Calif. mandating all cars sold by 2035 are zero-emission

[Tev42]

They got people in California so drugged up on dope and legal weed they dont even realize their state is fucking them sideways. Cali is a nice state to visit, but not to live in.....ya'll can keep all that.

I don't Think Thundercat would vibe with this statement

Sponsored

 

[chi town brat]

CA is great for those who can afford it. Someone said it here. They are correct, CA is a fine example of the Haves and Have Nots and what the Haves do for the Have Nots. So let's see what the Haves do to the Have Nots when it comes to transport that isn't electric. CA wants to be the Haves only, the Have Nots just won't leave and so Have Nots camping grounds grow.

Amazing how CA doesn't consider where people live to be in the housing they can afford is as much of a factor of their current pollution. So yeah, mandate this because it is in the agenda to be the Haves Only state.

@HondaFan2017 thank you.

I would enjoy a Honda E because it is retro to my 78 CVCC but only if I can charge it in the same manner as filling up my R.

 

[Blood_TypeR]

@haberno read a USA Today article about Elon musk having all Tesla cars having Full autonomous self driving capabilities by 2021 on the market says the technology drastically declines automobile accident by over 70% I Believe he also mention his self driving car are better drivers than most average people lol

 

[RehabJP]

Dude I used to love California now I wish I could move man so sick of the BS the government sticking their nose into everything trying to over regulate literally everything and they just blow all the tax money I and every other Californian pays on stupid shit. The cost of living is stupid high, minimum wage is lower than other states with lower cost of living. Everything is Bass Akwards.

 

[evilearn]

Re: Cali life - obviously the cost of living is too high, but if living with a large amount of culture is important to you going somewhere cheaper isn't such an easy solution. I'm not even sure what a good 2nd choice would be considering the rising cost of living in many American cities. With this perspective you're kind of taking a loss no matter what you do.

Re: the new regulation - great! I love my si and would LOVE a CTR but obviously something that doesn't hurt the environment is better than something that does. If I could afford a Tesla I'd get one. Maybe now we'll get some fun, affordable options for electric vehicles.

 

[tinyman392]

Automous cars are the worst idea. They should never be allowed on public roads.
They've already killed, including because of speeding, going off the street onto the sidewalk, etc.

There is NO WAY they can detect potential threats that humans can.
I've avoided hitting kids who have run out in front of my car from behind buildings because of various things that raised red-flags that no autonomous vehicle will ever be able to detect.

Autonomous vehicles should only be used in closed-circuit areas, never public roads!

As for September 19, 2019, autonomous cars have only killed 5 total people. 4 of the fatalities involved Teslas (which killed the driver only) and 1 of them involved a refitted Volvo from Uber (which killed a female pedestrian). Autonomous vehicles definitely aren't perfect yet, as Google saw that their vehicles needed to have some form of driver intervention every 13-5600 miles.

They have been involved in many accidents though. However, this is to be compared to the sheer number of accounts humans in general cause every year. In other words, it would be good to get a number of accidents per every X miles driven and compare those numbers.

That said, current autonomous cars aren't completely autonomous, think of them like the autopilot of an aircraft, it still needs an attentive pilot on board to control the plane and take over when needed.

Autonomous sensors and systems have many abilities that humans don't have. They have a far better range of view, fewer (no) blind spots and even the ability to sense what vehicles are doing 2-3 vehicles ahead of you and adjust for that. As for stating an autonomous vehicle couldn't detect a pedestrian running across the street, that could easily be done (and probably already has) by modifying currently existing cross-traffic alert systems. Machine learning and AI have come a very long way at not only detecting objects, but predicting their actions. I'm not going to sit here and say they are perfect, but they are the future.

 

[jrow3]

As for September 19, 2019, autonomous cars have only killed 5 total people. 4 of the fatalities involved Teslas (which killed the driver only) and 1 of them involved a refitted Volvo from Uber (which killed a female pedestrian). Autonomous vehicles definitely aren't perfect yet, as Google saw that their vehicles needed to have some form of driver intervention every 13-5600 miles.

They have been involved in many accidents though. However, this is to be compared to the sheer number of accounts humans in general cause every year. In other words, it would be good to get a number of accidents per every X miles driven and compare those numbers.

That said, current autonomous cars aren't completely autonomous, think of them like the autopilot of an aircraft, it still needs an attentive pilot on board to control the plane and take over when needed.

Autonomous sensors and systems have many abilities that humans don't have. They have a far better range of view, fewer (no) blind spots and even the ability to sense what vehicles are doing 2-3 vehicles ahead of you and adjust for that. As for stating an autonomous vehicle couldn't detect a pedestrian running across the street, that could easily be done (and probably already has) by modifying currently existing cross-traffic alert systems. Machine learning and AI have come a very long way at not only detecting objects, but predicting their actions. I'm not going to sit here and say they are perfect, but they are the future.

