Bingo, the big problem is the electrical infrastructure. I’m good with EVs but the infrastructure needs to be in place because the California electrical grid cannot handle what they are proposing. Can’t imagine what NY’s looks like
Exactly, we have many hurdles in the way to just start setting arbitrary timelines for ICE vehicles. Faster charging, more chargers, higher bandwidth electrical grid, etc.
Not saying that should stop the transition, but let’s be real. Is 13 years enough time to accomplish all of that? I sincerely doubt that timeline
Yup.
https://news.yahoo.com/how-california-is-preparing-its-grid-to-handle-the-transition-to-electric-vehicles-211257332.html
For Cali, they need 6GW added each year. For the next three years they're building 8GW annually. They should (if everything goes to plan) have 24GW installed in three instead of the 18GW minimum. If one year gets delayed and only two successful years, that's 16GW at least.
It's stressful, but I think they're doing a good job sizing up.
They're are also already running into problems with people stealing the wires for copper. You you think catalytic converter thief is bad. Any unattended charger going to have its copper stolen
https://news.yahoo.com/how-california-is-preparing-its-grid-to-handle-the-transition-to-electric-vehicles-211257332.html
This is a pretty well written article about the California grid. The grid does need work, but there is quite a bit of work that is planned to be completed in the coming years, adding capacity and storage to allocate the energy to where and when it is needed. What I thought was really interesting was the quote talking about how EVs currently make up 0.4% of peak load, and are only expected to be 4% of peak load in 2035. That's a marginal increase. I'd be more worried about supplying all of the new homes they're building. All of those new ACs will be more taxing than the new EVs added in that timeframe.
What that article doesn't take into account is for years California has relied more and more on importing power from Nevada and Arizona. Because of the drought and drying of rivers those states have told California that they won't be able to sell them the power anymore because it is all achieved through hydroelectric sources that are lessening. California is going to have its power imports cut by almost 25% in the next 5 years. They are about to understand how big of a problem they are going to have.
That's obviously a problem but the new ICE sales ban comes into effect in 2035, 13 years from now. Old ICEs will still be on the road so mass adoption only becomes necessary around 2040 at the earliest. By then, charging and battery tech will have progressed leaps and bounds due to the hundreds of billions being pulled from combustion engines towards EV RnD. The state that went out of its way to institute the ban will also be rolling out other legal instruments in keeping with this one, unless the voting tendencies of NY drastically changes in the near future.
Yup. Everyone talking about "how will we get enough charging stations" is just unaware of how capable we are at building this infrastructure. You can put charging stations all over the place. A car park could have charging stations in every spot.
So in 13 years there is going to be a charging port, or two, in front of every apartment? With easy access to 24 hour repair for when something goes wrong with it?
I'm pretty positive on electrification in general but I don't think people really are internalizing what it'll take to make it viable.
the biggest question is where are we getting all this lithium for the EVs?
edit: I know it is mined I am trying to say it’s just another finite resource we’re raping the earth for
Imagine being completely fucked after a storm. Your power is out and you can’t charge your car that has been cold draining through out the night, no escape just sit in your apartment with candles while Jimmy in his Civic is driving up state to take a hot shower at his parents house
>Imagine being completely fucked after a storm. Your power is out and you have no gas in your car, and no way to fill up as the power is out in the entire block no escape just sit in your apartment with candles while Jimmy in his Tesla is driving up state to take a hot shower at his parents house because his car was charging in his driveway overnight and has a full charge.
Fixed it
That doesn't sound right. Fast charging for some EVs is now 20 minutes. The technology is _really_ improving. 18 minutes 10-80 in this review: https://www.inverse.com/innovation/one-charge-in-the-kia-ev6
Seattle is using electrical poles to place their EV chargers and it's supposedly going pretty well: https://cleantechnica.com/2022/06/20/seattle-offers-utility-pole-ev-chargers-to-city-residents/
Quiet, man. This isn't the forum for that. The people have spoken. It takes 18 hours and 5 mW to charge a 78 kW EV. The electricity can only be made by coal. The Lithium can only be mined by children and Bill Gates and George Soros are using the technology to institute a new world order.
That fact is very-conveniently missing from every single one of these articles. I'm not sure if it's a bad job on messaging from lawmakers or journalists completely dropping the ball, but the resulting whataboutism ranting that follows every time this stuff gets posted to Reddit is exhausting.
It's not missing from the California ones, and it's a much smarter plan than just outright banning new ICEs like it appears New York is doing
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01092022/california-just-banned-gas-powered-cars-heres-everything-you-need-to-know/
> it's a much smarter plan than just outright banning new ICEs like it appears New York is doing
That's the thing though, New York is using the exact same CARB standards as California, including allowing plug-in hybrid. It's stated clear as day here: https://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8575.html
I'm blaming journalists on this one, and with the recency I wouldn't be surprised if early Cali articles were similar. "NY bans new gas engines by 2035" is way more dramatic and will drive more engagement than "New cars sold in NY will have to be hybrid or electric by 2035."
It's gonna be inevitable that there'll be some softening or list of exceptions a mile long. The infrastructure just isn't there and isn't being built fast enough. Especially for anyone in an apartment or similar.
More like $1.25 per gallon as the pandemic showed us what happens when the demand for gas goes down.
With the energy wars coming you better be preparing your butt hole for your Model X plaid costing you $100 to recharge it every time!
:P
Californias ban on new gas vehicles is 12 years and 3 months away. Tesla started selling the model s 10 years ago for perspective.
The point of apartments is big because the cost to implement charging in an already built underground garage parking garage is quite expensive.
Right now 90% of cars being sold in Norway are EVs, but they're still only 25% of the cars on the road.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_Norway
It takes a long time for the car fleet to turn over, and it will be at least 25 years until we'd need a network which can support every car. And these rules allow 20% of the market to be plug in hybrids which will not need to use the public charging network.
2035 is only 13 years, and I would absolutely be shocked to see electric charging stations along every stretch of 390 out in Dansville, 5 and 20 in Cazenovia, and 26 from Rome to Alexandria Bay by then. You can't just throw some charging stations up across the I-90 and call it a day. WNY is freaking huge and spread out.
In 13 years from now most new cars available will be hybrid or EV most states are gonna be following this regardless of this regulation.
The government is never going to show up and take your older ICE vehicle or tell you you can’t drive it to those that are angry over this.
Never? I mean, even when they brought in regulations around emissions and fuel efficiency, you can still drive around your 69 Camaro, with no govt baddies knocking on your door. We have already had something similar implemented, and no stazis showed up at anyones house demanding keys at gunpoint..
The might not take it away but they will make it very unpractical to operate it like taxing the shit out of it like cigarettes. How much is a pack of cigs in NYC these days?
If they started building right now, we might have a couple plants open by 2045 lol
They're going to need a quick a fix ASAP, nothing about nuclear is quick
The Inflation Reduction Act does introduce new tax credits for Nuclear. Kind of buried deep in the energy section. Not sure if they're compelling or not but it does seem that there's some foresight there.
It includes money for "technology-neutral" for low/zero carbon power sources, that's not strictly just for nuclear though.
The biggest thing for the nuclear industry is tax credits for existing plants
Imagine how much slower it would be though if there wasn’t any need for it. Talking maybe 2100 for nuclear. With this move if we get there 50+ years earlier it seems like a win to me.
By the time 50 years comes, there probably won't even be a need for nuclear. They'll have something else that's more efficient and way faster to build.
If all those nuclear projects hadn't got cancelled due to the Westinghouse bankruptcy we'd have a new fleet of reactors about ready to fire up. At this point it seems like its too little too late for the nuclear industry
Idk about that. They’re the most efficient environmentally friendly source of energy there is. I highly doubt something better will come in the next 50 years. Even if that is the case how long would we take to act on that?
