The EPA's Ban of Gasoline-Powered Cars Will Actually Slow Development of Electric Cars
The Biden administration wants as many as two-thirds of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. by 2032 to be electric. But the market should decide how to make that switch.

This week, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new vehicle standards with updated limits on car and truck emissions. If adopted, the rules would include prioritizing electric vehicles (E.V.s) and mitigating climate change. While those are good goals, it's not clear if the auto industry will be able to pull them off on the government's timeline.
More to the point, while it's entirely inappropriate for the government to make such mandates, it also may hinder future progress on E.V. technology.
President Joe Biden has been pushing for an E.V. future. In August 2021, he signed an executive order advocating that by 2030, half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. should be electric. At the time, the nation's "Big Three" automakers—General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis—agreed, jointly announcing a "shared aspiration" that by 2030, "40-50%" of their U.S. vehicles would be hybrid or all-electric "in order to move the nation closer to a zero-emissions future." To that end, the global automotive industry expects to spend $1.2 trillion by the end of the decade.
The EPA's new rules go even further. Some pertaining to light-duty vehicles (cars and trucks weighing under 10,000 pounds) would require as many as 60 percent of new cars and trucks to be E.V.s by 2030, jumping to 67 percent by 2032. If adopted, they would make mandatory what Biden's 2021 executive order had merely recommended.
The EPA estimates that adopting all of its rules "would avoid nearly 10 billion tons" of carbon emissions and "reduce oil imports by approximately 20 billion barrels" through 2055. But the auto industry may not be able to meet these accelerated deadlines, and it could even disincentivize innovation in the field.
In 2022, E.V.s made up 5.6 percent of U.S. auto sales, more than tripling their market share in three years. The sector is certainly booming—new E.V. registrations rose 60 percent in early 2022 even as overall new car registrations fell by 18 percent—but going from less than 6 percent of the market to fully two-thirds in less than a decade is quite ambitious.
Not to mention, despite falling prices in recent months, E.V.s remain considerably more expensive than their internal-combustion counterparts. In September 2022, the average E.V. cost $17,000 more than the average gas burner, according to Kelley Blue Book. Rep. Debbie Dingell (D–Mich.), whose district sits near the U.S. auto capital of Detroit, told Politico, "I'm hearing from too many people in this country—I mean, strong Democrats—that they can't afford an electric vehicle."
The Biden administration tried to put its thumb on the scale by including tax credits of up to $7,500 for E.V. purchases in last year's Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), but those credits are directly dependent on whether the battery's materials were sourced from a U.S. trade ally or a "foreign entity of concern." The latter clause was clearly directed at China—which is unfortunate, since that country owns or controls the vast majority of minerals used in E.V. batteries.
Overall, the E.V. industry is struggling to reach scale. Ford, which sells more E.V.s than any company except Tesla, lost $2.1 billion on its electric division last year and expects to lose another $3 billion this year. Rivian, an electric truck and SUV manufacturer with one of the most successful IPOs in recent history, is struggling to meet its own production targets as it burns through cash. At this rate, there's no guarantee that the automotive industry will be able to reach the government's target of 67 percent E.V.s by 2032.
The Biden administration should let the market decide. Clearly, there is a demand for electric vehicles. But by insisting on the rate at which the industry needs to make the transition, the administration's incentives could be undermining progress. Axios noted this week that "battery technology is still evolving…meaning the U.S. may be at risk of building mines and factories to produce batteries that wind up being obsolete in a decade."
As Reason's Ronald Bailey wrote in the March 2023 issue, electrochemists are already devising new methods of powering electric cars that don't use scarce materials. By imposing such a breakneck timeline, the EPA is forcing automakers to choose production over innovation.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The EPA's Ban of Gasoline-Powered Cars Will Actually Slow Development of Electric Cars
Electric cars are getting cheaper, this proves that the market is working.
It could also say that the market for electric cars is sagging and they are not in as much demand as ICE cars. Market working, just not how Biden and his Klimate Kult Kohorts want.
That’s what they said about the model T when Henry dropped the price.
However, the Model T had the tooling paid off by then, so Henry could lower the price and still make money. With the exception of Tesla, these electric vehicles so far do not make money.
