First of all: way to go Norway! 🥳
Additionally, bravo to the BBC for selecting a pic of one of the most Norwegian-looking people in existence for the article pic 😂
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
First of all: way to go Norway! 🥳
Additionally, bravo to the BBC for selecting a pic of one of the most Norwegian-looking people in existence for the article pic 😂
So now that Norway has 99% renewables and will soon reach 99% electric vehicles, they'll stop drilling oil in the North Sea, right?
They're best positioned for the Contraction and Convergence strategy so continuing to pump and sell oil is antithetical to their sustainability stance.
Unless they're creating a walled garden while letting everyone else around them burn - tho let's hope that's not the case as once the AMOC collapses and brings the likes of 160km/h bomb cyclones to it's territories it wouldn't matter how green they've been.
That means Norway will sell the fossil fuel they don't use to somewhere else.
As I said in another comment in this thread:
Now if they truly believed that fossil fuels were needed for a sustainable transition - then surely they would give out their trillions of oil and gas revenue to countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh to help them rebuild from the environmental disasters they're experiencing to deploy more sustainable infrastructure and housing.
Not specifically about Norway, but richer countries are already providing funds to poorer countries to combat climate change, but it goes to vanity projects and other corruption.
The climate fund is unfortunately a money laundering scheme. Nicaragua is right to be apprehensive of the 2015 Paris climate change accords, believing it doesn't go far enough. There is no actual legal mechanism to hold countries accountable for missing climate targets. Now that I think about it, Trump pulling out of the 2015 Paris climate deal during his first term is not necessarily a loss, since everyone is doing nothing since the accords were signed. In spite of the small climate wins, every current year is always the hottest year until the subsequent year records the hottest global temperature, always beating the previous year's record.
When it comes to globally warming they really can't lose.
Not true, Norway is remarkably warm compared to similar latitudes (i.e. Canada) due to the Gulf Stream and the resulting coastal current. If that collapses the sea will freeze and Norway will no longer be the mild climate it is now.
Congrats Norway.
Dude!!? All 2000 cars???
Educate yourself it's 1999 cars Gunderson passed last night in a car crash
But what about batteries which also poising environment after extraction.
But I was told by Susan on Facebook that EVs can't work in a cold place!
I think Susan meant in cold rural place where it's hundreds of kilometers to a larger city and days trip to EV maintenance.
Local boy can dismantle and assemble her current Toyota Hilux if necessary.
From a mechanical standpoint, this is a silly argument. I've worked on cars for approx. 15 years as a hobby/side hustle, owned a mobile mechanic business for 2.5 years, and worked at a auto shop for a time as well. Trust me, EV's are far more simple, hardware-wise. You could argue they're not simple, software-wise, for the average consumer to work on themselves, but that would ignore the relative complexity of modern CANbus systems in new cars, with dozens of subsystems feeding multiple computers, all of which can malfunction and cause problems for the whole system. Such as when an led tail-light breaks and that bricks the whole car, leaving the owner potentially stranded.
ICE vehicles have to rely on and maintain multiple pressurized systems (with dozens of specialized seals), vacuum, dozens (sometimes hundreds) of sensors, relays, and valves, not to mention rapid heat differentials, all of the moving parts with bearings and added weights to counteract various forces...
I love the idea of only having to work on suspension/steering/brakes from time to time. Have a motor issue? Unplug it, undo a few bolts, and put a new one in over a single beer. Sounds awesome to me..
I think you missed the point.
You could argue they're not simple, software-wise, for the average consumer to work on themselves, but that would ignore the relative complexity of modern CANbus systems in new cars, with dozens of subsystems feeding multiple computers, all of which can malfunction and cause problems for the whole system. Such as when an led tail-light breaks and that bricks the whole car, leaving the owner potentially stranded.
You think people living in middle of nowhere wants a car like this, with nearest approved maintenance with all the correct databus plugins nowhere in sight.
Otherwise agreeing what you posted, and yes many new ICEs have equally complex software and databus systems to control the maintenance infrastructure and keep the money flowing to the manufacturer.
Thanks for writing this. I had zero idea what EVs mean for a mechanic.
Good thing an electric motor requires less maintenance than an ICE. For the rest it’s the same as every car. Only the tires wear down faster, the brakes might rust when you always one-pedal drive and for certain EVs you need to flush and recharge the coolant once in a while.
A guy in the US drives about 40 miles on average a day and there's evs that can do 10x that now
Yeah. It's the range that's killer. EVs can run in cold all day long. But running heavy duty heating to keep the cabin comfortable and the windows clear of ice, plus heating the battery pack to maintain performance, can cut the already overstated manufacturer range down by 30-40% or more. Which can bring a marginally OK travel range in a lot of areas down to "shit this isn't enough".
