Washington State Plans to Ban Sales of Gasoline Cars after 2030

[Bill906]

Every rule is a story of someone doing something stupid ^-^

-Crissa

Also applies to warning labels. My favorite is “Do not fold up baby stroller with baby inside”

 

[DarinCT]

I would still argue let the free market take care of it vs governmental requirements. That means if I have an EV, I'm going to be asking about outlets before I sign my lease and take my business to the locations that can give me the service I need. If I own the apartment building and see demand and/or lost business due to me not having outlets, I'm for sure going to figure out how to add outlets.

The same is true for owners of hotels, restaurants along the highway, movie theaters, grocery stores, etc. The smart ones are figuring out how to add chargers to ensure they will not miss out on future customers, regardless of whatever the government is doing. The ones that do not/cannot figure it out will see their business impacted.

You're mixing commercial real estate and residential. There's a reason Dutch Bros is a thing. Commercial real estate can carve out a spot(s), sign a contract, plop down a coffee drive-thru, and business. Commercial real estate also gets a tax-break **cough** government encouragement **cough** for putting in an EVSE.

Residential real estate (speaking about multi-tenant, not individual) currently has no incentive. There's the carrot, the stick, and the bulldozer (pushing from behind). We're talking carrot not bulldozer here.

So eager to dictate control over private entities! I agree with JJ. Free market should determine the pace of change.

Tesla, which we all are here for, started with government assistance. The free market thought - and some still do think - they were a joke and would fail and wouldn't give them money.

Let's take high speed internet as an example. At some point in time, some apartments had high speed internet availability while others did not. I'm not aware of any government mandates making older apartments get access to high speed internet carriers, but they all did it because the landlords were worried about losing tenants and the ISPs wanted to make $ in those apartment buildings.

The landlords did nothing for building out broadband. The carriers, mostly telcos in the early days, converted their central offices to do data as well as long-distance. The cable companies already had their own infrastructure. While their was definitely a government hand-waving, this was an example of the free market. Dense communities where the return on investment would be quick got broadband first. As the cities brought in cash-flow, the more suburban areas got retrofitted.

The cost to the landlords was zero, the maintenance zero, the physical transformation zero.

The security of knowing there's a gas station is the same concern for charging at home. If the parking is designated, then a lot of things fall into place, except of course, the digging across the lawn from the meter on the side of the building out each stall. When it was rural broadband, the cost of the drop (connection from house to street) could be born by the customer. When it's a major job, like commercial or apartment complex, the backhaul could be assumed by the apartment complex. Now we have a chicken and egg issue, how long before the cost of the installation gets recouped. Is someone living in an apartment going to assume the cost to install a charger if they won't be able to keep the value or intend to stay?

Government carrots can solve a lot of these problems. Nobody wants government bulldozers.

 

[JJ_Tex]

Government carrots can solve a lot of these problems. Nobody wants government bulldozers.

For the record, I'm much more comfortable with the government offering incentives than I am with them outright mandating something. With the carrots/incentives, you still have the choice to do what is best for you as an individual or you as a landlord. With the bulldozer/mandates, that choice is taken away from you.

I may agree with some things that the government is mandating, but that does not mean I will always agree with their agenda, so I would prefer not to allow them to have that authority except when absolutely necessary.

 

[Crissa]

If you don't mandate it, they don't add it to their plans.

That's why bathrooms and electricity are mandated.

-Crissa

 

[DarinCT]

If you don't mandate it, they don't add it to their plans.

That's why bathrooms and electricity are mandated.

-Crissa

Agreeing and piling on... We wouldn't have helmets in the NHL or seatbelts in cars without mandates. It's standard now and it's hard to imagine not having helmets and seatbelts. Even after Bill Masterton died on the ice in 1968, the players and league voted three times not to have helmets mandatory by 1971.

Yes, I'm mixing basic safety (helmets, seatbelts) with public health and person choice (ICE vs EV). It's important for people to understand how far they think they government should go to protect public health and safety. If the government hadn't and doesn't step in, then it would be ICE forever. I think 2030(Washington) or 2035(Federal, California) is imminently reasonable.

