Environmentalists have been saying this for about 50 years, if not more. And yet oil companies keep finding more oil. Yes, eventually we’ll run out of oil if we keep burning it at the current rate. But it’s not going to be real soon.
True. Many of the complaints about EVs are due to them not being an exact drop-in for ICEVs. But that’s the way of all technologies that replace others; they’re never perfect drop-ins. People who adopt the new tech just have to adjust for the deficiencies of that new tech. Generally, they won’t be as bad as the deficiencies of the old tech or no one would be adopting the new.
Several other states generally adopt new air polution rules (and this is an air polution rule) set by California. I can’t remember if any others have already adopted this one, but if not, I expect some will.
Not true. Most posters here are on the side that Electric cars make great daily commuters/drivers. but are not ideal for all uses. Then again, no vehicle is ideal for all uses.
Not as easy as just doing it as you need to register your vehicle in CA.
There already are- a Plug in hybrid or a used vehicle.
We need an alternative to fossil fuels due to global climate change.
Yeah. There is no future where ICE vehicles play a significant role. We can quibble about the timing–but it’s not going to be more than 2-3 decades. ICE vehicles will be like horses, in the sense that horses are still around and that some people even use them for transportation, but only by people that really like horses for some reason. There will have to be a massive, overriding reason to choose an ICE car, and it’ll be very expensive to maintain.
The CA law is optimistic, but I expect that in some areas, it’ll happen ahead of schedule. I think there will be some counties where no dealers are offering new ICE vehicles before 2035, just because of sheer economics. In Santa Clara county (where I live), ZEVs are already 43% of new sales. At a certain point, it becomes actively inconvenient to own an ICE due to closing gas stations, service centers, etc.
People are bad at properly evaluating what they use things for. People call to mind all those thousand-mile roadtrips that might be a little slower in an EV… but in reality those trips are rare.
People often discount the benefits of the alternate technology because they’re unaware of them or don’t understand them. Lots of people don’t internalize how nice home charging is until they actually experience it, for example.
My point isn’t that EVs are currently suitable for all purposes, but that the gap between the threshold of “good enough” vs. the current capabilities is likely much smaller than what’s perceived.
Almost no EV drivers are willing to go back to ICE. That this is a biased sample puts things even more in favor of EVs: people who were already inclined towards EVs should, all else being equal, be more likely to regress to the mean. But that doesn’t happen. The EV experience is at least as good, or even better, than what they imagined it to be in advance.
Not to mention big pick up drivers who watch the ads of trucks hauling huge loads, etc- but then only drive their trucks to work, shopping etc. And then Jeep owners who watch ads of jeeps destroying delicate riparian habitats and think they are going to go do that, but again- just normal daily driving.
Does the current bill change the law? Because far as I know right now you can buy a car anywhere you like and register it in CA. It just needs to meet CA emission standards.
ETA: I suppose requiring zero emissions on a new car might do the job legally.
A car-based society is a wonderful thing. There are few technologies that have had such a dramatic positive effect on human happiness and freedom than the car. Everybody should have a car. Just about all people who can afford cars get them, and they don’t like going back.
The trouble with cars, of course, is that they come with a host of externalities. Most significantly, pollution and the death/injury they can cause. EVs eliminate the pollution, and self-driving will eventually eliminate the excess deaths. EVs will also likely be cheaper and more reliable in the long run than ICE cars, making them affordable to more people. The more cars the better!
Some time back., the UK gave a tax break to people and companies that bought EVs and PHEVs. Lots of companies took advantage of this break and bought them for their executives. Apparently getting a company-paid-for car is a common perk in the UK. Anyway, after a year or two, someone did a study on how this was working out and found that many, perhaps most, of those company-car-people had gotten PHEVs and never bothered to plug them in. In other words, they were running them as ICEs. This, of course, defeated the whole purpose of the tax break.
Based on this, I predict that when the California ICE ban goes into effect, lots of people are going to do the same. That is, buy PHEVs and never plug them in.
Part of the political debate seems to be saying that transition to EV’s (and heat pumps) are going to cause issues with the grid, totally ignoring that 1: It’s happening in conjunction with a build out of power infrastructure 2: It’s going to happen over a timeframe in the range of a decade or more, so a ‘soft’ transition.
Here is a report about NY’s grid Grid of the Future - NYISO which I read a while back. IIRC there may be some short term shortfalls in the more near term future than back to stability due to increasing buildout and also smarter use of the grid, along with a shift towards winter peak demand.
So I don’t think CA is being unreasonably optimistic if they are likewise looking at supporting the grid to support it’s growth over the transition.
Sort of but not entirely, as they do get better efficiency, and also have the option of plug in which may be used at times when fuel prices spike. And increasing demand for PHEV’s does help out jump start the manufacturing of them.
I wonder how much that’s an artifact of how UK folks park their cars. Perhaps an electricity supply is less common in garages or more cars park on the street or whatever. Did these UK companies with the PHEVs install corresponding quantities of chargers at work?
Here’s another thought: If these execs are getting free cars from their employer, do they also have a credit card where the get free gasoline petrol too? But would have to pay their own utility bill to charge their PHEV at home?
You don’t become an exec without being very sensitive to where your bread is buttered. Selfishness is the Prime Directive; milk every perk, and milk it hard. Unlimited free petrol vs £2 of extra self-paid electricity consumption per month? Easy decision every time: go for the free petrol. Despite a £100K+ salary.
Doubly so if the car did not come with whatever sort of charger it needs. If the exec was expected to spend their own money on that, not gonna happen.
What this whole thing does demonstrate is that both companies and people are very sensitive to incentives. Get them right and they’ll do right. Get them wrong and they’ll do wrong. Unfortunately, the political process tends to produce partial solutions with large gaps in the incentive system. Which is why perverse outcomes are so common.
I don’t remember if the study drilled down to find out why they weren’t plugging them in, but I don’t think it did. I suppose it could be for a variety of reasons and not mostly for just one. I assumed that the main reason was that the people using the cars were not invested in reducing GHGs, so they didn’t make the effort. After all, they didn’t make the decision to buy a PHEV.
At any rate, there are people hostile to the idea of fighting global warming by reducing their carbon footprint. I expect these to be the ones to buy a PHEV when there’s no new ICEs available and not plug them in.
I’m not disputing the UK scenario, but it boggles me. One of the reasons (far down the list, but an actual reason) my wife and I are working on transitioning to BEV/PHEV is that the whole going to a gas-station is a PITA. Either you’re making time for it in addition to all your other errands, or you have an “oh BLEEP” moment because you’ve been putting it off. And boom, 15 minutes of your day (going to Costco gas is cheap, but not normally fast) are gone.
Compared to the cell-phone like habit of taking a moment to plug it in at the end of the day? Just seems like such a no-brainer for me. Especially if you have a comparatively low-range PHEV where you can fully charge over a standard household connection (granted, assuming you have a garage or other secure structure).
If our research hadn’t turned up a major household wiring issue a month ago, we’d probably already have a BEV on order.
Agree completely that there are people who will spend a lot of extra money just to make exhaust to prove to those green woke bastards how wrong they are. America is a land of morons.
Our electric company is actively encouraging EV usage. Sure, they’ll sell more electrons, but if it was going to crash the grid, I think they might know that and urge a slower acceptance. They’re not. They’re going full steam into EVs. I assume they know what they’re doing (or at least more than I do)
They already are. CA’s grid is pretty solid right now, and getting better. Well, except for areas where PG&E still has above ground power lines, but that isnt an issue of not enough power.
There are truck drivers who do 'rolling coal" just to hurt bicyclists, etc.
