https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

There are 600k BEV's in Norway and 2.9m ICE vehicles, the BEV's have a long way to go before they kill off ICE.

The current govt are planning to add VAT back for new BEV's, this will be on all BEV's over 500k if passed into next years budget, this IMO will kill off the sale of family sized BEV's for many people and is a huge backwards step.

If rich Norway is taxing BEV's, then ...........

Can you imagine how much more revenue is flowing to them with these fossil fuel prices?

I feel you are slightly misrepresenting the numbers, Rob. But agreed on it being stupid to already start reducing incentives.

Registered car fleet 2021:
Petrol: 893 437
Diesel: 1 215 484
Pure electric: 460 734
(Source: SSB - Statistics Norway)

Sales, private cars March 2022:
EVs: 95.7%
(Source: OFV.no)
Businesses have different taxing, so "only" 68% of business bought cars were electric.

Not enough to compensate for the stock market losses in our national wealth fund..

MohawkWeekend wrote:

If rich Norway is taxing BEV's, then ...........

Can you imagine how much more revenue is flowing to them with these fossil fuel prices?

By being small and rich...

M564038 wrote:

I feel you are slightly misrepresenting the numbers, Rob. But agreed on it being stupid to already start reducing incentives.

Registered car fleet 2021:
Petrol: 893 437
Diesel: 1 215 484
Pure electric: 460 734
(Source: SSB - Statistics Norway)

Sales, private cars March 2022:
EVs: 95.7%
(Source: OFV.no)
Businesses have different taxing, so "only" 68% of business bought cars were electric.

The plug in electric car fleet is 647000 vehicles, this includes PHEV’s. Anyway adding vat to BEVs is just plain stupid and will see sales of ICE cars increase.

M564038 wrote:

Not enough to compensate for the stock market losses in our national wealth fund..

MohawkWeekend wrote:

If rich Norway is taxing BEV's, then ...........

Can you imagine how much more revenue is flowing to them with these fossil fuel prices?

Yip looked at my pension this morning, it’s not pretty.

Kiwirob wrote:

There are 600k BEV's in Norway and 2.9m ICE vehicles, the BEV's have a long way to go before they kill off ICE.

The current govt are planning to add VAT back for new BEV's, this will be on all BEV's over 500k if passed into next years budget, this IMO will kill off the sale of family sized BEV's for many people and is a huge backwards step.

Why is it a backwards step? If ICE vehicles have VAT, so should others. Let BEVs and other such vehicles stand on their merits rather than tax breaks.

WesternDC6B wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

There are 600k BEV's in Norway and 2.9m ICE vehicles, the BEV's have a long way to go before they kill off ICE.

The current govt are planning to add VAT back for new BEV's, this will be on all BEV's over 500k if passed into next years budget, this IMO will kill off the sale of family sized BEV's for many people and is a huge backwards step.

Why is it a backwards step? If ICE vehicles have VAT, so should others. Let BEVs and other such vehicles stand on their merits rather than tax breaks.

Electric vehicles are cheap in Norway, why make them more expensive when they don't need the revenue?

If they want to tax BEV's to make up from the shortfall in petrol taxes charge a per km rate.

If you have driven a BEV, you never want another kind of car.

pune wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

How many times and how many threads do you have to start discussing the same points?

Agreed, if everything else was equal.
But there is a bit more to it.
-Global warming
-Wars and international politics over fossil fuel resouces.
-Massive international government subsidies for the fossil fuel and fossil car industries for decades and decades.
-Massive anti-electric propaganda effort from the car industry for decades

Of course, the first point alone decides conclusively that we must actively phase out fossil fueled vehicles in a short amount of time.

But lucky for us! The alternative is so much better!
Once you are a EV-driver, you won’t go back! It is just. Better.

WesternDC6B wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

There are 600k BEV's in Norway and 2.9m ICE vehicles, the BEV's have a long way to go before they kill off ICE.

The current govt are planning to add VAT back for new BEV's, this will be on all BEV's over 500k if passed into next years budget, this IMO will kill off the sale of family sized BEV's for many people and is a huge backwards step.

