Everyone driving electric cars----------what a joke.

Totally deplorable. How can a civilized country have a situation like this? Oh yeah, separation of states allows large swaths to live as do the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Deplorable.

 

It’s not hard to do. Just tax cars with poor milage at higher rates.

 

exactly...and,
It’s totally unnecessary. Our state is the third coldest in the USA and 80% of our power is renewable. Solar is so efficient, you only need daylight, not sunlight. It’s cloudy all the time and we still get 1/4 power from solar. And, when it’s -20 F, we still get power. It’s about politics which includes believing in science.

Wouldn’t you know ? Our state believes in science, mail in and rank choice voting. Wonder if there is a connection ?

 

Totally agree with this. Political opinion does not change the laws of the universe, no matter how many politicians tell you otherwise.

 

Better still tax the fuel more heavily. That's how Europe ended up with cars that do more MPG. I drive a 998cc car that gets 55 to the gallon. It's 20 years old though and modern cars, especially diesels, get even better mileage.
It will also mean taxing the more polluting batteries but that will just incentivise cleaner technologies.
The polluter pays, the simplest way forward if we are to clean up the environment.

 

At the local level and in business, time marches on. While we’re discussing the relevance of evolution and electric power by its doubters, we use it for nearly all foods, vaccines and to power our cars already. It’s like, what world do some live it ?

 

A world that is going to change drastically within our lifetime if we don't come to our senses.

 

I have the most economical truck in the “Neighborhood”. It gets 17 mpg. Everything is relative.

 

It’s already changed in spite of us, not because.

 

Hence the reason you need more expensive fuel tax. It will lead to better MPG and higher rates of EV uptake.
Tax the polluters.
If you want more of something subsidise it and if you want less of something tax it. It's not rocket science.

 

To achieve critical mass...requires a paradigm shift...and will be a long-term process. I give credit for achievements so far but we've just picked off the low-hanging fruit...

 

When I speak about these general issues, I'm speaking about the nation as a whole. Where I live BMW EV's and Priuses and Teslas are rampant and we get 30% of our energy from alternative sources with plans to increase this...it's the demographics of this area and is completely different 50 miles from here, but we are not representative of the nation. This is why I state that collectively we must use all energy options in parallel with the collective goal to greatly reduce greenhouse gases. Technology and market conditions will advance these goals. Some individuals will get with the program but society must get on board as well...

 

When a majority of Americans basically live pay check to pay check, and businesses operate on low profits, in all of these cases money is a driving factor. While many of these people are trying to put food on the table, it's laughable to them to talk about buying an EV or installing solar panels, etc. This is partly why society needs to do more...some as a public entity and some in partnership with the private sector. How about a national grid system that allows anyone to consume or to supply alternative energies? Why doesn't every new building, or refurbished building, require solar power generation? And the list goes on. Yes all of this is already in progress but the next 70% will be the hardest to achieve...

 

When we tax something we must consider the collateral impact to people who don't have the financial position to make changes in their lives to offset the tax increases...

 

Well, yes and no. If a family needs a new car, moderate size EVs and many plug in hybrids are no more expensive then gas powered cars after the $7500 federal tax credit. Plus, there is a huge incentive for driving a car that cost .08 a mile and not .18 a mile.

As far as using solar panels are concerned, it’s more area dependent. In some areas it’s a no brainer because it is cheaper.

 

That’s why energy production or car type can never cheaply be a one size fits all. We have 37% of our state hydroelectric but it’s really cold and you’ll never see EVs as year round stand alone cars for a decade. But, plug ins work well here and hydro electric works well with it. Individuals have no choice. Every car maker makes hybrids. They are the transition to full EVs in warmer and moderate climates. There is no place in the nation a plug in hybrid would not work better. EVs no....for the near future.

 

I hear you...but,
I have no idea what a paradigm shift would be. Every technology goes through various stages as it slowly finds its way into public acceptance. The solid state battery has been used for pacemakers for a long time, but it cost over $100 k to put them in cars. We’re turning the corner. They'll be available soon in cars.

 

It won’t affect me other then drop my standard of living. I still need a truck that goes off road to get where I live. The cheapest way to keep up with high gas prices or a tax, is to keep vehicles for a long time even if they cost more to run. That’s why taxes alone won’t work. Personal incentives needs to be included. $7500 federal rebate means a lot.

 

Keeping vehicles for a long time works too.
Much of the CO2 emissions related to cars come from their manufacture.
It's not good news for car manufacturers but they need to build cars to last rather than them having an average lifespan of only about 10 years.

 

Yes, CO2 is emitted when making cars. But it’s a one time emission. If the car is significantly more efficient and less polluting , it’s less polluting its entire lifetime. Imo, it’s worth it to me to change cars at 10 to 12:years. The increased efficiency and safety devices are worth it. Cash for clunkers is worth the effort.

 

Yes it a one time emission but it is huge. Estimated to be more than the emissions from the entire lifetime of the car. If you can double the lifetime of the car it will reduce the overall emissions.

 

As the Science joke about paradigms goes, shift happens.

Once upon a time we took pride in LEADING the world in new technology and developments but now we are find ourselves being dragged, kicking and screaming, into using new technology.

The EU has now surpassed China as the leader in sales of EV's and they are pushing harder and further because they understand that ridding themselves of dependence upon the fossil fuel cartel will strengthen all aspects of their economy. Subsidizing the purchases of EV's now means that their balance of payments improves as a direct result of lower oil imports. It also WEAKENS the position of Russia by undercutting their ability to control the supply of oil to the EU.

It makes sound economic sense to move away from fossil fuels and while you are correct that it will take some time given the existing infrastructure the benefits are going to incentivize making the shift happen sooner rather than later.

 

Room temperature Liquid Metal batteries might be the long term storage solution for utilities and homes.

 

Well, If it’s just the same make and model, perhaps... But if you’re going to a hybrid or especially a plug in hybrid or EV where the average person commutes less the. 20 miles to work, there are ZERO emissions. Consider too that the emission control devises are long out of warranty for real old cars.

 

Exactly. There are a plethora of good options where weight is not a factor. Even concrete with its excellent thermal mass can store heat for a long time if it’s well insulated. A tight log home and a pellet stove which is on the surface old tech, makes a great emission neutral option. Energy storage has been available even with low tech.