Germany Needs Emissions-Free Car Fleet by 2030, Senior Government Official Says - Polidicks

[QUOTE]All new cars registered in Germany need to be emissions free by 2030 at the latest to help meet pollution reduction goals, a senior government official said. Germany’s pledge to cut carbon dioxide output by 80 percent to 95 percent by 2050 will be in jeopardy unless the country radically reduces transportation pollution, said Deputy Economy Minister Rainer Baake. Since cars typically have a 20-year lifespan, registrations of new diesel and gasoline cars needs to be cut over the next 15 years, he said. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-13/germany-needs-emissions-free-car-fleet-by-2030-official-says"]Source[/URL]

So what does this mean, that 99% all cars produced and bought now and in the near future will be unusable in 2030 because they can't be registered ?

[QUOTE=AntonioR;50524740]So what does this mean, that 99% all cars produced and bought now and in the near future will be unusable in 2030 ?[/QUOTE] I think they mean to ban the sale of non-electric cars after 2030.

[QUOTE=AntonioR;50524740]So what does this mean, that 99% all cars produced and bought now and in the near future will be unusable in 2030 ?[/QUOTE] The first sentence mentions all [i]new[/i] cars

I am curious if they're just banning petrol cars or if they intend to ban all ICE cars.

I hope Germany is prepared for a massive infrastructure upgrade, last I call they were trying to cut nuclear power. I know since Germany is smaller it can be done faster than in the US, but still this is pretty massive. I wonder what they are going to do in order to offset the upcoming power requirement changes.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;50524751]I hope Germany is prepared for a massive infrastructure upgrade, last I call they were trying to cut nuclear power. I know since Germany is smaller it can be done faster than in the US, but still this is pretty massive. I wonder what they are going to do in order to offset the upcoming power requirement changes.[/QUOTE] They shut down nuclear power plants, and wanted to go green, then realized sun doesn't always shine and there isn't wind all the time, so to stabilize the electrical grid they started making coal based power plants and actually increased their emissions.

[QUOTE=AntonioR;50524822]They shut down nuclear power plants, and wanted to go green, then realized sun doesn't always shine and there isn't wind all the time, so to stabilize the electrical grid they started making coal based power plants and actually increased their emissions.[/QUOTE] The key to 24 / 7 renewable energy is batteries. Like how SolarCity are doing a couple of projects in the US with batteries so that the solar plants provide energy 24 / 7.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50524855]The key to 24 / 7 renewable energy is batteries. Like how SolarCity are doing a couple of projects in the US with batteries so that the solar plants provide energy 24 / 7.[/QUOTE] Good luck with that. Anyone can do the back of the envelope calculation to show we don't have enough lithium and associated battery metals to power the entire planet's cars let alone the electricity grid.

[QUOTE=download;50524895]Good luck with that. Anyone can do the back of the envelope calculation to show we don't have enough lithium and associated battery metals to power the entire planet's cars let alone the electricity grid.[/QUOTE] Good thing sulfur batteries are only a few years away. Im skeptical Germany will be able to even do anything on emissions from cars considering how VW basically miraculously passed inspections for years even as the cheat was evident to government agencies. The government was as complicit as the company, and even now they're not really moving on VW as much as the US is, here the emissions scandle actually did damage our domestic companies trying to put out diesel cars which they thought needed urea injection

[QUOTE=AntonioR;50524822]They shut down nuclear power plants, and wanted to go green, then realized sun doesn't always shine and there isn't wind all the time, so to stabilize the electrical grid they started making coal based power plants and actually increased their emissions.[/QUOTE] Just btw solar panels still work even if its cloudy. Typical panels generate 25% of their capacity in ambient light but it can be increased if you design them to work with wavelengths that penetrate clouds. I dont think the weather in germany had much to do with it.

[QUOTE=download;50524895]Good luck with that. Anyone can do the back of the envelope calculation to show we don't have enough lithium and associated battery metals to power the entire planet's cars let alone the electricity grid.[/QUOTE] [citation needed]

[QUOTE=Morgen;50525735][citation needed][/QUOTE] Rather than redo the calculations myself: [url]http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/[/url]

[QUOTE=download;50525840]Rather than redo the calculations myself: [url]http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/[/url][/QUOTE] A blog post from 2011 that's about lead acid batteries is your source for: [QUOTE=download;50524895]we don't have enough lithium and associated battery metals to power the entire planet's cars let alone the electricity grid.[/QUOTE] :what:

[QUOTE=Morgen;50525862]A blog post from 2011 that's about lead acid batteries is your source for: :what:[/QUOTE] How about you criticise the maths? It's not exactly high-level stuff. Anyway, the point was to illustrate the scale of the problem which you seem to fail to appreciate; lead is one of the options that doesn't have a chance in hell of contributing a noticeable amount, do you think other options are going to fare much better?

