Talk:Phase-out of fossil fuel vehicles

Untitled

This page is going to need a lot of work but I wanted to get something basic started to capture events as the unfold since they will be easier to identify as they happen, particular to get the chronology of events correct.

Anon 2018-02-21: Thank you for starting this! Will be interesting to see how it progresses over time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.233.226.29 (talk) 04:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

how to handle cities versus countries doing localised bans?

My approach initially is to add the country with a city-qualifier to show that it applies to a sub-region (not the whole country). The other option is to have another page or a meta-page (top-level) that breaks things down by some geographical division. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nigwil (talk • contribs) 09:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

The 2020 ban in Oxford is only for certain types of parking and loading vehicles, it is not a general ban on petrol/diesel vehicles driving through the six shopping streets. I did not include that detail in the Cities and territories table because it would've taken up too much space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.213.234 (talk) 22:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

New entires from climateprotection.org

Multiple problems:

1. Dead link, gives 404, it's been like that for a while

2. Incentives is not the same as actual bans. Having them in the same list is misleading and confusing.

If the link is fixed, then the while "incentives" should be moved to a separate table, with clarification what these "incentives" even are. If the link stays broken, this needs to be romved.D2306 (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

3. On finally finding the report, it looks to be a very poor quality source with the alledged references not even saying that is claimed. Just going off alphabetically: the 2020 for Austria dealine is false and is based off an internal study (dead link again, but found reference in another article. It's a "maybe, not a deadline. I can find no other source for ban on ICE sales in Austria supposedly just over a year away. Due to this, I think the entire addition of this source should be reverted. Countries should be added to the list on an individual basis with solid sources for the claims.D2306 (talk) 23:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Ban vs Incentives

The title of this page is "List of countries banning fossil fuel vehicles." I propose that non-bans (i.e., incentives) be removed from this list. Clyde McQueen (talk) 16:52, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree. I removed the countries with non-bans (someone misunderstood the PDF from climateprotection.org probably), but there are others with non-bans (like Germany, just have at look at the sources). --Fraph24 (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Actually, if you examine the sources you will find that most countries are not banning ICE cars. They are banning the sale of new vehicles that are ICE cars. I know for certain that is the case in Vancouver. ICE cars are still permitted, but if you want to buy one it has to be electric.

https://vancouversun.com/news/politics/b-c-legislation-to-phase-out-gas-vehicles-by-2040-fuels-debate https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/every-new-car-sold-in-2040-will-be-zero-emission-b-c-government-says-1.4913679 TheDoDahMan (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Pollution_in_California

It would be interesting to include California diesels in the tables.

Thanks

--AXRL (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

The 2017 bill to ban diesel and petrol cars in California did not pass. In order to merit a place in this list, it needs to be an adopted proposal or plan. I expect a similar bill to be tabled in the future and passed, but not until then can CA be added. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:33, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Similarly, the NZ govt had plans for a 2035 ban, but they have been scrapped and not yet replaced by an adopted plan. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:37, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

Cosmetic change

I removed the centre alignment on the table cells. It improves the look and feel. There is NO effect on content of the article. TheDoDahMan (talk) 11:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

History?

Could use the addition of a section describing the history of decisions about this. RJFJR (talk) 13:18, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

How is the phase-out achieved ?

Following banner was removed by Chidgk1 (08:22, 13 September 2020‎):

It still isn't clear in the article. I think that some countries may ban the fuel used inside the vehicle, but others may just ban the internal combustion vehicle itself (at least the production of new ones). Banning the internal combustion engine seems and probably is counter-productive in the effort to reduce global CO2 emissions (because the internal combustion engine can use renewable fuels as mentioned, and doesn't require a new car to be build (emissions from new car production are large), and since the industry has been using it since a long time (many machines made specifically for production of the engine, well though-out process, ...) it is also cheaper to build then by using electric engines and batteries.

Can either the banner be re-inserted or the article improved ?

