[sharkymcpeterson]

It's being reported that California will ban new gasoline call powered vehicles by 2035 and that 35% of vehicles sold must be zero emission by 2026, the number jumps to 68% by 2030.

I knew there was a huge push toward electric vehicles but I didn't expect this. I'm very disappointed in this news, I love the sound an ICE can be made to produce, to me it's irreplaceable.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by sharkymcpeterson

It's being reported that California will ban new gasoline call powered vehicles by 2035 and that 35% of vehicles sold must be zero emission by 2026, the number jumps to 68% by 2030.

I knew there was a huge push toward electric vehicles but I didn't expect this. I'm very disappointed in this news, I love the sound an ICE can be made to produce, to me it's irreplaceable.

No, you read the headlight, but you didn't read the details. It is a credit system. In order to achieve so called zero emission requirement from each car manufacture, they just need to have the "emission" score = 0. Doesn't mean they cannot sell gasoline car.

[Stoshu]

Originally Posted by eelnoraa

No, you read the headlight, but you didn't read the details. It is a credit system. In order to achieve so called zero emission requirement from each car manufacture, they just need to have the "emission" score = 0. Doesn't mean they cannot sell gasoline car.

Can you explain how this is achievable?

If an EVs emission score = 0 and an ICE score > 0, how would a company have an “emissions score” = 0 if they sold even one ICE car?

Am I missing a vehicle that has a score < 0?

[Aimster82]

I think by 2035 90% of cars sold will be EV in the USA.

[birish21]

Originally Posted by Aimster82

I think by 2035 90% of cars sold will be EV in the USA.

With what supply?

[mmm50i]

Originally Posted by birish21

With what supply?

13 years away, supply won’t be an issue with all manufacturers producing more and more EVs.

[ScaldedDog]

Originally Posted by Stoshu

Can you explain how this is achievable?

If an EVs emission score = 0 and an ICE score > 0, how would a company have an “emissions score” = 0 if they sold even one ICE car?

Am I missing a vehicle that has a score < 0?

Probably from buying "credits" from EV manufacturers. I don't know if it's still true, but for awhile Tesla wasn't making money selling cars, they were making money selling credits to other automakers.

We have the government we deserve.

Mark

[cellarrat]

I don't think the issue will be the capability to make or sell the cars. I think the infrastructure is a much bigger nut to crack.

First, you need places for people to charge. Think about what it will take for all the vehicles in NYC or CHI to be able to charge. All those people in high rise bldgs. All those people in suburban duplexes. They surely won't all be able to have a home charging solution, and it would be a task of enormous scale to outfit every garage with enough stations to permit them all to charge. Unless we can figure out (on this timeline) how to make charging take minutes instead of hours, for the vast majority of vehicles, I fear this is just not do-able.

Second, if everyone is plugging in, our electrical grid is going to have to be massively upgraded, and we are going to have to figure out new ways to make all that juice. Really, nuclear is the only solution. Given tech advances in nuclear, I actually think is technologically feasible, but the cost will be staggering. The recent infrastructure and ICA bills are a good start, but nowhere near adequate

I support the effort completely. Not sure it is feasible. But unless we are pushed we won't even get started

[sharkymcpeterson]

Originally Posted by eelnoraa

No, you read the headlight, but you didn't read the details. It is a credit system. In order to achieve so called zero emission requirement from each car manufacture, they just need to have the "emission" score = 0. Doesn't mean they cannot sell gasoline car.

I read both the HEADLINE and the article my friend, I think you might want to do the same-the article clearly states that California is outright banning newly manufactured gasoline powered vehicles sales in 2035.

Here's a link-

https://dnyuz.com/2022/08/24/califor...gasoline-cars/

[97supratt]

Good luck with that! The infrastructure needed to support all those charging needs is obsolete both here in CA and around the world. Unless they implement what Europe is currently using which is charging roads.

[sharkymcpeterson]

Originally Posted by cellarrat

I don't think the issue will be the capability to make or sell the cars. I think the infrastructure is a much bigger nut to crack.

First, you need places for people to charge. Think about what it will take for all the vehicles in NYC or CHI to be able to charge. All those people in high rise bldgs. All those people in suburban duplexes. They surely won't all be able to have a home charging solution, and it would be a task of enormous scale to outfit every garage with enough stations to permit them all to charge. Unless we can figure out (on this timeline) how to make charging take minutes instead of hours, for the vast majority of vehicles, I fear this is just not do-able.

