ElectricMotorcycleForum.com
General Category => Electric Motorcycle News => Topic started by: Richard230 on October 30, 2016, 05:05:08 AM
-
I heard a report on the news today that Germany recently passed a law which would prohibit the sale of internal-combustion-powered vehicles after 2030. Their next move will be to convince the rest of the EU to do the same, which the news report said was likely. This could result in the big motorcycle brands finally getting into the electric motorcycle market in a big way. Better stock up on lithium batteries. ;)
-
Here is an article regarding Germany's new law. Apparently all gas and diesel vehicles will be banned from public roads after 2030. :o But it does require approval by the EU before it can go into effect. There are bound to be a lot of unintended consequences if this ban occurs, though. I was fascinated by the comment in the article that the ban could hurt Tesla sales. ???
I am sure that this ban will accelerate BMW's introduction of an electric motorcycle (no doubt a GS style) into the market and substantially increase the sales of their e-scooter range throughout Europe. It is kind of hard for me to imagine a Ducati or Moto Guzzi electric motorcycle, however. But I can see the Japanese finally getting up enough nerve to jump into the EV motorcycle market as 2030 approaches. In fact, if one of the Japanese brands were to really panic they might buy out Zero just to jump-start the process. No doubt both H-D and Polaris would also have an incentive to market their electric motorcycle models, too:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/bertelschmitt/2016/10/08/germanys-bundesrat-resolves-end-of-internal-combustion-engine/#4bfc2bd931d9 (http://www.forbes.com/sites/bertelschmitt/2016/10/08/germanys-bundesrat-resolves-end-of-internal-combustion-engine/#4bfc2bd931d9)
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
-
I like the idea of banning sales of new vehicles but not for making it illegal to continue using existing vehicles.
A different article says existing vehicles would still be allowed on the roads. I hope that's right and not Forbes.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/amp31097/german-government-votes-to-ban-internal-combustion-engines-by-2030/
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
-
It is kind of hard for me to imagine a Ducati or Moto Guzzi electric motorcycle, however.
I hear ya. It took me quite a while to wrap my head around Project Livewire. An electric Harley-Davidson? Da fuq?
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
I should note that my infant daughter cannot sit in the front seat of our 2+2 seater BRZ because of airbags that I cannot disable.. yet the rear seat, like all rear seats in the US is not crash tested or rated... it makes no sense to require the backseat in a car like this, yet do to the explosive device mandated by the government, I cant use the seat.
-
I like the idea of banning sales of new vehicles but not for making it illegal to continue using existing vehicles.
A different article says existing vehicles would still be allowed on the roads. I hope that's right and not Forbes.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/amp31097/german-government-votes-to-ban-internal-combustion-engines-by-2030/ (https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/amp31097/german-government-votes-to-ban-internal-combustion-engines-by-2030/)
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Yes it's only about banning the sale of them, Forbes is talking out of their ass.
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
I should note that my infant daughter cannot sit in the front seat of our 2+2 seater BRZ because of airbags that I cannot disable.. yet the rear seat, like all rear seats in the US is not crash tested or rated... it makes no sense to require the backseat in a car like this, yet do to the explosive device mandated by the government, I cant use the seat.
Doesn't the airbag autodisable on most modern vehicles unless the sensor detects 40lbs in the passenger seat? Also, do you have a manual override switch for the airbag?? My 2012 truck has all this...
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
I should note that my infant daughter cannot sit in the front seat of our 2+2 seater BRZ because of airbags that I cannot disable.. yet the rear seat, like all rear seats in the US is not crash tested or rated... it makes no sense to require the backseat in a car like this, yet do to the explosive device mandated by the government, I cant use the seat.
Doesn't the airbag autodisable on most modern vehicles unless the sensor detects 40lbs in the passenger seat? Also, do you have a manual override switch for the airbag?? My 2012 truck has all this...
There is no manual override, she weighs 21lbs @ 6 months old, and when you add in the car seat and the pressure from the seatbelt it can easily trigger it on.. Not to mention its illegal to have her there anyway. Doesnt matter if its disabled or not, there is technically a backseat, therefore she has to be in it.
once shes old enough to not be rear facing, it wont be as big of an issue as the front seat can have a passenger again, but to have unnecessary hardships forced on my by inept government officials that actively ignored the pleas of the very engineers who design this stuff... is annoying.
