• Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0

    Eight States Sign A Pact To Increase EV Sales


    William Maley

    Staff Writer - CheersandGears.com

    October 28, 2013

    California and seven other states have signed a new pact that hopes to increase the number of zero emission vehicles on their roads to 3.3 million by the year 2025.

    Joining California in this pact are Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, Oregon, and Vermont. The seven states have already adopted a rule like California where by 2025, 15 percent of vehicles sold must produce zero emissions. To help get to this goal, the eight states have four steps to spur sales of zero emission vehicles

    • Amend building codes so it becomes easier to build charging stations
    • Buy more zero emission vehicles for Government fleets
    • Further cash incentives and introduce discounted electricity rates for home-chargers
    • Introduced shared standards for charging stations and common signage

    "From coast to coast, we're charging ahead to get millions of the world's cleanest vehicles on our roads," said California Governor Edmund Brown in a statement.

    Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

    William Maley is a staff writer for Cheers & Gears. He can be reached at william.maley@cheersandgears.com or you can follow him on twitter at @realmudmonster.

    0


    Sign in to follow this  
    Followers 0


    User Feedback




    What a joke, just another way to waste tax payers dollars and put more luxury golf carts on the road that cannot travel any real distance. What a way for the governments to control population movement.

    Makes one question their real understanding of how these auto's are produced. No one has yet to address the toxic settlement ponds from the battery production.

    -3

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    260 miles isn't "any real distance"? Why do we keep having this conversation over and over? The Tesla Model-S has a longer range than my (currently out of service) Honda CR-V. As EV technology continues to improve, range will either increase or cost for that range will decrease, or a combination of both.

    Your Tin-Foil-Hat brigade comment that this is a way for the government to control the movement of the population is beyond dumb, and quite frankly, beneath you. The government is doing THE EXACT OPPOSITE of what you said by encouraging MORE CHOICE in the mode of transit.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tesla is not within reach of most people Drew.

    Looking at the current Affordable EV's, Nissan Leaf, Spark EV, etc. People cannot go on a real road trip in these auto's.

    These are the auto's that local cities and counties are buying and wanting the public to buy and no one seems to be a voice of reason that while they are good products, they do not meet the needs of the mass market.

    The GOV is pushing a single version of what the rich have onto everyone and not really supporting equally other options such as BioDiesel or CNG where you have vehicles that can be driven long distances between fill-ups.

    I see so much push on Electric and a clear ignoring of alternative power options. I continue to see a wealthy electric only crowd pushing to make everyone go electric and yet while this is an additional option of choice, it ignores what I see as better options that should be equally supported.

    -4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tesla while an outstanding car in today's society, is an exception and not the norm.

    Even their own polls seem to show a older, wealthy group of people buying or leasing these cars.

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/7238-Model-S-Buyers-What-s-Your-Income

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/17717-Model-S-Owner-Age

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6998-Model-S-Reservation-Holder-Demographics-Age

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/8920-What-was-your-age-annual-income-and-what-battery-pack-are-you-getting

    This in comparison to the average middle income household making 45-55K a year will be looking at auto's in the 30K range.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This in comparison to the average middle income household making 45-55K a year will be looking at auto's in the 30K range.

    I can't imagine someone in that low of an income bracket is looking at a car that costs more than $16k or so, let alone $30k.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This in comparison to the average middle income household making 45-55K a year will be looking at auto's in the 30K range.

    I can't imagine someone in that low of an income bracket is looking at a car that costs more than $16k or so, let alone $30k.

    Yet they do just like people making 75-85K a year look at the tesla. Does not mean they really can afford it, but they will look and some will buy.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This in comparison to the average middle income household making 45-55K a year will be looking at auto's in the 30K range.

    I can't imagine someone in that low of an income bracket is looking at a car that costs more than $16k or so, let alone $30k.

    Yet they do just like people making 75-85K a year look at the tesla. Does not mean they really can afford it, but they will look and some will buy.

    Tesla seems more like a car for people making $200k or more.... I know when I was making $85k a year $30k car seemed to me a bit high...(but was fine when I got past $100k/yr).

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Tesla while an outstanding car in today's society, is an exception and not the norm.

    Even their own polls seem to show a older, wealthy group of people buying or leasing these cars.

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/7238-Model-S-Buyers-What-s-Your-Income

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/17717-Model-S-Owner-Age

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6998-Model-S-Reservation-Holder-Demographics-Age

    http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/8920-What-was-your-age-annual-income-and-what-battery-pack-are-you-getting

    This in comparison to the average middle income household making 45-55K a year will be looking at auto's in the 30K range.

    This may come as a shock to you, but the early adopters of the first Apple iPod and first Apple iPhone ($499 for the 10gb model in 2001 and $499 for the 4gb model in 2007 respectively) were relatively wealthy people. As the technology improved the price came down, and more people were able to afford it.

    Today, the cheapest iPod that isn't a shuffle has a full color screen and 16gb of memory costing only $149 each.

