Newsom eradicating sales of new gas powered cars by 2035 (lease, buyer)

[V8 Vega]

A whole lot more electric cars are going to need a lot more than minor improvements in the amount of electricity. It's going to require a massive amount more electricity available.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

One last note about EVs is that I think calculations aren't taking into account the potential for greater "fuel efficiency" of EVs themselves. On average, EVs generally yield something between 3 to 4 miles per kWh on average. However, there are already vehicles slated for production next year that are nearing 5 miles per kWh on average. As EV technologies improve, it's not wild to expect more vehicles to move towards that mark or even possibly beyond such. In that case, that's a huge amount of power that doesn't need to be used or generated in the first place.

This is a good point. As the technology improves on EVs, the burden to "fuel" them will lessen some which translates to lessening of the burden on the system to provide that "fuel". But there's a finite level of efficiency and fifteen years isn't enough time to expect to hit that mark. Meanwhile, IC engine tech already squeezes a ton of power out of a drop of gasoline these days, and it's done cleaner than ever before. I don't see why this has to be an ultimatum. I think there's room for both platforms to still exist in 2035 without the planet melting. There's also the issue of everything that's not a passenger vehicle to address by 2045 too. That's where more of my doubt lies because that type of equipment isn't easily re-powered like a basic car.

[GuyInSD]

Originally Posted by V8 Vega

A whole lot more electric cars are going to need a lot more than minor improvements in the amount of electricity. It's going to require a massive amount more electricity available.

From my earlier post (take a look at it for the details behind the numbers):
"in just over 15 years, California has to increase it's electricity generation (and distribution - electricity doesn't just fly through the air from where it's produced to where it's needed) by anywhere from 50% - 180% (from 195 TWh to 285 - 552 TWh)"

[OyCrumbler]

Originally Posted by V8 Vega

A whole lot more electric cars are going to need a lot more than minor improvements in the amount of electricity. It's going to require a massive amount more electricity available.

Originally Posted by GuyInSD

From my earlier post (take a look at it for the details behind the numbers):
"in just over 15 years, California has to increase it's electricity generation (and distribution - electricity doesn't just fly through the air from where it's produced to where it's needed) by anywhere from 50% - 180% (from 195 TWh to 285 - 552 TWh)"

That's actually not entirely accurate depending on what you mean by electricity being available. We generally need to build our power plants for what we believe peak usage will be, but the thing is, the vast majority of time electricity demand is actually very far down from peak so it's potentially fairly little additional installed capacity necessary if you're thinking about total capacity over the year and total demand over the year. You can see the drill down on this in various reports like this one: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/...nergy-systems#

Unfortunately, you need to meet the peak in order to not have blackouts and other issues. One way is to simply have a lot more installed capacity. Another is something like one of the things suggested in the link which is to be very smart about when EVs charge, but that has its own issues especially in regards to coordination. I think the best thing though is what I mentioned earlier about stationary power storage improvements coinciding with EV improvements since they can both benefit from the constant improvements in batteries.

[Igor Blevin]

Originally Posted by vincenze

A smart meter will work.
$2 per kWh at 5pm and $0.3 at 3am.

But California must start building 4-5 nuclear power stations right now. It takes more than 10 years to build one.

You are kidding, right? California is DECOMISSIONING existing nuclear power plants. The environmentalists hate nuclear power. Not a problem though, as California will simply pass a law requiring power generation by unicorns farting AC current.

[Igor Blevin]

Originally Posted by looker009

Idea will have no impact on those that can't afford new cars. It's not like he is banning used cars from being used after 2035

Used cars will quickly be priced well out of reach of people who can't afford them. Supply and demand. Fixed supply + soaring demand = stratospheric prices.

You see, there will be no ceiling to gas powered used cars at some point due to the fact they they are a fixed and diminishing supplies. By 2045, they will become collectors items, selling for more than original purchase price.

California will become like Cuba in that people in 2050 will have these 30 year old dilapidated cars that rich people will spend serious money buying, improving and maintaining just to have a rare gasoline powered car.

The only way the poor will be able to afford them is with massive government subsidies on the back of tax payers, which is very likely given the socialist utopian dream state California has become.

[Igor Blevin]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Ah, the brilliant minds of the anonymous internet forum communities!

Meanwhile, while so many of you “experts” explain all the reasons things can’t work and will never happen ... um, other actually brilliant minds are working:

WELCOME TO SOLAR ROADWAYS®

Solar Roadways® (SR) is a modular system of specially engineered solar panels that can be walked and driven upon. Our panels contain LED lights to create lines and signage without paint. They contain heating elements to prevent snow and ice accumulation. The panels have microprocessors, which makes them intelligent. This allows the panels to communicate with each other, a central control station, and vehicles. Many people are surprised to learn that our panels are made of glass… but not ordinary glass. SR panels are made of specifically formulated tempered glass, which can support the weight of semi-trucks. The glass has a tractioned surface which is equivalent to asphalt. You can read more technical information in the Specifics page. We’re still in an early phase of our company’s development. Eventually our panels will be available for highways, but first will come non-critical applications such as driveways and parking lots. We are readying to install the first projects now.
https://solarroadways.com/

Flipping hilariously wrong. $9 million for a mile of "solar roadway" in France.


The World's First Solar Road Has Officially Crumbled Into a Total Failure


But less than three years later, a report published by Global Construction Review says France's road dream may be over. Cracks have appeared, and in 2018, part of the road had to be demolished due to damage from wear and tear.

But since the opening, panels have come loose or broken into little pieces. In May 2018, 300 feet (90 metres) of the road had to be demolished since it wasn't salvageable.

Even at its peak, the road was only producing half of the expected energy, because engineers didn't take into consideration rotting leaves falling on the road.

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-wor...inting-failure

[BeauCharles]

This is right up there with the high speed rail line from Merced to Bakersfield. Worse actually. Think back to 2005. It really wasn't that long ago. There's no way we're going to be prepared for an all EV fleet of cars in 15 years if we started preparing tomorrow. The only source of non-greenhouse gas producing electricity that could handle the load is nuclear... and that's not going to happen. New gas fired plants (and a lot of them) are the only way with current, economically feasible technology that isn't nuclear. Basically you're trading one source of CO2 for another. As far as the cars themselves go, what about the millions of apartment dwellers and those in urban areas that must park in the streets. How does he propose to have access to recharging for them? No, this is almost certainly going to get pushed back. Anyway, its nothing but an exercise in virtue signaling as if 40 million people out of 7.8 billion on the planet going full tilt "green" is going to matter. Insignificant drop in the bucket when China, India, Russia, Brazil and the rest of the developing (polluting) world is doing whatever they want and will continue to do so.

[GuyInSD]

Originally Posted by OyCrumbler

That's actually not entirely accurate depending on what you mean by electricity being available. We generally need to build our power plants for what we believe peak usage will be, but the thing is, the vast majority of time electricity demand is actually very far down from peak so it's potentially fairly little additional installed capacity necessary if you're thinking about total capacity over the year and total demand over the year...

Did you read my earlier post?
California's total current capacity to generate electricity is currently 195TWh annually.
That's it - the total amount of electricity that California can generate in a year is 195TWh.

If all the vehicle-miles driven in California in a year were to be powered by electricity instead of gasoline/diesel, then anywhere from 89 to 357 TWh of electricity would be needed to do just that alone.

Taking a middle value, 223 TWh, would require more than ALL of the current electrical generating capacity in California to be devoted to charge electric vehicles, plus an additional 28 TWh imported from elsewhere. That's just to power vehicles. Presumably, people in California would also be using even more electricity to do things other than charge vehicles, much like today.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Igor Blevin

Flipping hilariously wrong. $9 million for a mile of "solar roadway" in France.


The World's First Solar Road Has Officially Crumbled Into a Total Failure


But less than three years later, a report published by Global Construction Review says France's road dream may be over. Cracks have appeared, and in 2018, part of the road had to be demolished due to damage from wear and tear.

But since the opening, panels have come loose or broken into little pieces. In May 2018, 300 feet (90 metres) of the road had to be demolished since it wasn't salvageable.

Even at its peak, the road was only producing half of the expected energy, because engineers didn't take into consideration rotting leaves falling on the road.

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-wor...inting-failure

Lol. As I wrote in a series of posts back then: the solar roads campaign is full of failures. It’s a pretty predictable learning curve. I linked coverage that included reporting on other failures as well as the road in France.

Yet, a curious mind can also find reporting on how research and test projects continue in development by interested parties including city of Orlando and NASA at Kennedy Space Center and others. Venture capital and government and industry grant monies are being awarded and applied. This is a difficult project ... but one with such perceived upside work continues. Same with hydrogen cell power. The R&D has been ongoing for years and years and years ... it doesn’t die because the science and potential are real and alluring.

You are aware of how battery technology stumbled and bumbled for many years until recently, no? Do you know about the advance from wet cell to sealed glass mat batteries? And then to Lithium ... and from Lithium ion to LiFePO4 lithium iron? How many articles were written about Lithium battery failures, including exploding products in common use out in the daily consumer market? ... and now we have the very safe, LiFePO4 iron ... and pricing evolving down steadily as purchasing goes up.