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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s all those amazing things, yes. And yet totally unlivable because of what liberals have done to it.

[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.

The grid has been built up over 70+ years and you think a 40% increase in 10 years is not aggressive?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

It’s all those amazing things, yes. And yet totally unlivable because of what liberals have done to it.

part of why it's unlivable is due to the high housing costs, which is not because of liberals, but because of how desirable it is to live there. Tons of high paying jobs, great weather and things to do year round.

But, I do agree, that progressives in CA are also not doing CA any favors.

[Anonymous]

Can someone please help me understand, so people can go across state lines and still buy a gas powered car? Or buy on line and have it shipped into CA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EPA doesn't have the authority to ban the sale of gas cars, so they can't "grant" that authority to anyone else.

No, but the EPA can allow states to set their own emission standards, which can include banning the sale of ICE cars.

BTW, a R governor from CA fought the fed EPA to reduce emissions in further.

https://www.edf.org/media/schwarzenegger-obama-act-california-clean-cars-program

He's the guy that endorsed Kamala, correct?

[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.

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

No I am not, I am talking about how much additional electricity would need to be produced in order to replace 100% of current gasoline consumption. Total generation capacity of the US grid is only around 1.3TW. Some of this generation capacity is demand response based and it is not economical to use demand response based electricity generation to boost annual electricity production by 40%. This will require a substantial number of new power plants.

[Anonymous]

California has the highest tax rates on gasoline of any state. That resulted in high gas prices. But the demand for ICE is still there.

So democrats, in usual fashion, will use iron-fisted force by another means to get what they want.

States rights? That's a joke.

Individual rights will knock this right out. Another reason to close the EPA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The grid has been built up over 70+ years and you think a 40% increase in 10 years is not aggressive?

No, I don't think it's too aggressive. 2024 smart grid technology and other energy technologies of today are significantly better than 1954 power and grid technologies of 70 years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EPA doesn't have the authority to ban the sale of gas cars, so they can't "grant" that authority to anyone else.

No, but the EPA can allow states to set their own emission standards, which can include banning the sale of ICE cars.

BTW, a R governor from CA fought the fed EPA to reduce emissions in further.

https://www.edf.org/media/schwarzenegger-obama-act-california-clean-cars-program

He's the guy that endorsed Kamala, correct?

Yes, he endorsed Kamala, because the deranged, extremist GOP of today has become unrecognizable from the GOP he joined decades ago.

[Anonymous]

Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump's transition team is recommending sweeping changes to cut off support for electric vehicles and charging stations and to strengthen measures blocking cars, components and battery materials from China, according to a document seen by Reuters.

The recommendations, which have not been previously reported, come as the U.S. electric-vehicle transition stalls and China's heavily subsidized EV industry continues to surge, in part because of its superior battery supply chain. On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to ease regulations on fossil-fuel cars and roll back what he called President Joe Biden's EV mandate.

The transition team also recommends imposing tariffs on all battery materials globally, a bid to boost U.S. production, and then negotiating individual exemptions with allies, the document shows.

Taken together, the recommendations are a stark departure from Biden administration policy, which sought to balance encouraging a domestic battery supply chain, separate from China, with a rapid EV transition. The transition-team plan would redirect money now flowing to building charging stations and making EVs affordable into national-defense priorities, including securing China-free supplies of batteries and the critical minerals to build them...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/exclusive-trump-transition-team-plans-sweeping-rollback-of-biden-ev-emissions-policies/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone please help me understand, so people can go across state lines and still buy a gas powered car? Or buy on line and have it shipped into CA?

You should be able to do both. Probably going to create a new cottage industry of online new car sales, perhaps partnered with a dealer in CA. So you can go to a dealer for a test drive, buy the car via a website from an “out of state” company via a kiosk at the dealership that ships the car to the dealer for you to pickup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump's transition team is recommending sweeping changes to cut off support for electric vehicles and charging stations and to strengthen measures blocking cars, components and battery materials from China, according to a document seen by Reuters.

The recommendations, which have not been previously reported, come as the U.S. electric-vehicle transition stalls and China's heavily subsidized EV industry continues to surge, in part because of its superior battery supply chain. On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to ease regulations on fossil-fuel cars and roll back what he called President Joe Biden's EV mandate.

The transition team also recommends imposing tariffs on all battery materials globally, a bid to boost U.S. production, and then negotiating individual exemptions with allies, the document shows.

Taken together, the recommendations are a stark departure from Biden administration policy, which sought to balance encouraging a domestic battery supply chain, separate from China, with a rapid EV transition. The transition-team plan would redirect money now flowing to building charging stations and making EVs affordable into national-defense priorities, including securing China-free supplies of batteries and the critical minerals to build them...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/exclusive-trump-transition-team-plans-sweeping-rollback-of-biden-ev-emissions-policies/

Gee, Elon Musk paid $250+ million for a President and this is what he gets? To get screwed over by his own guy?

[Anonymous]

It's hilarious to hear Republicans doing the ole "Harrumph, we can't let California do that!" yet if Texas banned EVs you'd all be celebrating and calling it a victory for states rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:EPA doesn't have the authority to ban the sale of gas cars, so they can't "grant" that authority to anyone else.

No, but the EPA can allow states to set their own emission standards, which can include banning the sale of ICE cars.

BTW, a R governor from CA fought the fed EPA to reduce emissions in further.

https://www.edf.org/media/schwarzenegger-obama-act-california-clean-cars-program

He's the guy that endorsed Kamala, correct?

Several Rs endorsed Kamala over Trump because they are not cult members, and Trump is a populist, not a real R.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:California has the highest tax rates on gasoline of any state. That resulted in high gas prices. But the demand for ICE is still there.

So democrats, in usual fashion, will use iron-fisted force by another means to get what they want.

States rights? That's a joke.

Individual rights will knock this right out. Another reason to close the EPA.

Yea, who needs clean air and water. Drill baby drill.