Under EPA rules, EVs will need to be 30-40% of the market by 2030, down from the proposed 60%. And it now costs more per mile to fuel an electric F-150 than a gasoline powered truck. 
More Time to Hit Nonsensical Targets
The Biden administration had no choice given a consumer and auto manufacturer revolt against EVs.
Today, the Wall Street Journal reports Biden’s EPA Gives Automakers More Leeway to Phase Out Gas-Engine Cars
The Biden administration enacted the strictest-ever rules for tailpipe emissions but also handed the auto industry a significant concession by giving them more time to comply, a recognition that the transition to electric cars will take longer than hoped.
To hit the targets for model-year 2030, for example, an estimated 31% to 44% of new light-vehicle sales would need to be electric, rather than the 60% mark originally proposed.
Thousands of U.S. dealers signed letters to Biden in an organized campaign to get the administration to back off the emissions targets, saying there wasn’t enough consumer interest to support such a big swing to EVs.
On Wednesday, the dealer group said the slower implementation of the rules is helpful but the targets are still too aggressive. “This is unelected Washington bureaucrats dictating what kind of vehicles Americans can buy,” the group said.
Biden’s EV Mandate Blows Its Cover
Also consider Biden’s EV Mandate Blows Its Cover
Auto makers lauded the Administration for “moderating the pace of EV adoption” in “the next few (very critical) years of the EV transition” while calling its targets “still a stretch.” The Administration has taken auto companies hostage, threatening to cause financial carnage across the industry with its EV mandate. CEOs are grateful for the delay in execution.
EVs made up less than 8% of new auto sales last year, and more than half were Teslas. They accounted for less than 4% of General Motors and Ford sales. Foreign luxury auto makers such as BMW (12.5%), Mercedes (11.4%) and Porsche (10%) will have an easier time meeting the Biden mandates because their affluent customers can more easily afford EVs.
In the Zero Chance Category
Most popular gas-powered pickups emit about 430 grams of CO2 per mile. Under EPA’s final rule, trucks will have to average 184 g/mile in 2027, 128 g/mile in 2030 and 90 g/mile by 2032. Ergo, the companies will effectively have to produce one to two electric trucks for every gas-powered one in 2027. The ratio will be closer to four to one by 2032.
In the Irony of the Day Category
A new Panasonic EV battery plant in Kansas that will receive billions of dollars in subsidies from the Inflation Reduction Act is forcing a local utility to keep open a coal plant that was scheduled to close. Congratulations, Mr. President, for increasing coal production.
A Note About Running Costs
Fueling up a Ford F-Series truck now costs about $17 per 100 miles on average compared to $17.75 for an F-150 Lightning with mostly home-charging and $26.39 with mostly commercial chargers.
California Electricity Prices
Inquiring minds may be wondering what’s happening to electricity bills in California.
I can help.
Please consider Recent PG&E Bill With Rate Hike Shocks Customers
Sticker shock for some PG&E customers. Even for people who knew the utility was raising rates this year, January bills more than doubled for some.
Rate increases for PG&E customers have piled up in the last year and another could be coming in March. Even some customers doing the math say their bills just don’t add up.
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) approved a rate increase of 13 percent this month and is considering another 7.2 percent hike for March. If approved, PG&E Customers will pay about $48 more a month. TURN is pushing for new legislation that will cap future rate increases.
This year’s rate hikes aren’t the only frustrations TURN has. They say last year the CPUC approved enough rate hikes to increase customer’s bills by 33%
Absurd Proposals by Progressives to Fix a Problem Caused by Progressives
As one might have expected, economic illiterates think a rate cap is the solution.
The only solution is to not cram EVs down everyone’s throat when infrastructure is not remotely in place.
History of PG&E Rate Hikes
- In January of 2023, PG&E raised rates by 8.9%.
- This was preceded by an 8% increase for electricity prices and an 11% increase for gas prices in 2019, and an 8% increase in electricity prices in 2022.
- Overall, PG&E has increased its rates an average of 5.7%-6% year over year for the past 11 years.
- In January of 2023, PG&E announced that customers’ bills could go up as much as 32%, in contrast to the 24% they initially expected.
The above points are from Why is My PG&E Bill So High in 2024 and What Can I Do About It? That link is an infomercial for solar systems but I appreciate the history.
PG&E has other issues like fires and maintenance.
Throw California’s 100% EVs by 2035 into the mix. Who will be able to afford to charge their car? Turn on their air conditioner?
Things That Won’t Happen
- Companies will have to produce one to two electric trucks for every gas-powered one in 2027 to meet EPA goals. No chance.
- Companies will have to produce four electric trucks for every gas-powered one by 2032 to meet EPA goals. No chance.
- 100% EVs by 2035. No Chance
- 75% EVs by 2035. No Chance
Factor in what happens if Trump wins the election. All such goals will be thrown out the window.
If Trump wins, the next chance to force products down people’s throats that they don’t want will be 2028.
In the EU, expect a real shocker in the European Parliament elections in June. I will comment on that shortly. But here’s a hit: It won’t be Green.
EVs Emit More Particulates
Let’s discuss particulates from tires. They are another reason to be skeptical of the clean energy claims for EVs.
On March 3, I noted EVs Emit More Particulates, One of the Most Dangerous Pollutants
The lie of the day is a joint effort from the EPA and the state of California. Both are using rigged tests to get rid of gasoline powered vehicles.
The EPA used rigged tests to make EVs look better when in fact they are much worse.
Here’s the kicker: EVs will burn through tires 20-50% faster and “60% of rubber used in the tire industry is synthetic rubber, produced from petroleum-derived hydrocarbons.”
Biden Promotes Climate Change at the Expense of More Global Poverty
Please note Biden Promotes Climate Change at the Expense of More Global Poverty
The mad rush to deal with climate change, even if it works (it won’t), has a nasty tradeoff (more global poverty).
PG&E is favorite utility for hedge fund investors despite the wild fires. When cities break away and form their own power companies, PG&E is allowed to charge a perpetual heavy and increasing exit fees to the new utilities to make sure there is no benefit for customers to switch.
“This is unelected Washington bureaucrats dictating what kind of vehicles Americans can buy,” the group said.
You can have a debate about how reasonable are Biden’s rules on EVs, and I’m all for that. But bringing up the “unelected Washington bureaucrats” line just takes advantage of how broken American democracy is, and brings a hammer to break it some more, because it’s dying anyway, so who cares?
The whole point of Washington bureaucrats, if there is one, is to dictate things. Somebody has to figure out reasonable rules, and not everybody is going to like them, because that’s life. And electing the person is not going to make the person or their decisions more likeable (the fact that lots of people hate the president, whoever the president is at any given time, proves that beyond doubt). Blaming the disagreement on somebody being “unelected” is barking at the wrong tree.
The disagreement happens for a whole bunch of reasons, but one that stands out is because people are being constantly hammered with the wrong idea that they ought to have political opinions on subjects they know nothing about. It’s entirely irresponsible to demand that the average citizen should know everything about everything. People ought to pick the political battles they wish to engage in, based on their areas of knowledge, and ignore all the rest. And they should be actively discouraged from trying to engage in anything they don’t know much about. Of course, I know that presidential campaigns are the exact opposite of that, and that there is a whole lot of people whose careers depend on getting the votes of ignorant people and hoping that somehow that justifies their existence. How they manage to believe that’s for the overall good, or even for their own long-term personal benefit, is a mystery to me. It isn’t possible to fix anything without knowing what the hell you are doing.
“Absurd Proposals by Progressives to Fix a Problem Caused by Progressives”
I just heard last night that Newsom supported 6 billion $ state ballot measure for the homeless, passed. City of Los Angeles is working on a measure to replace prop HHH, a 1.5 billion $ measure. I’m thinking that one managed to produce some $750,000 apartments.
If a Democrat wins the WH in 2024 we plan on buying a new large SUV from Subaru next year. Dealers will be charging $$$$$ for new gas cars as there will be more demand for them. We’re not going to wait until the last minute. This will be the last car we buy.
subaru does not make a Large SUV
Once one knows the Great Reset / BBB objective is to reduce the population and transition to the 4th Industrial Revolution (people integrated with machines), then it all makes sense. Sadly, this is not some conspiracy theory, but it will fail. Our job is to minimize the damage and chart a new course for freedom after the dust settles in 2032. So buckle up, the real fun is about to begin, which will include having to fight criminal ILEGALS who can get guns easier than citizens – link to armstrongeconomics.com.
Here comes the war – link to armstrongeconomics.com,
“The Biden administration had no choice given a consumer and auto manufacturer revolt against EVs.”
The effect of major push back. After major pushback of lost revenue, Chapek was shown the exit door at Disney. Even California replaced AB2098, after doctors took them to court. Farmers pushed back hard in Europe. I guess the EU was a little hard of hearing.
I propose make 100% of yachts more than 30 feet long electrics by 2025. And turn off the air conditioning in the California Public Utilities Commission offices and Ivy League campuses.
That will reduce CO2 emissions without bothering the people.
I think the following chart (kn the link below) is helpful for putting the whole CO2 debate into perspective. Actually we are at historical lows in CO2. During the last ice age CO2 levels dropped to such low levels that it threatened certain C3 plants. Also the greenhouse effect from CO2 saturates (i.e. doubling CO2 only increases the greenhouse effect frlm CO2 by 1%). Yet we must kill our economy and let China and India burn coal without limit because we are noble and trying to save the planet. How silly! The planet will be here long after this generation of sheeple have been stampeded off the cliff of the greenies. I don’t care if they want to do this to themselves. Just don’t involve the rest of us in your silliness.
content://com.android.chrome.FileProvider/images/screenshot/17110360506475162183671419767844.jpg
Hopefully this will work
link to google.com
Historical lows compared to what?
Yes. CO2 is good for plants. But what about everything else? CO2 levels are currently 420 ppm. The last time CO2 levels were over 400 ppm was during the Pliocene era (2.6-5.3 million years ago). Global temperatures were 5F (3C) warmer than today, and sea levels were 50 ft higher, because the warmer temperatures melted so much of the world’s ice. This era gives us an idea of where we are headed in the future, as long as CO2 levels stay elevated or continue to increase.
Going further back, CO2 levels exceeded 2000 ppm during the Cretaceous period, over 100 million years ago. Global temperatures were 11C warmer than today, and all the ice was melted. Ocean levels were 70-100m (230-300 feet) higher than today.
With ocean levels so high there was a lot less land area exposed, but at least it was covered in plants.
But plants don’t “need” such high CO2 levels to thrive. CO2 levels have ranged from 170 ppm to 300 ppm for the last million years and plants did just fine during those million years. In fact, all current life on earth has adapted to those CO2 levels. Increasing levels from 280 ppm to 420 ppm in the last two hundred years may be good for plants, but it is already putting a lot of stress on many life forms; including birds, animals, insects and humans.
As I always say: mandates don’t matter, because they can rarely be accomplished. So the mandates will be altered or scrapped, when reality sets in. Which is why I take most mandates with a grain of salt.
For some drivers, an EV is a good choice. But a PHEV is a probably a better choice for most drivers. And an ICE vehicle is still the best choice for a lot of folks. It depends on the drivers needs and the existing infrastructure. Arguing that ICE should be banned, or that EVs are part of a hoax is a waste of time. Just drive the vehicle that makes sense for you and stop arguing over all this nonsense
Currently, US EV sales are still just 7% of all vehicle sales. And EVs represent just 1% of vehicles on US roads overall. I suspect that PHEV sales will soon overtake EV sales. But ICE sales will continue to dominate for many more years.
Over time, the number of EVs and PHEVs will continue to increase as an overall percentage of vehicles on the road. But they will make very little difference in reducing emissions. The whole EV thing is a terrible distraction from doing the simple things needed to reduce emissions. Like switching from coal to natgas.
As the cost of all vehicles goes up so too will insurance and maintenance. at some point, “owning” a car will be a luxury just like “owning” a home is a luxury for the young. It’s only a matter of time before there is a mileage tax too and that will only go up over time. Roads will become toll based and those costs will only go up.