Why is it a backwards step? If ICE vehicles have VAT, so should others. Let BEVs and other such vehicles stand on their merits rather than tax breaks.

M564038 wrote:

Once you are a EV-driver, you won’t go back!

Not everyone. Many of us have driven various EVs and yet, we prefer ICE vehicles for a myriad of reasons.

Yes. Sorry about that. Some people love needless loud farting noises and toxic fumes. For a variety of reasons.

ACDC8 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Once you are a EV-driver, you won’t go back!

Not everyone. Many of us have driven various EVs and yet, we prefer ICE vehicles for a myriad of reasons.

M564038 wrote:

Yes. Sorry about that. Some people love needless loud farting noises and toxic fumes. For a variety of reasons.

Thats right - here's one of them:



Fortunately, manufacturers like VW, Honda, Toyota have looked into driver "profiles" and realized that there are drivers out there who actually love to be engaged while driving a car instead of sitting behind the wheel of a boring EV and offered vehicles like the GTI, R, SI, Type R and GR with a manual, and in some cases, manual only

M564038 wrote:

Agreed, if everything else was equal.
But there is a bit more to it.
-Global warming
-Wars and international politics over fossil fuel resouces.
-Massive international government subsidies for the fossil fuel and fossil car industries for decades and decades.
-Massive anti-electric propaganda effort from the car industry for decades

Of course, the first point alone decides conclusively that we must actively phase out fossil fueled vehicles in a short amount of time.

But lucky for us! The alternative is so much better!
Once you are a EV-driver, you won’t go back! It is just. Better.

WesternDC6B wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

There are 600k BEV's in Norway and 2.9m ICE vehicles, the BEV's have a long way to go before they kill off ICE.

The current govt are planning to add VAT back for new BEV's, this will be on all BEV's over 500k if passed into next years budget, this IMO will kill off the sale of family sized BEV's for many people and is a huge backwards step.

Why is it a backwards step? If ICE vehicles have VAT, so should others. Let BEVs and other such vehicles stand on their merits rather than tax breaks.

Because vehicles have traditionally been excessively expensive in Norway, removing vat made new BEVs affordable for many more people than the previous ICE vehicles were, adding tax back makes many affordable vehicles unaffordable again.

At the moment I don’t have a BEV, I have a boat, we take it with us on holidays, towing isn’t something BEVs are very good at so far. Once range issues surrounding towing are sorted then I’ll jump ship.

Every car I have owned up until the EVs was a stick shift. You could add a mock up one from a Winnie the Pooh toy car or something on your EV if you want something to hold in your right hand. The performance will still be better.

ACDC8 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Yes. Sorry about that. Some people love needless loud farting noises and toxic fumes. For a variety of reasons.

Thats right - here's one of them:



Fortunately, manufacturers like VW, Honda, Toyota have looked into driver "profiles" and realized that there are drivers out there who actually love to be engaged while driving a car instead of sitting behind the wheel of a boring EV and offered vehicles like the GTI, R, SI, Type R and GR with a manual, and in some cases, manual only :thumbsup:

M564038 wrote:

Every car I have owned up until the EVs was a stick shift. You could add a mock up one from a Winnie the Pooh toy car or something on your EV if you want something to hold in your right hand. The performance will still be better.

Has nothing to do with performance.
Has everything to do with driver engagement and connection to the vehicle.

If you have an old farting rube goldberg engine that needs to be geared to be able to deliver the right force to the wheel: yes. Although they are not statistically safer, nor more efficient than their automatic Rube Goldberg cousins, so what this would achieve is a bit foggy. I guess it is in the same vein as Boeing steam punk steel wire by large Wheel-control is somehow better than Airbus’ joystick through computer, although no statistic even remotely support it after 35 years.

Anyway, if what you really wanna do is make lots of noise and keep your right hand engaged, why don’t you


pick up some drumming lessons and start a band?