[QUOTE=download;50525892]How about you criticise the maths? Anyway, the point was to illustrate the scale of the problem which you seem to fail to appreciate.[/QUOTE] It's not even relevant when electric cars are using Li-Ion exclusively. Energy storage is moving over to Li-Ion batteries as well. For grid scale batteries there's a ton of different storage technologies being worked on. Lead acid batteries aren't really relevant to future discussions anymore.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50525909]It's not even relevant when electric cars are using Li-Ion exclusively. Energy storage is moving over to Li-Ion batteries as well. For grid scale batteries there's a ton of different storage technologies being worked on. Lead acid batteries aren't really relevant to future discussions anymore.[/QUOTE] So, it's not relevant to car but then you go on to mention grid storage... Right. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] The point was to illustrate the scale of the problem but I can do the maths for lithium if you're going to be difficult.

[QUOTE=download;50525917]So, it's not relevant to car but then you go on to mention grid storage... Right. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] The point was to illustrate the scale of the problem but I can do the maths for lithium if you're going to be difficult.[/QUOTE] You brought up that there's not enough lithium to even do cars, and the linked to a source that talks about lead acid batteries. [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iavquu6PP9g&t=21m07s[/url] Lithium isn't the issue, you should worry more about the other bits rather than singling out Lithium. For EVs you should probably worry more about neodymium for the drive units.

Current demand for lithium for batteries is [url=http://www.dakotaminerals.com.au/index.php/lithium/lithium-supply-demand]70 kt/pa[/url]. I'll be generous and say that only half that is currently used in electric cars and the rest is used in other things like phones and laptops, or 45 kt/pa. That 45 kt/pa gets you [url=http://cleantechnica.com/2015/03/28/ev-demand-growing-global-market-hits-740000-units/]750,000 electric cars[/url] or 60kg of lithium per car. Assuming a complete market conversion to electric cars we would see [url=http://www.statista.com/statistics/200002/international-car-sales-since-1990/]75m electric cars sold[/url] each year or an annual consumption of 4500 kt/pa of lithium. The USGS estimate there is 34mt of lithium reserves world-wide currently economical to extract, or 7.5 years of consumption. So, our world-wide reserves, before even considering grid energy storage and with a generous margin doesn't even begin to cut it. However, for completeness sake I'll include it: Assuming 50 kWhr in an average car gets me 1.2 kg/kWhr (lets call it 1 kg/kWhr for simplicity and a tad of generosity). Last years electricity consumption was [url=https://yearbook.enerdata.net/world-electricity-production-map-graph-and-data.html]24,000 TWhr[/url]. Lets assume one day storage (I'll be generous) so 65 TWhr or 6.5*10^10 kWhr or 6.5*10^10 kgLi, or 65 Mt... So twice world-wide reserves just for 1 days battery storage (an unreasonably short amount of storage) and this assumes electricity consumption doesn't continue to grow as more people in the world gain access to it. The numbers do not make any sense and this is just for lithium. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Morgen;50525988]You brought up that there's not enough lithium to even do cars, and the linked to a source that talks about lead acid batteries.[/quote] And you appear to be being deliberately asinine at this point. [quote][url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iavquu6PP9g&t=21m07s[/url] Lithium isn't the issue, you should worry more about the other bits rather than singling out Lithium. For EVs you should probably worry more about neodymium for the drive units.[/QUOTE] I have a feeling this isn't the first time you've used Musk as a source. You do realise he's the guy who owns the largest electric vehicle manufacture in the world right? Why the hell would you trust him when billions of dollars are at stake to say the right thing?

