Ireland Owens
Contributor
Toyota’s North American Chief Operating Officer (COO) Jack Hollis criticized U.S. policies promoting electric vehicle adoption (EV) on Friday, according to Bloomberg.
The Toyota COO said that electric vehicle policies are “de facto mandates” that are not in sync with consumer demand, according to Bloomberg. Hollis also said that EV mandates such as those in California are impossible to meet, according to CNBC.
“The whole EV ecosystem is ahead of the consumer,” Hollis told reporters Friday, “It’s not in alignment with consumers. It’s just not.”
The Biden-Harris administration has introduced various EV-related policies as part of President Joe Biden’s climate agenda, including introducing a tailpipe emissions rule in March that would require about 67% of all light-duty vehicles sold after 2032 to be EVs or hybrids. Biden has been leading a push to build half a million public EV chargers nationwide by 2030, that has so far been met with various slowdowns. (RELATED: Ford CEO Admits Driving Chinese EV After Receiving Billions From Taxpayers To Make Rival Cars Domestically)
Various American automakers have backpedaled on EV goals despite the current administration funneling billions of dollars in subsidies as part of its EV agenda. The California Air Resources Board’s “Advanced Clean Cars II” regulations require that 35% of 2026 model-year vehicles be zero-emission.
“I have not seen a forecast by anyone … government or private, anywhere that has told us that that number is achievable. At this point, it looks impossible,” Hollis said of the zero-emission regulations. “Demand isn’t there. It’s going to limit a customer’s choice of the vehicles they want.”
Many automakers have experienced issues with EV sales, including used EV models experiencing drastic price cuts due to slackening consumer demand. Ford Motor Company announced in October that it lost an additional $1.2 billion on EVs in the third quarter and announced in September that it would offer free EV chargers and home installations to incentivize customers.
Toyota did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
A mandate isn’t a market. Who knew?
It’s the leftist way to approach all their moronic ideas –
everything has to be achieved by EDICT instead of presentation of benefits, making a rational case, addressing causes of hesitance, persuasion.
“…electric vehicle policies are “de facto mandates” that are not in sync with consumer demand…”
Literally by definition.
Hey! Anybody notice that Biden Harris lost the election (chuckle) – so does this matter – at all?
I’d bet a dollar he wouldn’t have said this if Harris had won.
I think you’ll find that Toyota head honcho Toyoda-san indicated not long ago that Toyota will continue to build only vehicles that consumers demonstrate that they want, not what edits are imposed upon them.
I think Newsom is now the real problem.
California has a major problem with keeping the lights on. This makes it even worse for EV charging. Newsom is adding regulations to California fuel production and it is driving these companies to leave so gas and diesel will cost even more by December. The people are not going to buy EVs when they cannot pay for the vehicles and there are issues with electricity.
The new Trump administration is almost guaranteed to end these mandates and the associated subsidies in short order. How much sense does it make to produce a product for which there’s limited demand?
Watching for a Trump wind-down on all this. Noting increased sales of second hand EVs because they are so cheap. There must be some sort of a battery life calculation where you sell on worth zero
Trump will neither mandate or block the sale of EVs.
He will however, do everything he can to stop Chinese group EVs entering the USA.
He will find a way to remove the ridiculous EPA emissions requirements… and let the market decide..
And they will mostly NOT chose EVs.
The inevitable result of command economics. Chaos, and pain for the populace.
Be careful. Next thing you’ll say is that tariffs are taxes, and get a lot of knee-jerk downvotes from all the hurt feelings.
A tariff is a tax, ONLY if someone wants to purchase that particular item from overseas.
Income tax is a tax, ONLY if someone has income. Now tell that to the IRS.
Tell me, Mr Smart Guy, what is the point of a tariff on a product which is never imported?
The whole point of protective tariffs is to raise prices so much that inefficient uncompetitive domestic industry can sell expensive goods.
Bunch of geniuses here. Cowards the lot, knee jerk downvotes with no comments. It’s a badge of honor to be downvoted by such cowards.
“The whole point of protective tariffs is to raise prices so much that inefficient uncompetitive domestic industry can sell expensive goods.”
