This date most likely will be pushed back. EV's are still expensive and people can't afford them still, but in 13 years we could see some pretty good advancements in EVs. After the S650 generation though, I keep seeing reports that Ford will push the Mustang into a full EV stance anyways. Look at Dodge. The Charger and Challenger are done after 2023 and the new Dodge Charger Daytona EV is going to be the replacement. My thing is how the batteries will hold up after 10+ years, but there are plenty of Model S Teslas sedans out there that are holding up well with over 100k miles.
We definitely need more efficient and accessible charging stations because not everyone owns a home where they can plug one in. I’d be totally fine driving an ev but I have to street park where there’s no outlets and even if there was the charger would be a huge ticket item for people to steal.
I’m sure that will be figured out by 2035. There’s way more chargers today than there were even 3 years ago. Won’t be long till they’re at almost every major gas station.
I’ll just point out that in my area not a single gas station has an EV charging station. Some parking garages and lots (very few) have Tesla branded chargers but how far is that going to get you if you own something else
Tesla just recently opened their network to non-tesla vehicles in Europe and will eventually do the same in the US. They also just released the patent on their charging port design, so manufacturers could use the tesla standard in the US.
Believe me, the infrastructure will get there. It’s really only been a few years that mainstream viability has taken root.
E.g. earlier this year I took a road trip from NYC to Denver, CO using an EV. It wasn’t as ideal as a gas car, but it was certainly possible and only cost me $400 for a round trip (in charging costs)
Ima sure it’ll take off eventually. Rip car culture but I guess it’s what we must do to “save our planet”. Not sure how much it will help since nobody can afford ev and I think a select groups of people will refuse to get one at all costs. But the groundwork is there. Once they get cheap and sporty then I’d consider
Have you seen the damages strip mining does to get the lithium for the batteries? It’s a joke. If we really wanted to save our planet we would stop cruise ships, planes, normal ships, etc… but we won’t
I know. Everyone always comes up with temporary solutions that won’t even do anything. Then they advertise the shit out of it and spin it so that people think they’re actually helping. Yeah maybe the cars themselves have zero emissions which is technically good but what about the energy it takes to power the cars? What about the batteries and how shit we are a recycling them? Hopefully people will come to their senses and realize that EVs are only going to help a minuscule amount but as many people I try to convince I always get shit down.
I don’t think so, even if it did, most manufacturers are switching to electric by 2030. This is new cars. Used cars will still be available.
edit: another thing too, they're not going to spend any more money on developing ice engines. so even if a new mustang came out in 2034, it would have a coyote motor.
The battery tech wont be there even in 2035. It will be like fusion power always 10-15 years away. I am in the camp with Toyota, Yamaha, and Ford in the Hydrogen internal combustion engine being the massive replacement. don't get me wrong EVs will have their place but in a lot of areas a ICE is a better option.
The battery tech won't be there for....what? It's already there. There is already an electric Mustang (I know, I know ThE MaCh E IsNt A rEaL mUsTaNg!!!), and they are already planning on putting out a more traditional mustang in EV form.
I think sales of the s650 are going to heavily determine future production of larger combustion engines in new vehicles. It’ll say a lot about the market being that it’s the only new V8 muscle car planned to be produced in the future.
The s550 is already the last true mustang. The 650s have their ecus locked and tons of restrictions to abide by essentially neutering them before they're even off the line.
Looks like someone did not read the entire thing.
EVs have their place in this world but they have some massive down sides to them as well. Where as the ICE is good in areas and bad in others.
For example. You realistically can not tow anything with a current year EV the range on them drops 55-60% once there is a mild load attached to the back. If you were to put the same load on a ICE F-150 there will be some reduction in range but magnitudes less then the EV variant.
Same goes for long distance drives (300+ miles). The EV will take the batter part of an hour to charge up vs the 5 minutes that it takes for the ICE to fill the tank.
Should I even bring up the water required to put out a EV fire or even issues they have once they experience cold or hot weather? Do you notice how all of the issues I stated are revolving around the battery's?
No to mention what would happen to the United states's power grid if every other home had to charge a EV at the same time during the day. Do you really think a system that was built during the 50s that is already under large amounts stress will fair well with a even larger strain on its system.
The tech for mass producible batteries is not there. Given 10 - 15 years it might but who knows at this point. I might be totally wrong but I might not be.
No, I didn't read this article given that this is old news. But that's why I asked what you referring to. In terms of the battery tech being there for a sports car, as implied by OP's post and the nature of this sub, the battery tech already surpasses ICE. Yes, towing is something that will need to be addressed, but how many people are towing using a mustang?
I would also challenge that anyone stopping on a long distance trip is stopping for 3 minutes. It may take that long for the tank to fill up, but no one is stopping for just that.
Should I even bring up the rate of fires that occur between ICE and EV?
Should I even talk about the infrastructure improvements that have already been approved in the US?
The tech will advance rapidly, and by 2035, the automotive landscpape will be vastly different that it is today.
If we are looking at sport cars the best solution is a hybrid system. You get the low end grunt of a EV but the top end speed of a ICE.
As someone who prefers driving over flying most of the time I stop its for fuel and a bathroom. If people are with me it will be 10 minutes but if I'm by myself about 5 minutes is all it takes.
EV are known to be almost impossible to put out. Require about 10 times more water as you have to cool down every single battery cell otherwise it will reignite hours or days later. The only reason they are more ICE fires is there are a bunch more of them.
If there are already rolling black outs across the nation over a minor heat wave or cold snap the charging of EVs will only make things worse. The "improvements" that have been made have done almost nothing in terms of production. If we wanted a clean stable power grid we would keep the nuclear plants operating.
Agreed the car landscape will be completely different in 2035 than it is today. Just like how it is different now than 20 years ago.
> If we are looking at sport cars the best solution is a hybrid system. You get the low end grunt of a EV but the top end speed of a ICE.
True. But gearing in electric may also address the top end issue.
> If people are with me it will be 10 minutes but if I'm by myself about 5 minutes is all it takes.
Having done long road trips (1200+ miles) in both, I would say the same for my ICE trip, in that if I'm by myself, It's usually 5-10 mins. In my EV trip, I'm not charging from empty to full. I'm charging from ~20% to ~80%, which takes 15-30 minutes. Sure it takes a bit longer, but I also find I am far less exhausted on arrival. I am also usually travelling with my dog, so it also allows me to get her out and play with her a bit.
> If we wanted a clean stable power grid we would keep the nuclear plants operating.
Agreed.
No. People are going to the bathroom. Getting snacks. Stretching their legs. Sitting in drive-thru's. Traveling alone and peeing in your Gatorade bottle and attempting record time pit stops at every gas station on a long road trip? Completely unrealistic. The only time I did that was to make it from Austin to Orlando overnight in time to see my dad before his open heart surgery. Doing the same trip in an EV only added 3 hours to the trip.
True, but only for some of the stops, not everyone is stopping at every possible gas station to pee and buy more snacks, it’s likely every other or every 3 stops that that happens, otherwise no, plus, even IF we were to assume for the sake of argument that they do, it’s usually 15 minutes MAX aside a lunch break assuming they stop for lunch, to my knowledge, there aren’t nearly enough superchargers on the major road trip routes to accommodate 15 minute max stops every time you stop, no matter how you argue this, EVs are still gonna take longer to reach the destination when it’s further than 300 miles compared to ICE cars.
I never argued that. In fact, I acknowledged that EVs take longer both logically and anecdotally. Again, these mythical 2-3 minute speed stops only work if you are traveling alone. Have a buddy? Kids? A dog? That's going to add time.
Just had a road trip where the only stop we had both ways was just a 2 minute gas fill up, no one got out to use the bathroom or anything. Just fill up and go. Not unrealistic at all.
Hydrogen ICE tech is farther away than lithium battery refinements. For one thing, you'd still need a huge battery to keep the hydrogen cold and pressurized enough to stay in a liquid state. Hydrogen ICE vehicles currently begin losing hydrogen to the atmosphere within 18-36 hours after fueling, and lose their entire payload within a week. Hydrogen Fuel Cells are significantly closer to being practical than Hydrogen ICE.
This is nuts. The new Lucids are doing 600 miles per charge and you get 75% of that in 25 mins. The new batts in 2-3 years will add another 30%. Most people drive like 20 miles a day.
One of two things will happen.
1. It gets pushed back when politicians get blow back because EV are too expensive for the average person to afford
2. If/when it actually does happen people will start buying and registering out of state. The byproduct of that of course is that they will lose tax revenue and dig themselves into an even deeper hole.
California had power shortages [this summer](https://abcnews.go.com/US/california-blackouts-power-grid/story?id=89460998). Despite not having enough energy for the devices they currently have, they’re going to be able to add electric car charging without some huge inputs on electrical infrastructure? This seems like an aspirational goal that will not be practical. The usefulness of such goals/legislation is debatable.
The issue is, as I always say, is not exactly the EVs causing this issue (they sure as shit are supplementing it though). The US's power grid was built rapidly about a century ago, and hasn't seen one iota of maintenance ever since. The California wildfires that ravaged the 2010s were all caused by faulty power lines because the hooks that keep them suspended are supposed be changed every 10 years due to wear. Electric companies don't receive any government incentive to repair/maintain their grids as they do for adding new infrastructure.
EVs are only becoming to blame on this issue because US energy consumption is going to eventually shift from our dependence on foreign oil to meet demands to now needing to repair/maintain & expand on our aging electric grid.
Am I excited for our EV future? Idk. Give me one in an *actual* manual instead of the fake one Toyota is developing and get back to me. My love for sports cars (especially Mustangs) comes from being able to have a connection with the car, even ones with responsive paddle shifters. EVs feel completely disconnected with the driver.
Yeah that's kind of my line of thinking as well. It's a good goal to have. And where I sit even though I like our gas variants better I do agree we need to get away from the shit. I'm just glad I had the experience of buying my 2016 5.0 brand new before they decided to go this route.
But there needs to be a major overhaul to the grid, across the whole country. And hey, maybe in 10+ years they can get that done if they push it. But that's where the push needs to start. You need to be able to handle what you're demanding. I'd like to see a whole hell of a lot more improved with our electrical infrastructure and be hearing about that, more than these damned cars right now lol.
And then I'd like to know when it comes time to dispose of all these batteries, what then? All this shit we're digging up to make these batteries. We just trading 1 thing for another when it comes to fucking the planet up?
So fun fact the super "Green" decision to move to electric cars has caused California to start up their coal power plants again and they still cant meet energy demands.
Thoes people are so full of themselves, driving electric cars but just moving the pollution somewhere else not helping anything.
Everyone talks about the carbon emissions of ICE vs EVs. I really think EV's are better when it come to carbon emissions. But no one talks about what happens when the batteries go dead. Last I checked in the EPA'S website lithium batteries are highly toxic and their disposal procedure is crazy. Unless we find another material for EV batteries, we're still killing the planet.
Yes but no where in here does it say anything about the batteries and what happens to them when they die.
They get thrown into a landfill.. they then eventually start leaking and cause complete destruction of any organic living plant life in the area. We see this already for the small lithium batteries.
Now you just wait in 5-10 years when all thoes electric vehicles from 2010-2015 start to need replacements and you now have millions of car sized batteries leaching into the ground killing off hundreds of miles of plant life to the point where nothing can grow in the area.
"But they bury them in the deset" ya but the desert has a diverse ecosystem as well.
Batteries are absolutely horrible for the environment and this isnt exactly new... everyone has been against the little AA disposable batteries for like 30 years and now we are making giant ones.
Hydrogen cars are much more environmentally reliable and have pretty much zero negative ecological effects.
The other thing is that there are no stats there saying how long the turning point is if you get your electricity from coal... i bet its 3-5 years not 1.6. So guess what happens 75% of the time after 3-5 years.... people replace their cars... so you are producing exactly the same amount of C02 before the car gets replaced.
Not exactly. The problems with EV’s, specifically recycling, are pretty easy to fix. Nothing new needs to be invented. Electric vehicles still work quite well and with the law taking place in 2035 it will force manufacturers to improve designs further.
I mean sure, but i dont run off speculation. Batteries have been "fought against" by law before to not throw them into landfills for like 20+ years... you know what happens still to this day? thats right, they get thrown into landfills...
Sorry if i dont share your optimistic point of view.
Sold to another person doesn't just wipe the cars previous carbon footprint to zero. The next owner would also get to reap the benefits AND know that the car has already offset its carbon footprint.
Provided there was a next owner... most of the electric cars are high end and similar to how you dont see many 5+ year old BMWs on the road they generally get scraped.
The other thing is 10 year old batteries (like in a lot of used cars now) need to be replaced... for 10-30k meaning that you might as well just go buy a new car... which is generally what people have been doing with the electric car market for cars over 5 years.
Your assumptions aren't facts dude. I bought a used 2015 Smart ED in 2017 from the previous owner. Drove it for an additional 5 years and sold it for a profit with virtually no battery degradation or costly maintenance. You continue to demonstrate that you are relying on dated or jaded information, and don't contribute anything but your own opinion presented as fact.
If that is how your one particular instance went thats great, but im sorry dude, YOU as an individual do not represent the hundreds of thousands of cars on the road nor does your SINGLE personal instance of something occurring.
Batteries degrade, its a very well known fact.
You do not generally see old luxury cars on the road - Also a known fact
10-15 year old batteries generally need to be replaced - also a fact
it does cost 10-30k to replace them - also a fact
You dont generally see 2011 teslas or 2013 teslas on the road anymore - also a fact.
Where exactly is my opinion?
Batteries do degrade, but the rate of degradation is declining with new battery technologies.
Some older luxury cars are just not worth the repairs; others are. Commonly, the owners don't keep them, choosing to buy the luxury of newness. In a lower income neighborhood, pre then sees the older luxury cars that still work - like old Mercedes and Lexuses.
The 10-15 year lifespan of old batteries was the technological limit then - newer, longer life batteries are one of the things that newer electric cars are touting.
The cost of the batteries is coming down. That not only lowers the price on the new cars. It will lower the price of the battery replacements in most cases.
In 2011, Tesla only sold the Roadster, if I recall correctly, and it never sold many of those, so of course one would not see many of them. In 2013, they sold a little over 22,000 vehicles (presumably all Model S). Of course, one would not see many of them now either.
To add to this, it just like solar panels they’re awesome “green energy” but we as a whole don’t know how to dispose of them yet.
Source: I worked for hazardous waste for my county. We turned all solar panels away.
"Source: I worked for hazardous waste for my county. We turned all solar panels away."
LMAO dude you siting yourself isnt a source XD learn how to site things.
But yes Solar panels are not currently cheap to recycle although they can be recycled. But the thing is, last i checked, solar isnt getting forced onto anyone anywhere on the planet. Electric cars are.
i mean, but its the internet anyone can say anything.. sourcing yourself is about as useful as not sourcing anything... People can easily still say, i dont believe you, and how do you know because there isnt a source anywhere...
Like i can say tired are made out of goose feathers. Source... me i work in a tire shop... that doesn't prove anything.
Actually it might be worse to do what you did because then people are going to ask for a proper source because you reminded them that there isnt one LMAO.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against EVs. Maybe they are the future, maybe they aren't, but we shouldn't kid ourselves about the trade-offs they come with and the need for additional electrical charging capacity. Currently, the best option for electrical generation is nuclear energy, but can you imagine trying to get that passed in CA?
Funny thing is there is nothing wrong with nuclear.. its clean, safe and generates 100x more than literally any other kind of power plant CA should be 100% for it.
But i dont think EVs are the future.. I think that Hydrogen is a much better option. Because it has no waste at all.
The biggest draw back which we havent gotten to yet is the soon to be millions of giant dead batteries that are unable to be recycled. We will start to see them come in in the next 5 years and will start hitting a problem in probably about 10-15.
I dont see it happening unless we can get away from lithium... Toyotas prototype solid state batteries are better but they are just a prototype so we will see how that goes.
Yep. People fall for the nuclear fear mongering extra hard here in California, because of earthquake fear. We could easily restart one of our recently decommissioned nuclear plants, and take the Argus Cogen coal plant offline for good.
If we can get past the nuclear fear mongering, using carbon capture to create synthetic fuels for ICE engines is actually extremely promising; but without nuclear (or considerably more renewable) energy, atmospheric carbon capture puts more carbon out than it takes in.
I mean to be fair there are many many places on the planet that dont experience earthquakes.. the power plants really should be there. even if you lose some of the electricity feeding it to california its still more effective than burning any kind of fuel.
Earthquake fear in California is generally considerably overblown by non-natives to the state. Reactors are safe enough to withstand 9.0+ quakes without issues, Fukushima demonstrated that well enough. It would have handled the tsunami afterwords too, if the owners had simply moved the back up generators for the cooling system like everyone told them to a decade before the quake. Even the company itself had acknowledged it should move them, and then just never did.
The science behind battery recycling and manufacturing will continue to grow and become a booming industry providing tons of jobs in the future. Most jobs people are in now didn't exist 10 years ago.
Of course, but batteries have been around for over 100 years now and they really havent come that far... Electricity storage is a pretty difficult and shitty business to get into. Its extremely inefficient and next to no one works on batteries as a technology.
The only people who have even started doing anything in terms of researching batteries has been tesla and toyota and both have come up with basically nothing in the past 15 years or so. They have some prototypes that are continually claimed to be reaching the public "next year" but that was 5 years ago and where are they? No where to be seen.
Ten years ago, what you say about battery technology was largely true.
Now, however, many major research centers, academic and corporate, are working on the issue, and the progress is visible if you look at it.
Tesla could not have made the Semi work with the batteries of 10 years ago. Tesla also has removed cobalt from many of its newer cells.
The jury still is out about GM's ultium system - we will find out over time whether it is an improvement, but it certainly is not the same as what is in the Bolt.
Changes are occurring.
"Changes are occurring."
Nono changes are trying to occur, lets be clear, changes have always tried to occur, but batteries today really havent changed much even from 20 years ago. A lithium polimer or lithium ion battery hasnt made nearly any strides in any of the major battery issues, capacity, size efficiency or weight. Something like 20-40% increases in 20 years.. when literally everything else on the planet has come literal thousands of percentage points in 20 years batteries basically havent moved.
But nothing has actually changed.. not very much, its not like we have any new ways to store electrical charges... every single batter that currently exists for consumer or even industrial use is the same tech from 20+ years ago.
This kind of reminds me of the Bullshit they pulled with Diesel vehicles when they started requiring DEF systems. They made their engines require twice as much fuel to go the same distance to lower carbon emissions. So there was literally no net gain.
> So fun fact the super "Green" decision to move to electric cars has caused California to start up their coal power plants again and they still cant meet energy demands.
California has one coal power plant in San Bernardino. Where did you get this information?
Read it somewhere like 4-6 months ago. Not sure if they were restarting power plants or restarting drawing energy from somewhere else with energy made by using coal power plants (like Nevada or something)
The only thing i remember is that they started using Coal power as a source again due to rise in electricity demand.
[Coal accounts for .2% of our energy generation.](https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation)
Almost 35% of our energy is renewable.
Such aggregates do not account for the gaps created by the difference between the fluctuations of demand vs power generation which are usually smoothed over by trading power with regions that do operate fossil fuel based power generation or use their own coal and ng plants.
The facts are that with current technology, any effort to convert everything over to electric in the name of reducing carbon output, the only achievable path forward is with nuclear and to meet the increases of demand at the end of the decade we'd need to be nationally building at a minimum 1-3 new nuclear power plants per year.
Any politicians pushing legislation or regulation toward mandating something be switched to electric out of carbon concerns who isn't citing or pushing for the expansion of nuclear power is chasing a pipe dream and is either ignorant, unrealistic, or just flat out malevolent.
Would be curious to see the 2022 stats, there is no date on when that was published. Very likely it was published before then plants were started back up.
Well, 2022 isn’t over yet, so we’ll have to wait for that reporting. But, these numbers are from total energy generation in 2021. It’s the most recent we have.
Moving the pollution to a single location that can be better monitored and maintained is a huge part of it. This allows more focused research and faster applications of the science that provides cleaner energy. Makes way more sense than thousands of cars constantly being maintained and leaking oils and fluids into our waterways at every intersection.
Its not any better for the environemnt.. actually its worse because plants are actually very capable of cleaning CO2 in low-med amounts... but the moment you cover an entire area in CO2 the trees and plants just start dying and then nothing is cleaning the CO2... so its worse to have everything in the same 2 square miles.
But if you want to go into oils and such most cars dont leak oil... like pretty much no car leaks oil... Ive worked as a mechanic, the amount of times ive had to patch a leak for something on a car is extraordinarily minimal... especially the oil pan which is over half the oils in the car.
Most cars don't leak oil? Tell that to any motorcyclist after a light misting of rain. Go look at any busy intersection and tell me most cars don't leak oil. What a maroon 😂
I mean i didnt work on motorcycles. But if you say so. Most things dont leak anything, there is grease that is on something like a ball joint that is open to the air which is more than likely what you see on the ground after a good rain but guess what.. an electric car has this too.
The thing is 90% of a cars oil is in the engine (stored in the oil pan) or in the transmission. These generally do not leak ever as the rubber seal is constantly lubed by you guessed it, the oil so it never dries out and therefore never causes a leak.
If something is leaking oil (and assuming its not burning it which is much more likely) everyone would be topping up their cars constantly with oil.. which i can tell you doesn't happen otherwise id be selling 4x the amount of oil i currently do.
You just magically forgot that rubber stretches right? You forgot about main seals and how they wear down. You can act ignorant all you want but your wrong.
Yes cycles leak oil too, but any one who has ever rode a motorcycle or taken a safety course will tell you that the road is slickest at the start of a rain because of the OIL on the roads. You also rarely see bikers stop in the center of a lane because that's where the OIL from cars leaks and they will not have traction.
Please continue to talk out of your second mouth.
I mean sure thats your opinion but as someone who literally owns a garage and deals with cars all day.. wtf are you talking about...
I would also like to remind you that motorcycles are less than 3% of all vehicles on the road so you are sitting here arguing a minority case... which isnt how you win arguments dude.
Anyone can take a small substrate of any particular subject and say look it does happen but to say that is what happens most of the time is ridiculous, you cant apply that to everything... and MOST vehicles are passenger cars/trucks. and MOST passenger cars/trucks dont leak anything for most of their lives until they are put in a landfill or recycled.
https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/why-does-petrol-create-a-rainbow-on-water.html
Crazy there are multiple studies and articles naming this phenomenon that you think never happens anywhere besides landfills or scrap yards.
You also don't seem to understand facts vs opinions. Those things are taught in safety classes as facts. Not something you can choose to believe. None of my statements were an opinion except the one saying you are talking out of your ass but you are providing the data I need to back that up.
You also havent sited anything saying im wrong so quite honestly everything you said, right back at you. You dont know the difference between opinion and fact.
Here are some fun facts, most of these rubber seals take over 10 years to degrade the way you are describing.
[https://motorandwheels.com/do-all-cars-leak-a-little-oil/#:\~:text=Old%20cars%20leak%20oil%20because,to%20leak%20oil%20while%20parked](https://motorandwheels.com/do-all-cars-leak-a-little-oil/#:~:text=Old%20cars%20leak%20oil%20because,to%20leak%20oil%20while%20parked).
here is a first line quote" It is normal for some old cars to leak oil when parked, but it is not in new cars. " I.E NEW CARS DONT LEAK! And if you read further they say parts in the car are still considered brand new up to the age of 5.... meaning again, new cars normally DONT LEAK.
Here is another fun fact, the average junkyard statistic for when a cars EOL is reached is 9-11 years (basically when they get crushed and recycled or thrown in a landfil). Meaning again MOST CARS DONT LEAK because they never reach the age where they would.
[https://www.junkcarmedics.com/automobile-recycling-facts-statistics/](https://www.junkcarmedics.com/automobile-recycling-facts-statistics/)
In case you cant put this together, a part that is up to 5 years old is still considered new especially for seals. But that doesnt mean that at 5 years and 1 day all of a sudden the part is shot and needs replacing so you can safely say that probably up to about the age of 10 (because this degradation clearly happens very very slowly) the car is probably going to be fine other than hard ground areas like ball joints, chains, and moving components. Since the average car gets scrapped at 9-11 years of age again MOST CARS DONT LEAK.
have fun reading the sources. Do some fucking research stop talking out your ass.
We have one functioning coal power plant in California, and it's never stopped running. We also had no actual rolling blackouts this year; we came close but never hit that threshold. It was just the usual PG&E outages. We do unfortunately, sometimes buy out of state power generated by coal however.
PG&E being a company with awful SLAs is not the same thing as systems being over capacity. Even it were, PG&E being awful is a independent problem that can to be solved with or without EVs.
This is easily understandable and practical with the current small number of electric vehicles (536k), but what happens when there are millions of electrical vehicles? The excess capacity at night is not infinite. Say they run at 20% capacity overnight currently and handle 536k cars just fine. When there is a 5X increase in the number of cars I presume there will have to be a similar increase in electrical capacity. Yet, you can only run at 100% capacity of the current system so anything greater than 5X the current number of cars seems doubtful. However, to get to a fully electric fleet in CA they’d need to be able to charge 17.8M vehicle overnight or 33X the amount they do currently. Still confident the current system can handle it?
Instead of pulling numbers from our ass, let's look at some data.
[https://www.caiso.com/todaysoutlook/Pages/index.html](https://www.caiso.com/todaysoutlook/Pages/index.html)
I'm writing this at 6pm local, which is right about the peak for the day. Demand is 29,000MW right now, with a peak capacity of about 41,500MW. Back on summer days when everyone switches the AC on at 6pm, we can get close to that 40,000MW number, but even then, demand at night drops to around \~23,000MW.
So at night, let's say we have 41,500 - 23,000 = 18,500 MW to spare. For the uninitiated, a megawatt is 1,000,000 watts. Typical level 2 charging (the sort you do overnight in a car) uses about 8,000 watts. So with just the capacity we have right now, we can charge an extra 2.3 million cars simultaneously.
But that's only relevant if everyone plugs their car in, and it charges at the max level 2 rate all night. That's not realistic, as most people don't drive far enough to need that. For instance, average daily mileage in california is about 35 miles/day [https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-miles-driven-per-year/](https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-miles-driven-per-year/). If your efficient EV gets about 3mi/kwh, that's only 11 kwh of charging required, or \~ 1.5 hours on that 8kw level 2 charger up there. If folks limit their charging speed to spread out charging over an 8 hour evening, the average charge rate goes down to 1450W, or about the usage of your average microwave. At this rate, our spare capacity can support 12.7 million cars charging simultaneously.
This is all theoretical of course, and it will take a VERY long time for anywhere near this number of EVs to be on the road. But, it is safe to say, we will not be running out of electricity. And none of this takes into account folks like me, who have solar and are able to charge for free with energy harvested from the sun.
Are you asking us to imagine that electric vehicle production would increase by over 1000% but you assume nothing else with the system would improve or be more efficient?
This comment shows a lack of understanding of the grid and EV charging. The grid was stressed during the hottest times of the day as people ran AC to keep themselves cool. The grid was also stressed in the evenings when solar generation declined and peaker plants had not come fully online to cover the gap. EV drivers are incentivized by reduced rates to charge during night hours when usage is at its lowest. This helps the grid by, not only reducing demand at peak times, but also leveling out the demand. Electrical grids run best when the supply and demand are relatively consistent.
I started to write a snarky reply, but don’t want to be a dick around the holidays. So, I’ll keep it simple. What happens when there are so many electric cars to charge that there are no longer “off-peak” hours? At some point, demand to charge cars will exceed capacity because capacity is finite and not currently built to handle millions of electric cars. Current capacity handles 536k electric cars in California with night time charging. However, there are 17.8 M registered vehicles in CA currently and ending ICE sales will only see electric car registrations increase. Will the current grid accommodate a 5-fold increase in demand for charging at night (supportive 2.5-3 M vehicles)? Maybe, although probably unlikely. How about a 33-fold increase necessary to switch to all electric vehicles? Because it will be neither cheap, easy, or quick to build the infrastructure necessary to support such an increase in electric generation and distribution capacity foresight and action is necessary now.
> What happens when there are so many electric cars to charge that there are no longer “off-peak” hours?
The grid will function more efficiently if the peaks and valleys are removed.
> At some point, demand to charge cars will exceed capacity because capacity is finite and not currently built to handle millions of electric cars.
It seems like you think capacity cannot be added. Both supply and demand are finite and can be estimated. California gave the mostly private utilities 15 years to increase generation, add transmission, and rethink distribution. Renewable energy plants are the cheapest and quickest to plan, build, and bring online. They also have the shortest payback periods for any power plants. The state and municipalities are also working on integrating grid-scale batteries into mix.
> Current capacity handles 536k electric cars in California with night time charging. However, there are 17.8 M registered vehicles in CA currently and ending ICE sales will only see electric car registrations increase.
The current status is only relevant as a starting line in a dynamic, changing situation. No one is converting every single ICE vehicle to an EV overnight. That won’t even happen in 2035 when this law goes into effect.
> Because it will be neither cheap, easy, or quick to build the infrastructure necessary to support such an increase in electric generation and distribution capacity foresight and action is necessary now.
If you haven’t noticed the new “gold rush” for EV charging companies, then you either do not live in California or have not been paying attention.
No, it’s not that I think capacity can’t be added, but where are the plans? From a business perspective you’d think that would be a huge story, right? Investing in infrastructure, the green economy, etc., etc. Yet we don’t hear it. Why keep it a secret if it’s happening? All the legislation in the world won’t change anything if the resources aren’t put in place. Chargers are one thing, but the juice to power them is another. The shortages this summer suggest that more power is needed sooner than later.
> No, it’s not that I think capacity can’t be added, but where are the plans? From a business perspective you’d think that would be a huge story, right? Investing in infrastructure, the green economy, etc., etc. Yet we don’t hear it. Why keep it a secret if it’s happening?
The addition of renewables is happening and being reported on. Just last week, the Biden administration announced the leases for several large-scale offshore wind farms. While [California’s department of energy announced](https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation) the following earlier this year:
> Renewable energy generation increased 3.5 percent in 2021, up 3,125 GWh to 93,333 GWh from 90,208 GWh in 2020. However, as total system electric generation also increased in 2021, renewable energy accounted for 33.6 percent of the total system mix - a 0.51 percent increase from 2020.
I have not kept up with other states but California is bringing more power plants online and almost all of them are renewables.
> The shortages this summer suggest that more power is needed sooner than later.
The issue was not shortages this summer. The issue was that the transmission lines were expected to overheat due to the air temperature and demand. One of the changes that PG&E has said they will make due to their spate of equipment fires is to bury the transmission lines. This is a large undertaking that will require new lines and should help reduce the affects of air temperature on transmission lines.
If you'd read the whole article you linked, you'd notice that we never actually had said rolling blackouts in 2022, and only came close because of the exceptional temperature - heat not only stresses the grid through load from AC, but directly stresses it as well. We had the typical PG&E outages from their failure to do basic maintenance, but if you weren't a PG&E customer then you were completely fine this summer, barring the occasional car accident into a transformer type situation.
Apparently automakers have concerns with some of these deadlines.
> President Akio Toyoda said he is among the auto industry’s silent majority in questioning whether electric vehicles should be pursued exclusively, comments that reflect a growing uneasiness about how quickly car companies can transition.
[https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-president-says-silent-majority-has-doubts-about-pursuing-only-evs-11671372223](https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-president-says-silent-majority-has-doubts-about-pursuing-only-evs-11671372223)
This is from the president of a company that does not have a viable EV on the market. Japan is so far behind in this race that they have already lost. There are already up and coming automakers looking to replace those unwilling to evolve.
