Still want an EV?

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by gatorfast

I don’t think this is a capitalism issue. The government regulates all sorts of things you can and can’t buy on the basis of the environment. Leaded gas used to be a thing. Catalytic converters are now required. People used to smoke cigarettes in the office at work. EVs are just a differently flavor of this.

And like socal said, this isn’t happening over night. It’s a gradual transition years in the making.

I don’t think we’re allowed to discuss this here. I’m not saying your points are wrong I’m just saying it will cause this discussion to go into a direction that will quite possibly trigger some people. So I’m just going with it’s a capitalism thing and will just leave it at that.

[2023G87M2]

Originally Posted by Patton250

You make some excellent points, and I agree with much of what you wrote with the exception of worrying. I am not worrying about anything other than political interference. Allow flat out capitalism to determine the direction we go and I’ll be happy as a school boy on Christmas Eve. But one thing is for sure and you made this point, even with all out government interference it’s still going to take many decades, to even think about eliminating ice.

Political interference should work both ways then don't you think? Capitalism interferes non stop with politics through lobbying, buying out politicians. So you would think it would work both ways?

The EV laws that may come, have NOTHING to do with government, but everything to do with the wealthy. You see, powerful and or wealthy people HATED smog in their cities like new York or la, INCLUDING politicians or shareholders etc. That's why the anti smog laws came about. If the EV laws are passed, they will be done in transitional phases, once more infrastructure is in place, and once enough shareholders have gotten even richer through oil, ICE, etc. EVs are like another anti smog law. Not even billionaires or car company CEO'S today would want to go back to pre smog laws because all it has done is benefit their property from not being covered in smog. The same thing will be true with EVs.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I sound like a broken record but, if PHEV's are included the mandates will not slip because one still has a gas back up if you need it.

One problem with that, how many PHEVs are being developed for the US market right now? Not enough to sustain the demand that would be generated. Unless you're insinuating that the current supply of PHEVs on sale today is sufficient to offset the emission restrictions. Pretty much everyone but Toyota has made it abundantly clear they are making the jump straight from ICE to EV with no hybrid stop-gap.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

So we can go around and around but at the end of the day let's not forget that "the government" has imposed deadlines. In my experience they have failed to hit a single "on time/on budget" in history.

I suspect that as time goes along the mandates will slip as they can't get the infrastructure and associated approvals in line within a generation.

Deadlines for manufacturers is one thing (and as you say, can easily be pushed out). I'm talking about carbon taxes for private citizens, mileage restrictions/limits, etc. These will be enacted eventually regardless of manufacturers' progress or lack thereof.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by 2023G87M2

Political interference should work both ways then don't you think? Capitalism interferes non stop with politics through lobbying, buying out politicians. So you would think it would work both ways?

The EV laws that may come, have NOTHING to do with government, but everything to do with the wealthy. You see, powerful and or wealthy people HATED smog in their cities like new York or la, INCLUDING politicians or shareholders etc. That's why the anti smog laws came about. If the EV laws are passed, they will be done in transitional phases, once more infrastructure is in place, and once enough shareholders have gotten even richer through oil, ICE, etc. EVs are like another anti smog law. Not even billionaires or car company CEO'S today would want to go back to pre smog laws because all it has done is benefit their property from not being covered in smog. The same thing will be true with EVs.

Couldn't be more correct (though I think the incentives are a little more lucrative than smog reduction haha - that's just a bonus). People need to wake up and realize this is not purely political. It's not about the "left" or "right". In the word's of George Carlin "There's a big club, and you ain't in it" - this is the status quo they will stop at nothing to maintain. This time it's just being sold under the guise of environmentalism.

[2023G87M2]

Originally Posted by Cos270

Couldn't be more correct (though I think the incentives are a little more lucrative than smog reduction haha - that's just a bonus). People need to wake up and realize this is not purely political. It's not about the "left" or "right". In the word's of George Carlin "There's a big club, and you ain't in it" - this is the status quo they will stop at nothing to maintain. This time it's just being sold under the guise of environmentalism.

Your right. Another form of pollution is noise smog. Imagine how quiet everything will be without car noise. I'm actually kind of happy about this part. I still want ICE for track use and some canyon roads should be reserved for enthusiasts with ICE allowed. But we don't need to worry about this for a LONG TIME

Real environmentalism would work something like this.

All cars EV
All power plants hydro, wind, a little of solar or solar roofs, geothermal (in areas that have it), and most importantly, Nuclear (but unaware people think nuclear=chernobyl)
Stopping all animal farming
Stopping fishing or at least overfishing
Stopping tree cutting by like 3/4ths
Cutting useless mail out to replace with email
More public transport.
Factories need to stop dumping waste or using oil/gas as energy.

Beyond that, I don't see cargo ships or planes going EV anytime soon, perhaps ethanol may replace oil?


SO Yea when you see that list, you just KNOW none of the things on the list will happen not even in the next 30 years. So people shouldn't be afraid whatsoever. The earth will continue building up more methane and co2. Climate deniers are like creationists or flat eathers. I assume no one here denies climate change

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

Worrying about any of it in 2023 is a waste of time

People care because this 12 year goal is already impacting them.

[RichF90M5C]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

Instead of UK, Brit drivers should put EU FU on their cars.

I’d be more inclined to have FU UK on mine, I’m so embarrassed of this country right now.

[RichF90M5C]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

Off peak charging rates is a thing NOW
When EVs become a larger part of the market say 2035
If 50% of the new cars are EV, the electric companies will know they got you by the short hairs
They can change their rates to maximize profit
For a normal Household, they can track usage based on load
Not charging a 100kwhr battery is one price
Charge your EV and put load on the circuit, a different higher price
Imagine paying more to charge your EV than paying for gas would be a reality soon in the future

I’ve been saying this will happen for months, people think I’m crazy.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by RichF90M5C

I’d be more inclined to have FU UK on mine, I’m so embarrassed of this country right now.

Sod it, I should have included it too. I'll only be voting for Jeremy Clarkson now if he stands for government.

[Tejas1836]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

Off peak charging rates is a thing NOW
When EVs become a larger part of the market say 2035
If 50% of the new cars are EV, the electric companies will know they got you by the short hairs
They can change their rates to maximize profit
For a normal Household, they can track usage based on load
Not charging a 100kwhr battery is one price
Charge your EV and put load on the circuit, a different higher price
Imagine paying more to charge your EV than paying for gas would be a reality soon in the future

The power companies will need to spend an estimated $5,800 per EV for the next 8 years to update the electrical grid for EV charging. That money has to come from somewhere, subsidies or directly.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Cos270

One problem with that, how many PHEVs are being developed for the US market right now? Not enough to sustain the demand that would be generated. Unless you're insinuating that the current supply of PHEVs on sale today is sufficient to offset the emission restrictions. Pretty much everyone but Toyota has made it abundantly clear they are making the jump straight from ICE to EV with no hybrid stop-gap.

Even Toyota axed their leader because he was adamant PHEV's would be the medium term solution. So I hear you, but reality is, in about 5 years, as 2035 gets closer, there will be a realisation we won't have the public charging in place for a pure EV transition and PHEV's will be back on the table.

It's already law in Canada.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Patton250

You make some excellent points, and I agree with much of what you wrote with the exception of worrying. I am not worrying about anything other than political interference. Allow flat out capitalism to determine the direction we go and I’ll be happy as a school boy on Christmas Eve. But one thing is for sure and you made this point, even with all out government interference it’s still going to take many decades, to even think about eliminating ice.

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past the point it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc. Sorry, I do not want to go back to the early 1900s.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by chris719

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

What a bunch of utter nonsense. Yes, most people that run big business’s the first thing they wanna do is make the earth unlivable for themselves and their children and their grandchildren. I don’t really think I can have a serious conversation with someone that makes statements like you did. Besides we really aren’t allowed to discuss it here.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by chris719

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past the point it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc. Sorry, I do not want to go back to the early 1900s.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

This doesn't need to be a binary solution. Mandating EV is a binary solution.

regulating lead out of gas was not a binary solution, you could and can still buy gas, and other additives and engine design features filled the gap created by its removal. Impact to the consumer was nearly non-existent, and required little infrastructure. It also profoundly impacted the targeted environmental goal.

EV's are a small part of the C02 Problem, and the proposed solution still generates a great deal of C02. And that doesn't even begin to discuss the cost.


It's a spectrum of choices and options, vs rewards and results. De-leading fuel was an easy choice and had good results. Ditching ICE with the current plan isn't easy or free of pain, and barely tickles the goal.

