[Tejas1836]

Originally Posted by pikkagtr

Off peak charging rates is a thing NOW
When EVs become a larger part of the market say 2035
If 50% of the new cars are EV, the electric companies will know they got you by the short hairs
They can change their rates to maximize profit
For a normal Household, they can track usage based on load
Not charging a 100kwhr battery is one price
Charge your EV and put load on the circuit, a different higher price
Imagine paying more to charge your EV than paying for gas would be a reality soon in the future

The power companies will need to spend an estimated $5,800 per EV for the next 8 years to update the electrical grid for EV charging. That money has to come from somewhere, subsidies or directly.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Cos270

One problem with that, how many PHEVs are being developed for the US market right now? Not enough to sustain the demand that would be generated. Unless you're insinuating that the current supply of PHEVs on sale today is sufficient to offset the emission restrictions. Pretty much everyone but Toyota has made it abundantly clear they are making the jump straight from ICE to EV with no hybrid stop-gap.

Even Toyota axed their leader because he was adamant PHEV's would be the medium term solution. So I hear you, but reality is, in about 5 years, as 2035 gets closer, there will be a realisation we won't have the public charging in place for a pure EV transition and PHEV's will be back on the table.

It's already law in Canada.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Patton250

You make some excellent points, and I agree with much of what you wrote with the exception of worrying. I am not worrying about anything other than political interference. Allow flat out capitalism to determine the direction we go and I’ll be happy as a school boy on Christmas Eve. But one thing is for sure and you made this point, even with all out government interference it’s still going to take many decades, to even think about eliminating ice.

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past the point it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc. Sorry, I do not want to go back to the early 1900s.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by chris719

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

What a bunch of utter nonsense. Yes, most people that run big business’s the first thing they wanna do is make the earth unlivable for themselves and their children and their grandchildren. I don’t really think I can have a serious conversation with someone that makes statements like you did. Besides we really aren’t allowed to discuss it here.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by chris719

Your utopia would have DuPont, for example, dumping even more toxic chemicals into rivers all over the country while we breathe in leaded gasoline fumes. Capitalism cannot solve these type of problems. Corporations will deny the harm until well past the point it is completely obvious. See, tobacco, leaded gasoline, PFAS, etc. Sorry, I do not want to go back to the early 1900s.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...tudy-rcna19028

This doesn't need to be a binary solution. Mandating EV is a binary solution.

regulating lead out of gas was not a binary solution, you could and can still buy gas, and other additives and engine design features filled the gap created by its removal. Impact to the consumer was nearly non-existent, and required little infrastructure. It also profoundly impacted the targeted environmental goal.

EV's are a small part of the C02 Problem, and the proposed solution still generates a great deal of C02. And that doesn't even begin to discuss the cost.


It's a spectrum of choices and options, vs rewards and results. De-leading fuel was an easy choice and had good results. Ditching ICE with the current plan isn't easy or free of pain, and barely tickles the goal.

[Socal_R8]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

People care because this 12 year goal is already impacting them.

In what ways?

How is Chevy announcing that they will be full electric by 2035 impacting you?

Or some states announcing they won't sell new ICE vehicles starting in 2035?


This isn't some sort of conspiracy by Bill Gates to reduce the population, this is about taking steps in the right direction to help preserve our planet for our great grandchildren and beyond ....you should have seen what the air looked like in LA in the 70's and 80's before we finally started taking steps in the right direction

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/r...efits-by-2030/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

https://content.sierraclub.org/evguide/myths-vs-reality

[M5Rick]

The ones in that house next to Westminster Bridge are F* mad, they want to get rid of PHEV's too.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

In what ways?

Too many to list here, so know this is only some of them:

• ICE development already curtailed for many brands, limiting choices
  
• Utilities are having to expend resources they don't' have spare to start planning for load they can't serve, with energy they don't have. This costs money today. It is impacting repair-and-maintain strategies, today. It is diluting the skills and manpower resources today.
  
• Utilities are having to increase prices to pay for this dream. the 2 biggest power utilities in my state just raised rates ~15%, and cited this as one of the many justifications. Paying today for what will happen tomorrow.
  
• taxes and budgets are being re-adjusted at federal, state, and local levels to pay for this future, by collecting taxes today.
  
• Infrastructure is being built with tax payer dollars today, to serve a use case model for this mandated future.
  
• Tax payers are subsidizing the purchase of EV's. That's my money, and yours.
  
• Government entities like utilities, are taking focus from other social initiatives to make room for this one. Because this initiative does not generate tax revenue, it -is- a zero-sum game.
  
• Some markets are already having to curtail power usage during peak-demand events, and that includes EV's. Adding EV's to the load causes this to happen more, and more often. It's already happening.

