backwards. The mineral law stipulates that Greenland gets 100% of the royalties on mineral extraction up to 500m krónur without reduction in the block grant, then everything after that is shared depending on a contract that both parties have to approve - aka Denmark won't approve unless there's something in it for them. Greenlanders were quite unhappy with the arrangement, but it's the way it is. As "Denmark-Greenland in the Twentieth Century" observed, "This arrangement shows a considerable Danish political and economic interest. Not only would the activity be under close observation, but also the Greenlanders would not be allowed to have the entire surplus if there really was something to earn." And with Greenland being one of the world's great untapped mining frontiers with vast deposits of many valuable minerals, yet only having a tiny population, you don't see how that is just a weeeeeee bit advantageous to Denmark?
If you think they're a burden, let them go. They want to leave, overwhelmingly. Over 3/4ths voted for independence in the last referendum. If you think they're a burden, then let them be free like they clearly want to be.
No, they don't want to leave, mostly beause they can not survive on their own. Plus wast majority of Greenland is Danish only because Danish military is there. If Denmark left it would be up for graps for anyone, since no greenlanders live there.
Market economies explicitly recognise this, which is why they reserve powers to break up monopolies to the state.
So over three quarters of them voted for independence because... what, a prank?
The self-justifications for empire know no bounds.
Maybe, but I can barely make out what you're saying because your horse is too high.
You assume that the people, and politicians, in Norway are of exactly the same mindset as the ones in the USA. I can assure you that is a faulty assumption.
I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
If it's one thing that I've learned over my life, it's that human nature doesn't change.
So, while I fully agree that you can find differences in mindset between Norway and the USA, while the center may be different, there's a core underlayment that will remain the same. And thus amount to much the same.
Though after sleeping on it, I have to stop thinking of 2025 as 'far in the future' and switch to 2050. After all, 2025 is just over 1 dual term president away...
I don't read AC A human right
Free from debt? Free from crumbling infrastructure? Free from starving sick people? Perhaps even free from having to decide which con artist to vote in as Emperor.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Are there no Inuit left in Greenland?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
The out-of-pocket difference between using and not using healthcare is 0. That's what's commonly understood by "free healthcare" - it doesn't cost you anything when you need it, and the rest of the time it is payed for by everyone pooling together, which results in lower costs across the board.
Which chiefly is by pumping the water uphill first.
Norway doesn't need to pump water uphill; precipitation and weather patterns do that for them. The way in which Norway has been "storing" electricity is simply by not using their reservoirs when there's other sources available, such as excess Danish wind power. But Norway still has untapped hydro potential, and likewise, they can augment their own generating capacity with non-hydro renewable sources of their own, just like some other countries such as Brazil or China introduced their own hybrid hydro solutions (for example, the Longyangxia Dam project in China).
Furthermore, what does that have to do with the sheer stupidity of the proposal to substitute the least expensive source of electricity with the most expensive one?
And the suppliers of that energy have contracts to get it back again, so Norway can't just keep that hydro power for EV's.
Oh, come on.
Ezekiel 23:20
Visiting Finland was somewhat odd, even though my Dad is a native. The way it was described to me, is that you could ride the same bus to work for 30 years next to the same guy and never talk and that would be considered socially normal. Very stark contrast to how open people are in the US.
Danish emotion in voice inflection and facial expressions, when you don't know the language, is by far the hardest to pick up of any language I've ever heard. It gets even harder when they switch over to speaking English. You can't get a read on them as a foreigner at all.
That's very interesting, actually. I know a lot of our humor relies on deadpan sarcasm, irony and inferred meaning from what is and isn't said directly, but I never thought about the inflection and expressions. It makes sense regarding the whole deadpan thing, though.
Compared to a Spaniard or an Italian (anyone from southern Europe, really), I can see how we can seem very unemotional or detached. On the other hand, we think all the wild gesticulating is kinda silly-looking :-)
Eat the rich.
Are there no Inuit left in Greenland?
No they just live in a small strip along one coast of Greenland. The rest of the island is uninhabitet except by researchers and military.
So over three quarters of them voted for independence because... what, a prank?
That never happened. Indepedence have not be up for an offical referendum, if it had been they would be independent now.
So it is inhabited, at least as much as much of northern Canada. Seems as the original owners, they should be able to choose their own course.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism