엔진오일 교환 수리 사례

2026. 8. 17. 작업

난이도 & 준비물

증상

ITP said: I ve no problem with EV s eventually being 50-75% of passenger cars. They work well as an only car for people uninterested in cars, who just want a cheap way of getting from A to B, previously maybe a diesel. The transition should just happen naturally though, not forced by government with taxpayer subsidy at all. It s up to manufacturers to sell the benefits of how cheap EV s are to run and people will then buy them. All the subsidies have done is raised list prices as the manufacturers know the govt are paying a chunk of the price.As far as pollution goes, what are you willing to

처리 내용

otolith said: ITP said: otolith said: ITP said: otolith said: Yeah. So all ^^ that? That's why in order to get the intended outcome, it has been necessary to intervene. What I m saying is I don t think the govt should intervene. We don t need to have any bans, ZEV mandates, etc. If manufacturers produce something that s better than before and cheaper to buy/run, then people will buy it.The problem is politicians setting an arbitrary deadline, and trying to force that date using bans on sales of ICE and taxpayers money for subsidies to EV. All they are doing is sending taxpayer money out of the country enriching foreign car companies.I don t think the world is going to end if the transition is much slower and happens with actual market forces, but I guess some people do. So here we are.And I'm saying that there is a policy objective to reduce CO2 emissions from cars by transitioning the fleet to electric propulsion, and without intervening that will not happen, certainly not over the timescale required. You may disagree with the objective, because you don't believe in or care about anthropogenic climate change, or you think having cars run on petrol is more important than it, or because you think the reductions in emissions should be somewhere else, but you have evidenced with your own position why if that is the objective, the actions which have been taken have been necessary to achieve it. I think the phrase there is the timescale required .Who decides what that timescale required is? We have had many, many predictions/warnings by politicians and scientists over the last 20-30 years, London was going to be underwater, the Maldives should have been gone years ago. There s a huge list of them that have not come to pass, all based on a timescale required when the claim was made.Everyone is for cleaner transport and energy, and it is becoming cleaner every year through technology but, personally, I don t think it needs to be forced to hit a specific date. China