How do you feel about the decline of petrol vehicles? | Page 19 | GTAMotorcycle.com

How do you feel about the decline of petrol vehicles?

Forum Sponsor
The problem is pretty simple, it's too much GHG in the atmosphere, of which CO2 is the major contributor and the one we can have the most influence over.

The repercussions and the path to avoid them are massively complex, that's why a market-based solution would be great if possible. And it is possible, because the problem is simple.
 
Last edited:
fastar1 said:
So after all that talk is there anybody left who still doubts the value of a carbon tax, and letting the market decide which fuels work best for each usage scenario?
Click to expand...
Taxes are implemented when a gov't decides to control or manipulate a market -- its their "thumb on the scale". "letting the market decide" only happens when there are no "thumbs on the scale".
 
Mad Mike said:
Taxes are implemented when a gov't decides to control or manipulate a market -- its their "thumb on the scale". "letting the market decide" only happens when there are no "thumbs on the scale".
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the 'free' market, which is about as useful as a live chainsaw with no operator.

The market system is just a tool, it's not magical or spiritual or all knowing. We need to shape it into an effective and well handled tool that can help us achieve our goals as a society.
 
fastar1 said:
Yes, that's the 'free' market, which is about as useful as a live chainsaw with no operator.

The market system is just a tool, it's not magical or spiritual or all knowing. We need to shape it into an effective and well handled tool that can help us achieve our goals as a society.
Click to expand...
Your reply drags this discussion outside he scope of a motorcycle enthusiasts forum.

All I did was correct your statement regarding markets deciding.
 
fastar1 said:
Correct what? I never said the 'free' market.
Click to expand...
Ok fastar1, have fun with words. You toss around 'market' in your posts, at least understand that subsequent posts don't qualify and un-qualify your jibber. Do you even have a motorcycle? Your contributions here seem to be mostly red-card blather - who sent you?
 
I'm actually 2KTo1M's mom and I'm here to rid the GTA of the scourge of the motorcycle! You found me out you clever imp.

I guess that your explanation for why you're able to correct me on something I never said...
 
Clearly, somehow, a level playing field needs to be created as far as different C02 footprints left behind by usage to get rid of, what many call often unfair incentives. Free market, while preferable, is no good in this instance, since free market doesn't care about GHG in general and its effects.

I say somehow, because it's incredibly complex issue where a system of one country will not easily work elsewhere. If I had an answer I would be busy working on it, rather than posting here ... :)
 
Market forces will be effective for competition between players ( and already is ).....useless for setting the playing field.

Electronics are a competitive market
Water supply is not.

There are various layers pf regulation in between that allow a mixed economy to balance interests of the public weal against private interests.
Given the current rising inequality ....we ain't doing to good on the public weal aspect.
 
mxs said:
How do you figure?? ... Maybe you misunderstood or I didn't put it as clearly as I could.

Most people (obviously not you assuming it's true when you said you work for energy company and you perhaps studied something along those lines as well, so you "get" it ...) get their facts from Google (Internet) or TV, some read books, some have friends who make living in the field and some of us have friends who happen to do science work in this field. But the Google and TV it is where majority of folks get their "facts". So my point was, that it doesn't take a lot of effort to get the wrong facts (facts you find ignorant and hard to believe) and therefore to discuss something as serious as this subject, here in this environment, had zero chance to lead to anything positive. That's all what I meant by it.

At any rate, at some point we have to make choice who and what we believe. Yes, some of us make the wrong choices in regards to what theory or fact we believe in .... but such is life. It used to be that you had to go to school to study something for long time before you could claim knowledge of anything. Then, you had to know that someone to pass that information on to you .... it was much harder to spread the wrong news so to speak (unless it was a state propaganda of course). Impossible today. If some "news" site says today that ICE will not be dead in 100 years from now (because Mazda says so ... LOL), you bet there are people believing it ....
Click to expand...

My bad. All your points are right. I've been more of a firm believer of "people are too stupid to Google" due to what I've experienced.