How is Chevy announcing that they will be full electric by 2035 impacting you?

See list above

Or some states announcing they won't sell new ICE vehicles starting in 2035?

See list above

This isn't some sort of conspiracy by Bill Gates to reduce the population, this is about taking steps in the right direction to help preserve our planet for our great grandchildren and beyond ....you should have seen what the air looked like in LA in the 70's and 80's before we finally started taking steps in the right direction

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/r...efits-by-2030/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

https://content.sierraclub.org/evguide/myths-vs-reality

Taking steps is moving to Hybrid tech first.

We need to take these steps. We don't need to be stupid about it.

[Socal_R8]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Too many to list here, so know this is only some of them:

• ICE development already curtailed for many brands, limiting choices
  
• Utilities are having to expend resources they don't' have spare to start planning for load they can't serve, with energy they don't have. This costs money today. It is impacting repair-and-maintain strategies, today. It is diluting the skills and manpower resources today.
  
• Utilities are having to increase prices to pay for this dream. the 2 biggest power utilities in my state just raised rates ~15%, and cited this as one of the many justifications. Paying today for what will happen tomorrow.
  
• taxes and budgets are being re-adjusted at federal, state, and local levels to pay for this future, by collecting taxes today.
  
• Infrastructure is being built with tax payer dollars today, to serve a use case model for this mandated future.
  
• Tax payers are subsidizing the purchase of EV's. That's my money, and yours.
  
• Government entities like utilities, are taking focus from other social initiatives to make room for this one. Because this initiative does not generate tax revenue, it -is- a zero-sum game.
  
• Some markets are already having to curtail power usage during peak-demand events, and that includes EV's. Adding EV's to the load causes this to happen more, and more often. It's already happening.

See list above



See list above



Taking steps is moving to Hybrid tech first.

We need to take these steps. We don't need to be stupid about it.

You talk about all the economics, but you drive a 13 mpg vehicle

you don't think the oil cartels are manipulating gas prices?

Like I said, don't worry about it....you be able to buy and drive gas guzzling ICE vehicles for the rest of your life, unless you are still driving in like 2093

[chris719]

Might want to check the air in LA now vs before regulation was introduced, to start. Visibility was ridiculously bad.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Capitalism exactly solves these types of problems.

Not without regulation, because ideal capitalism does not exist. I am pro capitalism, it just needs intelligent application of regulation. We can disagree as to what is intelligent or appropriate, but anyone who thinks a zero regulation environment will behave in a ideal manner is delusional.

[omasou]

Never wanted one. Never will.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Patton250

What a bunch of utter nonsense. Yes, most people that run big business’s the first thing they wanna do is make the earth unlivable for themselves and their children and their grandchildren. I don’t really think I can have a serious conversation with someone that makes statements like you did. Besides we really aren’t allowed to discuss it here.

It has already been demonstrated over the past century that humans are irrational and will in fact do things like this.

https://www.wired.com/2013/01/looney...t-sad-history/

Standard Oil knew TEL / leaded fuel was harmful in the mid 20s but continued to push it. Their own children and grandchildren collectively suffered the same effects as everyone else.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by chris719

It has already been demonstrated over the past century that humans are irrational and will in fact do things like this.

https://www.wired.com/2013/01/looney...t-sad-history/

Standard Oil knew TEL / leaded fuel was harmful in the mid 20s but continued to push it. Their own children and grandchildren collectively suffered the same effects as everyone else.

Just stop

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Just stop

Did you lose IQ from tetraethyl lead? Seems likely. Don't give me this politics BS. If the mods cared this whole thread has been 60 pages of libertarian circle jerk and should have been deleted a week after it started.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

You talk about all the economics, but you drive a 13 mpg vehicle

Imagine if I forced my values on others and only allowed them to drive 13MPG cars too? You see how this works? Think this through bro...

I get 20+ MPG BTW, better than my wifes Escalade. Not that you care about facts.

you don't think the oil cartels are manipulating gas prices?

You talking about Biden? Trump? or Putin?

Now we want our regulated monopolies to partake in this feeding frenzy? I can buy my gas from any number of business', at any number of locations, whenever I want, however I want. I can't do that with my power bill.

Like I said, don't worry about it....you be able to buy and drive gas guzzling ICE vehicles for the rest of your life, unless you are still driving in like 2093

Is that a promise, and are you qualified to make it?

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by chris719

Did you lose IQ from tetraethyl lead? Seems likely. Don't give me this politics BS. If the mods cared this whole thread has been 60 pages of libertarian circle jerk and should have been deleted a week after it started.

I mostly meant stop embarrassing yourself.

[BGM-M3COMP]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

In what ways?

How is Chevy announcing that they will be full electric by 2035 impacting you?

