Mandating electric cars I think is a dumb idea.

[Archae]

Suggesting people buy them, ok.

But mandating them?

Because electric cars create their own pollution trouble.

Mining the material for the electric motors and batteries.

Generating the extra power needed for recharging.
("Renewable" energy can help, but not enough.)

I have some skin in this game.
I own an e-bike, and I know that when it comes time to dispose of any of the parts, (like the battery,) they are going to be a problem at a landfill.

[durablend]

1. I think it's more stupid because the grid can't handle it

[rurallib]

2. Is there some research that shows that is true?

The question was brought up on Them Hartmann yesterday. Thom's response was that there wouldn't be that much of a load increase. Would really love to see some data.

[jimfields33]

5. California right now is asking customers to conserve energy

And that is even before electric cars become the norm.

[TheRealNorth]

10. No shit

They are writing the Republican attack ads for them.

[jimfields33]

12. Grrrr. I hate when we do that.

[Archae]

4. That too.

As is, California's government is currently telling people to ease off on electric use, how could they if all the cars needed recharging?

[ripcord]

28. They have told people not to charge their EVs during this heat wave

Because there will be too much strain on the grid.

[tinrobot]

40. Not really. The typical EV only needs to charge about an hour a day.

Most people drive 30 miles/day, which is about an hour of charging. About as much as two loads in an electric dryer. The grid can probably handle that. We also have a decade or so to improve the grid. It's not like everyone is going to suddenly start driving EVs tomorrow.

On top of that, some EVs can already act as back up power to smooth out spikes in demand, meaning fewer blackouts/brownouts. You can run your house off of your car/truck, if needed. That actually helps the grid.

So, that talking point is inaccurate.

[Calculating]

84. Totally not true

My Tesla model 3 uses about 15 hours of change time at 1kw every day going 25 miles round trip

[tinrobot]

96. 15kw to go 25 miles?

That's less efficient than the Hummer EV. A Model 3 should get about 4 miles/kw, so more like 60 miles for that amount of power.

And, and 1kw, you must be charging on a low power circuit. My calculation was for a 10kw charger and a vehicle that gets 3mi/kw

[Calculating]

98. Oh I'm including the power it uses keeping the cabin cool in the Parking lot

It has this feature called cabin overheat prevention and uses about half of the power just sitting around. Only half is actually used driving to work and back.

[Caliman73]

3. Context?

I agree with the idea that mandating a specific type of car is not a good idea. I also agree that the battery waste presents a challenge.

I am not in the know about who is "mandating" electric cars.

Over the life of the car (with the extraction, power generation, and manufacturing taken into account) electric vehicles produce considerably less waste than internal combustion cars. Something in the range of minimum 15% to something like 50% less pollution.

We do need to move away from internal combustion vehicles and the use of carbon producing fuels pretty quickly to reduce the impact that carbon has on the environment.

[Kaleva]

9. CO2 lingers in the atmosphere for hundreds of years

Even if we dropped CO2 emissions to zero now worldwide, it's going to take a very, very long time before we start seeing an improvement.

[Caliman73]

17. True, but there may be ways to "capture" carbon as well.

I know that the science about efficacy of carbon capture is not completely settled and it would also take time, but the point is the problem is not going to stop getting worse if we keep dumping more and more carbon into the atmosphere.

[ProfessorGAC]

25. It's Actually Not That Hard

But, it's REALLY expensive using existing technology & highly energy intensive.
So, unless all the energy used is non-emissive, it would be extremely inefficient.
Using current technology, it's possible but not close to practical.
Unfortunately.

[Caliman73]

30. Thanks for that.

I am certainly not an expert in this area. Good to have all kinds of information and perspectives.

I still didn't get an answer to my request on the context of "who is mandating electric cars".

I know that California is proposing that no more new gasoline vehicles be sold after 2035. Originally the implementation was for 2025 I believe, but it seems to be being pushed back.

All I really understand is basically that if we keep putting as much carbon into the air as we are doing now, that the climate change situation is going to get worse.