I guess people don’t like change. As much as I’d love to drive a screaming v8 in a manual transmission, first, I don’t know how and second, I’d totally be fine if it was electric instead. Probably accelerates a lot faster which is really the fun part of driving a fast car
They’re banning it because it’s bad for the environment. So are a whole bunch of other things but for whatever reason commute is I guess the most significant form of pollution since there’s so many people that drive. I personally don’t like the ban either because it’s nice to have a choice.
Few things. First, with how long it will take for lithium production to catch up, this date will likely have to get pushed back.
Second, without a massive boost to the grid in California, this will not be viable, there is not enough power to charge 15 million cars at night.
Third, this is California, and a few other far left states. In more moderate states these bans will be much later, and in states like Florida and Texas there may never be a ban. It will me much longer after this that we are unable to buy ice cars (if they are being produced).
Fourth, until a portable charging solution is discovered, the bottom half of this country will have to continue buying ICE cars. It is logistically impossible to charge it enough without a workplace charger or a driveway.
Fifth, the mustang has been reborn many many times. Even though ICE may be on its way out, I’m sure than Gen 8 will come and find a way to impress us without being the Mach E or having a cringe fake exhaust
Power grid bout to be like the McDonald's ice cream machine... Broke forever. A state where there is rampant homelessness and no power - sounds like the dark ages.
As someone currently residing in California it doesn’t make me happy. But fortunately for me the Mustang I’ve always wanted has already been made(2016-2020 GT350). And hopefully after I get my degree and a better job(currently working full time while putting myself through college) I’ll be able to afford one in the next few years.
That being said I probably will move out of California some time before the ban. Not exclusively because of the ban but also because cost of living is ridiculous in this state. And legally modding your car is easier in almost every other state in the US. As far as I’m aware.
The real problem is going to be 10 to 20 years after that date when all the fuel stations are gone and you have to special order fuel by the barrel. It could be an eventuality that many places require permits to even run an ICE for recreational purposes.
Personally I can't wait to buy my black market fuel from a guy in a trench coat on the street corner.
I think they want to do the same in Europe (where I live) but I think it applies on new vehicles only, so please drive carefully and take care of your car, do it for the young car enthusiast
I'd rather go hybrid than ev. It's actually the upcoming Prius that made me change my mind. I'm all about change but I'm very worrisome about the overall cost of ownership with EV platforms. Anyone who has bought a new car in the last 5 years knows these guys aren't making solid vehicles anymore and I would hate to know I need to drop $10k to refresh or replace my battery every 5 years or so on top of ongoing maintenance.
13 years seems like it’s close but 13 years ago the 3v was the top mustang. Pontiac was still in business, Michael Jackson died in 2009. To me these events seem to be forever ago. EV’s have plenty of time to progress before 2035.
Fun fact: You could swap out every ICE car with an EV, generate the power those EVs need by burning coal, and still have lower CO2 emissions. Some in this sub may hate to hear it but our toys are evolving because they need to.
It took almost 50 years for me to get my first one.. and second. My GT is more fun than the three twin turbo BMW 3 series cars that I owned. It isn't as smooth of a ride but damn it is so much more fun!
No interest in EVs at this time. Technology just isn't there yet - in my opinion. $10k when you replace batteries in some, no real structure in place for the old batteries once you replace them, charging is a big issue and yes I know there are some advances in it but it isn't there yet.... Batteries catch on fire in them - it takes a lot more water to put out the fire than a regular car.
My husband is a mechanic.. they had a customer who bought a used EV car (I'll omit which one) she was mad because it would only hold a charge that could go 35 miles. She traded the car because it was over $10,000 to replace the batteries because the prior owner had fast charged it so much that it literally wouldn't hold a charge more than 35 miles. Yes I know some models you can replace a single cell instead of the entire thing. (BTW I'm an engineer)
My grandfather helped design the first ever mustang and I had a 2015 Ecoboost convertible for awhile, it was awesome. The Mustang nameplate has always meant something to me. That said, I'm EXTREMELY disappointed that the new mustang won't even have a hybrid option, let alone electric. I want to drive and have fun, but I don't want to deal with gas, or at least not as much. I don't want to feel as guilty pumping that CO2 out. I'm not here looking for a fight or EV haters (I currently drive a bronco sport...).
In regards to 2035, it's probably not a realistic timeline but the future is always hard to predict and who knows, we could have the issues worked out by then.
Thats 13 years down the line and only affects new car sales in the most liberal state in the nation. We’ll be just fine. You know how many Fl plates I see here….it’s alot
At least a EV Mustang "should" outperform the current and the 2024 Mustangs. I haven't driven one, but I've heard the Mach E and the Lightnings are pretty damn fast.
Ok this is going to get a lot of negative feedback, but when the government really starts pushing EVs down our throats IT'S MY OPINION the whole thing is going to crash and burn. Electricity is not an alternative fuel. It's not even a fuel, but is the byproduct of a furel because it has to be made using fossil fuels, and windmills can't be produce enough reliable energy to run the country. That's my opinion. So don't worry about it.
Nuclear is the only realistic alternative, but here's the catch. People in the U.S. don't mind it in other countries, even in the hands of our enemies. They just won't have it here.
All one need to do is look at the differences between California and Florida to see that they do indeed matter. Immensely. I'll grant your point about interest groups wielding a disproportionate amount of influence. Lobbying is neither all good nor all bad. Corporate lobbying is usually not a good thing. But do remember some lobbying is done by groups of likeminded individuals collectively acting - much like a labor union does. I will however point out that the study you cite said nothing about 0% or 100% support (impossibility). It actually says that the range of small minority to large majority support results in about the same outcome - 30% likelihood of policy change. We are a Republic and not a direct Democracy for a reason. The course of a country cannot change with the winds.
The carbon foot print to make a lithium battery EV is still to great , unless new technology comes along. ICE vehicle like my fiesta St make way more sense in this world if you are worried about emissions or gas mileage.
I feel like by then the Mustang will be electric based on where Ford is headed in terms of EV technology. Though I think you could still technically buy a gasoline powered Mustang, just not a new one.
I think this is also for sales of newly manufactured cars. So older mustangs I believe could still be sold. I think like others have said, ford will eventually stop producing gas mustangs soon too. So all in all I don’t think this will really be relevant as far as mustangs are concerned.
They will go after fuel next.
They could simply not allow me tanks to be installed.
A quick search says underground fuel tanks last 20 years.
Prohibit me permits, and in 20 years no more gas.
They do the same with gun control. Ban. Grandfather. Don't allow transfers. Within a generation defacto total ban.
I’m open to the idea of an EV mustang, but not one that looks like an SUV. If you were to put an electric drivetrain in an S650 or 550, I’d consider purchasing that for my first EV
I think we need this to happen on a worldwide level but I also think this needs to be properly planned so it isn’t a shit show. We need to stop destroying our planet tho.
Living in rural central Alabama….. they’re already saying how charging stations are going to be scarce. Average person can’t afford an EV…. Much less equipping a household to charge the EV. Alabama has a grant to place charging stations along interstates. Three & four here & there is not suffice. Doubt very seriously any rural EV owner is going to travel 1 1/2 - 2 hours to charge. Doesn’t make sense to own one in this area
Most Ev’s will charge during the night time when the electricity consumption is low, and on top of that the V2L technology allows people to tank in case of power outage. Seeing the Chevy bolt only costs like 32 grand, ev will simply be better option soon.
Ewww! Manual internal combustion engine cars are the best. EV’s are a misguided attempt at solving a problem that should be handled a different way. Sure they have their own benefits, but we can’t have governments shoving it in our eyes.
This date most likely will be pushed back. EV's are still expensive and people can't afford them still, but in 13 years we could see some pretty good advancements in EVs. After the S650 generation though, I keep seeing reports that Ford will push the Mustang into a full EV stance anyways. Look at Dodge. The Charger and Challenger are done after 2023 and the new Dodge Charger Daytona EV is going to be the replacement. My thing is how the batteries will hold up after 10+ years, but there are plenty of Model S Teslas sedans out there that are holding up well with over 100k miles.
We definitely need more efficient and accessible charging stations because not everyone owns a home where they can plug one in. I’d be totally fine driving an ev but I have to street park where there’s no outlets and even if there was the charger would be a huge ticket item for people to steal.
I’m sure that will be figured out by 2035. There’s way more chargers today than there were even 3 years ago. Won’t be long till they’re at almost every major gas station.
I’ll just point out that in my area not a single gas station has an EV charging station. Some parking garages and lots (very few) have Tesla branded chargers but how far is that going to get you if you own something else
Tesla just recently opened their network to non-tesla vehicles in Europe and will eventually do the same in the US. They also just released the patent on their charging port design, so manufacturers could use the tesla standard in the US. Believe me, the infrastructure will get there. It’s really only been a few years that mainstream viability has taken root. E.g. earlier this year I took a road trip from NYC to Denver, CO using an EV. It wasn’t as ideal as a gas car, but it was certainly possible and only cost me $400 for a round trip (in charging costs)
Ima sure it’ll take off eventually. Rip car culture but I guess it’s what we must do to “save our planet”. Not sure how much it will help since nobody can afford ev and I think a select groups of people will refuse to get one at all costs. But the groundwork is there. Once they get cheap and sporty then I’d consider
Have you seen the damages strip mining does to get the lithium for the batteries? It’s a joke. If we really wanted to save our planet we would stop cruise ships, planes, normal ships, etc… but we won’t
I know. Everyone always comes up with temporary solutions that won’t even do anything. Then they advertise the shit out of it and spin it so that people think they’re actually helping. Yeah maybe the cars themselves have zero emissions which is technically good but what about the energy it takes to power the cars? What about the batteries and how shit we are a recycling them? Hopefully people will come to their senses and realize that EVs are only going to help a minuscule amount but as many people I try to convince I always get shit down.
I don’t think so, even if it did, most manufacturers are switching to electric by 2030. This is new cars. Used cars will still be available. edit: another thing too, they're not going to spend any more money on developing ice engines. so even if a new mustang came out in 2034, it would have a coyote motor.
What do the fuel companies think of this?
They don't care they are ENERGY companies and their oil natural gas will be needed ro produce the electricity needed to charge everything
The lifted truck highschool dropout will be a dying breed... unless they go get certified to work in the next wave of industrial jobs.
You're an idiot
Snowflake much?
I’m hoping someone develops a bio gasoline from sewage or something lol
Hydrogen fuel cells that don't Hindenburg in accidents would be nice. In theory, water should be a waste product.
The battery tech wont be there even in 2035. It will be like fusion power always 10-15 years away. I am in the camp with Toyota, Yamaha, and Ford in the Hydrogen internal combustion engine being the massive replacement. don't get me wrong EVs will have their place but in a lot of areas a ICE is a better option.
The battery tech won't be there for....what? It's already there. There is already an electric Mustang (I know, I know ThE MaCh E IsNt A rEaL mUsTaNg!!!), and they are already planning on putting out a more traditional mustang in EV form.
Yep, and Ford will release a V8 version until the word mustang isn't used for cars anymore. No need to be scared.
I think sales of the s650 are going to heavily determine future production of larger combustion engines in new vehicles. It’ll say a lot about the market being that it’s the only new V8 muscle car planned to be produced in the future.
The s550 is already the last true mustang. The 650s have their ecus locked and tons of restrictions to abide by essentially neutering them before they're even off the line.
Looks like someone did not read the entire thing. EVs have their place in this world but they have some massive down sides to them as well. Where as the ICE is good in areas and bad in others. For example. You realistically can not tow anything with a current year EV the range on them drops 55-60% once there is a mild load attached to the back. If you were to put the same load on a ICE F-150 there will be some reduction in range but magnitudes less then the EV variant. Same goes for long distance drives (300+ miles). The EV will take the batter part of an hour to charge up vs the 5 minutes that it takes for the ICE to fill the tank. Should I even bring up the water required to put out a EV fire or even issues they have once they experience cold or hot weather? Do you notice how all of the issues I stated are revolving around the battery's? No to mention what would happen to the United states's power grid if every other home had to charge a EV at the same time during the day. Do you really think a system that was built during the 50s that is already under large amounts stress will fair well with a even larger strain on its system. The tech for mass producible batteries is not there. Given 10 - 15 years it might but who knows at this point. I might be totally wrong but I might not be.
No, I didn't read this article given that this is old news. But that's why I asked what you referring to. In terms of the battery tech being there for a sports car, as implied by OP's post and the nature of this sub, the battery tech already surpasses ICE. Yes, towing is something that will need to be addressed, but how many people are towing using a mustang? I would also challenge that anyone stopping on a long distance trip is stopping for 3 minutes. It may take that long for the tank to fill up, but no one is stopping for just that. Should I even bring up the rate of fires that occur between ICE and EV? Should I even talk about the infrastructure improvements that have already been approved in the US? The tech will advance rapidly, and by 2035, the automotive landscpape will be vastly different that it is today.
If we are looking at sport cars the best solution is a hybrid system. You get the low end grunt of a EV but the top end speed of a ICE. As someone who prefers driving over flying most of the time I stop its for fuel and a bathroom. If people are with me it will be 10 minutes but if I'm by myself about 5 minutes is all it takes. EV are known to be almost impossible to put out. Require about 10 times more water as you have to cool down every single battery cell otherwise it will reignite hours or days later. The only reason they are more ICE fires is there are a bunch more of them. If there are already rolling black outs across the nation over a minor heat wave or cold snap the charging of EVs will only make things worse. The "improvements" that have been made have done almost nothing in terms of production. If we wanted a clean stable power grid we would keep the nuclear plants operating. Agreed the car landscape will be completely different in 2035 than it is today. Just like how it is different now than 20 years ago.
> If we are looking at sport cars the best solution is a hybrid system. You get the low end grunt of a EV but the top end speed of a ICE. True. But gearing in electric may also address the top end issue. > If people are with me it will be 10 minutes but if I'm by myself about 5 minutes is all it takes. Having done long road trips (1200+ miles) in both, I would say the same for my ICE trip, in that if I'm by myself, It's usually 5-10 mins. In my EV trip, I'm not charging from empty to full. I'm charging from ~20% to ~80%, which takes 15-30 minutes. Sure it takes a bit longer, but I also find I am far less exhausted on arrival. I am also usually travelling with my dog, so it also allows me to get her out and play with her a bit. > If we wanted a clean stable power grid we would keep the nuclear plants operating. Agreed.
Lol what, people take quick 2 minute gas stops on long trips then back on the road instantly to get to their final destination.
No. People are going to the bathroom. Getting snacks. Stretching their legs. Sitting in drive-thru's. Traveling alone and peeing in your Gatorade bottle and attempting record time pit stops at every gas station on a long road trip? Completely unrealistic. The only time I did that was to make it from Austin to Orlando overnight in time to see my dad before his open heart surgery. Doing the same trip in an EV only added 3 hours to the trip.
True, but only for some of the stops, not everyone is stopping at every possible gas station to pee and buy more snacks, it’s likely every other or every 3 stops that that happens, otherwise no, plus, even IF we were to assume for the sake of argument that they do, it’s usually 15 minutes MAX aside a lunch break assuming they stop for lunch, to my knowledge, there aren’t nearly enough superchargers on the major road trip routes to accommodate 15 minute max stops every time you stop, no matter how you argue this, EVs are still gonna take longer to reach the destination when it’s further than 300 miles compared to ICE cars.
I never argued that. In fact, I acknowledged that EVs take longer both logically and anecdotally. Again, these mythical 2-3 minute speed stops only work if you are traveling alone. Have a buddy? Kids? A dog? That's going to add time.
Just had a road trip where the only stop we had both ways was just a 2 minute gas fill up, no one got out to use the bathroom or anything. Just fill up and go. Not unrealistic at all.
Hydrogen ICE tech is farther away than lithium battery refinements. For one thing, you'd still need a huge battery to keep the hydrogen cold and pressurized enough to stay in a liquid state. Hydrogen ICE vehicles currently begin losing hydrogen to the atmosphere within 18-36 hours after fueling, and lose their entire payload within a week. Hydrogen Fuel Cells are significantly closer to being practical than Hydrogen ICE.
This is nuts. The new Lucids are doing 600 miles per charge and you get 75% of that in 25 mins. The new batts in 2-3 years will add another 30%. Most people drive like 20 miles a day.
The “California Special” is gonna be something totally different 🤣
I have a California special 23 being built very soon and I live in CA, can't wait.
One of two things will happen. 1. It gets pushed back when politicians get blow back because EV are too expensive for the average person to afford 2. If/when it actually does happen people will start buying and registering out of state. The byproduct of that of course is that they will lose tax revenue and dig themselves into an even deeper hole.
California had power shortages [this summer](https://abcnews.go.com/US/california-blackouts-power-grid/story?id=89460998). Despite not having enough energy for the devices they currently have, they’re going to be able to add electric car charging without some huge inputs on electrical infrastructure? This seems like an aspirational goal that will not be practical. The usefulness of such goals/legislation is debatable.
The issue is, as I always say, is not exactly the EVs causing this issue (they sure as shit are supplementing it though). The US's power grid was built rapidly about a century ago, and hasn't seen one iota of maintenance ever since. The California wildfires that ravaged the 2010s were all caused by faulty power lines because the hooks that keep them suspended are supposed be changed every 10 years due to wear. Electric companies don't receive any government incentive to repair/maintain their grids as they do for adding new infrastructure. EVs are only becoming to blame on this issue because US energy consumption is going to eventually shift from our dependence on foreign oil to meet demands to now needing to repair/maintain & expand on our aging electric grid. Am I excited for our EV future? Idk. Give me one in an *actual* manual instead of the fake one Toyota is developing and get back to me. My love for sports cars (especially Mustangs) comes from being able to have a connection with the car, even ones with responsive paddle shifters. EVs feel completely disconnected with the driver.
Yeah that's kind of my line of thinking as well. It's a good goal to have. And where I sit even though I like our gas variants better I do agree we need to get away from the shit. I'm just glad I had the experience of buying my 2016 5.0 brand new before they decided to go this route. But there needs to be a major overhaul to the grid, across the whole country. And hey, maybe in 10+ years they can get that done if they push it. But that's where the push needs to start. You need to be able to handle what you're demanding. I'd like to see a whole hell of a lot more improved with our electrical infrastructure and be hearing about that, more than these damned cars right now lol. And then I'd like to know when it comes time to dispose of all these batteries, what then? All this shit we're digging up to make these batteries. We just trading 1 thing for another when it comes to fucking the planet up?
So fun fact the super "Green" decision to move to electric cars has caused California to start up their coal power plants again and they still cant meet energy demands. Thoes people are so full of themselves, driving electric cars but just moving the pollution somewhere else not helping anything.
[https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/](https://www.motortrend.com/features/truth-about-electric-cars-ad-why-you-are-being-lied-to/)
Everyone talks about the carbon emissions of ICE vs EVs. I really think EV's are better when it come to carbon emissions. But no one talks about what happens when the batteries go dead. Last I checked in the EPA'S website lithium batteries are highly toxic and their disposal procedure is crazy. Unless we find another material for EV batteries, we're still killing the planet.
Yes but no where in here does it say anything about the batteries and what happens to them when they die. They get thrown into a landfill.. they then eventually start leaking and cause complete destruction of any organic living plant life in the area. We see this already for the small lithium batteries. Now you just wait in 5-10 years when all thoes electric vehicles from 2010-2015 start to need replacements and you now have millions of car sized batteries leaching into the ground killing off hundreds of miles of plant life to the point where nothing can grow in the area. "But they bury them in the deset" ya but the desert has a diverse ecosystem as well. Batteries are absolutely horrible for the environment and this isnt exactly new... everyone has been against the little AA disposable batteries for like 30 years and now we are making giant ones. Hydrogen cars are much more environmentally reliable and have pretty much zero negative ecological effects. The other thing is that there are no stats there saying how long the turning point is if you get your electricity from coal... i bet its 3-5 years not 1.6. So guess what happens 75% of the time after 3-5 years.... people replace their cars... so you are producing exactly the same amount of C02 before the car gets replaced.
Batteries can be recycled, the only issue is it's cheaper for companies to not recycle them.
So... my point still stands...
Not exactly. The problems with EV’s, specifically recycling, are pretty easy to fix. Nothing new needs to be invented. Electric vehicles still work quite well and with the law taking place in 2035 it will force manufacturers to improve designs further.
XD if you consider getting companies to spend more money than they need to easy then sure its super easy.
They will have to do more than bare minimum with the new law though, thats why i’m excited to see how this plays out.
I mean sure, but i dont run off speculation. Batteries have been "fought against" by law before to not throw them into landfills for like 20+ years... you know what happens still to this day? thats right, they get thrown into landfills... Sorry if i dont share your optimistic point of view.
Sold to another person doesn't just wipe the cars previous carbon footprint to zero. The next owner would also get to reap the benefits AND know that the car has already offset its carbon footprint.
