2035 California PHEV Mandate challenges

[Max Rockatansky]

Regarding the Kona, the conventional ICE variant doesn't have very good mileage.  The EPA rating I'm looking at is 26-31 MPG.  Yes, the 304 mile claimed range is on the lower end of what I would consider acceptable. 

All the same, I ended up getting a Corolla Hybrid last year for close to the starting price of the base Kona.  The car I got is rated at 47-50 MPG and doesn't have the compromise of having to charge it.  I guess if I really wanted a CUV/EV I probably would have considered the Kona. 

The Kona surprisingly on has 6.7 inches of ground clearance.  I was surprised to see how close it was to my Corolla which has 5.7 inches.  Both vehicles are probably going to be restricted to the same kinds of roads.

I know I've asked you before, but how would you match type of road (pavement, packed dirt, two-track) to how much ground clearance you need?  I still haven't come across a good definition of "high clearance vehicle."

I haven't really found a good definition myself either.  It is something I tend to question as an automotive truism given how many supposedly "high clearance roads" I've gotten cars through. 

I tend to look at vehicles like the CrossTrek as something that meets the criteria I would consider high clearance.  Apparently the minimum clearance on that model is 8.7 inches.

https://www.caranddriver.com/subaru/crosstrek/specs

[Rothman]

Regarding the Kona, the conventional ICE variant doesn't have very good mileage.  The EPA rating I'm looking at is 26-31 MPG.  Yes, the 304 mile claimed range is on the lower end of what I would consider acceptable. 

All the same, I ended up getting a Corolla Hybrid last year for close to the starting price of the base Kona.  The car I got is rated at 47-50 MPG and doesn't have the compromise of having to charge it.  I guess if I really wanted a CUV/EV I probably would have considered the Kona. 

The Kona surprisingly on has 6.7 inches of ground clearance.  I was surprised to see how close it was to my Corolla which has 5.7 inches.  Both vehicles are probably going to be restricted to the same kinds of roads.

I know I've asked you before, but how would you match type of road (pavement, packed dirt, two-track) to how much ground clearance you need?  I still haven't come across a good definition of "high clearance vehicle."

I haven't really found a good definition myself either.  It is something I tend to question as an automotive truism given how many supposedly "high clearance roads" I've gotten cars through. 

I tend to look at vehicles like the CrossTrek as something that meets the criteria I would consider high clearance.  Apparently the minimum clearance on that model is 8.7 inches.

https://www.caranddriver.com/subaru/crosstrek/specs

Thanks.

[Max Rockatansky]

Apparently the National Park Service defines High Clearance as a minimum of 8 inches.  Seems there is no real consensus definition though:

https://www.nps.gov/deva/planyourvisit/upload/508-Backcountry-and-Wilderness-Access-map_.pdf

[stevashe]

EVs are nowhere near ready to be the only option by 2035.

I don't really think a mandate is the course of action to be honest, but it is important to note that even under California's mandate, EVs would not be the only option! As the title of this thread says, it's only a PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicle) mandate. A PHEV is basically just a regular hybrid with a large battery that can be charged directly with electricity like a full EV so it can run on electricity for a short to medium range before starting to burn gas. And really there's nothing stopping you from ignoring the charging capability and just driving it like a pain ICE car if you're stubborn, so you still have plenty of options even after 2035.

[vdeane]

Is there even a 50% plus 1 requirement in the US?  Given our two-party system, I'm not even sure.  For Canada, I imagine it would require either a runoff or ranked choice voting.

Canada already has a Senate, modeled after the UK House of Lords.  In theory it operates like the US Senate except for how senators are appointed and the term they serve, and the part where the US Senate confirms officials and judges appointed by the Presidents.  In practice it's largely ceremonial.  It does sometimes veto bills passed by the House of Commons, however.

Exactly. There's no need to replace gas pump capacity 1:1 since anyone who charges their EV at home should only ever use a public EV charger when on a road trip.

(And on a road trip, I've timed my stops at gas stations and rest areas and they are almost always 15 minutes or longer, so I'd argue that the fastest chargers available now are sufficient. There's still a ways to go until you can road trip without planning your stops though.)

