Electric vehicle mandate in California

ShinerBock wrote:

Reisender wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:
OK and I don't read any stories about EV owners going back to ICE after a storm due to emergency evacuation issues. I would think all the Tesla haters would have jumped all over this by now. I call FUD on the whole issue.

It is a not issue right now because almost all Tesla or BEV owners have a secondary ICE vehicle and it has only recently been mandated forcing people to buy or vehicle makes to sell them. There is a huge difference between having the wealthy or upper middle class(who are the ones who are mostly buying right now) who can afford seconder vehicles buy them and forcing the middle class and below who can't afford seconder vehicles. Even in Europe, most BEV owners have secondary ICE vehicles.

I’m not up on the stats for that but will take your word for it. Around here though the numbers play out a little different an in an unexpected way. Many start out with a Leaf or equivalent and then eventually replace their second vehicle (a gasser) with a Tesla. Many find that once there is an EV in the family it becomes the go to car and everyone wants to get rid of the gasser. The second car gets replaced with a Tesla (usually a model 3 AWD) and then they are an all electric household. This doesn’t happen if the second vehicle is a truck as there are currently none available. However, many are itching to buy an EV truck and be an all EV household ASAP.

I think the demand for 1/2 ton E trucks will be robust in some areas and turn many more households into EV only households.

JMHO.

I am basing my statements on ultiple studies I have read like this one.....

"One such early adopter or early majority group could be multi-car households. In such households a conventional long-range vehicle could supplement the BEV. This is also observed as important in regions where BEV penetration is high. For example, in Norway, the country with the highest BEV share per capita, 91% of the BEV owners also have another car (Figenbaum and Kolbenstvedt, 2013). Furthermore, multi-car households have higher income (Dargay, 2002, Jong et al., 2004) and are thus more likely to afford the higher purchase price of BEVs. On the other hand, higher income is correlated to higher annual mileage and could imply more trips that exceed the electric driving range of a BEV. These trips would, if travelled by a car, require that the BEV is replaced by either a conventional vehicle in the household, or by renting another vehicle. In both cases the economic viability of the BEV is reduced. Thus, a systematic understanding of the utility of BEVs in multi-car households with respect to the driving need is required to understand if multi-car households are better suited for early BEV adoption compared to single-car households (i.e. households with only one car)."


Are multi-car households better suited for battery electric vehicles? – Driving patterns and economics in Sweden and Germany

Basically, almost all of the the people who are currently buying BEV's are upper middle class people who can afford multiple vehicles per adult/per household. Similar studies have shown this to be the case in the US as well. As you start getting into the middle class and below where they only have one vehicle per adult/per household, then BEV becomes a less viable option for their needs and charging them becomes more of a hassle especially for those who do not own the homes they live in.

I can replace one of my three vehicles or my wife's car with a BEV and can easily plug int in every night one of the three garage bays or shop if needed. However, I understand from how poor I was growing up that not everyone can do that and the "convenience" factor of just plugging it in at night starts to deteriorate the poorer you get especially for those living in projects or section 8 housing.

Yah that sounds plausible. Around here it seems different than that but your sceenario is obvious the case in many places. I think so much depends on infrastructure, fuel cost, electricity rates etc. All of which make EV’s very good candidates as a principal vehicle if the conditions are right. In American dollars gas is close to 3 bucks a gallon here. Power is under 10 cents a kilowatt hour. Infrastructure is good and new apartment buildings are mandated to have charging facilities making older building owners upgrade to be competitive. Lots of restaurants putting in charging facilities etc. If you commute a 150 km a day here a significant portion of your car payment is payed in fuel savings. I realize this is not the case everywhere but it’s easy to see why it’s taking off here.

Reisender wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:
OK and I don't read any stories about EV owners going back to ICE after a storm due to emergency evacuation issues. I would think all the Tesla haters would have jumped all over this by now. I call FUD on the whole issue.

It is a not issue right now because almost all Tesla or BEV owners have a secondary ICE vehicle and it has only recently been mandated forcing people to buy or vehicle makes to sell them. There is a huge difference between having the wealthy or upper middle class(who are the ones who are mostly buying right now) who can afford seconder vehicles buy them and forcing the middle class and below who can't afford seconder vehicles. Even in Europe, most BEV owners have secondary ICE vehicles.

I’m not up on the stats for that but will take your word for it. Around here though the numbers play out a little different an in an unexpected way. Many start out with a Leaf or equivalent and then eventually replace their second vehicle (a gasser) with a Tesla. Many find that once there is an EV in the family it becomes the go to car and everyone wants to get rid of the gasser. The second car gets replaced with a Tesla (usually a model 3 AWD) and then they are an all electric household. This doesn’t happen if the second vehicle is a truck as there are currently none available. However, many are itching to buy an EV truck and be an all EV household ASAP.

I think the demand for 1/2 ton E trucks will be robust in some areas and turn many more households into EV only households.

JMHO.

I am basing my statements on ultiple studies I have read like this one.....

"One such early adopter or early majority group could be multi-car households. In such households a conventional long-range vehicle could supplement the BEV. This is also observed as important in regions where BEV penetration is high. For example, in Norway, the country with the highest BEV share per capita, 91% of the BEV owners also have another car (Figenbaum and Kolbenstvedt, 2013). Furthermore, multi-car households have higher income (Dargay, 2002, Jong et al., 2004) and are thus more likely to afford the higher purchase price of BEVs. On the other hand, higher income is correlated to higher annual mileage and could imply more trips that exceed the electric driving range of a BEV. These trips would, if travelled by a car, require that the BEV is replaced by either a conventional vehicle in the household, or by renting another vehicle. In both cases the economic viability of the BEV is reduced. Thus, a systematic understanding of the utility of BEVs in multi-car households with respect to the driving need is required to understand if multi-car households are better suited for early BEV adoption compared to single-car households (i.e. households with only one car)."


