California to ban sale of new gas-powered cars starting in 2035

Kaitzilla

Kaitzilla

Lord Croissant
Supporter
Joined
Jun 21, 2008
Messages
13,107
Location
America!
I thought 100% renewable power by 2045 was unrealistic, but this one takes the cake!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...-banning-gasoline-cars-now-the-ev-race-begins

Can the governor of the USA's most populous/powerful state really phase out gasoline vehicles by 2035?
Should I buy some Tesla stock?
Won't this put all the regular car makers out of business?

Hopefully this will be more successful than the high-speed rail.


Remember conservatives, California is not a joke.
Their tough environmental standards quickly become the norm for businesses that don't want to lose out on market share. (They are 15% of the market I think)
 
The article makes it seem like the governor is doing this unilaterally. Is that how it works in CA or did the legislature come up with this and the reporter failed to mention it?
 
I approve of the sentiment, and is a good step to getting serious on fighting climate change and reaching 0 net emissions; but I just don't know how feasible it is and the burdens will almost certainly fall more on the poor and vulnerable.
Barring some massive breakthrough, electric cars are still going to be expensive and unreliable* and won't have had time to filter through the market and become cheap.
EDIT: I should probably read the actual proposal and see that it doesn't ban used cars.
A quick Google shows 46% of California's in-state electricity generation is done by natural gas. Might switching over to nuclear/wind/solar have a greater impact on emissions than telling people to buy new cars?
(Plus, I love my gas-powered sports car and considering I take the bus to work, walk to food shopping, and make an active effort to use mass transit whenever possible, I think I can drive my gas engine car occasionally.)

*Unreliable in the sense you are limited by battery charge and weather. One of my dad's coworkers has a Tesla and apparently the Minnesota winter is not nice on the battery, even though he is able to park it inside overnight.
 
JPetroski said:
The article makes it seem like the governor is doing this unilaterally. Is that how it works in CA or did the legislature come up with this and the reporter failed to mention it?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure exactly how the nuts and bolts work.
Here is the executive order.
https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/09/23/g...-in-californias-fight-against-climate-change/

Following the order, the California Air Resources Board will develop regulations to mandate that 100 percent of in-state sales of new passenger cars and trucks are zero-emission by 2035 – a target which would achieve more than a 35 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and an 80 percent improvement in oxides of nitrogen emissions from cars statewide. In addition, the Air Resources Board will develop regulations to mandate that all operations of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles shall be 100 percent zero emission by 2045 where feasible, with the mandate going into effect by 2035 for drayage trucks. To ensure needed infrastructure to support zero-emission vehicles, the order requires state agencies, in partnership with the private sector, to accelerate deployment of affordable fueling and charging options. It also requires support of new and used zero-emission vehicle markets to provide broad accessibility to zero-emission vehicles for all Californians. The executive order will not prevent Californians from owning gasoline-powered cars or selling them on the used car market.

California will be leading the nation in this effort – joining 15 countries that have already committed to phase out gasoline-powered cars and using our market power to push zero-emission vehicle innovation and drive down costs for everyone.
Click to expand...
Hmm, not seeing much legislature.
How powerful is the California Air Resources Board?

Anyway, at least used vehicles will still be allowed.
Just no new gas guzzlers.
 
Wow, I have not been paying attention at all.

Tesla announced a near-miracle in my opinion. ($25,000 is great!) :yup:
https://auto.hindustantimes.com/aut...aper-battery-3-years-away-41600826955744.html
CEO Elon Musk's promise to cut electric vehicle costs so radically that a $25,000 car that drives itself will be possible, but not for at least three years.
Click to expand...
And investors hammered him for it!
Investors had expected two significant announcements at Musk's oft-touted "Battery Day": The development of a "million mile" battery good for 10 years or more, and a specific cost reduction target -- expressed in dollars per kilowatt-hour -- that would finally drop the price of an electric vehicle below that of a gasoline car.
Click to expand...
Million miles?
Cheaper than a gas car?
:nope:


September 2020
Total value of car companies:

Tesla $361 billion!

Ford $26 billion
GM $41 billion
Fiat-Chrysler $19 billion

When did the big 3 US automakers get so small!? :wow: :dubious:
 
I thought this was really confusing and niche until I realised you meant automotive gasoline and not compressed natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas vehicles.
 
