yeah set it for way off in the future so it has plenty of time to be struck down before it affects those profits
this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
266 points (98.5% liked)
News
23404 readers
4627 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I get what you're saying and that's obviously a concern, but at the same time... doesn't it have to be reasonably far in the future? We don't have either the infrastructure or even enough supply of EVs to change this too quickly.
That said, I wish they'd use a gradual approach. Start ramping up taxes on gasoline with the proceeds entirely going to EV infrastructure (and similar for purchasing new gasoline vehicles and licensing existing vehicles). Start small and increase as we get closer to the cutoff date. Start limiting gas station development and create zoning regulations for EV infrastructure (especially charging for apartments, which is a huge gap). Make all the laws ramp up gradually so that it's always small, incremental changes that are never too difficult to do at a time, but will get us in a better place in 10-15 years.
The used car market will still go strong for years to come. Few people will be forced to buy an EV until probably at least 2040-2050.
Get your new gas car in 2034, drive it for ten years, probably be able to pick up a lower mileage used one in 2045 drive it for another 5 years. Buy an EV in 2050 when all the kinks and infrastructure has been ironed out.
This is a gradual approach. The problem is, even the first step of that approach is several years away. The infrastructure needs to start being built now, with priority. And while more would be great, its not like we dont already have electrical infrastructure, every home with electricity is already capable of charging an EV.
We are so shamefully behind on taking action that we are still increasing oil production!
My thoughts exactly. It's so far in advance, so many people will change seats... effectively a vague threat that this could be banned sometime in the future.
As it should be
If you think about the life cycle of cars though, even without everyone just going to buy their car in NY there will be plenty of 16 year old gas powered cars still driving around NJ in 2050. Hopefully we get a cash-for-clunkers type deal before then.
Maybe if we keep kicking the can down the road for another decade climate change will solve itself?
I'm surprised that this is something voters support. I see plenty of people who like electric cars on the internet, but I assumed that that was because the web pages I go to attract unusual people. I would have guessed that the majority of Americans wouldn't trust new electric technology and that they would get pretty angry if they wanted a new car but they weren't permitted to buy a gas-powered one.
Is this an issue of environmentalists being a vocal minority while most voters simply don't care what politicians promise to do twelve years from now?
I would have guessed that the majority of Americans wouldn’t trust new electric technology and that they would get pretty angry if they wanted a new car but they weren’t permitted to buy a gas-powered one.
You would be correct with your guess. People, as a whole, do not like bans.
The way to win people over is to make EVs the better product. Cars didn't beat out the horse and buggy because cars were mandated, they won because they were a better product. You can still drive a horse and buggy on the streets today, just ask the people in Pennsylvania, USA.
I'm extra shocked to see this in NJ; it is one of only two states where you are not allowed to pump your own gas. Efforts to change pump laws have been massively unfavorable because, among other things, they create jobs.
There's a lot of disinformation on EV's. I drove an ICE until 2018 when I felt EV technology, longevity, and charging infrastructure was ready, I got a model 3. This was still on the early adoption side and my circle of people expected the car to self combust. Even to this day people I am still educating people in my circle. You'd think 4 years of driving and 50k miles might change opinions, but I still get asked how much does the battery cost to replace. Which is the equivalent of an engine seizing in an ICE. It's not going to happen except in rare instances. Realistically the battery will last the life of the car for me. Maybe it will finally click for people when I've been driving it for 10, 15 years. I think for others gas prices will need to squeeze their wallet before reality sets in. I support this bill, even if its grasping at straws, it's a step in the right direction. But a lot of consumer education needs to happen between now and then.
TLDR: The majority of Americans are still skeptical about EV reliability and believe they cost more than equivalent hybrids, etc
Well, if you notice, it's only blue states that support it. Red states like their gas guzzlers, but they'll be forced to follow suit eventually.
Electric cars will be well and truly dominant by 2035, and likely well before then. Why would people want to buy crappy outdated tech by that point?
It would be like buying a horse and cart after cars have taken over during the 20th century.
The same goes for gas stoves and the like. They are trash compared to induction cooktops, and people will come to understand that once they use it.
I've used an induction cooktop, it had the most ridiculous user interface imaginable, using capacitive buttons on the cooktop. Gas is much more intuitive to use.
That's not inherent to the technology, just a particular implementation.
Most of the people who vehemently hate vehicle progress will be dead in 1-2 decades or at least will have lost their license to age or dui
Are they going to help people get the needed electrical upgrades to have EV chargers? Will they mandate landlords to provide chargers?
No, they will eventually get lobbied into reversing the decision, this is the new method for politicians in aligning themselves with good efforts, make money from corporations that don't want it, and act it wasn't feasible
might be we'll have "classic" gas/diesel powered vehicles for the next 60 years, like Cuba
Every new science finding always says "faster than expected", but we sure aren't acting like the clock is running out. Attacking car emissions without doing something about cars themselves (that cause and/or are a cause of a larger problem) isn't really going to solve much, and certainly not if that's all we change in more than a decades. How about less cars? Easier to just shift the marketing and keep on producing something.
The problem is that fixing infrastructure for a "less cars" world will take decades. Unless you want a war-time level mobilisation, which I would personally be okay with, but most won't give up even the slightest convenience so it's hard to expect many would be fine with that.
So pushing EVs is the more realistic alternative, and it will also help with distributed storage so that more of the increasing level of home and grid scale solar and wind can be used at night.
Unless you want a war-time level mobilisation
Some of the more "radical" scientists have been calling for such a thing for a while now. Meaning that it's needed even more now since we haven't done much to change anything and more damage has been done. You aren't wrong, addressing the core problems would be a long and intensive process and most people would resist even required participation (which says something about the chances of voluntarily doing much).
I doubt anyone here disagrees with you that it would be a good thing. Instead, we don't believe it is a possible thing to have happen in a democracy.
It's not a coincidence that the car lifestyle is so widespread in the USA - many (most) people really like it. I don't think you're ever going to see a lot of support for switching away from it, regardless of the condition of the environment.
It’s not a coincidence that the car lifestyle is so widespread in the USA - many (most) people really like it.
Lots of people hate car culture but have no alternatives. Many people have never given alternatives a thought. Car culture is the water they swim in. And many people are reflexively conservative, and while they'll defend car culture now if you pop them down in a walkable area they'll defend that instead, because they just defend the current state.
Many people in the US have simply never lived a life where they don't need a car. It's pretty sweet.
This is going to work out great for people like me living in an apartment. But at least I'm not in South Jersey. Those people are really going to be fucked.
Something something cart before the horse (lol)