Let me ask you this: if you could buy only one vehicle (as that's what most can afford/need for one person), would you buy the electric car that has at best 250 miles of range and takes a good half hour or more to refill at a special quick charging station, or would you buy the ICE car that has 350 miles of range and can be refilled in 5 to 10 minutes at any filling station, anywhere? Remember, people use their vehicles for more than just a daily commute.
I’ve owned a Tesla for the last two years. I’ve taken it cross country and many road trips. Works great.
Tesla by choice, have a party. by edict, fuck off.
You are correct
Great article, Mike. I appreciate your work, I’m now creating over $35,200 dollars each month simply by doing a simple job online! I do know You currently making a lot of greenbacks online from $28,200 dollars, its simple online operating jobs.
.
.
Just open the link—————————————>>> http://Www.JobsRevenue.Com
I am making $162/hour telecommuting. I never imagined that it was honest to goodness yet my closest companion is earning $21 thousand a month by working on the web, that was truly shocking for me, she prescribed me to attempt it simply
.
.
.
For Details—————————————➤ https://Www.Coins71.Com
And, how often have you done cross-country trips? How long did it take to refill? How often did you refill?
Road trips take about 15 to 20% longer than a gas powered car, but the time spent charging (15-20 minutes) is used up taking a piss, getting something to eat, checking emails.
Try it before you knock it.
I'd rather spend that time, y'know, *driving*.
But I will admit that I'm more of a "let's get where we're going" road tripper than a "let's see what's along the way" one.
Try it before you knock it.
Or, you know, don’t, and save time.
18 hrs. both ways, the 20% adds a workday to the vacation or subtracts a day full of activities. And that’s just the to-and-fro. Go someplace that doesn’t have chargers and you’ve got an extra couple hours off your vacay driving to the charger and sitting there checking email or not doing whatever it is you drove out there to do to get away from checking email.
How about, for your next vacation, you just cut it a day short and do work instead. Try it before you knock it. Dumbass.
Sorry to hear you still have to work for a living.
Don’t be so angry about it.
Wait, you don't have to work for a living and you *still* choose to be a slave to your car and email? That's even worse!
Teacher: What do you want to be when you grow up?
Timmy: A fireman!
Johnny: An astronaut!
Susie: A doctor!
Don't look at me!: I wanna sit around and check email while I wait for my car to charge!
Cars are used for commuting more than 90% of the time. If you really need to drive that away, you can always rent a car for your trip. The money you saved on gas using an EV will more than pay for it. Also, if you have kids, you have to stop anyways. It seems like your user case does not apply to most of the people.
You get something to eat every 250 miles at most? I can refill mine in 5 minutes and be back on the road for 350 miles. I’ve pulled off 1,000 mile days with my ICE.
But what about 2nd breakfast?
I’ve pulled off 1,000 mile days with my ICE.
… with a boat in tow.
I'm calling BS on that, because a friend of mine recently had to go from Seattle to Miami in hers and it was miserable.
Everyone has different expectations
I still hearken back to the fact that this is the guy who says EV road trips are not that inconvenient if you've got the bladder of an 8-yr.-old girl.
Enjoy your $5 gas
If it gets me there 20% quicker, that's like buying time. Enjoy your time with your family, huddled around your phone, checking email.
Considering the cost to install a charger at home and the cost of electricity at a commercial station, it actually costs more to charge an electric vehicle than an ICE. As for that high oil price? Electric cars pay it too, through natural gas power plants.
Yeah; just ignore that KWH equivalent charge or did Biden subsidize all the electric fuel while he was at it?
Review after review after review shows that the USPS Explorer cost more $/mile to drive than the gasoline equivalent JUST the fuel cost all by itself.
That was a big fat never-mind to longevity, wasted time, initial costs and everything else.
Hey; I don't mind EV vehicles. I do mind the fact I have to buy it (subsidize) it for others to drive.
I will never buy an elec. car reason being I live in Minnesota and with our cold weather some cars set out side in the cold and I think that would down the battery and another is they are to expensive and I have heard after 100 thousand miles u have to replace batteries at 10 grand. I can't afford it anyway because we live on our SS check and how about college kids they can't afford these cars either because they have to have money for there schooling . Also people that go on vacation cross country who wants to waste time waiting to charge up when it takes a few min. to gas up. No way will I buy one it is a very dumb idea.
Easiest online job opportunity to earn extra $450 everyday from home. Last month i have made $15855 from this very easy and simple job. I am a college student and just after the college i am doing this job for 3 to 4 hrs maximum a day. Get this job and kives a life debts free and financially free. Get this home job right now by follow instructions on the given website…….
.
SITE——>>>
DOLLARPAY.COM
...And they still can't out economy anything but a scooter sized car.
Golf cart as some are calling them which is about right.
Or - and this is the reality today - we bought a 2020 Tesla Model 3 LR that has a 332 mile range and recharges at a V3 Supercharger in about 19 minutes on average.
This illustrates the incredible rate of advance that has been the norm in EV tech over the past decade.
Let's see, registrations of electrics are up, even as gas cars are down. Doesn't exactly sound "sagging" to me. If we can keep the government from screwing things up too badly, EV's are likely to follow the same trajectory as so many other technologies, going from a luxury for the rich to a commodity for the masses.
EV’s are getting more expensive, as is the cost of battery replacement.
The laws of physics are a bitch.
If you have a ten thousand pound vehicle, it’s going to be a problem.
OMG, get a clue pal, EV prices are dropping and the batteries last longer than an ICE.
Who care if they are getting cheaper? I live in FL. We have no hydro power. We have no wind power (too dangerous with hurricanes), we have no nuclear power, we have no commercial solar power farms (hurricanes again). All your power comes from FOSSILE FUEL GENERATORS. That simple.
I just reduced my energy usage by 38%. My bill went up 10%.
Florida Uses 20,000,000 gallons of fuel a day for cars and trucks. That is over 700 million kW hours per day.
Explain to me how you plan to produce electricity at that scale and deliver it at all. The substations are not designed for it, the number of houses on a transformer are not designed for it. The power plants are not designed for it.
If we built a nuclear power plant for eery major city in Fl, plus say two more, to cover the balance of the state we could create the power, but we still can NOT deliver it.
Speaking if which, 90% of the houses in FL could not be upgraded to allow a 50AMP charging station to exist at the home and trust me a 10 amp will not work at all for the average person. Apartments would have NO possibility of allowing charging of residents' vehicles
California has already required this and it is now learning that there is no way to make it happen. they are finding out that even given 6 years notice, it can not be made to happen. Instead, no one will purchase new cars and they will purchase from out of state. that simple.
Lastly, IF this was to happen, by utility bill would soar to approximately 400% of what it is today. Why? because the demand on fossil fuels would become so great (to produce electricity) that it would more than triple the cost of fuel.
Remember our power plants do not burn liquid petroleum products in general. They burn NATURAL GAS. Which will triple or quadruple in price instantly.
I live in Minnesota and we have the cold as for u in Florida u have the heat and with air conditioners going it sucks up a lot of electricity and what if u lose power u r screwed the same for elec. v. it is a pain if u have to go somewhere or if it storms same for here in Minnesota u lose power u are screwed and it will up our elec. bill in both places so there for I am not sold on them and never will be so hopefully this will not go through and hope the Senate and House will vote it down.
In other Quack Libertarian news, providing people with water reduces the number of people bathing.
For USA, Work From Home On the computer, my friend’s aunt makes $164 every hour. Despite being jobless for eight months, she received a compensation check of $12,726 last month for a few hours of computer work.
.
.
Check info here————————>>https://salarycash710.blogspot.com/
While I have no doubt that eventually gasoline taxes will be pushed to punitive if not prohibitive levels, which is less likely to drive as strong a pushback as mandatory measures. The mandatory measures to drive "voluntary" compliance are always out there using Federal funds (e.g., Highway Safety Funds, Community Development Funds) being withheld from states that continue to register and license ICE vehicles. That, however, will be more interesting to watch, if it happens.
If you, like me, enjoy buttered popcorn while watching drama, keep your pantry and fridge well stocked, 'cause over the next few years there's going to be lots of drama to watch, and AOC, et al., is likely to seek to increase the gasohol mandate to the point that all the popcorn must be fermented and distilled to meet it, and cows have all been deported to rid the atmosphere of there toxic flatulence.
NO, it proves no such thing.
It isn't even true if you actually account for overall lifecycle cost and properly account for subsidies at every stages.
"President Joe Biden has been pushing for an E.V. future. In August 2021, he signed an executive order advocating that by 2030, half of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. should be electric."
When Obama said, ‘Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to fuck things up,’ it was a promise; not a warning.
