Notice that I used the phrase "Global Warming" instead of "Climate Change."

You're right. The temperature of the Globe undergoes big swings, and another theory is that the current cycle - out of an Ice Age - will continue to cycle, maybe back to another few centuries of Ice. I don't know whether the current trend is cyclical any more - it'll be a long time before anybody knows.

The big question here, is whether recent hot, record-setting temperatures are actually "Climate," or just "Weather." Weather is what you see on a day-month-year basis, and Climate is what happens measured at the Century level. It's too early to call the recent warming "Climate Change."

And it's not happening equally in the N (highly populated, industrial) and S (more agrarian, lower population) hemispheres. We only have a decade of good Southern Hemisphere data to incorporate into our models. And of course "models" can be manipulated, or simply have poor assumptions.
It's really difficult to look at all the data and evaluate. Example - I served on a 2005-2013 Committee, looking at Colorado's future water needs and actions needed. We considered 320 different Peer-Reviewed models! Just for Colorado!!!

 

Where is this "huge reserve capacity"?
CA doesn't have it at night, nor does Arizona or NY or any major urban area.
Maybe in Hershey PA.
Why can't people do basic math?
Also, home ownership is changing. More people are living in apartments and condo's. No chance to install a charger.
To retrofit an older building would probably cost tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars. Who pays it?
I think electric cars have a place in the world, but anyone who thinks they are the answer is kidding themselves.

 

The math might be complicated but the fact that no one advocating 100% Electric cars will even consider it tells us all we need to know.

There are still Coal Fired plants being phased out. Hydro is getting more expensive than alternatives and people want Dams removed to save the Salmon. No one wants an Atomic Plant in their neighborhood and certainly not any of the waste. After spending a fortune in Nevada for AE waste storage, Harry Reid killed that alternative site.
Population growth equals more energy users. High vehicle prices will probably price some people out of car ownership. Self Driving Vehicles (if ever practical) could provide an alternative for the poor but will still require energy. There is a moving target with some decreases in consumption but also measurable increases. If there was a definitive Electrification plan at all the Government would be required to make a budget and that requires doing the math. Unless all other countries have the same limitations we are kidding ourselves anyway. The leaders in vehicle electrification risk spending away their future much like the “Drunken Sailor”. We haven’t even begun to address the home heating replacement of Fossil Fuels with electric and solar-where it’s practical.
As you said, the retrofit costs alone will be staggering. The minute you pull an electrical permit you are now subject to upgrading other electrical components to meet code. Entire neighborhoods will need infrastructure upgrades in addition to needing more major infrastructure supply lines, sub stations and duplicated lines so that if one fails there is still power. Then you have many different electric utilities that will need to coordinate supply. The cost of adding more generating capacity and infrastructure will be astronomical. Mainstream news media will never consider objective reporting because it would create a backlash and loss of business…just not Woke!

Unobtanium seems to fit this whole mess…I hope some reality sets in before we spend our children’s future. As the world population grows the polluters will only increase. Is there even the remote possibility that other large countries will agree to these changes-and keep those agreements. If there is demand for ICE vehicles then someone will figure out a way to supply them.
I think most of us here see most of the big picture but when will enough others figure it out?

 

I disagree .I think you are in the minority. Something must be done and EV’s are the low hanging fruit. Thé US may not legislate EV’s because of polarisation and your system of govt makes it very difficult to legislate anything under those circumstances.(IAM not passing judgement, just stating a fact). Instead I think industry will take the lead and accomplish at least the bare minimum.

 

I live in Pennsylvania, a long way from California!! I am retired now but my entire career was in the electric utility industry. I have been following the California situation with interest. For grid stability and reliability, you need power generation with inertia behind it (power plants). Solar and wind energy do not provide that. If you want an eye opener, go to the web site of your regional grid operator and watch the availability of resources like solar and wind when weather systems are moving through your area. It was scary watching ERCOT (Texas) this winter. In my humble opinion, EVs will not be much of an issue, but politicians will be!!!!!

 

That is the big difference between our country and Canada and the EU. By and large we think that the government is not the answer. In Canada and EU you rely on the government to run your lives. No offense but as long as we have polarization we have freedom. Unilateral thinking is what you have when the government tells you what, when and how to run your life. See China, N. Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, etc, etc, etc. We are not perfect but it is better.