[ProfessorGAC]

38. That's The Only Thing I Saw Too

I haven't heard that anyone else has followed California's lead on this.
So, I think you have a fair question.

[Hugin]

91. I was recently looking into CO2 capture.

It’s the usual scenario of everyone is for it and nobody wants to pony-up via incentives.

There’s even a cynical tax credit on the books in the US. Worded like a BOGO (buy one, get one) making the only organizations who can afford to develop capture the worst offenders of release. A conflict of interests which won’t work itself out any time soon.

But, there have been some plausible systems for mass capture put forward. So, we all wait for a magic bullet.

[ProfessorGAC]

94. Agreed!

The chemistry & engineering are well understood, simple, & used extensively in other emissions capture processes.
Now, scrubbing the atmosphere of existing CO2 is more involved, but capture from emission sources is quite straightforward.
Simple, but not cheap, especially if we extend it to decarbonation.
But, are we willing to spend the money?

[NNadir]

14. If one is making claims of this sort, it behooves one to provide...

...sources.

Electric cars are not even close to being sustainable or clean..

The biggest problem with them is that they're cars, but thats only part of the story.

It is entirely feasible that a DME fueled diesel vehicle would be the cleanest such vehicle ever developed with the caveat that the DME source not be fossil fuels.

I have references for this claim, but they're not immediately available as I'm writing on a phone.

[Caliman73]

21. Here

This guy links his sources in the description.

Sure, dimethyl ether diesel fuels would work as a replacement, though they are not carbon neutral either. Currently DME is only taken from waste, coal, and natural gas.

[NNadir]

31. By references, I generally mean references from the primary scientific literature.

I've been through oodles of these, and have written a number of posts for these, in which links to the primary literature are contained.

The video seems cute, but smug, but I'm certainly not going to sit through it.

I have spent many hundreds, if not thousands of hours on the subject of DME and synthetic routes to it, again by accessing the primary scientific literature.

You will find no one on this planet who abhors coal more completely than I do. I would never agree to be in the German government, nor am I fan of DME synthesis from fossil fuel sources. It's slightly more stupid than hydrogen cars.

The direct hydrogenation of carbon dioxide with thermochemically generated hydrogen is completely carbon dioxide free, and diesel engines do not require 70% to 80% of the elements in the periodic table to operate.

The hydrogenation of carbon dioxide is exothermic.

I'm not talking about a status quo approach. It's clearly failed. I'm talking about nuclear DME.

[GenXer47]

6. it's not ideal, but...

...we have to move the ball forward somehow. The mining sucks, agreed. No easy fix for that. The power generation, well, yeah we will eventually have no choice but nuclear, wind, solar. The battery disposal, we'll have to teach kids from a young age, like we've done with plastic and glass recycling. It will take a generation or two but if you consider an engine is nothing more than a fancy fire box, we are still using a stone-age method: burn something!

[CloudWatcher]

7. A friend of mine asked ...

Lots of folks are forced to park their cars on the street at night. How
exactly are they going to be charging their electric cars?

Or even people with parking spots at an apartment/condo ... where they
don't own the spot that needs a hookup.

My two cents --- if you're going to mandate electric cars, you need to also
build the infrastructure to allow batteries to be swapped out quickly instead
of waiting for a recharge. Instead of just owning the batteries, they're part
of a pool of batteries that you can use with a station down the street that
will swap out a fully charged set for your depleted ones.

[Archae]

13. Your idea with the batteries sounds right, to a point.

What would we do with the batteries that no longer will hold a charge?

They will be pollution in landfills.

[Pobeka]

19. There are already serious efforts to recycle lithium batteries.

https://www.princeton.edu/news/2022/03/01/better-way-recycle-lithium-batteries-coming-soon-princeton-startup

[CloudWatcher]

24. recycling would have to be part of the infrastructure

The recycle issue is pretty much independent of where/how they are getting recharged.

But having some kind of standard(s) for easily swapping them might allow for
some standards for ease of recycling as well.

[moose65]

15. That sounds good in theory

But - how big are the batteries for electric vehicles? They are probably too big and too heavy, right now, to be interchanged quickly.