User:Genetics4good

Hi Genetics4Good, I'd like to pick up the issue of improving this article with you. I've already done many additions to the lists, but there is still a lot to be done in the Background and Scope sections, I agree with you there. As far as I can see, countries are adopting the policy of banning the sale of new vehicles with internal combustion engines, and some seem be wanting to make it a crime to drive one after a certain year in the future. Cities and territories are imposing geographical restrictions on where certain vehicles may be driven around, mostly in densely populated urban areas; they either check this through licence plates (which indicate the age of the vehicle, in countries like the Netherlands or Belgium) or the environmental stickers/badges a vehicle needs to have on it (in Germany). In the sources that I have read, nobody seems to be suggesting the prohibition of production or use of diesel or petrol fuel, nor the production of diesel or petrol engines, just the sale of new vehicles past a certain date (making vehicle-selling companies responsible), or the use of certain vehicles in certain areas past a certain date (making owners responsible).

As a sidenote, I noticed you removed some of my cited content about the Eindhoven sustainability study, and the recent record increase in EU electric car sales. When adding this information, I considered whether this was the appropriate article to put this in, neither is directly related to the phase-out of fossil fuel vehicles; they are just showing that electric vehicles are increasingly becoming a viable alternative and thus making the phase-out plans realistic. I don't think I agree with the reasons you gave for removing them though; if you disagree with the study, it's up to you to cite critics of the study pointing at flaws instead of removing it yourself. If you disagree with what is relevant about the increase in electric car sales, then you're welcome to provide information you deem more relevant to replace it with rather than just removing it. I'm open to better solutions for both, however, and as you appear to have some expertise in this area I anticipate your suggestions positively. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:51, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Nederlandse Leeuw,

Yes, I also think (most) are just focusing on the car itself (banning any car with an internal combustion engine). However, perhaps there are some countries that just ban the use of fossil fuel inside the ICE vehicle ? If so, we could highlight this and bring up the point that this is a better way to move away from the use of fossil fuels (because buying a new electric vehicle is expensive and may not always lower emissions much (and in some cases, perhaps not at all). Personally, I doubt it's worth it. Best is simple fuel switching (you probably need a few small changes done in the engine control unit or even just a simple software update for that system but that's about it -sometimes you may need a different tank too, ie when using hydrogen or biogas, ...) and if even that's too difficult, then you're probably better to just offset the yearly CO2 emissions of your gasoline car rather then buying a new electric one (also for the environment, because with offsetting, you can offset all your emissions, with a battery electric car you "might" just lower it somewhat).

For the emissions, look at Environmental_aspects_of_the_electric_car. Basically, it's a weight/power issue. Say you got a small internal combustion vehicle running on E10 gasoline. If you move to a much more powerful electric car (Tesla, ...) which has a big battery, then the manufacturing emissions of that vehicle may be so large that you'll never be able to get lower emissions (because there's a certain amount of CO2 emitted per kwh. Also, what battery type is used (some have much higher emissions, ie Li-ion) and in what factory is it produced (some factories may just be much more efficient and create less CO2 then other factories even when making a same battery). Other parameters are: how much kilometers do you travel with it (the more km's with electric, the less CO2 emissions per km compared to gasoline) ? In what country do you use the electric vehicle (some national power grids use much more fossil fuel power plants, some even rely mainly on coal). Or do you use power from own solar panels ? How fast does the battery needs to be replaced (because these don't last long, unlike the electric car and engine itself, which may last a lifetime) ? An then, what if you use a different fuel in the ICE car (i.e. hydrogen internal combustion, E-gasoline, E-diesel, cellulosic ethanol, ...) So you understand I have a real issue with generalisations such as "electrics are more sustainable", or "newer generations of electrics are now much more sustainable then gasoline cars". It really needs to be seen on a case-by-case basis, and really, I agree fossil fuel needs to be phased out, but those new fuels being developed are in my view much better then using electrics (because you don't need to buy a new car, with brings with it manufacturing emissions).

