Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:08 pm

Revelation wrote:

On the other hand he keeps saying Tesla is all about mass adaptation of electric vehicles so if he wants that to happen he needs to do better than the current >$35k price point.


The most important reason manufacturers are rushing to build cheap electrics is to give their larger ICE brethren a free emissions pass. No profit to be made there, especially on a company that has yet to build their cheap EV capacity.

Making cars and batteries are notoriously capital intensive and low margin operations. Tesla would do better to bank on their software leadership image and sell that instead.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:09 pm

c933103 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Why would yhey need to pay US tariff if the Shanghai factory is for China/Asia market?

Sorry, but I don't know about the issue. Can you provide a link (hopefully in English language)?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=AwwRcx4b
Oh, apparently it's not whole car, but just parts

Ok, and this article is only about the tariff on the parts that are imported into the US. Hopefully Tesla has arranged its supply chain so that the parts needed for cars built in China are not imported into the US, which is what I would expect.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:17 pm

JJJ wrote:
Revelation wrote:

On the other hand he keeps saying Tesla is all about mass adaptation of electric vehicles so if he wants that to happen he needs to do better than the current >$35k price point.


The most important reason manufacturers are rushing to build cheap electrics is to give their larger ICE brethren a free emissions pass. No profit to be made there, especially on a company that has yet to build their cheap EV capacity.

Making cars and batteries are notoriously capital intensive and low margin operations. Tesla would do better to bank on their software leadership image and sell that instead.

That's my point, Tesla has an large amount of evangelism in its mission statement.

If they were more driven by capitalism they would be doing as you say, let someone else deal with manufacturing cars and focus on developing the tech.

Right now they're doing a good job at both, which seems to be pissing off a lot of capitalists.

The traditional auto makers are doing their usual thing, focusing on short term profits.

There are plenty of articles showing they know they need to make big spends to do what Tesla did and design platforms from the top to bottom as EVs so they can get high integration like Tesla has and reduce costs, yet they simply lack the testicular fortitude to make such a plunge.

Instead we see a series of cars that are ICE designs with compromised EV systems made to fit the ICE designs, then they end up with sub-par range and extremely high cost due to poor integration.

In a few years we'll read how these same vendors were caught out by the changes, yet the real issue is they are focused on the short term rather than the long term.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 12482
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:21 pm

Revelation wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Sorry, but I don't know about the issue. Can you provide a link (hopefully in English language)?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=AwwRcx4b
Oh, apparently it's not whole car, but just parts

Ok, and this article is only about the tariff on the parts that are imported into the US. Hopefully Tesla has arranged its supply chain so that the parts needed for cars built in China are not imported into the US, which is what I would expect.


If memory serves a Panasonic guy told me that their EV battery division built a facility near Reno NV specifically to supply Tesla.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:31 pm

Revelation wrote:

There are plenty of articles showing they know they need to make big spends to do what Tesla did and design platforms from the top to bottom as EVs so they can get high integration like Tesla has and reduce costs, yet they simply lack the testicular fortitude to make such a plunge.

Instead we see a series of cars that are ICE designs with compromised EV systems made to fit the ICE designs, then they end up with sub-par range and extremely high cost due to poor integration.

In a few years we'll read how these same vendors were caught out by the changes, yet the real issue is they are focused on the short term rather than the long term.


There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

And whenever other manufacturers have started to show up Tesla struggles to maintain sales (much less grow), even those subpar offerings by other manufacturers are outselling Tesla in the markets with the highest EV penetration like Norway, Netherlands, etc.
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 3:33 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
c933103 wrote:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... f=AwwRcx4b
Oh, apparently it's not whole car, but just parts

Ok, and this article is only about the tariff on the parts that are imported into the US. Hopefully Tesla has arranged its supply chain so that the parts needed for cars built in China are not imported into the US, which is what I would expect.


If memory serves a Panasonic guy told me that their EV battery division built a facility near Reno NV specifically to supply Tesla.


It's not just they build it. The famous Gigafactory in Nevada is actually 2/3rds occupied by Panasonic cell manufacturing, which are passed on to the other side of the factory so that Tesla can put them into battery packs for cars, utility batteries, etc.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10734
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:32 pm

JJJ wrote:
There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.

Musk said growing profits was not as important to him as making Tesla's cars affordable, and therefore accessible to a broader base of drivers.

"We need to not go bankrupt obviously that's important because then we will fail in our mission," Musk said during the earnings call Wednesday. "But we are not trying to be super profitable either, if profitability is 1% or 2 %, it's not crazy. Last quarter it was only point one percent. So we want to be profitable, but we want to be slightly profitable and maximize growth and make the cars as affordable as possible, that is what we are trying to achieve."

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/23/teslas- ... ility.html

So it makes a lot of sense, grow the market, use this time to improve production efficiency so when emissions credits sales reduce and disappear they will be able to sustain with the vehicle sales.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13251
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:26 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Bringing a new ICE car in from outside California will not be banned. Although by 2025 I suspect EVs will begin to be the cars of choice for most people.


But you can expect restrictions. If SF or LA ban ICE engines, then your car bought elsewhere will be less useful.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
winginit
Posts: 2969
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:34 pm

Aesma wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Bringing a new ICE car in from outside California will not be banned. Although by 2025 I suspect EVs will begin to be the cars of choice for most people.


But you can expect restrictions. If SF or LA ban ICE engines, then your car bought elsewhere will be less useful.


Eh I don't know about that. Use the firearm issue today as an example for the purposes of precedent (I'll acknowledge it's not a perfect example up front). There is a set list of firearms that you can purchase in California. You cannot purchase firearms in the State that are not on that list. Yet - you can bring in firearms not on that list that were purchased in other states. It can be quite the process (as it should be) but it's certainly achievable, and those firearms are certainly no less useful in the State.

I can't even think of what types of restrictions would be put into place to make ICE vehicles post 2025+ 'less useful'. More expensive? No doubt - bring on the taxes, but not less useful as a method of vehicular transportation.
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:40 pm

Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.


Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.
 
winginit
Posts: 2969
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 8:55 pm

JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.


Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.


Is that problematic though practically? Wasn't it only last year that for at least one quarter (maybe more) American couldn't even make a dime flying passengers and instead were making all of their money pushing credit cards?
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10734
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:40 pm

JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.


Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I disagree with your statement.

It is not an admission "that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars". It is statement of fact that they have not maximized their pricing. Honestly they could definitely add $2-5,000 to the price of each car and still be selling all they produce as demand is still outstripping supply for the moment. Most competitors are priced higher (for equivalent specs). So there is margin that they are giving up. Yes an increase would reduce sales but they would tailor the increase to just cancel out the excess demand.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:44 pm

JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
There's absolutely no proof that vertical integration reduces costs. Tesla's core business is definitely not profitable since the only they they're printing profits at the moment is by selling emissions credits.

Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.

Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I'm not seeing the problem. In the linked article above Elon says they are not seeking great profit, they are investing in future growth. If they were focused on profit, they would run the business another way. If you're looking to invest in a company that is focused on profit, find a different company to invest in.

There's no proof that vertical integration reduces cost, but there's also no proof that Tesla could innovate as they now do if they went horizontal. There's plusses and minuses to each. Personally I don't see how competitors will be able to take off the shelf stuff and end up with the kind of innovation Tesla has. If it turns out the subcontractors can do better, Tesla can wait till they get the tech where they want it to be and get subs to bid on the work.

It seems Tesla is in a great spot. Great stock price so great ability to raise cash if needed, yet still free to invest back into the product. It should stay the same as long as they can show they are continuing to improve their tech. Heck as noted Apple has a huge valuation long after it's innovative phas has largely stopped.

Interesting documentary from DW: Will Germany's car industry survive? -- a bit melancholy, but that seems to be DW's style. It echos the point that the traditional auto makers are happy to rest on their laurels and rely on old school ICE SUVs to keep bringing home the bacon. Good luck with that!
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4339
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Thu Sep 24, 2020 9:51 pm

A Boeing engineer wrote a book on outsourcing versus vertical integration. A principle concern is that every outsourced item is contracted for as is. Boeing does not have the freedom to redesign it and save money with a simpler and better design/manufacture. Tesla and Panasonic do seem to have a contract that allows for ongoing changes, and both parties seem happy. Tesla can also change any of its parts or processes without any complications with supply chain or contracts. Cost and profit allocations don't need renegotiation. Sandy Munro has talked about the nightmare of getting Detroit to make design changes when he worked there - and that was only dealing with the bureaucracy of one company.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:30 am

Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.


Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I disagree with your statement.

It is not an admission "that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars". It is statement of fact that they have not maximized their pricing.


Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

They don't have pricing power.
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:35 am

Revelation wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
Not entirely accurate. One of the key things to understand is that the emissions credits sales allow Tesla to not need to gain that profit from their cars. But based on current GAAP they are around showing about 1% profit in their car production.

Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I'm not seeing the problem. In the linked article above Elon says they are not seeking great profit, they are investing in future growth. If they were focused on profit, they would run the business another way. If you're looking to invest in a company that is focused on profit, find a different company to invest in.


The numbers don't support that. Capex-depreciation is close to zero meaning new investment is close to zero. R&D as a % of sales is very typical of the industry 5%-ish, but on a much smaller revenue. John Deere has R&D budget higher than Tesla.

The only strength is share price meaning they have a large supply of money ready to use (they just raised 5B this month).
 
tommy1808
Posts: 13523
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:07 am

JJJ wrote:
Revelation wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I'm not seeing the problem. In the linked article above Elon says they are not seeking great profit, they are investing in future growth. If they were focused on profit, they would run the business another way. If you're looking to invest in a company that is focused on profit, find a different company to invest in.


John Deere has R&D budget higher than Tesla..


And JD doesn´t have the "do everything ourselves" approach either, and forks out even major R&D to its suppliers.

And Volkswagen spends over 10 Billion on R&D every year....

best regards
Thomas
Well, there is prophecy in the bible after all: 2 Timothy 3:1-6
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4512
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 8:35 am

JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Which is a roundabout admission that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars. Emission credits give you a heads start but eventually will dry out as other manufacturers make their own EVs and generate those green credits themselves.

Tesla still hasn't shown a profitable year and those quarterly profits are, at best, anemic.

As it should be because large scale manufacturing is not a particularly profitable business. Apple which seems to be the mirror Tesla keeps looking at barely makes anything by themselves.

I disagree with your statement.

It is not an admission "that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars". It is statement of fact that they have not maximized their pricing.


Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

They don't have pricing power.

is it incorrect to say they lowered the price as production line mature and cost reduced, just like F35?
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 9:24 am

c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
I disagree with your statement.

It is not an admission "that they can't make money manufacturing and selling cars". It is statement of fact that they have not maximized their pricing.


Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

They don't have pricing power.


is it incorrect to say they lowered the price as production line mature and cost reduced, just like F35?


Might be, might explain some of it, but doubtful overall.

Why on earth would a money losing company reduce price on items unless they absolutely have to?
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4512
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 10:14 am

JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

They don't have pricing power.


is it incorrect to say they lowered the price as production line mature and cost reduced, just like F35?


Might be, might explain some of it, but doubtful overall.

Why on earth would a money losing company reduce price on items unless they absolutely have to?

Are they losing money on the car production itself, or are they just losing money due to R&D and factory expansion and accounting and such?
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:03 am

c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:

is it incorrect to say they lowered the price as production line mature and cost reduced, just like F35?


Might be, might explain some of it, but doubtful overall.

Why on earth would a money losing company reduce price on items unless they absolutely have to?

Are they losing money on the car production itself, or are they just losing money due to R&D and factory expansion and accounting and such?


Only the good folks at Tesla accounting department know that, but from my own background in industrial manufacturing if your profits don't account for fixed costs they aren't actually profits.

There's some leeway there for startups, pre-revenue companies and so on, but Tesla is 17 years old already and is, by far, the most valuable car company in the world.
 
agill
Posts: 1082
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:49 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 12:18 pm

Hard to imagine that anyone would buy a new gasoline powered car in 2035.
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10734
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 2:26 pm

JJJ wrote:
Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

I don't think you taking into account the fact that, as planned, they began production with and prioritized sales of the highest cost version of each model in order to "create" as much initial cash flow as early as possible. That automatically leads to a reducing price over time.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
LCDFlight
Posts: 627
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2020 9:22 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:13 pm

Electric cars (as currently constructed and operated) really have zero environmental benefits... ZERO....

But don't let that stop you. I think they are really cool.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 12482
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:35 pm

LCDFlight wrote:
Electric cars (as currently constructed and operated) really have zero environmental benefits... ZERO....

But don't let that stop you. I think they are really cool.


Zero is quite a misnomer for people who like breathing clean air in their communities. Yes, how the batteries are built and what elements are harvested are problematic, but most Americans won’t care as long as that’s happening in China.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:59 pm

Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

I don't think you taking into account the fact that, as planned, they began production with and prioritized sales of the highest cost version of each model in order to "create" as much initial cash flow as early as possible. That automatically leads to a reducing price over time.

Tugg


What you said is true but it's not what I meant.

Tesla has cut prices across the board several times. It's true that at the beginning only the higher trim versions were offered but those versions are still for sale, with a reduced price.

Only recently the model Y that's not yet a year old model had prices drop 5% ish across the range.

