A speed limit to reduce fossil fuel consumption?

The question of a general speed limit on German autobahns has been on our minds for a long time. However, due to the war in Ukraine, the prices for fossil fuels are constantly rising to new record highs every day. If possible, drive as energy-efficiently as possible and generally reduce your journeys. Demands to introduce an immediate speed limit are becoming more and more frequent. As a reaction to the raw material situation, the rising prices and to flush Mr. Putin less money into the (war) coffers.

High fuel prices

Tempo 100 on highways is not new

I belong to the generation that can still vaguely remember the first oil crisis. That was in 1973 and brought 4 car-free Sundays. There was also a speed limit, which is largely forgotten today. The maximum speed on the freeway was 100 km/h, on country roads you were allowed to drive at a maximum of 80 km/h. The restrictions were limited to 6 months.

Then the oil crisis was considered over, the dependence on fossil fuels was quickly eliminated, and (almost) everything went on as before. Until then, only 6 years later, the next oil crisis surprisingly knocked on the German front door.

Not much has changed since then. Of course, our cars are generally equipped with more efficient technology compared to 1973. We gamble away some of their advantages by putting ever heavier and larger vehicles in front of the garages. And we treat raw materials as if they were infinite.

Now the discussion about a speed limit on motorways is getting going again. Against the background of the Ukraine war and the fact that Germany (and its government) probably don't have the courage to give up Russian oil completely. A reduction in daily needs would be a viable way to reduce the daily transfers to Moscow.

Cut Russian oil imports by a third

Greenpeace has a catalog with immediate measures released to reduce German oil consumption by 10-12%. As a result, implementation would eliminate a third of Russian imports. The core demands are 100 km/h on motorways and 80 km/h on country roads. Voluntary home office use and not taking every second private car trip are also part of this.

Is this enforceable? What must not be forgotten in the noise of war are two things. The enormously high fuel prices are a feast for the Federal Minister of Finance. Every visit to the gas station fills the tills. More than half of what the driver pays goes to the state for various taxes and environmental levies. And the price of fuel is now close to where the ruling Green Party wanted it to be.

What are the effects of increased fuel prices on the road? Currently - if you are on the A3 in the Frankfurt area - you don't feel much of it. As always, the majority drives within the recommended speed range of 130 km/h. But the usual suspects, who are always in a hurry, still clear the left lane without scruples.

Would a speed limit be an option to make at least a small solidarity contribution in response to the attack on Ukraine? With Tempo 100 on the highway, so that the transfers to the Russian oil companies are reduced? And should the speed limit only apply temporarily for the duration of the war?

Or do we want to accept the speed limit forever? In order to generally reduce dependency on fossil fuels?

Saab drivers certainly do not belong to the left-track faction. Older cars are generally moved more carefully and with less use of resources. What do the readers think of the situation? Vote and give your opinion!

A speed limit to save fossil energy?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Speed ​​limit only temporarily or generally?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

36 thoughts on "A speed limit to reduce fossil fuel consumption?"

  • blank

    The German discussion about the speed limit reminds me a lot of the American discussion about gun laws. It is mostly the sensitivities of individuals and lobbies that speak against it. Facts such as environmental protection and road safety are put into perspective here. The speed limit, like gun ownership, is often seen as one of the last few freedoms. As long as we debate for decades whether and how to save the environment (yes, in this case it's not about the environment, it's about Russia) and which sector should start with it, we are not ready to save the environment. And that is very unfortunate and highly irresponsible.

    2
    3
    • blank

      Thank you.
      I find that to be very good. A nice post. Other parables didn't open up to me at all...
      What does a speed limit have to do with lighting, night-time "light pollution"?
      Why do the lights have to go out all over Germany before you can even think about a speed limit?

      It's as if you could throw your beer bottles further into the landscape as long as there are water bottles. One crime legitimizes the other.

      You should have submitted your valuable comment earlier. I think he would have influenced the discussion significantly and positively. But better late than never. So thank you!

