Taking the Politics Out of EVs

[Firn]

CAFE standards and mandates. Although the trend seems to be reversing or at least softening, world governments have been in the process of regulating ICE vehicles out of existence.

But this is wrong, this is the rhetoric and conflates the issue.

Banning gas cars would mean to prevent their use. To ban. You cannot have them. Nowhere is that happening.

CAFE standards apply to NEW vehicles and new vehicles only. And the standards for new cars should absolutely get more stringent. No major manufacture will willingly develop towards lower emissions or willingly add emissions equipment. You HAVE to force them, they WONT do so themselves.

But tightening of emissions standards is NOT the same as banning ICE cars, yet it is often claimed to be. Heck, even California "stopping" the sale of ICE cars is not "banning" them.

Sponsored

 

[RickLightning]

I believe California's rule is zero emissions to be sold by 2035. There is no EV mandate. Just have to figure out how to have zero emissions.

 

[John Becker]

No major manufacture will willingly develop towards lower emissions or willingly add emissions equipment. You HAVE to force them, they WONT do so themselves.

Replace the word "manufacturer" with "consumer."
Consumers have to be "forced" to accept CAFE and emissions standards whether they want them or not.

 

[John Becker]

I believe California's rule is zero emissions to be sold by 2035. There is no EV mandate. Just have to figure out how to have zero emissions.

And that is different in what way?

 

[RickLightning]

And that is different in what way?

It gives companies a target of now 11 years to figure out how to make vehicles not emit. Maybe they'll create a way to do that with gas vehicles. Maybe they'll find an alternative fuel source.

And let's be clear - this is California. If you don't like it, move. Oh wait, you live in O_io. So you don't have to worry about it...

 

[Firn]

Replace the word "manufacturer" with "consumer."
Consumers have to be "forced" to accept CAFE and emissions standards whether they want them or not.

No, don't throw random arguments in here. My argument stands.

Now if you ALSO want to make an argument about consumer habits, then you can. Please go ahead and put one together.

Being that you did bring consumers into it, in BOTH cases the manufacture and the consumer both will chose not to accept them, because it's cheaper not to. So leaded fuel, no emissions equipment at all, the literal dirt cloud floating over every major city. Those all come back, because that won't self regulate. Somebody HAS to do so. So who is that if it isn't government?

 

[Scorpio3d]

Honestly, I approached my EV purchase from a perspective of conservatism or economics if you want to look at it that way. I was driving a 2016 expedition EL averaging about 17 miles per gallon. Just to do the math. I am saving $4000 +/- a year on electricity versus gas. Not to mention that I was lucky enough to catch the great deals on the 2023’s early this year and that doesn’t even count the smaller savings of $$ and time not having to do oil changes! Pretty radical for someone in Texas???
That was before I drove it daily and fell in love with the truck, It is simply amazing and that is what I tell people when they ask. I love to show off the front and all the outlets and all the other cool little features that it has.

 

[Mach Turtle]

....So leaded fuel, no emissions equipment at all, the literal dirt cloud floating over every major city. Those all come back, because that won't self regulate. Somebody HAS to do so. So who is that if it isn't government?

Why, it's Elon, of course.

 

[flyct]

Why would I want to fund a company whose profits accrue to Musk who has openly stated he wants tax cuts for billionaires, add tariffs to protect his profits, deregulate to rape our environment, anti-labor regulations to squeeze more profits out …….
What is possibly in it for me?

I understand and respect your position and hear it all the time. BUT that is exactly the same argument my WW2 friend used about buying a Japanese car years ago. I explained that Honda had the most US parts of all cars at the time and they were manufactured in the US by Americans. He didn't care. His response was the profits go to Japan.

He drove a Volvo and I explained that Swedish Ball Bearing factories supp;iied Germany.that kept the war going., yet he’s supporting Sweden.

He was conflicted when his granddaughter married a Doctor who was Japanese.

Edit: I might add that my Ford Lightning is my favorite vehicle of all times.. Before purchasing the Lightning our Teslas held that spot. We have 2 Teslas and a Lightning now and love them, but I don’t like “the man.”

 

[Jseis]

Having some foresight and acting on that is what drives the future. Hence the rural electrification act , interstate highways act, & harbors and rivers act. Not to mention creating the FCC and parsing out various frequencies.

Thus making it possible to move people, goods, services, & communications across the nation. Long dead politicians made those decisions giving you, the dear reader, an ability to argue about government intervention and your ability to self flagellate in BC.

The highways led to fuel taxes to pay for highway improvements & infrastructure maintenance. More argument. Then a military budget to keep sea/air lanes open for trade (oil & etc). More argument.

Wood economy, coal economy, natural gas economy, nuke economy, renewable economy. Natural progression.

Don’t like it? Vote or Go to Mars. Build a nation-state from scratch. Call us in 250 years.

 

[RickKeen]

I understand and respect your position and hear it all the time. BUT that is exactly the same argument my WW2 friend used about buying a Japanese car years ago.

Difference being that Musk is actively using the profits right now to attack our democracy, our country, and our way of life. Boycotting his company right now still has a chance of perhaps moderating his Broligarch behavior.

 

[Monkey]

Replace the word "manufacturer" with "consumer."
Consumers have to be "forced" to accept CAFE and emissions standards whether they want them or not.

Consumers have the ultimate ability to buy a product or not. Most consumers also are functioning members of society who can have some degree of control on policies and elected officials who write these standards into law. If you, or any consumer out there, has valid argument against the current CAFE standards, lets hear it. Something that isn’t just “we don’t want it” or “me like big engine, make loud noises and smell of gasoline.”

The CAFE standards do not stipulate any specific technology, they do not require vehicles to be hybrid or all electric. They control the amount of toxic crap the vehicle spews into the air. Evolving emissions standards have been a thing for a long time. Longer than I’ve been on this planet and I’m just about to turn 50. This is why we have catalytic converters, for example. This is why we no longer have lead in gasoline... We identify problems with how things work and how they impact our environment and adjust accordingly. The CAFE standards set targets for manufacturers to reach by certain dates and most all the requirements are grounded in reason and achievable with tech that is already on the market.

So, I’ll ask, what specifically in the current CAFE emissions standards do you not want or feel is being unduly forced upon you?

 

[Malimal]

It's funny because those, at least in America, claim America first, but want to be dependent on foreign oil..smh

 

[Scorpio3d]

Don’t like it? Vote or Go to Mars. Build a nation-state from scratch. Call us in 250 years.

But you need Musk to go to Mars!

 

[Jseis]

But you need Musk to go to Mars!

Emperor of Mars on Mars, fine by me. Maybe “The Expanse” in real time.

Sponsored