Another option is situations in which you simply use the (electric) car rather then owning it (car sharing, robotaxi, ...). This way, the car is used almost constantly and is hence much more effective then one which stands in a garage most of the time. Also, most of such city e-cars don't need a big battery because they can be recharged everywhere in the city, while still doing a lot of kilometers (both of which is excellent to keep emissions down in an electric car).

Perhaps that in the long run (by 2050 or so), fuel-based electrics (meaning those that use a fuel cell and run on hydrogen, or ethanol, or ... ) may be a better option (since they might be a bit more efficient) but again, at this moment in time, it's not worth the cost (for the given CO2 reduction), and there is still the issue that new cars then need to be made (manufacturing emissions). One option here is that existing ICE engines are simply converted to fuel-based electric (meaning the same car is used and most produced parts don't need to be replaced as well).

For the study, it doesn't belong here: put the info (ie CO2 emissions per kwh, ...) mentioned in the study (https://www.oliver-krischer.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/English_Studie.pdf ) in the Environmental_aspects_of_the_electric_car article. It's linked, so people can still view the specifics then there.

With the geographical restrictions, you're probably referring to the Low emissions zones (there's a wiki article on it). Indeed, this too isn't mentioned yet in this article, so perhaps it should be mentioned now.

User:Genetics4good

Hello Genetics4Good - it is interesting you mention that you think "that some countries may ban the fuel used inside the vehicle". If you have any example perhaps you could put it in the article. Having said that on reflection I now agree with you that I removed the banner too soon and banning the sale of fossil fuelled cars is not the only way to phase them out - the other being zero emission zones as you mentioned. How about if we amended the lead to add something like "Another method of phase-out is the use of zero emission zones in cities."? Chidgk1 (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi Chidgk1 and Genetics4Good, I've renamed the 'Scope' section to 'Methods' and rewritten it to include the three methods by which I have so far seen the restrictions on fossil-fuelled vehicles being planned or applied by governments: new sales, importation and usage. I linked the last one with the low/zero-emission zones mentioned by both of you. I agree with Chidgk1 in saying that if there are other methods (e.g. banning the production or use of certain fuels or engines) being planned or applied by governments, or recommended by notable experts in reliable sources, Genetics4Good can add them to this list of methods. But so far, I have not seen anyone else even suggesting such a method in order to phase out fossil-fuelled vehicles. Governments are holding vehicle-selling/importing companies and vehicle owners responsible, not vehicle producers or fuel producers, so they are focused on the end of the distribution chain. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I figured some countries might have just banned the use of fossil fuels inside ICE vehicles, but after a google search, found no hits. Just mentioned the issue in the text itself then.

I added the TUE study at the Environmental_aspects_of_the_electric_car article, and updated the info here. It doubt it's "significantly" less CO2 intensive then what it was before (li-ion batteries haven't changed much) but the main issue was that the IVL study figures were very, very wrong, so it now "looks" cleaner then what it used to be.

Still, we would actually better have a comparison (CO2 emissions, lifecycle assessment) between battery electric cars, electric car conversion, fuel cell (hydrogen, ethanol) electric cars and other alternative fuel cars (hydrogen internal combustion, E-gasoline, E-diesel, ...). I still think the latter gives much more ecological advantage vs the required investment cost ("more bang for the buck") User:Genetics4good

Scope of the article?

Should it cover just cars, just road vehicles (if so it should be renamed) or all types in the Vehicle article or something in between? I tend to think it should cover all vehicles and it could be split later if it gets too big. Chidgk1 (talk) 18:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

Countries and large Jurisdictions

I converted the countries section and added large jurisdictions. I think California would be 3 on that list by vehicle market size, for those actually implementing a ban.   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 17:47, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Separate lists for bans vs incentives, studies and proposals?

There are several on the list with "proposals", like China and Germany. I suggest we remove these. Perhaps a better idea is to create separate lists with bans vs proposals. What do you think?   Thanks! Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:49, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Another option would be to make the distinction clearer, for example by adding different background colors. This would keep things simpler instead of splitting tables. --Ita140188 (talk) 04:20, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

Adding population size to the table?

