6 ms·

Eight U.S. States Now Have Plans to Ban Sales of Gas-Powered Cars

66 points by walterbell 3y ago

lelandbatey 3y ago
The states are: Rhode Island, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia The timeline is by 2035
wepple 3y ago
11 years to get the technology to a place where it can reasonably replace gas. I have my doubts that we’ll have the range and capability by then, perhaps if automakers are smart we’ll see more series hybrids and range extender models.
- kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
  It won't happen. There is not enough money to subsidize upgrades to residential power so every household can have 200A service, plus all the urban homes that lack a secure place to plug in, plus all the rural homes where people have extended commutes to work. People aren't going to settle for a shit sandwich just because some have a god complex.
  - isatis 3y ago
    To add to your point, a lot of apartment complexes still don't have the infrastructure to charge electric vehicles.
    - timbit42 3y ago
      As EVs become more common, at some point the landlords will start falling over themselves to install charging so they can get tenants.
  - natch 3y ago
    We did fine for two years with 60 amp service and only 110 with two EVs. It helped that there were superchargers nearby.
    - natch 3y ago
      To clarify, 60 amp for the entire (apartment) unit. Obviously the 110 was, well, 110 so not many amps at all. And two cars shared one outlet, plugging in one car at a time as needed. It was a kitchen outlet so on the high side of amperage for 110, though I don’t know the number.
  - chris222 3y ago
    I don’t think the end state is everyone with an EV has home charging, that’s not practical. The next generations of BEVs are getting faster and faster charging with longer ranges such that I don’t think this will be an issue.
  - timbit42 3y ago
    You don't have to have 200A service. 100A can charge a car and it doesn't have to be annoying if you have a smart electrical panel which can prioritize charging with clothes dryer and stove usage. If the car is charging and you decide to dry clothes, it will switch off the car's circuit until the dryer shuts off. If you decide to cook dinner, it will shut off the car or the dryer until you turn the stove off again.
- rgbrenner 3y ago
  Charging speed is still increasing. Lucid Air peaks at 300kW, or 200mi in 12 minutes. The Hyundai Ioniq 6 is similar. But in China, there are 500kW EVs and chargers already being sold/installed. The Zeekr 001 does 300mi in 11 minutes. Here in the US, Gravity is installing 500kW chargers. I don't know if the infrastructure for home charging will be ready by 2035... but as charging times decrease, replacing gas stations with charging stations becomes more viable.
  - chris222 3y ago
    Yes the Zeeker 001 is very impressive. Another 500kW+ charging EV is the Li Auto Mega van. https://insideevs.com/news/710508/li-auto-mega-fast-charging/amp/ https://insideevs.com/news/710508/li-auto-mega-fast-charging...
- chris222 3y ago
  I am confident the technology issues will be solved having studied the market for many years. What you see now for products does not represent the state of the art which is mostly coming out of China. Most automakers are currently redesigning and retooling for the new reality of very cheap BEVs with lots of range and very fast charging. The largest shift currently underway is a major change over to LFP packs with cell-to-pack technology and large format prismatic cells like the BYD blade and CATL qilin. We also inch closer to solid state and sodium batteries which is likely the enablers for the next wave of innovative products at all price points in 5 years. I don’t think 500-600 mile range BEVs with 500kW+ charging will be that rare in 11 years. We already have some current examples like the 2024 Zeeker 001. Based on those figures recharging is on par with refueling an ICE car.
TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
How do you think about bans vs incentives when it comes to a situation like this one? I'm generally inclined to believe that making the alternatives so much better that people feel compelled to switch is the best approach, but maybe that's unrealistic for the gas powered car domain. Not that I have any particular affinity or love for gas powered cars in particular. It's weird to imagine that some day we might end up in a world where gas stations aren't common anymore and you need to go to the Hardware Store or some specialty shop to buy gas. My other immediate question is: what stops people from buying a car in the next state over and driving it in? At which point this ban might be meant as more of an increased barrier rather than a full ban.
- Aerroon 3y ago
  I think bans are a pretty terrible idea. It implies that the alternatives aren't good enough. But due to the bans people will be forced to use them anyway. It's great if you're an EV manufacturer though because you can rack up your price and customers won't have much of an alternative. Bonus points if the government also bans imports of EVs from certain other countries. Even if this isn't the objective, it nevertheless is a way people will see the whole situation as.
  - Teever 3y ago
    > I think bans are a pretty terrible idea. It implies that the alternatives aren't good enough. That could be true but we can't say for certain because the market is already so incredibly distorted by oil and gas subsidies. Automobiles in general are insanely subsidized in the form of state funded road infrastructure. There's nothing free market about transportation, especially in North America.
    - username332211 3y ago
      Could you give me a description of said subsidies? It's just that the last time I saw a serious study measuring them, the study was pretty much a study on the ways to torture the semantics of the word subsidy. Most countries in the world also implement significant excise taxes on petroleum fuels. The American one is about 5%, while in Europe they can go to 40% excluding VAT.
