- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Instead of essentially requiring automakers to rapidly ramp up sales of electric vehicles over the next few years, the administration would give car manufacturers more time, with a sharp increase in sales not required until after 2030
…
Ali Zaidi, Mr. Biden’s senior climate adviser, declined to discuss the details of the final regulation. But he said in an interview that Mr. Biden’s climate policies, combined with record federal investment in renewable energy, would still help to reach the president’s goal of cutting the country’s greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030.
You must log in or # to comment.
That’s fine. I’m sure the climate can wait for car manufacturers to be ready.
Remember when they talked about doing it 25 years ago and it was ‘by 2025’? Kick the can seems to still be our legislators’ favorite game.
If Gore was president in 2000, the above might have been true.
GOP fuckery in Florida and a GOP supreme court made sure it wasent.
They know they’ll be dead from old age before it affects them. Plus, the dirty money checks keep clearing, so they have no incentive.
If we had today’s battery technology 25 years ago and anything close to the charging infrastructure we have today (which is still grossly inadequate) The conversation might be different.  But, yes, we really should’ve gotten started a lot earlier.
It’s already too late.
Good, now move those investments into battery technology, push for Right to Repair on evs (especially batteries), & encourage level 1 & 2 infrastructure so people in multifamily buildings can charge at their places if not here & there at their work or at stores, since most building owners may actually consider it then.
That would do so much more to get EVs on the road.
Who would spend money on that stuff if you don’t need it yet. This approach is completely unrealistic. If you build an expectation of widespread ownership, they will come. We’re abandoning the approach likely to have worked best.
Some missing pieces might be regulations or incentives encouraging chargers at apartments and HOAs.
… “This approach is completely unrealistic”
Proceeds as a “missing piece” to basically give an example of what i said. Installing superchargers at most apartments is quite unrealistic, but level 2 & 1 charging will be affordable.
What about anything I said is actually unrealistic? The US government investing in battery tech for cheaper cars?
Incentives for apartments, condos, stores etc to install charging infrastructure so ev owners will never have to think “can I charge my car? And if so where?”
Right to repair so people driving used EVs will know for sure that not only can they guarantee a battery replacement or other part on their 2014 tesla model S, Ford Fiesta Electric, Chevy Bolt, of VW e-Golf, but that the parts & service won’t cost $20k?
Please enlighten me.
Good, now move those investments into …
What’s unrealistic is supporting the proposal to slow down adoption of EVs and think anyone would invest in infrastructure. You have great ideas that would really help adoption of EVs, except for the part of putting EVs on hold
I said “Good” because at the moment most EVs released in the USA are either gimped in some way like the bolt (55kw) or leaf (most leafs: 100 miles) or are expensive 50-70k luxury performance gods that a 7k govt discount isn’t going to make much more popular with the average earning or price-conscious person, ignoring dealerships, potential insurance rate hikes (heard this was a thing), ev road taxes (wtf), etc are thrown in the way.
I ignored the evs on hold part because even without govt funding for infrastructure & whatnot, EVs & car sales are still as “free” of a market as during the GM EV1 days, & as such EVs will keep coming forth unless Ford, GM, Chevy, etc want their lunch eaten by Rivian, Tesla, Lucid, Fisker & friends.
As consumer reports said, potentially about 1/3rd of Americans have significant interest in purchasing an EV. Being the pessemist I am, and only looking at the 14% of definitely buy on how many car owners there are (230 million or so), that’s still, at this point with all that is there today, at least 30 million people. As prices fall & used evs become more available, that number will rise significantly as it has in years past, and adoption of then subsidized & simple infrastructure will become a more financially advantageous investment than ever before.
In the end, I wasn’t actually asking for a halt or cooling to EV sales. I was asking for a reevaluation of current plans & methods of encouraging adoption.
As you said, most EVs are too expensive. However they’ve been coming down in price, Tesla started a price war, and several manufacturers have more affordable models planned for the next couple years
The incentives put it over the line, especially if you have state in addition to federal.
Charging is quite reasonable for those who own a house, although admittedly more difficult and expensive for everyone else
Honestly, i think our biggest difference is where we look. I am looking at people who cant easily afford a new car period and have to maintain what they got. The 7k tax credit doesn’t really help them. It helps the middle class where a 40k car with 7-10k tax credit sounds like a nice option.
Right now, im confident that if the coming cheaper cars flood in en masse, at first they’ll be bought by the people who took interest with the 7k tax credit, and then as they get sold & enter the used market they’ll be accepted by lower income families looking to save money on fuel and servicing over the years by fixing stuff themselves & just having less stuff which needs fixing.
I am of that income level, so there’s that too.
Democrats’ shoulder demons are like “NO! Not timid enough!”
Democrats’ shoulder angels drank themselves to death long ago.
Weak.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In a concession to automakers and labor unions, the Biden administration intends to relax elements of one of its most ambitious strategies to combat climate change, limits on tailpipe emissions that are designed to get Americans to switch from gas-powered cars to electric vehicles, according to three people familiar with the plan.
Sensing an opening, former President Donald J. Trump, the Republican front-runner, has seized on electric cars, falsely warning the public that they “don’t work” and telling autoworkers that Mr. Biden’s policies are “lunacy” that he would extinguish on “the first day” of his return to the White House.
But he said in an interview that Mr. Biden’s climate policies, combined with record federal investment in renewable energy, would still help to reach the president’s goal of cutting the country’s greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030.
Still, experts say it’s uncertain whether Mr. Biden can meet his twin goals of cutting the country’s greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and eliminating them by 2050, a target that scientists say all nations must achieve to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate change.
In public comments it filed regarding the proposed rule, the United Auto Workers pressed the Biden administration to relax the compliance timeline so that it “increases stringency more gradually, and occurs over a greater period of time.” Union leaders repeated that request in discussions with senior White House officials, including Mr. Zaidi, over the past six months.
Last fall, when the union went on strike against Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, in part over fears about the industry’s transition to electric vehicles, Mr. Biden sought to assuage their concerns and became the first president to stand with workers on the picket line.
The original article contains 1,698 words, the summary contains 287 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Oh boy, the car companies have more time to churn out more boring electric CUVs with gimmicky features and data harvesting.
Maybe electric car sales are slow because they’re too expensive and also kinda suck.
Bury the news you don’t want people to see on a Friday night/Saturday morning.
