What’s your take on this? De-car-ification and EVs

People want crossovers because they have more room than a sedan. Car companies want crossovers because they have to hit lower CAFE targets than a sedan.
 
Mostly good input, except the conspiracy stuff. Think about existing infrastructure- electric generation & distribution, and oil refinery & pipeline stuff. As stated above, there's simply no way our current grid is going to support 25%+ of vehicles being EVs, and the "green" technologies really aren't, and they are significantly more expensive per energy unit. Then, think about the refinery infrastructure, and of course all the jobs... I'd be willing to bet that even if you flipped a switch to say "transition to EV in the next five years" you're not going to maintain the current employment. Now, don't get me wrong- I think as the capitalistic market drives efficiency improvements and better processes for the EV side, they will eventually become more feasible. But for government to say "you got 5 years" or whatever abbreviated time frame it is, is simply going to drive prices up on this technology, while not giving enough time to ensure it's really ready for real life. As I've said before, in places where EVs seem to make the most sense (large cities etc) to help with pollution, to me it would make more sense to stuff that R&D money into better mass transit options that utilize the improved technologies. For example, if you can move a million people a day on electric trains vs having a million EVs running around the city, which makes more sense from a grid standpoint? From a parking space standpoint? From a safety standpoint? From an environmental and energy impact standpoint?
 
Hybrids make a lot of sense, but we have a long way to go before EVs make up a significant part of the vehicles on the road, or even new car sales. I like EVs, and the world needs companies like Tesla pushing the bar to innovate. With that said, they are mostly just fun vehicles for people who can afford them and have the right lifestyle for them. For the majority of citizens they do not make sense. The biggest problem as stated above is the charging network (or lack thereof). For people who live in large affluent cities this isn't that big of an issue, or for those who can charge at work or at home. For those outside of the city, living in apartments, or living on much of the continent that is still several miles away from any gas station, EVs will take a while to advance to the point where they can depend on them. I would go hybrid before EV at this point in the game. I've driven in several areas in the middle of the sticks where I've gotten range anxiety with a gasoline vehicle, an EV would be a whole different ball game. I think governments pushing for more efficient Hybrid systems would be a more realistic idea than attempting to push EVs on a limited infrastructure. California can't even turn on all their AC's in the summer. LOL
 
Regarding jobs, there are always winners and losers. That's progress. There is huge growth in renewable energy; and huge potential. Car manufacturers hate mass transit no matter how much sense it makes.
 
Jeff, I agree. But my whole point is, if we are not throwing out the system that got us here along with the bathwater, there needs to be a compelling case to make the switch. Like: Unlimited mass transit rides around the city for say $10/day per person, or something similar, so ~$300/mo. Efficiency of scale would likely make this worthwhile for the big cities, especially when you require up-front payment vs. on-the-spot so they can do trend planning and the like. Contrast that against even the cheapest car lease of say $150, plus gas, plus plates, plus insurance, plus parking, plus maintenance... probably at least $600/mo, and that's if you're extremely frugal and doing all the maintenance yourself. Even if you bought a 15-year-old hooptie, you're still 50% higher than the mass transit. I'd think orchestrating trains, buses, and possibly some other mass transit modes is likely easier than figuring out how to deal with all those cars and where to put them. When you don't have to devote 20% of a downtown area to parking spaces, you can fit in a lot more retail or business space, which will drive up revenues even more, and cut down on dangers to foot traffic as well.
 
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Jeff, I agree. But my whole point is, if we are not throwing out the system that got us here along with the bathwater, there needs to be a compelling case to make the switch. Like: Unlimited mass transit rides around the city for say $10/day per person, or something similar, so ~$300/mo. Efficiency of scale would likely make this worthwhile for the big cities, especially when you require up-front payment vs. on-the-spot so they can do trend planning and the like. Contrast that against even the cheapest car lease of say $150, plus gas, plus plates, plus insurance, plus parking, plus maintenance... probably at least $600/mo, and that's if you're extremely frugal and doing all the maintenance yourself. Even if you bought a 15-year-old hooptie, you're still 50% higher than the mass transit. I'd think orchestrating trains, buses, and possibly some other mass transit modes is likely easier than figuring out how to deal with all those cars and where to put them. When you don't have to devote 20% of a downtown area to parking spaces, you can fit in a lot more retail or business space, which will drive up revenues even more, and cut down on dangers to foot traffic as well.
Subie, you are just being logical again...
 
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Jeff, I agree. But my whole point is, if we are not throwing out the system that got us here along with the bathwater, there needs to be a compelling case to make the switch. Like: Unlimited mass transit rides around the city for say $10/day per person, or something similar, so ~$300/mo. Efficiency of scale would likely make this worthwhile for the big cities, especially when you require up-front payment vs. on-the-spot so they can do trend planning and the like. Contrast that against even the cheapest car lease of say $150, plus gas, plus plates, plus insurance, plus parking, plus maintenance... probably at least $600/mo, and that's if you're extremely frugal and doing all the maintenance yourself. Even if you bought a 15-year-old hooptie, you're still 50% higher than the mass transit. I'd think orchestrating trains, buses, and possibly some other mass transit modes is likely easier than figuring out how to deal with all those cars and where to put them. When you don't have to devote 20% of a downtown area to parking spaces, you can fit in a lot more retail or business space, which will drive up revenues even more, and cut down on dangers to foot traffic as well.
Subie, you are just being logical again...
Gee, I wonder how optimizing the traffic lights and certain patterns would affect traffic flow and the smog that comes with it... But but but the vehicles (Cars, Trucks, SUVs, CUVs) these days are more fuel efficient.... (hybrids, electrics, alternatives) But but but, not enough taxes to repair roads (while taking more money even accounting for #% annual inflation than some decades ago) I think the answers (I don't think there is a simple solution and it will be all local/Metro area) will take some very bright lighted heads and ........
 
Originally Posted by supton
I'm reminded of the run-up in fuel prices prior to the Great Recession. People started ditching those SUV's and trucks. Yet your datapoint seems to suggest that if the fuel prices only slowly rise, people won't care.
Around town, our Forester gets about the same mpg as our Civic. It's only on the highway, particularly with a strong headwind, that the mpg drops a lot relative to the Civic. And the last last long highway trip I did (over 300km on a flat road with no significant wind), the Forester still managed 6.2l/100km, which would be 38 US mpg or 46 Canadian. Today's CUV is not yesterday's SUV. And it's much better than the car I used to drive in the UK when fuel was a similar price to today's price in Canada, which could get as little as16mpg around town (or at high speed on the motorways).
 
Top