In my world, this is simply another hostile subject, along the line (and in the same basket exactly) as Gillards cash for clunkers.
I haven't bothered reading the article (and won't), my ears are shut to elitist propaganda.

It also joins the longline of negative innovations designed to strip the poor of their last vestiges of technological comforts, such as electricity and heaters in the winter, air conditioners in the summer, now reserved for the wealthy.

Along with the liberals tax cuts on offer, also guaranteeing to defund further, any public good, and demolish egalitarianism and community bond that still exists in small pockets in Australia.

Electric skateboards as toys for children, yes: Electric cars as toys for wealthy elitests, no, not if any move in that direction mandates me into their wealth stripping technology by force!

There are a few things that need to be taken into account. A major shortfall of petrol tax will have to be made up by some other tax on the feckless motorist. To cope with the increase in electricity usage, a new power station of the size of the now defunct Hazelwood power station will need to be built.
Another factor that needs to be considered is the possibility that fuel cells powered either from Hydrogen or ammonia will probably have replaced the need for large batteries, so that any infrastructure built to replace the internal combustion engine might also become obsolete in a short period.
Watch this space for future developments.

David

Is Labour serious about electric vehicles? Well, it would seem, they are. And given the nationwide rollout of fast charge charging station sure to be adopted by folk tired of being the captive market of the oil oligarchs! The elephant in the room is can we charge all these electric vehicles trucks buses utes and four-wheel drives, plying our highways and byways, once they come down in price and are made affordable for joe average, here's the conundrum?

If half the national fleet is all electric in a decade or two and all our coal-fired power stations are retired by then!? How do we charge cars as they go further and further from our cities?

And given the extra demand, this would place on the grid! How do we keep the lights on and the commuter traffic, trams, trucks, buses and electrically power rapid rail all moving? Without experiencing blackouts when the sun isn't shining the wind isn't blowing and years and years of endless enduring drought the like of which we've never ever seen before empty the reservoirs and the pumped hydro that relies exclusively on them!

Well, it demands a serious change in thinking and forward planning. And the rollout of the graphene highway to effectively treble the, available to the end user, megawatts of delivered power without increasing current capacity! And more like opening a valve to increase flow, if you want an analogy that almost anyone can understand?
TBC. Alan B.

Presumably everybody will have secure full time jobs by 2030 and will live in a detached house with a big solar roof and off-street parking. The cheapest practical EV in Australia costs about $45k on road so the low paid won't be getting them anytime soon. They will drive old bangers costing under $10k. Fuel costs not too far away over $2/L will chew up a lot of their income.

If 50% EVs requires 15% more national electricity that will have to be immune to weather. A fanciful idea is that plugged in EVs will help power aluminium smelters late at night when the wind dies down. Even Tesla ridiculed the vehicle-to-grid idea. As I said yesterday on OLO re fast trains consider the possibility that we'll be grounded.

If course they are not serious. It's just another 'by 2030' lark. The magic number is 2030, so far into the future, in political terms, that they can say what they like. When nothing happens in 2030, it will be 2050 or some other magic number. And the dopey public, if they are even listening, will be none the wiser. If voters were the slightest bit intelligent, politicians -all if them - wouldn't be getting away with the crap they are talking. We cannot rely on politicians to fix the problems they caused in the first place.

Oh god, another planner banging on about public transport. The only good thing about this article is it did not mention push bikes.

The last figures I saw suggested that public transport consumes about 17% more fuel per passenger mile than private, & costs 22% more. What a great idea for CO2 reduction is increasing public transport.

Then we have the fact that it only services the travel needs of about 10% of the population. How many more busses & trains would it really take, & at what cost to service the travel needs of even most people.

Then the stupidity of electric cars. The break even point in life time CO2 emission for electric cars against ICE cars comes out at about 110,000 kilometres. For most of us, that would be about battery replacement, or more likely scrap the thing time. Few will be stupid enough to fit $8000 in new batteries to a car worth $6000 with them fitted.

Wouldn't it be lovely if some planners could even once talk some sense. We might even get some sense in government policy if their advisers had some clue about future requirements.

Cont. Every domicile, apartment building school, hospital or office building etc. Must be fitted or retrofitted with locally invented two tank system, closed cycle, smell free, bio-digesters that turn all organic waste and food waste into deployable stored in large bladders, methane.

Which will, as a first planned consequence, massively turbocharge our steel metals smelting and metal fabrication industry!

After simple scrubbing, the generated biogas (methane) is sent on demand to also locally invented ceramic fuel cells, which produce on-demand electricity, endless free hot water, mostly pristine water vapour as the exhaust product.