The best thing to do is avoid all those costs and plan your life around not needing a car at all. If people can’t do that because they moved out to the far out suburbs well then you’ll get squeezed by the costs and taxes.
Of course, I am looking to snap up any toll road bonds out there because I’ll be bleeding those car lovers dry. I’m buying insurance stocks too.
Choo! Choo! Ditch the auto and board the money train.
I never heard a train go choo choo. Some go clickity clack and the high-speed ones go whoosh. I believe the trains 100 years ago used steam so choo choo could work but you have to put in the whistle which goes whoo whoo.
I am happy train…Choo! Choo! …..Choo! Choo!
link to youtube.com
Since it’s a money train it should go ka-ching so put together it comes out to clickity clack choo choo whoo whoo ka-ching train.
“The best thing to do is avoid all those costs and plan your life around not needing a car at all.”
Since noone, nor no things, ever being transported beyond an hour’s walking distance from where it originates, is such a recipe for wealth creation and all…… The best thing to do is avoid all those costs and plan your life around subsistence farming…….
The future is hard to predict. Cars have been getting more complex and more expensive. But I suspect that within the next 20 years, there will be a large influx of very small and inexpensive electric vehicles (2,3 and 4 wheel) that are affordable for a large portion of the world’s population for basic transportation around their communities (some too small for highway use or long distances).
I like your toll road idea.
Push for the moon knowing that it will be walked back significantly, but the ball still gets moved downfield in the generally desired direction. Incrementalism….
Incrementalism – correct. And that is how we have arrived at the mess that this country is in.
So far, no one I know has bought an EV. No one I know has any thoughts to ever buy an EV. Most consider this push to get us in EVs, very much like the push to get us “vaccinated.” Smart people do not fall for this hoax.
Good points. I also know no one who owns an EV. The only ones in my area are a few Teslas and one Rivian pickup. But these are all wealthy people for whom this is a third or fourth car.
“Look at me, I’m GREEN!”
I am very PRO-Hybrid (we own a Plug in Hybrid, which can run on engine power endlessly, if our Drive Battery depletes on a Road trip). I love it around town on Battery Mode. One summer, at our beach locale on the Oregon Coast, we spent a total of less than 100 bucks in 5 months because we drove to and from STORES using EV mode and our RV park does not charge us for power…
Trump is promising MORE tariffs on Goods flowing in from Off-Shore. If you do not think that this is an effective contributor to inflation, then think again.
Biden is impacting inflation from a GREEN perspective (that is not green) and Trump is impacting inflation with a PROTECTIONIST intent which protects everyone BUT US (regular Citizens trying to get by).
The lesson is that GOVERNMENTS are not the answer to problems: they ARE the problem.
Storm in a tea cup. Just wait till we finally get autonomous vehicles and your permission to be in control of a two-ton killer will be taken away. Like the engineering in every modern convenience we enjoy, “it’ll never happen”. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Heard it all before. The EV challenge will roll out regardless of political interference: if it benefits, we’ll buy it; if it doesn’t, well get around it.
Always the way as long as we have democracy. By the way, how’s democracy doing these days?
“Just wait till we finally get autonomous vehicles and your permission to be in control of a two-ton killer will be taken away”
Not to mention when we finally get toothfairies! And your permission to be in control of even the tiny, tiny traces of your life which is not already under complete control by the bottom of the barrel totalitarian terror state that is the current US will betaken away!
Upside is: The infinitely freer, better ran and in all ways preferable Taliban Afghanistan is still outbreeding “us” at least 3 to 1. Not everything is bad and getting worse!
You’re quite the little tyrant, aren’t you?
The infrastructure buildout is going well now that the commonsense solution of a common standard for recharging stations has been adopted by almost every constructor. Hopefully as more stations get built we should see more competition among them leading to a drop in recharging rates. EV adoption has dropped to a slower but more sustainable pace. Tesla is still by far the lowest-cost producer. Legacy has not yet been able to copy Tesla’s manufacturing methods but eventually they will catch on. By then Tesla will be using Optimus robots to lower manufacturing costs even more. We live in exciting times.