Second, if everyone is plugging in, our electrical grid is going to have to be massively upgraded, and we are going to have to figure out new ways to make all that juice. Really, nuclear is the only solution. Given tech advances in nuclear, I actually think is technologically feasible, but the cost will be staggering. The recent infrastructure and ICA bills are a good start, but nowhere near adequate

I support the effort completely. Not sure it is feasible. But unless we are pushed we won't even get started

I'm not against the effort to modernize our electrical grid or to lower emissions, I just don't like the idea that the state is outright banning the sale of these vehicles. The largest auto market in the US makes a change like that auto manufacturers are going to take notice.

The article I read said "The attorneys general of 17 Republican-led states have sued to revoke the California waiver, which would undo the new policy"

So things could change but in the long run EV's inevitable.

[sharkymcpeterson]

Originally Posted by 97supratt

Good luck with that! The infrastructure needed to support all those charging needs is obsolete both here in CA and around the world. Unless they implement what Europe is currently using which is charging roads.

"Charging roads" doesn't sound cheap to implement. The cost would be at our expense of course.

[cellarrat]

Originally Posted by sharkymcpeterson

"Charging roads" doesn't sound cheap to implement. The cost would be at our expense of course.

Cheaper than climate catastrophe. By a wide margin. The cost of inaction is much, much greater.

I'm not knowledgeable enough in the field to know what the most efficient path out of our predicament is. I do know that the current path we are on is not fit for the purpose

[Shllshck]

EV is one option. Keep in mind, electricity can come from solar, wind, and hydro but you still have natural gas and coal burning in many places. EV doesn’t necessarily equal clean energy. Hydrogen is another option but it’s infrastructure footprint is so much smaller now and besides Toyota, don’t know who is investing in that direction. Technology will keep evolving. While I do like ICE engines and have an X6 on order, when I move to replace my F36, it most likely will be an i4.

[cellarrat]

Originally Posted by Shllshck

EV is one option. Keep in mind, electricity can come from solar, wind, and hydro but you still have natural gas and coal burning in many places. EV doesn’t necessarily equal clean energy. Hydrogen is another option but it’s infrastructure footprint is so much smaller now and besides Toyota, don’t know who is investing in that direction. Technology will keep evolving. While I do like ICE engines and have an X6 on order, when I move to replace my F36, it most likely will be an i4.

Coal is dying. In 2001, 30 states got most of their power from coal.Today it's half that.
You can see where power comes from in your state here:


https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...-election.html

[sharkymcpeterson]

Originally Posted by cellarrat

Cheaper than climate catastrophe. By a wide margin. The cost of inaction is much, much greater.

I'm not knowledgeable enough in the field to know what the most efficient path out of our predicament is. I do know that the current path we are on is not fit for the purpose

What I was hinting at is this-tearing out the roads to re lay using special pavement doesn't seem realistic or cost effective, even in the face of utter annihilation. Do we have the resources available? Wouldn't something like that take decades to complete? The biggest question of all is will china go all electric?

The positive effects of reducing our footprint are substantially reduced if china doesn't take the same aggressive action. That isn't to say we shouldn't do our part….

I think zero emissions is a bit much and I think mandating no new gas vehicles is a bit much. I'm all for making EV's affordable and charging stations blah blah blah. I just don't like the government telling me I can't buy an ICE if I want one. Over reach is all it is.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by sharkymcpeterson

I read both the HEADLINE and the article my friend, I think you might want to do the same-the article clearly states that California is outright banning newly manufactured gasoline powered vehicles sales in 2035.

Here's a link-

https://dnyuz.com/2022/08/24/califor...gasoline-cars/

I read this as someone wants to do it, and trying to push into CA legislation. That is it. I think we should read the actual legislation for a more realistic target.

Like other said, the issue is infra structure. For date to date usage, as long as people has L2 at home, it maybe manageable. The issue will transfer to our grid can support all the EVs pulling 50A at 9pm or mid night. For long haul, it will be very challenging.

[cellarrat]

Originally Posted by sharkymcpeterson

What I was hinting at is this-tearing out the roads to re lay using special pavement doesn't seem realistic or cost effective, even in the face of utter annihilation. Do we have the resources available? Wouldn't something like that take decades to complete? The biggest question of all is will china go all electric?

The positive effects of reducing our footprint are substantially reduced if china doesn't take the same aggressive action. That isn't to say we shouldn't do our part….

I think zero emissions is a bit much and I think mandating no new gas vehicles is a bit much. I'm all for making EV's affordable and charging stations blah blah blah. I just don't like the government telling me I can't buy an ICE if I want one. Over reach is all it is.

