It may be *possible* to squint really hard and make up bullshit good-faith justifications for policies that mean one can avoid naming the obvious bad-faith actual justification for said policies. But it is not *advisable*. It makes you look like either a credulous buffoon, or someone who thinks other people on here are all credulous buffoons.

It’s not like Trump and his administration have *hidden* their desire to support ICE vehicles and damage EV vehicles, is it? There was some sort of weird hiatus in Trump’s own rhetoric when he was sucking up [sic and also sick] to Musk for a few months, but since then he’s been back to saying what he said beforehand, that he thinks EVs are shit and should be discouraged. And the rest of his admin never indulged in the hiatus.

Hear hooves, expect horses, not zebras.

Yeah but win amp was the first to whip the llamas ass, really.

And those can be explained in terms of other reasons. National security, protection of domestic production, immigration control, reduction of government dependency, regulation reduction to stimulate the economy, etc.

>"The current administration wanted to do that by imposing a national vehicle registration fee for EVs. Some states already do this with higher registration fees for EVs (and oddly enough, not all of the states are red ones)."

No, that is to make up for the loss of gasoline tax revenue. I think that is reasonable, as long as it is at least roughly based on mileage. In my State, they collect the odo reading during annual vehicle inspections. But for some stupid reason they don't use it and want people to put spy devices on their phones or in the vehicle.

No worries, with Tylenol under scrutiny,autistic programmers should fade out and we can all be happy.

We do not need a centralized grid. We only need food. There are many ways to live. Try a bit of imagination. Else ask chatgpt.

I do not think that was implicitly there. You may have projected something there. That is why you should keep reading. Judging is too easy.

Definitely a positive example. Government screws up, people do not stick to complaining about it and take initiative. Oy, US, taking notes?

Just file the paperwork for cutting the trees. I did this here (EU) Had to draw a plan on which all trees with a circumference of more than 1 meter were indicated. Made a rough plan. Did not spend too much effort on it. It was... accurate enough. Filed the paperwork and got a permit a few weeks later. As I had to cut down too many trees, I had to pay 2000 euro. That money is put in a fund to preserve and expand other forests. All makes sense to me. Consequences of being not alone on this world.

What do you mean by a four hour turnaround? I’m really confused.

My EV has a 330 mile range and my charging is either done at home (plug in at night, unplug in morning) or at my destination (typically a hotel, and once again plug in at night, unplug in the morning). If I really have to do a fast charge on a longer trip, I can go 10 to 80% in about 40 minutes, so I’ll time a charge for when I’m hungry. But I’ve only done that a couple of times in the last two years.

So it might well be that my current EV meets your nominal needs. Unless you mean something else by turnaround.

EU here. I have solar panels on my roof. In summer my electricity bill is zero. Is it a good investment? Yes, pays itself back in a year or 5. I bet they numbers are similar in the US.

This 15k replacement battery thing is clearly absolutely a totemic piece of idiocy that you guys are absolutely stuck on, isn’t it?

I used to have a Renault Zoe with an NMC pack. Here’s the numbers:
Summer range when new: 245 miles
UK average daily driving: 20 miles/day
Battery reaches 80% state of health after 750 equivalent full cycles (EFC) (could actually be as high as 1500 cycles, but let’s be cautious)

1. Daily distance driven = 0.08 of an EFC (20/245)
2. Days to reach 750 EFC = 750 / (20/245) = 9187.5 days.
3. Years to 750 EFC = 9187.5 / 365.25 = approx 25.15 years.
4. If you assume linear degradation and solve, that reduces to approx 23 years

At which point the thing will *still* drive you 200 miles in the summer.

If we now look at a new EV with a 300 mile LFP battery, then the battery will reach 80% state of health after more like 3000 cycles. So we are talking about 300 * 3000 = 900,000 miles of driving, which would take the typical UK driver more than 120 years to reach. At which point the battery would *still* be good for 240 miles of range.

Worrying about range degradation is right up there with worrying about fire risk as being a stupid thing to worry about.

Go Africa, show us how it is done!

Ending subsidies is also *not* the only thing the Trump administration has done to damage the EV market, so you’re whaling away on a strawman of your own invention. The Trump administration has also:
- Rolled back vehicle emissions / fuel-economy standards
- Attempted to revoke California’s EV-friendly regulatory authority / waivers
- Imposed tariffs on EV supply-chain components
- Raised tariff and non-tariff barriers on Chinese EVs
- Cut EV infrastructure support including *removing installed chargers*
- Ended the regulatory credit system that benefited EV makers
- Raided the Hyundai battery plant
Etc

It's very simple.
Big oil don't want you to get an EV, for really obvious reasons that should not elude anyone by now.

Their entire infrastructure and business model is built on the gas-station.
Mom & Pop gas stations don't want to invest in EV chargers either, basically because it's slower, will take up more space.

There is another phenomena on the rise, EV-charging malls. Innovative businesses have found out that if they make a parking lot with EV chargers, then they have an incentive to make customers their destination rather than the ones without a charging facility.

The prolonged charging time - has another advantage, you stay, you eat, and the longer you stay, the more you are enticed to make more purchases.