[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by LogicalApex

You’re now hypothesizing that the legislature and governors of states may be getting it wrong so the federal government needs to step in to “tell them this won’t be tolerated”. Yet, at the same time you are drumming up fear that the current administration will “make bans national”.

You can’t have it both ways. Either you support Federalism or you don’t.

People in IL don’t need to meddle in the politics of CA. Leave that to the Californians.

The current model for ICE bans in the US is the appropriate model for our system. Irrespective of your feelings on the feasibility of reaching the target.

You're reaching aren't you? I know the narrative you're trying to paint and it's totally false. I've said from the outset that if you don't like what's going on then use your power to vote. Period.

You then go on about how elections at the national/Federal level can influence local policy. I gave you an example of that with DC. If the DC council felt so strongly about this bill then they wouldn't have pulled it back and let it run its course through Congress and ultimately the President. They didn't. Even members aligned to the same party in the Senate are siding towards blocking this bill otherwise, it wouldn't make it out of the Senate for Presidential signature.

And I won't even go on about how you feel the ICE bans are appropriate as there are tons of posts with facts in this thread that say otherwise.

[zx10guy]

Originally Posted by Patton250

The absolute funniest of all these is California. These dudes have rolling blackouts left and right already. Can you imagine if just 20% of the cars were electric in that state? Actually, to be honest, I think it would be hilarious to watch.

I don’t know what’s so complicated to understand that nuclear is the most green energy of all. The whole country should be powered by nuclear. Instead, they’d rather kill birds with windmills and prevent spawning salmon from migrating with hydroelectric.

Oh and don't forget that it seems whales are being affected by these offshore windmill projects.

With respect to windmills and birds, a friend recently told me they were in Hawaii for vacation. During one of these tour guides, the guide talked about the windmills built there. That they don't even run at anywhere near capacity because they have to monitor some birds there and shut down the windmills when the birds are flying by them.

[MmmmmM2]

This thread doesn't disappoint!

[KRS_SN]

12 years until 2035 and somehow expecting a great green revolution (in the background of a long future recession) which requires giga billions(to borrow a term) of new investment is just a ideological fantasy.

In a lighter vein by 2035 greta and how dare you gang would have become adults and moved on with life and probably the government can roll things back without school strikes.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I think we had this discussion earlier... BUT, for manufacturers to build to 50 different emissions regs would be economically not viable, so a Federal standard makes the most sense. Why California was grandfathered in with its CARB I don't know the details; size of auto sales and unique topology I guess. Why the Feds let other states piggyback on Cali is a mystery.

IMO, I think Federalism took a big hit with the 17th Amendment...

Car makers are already pressed to build BEVs for China, the EU, and many other extremely large markets that currently have ICE bans on the books starting in 2035. The ICE ban in US states like CA allows them to use cars destined for those markets to easily comply and reach economies of scale.

The challenge for other states and those who oppose BEVs is that reality. With the world’s largest markets going BEV and some states going BEV as well it might become economically challenging to offer affordable ICE vehicles in the future. As the economies of scale will flip toward BEV and away from ICE. People hoping to toss out the CA ICE ban or block it with a national mandate are hoping to use the large US market as a way to keep some economies of scale and manufacturer interest in place.

The US is a large and diverse market that has unique challenges on a per-state basis. The Federalism model is the best way to handle the EV transition IMHO.

Originally Posted by zx10guy

You're reaching aren't you? I know the narrative you're trying to paint and it's totally false. I've said from the outset that if you don't like what's going on then use your power to vote. Period.

You then go on about how elections at the national/Federal level can influence local policy. I gave you an example of that with DC. If the DC council felt so strongly about this bill then they wouldn't have pulled it back and let it run its course through Congress and ultimately the President. They didn't. Even members aligned to the same party in the Senate are siding towards blocking this bill otherwise, it wouldn't make it out of the Senate for Presidential signature.

And I won't even go on about how you feel the ICE bans are appropriate as there are tons of posts with facts in this thread that say otherwise.

How am I reaching? You specifically said it. Not me.

Originally Posted by zx10guy

There isn't. But you have an administration/party that is currently laying down the ground work to foster the conditions for this 2035 mandate in various states.

Voting out the current administration would send a signal down to the local level that these policies are not going to be tolerated anymore.

Your position is to use the Federal Government to bludgeon local governments to support your position, but to advocate voting to get rid of the current administration you don’t agree with (who aren’t forcing ICE bans on states BTW) out of fear they’ll do what you would if you had power.

I ignored your DC comments as they aren’t relevant. DC is not a state nor does it have a state government. No one in Congress is elected by a single citizen in DC and, as such, they aren’t beholden to them. You can’t use DC to discuss Federalism.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by LogicalApex

Your position is to use the Federal Government to bludgeon local governments to support your position, but to advocate voting to get rid of the current administration you don’t agree with (who aren’t forcing ICE bans on states BTW) out of fear they’ll do what you would if you had power.
:

There is a reason this ban is associated with the fed:

U.S. government to end gas-powered vehicle purchases by 2035 under Biden order
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bid...35-2021-12-08/

President Biden Mandate: No More ICE Cars by 2035
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/2...ment-fleet.htm
President Joe Biden is launching a new mandate that would focus on electric vehicles, ousting internal combustion engines that use gas and diesel by 2035. The new directive from the POTUS is for the entire country and not an individual order for every state as what governors or other state leaders have implemented on their campaigns.



