Summary

Norway is on track to become the first country to eliminate gasoline and diesel cars from new car sales, with EVs making up over 96% of recent purchases.

Decades of incentives, including tax breaks and infrastructure investments, have driven this shift.

Officials see EV adoption as a “new normal” and aim for electric city buses by 2025.

While other countries lag behind, Norway’s success demonstrates the potential for widespread EV adoption.

  • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    So, you‘re saying that the slaughterhouse must continue killing animals in order to reduce killing of animals at all.

    I’m not saying it must continue. I’m saying continuing or discontinuing doesn’t decrease the killing of animals. If your goal is fewer animals killed this action would be completely neutral neither increasing nor decreasing the killing of animals.

    Because if this very slaughterhouse won‘t operate and kill, a different would do.

    Another would. If there is only a single possible supply in the entire world, then you might have a valid argument. However there is no practical limit to the number of places that can extract petroleum or kill animals.

    Best is to keep killing animals as long as the butcher is vegeterian everything is fine. ROFL

    Not “best”, better. Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. If your goal is to reduce the killing of animals for food, then you’re not going to achieve that by reducing the supply of animals in one place. You do it by reducing the demand for slaughtered animals. If the butcher him/herself has chosen to stop eating meat, that reduces slaughtered animals. Companies that slaughter animals won’t do so unless there is a person buying the meat. The butch, in your example, would now be reducing the number of animals slaughtered because he/she wouldn’t be consuming it.

    Edit: Quick google - the slaughterhouse is going to be expanded next years. More animals get killed

    Fewer actually, if you look at real numbers. In this case geopolitics caused a large producer, Russia, to no longer be able to bring their oil to market. Norway increasing is only replacing a fraction of what Russia produced. The net result is fewer (petroleum) animals killed Check it out. There is less oil being produced now than there was 3 years ago:

    source

    See, you can’t zoom in so far on one thing. You miss the big picture. You’re so upset about oil you’re not even able to recognize you’re getting your way. Less oil is being produced and used! Yet here you are making claims its getting worse. Its not.

    • DrunkenPirate@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      In the slaughterhouse image you arguing with the consumer-demands-industry-follows-argument. That is way too easy and not true. Take emobility for example: did it scale because customers demanded it? Or does it because it was subsidued by the Government tonlower prices AND incentivized with tax reduction and special traffic permits?

      No, emobility was enforced and engaged by the Government. Neither customers nor industry was the lead. So, is the way with petrol and gas.

      I didn‘t get your last point. You are saying that Norway is producing more petrol and gas, are you? And then you claim, that it‘s not that bad because Russia reduced its oil production? Wtf is this? Whatsaboutism?

      Same as we produce mountains of carbon every year through oil and gas production. But it‘s not that bad because we all ride electric cars?

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Take emobility for example

        No thank you. I already took your slaughterhouse example and dismantled it cleanly. We don’t need another tangent.

        I didn‘t get your last point. You are saying that Norway is producing more petrol and gas, are you?

        You were saying that. You cited a source. I didn’t disagree with it.

        And then you claim, that it‘s not that bad because Russia reduced its oil production? Wtf is this? Whatsaboutism?

        The world NET TOTAL OIL production is lower. With Norway producing more oil on its own, there is still LESS OIL BEING PRODUCED WORLDWIDE. I don’t know how much simpler it is to explain that.

        In the slaughterhouse image you arguing with the consumer-demands-industry-follows-argument. That is way too easy and not true.

        Gotcha, you’re lacking basic understanding of supply and demand. You need to learn some basic concept before you’re going to understand how the world works. In this case I’d recommend you look into basic Micro and Macro economics studies. Read a book and learn, then come back and we can continue our conversation. I’m done.

        Have a great day!