That's not a sign of pricing power.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:13 pm

Aaron747 wrote:
LCDFlight wrote:
Electric cars (as currently constructed and operated) really have zero environmental benefits... ZERO....

But don't let that stop you. I think they are really cool.


Zero is quite a misnomer for people who like breathing clean air in their communities. Yes, how the batteries are built and what elements are harvested are problematic, but most Americans won’t care as long as that’s happening in China.

Thanks for your realistic post.

I think most people under estimate the day to day air pollution we create.

Given the COVID19 era I have time on my hands so chose to walk to more places.

People should take the time to take a walk alongside a moderately busy road, especially one with a decent number of traffic lights. You'll get a good feel for how much pollution just a few cars can create.

Also look at how the reduction in commuting has helped clear the air in many polluted areas of the world.

I think it's a worthy goal to get rid of ICE engines for the widely dispersed pollution they create.

Creating and utilizing EVs does create pollution, but at least it's focused at locations where it can be controlled.

It's easier to control pollution at one electrical plant vs thousands of car, bus and truck exhausts.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10734
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:23 pm

JJJ wrote:
Tugger wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Every Tesla car on the road is selling now for less than it was initially offered for sale, and they've been discounted multiple times.

I don't think you taking into account the fact that, as planned, they began production with and prioritized sales of the highest cost version of each model in order to "create" as much initial cash flow as early as possible. That automatically leads to a reducing price over time.

Tugg


What you said is true but it's not what I meant.

Tesla has cut prices across the board several times. It's true that at the beginning only the higher trim versions were offered but those versions are still for sale, with a reduced price.

Only recently the model Y that's not yet a year old model had prices drop 5% ish across the range.

That's not a sign of pricing power.

OK, fair enough. However I still do not think that Tesla is wanting or seeking "pricing power" as you see it, they are focusing on production and increasing penetration down market (they already have a solid foothold above that). Without increased penetration into the largest portion of the market, pricing power will not help them. They have very low production compared to their competition, so production must increase or any pricing power is moot and all it would net was being a takeover target by someone looking to sell it to a competitor.

While I get that pricing power is good and a common and key metric, honestly we seldom have a new entrant into the automotive market so there is not a lot look at. I might look at Ford and the Model-T, that was a similar case of a company not seeking high prices, instead forgoing that to ficus on production volume which in turn can drive sales and then profits. If it works.

And finally I will also note that pricing power also encapsulates the ability to undercut your competitors, to price below what they can and drive them out of the market. Tesla has that ability right now as they are more viewed and and held by investors who were more traditionally tech investors and are used to no and even "negative profits" (that's a loss folks ;- ) so they have a luxury few other heavy production oriented businesses have. And so they are taking advantage of it. Short sellers have for years waited for their shareholder base to flip and been frustrated so far.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21861
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:02 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
So the celebrities and ultra wealthy resident in California won't be able to buy a new Bentley, Land Rover, Lamborghini, etc? I don't think so. This is dead in the water and will just be another reason to chase out the extremists running the state.


15 years ago there was no Facebook. 15 years ago today, I was a brand-new resident struggling my way through my first floor rotation. 15 years ago there was one hybrid (the Prius) and no mass-produced electric vehicles.

In 15 years, all of the luxury brands will have electric vehicles. 15 years is a long time.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
User avatar
Tugger
Posts: 10734
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:38 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:21 pm

DocLightning wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
So the celebrities and ultra wealthy resident in California won't be able to buy a new Bentley, Land Rover, Lamborghini, etc? I don't think so. This is dead in the water and will just be another reason to chase out the extremists running the state.


15 years ago there was no Facebook. 15 years ago today, I was a brand-new resident struggling my way through my first floor rotation. 15 years ago there was one hybrid (the Prius) and no mass-produced electric vehicles.

In 15 years, all of the luxury brands will have electric vehicles. 15 years is a long time.

15 years ago there was no iPhone, aka "the smart phone" as we know it today, and no SpaceX Falcon's had launched (and failed) yet.

Tugg
I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. - W. Shatner
There are many kinds of sentences that we think state facts about the world but that are really just expressions of our attitudes. - F. Ramsey
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13251
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:36 pm

winginit wrote:
Aesma wrote:
frmrCapCadet wrote:
Bringing a new ICE car in from outside California will not be banned. Although by 2025 I suspect EVs will begin to be the cars of choice for most people.


But you can expect restrictions. If SF or LA ban ICE engines, then your car bought elsewhere will be less useful.