[QUOTE=download;50526029]Current demand for lithium for batteries is [url=http://www.dakotaminerals.com.au/index.php/lithium/lithium-supply-demand]70 kt/pa[/url]. I'll be generous and say that only half that is currently used in electric cars and the rest is used in other things like phones and laptops, or 45 kt/pa. That 45 kt/pa gets you [url=http://cleantechnica.com/2015/03/28/ev-demand-growing-global-market-hits-740000-units/]750,000 electric cars[/url] or 60kg of lithium per car. Assuming a complete market conversion to electric cars we would see [url=http://www.statista.com/statistics/200002/international-car-sales-since-1990/]75m electric cars sold[/url] each year or an annual consumption of 4500 kt/pa of lithium. The USGS estimate there is 34mt of lithium reserves world-wide currently economical to extract, or 7.5 years of consumption. So, our world-wide reserves, before even considering grid energy storage and with a generous margin doesn't even begin to cut it. However, for completeness sake I'll include it: Assuming 50 kWhr in an average car gets me 1.2 kg/kWhr (lets call it 1 kg/kWhr for simplicity and a tad of generosity). Last years electricity consumption was [url=https://yearbook.enerdata.net/world-electricity-production-map-graph-and-data.html]24,000 TWhr[/url]. Lets assume one day storage (I'll be generous) so 65 TWhr or 6.5*10^10 kWhr or 6.5*10^10 kgLi, or 65 Mt... So twice world-wide reserves just for 1 days battery storage (an unreasonably short amount of storage) and this assumes electricity consumption doesn't continue to grow as more people in the world gain access to it. The numbers do not make any sense and this is just for lithium. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] And you appear to be being deliberately asinine at this point. I have a feeling this isn't the first time you've used Musk as a source. You do realise he's the guy who owns the largest electric vehicle manufacture in the world right? Why the hell would you trust him when billions of dollars are at stake to say the right thing?[/QUOTE] You are way way way over estimating the amount of lithium in a Li-ion battery. Tesla don't state exactly how much of each material they use but we know that the 85KWh pack contains less than 50 lbs of lithium. You can't just take the 1.2 kg/kWh figure for lead from a lead acid battery and apply it to a completely different material in a completely different battery technology. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] Hey if you think Musk is lying just to try and sell more cars and batteries then good for you.

[QUOTE=Morgen;50526086]You are way way way over estimating the amount of lithium in a Li-ion battery. Tesla don't state exactly how much of each material they use but we know that the 85KWh pack contains less than 50 lbs of lithium. [I]You can't just take the 1.2 kg/kWh figure for lead from a lead acid battery and apply it to a completely different material in a completely different battery technology.[/I][/QUOTE] I didn't, which you would know if you actually bothered to read. Alright, lets use 50lb for 85kWhr or 0.3kg/kWhr. You still need 20 Mt of lithium for a single days grid energy storage and you only have 20 years of lithium for electric cars assuming none is diverted for grid storage or anything else and assuming demand doesn't increase because of the demand for more cars. Still falls short by a long way. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Morgen;50526086] Hey if you think Musk is lying just to try and sell more cars and batteries then good for you.[/QUOTE] So, you'd stand up and trust the multi-billion dollar oil tycoon when he says something? Musk is no different. Just because he makes electric cars and other cool gadgets doesn't make him any less of a cunning businessman. You're a fool to think otherwise. And yes, I do think he's misrepresenting it. Standing up and saying they don't have enough lithium for their electric dream would seriously devalue his company.

[QUOTE=download;50525840]Rather than redo the calculations myself: [url]http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/[/url][/QUOTE] Molten salt batteries. Rechargeable molten salt batteries use a variety of ridiculously abundant resources. They are simple and have extremely long life cycles. They are larger by volume and operate at high temperatures, but both of these factors are largely irrelevant for grid storage. In related news, you don't need perfect grid storage, you just need enough to cover whatever power solar provides. Wind, hydro, and thermal all operate regardless.

[QUOTE=GunFox;50526173]Molten salt batteries. Rechargeable molten salt batteries use a variety of ridiculously abundant resources. They are simple and have extremely long life cycles. They are larger by volume and operate at high temperatures, but both of these factors are largely irrelevant for grid storage. In related news, you don't need perfect grid storage, you just need enough to cover whatever power solar provides. Wind, hydro, and thermal all operate regardless.[/QUOTE] I'll believe it when I see it. A lot of people have been making bold claims about batteries for many decades and nothing has eventuated from it.

[QUOTE=download;50526197]I'll believe it when I see it. A lot of people have been making bold claims about batteries for many decades and nothing has eventuated from it.[/QUOTE] Been there, done that. Sodium sulfur batteries, two elements which are listed as almost limitless by USPS, have been around for decades. Hell, they even tried to use them to power cars, but molten salt batteries are better suited for grid storage. [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ecostar[/url] [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium–sulfur_battery[/url] And [B]currently[/B] being used by Texas for grid storage: [url]http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100325-presidio-texas-battery/[/url]

[QUOTE=GunFox;50526213]Been there, done that. Sodium sulfur batteries, two elements which are listed as almost limitless by USPS, have been around for decades. Hell, they even tried to use them to power cars, but molten salt batteries are better suited for grid storage. [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ecostar[/url] [url]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodium–sulfur_battery[/url][/QUOTE] The bold claims I mentioned included the words "low cost". If there were cheaper than lithium batteries we would be seeing them in loads of places.

