California to ban ICE sales in 2035

[Richard230]

California jumps on the zero-emissions bandwagon: California's Governor just announced today that he is asking his regulators to formulate rules that would result in no new internal combustion powered cars or passenger trucks being sold in the state after 2035. Heavy-duty truck sales will be ended in 2045. Naturally there was no mention about motorcycles, but I imagine they will be on the chopping block too. The major motorcycle brands has better start thinking about what they are going to do before then.

[Daboo]

This will be interesting to see it unfold. If they can't pull it off, will they start postponing the ban in 2030?

A couple years ago, I rode through some parts of California where even gas stations weren't to be found. Will charging systems carry you through there?

And just think of how well it would work. Right now, you have an aging electrical infrastructure that results in rolling brown-outs from the existing demand. What if you add in 15.1 million vehicles that all need to be charged to the system?

The improvements can come...but they'll cost billions.

Chris

[Richard230]

You are right, Chris. One thing that wasn't mentioned in the announcement was a plan for updating the state's infrastructure so that it will be able to supply the power needed by all of these new electric vehicles. Apparently, just forcing people to purchase EVs though regulation will somehow overhaul our entire power transmission system so that the necessary electrical power can be distributed to electrical refueling stations that someone else will build. Likely not Big Oil installing charging stations at every one of their gasoline stations, though.

[TheMeteor]

they just figure someone else will pay for it.

[Richard230]

One other thing that never seems to be mentioned is: Are there enough raw materials in the world to make all of the needed batteries for everyone to drive electrically? I am not sure lithium is all that plentiful around the world and what about the conditions of the laborers who have to dig that stuff out of the ground? And then there is the little matter of recycling the spent batteries. Right now there doesn't seem to be any industry that can do so profitably. I know that my local recycling yard wants nothing to do with lithium batteries as they consider them a fire hazard.

[Daboo]

You won't have to worry about the lithium supply. The 4th largest reserves in the world are in China, and you know how reliable they are and how good they treat their people.

Chris

[BoxerBits]

Any suggestions for a viable alternative?


Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

[Daboo]

Any suggestions for a viable alternative?


Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

An alternative? ...Gas.

In the past, one form of technology superseded the existing technology as the benefits (and logistics) of the new technology caused people to move to the new technology. We went from horse and wagon to trains. From trains to cars. And eventually to trucks and semi's. You couldn't have gone from horses straight to semi's, even if the semi's would be a good idea.

There's a nuclear plant that is being decommissioned in the next few years. That's supplying the existing power needs and that loss of capacity will have to be made up.

Just as an aside...I read awhile back that the blades on wind turbines don't last forever ...and can't be recycled.

Chris

[BoxerBits]

You talking about generating electricity using gas turbine technology, or you using the term gas to mean to continue using ICE i.e. no change?

Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

[Daboo]

You talking about generating electricity using gas turbine technology, or you using the term gas to mean to continue using ICE i.e. no change?

Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

No change from the ICE till the technology and infrastructure can support it. And let the people decide with their pocketbooks what they want to buy. Not have a bunch of politicians make the decisions for them.

Chris

[BoxerBits]

Best check out what the Global Automotive Sector have been actively working on for some considerable time before you bring politics onto the forum.




Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

[Daboo]

Mentioning the word "politicians", is not bringing "politics" to the forum. The saying about teachers could easily be applied to politicians. "Those that can do, do. Those that can't, teach"...or get into politics. It's probably a lot more accurate when applied to politicians.

You missed some of the meaning behind the posts above yours, probably because you don't live in the same country, or even the same area of the country. No one doubts there is research and development on getting electric vehicles on the road. To use the analogy I mentioned above, doing away with the internal combustion engine by decree, would be like going back to the days when the railroads were starting out...and saying that all the horses and wagons would not be used after 15 years. No matter what you had for a train engine, the tracks were not there.

In this case, the infrastructure isn't there for the existing electrical demands. My daughter and SIL live in Palo Alto, and in 90F days, they are subjected to rolling brown outs. That means there's no air conditioning. No fans. No lights. No power for your refrigerator. You could take a cold shower...because there's no power for your electric hot water heater. Oh...and what would really hurt, there's no power for your Internet router so you're forced to read a book or take a walk.

Some of the California wildfires have been caused by their aging wires and transformers. (I hope I have the terminology right.) So not only does California have to grow their existing infrastructure to meet current demand, but they have to replace a lot of their infrastructure that's in place today. And the money isn't there. Now add 15.1 million electric vehicles to that electrical demand.

Good luck getting this to work. I just don't see it happening.

Chris

[Richard230]

My newspaper today had an article regarding this subject. The article said that EV owners could drive their cars during the day, recharge them before returning home, then connect them to the power grid to supply additional power to the grid during the early evening and then recharge their batteries late at night and during the early morning when the electrical demand was less. I am not at all sure that idea would work out very well. If nothing else, all of that charging and discharging of batteries would really cut into their overall life, resulting in big bucks for the owners to replace them when they expire.

[Daboo]

Interesting article.

EPA Administrator Pans Newsom’s Electric Car Mandate: ‘You Can’t Keep the Lights on Today’
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ghts-on-today/

Wheeler pointed out that if Newsom’s hoped-for scenario was in place today, there would be an even greater threat to the environment and public health than currently exists in the state, as heat and wildfires have resulted in forced rolling blackouts up and down the state. Wheeler wrote:
Beyond the significant questions of legality and the fact that consumer demand for the type of vehicle you would mandate has never met the aspiration of California’s political leadership, your state is already struggling to maintain reliable electricity for today’s demands. California’s record of rolling blackouts — unprecedented in size and scope — couple with the recent request to neighboring states for power begs the question of how you expect to run and electric car fleet that will come with significant increase in electricity demand, when you can’t keep the lights on today.