2035 California PHEV Mandate challenges

[kalvado]

Problems of grid level planning, along with push for all-electric households, may very well result in life threatening problems, ask Texas for example.

The Texas electric grid came close to failing a few years ago because they exempted themselves from federal regulations that could have prevented the problem (by having their own grid and not being on either national interconnect).  All-electric households/electric cars had nothing to do with it.

It's true that Texas got problems for a different reason, it's equally true that steep growth of consumption without significant upgrades of supply and grid may have similar effects.

[pderocco]

And no one was banning gasoline cars; they were just attempting to eliminate the sale of new gasoline cars. You would still be free to purchase a gasoline used vehicle. Or go to a state where gasoline vehicles were sold. Such restrictions exist today on other products.

You can't just buy a car in a state that doesn't also mandate the same emission standards as California, and then register the car in California. An electric mandate might end up working the same way. You'd need to keep your car registered at a friend's house in some other state, if you lived in California, and hope you don't get found out.

[Max Rockatansky]

And no one was banning gasoline cars; they were just attempting to eliminate the sale of new gasoline cars. You would still be free to purchase a gasoline used vehicle. Or go to a state where gasoline vehicles were sold. Such restrictions exist today on other products.

You can't just buy a car in a state that doesn't also mandate the same emission standards as California, and then register the car in California. An electric mandate might end up working the same way. You'd need to keep your car registered at a friend's house in some other state, if you lived in California, and hope you don't get found out.

I was under the impression that you could in fact buy a new ICE out of state and still register it post-2035 in California.  I thought it was only Washington State that took that extra step of banning new ICE registrations?

[jeffandnicole]

And no one was banning gasoline cars; they were just attempting to eliminate the sale of new gasoline cars. You would still be free to purchase a gasoline used vehicle. Or go to a state where gasoline vehicles were sold. Such restrictions exist today on other products.

You can't just buy a car in a state that doesn't also mandate the same emission standards as California, and then register the car in California. An electric mandate might end up working the same way. You'd need to keep your car registered at a friend's house in some other state, if you lived in California, and hope you don't get found out.

Is this fact or theory currently?

[pderocco]

And no one was banning gasoline cars; they were just attempting to eliminate the sale of new gasoline cars. You would still be free to purchase a gasoline used vehicle. Or go to a state where gasoline vehicles were sold. Such restrictions exist today on other products.

You can't just buy a car in a state that doesn't also mandate the same emission standards as California, and then register the car in California. An electric mandate might end up working the same way. You'd need to keep your car registered at a friend's house in some other state, if you lived in California, and hope you don't get found out.

Is this fact or theory currently?

The bit about emissions standards is current law. The electric mandate is still in flux, especially with the feds getting involved, but I'm sure the CA legislature would like to use whatever leverage it has to force people out of non-electrics, short of banning them from the road, which would be political suicide.

[kphoger]

Problems of grid level planning, along with push for all-electric households, may very well result in life threatening problems, ask Texas for example.

The Texas electric grid came close to failing a few years ago because they exempted themselves from federal regulations that could have prevented the problem (by having their own grid and not being on either national interconnect).  All-electric households/electric cars had nothing to do with it.

It's true that Texas got problems for a different reason, it's equally true that steep growth of consumption without significant upgrades of supply and grid may have similar effects.

And an increasing number of households going 'off grid' by switching to solar will only exacerbate the problem.  The grid will still need to be maintained just as much as ever before, but there will be fewer people paying in to pay for that maintenance.

[kalvado]

Problems of grid level planning, along with push for all-electric households, may very well result in life threatening problems, ask Texas for example.

The Texas electric grid came close to failing a few years ago because they exempted themselves from federal regulations that could have prevented the problem (by having their own grid and not being on either national interconnect).  All-electric households/electric cars had nothing to do with it.

It's true that Texas got problems for a different reason, it's equally true that steep growth of consumption without significant upgrades of supply and grid may have similar effects.

And an increasing number of households going 'off grid' by switching to solar will only exacerbate the problem.  The grid will still need to be maintained just as much as ever before, but there will be fewer people paying in to pay for that maintenance.

off-grid is not an issue. An issue with those solar panels is that there are buyback laws, which require utility to buy that power at retail - not market - prices. At the same time, solar generators provide no delivery guarantees, and only weak schedule based on weather forecast.
In general, that can - and should - be mitigated with energy storage facilities. Of course, there are few of those and little interest in further investment. So grid has to keep some other power generators available, but use them less often. Apparently that drives the up price for everyone.
As far as I understand, balancing the grid is difficult as it is - and making that task more difficult without major investment isn't a brilliant idea.
But brilliant ideas seem to be few and far in between when you look at the government offices.

[kphoger]

off-grid is not an issue.

Here's the background to my comment.  The first 12 minutes are just follow-up to a previous video of his.  If you don't want to bother with that, then just start at the 12-minute mark.

[kalvado]

off-grid is not an issue.

Here's the background to my comment.  The first 12 minutes are just follow-up to a previous video of his.  If you don't want to bother with that, then just start at the 12-minute mark.

[ youtube]

at least NY has a fee to keep home connected to the grid. But it's another story. 
Overall,  here is a high-level summary to all that: There is a laundry list of questions due to new things connecting to the grid, be it datacenters, electric cars, or solar rooftop. There are ways to solve those questions. Real problem is the same it was since the stone age - who pays?

[Max Rockatansky]

The Supreme Court ruled that the fuel industry lawsuit over California's emissions standards can move forward:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/supreme-court-joins-trump-gop-191830710.html