Wednesday, April 16, 2025

Polaris of Enlightenment

Ad:

No one escapes the chokehold of driving

The exaggerated climate crisis

Politicians make it purposefully and systematically increasingly difficult for ordinary people to have a car. Among other things, what can be expected in the future are more expensive cars, more expensive fuel, more expensive insurance and more expensive parking.

Published 19 January 2022
– By Tege Tornvall
Photo: Kathy/Unsplash
This is an opinion piece. The author is responsible for the views expressed in the article.

More expensive cars. Higher taxes. Only minor subsidies. More expensive fuel. More expensive electricity. More expensive insurance. More expensive parking. Fewer parking spaces. More traffic on streets and roads.

Motorists and car owners are expecting all of this in the future. Not even electric cars will escape it. And those who decide all of this are those in Sweden’s small Green Party, which at present in the Swedish Parliament is being given free rein for its generally anti-automobile views.

The Greens are not alone in disliking exhaust fumes, noise, and congestion. But apart from this, they also disapprove of anyone privately owning cars in the first place. They want us all to travel by public transport, by train or bus – or even better, to walk or cycle.

This may be suitable for fast and alert city-dwellers of an active age. The Greens’ ideal world seems to be one where there are thousands of sporty, brisk persons on the go, with porridge and carrot juice in the bag. But many more are not living this way, nor do they want to – nor could they.

This applies not least to everyone who contributes to the value and development of Swedish society through his or her labor. These are the people whose work contributes to child care, education, research, healthcare, elder care, policing, defense, and other community services. For them, time is a scarce commodity and distance an obstacle. They solve these problems using their own cars. They even do the labor of driving themselves, even though this usually goes unpaid (although it is taxed). Our politicians know this and start from in times of unrest.

But otherwise, private driving is a huge tax cow: it never runs out, since the need for private transportation is so great that it can rarely be met by public transportation alone.

Instead of thanking ordinary citizens for their service and facilitating the ownership and use of their own cars, the Swedish Parliament – and the government are responding with more restrictions and stricter fees.

This is what Swedish drivers’ everyday lives looked like in the autumn of 2021

 

Car prices

Only smaller gas and diesel cars cost less than SEK 300-350,000. Hybrids cost SEK 50-100,000 more than that. Pure electric cars of a practical size cost around half a million or more – but thus far their owners receive 70,000 kronor in bonuses.

Leasing

Smaller gas and diesel cars cost SEK 2-3,000 per month under a three-year contract. A few electric cars were being leased for around SEK 3,000 per month in order to entice more sales, but most of them cost at least 4-5,000 kroner per month. Companies can deduct Value-Added Tax from the price.

Tax

Everyone was paying SEK 360 per year. Gas and diesel cars result in a carbon dioxide tax of SEK 107 per gram and kilometer between 90 and 130 g/km. It is SEK 132 per gram over 130 g/km. Taxes increased in 2022: a VW Passat was SEK 1,700 more expensive, which equals SEK 9,000 per year. Electric cars receive their SEK 70,000 bonus, although there is no bonus for those that cost more than SEK 700,000. In 2023, the bonus will be reduced to SEK 50,000.

Fuel

Gas cost about 17.50 per liter in October, while diesel cost SEK 19. Price hikes were in progress, however. Drivers have a duty to reduce emissions, which means blending ethanol with the fuel. This will gradually increase until it reaches 28% by 2030 for gas, and 66% for diesel. This is worse for engines. Likewise, the lower energy content leads to higher consumption – meaning that it will also be more expensive.

Charging electric cars

Charging directly from the grid at 1.50 per kWh means that it costs approximately SEK 3 per mile. Using a charging box at home or at work, including installation, costs SEK 10-20,000. Over five years, that means 2-4,000 kronor per year, or about 1.50-3 kronor per mile. At the charging post, it is SEK 2-5 per kWh and SEK 4-10 per mile. Ionity tar 8.70 per kWh = 17.40 per mil. Additionally, parking fees may apply. It may be cheapest to charge at home, but this also means a limited range.

Parking

The countryside and smaller towns still often use a parking disc for free parking. The larger cities charge a parking fee that ranges from a few kronor all the way to 50 kronor per hour in Stockholm’s inner city. The purpose of this, as some MPs have openly stated, is quite simply to get cars out of the cities.

Garages

The rent per square meter is around SEK 500-1,000 per year = SEK 12 – 24,000 per year, and is higher in large cities. The cost also increases with demand.

Insurance

It is getting more expensive for more expensive cars, as well as due to the sensitive electronics that are increasingly being added to cars. The current crucial issue in relation to electronic driver assistance is the question of who is driving the car in the event of an accident.

Financing

Low interest rates provide cheap loans and make private leasing more interesting, but increasing pressure on higher interest rates could result in interest rates of 4-6% and higher borrowing costs within a few years.

