New Jersey Moves To Ban New Gas Powered Vehicle Sales From 2035 (motor1.com) 219
Brian Silvestro reports via Motor1.com: New Jersey announced a new rule set on Wednesday laying out plans to transition sales of light-duty vehicles in the state to 100-percent zero-emission by 2035. According to a statement released by the office of governor Phil Murphy, the law, titled the Advanced Clean Cars II rule, will come into effect starting in 2027, where manufacturers must ensure that zero-emissions vehicles represent 42 percent of sales in the state. That percentage will climb with each year until 2035, when it reaches 100 percent. Currently, EVs represent roughly 12 percent of all new vehicle sales, according to the governor's office.
The new law will also put more stringent standards in place for traditional ICE-powered vehicles, with the goal of improving air quality in New Jersey communities and high-traffic corridors. While the announcement does not directly mention investment into charging infrastructure, the governor's office points out its continued dedication to providing adequate charging locations across the state, claiming it has helped fund the installment of 2,980 charging stations with 5,271 ports at 680 locations. New Jersey is the ninth state to enact a ban on future ICE car sales, joining California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.
The new law will also put more stringent standards in place for traditional ICE-powered vehicles, with the goal of improving air quality in New Jersey communities and high-traffic corridors. While the announcement does not directly mention investment into charging infrastructure, the governor's office points out its continued dedication to providing adequate charging locations across the state, claiming it has helped fund the installment of 2,980 charging stations with 5,271 ports at 680 locations. New Jersey is the ninth state to enact a ban on future ICE car sales, joining California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.
Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:5, Insightful)
The only way car companies can guarantee a certain percentage of new sales is an EV is by either selling fewer ICE or dramatically cutting prices on EV to get them out the door. This command economy thing is crazy ass Soviet style bullshit.
If people really wanted them, they'd buy them.
I love my 3 but it's not ready for prime time for every random non techie to deal with. If it isn't as easy as ICE by the time these mandates come into effect they're going to fuck the car market.
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:2)
I mean if you wanna wait for someone overseas to fuck things up in such a way that you need to buy an EV that's your prerogative, but I distinctly recall a lot of vandalized gas pumps early into the Ukraine war.
Re: (Score:2)
but I distinctly recall a lot of vandalized gas pumps early into the Ukraine war.
The only vandalized gas pumps I've seen are the ones covered in that obnoxious sticker [amazon.com] of Biden saying "I did that".
To my right wing friends: It's cute and all, gets a chuckle out of me even though I like Biden, but all you're really doing is making life miserable for the working stiff that gets to scrape the sticker off the pump.
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:5, Insightful)
The 'asshole' is the one that thinks making work for some poor bastard earning barely minimum wage at a gas station is some form of meaningful political protest. It's not. You're just an asshole.
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:3)
The conservative movement is one that is decidedly pro authoritarian. Please show me a country whose democracy and freedoms were strengthened under a conservative government in the past 20 years?
US? No. Bush brought in the Patriot act, Trump instigated an insurrection. UK? No. Their PM is unelected, some ministers aren't even MPs. The country is a wreck because of Brexit. Canada? Harper censored scientists and sold the country to China. Israel? Netanyahu weakened the judiciary and consolidated power into th
Re: (Score:2)
If you think its just the right wing who are pro authoritarian you might want to catch up on the last 100 years of world history then get back to us.
Re NZ - check out how liberal Jacinda Ardern was when push came to shove. Most liberals are a ball of spikes covered in fluff.
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:2)
Ok. But in the past 20 years and the current trend is what it is unless you can demonstrate otherwise.
Re: (Score:2)
Cuba, China, Vietnam, Venezuela, North Korea, Belarus, South africa and those are just off the top of my head,
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:2)
Belarus is absolutely a right wing government.
But I asked you to show me conservative countries that are improving, not pseudo-commie countries that aren't. Stop deflecting
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it was the fact that you had to make up something like pedophilia to pull ahead of the "winning" candidate you lot want to put up.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Yeah, about that [people.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean if you wanna wait for someone overseas to fuck things up in such a way that you need to buy an EV that's your prerogative, but I distinctly recall a lot of vandalized gas pumps early into the Ukraine war.
Could you be more specific on the kind of vandalism? If this is graffiti getting spray pained onto them then that is just rude and annoying. If this is breaking things to render the pumps no longer functional then that's likely a tactic of Russian sympathizers trying to deny anyone access to fuel needed to resist the invasion. It is also possibly a tactic of the Ukraine military denying access to the fuel for Russians if they believe the territory would be lost to them.
In either case I expect that if the
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:4, Interesting)
In an emergency, an ICE car would be much better than an EV. I can have some gas cans with enough gas in them to get out of the danger area. Even if gas stations do not work, I can use that gas. A 20L can of gas does not weight a lot, takes up little space, but could get me quite far.
OTOH, with an EV, you need charging stations. If those do not work, you can charge from any electrical outlet, but it will take a long time. There is no practical way to have some spare batteries or a generator to charge an EV in an emergency..
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:2)
If by "practical", you mean cheap, maybe. But if by "practical", you mean simple, then solar panels are a very practical way to charge an EV in an emergency. Much more practical than relying on gas.
Re: (Score:2)
Emergency probably means that I would not have the hours needed for the car to charge. Solar panels are great for normal use, but imagine having to get in your car and run away at a short notice (got woken up by bombs falling near you). It may not even be sunny at the time.
Grab some gas cans, throw them in the trunk and go. With an EV though...
OTOH, if the emergency means no fuel or electricity, but no immediate danger, an electric car and solar panel combination would last longer (especially in the summer)
Re: (Score:2)
Normally my car has about half tank of LPG (good enough for about 150km) and about half tank of gasoline (good enough probably for 300km) and a 25L can of gasoline in the garage (probably would be good for 200km).
It would probably be enough to get out of the immediate danger area.and then go find a gas station. Though if things look bad or there's an upcoming gas price hike I have more than 25L of gas in cans.
There's always a tradeoff. I can fill up the gas tank quickly, so a gas station can serve a lot of
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If by "practical", you mean cheap, maybe. But if by "practical", you mean simple, then solar panels are a very practical way to charge an EV in an emergency. Much more practical than relying on gas.
You think charging a car by solar is a viable solution in an emergency? You're talking to the generation who ain't got time for a 30-second commercial.
But hey, I'm all for people testing out their emergency plans, so go ahead. Report back and tell us exactly how many days it takes for you to define "very practical". Since we're talking about some kind of massive power outage, I'd say the internet addiction is going to set in a hell of a lot faster, so I sure as hell hope you have a case of whine in the t
Re: (Score:2)
Why would a non-techie have trouble driving one?
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Driving one? No trouble. Paying for one? Hard pass man. My 22 Jetta cost ~22k and gets nearly 600 miles to a tank of gas. The entry level Leaf trim costs more and gets about a quarter the range. The better Leaf trim costs more than the Jetta + a lifetime of gasoline.
It might be easier for people that are used to paying for luxury cars or SUVs to rationalize the cost of an EV. I've never owned anything more than entry level Sedans. When will EVs compete with that price-point? :(
Re: (Score:2)
The thing is in many countries the arguments about cost and range are no longer valid for the average new car buyer, as of earlier this year. The fact the Tesla Model Y outsold the Toyota Coro
Re: (Score:2)
The Model Y is 10k+ more than my Jetta in the States. Still more than I am willing to spend on a car. And I actually could afford it. Many people would not be able to.
Re: (Score:2)
I won't deny there's a significant number of people that buy a huge vehicle that's massive overkill just because they might actually need the extra size once every couple of years. But most people are more practical in what they buy, and electrics are great for them.
The batteries almost always outlast the useful life of the car, so the replacement cost is pretty much irrelevant. Nissan even started selling used batteries from Leafs no longer in use. They found people typically replace the cars after 10 year
Re: (Score:2)
I won't deny there's a significant number of people that buy a huge vehicle that's massive overkill just because they might actually need the extra size once every couple of years. But most people are more practical in what they buy, and electrics are great for them.
The batteries almost always outlast the useful life of the car, so the replacement cost is pretty much irrelevant. Nissan even started selling used batteries from Leafs no longer in use. They found people typically replace the cars after 10 years and the batteries still hold over 80% of the original capacity. The rest of the car is going to wear out before the batteries do.