Indeed.  Aside from blanketing the interstate-side restaurants and convenience stores (along with Turnpike service areas) with charging in all the parking spots, I'd say the main things we'd need are to update building codes to have similar charging at apartments (and maybe a government program similar to NEVI to get them installed at existing sites) and high enough range available/affordable that one could leave in the morning, stop for lunch, and get to their destination without needing to add additional stops (even in hot/cold weather or on a hilly road).  It still wouldn't make the "I go through the drive thru and eat in the car because I want to be moving 100% of the time" crowd happy, but outside of this forum they're such a sharp minority that it's probably not worth bothering to cater to them (and given that drowsy driving is a problem, we probably shouldn't).  That would leave people who need street parking; I'm not quite sure how to handle that issue, to be honest.

There are a lot more EVs on the road now than there were 10 years ago.  Yet, it's rare to see lines and waits at charging stations.

Too be fair, there are a couple circumstances where lines have been a problem:
1. Holiday travel when everyone's on the road
2. California (where EV adoption is the highest)

Both would be solved by making sure people home charge and moving to a "park in any spot and charge at road trip stops" model over the current "go to dedicated charging station or the few dedicated spots set aside somewhere else" model.  I'd also ban the "X miles of free charging" incentives many automakers are giving out, since it drives people to take up charging spots rather than home charge because it's free.

[DTComposer]

Their cost is intrinsically higher because of the cost of the batteries

This is my anecdotal experience: I'm about 2½ years into owning an EV. When I was shopping for it the cost for the replacement battery was going to be $10K-$12K. That cost is down to around $9K now, so if/when I replace it (in, say, 8 years) it's reasonable to assume that cost will be closer to $7K-$8K or less. Of course, it could be longer before I replace it, since I've used a fast charger maybe three times per year, and I've only ever charged to 100% maybe six times total (beginning of road trips), so I'm very conscious about battery health; and based on my current usage, after 10 years I'll be at around 140,000 miles.

This is not an exact science given fluctuations in prices and usage, but my net savings in daily usage (no gas or oil changes, but increase in electricity bill) has been around $65 per month, or $780 per year. After 10 years, that's $7,800.

And yes, the EV model was more expensive than the ICE model, but I did get the tax credit. And at least for now, the ability to use the HOV lanes is definitely a tangible benefit in terms of time saved.

So everyone's story will be different, but for me, no, the cost is not/will not be intrinsically higher.

[tawnuskgrevy]

There's a part of me that would *love* to have an electric vehicle at some point, but there's just too many factors working against it for it to be viable right now. I live in an apartment and there's no way the landlord is going to spring for a charger, plus there's no EV chargers anywhere near my office. I drive a lot for work (to visit construction sites, often in the middle of nowhere), and (ironically) because a lot of our construction involves *adding* EV chargers to existing sites, they're usually installed but not yet switched on when I get there. Finally, there's currently no electric vehicle with the battery range to make it from Southern California to Albuquerque without needing to stop for an extended recharge time, and that's a drive I make at least twice a year and will continue to make as long as my parents are alive.

Don't get me wrong, I *want* electric vehicles to be a more viable option, there's just still a lot of infrastructural hurdles that are hindering wider EV acceptance.

[jeffandnicole]

I remember when the Prius came about, people were against hybrids because people will need to replace the batteries; batteries were expensive, and they wouldn't last.

Today, people are all for hybrids because they're no longer expensive. There's so few people that actually replaced the batteries to the point it's not even much of a thought, and they generally give excellent fuel mileage compared to a normal fully gasoline powered vehicle.

There's a part of me that would *love* to have an electric vehicle at some point, but there's just too many factors working against it for it to be viable right now. I live in an apartment and there's no way the landlord is going to spring for a charger, plus there's no EV chargers anywhere near my office. I drive a lot for work (to visit construction sites, often in the middle of nowhere), and (ironically) because a lot of our construction involves *adding* EV chargers to existing sites, they're usually installed but not yet switched on when I get there. Finally, there's currently no electric vehicle with the battery range to make it from Southern California to Albuquerque without needing to stop for an extended recharge time, and that's a drive I make at least twice a year and will continue to make as long as my parents are alive.

