New Bill Proposed In California Requires All New Passenger Vehicles To Be ZEV By 2040

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

GRA

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
14,018
Location
East side of San Francisco Bay
If they want to actually pass a bill, they could require all new cars and most trucks sold to be at least "weak" hybrids, with engine shutoff when stopped, and if feasible at least minimal electric drive.
 
LeftieBiker said:
If they want to actually pass a bill, they could require all new cars and most trucks sold to be at least "weak" hybrids, with engine shutoff when stopped, and if feasible at least minimal electric drive.
While the Dems have at least temporarily lost their supermajority, as the bill doesn't involve a tax or fee I don't think they need to water it down to pass it. And there's no doubt that Jerry Brown would sign it.
 
LeftieBiker said:
If they want to actually pass a bill, they could require all new cars and most trucks sold to be at least "weak" hybrids, with engine shutoff when stopped, and if feasible at least minimal electric drive.
They should legislate the desired outcome, not the details of how to get there.
Zero emission, better gas mileage, reduced emission, those are worthwhile goals.
Stating that the car must be a hybrid doesn't work towards a goal, its an implementation detail. You could still end up with a worse gas mileage giant vehicle hybrid vs. a super fuel efficient vehicle implemented some other way.
ZEV is pretty clear and unambiguous.
 
How many ZE trucks are out there, GRA? How many ZE SUVs and crossovers? I'd love to see 100% ZEVs in California, but passing laws requiring what is practically impossible isn't going to help. Aren't you one of those who argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good?
 
2040 is a LONG way off. I wouldn't be surprised if all passenger vehicles are electric by then anyway, mandates notwithstanding.
 
LeftieBiker said:
How many ZE trucks are out there, GRA? How many ZE SUVs and crossovers? I'd love to see 100% ZEVs in California, but passing laws requiring what is practically impossible isn't going to help. Aren't you one of those who argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good?
I have no problem with 2040, which is 22 years from now. Now, if the law specified 2025 as Norway has done, then no, that wouldn't be realistic, as it requires massive subsidiesand/or much higher gas prices to achieve. California leads the country in both total PEV sales and % of sales, and has a political demographic that's definitely in favor of such measures, as is the public: as of last March, PEVs (including PHEVs) had reached 4.8% of state LDV sales, with BEVs alone reaching 2.7%. I haven't seen CA numbers for the whole year yet, but for the country as a whole in 2017, PEVs made up 1.16% of LDV sales, so California's over 4 times the national rate.

The Model 3 is definitely going to boost those numbers significantly here. Combine that with the fact that we'll be seeing a lot of more affordable long-range BEVs arrive in the next few years, including several AWD CUVs, and that BEVs are forecast to reach cost/performance parity with ICEs by about 2025, and outlawing the sale of ICE LDVs after 2040 strikes me as entirely doable.

We might get there before that, depending on how quickly the charging infrastructure at workplaces, MFH and public locations grows. Assuming BEVs only and no use of FCEVs, a 2040 ICE ban will certainly require statewide rather than city by city requirements to provide charging at all such newly constructed facilities, if not retrofits of all existing ones, if it is to be feasible; otherwise, FCEVs/H2 stations (forecast to reach parity as above around 2030) will be needed to handle users of existing facilities which aren't retrofitted for charging. A complete phase-out of all existing ICEs will take another 15-20 years beyond that. And as the proposed law states, commercial trucks over 10,001 lb. GVWR aren't included in it, although cleaning up trucks, ports etc. is proceeding apace in any case.
 
GRA said:
LeftieBiker said:
How many ZE trucks are out there, GRA? How many ZE SUVs and crossovers? I'd love to see 100% ZEVs in California, but passing laws requiring what is practically impossible isn't going to help. Aren't you one of those who argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good?
I have no problem with 2040
Too many politicians between now and 2040.

5% a year
 
SageBrush said:
GRA said:
LeftieBiker said:
How many ZE trucks are out there, GRA? How many ZE SUVs and crossovers? I'd love to see 100% ZEVs in California, but passing laws requiring what is practically impossible isn't going to help. Aren't you one of those who argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good?
I have no problem with 2040
Too many politicians between now and 2040.

5% a year
That would only triple sales over a 22 year period. While it might only be that much for the first few years, as prices come down and performance improves the % will rise. Alternatively, something like the Model 3 will cause a big jump early.
 
SageBrush said:
GRA said:
LeftieBiker said:
How many ZE trucks are out there, GRA? How many ZE SUVs and crossovers? I'd love to see 100% ZEVs in California, but passing laws requiring what is practically impossible isn't going to help. Aren't you one of those who argue that the perfect is the enemy of the good?
I have no problem with 2040
Too many politicians between now and 2040.

5% a year

When the tipping point is reached, the politicians don't matter --it's gonna' happen regardless. In my opinion there's already enough research and capital in motion to assure EVs are going to replace ICE passenger vehicles entirely. The dependency is on battery breakthroughs so the date is hard to predict. It may be before or after 2040. If the tech arrives early the changeover happens early and CARB gets to pat themselves on the back. If it arrives later the CA law will be pushed back or rescinded, just like its previous "mandates".
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
All that does is move the emissions to the coal power plants.

Yeah, too bad there aren't other ways to generate electricity. That would be something!
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
All that does is move the emissions to the coal power plants.
Fully recognizing that the above is tongue in cheek, for those non-Californians out there, California has virtually no coal-fired power plants, and the number of out-of-state coal-fired contracts has been decreasing for a long time, as they cannot be renewed when they expire. It's anticipated that California will end all-coal-fired electricity use by 2026, very possibly sooner. See http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables...cuments/current_expected_energy_from_coal.pdf
 
You guys are a disappointment. In the good old days that troll would have landed at least 30-40 posts worth of outrage.

Soon all we'll be left with will be spontaneous cross country road trips and 30' boat towing.
 
If we are going all EV by 2040, Cali better get cracking on building out the power grid and charging infrastructure. I'm fairly certain our present power grid won't handle converting all of the miles driven in California daily to being powered by the grid. It wasn't that long ago we had rolling outages because the grid couldn't handle summer HVAC needs. Now lets require all movement to be powered by that grid. Sounds legit.

Oh and we will need to pay for that throughout the country or set up ICEV rental stations at the borders so when someone drives cross country they can make it through the vast wilderness of the gas-loving, no EV infrastructure midwest. :lol: I know, someone already beat me to the 30' boat towing, but still had to throw this in.

I would like to know however just how California plans to fund the grid infrastructure to replace all driving with plug in power. Also, the time it takes to get a power plant approved and built in this state is substantial. If it is going to be in place by 2040, they better start figuring out now how to fund it, and pulling the permits. The NIMBY lawsuits can add decades to the build or expansion of each plant and that assumes they can do so without harming a single endangered mouse somewhere.

Or we can pay Nevada or Mexico a ton of money to build nukes on the border and buy the power from them. Hope we never get in a dispute with them or they could turn us off and leave the state standing still. Did someone say 'build a wall'?

Just how many solar panels would be required to power all those miles. Assuming 4 miles per KWH, someone here should be able to figure out how many of the most efficient SunPower panels would be required and what amount of square miles those panels would cover. I'm guessing we might not need HVAC anymore because we will all be in the shade of solar panels. But I could be wrong - perhaps simply adding a few here and there will power all those miles that Californians drive daily.

Oh, I almost forgot, we will need a bazillion batteries so we can keep charging cars when there is some cloud cover. I'm sure there are no environmental consequences of producing that many batteries.
 
Back
Top