Thomas Engell

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Still don’t get it. Why in the world would I walk around in Copenhagen where I live and inhale anything that has been burned so inefficient as a combustion engine. 20% efficiency is what you have achieved from 150 years of technology development, and in ten years the electric motor has developed to near 90% energy efficiency and in Denmark outsold any ICE Vehicle.
People want more efficient, cheaper to run, easier to use, and yes cleaner air. None of those things an ICE vehicle will deliver on. Hence I bought a Tesla. Still build in Germany, efficient as nothing else and self driving with an AI controlling all vehicle functions.
The EU wants you to do better! I want you to do better!

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@elonmusk @denispleiades @yunta_tsai That one Elon is difficult, not saying impossible at all, but as a driver has to be in the vehicle supervising……. I don’t see it in Europe anytime soon
But hey I love the current version 14.2.2.6 in Denmark 🇩🇰 just has do deal better with cyclists 😃👍

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Har du set the great pacific garbage patch? Eller hvordan plastik opføre sig i fordøjelsessystemet på et dyr? Eks hvaler?
Plastik skruelåg er på top 3 (tælles i milliarder) af plastikstykker der estimeres at havne i naturen.
Fun fact; I Danmark spare vi naturen for 60 mio årligt ved at skruelåget sidder på.
Men hey, lad os hyle over lidt lovgivning der beskytter vores dyreliv.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@Hatsunehaj @GlobalDiss Great another bot 🤖🙈
The humans behind, zero intelligence 🤷

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Well Pieter Cleppe is incorrect

EU citizens don’t and the think tank mentioned is the ECFR which is an partly EU funded independent organisation

WELT: “70% reject the EU.” That is NOT what the survey shows.

The survey in question is the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) study “Future nostalgia: Europe’s unfinished song”, published on 9 September 2026. It is based on 5,834 AI-moderated interviews conducted in Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland.

The 68% figure that WELT turns into “70% rejection” refers to respondents describing Europe’s current situation as a deterioration or loss of normality. Only 12% described it as a European “awakening” or renewal.

That is not the same as saying that 68–70% reject the EU.

In fact, the survey presents a much more nuanced picture. Many Europeans want a stronger, more united and more self-reliant Europe, but have little confidence that Europe’s political leaders can actually deliver it.

This is what ECFR describes as an “imagination gap”: Europeans can imagine a better and stronger Europe, but struggle to see a credible path from today’s problems to that future.

Here is a link to the survey https://t.co/dar1mS873w…

Start reading before writing!

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

NO and you are very incorrect. The think tank behind the survey is the ECFR which is a partly EU funded independent organisation

WELT: “70% reject the EU.” That is NOT what the survey shows.

The survey in question is the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) study “Future nostalgia: Europe’s unfinished song”, published on 9 September 2026. It is based on 5,834 AI-moderated interviews conducted in Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland.

The 68% figure that WELT turns into “70% rejection” refers to respondents describing Europe’s current situation as a deterioration or loss of normality. Only 12% described it as a European “awakening” or renewal.

That is not the same as saying that 68–70% reject the EU.

In fact, the survey presents a much more nuanced picture. Many Europeans want a stronger, more united and more self-reliant Europe, but have little confidence that Europe’s political leaders can actually deliver it.

This is what ECFR describes as an “imagination gap”: Europeans can imagine a better and stronger Europe, but struggle to see a credible path from today’s problems to that future.

Here is a link to the survey https://t.co/dar1mS873w…

So Start reading before writing!

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Sorry but you need to separate EU from Belgian and check your knowledge of Dan Jørgensen as well as energy prices of renewable energy
It took some time an a little help from an AI to sort all your strings which are clearly a national view but not supported as evidence of something the EU as fault. 😐🥶

A fact-check of this claim about EU Energy & Housing Commissioner Dan Jørgensen:

1. “EU EPC requirements have made housing more expensive throughout Europe.”
in my view very MISLEADING
EPC = Energy Performance Certificate. The EU sets the framework, but EPC systems are implemented nationally.
There is no evidence that EPC certification itself has caused housing prices to rise across Europe. Energy efficiency can actually increase a property’s value because it reduces future energy costs.

2. “Dan Jørgensen is an opponent of nuclear power.” — OUTDATED
Being Danish myself I know Dan
Jørgensen has historically been critical of nuclear power. But describing his current EU position that way is misleading.
As Commissioner, he now explicitly supports nuclear energy as part of Europe’s decarbonisation strategy.

3. “Green energy policies have driven European energy prices through the roof.” — NOT SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE
Europe’s 2021–23 energy-price crisis was driven primarily by the extraordinary rise in natural-gas prices, including the disruption of Russian gas supplies following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Meanwhile, the cost of new renewable electricity has fallen dramatically.

In 2024, IRENA put global average LCOE at about:
• Onshore wind: $34/MWh
• Solar PV: $43/MWh

91% of newly commissioned utility-scale renewable projects were cheaper than the cheapest new fossil-fuel alternative.
That does NOT mean consumers automatically get cheap electricity: grids, taxes, balancing, storage and the design of Europe’s electricity market also matter.

4. “ETS2 is a carbon tax on consumers.” — OVERSIMPLIFIED
ETS2 is technically an emissions trading system, not a conventional tax.
It regulates fuel suppliers, who may pass the carbon cost through to consumers.

5. The €250–400 figure — BELGIAN, NOT EU-WIDE
The €250–400 annual figure comes from the Belgian Federal Planning Bureau, not the EU Commission.

The same Belgian study modelled approximately:
• Natural gas: +16%
• Heating oil: +21%
• Petrol/diesel: around +10–11%
But these are Belgian modelled estimates, based on a €60/tonne CO₂ assumption and assuming the full cost is passed on to consumers.
The study explicitly models the immediate impact and does not account for households changing behaviour, investing in alternatives, or receiving support through the Social Climate Fund.

