Climate change policy discussion.

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › Climate change policy discussion.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1963817 25-Feb-2018 12:08

happyfunball:

Just because you and I are both using a litre of petrol does not mean we are polluting the same amount. Emissions testing is more fair, those who pollute pay for it.

Actually as far as the topic of this thread goes "Climate Change Policy" it pretty much does mean you're polluting the same amount.

From the figures I read, average fuel economy of vehicles first registered was improving, but since about 2012 has remained fairly static, the average age of the NZ vehicle fleet has increased. The average miles per annum per registered vehicle has also increased.

happyfunball

287 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 112

#1963837 25-Feb-2018 12:46

Fred99:

happyfunball:

Just because you and I are both using a litre of petrol does not mean we are polluting the same amount. Emissions testing is more fair, those who pollute pay for it.

Actually as far as the topic of this thread goes "Climate Change Policy" it pretty much does mean you're polluting the same amount.

From the figures I read, average fuel economy of vehicles first registered was improving, but since about 2012 has remained fairly static, the average age of the NZ vehicle fleet has increased. The average miles per annum per registered vehicle has also increased.

Emissions testing in other countries for vehicles is not about carbon emissions, its about the toxic stuff coming out of the tailpipe. As far as carbon/climate change issues, you're right a litre is a litre regardless of the vehicle.

Cars are more fuel efficient, but they are getting heavier. Increased safety standards and all that stuff. A modern car is a tank compared to a car from the 90s.

PhantomNVD

2619 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 759
Inactive user

#1963843 25-Feb-2018 13:12

Except for cars like our Leaf which is made of aluminium, designed to crumple, and has 10 airbags for the ‘safety’ aspect.

I’m guessing this was to make it more energy efficient (greater distance per charge) but has the sideline effect of making it more ‘disposeable’ too?

Though very few insurance companies seem willing to repair cars these days anyway... seems the write-off potential may well be similar anyway...

happyfunball

287 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 112

#1963865 25-Feb-2018 13:42

PhantomNVD: Except for cars like our Leaf which is made of aluminium, designed to crumple, and has 10 airbags for the ‘safety’ aspect.

I’m guessing this was to make it more energy efficient (greater distance per charge) but has the sideline effect of making it more ‘disposeable’ too?

Though very few insurance companies seem willing to repair cars these days anyway... seems the write-off potential may well be similar anyway...

I'll take safety over repairability any day. Thats what insurance is for.

Modern cars are designed to crumple, this greatly increases the safety aspect. The crumple slows them down so you bounce around inside the car less. The airbags are also pretty amazing, you want those, the more the merrier. We have to 10 airbag version of the Leaf as well, I'm a bit saddened by seeing most Leafs in NZ only have 2 airbags.

Aluminum cars are better but much more expensive. If you look at the Leaf, its pretty crazy it costs so little. An all-alluminum body like that is usually reserved for high end car$. Most affordable cars are still made with cheap recycled steel. The BMW i3 went a step further and used carbon fibre, even more expensive than alluminum and probably crumples like a champ in a collision. Forget about beating out those panels though :)

Pumpedd

1759 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 887
Inactive user

#1963983 25-Feb-2018 17:47

1101:

Lets pass regulations that hammer the poor and make the well off feel good

Lets ignore the fact that ~newer~ and electric vehicles were made in china : USING POWER GENERATED BY BURNING COAL

EV's are far from being non pollutant. Their batteries are made with diminishing resources usually mined with low paid workers. The batteries only last a few years then where do we through them?

Is the electricity used to charge them made from what?

Then as said above, whatabout the resources and materials to make the car in the first place.

happyfunball

287 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 112

#1964027 25-Feb-2018 20:04

Pumpedd:

EV's are far from being non pollutant. Their batteries are made with diminishing resources usually mined with low paid workers. The batteries only last a few years then where do we through them?

Is the electricity used to charge them made from what?

Then as said above, whatabout the resources and materials to make the car in the first place.

Funny questions, are you trolling? Lets give you some answers just in case somebody takes your questions seriously.

EV's pollute less than combustion engine cars do, which is one reason why people like them.

The batteries are made with diminishing resources??? Like what? Lithium is so abundant and cheap nobody has bothered to even mine it before except for some really poor countries. Thats changing now but it takes years get a mine going. Australia is about to get in on the action in a big way. On top of that, the batteries are fully recyclable.

I don't know what country you're in, but in NZ, most of our electricity comes from renewable resources (83% in 2015, and going up).

It takes resources to make cars, yes, but thats true for any car. The problem with combustion engines is that petroleum is not renewable, you have to extract, transport half way around the world, then refine it, ship it, truck it and pump it. It takes a huge amount of electricity make a litre of petrol. Then you burn it sitting at a stop light and have to get more. And thats not even considering the carbon emissions and toxic chemicals in vehicle exhaust.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

gzt

18690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7828

Lifetime subscriber

#1964193 26-Feb-2018 08:22

Aredwood: What laws, regulations, rules etc Would you like to see passed / amended / repealed in NZ to help the environment? Mainly to reduce carbon emissions, but also other environmental problems.

