489
White House threatens to veto anti-EV bill just passed by US House
(arstechnica.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2023
489 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
58981 readers
4256 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Lol. No. I just know more and have more experience about both vehicles and batteries than almost anyone else that would be on here.
So why don't you go ahead and explain in your own words why an all electric vehicle built today is going to save the environment. Explain how a vehicle that will only last 15 years before needing to be scrapped or has to have $10,000 thrown at it is better. Explain how all the extra rubber and tire pollution from wearing out 15 to 20 percent faster due to all the extra weight, is going to save the environment. Explain how one country putting up 5% less cO2 is going to slow global warming.
EV will be great after batteries move beyond the li-pos and more of the US is on wind and solar. Right now though, straight EVs are shit.
Where the Orange have i heard talk like that before?
What's the maintenance costs for 15 years in an ICE vehicle vs electric? Now add in the savings from not having to pay $5.00+ a gallon(it will go up)? I'd also argue that more than half of drivers do not need to drive over 300 miles a day.
Probably significantly less than the cost to maintain roads because now every vehicle would be significantly heavier. Oh and bridges!
The US could compensate by people driving less of the unnecessarily large vehicles.
Look large pickups and SUVs have a function, but driving a 2 ton vehicle to and from the office by yourself is not a green choice.
Make road taxes based on weight.
In terms of EVs I would love a solution for the range. I drive relatively small commute and if there was a way to leave 2/3 of the batteries in my garage and only install them when I want to visit grandma it would be great and save a lot of weight.
Yeah, that will never happen.
I'm 100% on board with this. But we'll never see it happen. And regardless, in this context that means that ICE vehicles on average would be taxed less. Proves the point that there is an additional cost that people don't actually ever acknowledge with BEVs.
Then you'd be paying much higher taxes for something you're not actually leveraging. Normal people will basically never do this.
Well flat vehicle taxing based on weight, ICE engines are taxed additionally by tax on fuel. Not all taxation needs to/should happen in a single space.
If the US raises gas prices the desire to drive gas guzzling pickups and SUVs will automatically lower (I hope).
And about paying taxes for something im not leveraging.. depending on the tax burden and possible energy saving based on reduced weight I don't know. It might just be fully impractical as a system that allows for easy swap in and out of batteries might add so much weight and complexity it makes the whole exercise pointless anyway.
I'm mostly just hoping on improvements in battery tech in general. That aging EVs can be equipped with newer batteries with higher power density.
Considering that the point of gas taxes ARE to obtain funding to repair roads... Transitioning to weight/travelled distance based registration taxes would mean that you want to double tax ICE vehicles to obtain those funds. That would be a bit silly to do...
I'd probably just raise the gas taxes and inroduce the new taxes for EV's