Ajidica said:
A quick Google shows 46% of California's in-state electricity generation is done by natural gas. Might switching over to nuclear/wind/solar have a greater impact on emissions than telling people to buy new cars?
Click to expand...

They're doing both, but also even with that grid mix, electric cars would have substantially less emissions.

It takes a particularly dirty coal-fired grid, like one mostly run on lignite (brown coal) to bring electic car emissions up to the level of emissions from gasoline vehicles. Even EVs run on a mostly black coal supplied grid is going to make some emissions savings.
 
Arwon said:
They're doing both, but also even with that grid mix, electric cars would have substantially less emissions.

It takes a particularly dirty coal-fired grid, like one mostly run on lignite (brown coal) to bring electic car emissions up to the level of emissions from gasoline vehicles. Even EVs run on a mostly black coal supplied grid is going to make some emissions savings.
Click to expand...
Fair point.
I've just become increasingly aware of how many "green" policies, however necessary, seem to put a heavier burden on the poor than on well off people like myself.
 
JPetroski said:
The article makes it seem like the governor is doing this unilaterally. Is that how it works in CA or did the legislature come up with this and the reporter failed to mention it?
Click to expand...
Technically the executive order only sets a goal. This goal would be easier to reach of it were set out in statute. :dunno:
Newsom does have a history of overstepping his powers. :nono: As mayor, he declared California's then-ban on gay marriages to be unconstitutional and ordered his city clerk to issue marriage licenses. :hug:The California Supreme Court later overturned Newsom's order and voided the ensuing 8,000+ marriages.
However, if I were President of Ford, etc., it'd be clear to me where the tide of history is headed & rather than fight this in court, I use my resources to speed development of non-polluting vehicles. :cool:
 
Arwon said:
They're doing both, but also even with that grid mix, electric cars would have substantially less emissions.

It takes a particularly dirty coal-fired grid, like one mostly run on lignite (brown coal) to bring electic car emissions up to the level of emissions from gasoline vehicles. Even EVs run on a mostly black coal supplied grid is going to make some emissions savings.
Click to expand...

California has no coal-fired energy plants...although it does use power from five out-of-state coal plants.
 
Kaitzilla said:
When did the big 3 US automakers get so small!? :wow: :dubious:
Click to expand...

The US automakers are still large, its that Tesla had massive amounts capital from its stockprice and only just became profitable for this year
The other car manufacturers are also have electric cars in the works as well but from the looks of things Tesla is ahead in the how advanced their electric motor is but is lagging behind in mass manufacturing technology
 
Zkribbler said:
California has no coal-fired energy plants...although it does use power from five out-of-state coal plants.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah I know, I just used those because I happen to know how that emissions intensity calc works out since we do have mostly black coal and mostly brown coal grid areas here.

California is, for the record, part of a very large wide area grid region stretching to British Columbia, Alberta, and New Mexico. So to an extent the power in CA is an average of all that due to trade within the region, but there must be some separation because you can find different emissions intensities for different parts of it.



CA's emissions intensity for footprint calculations is relatively low, above places in North America and internationally that are mostly hydro or nuclear driven, but below most others. Its in-state generation is about half gas, 10% nuclear and the rest renewables, but then it also imports about a third of its power from the rest of the WECC.
 
Last edited:
I mean, 15 years is a long time, right? That's more than enough time to get their act together, isn't it? And it's something we need to do.

I have a partially electric car from Ford that cost me $15,000. In more than a decade, I'm pretty sure the big auto companies can have affordable fully electric vehicles for mass consumption.
 
An edict issued by the governor to state air quality regulators? Seems like it would be open to possible legal challenges, or some sort of reversal down the line.

I think the intent is good, but I worry about its feasibility in implementation and the costs that will ultimately be passed on to people on low incomes. If no new combustion engine cars can be sold in CA, what’s that going to do to the price of existing used vehicles? It’s going to push them up, and the socioeconomic classes most vulnerable to wild price fluctuations in something as necessary as a mode of personal transportation are going to be bearing the heaviest burdens.
 
Norway has the same vision for 2025. We'll see but I hope they make it. I think the market share for electric vehicles is around 50% in Norway these days. Tesla has a huge share here.
 
They'll need to build a lot of charging stations quickly. Frankly I think waiting until 2035 is like saying all people must be aboard the Titanic's lifeboats by the time the stern is pointed to the sky, but better late than never.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

raxo2222
Building Gametext review (missing text).
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
Dancing Hoskuld
Dancing Hoskuld
Top Bottom