I mean, it sounds like a great idea. Instead of gas stations, we would have battery stations where we could switch out our batteries for charged ones. The whole process would take about the same amount of time that it now takes to fill up. But I don't think it's practical right now - the batteries need to shrink! Some day we will get there.

[CloudWatcher]

27. A small issue of engineering :)

I'm not talking about some guy with a screwdriver, but the lifts
to deal with heavy objects are not complex. I suspect it'd be
reasonable to design some kind of quick disconnects and use a
lift for the car to get access from below (or a tunnel underneath
like I see at the quick-oil change places).

Security could be an issue. If they're really easy to remove,
you might return to your car to find it missing. Some kind of
secure-id for the battery would no doubt be required to prevent
theft.

[tinrobot]

43. Battery swapping is too complicated/expensive. Fast charging is the answer.

Battery swapping means you'd need dedicated swap facilities(expensive) that store a large inventory of batteries (expensive). Plus you'd need cars that are capable of the batteries being swapped, meaning a total redesign of existing vehicles (time consuming, expensive)

The solution is to make fast chargers as common as gas stations. A fast charger can refill a battery in as little as 20 minutes. You park for a half hour or so, go eat, shop, work out, or whatever, then come back to a full battery. Repeat once or twice per week. The standards/technologies are already in place, and the chargers can be placed anywhere there is power and parking. We just need to implement.

[Celerity]

8. I would need more context to further engage.

[vanlassie]

11. My GOP father used to poo-poo solar because "we would need to have a grid."

I would reply by marveling that we ever built a national highway system…

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

16. Not to mention they are hideously expensive.

I, for one, would never pay even $40k for a car, let alone the absurd prices for many of the electric ones.

[Liberal In Texas]

22. No their not.

No more than ICE cars. Especially with rebates available.

All new cars are pretty expensive especially if you think $40K is. Just like internal combustion cars, you can find fancy expensive models and more modest models like the Chevy Bolt from $27.2K.

My PHEV MSRP was around $35K. I got a $6K rebate from the feds and another $2.5K rebate from the state. If you do the math were now in the $20s.
And in case you think I have some cheapo, it has all the bells and whistles, to name a few: power everything, leather seats heated and airconditioned, remote start, lane keeping, parking assist and Harman Kardon stereo system. It has a 10 year warranty.

[WarGamer]

33. Yes they're more expensive than ICE Cars....

The Toyota Corolla Hybrid gets 53mpg costs 25k


KIA/Hyundai EV (the new one) 45k

Toyota EV (the new one) 45k

Ford Mach-E 48k

Tesla Model 3 48k


And before you bring up the Bolt EV/EUV... they're in their last year, they've had tons of mfg issues and their replacement will be more $$

[tinrobot]

44. Comparing a Corolla to a Mustang? No. The Chevy Bolt costs $27k.

Maybe even less, depending on incentives.

It gets 131MPGe city.

Plus, it's cheaper to maintain - no oil changes, belts, etc.

[WarGamer]

47. you missed what I wrote about the Bolt?

It's out of production in about 5 minutes. And the production line was close for a few months because of build issues.

[tinrobot]

48. It exists today and you can buy one today. What's so difficult about that?

It proves that affordable EVs can be done.

If you don't like the Bolt, get a Leaf or a Mini E.

Or... in less than a year, a $30+k Equinox EV (which will be less than $30k thanks to the incentive.)

2035 is over 12 years away. 12 years ago, the only EV on the market was a $100k Tesla Roadster. If that trend continues, cheap EVs will be very common. The CA deadline just makes that even more likely to happen.

[Ron Green]

80. A Chevy Bolt has been our only car for almost 6 years.

I’ve been a licensed driver since 1962 and this is the best car I’ve ever owned.

What I’m getting from your posts on this issue is that you don’t have much real knowledge about it.

[WarGamer]

81. Actually I know all about it...

Chevy announced a last minute price cut... but there really aren't any at the dealers and the few that ARE there are getting over MSRP.