[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

People care because this 12 year goal is already impacting them.

In what ways?

How is Chevy announcing that they will be full electric by 2035 impacting you?

Or some states announcing they won't sell new ICE vehicles starting in 2035?


This isn't some sort of conspiracy by Bill Gates to reduce the population, this is about taking steps in the right direction to help preserve our planet for our great grandchildren and beyond ....you should have seen what the air looked like in LA in the 70's and 80's before we finally started taking steps in the right direction

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/r...efits-by-2030/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

https://content.sierraclub.org/evguide/myths-vs-reality

[M5Rick]

The ones in that house next to Westminster Bridge are F* mad, they want to get rid of PHEV's too.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

In what ways?

Too many to list here, so know this is only some of them:

• ICE development already curtailed for many brands, limiting choices
  
• Utilities are having to expend resources they don't' have spare to start planning for load they can't serve, with energy they don't have. This costs money today. It is impacting repair-and-maintain strategies, today. It is diluting the skills and manpower resources today.
  
• Utilities are having to increase prices to pay for this dream. the 2 biggest power utilities in my state just raised rates ~15%, and cited this as one of the many justifications. Paying today for what will happen tomorrow.
  
• taxes and budgets are being re-adjusted at federal, state, and local levels to pay for this future, by collecting taxes today.
  
• Infrastructure is being built with tax payer dollars today, to serve a use case model for this mandated future.
  
• Tax payers are subsidizing the purchase of EV's. That's my money, and yours.
  
• Government entities like utilities, are taking focus from other social initiatives to make room for this one. Because this initiative does not generate tax revenue, it -is- a zero-sum game.
  
• Some markets are already having to curtail power usage during peak-demand events, and that includes EV's. Adding EV's to the load causes this to happen more, and more often. It's already happening.

How is Chevy announcing that they will be full electric by 2035 impacting you?

See list above

Or some states announcing they won't sell new ICE vehicles starting in 2035?

See list above

This isn't some sort of conspiracy by Bill Gates to reduce the population, this is about taking steps in the right direction to help preserve our planet for our great grandchildren and beyond ....you should have seen what the air looked like in LA in the 70's and 80's before we finally started taking steps in the right direction

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/r...efits-by-2030/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

https://content.sierraclub.org/evguide/myths-vs-reality

Taking steps is moving to Hybrid tech first.

We need to take these steps. We don't need to be stupid about it.

[SoCal_NSX]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Too many to list here, so know this is only some of them:

• ICE development already curtailed for many brands, limiting choices
  
• Utilities are having to expend resources they don't' have spare to start planning for load they can't serve, with energy they don't have. This costs money today. It is impacting repair-and-maintain strategies, today. It is diluting the skills and manpower resources today.
  
• Utilities are having to increase prices to pay for this dream. the 2 biggest power utilities in my state just raised rates ~15%, and cited this as one of the many justifications. Paying today for what will happen tomorrow.
  
• taxes and budgets are being re-adjusted at federal, state, and local levels to pay for this future, by collecting taxes today.
  
• Infrastructure is being built with tax payer dollars today, to serve a use case model for this mandated future.
  
• Tax payers are subsidizing the purchase of EV's. That's my money, and yours.
  
• Government entities like utilities, are taking focus from other social initiatives to make room for this one. Because this initiative does not generate tax revenue, it -is- a zero-sum game.
  
• Some markets are already having to curtail power usage during peak-demand events, and that includes EV's. Adding EV's to the load causes this to happen more, and more often. It's already happening.

See list above



See list above



Taking steps is moving to Hybrid tech first.

We need to take these steps. We don't need to be stupid about it.

You talk about all the economics, but you drive a 13 mpg vehicle

you don't think the oil cartels are manipulating gas prices?

Like I said, don't worry about it....you be able to buy and drive gas guzzling ICE vehicles for the rest of your life, unless you are still driving in like 2093

[chris719]

Might want to check the air in LA now vs before regulation was introduced, to start. Visibility was ridiculously bad.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Capitalism exactly solves these types of problems.

Not without regulation, because ideal capitalism does not exist. I am pro capitalism, it just needs intelligent application of regulation. We can disagree as to what is intelligent or appropriate, but anyone who thinks a zero regulation environment will behave in a ideal manner is delusional.

[omasou]

Never wanted one. Never will.