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
As time goes on I feel more confidently that the auto industry messed up by trying to "leapfrog" plugin hybrids and go straight to EVs. Yes, that may be the final destination, but in the interim I think pulling back on plugin hybrids slowed the transition. I've heard some people say plugin hybrids are the worst of both worlds ("You need to maintain an electric powertrain and an ICE!") but as a Chevy Volt owner, I think they are the best of both worlds: 1. The vast, vast majority of people drive less than 40-50 miles a day. 2. With a plugin hybrid, there is never range anxiety. If you run out of battery, you just can go on gas for that extra few miles you may need. 3. Going on a road trip currently is generally a PITA with an EV, especially if you don't have access to the Supercharger network. God forbid you plan things out and then pull up to an Electrify America site where none of the chargers work... 4. The batteries in plugin hybrids are much smaller, meaning they're cheaper, weigh less, and require much less mined metals to produce. 5. Since the battery is much smaller, you don't need a big expensive home charger/electrician upgrade. With my Volt, I'd just plug the portable charger into a normal 120V outlet and it would charge overnight. 6. Still has what in my mind are some of the biggest driving benefits of EVs, namely quick acceleration and 1-pedal driving. This article says some plugin hybrids qualify as 0-emission vehicles, but it's not clear to me if that's in all states. I hope so, as I think a lot more people who would be reticent to get a pure EV would love a plugin hybrid if they tried it.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > This article says some plugin hybrids qualify as 0-emission vehicles, but it’s not clear to me if that’s in all states. Its true under the “Advanced Clean Cars II” as adopted in CA, which a number of other states have adopted directly (including some states that have modified it by only adopting the timeline through 2032, stopping just short of a total phase-out of non-ZEVs, probably specifically to avoid the headline of “banning sales of gas-powered cars”.) https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/cars-and-light-trucks-are-going-zero-frequently-asked-questions https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/cars-and-light-tr... What is a zero-emission vehicle? Zero-emission vehicles (ZEV), in the context of the Zero-emission Vehicle regulation, include battery electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles.
- 3y ago
diziet 3y ago
I wonder if this will spur more people to buy and register cars in neighboring states. I also hope that the grid will be able to handle that load -- with the rising demand of AI driven power load and electric cars being a double whammy.
- bugbuddy 3y ago
  Serious question. Is this even possible given the laws being passed? Are vehicles usually registered where you reside?
  - joecool1029 3y ago
    Legally they almost always have to be registered in the state the driver resides. Only exception I can think of is a business registering the car. But if you are only asking if it's possible, sure. Look at the phenomenon of 'snowbirds' registering Florida plates on cars mostly driven in the NYC metro. Used to be much cheaper insurance premiums a decade or two ago, now not so much. (Just to be clear, this is insurance fraud and highly discouraged)
- AmVess 3y ago
  That doesn't work at all in California.
osigurdson 3y ago
I love when governments decide to get tough and righteous. Look at us, we are banning a something more than an decade in the future when, most likely, no natural market for the product will exist.
- MattPalmer1086 3y ago
  Actually, this is a good thing for auto manufacturers. We all know that fossil fuel powered vehicles aren't the future. Setting a cut off date gives certainty to the market, enables them to plan more effectively, and for third party suppliers to also plan accordingly.
  - fuckyah 3y ago
    [dead]
  - Gerlo 3y ago
    You think the market isn't capable of adapting to changes in the availability resources on its own? That's ridiculous.
    - MattPalmer1086 3y ago
      I didn't say it wouldn't be capable, only that having some certainty can help.
    - r00fus 3y ago
      Pretty much no. They would rather do almost anything else than be forced to change business models.
  - mdavidn 3y ago
    That’s … not where I thought you were going. A ban will drive demand for ICE vehicles in the years before going into effect, even if it ultimately does not.
    - 3y ago
iambateman 3y ago
This ban would last exactly one political cycle and everyone knows it. That’s why it’s suggested for 2035…politicians get to look noble and visionary while bearing none of the actual consequences of the policy actually doing anything. I would love to hear about a serious government proposal to reduce fuel emissions which starts working before my children graduate from college.
- chris222 3y ago
  Tax credits for EVs and the funding for charging in the IRA has been effective policy. The “bans” are just for show.
pugworthy 3y ago
It struck me the other day that post-apocalyptic fiction authors are going to have to really change their game in a while. Imagine rewriting, "The Walking Dead" where half (or more) of the cars were electric. It does though bring up an interesting question: In the event of natural catastrophe and loss of critical infrastructure due to natural disaster (or brain eating contagions), how does one keep the literal wheels of industry and commerce moving? Will preppers of the future focus on having gas cars, or having radically self-sufficient sources of electricity for their cars?