ACDC8 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Every car I have owned up until the EVs was a stick shift. You could add a mock up one from a Winnie the Pooh toy car or something on your EV if you want something to hold in your right hand. The performance will still be better.

Has nothing to do with performance.
Has everything to do with driver engagement and connection to the vehicle.

pune wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

How a bunch of wealthy white people made themselves feel better by driving massive chemical reactors around filled with heavy metals…. To me it has no relevance. And that’s my demographic group, more or less (shrug!)

If we cared about carbon, we would implement a carbon tax. Including India and China.

But we don’t really care… it is basically a charade; performative.

LCDFlight wrote:

pune wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

How a bunch of wealthy white people made themselves feel better by driving massive chemical reactors around filled with heavy metals…. To me it has no relevance. And that’s my demographic group, more or less (shrug!)

If we cared about carbon, we would implement a carbon tax. Including India and China.

But we don’t really care… it is basically a charade; performative.

It is the richest nations that have been the source of global warming, today as well as for centuries -

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51906530

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ation.html

Of course, those countries do not want to have the responsibility and the penalties - so the words, charade and performative should be first labeled there perhaps ???

M564038 wrote:

If you have an old farting rube goldberg engine that needs to be geared to be able to deliver the right force to the wheel: yes. Although they are not statistically safer, nor more efficient than their automatic Rube Goldberg cousins, so what this would achieve is a bit foggy. I guess it is in the same vein as Boeing steam punk steel wire by large Wheel-control is somehow better than Airbus’ joystick through computer, although no statistic even remotely support it after 35 years.

Anyway, if what you really wanna do is make lots of noise and keep your right hand engaged, why don’t you


pick up some drumming lessons and start a band?

What does drums have to do with enjoying driving a car? Or does that not fit your "driver profiles"

As far as your Airbus analogy - again, has nothing to do with which one is better, some pilots simply prefer good ol' stick and rudder and some steam gauge instruments.

Just like a JW on their crusade, you can preach until your blue in the face, ya just ain't gonna convert everyone to the Church of EV.

TheSonntag wrote:

If you have driven a BEV, you never want another kind of car.

I mean this just isn't true. Drove an I3 BMW, still like my Jetta better.

i3 doesn’t count. Silly!

T18 wrote:

TheSonntag wrote:

If you have driven a BEV, you never want another kind of car.

I mean this just isn't true. Drove an I3 BMW, still like my Jetta better.

M564038 wrote:

i3 doesn’t count. Silly!

T18 wrote:

TheSonntag wrote:

If you have driven a BEV, you never want another kind of car.

I mean this just isn't true. Drove an I3 BMW, still like my Jetta better.

You should ask my neighbour what he thinks about his model S.

It will be a long while until anything electric can win him back.

ACDC8 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Every car I have owned up until the EVs was a stick shift. You could add a mock up one from a Winnie the Pooh toy car or something on your EV if you want something to hold in your right hand. The performance will still be better.

Has nothing to do with performance.
Has everything to do with driver engagement and connection to the vehicle.

That’s only viable when you are driving a better than average car on the limit. Not when you commuting in an underpowered and “comfortable” family car.

marcelh wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Every car I have owned up until the EVs was a stick shift. You could add a mock up one from a Winnie the Pooh toy car or something on your EV if you want something to hold in your right hand. The performance will still be better.

Has nothing to do with performance.
Has everything to do with driver engagement and connection to the vehicle.

That’s only viable when you are driving a better than average car on the limit. Not when you commuting in an underpowered and “comfortable” family car.

I would argue you have that backwards, my Jetta would be awful with a auto but you put a 5 speed in it and its much more fun and zippier too, despite being a 2.slow. Its always more fun to drive a slow car fast opposed to a fast car slow.

pune wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

pune wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

How a bunch of wealthy white people made themselves feel better by driving massive chemical reactors around filled with heavy metals…. To me it has no relevance. And that’s my demographic group, more or less (shrug!)

If we cared about carbon, we would implement a carbon tax. Including India and China.

But we don’t really care… it is basically a charade; performative.