It takes ten years to replace 50% of the vehicles on the road, because cars are a long term investment for most people. Also,do the math, if sales double every year, starting at 5.6% in 9 years they will only make up just under 45% of sales. Of new cars. Used cars are by far the largest sector of the auto industry. But current EVs are not really suited for used car sales, as three quarters of their costs are batteries, which are only good for about five years, making their desirability as used cars extremely dubious. The average car loan is 60 months, which means you'll pay off the EV about the same time as the battery wears out. Who wants that kind of headache? Who would finance a three year old EV knowing it only has two years life expectancy?
Additionally, the first practical ICE was patented in the 1820s, Benz introduced his motor carriages in 1880, the Model T came out in 1908. Horses were still a major factor in transportation in many parts of the country up till WW2, over a century after the first ICE was patented and 60 years after the first cars were marketed. The idea that cars instantly replaced horses is a myth. It was a slow process that took decades to accomplish.
Yeah, but Biden signed an EO. So it is Written, So it Shall be Done:
Except Yul Brenner didn't have to get re-elected in order to make sure 'it shall be done' actually happens.
This shit is the very definition of fascism.
It’s not fascism if we don’t call it that!
-Kyles dad.
except Biden's EO had nothing to do with the American people. Biden can not make laws that apply to people or business. He can write executive orders regarding federal agencies. Other than that it is an attempt to violate the separation of powers, which will not fly at all.
So what I am saying is that maybe half the cars sold to FEDERAL government agencies in the USA will be battery powered. However it means diddly to any person or company outside the US government because an executive order has no power outside of the government itself!
Bullshit. Try again. If the EPA mandates this auto manufacturers have to fucking follow it or face huge fines. And since he is the head of the executive branch, he can write an EO that the EPA has to implement these standards. Someone's not been paying attention again.
Don't they have to vote on it the house and senate or is it a done deal?
The idea that cars instantly replaced horses is a myth. It was a slow process that took decades to accomplish.
It’s because it wasn’t government mandated. Only government makes things happen.
/tony
Another myth, that Kennedy made the moonshot happen. No, rocketry had been around since the 13th century. New propellants developed in the 1920s and 1930s made rockets more powerful and dependable. NASA could have beat the Soviets into space but was taking a step by step proof of concept approach, whereas the Soviet Space Program basically said 'let's shoot a man into space, and if he lives, he lives'. By the time of Kennedy's speech, NASA had been working on the fundamentals for years and had it largely worked out how to do it, the critical part was in developing the correct rockets, and luckily for them the DoD was also developing larger, more efficient missiles for their ICBMs (the Jupiter series which was the basis for the Saturn series rockets).
I’m not sure I agree. There was a certain amount of political willpower involved.
I just wish there had been a plan for what happened after the moon shots.
Oh, sure there was political willpower, but that isn't why it succeeded. And it wasn't some new, untried technology that the government magically whipped out of their ass is my point. Basically, the willpower was to tell the Soviets 'we can put a man on the moon, think what we can do with a nuke'.
I think they knew what we could do with a nuke.
The entire Apollo and Mercury projects grew directly out of the Redstone Missile project. It was always a showcase of what we could do with nukes. For fuck sake, the Soviets didn't even pretend. Their first satellites went up directly on the ICBM boosters.
Existential threat. I should not have to say anything else.
THIS is what happened…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qDy4OMAkgY
A moonbase with purple haired babes in metallic mini skirts running the place.
Amazing! I’ve been making $85 every hour since i started freelancing over the internet half a year ago… I work from home several hours daily and do basic work i get from this company that i stumbled upon online… I am very happy to share this work opportunity to you… It’s definetly the best job i ever had…
Check it out here……………….>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
Executive orders? Government goals?
Okay. I admit I like the idea of a future where most ("most") vehicles will be powered by electricity. Once the industry gets there, and the public, and once the grid is actually capable of handling it, which will be sometime after we build a few hundred new nuclear reactors and rebuild 50% of the grid.
I give it about thirty years. If we start today.
The NRC released it's new regulations for next generation of nuclear reactors, all 1200 pages of them. I'm thinking it'll take 30 years just to get one reactor on line considering how the government is approaching this. 1200 pages to regulate reactors designed to be safer, to deal with the problems from the prior generation. Yeah, there is going to be no nuclear renaissance.
