> The most immediate and obvious cost is not being able to drive those cars that do not respect the limits

Wishful thinking. You can still drive the most extreme of polluting vehicles as long as they're old enough, or as long as their manufacturer cheated at emission tests (many recalls are still pending for years).

> as long as they're old enough

old enough as in 30 years old at least

there are very few of them

and usually they can't be trusted to commute everyday

> as their manufacturer cheated at emission tests

that's universally true.

there was an article yesterday about Tesla Y built with cheap material and rooftop flying away while driving

I guess it can be considered dangerous too

Carbon emissions and units of currency are not fungible.

So unless some of that tax is intended to be a carbon tax and works to incentive cleaner alternatives, then this is a pretty weak argument.

Also, the producers aren't paying he cost, end users are[1] and without much in the way of alternatives.

1. always do, but you get where I'm coming from

> So unless some of that tax is intended to be a carbon tax and works to incentive cleaner alternatives, then this is a pretty weak argument.

Of course the incentive is towards cleaner alternatives, in my country is public transport (trains, trams and subway are electric here).

> Also, the producers aren't paying he cost

fiscal incentive for EV go straight to car producers pockets, I don't see the difference

taxing owners is a way to drive them to buy a different product, cheaper for the buyer and more profitable for the seller

it works both ways

Norway isn't a part of the EU.

Too simple a take on the relations between EU and Norway, here is a more comprehensive view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway%E2%80%93European_Union_...

In short, as much part of EU you can be without being part of it. Norway keeps the freedom on key areas like fishing rights and agriculture while essentially being part of everything else without voting rights. And in some partnerships also having voting rights due to their structure.

>Too simple a take on the relations between EU and Norway

It's just the truth. Norway is not a member of the EU. But I agree that it is good to have a strong understanding of what exactly the relationship is between Norway and the European Union.

Some of you may be noticed that the EU tends to make decisions that are acceptable to the countries that pay.

The truth is that except for some quite narrow fields, the EU decides a lot of things and Norway has to accept those things.

They're like Switzerland, which hemmeded and hawed about immigration from the EU, held a referendum deciding to block it, and then when the EU put an economic gun to their head, backed down and all EU citizens now have freedom of movement to Switzerland.

Freedom of movement (and a lot of other things) is guaranteed in the Bilateral I agreements [0] between the EU and Switzerland which are protected by a so-called guillotine clause [1]. The latter meaning that violation of any part of the agreement would void all of it.

The result of the referendum would definitely violate part of the agreement and the EU just reminded Switzerland of the consequences.

If anything it could be blamed on the initiators and supporters (SVP) of the referendum to not properly inform the populace of the consequences of a successful referendum.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Switzerland%E2%80%93European_U...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guillotine_clause

We've spent almost three decades negotiating and harmonising with the EU and still have plenty to work out afresh every year, so if the UK thinks it will tie up its divorce with a bowed ribbon in three months, the only word I have for that negotiating position is: brave.

Norway isn't part of the EU but is part of the EEA. It is through that membership that it's bound by the same as other EU countries economic agreements that through simplification people tend to associate with the EU.

Does it matter if 700 million people are under the same rules if a country of 5 is not?

ICE cars are not releasing CO2 for free, that's the point.

in Norway gas is heavily taxed as well

Germany plans to introduce a CO2 price and it won't end with cheaper fuel even though it is already quite expensive. The existing taxes aren't high enough to cover the CO2 price.