Don't get me wrong, I *want* electric vehicles to be a more viable option, there's just still a lot of infrastructural hurdles that are hindering wider EV acceptance.

And these are perfectly valid reasons. 

I've made the comparison in the past of buying a pickup truck - it's great for hauling stuff; not so great if you have a family of 5 when there's only a single bench seat.  People that are against EVs discuss it as EVs are bad for everyone.  Single row pickups aren't bad for everyone, but they're not practical for everyone either.

[Max Rockatansky]

Doesn't hurt the warranty on a Toyota hybrid battery is now 200,000 miles.

[michravera]

On a related note last November Governor Newsom declined (via veto) to enact stricter safety standards for cars in California.  In the statement he released it said something about he believed safety standards were the domain of Federal regulators.  I fully suspect what he said to come back up if the CARB EPA waiver issue ends up in court. 

https://apnews.com/article/california-speed-alert-cars-bill-veto-588605f3980c952c894756da6579bf3d

See The Ravera Criteria https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=28939.msg2591333#msg2591333

[jeffandnicole]

Doesn't hurt the warranty on a Toyota hybrid battery is now 200,000 miles.

Businesses design their warranties so they're generally out of reach of most issues, so if Toyota's warranty is now 200k, then those batteries are lasting at least 200k.

[Max Rockatansky]

Doesn't hurt the warranty on a Toyota hybrid battery is now 200,000 miles.

Businesses design their warranties so they're generally out of reach of most issues, so if Toyota's warranty is now 200k, then those batteries are lasting at least 200k.

Which conveniently coincides around the typical life cycle of when I pull a daily driver from duty. 

[pderocco]

But if ICE vehicles went the way of the dodo, we would need a staggering number of charging stations to avoid the musical chairs problem, and a staggering infrastructure to support them, and each charger would only be used for a small fraction of the time.

You're still completely ignoring the fact that 90+% of charging will be done at home and therefore not require any chargers to be built!

I don't mean to ignore that. I think it will be far less than 90+%, given the existence of apartment buildings where it will be close to zero. But even if people do charge at home, infrastructure is still required for that. It's less complicated because they're not retail chargers that anyone can use, but the large amount of energy still has to get there, and then get into the cars. And since most households have multiple cars, you still could have a musical chairs problem.

And all for what? I don't think forcing everyone into EVs will be necessary to "save the planet", and I don't think people who say it will should be taken seriously if they're opposed to nuclear power. That could eventually supply all our non-mobile energy needs, which is also a huge producer of carbon, which would reduce the need to switch to EVs.

Technological advances usually increase convenience. EVs introduce an inconvenience which people who are passionate proponents are willing to take on, but most people will have varying degrees of resistance to it, and the new technology will feel like a step backward.

[pderocco]

Sure batteries are made of some rather harsh chemicals, but you manufacture the battery ONE TIME and then you can drive with it for 10+ years. You mustn't forget that EVERY TIME you go to fill a car up with gasoline, you need to produce that toxic material. You likely use hundreds of times more material producing gasoline to power an ICE car compared to producing one lithium battery, especially when considering that batteries can be reliably recycled.

You're ignoring what it takes to produce the energy to charge the batteries.

These days, an awful lot of EVs are actually running on coal, which is worse than gasoline.

[DTComposer]

But if ICE vehicles went the way of the dodo, we would need a staggering number of charging stations to avoid the musical chairs problem, and a staggering infrastructure to support them, and each charger would only be used for a small fraction of the time.

You're still completely ignoring the fact that 90+% of charging will be done at home and therefore not require any chargers to be built!

I don't mean to ignore that. I think it will be far less than 90+%, given the existence of apartment buildings where it will be close to zero. But even if people do charge at home, infrastructure is still required for that. It's less complicated because they're not retail chargers that anyone can use, but the large amount of energy still has to get there, and then get into the cars. And since most households have multiple cars, you still could have a musical chairs problem.

It can be super un-complicated. I had a 240v outlet installed in my garage in three hours, and it charges my car while I'm sleeping. New construction can easily accommodate this, whether it's in a garage or at an outdoor spot, and for existing buildings, a small increase in rent would cover the cost relatively quickly, and then it's an amenity that will make the building more attractive to tenants.

Technological advances usually increase convenience. EVs introduce an inconvenience which people who are passionate proponents are willing to take on, but most people will have varying degrees of resistance to it, and the new technology will feel like a step backward.

Many technological advances introduce an inconvenience to some portion of the population - we've seen it on this forum when people bemoan smartphones - like it or not, "Western" society is advancing on the assumption that everyone has a smartphone. You could say the same for the switch to DTV, or email becoming the primary form of communication, texting instead of calling, etc. College students (and lots of high school students as well) do all of their assignments, communicate with teachers, track their grades, etc. through an app or online portal, meaning it's a necessity to have a computer. An increasing number of business no longer take cash.

Even 15 or 20 years ago, people complained about drops in cell phone coverage, even in dense urban areas - you'd pick your service provider based on whether you could get a signal in your home and/or office (and often you couldn't get both). It was a definite inconvenience in adopting a new technology, but it didn't stop people from getting cell phones, or from recognizing that they were the inevitable evolution in personal communication.

Some technologies have become more inconvenient as time has gone on, even if it's for supposedly good reasons - flying is much more of a hassle than it used to be, or the increase in two-factor authentication and other online security (as well as companies wanting to better track you) makes using large portions of the internet more complicated than before.

I'm not saying that EVs (or even hybrids) are the only way to go moving forward - but I think it's a bit disingenuous to simply cry "it's too hard, therefore it will always be too hard, therefore it's bad/a conspiracy/an infringement on my liberties." I don't think that's what you're doing here, but I sure do see/hear it all the time.

[Rothman]

Sure batteries are made of some rather harsh chemicals, but you manufacture the battery ONE TIME and then you can drive with it for 10+ years. You mustn't forget that EVERY TIME you go to fill a car up with gasoline, you need to produce that toxic material. You likely use hundreds of times more material producing gasoline to power an ICE car compared to producing one lithium battery, especially when considering that batteries can be reliably recycled.

You're ignoring what it takes to produce the energy to charge the batteries.

These days, an awful lot of EVs are actually running on coal, which is worse than gasoline.

Oops.

https://evadoption.com/are-evs-charged-mostly-by-coal-power-in-the-us/

[Scott5114]

A pretty common trick in Las Vegas is to get an EV and solar panels on the house. The amount you save by elimitanting both your transportation and your air conditioning costs more than makes up for the cost of the panels.

[formulanone]

Sure batteries are made of some rather harsh chemicals, but you manufacture the battery ONE TIME and then you can drive with it for 10+ years. You mustn't forget that EVERY TIME you go to fill a car up with gasoline, you need to produce that toxic material. You likely use hundreds of times more material producing gasoline to power an ICE car compared to producing one lithium battery, especially when considering that batteries can be reliably recycled.

You're ignoring what it takes to produce the energy to charge the batteries.

These days, an awful lot of EVs are actually running on coal, which is worse than gasoline.

Oops.

https://evadoption.com/are-evs-charged-mostly-by-coal-power-in-the-us/

Also, a power plant is much more efficient than a moving vehicle, because it doesn't have to deal with friction and wind resistance. Heat and chemical losses are repurposed (because a power plant takes up a vast amount of space). A vehicle's internal combustion engine and ancillary equipment cannot perform in any considerable amount of expelled energy regeneration (exhaust gas recirculation via mandate, a small amount of heat exchanged back into the HVAC's heater core, and hybrid vehicles' motor-generators are exceptions).

If I had a dollar for every time I have to repeat this EV haters, I'd have...well, at least two more dollars a week.

[oscar]

Doesn't hurt the warranty on a Toyota hybrid battery is now 200,000 miles.

Businesses design their warranties so they're generally out of reach of most issues, so if Toyota's warranty is now 200k, then those batteries are lasting at least 200k.

FWIW, even the hybrid battery in my 2008 Prius was still going strong until the car was totaled in a parking accident, just short of 320K.

[stevashe]

Sure batteries are made of some rather harsh chemicals, but you manufacture the battery ONE TIME and then you can drive with it for 10+ years. You mustn't forget that EVERY TIME you go to fill a car up with gasoline, you need to produce that toxic material. You likely use hundreds of times more material producing gasoline to power an ICE car compared to producing one lithium battery, especially when considering that batteries can be reliably recycled.

You're ignoring what it takes to produce the energy to charge the batteries.

These days, an awful lot of EVs are actually running on coal, which is worse than gasoline.

Oops.

https://evadoption.com/are-evs-charged-mostly-by-coal-power-in-the-us/

An even if they were running on 100% coal, the fact that an EV has the equivalent efficiency of 200+mpg means that they would still produce less pollution per mile driven, which just goes to show how relatively inefficient a gas powered engine is at converting energy to motion.

[mgk920]

I know your answer will be "they don't have the money to keep installing charging stations". Well, they have the money for other benefits, don't they?  Companies have daycares and gyms to encourage people to work for those companies. They can spend the money on charging stations as well. 

The EV argument has long centered on "this is what we have now; but we'll go with the theory if people keep buying EVs they won't expand EV charging and we'll all be in a huge line to charge our vehicles".

That isn't my answer. Of course they'll increase the number of charging stations. But if ICE vehicles went the way of the dodo, we would need a staggering number of charging stations to avoid the musical chairs problem, and a staggering infrastructure to support them, and each charger would only be used for a small fraction of the time. I don't think that's economically feasible. And since you can't store significant amounts of electricity cheaply, whenever someone is charging his car, that electricity will have to be generated somewhere else at that same moment, which in a green world doesn't work when the wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine. Not like gasoline sitting in a big underground tank, available whenever it's needed.

The only thing good about EVs is that they "save the planet". The list of downsides is quite long: the fact that trips often have to be planned around the need to spend time recharging, the loss of capacity in the cold, the initial cost of batteries compared to the cost of a gas tank, the fact that batteries eventually need to be replaced, the fact that they're made of toxic materials rather than metal or fiberglass, the fact that the energy has to be distributed by a huge number of new power lines rather than a modest number of tanker trucks on existing roads, etc. The motivated belief that all this and more can all be handled somehow seems of a piece with the motivated belief in the efficacy of windmills and solar panels.

Also try to build new power plants and power lines (can you say "NIMBY"?  I meant " N I M B Y ! ! ! " ? ).

As I have said many times before, straight battery-electric car tech has not been thought through and will fail in the market now just like it did in both the early-mid 1970s as well as in the earliest days of automobility - and for the same basic reasons.

We are also seeing modern-day (thieves) cutting charger cords for a few quick bucks of scrap in many markets.  Has that issue been adequately addressed yet?
 
Mike

[vdeane]

We are also seeing modern-day (thieves) cutting charger cords for a few quick bucks of scrap in many markets.  Has that issue been adequately addressed yet?

One would hope, but I imagine that will work itself out regardless once the thieves figure out that the cables won't actually make them any money.

[Scott5114]

We are also seeing modern-day (thieves) cutting charger cords for a few quick bucks of scrap in many markets.  Has that issue been adequately addressed yet?

1. Put the cable in your garage
2. Close the garage

Seems adequate to me.

[oscar]

We are also seeing modern-day (thieves) cutting charger cords for a few quick bucks of scrap in many markets.  Has that issue been adequately addressed yet?

1. Put the cable in your garage
2. Close the garage

Seems adequate to me.

For you. Not so much for those of us without garages, or other secured parking.

[Rothman]

We are also seeing modern-day (thieves) cutting charger cords for a few quick bucks of scrap in many markets.  Has that issue been adequately addressed yet?

1. Put the cable in your garage
2. Close the garage

Seems adequate to me.

For you. Not so much for those of us without garages, or other secured parking.

The feasible market for electric vehicles seems rather niche compared to ICE vehicles given this thread...