Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#91

Post by adastra22 » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 8:43 PM UTC

jjav wrote: post #89

adastra22 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And nationalize PG&E to get rid of exploitative power rates.

> And nationalize PG&E to get rid of exploitative power rates. This needs to be highlighted more. Electricity is so expensive with PG&E that it is going to hold back anything that needs electricity. A few more rounds of price hikes and we'll be at $1/kWh! If the PG&E price increases continue in their current pattern, in less than ten years my PG&E monthly bill will be larger than my mortgage! This is not sustainable.

Earlier price hikes this year were explicitly structured to capture all the "lost" revenue from solar. Basically if you have solar panels and are selling the power back to the grid, the various fees make it cost the same as if you just bought the power from PG&E in the first place.

It is insane that California utilities commission lets them get away with this. Blatant corruption.

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#92

Post by adastra22 » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 8:44 PM UTC

ivewonyoung wrote: post #77

adastra22 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going a step further, why should there be tax incentives at all for a product that is wildly popular and seeing adoption even without a tax credit? These credits were introduced back when the field was new and the presumption was some government influence was necessary to jumpstart mass production.

> why should there be tax incentives at all for a product that is wildly popular and seeing adoption even without a tax credit? To reduce air pollution and combat climate change. To encourage ICE manufacturers to switch.

The point is that the tipping point has already been reached. People who want electric vehicles are going to buy one, with or without the tax credit. Those who don't (e.g. because they can't have a charger where they live) aren't going to be swayed by the tax credit. It's not clear it has any effect on EV adoption anymore.

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#93

Post by bdangubic » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 9:25 PM UTC

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #90

Yizahi wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people miss that most people in the world live in the apartments and not in the private houses. I wouldn't be able to charge EV at home even via 1A usb cable, simply because there is no wiring whatsoever on the parking.

This is crazy to me. So you have an increased concentration of people and parking, and so there is NO WAY to more efficiently make charging infra for that? The only way we can do home charging is in geographically semi-sparse suburbia? Come on. Apartment buildings should be STRONGLY incented by local governments to provide charging infrastructure, even if it is simply regular power outlets not even L2, to apartments.…

giving money to build shit always works out. I think $6 trillion might be roughly enough for couple of buildings :)

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/05/congress-ev-charger...

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#94

Post by schobi » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 9:42 PM UTC

asteroidburger wrote: post #65

schobi wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people miss, that you do not need a full and fast charging infrastructure at home. I rarely need to fill the car from empty. I rarely need to jump on the next multi hour trip right away. If you "stay with family" I assume this is a few hours or overnight. Even slow charging from a regular outlet gives enough over night or a 6 hour stay. In Europe a regular outlet can give 3-4kW, so 6 hours is enough to go anothe…

I used an L1 charger at home when I first bought my car; I'm familiar with the process and speed. But I didn't have the foresight to carry the L1 cord with me in my carry-on luggage, nor did I want to buy one to leave behind, so I was missing that very critical component. Rentals do not include any cables, so I had no way to go from a 5-15 outlet to a J1772 or NACS vehicle.

Wow - that rental situation sounds painful. Almost like malicious compliance to discourage EV usage.

Around 2019 I rented an EV from a retired enthusiast, and this included all bells and whistles, charging cards and cables. Pricey back then, but great experience. This is how you convince people

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#95

Post by yyuugg » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 9:57 PM UTC

ziiiio wrote: post #82

yyuugg wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you believe this, it's still nonsense. Let's say you believe that trans women are men. And you believe you need to protect cis women. The number of trans women is so vanishingly small, that you've spent a huge amount of energy to prevent the 0.5% case. Legislating always has an opportunity cost, putting forward a bill means not putting forward other bills. Women suffer domestic violence and sexual violence. 3…

By this same logic, do you believe that no laws should be or should have been introduced that enable these males to access women's spaces and services? As there are only a vanishingly small number of such males, so spending a huge amount of legislative energy to give them what they want is a waste of time which could have been used for more worthy laws, like ones to prevent domestic violence. Your argument works both…

[dead]

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#96

Post by AtlasBarfed » Wed, Nov 27, 2024, 11:43 PM UTC

aeternum wrote: post #85

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me underline this. Tesla was once a company that was a shining star of environmental hope. The legacy of Tesla providing economic paths to viable EVs shielded the company from the, uh, controversy of its CEO, which my comment history has a history of somewhat reluctant defense. Tesla is no longer that company. It is a barrier and a hinderance to EV adoption. Tesla is a luxury car company that is only interested i…

Model 3 is priced under the average US car price. It is a mass market car. Yes Chinese EVs have superior economics. It's quite difficult to have both high labor rates "living wages!" and cheap cars. Tesla is still the most competitive in this regard vs. other US automakers. Tesla just announced their mass market robocar. Do you believe they won't actually produce it? Makes sense to oppose subsidies, Tesla's stance ha…

"Tesla just announced their mass market robocar. Do you believe they won't actually produce it?"

- Tesla generally is 1-3 years late on actual production of vehicles

- previous cars required only prosaic (but nonetheless difficult) industrial production scaling. The robotaxi requires Tesla to succeed in a huge AI leap, not the Actually Indians leap.

- Tesla's previous cars were built upon a base of delivery from previous models. The cybertruck is generally a failure, it won't be mass market. I predict Tesla stock will tank when its sales tank in the next 6 months.

"Yes Chinese EVs have superior economics. It's quite difficult to have both high labor rates "living wages!" and cheap cars. Tesla is still the most competitive in this regard vs. other US automakers."

- Tesla doesn't have battery tech or drivetrain leadership. It may have a couple percent efficiency advantage. They have no battery economic advantage over other makers, especially since the future is about sodium ion and LFP from CATL and other Chinese battery makers.

- Sodium Ion in particular is the great leveler for the car industry. 1/3rd the cost of NMC chemistry, it will enable even legacy auto to make dirt cheap cars. Tesla won't be willing to go downmarket

"Makes sense to oppose subsidies, Tesla's stance has always been if you remove the subsidies for gas cars then EVs will already be highly competitive just on merit alone."

Are there mass market sales of EVs from a dozen car companies? Is 30% of new car sales EVs, or even PHEV or EVs combined?

Is it paramount to get consumer transportation electrified from a carbon emissions standpoint?

Fine, it's clear you aren't an environmentalist and are just pro-Tesla from a stock fundamentals / crass business perspective. But this statement ALSO means that Tesla isn't environmentalist anymore, and excluding them from subsidies is perfectly plausible.

"Yes Chinese EVs have superior economics. It's quite difficult to have both high labor rates "living wages!" and cheap cars. Tesla is still the most competitive in this regard vs. other US automakers."

- Tesla is better than other union automakers in terms of living wages and cost competition? Do you have data?

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#97

Post by griomnib » Thu, Nov 28, 2024, 1:36 AM UTC

ziiiio wrote: post #80

yyuugg wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less than one percent of Americans are trans, yet republicans have put forth hundreds of bills to make their lives difficult. The parent is suggesting that the other side does already do the "imagine if..." thing.

Fifty percent of Americans are female, and most of these bills you refer to are intended to help them by preventing male incursion. Yes, this might make it more difficult for that minority of males who demand to use female spaces. That's the whole point.

Please elucidate me on your opinions about women’s rights then:

Reproductive rights?

Paid maternity leave?

Equal pay?

Equal civil rights?

Acknowledging domestic labor as vital to the economy and supporting it?

It seems to me that people who get hot and bothered about “protecting” women’s restrooms don’t actually care about women, they just don’t like queer people.

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#98

Post by tzs » Thu, Nov 28, 2024, 2:09 AM UTC

omarforgotpwd wrote: post #73

matthewdgreen wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The IRA was able to extend the subsidies for Tesla because it had the considerable resources of the Fedetal government behind it. A state is going to have fewer resources, and so it makes sense to go back to the original and less-generous regime. More practically, Tesla has already received a lot of subsidies and now has large sales and economies of scale, so it’s not very practical for California to allocate limited…

It makes no sense to subsidize only the players who have low market share. Tesla is the only carmaker that still makes cars in California, why subsidize foreign cars at the expense of California workers… using their own tax dollars? The only justification for such harmful economic policy is political retaliation against Musk. But it is not the role of the government to use taxpayer funds for political retribution aga…

It makes sense for the same reason that Musk reportedly endorsing Trump's plan to kill federal EV subsidies makes sense.

Tesla is profitable enough that Musk believes that Tesla will do fine without subsidies. Not so for most other EV makers--they are still at the stage where they are figuring it out and not yet reaping economies of scale. Musk believes that removal of subsidies will greatly hurt them.

If a state wants to encourage a healthy multi-company competitive EV market it makes sense to design the state subsidy program so that the benefits go toward making that happen which in the case of the current EV market means not subsidizing any company whose EV market share is about the same as that of everyone else combined.

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#99

Post by lightedman » Thu, Nov 28, 2024, 2:21 AM UTC

bagels wrote: post #21

lightedman wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"which would not make sense anyways since Tesla has a better product" I had a different experience. Watching a Cybertruck which had flat-bottomed itself in sand as my Subaru winched it out made me think more about getting an F-150 lightning.

Not a Subaru?

I already have one, don't need two! Just got this one, to boot. Customized 2013 outback with rally off-road package (paddle shifters, better shocks, still same crummy articulation.) I was thinking more electric vehicle that can do off-roading.

I'd love to see a small EV truck or wagon with its motor attached to an actual 4x4 transmission. Don't care if auto or manual (but no CVT please, I'm not entirely a fan of mine) but the slight loss of power and gentler acceleration of the tires actually helps when you're on stuff like sand. You don't want to instantly spin your wheels, even in tiny pulses. You want as even of a power profile as you want to stay on top and not dig yourself down like the Cybertruck did.

Re: Tesla excluded from EV buyer credits in California proposal

#100

Post by tzs » Thu, Nov 28, 2024, 2:28 AM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #59

Politically, I generally put my chips down on the liberal side of things - and this ain’t it. This is the kind of stuff that makes you go “maybe Ayn Rand had a point”. Arguably, the only reason Musk has decided to wade into politics is exactly this kind of shit - how can one build a business in an arbitrarily regulated environment, where it’s one rule for me, and one for thee? The regulatory environment is supposed t…

Starlink not getting rural broadband subsidies is an example of the regulatory environment being impartial and applying the same rules to everyone. There were minimum performance requirements attached the subsidies and Starlink fell short.

The FAA has processed Starship matters about as fast as the process similar things for other companies.

Tesla hasn't faced any more scrutiny from NHTSA than anyone other carmaker who has put a beta purported full self driving system in production cars sold to the public.