For the tires the problem is more weight and more torque. Of the two more torque is the major culprit. EVs allow you to accelerate like a bat out of Hell from a stoplight so when you come down to it, it is the driving style that would have to be changed.
But, drag racing is a blast and I have NEVER cared one bit about Fuel Consumption when my drag racing days were in full implementation (in the 60’s, 22 cents a gallon, with car that COULD achieve 8mpg – – I had my 327 Cu Inch floored EVERY CHANCE I COULD GET).
I wonder if in the past, horse racing produced hoof particles in the air that caused environmental damage. Vast herds of buffalo would have made the air irrespirable from dust and hoof particles not to mention all those fish and whales in the sea defecating, mating and who knows what else.
“I wonder if in the past, horse racing produced hoof particles in the air that caused environmental damage.”
Both cars and horses produce both contact patch and tailpipe pollution. The difference is: In modern (passenger, new, rich world) cars; the tailpipe variety is so low that the contact patch pollution is what mostly matters. Whereas for horses: Not so much.
And seriously, what about mowing your own yard and slicing into dried up animal waste? What’s the effect on health?
Horse hoofs on pavers were incredibly noisy. In 1896 75,000 horses disappeared from the streets of Philidelphis due to the bicycle.
Don’t know why the downvotes. Everything you said is right out of a high school physics book – 50 years ago.
I think someone here doesn’t like me. Anyway, votes up and down are easy to manipulate. I don’t pay attention.
Maybe EV’s will start having non adjustable eco firmness built into the accelerator pedal. It won’t stop burnouts but would reduce 80% of them.
Ford and GM were fully committed to ev. The Biden flexible autocratic regime is trying to save them. AAPL cancelled its ev car projects. AAPL cancelled other projects. So is KLA. High tech layoffs cont. The BOJ rotates from the grande7 to US 10Y for 4.3%. Japan 10Y is 0.7%. The BOJ raids people’s bank accounts, for an IOU, and buys US 10Y for 4.3%.
Gas prices flucturate with the world market and utility rates stay pretty much flat. It is strange to me that the author would even make such a wrong statement. My area gas prices just went up to $4 a gallon. I have been reading that the oil states are trying to keep prices higher for the election coming up working against Biden. In the irrationality of such a move, it makes even more sense than ever with oil barrons with their emotional nonsense. It would be better to keep gas prices low rather than to manipulate the politics of elections. So by all means, enjoy your high gas prices.
“Fuel” costs of gas vs. electric trucks
For our purposes, we’re looking at daily driving – not road trips or towing. So, this means your regular trips to the gas station and overnight charging.
In Nebraska, at the time of writing this article, the current cost of gas is $3.67 per gallon. Looking at EPA fuel economy numbers, the F-150 with the 3.3-liter engine averages 20 MPG and with the 2.7-liter engine averages 21 MPG. Therefore, the former will glug through 750 gallons of gas in a year, and the latter will eat up 714.29 gallons. So, annual cost will be between $2,752.50 and $2,621.44, depending on the model.
For the electric number, after consulting some EV experts I settled on getting 2 miles per kWh. Using the 15k miles number, that means an average consumer would use about 7,500 kWh per year. The current cost of at-home charging in Nebraska is $0.11 per kWh, so the annual cost to charge would be $820.
That’s an annual difference of $1,932.50 for the 2.7-liter XLT and $1,801.44 for the 3.3-liter XLT.
Nebraska is not exactly California
Then the answer is to add MORE math, simple math, to your calcs using population density and cost per gallon AND implementation for each sector…I am currently in an area where EV adoption is LOW and Pickup trucks are everywhere (Cow Country, Ranches)…we were able to buy a Trade-in Plug in EV (A sedan, 52 mpg) at a Ford TRUCK dealer (very few EV’s on the lot and they wanted it OUT of inventory)….
California USA Trend; Today: 4.805: 3.348: Yesterday: 4.788: 3.341: One Week Ago: 4.646: 3.276: One Month Ago: 4.536: 3.121: One Year Ago: 4.818: 3.373
The average electric rates in California cost 33 ¢/kilowatt-hour (kWh), so that means that the average electricity
20 miles per gallon is 750 gallons every 15,000 miles 750 x 4.64 is $3,480
2 miles per kw-hr, 7500 kw-hr per year 15,000 miles 7500 x .33 is $2,475
$1000 savinngs every 15,000 miles.