It is the richest nations that have been the source of global warming, today as well as for centuries -

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51906530

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ation.html

Of course, those countries do not want to have the responsibility and the penalties - so the words, charade and performative should be first labeled there perhaps ???

"There are 2.7 million Indian immigrants in the United States, making them the second-largest immigrant group after Mexicans"
Maybe the US has already done it's part.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

pune wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

How a bunch of wealthy white people made themselves feel better by driving massive chemical reactors around filled with heavy metals…. To me it has no relevance. And that’s my demographic group, more or less (shrug!)

If we cared about carbon, we would implement a carbon tax. Including India and China.

But we don’t really care… it is basically a charade; performative.

It is the richest nations that have been the source of global warming, today as well as for centuries -

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-51906530

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ation.html

Of course, those countries do not want to have the responsibility and the penalties - so the words, charade and performative should be first labeled there perhaps ???

"There are 2.7 million Indian immigrants in the United States, making them the second-largest immigrant group after Mexicans"
Maybe the US has already done it's part.

Maybe you are convincing yourself as the majority in the U.S. doesn't thnk so -

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-envir ... t-climate/

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-envir ... enough-on/

The Hill is hardly a good judge of American public opinion. There is a reason no one in the US talks about a carbon tax - cause it aint happening.

And it's gets harder to cut your CO2 output when your population keeping growing from immigration (both legal and illegal).
" For the foreseeable future, immigration will fuel US population growth"
https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration ... on-growth/
" for the first time in America’s history, the demographic contribution of immigration has surpassed natural increase, which is simply the difference between births and deaths. "

marcelh wrote:

That’s only viable when you are driving a better than average car on the limit. Not when you commuting in an underpowered and “comfortable” family car.

Plenty of people have zero issues driving a manual during day to day driving, even in a basic car - adding a manual to a higher performance car is just the cherry on top even if you don't push it to the limit. For many more, a direct shift dual clutch transmission vehicle gives them the enjoyment the crave, something that an EV can't replicate.

People who still enjoy driving and engagement are in the minority, just as those who buy an EV solely for environmental reasons. For the vast majority of people it comes down to one thing - costs. For many parts of the World, EVs are simply too expensive to be a viable option for the majority, if people are struggling to fill up their cars at $2/litre, they'll struggle even more signing a loan for a $60K plus EV. Places like Norway, where EVs are popular, the price difference between an ICE and EV is negligible so there is a genuine argument to go EV. Other places like the US and Canada, the spread is still too far.

T18 wrote:

I would argue you have that backwards, my Jetta would be awful with a auto but you put a 5 speed in it and its much more fun and zippier too, despite being a 2.slow. Its always more fun to drive a slow car fast opposed to a fast car slow.

I miss my Mk4 Golf and Jettas - the 2.Slow was a pretty good car with a manual, even tho my current Alltrack is peppier, the DSG just takes all the fun out of it. My Mk7 R with the manual was a total blast - looking forward to next year for my new Mk8 GTI - manual of course.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Hill is hardly a good judge of American public opinion. There is a reason no one in the US talks about a carbon tax - cause it aint happening.

Pune has shown a complete lack of understanding of policies and mentality in other countries other than his own, often posting random articles he finds on line as he's done in the other dozen or so threads he's started on the exact same subject.

While the EV fanboys are promising fairy dust and unicorns in their Utopian future, the stark reality of EVs looks very different:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo ... li=BBnb7Kz

LCDFlight wrote:

pune wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJtzuZIO-88

Very relevant to our times.

How a bunch of wealthy white people made themselves feel better by driving massive chemical reactors around filled with heavy metals…. To me it has no relevance. And that’s my demographic group, more or less (shrug!)

If we cared about carbon, we would implement a carbon tax. Including India and China.

But we don’t really care… it is basically a charade; performative.

Why pick on white people, China is the worlds largest EV market.

ACDC8 wrote:

While the EV fanboys are promising fairy dust and unicorns in their Utopian future, the stark reality of EVs looks very different:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technolo ... li=BBnb7Kz

That is the problem of centralization. What has not been taken into account is that many people and even businesses are getting into solar and batteries and charing. So you don't need to even access the central grid anymore.