Waste products from the digesters include thoroughly sanitised, nutrient-loaded reusable water (millions and millions of annual litres) and also thoroughly sanitised, carbon-rich soil improver! (millions and millions of annual tons! Which will improve soil moisture retention, friability and permeability!

The surplus metered and paid for electricity (50+%) can be sent to the graphene highway via suburban graphene roads! And without significant transmission loss!

And durable and maintenance free for centuries as the first result of intelligence, pragmatism and fiscal literacy! The reusable water can be sent to outlying farmland and deployed under biodegradable plastic film, to optimise subsoil moisture and force weed species to germinate and met their doom under the plastic.

Which would in due course, be drilled directly into for planting commercially desirable crops? And not when the vagaries of the weather decide! But when market conditions determine! And traditional high water using crops!

Leaving current water flows currently diverted for such crops to flow unimpeded to the Coorong!

How do households pay for this amenity? Via government loans and off budget!

And simple, their last ten years electricity bill could be averaged and that amount collected less the wholesale of their personal power contribution to the grid. As a quarterly fee. Until their amenity is fully paid for say thirty years down the track.

All new buildings to be compulsory fitted and paid for/financed, as part and parcel of future construction costs?

One assumes peak power loading would be offset by rooftop solar and current planned and implemented pumped hydro etc?
Alan B.

This plan if ever implemented would make every household a power generator and able to use energy generated on the premises 24/7 for heaters, air conditioners, whatever. And given all of it, solid-state technology, very little maintenance and no summer storm blackouts nor transmission tower brought down by increasingly severe high winds.

Moreover, the whole nation would be put to work! Fitting and retrofitting the system. Given all the costs are upfront and financed by the government and off budget. Able to become more and more affordable with time and managed inflation.

If we make the electric vehicles and batteries here? And we can! We may well need some other sources of industrial power.

The least costly would arguably be MSR thorium.

As for thermal coal? Well, it could/should be cooked and then sent to banks of methane-consuming ceramic fuel cells at the industry premises via a (no other choice) national gas grid.

Perhaps when we have a more carbon-constrained economy and carbon tariffs?

Therefore, no other possible choice and the costs have trebled, quadrupled/massively magnified! Your choice, financial genius!
Alan B.

Alan B.,
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here. Is it an analogy of how impractical EVs would be? Or do you actually think that's what we should do?

Labour just can't help themselves. Wedded to the Greens they continue to show themselves as economic vandals as well as hypocrites. Tanya says she needs a big car to drive her family around. They have no idea whatsoever its like to live in the Regions who are watching these goons destroy the economy along with Greens/Vegans. No wonder people are attracted to Fraser Anning. He seems a lot more sensible and rational than Shorten and his mob.

EV's should be charged and ready for purpose, like all other rechargeable appliances in a house. Draining their battery other than in driving shortens the life of their intended purpose.

Baseload electricity is more important to Shorten's fantasy than he seems capable of understanding. Brain-farting is a poor substitute for planning.

As politics is the art of compromise AND offending the lowest number of voters

Labor's policy will probably pan out as pro-HYBRID cars.

This is noting many Toyota Camrys and Corollas are already HYBRID with NO (that is NO) RELIANCE ON THE ELECTRICITY GRID.

There are a number of things to be considered.
Among them are the basic reasons for using a vehicle - is it for commuting to work, for carrying tools of trade, for travel as part of work, for shopping, for recreation, for distance travel to visit others?
The need for a vehicle determines its justification.

Then there is the question of distance to be travelled - this may be short city or suburban trips, or else long country driving.

For shorter trips, an electric vehicle could be suitable, but there is the problem with the recharging method used.
This could range from overnight charging, some ten or more hours, from a domestic power outlet to fast charging at a dedicated station, which could take around twenty minutes.
That compares poorly with the few minutes it takes to fuel a petrol or diesel car, and could possibly mean that electric vehicle users would have to queue for long periods at charging stations to await their turn.
There is the matter of charging station existence. At present, they are few and far between, meaning that some long trips over some routes are out of the question.

However, the use of hybrid vehicles would help with range, lower pollution, and independence of travel, meaning not being reliant on public transport over fixed routes only.

There are many factors to be considered, including the basic question raised by one commenter about whether other powering technologies such as hydrogen may emerge, rendering a move to electric cars as similarly outdated as the NBN's being supplanted by satellite innovation.