Every 90,000 miles is a 6,000 dollar savings.
Farmers love a fancy Truck instead of a cadillac. Its the consumers choice.
So a point not answered, are you now enjoying your high gas prices as a spike against Biden for political manipulation in our pollitics by big oil?
“Gas prices flucturate with the world market and utility rates stay pretty much flat.”
Considering that virtually everywhere, marginal electricity is now produced by burning gas: That makes about as much economic sense as central banking.
My point is, electricity prices are stable while the open market is up and down sometimes dramatically. Electricity’s role is to be there for us 24/7 while FFs vary all over the place with no real guarantees. The future renewable energy grid or also called clean energy will be built to be there 24/7 with no fossil fuels.
At that point the EV can operate completely fossil free.
“My point is, electricity prices are stable while the open market is up and down sometimes dramatically”
As long as you are willing to overpay in order to hedge, you can hedge gas prices as well. That’s what those utilities who keep electricity prices stable do.
As for future fantasies and magic fairy dust: Those are always amazing. While in the real world; The West has gone exactly nowhere but backwards for at least 50 years, nor is showing any indication of ending that streak. “We” blindly believe in trivially childish hype and “making money” from our decaying homes now. Not in improving, nor even maintaining, anything which actually serves any useful purpose.
I believe the red states will clearly lag behind what is the future of energy. Illinois where I live in the mean time has the support from the state to make progress towards clean energy goals. Possibly it is the fairy tale of you can live just a wonderful life on FFs the rest of your life. FFs by the science are really bad for living things on earth.
On September 15, 2021, Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker signed into law the sweeping Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (SB 2408), establishing the next steps for Illinois energy policy after years of negotiation. This legislation builds on the expansive 2016 Future Energy Jobs Act, which amplified energy efficiency programs, customer education, and renewable energy infrastructure and access. In a statement, Governor Pritzker heralded this legislation as “the most significant step Illinois has taken in a generation toward a reliable, renewable, affordable and clean energy future.”
Of particular note, this legislation establishes a statewide clean energy goal of 100% by 2050, with “clean energy” defined as “energy generation that is 90% or greater free of carbon dioxide emissions.” This goal is accompanied by an intermediate goal of 50% renewable energy by 2040, drawing on a narrower definition that includes “energy and its associated renewable energy credit or renewable energy credits from wind energy, solar thermal energy, geothermal energy, photovoltaic cells and panels, biodiesel, anaerobic digestion, and hydropower that does not involve new construction or significate expansion of hydropower dams.”
This legislation includes an associated phase out of coal-fired power plants and natural gas plants by 2045, subject to adjustments by the Illinois Commerce Commission, Illinois Power Agency, and Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to ensure energy grid reliability. Subsidies to convert coal-fired power plants into solar or energy storage facilities become available starting in 2024. A $180 million annual investment in clean energy workforce diversification and training aimed at providing the fossil fuel workforce with transition opportunities is also established. An Energy Transition Workforce Commission will be created, which will be responsible for planning the eventual shut down dates for all fossil fuel power plants.
To help reach its clean energy goals, this legislation requires the Illinois Power Agency to spend an estimated $580 million a year on renewable energy credits (RECs) for new solar and wind projects, with an emphasis on RECs from distributed and community solar projects. This legislation also indicates that nuclear energy is expected to contribute to Illinois’s clean energy goals, recognizing that “nuclear power generation is necessary for the State’s transition to 100% clean energy, and ensuring continued operation of nuclear plants advances environmental and public health interests.” Support for the continued operation of nuclear power plants includes the opportunity for nuclear plants to earn carbon mitigation credits for their power generation.
In addition to electric vehicle rule development and program administration requirements, a new Electric Vehicle Coordinator appointed by the Governor will also act as the point person for electric vehicle and electric vehicle charging-related policies. The electric vehicle component of the legislation targets putting 1 million electric vehicles on Illinois roads by 2030.
You don’t have to see the reality of 100% renewable energy if you don’t want to. Electrification of our society is taking place now. Your powerlessness over that reality is something you are just giong to have to endure. This is growing and you just can’t stop it.
/wiki/100%25_renewable_energy#Places_with_near_100%_renewable_electricity
A little dose of reality for you about electrifying our society. Energy efficiency goes up dramatically and the cost of energy goes down saving money. Health is improved increasing productivity and again saving money. Something people stubbornly resisting change keep their heads buried in the sand. Several years down the road you might just just get it or you will take it to your grave never really getting it.
I’m sticking with my EV as long as I can. EVs (Exhaust Vehicles) also known for their use of ICE with the correct amount of research have untapped efficiencies that AI (Artificial Intelligence) will likely lead us to within 5 years or less. To dispose of what works before it’s natural depletion is wasteful and destructive.
Mish wrote “Companies will have to produce one to two electric trucks for every gas-powered one in 2027 to meet EPA goals. No chance. Not a chance.”
The government can mandate that. Customers who seek to buy an ICE-powered car will find none at any dealership. They will have to buy an EV, repair what they have or do without. This presumes that Democratic-Greens don’t lean on auto-repair places to stop repairing ICE-powered cars. The same Democratic-Greens, being religiously opposed to all fossil fuels, would be happy, perhaps over-joyed, if the people gave up on all auto-travel and reverted to the old days of bicycles and walking. Life just like Cuba.
That said, exactly how long could that last before the people vote out the Democrats and the Greens?
————
Prosperity is as much about how much we have and can do, as it is about how many US $s we have. In the future this administration is pointing us to, even with the Green New Deal and all those “high-paying” Green Jobs that they promise us, how prosperous will we be in ten years?
Bwahahahaha
These 30-40% targets for new vehicle sales to be electric are “still a stretch”?
No. There is ZERO chance of that happening. Zero. You might get to15%. That is about the FINAL percentage all-electric can reach
Consumers WILL NOT go north of that
Electric vehicles simply suck. For dozens and dozens of reasons
It. Will. Not. Happen
God Climate cultists are stupid. And harmful
NetZero == Genocide
They’re including PHEV’s in that target. Fully electric would be tough to hit that limit, but there’s no reason that PHEV’s can’t.
EV’s only suck for some people. For my use pattern, having one in the house is a benefit. No more fights about overdue oil changes! That has to be worth something, right?
Overdue oil changes ? The exageration exist on both sides . The ICE vehicles that have been produced over last 10-20 years are incredible machines . You can do oil changes for $25 air filters for $10 if you can do anything for yourself . They will go 200k miles easily if taken care of and those costs are minimal .Oil changes recommended are every 10k so wow $250 dollars over a 15 year period for oil changes. The hybrids can even be better and some are super efficient with batteries lasting up to 20 years .Most people ditch their car because they want something new and so will the EV owners who owned big suvs before their Teslas, instead of driving a civic to so call save the planet .
If you simplify EVs there are only battery and mortar to run. Battery has some problems but I believe many can be solved. The problems arise when the manufacturers make it futuristic by adding one touch buttons,keyless entry and keyless starter, voice control,auto doors and windows,Lidar or Radar, cameras on all sides,various software’s, etc.
So you have to choose – simple or futuristic EV. Cheaper or expensive version.
When hydrogen fuel ICE comes you will have the same problems.
If you buy the patrol ICE cars with futuristic features you will have the same problems.
Totally agree. No one I know of has any thought of every buying one of those nightmares
I have been asked to speak for the plants. “We love CO2. The world was a much better place when CO2 was more prevalent. When oxygen reaches 19 percent of the atmosphere you can’t start a forest fire. When oxygen reaches 22 percent of the atmosphere you can’t put out a forest fire. You humans don’t understand that we plants get the world we want.”
When the world was much warmer than today forests were so verdant that Oxygen was 30% of the atmosphere. Coal deposits are residue from that age.
