Interesting legislation from Massachusetts on gas/diesel/electric vehicles

[gtgt_bangbang]

gtgt -
It is obvious you have not read the posting guidelines. Personal attacks and demeaning statements about other members will not be tolerated. Please do not do that again. Future violations of the posting guidelines will result in an infraction. Infractions will result in time off from the forum and potentially banning from the forum.

Let's get back to sharing information but not doing so at the expense of others. Thanks.

thank you , true I should have disembodied my witticism with the zen "some are" , although I corrected my ways on further review.

still, I placed a post , now removed , that was not directed at any one atall by any stretch what so ever, and had it removed for a 'politics' affront , to a throng of shrieks or so I'm informed.

but a thread away, am the butt of "because their political idols and their TV idols tell them to be" and urged to check my Conscience at the door.

and its all kosher. maybe a re-reading between the between the lines is in order

amazing how simple to highlight the hypocrisy

 

[83014]

Or-

Remember, if those that beat the Horse Quite Dead are posting the same 'ol same 'ol, you can use the ignore feature-

Settings from upper right-

>Edit Ignore List-

>User name- (enter name)

>Okay.

OM

Done.

Doug

 

[classicvw]

Just a general observation seen on Internet forums, about no one or one place in particular… It still amazes me that those who think they’re smarter and wittier than others still aren’t smart enough to stop digging when they find themselves in a hole.

 

[rangerreece]

Electric power existed before the internal combustion engine, and people’s main form of transportation was horses (and steam engines powered by coal). I fear an arbitrary, altruistic, ill-advised ban will cause us all to realize why the ICE was invented in the first place.

 

[classicvw]

Electric power existed before the internal combustion engine, and people’s main form of transportation was horses (and steam engines powered by coal). I fear an arbitrary, altruistic, ill-advised ban will cause us all to realize why the ICE was invented in the first place.

Very early on, 1900 to roughly 1915 there were 30,000 registered electric vehicles in the U.S. and range already had advanced to 100 mile range. They were marketed as a cleaner alternative to ICE vehicles and also marketed to women. Then cheap oil was discovered in Texas which helped ICE vehicles move ahead. We’ve been slaves to Big Oil ever since. Hopefully that’s going to change.

 

[Omega Man]

Electricity is everywhere. A fleece robe and winter, dry conditions and touch a light plate screw.
OM

 

[rangerreece]

Slaves to big oil… ironic turn of phrase, as I think it was slavery that was the energy used to build the pyramids… you know, before ICE’s (and electricity). I suggesting we better be careful about allowing those in power to burn down the forest in order to improve their view of the mountains.

All analogies aside: screw this transition up; the consequences would be completely catastrophic… (again)

 

[gregfeeler]

Very early on, 1900 to roughly 1915 there were 30,000 registered electric vehicles in the U.S. and range already had advanced to 100 mile range. They were marketed as a cleaner alternative to ICE vehicles and also marketed to women. Then cheap oil was discovered in Texas which helped ICE vehicles move ahead. We’ve been slaves to Big Oil ever since. Hopefully that’s going to change.

I read a long analysis one time on why the Internal Combustion Engine beat out other alternatives at the beginning of the automotive age. Instant power, very long range, quick refueling, easy transportation and storage of fuel, and perceived as less dangerous to the driver than steam or eclectic were all big factors. However, the one thing which sealed the deal for ICE was the invention of the electric starter. That allowed those less coordinated or of weaker frame - especially women - to start an ICE vehicle as easily as electric and far faster than steam.

 

[kbasa]

I read a long analysis one time on why the Internal Combustion Engine beat out other alternatives at the beginning of the automotive age. Instant power, very long range, quick refueling, easy transportation and storage of fuel, and perceived as less dangerous to the driver than steam or eclectic were all big factors. However, the one thing which sealed the deal for ICE was the invention of the electric starter. That allowed those less coordinated or of weaker frame - especially women - to start an ICE vehicle as easily as electric and far faster than steam.

Give "My life with General Motors" a read. Alfred P. Sloan was a heavily marketing driven individual and his focus on what made better product differentiated GM from Ford in major ways. Ford intended to build the Model T pretty much forever, but when GM showed up with cars available in other colors, frames that fit the passengers between the axles instead of above them, heaters, radios, enclosed cabins and the like, it put a big hurt on Ford's ability to sell the T any longer.

If you look at what's going on now in the framework of Sloan's book, we're on the exact same path, but instead of spending 40 years going through the "horseless carriage" and then the "brass era" cars to get to major market penetration, we are, IMHO, right at the end of the brass era. That's when we started getting reliable cars that didn't require much in the way of mechanical knowledge to operate.

We're right there and if you wanted a time period from last century to equate our current position to, I'd say it's kind of late 20s to early 30s. We've got heavy iteration going on in EV technology and infrastructure as we stage for the next evolution in not only automotive technology, but energy creation in general.