So these figures should NOT be presented as “what ETS2 will cost European families”.
The Belgian study does, however, find that lower-income households can be disproportionately affected relative to their income.
That is a legitimate concern — but it is a Belgian national impact assessment, not an EU-wide forecast.

Bottom line:

There are legitimate arguments to be made against ETS2, EU energy policy and the pace of Europe’s green transition.
But turning a Belgian model calculation into a Europe-wide €250–400 annual bill, and claiming that EU green policies have simply “driven energy prices through the roof”, goes beyond what the evidence actually demonstrates.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

No they don’t and the think tank you mention is the ECFR which is an partly EU funded independent organisation

WELT: “70% reject the EU.” That is NOT what the survey shows.

The survey in question is the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) study “Future nostalgia: Europe’s unfinished song”, published on 9 September 2026. It is based on 5,834 AI-moderated interviews conducted in Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland.

The 68% figure that WELT turns into “70% rejection” refers to respondents describing Europe’s current situation as a deterioration or loss of normality. Only 12% described it as a European “awakening” or renewal.

That is not the same as saying that 68–70% reject the EU.

In fact, the survey presents a much more nuanced picture. Many Europeans want a stronger, more united and more self-reliant Europe, but have little confidence that Europe’s political leaders can actually deliver it.

This is what ECFR describes as an “imagination gap”: Europeans can imagine a better and stronger Europe, but struggle to see a credible path from today’s problems to that future.

Here is a link to the survey https://t.co/XkRlEWoJqV

Start reading before writing!

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

I can understand why you have no source references cause you’re conclusion are incorrect

Die WELT writes: “70% reject the EU.” That is NOT what the survey shows.

The survey in question is the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) study “Future nostalgia: Europe’s unfinished song”, published on 9 September 2026. It is based on 5,834 AI-moderated interviews conducted in Britain, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland. (Funny the UK is in🤷)
The 68% figure that WELT turns into “70% rejection” refers to respondents describing Europe’s current situation as a deterioration or loss of normality. Only 12% described it as a European “awakening” or renewal.

That is not the same as saying that 68–70% reject the EU.

In fact, the survey presents a much more nuanced picture. Many Europeans want a stronger, more united and more self-reliant Europe, but have little confidence that Europe’s political leaders can actually deliver it.
This is what ECFR describes as an “imagination gap”: Europeans can imagine a better and stronger Europe, but struggle to see a credible path from today’s problems to that future.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@__EarthPicture Before anyone gets overly excited about this post the account owner of world Pulse is based in Pakistan and has what interests in European affairs?
If you’re European you do the math.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Just to be clear, the US sends two real estate agents to Moscow and then on to Kiev to deliver an exact list of demands from Moscow there always has been the same. How is that negotiation.
You give no evidence as to how the Ukrainian state is murderous and yet somehow the Russian regime is not? (While being the country who unilaterally started the war)
Just wondering what the Bundestag would feel about Denmark claiming Schleswig back, or the opposite 🤔

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

So let’s be clear, the European Union has no tax arm and cannot under any circumstances collect taxes from anyone individual.
While the Union certainly has in the 2028 budget suggestions for Union ‘taxes’ if you will, on different areas like CO2 kvotas and tobacco it does not currently collect taxes

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Meget rigtigt skrevet. Specielt hvis man er dansker og tror nogen af de stærkt
Ekstreme partier i nationalstaternes Europa vil Danmark det godt.
Vi har pt kun et bolværk mod et ‘nyt’ nationalstaternes Europa og det er stærkt EU.
Og til det skal siges at på intet tidspunkt i verdenshistorien har 30+ nationale stater været en succes i Europa. Det føre kun til mindre vækst, mere division og igen igen endnu en storkrig i Europa.
De eneste i denne verden der virkelig har en interesse i nationale stater i Europa er USA, Rusland og Kina.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

Have the French authorities explained exactly what they are testing and against what?
RDW did all the testing for 18 months and drove 1,6 mio km in close cooperation with Tesla and ensured the changed to the US version match an artificial 39 exemption.
On that basis it was approved as a level 2 ADAS ( in reality it is capable of both 3 and maybe 4)
This thorough testing is what let the Danish authorities to approve it as well. No testing or explanation required. That is why we have a union, to mutually recognise each other’s regulation, in the interest of all Europeans safety.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

While FSD definitely drives defensive, which is a good thing btw, in Copenhagen traffic it needs more training handling cyclists and pedestrians. Here cyclists are all over the place and especially when sharing a right hand turn lane with cyclists FSD needs to be trained in either as per regulations go in front and in to curb (all the way) and close off or go behind the cyclist and then all the way to the curb and close off. I have inserted an example here where FSD hesitates and stops in between the turn and straight ahead lane.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@AlexanderKr Speed offset is a great tool. Regardless of the speed you have set, I have a 5% above the speed limit and context dependent max speed set the car calculates the safest speed under prevailing conditions and it is rarely above the speed limit as you mention from the surveys

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@oresundsbaron Har du noget evidens for det du påstår?
Og hvorledes er det at du mener et diktatur i Kreml er åh så troværdigt modsat et demokratisk valgt regering?
Man kan godt demokratisk stemme for afskaffelse af et demokrati, men det kan ikke stemmes tilbage igen. Gratis information.

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@sashameetsrus Evidens please

[Thomas Engell @thomasengell1]

@Automoto415792 I don’t know, does it have an interactive AI built in you can ask to control all functions and teach you history along the way? And does it drive itself from A to B (city/country) while packing cross country ability and have 800 liters cargo space all while carrying 5 comfortable