Eh I don't know about that. Use the firearm issue today as an example for the purposes of precedent (I'll acknowledge it's not a perfect example up front). There is a set list of firearms that you can purchase in California. You cannot purchase firearms in the State that are not on that list. Yet - you can bring in firearms not on that list that were purchased in other states. It can be quite the process (as it should be) but it's certainly achievable, and those firearms are certainly no less useful in the State.

I can't even think of what types of restrictions would be put into place to make ICE vehicles post 2025+ 'less useful'. More expensive? No doubt - bring on the taxes, but not less useful as a method of vehicular transportation.


Just read what I wrote. Cities could ban ICE altogether. It's already happening regarding the most polluting ones, and it will only go one way : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-emission_zone
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
winginit
Posts: 2969
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:52 pm

Aesma wrote:
winginit wrote:
Aesma wrote:

But you can expect restrictions. If SF or LA ban ICE engines, then your car bought elsewhere will be less useful.


Eh I don't know about that. Use the firearm issue today as an example for the purposes of precedent (I'll acknowledge it's not a perfect example up front). There is a set list of firearms that you can purchase in California. You cannot purchase firearms in the State that are not on that list. Yet - you can bring in firearms not on that list that were purchased in other states. It can be quite the process (as it should be) but it's certainly achievable, and those firearms are certainly no less useful in the State.

I can't even think of what types of restrictions would be put into place to make ICE vehicles post 2025+ 'less useful'. More expensive? No doubt - bring on the taxes, but not less useful as a method of vehicular transportation.


Just read what I wrote. Cities could ban ICE altogether. It's already happening regarding the most polluting ones, and it will only go one way : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-emission_zone


A fair point, and I'd say you've changed my mind on the fact that ICE could be made far less useful. Having said that, cities, eventually, very much should ban ICE altogether at a minimum just in select zones (Santa Monica comes to mind) - it's inevitable and much needed, but today we only see it predominantly in European cities with heavily utilized and well connected public transportation, which is a rarity especially in a state like California and still will be in 2025.

What's the alternative? ICE forever? Just spewing CO2 across the same streets where people dine outside? It's absurd, and it's due time to start drawing lines in the sand.
Last edited by winginit on Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13251
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 5:55 pm

JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
Might be, might explain some of it, but doubtful overall.

Why on earth would a money losing company reduce price on items unless they absolutely have to?

Are they losing money on the car production itself, or are they just losing money due to R&D and factory expansion and accounting and such?


Only the good folks at Tesla accounting department know that, but from my own background in industrial manufacturing if your profits don't account for fixed costs they aren't actually profits.

There's some leeway there for startups, pre-revenue companies and so on, but Tesla is 17 years old already and is, by far, the most valuable car company in the world.


But they're building new capacity (factories) left and right, while other auto manufacturers are closing them. These factories have to be amortized over some time.

I actually agree that the valuation is ridiculous, and don't buy the argument that there is software etc. I'm all for autonomous vehicles and want them ASAP, Tesla isn't there yet, and governments are certainly not there yet.

I know that for US people, especially relatively affluent ones on this website or in the tech and financial world, a Tesla Model 3 is relatively cheap, but on the planet, it's an expensive luxury car, not one that can sell millions upon millions.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 2200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:29 pm

TTailedTiger wrote:
So the celebrities and ultra wealthy resident in California won't be able to buy a new Bentley, Land Rover, Lamborghini, etc? I don't think so. This is dead in the water and will just be another reason to chase out the extremists running the state.


Maybe they should take away the marijuana. Someone is smoking too much to think this is going to be a reality. :D
Funny. It only took one pandemic for those who argue endlessly about natural selection to stop believing in natural selection.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 2200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:30 pm

frmrCapCadet wrote:
Bringing a new ICE car in from outside California will not be banned. Although by 2025 I suspect EVs will begin to be the cars of choice for most people.


In a state with a power shortage all the time and rolling blackouts. What could possibly go wrong?
Funny. It only took one pandemic for those who argue endlessly about natural selection to stop believing in natural selection.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 2200
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:31 pm

DocLightning wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
So the celebrities and ultra wealthy resident in California won't be able to buy a new Bentley, Land Rover, Lamborghini, etc? I don't think so. This is dead in the water and will just be another reason to chase out the extremists running the state.


15 years ago there was no Facebook. 15 years ago today, I was a brand-new resident struggling my way through my first floor rotation. 15 years ago there was one hybrid (the Prius) and no mass-produced electric vehicles.

In 15 years, all of the luxury brands will have electric vehicles. 15 years is a long time.


