Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 218 posts

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#141

Post by thaumasiotes »

angrybits wrote: post #33
Shivetya wrote: post #19

Well battery tech will be a roadblock for some time but deadlines as far out as these make it look like something is being accomplished but provide enough time to not actually be a deadline. Converting off peak electrical power into hydrogen is getting more and more viable and frankly, I don't mind storing and transporting hydrogen versus stuffing the planet with li-ion batteries replete with their hazards. GM should…

> the poor rarely can take advantage of them I'm pretty sure the solution to that is clean public transportation, no?

Cheap public transportation sounds like it'd be more applicable to the poor than clean transportation.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#142

Post by gertef »

jonknee wrote: post #140
stickfigure wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have evidence for this? I seem to recall that low-mpg light trucks and SUVs were wildly popular in the US until the price of gasoline went to $4.

http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita.dot.gov.bts/files/pub... Since 1980 we've gotten about 50% better mileage over all. Considering the number of cars is greater today the real effect of gas saved is even more.

Is that due to CAFE or due to consumer preference for fuel-efficient cars within a class? Since MPGS are heavily touted in advertising, it seems to be related to consumer preference

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#143

Post by gertef »

cracell wrote: post #134
gambiting wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the fact that millions of people live in flats, condos, terraced houses with no private parking spots and they can't charge their cars overnight. Here in UK the vast majority of people I know live in places where it would be impossible to take out a charging cable at night, so the only option is...charging at work? But who will foot the bill for installing chargers at literally every single parking spot everywher…

Seems like battery swaps are the solution to this. Essentially the battery pack is designed to be easily removable and you just "lease" it in one way or another. You go to a fuel station and swap your battery packs with some that are already charged. Here's Tesla's pilot program http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/battery-swap-pilot-program There's a lot of big challenges to this (weight of batteries, standardization, co…

Battery swaps help with long-range trips, but are in no way a convenience improvement over filling up a tank of gas.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#144

Post by mariodiana »

stickfigure wrote: post #30

I don't get it. Mandating that auto manufacturers sell a certain percentage of electric vehicles seems a bit like legislating the weather. If CA really wants to push people into electric vehicles, why not manipulate the demand for electric vehicles? Perhaps add another dollar or two to the gasoline tax?

Don't you understand? When government mandates something, things happen. We've won Bush's war on terrorism, we've won Reagan's war on drugs, and we've won Nixon's war on cancer. Victory is at hand in Obama's war on gasoline powered cars, and you're going to feel pretty foolish when you miss the celebration.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#145

Post by Frozenlock »

_ph_ wrote: post #139
danielweber wrote: post #28

What is the comparison between using energy to generate liquid fuels from atmospheric CO2 (which would be carbon neutral) and trying to electrify the entire transportation sector? Those Los Alamos guys [1] said in 2007 they could get it down to $3.40 a gallon. Okay, maybe they were wrong and/or optimistic. But, still, there is some price point at which it is break-even. What is it? Five dollars? Ten? The advantages o…

Electric cars have an efficiency of about 70-80%, if you count the losses of electrical transmission, charging and the engine. A car engine < 40%, in mixed use about 20%. So even if you could generate fuel from electricity at close to 100% - which you probably can't - the electrical car is way more efficient. And of course, even with synthetic fuel, you have some level of pollution, as no combustion engine is perfect…

Except your electricity has to come from somewhere. If you are in the US, it will most likely be from some kind of hydrocarbon. You are just hiding the pollution, not removing it.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#146

Post by evgen »

Frozenlock wrote: post #145
_ph_ wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electric cars have an efficiency of about 70-80%, if you count the losses of electrical transmission, charging and the engine. A car engine < 40%, in mixed use about 20%. So even if you could generate fuel from electricity at close to 100% - which you probably can't - the electrical car is way more efficient. And of course, even with synthetic fuel, you have some level of pollution, as no combustion engine is perfect…

Except your electricity has to come from somewhere. If you are in the US, it will most likely be from some kind of hydrocarbon. You are just hiding the pollution, not removing it.

It is much easier to make those centralized power generation sources green than it is to make all of the cars on the road just a small margin greener. If you are in the US then those electricity has rapidly changed from dirty coal to cleaner gas and a growing percentage of renewable over the past decade.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#147

Post by marincounty »

stickfigure wrote: post #30

I don't get it. Mandating that auto manufacturers sell a certain percentage of electric vehicles seems a bit like legislating the weather. If CA really wants to push people into electric vehicles, why not manipulate the demand for electric vehicles? Perhaps add another dollar or two to the gasoline tax?

The poor, nor the California economy couldn't take on another tax on gasoline?

A lot of guys(including politicians, and the people who fund them) like their collector's cars/trucks. They want to drive that 455 Oldsmobile convertible on the weekends without gouging the wallet? (Collector car enthusiast are a big group of people, across all income levels. "Just try to pry my '65 Corvette from my cold, dead hands?"

California provides a big demand for the sales of automobiles; the legislature knows they can tell carmaker's what to do? I couldn't imagine being the guy who lost the sales rights to California? Not fair, but in this case I not crying over the car companies.(Car companies will get my sympathy when they start manufacturing cars that owners/independent shops can easily work on, or at least have access to the proprietary programs? I don't think I will buy a new car until I can have complete access to your programming? I buy your car. I buy your programming too--because I need to clean it up in so many cases? Seal off Emmissions--fine. Give me access to everything else?

(This is a note to CARB: right now you only require Emmission shops to have one reference on hand to verify smog requirements. Most shops take the cheep route and buy Motor Emmission publications.(The publication is filled with errors. Technicians and customers know this. Many smog customers are sent home with failed visual component tests, but smog compliant automobiles. There are mistakes in Volvo's, BMW's and Toyota(88 toyota's, air aspirated, do Not have an MIL light). These are just the mistakes I ran across. It took at least three emails to Emission Publications Ltd. for them to respond to my complaints about errors in their publications. They literally argued with me? They didn't know the difference between natural aspirated(carburetor), and FI(Fuel injection)? I was floored!

Require the smog shops to have access to two Emmission references? Ondemand5(Mitchell manuals) is a good alternative, and I have yet to found an error in it.)

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#148

Post by caseysoftware »

mariodiana wrote: post #144
stickfigure wrote: post #30

I don't get it. Mandating that auto manufacturers sell a certain percentage of electric vehicles seems a bit like legislating the weather. If CA really wants to push people into electric vehicles, why not manipulate the demand for electric vehicles? Perhaps add another dollar or two to the gasoline tax?

Don't you understand? When government mandates something, things happen. We've won Bush's war on terrorism, we've won Reagan's war on drugs, and we've won Nixon's war on cancer. Victory is at hand in Obama's war on gasoline powered cars, and you're going to feel pretty foolish when you miss the celebration.

You forgot LBJ's war on poverty and Clinton's war on pants.

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#149

Post by [deleted] »

caseysoftware wrote: post #148
mariodiana wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you understand? When government mandates something, things happen. We've won Bush's war on terrorism, we've won Reagan's war on drugs, and we've won Nixon's war on cancer. Victory is at hand in Obama's war on gasoline powered cars, and you're going to feel pretty foolish when you miss the celebration.

You forgot LBJ's war on poverty and Clinton's war on pants.

[deleted]

Re: California Has a Plan to End the Auto Industry as We Know It

#150

Post by btian »

greeneggs wrote: post #125
Animats wrote: post #105

The California Air Resources Board and the EPA have achieved quite a lot. Los Angeles air was barely breathable in the 1970s. Now, there's very little smog. Look at 1960s pictures of Los Angeles, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, New York. That was once considered impossible. Now, it's mostly done. The only thing keeping electric cars from taking over is battery cost. Performance and range have already been fixed. Once battery…

> The California Air Resources Board and the EPA have achieved quite a lot. Los Angeles air was barely breathable in the 1970s. Now, there's very little smog. Look at 1960s pictures of Los Angeles, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, New York. That was once considered impossible. Now, it's mostly done. I've never understood how Los Angelenos can be satisfied with their air quality. So many people are like you, and say that it is…

+1. It's not "solved". Therefore the mandate to sell ZEVs.
Post reply on HN