|
Boris Galerkin posted:Taking a car to a gas station is like a 5 minute stop on your way home or to wherever you're driving to. There are gas stations on every other corner wherever you're driving. You pull up and put gas in and you're out in like 5 minutes. Yeah, public charging is a giant pain in the rear end, but I still think it's more reasonable than dropping an extension cord out of the apartment window for people who want an electric car but can't install their own charger. And my larger point is that I think battery technology and public charging infrastructure will improve to the point where charging an electric car will be a lot like fueling a gas car.
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 04:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
Seattle is installing city owned curbside chargers that are just bolted onto existing utility poles next to the street, targeted at renters and people without a garage to charge from. https://seattle.gov/city-light/in-the-community/current-projects/curbside-level-2-ev-charging
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 04:22
|
|
|
Papercut posted:I charge basically exclusively at grocery stores. I shop while it charges. Pretty much. You'll have to stop having "top up car" as a standalone task and get used to matching it to some other errand you have to run, in a place convenient to a charger.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 05:13
|
|
|
Willa Rogers posted:The old white people said they'd vote for Biden, though, and the younger people's sampling sizes ranged from n = 726 (zoomers) to n = 1254 (xers), which are decent samples. I think that generally the polling of older people is probably fairly accurate. I spent the last two weeks at my parents, and they absolutely refused to not pick up phone calls they knew were scam/spam calls. No matter how I tried to reason with them, they insisted that it might maybe be someone real reaching out to them because that happened one time with a number they didn't know that was listed as spam. Even when it was the 10th time in 20 minutes that they got a call from "Citibank" about suspicious activity on the visa card they don't have. The problem with polling is with younger people. People who look at the number calling them, and refuse to pick up unless they know the number or are oddly expecting a phone call from their insurance company or something. This results in the sample of younger people being skewed towards inaccuracy no matter how many people of the demographics they end up with by the end. People who pick up unknown phone numbers and are under 50 are an inherently unrepresentative sample of their demographic, and even if you asked 10,000 of them a question their answer is not going to give you accurate insight into how the other 95% of their cohort would answer. This seems to be especially true for non-white people under 50, which is why Trump keeps getting unprecedented political realignment results among Black Men and the like. Online polling similarly suffers from being limited to people searching out polling questions to answer or people willing to click weird links to answer 20 minutes of questions. Maybe in the future they'll be able to find a work around for this issue, but as of right now they sure ain't found it. Hell, I want to be polled and I keep not clicking through on my Gallup emails because I forget to check.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 06:19
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Then you gotta wait there for an hour for it to charge. You're not going to do this on your way home from work or on your way to get groceries. Have you looked into this lately? Mine (a Hyundai Ioniq 6) takes about 18 minutes to get about 200 miles worth of charge.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 08:02
|
|
|
I have a plug in hybrid Toyota and it's great. I use a tank of gas about every six months. Charge it up on house current overnight twice a week or so from a standard outlet.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 08:19
|
|
|
The Artificial Kid posted:That's a bit of an oversimplification. It's the best in certain ways or at certain levels of environmental and financial constraint. But trains as we understand them are nowhere near even the ideal train. We could have trains where carriages have their own destinations and join and leave the train as it traverses a branching network that brings people nearly as close to their destination as a car would. That might be the "ideal train" (whatever that means), but the "ideal public transport solution" is most likely just a lot of modal interchanges with trams and electric buses, not a Dahir Insaat-inspired Mortal Engine that will spontaneously disassemble and kill everyone onboard as soon as the service contract is allowed to lapse.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 08:36
|
|
|
My fiance and I had a bad experience renting an EV earlier this year. I had training at Grand Canyon, and since we knew there are chargers at the park we thought it would be fun (and potentially save money) to try renting an EV for the trip. From the start, the car (A Kia Niro EV) almost ran out of charge just driving from Phoenix to Flagstaff, and we had to park at the airport (the closest charger) for 20 minutes to build up enough charge to limp to the nearest fast charger in town. And then a few days later, the car completely ran out of charge between Phoenix and Flag while she was on her way from the canyon to a wedding dress appointment, and she had to get towed to the nearest charger while desperately trying to reschedule. Which was not a fun experience! Overall, the car itself was very nice, and being able to plug in at the various free chargers in Flagstaff and at the Canyon was neat - but the actual cost of plugging into fast chargers seemed to cost more than what the equivalent cost of gas for an economy car would have been, downloading an app for every different type of charger was obnoxious, some of the advertised info on what chargers were available/functional was incorrect, and obviously every stop to charge took far longer than filling up (Which we were able to plan around somewhat via grocery shopping or eating at restaurants, but not completely). Obviously, our experience was not typical - most people's commutes don't include several thousand feet of elevation change. But given our lifestyle and careers, it really soured us on getting a full EV any time in the near future (Though admittedly it's not like we were going to get a new car anytime soon anyway). But... Hieronymous Alloy posted:I have a plug in hybrid Toyota and it's great. I use a tank of gas about every six months. Charge it up on house current overnight twice a week or so from a standard outlet. Conversely, part of the reason why we rented an EV for the above trip was that we'd rented a plug-in Jeep for a trip to Mount Rainier late last year and it went great. So if we do end up in the new (or slightly used) car market in the near-ish future, I think we'd both lean heavily towards getting a plug-in hybrid. Enough charge for the day-to-day commute, but you're not completely hosed if you need to take a longer trip. Acebuckeye13 fucked around with this message at 09:10 on May 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 08:51
|
|
|
Yeah as a Volt owner it really is the mostly best of both worlds (I guess it doesn't have the extreme ease of maintaining like a true electric). During the first year of covid we used a single tank of gas, everything else was on battery. I get that it's not the perfect no emission solution but I think a lot of hesitation from consumers about range, charging time, etc would go way down with phev. Apparently the battery weighing a lot less helps with other pollution factors, although I'd love a ~100/200 electic/gas miles mix instead of the 50/300 of the best phevs
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 09:59
|
|
|
Don't forget the fun part where you rented a bolt and all the chargers in the area use the Tesla connector. Then you find a charger at a Sheetz that has the right connector and standard for a bolt but that brand of charger still can't charge them and you need to wait for the one that can to open up. There's no reason most people can't switch just like there's no reason most people need a full size pickup but there are still plenty of cases where you need the range or capacity. On the service side, Rivian among others won't train/certify fleet mechanics so some electric utilities can't buy them.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 11:39
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Bucee's are slammed during normal human hours already and don't feature any available seating since they want people in and out. Maybe they change nothing and figure bored commuters will spend the time shopping for beaver merch and they're ahead of the game, idk. This is a store the size of a medium-to-large sized grocery store with half dedicated to the store merch, a quarter to standard convenience fare (beer, chips, candy), and the remaining quarter to food stations making fresh burgers, pulled pork sandwiches, burritos, etc. That food area footprint is maybe the same size footprint of an average McDonalds building. It reminded me of the one time I went to a Wegmans prepared food area. It's hard to understate how crazy it is to me that there is no seating for this environment.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 12:04
|
|
|
I mean if we're handwringing about total and net car weight in terms of road and parking infrastructure the incredibly easy and obvious targets are the regulations that make light trucks have lighter requirements and also make "light truck" to be a ludicrously easy bar to hit, as well as ones that require less efficient engines the larger the car footprint is, which essentially encouraging every manufacturer to make near-exclusively megatrucks, SUVs, and crossovers. There's no real "entry level" car because the regulatory space doesn't allow it. Reversing those and heavily encouraging a downsizing of car size is good in its own right, but also seems important in terms of increasing EV prevalence. Weaning people of their loving megatrucks before they start wanting exclusively electric megatrucks seems good too.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 12:19
|
|
|
Why would you expect there to be seating in a gas station? The whole point is you drive there in a car to fill up and grab something on the way out?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 12:20
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I have a plug in hybrid Toyota and it's great. I use a tank of gas about every six months. Charge it up on house current overnight twice a week or so from a standard outlet. Which one? My current hybrid is almost ten years old and I’m pondering a replacement but go on too many long distance road trips to be comfortable with fully electric.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 12:21
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:Last month we went to the new Bucees in TN and even though my wife confirmed there was no seating for dining, I was still legitimately shocked. Buccee's in Florida are even larger with a larger area dedicated to food and they still have no seating. Get your poo poo and eat on the road, I guess?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 13:13
|
|
|
Nobody has mentioned that combinations of laws and economics means not every consumer even has access to the same vehicles. We wanted a PHEV Hyundai when we were in the market 2 years ago, but they weren't offered anywhere in Georgia, and the dealer believed them to not have any concrete plans to make them available. Which meant even if we got one from out of state, the dealer wouldn't have the knowledge or parts for certain repairs.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 13:32
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Why would you expect there to be seating in a gas station? The whole point is you drive there in a car to fill up and grab something on the way out? Labeling it as a gas station is a bit of an oversimplification. Gas stations typically don't have food courts the size that you'd see at a shopping mall.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 13:50
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:Last month we went to the new Bucees in TN and even though my wife confirmed there was no seating for dining, I was still legitimately shocked. Seating is antithetical to Bucee’s whole ethos. Their claim to fame is being able to process insane amounts of human traffic as quickly and cleanly as humanly possible. They do not want you to stick around. It’s also why they multiple internal food kiosks, but only have cash registers at the exits, so they can shove you out the door before you start eating. Old Kentucky Shark fucked around with this message at 14:19 on May 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 14:15
|
|
|
Old Kentucky Shark posted:Seating is antithetical to Bucee’s whole ethos. Their claim to fame is being able to process insane amounts of human traffic as quickly and cleanly as humanly possible. They do not want you to stick around. They also famously refuse to allow employees to sit, even on their breaks.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 14:39
|
|
|
Oil! posted:They also famously refuse to allow employees to sit, even on their breaks. This is violence.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 15:28
|
|
|
Take it up with Less Security™
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 15:32
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:Taking a car to a gas station is like a 5 minute stop on your way home or to wherever you're driving to. There are gas stations on every other corner wherever you're driving. You pull up and put gas in and you're out in like 5 minutes. This is the thing that needs to get figured out to truly get most people on board. It doesn't matter that you're one off the 5 people at the grocery store currently with an EV so you can charge while you're in there on the couple of chargers they have, most people want to be able to "refill" their car in a few minutes and continue on their way. If they get that working and widespread then the sky's the limit. Being able to charge at home is just a bonus at that point.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 15:54
|
|
|
kdrudy posted:This is the thing that needs to get figured out to truly get most people on board. It doesn't matter that you're one off the 5 people at the grocery store currently with an EV so you can charge while you're in there on the couple of chargers they have, most people want to be able to "refill" their car in a few minutes and continue on their way. If they get that working and widespread then the sky's the limit. Being able to charge at home is just a bonus at that point. Even then those limited number chargers work because EV adoption is so low, we'd need 20+ chargers at each grocery store if we all started driving EVs.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:02
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Even then those limited number chargers work because EV adoption is so low, we'd need 20+ chargers at each grocery store if we all started driving EVs. A small anecdote - I asked my local selectboard member if they are going to put chargers at the local super market/commercial area near by as a few of my neighbors have Teslas and they are shopping in other towns to charge their car. He told me the business owners refuse to put charging stations in for ~ReAsOnS~.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:06
|
|
|
kdrudy posted:This is the thing that needs to get figured out to truly get most people on board. It doesn't matter that you're one off the 5 people at the grocery store currently with an EV so you can charge while you're in there on the couple of chargers they have, most people want to be able to "refill" their car in a few minutes and continue on their way. If they get that working and widespread then the sky's the limit. Being able to charge at home is just a bonus at that point. While I agree that charging needs to move towards the gas station model a bit more, I think that there has to be some amount of expectation for consumers to change habits as well. And like someone else said, other businesses need to get on the charging game. Restaurants, movie theaters, banks, parks, etc. Anywhere people can reasonably expect to spend more than 10-15 minutes should have a plethora of chargers available, and people need to move away from the mindset of "fill up fuel in less than 5 minutes" and towards the "incrementally add fuel multiple times during your normal routine, but not necessarily ever 'top off' unless you really need to" kdrudy posted:I'm just saying expecting consumers to change habits that make the experience worse is fighting quite the uphill battle. See I think that the EV charging experience can be better, and I think that's my disconnect. Being able to fuel up while I do the things I'm going to do anyway (get groceries, eat at a restaurant, take my kids to a park) instead of having to have a separate stop is easier to me. aBagorn fucked around with this message at 16:16 on May 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:07
|
|
|
aBagorn posted:While I agree that charging needs to move towards the gas station model a bit more, I think that there has to be some amount of expectation for consumers to change habits as well. And like someone else said, other businesses need to get on the charging game. Restaurants, movie theaters, banks, parks, etc. Anywhere people can reasonably expect to spend more than 10-15 minutes should have a plethora of chargers available, and people need to move away from the mindset of "fill up fuel in less than 5 minutes" and towards the "incrementally add fuel multiple times during your normal routine, but not necessarily ever 'top off' unless you really need to" I'm just saying expecting consumers to change habits that make the experience worse is fighting quite the uphill battle.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:09
|
|
|
Yeah and further I’ve got 500 other things to do besides worry about if I can get around town, and far fewer resources than a giant company owned by an even bigger corporation. I’d love to drive an EV, or even better, have no need for a car. But when you live in an area with no support for public transit or charging stations… what’s to be done? Change the people with power rather than asking me to change, tbh.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:13
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:As much as I would love for green tech to be cheaper; there's other concerns and its legitimately in the US and EU's interests to take measures if China isn't playing by the rules it agreed to follow. It just happened to be green technology in the headlines this time but it can just as easily be any other trendy growing industry; American workers and the American/EU economies also have a right to support its own industries and to make sure competition is being done fairly. China could always have negotiated a trade agreement if it wants to legally subsidies EVs in the EU and US markets. I can't find much about these rules, do you have any good sources that summarize how China is breaking them?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:16
|
|
|
kdrudy posted:I'm just saying expecting consumers to change habits that make the experience worse is fighting quite the uphill battle. Is it worse? You go to a place you expect to spend some time (you were going to do this anyway). You pull into a parking spot and get out (you were going to do this anyway). You stick the plug into your car before you walk away. You go about your business (you were going to do this anyway). You return to your car, unplug it, and get in. As you drive away you note that the range indicator has a bigger number than when you left your house As compared to today, where the car does nothing while parked at the store and you have to drive to the gas station as a separate leg of the trip and then be actively involved in the fill-up process Obviously this requires that chargers be much more widespread than they are today, and that it's streamlined enough that you don't have to dip a credit card or mess with an app or etc. But it basically makes your car behave like your phone and we're all used to charging those overnight and/or opportunistically now
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:16
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Is it worse? You go to a place you expect to spend some time (you were going to do this anyway). You pull into a parking spot and get out (you were going to do this anyway). You stick the plug into your car before you walk away. You go about your business (you were going to do this anyway). You return to your car, unplug it, and get in. As you drive away you note that the range indicator has a bigger number than when you left your house Yes, it's worse, you're relying on your destination having the ability to charge you instead of an independent place that is on the way to many destinations. Your phone is important but it isn't your transportation.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:23
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:I can't find much about these rules, do you have any good sources that summarize how China is breaking them? No country wants their economy flooded with products being sold at an artificially low price because the company making them is being subsidized by a government. It is similar to when a large company sells products at a loss to drive a small company out of business, with local producers unable to compete. But governments love giving out tax breaks and subsidies. So most trade agreements are therefore pretty preoccupied with the topic, with voluntary restrictions on subsidies in exchange for guaranteeing minimal tariffs.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:27
|
|
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:No country wants their economy flooded with products being sold at an artificially low price because the company making them is being subsidized by a government. It is similar to when a large company sells products at a loss to drive a small company out of business, with local producers unable to compete. But governments love giving out tax breaks and subsidies. So most trade agreements are therefore pretty preoccupied with the topic, with voluntary restrictions on subsidies in exchange for guaranteeing minimal tariffs. Thanks but this is very vague, I'm more interested in specific rules they are not playing by, as mentioned by the OP. I see a lot of articles about US and EU "looking into it," starting an investigation etc. but they are light on specifics. FWIW, China is also looking into it and has followed suit in making vague statements China to challenge Biden's electric vehicle plans at the WTO apnews.com - Tue, 26 Mar 2024 posted:BEIJING (AP) — China filed a World Trade Organization complaint against the U.S. on Tuesday over what it says are discriminatory requirements for electric vehicle subsidies. Also lol quote:The real-world impact of the case is uncertain. If the United States loses and appeals the ruling, China’s case likely would go nowhere. That is because the WTO’s Appellate Body, its supreme court, hasn’t functioned since late 2019, when the U.S. blocked the appointment of new judges to the panel.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 16:34
|
|
|