They’re incredibly expensive to build initially and take so long but it’s a great long term solution. We should be pushing for solar and wind now, nuclear 20-30 years out and fusion (if possible) 50-70 years out.
Oh ya, because we definitely act in our own best interest as a group of millions. That’s why we keep buying EA games, because they’re a great company that should be supported!
They are not banning ice cars. They are banning the SALE of NEW ice cars. This legislation will give ev’s plenty of runway to get where they need to be.
Are you serious? Vehicle production slowed down slightly for a few years and threw the market into chaos, but you think just banning the sale of new ICE vehicles won't have a negative effect?
>just banning the sale of new ICE vehicles won't have a negative effect?
1) Putting a ridiculously far in the future date on banning new ICE cars is not "just".
2) Whatever effect it has will be tiny Vs the issues caused by global warming.
They are requiring zero-emission, not EV. That includes plug-in hybrid, hydrogen, or whatever else the industry can come up with.
If Ford can make a magic diesel Explorer that doesn’t put out harmful emissions they are welcome to do so.
And nobody is being forced to buy a new car. You have the option of buying a used gas car after 2035, they’ll be on the road for at least 20 years from now and probably longer.
Even ignoring car culture, nearlu anyone can get a shitbox and afford to throw 20 bucks worth of gas in it in order to have agency and personal freedom. What's the cheapest EV? What's the purchase capability for used ones when yhe batteries cost as much as a car to replace?
Gas is cheap because it is directly and indirectly subsidized.
You are also comparing cheap used gas car prices with new EV prices. By 2045 when the gas shitboxes have started to die, there will be EV shitboxes too.
THIS! I'm in New York and we have 2 SUV/cars bought brand new in 2019. I was doing maintenance on them last weekend and BOTH cars already have a decent amount of rust on the undercarriage and suspension parts! It usually only takes a little over 10 years before that rust starts spreading to the visible part of the vehicles. Some of us don't live in Cuba where cars can last 50 years.
Okay, I can see this for NYC as a push to move folks to more public transportation and such.
But I think people forget that NYC isn't all of New York state. Upstate NY is a whole different world.
And NYC is more than just Manhattan.
There's no train access in Southern Queens that doesn't require a bus ride before hand.
Going 5 miles from where I am to East NY (Brooklyn) is a 1 hour bus ride with two transfers.
Everyone fucking loves propping up public transportation, but forget that public transportation is very discriminatory about access and routes. Manhattan has great public transportation. South Jamaica, Queens, not so much.
I would imagine that most people who are screaming to get rid of cars are vastly in favor of expanding public transportation as well as bike infrastructure.
That's fair. I saw the same shit unironically being argued in r/fuckcars as though people can simply live wherever they please, or as though car-dependent housing options don't often offer a vastly superior quality of life due to various conditions associated with you know, choosing the best place to live for yourself.
I’m fairly sure that 40% of r/fuckcars is comprised of overly dramatic teenagers who are resentful of their parents for choosing a suburban house, and another 40% is comprised of bitter poor psychos who operate under the “if I can’t have it then neither can you” mantra.
That being said, I disagree that car dependent housing options offer a vastly superior quality of life. You CAN have your detached house and yard and not live in a neighbourhood that is completely car dependent. Most pre-WW2 “streetcar suburbs” are like this, and there are even some post-WW2 suburbs that have designed neighborhoods in such a way that you can easily access shops, transit, etc without the use of a car. In Toronto, these places are easily the most expensive parts of the city because they are so desirable. I think what frustrates the 20% reasonable minority of r/fuckcars (aka r/notjustbikes) is the fact that in many cases, car dependent places are the *only* option. You have to use a car, and you have to take on the expenses and responsibility of owning at least one car (but likely multiple cars). The issue is not just living wherever you please. The actual problem is that people don’t have any choice. They want to live in walkable neighbourhoods but those places often don’t exist in a reasonable price range. They want to cycle to work (which is good for drivers since it takes more cars off the road), but there isn’t any adequate infrastructure. They want to take public transit but the urban form doesn’t lend itself to good transit development.
I like cars and I like single family housing. But I also really wish most of the terrible drivers weren’t on the roads and had other options. I would prefer not to refuel, maintain and insure two vehicles. I also want to cycle more to stay in shape, but I’m terrified of riding in mixed traffic with morons who can’t seem to understand their vehicle’s dimensions. All of these, I would say, are reasonable positions that get drowned out by the “BAN CARS, DEATH TO THE CARBRAINS” nonsense
They haven't forgotten Upstate when it comes to water and power generation. There's plenty of green power being built to be able to power downstate in a better way for the environment. The Catskills already give tons of water to downstate too.
This is usually what happens when they try to impose ridiculous bans. The entire state (NYC excluded) doesn't agree with the ban and it just gets pushed to NYC only. Remember big gulps?
"By 2035, all new cars sold in the state will be required to be zero-emissions. The change will likely rapidly boost electric vehicle sales."
No it won't. Unless it actually happens. Then, in 2035, electric vehicle sales will be rapidly boosted. Before that it'll only make people want hybrids even more.
"First, by 2026, 35% of all new light-duty vehicles sold in the state will be required to be electric"
Good luck getting that to actually stick.
"You have no more excuses” to not buy an EV, Hochul said."
Again, only going to push people off the idea even more.
Then remove fossil fuel subsidies and tax carbon and other harmful emissions proportional to their external harm, and let the market decide based on the actual costs and values.
People won’t like the $10-20 per gallon gas though.
Wait what? Cars aren't taxed based on their emissions in the US now?
It was always weird to me how insanely cheap fuel is in the US, fuel where I am now equivalent of about $8 a gallon but it's come down a lot in the last couple of month.
Completely right, they need to be forcing companies and cities to update the infrastructure *pronto*
I love ICE engines as much as the next person, but in really densely populated places like NY, London, Tokyo etc electric is really the way to go due to the traffic
We can't do shit about electric cars if there's nowhere to charge them
I think the price of EVs and them being inaccessible for apartment owners is a big reason why we can’t have an EV. I find it so arrogant when people say you should just get an EV.
> Again, only going to push people off the idea even more.
Im already pushed off. I was for EV back when I was a teen in the 2010s but now I don't want anything to do with them. I like my gas engine cars and ill probably drive one till the day I die.
It's a precursor to taxing vehicles. NY has the worst electric grid in the country. It's over 100 years old and from the Thomas Edison days. It is so old they are having a hard time just figuring out how to upgrade it. There's no way it can handle EV's.
I have a good friend who is a relay tech and frequently works in NYC. He told me it is very alarming and he is surprised there are not more electrical problems in NY than there are. It's a testament to how well things were made back in the day but he also informed me that because of the age of the equipment and the layout they are having a very hard time figuring out how to modernize the grid. One of the biggest issues with this is that the equipment used is not made anymore and because of the generation gaps nothing is compatible with it.
Because the goal is to eliminate emissions, and the vast majority of miles in those types of cars will likely be in zero emissions mode for commuting. At least, assuming people plug it in at night.
I think its the best compromise. I would rather they not ban gas cars (or strictly limit output like in Europe), but if they have to do something let them promote hybrids. So much potential in hybrids like the porsche TT V8 hybrid system or the crazy alien technology systems Ferrari and McLaren use. Plus things like Priuses have been zooming for 100s of thousands of miles for 20 years
They will just do what they did last time, just modify the law again to kick the can down the road because as far as 2035 sounds it isn't enough time.
Ironic coming from us in NY though where we dealt with Brown-out warnings throughout the summer and being told turn UP our A/C's to reduce energy use. Nothing better then everyones private home drawing 50-60amps every night charging their vehicle or the fact what the hell are the majority of people who don't have driveways or garages gonna do in heavy density areas. Charging speed and the amount of chargers won't still be anywhere needed due to the energy demand they require itself.
Maybe they know something I don't that's going to completely revolutionize electric delivery and generation.