- legulere 3y ago
  Industry already now is heavily reliant on electricity. So not really a change there. Preppers will just use their generators and PV system to charge their cars.
- dmead 3y ago
  Did you not consider solar cells when you wrote this?
  - pugworthy 3y ago
    Yes, along with whimsy.
- doikor 3y ago
  Gas and diesel have relatively short shelf lives. They last around 12 months (way less for gas with added ethanol) if stored properly meaning not too cold or hot and no big temperature changes. This can be extended with preservatives/stabilizers to a few years but after that you are fucked if you don’t run a refinery. So yeah preppers should go with electric. Batteries also have a limited lifespan but it should be longer if managed properly.
- livrem 3y ago
  The Car Wars board game originally published in 1981 already imagined a post-apocalyptic world using mostly electric cars: "There are two kinds of engine available in 2040: gas and electric. With gasoline unavailable in many areas of the world, multiple-fuel-cell electric power plants are far more common than the old-style internal-combustion engines". That is from the 1990 rulebook. The original rulebook had the year 2031 instead of 2040 (because "Car Wars is set 50 years in the future"). https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/2829/game-car-wars https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/2829/game-car-wars
walterbell 3y ago
March 2023, https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/eu-countries-poised-approve-2035-phaseout-co2-emitting-cars-2023-03-28/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/eu-cou... EU law will require all new cars sold to have zero CO2 emissions from 2035, and 55% lower CO2 emissions from 2030, versus 2021 levels.. The European Commission has pledged, however, to create a legal route for sales of new cars that only run on e-fuels to continue after 2035, after Germany demanded this exemption.. The EU policy had been expected to make it impossible to sell combustion engine cars in the EU from 2035. But the exemption won by Germany offers a potential lifeline to traditional vehicles - although e-fuels are not yet produced at scale.. E-fuels are considered carbon neutral because they are made using captured CO2 emissions - which proponents say balances out the CO2 released when the fuel is combusted in an engine.
prerok 3y ago
What I don't understand with these policies is, how the states and countries (I live in EU, which passed the same kind of laws) intend to support the massive electrical demands that will put on the grid. I live in a city, small by global standards, and I am certain all these vehicles charging over night will create heavy tolls on the grid, not even to mention the last mile delivery, where apartment blocks will have to upgrade cabling as well as local transformer stations. And this will have to be done within the entire country, which already imports 40% of its electricity needs. So, does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?
- thecopy 3y ago
  I think there is an investment aspect to this. Without a certainty that demand will increase in a significant way the power grid wont see investment. By forcing EVs, power companies know that demand will go up in the future enabling easier investment decisions
  - spxneo 3y ago
    how does this help most americans who cant afford ev? this is like "let them eat cake"
    - appplication 3y ago
      The demand for cheap electric vehicles will exist. They will be worse, and have less features, poorer construction, etc. but that’s the nature of budget stuff. Not everybody needs 300 mile range. Most folks can get most of their trips done with just a couple dozen miles of range. It sucks, but we don’t have a choice to not act against climate change. Some people are going to get fucked in some ways, but those same people will be fucked in different ways if we don’t do anything or move too slowly.
      - FpUser 3y ago
        >"Some people are going to get fucked in some ways, but those same people will be fucked in different ways if we don’t do anything or move too slowly." If fucking up people starts with those at the top I am all for it. Otherwise GFY
spxneo 3y ago
how do ppl get to work now if they are still driving old cars because they cant afford a new car? in the cold? uphills?
- high_5 3y ago
  Electric vehicles are currently on a good path to become gentrification of mobility.
UberFly 3y ago
Will they subsidize new batteries? This will just mandate that most cars will only be driven for 10 years or 100k miles. The failing batteries will cause more environmental damage than modern gas vehicles. Used gas and EVs will be priced above what the low-income can afford. The untended consequences will be enormous but in the end the facts won't matter since there will be backs to pat and endless passes given.
- legulere 3y ago
  100k miles is the minimum warranty you get from manufacturers, in California it’s 150k miles. More realistic is 200k miles. And then your still left with 80% capacity. And then you can recycle them. There’s almost no capacity yet because there’s also no demand, but it seems like it will be a no-brainer financially to recycle them.
cjensen 3y ago
Allowing plug-in hybrids to continue to be sold simply ensures that people will buy plug-in hybrids that are never plugged in and simply carry around extra weight for no useful purpose. And when those cars are passed on to the used market, I wonder if anyone will ever bother to replace the batteries. Personally, I'm looking to buy exclusively hybrids in the near future. But I'm a weird case because I keep vehicles for decades. I have a lot of bad feelings about this legislation.
fdschoeneman 3y ago