Let me get this straight. You're going to pay a 20 - 50% premium for an EV, only to find that expensive investment being treated like every other disposable electronic device sold today, with a "useful" life of only 10 fucking years? Paying a car payment for well over half the estimated life? Fuck that pseudo-lease nonsense. I'll continue to turn a DIY wrench and keep my cars alive a hell of a lot longer than that.
On top of that, the fuck do you mean "wear out"? What happened to this big sales tactic o
Re: (Score:2)
As with all new tech, as consumer adoption grows, economies of scale kick in, and prices come down. We are about five years away from the price point you're talking about
Re: (Score:2)
As with all new tech, as consumer adoption grows, economies of scale kick in, and prices come down. We are about five years away from the price point you're talking about
Well I guess we all better hope Elon stops getting shit on long enough to do that, since the competition has pissed away billions trying and failing to make EVs at the scale that will demand a reasonable price tag, and without Daddy Government stepping in with Too Big To Fail subsidies at the expense of the taxpayer.
Finding electric vehicles measured in "horse" power, re-inventing the cart-before-the-horse problem with an utter lack of infrastructure. How ironically human. Let's hope those price-per-watt
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not convinced that most automakers (with the exception of Tesla or perhaps Kia/Hyundai) will be ready to commit to full EV production by 2035. Many of the first-generation EV's from the likes of Ford and Stellantis were mostly failures, with either high price tags or pathetic range.
Plus, a $40,000 Tesla Model 3 is a tough sell when you can get a gas-powered Toyota Corolla or Honda Civic for $23,000. I don't see true mass market demand for EV's happening until they're near the same price point with a sim
Re: (Score:2)
Failures or not, they are selling reasonably well. Peugeot e208 is one of the best selling electric cars in Europe even though it is inefficient and has a pathetic range, especially when it gets colder. Even I drive that clunker.
Re: (Score:2)
Failures or not, they are selling reasonably well. Peugeot e208 is one of the best selling electric cars in Europe even though it is inefficient and has a pathetic range, especially when it gets colder. Even I drive that clunker.
With tactics like that, I can already envision consumers gathering 'round the sales lot to enjoy the steam coming off that shitpile of a solution...
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is the price, you know. If you want an electric car and aren't rich, you either get a French marvel of shitty engineering or some weird brand from China. For anything better you have to pay through the nose.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is the price, you know. If you want an electric car and aren't rich, you either get a French marvel of shitty engineering or some weird brand from China. For anything better you have to pay through the nose.
Or one could just settle for a reasonably priced ICE solution, at half the cost and twice the reliability and convenience.
Kind of a bitch to sell a planet on EVs when you're replacing shitty engineering twice as often, while filling landfills. If we thought a tire fire would burn for a while, just wait until those lithium fires become all the rage...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...or dramatically cutting prices on EV to get them out the door.
Force Detroit to invest in EVs, all so they can claim horrible losses due to overpriced EV crap that doesn't have the infrastructure, and then turn around and threaten the US economy in order to demand a bailout because Too Big To Fail legal precedent, at the expense of every taxpayer? Again?
Fuck that fucking bullshit. - Taxpayers
Re:Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:4, Informative)
Privatize success and socialize losses. That's what passes for American capitalism these days.
Re: (Score:2)
What will happen is what GM is doing with some of their Buicks and Cadillacs, like the Buick Envision. Import the EVs from China, rebadge them. Priced Chinese cars? You can get a Maybach-tier luxury car from Hongqi (the car maker that made Xi's N701 limo) for $70k. The US car market is so overpriced that if China did set foot in the US market, they would do what Japanese makers did in the '70s and '80s, offer insane quality for prices that are affordable by average people.
Will we see domestic jobs happe
Re: (Score:2)
What will happen is what GM is doing with some of their Buicks and Cadillacs, like the Buick Envision. Import the EVs from China, rebadge them. Priced Chinese cars? You can get a Maybach-tier luxury car from Hongqi (the car maker that made Xi's N701 limo) for $70k. The US car market is so overpriced that if China did set foot in the US market, they would do what Japanese makers did in the '70s and '80s, offer insane quality for prices that are affordable by average people.
Will we see domestic jobs happen, which is the real expected result from EV investment? Nope. It will head off to China.
Uh, insane quality? You do realize where a planet buys most of its disposable product from, right? Not exactly the stuff we brag about lasting decades. China even exploits their own economy by making disposable product that is rapidly replaced.
But hey, let's see how many offer that Chinese EV with a 15-year bumper to bumper warranty at half the cost and 30% more range.
Re: (Score:3)
I was comparing the Japanese imports to what the domestics had at the time. If you compared an Accord CVCC to a Chevette, one could use the term "insane" for the quality gap.
China seems to be doing a job with their import vehicles, otherwise, GM would be being crucified by stockholders and the public at large for their imports of the Envision and other vehicles.
The big issue is the price gap. If you go to Mexico, China, or other parts of the world, you will find the same or similar models for a lot less.
Re: (Score:2)
I was comparing the Japanese imports to what the domestics had at the time. If you compared an Accord CVCC to a Chevette, one could use the term "insane" for the quality gap.
I'm comparing the disposable shit we get today out of China. Yesteryear only matters to historians. And we're talking about electronics here with EVs, not forged piston and flat-plane crankshaft strength. If China provides a 15 to 20-year bumper-to-bumper warranty on EVs and manages to prove that reliability a couple decades from now, then we can sit around and talk about "insane" gaps like we do Japan today, which is an entirely different culture when it comes to quality and reliability. Needless to sa
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well I guess it depends on the "random non techie" but my 80 year old mother was finding going to the gas station a problem, she would get one of us kids fill it for her because she was finding it too difficult. She doesn't seem to have much trouble plugging in the Nissan Leaf she replace her old ICEV with.
What kind of problems was she having? I could guess that it could be a bit of a frustration operating the pump with it's increasing complexity on payment options, and security against people driving off without paying and/or credit card fraud. I can also imagine a matter of manipulating the pump handle, such as lacking hand strength to comfortably open the valve. In either case I expect she'd have problems with a public EV charging station for all the same reasons, though not opening a valve exactly but
Re: (Score:2)
The usability of public EV charging has been a week point and I can understand why non-technical people would struggle with it
Re: (Score:2)
If people really wanted them, they'd buy them.
Not how it works. Many people make purchasing decisions (or life decisions in general) based on an overwhelming amount of ignorance on any topic. If you asked people what *they* want the dumbnuts would still prefer to be huffing lead paint fumes and say catalytic converters are the devil.
It's impossible to change an entrenched mindset of a population. Regulating away a purchasing option forces the issue, and people largely at the end wake up and realise their world didn't end when ${evilthing} suddenly got
Re: (Score:2)
If people really wanted them, they'd buy them.
Not how it works. Many people make purchasing decisions (or life decisions in general) based on an overwhelming amount of ignorance on any topic. If you asked people what *they* want the dumbnuts would still prefer to be huffing lead paint fumes and say catalytic converters are the devil.
It's impossible to change an entrenched mindset of a population.
It's also apparently impossible to get people to stop exaggerating greatly about what the masses "prefer". 95% of consumers don't even know where their catalytic converter is, much less know what it does. And I'm being conservative with that estimate. It's not even remotely "popular" to go home from the dealership with your new car and rip out the cat like you're tearing off the plastic from the back seat.
If mindsets were that impossible and entrenched, all EV makers would have failed miserably by now.
Re: (Score:2)
Right now, the technology is still not yet completely mature. Just wait until battery chemistry is available by 2026, which will finally allow battery packs to dramatically shrink in size. Not to mention near universal adoption of SAE J3400 (Tesla NACS) plug for DC charging stations.
Re: Forced sales will lead to fewer overall sales (Score:2)
The thing is we already tried this in the past. Itâ(TM)s called the CAFE rules and the reason why Americans drive SUV instead of smaller more efficient cars. Smaller more efficient cars (EVs in this case) became more expensive than commercial vehicles, so you just bolt a passenger cabin on a commercial truck base and you get a cheaper vehicle.
Given we donâ(TM)t have any feasible commercial vehicle EV, I foresee NJ will drive a lot of F350s soon.
No Self Charging (Score:2)
Light duty (Score:2)
Time to start looking for a deal on a Kodiak pickup truck.
Light duty vehicle (Score:3)
That little phrase explains it all. I smell the exact kind of unintended consequences that caused station wagons to be replaced with SUVs. For the station wagon disappearance, that was caused by fleet milage mandates which caused station wagons which were considered cars to be replaced by SUVs which were considered trucks. Too bad the SUVs had lower mpg than the station wagons. Now, I suspect that people will purchase heavy duty vehicles instead of light duty just to avoid this silly mandate.
The problem is not the ICE, it is the fuel. (Score:3)
These bans on ICEVs doesn't account for zero carbon fuels. Ethanol fuel is already a thing and that is zero carbon.
But then the claim would be that this is about VOCs and NOx, not just CO2. With modern catalytic converters and air filters on ICEVs the tailpipe exhaust is cleaner than the air coming in, it's devoid of oxygen but also filtered of all manner of particles in the air. (I feel I have to add that because if I merely point out that it is clean then some wiseguy will suggest I suck on a tailpipe to prove how clean the air is. I know that it's not going to have enough oxygen to sustain life but it's also not going to have tire and brake dust, pollen, and all manner of things that would irritate the lungs.)
Even if the people involved could prove this law would clean up the air there's a very practical problem that there's not likely to be enough EVs produced to go around. If these policies remain relatively limited then it means EVs that would have normally sold elsewhere would instead be sold in New Jersey. If this was a rule adopted universally then we'd have shortages of production. We just can't ramp up mining and manufacturing fast enough to produce the volume of batteries required.
I expect that many of these laws mandating EV use will get repealed in a few years as reality comes into conflict with policy. I can see in the comments posted so far that these policies are not popular, and Slashdot is a forum that has a membership that self selects to lean in favor of new tech and such that should be more approving of such policies.
I'd normally invoke my rule that any law with an effective date that is 8 years or more in the future as being a fantasy, because politicians rarely expect to still be in office after 8 years, but it appears that in this case the mandates take effect in stages with the 2035 date being the date of the last stage. It appears that the first stage of the rule takes effect in four years, and even then that is butting up against the line on politicians putting in laws that they may not be in office to enforce when it comes into effect. Assuming a state senator serves a six year term then there's some that may have to answer for this policy if it doesn't go over well. For any other politician they can make up some excuse to bow out of a future re-election campaign if this comes back to bite them, then perhaps try again in a couple years after people forget about the unpopular law. This means avoiding a record of losing an election, which looks bad for running again for public office.
In short, I expect this and similar rules to lose popularity when they actually come into effect and people are faced with rising costs of vehicle ownership and the limitations of battery-electric vehicles. I'm sure it sounds great now with the promise of new technology offering lower costs and increased performance but I have doubts that we will see this happen, we are already hitting physical limits so there won't be the big leaps in performance we've seen previously any more.
Re: (Score:2)
ICE cars are way less effective in real-world driving conditions than you give them credit for, in removing particulates and polluting gases. Better than previously, sure, but not actually good. On top of that, ICE vehicles are noisy and cause vibration damage. Both of those are inherent issues, and EVs don't suffer from either one. Noise pollution from ICE vehicles is a significant cause of human morbidity and mortality. We could all benefit from a quieter world.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Batteries are way less effective energy storage devices for vehicles than is often claimed so we will be stuck with the ICE for some time. Also, having electric propulsion and having an ICE are not mutually exclusive, a marriage of technologies that goes back something like 100 years. Put a small battery with the electric propulsion and ICE and people can have a quiet commute on all electric power, assuming they remember to plug in for a recharge most every night. This kind of driving also keeps most of
Re: The problem is not the ICE, it is the fuel. (Score:2)
Most modern ICE vehicle is no more noisy than an EV. Vibration is caused by rotating parts, which the EV has plenty of. You can vibrate an electric motor just as hard as a diesel. As EVs deteriorate they too will start generating more noise and vibrations as bearings, gears, transmissions and differentials start wearing.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd normally invoke my rule that any law with an effective date that is 8 years or more in the future as being a fantasy, because politicians rarely expect to still be in office after 8 years...
Uh, what country are you reporting from that you assume politicians don't like their cushy gig with insider trading benefits and kickbacks, for longer than 8 years?
I fully expect a former bartender to become an old maid while holding office for the next half century. Here's a aging glimpse of the problem:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/29... [cnn.com]
You don't get average ages like that because they have a time machine in the back room.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact most of these bans do account for non-electric zero emission vehicles. For example, all the bans in Europe are based on emissions of 0g CO2, not mandating any particular fuel or engine type. If you can show that combusting your fuel doesn't produce any CO2, go ahead.
At the current rate of EV growth there will be more than enough to go around. They are also an important part of helping balance future low emissions electricity grids.
More states may as well jump on the bandwagon, because with Europe an
Re: (Score:2)
These bans on ICEVs doesn't account for zero carbon fuels. Ethanol fuel is already a thing and that is zero carbon.
Ethanol is far from zero carbon. Even the Iowa Farm Bureau [iowafarmbureau.com] (which wants to sell corn ethanol) claims that it's 40-50% of the CO2 compared to normal gasoline.
Meanwhile, another study [reuters.com] says that it's worse that gasoline, due to land use changes. I know that my vehicles in the past would get less mileage with ethanol gas. If you get 10% less mileage on E10 gasoline, is the ethanol really helping?
Re: (Score:2)
Ethanol fuel is massively carbon positive due to the amount of fossil fuel emissions required to plant, fertilize, harvest, and process the corn. And then of course it only constitutes a few percent of ICE fuel blend anyways. All your other claims are similarly bogus.
Oh boy (Score:2)
Here we go again.
Symbolic (Score:2)
When 2035 rolls around, if manufacturing of EVs hasn't reached the scale necessary to comply with the ban of ICE cars, the date will be extended.
Re: New Jersey is small (Score:4, Informative)
For a while, maybe, but it won't be the same amount.
Re: New Jersey is small (Score:5, Interesting)
The price of ICE cars will rise as production volume declines.
Gasoline will also be more expensive. Once most people are driving EVs, there will be little political resistance to jacking up gas taxes on the minority.
ICE drivers will be treated like cigarette smokers and hit with similar "sin taxes".
Re: (Score:2)
The price of ICE cars will rise as production volume declines.
I'm pretty sure that is not how a free market works. Prices tend to go up with increasing demand. This price increase tends to increase production since it means there's more profit motive. If production is going down then it is because people aren't buying product, and that usually comes after a price decline in an effort to maintain demand.
If prices are going up with declining production volume then there's something odd going on. I'm not saying this can't happen, only that it would take something mor
Re: New Jersey is small (Score:4, Informative)
One of the big things we've seen in other countries is that once you pass a certain percentage of car sales being electrics, it makes sense to favor electric car production as you build or renovate factories. Once you start migrating the assembly lines more toward electrics, costs start to go down on the electrics and up on the ICE cars.
We've seen this happen over and over in technology. A newer tech comes out that improves on an older one. Say a new type of memory comes out. The new memory is much more expensive than the older memory at first and in limited supply. It starts to get cheaper and becomes more common. Then demand shifts to the newer memory, and production lines shift to match. Prices go down more, and prices go up on the older memory. Now the older memory is the more expensive type, with the prices increasing as it heads on its journey toward being obsolete.
The lifespan of cars is a lot longer than that of computer memory, so the cycle will take longer to play out, but we're seeing signs of it already.
Re: (Score:2)
The lifespan of cars is a lot longer than that of computer memory, so the cycle will take longer to play out, but we're seeing signs of it already.
Less so as time goes by. Apparently the average age of cars on the road in the UK is 8.4 years, which is a record high. that's some what surprising as I assumed it would be older since cars don't just instantly fall apart.
That's I assume older than the average PC, but those are beginning to age up. I'm a cheerful turbonerd and my daily PC from which I rant on sla
Re: (Score:2)
The old cars don't instantly fall apart, but expensive components begin to fail and older cars tend to rust.
Re: (Score:2)
The old cars don't instantly fall apart, but expensive components begin to fail and older cars tend to rust.
Yep, still surprised they're not averaging 10 years though. Though I only had a car in New Mexico, where (a) nothing rusts and (b) there are no equivalents to the MOT so ancient death traps are all over the place.
Re: (Score:2)
What we really need now are more battery repair options. They are becoming more common in Norway, but we need to get to the point where out-of-warranty replacement of a couple of cells is pretty cheap.
Used packs themselves are very low cost now. The issue is that so much labour is involved in doing anything useful with them, it's only hobbyists who can really be bothered.
Re: (Score:2)
>> Prices tend to go up with increasing demand.
Yes, prices tend to go down with decreasing demand.
BUT
Prices also tend to go up with decreasing production. A lot.
and there is not much margin in car production, so it is more likely that factories will close, and therefore the remaining factories see huge spikes in demand despite falling market for ICE vehicles, and therefore, increase prices.
Re: (Score:3)
Prices also tend to go up with decreasing production. A lot.
Why would production be reduced if people are still buying? To force the prices higher? That only works if all the automakers collude to force ICEV prices higher, or there's some government imposed limit on production. If this price hike gets bad enough then any government imposition will fall away and automakers will restore production, because doing otherwise means politicians lose elections and automakers lose money.
It looks to me like the EV fanboys are dreaming up scenarios where ICEVs become obsole
Obsolescence is here. (Score:3)
>> ICEVs become obsolete
Cost for the vehicle is similar.
Maintenance and fuel is 1/3.
Obsolescence is already here.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Supply vs Demand (Score:2)
Prices tend to vary at a much more complex rate than "more demand equals higher". That's what tends to happen if you have a demand spike, but over time things get more complex. You're missing economy of scale, basically.
The actual price of things tends to follow a "U" shape more. As in the price starts extremely high, then drops, and only increases at some point in the future. Where these levels are depends on many, many factors.
For example, let's say that we were to produce exactly ONE car in the world
Re: (Score:2)
>> a nightmare to me will be all over by fall 2024.
Yeah. Nope.
You can stay on old tech, but economics will get you to switch on the long run....
I heard horses are better than those newfangled stinking gasoline cars
Re: New Jersey is small (Score:2)
The problem is that EVs will have to follow said onerous tax increases as most EV depend on ICE to be produced, transported and maintained. If youâ(TM)re going to implement CAFE style rules where trucks are exempt because you want to push EV for âregular peopleâ(TM), then you get CAFE style results (yes, weâ(TM)ve tried the solution you propose before) where everyone is driving SUVs because they are cheaper than smaller more efficient cars because onerous regulation and taxation.
Re: (Score:2)
So make it such that any vehicle which is privately owned and not used for a business will have to be EV only or get taxed sky high. Does not matter if it's a small sedan, SUV or even a truck.
Exemptions should only be for tractors and other vehicles owned by a business.
Re: (Score:2)
"I rather they start a tax on ICE cars from 2035 onwards. Call it 30% of the vehicle cost. And over the years increase the %, so maybe will be 100% in 10 years. And keep on increasing until people decide it's not worth buying ICE anymore."
*illionaires don't care about such 'fees', just like they ignore the extra 'fee' when buying 20 million flats.
Not to mention, that their car would be exempt anyway, since it is owned by one of their 'charities'.
This is much fairer.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You are not supposed to in most states, but it's easy to register another vehicle in another state as long as you have a verifiable address to give there. It remains un-prosecuted or investigated so far as much as I can tell.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Their next trick will be to deny registration of ICE vehicles made after a certain year.
Re: (Score:2)
After?
Fine with me. I've got a couple of 45 year-old cars I still enjoy driving.
ICE vehicles made before a certain year makes more sense. Except that my cars are so old they no longer require registration.
Re: New Jersey is small (Score:3)
Cuba is still driving 1950s cars because of similar laws and regulations.
Re:New Jersey is small (Score:5, Informative)
Electrics are growing in popularity here in NJ. Obviously still a small part of the market, but you spot them pretty often now and they keep becoming more common. You can see the uptake getting faster.
I dunno if we'll match the schedule proposed here, but it doesn't sound crazy.
Re: (Score:2)
Try visiting the northeast part of the state, where most of the people and the money are. There's enough demand that we got a second Tesla store a few miles away from the first a few years ago.
You won't find many electrics in the more rural parts of the state.
Re: (Score:2)
"People will simply buy their vehicles in a neighboring state."
But never be able to register in in Jersey and after a time, fines and impounding.
Re: (Score:2)
Not funny.
Re: (Score:2)
They can't ban driving them if registered elsewhere. Can you imagine the chaos if the 50 States could ban lawfully registered vehicles from elsewhere? Even if that 'elsewhere' is somewhere with lesser emissions and/or safety inspection standards, they can't do it, my vehicle registered in a State with no safety inspection is lawful on the roads in a State with one.
That they could do, is proscribe the registration of ICE vehicles in New Jersey after a certain date, then enforce an in-state registration
Re: (Score:2)
It may not even be entirely legal for them to ban the sales of ICE vehicles on a state-by-state basis under the rules of interstate commerce. Eventually we should expect a legal challenge to these regulations.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:2000 to 1 (Score:4, Informative)
That's the ratio of particles from tires versus emissions. The smog and bad air quality is caused by tire particulate. EVs won't help that. If anything they'll make it worse because EVs are heavier and the amount of tire particulates is a function of the weight of the vehicle.
Okay, first up, a source [emissionsanalytics.com] on what appears to be your claim - they say that tire wear releases 1850 more particles than the come out the tailpipe.
They point out that this is because modern car engines are actually incredibly clean, at least for particulates.
But they're talking about particles, which is only a portion of the pollution that comes from a car. Particles, of course, are actually solid bits/objects that fit within a size range that they don't settle all that quickly. They're the kind of thing that standard air filters are designed to catch.
But these are particles, not the nitrogen oxides [nationalgeographic.org] that react with VOCs and sunlight. They're also not carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide (many today consider this a pollutant).
Also:
An important difference between tire and tailpipe particle emissions is that most of the former is understood to go straight to soil and water, whereas most of the latter is suspended in air for a period, and therefore negatively affects air quality.
tire emissions hit the ground fast, tailpipe emissions get into the air (where you can breath them) much more. Reading more, it seems that most of the particles are actually too big to be a breathing hazard - that's around PM2.5, but of the particles that are below PM10, 92% are between 6-23nm (That would be PM6-23).
My conclusion: The 2k:1 figure is misleading from understanding the harm, given that it concentrates on only ONE pollution type, and that because of various factors, it's less of a deal than the stuff coming out of the tailpipe. However, we have a body of research that shows that this is likely still hazardous, so more research to figure out the actual hazard level, and to develop cleaner alternatives if necessary.
The article I was referred to (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you seriously suggesting that Big Tire is more likely than Big Oil to be funding dodgy studies to show them in a good light?
ICE combustion is self-evidently worse than tire pollution: it contains NOx, SOx, CO, CO2 and particulates that are small enough to stay suspended and get into your lungs and bloodstream. None of that is true for tire pollution. It is massively worse for human health.
Re: (Score:2)
NOx, SOx, CO, CO2 are just gases that aside from CO2 have short half lives in the atmosphere and the particulates from cars are mainly carbon particles.
Meanwhile what you seem to think is harmless tyre residue is artificial rubber (more like specialised plastic these days) particles that get washed into the enviroment and eventually the sea where they settle into the sediment and proceed to fuck up the bottom of the food chain.
This is a serious enviromental issue people are only just waking up to.
Re: The article I was referred to (Score:2)
EV tires (low resistance tires) disintegrate a lot faster (some as fast as 25k miles), you need about 3 sets of tires on an EV for every ICE tire change.
Ouch... (Score:2)
Now I do that once every 3-4 years (I don't drive much, too broke to be going anywhere). I can't imagine if I had to do that every year and it cost more...
I don't see how I'm supposed to afford an EV between tire and battery replacement. I get that the other parts need less maintenance, but I can't do much
It's not residue (Score:2)
No, but both of them will (Score:2)
Re: I hate these fucks (Score:2)
Nuclear power. Even though NJ razed all its coal power plants, it required as a result importing more energy than it produces, in 2022 coal was the source of 14.1 percent of the state's power. 50% was already nuclear but as power consumption increases, NJ isnâ(TM)t building any new nuclear power sources so as a share of total consumption, it is declining.
Re: LPG (Score:2)
Gas in the US is petrol. The US never had a huge contingent of the car bombs that was LPG fueled (or even worse, LPG converted) vehicles. That was another green boondoggle alternative promoted by environmentalists and only ever took off in the EU. We are going to start talking about lithium EV in the same way in just a decade or so.