Doesn't matter anyways... it's out of production soon.

[Liberal In Texas]

51. Your comparisons are disingenuous.

Did you even read my post? My car is nicer than a cheapo Toyota Corolla and with REBATES is in the same price neighborhood.

Those cars you list are not in the same amenity and quality build. They're a lot nicer than a Corolla.

AND...the Bolt is still being manufactured and the 2023 model can be ordered. Chevy like most car makers is going to expand their EV manufacturing and some of those changes require the change from one model to another model. This is common in the car making biz.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

52. I bought my current car, a 2017 Honda Fit

in 2018 for under $20k.

And if electric cars are so desirable, why in the world are people being bribed to buy them?

Oh, something else that's an absolute deal breaker for me: do any electric cars have manual transmissions? That's all I've ever driven and all that I ever want to drive.

[moose65]

62. That's fine

I’m sure there were people who refused to give up their horse and buggy for those newfangled “autos.” 😆

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

63. Oh, for chrissakes.

There are a number of issues about requiring everyone buy an electric car.

The cost. They are definitely more expensive than gas powered cars. And please don't quote the current median cost of a conventional car, because I happen to purchase a car that's about half that cost. And of course, median cost means that half of all cars cost less than that. A quick Google search tells me that the typical current car loan is over five years, which I personally find horrifying. With electric cars, which will cost significantly more, I'm guessing that car loans will rise to 7 or 8 years.

Personally, I have always paid cash for a car, other than my very first one. Sadly, too many people watch car ads and are seduced by them, and decide they'll happily go into servitude for a car.

Another problem with everyone buying an electric car, the infrastructure to charge them. That's been discussed at length, so I don't need to repeat that.

The actual cost of making the batteries, including the issue of rare elements.

Electric cars are promoted as if there are no costs whatsoever to owning them. But there are. Huge costs.

Lucky for me I'm now 73 years old, and even though I have plans for my 97th birthday (a separate conversation entirely) I will likely give up driving within 10 years, and so mandatory electric cars probably won't be a part of my life. But the high cost of them will mean that people with low income simply won't be able to afford a car. Even now, the cost of owning a car is beyond a lot of poor people. It will get beyond even more people in the future. As someone who has often been relatively poor, who was barely able to pay rent, utilities, food, I understand. I had a seven year period in which I lived in the DC area and did not own a car, but could take the public bus where I needed to go. Public transportation isn't everywhere, sadly.

[moose65]

66. Question for ya:

Just WHO is "requiring" people to buy an electric car?

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

68. California is clearly moving in that direction.

No new gasoline powered cars to be sold after 2035. Yes, you'll still be able to buy them second hand. Or perhaps buy a new one in another state and get it registered in California; but that's not clear at this point.

For me, a car has always been something on four wheels that gets me from place to place. I want them to be inexpensive and reliable. It's annoying enough that standard transmissions are so hard to find in this country.

Again, the push to all electric cars is as if there are no real costs, including environmental costs, to them. The rare minerals needed for the batteries are an issue. As is charging and recharging the batteries. If all you ever do is short drives around town, then a six hour recharge overnight isn't a problem. But when I drive from Santa Fe to Denver, or to Tucson, or to Kansas City, I don't want to spend hours recharging, adding days to my trip.

Lucky for me my Honda Fit will probably last me as long as I will continue to drive.

[moose65]

69. Then it shouldn't be a problem for you

If you're going to keep your Honda Fit forever, it won't affect you at all.

I keep seeing all of these posts that "we're not there yet." True. But we have to plan and prepare in order to "get there." It won't just magically happen.

2035 is 13 years away. A LOT can happen in that period of time. Think back to 1995. At that time, I had one of those huge analog cell phones and my cell plan was for 30 minutes a month. 13 years later, the smart phone came into our lives. But we couldn't have gotten to the smart phone without all of those old phones. The smart phone didn't just happen overnight.

Same thing with flat-panel TVs. In 2006 we got our first one, and it cost almost $3,000. Now, you can find the same size for $300.

California will not force to you to buy anything.