I think it would be really beneficial and informative if country population was a column in the table. This would help contextualise and show the significance of each ban - a ban in a tiny country with a few hundred thousand residents is far less significant than a ban in China for example.

Alternatively the table could list another relevant statistic - for example current cars on the road, or number of new vehicles sold annually. I'm not sure what the best option would be - or even how accessible some of this information is.

Benisasun (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

Fossil fuel?

Scientists thought the oil would run out 20 years ago based on the fossil model. The scientific evidence for 'fossil fuel' is simply not there. Oil and gas are being drawn up from depths where fossils could never had decended to. It is now known that oil and gas are being produced by nuclear forces within the mantle. Hydrocarbons as they should be called are actually being produced continuously, almost a renewable! Some of the largest wells in Russia are filling up! The oil will never run out and to stop using it makes no economic sense unless the destruction of capitalism and the West is the goal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.187.170.90 (talk) 10:37, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Eu commission proposal: 2035

The EU commission has proposed in the regulation (pdf, p19) that: "‘5a. From 1 January 2035, the following EU fleet-wide targets shall apply: (a) for the average emissions of the new passenger car fleet, an EU fleet�wide target equal to a 100 % reduction of the target in 2021 determined in accordance with Part A, point 6.1.3, of Annex I; (b) for the average emissions of the new light commercial vehicles fleet, an EU fleet-wide target equal to a 100 % reduction of the target in 2021 determined in accordance with Part B, point 6.1.3, of Annex I."

The precise date is not mentioned in the communication of the commission. This should not be confused with the target of 55% reduction of emissions in 2030. So I have corrected this in the article.--2A02:1810:BC04:4B00:945F:B76B:4717:24B3 (talk) 11:04, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Objectives

There needs to be a statement that the main reason for phaseout of fossil fueled vehicles is to phase out the addition of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, which is mainly caused by burning fossil fuels in ICEVs. Nothing is said about converting ICEVs to run on hydrogen or biofuels, although the ICEVs still would produce NOx, a greenhouse gas. 2600:1700:CD40:C510:307A:6A45:1EA:A0BA (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source that is the main reason (not energy security or health) then go ahead and cite it Chidgk1 (talk) 08:56, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: CALIFORNIA DREAMING, THE GOLDEN STATE'S RHETORICAL APPEALS

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 February 2023 and 24 March 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joseph Warton (article contribs). Peer reviewers: StassieKrosten, Sweetangos.

— Assignment last updated by Phrynefisher (talk) 01:07, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Glasgow declaration signatories list

The sources give differing accounts with respect to which countries have signed (and how many there are).

It is also unclear whether the Governments in Emerging Markets and Developing Economies have pledged the same thing as the other countries (the developped ones). i.e. if they are also subject to A (the BBC tends to take this view). "A. As governments, we will work towards all sales of new cars and vans being zero emission by 2040 or earlier, or by no later than 2035 in leading markets. B. As governments in emerging markets and developing economies, we will work intensely towards accelerated proliferation and adoption of zero emission vehicles. We call on all developed countries to strengthen the collaboration and international support offer to facilitate a global, equitable and just transition."

Seeing as the declaration is not legally binding, I would suggest in the countries table to only keep "Signatory of the Glasgow declaration" if that is earliest phase out date that we have and if there is not a law saying otherwise. For example the EU member states are subject to a legally binding European Union law that phases out new sales of emitting cars by 2035, in that case the Glasgow declaration signatory can be removed. 2A02:1810:BCA9:3A00:84A2:E8EA:8CFD:DFC (talk) 20:43, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

No criticism section?

With the pushback by Germany and other EU states, I'm amazed there is no criticism section on such a universal change in social energy consumption. I seriously doubt every interest on Earth is behind this movement. Doyna Yar (talk) 16:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)