Want to know about the greenhouse effect?
Short description of the Greenhouse effect
The heat radiation through the surface of the Earth is easily absorbed by the carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, etc., of gas in the atmosphere. This makes the atmosphere warmer. The atmosphere of longwave radiation by the atmosphere is like a tactic in the glass house, which is called the “greenhouse” in the process of the atmosphere.
In this case, the sunlight can easily pass through the good glass, but the long wave rays cannot be crossed. As a result, the cottage is easily heated. Due to this reason, sunflower glasses are used in the glasshouse and flowers are cultivated. The house is called the Green House.

Short description of Greenhouse effect
The heat radiation through the surface of the Earth is easily absorbed by the carbon dioxide, ozone, methane, etc., of gas in the atmosphere. This makes the atmosphere more warm. The atmosphere of long wave radiation by the atmosphere is like a tactic in the glass house, which is called the “green house” in the process of the atmosphere.
In this case, the sunlight can easily pass through the good glass, but the long wave rays can not be crossed. As a result the cottage is easily heated. Due to this reason, sunflower glasses are used in the glass house and flowers are cultivated. The house is called the Green House. visit for more http://greenhouseeffect.in

The first thing to understand is that electric cars are not about
global warming and CO2.
A few years ago Royal Dutch Shell CEO announced that Shell had
undertaken a study on the way to exit the oil industry.
BP & Mobil confirmed they were examining the same subject.
A few years later over a year or two almost all car manufacturers
announced that they were changing their production to electric cars.

Is there a connection ? Well I certainly do not know, but just why
have they all made that decision ?

Someone that owns an EV has to manage his car usage. Those cars with
the largest range have it easier of course, but the average car user
seem to have no problems. Several people have driven EVs around
Australia and that is with no fast chargers available except in some
cities.
Several companies and motorists organisations are installing chargers
on highways as is Shell overseas. Shell have announced all Shell
stations world wide will have chargers installed.
As two friends of mine have demonstrated there is no problem for the
average usage of EVs. They just do all the normal things they did
with their previous cars, go to work, go shopping, visiting etc etc.
What some media are carrying on about is long distance travel.
After looking at the map there are chargers at Mittagong, Marulan
Goulburn, Yass, Queanbeyan and Canberra.
All cars now available can do Sydney to Canberra.
There are no fast chargers between Canberra and Wodonga as far as I
can see. However they are coming. Plenty of 240 volt sockets
available but they take a long time with your own charger.

Hasbeen, exchange battery businesses have been operating in the US
for while now. They remove dud cells and get them ready for the next customer.

I see that the Labor party is talking to Toyota about hydrogen fueled cars being manufactured in Australia, so don't run out and buy an obsolete battery powered car.

David

Bazz, just because something can be done, does not make it a good idea to do it.

Of course it is not about global warming. In real terms it makes no difference to the global temperature which type of car you drive, the lifetime CO2 output is almost identical. Not that it matters how much CO2 they produce in the real world.

It probably resonates with dills like MISSION GEOGRAPHY, who are silly enough to have bought the full catastrophe from the warmists, but understand nothing of the story. If they are thick enough to leave the real warming gas, water vapour, out of their post, they are obviously just parroting what they have been primed with. I do wonder sometimes, if the greenies & lefties have a roster of people detailed to sprout their bulldust on blogs like this. Surely it can't be simply group think.

If you just look at cost, & raw materials consumed, electric cars are a bad idea, but so probably are mobile phones. If you take away the government using economic force to try to make a market for the things, they could find a small niche market for those with money to spare, & be acceptable. It is this coercion by lefties & greens to force us into the things that annoys me.

Electric is fine by me. I fly electric remote control planes & don't complain about the high cost & short life of LiPo batteries. They do the job I require of them, but I don't want a car with the things. Surely government has no place in forcing me into one.

Hasbeen,
Firstly, rest assured the government will not be forcing you into an electric car.
Secondly, the main advantage of electric vehicles is less air pollution.
Thirdly, if CO2 produced is the same over the lifetime of an electric car and a similar sized petrol car, it's probably because the EV has a longer lifetime!
Fourthly, I'm glad you at least recognise the warming effect of water vapour. But what would it take to convince you that the warming from CO2 and other greenhouse gases increases the amount of water vapour in the atmosphere?

David, The problem with hydrogen is that the energy loss in the cycle
of using the original energy and converting it to turning wheels.
There is still a problem with fuel cell life time.
My son's inlaw was the GM of of a Bus manufacturing company and they
put a lot of effort into hydrogen/fuel cell buses but they just were
not economic. They are still trying but there are fundamental problems.
They were also working with Mercedes buses and there are some of those
being trialed.
Oh yes, the fire regulations required that they rebuild the roof of
their factory.