Featured New Cali Cars to be ZEV by 2040

california banning the rav4 and camry hybrid? Toyota is going to sue and win if this thing passes.

 

Toyota could be like Mitsubishi in 2040 if they are not serious about EV. At that point, suing CA is least of their problem.

Other automakers are already talking 300+ miles cars and 350kW+ charge rate... in a few years.

EVGo already installing 350kW charging stations when no car can do this fast.... not even Tesla.

 

Preparing for the future - good thing.
Pretending we know the future and can force a technology in a short time - bad thing.

2040 is only 22 years away. When california put in the first zev mandate in 28 years ago, it had some crazy ideas about how fast batteries would improve. Then it decided that fuel cells and hydrogen was the way to go. I really don't think the political air resources board has a clue of what is going on.

What california can do is encourage plug ins (including those with engines). What it seems to want to do is over subsidize science experiments, and pull the experiment from other states to its own borders.

In just 22 short years it is highly likely that PHEVs will be able to travel long distances more conveniently and less expensively than long range fast charging bevs or fuel cell vehicles. Outlawing the internal combustion engine from new sales within the state with no clue on if it is economically or environmentally advantageous is just short sited and silly. Sure there are a lot of cities like london that are doing the same fullish thing. Most of these encouraged diesel cars in the past. I don't understand how passing bad laws helps. It does cut off one leg of the stool - hybrid and phev - for r&d and sales in California.

 

Pushing too hard, too fast I think. Will lead to all the above, end runs, lawsuits. And frustration, wasted tax dollars. Better to set attainable goals.

 

Without forcing us into FHoP, this effects all of us as essentially Ca. is saying that Ca. henceforth demands the auto industry (R&D etc) will be controlled by Ca. policies. In other words, there is a known conflict brewing with CARB and EPA, with Congress having ceded partial policy control to CARB (for the purpose of special local air quality concerns). Now Ca. is using the autonomy to force climate change policy, which I would argue was probably not Congress' original intent

 

Interesting article, but this bill has no shot to be approved into law-mat least not at this time. I'm in favor of reducing emissions to the levels of the Prius, for example. That would still make a world of difference but would face an uphill battle.

 

California, for decades, has had an unannounced agenda of "shaming" the US and other states into going green, promoting healthy living practices, and in progressive legislation. I see this 2040 no-emissions bill as no different. Someone has to lead when the U.S. can't or won't. I wish them success.

 

It could be self-selection, a "Grapes of Wrath" emigration effect. The Gestalt is a brain drain from the Midwest and South. Kansas in particularly hard hit but Oklahoma where I grew up is not far behind.

Bob Wilson

 

Before criticizing CA, recall they do have some unique geography that traps polution into hanging around over areas which are very desirable living areas otherwise. Kansas is a bit different....

 

Yes but Ca. has moved on to climate change - not smog - as their policy rationale.

 

makes me want to move there even more, subtraction by addition?

 

Watch out I will post Ballad of Jed Clampett on you too if you move to Californie.

 

would be worth it, specially if i were hunting and struck oil, and daisy.

am i conflating with lil abner?

 

imagine how cheap the real estate would be if everyone with gassers had to leave.

 

But then that "bubbling crude" would be worth squat?