This is UK maths, but should be similar for the States - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4BUUQLsFSmY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T0vahG6JPU

The first is about solar panels and the second one is about batteries investment.

To add, now perovskite batteries are also coming to market -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1BvXUity0s

Of course, there will be people who won't be able to do either of the above, that is where businesses will make a dime and dollar.

In fact, just 2 weeks back ABB and Shell made a global agreement on EV charging -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jmc9jV0Zrd0

And there are at least 10-15 such similar things happening elsewhere. Even a laggard like my own country, India is getting into it. Have been seen new charging infrastructure in nearby hotels and whatnot.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Hill is hardly a good judge of American public opinion. There is a reason no one in the US talks about a carbon tax - cause it aint happening.

And it's gets harder to cut your CO2 output when your population keeping growing from immigration (both legal and illegal).
" For the foreseeable future, immigration will fuel US population growth"
https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration ... on-growth/
" for the first time in America’s history, the demographic contribution of immigration has surpassed natural increase, which is simply the difference between births and deaths. "

A carbon tax is by definition the cheapest, most comprehensive way to limit CO2. If we aren’t doing it, we aren’t serious.

Electric cars make a pitiful impact, really near zero. People have no concept of the energy mix. The biggest factors in man made CO2 are agriculture/deforestation and building heating. Freight is next. Personal transport is a tiny slice of the CO2 problem.

People living in a 5,000 square foot house, flying >75,000 leisure miles per year, buying 2 Teslas think they are saving the world. This is a psychological issue of wealthy high status people. An electric car is a pill to make them feel better about themselves.

But hey, I guess we have to start somewhere. $1000 phones for rich idiots (phones everybody laughed at) did end up changing the world. So I’m open minded. Maybe this does lead somewhere… eventually.

pune wrote:

This is UK maths, but should be similar for the States

Math plays second fiddle to polices. What happens in one country does not happen in another. Seriously, how many times do we have to go over the same thing with you?

In fairness the US is still cutting CO2 emissions. 3 reasonably large coal fired power plants shut down on April 1st - 2 in Ohio (one about 5 miles from my house) and one in Pennsylvania. Over 2 gigawatt capacity.

LCDFlight wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Hill is hardly a good judge of American public opinion. There is a reason no one in the US talks about a carbon tax - cause it aint happening.

And it's gets harder to cut your CO2 output when your population keeping growing from immigration (both legal and illegal).
" For the foreseeable future, immigration will fuel US population growth"
https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration ... on-growth/
" for the first time in America’s history, the demographic contribution of immigration has surpassed natural increase, which is simply the difference between births and deaths. "

A carbon tax is by definition the cheapest, most comprehensive way to limit CO2. If we aren’t doing it, we aren’t serious.

Electric cars make a pitiful impact, really near zero. People have no concept of the energy mix. The biggest factors in man-made CO2 are agriculture/deforestation and building heating. Freight is next. Personal transport is a tiny slice of the CO2 problem.

People living in a 5,000 square foot house, flying >75,000 leisure miles per year, and buying 2 Teslas think they are saving the world. This is a psychological issue of wealthy high-status people. An electric car is a pill to make them feel better about themselves.

But hey, I guess we have to start somewhere. $1000 phones for rich idiots (phones everybody laughed at) did end up changing the world. So I’m open-minded. Maybe this does lead somewhere… eventually.

That is an opinion. Just doing a search gives me this -

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases

The above tells where the biggest greenhouse gases are. Even today, it is the U.S. which is the biggest emitter of the said gases

pune wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

The Hill is hardly a good judge of American public opinion. There is a reason no one in the US talks about a carbon tax - cause it aint happening.

And it's gets harder to cut your CO2 output when your population keeping growing from immigration (both legal and illegal).
" For the foreseeable future, immigration will fuel US population growth"
https://thehill.com/opinion/immigration ... on-growth/
" for the first time in America’s history, the demographic contribution of immigration has surpassed natural increase, which is simply the difference between births and deaths. "

A carbon tax is by definition the cheapest, most comprehensive way to limit CO2. If we aren’t doing it, we aren’t serious.