Cars aren’t phones.
Funny. It only took one pandemic for those who argue endlessly about natural selection to stop believing in natural selection.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 12482
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Fri Sep 25, 2020 11:48 pm

DL717 wrote:
TTailedTiger wrote:
So the celebrities and ultra wealthy resident in California won't be able to buy a new Bentley, Land Rover, Lamborghini, etc? I don't think so. This is dead in the water and will just be another reason to chase out the extremists running the state.


Maybe they should take away the marijuana. Someone is smoking too much to think this is going to be a reality. :D


People said the same about air quality management until Gov. Reagan signed the Mulford-Carrell Act in 1967.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 6290
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 1:05 am

What many miss is how much the ICE has improved over the years. My MB gets better fuel mileage with not 10% of the emissions my Pinto did 45 years ago. And maintenance is vastly easier, no,points and condensers, no oil changes every 3,000 miles and it would the GTO in a drag race. With better luxury, to boot.
 
Newark727
Posts: 2121
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 2:50 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
What many miss is how much the ICE has improved over the years. My MB gets better fuel mileage with not 10% of the emissions my Pinto did 45 years ago. And maintenance is vastly easier, no,points and condensers, no oil changes every 3,000 miles and it would the GTO in a drag race. With better luxury, to boot.


I mean, you're not wrong, but are you sure you want to use a Pinto as a point of comparison? :D
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4512
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 7:45 am

JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Might be, might explain some of it, but doubtful overall.

Why on earth would a money losing company reduce price on items unless they absolutely have to?

Are they losing money on the car production itself, or are they just losing money due to R&D and factory expansion and accounting and such?


Only the good folks at Tesla accounting department know that, but from my own background in industrial manufacturing if your profits don't account for fixed costs they aren't actually profits.

There's some leeway there for startups, pre-revenue companies and so on, but Tesla is 17 years old already and is, by far, the most valuable car company in the world.

Their current valuation shows that the marlet is still treating them as a startup with many grow potentials.Yes it is a long time compare to other startup, but it's also actually making cars instead of just creating software platforms.
The valuation reflect what investors think of their potential in the future rather than what they have now, which is how other car companies without prospect of such growth are valuated
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
JJJ
Posts: 3755
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 5:12 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:27 am

c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Are they losing money on the car production itself, or are they just losing money due to R&D and factory expansion and accounting and such?


Only the good folks at Tesla accounting department know that, but from my own background in industrial manufacturing if your profits don't account for fixed costs they aren't actually profits.

There's some leeway there for startups, pre-revenue companies and so on, but Tesla is 17 years old already and is, by far, the most valuable car company in the world.

Their current valuation shows that the marlet is still treating them as a startup with many grow potentials.Yes it is a long time compare to other startup, but it's also actually making cars instead of just creating software platforms.
The valuation reflect what investors think of their potential in the future rather than what they have now, which is how other car companies without prospect of such growth are valuated


"The market" was also valuing a company with barely more than a few renders (Nikola) in the billions, to the point of getting them a partnership with GM.

See how it's turning out.

When even a property developer like Evergrande is raising money to build EVs it tells you that the level of scrutiny on anything related to EVs is, to put it mildly, appallingly low.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2714
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:40 am

What "the market" says and does is extremely far removed from reality. Exhibit one: the valuation of Tesla. Exhibit two: The DJ index rising to record heights in the midst of a pandemic. It would be exceedingly delusional to use "the market" of an indicator of anything but how rich people get even richer.

Tesla is worthy of praise for making EV's viable as a means of transportation, but the assembly and build quality is nowhere near what it should be given the price they're asking for their products. However, once companies who know how to build quality premium products get their EV production up and running, the market for Tesla's will be diminishing fast, at least in the premium category.
Signature. You just read one.
 
User avatar
c933103
Posts: 4512
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 8:40 am

JJJ wrote:
c933103 wrote:
JJJ wrote:

Only the good folks at Tesla accounting department know that, but from my own background in industrial manufacturing if your profits don't account for fixed costs they aren't actually profits.

There's some leeway there for startups, pre-revenue companies and so on, but Tesla is 17 years old joui and is, by far, the most valuable car company in the world.

Their current valuation shows that the marlet is still treating them as a startup with many grow potentials.Yes it is a long time compare to other startup, but it's also actually making cars instead of just creating software platforms.
The valuation reflect what investors think of their potential in the future rather than what they have now, which is how other car companies without prospect of such growth are valuated


"The market" was also valuing a company with barely more than a few renders (Nikola) in the billions, to the point of getting them a partnership with GM.

See how it's turning out.

When even a property developer like Evergrande is raising money to build EVs it tells you that the level of scrutiny on anything related to EVs is, to put it mildly, appallingly low.

A company would worth 1 billion if it have 0.1% chance to grow to a trillion dollar enterprise but 99.9% chance the company value woild drop to zero.
Question is how do you accurately determine chance of a company succeeding and how successful it'll be if it do
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 1:10 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
What many miss is how much the ICE has improved over the years. My MB gets better fuel mileage with not 10% of the emissions my Pinto did 45 years ago. And maintenance is vastly easier, no,points and condensers, no oil changes every 3,000 miles and it would the GTO in a drag race. With better luxury, to boot.

Yes, and Tesla has only been around 15 years and they've gone from a Lotus chassis with a battery in the boot to a car that can go over five hundred miles on one charge. And, over the next three years, the roadmap looks like:

All told, the series of advances will yield a 54 percent increase in range, a 56 percent decrease in the dollar per kilowatt-hour pack price, and a decrease in capital investment required for manufacturing.

Ref: https://www.greentechmedia.com/articles ... hree-years

The ICE engine has improved, but it's a dead end. You can't get around the fact that it's at best 30% energy efficient. Most of the energy you put in goes to all the friction in the engine. All those pistons moving up and down, that whole valve train pushing valves in and out, that crankshaft turning linear force into rotational force, that transmission that exists because the engine can only produce power over narrow bands of output, those fan belts turning the alternator because you need to have electricity to run the car, the oil pump you need to reduce friction, the water pump you need because the engine produces so much waste heat.

You haven't addressed the reason this ban is happening: your improved ICE engine pollutes the air everywhere it goes. And unless you live on your own oil field and refine your own crude your ICE is tied to big oil, whereas those with means can buy solar panels and Powercells and make and store their own electricity.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Classa64
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 5:40 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 1:55 pm

In 2034 I could see a surge of people buying one or even two new gas powered cars that will last them 20 years and not care about the stop sale.I don't have an issue with all electric but no one has made one that is even remotely attractive exterior wise, Tesla's are butt ugly for sure, the Mach E... ewww. Over time designs will have to get better and charging stations more accessible. The next closest to me is at a Tim Hortins and always not accessible due to were its placed and non electric cars always parked in its spot. 35 years from now the designs will change and may become more attractive, infrastructure will get better so maybe the world will go electric on there own. But with more need for power comes questions. How will the grid be upgraded, whose going to pay, will more power stations have to be built, whose going to pay.

What do we do with battery waste and does going electric offset the emissions from that?

In the posters link(up top) it say "Environmental groups praised the governor’s action on clean vehicles...
They also want "Environmental groups had hoped he would ban all new drilling permits in the state.

Both good things, but when we go electric are the going to complain about the waste?
C
"Freedom is the miles i'm rolling on"
 
kalvado
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 2:00 pm

Revelation wrote:
You haven't addressed the reason this ban is happening: your improved ICE engine pollutes the air everywhere it goes. And unless you live on your own oil field and refine your own crude your ICE is tied to big oil, whereas those with means can buy solar panels and Powercells and make and store their own electricity.

There are three reasons such ban is promised: votes, votes, and votes.
You cannot make up things like this, huh...
winginit wrote:
What's the alternative? ICE forever? Just spewing CO2 across the same streets where people dine outside? It's absurd, and it's due time to start drawing lines in the sand.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:01 pm

Classa64 wrote:
In 2034 I could see a surge of people buying one or even two new gas powered cars that will last them 20 years and not care about the stop sale.I don't have an issue with all electric but no one has made one that is even remotely attractive exterior wise, Tesla's are butt ugly for sure, the Mach E... ewww. Over time designs will have to get better and charging stations more accessible. The next closest to me is at a Tim Hortins and always not accessible due to were its placed and non electric cars always parked in its spot. 35 years from now the designs will change and may become more attractive, infrastructure will get better so maybe the world will go electric on there own. But with more need for power comes questions. How will the grid be upgraded, whose going to pay, will more power stations have to be built, whose going to pay.

What do we do with battery waste and does going electric offset the emissions from that?

In the posters link(up top) it say "Environmental groups praised the governor’s action on clean vehicles...
They also want "Environmental groups had hoped he would ban all new drilling permits in the state.

Both good things, but when we go electric are the going to complain about the waste?
C

We'll all know more in 2034, but I imagine the oil economy will be a lot different. You won't want to own a car if the reducing production of gasoline means the price per gallon is going up and it's getting hard to find. A good example of this is 100LL aviation fuel. Look what happened to its price as production volume was reduced. One airport I know of has enough business to keep going but cannot get anyone to make a delivery.