[Liberal In Texas]

73. Well said.

Right now the charging infrastructure is being built up.

BUT. Most people charge at home. About the only time you need a public charger is when you're on the road.

Apartment dwellers do have a problem, but some of the new builds are putting in charging stations for their tenets. More local building requirements need to happen to make charging stations mandatory for new construction. If the full chargers aren't installed right away, they should at least be required to have the electrical wiring and outlets installed.

[Mr.Bill]

76. What I see happening for a few decades

is people perhaps owning an electric car as a daily commuter and also a gas powered economy car for longer trips. Most households have more than one vehicle because they use them for different purposes. Eventually, there will be more charging stations and cars will charge faster and have more range. It will not be an overnight transition any more than the transition from horses to cars was. Saying we should not have electric cars because they are not practical for cross-country trips is like saying they should not make sports cars because they can't pull a horse trailer. Different vehicles for different purposes.

By the time the world has completely transitioned to electric cars and they are capable of fulfilling all of our vehicular needs, I will be long dead. It's not going to happen anytime soon.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

83. Why should everyone need to have two cars???

I only want to own one, not two. Even though long trips and short trips are two different kinds of car trips.

And how long should charging last? I currently own a gas car and it takes maybe three minutes to refuel. Why, exactly, should I be willing to take several hours to charge an electric car?

Some years ago here on DU, someone said that everyone who owns a home needs to have a pick-up truck to take care of things for that home. Huh? I've been a home owner for some thirty years now, and never personally needed a pick-up truck. We all live our lives differently, and I've never needed a truck nor more than one car at a time.

[Mr.Bill]

85. Many families have more than one or two drivers in the household.

and some have more than one driver that has to drive to work. I don't know where you live, but in California most households have more than one vehicle. Another thing that is common in metropolitan areas in California is employers that offer free charging where you work. It's especially common in Silicon Valley. Starting to make sense now?

By the way, I've never owned a pickup truck in my life, either, but I don't know what that has to do with this conversation.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

86. I live alone.

So I only need one car at a time. I am 74 years old, and I am not going to work every day.

Not everyone lives in California. Does that make sense to you?

[Mr.Bill]

87. This thread is about electric cars in California.

I thought that's what we were talking about. By the way, I'm 69 and didn't get married until I was 41. I, too have lived alone, so I can see your viewpoint. Thanks for the conversation.

[hunter]

90. I figure plug-in hybrids are a better idea.

We can make ten plug-in hybrids that go 40 miles on a charge or one purely electric car that goes 400 miles using the same amount of lithium for batteries.

Since most car trips are less than forty miles, these plug-in hybrids would reduce gasoline use almost as much as the pure electrics, and they'd do it without the "range anxiety."

If these hybrids use synthetic carbon-neutral fuels made from atmospheric or oceanic carbon dioxide, they too can cut fossil fuel use to zero.

My ideal car, however, would be no car. I'd live in a world where car ownership was unnecessary.

[catbyte]

18. When I went to buy a new a new car in 2019, I considered a hybrid or an electric car, but

I live in an apartment complex with no place to plug the car in. I think that just putting the outlets in place for plugging your car in will take years. So I bought a Subaru.

So, I'm all for encouraging electric car ownership, I just think mandating it would cause big problems. That said, I hope they do refit places to enable it, but as of now, it would be very difficult to manage.

[Zeitghost]

20. It's a looming disaster

California has mandated that there will be no new ICE cars sold by 2035. That's great, but 2035 is not that far away and they are currently asking people not to charge EV's during the evening. That's a problem.

Now imagine the next So-Cal Earthquake and millions of people trying to evacuate. We're putting the cart before the horse, the infrastructure needs to get built first, then we can switch to EV's.


And I agree, we need to subsidize/encourage EVs, not ban ICE vehicles.

[WarGamer]

34. Saw a picture from Ukraine...

I Kid you not... a Tesla Model S on the side of the road, dead... next to a gas station.

[tinrobot]

45. Such fear-mongering. I've been in many CA earthquakes. We don't evacuate.

It's simply not a thing.

And you might want to read the full warning about the current heat wave - in addition to EVs, they suggest not using clothes dryers, dishwashers, or any appliance that consumes significant power. People seem to be cherry-picking the part about EVs.

[EX500rider]

53. Some states certainly have evacuations for hurricanes like Florida

[tinrobot]

56. They evacuate *before* the hurricane hits.

When there's still working roads, electricity, and other services. EVs would be no different in that situation.

With earthquakes, you don't get a week's notice. It's over in less than a minute, then you clean up. And, if the power does go out, at least EV drivers have a giant battery in their garage they can use.

[Mr.Bill]

77. And if it won't be practical in 2035, and they see that coming,

they can change the law and postpone the date. This happens all the time with legislation. It's a goal, not an unchangeable mandate.

[Liberal In Texas]

93. EVs would not have a problem in any evac. Most people charge up at home.

The range on an EV is almost as far as an ICE car, in the hundreds of miles. EVs can sit in stalled traffic running AC for days while ICE cars will run out of gas trying the same thing.

And by the way. You do know that gas stations don't pump diddly without electric power.

[Johnny2X2X]

100. GM isn't going to even make ICE cars by 2035

Several other manufacturers won't be making them before that. You'll still be able to buy used ICE cars after 2035, but new options will be very limited.

[BigDemVoter]

26. While I think we DO need to go electric, we cannot do so until we are ready. . . .

Running into charging issues because of a dearth of charging stations would be a fucking nightmare. . . .

[tinrobot]

57. Biden just pushed through $7.5 billion in new charging infrastructure.

Owning an EV is already totally viable in a lot of cities. Hopefully, this money will help the rest of the country catch up.

[BigDemVoter]

58. I live in San Francisco, and it would be easy here. . . . I'm just wondering about a drive

across the country.

There are some interesting ideas out there. . . . I heard one about having a battery that can just be removed with another one (charged) replacing it instead of waiting for a charge. . . I'm not sure how that would work, but I suspect there are going to be lots of great initiatives.

I don't know a lot about electric cars. . . From what I've been told, can't a rapid recharger completely recharge a car in 30 minutes or so? I see the rapid ones when I go to Whole Foods or different places like that, but it seems like there is always a line, as many people plug in their cars while they do their shopping.

HOWEVER, as you said, maybe this money Biden has pushed through will help ease the burden. Electric cars are getting more efficient with longer ranges.

[tinrobot]

61. Cross-country road trips are totally possible

I'm in Southern California, have driven up to Oregon/Washington, Salt Lake City, as well as all sorts of places in California. Longest was 2000 miles round trip. All you have to do is make sure there are fast chargers on your route and drive normally. On the West Coast, all the major routes are already covered, and more chargers are being installed every month.

Charging takes anywhere from 20-60 mins, depending on the car and the charger. For my car and the chargers I use, it's typically about 30 mins every 200 miles or so.

I've found demand can be pretty high in San Francisco (which has a lot of EVs and not a lot of space.) On a road trip, however, I don't think I've ever had to wait.

[Hortensis]

29. There is no MANDATE to buy electric cars. That's a RW boogie under the bed,

Last edited Fri Sep 2, 2022, 02:51 PM - Edit history (1)

of the same type as IRS agents armed with automatic weapons banging on our doors. What are they going to do to my husband and me if we don't? Jail us?

As for electrical supply issues, they'll be addressed. How can anyone doubt it? Constant, life-altering changes have been the reality all our lives. What's weird is denial that they always happen.

We comment in text messages, "Just noticed, all the pay phones are gone. They just disappeared." As if we could remember the last time we used one. "Both our kids work at home for companies on the other side of the country. How is that even possible?" After 50 years Republicans stop denying climate change is real; who ever could have seen that change coming?

To put it mildly, my husband and I are not setting up a special account to save for the time when we are MANDATED to purchase an EV.

A suggestion to watch for the dishonest terminology used to maneuver people into opposing necessary changes. And of course: every single option has costs to weigh, including walking; that costs exist is an of-course, not a rule-out, no matter what the manipulators are saying.