 

Wow. What a ridiculous crock of ***** this post is. Is this what they teach you in school, or did you arrive at this on your own?

Either way it is a sad and ignorant commentary.

 

We always have the option to vote out a govt when the majority disagrees with its’ policies. That is freedom for me. What I fail to understand is the minority overruling the the majority. But my point was not to argue one system of govt over another. I believe thé US will lead in the green movement but it will be by industry not govt. GM has already announced that EV’s and ICE cars will be the same price by 2025. Car companies will no longer invest in ICE tech to make them more efficient. That will soon speed up obsolescence.The R&D dollars are all going in EV tech. This applies to all all manufacturers. Utilities will have more demand and will have the added revenue to increase capacity. Many gas stations will become charging stations. The main freeways will accommodate demand as the need increases. The free market has always stepped up to the plate. This is just the beginning. Then we must tackle shipping, manufacturing and making the transition to more renewables. As battery technology advances, we will heat and air condition our homes with solar. Nothing will be 100% but we can greatly reduce our dependency on fossil fuels. Maybe solar panels on the flat surfaces of our cars will charge our batteries, at least partially. Today we are at the model T stage of EV. It’s just the beginning.

 

Now we're moving from the topic to personal attacks again.
Each of the first two quoted posts are opinions, and yours is judgmental. Aside from the Crock statement, do you have an opinion?
As they say in school, "Why and How" do you think it's a crock?

My opinion: I tend to think Futbol's statement is closer to actuality, but right now, the US's pendulum is swinging toward Gov control. I expect it to swing back toward the center in the future, as it always has in the past. It's why the rest of the world looks to the US for leadership. Financially included.
Often, however, the public spats get attention and there is a lot of posturing, making people around the World think we're dysfunctional. They aren't use to public discussions on policy. Britain's internal arguing is also more public than most.

 

Consider also that what the Automakers say versus what will actually happen may be two different things. There is a lot of FOMO along with maybe trying to reduce outside pressure and potential regulation by announcing all Electrics. I agree with others that it may never happen. Nice informative discussion, we have some members with expertise.

 

Segue-ing back to the EV topic, Canada seems to follow France's lead this issue. And so do many Countries, currently including the current US administration.

Paris is perhaps the worst example of a self-imposed environmental catastrophe. Look at what they have done to their air quality, and how they have done it.
Essentially they enacted Tier standards far in advance of available technology, raising the price of new vehicles (especially Delivery Vehicles) to un-affordable levels, and the commercial fleet average went from an admirable 6 years to 15, in just 20 years!
Which meant that the fleet is comprised of worn out, pollution-spewing vehicles, which led to some if the worst air quality in the Free World. With enormous health issues.

Yes, the Tier standards were a nice idea, but they were implemented before they were practically achievable. Wishful Thinking.
We may be doing the same thing here, with the US (and Canada) rushing to abolish Internal Combustion Engines before a viable alternative is available. It's another recipe for a Paris-like disaster. (However Paris is now a leader in charging points, even though EV's only comprise @1% right now. They may have learned a lesson in providing infrastructure before requiring compliance.)

Lesson: If Government follows the Media for policy decisions, disaster is likely to follow. (Note that the Media fell completely into the grasp of the UN's IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - which was NOT science based, but Media driven in its own right. A strange but disastrous feedback loop.)

Lesson 2: If cleaner air, oceans and land are the goal, "technology neutral" efforts are the only way to move forward. Put another way, dictating the methods to achieve the goal is likely counterproductive. I.e. let Industry and Innovators lead the way, and they will find solutions. Governments only stymie innovation.

Here's a site that I don't agree with on many points, but it's data seems correct. And it's a good thing to "know your opposition" although I'm not opposed to advances in technology. https://www.acea.auto/news/access-to...auto-industry/ Snoop around on the site to see what's going on in that densely populated region - the EU.

 

As expensive as moving away from fossil fuels will cost it will be much cheaper than coping with consequences of climate change. Look at he cost in thé US. And this is just the beginning. Food production could be the next big hurdle. We are seeing more droughts , wild fires and hurricanes. When a country can’t feed itself, they are in big trouble. Act now before it is too late. If the pendulum swings too far, there will be no coming back.
The US is one of the most vulnerable countries because of climate change. They can choose to lead or suffer serious consequences .I wish you well, whatever happens there will affect many countries. And with that I am out of this conversation. I am a climate change believer and I am outnumbered here. I should have my first EV in the next 12 months. That will be a beginning for me.

 

Your opinion is always welcome and respected…that’s all many of us have at the moment is our opinion. I lean mostly the other way but respect either viewpoint. In the US it’s become Political with some of the stupidest politicians making absurd claims. They don’t have a plan, just keep making noise to get re-elected. AOC (ex bartender)…the world will end in 12 years(10 now). Our Climate Czar, John Kerry, is a serial polluter and the only thing he’s done personally to set an example…fly Commercial after criticism for his Private Jet trips.
More of us might be swayed..if there was an overall plan for a reasonable transition and one for the world since we are only a very small part of the overall pollution problem.

 

EU Plans to Phase Out Internal-Combustion Cars by 2035

That proposed 100 percent ban would effectively end sales of gas- and diesel-engined models, as well as hybrids. Not surprisingly, there is opposition.

Car and Driver

 

Sad and uninformed, but Politically Correct.
Reason enough to secede from the EU!

 

2035 is just 14 years away. There is absolutely no way that Europe will get there. Then can pass all the laws they want and force it down the EU's throat but it will demolish the economy of every single EU country. There is just not the infrastructure to support this. The idea of having charging stations every 35 KM is laughable. How long will the lines be? Most cities in Europe do not have homes with garages like those in the US. So most will not be able to charge the cars at home. They do not have the power generation at this time to support that unless they build more nuclear plants. Is that the trade-off? Laughable. The link below shows the most polluted cities in the world through mid-2021. Of the top 100 only 3 cities are in Europe proper. Their population size is minuscule compared to the other 97 in India and China. So this is like urinating in the ocean in an attempt to raise the water level? Silly EU bureaucrats - they have all signed a death pact! Socialism at its best.

https://www.numbeo.com/pollution/rankings.jsp

Good luck!!

 

Unfortunately we are nearing the “point of no return”. Even California can dictate to a certain extent, with some requirements, because they are a large car market.
Politicians aren’t burdened by facts or long range planning. Unless the Media starts some honest investigative reporting the masses won’t wake up until it’s too late. Electric cars will probably stop Volcanoes & Forrest fires…two other major polluters.

 

Ha.
And natural Methane leaks, which, we seem to be finding, exceed all the flaring that the natural gas industry is now curbing.
USGS is flying a helicopter in our area, scoping out methane leaks, as we speak. Maybe truth will prevail????
Well, not until the Media, as you say, quits supporting the Clueless Ones. But they are joined at the hip (where the wallet resides)....

 

Don’t forget about the cows — need to outlaw beef while we’re at it.

 

Maybe they can be trained to stop farting. But then what can we do about the bloviating politician excretions?

Here’s some good news about electric car insurance. Since rates vary a lot by location it would be more meaningful to have a comparison in the tables to the comparable gas vehicle. The point of the article was to be prepared for some high rates on EV’s.
Motortrend recently studied how much it would cost each year to insure the various Tesla models available. Among other factors, these averages assume the owner is a single 40-year-old man with a clean record and good credit score:

• Tesla Model 3: $2,114-$2,351
  
• Tesla Model S: $3,673-$4,143
  
• Tesla Model Y: $2,118-$2,227
  
• Tesla Model X: $3,355-$4,025
  

 

Maybe Musk could pitch in some of the corporate welfare that has made him a multi-billionaire to cover the insane costs of insurance for what amounts to a fancy golf cart with a large iPad!!

 

Seems that development & testing is going well and we might be seeing this EQE SUV be a 2023 with possible release in Q4 of 2022.

https://www.motorauthority.com/news/...-suv-spy-shots

 

I hope it looks better with the wrap off. Personally, I don’t care for those wheels or the look of the exposed grill area. It’s hard to tell if it’s the same size, to me it looks a little smaller?

 

It will likely be the same size, just the proportions such as a shorter hood mainly give it the appearance of being smaller when in reality it isn’t. The longer wheelbase should allow it to achieve a larger interior space though. I expect the production model should look similar to the EQS Maybach SUV concept of course without all the Maybach design characteristics though.

 

Do you guys think it will have the exact, I mean exact taillights as the EQE sedan (or EQS, other than the bending of the light strip near the end) ? It looks like it so far from the car's spy shots (no point really covering it with camouflage at this point because it is so predictable), I doubt they will change anything in the middle but I love to be wrong.