California to Ban the Sale of New Gasoline Cars

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Nah. Nonsense. It takes a few days and a few thousand dollars to install a fast-charger. Furthermore, 90% of trips are just a few miles long, to work/school/store. This is going to be done, successfully, and the gargoyle naysayers will be laughed at again.

Remember when people ‘didn’t want’ ABS? LOL

Carry on.

I have no skin in this game and sit a long way left of the god and guns crowd here but I really do not understand how grown adults cannot visualise the monumental investment needed in public charging for this to work.

It's a colossal undertaking no one wants to talk about, because without it, EV's are going to cap out at 30 to 40% of the market.

[Quadruple VANOS]

I'm not surprised. There's near-zero political pushback from even so-called automotive enthusiasts. I think I see more organization and support for Save The Manuals; and that's not even serious! We reap what we sow.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

[FastFrog]

Originally Posted by Cos270

We will know by 2025 is this is really going to work. Companies that have gone all in on EV are too far in to pull back now - it will either be a success or a massive failure.

Depends on what you call a massive failure. Reality checks aren't always performed when politics is at stake.
Here is France you need to pay an extra 40k€ 'écotaxe' (roughly same amount in $) when you buy an M4. Next year, it's going to be 50k.
Also, they have added an extra tax for vehicles weighting more than 1800kg (~4000 lbs)... except if they are EVs.
Meanwhile, they are burning taxpayers' money to subsidize the purchase of EVs. Rigged market. How do you think this will end up? They'll state that after all, people prefer EVs over ICE and will simply blame fate or suddenness for the lack of infrastructures or plain electricity and will demand for sacrifices (=more taxes) for the sake of Mother Earth. Will that be labelled a massive failure? I doubt it.

[Quadruple VANOS]

Prediction: By 2050 California and the EU will be treating tailpipe emissions like you're emitting asbestos. You can own an ICE vehicle for collecting and display, but you're going to have to make the ICE inoperable. Similar to how people now can own old military equipment but the weapons are inoperable. Same thing.

[Marcoose]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

I have no skin in this game and sit a long way left of the god and guns crowd here but I really do not understand how grown adults cannot visualise the monumental investment needed in public charging for this to work.

It's a colossal undertaking no one wants to talk about, because without it, EV's are going to cap out at 30 to 40% of the market.

It is neither monumental or colossal. A modest charging station takes about 45 days from inception, to design, to permit, to installation. And it can get down to 20 days. It is no harder than a new aircon, carport or loo in your house. A no-brainer. A greater concern is retraining all techs and indies to work on ERS and KERS.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

It is neither monumental or colossal. A modest charging station takes about 45 days from inception, to design, to permit, to installation. And it can get down to 20 days. It is no harder than a new aircon, carport or loo in your house. A no-brainer. A greater concern is retraining all techs and indies to work on ERS and KERS.

Chief, not everyone own a house. Retrofitting this into apartment complexes and areas where people park on the street is a HUGE undertaking. Even then, it's a tiny project compared to the chargers needed in public places for those trips that are not from home to work.

In an all EV world, at even 30 minutes a charge, you're talking monumental infrastructure changes the likes of which we have never undertaken in anything like 13 years.

It isn't going to happen, i absolutely guarantee it.

[TTM0TION]

So Volvo's report they did on the XC40 vehicles comparing ICE and Hyrbrid and full EV that basically ruined the EV narrative is just not being talked about anymore? LOL seems interesting.

[H2O_Doc]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

Nah. Nonsense. It takes a few days and a few thousand dollars to install a fast-charger. Furthermore, 90% of trips are just a few miles long, to work/school/store. This is going to be done, successfully, and the gargoyle naysayers will be laughed at again.

Remember when people ‘didn’t want’ ABS? LOL

Carry on.

And acid rain and the hole in the ozone layer. Don't hear much about those issues anymore. Things can change at a large scale quicker than we sometimes think.

[Quadruple VANOS]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

It is neither monumental or colossal. A modest charging station takes about 45 days from inception, to design, to permit, to installation. And it can get down to 20 days. It is no harder than a new aircon, carport or loo in your house. A no-brainer. A greater concern is retraining all techs and indies to work on ERS and KERS.

Apparently you're not aware of Ohm's Law or even just the challenges of navigating the massive complexity of building regulations. Creating a suitable public charging network at scale is absolutely colossal and monumental. This is far, far more complex and difficult than just installing the chargers themselves.

[Cos270]

Originally Posted by Quadruple VANOS

Apparently you're not aware of Ohm's Law or even just the challenges of navigating the massive complexity of building regulations. Creating a suitable public charging network at scale is absolutely colossal and monumental. This is far, far more complex and difficult than just installing the chargers themselves.

Don't waste your breath. He'll probably be dead before any of this affects him. Just like those currently pulling all the levers to make this happen. They get all the "benefits" (good optics and short term record profits) without actually having to live with the consequences.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by TTM0TION

So Volvo's report they did on the XC40 vehicles comparing ICE and Hyrbrid and full EV that basically ruined the EV narrative is just not being talked about anymore? LOL seems interesting.

My prediction for three years now has been that we will see a massive, sudden uptick in EV adoption, but then it will slam into a wall at about 30 to 40pc market share and the hybrids will take the rest.

I have seen nothing to dissuade me in the three years since. The japanese manufacturers are going hybrid, not EV. They won't say it for fear of back lash but you can see they are, at the very least, expecting a shared market.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by Marcoose

For those old enough to remember the stupid, ignorant and defeated diatribes against seatbelts, airbags, converters and unleaded petrol, how they were going to bankrupt the auto industry and the economy, lest we forget, it didn’t happen.

Carry on.

We’re also old enough to remember all the failed doom and gloom we’re all going to die in 20 years due to “global warming” predictions. If even older, we remember the coming ice age, ozone holes, acid rain, and rain forest depletion scare tactics that didn’t happen either. All pushed by the same types of charlatans we’re unfortunately infected with now. The Convid scam is over, but on to the next one to keep everyone irrationally terrified.

Carry on.

[Torgus]

Forcing EVs only hurts the poor people.

Almost no one owns only an EV. They have at least 1 or 2 more vehicles.
CA bans all ICE sales by 2035. CA is going to have the largest number of garages and 'old ICE' cars in the US.

I can't drive into boston, leave my EV for a week, come back from my business trip and make it home in the winter. The average brand new EV has 234 miles. 10 years old it will have ~100 miles of range. EVs lose 40% of range in the cold winter. So now I have 60 fucking miles.

My diesel x5 gets me roughly 550 on a fill up. Doesn't matter how old it gets. Same MPG.

No one ever talks about the inherent degradation of EV batteries at the rate of 2-3% per year.

No one puts a new engine in their car at year 10. No one will put a new EV battery pack in at year 10 for 14k. That is like a brand new engine and transmission installed + dealership labor rates.

https://electrek.co/2022/08/02/gm-of...recall-fiasco/

https://www.motorbiscuit.com/family-...more-than-car/

After only 60,000 miles, the 2014 Ford Focus Electric’s dash lit up like Christmas. Shortly after that, it died altogether. At this point, Siwinski’s granddad stepped in to help.

“Turns out, this is a pretty common problem for this particular car,” he said. “The Ford dealership had advised us that we could replace the battery. It would only cost $14,000.”

The worst part about this news was that the $14,000 was only for the parts; this didn’t include installation labor.
8 years old. 60k miles.
junk
and the battery pack is discontinued so even if they were to pay the 14k they are SOL
8 years old and the battery pack is disco'd?
Talk about throw away cars. Know what mines all the Lithium out of the ground? Diesels. NOT EVs.


Now why push EVs you might ask? The goal is for you to never own a car so you are 100% reliable on other people, hopefully public transport EVs. So they can track you and keep you where they want. I know it may sound stupid but the desire is to end private ownership of vehicles. When you can control your populace there is a lot you can get away with. The difference is just how you go about it. China's way or ours.

As said in this thread mining lithium is done by diesels, not EVs. and China can pollute all it wants.





Example, my work place is a big mill building. many companies. roughly 2k cars. You know how much power 2k EVs draw all at once after their morning commute? Well you say they could space the charging out, sure wat if I have to leave in an emergency and pick up my kid but the car was not set to charge until 2pm? What if I am a traveling sales person and need a charge right away? I then have to pay for an instant charge? The whole thing is so none well thought out. Take any city let's say Boston, the # of cars in it. Then you can calc the amount of current draw 80% of them will need all at the same time morning and night 9am 6pm. There is not NEARLY enough infrastructure in place or will be in place to supply that much power. That is just for EVs. Let alone lights, and everything else you have to power. The cost is astronomical to make a city actually EV ready and each city will need a dedicated nuke plant to supply the energy. It would make Boston's Big Dig look like a highschool fair project in terms of scale and cost. Now you want to do this to every major city, there is not enough tax money to make it work even if the FED just keeping printing.

TLR: EVs are not the answer and again poor people miss out. Just like Biden's 20k college refund. Poor people miss out, the well off do even better. Same ol Same ol. Poors will just drive older and shittier cars because they rent and can't afford an EV ready house/apartment. The divide just gets bigger.

[T0RM3NT]

This discussion will likely continue to be a point made and then countered with an opposing point.

So, here we go...

We haven't even begun to dive into the largest EV battery manufacturers to supply this demand, right?

I believe the top 10 or more are also Asian-based companies. Does that consider discussion? Importing these batteries because we don't/can't manufacture them for ourselves? At least, not nearly so in the quantities we need to support the advocates for this transition.

What about the impacts of securing the supplies to manufacture them? I know UNICEF has some huge concerns over the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with concerns over children mining the Cobalt necessary for these batteries. One of the many minerals needed and mined for EV batteries. I'm reading that 70 percent of the world's Cobalt mining happens in the DRC. Is everybody good with children in mines to get the Cobalt needed to mass produce these EV batteries? I believe UNICEF is stating as many as 40,000 children are mining in the DRC, some as young as 6.

I'm just saying, as with most polarizing topics, there are many things to consider for all of us. Some of the considerations are conveniently dismissed or overlooked if they don't meet our agenda, from both sides.

Being open-minded (this includes me) and considering everything involved is important to have an educated opinion on any topic.

[Alfisti]

Originally Posted by NickyC

We’re also old enough to remember all the failed doom and gloom we’re all going to die in 20 years due to “global warming” predictions. If even older, we remember the coming ice age, ozone holes, acid rain, and rain forest depletion scare tactics that didn’t happen either. All pushed by the same types of charlatans we’re unfortunately infected with now. The Convid scam is over, but on to the next one to keep everyone irrationally terrified.

Carry on.

TBH, I think we are starting to see the predictions manifest themselves. Weather be weird man, it's hot as hell damn near everywhere, there's drought in flat out weird places and it hasn't stopped raining in australia for damn near 3 years.

Shit be starting to get real.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by Alfisti

TBH, I think we are starting to see the predictions manifest themselves. Weather be weird man, it's hot as hell damn near everywhere, there's drought in flat out weird places and it hasn't stopped raining in australia for damn near 3 years.

Shit be starting to get real.

I remember when the historic cold snaps of the past years were just called “weather” and not climate. Now, the present day heat waves which are less serious than documented from just centuries ago are now solely due to “man made climate change”.

The con men always want it both ways, and no shit is not starting to get real. It would only be getting real if there were no temperature variations. Change and weather patterns on our planet are constantly in flux with little to no impact caused by humans.

If anyone doesn’t understand this, I highly suggest you study the temperature and climate changes on other planets in our solar system. Spoilers, according to your definition above shit gets real there too. Fortunately for those planets, there is no one to control, no one to tax, and no poor and middle income people to be screwed over.

