EV subvencije

Citat:
Uporabnik Pepe pravi:

Citat:
Uporabnik AndY1 pravi:Kakorkoli že - rezultat nevlaganje v čistejše okolje lahko vidiš na Kitajskem. Ne vem, če si tam že bil, da bi to videl iz prve roke - jaz sem bil. Reke smrdijo in niso več reke, ampak tekoče odplake, zrak je pa tako umazan, da če si potno čelo obrišeš z rokavom bele bombažne majice, bo tisti del majice črn. To so moje osebne izkušnje.
To je rezultat nevlaganja v čisto okolje. Če so vsi ti stroški odvečni, odstranimo DPF filtre z dizel izpuhov in katalizatorje z bencinskih izpuhov. Saj je to nepotreben strošek, ne?

Klikni za razširitev

Napisal sem ti že da nakladaš in iz malega prsta na nogi vlečeš povezave, ki niso bistvene in jih skoraj ni. Da se spravim na tvoj nivo: ali v Nemčiji dobijo podjetja subvencijo, da plačajo delavca za enako delo več kot v Sloveniji? Napisal bi primerjavo za Kitajsko, pa nisem več prepričan, da dobi inženir v Sloveniji več kot na Kitajskem. Nisi sposoben ločiti med obdavčitvijo in vračilom denarja iz proračuna v obliki subvencije. DPF filtri na vozilih niso zaradi subvencij. Vsaj jaz ne vem, da bi bila kdajkoli pri nas kaka možnost, da jo dobiš.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Pepe pravi:
Pa kaj še boš našel siromak, samo da svoje opravičiš. V ZDA pa so verjetno subvencijo v kaki državi za nakup orožja za samoobrambo.
Če bi država res želela, da bi po cestah v Sloveniji in skozi Slovenijo vozilo precej več EV vozil, bi ves možen denar kanalizirala v infrastrukturo. Če bi želela, da je v mestih manj prašnih delcev, mora samo urediti pretočnost prometa in povprečna poraba bo takoj padla za 1 liter v vseh mestih v državi. Drastična sprememba in načeloma "čisto simple".

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Gargy pravi:
ostale strupene snovi (ki res škodujejo) pa smo že zdavnaj spucali iz avtomobilov...

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Gargy pravi:
CO, CO2 in vodne pare so za tebe strupene snovi???

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Carbon monoxide is a toxic gas, but, being colorless, odorless, tasteless, and initially non-irritating, it is very difficult for people to detect.

It is often produced in domestic or industrial settings by motor vehicles that run on gasoline, diesel, methane, or other carbon-based fuels and tools, heaters, and cooking equipment that are powered by carbon-based fuels such as propane and butane. Exposures at 100 ppm or greater can be dangerous to human health.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Gargy pravi:
Tako dolgo, dokler se bo objavljajo "moja lifetime poraba je xxl/100km" in ne "jaz sem do sedaj v luft spustil "le" xxxg CO2," tako dolgo me nobeden ne bo prepričal, da vozijo EV samo zaradi čistega lufta. Sploh pa ne traparij, da ni emisij okrog vrtcev, parkov in podobno... Sem že povedal, da prdec od krave naredi več škode, kot avto.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
The California Air Resources Board (C.A.R.B.) found in studies that 50% or more of the air pollution (smog) in Southern California is due to car emissions

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Uporabnik Gargy pravi:
klaj ko bi se ti malo pozanimal o smogu preden lepiš neke slikice? Daj vpiši v Google še Sunny LA Wallpaper all pa Sunny Peking... jezus.

Smog je normalen pojav. Pravzaprav je bil še bolj normalen 70 let nazaj. Koncentracija smoga v zraku naj ne bi presegla 0.12 ppm za več kot 8 ur, šele nad to mejo je ob daljši (več dni) izpostavljenosti možnost, da zelo občutljivi ljudje sploh kaj opazijo. Sem za foro pogledal graf za ZDA, predvsem CA in SV del, kjer je "onesnaženost" največja. ne boš verjel, ampak med 2003 in 2013 v CA se vrednost smoga ni dvignila nad 0.12 ppm. Povprečje je pod 0.10 ppm.

Vrednost ozona (smog, ne pa CO2) je v zadnjih 10. letih padel za nekje 10 - 13%, medtem ko se je število avtomobilov skokovito povečevalo.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Smog is a type of air pollutant. The word "smog" was made in the early 20th century as a portmanteau of the words smoke and fog to refer to smoky fog.[1] The word was then intended to refer to what was sometimes known as pea soup fog, a familiar and serious problem in London from the 19th century to the mid 20th century. This kind of smog is caused by the burning of large amounts of coal within a city; this smog contains soot particulates from smoke, sulfur dioxide and other components.

Modern smog, as found for example in Los Angeles, is a type of air pollution derived from vehicular emission from internal combustion engines and industrial fumes that react in the atmosphere with sunlight to form secondary pollutants that also combine with the primary emissions to form photochemical smog. In certain other cities, such as Delhi, smog severity is often aggravated by stubble burning in neighboring agricultural areas. The atmospheric pollution levels of Los Angeles, Beijing, Delhi, Mexico City and other cities are increased by inversion that traps pollution close to the ground. It is usually highly toxic to humans and can cause severe sickness, shortened life or death.

Klikni za razširitev

Citat:
Health effects
Smog is a serious problem in many cities and continues to harm human health.[17] Ground-level ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide are especially harmful for senior citizens, children, and people with heart and lung conditions such as emphysema, bronchitis, and asthma.[18] It can inflame breathing passages, decrease the lungs' working capacity, cause shortness of breath, pain when inhaling deeply, wheezing, and coughing. It can cause eye and nose irritation and it dries out the protective membranes of the nose and throat and interferes with the body's ability to fight infection, increasing susceptibility to illness. Hospital admissions and respiratory deaths often increase during periods when ozone levels are high.[19][20]
Levels of unhealthy exposure

The U.S. EPA has developed an Air Quality Index to help explain air pollution levels to the general public. 8 hour average ozone concentrations of 85 to 104 ppbv are described as "Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups", 105 ppbv to 124 ppbv as "unhealthy" and 125 ppb to 404 ppb as "very unhealthy".[18] The "very unhealthy" range for some other pollutants are: 355 μg m−3 - 424 μg m−3 for PM10; 15.5 ppm - 30.4ppm for CO and 0.65 ppm - 1.24 ppm for NO2.[21]
Premature deaths due to cancer and respiratory disease

The Ontario Medical Association announced that smog is responsible for an estimated 9,500 premature deaths in the province each year.[22]

A 20-year American Cancer Society study found that cumulative exposure also increases the likelihood of premature death from a respiratory disease, implying the 8-hour standard may be insufficient.[23]
Smog and the risk of certain birth defects

A study examining 806 women who had babies with birth defects between 1997 and 2006, and 849 women who had healthy babies, found that smog in the San Joaquin Valley area of California was linked to two types of neural tube defects: spina bifida (a condition involving, among other manifestations, certain malformations of the spinal column), and anencephaly (the underdevelopment or absence of part or all of the brain, which if not fatal usually results in profound impairment).[24]
Smog and low birth weight

According to a study published in The Lancet, even a very small (5 μg) change in PM2.5 exposure was associated with an increase (18%) in risk of a low birth weight at delivery, and this relationship held even below the current accepted safe levels.

Klikni za razširitev