I suppose both not Googling and propagating false information (similar to how people used to do it via "a friend of a friend told me...") are both equally bad. But I've always operated on the mindset of "assume everyone is wrong unless verified" due to my work...and especially motorcycling. Just listen to all the ******** you'll hear at LnL or KC.
 
For the desiel lovers...

On Netflix

[video=youtube;QBkPQ6N8qx4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBkPQ6N8qx4[/video]
 
MacDoc said:
For the desiel lovers...

On Netflix

[video=youtube;QBkPQ6N8qx4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBkPQ6N8qx4[/video]
Click to expand...

Will check this out, however, and I want to stress that I worked internally with diesel-gate, this is done all over the industry. And this is the issue, the entire Auto Industry is culpable to one degree or another, whether its VW/Mitsubishi/Harley Davidson etc... creating cheating devices to bypass emission restrictions, or Takata with their airbag fiasco, which I dealt with, too. (This analogous to TEPCO/Fukushima for that matter!)

It comes down to a phrase that was used a lot a few years a go, 'moral hazard,' but has since lost its impact; Businesses will continue to do what ever generates short-term profit and set-aside what ever they need to in a trust or fund so when they do get caught they can lean on that, and should it exceed a certain cost, as in the case with Takata, get nationalized and have the costs subsidized by Japanese citizens. Painfully ironic considering that they stopped paying to help victims of Fukushima, but had all the money needed to help rescue Takata and still hold the Olympics.

Its incredibly immora and insane, and as a petrolhead its really hard not to realize that the cost of 'business as usual' is simply not worth it; our environment and our personal health cannot sustain this anymore--Cancer frequency increase is devastatingly alarming in N. America in just the last 25 years.

I'm a strong advocate of EVs taking over the entire consumer market share, in fact I want it to go fully automated sooner (Tesla's AP2 should get us to see how fast this can scale, despite the delays) on top of that.

I despise that this mainly being done by the Government, as the incentives to go EV are obvious, albeit expensive in the short-term; but, in my lifetime I have seen countless wars/conflicts and misery fought for oil, Exxon and BP spills etc... enough is enough. (All created by Governments, no less.)

I'll continue to maintain my race vehicles, which are all ICE, but beyond that I welcome the EV models. But when ever I can afford it I'm going EV for the daily use. A used Model 3 with AP2 sounds nice, the new Leaf might have been a contender but their battery tech is way behind, and GM products are garbage. BMW's i3 is a joke, too. I hope Toyota comes out with something like the Prius but full EV and can piggy back off Tesla's SC network and AP tech somehow, I'd definitely be all over that.

BTW I saw their team on the Mountain and coming back down when they set the record last year:

https://car.osu.edu/news/2017/06/buckeye-current-places-first-pikes-peak-international-hill-climb

And while watching them go up wasn't as exciting as hearing a liter bike popping and banging due to elevation shift and engine mapping changes as some cars/bikes, it was like seeing the Future just whizz right by. It was eerily calm, yet immensely disruptive to my own value-system and view of what motorsports meant. Those are some of the coolest and smartest kids I've ever met, and it left me with a deep sense of sanctification as they are going to be the ones who are already changing the industry.

Harley Davidson along with Honda sponsored the development of that bike! And some went t to HD after graduation to go work on their EV bike program.
 
Last edited:
You are making, mostly good points, in my opinion ... I am just wondering about a couple of things.

1) What does this mean? .... "I worked internally with diesel-gate."

2) How do you square this? (you are not only one I heard this from ...) ... "I'm a strong advocate of EVs taking over the entire consumer market share" ... but in next paragraph, you say ... "I despise that this mainly being done by the Government, as the incentives to go EV are obvious, albeit expensive in the short-term;"

I mean, how else would you want to kickstart to necessary change, especially since you realize we cannot continue the old way for much longer. If you leave it to the market or car companies themselves, you will have lonely Tesla for very very very long time and the old OEM's will continue making ICE cars, just with better and better fuel consumption .... we don't want that, right? So somehow the market's hand must be forced, in other way than just emission mandates, because those don't help companies to make EV's. Not now and not for very long time ...
 