  • blank

    You didn't understand something there. Who even talks about 300 km/h? I am not worthless in the job market, the opposite is the case!. Existential fears are alien to me. That is not the point. I contribute to the fact that large parts of the population in Germany are doing well. I fulfill expectations that you also expect. Anyway, you don't understand. I could have guessed. Mr Volvo??

    • blank

      It just scares me when someone feels the pressure to go faster (!)...

      That's how I understood your reasoning and the reference to the pensioners.

      By the way, you save by driving faster. surprisingly little time. Often you are still standing at the petrol pump and see a truck on the motorway that you overtook half an hour earlier.

      There is a valid rule of thumb according to which a 10% higher speed requires around 30% more performance (and correspondingly more energy). You can easily understand this formula within the Saab world. A 9-5 2.0t has 150 hp and can do 210 km/h. A deer Aero has 300 hp and doesn't do 420 at full throttle, but "only" 259 ...

      30% more fuel, for 10% more speed. One can start pondering how quickly it must or may be - be it to transfer less money to Russia or in the name of people and the environment.

      3
      3
    • blank

      PS

      Here's another nice riddle that fits the topic very well...

      You drive a leisurely lap at an average speed of 100 km/h in a racing car to explore the track.
      How fast do you have to drive the second lap to have an average speed of 2 km/h after 200 laps?

      The right answer will knock your socks off. Guaranteed …

      You would actually have to drive the second lap infinitely fast and in 0,0 seconds. Only then would you have reached the average speed of just 200 km/h. You have already spent all the time for this on the first lap.

      A nice headbutt, I think. It shows very clearly and impressively how silly it is to be stuck at full throttle...
      It doesn't give a fuck how fast your car is, or how important you are, how valuable your work or leisure time is. You might as well draw a line here and just accept that you could never step on the gas as much as you need to if you could do anything positive with more gas....

      It doesn't matter at all whether you are a retiree or socially valuable. What is certain, however, is that the world will certainly not recover from your hard-pressed gas pedal. If you come to a different point of view, then it is probably still mildly diagnosed with overconfidence ....

      • blank

        Super constructive comments. Great, good to see the many thumbs up. Great, you are the best, I have no doubt about that.

        • blank

          Yes, Mr Johl.

          Was that a constructive comment from you?
          It's not like comments here didn't get approval for a limit. Let's stick to the point and the pros and cons.

          I don't care about thumbs. Read the comments and make a tally of how many writers might agree with a speed limit (whatever the level), permanent or temporary. You are quite isolated with your categorical no.

          The thumbs? I haven't bet a single one myself. For ages and not three days anymore. A thumb is not an argument, not a constructive contribution, not a dialogue and is completely undifferentiated. You must have been very busy there anyway?
          If the arguments are missing, that's really good and you can falsify the statistics you like to believe.

          In Germany there has been a majority for a general speed limit on the BAB for many years. That's fact. Discussion and decision suffer only from the "right" height. This significantly distorts the discussion and the majorities …
          Well over 50% would agree 130 versus unreservedly. And then the approval gradually decreases. Around 50% would still agree 120 versus unreservedly. At 110 significantly less and at 100 almost only train drivers ....

          It's a pity that we can't discuss the subject objectively with you. The lobby is happy to build and sell EVs and nitros to your scale - unlimited and unlimited...

          Have fun with the many thumbs you collect with it. Is for a good cause and good for your own ego. And it's super constructive...

  • blank

    It was dark in the East, in the GDR. Poorly lit streets and no bright advertisements. It wasn't always so nice. Today, however, everything shines in abundance. Advertising, neon signs, anytime, all night long. Does not matter. Nobody talks about that. And I also agree with the previous speakers when it comes to heating the rooms. There are certainly many retirees here among the Saab drivers who have time and don't have to look after children, no longer have a responsible job and don't have to be at work very early every morning and then have to organize the day, lead a team have to and don't have to go out at night either. Congratulations to everyone who made it or never had to. In this capitalist society, which is geared to time pressure, a speed limit is not what we need. One should start with the senseless consumption of resources, not so much permanent neon advertising, reduction of the heating and also reduction, better renunciation of meat. Those who have to drive quickly in order to be able to do their job on time (of course when the freeways are free) should please be allowed to continue. When I'm on holiday in Denmark (referring to the post above), I'm also welcome to go very slowly at 100. No, I am absolutely against a speed limit. Incidentally, the number of traffic accidents was at its lowest in 2021.