You obviously are clueless about Trump ideas on tariffs…
They are first and foremost “equalisation” tariff.
China puts huge tariffs or outright refuses US car imports to China.
China also uses near slave labour on many item.
To accuse US industry of being ineffective and uncompetitive.. pretty nasty thing to say to US manufacturing..
Are you a depressed and grieving Kamal supporter?
Very few people seem to understand the strategic significance of tariffs, both economically and militarily. I am so sick of hearing about “free trade,” which is a unicorn.
President Trump has stated he will impose tariffs equal to other nations’ tariffs on U.S. goods.
Were tariffs introduced and income tax eliminated, people have the choice as to whether they buy goods and services from overseas and therefor whether they pay ‘tax’ (tariffs).
People have more disposable income, and have the choice to buy home made, tariff free products or, imported products with tariffs added, whilst the nation uses the income from tariffs for public spending.
If other nations manufacture goods/services people demand, national revenue from tariffs will be higher which encourages domestic manufacturers to compete on quality and service, especially to export.
Tariffs can be better adjusted to reflect the need for particular products/services whereas income/local purchase taxes are a blunderbuss approach to raising national income which penalises people for working.
Now, that’s all assuming a perfect world operating in harmony and that just doesn’t happen, however, it’s a better starting point that swiping more and more income tax from people, the harder they work.
Income tax is theft with menaces. VAT (Value Added Tax) was introduced in the UK at 8% in the 1970’s to give people the choice of buying things or not buying things. Pay the tax or don’t. Our overall personal tax burden was (guessing here) somewhere in the 30% – 40% region.
VAT is now 20% and our overall tax burden is 50%. The current labour party are to impose VAT on what was hitherto considered an essential, and therefore VAT free product, private education of children under 18 years old.
In reality it’s a continuing socialist war against even the modestly wealthy to punish them for having the audacity to have worked and saved hard to provide a quality education for their children. Tariffs eliminate that type of vindictive and targeted attack on individual groups of people.
Well targeted tariffs are a good thing. There is value beyond end product price. For example, what is it worth to have a domestic steel industry? What is it worth to have a viable nanotech/chip production capability? Some manufacturing industries are simply too valuable to ship overseas.
Its almost as if Leftists, Socialists, Marxists and Communists planned it that way.
Exactly, EV mandates are dumb
I went to a Ford dealer late September to look at a Super Duty pickup. The sales guy tried hard to get me to consider an F150 Lightning, of which they had several on the lot. I asked to order a custom build F250, because that was the only way to get what I wanted.
While the computer guy was putting in my order, the manager said they weren’t allowed to get more Super Duty’s until the EVs sell, and they are not selling.
Nice way to grow your business. Ford is disaster.
Is it Ford in this case?
If the government mandates that they MUST sell a certain percentage of EVs and $$,$$$ fines per non-EV follow if they don’t, they literally cannot sell the non-EVs until the EVs have sold.
The UK is worse!
Our government has set minimum EV targets, 20% of sales this year from memory. For every ICE sold over that target the manufacturer is either charged £15,000 or has to buy carbon credits from an EV manufacturer – either Elon or China because there are no manufacturers here making enough EV’s to have spare carbon credits to trade.
By 2030 that EV target will be 80% – 100%. I can’t quite remember which because I can’t be bothered finding out as it’s pie in the effing sky.
Western government bureaucracies are now so infested with petty departments determined to be indispensable by raising money from the consumer it’s now a race to the bottom as governments take over our whole lives, and we saw that ending very badly in the USSR, but seem determined to reproduce it.
The Future
Abundant and cheap energy from Nuclear Power, Natural Gas, and Roof-top solar panels.
All heating and cooling of houses from electric air-conditioners.
All cooking from electric stoves.
Most vehicles to be battery-operated, for most situations where it’s practical.
New battery technology which is safer and cheaper than Lithium-Ion, and which doesn’t rely upon significant amounts of scarce, rare-earth materials.
What could better!
DELUSIONAL !
Why is it delusional? Electricity is a marvelous invention. I have a split system airconditioner with a remote temperature control device which can change the temperature setting to whatever feels comfortable. I have an electrice stove and electric Microwave oven which are easy to use and very safe.
