Sigh!
Sigh!
Found it:
E-fuels are produced by synthesising captured CO2 emissions and hydrogen produced using CO2-free electricity. They are considered carbon neutral because the CO2 released when the fuel is combusted is balanced by the CO2 removed from the atmosphere to produce the fuel.
And also learnt that they're also called "electrofuels" [1].
That makes it sound less horrible, except that such production doesn't exist yet at a sensible/interesting scale as far as I understand.
Not air but tires still pollute environment.
I made the mistake to buy an electric oven, super modern type. The number of times it displayed an "E" for error in the display, I stopped counting. Any electric component will not only last less longer but also be more error prone and will need to be repaired more often.
Silence is a luxury I don't have. Only at night between 2-4AM. I've recently started wearing a full ear headset to dampen some of the noise.
I wish I could just move out, but other flats cost double the price.
Ideally I'd move to a country with more regard towards silence, calm and cardiovascular health of citizens.
Which can explain a large part of the conservatism in this domain.
To me it sounds less horrible, because it sounds like fantasy technology that will not be economically feasible in the end so the end result is that this exception doesn't actually matter. Suffers the same problem as the whole carbon capture thought experiment.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/revealed-how-ge...
It's a hand-wavey solution to keep the status quo.
1: https://www.ev-volumes.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/WW-S3-...
The issue is with the suppliers and suppliers of suppliers which are a backbone of German industry and some of which cannot transition away ICE technology.
Of course e-fuels are not going to safe them anyway but their lobbying caused this.
The EV transition is accelerating, this is just the minimum that could get cross EU support in law today. But individual countries already have their own phase outs.
Which ones are you talking about?
Guess what we Germans are unable to kill either: Adding a generic speed limit so we do not get heart attacks when someone drives 300km behind us.
Sucks but is called a compromise. Democracy.
Also I'm not FDP voter, but I'm definitely pro no-limit. There is little no-limit patches anyway, traffic often doesn't allow driving faster than 160. Construction work all the time everywhere.
Whenever I come over to Germany, driving on autobans feels like a pleasure compared to eastern european highways with a speed limit :/
https://www.upi.com/Archives/1994/05/24/Four-die-in-Australi...
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
I would rather ban SUVs than anything else. It's upsetting to hear people complaining about climate change, pollution, voting for the Green party because of this, and then instead of a sedan or wagon they are going for a SUV which uses 3-4 liter of fuel.
Whether EU itself will be still a thing in 12+ years to enforce this bullshit ban is another question.
Unless any of the European countries (even the larger ones) wants to be crushed by the economic weight of the US or China they better stick together.
Even most Euro-skeptics seems to get it by now.
The fact that Russia is removing itself from the game of economics and has voluntarily killed of European dependency on their gas is reducing inner EU conflict.
Personally I would much prefer EU to *reset* to bare free-trade, free-movement, no-borders ethos, removing entirety of central regulations and central governance.
I can only wish you open eyes and an open mind capable of thinking your own thoughts.
I should know better than to comment on something like this, but sometimes I just can't be helped.
You are correct, the EU is going to break up, definitely before 2035, and probably sooner rather than later. We are at the beginning of a serious financial crisis, this time it's a sovereign debt crisis, caused by going to negative interest rates in 2014 (among other reasons).