[WarGamer]

35. If you're NOT ALLOWED to buy an ICE car...

then isn't it a mandate to buy an EV?

I mean, I guess you could just not buy ANY car... but aren't you splitting hairs?

[Hortensis]

41. No. We'll have to make individual choices, but we'll have them.

My post is about using our heads and refusing the kind of pernicious terminology that sweeps people into accepting deceitful, usually RW premises.

Surely everyone here should be able to recognize a hoary old RW anti-government, anti-tax, anti-progressive, anti-regulation trigger word when we see it? And realize how ridiculous this use of this fearsome boogie is?

Next, they'll be claiming Democrats intend to GOVERNMENT MANDATE socialism. Oh, that's right. They've been doing that for a long time now.

Btw, although we could take from retirement to buy an EV, that might become problematic, and we might have to keep our old gas car running, paying higher taxes on it, until one of our kids passes one on or until the last local gas station also "disappears." Life never meant not having to meet change, though.

[WarGamer]

42. I Understand caution re: wording...

But in reality... you're going to need to buy an EV in California after 2035.

By then, hopefully they're affordable.

I've driven an i3 for years... it's a fun little golf cart.

I've considered a new EV many times... just haven't pulled the trigger. At least partially because of how fast technology is changing.

[Polybius]

60. You'll be allowed to buy an ICE car

It will just have to be manufactured in 2034 or earlier.

[Mr.Bill]

64. You will not be able to buy a NEW ICE car

ICE cars will still be on the road and available as used cars for decades.

[moose65]

67. What would stop you from going to Arizona?

Or to Oregon, or Nevada to buy a new ICE car? I can't see any Democratic administration that would stop you from buying in another state.

I live in the NW corner of NC, not far from Tennessee and Virginia. People around here routinely go to those other states for things that they think are cheaper.

This is fear mongering. The rightwing has already latched onto it, just like they did when they claimed that liberals would ban soft drinks and hamburgers, which hasn't happened yet, that I know of.

[Grins]

32. Who has mandated them?

[ForgedCrank]

37. Some states

are already banning the sale of gasoline and diesel vehicles within 10 years.
And when folks go border shopping for gasoline cars after that, we can expect lawmakers to enact mitigation laws to stop that as well.

[Mr.Bill]

65. They are banning the sale of NEW ICE cars.

[ForgedCrank]

36. I have

no beef regarding EV's at all, but forcing it on the public is a terrible idea and many people will suffer great consequences because of it.
Ultimately, EV's are a lot more expensive to operate over the lifespan of a typical car.
The half of the country who can only afford 10 year old used vehicles will lose that option over time as a 10 year old EV will need new battery packs that are absolutely unaffordable. It's like having to overhaul the gasoline engine in your current car every 7-8 years, but double the price. There will be many left without transportation options.
And for us rural folks, we drive a LOT of miles to get anywhere. A typical trip to get a gallon of mile at the closest store is almost 30 miles round trip.
There are just far too many issues to allow a mandatory change in direction. The least of all is the argument that they aren't even cleaner in the end.

[tinrobot]

39. The alternative is mandating others breathe your polluted exhaust...

...and suffer with the climate-altering effects of that exhaust.

Nope. That stuff coming out of tailpipes is toxic and needs to be regulated/mandated.

And -- BTW, the CA mandate is not for electric cars, it is simply against cars that emit greenhouse gases.

[roamer65]

46. Cars are getting rationed as we speak, regardless of propulsion method.

Average price of a new car is $48K and the average price of a used one is $33K.

That rationing is a good thing for the planet.

[ForgedCrank]

54. For real,

who cares about all those low income types if they don't like it. It's for the common good so they can just deal with it and walk.

[Saboburns]

49. Climate change is a BIG EFFIN DEAL in CA

Their towns are burning down. Their homes are burning down. People are frightened because it keeps getting worse. Rapidly.

One fire, the Tubbs fire, burned down over 18,000 structures in less than 24 hours.