I have a small area of solar panels on my roof, covering about 1/10th of the total roof area, which has significantly reduced my power bills during the past 15 years.
Am I delusional to think that covering the entire roof with solar panels, and using safe battery storage, is a practical and an efficient source of energy for all my electrical devices and future BEV?
Whatever floats your boat Vincent.
Your $$$$, spend them on whatever legal pursuits you want.
But why do you want everybody else to abide your preferences?
That’s the main issue.
Items 3-5 are delusional…
Many people prefer gas top stoves
EVs are only practical if your life exists around short distance shopping and commute, and you never want to actually GO anywhere.
New Battery tech.. whatever you want to believe.
Safe battery storage on all houses would require an incredible amount of mining… using fossil fuels.
Yes.. it is a delusion.
Yes.
Us all choosing what we want to spend our own money on and our personal preferences would be far, far better.
In my opinion.
Oh! I see! Like spending a $100,000 on a huge sports car with a roaring engine, and $200 on a pair of jeans that one can buy in Kmart for $20, and guzzling large quantities of expensive and tasty food which results in obesity and huge future medical expenses.
The main problem in developed countries is not CO2 emissions, but a huge waste of resources because people are sucked in by advertisements to buy unnecessary products to boost their ego and vanity.
Oh look, another totalitarian that wants to tell everyone what they have to do. !!
Wants everyone to cow-tow to his limited self-perception.
We live in a society where everyone is ‘told’ what to do, at least part of the time. If you have an 8am to 4pm job in an office or factory, and you turn up for work whenever you want, and leave whenever you want, you’ll likely be sacked. You are ‘told’ to arrive at 8am and depart at 4pm.
You don’t have the choice to drive at whatever speed you like if that speed is above a speed limit. You are told, by the signage on the road, the speed you must not exceed.
Regulations are everywhere, to ensure human safety and efficient production. You think that’s totalitarianism?
Wow, how to say you’re delusional without using the word “delusional”.
For starters, regulations mostly prevent efficient production, not promote it. Cost reduction is what drives efficient production, not government interference.
As for speeding, people do have a choice and some will choose to break the speed limit when it suits them. They also choose to pay any penalty which applies for that choice and, if they don’t pay, they will have chosen to go to jail for that privilege.
Your posts so far seem very “idealistic”, unburdened by any of the harsh realities of life. Leftism always fails because, lefties choose to ignore human nature and human nature always wins.
“For starters, regulations mostly prevent efficient production, not promote it. Cost reduction is what drives efficient production, not government interference.”
I’ll give you just a couple of examples how cost-cutting measures and a lack of sensible regulations resulted in very inefficient production, taking everything into consideration.
The Chernobyl accident in 1986 was the result of a flawed reactor design that was operated with inadequately trained personnel, presumably to cut costs.
The Fukushima nuclear disaster was a result of cutting costs by locating the reactor at a low level near the coastline, which had previously been inundated by tsunamis.
If the only penalty for violating a law is a fine then it is legal for a price.
Too many laws on the books where there is no harmed party but the government extracts $ for not kowtowing to their fiats.
It sounds like you won’t ne happy until everything that is not forbidden is mandatory.
WOW, you really are a leftist child, aren’t you.
And NO, when you take up a job, you agree to work specific hours.
You do not have to take that job if you don’t want to work those hours.
YOU are the one saying everyone and everything has to go “electric”.
That is the far-left totalitarian idiocy that is currently destroying the UK.
YOU are the one saying people shouldn’t buy things that YOU deem unnecessary.
Basically, naff-off and stop trying to put your totalitarian idiotology onto other people.
How is it your business what other people want to do with their money Vincent?
Isn’t it obvious? All the problems we face, world-wide, are due to spending money stupidly, wastefully, and unwisely.
A very prevalent example is wasting a million dollars building a house on a flood plain or a river bank, when the historical evidence, available in the meteorological records, shows that such areas are flooded on a fairly regular basis, such as a major flood every 20 or 30 years, on average.