Bonus content, this is an exposed “hunger stone”. Guess what wasn’t around when this stone was first etched?

[gonzo]

Opinion:

Besides wanting Israel turned into glass, why are certain Americans so darn insistent on licking Iran's boots?
I mean, they want us dead, dead and dead.
Welp. How about having their hooks and claws invested in Namak Lake?

200 grams of lithium per m ton. 200!!!
Pushing EV down our throats like there's some sort of timer on. No real plan. Just ACCEPT WHAT WE SAY.

Carry on.

[H2O_Doc]

Originally Posted by NickyC

I remember when the historic cold snaps of the past years were just called "weather" and not climate. Now, the present day heat waves which are less serious than documented from just centuries ago are now solely due to "man made climate change".

The con men always want it both ways, and no shit is not starting to get real. It would only be getting real if there were no temperature variations. Change and weather patterns on our planet are constantly in flux with little to no impact caused by humans.

If anyone doesn't understand this, I highly suggest you study the temperature and climate changes on other planets in our solar system. Spoilers, according to your definition above shit gets real there too. Fortunately for those planets, there is no one to control, no one to tax, and no poor and middle income people to be screwed over.

We understand the physics of climate change and we understand both the drivers of past climate change and what is likely to occur under different scenarios based on physics. We expect warming based on the very well known properties of GHGs. That's why scientists recombined over a century ago that our combustion of fossils fuels would likely warm the planet. This isn't a new idea.

No, we don't know every last detail, but we do understand the most powerful drivers of climate change more than well enough to make attributions and projects within a reasonable range of uncertainty.

[NickyC]

Originally Posted by H2O_Doc

We understand the physics of climate change and we understand both the drivers of past climate change and what is likely to occur under different scenarios based on physics. We expect warming based on the very well known properties of GHGs. That's why scientists recombined over a century ago that our combustion of fossils fuels would likely warm the planet. This isn't a new idea.

No, we don't know every last detail, but we do understand the most powerful drivers of climate change more than well enough to make attributions and projects within a reasonable range of uncertainty.

Considering experts in weather routinely get forecasts wrong in just a 24 hour time period, I don’t share your faith in “experts”. I especially don’t share that faith when science is now so obviously corrupted by political forces that getting to the truth is near impossible.

Or maybe, I’m just a forever summer guy and know warmer temperatures are far better for our species than cold. Nothing promotes our advancement more than warmer temperatures, with extended periods of cold always being associated with death and famine. Who the hell wants to be cold and miserable all the time? It boggles my mind.

Finally, there is not a single person who can prove any attempts we take to change the climate will be successful. Until the theory is proven, I’ll take increased carbon dioxide which we know is good for the planet.

[NickyC]

I’ll bow out of this thread now as anything else I’ll say will be rehashed bloviating that won’t change anyones mind.

I will say this though. I beg anyone who is still so swayed by the “science” to please keep in mind what has happened over the past 18 months. Any dissenting opinions concerning the COVID “vaccine” were cancelled, kicked off platforms, ridiculed, and absolutely beaten into submission by the government/media cabal pushing the “safe and effective” lie. Those same forces are now telling you they never said the “vaccine” would prevent transmission, nor injury, nor death. They were lying to us then and they’re lying to us now. Never forget who filled in skate parks with sand, didn’t allow you to see dying relatives, destroyed your small business while massive box stores remained open, and worst of all robbed you of your dignity over a virus that primarily targeted people past average life expectancy.

Science is dead, a narrative is being pushed and all dissenting views are crushed.

Please ask yourself what else are they lying about?

[H2O_Doc]

Again, we've know that certain gases warm the planet. We've known this for centuries. We expected that unabated fossil fuel combustion, which releases those gases and those gases can accumulate in the atmosphere, should by properties of physics warm the planet. The planet is warming as should be expected. For it not to be warming would be very odd.

Not a new idea. Lots of data. Ice cores give us data for hundreds of thousands of years ago. There is a ton of cross checking of data with very reliable proxies.