One would think that if climate change was a serious concern, we would prioritize it over 10000-100000 American jobs.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:You don’t actually need a level 2/3 charger (the kind that uses a dryer plug and the pseudo-gas station kind, respectively) unless you’re doing something weird like driving more than 300 miles per day on a near-daily basis. You just straight up don’t. If you think that, you are probably wrong, I’m sorry to tell you. I see this kind of comment from EVangelicals a lot, and I don't think it actually helps convince anyone to adopt EVs. The insistence on using maximum stated range and the focus on daily or near-daily drives leaves out a lot of use cases, and telling people that "You just straight up don't" do some rather ordinary driving isn't going to convince them that they 'straight up don't' do something they do. The 300 mile range on an EV drops to 240 if you follow recommendations and only charge it to 80%, and drops further in cold weather or with higher speed driving. Driving something around 100-150 miles one-way hits up against that limit really fast, and definitely goes over it if you have a commute immediately before the trip or plan to drive around at the destination. That range is a 1.5 to 2.5 hour drive, which a good number of people will make for a day trip and lots of people make for an overnight trip. Going to a semi-near large city for a concert in the evening or music festival over the weekend, going to the beach from where I live, going to a lot of camping/fishing/hunting destinations, going to another city where I used to date someone are all things I've done that hit that range. And a lot of those destinations definitely don't have destination chargers. Outlets don't grow on trees, so if the camping/fishing/hunting is unimproved it's a no-go. Concert parking is generally similar, and at a music festival you're going to have to pay extra for a spot designed for an RV to get charging or have no outlet. The person I would drive to date lived in an apartment with a dirt parking lot. Beach parking is generally 'what's available' or 'visiting a the beach house a friend is renting', which isn't condusive to charging if it's even possible. If there is destination charging, I have to plan my trip around it, limiting what hotels or restaurants I can use and what activities I can visit. With a gas car, you spend 10 minutes at one of many gas stations along the way and fill up if you're worried about range, it's not a big deal and not something you have to really think about. With an EV, you're looking at adding an hour or more to go to a supercharger that is likely out of the way and then sit and wait at the charger. And if there's a line or there's a problem that can grow a lot (if there's a line or a problem at one gas station, you just drive another exit or two). Adding another hour of driving to a 4-5 hour trip is a 20-25% increase in trip time and corresponding reduction in fun time. This is a common category of trip that gives people pause when thinking about an EV. It's not a daily drive, but it's a 'once a week to once a month' drive for a lot of people, and it's something that I (and a lot of people worried about EV range) expect my car to be able to do without requiring major changes. haveblue posted:Obviously this requires that chargers be much more widespread than they are today, and that it's streamlined enough that you don't have to dip a credit card or mess with an app or etc. But it basically makes your car behave like your phone and we're all used to charging those overnight and/or opportunistically now My car will charge my phone while I'm driving, and I can carry a light, cheap battery pack to give my phone multiple full recharges out of something I can easily carry with me if I'm worried about it. Also even if I don't use a car charger, my phone will hold a charge for more than 12 hours of highway driving (I'd say 24, but I'm not sure how well the battery would hold up with GPS on), which is way outside of what an EV can do. I don't think any projected improvements in EVs are going to make a car behave remotely like a phone, which I can operate for days without any significant inconvenience.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:02
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:I can't find much about these rules, do you have any good sources that summarize how China is breaking them? mawarannahr posted:Thanks but this is very vague, I'm more interested in specific rules they are not playing by, as mentioned by the OP. I see a lot of articles about US and EU "looking into it," starting an investigation etc. but they are light on specifics. FWIW, China is also looking into it and has followed suit in making vague statements So just to be clear, you are aware that there are in fact rules, you're just unsure if China's subsidies are infringing on the WTO rules or the rules of some other international body or treaty or other agreement? Currently I am taking it at face value the statements of the United States the grievance is factual, that China is subsidizing its EV manufacturing in a means or method in violation of some statute, or agreement China agreed in principle to. As statements by ranking officials of the United States are generally pretty authoritative and there's nothing unreasonable in choosing to do so. According to a similar article as the original one linked is paywalled: quote:Sources said the move followed a four-year review and was a preventive measure designed to stop cheap subsidised Chinese goods flooding the US market and stifling the growth of the American green technology sector. It seems like this isn't a knee jerk reaction, but indeed a sober technocratic decision made by going through the proper review processes; I'll note that rather than respond to the main substance of my post, which is that protectionist measures are often needed to protect workers livelihoods