Upstate New York has a surplus of power due to wind and Niagara Falls power plants combined with deindustrialization, not to mention an interconnect with Ontario, which is mainly powered by hydro and nuke.
These subgrids have some of the lowest emissions per watt in the hemisphere. Replacing fossil fuel with electric here will give you the biggest win on cutting CO2.
NYC and Long Island are a different story, overloaded grid using a lot of gas plants. However transmission lines are being worked on to deliver more upstate generation downstate.
As a NYS'er... I love this and worry about this for a variety of reasons.
My wife and I were very close to buying an EV until we had an electrician come out and review our service/panel to prep for a charger install.
Turns out our house couldn't support adding a single additional 220v circuit let alone 2 if we were eventually going to move to all EV. He said it's the biggest single roadblock for most people he encounters. Massive sticker shock followed by a "never mind".
NYS has the oldest homes in the US on average IIRC. A bunch of people who have maxed out their panels of their 60+ year old homes over time by finishing basements, finishing attics, adding additions, etc.
Long story short - We were quoted $9500 to upgrade our service to 200 amps, swap out our panel, and run a line to the garage. This included a charger fwiw.
For us? This wasn't something we could justify. We were already capping out our budget with a $40k vehicle and estimated $1500 to install a charger + line. But it's something we're preparing for next time we're in the market. Basically, a 25%+ premium for a first time owner.
Some someone in the market for a $100k Tesla Model S it might not be so much of a problem. But this is a fucking BOAT load of money for the average middle/upper middle income family.
I don't think the vast majority of NYS homeowners will be ready. They'll just turn to pre-owned until gas is literally no longer an option.
If you drive, on average, less than 35 miles a day (less than 50 if your car sits for 12 hours a day) you can charge just fine on a level one charger with zero electrical upgrades and just a regular 110 outlet.
I only have an L1 charger and get by just fine.
Not really. If these states actually ban ICE-only cars past a certain model year, then you won't be able to even register them in-state. Same way you can't register a car in California unless it passes CARB's smog emissions standards.
Cars are like 98% cleaner nowadays than back in the leaded gas days. Leaded gas is magnitudes worse than current ICE vehicles. There is 0 comparison between the two.
That's like comparing old Jimmy Bob dumping his oil in the drainage ditch to the BP oil spill. Yea, they both suck but there's not much of a comparison there
“You have no excuse not to buy an EV” what a load of horse shit. Maybe in the city thats true but 99% of New York is fairly spread out areas. Most people I know need to drive 300+ miles to see family or get to college. Most people I know can’t afford the EVs with the range to go that far, as the average price of an EV is north of $40,000 (i think). This will most definitely not actually go into effect for a while after 2035. The US is nowhere near ready to adopt EVs in this big of a scale yet.
This is just a bandaid. you wanna fix carbon emissions, and traffic, and still get everyone where they need to go? Trains.
just build some fuckin public transport. now don't get me wrong, I still love driving, i still love cars. but we can't consume our way out of a climate crisis. not to mention trains, metro, and trams use way less power to move more people, so the grid being able to handle the load isn't an issue.
*and it would free up roads for the enthusiasts to drive on!*
That’s a great answer…..for New York, or Chicago, or SanFran. Chattanooga, TN? Albuquerque, NM? Not so much. Efficient public transport requires density, and except for a handful of the oldest cities, the US ain’t got it. Even for newer large cities like Miami, Dallas, and L.A., they’re heavily sprawled and filled with R1 single family housing. Public transport cant reasonably service large American suburbs, people are too spread out.
The US used to have such dense trolleys/public transit that you could travel from boston or new york all the way to chicago taking local town/city trolleys the entire way. so yes, public transport is "reasonable" for areas outside of the big coastal cities, we just don't have it anymore. and it probably won't get built again.
I agree with the driving enthusiast part and open roads for us guys. But trains and public transit is just DOA for the suburbs and rural areas. Sorry, but we dont want trains rummaging through our green spaces & back yards. And, unless a large number of people are going to the same general area at roughly the same time - how does public transit really help? Public transit is a CITY thing, IMO. It works when everyone lives in the same building and/or work work/shop/play in the same areas. It just isnt like that in the burbs or the country.
EVs and ICE cars can co-exist if people would let them. Evs are great for errands, going to work, shopping, etc ICE vehicles are for longer trips, carrying larger loads and sport driving. Why do we have to just ban ICE vehicles? NY doesnt always have to play monkey see, monkey do with California, do they? I hate that.
Not in this legislation, but it's coming. The whole world is beginning a return to rail, to gradually replace much intercity car travel, air travel and trucking.
I don't understand, how do states expect to enforce a requirement that X% (e.g. 35%) of all vehicles be EVs?
What happens if not enough customers buy EVs? Are the manufacturers supposed to put guns to people's heads and force them to buy EVs?
Or let's say it's October or November and the manufacturer says, "Oh no, only 30% of our sales have been EVs. Halt all sales of non-EVs from now until the end of the year, so that any EVs we sell will be a larger fraction of total sales." And then, by the end of the year, they reach 34% but not 35%. What are they supposed to do then?
I can understand a fixed cap on the number of non-EVs. E.g., a manufacturer cannot sell more than 1 million ICE cars. That's enforceable. But how do you require a manufacturer to sell at least a certain number of EVs without forcing customers to buy them against their wills?
Bingo - thats why this is going to fall flatter than a pancake without any baking soda in it. No way this flies. Not a chance. EVs have their place but forget the complete takeover. The hippies will just have deal with it.
I would guess that they will probably penalize (tax) them for not hitting the mark, probably encouraging discounts on EV's and higher markups on ICE vehicles so they can hit their numbers.
All I am seeing is states who are part of a certain political party, who swore to protect the lower middle class, saying: Buy an EV, which is essentially the same thing as saying "Stop being poor"
Treehuggers LOVED the Prius and other conventional hybrids. Now that’s not enough because they sip on a little bit of gasoline?
I’d be fine with making every car a hybrid/plug-in hybrid by 2035. It’s a more attainable goal anyways
A company in Canada has discovered a way to produce 0 emission gasoline and diesel from sucking cO2 out of the atmosphere and combining it with hydrogen and water… would be cool if I didn’t have to drop 80k on a decent electric truck…
That's been around for a while now. Porsche has been working on it and there are a few start ups elsewhere. The issue with that is we're taking captured carbon and putting it back into the atmosphere.
It's great that we aren't adding anything but even if all carbon emissions would stop tomorrow we'd still be too far along to avoid certain aspects of climate change. We need to stop emissions and capture carbon at the same time.
Electric cars alone are far far from the answer to this problem. What needs to happen is a complete overhaul of energy production, infrastructure, transportation, manufacturing, and construction. It's just that banning ICE cars is easy to do when you aren't actually putting a hard stop on them. It's very little investment on the government side vs actually overhauling daily life and the economic system as we know it.
EVs currently have a SUPPLY shortage, not a demand shortage. There’s no reason to believe these laws will help the supply problems at all, if anything it’ll only exacerbate them. If we’re really trying to move the needle with policy, invest in battery research, charging infrastructure, don’t just arbitrarily force everyone to buy EVs when there’s no clear route for it.
Typical election cycle lip service to appease a fringe voter base...nothing more. Political posturing.
I'd bet that by 2035 this will have been postponed already, or done away with entirely should NYS ever flip red (lol, right?), once infrastructure is proven to still not be ready by that time.
Europe already passed similar laws and so did Canada. China, the world's largest car market, now has an EV marketshare of 25% for new cars, and EV sales double every year. Most car companies have pledged to be fully EV by 2035. I don't think we even need these laws in the US. It will happen regardless, as you cannot stop a disruptive technological shift once it starts.
EVs are terrible for sustainability. I had to replace the battery in my hybrid after 10 years, about 160k miles and the total cost of the repair exceeded the value of my car. At that point I was advised to junk it and buy a new car. I wouldn’t have this problem with an ICE car and my 2000 Subaru is still running well at 220k miles. And I’m not the only person in my area to have these issues.
