EPA will grant California the right to ban sales of new gas cars by 2035

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant the state the right to set stronger climate rules for cars, SUVs and pickup trucks as soon as next week.
The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant California permission to set stronger climate rules for cars and SUVs — a move that President-elect Donald Trump could attempt to reverse — according to two people briefed on the matter.
Ask your climate questions. With the help of generative Al, we'll try to deliver answers based on our published reporting.

The EPA intends to issue California a waiver as soon as next week to enforce its rule aimed at banning sales of new gasoline-powered cars in the state by 2035, said the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. The Trump administration will probably try to revoke the waiver, although those efforts could run into legal obstacles.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/12/13/epa-california-climate-cars-evs/

Looks like 11 other states will be included in this. Will be very good for Musk.

Not really. Tesla was hugely important for creating a market for EV. But there has been a lot of innovation since then and most of the major car companies are heading in that direction regardless. Much of Europe has adopted similar restrictions on the sale of new old-timey combustion engine vehicles. And these days, China is the biggest exporter of EV. Any car company that's all in for combustion engines in 2035 is doomed.

The other electrics are failures. Tesla is the only car that matters. Europe does have good models, but they are much more expensive, around 200k.

Not really. The market for the "small SUV EV" is the hottest EV market right now and Tesla was behind the ball on that (their SUV is not that small and is incredibly stupid looking). Hyundai, Nissan, Kia, Chevy, Volkswagen, and Subaru are all offering more consumer-friendly options in this segment. Tesla will hopefully come out with a non-stupid small SUV to compete -- the more competition the better. But that's the kind of vehicle most consumers want -- a compact SUV that sits up higher than a sedan, has a hatch back, and has good storage and head room.

If I were buying an EV this year I'd be leaning towards the Ioniq 5 from Hyundai, though I want to see what the 2025 Volkswagen id.4 is like. I like Teslas but they don't make sense for a family of 4 with kids who play sports.

If you pay attention to auto press, there is far more to come in this segment and there are lots of competitors in the market. Also, as the EV market grows, it's unrealistic to expect that most EV consumers will choose an EV-only brand like Tesla. Consumers are habitual. In order for EVs to get to 30-40% of the market, you are going to have to capture consumers who are brand-loyal to BMW or Subaru or whatever, so you need those companies to be offering appealing EVs for those customers (I have high hopes for the Subaru Solterra -- Subaru owners are a prime market for EVs because they tend to be liberal and eco-conscious, and if they can solve their manufacturing issues with EVs and produce a decent competitor in this space, I think it will lead to a big swing toward EVs).

If you pay attention to auto press you also know all the domestic manufacturers are massively scaling back their EV plans because EVs simply are not yet catching on in the full size SUV/Truck market in the US market. You would also know that Toyota-by far and away the sharpest worldwide auto marker IMHO-has strongly resisted investment in all electric eschewing all electric for a hybrid approach. You would also know that Toyota's share price has performed very nicely the last five years as a consequence of forgoing EVs while the the big traditional manufacturers, especially in Europe but also including Honda (Toyota's closest comp), are all under duress due to their EV investments (I ignore the Koreans due to the weird corporate conglomerates over there). You would also know that VW is a total mess right now and they have a budding labor issue on top of the German electricity problems to deal with. Tesla is Tesla.

EVs definitely have a role to play in a multifaceted approach. I like them. But mandating is just stupid and unnecessarily poking the bear (what happens when Texas, GA and FL ban EVs in response?). If the tech is superior then it will win out, if it isn't, then you're just messing up the market by misallocating capital.

I would love TX to ban EVs as a big F U to Musk, who gave a big F U to CA which gave him a ton of subsidies for Tesla.

Why would you want state governments to use their power to suppress the free market? Because what, you're mad about his tweets?

a truly free market does not impose tariffs or regulate costs, like price gouging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Access to charging, especially on longer trips, is still a huge barrier for a lot of consumers, us included. Currently, the price of gas is worth the convenience to just pull up, top off, and be on our way.

for now, yes, which is why we have one EV and one ICE.

[Anonymous]

I enjoy my 18mpg ICE car, but this is probably a good idea. CA is often ahead of the game on many issues. They seem to be one of the few states that cares about their residents’ health. It’s obviously not going to go down with the “I should be able to do whatever I want and own whatever I want” crowd, usually Rs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

And rewire the entire grid. And get such rewiring past all the YITBYs in a timely fashion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

There is spare capacity in the US grid. Smart people have looked in to it and there is no problem with supply of electricity. People like you think EVs draw power from the grid with a big extension cord and the cars are plugged in all the time..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant the state the right to set stronger climate rules for cars, SUVs and pickup trucks as soon as next week.
The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant California permission to set stronger climate rules for cars and SUVs — a move that President-elect Donald Trump could attempt to reverse — according to two people briefed on the matter.
Ask your climate questions. With the help of generative Al, we'll try to deliver answers based on our published reporting.

The EPA intends to issue California a waiver as soon as next week to enforce its rule aimed at banning sales of new gasoline-powered cars in the state by 2035, said the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. The Trump administration will probably try to revoke the waiver, although those efforts could run into legal obstacles.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/12/13/epa-california-climate-cars-evs/

Looks like 11 other states will be included in this. Will be very good for Musk.

Not really. Tesla was hugely important for creating a market for EV. But there has been a lot of innovation since then and most of the major car companies are heading in that direction regardless. Much of Europe has adopted similar restrictions on the sale of new old-timey combustion engine vehicles. And these days, China is the biggest exporter of EV. Any car company that's all in for combustion engines in 2035 is doomed.

The other electrics are failures. Tesla is the only car that matters. Europe does have good models, but they are much more expensive, around 200k.

Not really. The market for the "small SUV EV" is the hottest EV market right now and Tesla was behind the ball on that (their SUV is not that small and is incredibly stupid looking). Hyundai, Nissan, Kia, Chevy, Volkswagen, and Subaru are all offering more consumer-friendly options in this segment. Tesla will hopefully come out with a non-stupid small SUV to compete -- the more competition the better. But that's the kind of vehicle most consumers want -- a compact SUV that sits up higher than a sedan, has a hatch back, and has good storage and head room.

If I were buying an EV this year I'd be leaning towards the Ioniq 5 from Hyundai, though I want to see what the 2025 Volkswagen id.4 is like. I like Teslas but they don't make sense for a family of 4 with kids who play sports.

If you pay attention to auto press, there is far more to come in this segment and there are lots of competitors in the market. Also, as the EV market grows, it's unrealistic to expect that most EV consumers will choose an EV-only brand like Tesla. Consumers are habitual. In order for EVs to get to 30-40% of the market, you are going to have to capture consumers who are brand-loyal to BMW or Subaru or whatever, so you need those companies to be offering appealing EVs for those customers (I have high hopes for the Subaru Solterra -- Subaru owners are a prime market for EVs because they tend to be liberal and eco-conscious, and if they can solve their manufacturing issues with EVs and produce a decent competitor in this space, I think it will lead to a big swing toward EVs).

If you pay attention to auto press you also know all the domestic manufacturers are massively scaling back their EV plans because EVs simply are not yet catching on in the full size SUV/Truck market in the US market. You would also know that Toyota-by far and away the sharpest worldwide auto marker IMHO-has strongly resisted investment in all electric eschewing all electric for a hybrid approach. You would also know that Toyota's share price has performed very nicely the last five years as a consequence of forgoing EVs while the the big traditional manufacturers, especially in Europe but also including Honda (Toyota's closest comp), are all under duress due to their EV investments (I ignore the Koreans due to the weird corporate conglomerates over there). You would also know that VW is a total mess right now and they have a budding labor issue on top of the German electricity problems to deal with. Tesla is Tesla.

EVs definitely have a role to play in a multifaceted approach. I like them. But mandating is just stupid and unnecessarily poking the bear (what happens when Texas, GA and FL ban EVs in response?). If the tech is superior then it will win out, if it isn't, then you're just messing up the market by misallocating capital.

I would love TX to ban EVs as a big F U to Musk, who gave a big F U to CA which gave him a ton of subsidies for Tesla.

Why would you want state governments to use their power to suppress the free market? Because what, you're mad about his tweets?

a truly free market does not impose tariffs or regulate costs, like price gouging.

A truly free market does not heavily subsidize, incentivize and give tax breaks to the tune of billions of dollars a year as we've given to the fossil fuel industry for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

When did anyone ever say it was going to happen overnight. Even the most aggressive timeline, in California, is targeting 10 years out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

I think you are confusing generation and capacity, energy vs power.

[Anonymous]

Doesn't matter at the current rate of exodus, no one will be left in CA to care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maryland is so stupid for joining this. The only thing that is going to happen is that used cars will get more expensive.

Used gas cars will be expensive.

If a cheaper battery replacement comes about for evs then uses Eva will be more desirable, no one wants to buy a used ev when it's 10k for new batteries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't matter at the current rate of exodus, no one will be left in CA to care.

California is regaining population again. Your narrative is stale. Oops.

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/04/30/californias-population-is-increasing/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant the state the right to set stronger climate rules for cars, SUVs and pickup trucks as soon as next week.
The Environmental Protection Agency plans to grant California permission to set stronger climate rules for cars and SUVs — a move that President-elect Donald Trump could attempt to reverse — according to two people briefed on the matter.
Ask your climate questions. With the help of generative Al, we'll try to deliver answers based on our published reporting.