Benefit cars

New rules are increasing the costs and reducing the deductions. There will be no difference between buying and owning a car privately – other than that you, as a private person, do not have to finance the deal. In return, you commit to a fixed monthly price during the contract period. The benefit reduces pensionable income.

Conclusion

Having a car is becoming more and more expensive, as well as more difficult due to taxes and regulations. In larger cities, extra costs can almost double the total cost. You can take a lot of taxis for the same price, but the car gives you more freedom – even in your working life.

 

Tege Tornvall

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Florida governor supports ban on weather manipulation

The exaggerated climate crisis

Published 4 April 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Ronald Dion "Ron" DeSantis, Florida's governor since 2019, is a strong critic of spraying aluminum, sulfates and other compounds into the air. The image on the right is illustrative.

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis expresses strong support for a bill to ban geoengineering and weather manipulation in the state, but criticizes the House of Representatives for watering it down.

The statement comes amid an ongoing debate on the health risks associated with these practices, in which the state’s health secretary Joseph Ladapo has also raised his voice.

Ron DeSantis has commented in an appearance on X on a bill by Senator Ileana Garcia that seeks to ban geoengineering, also called aerosol spraying, and weather manipulation in Florida.

The bill has passed the Senate Rules Committee by a vote of 20-4, but faced opposition in the House of Representatives, where amendments have been made that would allow these practices instead.

DeSantis is clear in his support for Senator Garcia’s initiative.

– Senator Ileana Garcia has a bill in the Florida Senate to ban geoengineering and weather manipulation in the state of Florida. I support the bill, he says.

He strongly criticizes the House of Representatives for their handling of the bill.

– The Florida House of Representatives has gutted Senator Garcia’s legislation, DeSantis adds, warning that a watered-down law could set the practice of geoengineering and weather manipulation.

Criticism of “kooky ideas” on climate solutions

The governor rejects ideas about manipulating the atmosphere to counter climate change.

– People got a lot of kooky ideas that they can get in and put things in the atmosphere to block the sun and save us from climate change. We’re not playing that game in Florida, he says.

DeSantis is now urging the public to put pressure on the House of Representatives.

I hope people will tell the House of Representatives in Florida: do not gut this bill, he concludes.

Surgeon general warns of risks

Florida’s surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo, has also spoken out on the issue and supports Senator Garcia’s work. In a post on X the same day, he writes: “These planes release aluminum, sulfates, and other compounds with unknown and harmful effects on human health”.

Ladapo emphasizes the importance of protecting Florida’s environment and residents. “We have to keep fighting to clean up the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat”, he adds.

Background geoengineering: Environmental and health concerns

The debate over geoengineering, also called aerosol spraying, has intensified in Florida following reports of potential health risks. According to data from US health advocate Mike Adams, samples from Florida's skies have indicated high levels of toxic metals such as aluminum, which is being linked to weather manipulation.

Four senators – Shevrin Jones, Lori Berman, Tracie Davis and Rosalind Osgood – voted against the bill in the Senate Rules Committee, which has drawn criticism from groups like Florida Sky Watchers, which accuses them of prioritizing partisan politics over environmental protection.

The House of Representatives, where Republicans hold a supermajority with 87 out of 120 seats, has, according to critics such as Christina Pushaw, chosen to support practices such as carbon storage instead of banning weather manipulation, which was seen as a controversial move.

In Sweden, the aerosol spraying debate has been completely dismissed by mainstream media as "conspiracy theories" despite the fact that spraying has also occurred in Sweden via the Esrange space base in Kiruna.

UK climate proposal: Less meat and more expensive flights

The exaggerated climate crisis

Published 5 March 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Air travel and meat eating are very harmful to the climate and need to be significantly reduced, according to the UK government's climate advisory body.

The UK government’s climate change advisory body, the Climate Change Committee, wants the island nation’s population to change their diets and start eating significantly less meat and dairy products.

In addition, flying will have to become much more expensive than it is today – in order to meet climate targets.

Or, under current legislation, the UK government must regularly put forward legally binding measures to reach its net-zero greenhouse gas emissions targets by 2050.

The CCC is tasked with making the proposals, and its latest report calls for UK emissions to be reduced to 87% below 1990 levels – to 535 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent for the period 2038-2042.

This would be an ambitious target, reflecting the importance of the task. But it is deliverable, provided action is taken rapidly”, the report argues.

Explosive electrification expected

According to the CCC, electrification and low-carbon electricity supply should account for the largest share of emission reductions. It wants to expand offshore wind power from today’s 15 GW capacity to 88 GW by 2040, but also double onshore wind power to 32 GW.

It estimates that three quarters of all cars and vans, and almost two thirds of all heavy trucks on the road, will be electric in 15 years – compared to only 2.8% of cars and 1.4% of vans in 2023. This shift will be “propelled by the falling cost of batteries”, it speculates.

It also believes that the electrification of domestic heating will be very rapid and estimates that half of UK homes will be heated by heat pumps by 2040 propelled by the falling cost of batteries compared to around one percent today.