All 8 states are run by Democrats. The bans are ultimately motivated by Democratic Party leaders and influencers who believe a) that climate is changing, b) that this change is for sure going to lead to a climate apocalypse which will kill billions of people and irrevocably destroy the ecosystem, c) that the anthropogenic component of this climate change is decisive, d) that the portion of anthropogenic change due to Co2 emissions is also decisive, and that the decisive factor in Co2 emissions comes from consumption of fossil fuels. Which are all fine. I don't know enough to question their beliefs. But I do know enough about math and engineering to know that the only realistic way to deal with the disaster they are predicting is an immediate and massive expansion of nuclear power. But instead of arguing in favor of this immediate and massive expansion of nuclear power, which Republicans would likely support, they push stuff like this.
- pavlov 3y ago
  If by now you don’t know enough about this topic to form any kind of opinion on whether humans are responsible for climate change, you have chosen to intentionally ignore the scientific community. Building more nuclear power is good, but it can’t be the only solution because it’s very expensive and takes so long to ramp up. Projects in the West have been decades behind schedule. And it’s far from given Republicans would support it. Why don’t Republicans take the initiative and get Democrats behind a national plan for more nuclear? Because their voters don’t care. So why would they support such a Democratic initiative? It’s a weird assumption that Republicans are somehow just waiting to do the right thing, if only Democrats would come to them with a plan. It’s never worked like that.
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    From wikipedia: In the USA in April 2023 a Gallup poll had nuclear support at 54%, the highest level since 2012.[54] In August 2023 Pew Research Center conducted a survey which found that 57% of Americans favor more nuclear power plants. This is up from 43% in 2020. Support for nuclear power has increased among both Democrats and Republicans. However, Americans are still more likely to favor solar and wind power than nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_nuclear_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_nuclear_issu...
fumar 3y ago
For a group of smart solution driven folks, this comment section reads overly negative. I am curious if any one here is in the autos sector. My extended family works in motorcity and some work in machining around the Midwest. I hear excitement for new growth opportunities and hesitancy as the US autos lag behind China in rapid development. I have an EV and an ICE motorcycle. Admittedly I would be sad if all ICE vehicles were banned but I am open to change. I hope American auto groups can take the reigns and become global leaders again. There is a large sector of people itching for more manufacturing jobs.
- chris222 3y ago
  Not many people in tech are really aware of how the auto industry works. Mostly the insane lead times on new products. What is out there and for sale now is something that was likely designed 3-5 years ago. You are right to point out the innovation coming out of China in the EV space. Every automaker is currently in a cycle of copying what they are doing for their next wave of products. To the extent that there is an EV “slowdown” right now is basically intentional until the next wave of BEVs starts coming out which are way more cost competitive. As I pointed out in another comment the main driver is large format LFP prismatic cells in a cell-to-pack configuration. BYD blade and CATL qilin are examples to study.
evanelias 3y ago
Meanwhile, New Jersey (one of the eight states mentioned here) just passed a law that increases the annual registration fee for EVs by $250/year, with automatic increases to this amount each year. And since new car buyers in NJ have to pay 4 years registration upfront, that's an extra upfront payment of $1000+ when buying a new EV. The governor's budget also proposes eliminating the state's sales tax exemption for EVs (one of the few reliable EV incentives in NJ), which will effectively increase their upfront cost by another several thousand dollars. I should mention the state does have a $5000 tax credit for new EVs. But it goes in and out of effect completely unpredictably, as funding runs out each year and then is reinstated arbitrarily some time the next year. And this is all happening while EV sales are not doing well to begin with. There's basically no chance the ICE ban will happen as planned there. And this is a blue state, with (iirc) ~40% nuclear and 10% renewable energy.
- dzhiurgis 3y ago
  In NZ new right government (congratulated by Musk himself) scrapped incentives and slapped $80nzd per 1000km tax. Which is twice of phev or same as 7000lbs diesel truck.
- ryathal 3y ago
  Removing incentives for EVs has to happen eventually, especially if ICE cars get banned. Something has to replace that loss in revenue.
  - evanelias 3y ago
    Eventually, sure. But 11 years ahead of the supposed ICE ban? When EV sales already aren't growing with those incentives in place? All this will accomplish is ensuring the ICE ban never happens. Also, this is more than "removing incentives" -- it's an outright EV penalty. The increase in registration fee for EVs is roughly double what the most popular ICE car (Honda CRV) pays in annual gas taxes in the state, according to Gothamist/NPR https://gothamist.com/news/what-drivers-need-to-know-as-nj-makes-electric-vehicles-more-expensive https://gothamist.com/news/what-drivers-need-to-know-as-nj-m...
ajdude 3y ago
A few of these are northern states like New York in Massachusetts. Do electric cars still have issues if the weather is cold enough? We got some pretty bitter winters lately.
- timbit42 3y ago
  You lose some range. How much depends on the brand/model of the vehicle. Some lose quite a bit, some lose hardly any. Of course, ICEVs lose quite a bit of range in cold weather too.