Are multi-car households better suited for battery electric vehicles? – Driving patterns and economics in Sweden and Germany

Basically, almost all of the the people who are currently buying BEV's are upper middle class people who can afford multiple vehicles per adult/per household. Similar studies have shown this to be the case in the US as well. As you start getting into the middle class and below where they only have one vehicle per adult/per household, then BEV becomes a less viable option for their needs and charging them becomes more of a hassle especially for those who do not own the homes they live in.

I can replace one of my three vehicles or my wife's car with a BEV and can easily plug int in every night one of the three garage bays or shop if needed. However, I understand from how poor I was growing up that not everyone can do that and the "convenience" factor of just plugging it in at night starts to deteriorate the poorer you get especially for those living in projects or section 8 housing.

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:
OK and I don't read any stories about EV owners going back to ICE after a storm due to emergency evacuation issues. I would think all the Tesla haters would have jumped all over this by now. I call FUD on the whole issue.

It is a not issue right now because almost all Tesla or BEV owners have a secondary ICE vehicle and it has only recently been mandated forcing people to buy or vehicle makes to sell them. There is a huge difference between having the wealthy or upper middle class(who are the ones who are mostly buying right now) who can afford seconder vehicles buy them and forcing the middle class and below who can't afford seconder vehicles. Even in Europe, most BEV owners have secondary ICE vehicles.

I’m not up on the stats for that but will take your word for it. Around here though the numbers play out a little different an in an unexpected way. Many start out with a Leaf or equivalent and then eventually replace their second vehicle (a gasser) with a Tesla. Many find that once there is an EV in the family it becomes the go to car and everyone wants to get rid of the gasser. The second car gets replaced with a Tesla (usually a model 3 AWD) and then they are an all electric household. This doesn’t happen if the second vehicle is a truck as there are currently none available. However, many are itching to buy an EV truck and be an all EV household ASAP.

I think the demand for 1/2 ton E trucks will be robust in some areas and turn many more households into EV only households.

JMHO.

ShinerBock wrote:
Okay with a mandate that forces other people to spend their money to drive zero emissions vehicles, but still drive an old 2001 F150 when more emissions friendly options have been available for a long time? Do as I say, but not as I do????

Yes. I want the mandate in place so when I do buy a truck there will be a zero emission option. Currently there are none that I know of. I am in full compliance with the mandate. The mandate does not require anyone to buy a zero emission vehicle.

In the mean time you can stick with your petrol vehicles new or old.

If the mandate includes trading in old vehicles I will be on board with that also. Let me know when that happens.

Okay with a mandate that forces other people to spend their money to drive zero emissions vehicles, but still drive an old 2001 F150 when more emissions friendly options have been available for a long time? Do as I say, but not as I do????

Too far off topic for me. I will just reiterate I am not opposed to the mandate for a few zero emission vehicles. If you don't want one that is a valid option for a long time.

And GM gets in the game.

https://electrek.co/2020/08/20/gm-mini-electric-car-price-orders/

time2roll wrote:
I was responding to your post. I am not promoting anything in my statement. You brought up solar panels, not me.

Actually no, you brought up solar panels when you stated "If you want immediate power at home then you can spring for a solar roof and several powerwall." in response to my question.

ShinerBock wrote:

time2roll wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
I am guessing you have never been through a hurricane or tornado. Solar panels don't last long in them (just like they don't in hail storms) and not everyone can afford solar panels or battery packs. Many do not have the land to put them on either or are of the 43 million Americans who rent their home or apartment. Step outside of the bubble and think about others before being for mandating things.

Solar panels will hold up as good as the roof itself in wind or hail. Either way insurance would put them back on.

What percent is the mandate? You talk like it was 50% or even 100%. Don't panic, it will be a looooong time before you have to join this group.

Man, you need to get out of your bubble. As I stated before, there are 43 million Americans that rent and can't put up solar panels. There are another tens of millions of American homeowners who can't afford homeowners insurance let alone solar panels. With thinking like this, it is no wonder the poor and middle class are leaving California in droves. You guys just think everyone has all sorts of money for the policies you all promote.

I was responding to your post. I am not promoting anything in my statement. You brought up solar panels, not me.

time2roll wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
I am guessing you have never been through a hurricane or tornado. Solar panels don't last long in them (just like they don't in hail storms) and not everyone can afford solar panels or battery packs. Many do not have the land to put them on either or are of the 43 million Americans who rent their home or apartment. Step outside of the bubble and think about others before being for mandating things.

Solar panels will hold up as good as the roof itself in wind or hail. Either way insurance would put them back on.

What percent is the mandate? You talk like it was 50% or even 100%. Don't panic, it will be a looooong time before you have to join this group.

Man, you need to get out of your bubble. As I stated before, there are 43 million Americans that rent and can't put up solar panels. There are another tens of millions of American homeowners who can't afford homeowners insurance let alone solar panels. With thinking like this, it is no wonder the poor and middle class are leaving California in droves. You guys just think everyone has all sorts of money for the policies you all promote.