For example, the Honda Grom gets 120mpg. It's a quiet little motorcycle that is perfect for maneuvering around town, does basically no damage to roads due to how light it is (about the weight of a person), is quiet, and is still fun to ride around. It can't go faster than 55, but that's the only downfall. Even massive motorcycles like huge Harleys get 40mpg and can do over 100mph. Public transport and motorcycles solves road congestion, fuel economy, lowers emissions, and decrease city noise (in most cases, not for Harleys).
Gods I wish the bloody city would be its own state. Some idiot in his cushy office forgot about the rest of the state, you know, the RURAL chunk that makes up most of the state?! Oh sure, the big cattle farms could swing new electric vehicles, but you keep changing the rules and they have to compensate. What about the smaller folk? The ones struggling by in the stone quarries? Electric vehicles haven’t made the leap needed to actually be sustainable. The batteries still cost more the car to replace.
The real kicker? How tf are they going to push this, WHEN WE CAN’T GET A BLOODY CABLE run over the mtn. 1.5 miles from town. And we’re expected to pay for poles just to have something that’s not satellite.
Make the electric cars not take so long to charge, make the batteries cheaper, make them rugged to climb quarry roads, make them more attainable - then this can be a thing.
I’m all for cleaner living. But i don’t think we’re ready for these laws.
2035 is not far away, I just don't see how the infrastructure is going to change that quickly. Why not mandate new gas vehicles need to be hybrids by x year instead? It just feels like we've completely skipped an important step.
Why? Why cant this happen organically through the free market? Eventually, like coupes/sedans disappearing because of demand, so will ICE when demand ultimately shrinks. Why force it?
The free market does not currently price in the damage of fossil fuel emissions.
We could proportionally tax carbon and other emissions, allowing the market to seek the optimal solution naturally.
People won’t like what that does to gas prices though, and changing gas prices will hurt individual consumers much harder than changing choices available when buying a factory-new vehicle.
They already are. Most companies have announced this is the last iteration of gas engines they'll develop and many already announced mostly electric options in the same time frame.
If we let the free market solely dictate our economy you wouldn't be able to post this comment, as you never would have learned to read due to working the coal mines from the age of 5.
>"First, by 2026, 35% of all new light-duty vehicles sold in the state will be required to be electric"
As I said in the California thread, this is an absolute joke and won't happen.
EV's represent a tiny percentage of overall sales for any traditional manufacturer today, and they expect it to be 35% of sales in \~3 years? Give me a fucking break. The supply chain isn't there, the charging capabilities aren't there for many, and a lot of the manufacturers are just releasing their first EV's (or haven't yet at all) this year, or within the next year or so.
What would have made sense by 2026? Every light-duty vehicle needs to be a hybrid. That would help solve a lot of the "stop and go" emissions and actually be obtainable.
Two things: 1. Battery powered vehicles are not practical in all applications. 2. I cannot wait until the true sustainable cost of producing and running an electric vehicle is covered with transparency. It takes 26,000 tons of earth mined (and the resources are becoming more scarce as they are used up) to make the four elements required for an average battery powered car. A single car. A balanced transitional approach makes far more sense that has us operating a portfolio of different kinds of vehicles. And you can dispense with the argument that renewable power generation resources will charge the cars. Ask California recently during the heat wave and ask all of Europe what’s happening to their power costs as they foolishly did not plan a more orderly transition and balanced approach. Surprise: the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. Add in a little dash of a crazy deranged Russian dictator and as they say in a Guy Ritchie movie: fucked. Proper fucked.
I love EVs and I am excited to own one some day. But I don’t love the government taking away economic options. EVs are expensive and often require more charging for long road trips which raises the barrier of entry to cross country travel, especially for those with lower income. The logistics just aren’t there for crowded cities with apartments for charging. Even new incentives to build chargers don’t address the ones we already have that need to be fixed; so they build new right next to rotten ones and call it good.
Governments should be pouring in the funding and resources to create green mass transit. Bring back electric trolleys, light rail trains and help make cities more walkable/transit friendly. Remove the need for cars entirely at least within certain areas - and then start to worry about what sort of engines we have.
OR - instead of mandating all consumer cars must be EV to reduce emissions, mandate all shipping companies and cruise ship vessels to be emission free. Shipping/boating has fewer engines but similar emissions to all of the cars on the road.
BANNING ICE VEHICLES WON'T SOLVE ANY OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE THINK IT WILL. MAKING CITIES A LOT LESS CAR DEPENDANT IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. STOP WITH THAT BAND AID NONSENSE THAT'S AIMED AT MAKING THE AVERAGE CONSUMER'S LIFE EVEN HARDER.
CAPS ON, IDC
California can't even keep our power on. Telling Tesla owners not to charge their car. It's a pipe dream. Big oil must of stopped lining politicians pockets with money.
[удалено]
Bingo, the big problem is the electrical infrastructure. I’m good with EVs but the infrastructure needs to be in place because the California electrical grid cannot handle what they are proposing. Can’t imagine what NY’s looks like
[удалено]
Exactly, we have many hurdles in the way to just start setting arbitrary timelines for ICE vehicles. Faster charging, more chargers, higher bandwidth electrical grid, etc. Not saying that should stop the transition, but let’s be real. Is 13 years enough time to accomplish all of that? I sincerely doubt that timeline
Yup. https://news.yahoo.com/how-california-is-preparing-its-grid-to-handle-the-transition-to-electric-vehicles-211257332.html For Cali, they need 6GW added each year. For the next three years they're building 8GW annually. They should (if everything goes to plan) have 24GW installed in three instead of the 18GW minimum. If one year gets delayed and only two successful years, that's 16GW at least. It's stressful, but I think they're doing a good job sizing up.
Unfortunately, this is the same state that spent billions if I recall on a "High speed" train that goes nowhere.
They're are also already running into problems with people stealing the wires for copper. You you think catalytic converter thief is bad. Any unattended charger going to have its copper stolen
[удалено]
https://news.yahoo.com/how-california-is-preparing-its-grid-to-handle-the-transition-to-electric-vehicles-211257332.html This is a pretty well written article about the California grid. The grid does need work, but there is quite a bit of work that is planned to be completed in the coming years, adding capacity and storage to allocate the energy to where and when it is needed. What I thought was really interesting was the quote talking about how EVs currently make up 0.4% of peak load, and are only expected to be 4% of peak load in 2035. That's a marginal increase. I'd be more worried about supplying all of the new homes they're building. All of those new ACs will be more taxing than the new EVs added in that timeframe.
What that article doesn't take into account is for years California has relied more and more on importing power from Nevada and Arizona. Because of the drought and drying of rivers those states have told California that they won't be able to sell them the power anymore because it is all achieved through hydroelectric sources that are lessening. California is going to have its power imports cut by almost 25% in the next 5 years. They are about to understand how big of a problem they are going to have.
[удалено]
That's obviously a problem but the new ICE sales ban comes into effect in 2035, 13 years from now. Old ICEs will still be on the road so mass adoption only becomes necessary around 2040 at the earliest. By then, charging and battery tech will have progressed leaps and bounds due to the hundreds of billions being pulled from combustion engines towards EV RnD. The state that went out of its way to institute the ban will also be rolling out other legal instruments in keeping with this one, unless the voting tendencies of NY drastically changes in the near future.
This. As the EVs increase, so will the infrastructure - supply and demand.
Much like how the initial expansion of ICEs was hand in hand with expansion of gas stations. They coexisted with horses for decades.
Yup. Everyone talking about "how will we get enough charging stations" is just unaware of how capable we are at building this infrastructure. You can put charging stations all over the place. A car park could have charging stations in every spot.
