view the rest of the comments
News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
I was hoping for a cash for clunkers 2.0
oh no, won't someone think of the... checks notes... classic car enthusiasts?
I know you're being sarcastic but the cash for clunkers, while it worked pretty well, worked a little too well. Since that program it got harder to find cheap, old vehicles. Sure, they were inefficient, but they were cheap. Cheap cars don't seem to exist much anymore.
Removing inefficient cars from the roads was literally the point of the program. You're saying the program worked exactly as intended
Not so fun for those relying for cheap cars for their transportation but there's bad sides to everything.
I get it, but old cars are also much less efficient even than modern ICE cars, so if the goal is to facilitate a transition into EVs and hybrids it might make some sense. The obvious issue with that is that there is also an environmental cost to making new cars to replace all the old cars, and I personally don't know how that pencils out compared to keeping people in older, inefficient cars, even if they have a pretty limited lifespan anyway....
I guess I'm kind of torn on it. Personally I'd love to move away form my 2014 BMW which makes about 18mpg on average.
Cash for Clunkers impacted the used car market for well over a decade.
Wasn't that part of the expectation?
First the charging infrastructure needs to be better
It’s well on its way. And most people charge at home day to day.
That’s a great way to do it, but that solution excludes a lot of people renting or in condo HOAs that don’t have easy access to overnight charge points in their complex’s or city’s lots. Hopefully those missing pieces are addressed soon so EVs feel like an option to everyone driving an ICE car, not just homeowners with garages.
They should start fining VW for their failure to maintain Electrify America.
Hell I'll take a clunker to e-clunker conversion kit plan.
Is that something that's even remotely viable? I mean I'm sure it's technically possible but there's way more to it than just an engine swap, I'm not sure it would be any cheaper than just building a new car.
I mean poor folk aren't getting any cheap options anytime soon, new or used. It'd be nice to have the option for a $7k-9k conversion, but with a decent rebate to make it viable, along with the ability to pay over time. And EV conversions seems to have gone down in cost than when I last looked, if we can get it down even more heck yeah!
New EVs in China are going for 10k, so it's clearly possible...
I would love to see that, if nothing else than to give classic cars new life as EVs or hybrids. Probably not something for purist-type collectors who want to keep things as stock as possible, but there are so many absolutely iconic old cars that I would love to continue to see kept alive.