Yes. CO2 is good for plants. But what about everything else? CO2 levels are currently 420 ppm. The last time CO2 levels were over 400 ppm was during the Pliocene era (2.6-5.3 million years ago). Global temperatures were 5F (3C) warmer than today, and sea levels were 50 ft higher, because the warmer temperatures melted so much of the world’s ice. This era gives us an idea of where we are headed in the future, as long as CO2 levels stay elevated or continue to increase.
Going further back, CO2 levels exceeded 2000 ppm during the Cretaceous period, over 100 million years ago. Global temperatures were 11C warmer than today, and all the ice was melted. Ocean levels were 70-100m (230-300 feet) higher than today.
With ocean levels so high there was a lot less land area exposed, but at least it was covered in plants.
But plants don’t “need” such high CO2 levels to thrive. CO2 levels have ranged from 170 ppm to 300 ppm for the last million years and plants did just fine during those million years. In fact, all current life on earth has adapted to those CO2 levels. Increasing levels from 280 ppm to 420 ppm in the last two hundred years may be good for plants, but it is already putting a lot of stress on many life forms; including birds, animals, insects and humans.
The 300 mile range lightning has a 131 kWh battery. Assuming around 19 cents (US national average, you might pay more or less of course) per kWh that (in theory) gives you 300 miles for $25 or around $8.30 for that 100 miles. Call it $10 for 100 miles given that most people don’t achieve the rated range. Still way cheaper than $17!
This isn’t a vote for gov’t mandates for anything, but at least check your facts before posting, eh?
As long as it confirms one’s bias there is no need to question it.
Average price of gas in California is near $5, so giving a generous 20mpg rating to a F-150, going 100 miles on gas would be $25, not $17. Average price of electricity in California is a whopping .30cents per kilowatt hour. Assuming 2 miles per kilowatt hour on an electric F-150 it would be $15 per 100 miles. 40% cheaper than gas. Maybe a high speed charging station charges .40cents per kilowatt hour, raising the cost $20/100 miles. Still 20% cheaper than gas.
Electricity at a California commercial charger is $1.00 per kilowatt Hour.
Commercial chargers have been close to parity with gas for a long time. My home charger is still a fraction of gasoline cost. Right around 1/3. Commercial chargers are a ripoff. Really just for emergency use and road trips.
What about all those people who don’t have home chargers (people who live in apartments or renters etc). They only have one option to charge and that’s commercial chargers.
That’s the problem with EV adoption is that not everyone has a place to charge at home.
Don’t forget the cost of installing your home charger and difference between the unsubsidized cost of the EV and the ICE vehicle in both manufacture and disposal. If electric cars were actually a good deal they wouldn’t have to force people to buy them.
My local green electricity costs $0.50/kWh.
I have an oil derrick in my back yard!
While doing your fact checks Walt, please let us know how the EV models stack up to ICE models when hauling and/or towing. Spoiler alert: EV’s suck range under these conditions.
Bye Walt. I’ll be out making bank in my gas powered machine while you are stranded at the charging station, if you can find one.
That’s really the crux of it: Battery is efficient for low draw and/or intermittent application. Diesel for continuous high draw. Petrol and hybrid for inbetween.
The only vehicle class where battery completely blows the rest out of the water, is for very light uses: kick scooters to pedelecs. Those ARE capital G “Green.” And efficient as heck. Mainly because they don’t need to move much more weight than the person they’re hauling. No vehicle can ever be meaningfully efficient, if moving a 200lb dude requires an additional 5000lbs of deadweight to be moved right along with him.
But yes: Balancing and maneuvering on two legs and wheels does require some modicum of competence. Ergo: Doing so is no doubt far, far beyond the abilities of most current Westerners. Who can instead be counted on to cheer for banning the few “superhumans” among us in possession of such unfair talents, from showing the rabble how devoid of ability they really are, as they crawl around on all four in their 3 ton wheelchairs while being nothing other than in the way of their betters.
How does an electric vehicle pay the HUTF taxes to build, maintain, and plow the roads?
Bidan going to make used vehicles great again. We are keeping our 2016 in tippy top shape and planning on driving it until they take our licenses away. They can’t spy on us. They can’t remote turn it off. It has a phenomenal turbo and still gets 38mpg on the fwy. Joe can suck on that.