66 points by walterbell 3y ago

The states are: Rhode Island, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington and the District of Columbia The timeline is by 2035

wepple 3y ago

11 years to get the technology to a place where it can reasonably replace gas. I have my doubts that we’ll have the range and capability by then, perhaps if automakers are smart we’ll see more series hybrids and range extender models.

kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
It won't happen. There is not enough money to subsidize upgrades to residential power so every household can have 200A service, plus all the urban homes that lack a secure place to plug in, plus all the rural homes where people have extended commutes to work. People aren't going to settle for a shit sandwich just because some have a god complex.
- isatis 3y ago
  To add to your point, a lot of apartment complexes still don't have the infrastructure to charge electric vehicles.
  - timbit42 3y ago
    As EVs become more common, at some point the landlords will start falling over themselves to install charging so they can get tenants.
- natch 3y ago
  We did fine for two years with 60 amp service and only 110 with two EVs. It helped that there were superchargers nearby.
  - natch 3y ago
    To clarify, 60 amp for the entire (apartment) unit. Obviously the 110 was, well, 110 so not many amps at all. And two cars shared one outlet, plugging in one car at a time as needed. It was a kitchen outlet so on the high side of amperage for 110, though I don’t know the number.
- chris222 3y ago
  I don’t think the end state is everyone with an EV has home charging, that’s not practical. The next generations of BEVs are getting faster and faster charging with longer ranges such that I don’t think this will be an issue.
- timbit42 3y ago
  You don't have to have 200A service. 100A can charge a car and it doesn't have to be annoying if you have a smart electrical panel which can prioritize charging with clothes dryer and stove usage. If the car is charging and you decide to dry clothes, it will switch off the car's circuit until the dryer shuts off. If you decide to cook dinner, it will shut off the car or the dryer until you turn the stove off again.
rgbrenner 3y ago
Charging speed is still increasing. Lucid Air peaks at 300kW, or 200mi in 12 minutes. The Hyundai Ioniq 6 is similar. But in China, there are 500kW EVs and chargers already being sold/installed. The Zeekr 001 does 300mi in 11 minutes. Here in the US, Gravity is installing 500kW chargers. I don't know if the infrastructure for home charging will be ready by 2035... but as charging times decrease, replacing gas stations with charging stations becomes more viable.
- chris222 3y ago
  Yes the Zeeker 001 is very impressive. Another 500kW+ charging EV is the Li Auto Mega van. https://insideevs.com/news/710508/li-auto-mega-fast-charging/amp/ https://insideevs.com/news/710508/li-auto-mega-fast-charging...
chris222 3y ago
I am confident the technology issues will be solved having studied the market for many years. What you see now for products does not represent the state of the art which is mostly coming out of China. Most automakers are currently redesigning and retooling for the new reality of very cheap BEVs with lots of range and very fast charging. The largest shift currently underway is a major change over to LFP packs with cell-to-pack technology and large format prismatic cells like the BYD blade and CATL qilin. We also inch closer to solid state and sodium batteries which is likely the enablers for the next wave of innovative products at all price points in 5 years. I don’t think 500-600 mile range BEVs with 500kW+ charging will be that rare in 11 years. We already have some current examples like the 2024 Zeeker 001. Based on those figures recharging is on par with refueling an ICE car.

TheAceOfHearts 3y ago

How do you think about bans vs incentives when it comes to a situation like this one? I'm generally inclined to believe that making the alternatives so much better that people feel compelled to switch is the best approach, but maybe that's unrealistic for the gas powered car domain. Not that I have any particular affinity or love for gas powered cars in particular. It's weird to imagine that some day we might end up in a world where gas stations aren't common anymore and you need to go to the Hardware Store or some specialty shop to buy gas. My other immediate question is: what stops people from buying a car in the next state over and driving it in? At which point this ban might be meant as more of an increased barrier rather than a full ban.

Aerroon 3y ago
I think bans are a pretty terrible idea. It implies that the alternatives aren't good enough. But due to the bans people will be forced to use them anyway. It's great if you're an EV manufacturer though because you can rack up your price and customers won't have much of an alternative. Bonus points if the government also bans imports of EVs from certain other countries. Even if this isn't the objective, it nevertheless is a way people will see the whole situation as.
- Teever 3y ago
  > I think bans are a pretty terrible idea. It implies that the alternatives aren't good enough. That could be true but we can't say for certain because the market is already so incredibly distorted by oil and gas subsidies. Automobiles in general are insanely subsidized in the form of state funded road infrastructure. There's nothing free market about transportation, especially in North America.
  - username332211 3y ago
    Could you give me a description of said subsidies? It's just that the last time I saw a serious study measuring them, the study was pretty much a study on the ways to torture the semantics of the word subsidy. Most countries in the world also implement significant excise taxes on petroleum fuels. The American one is about 5%, while in Europe they can go to 40% excluding VAT.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