Nowhere near as much of a problem if you keep it plugged in and warm up prior to leaving, which most EVs have a timer feature to do automatically. Gasoline powered vehicles also lose significant range in the cold, it’s just not as noticeable to some because ICE are already extremely inefficient.
Unfortunately this doesn’t help people who can’t charge at home, but that’s an infrastructure/housing issue not an EV issue.
As an EV owner, you're not wrong about heating the cabin taking like 30% of the range, but the battery heater is a drop in the bucket by comparison.
Amazing how easily it's happened with barely any effort. We could have fixed climate change 50 years ago but the fossil fuel industry wanted their money so now the earth is fucked
To be absolutely clear, Norway has achieved this by selling oil to other countries. This wasn't a heroic sacrifice or noble vanguard effort.
The ability to pay for subsidies has no relation to the source of the funds. What matters is GDP, overall national wealth. And Norway is only slightly ahead of the US. Considering the US's far superior manufacturing capability, if Norway could go all electric, than the US certainly could have by now. Norway's had to import almost all its electric cars; the US can make its own cars.
Why are you telling me about America?
Because the whole internet is America, at least that's what Americans think.
I'm kidding, he/she/they probably wanted to provide an example of a country with a similar GDP that is in the exact opposite position.
You mean all that oil money that was spent on lying to the public and bribing politicians could have been spent on solving the problem this whole time?
That does nothing to inhibit this achievement.
Maybe if the rest of us got our collective thumbs out of our asses and started curbing our addiction to fossil fuels they wouldn’t have to sell oil to other countries.
Your comment history seems to be fueled by a lot of hate and misinformation.
Care to point out what hate and misinformation is relevant to this? If other countries didn't buy their oil, they could not have achieved this. Norway is a small petrostate with a side gig in poaching EU fish. No amount of Irish salmon would have covered the cost of this. If you don't understand that a country smaller by population than the city of Barcelona exporting the fourth largest amount of natural gas in the world taints this achievement to some degree, you are entitled to your opinion, but it's not misinformation.
I’m not trying to give them a free pass at selling oil or anything, but this is a much better use of the profits compared to other countries.
I’d rather see a country exporting fossil fuels doing something with that money to not use fossil fuels than give it to Billionaires or something.
If more countries followed their example, there wouldn’t be much demand left for that oil.
Absolutely it is better than not subsidising EV cars. No doubt. My issue is with the original comment painting this as something "barely any effort" implying that any country could do this. This was a unique situation and I'm glad that Norwegians chose to make themselves feel better about being an educated western petrostate bane on the planet by buying themselves EVs instead of feeding it to a king, ceo, sultan or emir.
Any country could do this, and it’s a bigger start than most are making. I think the “barely any effort” bit was relative compared to what other, bigger, richer countries are prioritizing instead.
Maybe it’s not literally effortless but compared to other countries, yeah.
Not every country has ungodly reserves of fossil fuels providing essentially free money. "Richer" is a bit silly - by raw GDP per capita, Norway has been one of if not the richest country in the world since the establishment of State Oil. Combined with not being a dirt poor monarchy ready to sell its resource extraction rights to Britain/America when the resources were found, Norway is nearly unique.
Norwegians aren't more environmentally-minded than people elsewhere, she reckons. "I don't think a green mindset has much to do with it. It has to do with strong policies, and people gradually understanding that driving an electric car is possible."
Yet Norway is also a very wealthy nation, which thanks to its huge oil and gas exports, has a sovereign wealth fund worth more than $1.7tn (£1.3tn). This means it can more easily afford big infrastructure-build projects, and absorb the loss of tax revenue from the sale of petrol and diesel cars and their fuel.
The country also has an abundance of renewable hydro electricity, which accounts for 88% of its production capacity.
I don't think Norway's wealth or energy supply has anything to do with it.
Aren't US taxes on gas cars lower than Norwegian taxes on electric cars? US gasoline is insanely cheap.
Norwegian evs have to pay 25% sales tax over $50k and they're also taxed based on weight.
https://elbil.no/english/norwegian-ev-policy/
Come to think of it, the US is in the same economic situation as Norway, as an extremely wealthy oil exporter. Any western country jealous of Norway could match it if they just had the political will.
US gas is subsidized by the US government. Norway subsidizes electric cars instead.
https://www.iea.org/reports/fossil-fuels-consumption-subsidies-2022