Now, you may argue that anyone, including multi-millionaires and billionaires, have the right to spend their own money on whatever pleases them. If the home of a wealthy person is demolished by a flood, so what! Their insurance takes care of it, and they rebuild the house if they want to, because they like the view and the location. That’s their right, isn’t it!!
My point of view is that wasting money building structures that are at risk of being destroyed by extreme weather events, is plain stupid. It should not be allowed. A sensible government should not allow such constructions to take place in such areas, or at least they should ensure that such constructions will be resistant to the effects of previously known, extreme weather events, by changing the building codes.
This is just one example. There are millions of examples throughout the world, resulting in trillions of dollars being thrown down the drain. What a tragic waste!
“…at risk of being destroyed by extreme weather events…”
Right, so no one should be allowed to build anywhere there is a risk of flooding, storm surges, hurricanes, tornadoes, avalanches, blizzards, forest fires… um, have I missed any? Because, that really does limit where people can live.
Perhaps you should stop drinking the kool-aid, then maybe that nasty case of lefty mind-rot you have might clear up.
How is your reading comprehension? This is what I wrote.
“A sensible government should not allow such constructions to take place in such areas, or at least they should ensure that such constructions will be resistant to the effects of previously known, extreme weather events, by changing the building codes.”
If you’re an AGW skeptic, you should be aware that blaming the destruction caused by extreme weather events, on human-caused climate change, let’s the authorities off the hook.
You should know that the continual increase in the destruction of property by extreme weather events, is not a result of an increase in the severity and frequency of extreme weather events, but a result of incompetent officials allowing the construction of dwellings and infrastructure which are inadequate to withstand such extreme weather events that have occurred in the past in such areas, and are ‘with high confidence’ expected to reoccur in the future.
WOW.. and you say you are not a totalitarian.
“It should not be allowed.”
Yet everything in your comment is totalitarian, dictator style. !!
We’re not worthy.
One mans stupidity is others wages.
If the stupide person by your definition, wishes to spend, their money, “stupidly”
Like planning regulations for housing on flood plains and building codes for fire and cyclone areas?
There are alternatives to banning it. Ask the Dutch, or most inland NSW towns.
Are you saying these don’t exist?
Diogenes is said to have owned nothing but a robe and a bowl. I expect you aspire to that example?
“The Future” may arrive someday. Perhaps in 97 years or more likely around 2197.
AKA FUTURAMA
Reply to Vincent,
And all planes will be grounded & replaced by flying pigs … (they are now selling faster than EVs ).
That third picture reminds me of the world of The Giver.
The Future,
if you had put a ‘sarc’ tag at the end I would agree with you.
If you really believe what you wrote then you deserve all the negative votes and more.
What is the new battery technology?
It’s a lot like fusion. It’s always getting better but won’t be ready real-world use for another 40 years.
In forty years, it will be almost ready – in another 40 years.
Rinse, Repeat.
Define “where it’s practical” please. In precise terms thanks. For example, 45% of UK households have no off street parking.
If you advocate for localised electricity production would you take that to it’s natural conclusion and advocate for localised water production i.e. each of us digging our own well on our properties? And can you explain, please, how that would work with high rise buildings. In the UK, for example, much like the limited sunshine we get, rain is a widespread phenomenon we could all collect, but we don’t.
You might consider the Ricardo and Smith theories of ‘specialisation’ before replying.
Have you ever considered where all this electricity…or the infrastructure to support it is going to come from? If everyone in your neighborhood is charging 1 or 2 EV’s, I suspect your local electrical supply or equipment is totally inadequate.
How about an apartment complex with 1000 units? Could the infrastructure support 1000 x 50 amp (slow) chargers?
I do not believe we are building electrical infrastructure today which could support a 50% EV fleet even in 20 years.
On the other hand, gasoline and other oil related products could become very cheap!
“Have you ever considered where all this electricity…or the infrastructure to support it is going to come from? If everyone in your neighborhood is charging 1 or 2 EV’s, I suspect your local electrical supply or equipment is totally inadequate.”
Didn’t you read my original post. Here’s what I wrote:
“Abundant and cheap energy from Nuclear Power, Natural Gas, and Roof-top solar panels.”