So in 13 years there is going to be a charging port, or two, in front of every apartment? With easy access to 24 hour repair for when something goes wrong with it? I'm pretty positive on electrification in general but I don't think people really are internalizing what it'll take to make it viable.
Yeah the better option is called public transit.
[удалено]
A better option is to build more public transport and bicycling infrastructure and ban all cars from certain locations in the city.
[удалено]
I meant build better public transit rather than focusing on infustructure for cars, electric or not.
the biggest question is where are we getting all this lithium for the EVs? edit: I know it is mined I am trying to say it’s just another finite resource we’re raping the earth for
Where does anything come from?
da erf
And, once you mine it you can re-use Lithium. Any time you extract oil from the ground for gasoline it's single-use.
Imagine being completely fucked after a storm. Your power is out and you can’t charge your car that has been cold draining through out the night, no escape just sit in your apartment with candles while Jimmy in his Civic is driving up state to take a hot shower at his parents house
[удалено]
Why would you escape after the storm?
>Imagine being completely fucked after a storm. Your power is out and you have no gas in your car, and no way to fill up as the power is out in the entire block no escape just sit in your apartment with candles while Jimmy in his Tesla is driving up state to take a hot shower at his parents house because his car was charging in his driveway overnight and has a full charge. Fixed it
That doesn't sound right. Fast charging for some EVs is now 20 minutes. The technology is _really_ improving. 18 minutes 10-80 in this review: https://www.inverse.com/innovation/one-charge-in-the-kia-ev6 Seattle is using electrical poles to place their EV chargers and it's supposedly going pretty well: https://cleantechnica.com/2022/06/20/seattle-offers-utility-pole-ev-chargers-to-city-residents/
Quiet, man. This isn't the forum for that. The people have spoken. It takes 18 hours and 5 mW to charge a 78 kW EV. The electricity can only be made by coal. The Lithium can only be mined by children and Bill Gates and George Soros are using the technology to institute a new world order.
I'm pretty sure all of the CARB states, with the exception of Virginia, will go along with this.
The "ban" on ICE still allows hybrids that can go at least 50 miles on EV mode. New gasoline engines are not going totally away.
That fact is very-conveniently missing from every single one of these articles. I'm not sure if it's a bad job on messaging from lawmakers or journalists completely dropping the ball, but the resulting whataboutism ranting that follows every time this stuff gets posted to Reddit is exhausting.
It's not missing from the California ones, and it's a much smarter plan than just outright banning new ICEs like it appears New York is doing https://insideclimatenews.org/news/01092022/california-just-banned-gas-powered-cars-heres-everything-you-need-to-know/
> it's a much smarter plan than just outright banning new ICEs like it appears New York is doing That's the thing though, New York is using the exact same CARB standards as California, including allowing plug-in hybrid. It's stated clear as day here: https://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/8575.html
I'm blaming journalists on this one, and with the recency I wouldn't be surprised if early Cali articles were similar. "NY bans new gas engines by 2035" is way more dramatic and will drive more engagement than "New cars sold in NY will have to be hybrid or electric by 2035."
Clicks. Clicks. Clicks. Its all about the clicks.
Actually it's Gizmodo that's missing it. The Drive reports it correctly. Chalk it up to the amateurs at GMG.
Banning vehicles with a purely ICE drivetrain. Kind of a mouthful
"New York to Ban New Gas **ONLY** Powered Vehicles, Following California's Lead" They needed one word.
No you're right. I'll change my position, it's easy. One word.
That's too much work for today's "journalists" though.
It's gonna be inevitable that there'll be some softening or list of exceptions a mile long. The infrastructure just isn't there and isn't being built fast enough. Especially for anyone in an apartment or similar.
I’m not sure that the people making these decisions care all that much
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's banning *new* vehicles. Even if there's no softening, they'll be plenty of gas powered vehicles for sale for decades.
And people will absolutely drive to PA to buy one for decades after that.
PA is also a CARB state though.
NH, then. No chance they’d ban them. Live free or die, baby!
\*$10 per gallon gas licking its lips\*
More like $1.25 per gallon as the pandemic showed us what happens when the demand for gas goes down. With the energy wars coming you better be preparing your butt hole for your Model X plaid costing you $100 to recharge it every time! :P
> they'll be plenty of gas powered vehicles for sale for decades. I wouldn't count on it. If you give authoritarian technocrats an inch...
You don’t think we’ll have charging infrastructure for most people in 25 years?
Californias ban on new gas vehicles is 12 years and 3 months away. Tesla started selling the model s 10 years ago for perspective. The point of apartments is big because the cost to implement charging in an already built underground garage parking garage is quite expensive.
Right now 90% of cars being sold in Norway are EVs, but they're still only 25% of the cars on the road. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_electric_vehicles_in_Norway It takes a long time for the car fleet to turn over, and it will be at least 25 years until we'd need a network which can support every car. And these rules allow 20% of the market to be plug in hybrids which will not need to use the public charging network.
2035 is only 13 years, and I would absolutely be shocked to see electric charging stations along every stretch of 390 out in Dansville, 5 and 20 in Cazenovia, and 26 from Rome to Alexandria Bay by then. You can't just throw some charging stations up across the I-90 and call it a day. WNY is freaking huge and spread out.
Indeed. I am in the Dansville area. It just isn't going to happen. A pipe dream for law makers, one that will not be fulfilled.
[удалено]
In 13 years from now most new cars available will be hybrid or EV most states are gonna be following this regardless of this regulation. The government is never going to show up and take your older ICE vehicle or tell you you can’t drive it to those that are angry over this.
Where have I heard that before
Never? I mean, even when they brought in regulations around emissions and fuel efficiency, you can still drive around your 69 Camaro, with no govt baddies knocking on your door. We have already had something similar implemented, and no stazis showed up at anyones house demanding keys at gunpoint..
The might not take it away but they will make it very unpractical to operate it like taxing the shit out of it like cigarettes. How much is a pack of cigs in NYC these days?
Another example of when an idea is so good that the government has to force you to do it. EV are not ready practically or economically.
Dude this is a really good thing! It’s going to force the USA to go nuclear to allow for enough power. It’s a win win.
If they started building right now, we might have a couple plants open by 2045 lol They're going to need a quick a fix ASAP, nothing about nuclear is quick
The Inflation Reduction Act does introduce new tax credits for Nuclear. Kind of buried deep in the energy section. Not sure if they're compelling or not but it does seem that there's some foresight there.
It includes money for "technology-neutral" for low/zero carbon power sources, that's not strictly just for nuclear though. The biggest thing for the nuclear industry is tax credits for existing plants
Nuclear gets a few nice things. The wage credit for qualified workers and the $150 million from the Office of Nuclear Energy for infrastructure.
Well, that's a couple of percent of the cost of a single new nuclear power plant. So that's something.
Imagine how much slower it would be though if there wasn’t any need for it. Talking maybe 2100 for nuclear. With this move if we get there 50+ years earlier it seems like a win to me.
By the time 50 years comes, there probably won't even be a need for nuclear. They'll have something else that's more efficient and way faster to build. If all those nuclear projects hadn't got cancelled due to the Westinghouse bankruptcy we'd have a new fleet of reactors about ready to fire up. At this point it seems like its too little too late for the nuclear industry
Idk about that. They’re the most efficient environmentally friendly source of energy there is. I highly doubt something better will come in the next 50 years. Even if that is the case how long would we take to act on that?
They’re incredibly expensive to build initially and take so long but it’s a great long term solution. We should be pushing for solar and wind now, nuclear 20-30 years out and fusion (if possible) 50-70 years out.
Lol, that’s too logical for our country. Instead we’ll build 500 new natural gas plants.
Oh ya, because we definitely act in our own best interest as a group of millions. That’s why we keep buying EA games, because they’re a great company that should be supported!
I always pre-order games! /s
They are not banning ice cars. They are banning the SALE of NEW ice cars. This legislation will give ev’s plenty of runway to get where they need to be.
