It’s best to not give businesses or people a choice.

HockeyDad wrote:

I hope you realize that government actions have virtually zero relation to their effectiveness.

Look at the E85 gasoline: Take dino gas and add 15% ethanol. Corn is renewable, so that's good. Right?
Novels have been written regarding the poor planning on this one. Start with the lower mpg that offsets the assumed savings and go from there.

Now look at the CA initiative. A state that can't power their current electric needs is mandating electric vehicles. And unless the liberals in LaLA land embrace nuclear soon, they won't have enough juice to do it. Remember this: all the solar and wind creates power (albeit at about 40% efficiency) but they can not and do not result in closing fossil fuel plants. They don't even slow down the production of the electricity. Fuel plants need days to reach peak performance. so they remain running. Burning coal or natural gas or whatever. You wouldn't want to have a 3 day stretch of windless clouds during a heat wave, would you?

When electric is superior it will reign supreme.
When something is better. TRULY better. It will replace the old technology.
We didn't need to mandate the Model T.

I fully expect the ICE to be replaced in my lifetime. As an engineer I embrace new technologies.
I've said that many times during our banter, but all you hear is that I'm against the mandates and you assume I must be anti-electric.
You're predictable, and I'm disappointed in that.

tailgater wrote:

When cost (or bottom line) is the only factor preventing progress, then you have a point.
That isn't the concern here.
The technology doesn't support your mandate.


Follow the money.
The mandate will result in political coffers making money on "green" initiatives that fail miserably. AFTER their checks get cashed.
We've already played this out very recently. But y'all have short memories. Too bad the woke aren't awake.

tailgater wrote:

I am surprised to read that you are an engineer. That said, good for you - it’s a fine profession.

I did not assume you were for or against EV’s. I disagree with your statement that the technology is not ready and that is is not superior.

How well mandates work says nothing about how or if they are needed. Seems clear to me that they are needed.
How would you recommend we get companies to build clean vehicles and get people to buy them?
Trust companies to be environmentally responsible and the average Joe to “do the right thing”?

California is leading us in embracing clean power production. You may well thumb you nose at them, but at least they have a plan and are doing something. And no one technology is going to fix the pollution problem. It will take decades and lots of different things - including mandates.

Brewha wrote:

What qualifies you to assess if the technology is there?
Or - who is feeding you that crap?

Brewha wrote:

I'm not anti electric cars or "green energy". At this time and in the near future, they have their place and time for niche areas and opportunities but full force mandates before the technology can support it is just stupid.

BuckyB93 wrote:

I find this rather funny. Leading us in embracing clean power production? Bwahhhaaahhaa.

CA is a leach. It can't produce enough energy to support their own population. That state is the country's leading importer of electricity. 25% of their electricity comes from other states. Once they get self sufficient, then they can come back and preach.

"California’s net electricity imports were the largest in the country at 70.8 million megawatthours (MWh), or 25% of the state’s total electricity supply."

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=46156 [/color]

But, yeah, let's not let facts get in the way of things.

I say we cut off all electricity and fresh water that CA imports from other states and let them try to live on their utopian steaming $hit hole that they created.

BuckyB93 wrote:

"Why the mandates are needed."
LOL!
You're completely brainwashed. Or is it just being woke?

tailgater wrote:

I am surprised to read that you are an engineer. That said, good for you - it’s a fine profession.

I did not assume you were for or against EV’s. I disagree with your statement that the technology is not ready and that is is not superior.

How well mandates work says nothing about how or if they are needed. Seems clear to me that they are needed.
How would you recommend we get companies to build clean vehicles and get people to buy them?
Trust companies to be environmentally responsible and the average Joe to “do the right thing”?

California is leading us in embracing clean power production. You may well thumb you nose at them, but at least they have a plan and are doing something. And no one technology is going to fix the pollution problem. It will take decades and lots of different things - including mandates.

Brewha wrote:

Same f--kwit that wanted to "mandate" a shot that has proven very ineffective.

Recap: No shot... got covid... over it in 2 days... never got it again... don't wear a mask, social distance or give 2 fkn sheits.

MACS wrote:

From the Chevy EV site:

Three charging options:
1. Standard household outlet: 4 miles per hour of charging. (not a typo)
2. 240V with current amp service (appliance outlet): 26 miles per hour of charging.
3. 240V 80amp set up: 39 miles per hour of charging.

So with the optimum set up you would charge up for 60 minutes and then drive less than 40 miles before you need to recharge again. Assuming you find a high amp charge station on your route.

80 amps.
Most households have what? 200 amps?
80 is big chunk of that.

And what about businesses? 200 cars in the lot. Can the grid handle that kind of amperage?

EV's are a great option for homes with specific driving habits. Folks I know LOVE their EV's.
But they all have a gas car as well.

Brewha wants to take away that option. Eliminate the choice. By government force.
It's the woke thing to do.

tailgater wrote:

California is leading us off the cliff. You may well thumb you nose at them and you would be correct to do so.

Brewha wrote:

98.2% of the country cannot support the technology or infrastructure needed for full e-vehicles adoption. Technology and infrastructure aside (probably a decade or more away), if your car breaks down, where do you go to get it fixed?

P.S. you missed a nine!

BuckyB93 wrote: