In reply to 1988RedT2 :
So I had in here somewhere (page 20?) that I was going to have to change my name to Pandora.
I've rethought that and I've decided not to becuase this thread would make the late comedian Andy Kaufman very proud.............he'd appreciate this level of chaos.
Also it makes post #750.
In reply to Toyman! :
I'm sure I've mentioned it but I'm as ADD as it gets...........
Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Tom1200 said:In reply to Toyman! :
I'm sure I've mentioned it but I'm as ADD as it gets...........
I resemble that remark.
llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
In reply to llysgennad :
EV does mean BEV, but it also means HEV and PHEV and MHEV.
For sure, new cars will have electric assist, but not necessary just batteries.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
The neat thing about the market is if people don't want big SUV's they won't sell. If a recession is indeed coming then little EV's will be all the rage.
Some people will focus on range and buy Hybrid's in spite of the added cost.
Perhaps Elon Musk will be right again with his new $25,000 EV Apparently several sources say his stock will be worth a lot of money.
While traditional Auto makers stocks are going in the opposite direction.
I'm hearing from a lot of places that those big ICE pickup trucks aren't in high demand right now. The dealers are actually discounting them in order to remove them from their inventory.
Just to explain my bias I currently own a 5 liter F150 I intend to keep. And I'm excitedly waiting for the new Cheap Tesla.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:You know those trees you want to remove reprocess CO2 and then produce O2 with it. And I always thought that was the whole point reducing CO2. This is a pretty good example of how going green is more about money than the environment in many cases.
I deliberately speak only about money to avoid making the issue political.
But let us speak briefly about the life of trees. Depending on various factors most trees live 100-200 years before falling down and releasing CO 2 they've captured during their life.
Growing trees are green. Are decaying trees? Of course trees on fire because of? Lightening strikes, vandalism, neglected camp fires? Are good for polution either.
Just like EV's aren't always perfect. Trees aren't always perfect either. Yes I really do like trees.
BA5 said:Fupdiggity (Forum Supporter) said:AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:In reply to Toyman! :
There is a 3rd type of load too: reactive load. It's produced by giant electric machines that are not using renewable energy. It is the load that keeps the grid stable. Without it, there is no grid. Large plants have to coordinate reactive load changes with grid operators.
Renewable facilities can (and do) provide reactive power support. Inverters are pretty good at it, actually. They don't have any inertia (unlike spinny machines) so they can vary their reactive output almost instantaneously with appropriate controls.
In terms of the power grid, I wouldn't say either of those statements is particularly correct.
Reactive power is the amount of power stored in the capacitance and inductance of the system. It's actually bad for the system, because it means that power being produced is going into sustaining electric and magnetic fields instead of powering your TV or running your A/C or computer or vacuum cleaner or whatever.
They are, however, able to balance it in order to minimize the amount of reactance on the system. Inductors and capacitors essentially cancel each other out in terms of reactance. You can't really 'adjust' the inductance of the electrical motors on the system, so when lots of electrical motors are running on the system (A/C motors, machining equipment, etc) they add capacitors to the system. There's not much that really adds a lot of capacitance to the system except long transmission lines, but when they need to add extra inductance they switch on giant inductors (literally just huge coils of copper wire).
In this way they balance the 'power factor' (a measure of how much real power is being delivered vs how much total power is being generated). They put giant capacitor banks outside of pretty much all generating stations to balance the inductance of the generator, renewable or not.
Source: I used to design the really big specialized switches that turned the capacitor and inductor banks on and off.
Good explanation.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
None of us advocating for the adaption of EV's believe we should get free use of public roads.
It will be nteresting to see exactly what method is commonly adapted to collect the needed taxes. And will it be fair?
I sincerely hope so but I doubt it can be done without a flat tax which wouldn't be fair. ( some may use the roads more while some use less). Or wildly intrusive and complex. (Report miles covered )
Maybe a surcharge on the electric bill of homes with an EV registered? Nah, a hot summer with A/C running at home ?
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
In reply to BA5 :
Your entire discussion is a great attempt at never addressing the fact reactive load is NEEDED in order to keep the grid stable. And yes it can be adjusted at giant generators. Step one when one of these larger generators is reaching high temperature is..... reduce reactive load at that node. As you mention reactive load is maintaining fields that due not produce useable power but they do make a lot of heat. Without reactive load to absorb grid fluctuations you'd get trips at nodes on frequency or voltage spikes. Those trips are called load shedding and it's how the grid protects itself. Without enough reactive load you'd get rapidly cascading trips or a blackout event. Improving the grid to reduce the amount of reactive load needed is a major issue. However since all the people decreeing EVs will save the planet don't and can't understand it, it gets ignored. At some point it will likely become the issue that takes down the grid. I'd prefer to avoid that.
Frenchy, yes windmills keep improving. That's the great thing about humanity. If people stop demanding things like forced use of EVs by XXXX year, it can happen all on its own arriving at a better solution for everyone.
z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Good point except it's not exactly how it works. Oil companies spend a great deal moving markets. Influencing politicians.
Considering the trillions of dollars they have invested in oil wells it's understandable. But if you think only EV's are subsidized don't look into the oil companies depletion allowances. Or other tax write offs.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
Where do you get the idea that an EV will cost $1000 a month payment?
New EV's start under $400 a month with nothing down.
Sure if you think that everyone needs a Porsche EV or Tesla plaid, you'll get up there
While used EV's can earn a $3400 rebate. And start in the low teens price wise.
To counter the battery replacement myth. GM offers an 8 year 100,000 mile warranty on the Bolt. Since the gas/ Diesels only offer a 50,000 mile warranty yet go much longer than that. 20 years and 200,000 miles is a realistic expectation for battery life.
In reply to frenchyd :
Not eligible for the rebates from uncle Sugar.
also not available with the uncle sugar bait.
cheapest Toyota electric offering.
fords cheapest offering of pure electric.
So about $45-49k is the going rate since the Bolt is now out of production.
It's not quite $1000, but damn close. By the time you add on the yearly plate/registration fees you're over $900/ month.
frenchyd said:In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Good point except it's not exactly how it works. Oil companies spend a great deal moving markets. Influencing politicians.
Considering the trillions of dollars they have invested in oil wells it's understandable. But if you think only EV's are subsidized don't look into the oil companies depletion allowances. Or other tax write offs.
Nothing should be subsidized yet everything is. They can mandate EVs and then the taxpayer will pay for them regardless. I'd say that's a huge part of the problem. If the people were left alone to solve this problem it will happen more organically and likely lead to a better solution.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
You're exposing yet another problem with the majority on this forum. The VAST MAJORITY of people aren't interested in working on their own vehicles.
I don't know why this is a constant point of contention. Us 0.01% of car owners, who are enthusiasts, are obviously not the majority. I'm not sure why this has to be continually brought up.
In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
We agree in that regard. Yet we take advantage of the mortgage deduction to make home owning more affordable because the benefits clearly outweigh the costs.
We approve "sin taxes" on alcohol and cigarettes as a way to reduce smoking and drinking with attending society costs.
Then there is gambling. Supposedly illegal except on tribal land and every lottery place. Oh and on line for sports betting.
AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:frenchyd said:In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :
Good point except it's not exactly how it works. Oil companies spend a great deal moving markets. Influencing politicians.
Considering the trillions of dollars they have invested in oil wells it's understandable. But if you think only EV's are subsidized don't look into the oil companies depletion allowances. Or other tax write offs.Nothing should be subsidized yet everything is. They can mandate EVs and then the taxpayer will pay for them regardless. I'd say that's a huge part of the problem. If the people were left alone to solve this problem it will happen more organically and likely lead to a better solution.
That's the result of our representative democracy. Politicians give tax breaks to Oil companies in exchange for donations. Then society gets tired of the extreme wealth of oil company executives and seeks another solution. So more tax breaks.
No wonder we have a 31 trillion dollar deficit and a 77,000 page tax code.
frenchyd said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
Where do you get the idea that an EV will cost $1000 a month payment?
New EV's start under $400 a month with nothing down.
Sure if you think that everyone needs a Porsche EV or Tesla plaid, you'll get up thereWhile used EV's can earn a $3400 rebate. And start in the low teens price wise.
To counter the battery replacement myth. GM offers an 8 year 100,000 mile warranty on the Bolt. Since the gas/ Diesels only offer a 50,000 mile warranty yet go much longer than that. 20 years and 200,000 miles is a realistic expectation for battery life.
I'm not talking about a lease. But where can you get a lease without putting at least some money down? You can get a lower payment if you get a longer loan. I don't like leases and I don't like borrowing money. I paid cash for my last car, but I understand that not everybody can do that. You could still be paying on the car when it's falling apart in 8 years. And of course 100,000 miles just covers the battery. Not the entire car. Lots of people want to get rid if that old car before it is paid for so they roll the debt into the next new car. You would be surprised at the number of people I know who do that. And that was before the current jump in car prices. This will go on and on as car prices go higher. There are people who are paying $1,000 a month for a $400 a month car. There are also people who have rolled several cars over who pay $1,500 a month.
z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
You're exposing yet another problem with the majority on this forum. The VAST MAJORITY of people aren't interested in working on their own vehicles.
I don't know why this is a constant point of contention. Us 0.01% of car owners, who are enthusiasts, are obviously not the majority. I'm not sure why this has to be continually brought up.
That's not the problem I am bringing up. Of course anybody who can fix his own car has an advantage. But what I see is that cars are soon going to be unaffordable for the lower middle class and the poor. For some people, even $400 a month is too much. The lower your credit score is, the higher your car payment is and the higher your car insurance is too. Car companies want to get out of the business of making cheap cars and they will.