Massively increase our research spend for CO2 reductions in agriculture. It's a massive part of the economy and our research contribution should reflect that. We have an excellent agricultural science and technology background and an innovative farming sector that will put innovations into practice. The innovations created will more than pay for themselves and there will be many side benefits.

Geektastic

18010 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8468

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964364 26-Feb-2018 11:57

I'd really like to see some effort being made to get better uptake of home solar.

Many other OECD nations have subsidised that but for some reason NZ has not. We spend an inordinate amount of time using websites to save what generally amounts to the equivalent of a week's showing at Countdown off the annual electricity bill yet make no great effort to help people generate it for free from the sun...

happyfunball

287 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 112

#1964370 26-Feb-2018 12:14

Geektastic:

I'd really like to see some effort being made to get better uptake of home solar.

Many other OECD nations have subsidised that but for some reason NZ has not. We spend an inordinate amount of time using websites to save what generally amounts to the equivalent of a week's showing at Countdown off the annual electricity bill yet make no great effort to help people generate it for free from the sun...

NZ has excess electricity capacity, except at peak times. What we need more than solar is just some energy storage, or shifting usage away from peak times. Home generation makes sense during those peak times, otherwise its just good for saving on electricity bills isn't it?

As for subsidies, what would work is just reducing the barriers to adoption. For example, consent fees for a home solar installation are horrendous. Simplifying that process, perhaps allowing electricians to certify the install work instead of councils, would lower the cost considerably.

But then the councils will have to get the money someplace else I suppose.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1964405 26-Feb-2018 13:02

happyfunball:

For example, consent fees for a home solar installation are horrendous. Simplifying that process, perhaps allowing electricians to certify the install work instead of councils, would lower the cost considerably.

But then the councils will have to get the money someplace else I suppose.

Not according to this:

https://www.mysolarquotes.co.nz/about-solar-power/residential/regulations/

MikeAqua

8031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#1964508 26-Feb-2018 14:32

happyfunball:

The problem with combustion engines is that petroleum is not renewable,

Petroleum is renewable. It just takes a while ...and we are burning it faster that it can form.

Ultimately the energy in petroleum is derived from sunshine.

Mike

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

MikeAqua

8031 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3822

#1964544 26-Feb-2018 14:40

gzt:

Massively increase our research spend for CO2 reductions in agriculture. It's a massive part of the economy and our research contribution should reflect that. We have an excellent agricultural science and technology background and an innovative farming sector that will put innovations into practice. The innovations created will more than pay for themselves and there will be many side benefits.

CO2 isn't the big issue in Agriculture, methane is. That is proving very challenging to address. Ruminant animals host methanogen bacteria for a reason - those particular bacteria are very good at their jobs.

Relatively simple changes to agriculture practice could significantly increase carbon sequestration in pasture and arable soils, while improving resilience and profitiability. Especially in drier areas, but also in wet locations as well.

This would in turn increase leaf mass, which increases the standard stock of CO2 fixed into plant tissue.

Mike

gzt

18690 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7828

Lifetime subscriber

#1964546 26-Feb-2018 14:42

The South Australian government has a deal with Tesla for 50,000 homes solar + powerwall battery:

News.com.au: Public housing tenants will be the first to benefit from the plan, with 1100 Housing SA properties participating in a trial. They will have a 5kW solar panel system and 13.5kWh Tesla Powerwall 2 battery installed for free. Later 24,000 Housing Trust properties will have the systems installed and after that up to 25,000 private homeowners will be able to sign up to the project from about July 2019.

happyfunball

287 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 112

#1964550 26-Feb-2018 14:50

Fred99:

Not according to this:

https://www.mysolarquotes.co.nz/about-solar-power/residential/regulations/

Interesting, we had a quote of $12,000 for a very small 4kw system and when I asked why, was told the installation and inspection costs were most of it. My understanding is the actual install takes 1 day!

Apparently the council has/had to inspect the work. Or maybe thats not 'consent' but rather another permit. :)

Geektastic

18010 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8468

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1964599 26-Feb-2018 15:22

happyfunball:

Geektastic:

I'd really like to see some effort being made to get better uptake of home solar.

Many other OECD nations have subsidised that but for some reason NZ has not. We spend an inordinate amount of time using websites to save what generally amounts to the equivalent of a week's showing at Countdown off the annual electricity bill yet make no great effort to help people generate it for free from the sun...

NZ has excess electricity capacity, except at peak times. What we need more than solar is just some energy storage, or shifting usage away from peak times. Home generation makes sense during those peak times, otherwise its just good for saving on electricity bills isn't it?

As for subsidies, what would work is just reducing the barriers to adoption. For example, consent fees for a home solar installation are horrendous. Simplifying that process, perhaps allowing electricians to certify the install work instead of councils, would lower the cost considerably.

But then the councils will have to get the money someplace else I suppose.

It does not matter that we have companies which have excess capacity. We have to pay them vast sums of money for their product.

I'd rather they went broke and we all generated our own power. We could get rid of those ugly transmission lines and ghastly wind turbines then. Obviously that is unlikely but I see no reason why the fact that the companies produce too much means we should have to carry on paying them.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6