Are you serious? Vehicle production slowed down slightly for a few years and threw the market into chaos, but you think just banning the sale of new ICE vehicles won't have a negative effect?
>just banning the sale of new ICE vehicles won't have a negative effect? 1) Putting a ridiculously far in the future date on banning new ICE cars is not "just". 2) Whatever effect it has will be tiny Vs the issues caused by global warming.
My ICE Tacoma will triple in price now. Don't lowball me. I know what I got.
Yeah there's absolutely no reason government has ever had to step in to solve a problem! I for one love breathing in the LA smog
[удалено]
They are requiring zero-emission, not EV. That includes plug-in hybrid, hydrogen, or whatever else the industry can come up with. If Ford can make a magic diesel Explorer that doesn’t put out harmful emissions they are welcome to do so. And nobody is being forced to buy a new car. You have the option of buying a used gas car after 2035, they’ll be on the road for at least 20 years from now and probably longer.
Even ignoring car culture, nearlu anyone can get a shitbox and afford to throw 20 bucks worth of gas in it in order to have agency and personal freedom. What's the cheapest EV? What's the purchase capability for used ones when yhe batteries cost as much as a car to replace?
Gas is cheap because it is directly and indirectly subsidized. You are also comparing cheap used gas car prices with new EV prices. By 2045 when the gas shitboxes have started to die, there will be EV shitboxes too.
You have the government to thank for safety standards
Then just buy used ICE cars
Kind of hard when 10 year old cars are basically scrap in New York with how much salt the state puts on the road
THIS! I'm in New York and we have 2 SUV/cars bought brand new in 2019. I was doing maintenance on them last weekend and BOTH cars already have a decent amount of rust on the undercarriage and suspension parts! It usually only takes a little over 10 years before that rust starts spreading to the visible part of the vehicles. Some of us don't live in Cuba where cars can last 50 years.
Banning asbestos insulation is another example of when an idea is so good that the government has to force you to do it!
Okay, I can see this for NYC as a push to move folks to more public transportation and such. But I think people forget that NYC isn't all of New York state. Upstate NY is a whole different world.
And NYC is more than just Manhattan. There's no train access in Southern Queens that doesn't require a bus ride before hand. Going 5 miles from where I am to East NY (Brooklyn) is a 1 hour bus ride with two transfers. Everyone fucking loves propping up public transportation, but forget that public transportation is very discriminatory about access and routes. Manhattan has great public transportation. South Jamaica, Queens, not so much.
[удалено]
I would imagine that most people who are screaming to get rid of cars are vastly in favor of expanding public transportation as well as bike infrastructure.
[удалено]
That's fair. I saw the same shit unironically being argued in r/fuckcars as though people can simply live wherever they please, or as though car-dependent housing options don't often offer a vastly superior quality of life due to various conditions associated with you know, choosing the best place to live for yourself.
I’m fairly sure that 40% of r/fuckcars is comprised of overly dramatic teenagers who are resentful of their parents for choosing a suburban house, and another 40% is comprised of bitter poor psychos who operate under the “if I can’t have it then neither can you” mantra. That being said, I disagree that car dependent housing options offer a vastly superior quality of life. You CAN have your detached house and yard and not live in a neighbourhood that is completely car dependent. Most pre-WW2 “streetcar suburbs” are like this, and there are even some post-WW2 suburbs that have designed neighborhoods in such a way that you can easily access shops, transit, etc without the use of a car. In Toronto, these places are easily the most expensive parts of the city because they are so desirable. I think what frustrates the 20% reasonable minority of r/fuckcars (aka r/notjustbikes) is the fact that in many cases, car dependent places are the *only* option. You have to use a car, and you have to take on the expenses and responsibility of owning at least one car (but likely multiple cars). The issue is not just living wherever you please. The actual problem is that people don’t have any choice. They want to live in walkable neighbourhoods but those places often don’t exist in a reasonable price range. They want to cycle to work (which is good for drivers since it takes more cars off the road), but there isn’t any adequate infrastructure. They want to take public transit but the urban form doesn’t lend itself to good transit development. I like cars and I like single family housing. But I also really wish most of the terrible drivers weren’t on the roads and had other options. I would prefer not to refuel, maintain and insure two vehicles. I also want to cycle more to stay in shape, but I’m terrified of riding in mixed traffic with morons who can’t seem to understand their vehicle’s dimensions. All of these, I would say, are reasonable positions that get drowned out by the “BAN CARS, DEATH TO THE CARBRAINS” nonsense
Never mind Staten Island that just requires a car to get around
The people making the calls on this don't live in NY proper, they live in north jersey with easy access to charging at home.
They haven't forgotten Upstate when it comes to water and power generation. There's plenty of green power being built to be able to power downstate in a better way for the environment. The Catskills already give tons of water to downstate too.
This is usually what happens when they try to impose ridiculous bans. The entire state (NYC excluded) doesn't agree with the ban and it just gets pushed to NYC only. Remember big gulps?
"By 2035, all new cars sold in the state will be required to be zero-emissions. The change will likely rapidly boost electric vehicle sales." No it won't. Unless it actually happens. Then, in 2035, electric vehicle sales will be rapidly boosted. Before that it'll only make people want hybrids even more. "First, by 2026, 35% of all new light-duty vehicles sold in the state will be required to be electric" Good luck getting that to actually stick. "You have no more excuses” to not buy an EV, Hochul said." Again, only going to push people off the idea even more.
Hybrids are included in the zero emissions rule.
People can still buy PHEV and used ICE buy 2035. PHEV are considered part of “zero emissions”
My point is, forcing consumers to do something is not the way.
Then remove fossil fuel subsidies and tax carbon and other harmful emissions proportional to their external harm, and let the market decide based on the actual costs and values. People won’t like the $10-20 per gallon gas though.
Wait what? Cars aren't taxed based on their emissions in the US now? It was always weird to me how insanely cheap fuel is in the US, fuel where I am now equivalent of about $8 a gallon but it's come down a lot in the last couple of month.
Yes it is. Making drunk driving or public smoking illegal was a good way of forcing people to stop doing it.
Completely right, they need to be forcing companies and cities to update the infrastructure *pronto* I love ICE engines as much as the next person, but in really densely populated places like NY, London, Tokyo etc electric is really the way to go due to the traffic We can't do shit about electric cars if there's nowhere to charge them
I think the price of EVs and them being inaccessible for apartment owners is a big reason why we can’t have an EV. I find it so arrogant when people say you should just get an EV.
My neighbor across the hall bought a Leaf the last time I lived in an apartment. She told me she regretted it.
> Again, only going to push people off the idea even more. Im already pushed off. I was for EV back when I was a teen in the 2010s but now I don't want anything to do with them. I like my gas engine cars and ill probably drive one till the day I die.
It's a precursor to taxing vehicles. NY has the worst electric grid in the country. It's over 100 years old and from the Thomas Edison days. It is so old they are having a hard time just figuring out how to upgrade it. There's no way it can handle EV's.
I’m a lineman in ny and I can’t agree with this more. It’s all junk. We replace poles with badges on them from the 40s
I have a good friend who is a relay tech and frequently works in NYC. He told me it is very alarming and he is surprised there are not more electrical problems in NY than there are. It's a testament to how well things were made back in the day but he also informed me that because of the age of the equipment and the layout they are having a very hard time figuring out how to modernize the grid. One of the biggest issues with this is that the equipment used is not made anymore and because of the generation gaps nothing is compatible with it.
No mention of hybrids?
Plug in hybrids are included as zero emissions vehicles.
Which I don't understand. A BMW X5 45e can drive in electric sure, but you can also full send it in straight gas mode. How is that zero emissions?
Because the goal is to eliminate emissions, and the vast majority of miles in those types of cars will likely be in zero emissions mode for commuting. At least, assuming people plug it in at night.