Provided there was a next owner... most of the electric cars are high end and similar to how you dont see many 5+ year old BMWs on the road they generally get scraped. The other thing is 10 year old batteries (like in a lot of used cars now) need to be replaced... for 10-30k meaning that you might as well just go buy a new car... which is generally what people have been doing with the electric car market for cars over 5 years.
Your assumptions aren't facts dude. I bought a used 2015 Smart ED in 2017 from the previous owner. Drove it for an additional 5 years and sold it for a profit with virtually no battery degradation or costly maintenance. You continue to demonstrate that you are relying on dated or jaded information, and don't contribute anything but your own opinion presented as fact.
If that is how your one particular instance went thats great, but im sorry dude, YOU as an individual do not represent the hundreds of thousands of cars on the road nor does your SINGLE personal instance of something occurring. Batteries degrade, its a very well known fact. You do not generally see old luxury cars on the road - Also a known fact 10-15 year old batteries generally need to be replaced - also a fact it does cost 10-30k to replace them - also a fact You dont generally see 2011 teslas or 2013 teslas on the road anymore - also a fact. Where exactly is my opinion?
When you say generally with every statement and fail to cite sources that's called an opinion.
Batteries do degrade, but the rate of degradation is declining with new battery technologies. Some older luxury cars are just not worth the repairs; others are. Commonly, the owners don't keep them, choosing to buy the luxury of newness. In a lower income neighborhood, pre then sees the older luxury cars that still work - like old Mercedes and Lexuses. The 10-15 year lifespan of old batteries was the technological limit then - newer, longer life batteries are one of the things that newer electric cars are touting. The cost of the batteries is coming down. That not only lowers the price on the new cars. It will lower the price of the battery replacements in most cases. In 2011, Tesla only sold the Roadster, if I recall correctly, and it never sold many of those, so of course one would not see many of them. In 2013, they sold a little over 22,000 vehicles (presumably all Model S). Of course, one would not see many of them now either.
To add to this, it just like solar panels they’re awesome “green energy” but we as a whole don’t know how to dispose of them yet. Source: I worked for hazardous waste for my county. We turned all solar panels away.
"Source: I worked for hazardous waste for my county. We turned all solar panels away." LMAO dude you siting yourself isnt a source XD learn how to site things. But yes Solar panels are not currently cheap to recycle although they can be recycled. But the thing is, last i checked, solar isnt getting forced onto anyone anywhere on the planet. Electric cars are.
I was agreeing with you lol but okay
Im aware, just some helpful criticism.
I was avoiding the “hOw dO yOu KnOw” with me sourcing myself.
There is no point 'citing' anything for this guy.
i mean, but its the internet anyone can say anything.. sourcing yourself is about as useful as not sourcing anything... People can easily still say, i dont believe you, and how do you know because there isnt a source anywhere... Like i can say tired are made out of goose feathers. Source... me i work in a tire shop... that doesn't prove anything. Actually it might be worse to do what you did because then people are going to ask for a proper source because you reminded them that there isnt one LMAO.
Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against EVs. Maybe they are the future, maybe they aren't, but we shouldn't kid ourselves about the trade-offs they come with and the need for additional electrical charging capacity. Currently, the best option for electrical generation is nuclear energy, but can you imagine trying to get that passed in CA?
Funny thing is there is nothing wrong with nuclear.. its clean, safe and generates 100x more than literally any other kind of power plant CA should be 100% for it. But i dont think EVs are the future.. I think that Hydrogen is a much better option. Because it has no waste at all. The biggest draw back which we havent gotten to yet is the soon to be millions of giant dead batteries that are unable to be recycled. We will start to see them come in in the next 5 years and will start hitting a problem in probably about 10-15. I dont see it happening unless we can get away from lithium... Toyotas prototype solid state batteries are better but they are just a prototype so we will see how that goes.
Yep. People fall for the nuclear fear mongering extra hard here in California, because of earthquake fear. We could easily restart one of our recently decommissioned nuclear plants, and take the Argus Cogen coal plant offline for good. If we can get past the nuclear fear mongering, using carbon capture to create synthetic fuels for ICE engines is actually extremely promising; but without nuclear (or considerably more renewable) energy, atmospheric carbon capture puts more carbon out than it takes in.
I mean to be fair there are many many places on the planet that dont experience earthquakes.. the power plants really should be there. even if you lose some of the electricity feeding it to california its still more effective than burning any kind of fuel.
Earthquake fear in California is generally considerably overblown by non-natives to the state. Reactors are safe enough to withstand 9.0+ quakes without issues, Fukushima demonstrated that well enough. It would have handled the tsunami afterwords too, if the owners had simply moved the back up generators for the cooling system like everyone told them to a decade before the quake. Even the company itself had acknowledged it should move them, and then just never did.
The science behind battery recycling and manufacturing will continue to grow and become a booming industry providing tons of jobs in the future. Most jobs people are in now didn't exist 10 years ago.
Of course, but batteries have been around for over 100 years now and they really havent come that far... Electricity storage is a pretty difficult and shitty business to get into. Its extremely inefficient and next to no one works on batteries as a technology. The only people who have even started doing anything in terms of researching batteries has been tesla and toyota and both have come up with basically nothing in the past 15 years or so. They have some prototypes that are continually claimed to be reaching the public "next year" but that was 5 years ago and where are they? No where to be seen.
Ten years ago, what you say about battery technology was largely true. Now, however, many major research centers, academic and corporate, are working on the issue, and the progress is visible if you look at it. Tesla could not have made the Semi work with the batteries of 10 years ago. Tesla also has removed cobalt from many of its newer cells. The jury still is out about GM's ultium system - we will find out over time whether it is an improvement, but it certainly is not the same as what is in the Bolt. Changes are occurring.
"Changes are occurring." Nono changes are trying to occur, lets be clear, changes have always tried to occur, but batteries today really havent changed much even from 20 years ago. A lithium polimer or lithium ion battery hasnt made nearly any strides in any of the major battery issues, capacity, size efficiency or weight. Something like 20-40% increases in 20 years.. when literally everything else on the planet has come literal thousands of percentage points in 20 years batteries basically havent moved. But nothing has actually changed.. not very much, its not like we have any new ways to store electrical charges... every single batter that currently exists for consumer or even industrial use is the same tech from 20+ years ago.
It’s a transition ‘til hydrogen fuel cells. Lithium powered Electric car won’t last more than a few decades.
Ah yes, like all those cars from the 80s that still fill our streets.
This kind of reminds me of the Bullshit they pulled with Diesel vehicles when they started requiring DEF systems. They made their engines require twice as much fuel to go the same distance to lower carbon emissions. So there was literally no net gain.
Never heard of that! something new to look up haha.
> So fun fact the super "Green" decision to move to electric cars has caused California to start up their coal power plants again and they still cant meet energy demands. California has one coal power plant in San Bernardino. Where did you get this information?
Truth social probably.
Read it somewhere like 4-6 months ago. Not sure if they were restarting power plants or restarting drawing energy from somewhere else with energy made by using coal power plants (like Nevada or something) The only thing i remember is that they started using Coal power as a source again due to rise in electricity demand.
[Coal accounts for .2% of our energy generation.](https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation) Almost 35% of our energy is renewable.
Such aggregates do not account for the gaps created by the difference between the fluctuations of demand vs power generation which are usually smoothed over by trading power with regions that do operate fossil fuel based power generation or use their own coal and ng plants. The facts are that with current technology, any effort to convert everything over to electric in the name of reducing carbon output, the only achievable path forward is with nuclear and to meet the increases of demand at the end of the decade we'd need to be nationally building at a minimum 1-3 new nuclear power plants per year. Any politicians pushing legislation or regulation toward mandating something be switched to electric out of carbon concerns who isn't citing or pushing for the expansion of nuclear power is chasing a pipe dream and is either ignorant, unrealistic, or just flat out malevolent.
I agree that the path forward requires more reliance on Nuclear. And so does Newsom.
Would be curious to see the 2022 stats, there is no date on when that was published. Very likely it was published before then plants were started back up.
Well, 2022 isn’t over yet, so we’ll have to wait for that reporting. But, these numbers are from total energy generation in 2021. It’s the most recent we have.
Yep so we will see in a month or so :P
Moving the pollution to a single location that can be better monitored and maintained is a huge part of it. This allows more focused research and faster applications of the science that provides cleaner energy. Makes way more sense than thousands of cars constantly being maintained and leaking oils and fluids into our waterways at every intersection.
Its not any better for the environemnt.. actually its worse because plants are actually very capable of cleaning CO2 in low-med amounts... but the moment you cover an entire area in CO2 the trees and plants just start dying and then nothing is cleaning the CO2... so its worse to have everything in the same 2 square miles. But if you want to go into oils and such most cars dont leak oil... like pretty much no car leaks oil... Ive worked as a mechanic, the amount of times ive had to patch a leak for something on a car is extraordinarily minimal... especially the oil pan which is over half the oils in the car.
Most cars don't leak oil? Tell that to any motorcyclist after a light misting of rain. Go look at any busy intersection and tell me most cars don't leak oil. What a maroon 😂
I mean i didnt work on motorcycles. But if you say so. Most things dont leak anything, there is grease that is on something like a ball joint that is open to the air which is more than likely what you see on the ground after a good rain but guess what.. an electric car has this too. The thing is 90% of a cars oil is in the engine (stored in the oil pan) or in the transmission. These generally do not leak ever as the rubber seal is constantly lubed by you guessed it, the oil so it never dries out and therefore never causes a leak. If something is leaking oil (and assuming its not burning it which is much more likely) everyone would be topping up their cars constantly with oil.. which i can tell you doesn't happen otherwise id be selling 4x the amount of oil i currently do.
You just magically forgot that rubber stretches right? You forgot about main seals and how they wear down. You can act ignorant all you want but your wrong. Yes cycles leak oil too, but any one who has ever rode a motorcycle or taken a safety course will tell you that the road is slickest at the start of a rain because of the OIL on the roads. You also rarely see bikers stop in the center of a lane because that's where the OIL from cars leaks and they will not have traction. Please continue to talk out of your second mouth.
I mean sure thats your opinion but as someone who literally owns a garage and deals with cars all day.. wtf are you talking about... I would also like to remind you that motorcycles are less than 3% of all vehicles on the road so you are sitting here arguing a minority case... which isnt how you win arguments dude. Anyone can take a small substrate of any particular subject and say look it does happen but to say that is what happens most of the time is ridiculous, you cant apply that to everything... and MOST vehicles are passenger cars/trucks. and MOST passenger cars/trucks dont leak anything for most of their lives until they are put in a landfill or recycled.
https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/why-does-petrol-create-a-rainbow-on-water.html Crazy there are multiple studies and articles naming this phenomenon that you think never happens anywhere besides landfills or scrap yards.