 

[HaulingAss]

So eager to dictate control over private entities! I agree with JJ. Free market should determine the pace of change.

When the government requires all four-wheeled vehicles on public roadways to have brakes on every wheel is that dictating control over private entities? Why should poor people have to pay for front wheel brakes when they can drive just fine with rear brakes only?

And before you say, one is a safety issue, I think you need to look with a rational mind at how many commuters die from cancer caused by the smog that hangs over our public roadways. It affects children's mental development even more. Why shouldn't government have minmum standards for the use of public roadways?

You are lucky they don't ban every gas vehicle from the road in 2030 and they are being reasonable by only banning the sale or import of new gas cars (model year 2030 and later). Personally, I'm shocked gas cars don't have to pay a large pollution tax to compensate cancer victims and fund better medical care for those impacted by pollution. And that's just the beginning of the impacts caused by freeloaders who think they should be able to pollute at will.

 

[HaulingAss]

Thanks, I think it is always good and healthy to learn everyone's perspectives, even if you do not always agree.
Using the stalemate example above, I'm curious to your thoughts on other "amenities" in apartments. Let's take high speed internet as an example. At some point in time, some apartments had high speed internet availability while others did not. I'm not aware of any government mandates making older apartments get access to high speed internet carriers, but they all did it because the landlords were worried about losing tenants and the ISPs wanted to make $ in those apartment buildings.
The same could be said about numerous other amenities in an apartment like central A/C, covered parking, a pool, a gym, etc. If the landlords/apartments do not keep up with the demand, they lose business. In my mind, EV charging outlets would just be another amenity that will become more common as demand grows and those apartments that do not keep up will not be as successful.
I'm curious to your thoughts, and how EV charging would be different than those other amenities.

If an apartment dweller doesn't have high-speed Internet, it doesn't kill me or my family. I cannot say the same if all apartment dwellers continued to pollute the roads my family needs to use. Some smart apartment owners are already adding EV charging but if government mandates to add electricity availability to a certain percentage of the parking would speed the transition away from pollutionmobiles, then I'm in favor.

It doesn't cost much regardless of what all the anti-EV whiners repeatedly claim. It will actually pay for itself many times over.

 

[duck]

When the government requires all four-wheeled vehicles on public roadways to have brakes on every wheel is that dictating control over private entities? Why should poor people have to pay for front wheel brakes when they can drive just fine with rear brakes only?

And before you say, one is a safety issue, I think you need to look with a rational mind at how many commuters die from cancer caused by the smog that hangs over our public roadways. It affects children's mental development even more. Why shouldn't government have minmum standards for the use of public roadways?

You are lucky they don't ban every gas vehicle from the road in 2030 and they are being reasonable by only banning the sale or import of new gas cars (model year 2030 and later). Personally, I'm shocked gas cars don't have to pay a large pollution tax to compensate cancer victims and fund better medical care for those impacted by pollution. And that's just the beginning of the impacts caused by freeloaders who think they should be able to pollute at will.

I didn't say anything about brakes?

 

[HaulingAss]

I didn't say anything about brakes?

I know, I was responding to this comment of yours:

So eager to dictate control over private entities! I agree with JJ. Free market should determine the pace of change.

Shouldn't private entities and market demand dictate whether we need front brakes or not?

 

[duck]

I know, I was responding to this comment of yours:



Shouldn't private entities and market demand dictate whether we need front brakes or not?

I see. Sorry, I'm not familiar with the brake issue.

 

[Red61224]

They don't need charging ports. All they need is a 110 plug, and overnight the vehicle would have replentished energy for a 40 mile drive. Maybe at work have a 110 outlet to plug in for another 25-30 miles. If needed maybe stop by a supercharger every couple of days for a fill-up. Who knows by 2030 a lot of apartment dwellers might prefer not to own a car and take Robotaxi. Between now and then we will see LOTS of hybrids go on the market. In the 6 months we've owned a Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid, we plug it in overnight with 110 and have put about $120 in gas into it.

In Alaska it is very common to see block heater power outlets in the parking lots to keep the ICE engines warm while the shoppers spend $$$ inside, it can be done.