"The NRC released it’s new regulations for next generation of nuclear reactors, all 1200 pages of them. I’m thinking it’ll take 30 years just to get one reactor on line ..."
Yeah. I was trying to be optimistic.
If you’re gonna be optimistic, shoot for the future where cars run on Mr. Fusion drives and fly, because the EV future is gonna suck.
I give it 50 years if we started two years ago.
IF we start today and put 100% effort into it, and rebuild every substation in the USA to double its capacity and then double the capacity of every transformer along the route...maybe.
But by then we will be placing banana peels and cold coffee into the device and traveling through time as well as space.
What's this about doubling the capacity of substations and transformers? Do you think increasing the grid capacity will magically increase the generation capacity to match?
“he rules would include prioritizing electric vehicles (E.V.s) and mitigating climate change. While those are good goals…”
No Joe, those are competing goals. And it’s stealing a base to assume that “mitigating climate change” is a good goal, let alone an obtainable one.
Amd also not the business of the federal government. Let alone by ‘executive order’.
He said it used to be a farm, before the Motor Law ...
That’s funny. I wrote a blog entry on American Thinker during the Obama administration about that very thing. I noted how Red Barchetta used to be pure science fiction to me, but not anymore.
"A Nice Morning Drive", the short story that Neil based the song on is about the roads in Maryland. It's just off Alt. 40 by the Reno Monument, just outside of Boonesboro. I've had my bike around there quite a bit. The road the author turns on to evade his pursuers is now closed off, and there's a government installation up there.
A few points -
The 10 billion in emission reduction will greatly be diminished by the emissions from mining the minerals for batteries. The environmental damage in foreign countries never seems to bother the busybodies in the US.
Will the 'green' acolytes allow mining in the US for the lithium and other minerals where environmental protections are better than anywhere else on earth?
This also assumes there can be enough production of batteries to power that many new vehicles and the computer chips will also be available. 2020 should be a lesson learned, but we are discussing government where reality is not an option.
Is there a cost effective process to recycle millions of batteries per year? I honestly do not know. If someone does, let me know.
Fossil fuels still power most of the grid that will power the vehicles. Are the religious "greens" willing to accept a couple hundred SMR's for energy production?
The current electrical grid cannot handle the load for that many vehicles to be plugged in. Massive upgrades will be necessary and that does not happen overnight. Eight years may not be enough even with several hundred SMR's.
Remember a few years ago, the government wanted to ban incandescent light bulbs and force everyone into CFLs. It is difficult to find a CFL as the marketplace shifted everything toward LED. It is easy to see the technology in hydrogen fuel cells and other resources making the current battery technology obsolete. Government has a poor track record of picking winners and losers (Solyndra anyone?).
The marketplace seems to love hybrid vehicles. As these are less polluting than full ICE and costs considerably less than EV with less environmental damage from mineral extraction, why not encourage the use of hybrids to reduce emissions incrementally. Hybrids fall closer to the price point most of America can afford.
I was checking on the status of SMRs a few weeks ago, and it seems that their cost is looking like it will be rather greater (x2) than what was being promised about 2 years ago. Still a good technology and concept, but it's going to be a harder sell than one might have hoped.
A lot of the costs is the 1200 pages of regulations the NRC decided to write for them. One thousand, two hundred pages! It's almost like they don't believe their own propaganda, almost...
It’s frightening how so many people are comfortable with a president unilaterally mandating things like this. Not only democrats, but a lot of Americans too.
Government schools have done their job well.
Nothing a President writes as an order applies to any US citizen. It can ONLY apply to department of Government. This is the separation of powers. Congress didn't write it, Senate didn't approve it. It can not by law be a legally enforceable anything except within departments that fall under the President's Authority.
They really should have disarmed us before they tried to implement communism.
So, you mean like if the President writes an EO telling the EPA to do something, and the EPA regulates it into effect, gotcha.
May want to check your facts again. Which branch does the EPA belong to? Who is the head of that branch?
“Hybrids fall closer to the price point most of America can afford.”
But the the popes can still get to places that should be exclusively for my benefit! - the elite (and people who think they’ll be in that class)
Time for Congress to start doing their job again and taking a more active role in determining policy. The Executive branch obviously needs greater oversight in their application of the written law (law, not regulations).
And then I wake up, it was such a pleasant dream.....
>>mitigating climate change.
one Bailey is too many
"The EPA's Ban..."
It's not a "ban" = clickbait
And...many vehicles are exempted.
And...it's not even a law - it's a notice-of-proposed-rulemaking:
https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/proposed-rule-multi-pollutant-emissions-standards-model
EPA’s proposals are informed by robust and inclusive stakeholder engagement with industry, labor, advocates, and community leaders. EPA’s proposals will be published in the Federal Register and available for public review and comment, and the agency will continue to engage with the public and all interested stakeholders as part of the regulatory development process.
Gee, that sounds like corporatism, that is. the decision making process of fascism. It iseems to certainly usurp legislative authority.
And it sets rules that will be treated as law. The fact that there will be loopholes, only makes it less rational and more ad hoc and arbitrary creating perverse incentives in the market.
Don't worry hunny, I'm just going to put the tip in for a second.
Good point that, unlike book “bans”, where you would still be able to get books generally and even specifically “banned” books from Amazon or even at your local library, just not sitting in the window up front, this would be an actual *ban*. Where, analogously, you generally couldn’t get books and, even if you did, it would only be the specifically exempted ones and/or under specifically exempted conditions.
Also worth further note that rather than some/many of the book “bans” where the local community decides, or elects people to decide, or the schools themselves decide what books can/can’t go on elementary school shelves or (analogously, which carmakers can sell which cars) this would be a federal, unelected/administrative ban.
But based on robust and synergistic labor and community leader advocacy engagementisms.
[Places another tally mark next to "Diane Reynolds (Paul.)" on the FBI watchlist.]
EPA’s proposals are informed by robust and inclusive stakeholder engagement with industry, labor, advocates, and community leaders. EPA’s proposals will be published in the Federal Register and available for public review and comment, and the agency will continue to engage with the public and all interested stakeholders as part of the regulatory development process.
Just like "navigable waters" was the result of "robust and inclusive [not sure what that means in this day and age] engagement with industry, labor, advocates and community leaders [not sure what that means in this day and age]"
The political hacks he likes make the decision, not those other icky types. So obviously they know what they're doing.
The difference between an ICE and and EV is a minor consumer choice. The government shouldn't be dictating the nature of such trivial purchases.
Dude, the government decided what lightbulbs people should use. The "The government shouldn't be making such trivial decisions" boat sailed a long time ago.
How many gallons is your toilet allowed to flush?
[ ] I have no idea
[ ] Depends on how long I hold the handle.
[ ] Whatever the number, it's dictated by a regulatory agency in Washington which *checks above comments* is only done after a robust engagement. Kind of like my marriage.
And like most things the government touches, I know use more water because the shit (literally) needs to be flushed twice because they wanted me to use 30% less water. Oh and it's not like we really have a water shortage in the US (except where some idiot decided building mega metropolises in the desert was a good idea).
So goes LA, so goes the country.
AFAICT, spill-proof spouts were specifically designed to ensure the gas tank gets rinsed off with gasoline more frequently.
I busted mine off, because the fucked wouldn't work in my F-150 until I busted the safety feature off.
It ought to be noted by someone that the US electric grid won't be able to handle this..
What? Who cares about that?!
That’s a bonus for the elites. Less of the little people on the road.
"We'll cross that bridge when we come to it."
"Top Men are working on it."
"Shhhh, people won't have their own cars anymore anyway."
Well, it's a ten-year plan, which probably means it twice as fucked as the typical five-year plans were.
Lately you'd think Reason has Biden Derangement Syndrome. All they do is rip on the guy.
It must be awful being you.
It's awful reading what that steaming pile of lefty shit posts; the mute tab is your friend.
Watch now he'll play the martyr and say we're all yelling at him. What a fucking narcissist.
Drooling Man Bad!
Is it fifty cents a post, or fifty cents a word?
You say that sarcastically, but he is objectively worse in every measure then the last three presidents, at least.
Yeah it only took two years for Reason to start covering the current president. I guess there wasn't much Ron DeSantis news this week.
But the market should decide how to make that switch.
...*if* to make it at all, right? RIGHT?
Note: This is, of course, not to say that ICEs will be around forever, but to point out that the market didn't choose to (e.g.) switch from incandescent lightbulbs to CFLs either.
EV's, the vehicles that cost 2-3 times as much, have half the range and less than half the lifespan of ICE vehicles, and take six to ten times as long to refuel. Plus there's however many thousands of dollars to retrofit my home for charging, which could easily be susceptible to neighborhood hooligans.
Oh and we totally lack enough infrastructure for it, and their net carbon impact because of all the mining means they don't accomplish squat other than making politicians who invested in "green" companies richer and more powerful.
Switching a majority , or even a large minority of US new auto production and sales to EV is infeasible. Probably by design. The people who puppeteer Biden (Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Ron Klain until recently. To name a few’) want the little people out of their personally owned cars anyway.
I think the joke will be on them,
There are still Cubans driving cars from the 50s.
Oh I’m hoping for more than that.
They will make gas illegal. Problem solved.
We should preempt that by making democrats illegal.
Buy diesel than you can use your used cooking oil.
My GF's son has a Chevy Volt (or Bolt, whatever). $3,000 to get a 220 line up to the driveway and install a charger. On top of the price of the car. I'm not seeing how this is any sort of financial benefit to the end user unless he (or she) keeps the car for a decade and drives enough miles to offset the costs. My truck gets 20mpg, so the cost of the charger installation alone is two years of driving at $3/gallon gas at the 8-9,000 miles a year I drive.
EVs make sense for some, but not for all.
I also like that your electricity bills to charge it will be basically unchanged from what they are right now when you are not.
I agree with u 100 per cent and that's why I will never get one.
These kind of rules actually make me want to run out and buy several new gas powered vehicles.
How did we, a supposedly ‘free’ country, come to allowing an unelected agency power over this degree of the economy?
The EPA needs to be re-named GOSPLAN, and it will probably deliver the same results.
[Na]tional So[zi]alism....... because the sky is falling down!!!! /s
"THE WEATHER IS STILL CHANGING!!!!!!"
Good grief how dumb can people get?
Summary......
The [WE] mob packing Gov-Guns has to plan this for everyone....
And that is why the USA is broken.
The goal is literally to limit everybody but the nomenklatura to electric golf carts. They're not banned from producing ICE cars, notice: They are just capped on how many they can produce.
So they'll all be luxury vehicles, not economy models. It's the unimportant people, usually poor, who will be forced into the electric cars, and the only electric cars THEY can afford are basically electric golf carts.
If you just assume they're trying to recreate serfdom, 99% of what they do suddenly makes sense.
Here's an idea. If we are going to go around and banning things, let's ban idiotic Return To Office policies and investigate these CEOs for kick backs from real estate portfolio managers. Do a lot better cutting CO2 in the short term.
Because of market forces, automakers are spending money to catch up with Tesla. Saying that market is not ready is just lying. The CEOs don't want to give up a dime of their compensation. That is what this article is about.
Childlike fantasy that is not going to happen. We are decades away from the ev revolution, if there ever is one.
Why don't we just ban Executive Orders!
The US Constitution actually does ban most of the Nazi-Agencies executive orders pretends to dictate. But heaven forbid this be a Constitutional USA; Nope... Voters insisted it be a Nazi-Empire instead.
Pure clickbait since there is no " Ban of Gasoline-Powered Cars " .
You're full of shit:
"After the California Air Resources Board approved Thursday regulations that ban the sale of new gas-engine vehicles by 2035, requiring all new cars to run on electricity or hydrogen, California Gov. Gavin Newsom told ABC News he was confident that more states would do the same to help combat climate change."
https://abcnews.go.com/Business/states-banning-sale-gas-powered-vehicles/story?id=88895372
I wonder if people are finally realizing the dangers of unelected bureaucrats in an out of control administrative state
If Joe Biden had a mind, and if he really wanted everyone driving an electric car, he would be encouraging massive construction of nuclear plants. No one with any sense will buy electric cars when they have to wait for the sun to shine and the wind to blow before they can charge their cars.
I use Monster Transmission and I must say, I was thoroughly impressed with the experience. From start to finish, the process was seamless and efficient. The website was easy to navigate and provided all the necessary information I needed to make an informed decision. Once I placed my order, the delivery was prompt and the product arrived in excellent condition. The installation process was straightforward and the instructions provided were clear and concise. Check out their website at https://monster-transmission.pissedconsumer.com/review.html for more information. But what really stood out to me was the performance of the transmission itself. It was smooth, powerful, and reliable. I could feel the difference in my vehicle's performance immediately.