This. Are autonomous cars perfect? Far from it. However autonomous cars don't text and drive, do 70 in a 25 zone, do burnouts in cul-de-sacs, run through that stop sign, or drive drunk.

Will autonomous cars continue to kill people? Absolutely. But they will do it a a rate MUCH less than human drivers.


As for the CA regs. Meh. There are times I really hate CA and all the BS they make us put up with, but at the same time this is probably a better thing for the environment and the long term health of the planet. In theory I would love to not have any car regulations, but at the same time I also car about the future I'm leaving someone elses kids (no plans for my own). As someone utterly frustrated at attempting to get a CA legal Cappuccino I hate this state, but as someone who realizes that CA has the power to shape the entire US automotive industry (and really the world) I'm a fan of not ruining the planet for I can have my 10 years of zooms.

 

[tinyman392]

I completely disagree. You are assuming people walking across the street on street walks.

These do not exist in residential areas & other areas.

Most of the accidents by humans are very minor fender-benders.
They can't be counted like fatal accidents.

And, just because we can do something does not mean we should do it.

We can blow up the entire world with hydrogen & nuclear bombs, but that does not mean we should do it.

We can clone sheep & humans, but that does not mean we should do it.

I'm not assuming people walk across in street walks... Neither do the ML and AI that power the autonomous vehicles. ML and AI is designed to identify people and their movements and predict their next movements (among other things). The ML and AI will learn that a lot of people use cross walks, but it'll also learn that there are lots of people who don't.

While it's true that the majority of car accidents are minor fender benders, but let's not ignore the over 30k fatal car accidents that occur each year. That number seems to be trending down as well.

I'm not going to comment on hydrogen, nuclear bombs, and cloning as they're horrible straw men.

 

[ComradeCivic1312]

California is a beautiful place to live and I stand by that. However, it's clear that liberalism does not work to solved problems because it does not address the problems at its core. In contrast, conservative governments do not necessarily mean freedom=happiness. I think as car enthusiasts we should be critical of how our decisions affect the people and environment around us (e.g. stereotype of conservatives having large diesel trucks with 4in plus piping). Unfortunately, zero-emission vehicles is an illusion. A massive amount of emissions go into producing these vehicles. Not to mention, lithium extraction has a high humanitary cost to the countries they are being extracted from. The solution, I believe, relies on the true enthusiasts who wish to see our planet survive more generations of car enthusiasts and are willing to create a more conscious market.

 

[Averia]

Every time cali is mention in a forum it turns into a hate thread. Having to deal with the heat and the mosquitos of Texas, the cold of Chicago you can keep them I'm fine right here with you. The only thing that sucked for me recently was a week of smoke but its gone now.

Mosquitos are just are bad enough in the SFV these days especially with active during the day Aedes about. So I wouldn't call that a plus.

 

[Averia]

CA is great for those who can afford it. Someone said it here. They are correct, CA is a fine example of the Haves and Have Nots and what the Haves do for the Have Nots. So let's see what the Haves do to the Have Nots when it comes to transport that isn't electric. CA wants to be the Haves only, the Have Nots just won't leave and so Have Nots camping grounds grow.

Amazing how CA doesn't consider where people live to be in the housing they can afford is as much of a factor of their current pollution. So yeah, mandate this because it is in the agenda to be the Haves Only state.

@HondaFan2017 thank you.

I would enjoy a Honda E because it is retro to my 78 CVCC but only if I can charge it in the same manner as filling up my R.

Totally agree if you drive 10 minutes a day to get to work is way less pollution then driving 5 hours a day (like most do in CA). Never heard this issue address by anyone. That is why I have a hard time with politicians they never are open an honest and simply act to protect their own interests.

 

[Habanero]

Mosquitos are just are bad enough in the SFV these days especially with active during the day Aedes about. So I wouldn't call that a plus.

I'm guessing you have never been to the Gulf Coast. The mosquitos here are nothing compared to those vicious things they are big, very aggressive and will swarm all over you like every movie that shows the Amazon- same thing. Its like the difference between a skeeter and the spiders from Minority Report does not matter what screens you have they will have blood they will get you.

 

[NorrinRadd]

Plastic trash is the latest source of greenhouse gas
https://anthropocenemagazine.org/2018/08/plastic-trash-is-the-latest-source-of-greenhouse-gas

EVs will do NOTHING for Climate Change! The REAL sources of GHG are from non-car sources!!

Converting Plastic to Fossil-Free Gasoline is just RE-USING the Same Hydrocarbons over-&-over-&-over again which = CARBON NEUTRAL before 2050!

New Technique Converts Plastic Waste to Fuel
https://advancedbiofuelsusa.info/new-technique-converts-plastic-waste-to-fuel

"The researchers were able to transform 91% of the plastic into oil. The oil, which is a mix of different hydrocarbon compounds, can be used to make buildings blocks for gasoline and other fuels and chemicals."

If your goal is reduced greenhouse gas emissions, why would you go through the trouble of converting plastic into oil, then converting it into fuel, which then gets converted into... greenhouse gas emissions?

Surely there are cleaner things we can do with recycled plastic.

 

[charleswrivers]

there are still no good batteries for electric cars and little hope for any progress

Thinking the long game: EV1 started its life in the mid-90s with lead acid batteries like a submarine. They usually only go a couple hundred cycles and do not take to high rates of discharge well (too much internal resistance). It ended it’s life with NiMHs. It had only 50-100 miles of range between type. Agreed... it was more of a mule than a proper car... but it’s where we started, if you don’t count late 19th/early 20th century efforts that ultimately got beat out by better gasoline autos (and well they should).

Some hybrid makers went with some nastier techs (cadmium) and they’re still working to eliminate cobalt and, definitely, the recycling infrastructure needs to meet the needs and match the process and infrastructure that’s made lead acid so successful. In 25 years though.... hybrids have come on in a decent way, though I’d admit earlier 90s hybrids have been about matched with the more frugal modern gasoline cars. Improved aero and engine downsizing has closed the gap.

Tesla’s called for a $25k car. They have the Supercharger network to allow driving across most of the US (I think if your in a few spots like North Dakota... you’re still pushing your car Al Bundy style). Battery energy density is still soooo low compared to gasoline, but the electric motors are much more efficient in converting chemical energy to mechanical work, that we could always carry just a small fraction of that energy and accomplish the same work or more.

Technology develops if there’s a market for it. I’d argue that much of the reasons batteries didn’t develop was because there wasn’t a commercial market for batteries that had high energy densities at low weight. Stationary batteries... weight didn’t matter. Cost did... and you could add capacity of cheap existing batteries and limit cycling and go a decade or more with some TLC. Now that there’s a mass market and consumer interest in a product that is improving... I think batteries are going to continue to improve. The 4000 cycle (1 million mile battery) is around the corner. They’re already in the 1500 range as it is... so at 300-400k miles... battery replacement cost ($3k-7k claimed) isn’t going to be much worse than a dealer installed engine. I’d be hard pressed to drive 300k-400k in 25 years. I won’t live long enough to go a million miles given my driving style. The cost of tires is going to cost far more than batteries... and if I keep buying cars the way I do... it’ll never be a cost I’ll incur because I’ll get a new car before I get tot that point.

I really do think with incremental improvements over the next ~30 years we can see electrical cars begin to really supplant gasoline cars on a massive scale. I also think it should happen when/because it’s a better product. We went from a Pb acid EV1 to the roadster that was a toy for the rich to the various models that has driven prices solidly under $50k and they’re claiming to be targeting the $25k realm. The Leaf exists and gets a little love as an in-town car. Chevy sold (some) Volts though it never got a lot of widespread love though it’s owners ranted and raved by it. Maybe we’ll see some of the other big companies put something out there.

To the point: battery tech has been slowly coming along. I don’t think we’re going to get a revolutionary breakthrough and have antimatter batteries or something that weigh less than a tank of gas but go 1000 miles or something wild that’ll last more than from the moon and back 2x (~million miles). I think we’re going to see small improvements piling onto others and more effective form factors that eliminate case/jars for more reactants per weight/volume. Remember... Tesla was just using other industry hand-me-down 18650s from Panasonic for awhile. They did it because they had the highest energy dense Lions available for use at that time... but using thousands of tiny cells is a terrible idea and they’re doing better as they’re moving to larger form factors. Give ‘em 30 more years and the first run of the heavy 200 mile range Tesla Ss will look like EV1 on NiMHs.

It’s neat, to me, to see it happening in our lifetime. I don’t want a future with only Taco Bell and morality standards and no sex... but I’d buy an electric car if it beats out it’s gasoline competition with a blend of an aggressive price point, lower operating costs and greater performance per dollar. The problem California is having is their stranglehold on things makes me think they’re trying to make the Demolition Man future into a reality through controlling what people can and can’t do/have. Not a fan.

 

[BarracksSi]

Gov Newsom's statement included:

“Pull away from the gas pumps,” Newsom said in announcing his executive order to state regulators to draw up guidelines. “Let us no longer be victims of geopolitical dictators that manipulate global supply chains and global markets.”

He ain't wrong.

Unfortunately, seeing how bare the interior is in a $35k-$60k Model 3 makes me hopeless for anything better in a $25k Tesla. The interior in the Model 3 looks worse than cars that cost half the price. I'm expecting the $25k Tesla to have a Mitsubishi Mirage interior.

I'm thinking of the Model 3 as an outlier, based on the notion (technically a rumor, AFAIK, until I see more evidence) that they were rushing to market so quickly that they gave up on designing a typical interior with buttons and switches, deciding to just throw everything onto the screen instead. It's less of a stretch than it seems, because even in our Civics, most of the switches are just controlling software anyway instead of having hard connections to physical components.

Sponsored