It has to be zero emissions “synthetic fuel” though. So if you use methane it has to be biogas and not natural gas.

The rule is zero emissions for new cars sold in the EU starting 2035. So plug in hybrids are allowed as long as they only use e-fuels. Methane steam reformed hydrogen would also be allowed, as long as the methane does not come from fossil fuels.

deleted by creator

Sorry, but the fact of the matter is that the EU has a ban on fossil fuel cars starting 2035. The EU parliament is very likely going to have a coalition of EPP, Renew and S&D with maybe some support of the Greens or some groups from ECR. S&D and Renew are mostly pro ban. France just voted in a more left leaning parliament as well. So the Council is very likely to remain pro ban and it takes a qualified majority to change that law. There is basically no way to get the ban removed before the car manufacturers have to make the big investments into new EV factories.

This is CEOs preferring short term profits to make themself richer, while destroying the future of their companies.

Also they are easier to spot.

Universal health care is not EU wide. Quite a few countries do not have that. Bulgaria sits at 15% uninsured for example. PTO is nice, but it is really just a way of paying out money. In the end it hardly matters. If you earn more on the days you work, then it ends up being roughly the same. Mutual assistance is very very loose. Plenty of EU countries have no problem whatsortever to send refugees to die. Homelessness is much more common in the EU then in the US.

At the same time the EU has with Hungary a full blown dictatorship. Far right governments are ruling multiple member states already and are systematically removing workers rights. Greece just introduced the 6 day work week and eliminated a lot of worker protections as well.

I am thinking of states like California, Oregon and Hawaii. As for EU countries I am thinking of Hungary, Italy or Slovakia for example. As for further left that to me means giving more power to the majority of the population. Be that economic or political. Last time I checked none of those US states were activly trying to turn the states themself into dictatorships, which has been very much the case for those EU members.

Honestly many US states are further left then many EU countries and at least try to do some good work for the enviroment.

Looking at the insanely fast built up of renewables in China, we will see coal consumption collapse in the coming years.

Obviously they are in the pockets of big data.

This ignores all solar under 20MW, which is for many countries most of new solar capacity.

Which takes time to do and Labour can just change the law, if need be.

How is it risky?

A Biden donor event, where Biden and Alex Jones fight to the death. All on a livestream and tv. It being offical presidental business it would be legal according to SCOTUS for Biden to kill Jones. Whatever the outcome the Democrats presidential candiate will be seen as fit as well. If Biden looses, Jones is being thrown into prison.

And people say Trump is a showman…

The protests are already breaking a lot of the fossil fuel industry. The simple truth is that the inflation reduction act means cheap American EVs on a massive scale. That removes most of the US oil consumption. Renewables and gas have taken out most coal electricity generation in the US and renewables are starting to kill gas as well. So local demand in the US for oil and gas is going to fall in the coming years

So by blocking or just delaying exports, this is becoming a rather large problem for the US.

That is on top of China investing a lot into renewables and the EU being probably even further along, with some fairly powerfull legislation. Seriously we are getting very close to peak emissions and that means the death of the fossil fuel industry is starting.

Hence the EU thinks about just forcing them to use it.

to developers that they could fit another 2 or 3 stores in a lot that was previously going to be dedicated to parking

That is exactly my point. Underground parking adds 35-50% to a mid rise building construction cost. That means people have the choice between larger or cheaper units without a parking spot and more expensive ones with a parking spot. Even with underground parking mid rise buildings are already cheaper then single family housing. Especially ifthe area we are talking about has high land prices, like pretty much every city.

Imho the best policy is to require a permanent parking space close to the main residence of the person owning the car. With permanent access I mean that the space is only to be used for the car and has to be either rented or owned by the person using it. This is rather easy to do in a rural setting, but much harder the more urban the area becomes.

The next part is making access worse for cars. Place parking further away from interesting destinations then bicycle parking and public transport access. Like having bicycle racks right next to the shop doors. That also includes just removing parking as much as possible. Besides handicap spots obviously. Also modal filters to block cars to move through certain streets, but allow bicycles and pedestrians to use those. That can also mean one directional roads.

Slow down cars as much as possible. When cars are as fast as bicycles, cars loose a massive advantage. This has to be done using built infrastructure and not just street signs, but those are an important start. So narrow roads, little viewing space and speed bumps. Also traffic lights are a good option. Give priority to other forms of transport(default green for pedestrians and bicycles for example).

Macron actually did some good work on reducing single use plastic using a presedential decree. That would very likely be reversed under RN.

A war over Taiwan would at first be a naval conflict. Ukraine does not need many anti ship weapons and does not get many as well. Those factories are mainly free.

For many other systems the West is running at capacity and increasing it. Air defence missiles for example. Taiwan has Patriot and it would only be a matter of moving production to Ukraine to Taiwan instead to make it work. The West has jets, so there are other options of winning the air war. Ukraine currently gets F-16. So no longer as much needed and maybe the Europeans could intervene with a few jets, if need be. Similar story for a lot of other weapon systems. Increased production in Europe, which can be delivered to Taiwan.

Then you have use of weapons. It is much more likely that Taiwan will be allowed to strike China right away. No discussion as we saw in Ukraine.

Also yes China is not ready. They have to win the naval war and then be able to land. Invading Taiwan is much harder then invading Ukraine over what is flat open ground.