People who are priced out are not going to go to Harbor Freight and get a full set of tools as they can't work on cars at their apartment complexes. They will simply be priced out. They will be on the bus or walking to work or calling Uber.
Then there is the infrastructure. I don't think we are there yet. We have been building gas stations for over 100 years. It is going to take us a while to build that many charging stations. Maybe in another 20 years IF either private or government money is made available.
Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:z31maniac said:Snowdoggie (Forum Supporter) said:llysgennad said:Back to the Original Topic...
We may not have a choice. GM is starting the 10-year countdown to ALL electric by 2035. Ford and Stellantis are rapidly going that direction, especially in Europe, which will affect what is sold here. Other manufacturers are doing it to varying degrees, from a little to whole hog.
But the kicker are the new proposed MPG/EPA requirements that, when parsed out to reality, mean manufacturers will need to sell 50% EV by 2027, and roughly 63% by 2032. That is a BIG, rapid change. I don't think it's possible to build that many batteries that quickly, given the scarcity of ingredients. And the electrical infrastructure will definitely not be ready.
Oh we have a choice. The choice is to keep the old car running and not buy a new car. To leave the overpriced EV SUVs on the lot. And that is the choice that the government, the car manufacturers, the banks and the leasing companies hope we won't make for obvious reasons. Not to mention the fact that a recession might be coming up and it is harder to sell expensive cars during a recession.
You can crunch numbers about saving money by not buying gas all you want. But it's hard to get a loan for a 50K SUV if you don't have a job, and unemployed people don't have to worry so much about commuting. And not using gas doesn't mean the roads are suddenly free. The State of Texas just proposed a $200 a year tax on EVs to make up for the gas tax they are not paying.
This assumes manufacturers and the aftermarket keep making repair parts available. From what I've read, even a company like BMW who is famous for keeping old parts available is no longer the case.
It will be hard to keep that older ICE car going if you can't get parts for it.
I'm not saying they will or won't do it, but I'm pragmatic about the possibility.
I can still get parts for my 1975 Porsche and they aren't all made by Porsche. Aftermarket companies make parts. Guys on the 914 forum with small machine shops make parts. And there are 3D printers out there that can make parts. You don't have to depend on a big car manufacturer that is only interested in big profits to get what you want. A whole new. industry could be started.
Of course if times get really bad and your option is a $1,000 a month car payment with a $200 a month government rebate or a bicycle, many of us will have to chose the bicycle and leave the overpriced EV on the lot. I see a lot of grown men riding cheap or stolen bicycles already. Especially around the homeless camps under the freeway. Expect to see a lot more of that if we go into a depression.
You're exposing yet another problem with the majority on this forum. The VAST MAJORITY of people aren't interested in working on their own vehicles.
I don't know why this is a constant point of contention. Us 0.01% of car owners, who are enthusiasts, are obviously not the majority. I'm not sure why this has to be continually brought up.
That's not the problem I am bringing up. Of course anybody who can fix his own car has an advantage. But what I see is that cars are soon going to be unaffordable for the lower middle class and the poor. For some people, even $400 a month is too much. The lower your credit score is, the higher your car payment is and the higher your car insurance is too. Car companies want to get out of the business of making cheap cars and they will.
People who are priced out are not going to go to Harbor Freight and get a full set of tools as they can't work on cars at their apartment complexes. They will simply be priced out. They will be on the bus or walking to work or calling Uber.
Solid point! Yes a portion of Americans and even more of the rest of the world simply won't be able to buy a new car or even a worn used car.
Yet every day cars are hauled off to the junkyard with life left in them. The cost of a repair is higher than the value of the car.
Yet for the DIY guy who buys used parts there may be years of use left.
frenchyd said:AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:You know those trees you want to remove reprocess CO2 and then produce O2 with it. And I always thought that was the whole point reducing CO2. This is a pretty good example of how going green is more about money than the environment in many cases.
I deliberately speak only about money to avoid making the issue political.
But let us speak briefly about the life of trees. Depending on various factors most trees live 100-200 years before falling down and releasing CO 2 they've captured during their life.
Growing trees are green. Are decaying trees? Of course trees on fire because of? Lightening strikes, vandalism, neglected camp fires? Are good for polution either.
Just like EV's aren't always perfect. Trees aren't always perfect either. Yes I really do like trees.
Plants maintain the balance of CO2/O2. They don't produce either one in the grand scheme. They just manipulate what already exists in the biosphere.
Fossil fuels take carbon that was deposited millions of years ago miles under the ground and dump it into the biosphere. Big difference.
If we had developed our infrastructure on biofuels all those years ago, we wouldn't be desperately trying to reverse the damage we've done.
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