As time goes on I feel more confidently that the auto industry messed up by trying to "leapfrog" plugin hybrids and go straight to EVs. Yes, that may be the final destination, but in the interim I think pulling back on plugin hybrids slowed the transition. I've heard some people say plugin hybrids are the worst of both worlds ("You need to maintain an electric powertrain and an ICE!") but as a Chevy Volt owner, I think they are the best of both worlds: 1. The vast, vast majority of people drive less than 40-50 miles a day. 2. With a plugin hybrid, there is never range anxiety. If you run out of battery, you just can go on gas for that extra few miles you may need. 3. Going on a road trip currently is generally a PITA with an EV, especially if you don't have access to the Supercharger network. God forbid you plan things out and then pull up to an Electrify America site where none of the chargers work... 4. The batteries in plugin hybrids are much smaller, meaning they're cheaper, weigh less, and require much less mined metals to produce. 5. Since the battery is much smaller, you don't need a big expensive home charger/electrician upgrade. With my Volt, I'd just plug the portable charger into a normal 120V outlet and it would charge overnight. 6. Still has what in my mind are some of the biggest driving benefits of EVs, namely quick acceleration and 1-pedal driving. This article says some plugin hybrids qualify as 0-emission vehicles, but it's not clear to me if that's in all states. I hope so, as I think a lot more people who would be reticent to get a pure EV would love a plugin hybrid if they tried it.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> This article says some plugin hybrids qualify as 0-emission vehicles, but it’s not clear to me if that’s in all states. Its true under the “Advanced Clean Cars II” as adopted in CA, which a number of other states have adopted directly (including some states that have modified it by only adopting the timeline through 2032, stopping just short of a total phase-out of non-ZEVs, probably specifically to avoid the headline of “banning sales of gas-powered cars”.) https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/cars-and-light-trucks-are-going-zero-frequently-asked-questions https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/cars-and-light-tr... What is a zero-emission vehicle? Zero-emission vehicles (ZEV), in the context of the Zero-emission Vehicle regulation, include battery electric vehicles, plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles.
3y ago

diziet 3y ago

I wonder if this will spur more people to buy and register cars in neighboring states. I also hope that the grid will be able to handle that load -- with the rising demand of AI driven power load and electric cars being a double whammy.

bugbuddy 3y ago
Serious question. Is this even possible given the laws being passed? Are vehicles usually registered where you reside?
- joecool1029 3y ago
  Legally they almost always have to be registered in the state the driver resides. Only exception I can think of is a business registering the car. But if you are only asking if it's possible, sure. Look at the phenomenon of 'snowbirds' registering Florida plates on cars mostly driven in the NYC metro. Used to be much cheaper insurance premiums a decade or two ago, now not so much. (Just to be clear, this is insurance fraud and highly discouraged)
AmVess 3y ago
That doesn't work at all in California.

osigurdson 3y ago

I love when governments decide to get tough and righteous. Look at us, we are banning a something more than an decade in the future when, most likely, no natural market for the product will exist.

MattPalmer1086 3y ago
Actually, this is a good thing for auto manufacturers. We all know that fossil fuel powered vehicles aren't the future. Setting a cut off date gives certainty to the market, enables them to plan more effectively, and for third party suppliers to also plan accordingly.
- fuckyah 3y ago
  [dead]
- Gerlo 3y ago
  You think the market isn't capable of adapting to changes in the availability resources on its own? That's ridiculous.
  - MattPalmer1086 3y ago
    I didn't say it wouldn't be capable, only that having some certainty can help.
  - r00fus 3y ago
    Pretty much no. They would rather do almost anything else than be forced to change business models.
- mdavidn 3y ago
  That’s … not where I thought you were going. A ban will drive demand for ICE vehicles in the years before going into effect, even if it ultimately does not.
  - 3y ago

iambateman 3y ago

This ban would last exactly one political cycle and everyone knows it. That’s why it’s suggested for 2035…politicians get to look noble and visionary while bearing none of the actual consequences of the policy actually doing anything. I would love to hear about a serious government proposal to reduce fuel emissions which starts working before my children graduate from college.

chris222 3y ago
Tax credits for EVs and the funding for charging in the IRA has been effective policy. The “bans” are just for show.

pugworthy 3y ago

It struck me the other day that post-apocalyptic fiction authors are going to have to really change their game in a while. Imagine rewriting, "The Walking Dead" where half (or more) of the cars were electric. It does though bring up an interesting question: In the event of natural catastrophe and loss of critical infrastructure due to natural disaster (or brain eating contagions), how does one keep the literal wheels of industry and commerce moving? Will preppers of the future focus on having gas cars, or having radically self-sufficient sources of electricity for their cars?