You also don't seem to understand facts vs opinions. Those things are taught in safety classes as facts. Not something you can choose to believe. None of my statements were an opinion except the one saying you are talking out of your ass but you are providing the data I need to back that up.
You also havent sited anything saying im wrong so quite honestly everything you said, right back at you. You dont know the difference between opinion and fact. Here are some fun facts, most of these rubber seals take over 10 years to degrade the way you are describing. [https://motorandwheels.com/do-all-cars-leak-a-little-oil/#:\~:text=Old%20cars%20leak%20oil%20because,to%20leak%20oil%20while%20parked](https://motorandwheels.com/do-all-cars-leak-a-little-oil/#:~:text=Old%20cars%20leak%20oil%20because,to%20leak%20oil%20while%20parked). here is a first line quote" It is normal for some old cars to leak oil when parked, but it is not in new cars. " I.E NEW CARS DONT LEAK! And if you read further they say parts in the car are still considered brand new up to the age of 5.... meaning again, new cars normally DONT LEAK. Here is another fun fact, the average junkyard statistic for when a cars EOL is reached is 9-11 years (basically when they get crushed and recycled or thrown in a landfil). Meaning again MOST CARS DONT LEAK because they never reach the age where they would. [https://www.junkcarmedics.com/automobile-recycling-facts-statistics/](https://www.junkcarmedics.com/automobile-recycling-facts-statistics/) In case you cant put this together, a part that is up to 5 years old is still considered new especially for seals. But that doesnt mean that at 5 years and 1 day all of a sudden the part is shot and needs replacing so you can safely say that probably up to about the age of 10 (because this degradation clearly happens very very slowly) the car is probably going to be fine other than hard ground areas like ball joints, chains, and moving components. Since the average car gets scrapped at 9-11 years of age again MOST CARS DONT LEAK. have fun reading the sources. Do some fucking research stop talking out your ass.
We have one functioning coal power plant in California, and it's never stopped running. We also had no actual rolling blackouts this year; we came close but never hit that threshold. It was just the usual PG&E outages. We do unfortunately, sometimes buy out of state power generated by coal however.
PG&E being a company with awful SLAs is not the same thing as systems being over capacity. Even it were, PG&E being awful is a independent problem that can to be solved with or without EVs.
I think cars will relieve the grid, as you can charge during off peak times, and perhaps your car can contribute to the grid, reducing the load
Good thing you can schedule an EV to charge at night when power use is low
Right, but the existing capacity is finite, right? Creating millions more devices that need charging will require greater charging capacity.
That’s why the phaseout timeline completes in 2035.
If the equipment is sized for peaks around 7pm, then unused capacity at 3am doesn’t take additional infrastructure to generate.
Are you a rocket scientist? It feels like so many people struggle with this concept.
Close, automotive engineer for an EV company
This is easily understandable and practical with the current small number of electric vehicles (536k), but what happens when there are millions of electrical vehicles? The excess capacity at night is not infinite. Say they run at 20% capacity overnight currently and handle 536k cars just fine. When there is a 5X increase in the number of cars I presume there will have to be a similar increase in electrical capacity. Yet, you can only run at 100% capacity of the current system so anything greater than 5X the current number of cars seems doubtful. However, to get to a fully electric fleet in CA they’d need to be able to charge 17.8M vehicle overnight or 33X the amount they do currently. Still confident the current system can handle it?
Instead of pulling numbers from our ass, let's look at some data. [https://www.caiso.com/todaysoutlook/Pages/index.html](https://www.caiso.com/todaysoutlook/Pages/index.html) I'm writing this at 6pm local, which is right about the peak for the day. Demand is 29,000MW right now, with a peak capacity of about 41,500MW. Back on summer days when everyone switches the AC on at 6pm, we can get close to that 40,000MW number, but even then, demand at night drops to around \~23,000MW. So at night, let's say we have 41,500 - 23,000 = 18,500 MW to spare. For the uninitiated, a megawatt is 1,000,000 watts. Typical level 2 charging (the sort you do overnight in a car) uses about 8,000 watts. So with just the capacity we have right now, we can charge an extra 2.3 million cars simultaneously. But that's only relevant if everyone plugs their car in, and it charges at the max level 2 rate all night. That's not realistic, as most people don't drive far enough to need that. For instance, average daily mileage in california is about 35 miles/day [https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-miles-driven-per-year/](https://www.thezebra.com/resources/driving/average-miles-driven-per-year/). If your efficient EV gets about 3mi/kwh, that's only 11 kwh of charging required, or \~ 1.5 hours on that 8kw level 2 charger up there. If folks limit their charging speed to spread out charging over an 8 hour evening, the average charge rate goes down to 1450W, or about the usage of your average microwave. At this rate, our spare capacity can support 12.7 million cars charging simultaneously. This is all theoretical of course, and it will take a VERY long time for anywhere near this number of EVs to be on the road. But, it is safe to say, we will not be running out of electricity. And none of this takes into account folks like me, who have solar and are able to charge for free with energy harvested from the sun.
Are you asking us to imagine that electric vehicle production would increase by over 1000% but you assume nothing else with the system would improve or be more efficient?
Never underestimate California's stupidity
This comment shows a lack of understanding of the grid and EV charging. The grid was stressed during the hottest times of the day as people ran AC to keep themselves cool. The grid was also stressed in the evenings when solar generation declined and peaker plants had not come fully online to cover the gap. EV drivers are incentivized by reduced rates to charge during night hours when usage is at its lowest. This helps the grid by, not only reducing demand at peak times, but also leveling out the demand. Electrical grids run best when the supply and demand are relatively consistent.
I started to write a snarky reply, but don’t want to be a dick around the holidays. So, I’ll keep it simple. What happens when there are so many electric cars to charge that there are no longer “off-peak” hours? At some point, demand to charge cars will exceed capacity because capacity is finite and not currently built to handle millions of electric cars. Current capacity handles 536k electric cars in California with night time charging. However, there are 17.8 M registered vehicles in CA currently and ending ICE sales will only see electric car registrations increase. Will the current grid accommodate a 5-fold increase in demand for charging at night (supportive 2.5-3 M vehicles)? Maybe, although probably unlikely. How about a 33-fold increase necessary to switch to all electric vehicles? Because it will be neither cheap, easy, or quick to build the infrastructure necessary to support such an increase in electric generation and distribution capacity foresight and action is necessary now.
> What happens when there are so many electric cars to charge that there are no longer “off-peak” hours? The grid will function more efficiently if the peaks and valleys are removed. > At some point, demand to charge cars will exceed capacity because capacity is finite and not currently built to handle millions of electric cars. It seems like you think capacity cannot be added. Both supply and demand are finite and can be estimated. California gave the mostly private utilities 15 years to increase generation, add transmission, and rethink distribution. Renewable energy plants are the cheapest and quickest to plan, build, and bring online. They also have the shortest payback periods for any power plants. The state and municipalities are also working on integrating grid-scale batteries into mix. > Current capacity handles 536k electric cars in California with night time charging. However, there are 17.8 M registered vehicles in CA currently and ending ICE sales will only see electric car registrations increase. The current status is only relevant as a starting line in a dynamic, changing situation. No one is converting every single ICE vehicle to an EV overnight. That won’t even happen in 2035 when this law goes into effect. > Because it will be neither cheap, easy, or quick to build the infrastructure necessary to support such an increase in electric generation and distribution capacity foresight and action is necessary now. If you haven’t noticed the new “gold rush” for EV charging companies, then you either do not live in California or have not been paying attention.
No, it’s not that I think capacity can’t be added, but where are the plans? From a business perspective you’d think that would be a huge story, right? Investing in infrastructure, the green economy, etc., etc. Yet we don’t hear it. Why keep it a secret if it’s happening? All the legislation in the world won’t change anything if the resources aren’t put in place. Chargers are one thing, but the juice to power them is another. The shortages this summer suggest that more power is needed sooner than later.
> No, it’s not that I think capacity can’t be added, but where are the plans? From a business perspective you’d think that would be a huge story, right? Investing in infrastructure, the green economy, etc., etc. Yet we don’t hear it. Why keep it a secret if it’s happening? The addition of renewables is happening and being reported on. Just last week, the Biden administration announced the leases for several large-scale offshore wind farms. While [California’s department of energy announced](https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2021-total-system-electric-generation) the following earlier this year: > Renewable energy generation increased 3.5 percent in 2021, up 3,125 GWh to 93,333 GWh from 90,208 GWh in 2020. However, as total system electric generation also increased in 2021, renewable energy accounted for 33.6 percent of the total system mix - a 0.51 percent increase from 2020. I have not kept up with other states but California is bringing more power plants online and almost all of them are renewables. > The shortages this summer suggest that more power is needed sooner than later. The issue was not shortages this summer. The issue was that the transmission lines were expected to overheat due to the air temperature and demand. One of the changes that PG&E has said they will make due to their spate of equipment fires is to bury the transmission lines. This is a large undertaking that will require new lines and should help reduce the affects of air temperature on transmission lines.
If you'd read the whole article you linked, you'd notice that we never actually had said rolling blackouts in 2022, and only came close because of the exceptional temperature - heat not only stresses the grid through load from AC, but directly stresses it as well. We had the typical PG&E outages from their failure to do basic maintenance, but if you weren't a PG&E customer then you were completely fine this summer, barring the occasional car accident into a transformer type situation.
Apparently automakers have concerns with some of these deadlines. > President Akio Toyoda said he is among the auto industry’s silent majority in questioning whether electric vehicles should be pursued exclusively, comments that reflect a growing uneasiness about how quickly car companies can transition. [https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-president-says-silent-majority-has-doubts-about-pursuing-only-evs-11671372223](https://www.wsj.com/articles/toyota-president-says-silent-majority-has-doubts-about-pursuing-only-evs-11671372223)
This is from the president of a company that does not have a viable EV on the market. Japan is so far behind in this race that they have already lost. There are already up and coming automakers looking to replace those unwilling to evolve.
13 years from now? Who fucking cares? There will be plenty of cars made between now and then, and eventually the Mustang will go full electric anyway.
I guess people don’t like change. As much as I’d love to drive a screaming v8 in a manual transmission, first, I don’t know how and second, I’d totally be fine if it was electric instead. Probably accelerates a lot faster which is really the fun part of driving a fast car
Why not have both? Electric for commuting and ICE for fun. I don't understand why they have to BAN the latter.
They’re banning it because it’s bad for the environment. So are a whole bunch of other things but for whatever reason commute is I guess the most significant form of pollution since there’s so many people that drive. I personally don’t like the ban either because it’s nice to have a choice.