    11
    1
    • blank

      Interesting worldview. Personally, 100 is too restrictive for me. I already wrote that. 120 is the minimum for me on the Autobahn. I would prefer 130...

      If it's 130, I can easily drive 140 according to the speedometer. The StVO does not threaten imprisonment, points, or horrendous fines...

      If, as is apparently the case with you, I had a job that I could no longer do just because the speed of the last free kilometers on the BAB is limited, then I would seriously ask myself what exactly I was doing there do for whom?

      You can't be serious that you would be worthless on the job market if you weren't allowed to travel at 300 km/h for the few kilometers that you can still do...

      And if it were, it would be the best pro-speed limit argument ever. It cannot and must not be that existential fears determine our driving style. We're not wild animals - at least I hope so...

    • blank

      Hmm – perhaps the much more important question is to reconsider such assumptions as 'my job is important' and 'that's responsible' and to figure that out more together than to continue doing things that have been lived or internalized in the past.
      And: nobody tells us to be geared to time pressure. There isn't the big monster 'society' that dictates what has to be how - society is we who make it up. And it is precisely those – we – are the ones who change when something bothers us, instead of remaining in the grip and complaining that times are hard and that time is scarce anyway. WE have it in our hands to change that. And then please do this as independently as possible and free from self-proclaimed educators who have not even asked before if I even want to be their child...

      • blank

        I do not want …

        I don't want to comment again!
        It annoys me myself. But the topic (hotly debated for 30 years without a solution) and the comments are just so damn exciting...

        You, Mr. Saabansbraten (cool name by the way), are truly a philosopher and a real asset. We don't always get to the same point, but I imagine that my intentions are not so dissimilar to yours. Who knows exactly? Anyway, I really appreciate your thoughtful comments and questions. I just had to get rid of it...

  • blank

    Everyone can immediately drive 100 km/h on the streets independently. Just turn on the cruise control and it works. Why do others have to determine how fast everyone can drive? Not every freedom has to be restricted that easily. Of course, my Saab is most economical at 90 in the slipstream of a truck. But I don't want to collect points and driving bans straight away if I drive a little faster at night. And every sporty drive is precisely documented at the pump. It seems to me that organizations like Greenpeace and Deutsche Umwelthilfe now want to enforce new bans on all motorists under the guise of the Putin war. Ultimately, they want to massively restrict individual mobility. People should be pressed into mass transport. The bans are mostly permanent, even if in a few years there will be more than enough synthetic fuels or hydrogen vehicles. I experience that every day in Stuttgart: It started with 80 km for air pollution control, then came 60 km/h. In the meantime, 40 km or 30 km on main traffic routes is the trend.

    14
    2
  • blank

    100 km/h would be a wrong number. When I think of the 1000km from Basel to Kiel that I want to cover in June, it would take forever.
    It would have to be 120 or 130 km/h, I could imagine that permanently.

    • blank

      ...this will take "forever"...
      Around HH there are enough construction sites that "restrict" traffic badly. Planning a supposedly favorable time of day or night might help ;-). 1000 km BAB is no longer a "pleasure". But this situation has existed for a long time. And yes, being annoyed on the BAB is also relative.

      • blank

        ... I'll be dreading Hamburg again soon ....
        And my mother (around 80) shortened her vacation on a North Sea island by 1 week "for my sake" so that I can pick her up again before the whole vacation starts (SH, NI, HB) ....