    Tesla is, at best, in the circa 2003 iPod time frame when they are still a curiosity that rich people buy, but that price WILL come down. The next generation models are already supposed to be cheaper than the current one.

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    In bringing this back to the focus of the 8 states pushing with incentives to have people buy EV auto's, My whole point it that they should not just focus on EV but include all alternative energy auto's and let the market sort it out as to who the winner should be.

    I would take a CNG/Petrol 2014 Impala over a Nissan Leaf 2014 or Spark EV 2014 model.

    Where is my incentive for going green?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    You can fill up a CNG vehicle with CNG in even fewer locations than EVs at the moment.

    CNG seems to be one of those technologies that's fallen off the table..it doesn't seem to have much buzz or push compared to electric.

    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What a joke, just another way to waste tax payers dollars and put more luxury golf carts on the road that cannot travel any real distance. What a way for the governments to control population movement.

    You are seriously delusional.

    2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Like the 40 billion in tax breaks and subsidies the oil companies been getting per year for 30 years, or the trillions we have spent in the Middle East to protect the financial interest of the Oil companies.. That not a waste of government tax payer money?

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What a joke, just another way to waste tax payers dollars and put more luxury golf carts on the road that cannot travel any real distance. What a way for the governments to control population movement.

    You are seriously delusional.

    CNG is not delusional, the infastructure in place is wide spread and anyone with natural gas at their home or business can install a fueling appliance and gas at home or work. No need for expensive stations.

    If CNG was delusional then why is the train industry converting over their diesel generators to CNG and the trucking industry is moving to CNG. On top of this is the marine industry is moving to have large ships go to LNG compared to Diesel. NG is a valid fuel option.

    All I am asking for is if they want to give tax breaks to Electric, then also allow it for BioDiesel or CNG auto's also.

    -2

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    What a joke, just another way to waste tax payers dollars and put more luxury golf carts on the road that cannot travel any real distance. What a way for the governments to control population movement.

    You are seriously delusional.

    CNG is not delusional, the infastructure in place is wide spread and anyone with natural gas at their home or business can install a fueling appliance and gas at home or work. No need for expensive stations.

    If CNG was delusional then why is the train industry converting over their diesel generators to CNG and the trucking industry is moving to CNG. On top of this is the marine industry is moving to have large ships go to LNG compared to Diesel. NG is a valid fuel option.

    All I am asking for is if they want to give tax breaks to Electric, then also allow it for BioDiesel or CNG auto's also.

    I didn't say CNG was delusional...it was about your 2nd sentence..that is paranoid delusional conspiracy theorist BS.

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This thread is simply fantastic. The wide-eyed dreamers who believe there will be 3.3 million EVs on the road by 2025 are the delusional ones. And so far... the public sides with my view more than the sad, nerdy dreamers. So have your fun, dreamers, it won't change REALITY.

    -4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Local media reports that the EV was speeding and crashed early in the morning, and "hit a raised pedestrian crossing and briefly took flight before crashing into a wall and tree," according to Yahoo.

    4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    October 18th, 2013. Tesla Model S.

    In a crash like that it probably would have blown up even if it was a Beetle...

    Edited by Cubical-aka-Moltar
    1

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Diesel fuel is not nearly as explosively combustible as gasoline, but yeah, it could happen. It wouldn't please me as much as this story out of Mexico does, though. ;)

    -4

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    So here are the arguments for and against electrification:

    For = Overhauling energy consumption needs in order to make North America's vehicle fleet totally sustainable through the use of alternative energy sources, and reducing oil consumption as it's a resource that needs to be conserved so it may be used in industrial processes, as well as helping reduce smog and particulate emissions. Also:

    So you want the market to sort it out? How? That's impossible. Natural gas and biodiesel infrastructure will need major government subsidies and inputs.

    Electric infrastructure already exists in like, 95% of habited areas. It's wiser of the states to incentivize electric cars which will require fairly minimal taxpayer subsidization, as opposed to rigging up several new infrastructures and creating the necessary regulations just to please this notion of 'free markets.'

    VS.

    Against:

    HERPA DERPA DERPA DERP!

    0

    Share this comment


    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

    Guest
    You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
    Add a comment...

    ×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor




  • Popular Stories

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. gmcbob
      gmcbob
      (42 years old)
  • Similar Content

    • By William Maley
      To say we were slightly disappointed to find out that the U.S.-Spec Toyota C-HR would only come with a 2.0L four-cylinder producing 144 horsepower would be an understatement. The European-spec C-HR has the choice of either a turbocharged 1.2L four or a hybrid, but neither of these powertrains will be showing up in the U.S.
      Car and Driver spoke with the C-HR's chief engineer, Hiroyuki Koba to find out why. Koba didn't say why the turbocharged 1.2L would not come to the U.S., but we're guessing Toyota didn't want to put the effort in getting this engine certified for the U.S. Also, performance numbers between the 2.0L and turbo 1.2L are similar (11 seconds for the 2.0 to hit 60 mph, 11.1 seconds for the 1.2).
      As for the hybrid, Koba said the decision comes down to the market, not engineering. At the moment, Toyota doesn't see the demand for this model in the U.S.
      Koba did admit there is a possibility for a more powerful version of the C-HR, but quickly added there aren't plans for this at the moment.
      Source: Car and Driver