The EPA intends to issue California a waiver as soon as next week to enforce its rule aimed at banning sales of new gasoline-powered cars in the state by 2035, said the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. The Trump administration will probably try to revoke the waiver, although those efforts could run into legal obstacles.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2024/12/13/epa-california-climate-cars-evs/

Looks like 11 other states will be included in this. Will be very good for Musk.

Not really. Tesla was hugely important for creating a market for EV. But there has been a lot of innovation since then and most of the major car companies are heading in that direction regardless. Much of Europe has adopted similar restrictions on the sale of new old-timey combustion engine vehicles. And these days, China is the biggest exporter of EV. Any car company that's all in for combustion engines in 2035 is doomed.

The other electrics are failures. Tesla is the only car that matters. Europe does have good models, but they are much more expensive, around 200k.

Not really. The market for the "small SUV EV" is the hottest EV market right now and Tesla was behind the ball on that (their SUV is not that small and is incredibly stupid looking). Hyundai, Nissan, Kia, Chevy, Volkswagen, and Subaru are all offering more consumer-friendly options in this segment. Tesla will hopefully come out with a non-stupid small SUV to compete -- the more competition the better. But that's the kind of vehicle most consumers want -- a compact SUV that sits up higher than a sedan, has a hatch back, and has good storage and head room.

If I were buying an EV this year I'd be leaning towards the Ioniq 5 from Hyundai, though I want to see what the 2025 Volkswagen id.4 is like. I like Teslas but they don't make sense for a family of 4 with kids who play sports.

If you pay attention to auto press, there is far more to come in this segment and there are lots of competitors in the market. Also, as the EV market grows, it's unrealistic to expect that most EV consumers will choose an EV-only brand like Tesla. Consumers are habitual. In order for EVs to get to 30-40% of the market, you are going to have to capture consumers who are brand-loyal to BMW or Subaru or whatever, so you need those companies to be offering appealing EVs for those customers (I have high hopes for the Subaru Solterra -- Subaru owners are a prime market for EVs because they tend to be liberal and eco-conscious, and if they can solve their manufacturing issues with EVs and produce a decent competitor in this space, I think it will lead to a big swing toward EVs).

If you pay attention to auto press you also know all the domestic manufacturers are massively scaling back their EV plans because EVs simply are not yet catching on in the full size SUV/Truck market in the US market. You would also know that Toyota-by far and away the sharpest worldwide auto marker IMHO-has strongly resisted investment in all electric eschewing all electric for a hybrid approach. You would also know that Toyota's share price has performed very nicely the last five years as a consequence of forgoing EVs while the the big traditional manufacturers, especially in Europe but also including Honda (Toyota's closest comp), are all under duress due to their EV investments (I ignore the Koreans due to the weird corporate conglomerates over there). You would also know that VW is a total mess right now and they have a budding labor issue on top of the German electricity problems to deal with. Tesla is Tesla.

EVs definitely have a role to play in a multifaceted approach. I like them. But mandating is just stupid and unnecessarily poking the bear (what happens when Texas, GA and FL ban EVs in response?). If the tech is superior then it will win out, if it isn't, then you're just messing up the market by misallocating capital.

I would love TX to ban EVs as a big F U to Musk, who gave a big F U to CA which gave him a ton of subsidies for Tesla.

Why would you want state governments to use their power to suppress the free market? Because what, you're mad about his tweets?

a truly free market does not impose tariffs or regulate costs, like price gouging.

A truly free market does not heavily subsidize, incentivize and give tax breaks to the tune of billions of dollars a year as we've given to the fossil fuel industry for decades.

that, too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Doesn't matter at the current rate of exodus, no one will be left in CA to care.

Maybe I can go back to CA, then. It's an amazing place, if you have money. Beautiful coastline, awesome mountains, amazing forest and desert. I can grow fruits and vegetables almost year round there. I miss my meyer lemon tree and home grown tomatoes until close to December. And few mosquitoes, unlike here..ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does our country even have the ability to produce all the electricity required to power all these cars?

Just did some math on this question because I’m curious and replacing 100% of current gasoline consumption in the US (135.7 billion gallons per year) would require around 1,700 Terawatts of additional electricity generation each year. Current utility scale electricity generation per year is around, 4,230 TW. So electricity generation needs to increase by 40% to electrify 100% of gasoline vehicles.

When did anyone ever say it was going to happen overnight. Even the most aggressive timeline, in California, is targeting 10 years out.

Meanwhile California is trying to close down the remaining power plants still in the state and rely solely on grid power from other states, lolz! Pure genius.

And last year during the annual summer brownouts, there was a bunch of talk about REQUIRING owners of EV’s to keep them plugged into charging ports so that power *could be drawn* from millions of vehicle batteries back into the power grid in times of peak demand!

California is a LOT like DCUM - out of touch bubble dwellers.