Or some states announcing they won't sell new ICE vehicles starting in 2035?


This isn't some sort of conspiracy by Bill Gates to reduce the population, this is about taking steps in the right direction to help preserve our planet for our great grandchildren and beyond ....you should have seen what the air looked like in LA in the 70's and 80's before we finally started taking steps in the right direction

https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3134/r...efits-by-2030/

https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/el...-vehicle-myths

https://content.sierraclub.org/evguide/myths-vs-reality

Bingo bango!

[Socal_R8]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Imagine if I forced my values on others and only allowed them to drive 13MPG cars too? You see how this works? Think this through bro...

I get 20+ MPG BTW, better than my wifes Escalade. Not that you care about facts.




You talking about Biden? Trump? or Putin?

Now we want our regulated monopolies to partake in this feeding frenzy? I can buy my gas from any number of business', at any number of locations, whenever I want, however I want. I can't do that with my power bill.



Is that a promise, and are you qualified to make it?

So who is forcing you to buy an EV TODAY??? No one... You will be able to drive your school bus until the wheels fall off....and then buy another one after that in 2034 and drive that until what 2050, 2060? you still alive then?

Do you really think we should just ignore studies by NASA, MIT, EPA, etc just so you can keep buying what you want for the rest of your life? Should we just ignore speed limits and drive as fast as we want also?
Or should we try to what is truly best for this planet ?

It is still a long long way away before you won't be able to still enjoy a gas powered car....trust me, they will outlive you and me

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by SoCal_NSX

So who is forcing you to buy an EV TODAY??? No one... You will be able to drive your school bus until the wheels fall off....and then buy another one after that in 2034 and drive that until what 2050, 2060? you still alive then?

Do you really think we should just ignore studies by NASA, MIT, EPA, etc just so you can keep buying what you want for the rest of your life? Should we just ignore speed limits and drive as fast as we want also?
Or should we try to what is truly best for this planet ?

It is still a long long way away before you won't be able to still enjoy a gas powered car....trust me, they will outlive you and me

Always cracks me up when people like you, just act oblivious to the fact that there are actually a significant amount of other people that disagree with you, as well as the institutions you quoted, including a significant amount of scientists, meteorologists and engineers. You guys just kind of ignore that and move right forward with your intentions. It’s usually funny until you start forcing policy. That’s where we are now. Get it?

By the way, if Chevrolet is 100% Electric by 2035 I’ll donate $1000 to your favorite charity. But if they’re not you donate $1000 to my favorite charity. Would you like to wager? It’s 12 years away. I’m sure we will all still be here in some form or fashion and I can set my calendar to remind me to come back to this thread. I would almost bet they won’t even be half electric by that date.

[Socal_R8]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Always cracks me up when people like you, just act oblivious to the fact that there are actually a significant amount of other people that disagree with you, as well as the institutions you quoted, including a significant amount of scientists, meteorologists and engineers. You guys just kind of ignore that and move right forward with your intentions. It’s usually funny until you start forcing policy. That’s where we are now. Get it?

By the way, if Chevrolet is 100% Electric by 2035 I’ll donate $1000 to your favorite charity. But if they’re not you donate $1000 to my favorite charity. Would you like to wager? It’s 12 years away. I’m sure we will all still be here in some form or fashion and I can set my calendar to remind me to come back to this thread. I would almost bet they won’t even be half electric by that date.

huh, so you just ignore the actual facts and studies posted on here about carbon emissions and its impact on climate changes and how its been proven by actual data collected by NASA, MIT, EPA and all sorts of other non biased agencies and scientist and go with what some dude said on Joe Rogan podcast or Youtube said about it being some sort of hoax ? or that we shouldn't even try to slow it down cuz your freedom of choice is in jeopardy ?




btw, I could care less if GM is or isn't full EV by 2035...and either should you. I already have both EV and gas cars and already enjoying the fact that I haven't seen a gas station since I got my M3P a couple weeks ago


but GM has a $35B bet they will be
https://fortune.com/2021/11/16/gener...la-volkswagen/

[gonzo]

Scientists you say...
Trust and obey.


•Transmission of the disease—wrong
• Asymptomatic spread—wrong
• PCR testing—wrong
• Fatality rate—wrong
• Lockdowns—wrong
• Community triggers—wrong
• Business closures—wrong
• School closures—wrong
• Quarantining healthy people—wrong
• Impact on youth—wrong
• Hospital overload—wrong
• Plexiglass barriers—wrong
• Social distancing—wrong
• Outdoor spread—wrong
• Masks—wrong
• Variant impact—wrong
• Natural immunity—wrong
• Vaccine efficacy—wrong
• Vaccine injury—wrong


I aM tHe $ciEncE!!!