I'd venture that EVs of 100 years ago went away for the same reason people try to claim they'll never catch on: range. That reason is ending soon as a viable rejection of EVs for most Americans. Sure, you're not going to tow your horse truck from Kansas to Montana yet, but for most of what people need to do in their regular daily lives will be readily facilitated by EVs.

 

[kbasa]

Slaves to big oil… ironic turn of phrase, as I think it was slavery that was the energy used to build the pyramids… you know, before ICE’s (and electricity). I suggesting we better be careful about allowing those in power to burn down the forest in order to improve their view of the mountains.

What does any of this mean? I'm trying to follow along, but what conscripts in Egypt building memorials to kings has to do with us being endlessly reliant on those who hate us to provide our energy sources is completely lost on me.

And I utterly don't follow you on the second sentence. Like not at all.

Help me out.

 

[gregfeeler]

What does any of this mean? I'm trying to follow along, but what conscripts in Egypt building memorials to kings has to do with us being endlessly reliant on those who hate us to provide our energy sources is completely lost on me.

And I utterly don't follow you on the second sentence. Like not at all.

Help me out.

Dave, as I read it, Reece's second sentence is a reference to one of his core arguments that any partial bans of ICE power vehicles will be inherently elitist. Only the "poor" (i.e., middle and low income) will be prohibited from owing non-electric vehicles while those the rich, super rich, power elites, and governments will still have access to ICE vehicles which will still have more range, power, and flexibility than EVs.

I have to agree with Reece on this. Any pending bans on ICE vehicles will in practice only apply to the average citizen who's driving of ICE vehicles, while a part of the CO problem, is actually a very small part. Get the masses to feel like their sacrifice is making a difference, when it's really not.

 

[rangerreece]

Dave, before the Industrial Revolution powered by fossil fuels, the primary source of “energy” was beast and man. “Pyramids, roads, dams, churches, houses, agriculture, all came into being through the energy of human labor, some compensated, some not. Come on now, we are men of reason, don’t be coy, you know your history as well as I.

One bad overreaching policy change, no matter how altruistic on its facade, could put us back in the dark ages, I’ve seen it happen in nations before (Bosnia in particular), we are not immune.

If there is an equivalent power source, by all means, I’m for it. But I know damn well, there isn’t, I am immune to gas lighting.

 

[henzilla]

OK everybody, how about some not so serious posts.

Here’s the answer

 

[52184]

Like this? But… don’t try crossing into Canada; too many questions!



Best,
DeVern

 

[rangerreece]

That’s a good one DeVern.

 

[Visian]

The history of gasoline… A long but fascinating read.

 

[kbasa]

Dave, before the Industrial Revolution powered by fossil fuels, the primary source of “energy” was beast and man. “Pyramids, roads, dams, churches, houses, agriculture, all came into being through the energy of human labor, some compensated, some not. Come on now, we are men of reason, don’t be coy, you know your history as well as I.

One bad overreaching policy change, no matter how altruistic on its facade, could put us back in the dark ages, I’ve seen it happen in nations before (Bosnia in particular), we are not immune.

If there is an equivalent power source, by all means, I’m for it. But I know damn well, there isn’t, I am immune to gas lighting.

It feels like we often frame discussions about solutions as a zero sum. "We can't go to EVs because there's an exception". Or we can't envision new opportunities that distributed generation might bring to us. Out here in the west, we keep burning places down because of the way we transmit electricity. Or we start with the "if I can't tow my boat 1500 miles, then EVs aren't any good" type of exception case. That's what I keep pushing back against here - logical fallacies. The "it won't work for me because I live 900 miles from town and have to tow my 45 ton trailer with me to get groceries" sort of exception is fine for that person, but for the rest of the folks rolling less than 50 miles a day, why not go EV? My R11S would go all of 125 miles before it needed gas and I toured all over the country on that thing. That's about a third of the range of a modern EV.

I'm not trying to be coy. I sometimes have a hard time following your comments, so if I ask you to clarify, please don't take that as confrontational. I'm trying to understand your thinking. I use "ignorant" not to say someone is stupid, but the way it's defined in the dictionary to indicate someone has a gap in their knowledge.

Maybe you can give me an example of something that would "return us to the dark ages". I'm having a little difficulty finding an example. If we don't have a specific reason, then we're operating on Fear Uncertainty and Doubt apropos of nothing but our imaginations, no?

I think my larger issue is that there's so much information in this thread that's just flat out wrong. The ban is in 2035, not 2030. Only light trucks and cars are affected by it, not all the rest of the stuff someone posted in a big laundry list of "what about". Folks thinking their taxes are going to go up is false unless they make $400k/year. If we're going to have the conversation, let's start from actual facts, not partially remembered impressions that are flat out wrong.

I hope that makes sense. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Until then, here's a picture of one of my favorite bikes. Ride safely, ride well, ride often.

 

[pglaves]

I don't think we will eliminate internal combustion engines by 2035. And I don't think we will eliminate natural gas fired power plants either. But that does not mean we can't accelerate the development and use of solar energy and wind energy and new battery technology. I probably live as remote as almost anybody on this forum: 53 miles from the nearest grocery store, 25 miles from the nearest gas pump, and almost 60 miles from the nearest doctor and hospital. Still, except for trips I could easily get by with an EV with a 250+ miles range. I could without inconvenience get rid of one of our ICE vehicles and keep the other for travels.

As for at home solar, we are surrounded by folks who have solar as their only source of electricity. Fewer than 25% of the dwellings in south Brewster County, Texas are connected to the power grid. In New Mexico the Kit Carson REC does "net metering" meaning you are connected to the grid in a plus and minus fashion. If your solar provides back to the grid more than your usage draws from the grid you get a check and not a bill. And if you have a condo or are otherwise limited in the placement of on-site solar you can buy into a large solar farm and get credit for your share of the total number of panels. Don Cameron who used to own the BMW dealership in Deming New Mexico gets a check from the power company every month.

Here in Texas the - get this name - Railroad Commission - regulates the energy industry and in its own way does all it can to discourage usage of much of anything that is not oil and gas related.

My point is it is not an all or nothing game. EVs and at-home solar as well as solar fields and wind farms will evolve and increase over time while ICE vehicles will decrease over time. Younger generations than those of us who are baby boomers or pre-baby-boomers are already increasing the enthusiasm for these changes. All I can do is sit back, smile, and watch it happen. And, oh by the way, our daughter's Tesla with 0 to 60 mph acceleration in less than three seconds is a real hoot to drive.

 

[classicvw]

As we used to say- Right On Paul!

 

[kbasa]

I don't think we will eliminate internal combustion engines by 2035. And I don't think we will eliminate natural gas fired power plants either. But that does not mean we can't accelerate the development and use of solar energy and wind energy and new battery technology. I probably live as remote as almost anybody on this forum: 53 miles from the nearest grocery store, 25 miles from the nearest gas pump, and almost 60 miles from the nearest doctor and hospital. Still, except for trips I could easily get by with an EV with a 250+ miles range. I could without inconvenience get rid of one of our ICE vehicles and keep the other for travels.

As for at home solar, we are surrounded by folks who have solar as their only source of electricity. Fewer than 25% of the dwellings in south Brewster County, Texas are connected to the power grid. In New Mexico the Kit Carson REC does "net metering" meaning you are connected to the grid in a plus and minus fashion. If your solar provides back to the grid more than your usage draws from the grid you get a check and not a bill. And if you have a condo or are otherwise limited in the placement of on-site solar you can buy into a large solar farm and get credit for your share of the total number of panels. Don Cameron who used to own the BMW dealership in Deming New Mexico gets a check from the power company every month.

Here in Texas the - get this name - Railroad Commission - regulates the energy industry and in its own way does all it can to discourage usage of much of anything that is not oil and gas related.

My point is it is not an all or nothing game. EVs and at-home solar as well as solar fields and wind farms will evolve and increase over time while ICE vehicles will decrease over time. Younger generations than those of us who are baby boomers or pre-baby-boomers are already increasing the enthusiasm for these changes. All I can do is sit back, smile, and watch it happen. And, oh by the way, our daughter's Tesla with 0 to 60 mph acceleration in less than three seconds is a real hoot to drive.

Exactly. We're on the cusp of green energy becoming economically advantageous. Most of the rest, from what I can tell is either resistance to change or letting FUD control ones thinking.

IMHO, we won't be free of ICE for a few decades, if ever, but over time, EVs will replace a lot of vehicles. I'm not sure I buy the "only the rich" argument. Don't forget that market forces are still in play and we'll see economic factors yield to them, yielding lower cost cars. The used market is kinda silly right now, but if you need a short haul vehicle, you can buy a used Nissan Leaf for a few thousand bucks. It probably wouldn't work for you, but for most suburban situations, it'd do everything they need about 95% of the time.

I think that as we see "skateboard platforms" arrive, costs will drop. Until now, EVs have been bespoke products, sharing little with other models. Now, Kia, for example is working from a standardize platform, as is Audi/Porsche/VW. Economies of scale will start to apply. Given that an EV has something like 1/3rd (trying to remember here) the parts of an ICE car, we'll see prices begin to normalize and be more like what people are buying now. Just as a point of comparison, the average car payment is about $700, which roughly equates to a $40k car. We're not there yet with EVs broadly, but there are a pretty good selection of them out. My neighbor bought a VW id.4 and it came with 2 years of free charging. So they went and bought a Kia EV and that came with two years of free charging, too. After rebates, these are both ~$30K cars and more in line with folks going to buy a new top line Corolla or lower level Accord. We're getting there, right?

Consider EVs like communications technology's arc over the last 30 years. We're on UseNet now, moving to the Beeg Leest and I figure we're going to have forums/social media in the next few years.

Thanks for addressing the zero sum argument that keeps showing up in these kind of conversations.