
Schumer proposes $462B car swap – gas for electric - prostoalex
https://apnews.com/ffd9b2112605471484e967a137478e94
======
unlinked_dll
Personally I think a more effective use of money to reduce fossil fuel
consumption would be to provide subsidies to companies for remote work and a
collective effort to go to a 4 day work week.

The problem isn't what kind of car I drive, it's that I need to drive it in
the first place.

~~~
acollins1331
But buying new cars also helps the economy

~~~
bobthepanda
If the goal is reduction of carbon and environmental impact, building lots of
new cars from newly mined materials is a bit silly.

~~~
acollins1331
There are often multiple goals. My guess is the reason why something like this
is picked over something carbon negative is because of the economy. You can
downvote it but it's $462 billion into car companies and all their
subsidiaries, which is something that tends to have broad public support.

------
bobthepanda
Each new electric car is going to have an impact on the environment during its
manufacturing as well. Batteries aren’t all peaches and cream.

We should really just make a concerted effort to retrofit America so a car is
not the only, default option.

------
jmpman
Change the fuel economy standard so that no vehicle (including trucks and
SUVs) can get less than 35mpg, and you’ll see the market drive the conversion
to electric.

~~~
Spivak
That’s a terrible metric. You want to deter vehicles that use a lot of fuel
disproportionately to the cargo they’re carrying — not just punish heavy
vehicles.

~~~
watersb
Most automobiles in the US are designed to carry up to five people, and almost
always carry just a single person.

It still makes sense to target those with an MPG requirement.

We could also eliminate the Federal tax credits for farm vehicles -- actually
we should alter the vehicles which qualify for the subsidy. Because current
tax law encourages the purchase of vehicles larger than 8000 pounds for
primarily personal, non-farm activity.

Almost insane touch that one, though; it hands the story to those who would
oppose any reduction of carbon subsidy. I mention it by way of illustrating
one of the myriad ways that hardworking, independent Americans depend upon
Federal handouts. (Using emotionally provocative language on purpose here. I
prefer to avoid such framing, not useful. Here I use it by way of another
illustration of warped perspective on carbon economy status quo.)

------
woodandsteel
I like what Schumer is trying to accomplish, but I don't think his plan will
be necessary, at least for maybe a decade. Schumer is assuming that Americans
are not going to want on their own to switch to EV's, and so they need
financial incentives.

However, from all I read starting in another two or three years there is going
to be an explosion of demand by consumers to buy EV's. This will be for a
number of reasons, including governmental regulations, improving EV's, many
more manufacturers selling many more different models, expanding charging
networks, and perhaps most important, EV's will start to have sticker-price
parity with ICE autos.

Demand will grow much faster than supply. One reason for this is that demand
for li-ion batteries for electricity storage will be growing rapidly at the
same time. As a consequence demand is going to outstrip supply for many years.
It won't catch up until 2030 or later, and only then will it make sense to
subsidize car swaps.

------
onetimemanytime
To put things in perspective: USA is running a $1 Trillion _deficit_ this
year.

So, if global warming and pollution matter, $0.462 Trillion over 10+ years is
nothing. Majors shifts are helped /require government intervention.

------
innagadadavida
Continuing to encourage car usage will not solve environmental problems.
Governments should invest in infrastructure to avoid one person in a car
during peak hours. This suboptimal commute pattern is a major contributor to
not only green house gases but also traffic congestion and reduced quality of
life as a result.

One unexplored option is to build freeway bus services - build pickup and
parking lots near freeway exits and reserve diamond lanes exclusively for
commuter buses. Unlike trains this can reuse existing infrastructure and works
well with company shuttles and the like.

------
gist
Typical nonsense which is very broad and not only lacking specifics but does
not take into account the unintended consequences of such an abrupt change in
behavior.

Not only can't I find anything but an attention grabbing headline about this
but even the basic idea and numbers are literally pulled out of nowhere.

And he uses a non exact number to make it appear to be legit and well thought
out. $462 Billion not $500 Billion not 1 Trillion I mean absurd on it's face
and solely intended to just make the number appear entirely realistic in some
way.

------
ZeroGravitas
Each EV is estimated to save the country $20,000 (air pollution health costs,
fuel etc) so if this causes 23 million transitions it would pay for itself.

------
msre1965
How about investing that $462B in high temperature fission reactors? Make
carbon neutral fuel and electricity at the same time.

~~~
unlinked_dll
I hate comments like this when it comes to public policy. Humans and their
organizations are capable of doing more than one thing at a time.

Energy policy is necessarily multifaceted. Carbon neutral electricity
production and consumer fossil fuel consumption are two different problems,
and while related, solving one of them does not negate any effort to solve the
other.

------
notjustanymike
Cash for Clunkers 2.0