and fragile nascent industries, you mainly seem to be focused on the aspect of the post that is indirectly critical of China, I think this is an odd choice of debate tactic because whether or not China is technically correct by the rules/regulations/agreements/etc isn't the main point of the post, and the extent in which punishedkissinger seemed critical of Biden and to what extent OP was off base regarding their post because "but the environment" is a deeper and more substantial conversation and I'm just going to point out here you aren't responding to the main focus or thrust here; which is that "but the environment" is a nuanced and complex issue and ultimately we shouldn't be happy to see the US EV industry die in its crib on the idea that there might be marginally more EVs in the market sooner if only Biden didn't slap a tarriff on Chinese EVs? That's obviously balloony. But in any case, a trivial google later, (or in my case since google is increasingly useless for complex questions, so I asked ChatGPT and then Googled using what it gave me) there is the general "AGREEMENT ON SUBSIDIES AND COUNTERVAILING MEASURES" quote:The Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (“SCM Agreement”) addresses two separate but closely related topics: multilateral disciplines regulating the provision of subsidies, and the use of countervailing measures to offset injury caused by subsidized imports. From Wikipedia quote:Countervailing duties (CVDs), also known as anti-subsidy duties, are trade import duties imposed under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules to neutralize the negative effects of subsidies. They are imposed after an investigation finds that a foreign country subsidizes its exports, injuring domestic producers in the importing country. According to World Trade Organization rules, a country can launch its own investigation and decide to charge extra duties, provided such additional duties are in accordance with the GATT Article VI and the GATT Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. And googling "SCM Agreement" and "China" shows that China clearly seems to be by virtue of being a WTO member, bound by it: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds427_e.htm In a news article from the CBC we get: quote:Under the findings of a four-year review on trade with China, the tax rate on imported Chinese EVs is to rise to 102.5 per cent this year, up from total levels of 27.5 per cent. The review was undertaken under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the government to retaliate against trade practices deemed in violation of global standards. Which quotes a specific law: Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974. From the Congressional Research Service: quote:Overview of Section 301 Title III of the Trade Act of 1974 (Sections 301-310, 19 U.S.C. §§2411-2420), titled “Relief from Unfair Trade Practices,” is often collectively referred to as “Section 301.” Section 301 provides a statutory means by which the United States imposes trade sanctions on foreign countries that violate U.S. trade agreements or engage in acts that are “unjustifiable” or “unreasonable” and burden U.S. commerce. Prior to 1995, the United States used Section 301 extensively to pressure other countries to eliminate trade barriers and open their markets to U.S. exports. The creation of an enforceable dispute settlement mechanism in the WTO, strongly supported by the United States, significantly reduced U.S. use of Section 301. While the United States retains the flexibility to seek recourse for foreign unfair trade practices in the WTO or under Section 301, a determination to bypass WTO dispute settlement and impose retaliatory measures (if any) in response to a Section 301 investigation may be challenged at the WTO. Section 301 Investigations While the law does not limit the scope of investigations, it cites several types of foreign government conduct subject to Section 301 action, including (1) a violation that denies U.S. rights under a trade agreement, (2) an “unjustifiable” action that “burdens or restricts” U.S. commerce, and (3) an “unreasonable” or “discriminatory” action that “burdens or restricts” U.S. commerce. The statute defines “commerce” to include goods, services, and investment. It seems pretty clear that taken at face value and given the facts that it's reasonable to conclude that the US has legitimate concerns about the Chinese subsidies regarding EVs to justify these tariffs under standards set by pre-existing international rules (which is the basis of the law in question that is enabling the tariffs). koolkal posted:One would think that if climate change was a serious concern, we would prioritize it over 10000-100000 American jobs. That's a terrible argument. For one, long term, fighting climate change requires to be many industries around the world invested into renewables and green technology, including the US. Second, those jobs could be one of many things that determines whether Biden wins reelection, and the whatever "progress" towards the nebulously defined goal of "fighting climate change" by allowing those EVs to flood the market and potentially kill the US EV industry is almost certainly going to be overwhelmingly offset by the actions a second Trump term would do to allow more climate change out of spite. There's many more important things the US should be doing, like copy and pasting more nuclear reactors; and many things they are already doing thanks to the legislation passed under Biden and official acts like executive orders to further greenify the US economy. It's short sighted to look at this and conclude that this is a particularly noteworthy negative progress towards fighting climate change and just ignores all other substance or relevant concerns on the topic or actions already done. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 17:15 on May 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:06