-
I'm from Germany and have been closely following the heated debate about the ban.
Just to correct a few things mentioned here that aren't totally correct:
1) The law didn't pass. It was proposed in the Bundesrat (which is an assembly of state/region governments within Germany) which it didn't even pass because a lot of members (namely the regions where the big car manufacturers are located) rejected the proposition. Even if it had passed the Bundesrat, it would have still been up to the parliament to pass the law.
2) The idea was to ban ICE car sales. Any vehicle that would have been sold until then could continue to drive around. We have very strict traffic laws that make it virtually impossible for the government to forbid to use something that has been allowed at the point you bought/build or started using it.
3) The debate was triggered by similiar ideas of the norwegian gouvernment. Usually things that have an impact in the mid to distant future like this are brought up as a rough idea and get rejected the very first time. Afterwards the debate can be restarted if there are further details/analyses/information and will be a reference for this. In the end a modified version of the proposition will be finally discussed and either put into effect or (which I don't be believe in this case) will be totally rejected. Personally, I suppose that in a few years there will be a regulation like this with different time frame, certain exceptions and a real transistion plan.
And as you may know Germany and European countries in general lean more towards a democratic approach of politics and favour state regulation/intervention more than America does. Very few things happen without any state intervention at all. I can't imagine a huge transition like this happening here without some form of state intervention. It's just like that.
-
Well, we are ready for the future - if anyone can afford it. ;)
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
I should note that my infant daughter cannot sit in the front seat of our 2+2 seater BRZ because of airbags that I cannot disable.. yet the rear seat, like all rear seats in the US is not crash tested or rated... it makes no sense to require the backseat in a car like this, yet do to the explosive device mandated by the government, I cant use the seat.
I remember when airbags first came out, they were part of a big push for passive restraints for people who wouldn't use seatbelts. Remember automatic seatbelts? They got beat out by airbags. Now they tell us that the airbag must be used with the seatbelt. I was in a major accident (a fatality involved) wearing a seatbelt. The airbag went off and never touched me. My only injury was a minor case of "belt burn". Then we have the airbags shooting metal fragments into people's chests and the dire warnings about the risk to children and smaller adults. So, if the airbag can kill you, and does not have any benefit without a seatbelt which negates the effectiveness of the airbag, what's the point?
Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk
-
I would prefer electric to just out preform and win over customers than an overreaching ban.
There was a crowd that said the same thing about seat belts in cars, then airbags, then ABS. I was one of them on occasion...I was pretty skeptical about airbags in particular, ABS to a lesser extent. There are still a few naysayers out there, but by and large all these things are now acknowledged as massive improvements in automotive technology.
Sometimes us curmudgeons need a nudge.
I should note that my infant daughter cannot sit in the front seat of our 2+2 seater BRZ because of airbags that I cannot disable.. yet the rear seat, like all rear seats in the US is not crash tested or rated... it makes no sense to require the backseat in a car like this, yet do to the explosive device mandated by the government, I cant use the seat.
I remember when airbags first came out, they were part of a big push for passive restraints for people who wouldn't use seatbelts. Remember automatic seatbelts? They got beat out by airbags. Now they tell us that the airbag must be used with the seatbelt. I was in a major accident (a fatality involved) wearing a seatbelt. The airbag went off and never touched me. My only injury was a minor case of "belt burn". Then we have the airbags shooting metal fragments into people's chests and the dire warnings about the risk to children and smaller adults. So, if the airbag can kill you, and does not have any benefit without a seatbelt which negates the effectiveness of the airbag, what's the point?
Sent from my Z981 using Tapatalk
Airbags are supplementary restraint devices. The point is that the politicians never listened to the engineers... they listened to the safety lobbyists that are also not engineers.
Did you know the USA is the only country that has crash standards for UNBELTED passengers? That the idea of airbags was that not enough people buckled up, so this was supposed to help.. but after making them mandatory, it killed, burned and injured people... so they further ensnared the problem by making more stupid law.
Now I am not saying they dont work. They have their purposes... but its only in the last 15 years that they have substantially improved safety, and still the laws surrounding them in the US are pretty messed up.
My basic opinion is.. they should overhaul that section of law. Not remove airbags.