        Has it been like this before:
        Outward journey (through Hanburg) very early in the morning approx. 3.25 h …
        Straight back (only a few hours later) approx. 6,5 hours …. and mostly just because of Hamburg

  • blank

    I would be for immediate Putin transfer reduction. That sounds pretty good.

    But please only for a certain time, not for eternity.

    • blank

      Hello,
      my experiences with about 30.000 km driven in Denmark and about 8.000 driven km in Germany clearly show me that I can save around 15% (diesel). In addition, I'm more relaxed on the road because the traffic is floating. I have only had good experiences with such a limit.
      Regards Hubert

      5
      2
  • blank

    Hey everyone... my "simple" thoughts on this in general (with a bit of "precedence")

    … I can still remember my youth ….
    It was always said: "Close the doors, we're not heating for the stairwell!"
    And I also remember that it was cool in many rooms (especially at Grandpa's on the ground floor) and you usually wore sweaters everywhere in the house, but it was warmer in the kitchen and living room, for example (maybe that's where my comfortable temperature of max. 18 -19°C).
    Today, almost all of my acquaintances have "T-shirt weather" of about 23-24° everywhere in their apartments.

    Later, before I graduated from high school, I "learned" that, for example, energy costs are actually all calculated "wrongly" and they are "secretly subsidized" (especially at the expense of future generations) (through environmental, hidden and " repair costs", etc.).
    There are enough comprehensible examples today (keyword “repository” of nuclear waste, perpetual costs, etc.)

    I would actually have liked to drive fast in the past (if I had had the right car).
    Now I have a fast car (Swedish Mexican from 2011; which will remain my “daily” for many years to come), but I prefer to drive it moderately (soon back to the coast and back on 1 day).

    I tend to find too many restrictions rather stupid, but I can live with it very well with speed limits (and other things)!
    (and here again, for example, from friends: several would like a Tempo30 zone in front of their house "because of the children and in general"; but if such a zone is somewhere else and these friends often use the route to work or home, they will find it Restriction because exactly at this point often "completely stupid").

    I think (which is also the case with some acquaintances) the attitude “yes terrible, but what should I do about it on my own” or “.. should the others do something first” or similar.
    (an acquaintance considers himself to be very social and environmentally conscious, but finds FFF ridiculous, flies 2-3x on vacation for sports (and 1-2x abroad for family), races like a madman if possible and is happy every 2-3 years about his new Leasing AMG Merci).

    Personally, however, I am of the opinion that everyone is “responsible” with everything they do (also for everything else, such as career decisions, dealing with “radical” people in their circle of acquaintances, stocks, etc.).
    And that sometimes means – if you want to be “critical” – your own inconveniences or limitations or limitations.
    (So ​​I no longer buy from Amazon, nothing from Nestle, Müller Milch, Tönnies and many more; it takes a little more effort, but it's worth it to me personally).

    To get back to the topic of the post (and also completely unrelated to the Ukraine war):
    Almost all other countries have speed limits.
    And driving there is often more relaxed than, for example, on German autobahns (keyword "Autobahn" USA).
    Therefore (and especially in the interest of the environment and future generations) I can live very well with a speed limit!
    (and I would also accept higher fuel costs if necessary ... I would just have to adapt my cherished habits a bit ... and I think that's what only bothers many about such topics)

    So, now I can be "bashed" .... 😉

    11
    1
    • blank

      thrash?

      But who, how and why? These are all accurate observations and valid thoughts. Just asking about the cardigan or the Norwegian sweater in the adjoining room is ingenious and gets to the heart of the zeitgeist and madness...

      Anyone who has a cool basement today that can only be entered in winter with felt slippers and a pullover or used as a workroom is considered an environmental pig. Apples feel good there for months without any further energy supply...
      But anyone who has 24 degrees in the elaborately insulated hole in the ground and is still sweating in a T-shirt fighting for his onions with A+++ cooling devices against heating and insulation is considered exemplary. I would like to see the energy balance of both scenarios.