legulere 3y ago
Industry already now is heavily reliant on electricity. So not really a change there. Preppers will just use their generators and PV system to charge their cars.
dmead 3y ago
Did you not consider solar cells when you wrote this?
- pugworthy 3y ago
  Yes, along with whimsy.
doikor 3y ago
Gas and diesel have relatively short shelf lives. They last around 12 months (way less for gas with added ethanol) if stored properly meaning not too cold or hot and no big temperature changes. This can be extended with preservatives/stabilizers to a few years but after that you are fucked if you don’t run a refinery. So yeah preppers should go with electric. Batteries also have a limited lifespan but it should be longer if managed properly.
livrem 3y ago
The Car Wars board game originally published in 1981 already imagined a post-apocalyptic world using mostly electric cars: "There are two kinds of engine available in 2040: gas and electric. With gasoline unavailable in many areas of the world, multiple-fuel-cell electric power plants are far more common than the old-style internal-combustion engines". That is from the 1990 rulebook. The original rulebook had the year 2031 instead of 2040 (because "Car Wars is set 50 years in the future"). https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/2829/game-car-wars https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamefamily/2829/game-car-wars

walterbell 3y ago

March 2023, https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/eu-countries-poised-approve-2035-phaseout-co2-emitting-cars-2023-03-28/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/eu-cou... EU law will require all new cars sold to have zero CO2 emissions from 2035, and 55% lower CO2 emissions from 2030, versus 2021 levels.. The European Commission has pledged, however, to create a legal route for sales of new cars that only run on e-fuels to continue after 2035, after Germany demanded this exemption.. The EU policy had been expected to make it impossible to sell combustion engine cars in the EU from 2035. But the exemption won by Germany offers a potential lifeline to traditional vehicles - although e-fuels are not yet produced at scale.. E-fuels are considered carbon neutral because they are made using captured CO2 emissions - which proponents say balances out the CO2 released when the fuel is combusted in an engine.

prerok 3y ago

What I don't understand with these policies is, how the states and countries (I live in EU, which passed the same kind of laws) intend to support the massive electrical demands that will put on the grid. I live in a city, small by global standards, and I am certain all these vehicles charging over night will create heavy tolls on the grid, not even to mention the last mile delivery, where apartment blocks will have to upgrade cabling as well as local transformer stations. And this will have to be done within the entire country, which already imports 40% of its electricity needs. So, does the left hand know what the right hand is doing?

thecopy 3y ago
I think there is an investment aspect to this. Without a certainty that demand will increase in a significant way the power grid wont see investment. By forcing EVs, power companies know that demand will go up in the future enabling easier investment decisions
- spxneo 3y ago
  how does this help most americans who cant afford ev? this is like "let them eat cake"
  - appplication 3y ago
    The demand for cheap electric vehicles will exist. They will be worse, and have less features, poorer construction, etc. but that’s the nature of budget stuff. Not everybody needs 300 mile range. Most folks can get most of their trips done with just a couple dozen miles of range. It sucks, but we don’t have a choice to not act against climate change. Some people are going to get fucked in some ways, but those same people will be fucked in different ways if we don’t do anything or move too slowly.
    - FpUser 3y ago
      >"Some people are going to get fucked in some ways, but those same people will be fucked in different ways if we don’t do anything or move too slowly." If fucking up people starts with those at the top I am all for it. Otherwise GFY

spxneo 3y ago

how do ppl get to work now if they are still driving old cars because they cant afford a new car? in the cold? uphills?

high_5 3y ago
Electric vehicles are currently on a good path to become gentrification of mobility.

UberFly 3y ago

Will they subsidize new batteries? This will just mandate that most cars will only be driven for 10 years or 100k miles. The failing batteries will cause more environmental damage than modern gas vehicles. Used gas and EVs will be priced above what the low-income can afford. The untended consequences will be enormous but in the end the facts won't matter since there will be backs to pat and endless passes given.

legulere 3y ago
100k miles is the minimum warranty you get from manufacturers, in California it’s 150k miles. More realistic is 200k miles. And then your still left with 80% capacity. And then you can recycle them. There’s almost no capacity yet because there’s also no demand, but it seems like it will be a no-brainer financially to recycle them.

cjensen 3y ago

Allowing plug-in hybrids to continue to be sold simply ensures that people will buy plug-in hybrids that are never plugged in and simply carry around extra weight for no useful purpose. And when those cars are passed on to the used market, I wonder if anyone will ever bother to replace the batteries. Personally, I'm looking to buy exclusively hybrids in the near future. But I'm a weird case because I keep vehicles for decades. I have a lot of bad feelings about this legislation.