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      To say we were slightly disappointed to find out that the U.S.-Spec Toyota C-HR would only come with a 2.0L four-cylinder producing 144 horsepower would be an understatement. The European-spec C-HR has the choice of either a turbocharged 1.2L four or a hybrid, but neither of these powertrains will be showing up in the U.S.
      Car and Driver spoke with the C-HR's chief engineer, Hiroyuki Koba to find out why. Koba didn't say why the turbocharged 1.2L would not come to the U.S., but we're guessing Toyota didn't want to put the effort in getting this engine certified for the U.S. Also, performance numbers between the 2.0L and turbo 1.2L are similar (11 seconds for the 2.0 to hit 60 mph, 11.1 seconds for the 1.2).
      As for the hybrid, Koba said the decision comes down to the market, not engineering. At the moment, Toyota doesn't see the demand for this model in the U.S.
      Koba did admit there is a possibility for a more powerful version of the C-HR, but quickly added there aren't plans for this at the moment.
      Source: Car and Driver
    • By William Maley
      Will Volkswagen make a return with diesels to the U.S. or not? Unfortunately, we're getting mixed messages on this issue.
      Back in July, Volkswagen of America CEO Hinrich Woebcken said diesel would not a core element of the brand going forward. But they could start selling a diesel vehicle in the U.S. again if it makes sense.
      “We are not stopping diesel. Wherever diesel makes sense as a package to the car, we’ll continue. But in reality, we have to accept that the high percentage of diesels that we had before will not come back again,” said Woebcken.
      Last week in an interview with Motor Trend, Woebcken reiterated his earlier statement with the automaker not ruling out diesels in the future. 
      But this week, Volkswagen brand chief Herbert Diess told German business paper Handelsblatt that diesel will not be returning to Volkswagen's U.S. lineup.
      "At the moment we assume that we will offer no new diesel vehicles in the U.S," said Diess. “The reason is the legal framework.”
      Who to believe? We're not sure ourselves. Stay tuned.
      Source: Motor Trend, Handelsblatt, Reuters

      View full article
    • By William Maley
      Will Volkswagen make a return with diesels to the U.S. or not? Unfortunately, we're getting mixed messages on this issue.
      Back in July, Volkswagen of America CEO Hinrich Woebcken said diesel would not a core element of the brand going forward. But they could start selling a diesel vehicle in the U.S. again if it makes sense.
      “We are not stopping diesel. Wherever diesel makes sense as a package to the car, we’ll continue. But in reality, we have to accept that the high percentage of diesels that we had before will not come back again,” said Woebcken.
      Last week in an interview with Motor Trend, Woebcken reiterated his earlier statement with the automaker not ruling out diesels in the future. 
      But this week, Volkswagen brand chief Herbert Diess told German business paper Handelsblatt that diesel will not be returning to Volkswagen's U.S. lineup.
      "At the moment we assume that we will offer no new diesel vehicles in the U.S," said Diess. “The reason is the legal framework.”
      Who to believe? We're not sure ourselves. Stay tuned.
      Source: Motor Trend, Handelsblatt, Reuters
    • By William Maley
      The diesel emission scandal has left Volkswagen at a bit crossroad in a number of areas. One of them deals with their brand identity in the U.S. For a better part of a decade, Volkswagen was known as the brand that sold 'clean diesels'. But the company is working to rebuild and change their identity. Part of that plan is taking diesel and putting it on the backburner.
      Volkswagen Group of America CEO Hinrich Woebcken tells Automotive News that diesel will not be a core element of their identity going forward. That isn't to say diesel will be banished from the brand. Woebcken said the fuel are still in their plans from 2017 to 2019 if they can get regulatory approval. But he did say they are re-evaluating diesel in their future lineup for the U.S.
      “We are not stopping diesel. Wherever diesel makes sense as a package to the car, we’ll continue. But in reality, we have to accept that the high percentage of diesels that we had before will not come back again,” said Woebcken.
      “The regulations from 2019-2020 are going to be so hard that we would have had to find an alternative to a certain extent anyhow. The diesel crisis is forcing us simply to think about this earlier.”
      Volkswagen's image rebuilding process in U.S. will see them at the beginning putting more emphasis on crossovers and all-wheel drive offerings. The first part of this process kicks off with the Golf Alltrack launching later this year. This will be followed by the long-awaited three-row crossover next March or April, and the long-wheelbase version of the Tiguan sometime in the summer.
      In 2020, Volkswagen will launch the first of many electric vehicles using their MEB modular platform in the U.S.
      Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

      View full article
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Who's Online (See full list)