      How much energy does a second or third fridge save compared to just one fridge? How much energy does one or the other basement heater save compared to an unheated basement? How much energy does an insulated basement save compared to an uninsulated one? Why can't a cellar just be cold and save on a second or third refrigerator?

      Is not "efficient" enough. Doesn't get an A+++ label or KfW funding. But somehow it was just as good and right.

      We're on an over-regulated path of madness...

      • blank

        Thank you for your "positive" answer. 🙂

        But as you can see, not everyone likes my post. 😉

        2 more examples on the “general” topic:

        In the past as “Steppke” I went to the butcher “next door” with my mother (really only about 100m away) and we bought some sausage (usually a maximum of only 2 or 3 different ones) BY SLICED.
        Today there are “thousands” of types of sausage “by the kilo” in the fridge (unfortunately, from time to time I do too.. “Organic” or “from the region” doesn’t help either). 🙁
        And? Was it really that much worse before?
        My best friend is a self-employed construction engineer.
        His father was a civil servant, his mother worked in various "shops".
        They always had "only" 1 car, only went on "longer" vacations every few years, had a normal apartment (and could only support 2 children in their studies "to a limited extent").

        Today, however, he finds that he can hardly manage his life and thinks he needs at least approx. € 10.000 !?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
        But he has, among other things, a huge half-timbered house (with property, outbuildings, "barbecue house", etc.), 2 cars, various four-digit mountain bikes for the son, tractors, various hobbies, often goes on vacation (also by plane), for example, also has 3 refrigerators, etc ).

        I, on the other hand, generally think that in recent years (or decades) our standards have increased so exorbitantly (and I, UNFORTUNATELY, don't exclude myself here and there; see some of them above or Tinnef like "made-to-measure" shirts from Poland), that we have often lost sight of real “needs”. In general, we live in Germany not so badly/badly.

        I've been trying to get "a little better" in general over the last few years.
        Here and there I succeed, here and unfortunately (and probably in the majority) probably still not. 🙁

        • blank

          Yes, the sausage 😉 ...

          And retail. A lot has changed and you bring back memories. Not everything was better in the past, but some things were fine the way they were...

          As a stepke, I lived in the suburbs. A small-town shopping street about 1,5 km long, about 500 m from my parents' house. All shops there were therefore max. 2 km away and there was simply absolutely everything there. The shops were highly specialised. In one there were only potatoes (3 or 4 good types, also floury) and eggs. In another, only paints & varnishes, or only screws, bolts, nuts & nails, but in every imaginable shape & size (including inch dimensions). And so forth …

          Depending on the shop, the way there and back was at least one and a maximum of 4 km. About a model car in 1:87. There was everything. And everything was within walking distance!

          Today I live near this "shopping street" again, coincidentally at a similar distance to the other end. And there is almost nothing there anymore. No screws, no paint, no strips, no sports or shoe shop, no Christmas trees or trucks for the H0 model railway, no lamps, no more nothing. But a gastronomic oversupply of questionable quality of hot and greasy shit. Those who want to eat "Thai" and find Thai basil, mint, fresh coriander, galangal, lemongrass and fine strips of fresh lime leaves all superfluous, those who like to pay more for less will even find what they are looking for.

          For purchases, on the other hand, you have to rely on a car or shipping. Almost nothing can be done on foot (here). You have to go to the supermarkets and hardware stores. And if only to find out there that you are not served at all, that your personal desire for paint, wood profile or the size of screws does not fit into the "prey scheme".

          And to get back to the point…
          There's amazing stuff in supermarkets. But that is then sold in 60 to 80 g packs and there is more plastic than meat on the market. That's terrible. The butcher at the counter, who was able to fold the desire for quality, for diversity and thus a whole range of cold cuts for a whole and enjoyable week carefully and sorted into wax paper and hand the whole range over the counter in a single, very thin-walled bag, saved us a lot of rubbish and wasn't that bad at all...

          Personally, I'm increasingly buying whole salamis. That reduces the garbage a little bit. With other cuts, however, it becomes difficult. Cheese in one piece is also quite good and hassle-free. But beyond salami and hard cheese?

