Norway bans all fossil fuel car sales by 2025

Car manufacturers and dealers will have to get used to make and sell zero emission cars.
Is that so difficult?
No.
Instead of putting all their marketing skills at selling absolutely useless performances (0 to 60mph in XXX seconds, top speed and other nonsenses), they will instead bring environment friendly vehicles on the market. What is there not to like in that ?

 

Although I think we're all be driving full electric in 20 to 30 years time...

It will be less fun and I wonder how Ferrari for instance will differentiate themselves, other than maybe on things like low weight and design. Engine and gearbox, a big part of what Ferrari is, will be far less distinctive.

 

I still think there will be a massive difference between an entry level electric car, and a luxury electric car.
If massive price difference can be substained for things like wristwatches, from a few $s to $100,000 and more, they will also probably exist for electric vehicles.

I am not certain that electric vehicles will be less fun, although I am aware that the noise factor will go. Electric bikes, for example, can be as thrilling as IC ones. Some performance aspects may even be better - instant torque, for example?

 

There are quite a few people talking out of thier ass when it comes to electric cars and performance.

I will tell you this, from experience. Performance goes through the roof with electric. There is no comparison. None. The only draw back is sound. Some people need to get their heads out of thier butt holes and go out and experience a fully electric vehicle. But they must remember, these are the model "T" years. They will only get better. And I can't even imagine what a Ferrari badged electric car would be like. I have a feeling it would melt your eyeballs.

 

It could jerk me off, and I still wouldn't want it.


Mark

 

I highly doubt it. I'm not going to write up all the advantages performance wise. It's up to you to experience and give it the time of day. I'm not so sure you understand what you are missing.

 

In future, you may have NO choice but buy electric cars.

So, luxury brands like Ferrari will have to adapt to next legislation or go out of business.

 

-- That it's driven by an erroneous vilification of fossil fuels.

-- That it's part of an agenda that ought not have this sort of momentum/power, wouldn't have it in a more rational era.

-- That it's being rammed down people's throats.

-- That it's expensive and is likely to remain so for some time, stalling the developing world and taking options away from those on the lower socio-economic rungs in the industrialize world.

-- The tag-on controls that will follow once the principles behind this hoax are further entrenched.

-- That we're still getting almost all of electricity from fossils, with no proof that there are any energy alternatives that can provide cheap, reliable, easily scaled power.

-- That the Green movement doesn't want us to have cheap, reliable, easily scaled power. (We'd destroy their object of worship overnight, supposedly.)

-- Man is the problem in this POV and, therefore, must be regulated every moment of every day. (No coincidence that the Greens are on the side of those who make that other colossal error in our time: making an issue out of income inequality.)

(Plastics? We've had the tech to burn them for energy with no serious emissions issues for some time. Now, the tech is so good that net impact would be the same as burning NG -- and no funds or energy expended on recycling, burying, etc.)

 

All these arguments have been debated, and it will be down to political choice in the end.

I don't think that environmental issues are pushed down people throats. In some instance, it's the public himself that asked for anti pollution measures to be taken. In some large cities, the pollution and the health issues it provokes has raised alarming level.

We may need to reduce our energy consumption in future, including restricting travels and produce locally instead of importing. The global economy may have to disappear.

 

You think you know what I want more than me? I guess I'm just too dumb to decide for myself.



Mark

 

Irrelevant to your constant claims of impeding doom.

The public has been misinformed in a variety of ways on this and related issues. So what people end up demanding isn't an argument for what they're demanding.

It's clear that something needed to be done in certain cities. As long as the regulations imposed make sense, that is, as long as we reject the crazy standards currently used to determine what is and isn't toxic, what does and doesn't constitute polluting, what we are and aren't entitled to do, etc., no one could object to such laws.

In the name of what?

Do you realize that globalization has made it possible for a billion people to claw their way out of abject poverty over the last 30 years? (UN study, which means it's more than a billion and/or that if happened quicker.) Even if such trade pollutes or Warms, its long term stabilizing effect and the resulting peace can't be ignored. It's far cheaper than the US policing the world, far more effective than all the charity in history added up and cubed could ever be.

 

Really? I like to track drive my sportscars. Name me an electric car that can do say, 3 30 minute on-track sessions in a day. And name me one under 3500 lbs, other than the original Tesla that BTW could do only 3 laps and was done.

For transportation appliances, they are great - the Model S is a quantum leap up. I used to own a Volt and as vilified as it was, it was a great transportation appliance.

But electric vehicles are not yet performance cars in my way of thinking. Even the Formula E race program requires a complete car change mid-race, as they can't complete a race distance.

Even the hybrid cars are disappointing to me, in that they are so very heavy.

 

It's not the performance itself.

Currently a Ferrari engine is something entirely diff. than the average car engine; other than performance, it's also the way the engine picks up/engine response, the rev happy nature and max. rpm, the sound, etc. Even the way it looks.

An electric motor is an electric motor, wether it has 100 KW or a 1000. Instant torque, just a bit more of it, but the same character.

So how does Ferrari distinquish themselves in the future when going electric when a Tesla already has 700hp, just Chiron levels of power in the future electric 488 gtb successor and that's it ?

 

I am not talking about impeding doom, but legislation put in place by courageous countries to ban fossil fuel use in road vehicles by 2030.

Yes, the public has been kept in the dark for ages about the cancerous effects of burning fossil fuels, the waste caused by not recycling, and the poison spread by chemical fertilisers, without talking about GM food.

Globalisation has allowed the exploitation of poor countries to make rich ones ever richer by poaching their natural resources, treating their population as slaves, and corrupting their leaders. Only corporations have gained from globalisation, not the individuals.

Who is talking about the need for "the US policing the world"? Who give them that right?

This subject is far more important to be treated on a Ferrari forum.

 

As far as I know, this is unfounded. It's rooted in the crazy standards used to determine toxicity, abuse of trust through dishonesty, etc. Now if these claims turn out to be true, we'd need to hold these industries to rational standards. But that's a long way from outright bans with no real alternatives on the horizon, let alone available, denying people choices, etc.

Pure, dated cliches with zero truth to them (like I said: a billion people, empowered by some freedom, have improved their lives immeasurably over the last 30 years. That's not open to argument because it's a fact, a fact even the UN had to acknowledge.) Hopefully, your claims regarding the impact of fossil and agricultural techs were inferred a bit better.

Go it.

Nice chat, man.