NY is joining California’s plan to phase out new ICE cars by 2035, do you think your state will join in as well?

35 comments

1. I think that the market will eliminate new ICE cars by itself with or without any mandates. Automakers are diving headfirst into EVs.

2. I don’t think it matters if my state does or not. That’s 1/6 of the country’s population and #1 and #3 in the GDP ranks. Automakers will go electric-only based on that alone. It won’t be worth it to produce ICE cars for America any more.

3. My state? No. Not a chance. If there is anything Wyoming loves it’s fossil fuels.

4. Is there a plan to beef up their electrical grid?

5. lol, no

6. The supply chain problems that need to be solved to make electric cars more than mere luxuries will take longer to solve than the legislators think (the supply chain is an order of magnitude more complex than it is for Internal Combustion Engine cars). I expect to see a good deal of reimportation of ICE cars from the states that don’t ban them into the states that do ban new sales of such cars. People in, say, Texas, will be making money by holding onto a new ICE car for about 6 months, perhaps before selling it to a broker that sells it into California.

   Relatively new ICE cars in the “ban” states will become more expensive. They won’t go away.

7. I don’t see us ever doing that.

   I also don’t think it’s necessary to do it in the first place. EV’s were already slowly gaining more and more of the market share on their own prior to these initiatives.

   The market would have made them the majority on its own *without* punishing citizens who can’t afford EV’s or who can’t properly be served by them.

8. Mandates to switch, even just as a goal, would be wildly unpopular in PA outside of Philly and Pittsburgh. I think it should happen naturally over time. The private sector is already starting to produce EVs and the infrastructure to support them will be built as the technology becomes cheaper and more efficient. Brute forcing it just digs people in.

9. I hope not, I strongly disagree with this. I don’t think the state has the right to tell people what kind of car they can drive.

10. I think Washington state did as well?

11. We already [did,](https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/transportation/wa-will-ban-new-gas-powered-cars-by-2035-following-cas-lead/) like a month ago. On paper, anyway.

12. Maine almost certainly will not.

    We have too many rural areas and don’t have the infrastructure plus a metric ton of people with work trucks they run ragged and can’t spend .5-3 hours charging during the day.

    10+ years is a lot of time so I am open to seeing it happen but I am not holding my breath.

    Then you have all the supply chain issues which aren’t trivial. We have been making combustion cars for a long time and all the supply and infrastructure is in place.

    I am curious to see how it plays out and if a few states can sort of force it on the rest of the country.

13. Hahaha no Texas is more likely to require rolling coal before they phase out ICE engines

14. I highly doubt my state will do that

15. I doubt it

16. Probably. Save the petroleum for other applications.

17. No and I don’t think this will pan out for either state so, therefore, it won’t spread.

18. I’m not sure. It’s an ambitious goal, not sure it’s realistic. My big problem is that poor people are very screwed in the electric car world. There is no equivalent of getting a 5k beater in the electric car world. Poor people can’t afford new cars. And with electric cars, you don’t really get the benefit of buying a 10+year old one because it will need a costly battery replacement. Personally I drive a 3k beater, hasn’t needed a repair in 3 years, it needs liability only coverage. Even if gas were 10 bucks a gallon, it wouldn’t make financial sense to me to move to electric

19. I think so, especially with a Democratic governor likely starting next year.

20. Texas? Oh hellllll no lol

    But they don’t really need to do it legislatively. The market will head that way eventually anyway and other state, especially ones that big, will accelerate that with or without TX getting involved at the government level.

21. Common CA w

22. EVs cannot tow anything or work in the cold. Not seeing it

23. Meanwhile everyone is ignoring the Diesel semis that deliver everything

24. Zero chance of Michigan or Texas joining (I have ties to both states). On the other hand it’s a decent policy.

25. It better not.

26. My home state **is** NY and these idiots didn’t think any of this through. CA can get away with it because most of the state doesn’t become a frozen wasteland for almost half the year. They’ve apparently never heard of Oswego County in Albany where 6 inch *an hour* snowfall isn’t unheard of. Or Jefferson County where it got so cold (-40F/C, at that temp they cross) I couldn’t de-ice the planes I ground serviced at the time. Those fools thought all about their fancy ICE acronyms and forgot that **actual fragging ice** is a thing outside of their comfy legislative homes. They got an electric vehicle that will drive in 8 inches of snow on I-81 after it starts in -37°F morningTemps? I’d sure like to see it.

27. Hell, no.

28. Sure hope not. Range and towing capacity still isn’t close to what I need, plus I street park so I can’t charge at home.

29. I figure my state will start requiring coal-powered cars

30. I fucking hope not.

31. Michigan? No

    Lol

32. I can’t even imagine that. We are almost entirely rural, have a very low population, and very little infrastructure to support EVs.

33. No, we have working brains.

34. Doubt it. They’d have to put WAY more money into infrastructure to make it a viable option for most people, and I don’t see that happening in the near future

35. I think most states are going to sit by watching to see if this will be a total clusterfuck disaster before they even remotely consider it.