          The insanity of packaging and waste, as well as changed structures in retail, is having an impact. First I have to drive the car in order to be able to reach an offer that was previously available on foot as a matter of course. Then, in order to even notice it, I have to swallow almost any minimum amount and the amount of packaging material involved. Cooked ham under 200g and not sealed in 20 to 40g plastic is simply not available depending on the supermarket. And so forth …

          Not everything was better in the past, but many a "Steppke" used to save a hell of a lot of CO2 and packaging. It can't be entirely wrong to remember that, too.

  • blank

    perforce

    On this question, I vote for yes and if so then yes - in equal parts out of conviction and against a healthy eye ...

    I am in favor of a speed limit and maintaining it, if only because it makes over-motoring of 2 to 3 tonne battery projectiles completely superfluous.

    Currently, at least in sections, 80, 100 and even 120 apply to federal highways. 120 also on the BAB, for example with a reference to noise protection, lack of emergency lanes, inclines, declines, curves, whatever ...

    For me, 120 for freeways would be something like the sweet spot for a general speed limit. And it would trigger a positive forest dieback (forest of signs).

    A similar forest dieback would also bring about general 80 on federal roads. But then please also consider the well-developed sections and where 120 are allowed today, allow 100 in the future. That would be my personal ideal for permanently valid limits on country roads and motorways. Very Swedish, funnily enough...

    What I miss and what I have to keep thinking about are the completely stalled biofuels in Germany. There are the legally prescribed admixtures, from 5 to 10%, but as we all know, petrol and diesel can be operated with 85 or even 100% vegetable fuel without any problems. Against the background of dependence on Putin's "fossils", the fact that this path was stalled hurts twice. But it also hurts in terms of environmental and climate policy if we do not use forestry, agricultural and household waste as completely as possible for ethanol and biogas.

    9
    2
    • blank

      I'm happy to sign that. Especially the one with the forest of signs. And at junctions, 80 are allowed instead of 70. And: Trucks should then also drive 80 on country roads. Then it's smoother.

      As far as biofuels are concerned: I didn't think I'd be happy about a SAAB BioPower again. At the end of March we will go to Switzerland by car. With a full tank of Super 98 I can get as far as Scheibenhard in France, where I can fill up with E85. Will there be another change in Germany in this regard? A lot seems to be possible at the moment, I'm amazed at the many positive activities.

  • blank

    Basically, I still want to decide for myself what I do. If the law changes, we all have no choice anyway. In addition, more or less all countries with large oil reserves are problematic. Apart from Norway. But that's another story.
    I've been following some extreme long-distance drivers for a while, once a Tesla and then the Mini driver who has already clocked up 1,2 million kilometers on his Skoda Fabia and now has 640km on the Mini, all with minimal wear and tear. This is due to resource-saving treatment, which is also very important to us Saab drivers due to a lack of supplies. For distances no longer than 000km and when there is time, I have been doing this for some time, driving in the right lane at 150-85, depending on how the trucks or buses are driving in front of me. I save quite a bit of fuel, almost never have to brake and the loss of time to the Austrian 105-140 is relatively small. However, longer distances than 150km without distance cruise control and other aids are tiring. But I don't drive it that often at the moment. A week ago, I drove to the gas station to fill up the diesel, and the liter “still” cost €150. Now it's €1,59 there. The car has been in the garage ever since. Thanks to a nationwide parking sticker in Vienna, we now only drive publicly in the city, which saves a little fuel.
    Now, when I go to my petrol station around the corner, I'm glad that the fuel didn't rise to €2, but is still €1,99. But who knows for how much longer?

  • blank

    ...I'm against it, if it works once then we'll do it next so as not to flush money into the war chests of the sheikhs, the Texans or whoever. Or just to push through green ideologies!
    If you want, you can drive slowly...