fdschoeneman 3y ago

All 8 states are run by Democrats. The bans are ultimately motivated by Democratic Party leaders and influencers who believe a) that climate is changing, b) that this change is for sure going to lead to a climate apocalypse which will kill billions of people and irrevocably destroy the ecosystem, c) that the anthropogenic component of this climate change is decisive, d) that the portion of anthropogenic change due to Co2 emissions is also decisive, and that the decisive factor in Co2 emissions comes from consumption of fossil fuels. Which are all fine. I don't know enough to question their beliefs. But I do know enough about math and engineering to know that the only realistic way to deal with the disaster they are predicting is an immediate and massive expansion of nuclear power. But instead of arguing in favor of this immediate and massive expansion of nuclear power, which Republicans would likely support, they push stuff like this.

pavlov 3y ago
If by now you don’t know enough about this topic to form any kind of opinion on whether humans are responsible for climate change, you have chosen to intentionally ignore the scientific community. Building more nuclear power is good, but it can’t be the only solution because it’s very expensive and takes so long to ramp up. Projects in the West have been decades behind schedule. And it’s far from given Republicans would support it. Why don’t Republicans take the initiative and get Democrats behind a national plan for more nuclear? Because their voters don’t care. So why would they support such a Democratic initiative? It’s a weird assumption that Republicans are somehow just waiting to do the right thing, if only Democrats would come to them with a plan. It’s never worked like that.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  From wikipedia: In the USA in April 2023 a Gallup poll had nuclear support at 54%, the highest level since 2012.[54] In August 2023 Pew Research Center conducted a survey which found that 57% of Americans favor more nuclear power plants. This is up from 43% in 2020. Support for nuclear power has increased among both Democrats and Republicans. However, Americans are still more likely to favor solar and wind power than nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_nuclear_issues https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_on_nuclear_issu...

fumar 3y ago

For a group of smart solution driven folks, this comment section reads overly negative. I am curious if any one here is in the autos sector. My extended family works in motorcity and some work in machining around the Midwest. I hear excitement for new growth opportunities and hesitancy as the US autos lag behind China in rapid development. I have an EV and an ICE motorcycle. Admittedly I would be sad if all ICE vehicles were banned but I am open to change. I hope American auto groups can take the reigns and become global leaders again. There is a large sector of people itching for more manufacturing jobs.

chris222 3y ago
Not many people in tech are really aware of how the auto industry works. Mostly the insane lead times on new products. What is out there and for sale now is something that was likely designed 3-5 years ago. You are right to point out the innovation coming out of China in the EV space. Every automaker is currently in a cycle of copying what they are doing for their next wave of products. To the extent that there is an EV “slowdown” right now is basically intentional until the next wave of BEVs starts coming out which are way more cost competitive. As I pointed out in another comment the main driver is large format LFP prismatic cells in a cell-to-pack configuration. BYD blade and CATL qilin are examples to study.

evanelias 3y ago

Meanwhile, New Jersey (one of the eight states mentioned here) just passed a law that increases the annual registration fee for EVs by $250/year, with automatic increases to this amount each year. And since new car buyers in NJ have to pay 4 years registration upfront, that's an extra upfront payment of $1000+ when buying a new EV. The governor's budget also proposes eliminating the state's sales tax exemption for EVs (one of the few reliable EV incentives in NJ), which will effectively increase their upfront cost by another several thousand dollars. I should mention the state does have a $5000 tax credit for new EVs. But it goes in and out of effect completely unpredictably, as funding runs out each year and then is reinstated arbitrarily some time the next year. And this is all happening while EV sales are not doing well to begin with. There's basically no chance the ICE ban will happen as planned there. And this is a blue state, with (iirc) ~40% nuclear and 10% renewable energy.

dzhiurgis 3y ago
In NZ new right government (congratulated by Musk himself) scrapped incentives and slapped $80nzd per 1000km tax. Which is twice of phev or same as 7000lbs diesel truck.
ryathal 3y ago
Removing incentives for EVs has to happen eventually, especially if ICE cars get banned. Something has to replace that loss in revenue.
- evanelias 3y ago
  Eventually, sure. But 11 years ahead of the supposed ICE ban? When EV sales already aren't growing with those incentives in place? All this will accomplish is ensuring the ICE ban never happens. Also, this is more than "removing incentives" -- it's an outright EV penalty. The increase in registration fee for EVs is roughly double what the most popular ICE car (Honda CRV) pays in annual gas taxes in the state, according to Gothamist/NPR https://gothamist.com/news/what-drivers-need-to-know-as-nj-makes-electric-vehicles-more-expensive https://gothamist.com/news/what-drivers-need-to-know-as-nj-m...

ajdude 3y ago

A few of these are northern states like New York in Massachusetts. Do electric cars still have issues if the weather is cold enough? We got some pretty bitter winters lately.

timbit42 3y ago
You lose some range. How much depends on the brand/model of the vehicle. Some lose quite a bit, some lose hardly any. Of course, ICEVs lose quite a bit of range in cold weather too.