Two fewer meat dishes a week

Better infrastructure should also encourage more people to choose alternatives to driving – while wanting to see “relatively large changes in price” on air travel to ensure citizens stay away from flying.

If airlines pass on the costs to customers, a return ticket from London to Spain could increase by around £150 by 2050, according to the report, which is touted as a positive and necessary measure.

In addition, Britons need to eat less meat. The authors of the report want to see a 25% reduction in meat consumption by 2040 – which means people eating two fewer meat dishes a week.

Meat production in particular is often singled out by those in power as a “climate villain”, and the CCC wants the country’s farmers to be financially compensated by the state for partially opting out of livestock farming to focus more on growing cereals and vegetables.

The government and MPs will now consider the report before voting on what the legally binding carbon budget should look like.

Climate activists’ lawsuit against Swedish state rejected by Supreme Court

The exaggerated climate crisis

Published 20 February 2025
– By Editorial Staff
Aurora promises to “continue to work feverishly to ensure that Sweden takes its legal responsibility” for the climate.

The climate alarmist group Aurora has sued the Swedish state, claiming that their human rights have been violated because the government has not taken sufficient measures to counteract alleged climate change,

The Supreme Court has now decided not to hear the case.

The approximately 300 activists claim that Sweden’s, in their view, inadequate climate action has violated their rights under the European Convention.

They argue that the state is not taking sufficient measures to combat climate change and that the state is not meeting certain stated climate objectives. They seek a declaration that the State is not taking certain specifically enumerated measures. In the alternative, they have requested the Court to order the State to take certain specified measures to reduce the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere”, writes the Supreme Court.

The Court writes that individuals with reference to the ECHR may indeed in some cases have the right to bring a climate action against the state but that in that case they must be able to show that they themselves have been adversely affected. The Supreme Court does not consider that these requirements have been met in the Aurora case.

It is a fundamental principle not to allow an action by individuals to defend public interests and climate change affects everyone. There are therefore very high requirements for individuals to have the right to bring such an action. Individuals are only entitled to judicial review if the State’s failure has caused sufficiently imminent and certain effects on their individual rights”, it says.

“Extremely stressed”

– The Supreme Court has thus concluded that the group members’ lawsuit, as it was formulated in the district court, cannot be tried, clarifies Judge Jonas Malmberg, emphasizing that no position has been taken on how different alternative scenarios would be assessed.

In the tabloid Aftonbladet, Aurora’s spokesperson, Ida Edling, states that she is “extremely stressed” by the Supreme Court’s decision because she believes that we “only have five years to reach the 1.5-degree target”.

– It is also important to say that the Supreme Court has not said anything about the legality of Swedish climate policy. They have only said that the Aurora case cannot be tried in Swedish courts, she continues.

– We need to analyze the decision, but we will continue to work feverishly to ensure that Sweden takes its legal responsibility to protect human rights. We are in a burning crisis. It is important that the whole society takes its responsibility, also legally to ensure that the state takes sufficient climate action, she concludes.

New research on the bovaer supplement amid a wave of criticism

The exaggerated climate crisis

Published 15 January 2025
– By Editorial Staff
The Danish Animal Welfare organization argues that cows risk being excluded from grazing pastures due to bovaer.

Further research will be carried out on the highly controversial feed additive bovaer, researchers at Aarhus University in Denmark have confirmed. The decision is based on the widespread criticism of the methane-reducing additive.

From the beginning of the year, all Danish dairy farms with more than 50 cows must use methane-reducing supplements in their feed. This can be done by adding more fat to the feed or by using the new supplement bovaer for 80 days per year. Swedish Arla has recently faced harsh criticism for its use of bovaer, with many calling for a boycott of the company.

The decision has been welcomed by some dairy farmers, but also faced strong criticism, especially against the bovaer, from, among others, the Danish Dyrenes Beskyttelse.

– We don’t know how it will affect them in the long term. At the same time, cows risk being locked up in stables all year round because the effect of the substance is more uncertain when they go to pasture, the organization states.

“Focus on animal welfare”

Earlier this week, Danish farmers also protested against, among other things, climate taxes, but also the compulsion to use bovaer for their cows.

Due to the widespread criticism, more research is being planned on the impact of bovaer on the health of cows, as well as on the milk and meat of the animals that receive the supplement.

– In the trials we have done so far, the focus has been on the effect on methane, feed intake and milk yield. Therefore, we will focus on animal welfare in the trials we will do in the new year, and we also need new research that provides a better understanding of what happens in the cow’s rumen when we use Bovaer and other effective methane-reduced feed additives, he tells Danish tjekdet.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Our independent journalism needs your support!
Consider a donation.

You can donate any amount of your choosing, one-time payment or even monthly.
We appreciate all of your donations to keep us alive and running.

Dont miss another article!

Sign up for our newsletter today!

Take part of uncensored news – free from industry interests and political correctness from the Polaris of Enlightenment – every week.