    12
    4
    • blank

      A topic that speaks for a speed limit in addition to higher energy efficiency has not yet been considered here.
      Autonomous driving!
      If this is to become the future, we will not be able to avoid a nationwide speed limit. Whether you want it or not. The speed differences on the lanes of the autobahn are enormous in Germany. This makes automated driving even more complex. There must be a uniform European regulation for car manufacturers.
      And that could mean a maximum of 130km/h on the Autobahn, for example.
      Apart from the fact that you shouldn't drive so fast with an electric car anyway in order to conserve the battery range.
      For my part, I like to drive fast.
      But trips to France and Denmark show that the range of a normal diesel increases significantly at 130 KMH.
      I could get used to it and there are many good reasons for that.

      • blank

        Autonomous driving requires 5G nationwide. I'm afraid it will take time to achieve that. But yes, things will change in general, if only because of the option of autonomous driving.

        • blank

          I hadn't thought of that at all, but of course it's correct. On the other hand, it is already clear that autonomous driving will never exist across the board. Why, just as there is little entitlement to nationwide mobile telephony (there are coverage requirements for 5G, but not 100%), there is also a need for nationwide autonomous driving.
          Maybe when the Bundeswehr is dependent on it, but by then the special fund will probably have been used up ...

          • blank

            Should the Bundeswehr ever need a nationwide G5 standard, it would be best for us to get rid of it completely and very quickly...

            Anyone who immediately loses their orientation locally or globally on land, on water or in the air without a pacifier is not worth a cent anymore. Especially not an additional €100 billion. And there are special debts (!), not an (accumulated) "special fund" ...

            You have to look damn closely at the moment to see who is saying what, why and how exactly...

            The, the, that. Why, why, why? Who dont asks stays dump! Sesame Street is over now, make up your own mind!

            I really hope that our defense isn't already so dependent and fragile today? Perhaps one should quickly download all the "analogue" knowledge on navigation and ballistics available on Wikipedia and print it out several times? Who knows? Maybe we're already at that point?
            They scare me 😉

            • blank

              Assets and debts depend on your point of view: for the Bundeswehr it is assets, for the citizens it is debt. However, when inability meets wealth, it will probably soon be wealth in the accounts of consulting firms, I would suspect.
              And if you're going to want autonomous drones, autonomous military vehicles aren't that far-fetched now. Since the requirements for military autonomy in combat will not necessarily require observing lanes and priority rules, these vehicles cannot drive autonomously in the civilian environment, or at least have to be integrated there somehow, or use the civilian system for it right away.
              But then we're probably no longer talking about 5G, but about 36G, to add a little pun...

              • blank

                😉

    • blank

      …green ideologies…
      The fact is, all (!) areas of public and private life are allowed to change in an environmentally friendly way.
      Otherwise it won't work.
      The (possibly beloved) "mobile metal box" should also do its bit. 😉

      • blank

        As long as e-fuels, E85, E100, autogas, thorium reactors, CO2 separation and other technical solutions not mentioned are installed in the energy transition, what is happening right now remains ideology for me. 🙁
        Even if I'm against a speed limit, I'm a self-confessed slow driver, I think about 90% of my journeys. But also enjoy going over 200 km/h when the route is free, or reeling off the holiday trip to the Baltic Sea at 150-160 cruising speed on the AB.

        • blank

          ..so that means as long as...technical solutions...are not built into the energy transition

          • blank

            Okay, we overlapped there 😉

        • blank

          I don't understand the comment...

          Did you want to write, "as long as (...) and other technical solutions not mentioned are NOT incorporated into the energy transition (...)."?

          So it would make sense to me and I would see it similarly. The energy turnaround needs more diversity, a whole variety of solutions, in order to implement it sensibly – in order to be able to implement it at all. We need a whole range of both technical and natural, biological solutions. Wind, sun and batteries alone are not enough. That has long been an established fact. For hard-core ideologues, however, such demands are still quasi blasphemy and the earth is flat. Anyone who thinks outside the box of sun, wind and batteries is an infidel and a heretic...

Comments are closed.