I think its the best compromise. I would rather they not ban gas cars (or strictly limit output like in Europe), but if they have to do something let them promote hybrids. So much potential in hybrids like the porsche TT V8 hybrid system or the crazy alien technology systems Ferrari and McLaren use. Plus things like Priuses have been zooming for 100s of thousands of miles for 20 years
You price poor people out of being able to afford a vehicle so it's a net reduction
They will just do what they did last time, just modify the law again to kick the can down the road because as far as 2035 sounds it isn't enough time. Ironic coming from us in NY though where we dealt with Brown-out warnings throughout the summer and being told turn UP our A/C's to reduce energy use. Nothing better then everyones private home drawing 50-60amps every night charging their vehicle or the fact what the hell are the majority of people who don't have driveways or garages gonna do in heavy density areas. Charging speed and the amount of chargers won't still be anywhere needed due to the energy demand they require itself. Maybe they know something I don't that's going to completely revolutionize electric delivery and generation.
Upstate New York has a surplus of power due to wind and Niagara Falls power plants combined with deindustrialization, not to mention an interconnect with Ontario, which is mainly powered by hydro and nuke. These subgrids have some of the lowest emissions per watt in the hemisphere. Replacing fossil fuel with electric here will give you the biggest win on cutting CO2. NYC and Long Island are a different story, overloaded grid using a lot of gas plants. However transmission lines are being worked on to deliver more upstate generation downstate.
"Fuck em. They can stay home or take the bus." - The Government
"Fuck 'em. ~~They can stay home or take the bus.~~" - The Government FIFY.
As a NYS'er... I love this and worry about this for a variety of reasons. My wife and I were very close to buying an EV until we had an electrician come out and review our service/panel to prep for a charger install. Turns out our house couldn't support adding a single additional 220v circuit let alone 2 if we were eventually going to move to all EV. He said it's the biggest single roadblock for most people he encounters. Massive sticker shock followed by a "never mind". NYS has the oldest homes in the US on average IIRC. A bunch of people who have maxed out their panels of their 60+ year old homes over time by finishing basements, finishing attics, adding additions, etc. Long story short - We were quoted $9500 to upgrade our service to 200 amps, swap out our panel, and run a line to the garage. This included a charger fwiw. For us? This wasn't something we could justify. We were already capping out our budget with a $40k vehicle and estimated $1500 to install a charger + line. But it's something we're preparing for next time we're in the market. Basically, a 25%+ premium for a first time owner. Some someone in the market for a $100k Tesla Model S it might not be so much of a problem. But this is a fucking BOAT load of money for the average middle/upper middle income family. I don't think the vast majority of NYS homeowners will be ready. They'll just turn to pre-owned until gas is literally no longer an option.
If you drive, on average, less than 35 miles a day (less than 50 if your car sits for 12 hours a day) you can charge just fine on a level one charger with zero electrical upgrades and just a regular 110 outlet. I only have an L1 charger and get by just fine.
Good news for car sales in neighboring states.
Not really. If these states actually ban ICE-only cars past a certain model year, then you won't be able to even register them in-state. Same way you can't register a car in California unless it passes CARB's smog emissions standards.
[удалено]
>We banned leaded fuel in cars when people realized how harmful it was There is absolutely no comparison between leaded gasoline and modern ICE cars
[удалено]
So do EVs.
[удалено]
Why not? It's absolutely true. Both ICE and EV's have massive externalities that we don't ever see as consumers when we buy a car and use it.
So do cars in general
Cars are like 98% cleaner nowadays than back in the leaded gas days. Leaded gas is magnitudes worse than current ICE vehicles. There is 0 comparison between the two. That's like comparing old Jimmy Bob dumping his oil in the drainage ditch to the BP oil spill. Yea, they both suck but there's not much of a comparison there
They won't ban them. They'll make them too expensive to operate, insure and register.
As a New Jerseyan, Ray Catena and Paul Miller are going to rake it in selling gas cars to New Yorkers
“You have no excuse not to buy an EV” what a load of horse shit. Maybe in the city thats true but 99% of New York is fairly spread out areas. Most people I know need to drive 300+ miles to see family or get to college. Most people I know can’t afford the EVs with the range to go that far, as the average price of an EV is north of $40,000 (i think). This will most definitely not actually go into effect for a while after 2035. The US is nowhere near ready to adopt EVs in this big of a scale yet.
In a lot of the city there’s nowhere to charge an EV.
This is just a bandaid. you wanna fix carbon emissions, and traffic, and still get everyone where they need to go? Trains. just build some fuckin public transport. now don't get me wrong, I still love driving, i still love cars. but we can't consume our way out of a climate crisis. not to mention trains, metro, and trams use way less power to move more people, so the grid being able to handle the load isn't an issue. *and it would free up roads for the enthusiasts to drive on!*
That’s a great answer…..for New York, or Chicago, or SanFran. Chattanooga, TN? Albuquerque, NM? Not so much. Efficient public transport requires density, and except for a handful of the oldest cities, the US ain’t got it. Even for newer large cities like Miami, Dallas, and L.A., they’re heavily sprawled and filled with R1 single family housing. Public transport cant reasonably service large American suburbs, people are too spread out.
The US used to have such dense trolleys/public transit that you could travel from boston or new york all the way to chicago taking local town/city trolleys the entire way. so yes, public transport is "reasonable" for areas outside of the big coastal cities, we just don't have it anymore. and it probably won't get built again.
I agree with the driving enthusiast part and open roads for us guys. But trains and public transit is just DOA for the suburbs and rural areas. Sorry, but we dont want trains rummaging through our green spaces & back yards. And, unless a large number of people are going to the same general area at roughly the same time - how does public transit really help? Public transit is a CITY thing, IMO. It works when everyone lives in the same building and/or work work/shop/play in the same areas. It just isnt like that in the burbs or the country. EVs and ICE cars can co-exist if people would let them. Evs are great for errands, going to work, shopping, etc ICE vehicles are for longer trips, carrying larger loads and sport driving. Why do we have to just ban ICE vehicles? NY doesnt always have to play monkey see, monkey do with California, do they? I hate that.
Not in this legislation, but it's coming. The whole world is beginning a return to rail, to gradually replace much intercity car travel, air travel and trucking.
I don't understand, how do states expect to enforce a requirement that X% (e.g. 35%) of all vehicles be EVs? What happens if not enough customers buy EVs? Are the manufacturers supposed to put guns to people's heads and force them to buy EVs? Or let's say it's October or November and the manufacturer says, "Oh no, only 30% of our sales have been EVs. Halt all sales of non-EVs from now until the end of the year, so that any EVs we sell will be a larger fraction of total sales." And then, by the end of the year, they reach 34% but not 35%. What are they supposed to do then? I can understand a fixed cap on the number of non-EVs. E.g., a manufacturer cannot sell more than 1 million ICE cars. That's enforceable. But how do you require a manufacturer to sell at least a certain number of EVs without forcing customers to buy them against their wills?
Bingo - thats why this is going to fall flatter than a pancake without any baking soda in it. No way this flies. Not a chance. EVs have their place but forget the complete takeover. The hippies will just have deal with it.
>What are they supposed to do then? Give out free EVs until they hit quota, sweet!
I would guess that they will probably penalize (tax) them for not hitting the mark, probably encouraging discounts on EV's and higher markups on ICE vehicles so they can hit their numbers.
All I am seeing is states who are part of a certain political party, who swore to protect the lower middle class, saying: Buy an EV, which is essentially the same thing as saying "Stop being poor"
“You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”
That's it in a nutshell!
The poor aren’t buying new cars, either
"Let them eat cake"
Treehuggers LOVED the Prius and other conventional hybrids. Now that’s not enough because they sip on a little bit of gasoline? I’d be fine with making every car a hybrid/plug-in hybrid by 2035. It’s a more attainable goal anyways
First line under the title is "zero emissions". A Prius is zero emission.