Some good points here, but I don't think we can wait for China. If what we are doing is destroying the planet, it is counter-productive to say "we won't if they don't."



China's approach to reducing its footprint is complicated. No country is moving more aggressively towards nuclear/renewables, but no country has as far to go. And their economy is so poor right now that there has been a lot of backsliding on promises made to reduce coal usage. In fact they are building new coal plants while they are building new nukes. They have 50+ nukes now, and plan to have another 20+ by 2025. Capacity is supposed to triple by 2030. These aren't just pinky-swears; they are actually building them now


As for whether CA's approach is "overreach," it depends on how seriously you take the dire predictions about sea-level rise etc. As I said above, I am not at all sure it is realistic, and I'm sensitive to the heavy hand of the gov't dictating behavior, but if it is a planet-saving (and money-saving) step, I am not sure it is overreach at all.

[eelnoraa]

Originally Posted by 97supratt

Good luck with that! The infrastructure needed to support all those charging needs is obsolete both here in CA and around the world. Unless they implement what Europe is currently using which is charging roads.

I don't think Europe has charging road. They have charging parking spots, where supporting car is charge while parked. Very early phase of testing, very slow charging as of now too. Can we get "there"? sure, it will take some time, we are not there yet. And NO they do NOT have charging road where car is charged while they are being driven.

[jad03060]

There have been a few, very short sections of charging 'roads', but by no means is it widespread as not only the roads would need to change but any EV wanting to drive on it.

There was a paper released today on a prototype AL-S (aluminum-sulphur) battery from MIT and a spinoff to commercialize it has started. Very fast recharge, higher energy density, and long life, but it probably wouldn't work in a vehicle (yet), but could be a cheap way to buffer the grid and store any excess capacity of solar or wind. It uses a liquid salt solution that needs to be 90C to stay liquid and work. Both materials are plentiful and cheap. It has a higher energy density than lithium batteries, too. Longevity and recharge rates are good, too.

These could be very useful for EV charging stations as they can buffer the load and release it quickly, or suck up any excess rapidly.

Need pushes results...setting a goal is part of that process.

[mitch57]

Here's a link on the US's source of electrical power that doesn't require a subscription to read. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/...-in-the-us.php

The bottom line is that the infrastructure will not be able to support an all electric auto industry by 2035 unless the technology changes drastically before then.

I believe the real issue here is the politicians and the media FAIL to present the WHOLE story on energy.

I don't see how the current push for all electric is going to solve our problems when all we're really doing is trading Tit for Tat.

https://evolvetoecology.org/2022/08/...tric-vehicles/

[Celos]

Originally Posted by cellarrat

Cheaper than climate catastrophe. By a wide margin. The cost of inaction is much, much greater.

I think this is really the heart of the matter.

Does the US (or the world) have the electrical distribution capacity or charging infrastructure today for every ICE vehicle to be EV? No.

Will China (or India, Brazil, etc.) keep burning fossil fuels? Probably.

Will the U.S. (in particular) get to a less carbon-intensive future purely on market-based grounds? Highly unlikely.

Something has to be done, and government incentives and mandates are part of the answer. And there's a long history of that, even in the U.S., such as the technologies that came out of WWII efforts, the NIH, and basic science research.

Since moving to a better public transportation system seems to be off the table, if we're all going to have private automobiles, EVs are better. Not all electricity generation is "clean" — but the potential is there in a way that simply isn't for petroleum-burning vehicles.

I also think about two other aspect of this discussion that go beyond purely EVs. One, petroleum is needed for plastics and other materials. Future generations will look back and ask why we burned it all for transportation and electricity. While cleaner energy sources have their own carbon footprints and raw material inputs, they are more renewable, and some such as wind or tidal power have very long serviceable lives once deployed.

Two, this related basket of technologies and industrial processes is going to be a critical economic driver for the next 20-50 years. If the U.S. (and Europe) don't invest in this stuff, it virtually guarantees economic decline, with all the pain that comes with that. It's perhaps unlikely that anything can stop China from overtaking the U.S./EU in terms of economic output, but ceding technological advancements that the rest of the world wants is not a good path to success.

Back to the topic at hand, I live in CA and have owned a pure EV for four years. I really wanted to never buy another ICE vehicle again, but I need a road trip vehicle that can tow, and while there are vehicles out there with enough range to fit that bill, the infrastructure isn't there yet. I expect the 45e to be a transitional vehicle, not just for me, but for the wider market until EVs get there.