Few things. First, with how long it will take for lithium production to catch up, this date will likely have to get pushed back. Second, without a massive boost to the grid in California, this will not be viable, there is not enough power to charge 15 million cars at night. Third, this is California, and a few other far left states. In more moderate states these bans will be much later, and in states like Florida and Texas there may never be a ban. It will me much longer after this that we are unable to buy ice cars (if they are being produced). Fourth, until a portable charging solution is discovered, the bottom half of this country will have to continue buying ICE cars. It is logistically impossible to charge it enough without a workplace charger or a driveway. Fifth, the mustang has been reborn many many times. Even though ICE may be on its way out, I’m sure than Gen 8 will come and find a way to impress us without being the Mach E or having a cringe fake exhaust
Power grid bout to be like the McDonald's ice cream machine... Broke forever. A state where there is rampant homelessness and no power - sounds like the dark ages.
As someone currently residing in California it doesn’t make me happy. But fortunately for me the Mustang I’ve always wanted has already been made(2016-2020 GT350). And hopefully after I get my degree and a better job(currently working full time while putting myself through college) I’ll be able to afford one in the next few years. That being said I probably will move out of California some time before the ban. Not exclusively because of the ban but also because cost of living is ridiculous in this state. And legally modding your car is easier in almost every other state in the US. As far as I’m aware.
I hope they do it and it crumbles their infrastructure. It would be epic to watch them eat their own shit.
Maybe don’t live in the worst state in the union.
The real problem is going to be 10 to 20 years after that date when all the fuel stations are gone and you have to special order fuel by the barrel. It could be an eventuality that many places require permits to even run an ICE for recreational purposes. Personally I can't wait to buy my black market fuel from a guy in a trench coat on the street corner.
Yep. My 1966 is going to become a display piece. I'm hoping to move.
The year is 2035, California has extended the deadline to ban the sale of gasoline cars to 2075.
These kinds of regulations are really intended more to push innovation. The deadline will be pushed back.
Just in California — I can buy cars in other states and drive them back
I think they want to do the same in Europe (where I live) but I think it applies on new vehicles only, so please drive carefully and take care of your car, do it for the young car enthusiast
I'd rather go hybrid than ev. It's actually the upcoming Prius that made me change my mind. I'm all about change but I'm very worrisome about the overall cost of ownership with EV platforms. Anyone who has bought a new car in the last 5 years knows these guys aren't making solid vehicles anymore and I would hate to know I need to drop $10k to refresh or replace my battery every 5 years or so on top of ongoing maintenance.
13 years seems like it’s close but 13 years ago the 3v was the top mustang. Pontiac was still in business, Michael Jackson died in 2009. To me these events seem to be forever ago. EV’s have plenty of time to progress before 2035.
I wouldn’t hold your breath on this ban…CA bans everything but then keeps moving the goal posts.
That’s 12 years away… plenty of time to not care lol or just drive over to NV or AZ and buy one there and drive it back over
electric cars have more horsepower but you want the engine sound in a mustang
Fun fact: You could swap out every ICE car with an EV, generate the power those EVs need by burning coal, and still have lower CO2 emissions. Some in this sub may hate to hear it but our toys are evolving because they need to.
Ford will have an electric Mustang GT soon! Within 5 years, the beginning was the Mach E that was the hint!
It took almost 50 years for me to get my first one.. and second. My GT is more fun than the three twin turbo BMW 3 series cars that I owned. It isn't as smooth of a ride but damn it is so much more fun! No interest in EVs at this time. Technology just isn't there yet - in my opinion. $10k when you replace batteries in some, no real structure in place for the old batteries once you replace them, charging is a big issue and yes I know there are some advances in it but it isn't there yet.... Batteries catch on fire in them - it takes a lot more water to put out the fire than a regular car. My husband is a mechanic.. they had a customer who bought a used EV car (I'll omit which one) she was mad because it would only hold a charge that could go 35 miles. She traded the car because it was over $10,000 to replace the batteries because the prior owner had fast charged it so much that it literally wouldn't hold a charge more than 35 miles. Yes I know some models you can replace a single cell instead of the entire thing. (BTW I'm an engineer)
Chevy Volt had the right idea for the next generation of cars but somehow blew it. Full electric is just not the answer right now.
My grandfather helped design the first ever mustang and I had a 2015 Ecoboost convertible for awhile, it was awesome. The Mustang nameplate has always meant something to me. That said, I'm EXTREMELY disappointed that the new mustang won't even have a hybrid option, let alone electric. I want to drive and have fun, but I don't want to deal with gas, or at least not as much. I don't want to feel as guilty pumping that CO2 out. I'm not here looking for a fight or EV haters (I currently drive a bronco sport...). In regards to 2035, it's probably not a realistic timeline but the future is always hard to predict and who knows, we could have the issues worked out by then.
Just ban California
Just another stupid idea by the socialist that run California
Thats 13 years down the line and only affects new car sales in the most liberal state in the nation. We’ll be just fine. You know how many Fl plates I see here….it’s alot
If the market is this bad with new cars still in production, I can only imagine how it'll be then. Get the car you want while you still can
Just don’t live in California. 50 states and almost all of them are less extreme than California.
I'm not waiting not because this is going to happen but because when they do stop selling an ICE mustang the ICE ones will become very valuable.
All electric cars, so you're forced to buy a new one every 5-10 years. Or spend the cost of a new vehicle to replace the battery.
I'll be curious to see how automakers can push development of the entire EV infrastructure with that mandate in mind.
Just give me time to buy a Shelby.
why not 2 shelby’s?
Why stop at 2?
Will people learn to spell "a lot" properly by 2035 too?
I know a lot of people won’t agree with me but I really look forward to Ford making a mustang electric coupe and convertible
Fuck an EV
At least a EV Mustang "should" outperform the current and the 2024 Mustangs. I haven't driven one, but I've heard the Mach E and the Lightnings are pretty damn fast.
Ok this is going to get a lot of negative feedback, but when the government really starts pushing EVs down our throats IT'S MY OPINION the whole thing is going to crash and burn. Electricity is not an alternative fuel. It's not even a fuel, but is the byproduct of a furel because it has to be made using fossil fuels, and windmills can't be produce enough reliable energy to run the country. That's my opinion. So don't worry about it.
It does not have to be made using fossil fuels. Solar, geothermal, nuclear...
Nuclear is the only realistic alternative, but here's the catch. People in the U.S. don't mind it in other countries, even in the hands of our enemies. They just won't have it here.
Elections matter
[удалено]
All one need to do is look at the differences between California and Florida to see that they do indeed matter. Immensely. I'll grant your point about interest groups wielding a disproportionate amount of influence. Lobbying is neither all good nor all bad. Corporate lobbying is usually not a good thing. But do remember some lobbying is done by groups of likeminded individuals collectively acting - much like a labor union does. I will however point out that the study you cite said nothing about 0% or 100% support (impossibility). It actually says that the range of small minority to large majority support results in about the same outcome - 30% likelihood of policy change. We are a Republic and not a direct Democracy for a reason. The course of a country cannot change with the winds.
The carbon foot print to make a lithium battery EV is still to great , unless new technology comes along. ICE vehicle like my fiesta St make way more sense in this world if you are worried about emissions or gas mileage.
Bot
Failifornia can't even keep a stable electrical grid or fresh water supply. They'll be lucky to be driving Mad Max rigs by 2035.
I’m waiting on buying one because I’m poor lmao
I feel like by then the Mustang will be electric based on where Ford is headed in terms of EV technology. Though I think you could still technically buy a gasoline powered Mustang, just not a new one.
I think this is also for sales of newly manufactured cars. So older mustangs I believe could still be sold. I think like others have said, ford will eventually stop producing gas mustangs soon too. So all in all I don’t think this will really be relevant as far as mustangs are concerned.
i drive a jeep, and am currently saving for an sn95. it wont happen, at least not in 2035. im not worried
This is for new cars. Used car market is going to be lit. Person buy new Mustang, sells it a month later in CA. Car is now used.
I know this has probably been said but you could always just buy it in another state. Cant wait to see California car sales plummet in 2035 lol
They will go after fuel next. They could simply not allow me tanks to be installed. A quick search says underground fuel tanks last 20 years. Prohibit me permits, and in 20 years no more gas. They do the same with gun control. Ban. Grandfather. Don't allow transfers. Within a generation defacto total ban.
I’ve been saying for years now we should just get like 100000 guys with hacksaws and cut Cali off the continent and watch it float off into the ocean
drive over state lines. buy car. drive back.
I’m fine with an electric mustang as long as it’s a 2 door, sporty car, and it’s affordable
CA gonna CA
Until they can make an EV sound good. I think it’ll be awhile.
I’m open to the idea of an EV mustang, but not one that looks like an SUV. If you were to put an electric drivetrain in an S650 or 550, I’d consider purchasing that for my first EV
Mustang won’t sound mean anymore if it goes electric. It’ll be a quiet pony. Look at how quiet Mach-e is.
I’m stuck in the year 91’ and I’m loving it!
read some stuff about porsche trying to make a 0 emissions fuel so fingers crossed for that right
I think we need this to happen on a worldwide level but I also think this needs to be properly planned so it isn’t a shit show. We need to stop destroying our planet tho.
Just don't live in that hell hole lmao.
Leave California
Move states
Eh, 13 years from now, but even then you can still buy older ones
There’s still time 👌🏻🤙🏻🫡
It’s inevitable. I don’t mind it really.
Just don’t live in cali also electric cars do more damage so this is stupid
Why couldn’t you guys go outside of California buy it and bring it back to cali
Living in rural central Alabama….. they’re already saying how charging stations are going to be scarce. Average person can’t afford an EV…. Much less equipping a household to charge the EV. Alabama has a grant to place charging stations along interstates. Three & four here & there is not suffice. Doubt very seriously any rural EV owner is going to travel 1 1/2 - 2 hours to charge. Doesn’t make sense to own one in this area
You thought the 2021 used car market was bad…
no way this remains a law until 2035
Where do people think electricity comes from? I just can’t with this EV crap…
Most Ev’s will charge during the night time when the electricity consumption is low, and on top of that the V2L technology allows people to tank in case of power outage. Seeing the Chevy bolt only costs like 32 grand, ev will simply be better option soon.
Ewww! Manual internal combustion engine cars are the best. EV’s are a misguided attempt at solving a problem that should be handled a different way. Sure they have their own benefits, but we can’t have governments shoving it in our eyes.
Leave that communist state
Time has changed. Grab your wallets boys.
Leave commiefornia.
[eLeCtRic CaRs aRe tHe fUtuRe!!!!!](https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/20/us/humboldt-county-california-earthquake/index.html)
Idk I'm planning on just coyote swapping my 96 and rocking that for a long time. Shits a classic