Home Industry News Can Stockholm’s Bold Move in Banning Both Petrol and Diesel Cars Set a Global Precedent?

Can Stockholm’s Bold Move in Banning Both Petrol and Diesel Cars Set a Global Precedent?

0
Can Stockholm’s Bold Move in Banning Both Petrol and Diesel Cars Set a Global Precedent?

The Shocking Truth: Why Smoking and ICE Cars Must Be Banned Immediately

In the last two decades, civilized European countries have taken a stand against smoking in public places, recognizing the harm it causes to everyone’s health. However, the same logic has not been applied to the banning of Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) cars in urban areas, despite the undeniable evidence of their detrimental effects. Thankfully, Stockholm has emerged as a pioneer in this movement, and it’s only a matter of time before other European capitals follow suit. Sorry, Big Auto, but common sense will prevail.

The Delayed Smoking Ban and the Outrageous Impact of Second-Hand Smoke

It is truly outrageous that it took so long for the smoking ban to be implemented. For decades, innocent people, including children, have suffered from the effects of second-hand smoke. The fact that scientific and medical proof of smoking causing cancer was either ignored or downplayed is scandalous. Nowadays, we are rightly outraged when someone smokes indoors or near children.

Banning Smoke – A Common Sense Approach

Banning smoke in areas where it can harm others is simply a matter of common sense. There are far more non-smokers in the world than smokers, and allowing the minority to harm the majority is not an option. As evidence of the harm caused by smoking continues to mount, it becomes clear that imposing taxes on cigarettes is not enough. Smoking must be banned altogether.

The Tyranny of Smoking and the Autocracy of Ignoring Others’ Rights

Some may argue that a smoking ban is a form of tyranny. However, the fundamental rule of democracy is that one person’s freedom ends where another person’s freedom is under attack. While smokers have the right to endanger their own health, they do not have the right to endanger the health of others. Enforcing the right to smoke around non-smokers, disregarding common sense and logic, is a form of autocracy.

Burning Fuels in ICEs – Worse Than Smoking

What have we learned from the smoking debate? Taxing cigarettes has proven to be costly for society without effectively curbing the habit. The tobacco industry has fiercely fought against any attempts to regulate smoking. While a step-by-step anti-smoking strategy may yield results in the future, completely eradicating smoking seems unlikely.

It is highly likely that smoking and the manufacturing of tobacco products will be restricted in the future to prevent harm to others and the environment. Smoking may be banned in outdoor areas, with limited designated spaces for smokers. Increasing the cost of cigarettes may also deter more people from taking up the habit. However, is such a compromise feasible when it comes to fossil fuel-based fuels and internal combustion engines (ICEs)?

The Case Against ICE Cars: The Math and the Reality

Let’s do some simple math to understand the true impact of ICE cars on pollution levels. The latest Euro 6d emission standards require petrol and diesel engines to emit no more than 0.0045 g/km of fine particulate matter (PM). Modern cars usually emit around ten times less, with approximately half of it being PM2.5 particles.

Considering an average daily distance of 32 km in Europe, a car emits around 6,000 micrograms of PM2.5 daily. That equates to around 260 micrograms per hour, ten times more than the equivalent pollution exposure from smoking a cigarette. In other words, driving a car in Europe daily is like smoking a whole pack of cigarettes.

When you factor in the number of cars on the road, it becomes evident that Europeans are unwittingly inhaling the smoke from over 250 million cigarette packs each day. This is in addition to the 100 million packs consumed by smokers. Essentially, almost two-thirds of Europeans are unknowingly smokers. The magnitude of this issue is truly alarming.

Banning ICE Cars – The Logical Step

Considering that city centers are typically the most densely populated areas, it is only logical to ban ICE cars from these zones. Just as smoking is banned indoors rather than merely taxed, the same principle should apply to car emissions. However, it’s important to recognize that people are not only exposed to these emissions in city centers but also where they live and spend their time.

Therefore, the ban on ICE cars should extend beyond city centers to encompass the whole urban area. Cars powered by engines that release harmful pollutants should no longer be allowed in any part of the city. This approach is not only consistent with the goal of protecting public health but also aligns with the parallels drawn from the smoking ban.

The Future of ICE Cars – A Trend Sparked by Stockholm

I firmly believe that other capital cities will soon follow Stockholm’s lead in banning ICE cars. The only effective solution to reduce emissions in urban areas is to replace ICE vehicles with Electric Vehicles (EVs) or Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEVs). The automobile industry and enthusiasts may resist this change and argue for the adoption of hybrid vehicles as a compromise, but the evidence clearly shows that a complete transition away from ICE cars is necessary.

The “ICE ban” subject is far from settled, but Stockholm has certainly sparked a new trend. It is worth noting that this movement was not influenced by Greta Thunberg or any other individual. So, dear ICE fans, it’s time to shift the blame elsewhere. The transition away from ICE cars is an essential step for the well-being of our planet and future generations. Let’s embrace this necessary change and work towards a cleaner and healthier future.

Note: The article is meant to convey the author’s passionate support for the ban on smoking and ICE cars and the urgency behind these issues. It is important to note that the author’s opinions are based on their interpretation of the available evidence and may not necessarily reflect the views of others.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here