3 ms·
Because it's obvious enough that those who aren't experts in that field can easily point it out. That a supposed expert in the field missed it raises concerns b
by lucideer 3y ago
Because it's obvious enough that those who aren't experts in that field can easily point it out. That a supposed expert in the field missed it raises concerns by proxy about their expertise in general.
- jjulius 3y agoAnd it's not at all possible that someone making a blog post forgot to put the word "passenger" before "ICE" there?
- enragedcacti 3y agothe big mistake isn't missing "passenger", its claiming that 100% of vehicles on the road will be BEV when the regulation says 100% of sales will be BEV. The average age of cars on the road is about 10 years so a substantial number of vehicles will still be ICE in California in 2035.
- jjulius 3y agoEh, I got the word wrong (switch it to "sales") but it doesn't really change my point.
- lucideer 3y agoThe sentence is talking about full switchover- that doesn't happen with sales bans. It's not a missing word, no matter what way you want to try and frame it. The sentence is written as intended.
- p1esk 3y agoSo it’s ok to have a ban on new ICE vehicles, when half of existing vehicles are still ICE?