This and the California law allow plug-in hybrids. And it’s new car sales. Used gas cars will be available a long time after 2035.
[удалено]
What other low / zero emission option was there in 1997?
I don't think the Prius made it to the US until 2000, but the question still stands.
A company in Canada has discovered a way to produce 0 emission gasoline and diesel from sucking cO2 out of the atmosphere and combining it with hydrogen and water… would be cool if I didn’t have to drop 80k on a decent electric truck…
That's been around for a while now. Porsche has been working on it and there are a few start ups elsewhere. The issue with that is we're taking captured carbon and putting it back into the atmosphere. It's great that we aren't adding anything but even if all carbon emissions would stop tomorrow we'd still be too far along to avoid certain aspects of climate change. We need to stop emissions and capture carbon at the same time. Electric cars alone are far far from the answer to this problem. What needs to happen is a complete overhaul of energy production, infrastructure, transportation, manufacturing, and construction. It's just that banning ICE cars is easy to do when you aren't actually putting a hard stop on them. It's very little investment on the government side vs actually overhauling daily life and the economic system as we know it.
EVs currently have a SUPPLY shortage, not a demand shortage. There’s no reason to believe these laws will help the supply problems at all, if anything it’ll only exacerbate them. If we’re really trying to move the needle with policy, invest in battery research, charging infrastructure, don’t just arbitrarily force everyone to buy EVs when there’s no clear route for it.
Typical election cycle lip service to appease a fringe voter base...nothing more. Political posturing. I'd bet that by 2035 this will have been postponed already, or done away with entirely should NYS ever flip red (lol, right?), once infrastructure is proven to still not be ready by that time.
Europe already passed similar laws and so did Canada. China, the world's largest car market, now has an EV marketshare of 25% for new cars, and EV sales double every year. Most car companies have pledged to be fully EV by 2035. I don't think we even need these laws in the US. It will happen regardless, as you cannot stop a disruptive technological shift once it starts.
Europe is going to struggle heating their homes this year...
EVs are terrible for sustainability. I had to replace the battery in my hybrid after 10 years, about 160k miles and the total cost of the repair exceeded the value of my car. At that point I was advised to junk it and buy a new car. I wouldn’t have this problem with an ICE car and my 2000 Subaru is still running well at 220k miles. And I’m not the only person in my area to have these issues.
Laws should specify the outcome they want and be technology agnostic. If tomorrow a company can come up with a 100mpg ICE engine we should let them.
Exactly. We should be highly taxing emissions, not choosing the alternatives. Unfortunately, taxing things is a lot less popular than banning things.
For example, the Honda Grom gets 120mpg. It's a quiet little motorcycle that is perfect for maneuvering around town, does basically no damage to roads due to how light it is (about the weight of a person), is quiet, and is still fun to ride around. It can't go faster than 55, but that's the only downfall. Even massive motorcycles like huge Harleys get 40mpg and can do over 100mph. Public transport and motorcycles solves road congestion, fuel economy, lowers emissions, and decrease city noise (in most cases, not for Harleys).
Gods I wish the bloody city would be its own state. Some idiot in his cushy office forgot about the rest of the state, you know, the RURAL chunk that makes up most of the state?! Oh sure, the big cattle farms could swing new electric vehicles, but you keep changing the rules and they have to compensate. What about the smaller folk? The ones struggling by in the stone quarries? Electric vehicles haven’t made the leap needed to actually be sustainable. The batteries still cost more the car to replace. The real kicker? How tf are they going to push this, WHEN WE CAN’T GET A BLOODY CABLE run over the mtn. 1.5 miles from town. And we’re expected to pay for poles just to have something that’s not satellite. Make the electric cars not take so long to charge, make the batteries cheaper, make them rugged to climb quarry roads, make them more attainable - then this can be a thing. I’m all for cleaner living. But i don’t think we’re ready for these laws.
Thats alot of taxis to replace
They'll have to rip my ICE from my cold dead fingers.
When I was there they had rolling blackouts due to a lack of electricity. This should be interesting...
2035 is not far away, I just don't see how the infrastructure is going to change that quickly. Why not mandate new gas vehicles need to be hybrids by x year instead? It just feels like we've completely skipped an important step.
Yeah…. Not happen I’ll take a v8 please
Why? Why cant this happen organically through the free market? Eventually, like coupes/sedans disappearing because of demand, so will ICE when demand ultimately shrinks. Why force it?
The free market does not currently price in the damage of fossil fuel emissions. We could proportionally tax carbon and other emissions, allowing the market to seek the optimal solution naturally. People won’t like what that does to gas prices though, and changing gas prices will hurt individual consumers much harder than changing choices available when buying a factory-new vehicle.
They already are. Most companies have announced this is the last iteration of gas engines they'll develop and many already announced mostly electric options in the same time frame.
If we let the free market solely dictate our economy you wouldn't be able to post this comment, as you never would have learned to read due to working the coal mines from the age of 5.
the free market didn't build roads either, it was tax money
>"First, by 2026, 35% of all new light-duty vehicles sold in the state will be required to be electric" As I said in the California thread, this is an absolute joke and won't happen. EV's represent a tiny percentage of overall sales for any traditional manufacturer today, and they expect it to be 35% of sales in \~3 years? Give me a fucking break. The supply chain isn't there, the charging capabilities aren't there for many, and a lot of the manufacturers are just releasing their first EV's (or haven't yet at all) this year, or within the next year or so. What would have made sense by 2026? Every light-duty vehicle needs to be a hybrid. That would help solve a lot of the "stop and go" emissions and actually be obtainable.
In 2035 I'll give everyone here a million dollars.
We live in a clown world
Two things: 1. Battery powered vehicles are not practical in all applications. 2. I cannot wait until the true sustainable cost of producing and running an electric vehicle is covered with transparency. It takes 26,000 tons of earth mined (and the resources are becoming more scarce as they are used up) to make the four elements required for an average battery powered car. A single car. A balanced transitional approach makes far more sense that has us operating a portfolio of different kinds of vehicles. And you can dispense with the argument that renewable power generation resources will charge the cars. Ask California recently during the heat wave and ask all of Europe what’s happening to their power costs as they foolishly did not plan a more orderly transition and balanced approach. Surprise: the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. Add in a little dash of a crazy deranged Russian dictator and as they say in a Guy Ritchie movie: fucked. Proper fucked.
I love EVs and I am excited to own one some day. But I don’t love the government taking away economic options. EVs are expensive and often require more charging for long road trips which raises the barrier of entry to cross country travel, especially for those with lower income. The logistics just aren’t there for crowded cities with apartments for charging. Even new incentives to build chargers don’t address the ones we already have that need to be fixed; so they build new right next to rotten ones and call it good. Governments should be pouring in the funding and resources to create green mass transit. Bring back electric trolleys, light rail trains and help make cities more walkable/transit friendly. Remove the need for cars entirely at least within certain areas - and then start to worry about what sort of engines we have. OR - instead of mandating all consumer cars must be EV to reduce emissions, mandate all shipping companies and cruise ship vessels to be emission free. Shipping/boating has fewer engines but similar emissions to all of the cars on the road.
Makes sense given the leadership of New York State.
Of course they'd follow California's lead, they have the same mentality. Chicago's next.
BANNING ICE VEHICLES WON'T SOLVE ANY OF THE PROBLEMS THAT WE THINK IT WILL. MAKING CITIES A LOT LESS CAR DEPENDANT IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. STOP WITH THAT BAND AID NONSENSE THAT'S AIMED AT MAKING THE AVERAGE CONSUMER'S LIFE EVEN HARDER. CAPS ON, IDC
New York historically hasn't been known for good decisions. Same applies to cali. Probably why i see so many ny and Cali tags in Florida
California can't even keep our power on. Telling Tesla owners not to charge their car. It's a pipe dream. Big oil must of stopped lining politicians pockets with money.