Electric cars make a pitiful impact, really near zero. People have no concept of the energy mix. The biggest factors in man-made CO2 are agriculture/deforestation and building heating. Freight is next. Personal transport is a tiny slice of the CO2 problem.

People living in a 5,000 square foot house, flying >75,000 leisure miles per year, and buying 2 Teslas think they are saving the world. This is a psychological issue of wealthy high-status people. An electric car is a pill to make them feel better about themselves.

But hey, I guess we have to start somewhere. $1000 phones for rich idiots (phones everybody laughed at) did end up changing the world. So I’m open-minded. Maybe this does lead somewhere… eventually.

That is an opinion. Just doing a search gives me this -

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases

The above tells where the biggest greenhouse gases are. Even today, it is the U.S. which is the biggest emitter of the said gases

From your first link… cars and buses contribute 45% * 20% = 9% of human carbon emissions. So even if we double xar efficiency over the next 40 years, we will bend the curve by 4.5%. People actually think Teslas owned by a few people will solve global warming. They think it is significant. It’s not. But it might be a flag around which more serious carbon reductions are positioned. For example, heating Boston without emitting carbon. Promoting full reforestation of Massachusetts. India and China will of course be actively involved in this technology and will also use it.

Carbon tax being most efficient is a consensus of experts, not my personal view. You point that the west emitted most of the carbon in the atmosphere today is correct, especially per capita. No question. And it’s also relevant to point out that today, looking forward, Asia will need to upgrade its technology too. The west doing so now will not fix the problem.

People always talk about air pollution but don't mention another aspect of pollution...water. I wonder where India and China rank there. Also, how can China be low on air pollution when their cities have crisis days?

LCDFlight wrote:

pune wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

A carbon tax is by definition the cheapest, most comprehensive way to limit CO2. If we aren’t doing it, we aren’t serious.

Electric cars make a pitiful impact, really near zero. People have no concept of the energy mix. The biggest factors in man-made CO2 are agriculture/deforestation and building heating. Freight is next. Personal transport is a tiny slice of the CO2 problem.

People living in a 5,000 square foot house, flying >75,000 leisure miles per year, and buying 2 Teslas think they are saving the world. This is a psychological issue of wealthy high-status people. An electric car is a pill to make them feel better about themselves.

But hey, I guess we have to start somewhere. $1000 phones for rich idiots (phones everybody laughed at) did end up changing the world. So I’m open-minded. Maybe this does lead somewhere… eventually.

That is an opinion. Just doing a search gives me this -

https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-transport

https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/greenhouse-gases

The above tells where the biggest greenhouse gases are. Even today, it is the U.S. which is the biggest emitter of the said gases

From your first link… cars and buses contribute 45% * 20% = 9% of human carbon emissions. So even if we double car efficiency over the next 40 years, we will bend the curve by 4.5%. People actually think Teslas owned by a few people will solve global warming. They think it is significant. It’s not. But it might be a flag around which more serious carbon reductions are positioned. For example, heating Boston without emitting carbon. Promoting full reforestation of Massachusetts. India and China will of course be actively involved in this technology and will also use it.

Carbon tax being most efficient is a consensus of experts, not my personal view. Your point that the west emitted most of the carbon in the atmosphere today is correct, especially per capita. No question. And it’s also relevant to point out that today, looking forward, Asia will need to upgrade its technology too. The west doing so now will not fix the problem.

At least we are in agreement somewhere and that is progress. While you think that the e-mobility revolution is limited to cars, it actually goes far beyond it, and not just e-mobility but even industrial processes as well as heating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nbsPXqr_4A

You talked about freight, even that is being based on e-mobility -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qag-AxNPhg&t=2s

If people think that only cars will go through the electric revolution, for e.g.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu0Wb2pP3hQ

and

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_k59bnetO68