Californians are much more tuned into climate change than anywhere else in America. I experienced a California wildfire, it leaves lifelong scars in your psyche.

When it's pitch black at noon on an August day from smoke, and you're not really sure that you will survive the next hour, electric cars seem like a damn good idea.

And you wonder why the hell didn't we do stuff like this 20 years ago.

[hunter]

50. Cars themselves are a stupid idea.

If we truly want to quit fossil fuels we ought to start by restructuring our cities, turning them into attractive pedestrian friendly places where car ownership is unnecessary.

If I was Emperor of the Earth I'd ban the manufacture of new cars capable of speeds greater than 50 kilometers per hour. This would discourage commuter lifestyles.

Just a thought experiment.

With the human population approaching eight billion, the earth simply can't support an automobile for every adult. It doesn't really matter what powers these automobiles, the infrastructure required to support car culture is immense and the environmental impacts huge.

[FreeState]

55. I personally think car ownership is a bad idea

I think 10-15 years from now few will buy them and when they need one they will call it via their phone (or what ever replaces that) and a driverless car will pick them up and take them were they need to go. It may be a while before remote areas lose car ownership though if ever.

[hunter]

71. That, combined with excellent train service between cities...

... would get a lot of cars off the road.

We're supposedly a very wealthy nation. Why can't we have reliable rail service like Switzerland?

Whenever I use public transportation in the U.S.A. it's almost always an adventure of missed connections and crazy people. Even flying is like that. There are crazy people on the road too but they are isolated in their little steel and glass boxes. You only know they are crazy by their driving.

[sakabatou]

59. CA may need a new energy plant, plus more charging stations.

We have that aging nuke plant, but I believe it needs to be replaced sooner than later.

[Dysfunctional]

70. What good is a tax rebate to buy an electric car if you don't pay taxes or just a little tax.

Also, infrastructure must handle the increase in electricity needed before the cars are mandated.

[pwb]

74. Isn't it a tax credit?

.

[Dysfunctional]

79. You have to pay taxes to get the tax credit.

[Liberal In Texas]

92. You still file don't you?

Even if you're not paying much. The tax credit would come to you in the form of a refund even if you didn't owe anythig.

In the case of the state refund that I got, the state sent me a check for about $2,500.

[IcyPeas]

72. Taiwan has swappable batteries for their electric scooters....

I realize these are just scooters, but I thought it was a good idea.

Taiwan has swappable batteries for their electric scooters, there's no reason why American cities shouldn't have this too

Link to tweet

[Polybius]

75. If we can do that with cars, it would solve waiting a long time for a charge

It's a brilliant idea.

[Mr.Bill]

78. They are doing this in China with fleet vehicles such as

police cars, taxis and local delivery vehicles, for instance.

[Ron Green]

82. The dumbest idea for a mandate is that transportation, zoning and land use

be designed almost exclusively for the automobile, which is what has happened in this country, especially since World War 2.

And to deny that it’s been mandatory is to ignore the history of the above institutions as well as that of finance, advertising, education, entertainment, and most other cultural pressures.

[Mr.Bill]

88. You make some very good points.

And some very good points about investing in public transportation. I live in a rural county in Northern California, and we didn't have bus service until about 15 years ago. Not one foot of railroad track has ever been laid in my county. There isn't even Uber here. There are to the best of my knowledge three or four public charging stations for EVs and none of them are free. I would love to see and would use public transportation if more of it existed here. (The bus service here is very sparse and infrequent. Going to a doctor's appointment can be an all day process.)

[uponit7771]

89. +1

[Emile]

95. The Times They Are A-Changin'

Don't be afraid of change.

[Yavin4]

97. The best environmental strategy is to make more of America less car dependent.

Build more densely populated urban areas. No, not another NYC, but what about making existing cities like Milwaukee, Cincinnati, Buffalo, Albany, Columbus, etc. all less car dependent and more urbanized. Tear down the ugly ass freeways running through them. Build more moderate housing within walking/biking distance to downtown. Invest more in public transportation.

[Ron Green]

99. This

is good.