I'm all for EVs and have a dream that someday we will all drive/ride clean and efficient EVs. In most of Canada EVs lower carbon footprint when compared to a similar size ICE vehicles -- but not all of Canada, and certainly not all of the world.

A Chev Volt on electricity creates about 50g of Co2/km vs 150g for it's close sister the ICE Cruze in Ontario. In Alberta and SK where fossil fuels are used to generate electricity, making the electricity to drive a Volt 1km creates 300 to 600g of Co2 - 2 to 4 times more than a Cruze. This is an often under considered fact when evaluating EVs -- particularly in areas that generate a lot of C02 when making electricity.

Over the live of EV vehicle (assuming 400,000km), you need to save an additional 10g/km because manufacturing that ev car generated 4 tons more Co2 than did it's ICE sister.

Boiled down, choosing EVs to reduce greenhouse gas is less about the car -- more about the Co2 made in electricity generation. Where wind/hydro/nuclear generation prevail -- EVs are cleaner, where Fossil/Bio/Coal is used to generate electricity, ICE cars are cleaner. Choosing an ICE car today with it's EV sister in the Alberta, Sask, most of the USA and China will cause more C02 than it's sister ICE car.
 
Last edited:
Mad Mike said:
I'm all for EVs and have a dream that someday we will all drive/ride clean and efficient EVs. In most of Canada EVs lower carbon footprint when compared to a similar size ICE vehicles -- but not all of Canada, and certainly not all of the world.

A Chev Volt on electricity creates about 50g of Co2/km vs 150g for it's close sister the ICE Cruze in Ontario. In Alberta and SK where fossil fuels are used to generate electricity, making the electricity to drive a Volt 1km creates 300 to 600g of Co2 - 2 to 4 times more than a Cruze. This is an often under considered fact when evaluating EVs -- particularly in areas that generate a lot of C02 when making electricity.

Over the live of EV vehicle (assuming 400,000km), you need to save an additional 10g/km because manufacturing that ev car generated 4 tons more Co2 than did it's ICE sister.

Boiled down, choosing EVs to reduce greenhouse gas is less about the car -- more about the Co2 made in electricity generation. Where wind/hydro/nuclear generation prevail -- EVs are cleaner, where Fossil/Bio/Coal is used to generate electricity, ICE cars are cleaner. Choosing an ICE car today with it's EV sister in the Alberta, Sask, most of the USA and China will cause more C02 than it's sister ICE car.
Click to expand...


Good points above, this is Mazda's case as well, they say their next gen ICE engines are more efficient with emissions, then the emissions needed to produce electricity for an electric car.

Also, the Volt gets poor hwy mileage compared to say a Civic, so it pollutes more there as well.


Clean Hydrogen and hydrogen cars are the best solution, and I see more and more reports of scientists working to make this happen. https://phys.org/news/2018-02-method-efficiently-hydrogen.html
 
SunnY S said:
Clean Hydrogen and hydrogen cars are the best solution, and I see more and more reports of scientists working to make this happen. https://phys.org/news/2018-02-method-efficiently-hydrogen.html
Click to expand...
You can get zero tailpipe emissions from a hydrogen powered car, but making the hydrogen to fuel that car is dirty -- the end doesn't justify the means (today).

Hydrogen only solves the problem if it's made using solar/wind or hydro electricity. There is some promise here, particularly where wind/nuclear/hydro energy is wasted at night. If clean electricity generators converted waste energy to hydrogen, we would solve the carbon problem -- that leaves 3 daunting issues in the way of hydrogen cars.

SunnY, I'll leave you to figure out:
1) reducing engine cost by $50,000
2) building a filling station and distribution network
3) providing fuel at a cost that is competitive with electricity
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom