What’s your plan in 2035 when E-cars are mandatory?

[bjl584]

It looks like my home state of Pennsylvania just realized that folks who drive electric cars are dodging the gasoline tax applied at the pump.
There is currently legislation pending that would charge an annual fee on people who drive a vehicle not powered by gasoline or diesel.
I haven't heard how much the fee will be.

[disneysteve]

It looks like my home state of Pennsylvania just realized that folks who drive electric cars are dodging the gasoline tax applied at the pump.
There is currently legislation pending that would charge an annual fee on people who drive a vehicle not powered by gasoline or diesel.
I haven't heard how much the fee will be.

Makes sense. They need to make up that revenue somewhere. Don't be surprised if they don't also raise the gas tax to get some of the shortfall from the folks still driving gas vehicles. Or raise tolls. Or do other things to compensate. They could also raise the registration fee for electric cars so that those drivers pay more than owners of gas vehicles. Lots of ways to adapt.

[LivingAlmostLarge]

It looks like my home state of Pennsylvania just realized that folks who drive electric cars are dodging the gasoline tax applied at the pump.
There is currently legislation pending that would charge an annual fee on people who drive a vehicle not powered by gasoline or diesel.
I haven't heard how much the fee will be.

Easiest way to make it very expensive to register electric vehicles.

[myrdale]

I don't believe this will come to fruition.

Internal combustion is here for the far foreseeable future. Batteries are going to need some amount of serious technical and economical advancements. Also consider the strain this will put on power grids. I am sure Nevada, Arizona, and Oregon wouldn't mind at all if California banned the sale of internal combustion engines.

[bjl584]

I don't believe this will come to fruition.

Internal combustion is here for the far foreseeable future. Batteries are going to need some amount of serious technical and economical advancements. Also consider the strain this will put on power grids. I am sure Nevada, Arizona, and Oregon wouldn't mind at all if California banned the sale of internal combustion engines.

My feelings as well.
At least in the short-term.
I doubt we will see a major shift away from internal combustion in the next 15 years.
Eventually something better will come along whether it be electric or something else, but in the grand scheme 15 years isn't that far away.

[bjl584]

Easiest way to make it very expensive to register electric vehicles.

I read it will be $75 a year.
Not horrible since a lot of counties in PA require annual emissions inspection alongside the safety inspection.
Electric cars are emissions exempt, so that saves a driver around $55 a year.
So it will nearly wash out

[disneysteve]

I read it will be $75 a year.
Not horrible since a lot of counties in PA require annual emissions inspection alongside the safety inspection.
Electric cars are emissions exempt, so that saves a driver around $55 a year.
So it will nearly wash out

If the savings on emissions is balanced by the higher registration, the state still needs to find a way to make up the lost gas tax revenue. I'm sure they'll think of something. Of course, you will pay more in utility taxes since you'll be using more electricity, but I don't know if that will offset it enough.

[jIM_MI]

While I follow your logic, I think this is not a directly comparable point. Maybe a bit towards education, but Healthcare is NOT able to be compared to.

Reason being, health care is un-substitutable. You can't chose an alternative, to being healthy. So emotionally, you HAVE to spend whatever they tell you to get well, this is especially true for emergency situations. Education you can substitute. If we are using education as a step to enable = Higher income earning. I'd imagine that's the eventual goal 90% of people go to school for, is to find a way to make a living. If you choose to forgo this in 2020, it does drastically limit your options. But you can find other subtitues, (working harder or longer, leaning into talents, develop skill, or something else). Vehicles, there are many many substitutions. Like move closer to work, bicycle, walk, ride share, use cab's, public transportation, carpool, and etc....

You don't have to buy a car to work. But you do (on average) need education to earn a decent or higher wage. And you absolutely need healthcare, if you want to be a independent productive member of society.

So I don't think you should compare this type of government policy, the same as the other 2. That being said, I hear your concern with government meddle in the market. I dont like it in most cases, at least this is one that is trying to motivate a more efficient cause (electrical vs gas). So I don't mind it.... I'd prefer them to meddle in cars, before they do in many other industries.... (I still think we've proved we are not responsible enough to maintain a subsidized, for profit, healthcare). But I'll end it there, as you all know my stance, and it's not a corollary thread directly.

Need should not be a reason for government to intervene, or not intervene, but when government intervenes, there is ALWAYS inflation. Show me one thing government does better than private sector or something government adds value to when it gets involved.

[amarowsky]

Need should not be a reason for government to intervene, or not intervene, but when government intervenes, there is ALWAYS inflation. Show me one thing government does better than private sector or something government adds value to when it gets involved.

Depends what your qualification of "better than private sector".

I think our fire department, water treatment facilities, police, and DNR/conservation are successful. I don't know that they're "better" than private. But these are things that should NOT have profit motivators in them..... I think that would lead to poor results, and additional stress on the consumers of these products. The reason I say this, is primarily, competition would be too costly if it had to be considered with EVERY purchase or consumption choice one has.

I would not want to way "which fire department is a better value or price" when I need to dial 911 to put a structure out. I certainly love having public land that I'm free to hike, hunt, fish, or merely enjoy. And I'm glad I don't have to worry about shopping for the best conservation officers, who act as stewards of the land we share. I would HATE to have to fight over my Water provider the same way I have to for cable companies, ISP companies, or phone service providers. I'm glad these companies compete, but I would HATE to have to do my homework at which "water company" to chose. While it only may lead to better outcomes, there are some things I just want regulated, and do NOT want to have to research prior to buying. This is a very small section of what I consume overall....

Electric cars.... If efficiency is the only metric you care about, then any gov't intervention is a bad idea. Overall, I strongly believe electric cars are much more efficient and less wasteful than conventional. I subjectively believe, that the loss of consumption (by higher cost for electric cars because of gov't intervene) is an insignificant cost to me that is worth paying. I'd prefer to have the benefits of more electrically based society. It's the most likely lane technology will follow, and i'm sure the more we let conventional go by the wayside, the quicker it will be more cost efficient to go electrical/battery style.

I think the most ridiculous fact, is in America we are still subsidizing fossil fuel energy companies... So while we're setting rules & quotas for "electric veh production" in the Future, RIGHT NOW, our USA leaders have chosen it to be beneficial, to help support the fossil fuels (oil & gas primarily) by giving them our Tax dollars Directly + writing more $$$'s & inflation from the FED to help feed these companies.

If it would result in them cutting these subsides to these giant mega energy corps NOW , I would gladly support cutting the production quota's in the future. Because it would allow the "invisible" hand to naturally guide people to buying electric cars in the future. Where demand is clearly carving a path towards..... Conventional car's functional obsolescence is on the horizion.... No one knows when it will effectively arrive. Helping push them out the door only accelerates the inevitable (and is probably not necessary).