If the supply or equipment in certain areas is inadequate, then get it fixed by voting for politicians who understand the problem and promise to fix it. This is what democracy is about.
I shall try once to educate you though you have shut off your critical thinking.
-There currently is not enough power on the grid to support an EV mandate so we would need to build a lot more capacity first, capacity that the same people who want to mandate EV’s want to prevent being built. Unless it’s wind or solar which will not power modern society. These people hate nuclear, gas and coal so use lawfare to delay or stop projects.
-Our power transmission lines from power plant down to your house panel can’t currently support the needed requirements to charge all those EV’s so they will need to be beefed up first.
-There’s been studies done on how much metals it would take to increase the infrastructure and build all those EV’s. We currently don’t have enough developed mines to meet the demand by a far margin.
-There’s a bunch more reasons why EV’s are not ready for prime time but lets cut it down the the last problem. High density living means a huge part of the population does not have a fixed place to park. Without a fixed place to park they can’t just plug their car in after driving home so the car will be ready to go next morning. Sure some apartment complexes have “assigned” parking but my experience shows there’s more vehicles than assigned parking. Next issue since you don’t own your parking spot who pays install and maintain the charger. Also who pays for maintenance of those chargers? Who is going to pay for all the missing charging cords that disappear over night so a meth head can sell the copper for their next fix? How does making it illegal to steal (since you are so in favor of laws fixing all problems) stop the meth heads…
New battery technology which is safer and cheaper
So they finally found the unicorn herd?
The Magic Battery is just around the corner, and always will be.
CARB and Congressional Democrats believe if you wish hard enough, all cars will be BEVs. How hard? Hard enough for it to happen, silly!
Trump is going to be very busy the last 10 days of January 2025. So many FJB EOs to overrule. Then get things fixed via legislation via Congress- we should not be ruled by decrees from a 21st century. Caesar.
Free in home chargers???
A simple 18′ 120v or 240V Cable can cost $89 to $200 and higher and would require room in your breaker box for a dedicated 60A circuit breaker and take more than 12 hours to recharge.
The larger Tesla type charger can draw 90 amps and would require a separate 100/200A breaker box and meter panel. And higher amperage chargers need to run on 480v which most homes aren’t designed for. The 480V charger can recharge most EVs in under 4 hours but have a larger demand for electricity.
One way around this might be a Parallel 240V double service but your utility co would need to hang a dedicated Transformer and the EV customer would bare the costs. Might even require replacing the Transformer pole with a new pole at an upgraded class to.
Though for most residential services 240/480 is too high as homes are designed as 120/240.
So likely your “Free Home Charger” will be a simple cable with a 120V plug.
Correct: majority of services into houses are two-phase 240V AC; changing over to 480 would be horrendously expensive or impossible.
Nobody needs 480 vac or a level 3 charger at home – they are only for use as public commercial installations.
What kind of idiot downvotes proven facts. There is no debating this.
There is no debating this.
I think you’re being downvoted for the absolute certainty with which you make the claim. Unless you know the needs of every household in the country, you can’t say that for certain.
I think there is a world market for maybe five computers
A level 2 EV charger only needs 240 vac, all residential homes have 240 vac, and no, you don’t need a new distribution panel since all of them already have 240 vac (necessary for ranges, water heaters, dryers, and AC units). All that is needed is to install an outlet
A level 2 charger will easily charge an EV battery in a few hours. A level 3 charger can charge an EV in about an hour or less. Few EV owners will need to charge that fast, almost none are ever installed at homes – rather they are used as commercial public chargers.
From Australian NRMA…
Level 2 single-phase
Considered a middle ground in terms of charging your EV at home, Level 2 single-phase provides a considerably increased power output and reduced charge times compared to using a wall socket (Level 1) [usually max 15A], while not requiring major modification to a home’s wiring to suit.
While Level 2 single-phase charging receives the same single-phase 240v AC electrical feed as Level 1, its dedicated wall box/wall charger system can operate at much higher amperages of about 32A. ie about 7kW
—— end
A quick look seems to indicate that the cost of the box is around $1500 + installation.
