Washington State will ban ICE cars by 2030

[LagerHead]

Check out this funny video, I think you might prefer the politics in Australia.

It's an entertaining satire on the EV political situation down under that just came out:



Super-hilarious!

Sponsored

 

[LagerHead]

Of course there's not enough batteries to hit the target yet, because the target is 9 years off.

I didn't ignore anything!

 

[LagerHead]

The constitution does not give us rights, it merely protects them. Constitutionally speaking, the federal government has no authority to do anything climate related. That is a reserved power for the states. So the clean air act, is unconstitutional and illegal.

Saying the ground-breaking Clean Air Act is unconstitutional is really odd considering that it's been challenged many times at the Supreme Court and been upheld repeatedly. It was signed into law in 1970 and had a dramatic effect on air quality over the next two decades. Yes, change takes time.

Trust me, you would not want to live or breathe the air in the 1970's in American cities.

 

[LagerHead]

Here's another funny EV video from many years ago:

 

[zhackwyatt]

Saying the ground-breaking Clean Air Act is unconstitutional is really odd considering that it's been challenged many times at the Supreme Court and been upheld repeatedly. It was signed into law in 1970 and had a dramatic effect on air quality over the next two decades. Yes, change takes time.

Trust me, you would not want to live or breathe the air in the 1970's in American cities.

I think it's interesting when people think that asking the federal government whether the government itself should be allowed to do something makes sense. "Please sire, you decided you have power, now decide you don't. It's up to you!"

Remember the Supreme Court also said it was OK to round up Japanese and put them in camps during WWII. Also an unconstitutional action.

And, just because I don't think the federal government should take action doesn't mean I want dirty air. It also doesn't mean I want no government action at all.

 

[sockmeister]

Similarly, I can't believe I have to explain again that in *every scenario imaginable*, it's always better for carbon emissions to have a pure BEV with a properly sized (small enough to give you the range you need!) battery than to have a hybrid with any ICE of any size. Plug-in or generator is irrelevant.

Production emissions are always eventually offset by driving using the battery.

Running the ICE will always expel greenhouse gases, and always works against the lifetime emissions.

It's that simple. BEVs offer less total emissions than hybrids.

Anyway, it seems like there's another discussion going on here that's a bit more heated. This thread is probably in the danger zone of getting admin-locked lol.

 

[milepost1]

I’m with you that carrots are better. That’s why WA has put so much into encouraging the switch away from fossil fuels. However, sometimes it takes sticks as well.

What has Washington (the state) to encourage ev's? A lot of rhetoric that's it. Just inslee saying we are going to do it. Definitely the stick.

 

[sockmeister]

That's agreeable; I wasn't even talking about the ban anymore. We were way off tangent.

 

[ChasingCoral]

That's why the ban isn't set for MY2022.

 

[LagerHead]

What has Washington (the state) to encourage ev's? A lot of rhetoric that's it. Just inslee saying we are going to do it. Definitely the stick.

My wife and I each avoided sales tax on the first $45,000 of our EV's using the State sales tax exemption for EV's. That saved us $9,000. We also avoided sales tax on the EV charging infrastructure we installed in our carport to charge two EV's.

I would say that's quite an incentive to buy an EV instead of ICE. The cars are so much better than ICE we would have done it anyway but it's a good incentive for fence-sitters.

 

[mwsno]

My wife and I each avoided sales tax on the first $45,000 of our EV's using the State sales tax exemption for EV's. That saved us $9,000. We also avoided sales tax on the EV charging infrastructure we installed in our carport to charge two EV's.

I would say that's quite an incentive to buy an EV instead of ICE. The cars are so much better than ICE we would have done it anyway but it's a good incentive for fence-sitters.

I still feel the WA incentive is weak. There shouldn't be a 45k cap on the incentive when it limits your choices, when there are very few to begin with. At the very least, allow me to buy a 50k car but only 45k worth of tax incentive.

Glad to hear you guys made the best of it though. My math would make that no more than 8k savings. What EVs did you purchase that made it under the 45k mark?

 

[Billyk24]

They're not, even in the long run. BEVs over their lifespan emit far fewer emissions than an ICE of any kind, even considering fueling only on coal power...

Also, look at their own data in this article. Hybrids are only actually the same as BEVs in emissions when they are run on "mostly battery". There are very few people that can run a hybrid daily on "mostly battery" with a 6-10kWh battery. In that case, you are better off just buying a BEV with a 10kWh battery.
Finally, at the end, they admit that if energy sources change by 2030 (they will), then this data will require "re-analyzing"....

By the way, that "company" is incredibly biased. Their only stake exists in analyzing ICE emissions. Of course they're going to release an article like that ?

Ok, I like these kind of discussions. Not disagreeing with you overall, but I noticed a ton of red flags in that article.

There are very few people that can run a hybrid daily on "mostly battery" with a 6-10kWh battery. In that case, you are better off just buying a BEV with a 10kWh battery.-------your reference for this statement came from.....? Follow the money again?

Sponsored