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526228]Goddamn do I hate this electric car trend that's going around recently. Anyone for appreciates cars more than "A to B" vehicles will know that electric cars are absolutely shitty to drive. One of the purest and fundamental joys of cars is revving the engine, it's almost primal. It doesn't have to be some riced up shitbox or a V8 engine, it can even be a Prius, it's a fine thing to rev the engine hearing it growl and roar ready to take you to where you need to be. Electric cars have don't have this. They're bland, optimized for comfort and lack any sort of personality or "fun" that an internal combustion engine bestows upon us. Instead of working on ways to improve emission control and filters in vehicles, so that we may maintain the greatness of combustion engines while not destroying the environment in the process, we throw the entire concept out of the window and look to electricity to solve it all. It's pretty shitty. Tesla continues to seem like one massive gimmick on wheels. A car that would be impressive to drive for a few days, but then the "self driving" shtick gets old really quickly and then all you're left with is just another boring electric car with a presumably horrible aftermarket -- since the majority of the components in the car are electric and we all know how electric gadgets fare in vehicles, fucking horribly. Just look at over-engineered Mercs or BMWs.[/QUOTE] Electric motors are better almost literally every way. Basic physics tells us that internal combustion is a terrible mechanism for propulsion due to innate inefficiencies. Plus your point is largely invalid. Go drive a Tesla, they are all kinds of fun. [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=download;50526240]The bold claims I mentioned included the words "low cost". If there were cheaper than lithium batteries we would be seeing them in loads of places.[/QUOTE] They have weird limitations. Like they get wonky if you let them solidify. Also they are dangerous due to it being a pool of molten salt. None of which is a concern for grid storage, but in other applications, it is a major problem.

[QUOTE=JohnFisher89;50524751]I hope Germany is prepared for a massive infrastructure upgrade, last I call they were trying to cut nuclear power. I know since Germany is smaller it can be done faster than in the US, but still this is pretty massive. I wonder what they are going to do in order to offset the upcoming power requirement changes.[/QUOTE] The government also said that this needs to go hand in hand with massive renewable energy increase [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=download;50524895]Good luck with that. Anyone can do the back of the envelope calculation to show we don't have enough lithium and associated battery metals to power the entire planet's cars let alone the electricity grid.[/QUOTE] Batteries don't have to be Lithium batteries, anyone can make that observation. :downs: [editline]15th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=download;50526197]I'll believe it when I see it. A lot of people have been making bold claims about batteries for many decades and nothing has eventuated from it.[/QUOTE] So when presented with how many options your limited "can't do it" opinion leaves out you just go "believe it when I see it" Good job.

[QUOTE=AntonioR;50524740]So what does this mean, that 99% all cars produced and bought now and in the near future will be unusable in 2030 because they can't be registered ?[/QUOTE] They are likely to be grandfathered in, since the wording specifically calls out [I]new[/I] cars.

Man you sure are an optimistic and proactive person!

[QUOTE=Retardation;50526361]Doubt it, it's already shitty enough to have touch screens in most vehicles today because they tend to break or malfunction within less than half a year after purchase, but to have the entire fucking central console just one big touchscreen is infinitely stupid. Have you any idea how much it would cost you to repair once it breaks? And it will break often because it's delicate technology and not everybody likes driving with the windows up everywhere to keep dust from settling and getting into all the technology shit you have going on the dashboard. I dont really need to drive a Tesla because there are so many videos out there of professional car salespeople and enthusiasts alike, fucking thousands of them and they all go into detail about all the ins and outs of the car. Almost nobody says it's fun to drive. Its - again - only redeeming "fun" thing is "wow look at me driving with no hands it knows where to go" for about a minute because you have to keep your hands on the steering wheel by law anyway so that further defeats the purpose and the cars sole innovation beyond its battery. Electric motors may be better but that was never my point. They're still dull and if we, in any field, only utilized things that are strictly better on paper we'd have a pretty shitty and bleak world to live in. There are other factors to consider.[/QUOTE] Lol what? Everyone says that it's amazing to drive. It's way more responsive than an ICE, it's way smoother, and it goes really fucking fast. If by professional car sales people you mean dealerships then yeah they will diss it because Tesla are going against the dealership framework. Dealerships make their money off of service, and EVs require way less service once they have matured a bit which cuts dealership income a ton. Seriously just go and test drive one, Tesla will let you even if you have no means or intention to buy just to prove blatantly wrong points of view like this wrong.