|
|
|
The ideal use situation for EVs is to charge overnight at home- on the daily, most people shouldn't be exceeding 200+ miles in a day. Nobody frets about keeping their gas tank topped off all the time, but there's a weird expectation that if your car isn't at 80%+ charge you're about to be stranded. The downside to PHEVs and regular hybrids is that you're adding weight and complexity by having a redundant drive system in them, which means worse efficiency and more repair costs, not to mention gas engine maintenance costs- one of the primary benefits to an EV is they're relatively easy to maintain. The short-term fix for long trips is a bigger charger network. I'm not fretting about it in Southern California, but if I were in, say, Arkansas, I would have to plan that route carefully. One cool idea is battery swap stations- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNZy603as5w. You drive in, the batteries are swapped for new ones, and you drive out. Include that kind of thing in the serviceable life of the car (with an option to extend after that) and it could help alleviate range anxiety AND people's worries about battery longevity.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:07
|
|
|
koolkal posted:One would think that if climate change was a serious concern, we would prioritize it over 10000-100000 American jobs. Polling consistently shows that people agree that something should be done about climate change, so long as it doesn't cost them one thin dime. It's not a thing that the majority of people vote on. quote:But the AP survey also showed that Americans don’t want to pay very much to fight climate change. A $1 per month fee was favored by 57 percent of those surveyed. However, if the monthly charge increased to $10 a month, just 28 percent would be supportive, while 68 percent would be opposed. Politically, fighting climate change isn't worth a single American job. That's of course incorrect, and we're gonna lose a lot more jobs than 100000 due to climate change, but good luck convincing a significant number of Americans that.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:08
|
|
|
Mooseontheloose posted:A small anecdote - I asked my local selectboard member if they are going to put chargers at the local super market/commercial area near by as a few of my neighbors have Teslas and they are shopping in other towns to charge their car. He told me the business owners refuse to put charging stations in for ~ReAsOnS~. One of my local grocery stores had a half dozen chargers, wound up removing them because it caused traffic jams at the entrance to the parking lot where the chargers were located. Turns out a lot of people own Teslas but either didn't have the ability to charge at home, or didn't have the ability to charge rapidly at home. It wasn't uncommon to see all 6 chargers in use and another 10 Teslas lined up, hoping someone would leave.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:16
|
|
|
zoux posted:Polling consistently shows that people agree that something should be done about climate change, so long as it doesn't cost them one thin dime. It's not a thing that the majority of people vote on. When you describe it that way, democracy doesn't sound very good.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:08 |
|
|
zoux posted:Polling consistently shows that people agree that something should be done about climate change, so long as it doesn't cost them one thin dime. It's not a thing that the majority of people vote on. I think the important thing here isn't to look at is as "10,000 american jobs or progress towards climate change" I think ultimately that's a bit of a false dichotomy; and plays into the same sort of narrative like if you aren't doing everything in your own individual power to be "go green" you're contributing towards the death of the planet; complex issues don't just boil down to Roko's Basilisk. koolkal posted:When you describe it that way, democracy doesn't sound very good. I'm not aware of many dictatorships or authoritarian nations being particularly concerned about the environment? As an example, the environment in the USSR didn't do very well quote:The region including Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union is one of the most thoroughly ecologically devastated areas on the planet, and Soviet political domination of the region during most of this century provides a key to the reason for that environmental destruction. The Soviet version of Communist ideology centred on the creation of wealth for the common good, but with little or no regard for the environmental costs of such a policy. The emphasis was on productivity and continually increasing industrialization, and any concerns which conflicted with those goals were brushed aside. It's pretty internet famous the images of Russia's houdini lakes? And of course China's environmental issues are haunting and daunting to their own future prospects: quote:In fact, China’s environmental problems are reaching the point where they could constrain its GDP growth. China’s State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) concluded in June 2006 that environmental degradation and pollution cost the Chinese economy the equivalent of 10% of GDP annually. This figure is echoed in more specific costs reported in the Chinese press: up to $36 billion in lost industrial output from a lack of water to run factories, $13 billion from the degradation and health impact of acid rain, $6 billion from the spread of desert regions, and the list goes on. I think it isn't very meaningful to point at the political realities of the US wrt Climate Change, the Economy, Jobs, Elections, etc and say "democracy doesn't seem very good" when no credible alternative seems to exist in practice with a better track record. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 17:29 on May 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
May 14, 2024 17:17
|
|