Again, a “dedicated box” is not needed to supply a level 2 charger at 240 vac. All home distribution panels supply 240 vac – the number of amps supplied is determined by the rating of the breaker and/or number of breakers and how the breakers are wired inside the panel. A higher current draw at a given voltage may use either a single higher capacity breaker or it may gang 2 or more breakers together to supply a particular outlet.
Typical electric services in newer single family homes have 200 amp service, while old homes may have less. Plenty to power a level 2 charger (draw of 20-80 amps). A 100 amp breaker in the distribution panel is sufficient.
All that is needed to supply a level 2 charger is a 240 vac feed to an outlet.
I’ll take NRMA advice over a known low-Q ranter, any day.
Don’t need a new box, just another breaker at 100 amps, and an outlet. Couple hundred dollars,
Don’t ignore that the “fuel” cost for an EV is only 1/3 of gasoline or diesel.
So a typical 200A panel:
30A for oven.
30A for stovetop.
30 A for electric drier
60 A for heat pump/air conditioner
50-100A for various 15/20A small power and lighting circuits
Yeah, plenty of room for new 100A service.
Just so long as you don’t want to run anything else.
:
Those appliances never all operate at the same time. so there is plenty of spare ‘amps’ to run a 50 amp, 240 volt charge overnight, while folks are sleeping. so maybe just the heatpump is running and a few night lights.
‘Fuel’ cost on Northern California has electricity at $0.40 per kWhr and gas is $3.70, so my 30 mpg Chevy is lower cost to operate than a Tesla.
You forgot to mention that you need to add a 30 or 40 Amp double pole (240V) breaker to the panel to power the outlet. Most newer residential installations are 200 Amp, but there are a lot of 150 and 100 Amp panels out there. If an upgrade is necessary that can be a fairly large cost.
I didn’t forget anything. I wrote that a typical single family home distribution panel easily accommodates a 240 vac level 2 charger, all that is needed is a breaker – a 10 minute installation.
Virtually all SF homes built within the last 50 or more years come with 200 amp service. If you have an old home with 60 amp service, you have a problem anyway if like most homeowners you have AC, electric water heater, electric range, electric dryer, etc. Not to mention electric resistance space heating. In which case you need to install a modern 200 amp service and modern wiring. Anyone buying an old home has to either confirm that its distribution panel and wiring are up to modern standards, or else they need to budget for a rewire.
Electrical demand is only going to increase in the future.
Maybe all very well for single-family homes Duane, but in Canada for example, ~ 40% of their population lives in condo / apartment / multi-unit type buildings.
Capacity factors at local substations is the first order of concern for extra power draw, before it even gets down to what’s needed in residential building complexes to accommodate heat pumps, all-electric appliances, EV chargers, etc etc.
Nothing in public policy setting seems to get thought through completely these days, does it?
What level charger is available for those who live in condos, apartments or other multi-family housing?
Level 0
Condos and other MF housing have no problem installing level 2 chargers at assigned parking spaces. Indeed many are doing just that if a demand is perceived by their owners or renters. Here in south Florida most new condos are installing chargers at at least some of their parking spaces. It really makes little difference if it is level 1 or level 2, it is just whether 120 vac or 240 vac is available at a given parking spot. One can also choose to use public level 3 chargers if home charging is not practical.
Lots of choices for EV owners – they can choose where and how to charge. And as long as buyers are not forced to buy EVs over ICVs, they can make their own decisions.
BOOM!
A level 2 240VAC can pull upwards of 60A-90A and many homes are wired with a 125A panel. And would either need a 200A replacement or a separate 100A panel with an individual meter. Not everyone has either the space in their Breaker Buss Bars to add 60A breakers without uprising either their panel and/or their service.
Also putting 2 EVs in every garage would require 2 chargers and a minimum 100A panel just for the chargers and potential up line upgrades (larger services, second services, larger Transformers and up sized poles)
Virtually all new SF homes built in the last 50+ years have 200 amp service.
It is not necessary to install 2 chargers if one family owns 2 EVs. In almost all circumstances an EV does not need a full charge for typical commuting more than 1-2 times per week.
A vehicle buyer has tons of choices – whether to buy EV vs ICV, how many of each to own, where and how to charge. Every vehicle owner is free to choose what works best for them.
If you don’t want an EV, don’t buy one.
What kind of idiot downvotes proven facts? There is no debating this.
You are entitled to your own opinion – you are not entitled to your own facts.
Duane, when you grow up, you won’t care so much that the whole world agree with you.
no, you don’t need a new distribution panel since all of them already have 240 vac
You are aware that panels have max amp ratings too, right? It’s not just the voltage that you have to consider.
According my brother in law his Tesla charges at a whopping 4 miles/hr off a 120V plug. It only works for them because he lives 1 mile from work (has a disability that prevents him from easily walking that far) and my sister no longer drives (she has a disability that does not pair well with safely driving anywhere).
I personally don’t see how anyone with a normal driving habit can own an EV without also installing a charging station. Sure there’s some public charging stations that may or may not work or have a long waiting line for in high population areas but in the burbs or out in the country good luck. I live in a small town and there’s exactly 1 Tesla charging station, nothing for any other EV.
Wait 2-1/2 months and the current inhabitant of the White house will be gone and a new sane one will be there. Then all the idiotic EV mandates will disappear.
Every watt of “clean” power can be consumed on other things besides charging up EVs. This can only mean one thing: All the “dirty” power generated will go to the EV chargers. What good is it to move the pollution from the tailpipe to the smokestack?
“What good is it to move the pollution from the tailpipe to the smokestack?”
Moving the emissions out of congested areas. Certainly useful in places like China.
But in most western countries, most real pollution in congested areas is not necessarily from modern cars.
Nuclear and hydro are clean. And natural gas is “clean” too. The issue is not CO2 – the issue is all the other pollutants.
In my neck of the woods we are not allowed to build nuclear by state law. Our wise lawmakers also downgraded hydro from clean/green to dirty power with plenty of agitation to remove all dams to save the salmon. Yes, a couple smaller dams have already been removed so they can study the impact to the rivers ecosystem. This is of course being done in preparation to remove larger dams.
Don’t let facts get in the way of the narrative.
CARB and the Gov tried for just a “10% of all new auto sales shall be zero emissions” in 1995 with the deadline of Y2K. Toyota and GM were on board and by Y2K, it was a total failure with not even 1% “zero-emission” vehicles being sold. Even the GM EV-1 got recalled and nearly every one got recycled into ICE cars.
The deffinition of insanity is to keep trying the same thing and expect different results and at CARB and many other California alphabet agencies are totally nuts and divorced from reality.
Cone on, man. The laws of physics are null and void in California.
Woke Fisics
France wants handouts from the EU to save local EV makers from Chinese coal fired ones-
France to EU: Rescue Our Cars or Risk Losing to China’s EV Powerhouse
They’ve forgotten former GM president Roger Smith’s quote ” that nobody will lie to you like a battery engineer “>
Right now there is a minimum wait time of 2 years for substation transformers. I quote an owner of a power engineering consulting firm, “We are becoming a 3rd world country.”
He also told me that once a solar farm (solar generating station) reached it end-of-life (20-25 years), it becomes the responsibility of the land owner. For reference, land use requirements for 2-axis PV farm ranges from 3 – 13 acres/MWAC. A MWAC is defined as megawatts of PV in Alternating Current output.
What does one do with a solar farm that will not produce electricity?
Where does one dispose of these useless panels?
What is the environmental damage to the land?
Woohoo V2G is coming to the grid so don’t forget to buy a bigger EV battery than your transport needs to be philanthropic for your neighbours firming the grid-
V2G is now approved in Australia
Meanwhile down in the fine print don’t forget before install cost-
the trial required a circa $10,000 vehicle-to-grid supporting inverter to allow energy from the car to be sold back into the grid.
Don’t all rush the sole approved provider at once driving up the price.
There will be no EV market until or unless: 1. Charging Stations are as plentiful as gas stations 2. Electricity is cheaper than fossil fuel alternatives 3. Alternative batteries not yet invented resolve range issues. These issues will not likely be successfully addressed in anyone now living’s lifetime. Some other technology will likely emerge to make this whole business moot. Either that or the lack of fear of Nuclear War leads us back to another stone age of sorts.