If other markets are already forcing industry shift, and that industry is already implementing their EV plans, a ban shouldn't be needed.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

12 years until 2035 and somehow expecting a great green revolution (in the background of a long future recession) which requires giga billions(to borrow a term) of new investment is just a ideological fantasy.

In a lighter vein by 2035 greta and how dare you gang would have become adults and moved on with life and probably the government can roll things back without school strikes.

unlikely she indocterined, which is her right

[Tejas1836]

There is a new nuclear reactor, Vogtle in GA, that just went critical and is expected to be online later this year. First new reactor in about 7 years. Finally.

[LogicalApex]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

There is a reason this ban is associated with the fed:

U.S. government to end gas-powered vehicle purchases by 2035 under Biden order
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bid...35-2021-12-08/

President Biden Mandate: No More ICE Cars by 2035
https://www.techtimes.com/articles/2...ment-fleet.htm
President Joe Biden is launching a new mandate that would focus on electric vehicles, ousting internal combustion engines that use gas and diesel by 2035. The new directive from the POTUS is for the entire country and not an individual order for every state as what governors or other state leaders have implemented on their campaigns.



If other markets are already forcing industry shift, and that industry is already implementing their EV plans, a ban shouldn't be needed.

Neither of your links work, but the Biden order governs the vehicles the Federal government purchases for their fleet. It has zero impact on anyone else.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-23-105635

The Federal Government is free to mandate they all drive Chevy’s too, that doesn’t mean BMW wouldn’t have a market to sell their vehicles in the US… It also wouldn’t mean that all other car brands are banned in the US… It would just mean that the Feds want Chevy’s. That’s it.

You can argue that by buying EVs the Feds will spend more than buying an ICE today, but with the amount of back scratching that happens on government contracts I doubt the Feds buy even ICE vehicles at the same price as the rest of us.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by G35POPPEDMYCHERRY

unlikely she indocterined, which is her right

I truly would love to know what your sentence means.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I truly would love to know what your sentence means.

well I was saying she seems like she is about this shit for life.


and i was ending it with. well its her right to whatever she wants with her life.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by G35POPPEDMYCHERRY

well I was saying she seems like she is about this shit for life.


and i was ending it with. well its her right to whatever she wants with her life.

I’m more confused than ever.

[G35POPPEDMYCHERRY]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I’m more confused than ever.

life be like that

[Murf the Surf]

Originally Posted by Tejas1836

There is a new nuclear reactor, Vogtle in GA, that just went critical and is expected to be online later this year. First new reactor in about 7 years. Finally.

If you go back through this thread you'd see that this type of comment has been made time and again. It takes 5-10 years to construct a reactor. That's after planning, environmental assessments, getting past the NIMBY's and government approval. Same goes for the transmission lines.

Those simple facts and some common sense tells me that there won't be a sufficient power supply available by 2035.

Can anyone think of a time when government has managed to do anything on time or on budget?

[kyriian]

Originally Posted by Murf the Surf

If you go back through this thread you'd see that this type of comment has been made time and again. It takes 5-10 years to construct a reactor. That's after planning, environmental assessments, getting past the NIMBY's and government approval. Same goes for the transmission lines.

Those simple facts and some common sense tells me that there won't be a sufficient power supply available by 2035.

Can anyone think of a time when government has managed to do anything on time or on budget?

Yep, when they need to raise taxes, oh they are on it, every single time.

[RM7]

Originally Posted by kyriian

Yep, when they need to raise taxes, oh they are on it, every single time.

If that were strictly true, then there wouldn't be a national debt...

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by RM7

If that were strictly true, then there wouldn't be a national debt...

The national debt has nothing to do with taxes. Something tells me you knew that though.

[Soul_Glo]

https://www.reuters.com/business/aut...es-2023-03-08/

Was only a matter of time.


How dangerous can you get Tesla?!

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Soul_Glo

https://www.reuters.com/business/aut...es-2023-03-08/

Was only a matter of time.


How dangerous can you get Tesla?!

Look brother it’s obvious that Reuters just hates Tesla. I don’t think it’s anything more than that. A bunch of Teslaphobes. .

[KRS_SN]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Look brother it’s obvious that Reuters just hates Tesla. I don’t think it’s anything more than that. A bunch of Teslaphobes. .

its driver error for being interested indriving and holding the steering wheel etc..
tesla has already disagreed with the nhtsa's findings before they come out...
an over the air update will be rolled out to to deploy air bag when steering detaches to maintain safety.

[M5Rick]

Tes steering wheels dropping off when driving.. a new one that didn't even have the nut fitted, so I gather they are not even test driven to see if they are roadworthy? Pays your money and go down to the delivery dock to collect it and could end up in the bay.

[KRS_SN]

https://insideevs.com/news/655782/ge...-over-e-fuels/

Objection sustained!