It seems a grid upgrade is already needed, even before mass electification of transportation. One good thing about EVs is you can charge them off peak. My last employer had charging spots right outside the door that were always busy. They never had a gasoline pump! And of course home owners can install their own chargers and charge overnight.

Battery waste is a different problem than air pollution. ICEs pollute everywhere they go. Battery waste can be localized.

kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
You haven't addressed the reason this ban is happening: your improved ICE engine pollutes the air everywhere it goes. And unless you live on your own oil field and refine your own crude your ICE is tied to big oil, whereas those with means can buy solar panels and Powercells and make and store their own electricity.

There are three reasons such ban is promised: votes, votes, and votes.

So what is your antidote for democracy?
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Classa64
Posts: 325
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 5:40 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:24 pm

Revelation wrote:
Classa64 wrote:
In 2034 I could see a surge of people buying one or even two new gas powered cars that will last them 20 years and not care about the stop sale.I don't have an issue with all electric but no one has made one that is even remotely attractive exterior wise, Tesla's are butt ugly for sure, the Mach E... ewww. Over time designs will have to get better and charging stations more accessible. The next closest to me is at a Tim Hortins and always not accessible due to were its placed and non electric cars always parked in its spot. 35 years from now the designs will change and may become more attractive, infrastructure will get better so maybe the world will go electric on there own. But with more need for power comes questions. How will the grid be upgraded, whose going to pay, will more power stations have to be built, whose going to pay.

What do we do with battery waste and does going electric offset the emissions from that?

In the posters link(up top) it say "Environmental groups praised the governor’s action on clean vehicles...
They also want "Environmental groups had hoped he would ban all new drilling permits in the state.

Both good things, but when we go electric are the going to complain about the waste?
C

We'll all know more in 2034, but I imagine the oil economy will be a lot different. You won't want to own a car if the reducing production of gasoline means the price per gallon is going up and it's getting hard to find. A good example of this is 100LL aviation fuel. Look what happened to its price as production volume was reduced. One airport I know of has enough business to keep going but cannot get anyone to make a delivery.

It seems a grid upgrade is already needed, even before mass electification of transportation. One good thing about EVs is you can charge them off peak. My last employer had charging spots right outside the door that were always busy. They never had a gasoline pump! And of course home owners can install their own chargers and charge overnight.

Battery waste is a different problem than air pollution. ICEs pollute everywhere they go. Battery waste can be localized.

kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
You haven't addressed the reason this ban is happening: your improved ICE engine pollutes the air everywhere it goes. And unless you live on your own oil field and refine your own crude your ICE is tied to big oil, whereas those with means can buy solar panels and Powercells and make and store their own electricity.

There are three reasons such ban is promised: votes, votes, and votes.

So what is your antidote for democracy?


I did not think of the price of gas actually. Up here where I live we are paying 1.10Lnow ( varies a lot in this area from .95-1.30) I drive a civic so I'm good for 600km a tank. An all electric for me works, I have 35km commute on paved 4 lane divided hi-way and I pass one car on a busy day lol.
In Ontario, Hydro One has frozen rates for now, used to have Low/Mid/Peak time rates but now its frozen at 12.8 cents per kWh, 24 hours a day, seven days a week from June 1 to October 31. I would not have a problem installing a higher voltage charger, but it all comes at a cost I guess.
C.
"Freedom is the miles i'm rolling on"
 
kalvado
Posts: 2898
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 3:55 pm

Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
You haven't addressed the reason this ban is happening: your improved ICE engine pollutes the air everywhere it goes. And unless you live on your own oil field and refine your own crude your ICE is tied to big oil, whereas those with means can buy solar panels and Powercells and make and store their own electricity.

There are three reasons such ban is promised: votes, votes, and votes.

So what is your antidote for democracy?

I would say education and critical thinking - but apparently none of those is surviving the task...
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 24635
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: California to ban sale of new gasoline-powered passenger vehicles in 2035

Sat Sep 26, 2020 4:41 pm

kalvado wrote:
Revelation wrote:
kalvado wrote:
There are three reasons such ban is promised: votes, votes, and votes.

So what is your antidote for democracy?

I would say education and critical thinking - but apparently none of those is surviving the task...

Yeah, even kids who were in the back of the classroom get a vote, and now social media has provided a way for the uncritical thinkers to unite.

Hurrah for modern times!
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], flyguy89, Google [Bot], JJJ, lowwkjax, qfflyer, tommy1808, vrbarreto and 42 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos