scroll_lock's recent activity
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, personal perspective Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none Well, I'm glad that you've gained something from my comments! I'm not a minister but I am...Comment box
- Scope: comment response, personal perspective
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: none
- Sarcasm/humor: none
Well, I'm glad that you've gained something from my comments!
I'm not a minister but I am sincerely religious. I go to church every week and if I'm making a decision without a clear answer, I will pray for guidance from God. That might be a surprise to people on this website because I spend all my time citing research articles and government datasets, and talking about technology.
There are a few theists on this website (Pretty sure one or more ministers... but I can't remember who!) Rarely, but occasionally, a nice discussion about spiritual worldviews pops up in ~life/religion. Usually when people discuss religion here it is in a negative context. I guess I can't blame anyone for that, but I think people are missing out on something meaningful by restricting their knowledge to that which is scientifically empirical.
I'm not a conservative person, but I do feel some kind of resentment or distrust if I am too open about my religion in a very secular/liberal/technological group of people. No one is ever aggressive. But it's like I am "reduced" in their eyes, somehow foolish for 'believing in' God - I'm not sure what they think exactly. I am not ashamed of my religion but I dont bring it up too much because people just don't get it.
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, personal analysis Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none My confidence intervals that the metrics you mention will be achieved by 2035: Price:...Comment box
- Scope: comment response, personal analysis
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
My confidence intervals that the metrics you mention will be achieved by 2035:
- Price: low/medium confidence. I think cars as a whole will get more expensive due to (necessary) safety regulation and consumers wanting additional luxury features (treating more luxuries than before as the norm). However, I also see battery technology decreasing in cost substantially. There are so many different valid solutions to battery prices, and unlike nuclear fusion they are easy to commercialize. I think this is by far the biggest problem EVs have to overcome... but it is possible to build EVs cheaply. You can get them from China for $10,000.
- Charger availability: extremely high confidence/near certainty. See AFDC Trends: if the ~20% annual growth rate continues, there will be about 1.4 million public L2 or DC charging ports nationwide in 10 years, which according to their estimates would more than satisfy requirements for a 100% electric fleet. I am very confident that this growth rate will continue due to the billions of dollars being invested in the charging network by the federal government and private companies.
- Time to charge: high confidence. New technology coming to production in 2025 could lower DC fast charging times to 10 minutes. Several billion dollars are being invested into expanding the DC charging network. I slightly doubt we will actually see 10-minute 20% to 80% DC charge times, or they will be expensive, but I'm essentially certain based on AFDC datasets that the DC fast charging network will expand considerably.
- Range: medium/high confidence. There are already EVs on the road with ranges of more than 500 miles (theoretically). I think that in 10 years we will have "on-paper" ranges closer to 600-650 miles and "real" ranges of about 500 miles. This is on par with gasoline-powered cars. With an expanded charging network (which I think is near-certain), this should be fine. I think that consumers have ridiculous expectations for range considering 93% of trips are under 30 miles, and it's possible that consumer expectations will increase further. But I see them being generally met.
- This has an inverse correlation with my confidence interval for price. The more range consumers expect, the higher the price of the vehicle. But I think there will eventually be a point where manufacturers start differentiating more clearly between short-range, mid-range, and long-range EVs and where consumers will have no problem with that.
Metrics you didn't mention:
- Charging software consolidation: high confidence. Manufacturers are pushing for "universal plug and charge" nationally/globally in 2025 and beyond. This reduces a minor friction point for EV users.
- Off-grid charging: medium confidence. Drivers may be stranded from chargers if they are irresponsible or doing something really niche. It seems like some companies are releasing tech to address this, such as a solar-powered roof rack that could be used for emergency charge, and perovskite solar automotive paint for the same purpose.
- Charging station amenities: medium confidence. I think that EV charging stations will start to become more like gas station rest stops, with protection from the elements and nearby convenience stores or restaurants. However, I think this will be limited to large rest stops, mostly, which could continue to be a mild inconvenience.
- Cultural acceptance: low/medium confidence. There may continue to be some sort of culture war about electric cars, especially from people who identify with "country lifestyles" (even if they live in the city). I doubt that 100% of people will be happy about the mandates, even if they are unhappy for tribal reasons rather than real ones. But I also think it won't matter because these people don't represent enough of the market to stop the transition.
being a realist about how long it takes to build out national infrastructure for something as ubiquitous as driving,
Good to be realistic but I think you have reason to be optimistic here. Because most people in the US drive, there is much demand for making that a high-quality experience. As more people adopt EVs, that pressure mounts. An interesting article from Ben James on this subject: Actually, we can deploy energy infrastructure very quickly
-
Comment on Goodbye refrigerants, hello magnets: Scientists develop cleaner, greener heat pump in ~enviro
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, quotation Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none It appears that they physically built it, and that these already existed physically.Comment box
- Scope: comment response, quotation
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: none
- Sarcasm/humor: none
It appears that they physically built it, and that these already existed physically.
Julie Slaughter, the research team leader, explained that their investigation began by building a magnetocaloric heat pump. “We first looked at what is out there, and how close the existing magnetocaloric devices are to matching compressors,” she said. “Next we developed a baseline design and then asked, ‘Okay, now how far can we push the technology?’”
-
Comment on Bold solutions to end the homelessness crisis in ~life
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response Tone: heartwarmed Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none That is a great and inspiring video!Comment box
- Scope: comment response
- Tone: heartwarmed
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
That is a great and inspiring video!
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, personal perspective Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none I think this is mostly true, but the nonprofits I work with always use social media heavily...- Exemplary
Comment box
- Scope: comment response, personal perspective
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
I think this is mostly true, but the nonprofits I work with always use social media heavily in order to encourage real-world/physical action. They spend a lot of time and energy on crafting good Instagram posts, newsletters, op-eds, etc. Each of those have a different tone because they have a different audience, but they all support the mission.
It is worth emphasizing that non every person on the internet/social media is the same, and not every platform is the same. Most people do not care about most problems, including big problems. However, there are some people who are "super-spreaders" of information, in a good or bad way, or are "super-affectors" of the world. For example, a website full of the following people:
- Career activists
- Academics and professionals
- Students and other volunteer bases
- Charitable donors
If an activist makes a statement on such a website, that is like going to a conference. It has a different, greater, and more meaningful second-order impact because everyone listening is more likely than average to reiterate it, or the part of it they like, in some way. Since this is a second-order effect, the original message is necessarily translated through the initial audience and molded to their preferences when it is reiterated, but the original message can still come through in some capacity.
I happen to think that Tildes is full of a mild variety of "super-affector," though mostly academics/professionals (and some donors) and only a handful of career activists. Demographically this is evident by the fact that most people here are more educated than average, wealthier than average, whiter than average, more secular than average, and otherwise have qualities that correlate with political agency and influence. I also suspect, though I have no proof, that a couple popular-ish YouTubers who make environmental content are either secretly on this website, or are one (close) degree of separation from it. I can think of various other platforms where this is true.
Believe it or not I usually try not to be excessively antagonistic on here, because I am through my real-world advocacy intimately familiar with the proclivities of the white professional class in America (claiming progressivism while often enabling structural inaction), and I know that people here don't respond very well to emotional arguments. This thread is an example of that. People on this website mostly do not believe that emotion/lived experience is an equally or more valid rhetoric than logic/reason/perfectly cool and collected argumentation with well-formatted citations, including in humor (and, ironically, are mostly unwilling to accept that this is subjective). That's an epistemology consistent with this site's demographics - the same thing comes through when we analyze political coalitions.
-
Comment on Bold solutions to end the homelessness crisis in ~life
scroll_lock LinkComment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none A creative way to provide temporary, safe housing to unhoused people so that they can work toward permanent...Comment box
- Scope: summary, information
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: none
- Sarcasm/humor: none
A creative way to provide temporary, safe housing to unhoused people so that they can work toward permanent housing and employment.
Anyone who works in a homeless shelter knows how dangerous they can be: valuables can be stolen in a shared space like that, and it's not like you can't sleep. So this seems like a reasonable solution that does a good job of creating a low-cost, flexible opportunity for unhoused people to improve their lives.
Nonprofit DignityMoves is developing interim supportive housing communities in California on temporarily vacant land with prefabricated, relocatable “tiny home” structures, to give every resident their own room with a door that locks. In these communities, service providers offer critical case management, supporting residents in achieving the stability and security needed to transition out of homelessness.
As a new model, interim supportive housing is proving to be a lynchpin solution to homelessness. Of the 610 formerly unhoused individuals who’ve resided in our first four DignityMoves communities, 307 have transitioned to more permanent housing so far.
Part of DignityMoves’ innovation is that we identify vacant or underutilized land that we can borrow for a few years, rather than purchasing permanent property for the communities. In this way, an unused half acre—such as a parking lot, odd-sized parcel, or future development location awaiting entitlements—can quickly become a community of 70 rooms, complete with ample common areas. Using emergency building codes to cut through red tape and modular materials to build quickly and at scale, our communities are designed to be temporary and transportable; they can be moved to a new neighborhood in need when the time is right.
In my opinion the "red tape" should not exist to begin with. There should just be way more housing than there currently is. But in any market-driven/capitalistic housing system there will inevitably be some unhoused people, so it makes sense for a nonprofit to partner with the local government to implement solutions like this.
The article talks about some of the legislation it needed in order to make this happen:
In California, Senator Josh Becker’s Interim Housing Act (SB 1395), signed into law in September 2024, marks a significant step. Streamlining the approval process for interim housing projects, the law makes it easier and faster to build these units, a critical step in addressing the state’s housing shortage.
Another glimmer of hope is the recent passage of Proposition A in Los Angeles County in the November 2024, election, which provides an additional $1 billion annually to combat homelessness. This significant funding can support multiple initiatives in a county with more than 75,000 unhoused, including the expansion of supportive services and the implementation of innovative programs and solutions like interim supportive housing.
Proposition A was approved in LA County by a large margin, so that's happening. Reading the text on Ballotpedia, it seems like the proposition would provide permanent funding for this problem ("until voters decide to end it [in a future referendum]"), which is good. Hopefully this will help things. More legislation is likely needed though, and more permanent housing is definitely needed. Other reforms, like eliminating or reducing minimum parking requirements, could dramatically increase the housing supply at very little cost to the government.
-
Bold solutions to end the homelessness crisis
18 votes -
Comment on Growing pollution in Pakistan’s Punjab province has sickened 1.8M people in a month, officials say in ~enviro
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response Tone: pleased Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none Wow! This is a great dashboard! You made this?? This is amazing. You should totally continue promoting it. I bet...Comment box
- Scope: comment response
- Tone: pleased
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
Wow! This is a great dashboard! You made this??
This is amazing. You should totally continue promoting it. I bet if you got in touch with some folks at A-PAG or similar they would even promote it on social media for you. It's a really nice demonstration. Conceivably this is the sort of thing a nonprofit would like to integrate into their website directly, maybe.
In any case I'm glad you decided to take some action here! I think that's what activism is all about: people being proactive about a big problem, and just doing what they can to raise awareness toward actionable solutions.
I hope your country is able to improve its air quality soon!
-
Comment on A planet-wide solar boom has been beating expectations at every turn. And it’s only just the beginning. in ~enviro
scroll_lock LinkComment box Scope: preface Tone: neutral Opinion: yes, placidly Sarcasm/humor: none I thought this was a nice visualization. I have not looked at this on a phone, only a computer, so I'm not sure...Comment box
- Scope: preface
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: yes, placidly
- Sarcasm/humor: none
I thought this was a nice visualization. I have not looked at this on a phone, only a computer, so I'm not sure if the interactive elements display correctly for everyone.
The first person I knew who installed solar on their house did that around 2010, when it cost $5.12/W. Now it costs $0.88/W and is still dropping.
The amount of solar power in the world has been doubling roughly every three years, but because it came off a low base, it’s hard to get a sense of how remarkable that growth is.
Like Moore's law of energy infrastructure.
At current rates, solar is on track to provide 12 per cent of global electricity in three years, 24 per cent in six years, and 48 per cent in less than a decade.
That puts us on track to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the 2030s. Solar doesn't need to provide 100% of electricity: wind, hydro, geothermal, nuclear, and tidal systems can easily handle the rest.
Sometimes people make remarks about China and India polluting so much, but not pulling their weight with renewables. However I think this is misleading. Individuals, companies, and governments everywhere are adopting renewable energy despite many of them lacking the capital of developed nations.
Kingsmill Bond says the embrace of solar in the global south runs counter to the narrative that only developed countries are interested in investing in renewables.
“We found that, in fact, 20 per cent of the global south has already leapfrogged what’s going on in the global north,” he says.
On top of those 20 per cent installing solar at record rates, he says another 60 per cent of nations in the global south are adding it at the same pace as developed economies.
Market forces have shown just how useful solar power is and how dominant it is becoming. It's being deployed everywhere, including in places that rally against it politically. This is because it is simply a better and more cost-effective technology than fossil fuels. Used in conjunction with other renewables, it offers a direct way to minimize the effects of climate change.
The IEA report mentioned here thinks that solar will only reach 33% of global supply by 2050, but they and all other groups that make projections have been consistently wrong about solar every single year for like a decade. Solar has consistently exceeded expectations everywhere. I don't think we will have to wait that long.
-
A planet-wide solar boom has been beating expectations at every turn. And it’s only just the beginning.
30 votes -
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock (edited )Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, information Tone: neutral Opinion: a little bit, but this is mostly factual Sarcasm/humor: none Yes, this is already happening. I recommend you read the...Comment box
- Scope: comment response, information
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: a little bit, but this is mostly factual
- Sarcasm/humor: none
If they ever want EV only to work they have to somehow convince everyone to install EV chargers everywhere.
Yes, this is already happening. I recommend you read the Alternative Fuels Data Center reports on EV charging infrastructure trends. I know I often share dry and boring material on here, but it is shocking how quickly the charging network is being built out. The AFDC publishes reports quarterly showing growth of about 5% per quarter (often more). It has been a rate of about 20% growth year-over-year for about 5 years and shows only signs of sticking to that, or accelerating.
Here's a good article from Ben James: Actually, we can deploy energy infrastructure very quickly.
At the grocery store, every street parking spot, every parking garage, every dinky apartment parking lot.
It is not necessary to install EV chargers in literally every parking spot because most people live in single-family homes and would have access to home charging, but you are correct that some EV chargers will be needed in many places. Luckily we already have electrical infrastructure everywhere you would put a building. This is because all commercial buildings in the US have existing electricity demand. While the charging station costs money to install, it can pay for itself over time (leasing to a charging company, or requiring a small fee to charge).
FYI, many people in cities do not drive cars and therefore do not need charging to begin with.
Private apartment charging is one of the economically harder problems to solve. However, it is also not technically necessary for every parking spot in a garage to have an EV charger. 93% of car trips are under 30 miles, so it's actually totally fine to just park your car and drive it like 1 mile to a charging station. I mean, you don't have a gas station in your parking garage. Why is EV charging fundamentally different?
The easy thing about charging amenities in multi-family housing structures is that landlords and condominium associations respond to market demands very flexibly. If you go on Zillow.com you can search "charger" or "ev" in the filters and find many apartments with EV charging in the garages. These are just the ones that have bothered to specify it in the online listing. Pretty soon I'm sure apartment searching sites will have dedicated filters for that sort of thing, just like they currently have filters for number of parking spots for a house, etc. The Alternative Fuels Data Center Reports also talk a bit about private charging. They show some but not a whole lot of private garage/apartment chargers in the dataset, but they're probably severely undercounting them (they explain this). Since an EV charger increases home value noticeably, it will become quite typical to see more of them in the future.
What about shipping? As far as I know they aren't making EV semi trucks. How are any goods going to get transported where they need to go? There's no way you could have an EV truck with the same distance a diesel truck has.
Let's take a step back - we have shipped goods by rail since 1825 (199 years in England... or 197 years in the US) and waterway and road for millennia. The US freight rail network is the most robust in the world by a great margin. People shit on the passenger rail network here, but the freight network is often described as "the envy of the world." I am not joking. Ask a European freight rail company what they think of the American network, and they will pretty much only have positive things to say. Railroads go straight from mines to factories to warehouses, even in major cities, and railroads are everywhere in the US (zoom in to see the branch lines...). People just don't notice rail infrastructure because they don't look. Also, major waterways like the Mississippi, Great Lakes, and others continue to be extremely important to the shipping industry; shipping by rail is much more energy-efficient than truck, and water even more so. Not everything is shipped by semi truck, not even close, it's not economical for raw materials or even some finished products.
But truck shipping is important too. Since semis are large/heavy and just tend to drive for longer distances than passenger cars, they have not been electrified as quickly. I am not an expert on this industry but I do follow material production and battery trends fairly closely. I can say with a high degree of confidence that the rate of improvement of battery energy density is fast enough that I can totally see a 100% electric freight fleet 10 years from now.
I just shared an article about how the US recently announced $10 billion in loans for new EV charging and battery production. In this case $9 billion of that was for the batteries (on top of another $10 billion that had been financed privately). This has been par for the course for the past few years, with the Joe Biden admin's "Inflation Reduction Act" and "Bipartisan Infrastructure Law" galvanizing the industry. It has been a great contributor to economic growth and has shown how fast things can develop. We have every indication that investment into batteries will continue: they are very useful for many industries, so that is having a compounding effect on technology improvement.
Some other battery-related technology articles I have personally shared on this website recently:
- December 17: Sionic Energy unveils 100% silicon anode battery with high energy density
- December 14: In the real world, existing EV batteries may last up to 40% longer than expected from lab tests
- November 3: Solid-state batteries enter pilot production, costs expected to drastically drop
Honestly there are so many news articles about batteries that I ignore most of them. There is a ridiculous amount of research and commercialization happening in the field right now. You might want to check out the YouTube channels Undecided with Matt Ferrell and Just Have a Think; they often talk about this tech in a digestible way.
There are many electric trucks deployed already. Since electric heavy-duty trucking is a harder technological problem to solve than passenger vehicles, volume production for electric semis is still ramping up. Currently the Freightliner eCascadia is in production. You wouldn't necessarily notice that it's electric because it looks identical to a regular semi truck. There are others already too.
An important one is the Tesla Semi (500 mile range), which have been on the road since 2022. The Tesla Semi will be entering mass production in 2026.
You can read this fact sheet from the Environmental and Energy Study Institute for more info about electric semi trucks that currently exist and will exist in the future.
And the technology would have to be better to go distances similar to that of gas vehicles on a single tank.
There are EVs on the market with ranges of apparently 516 miles. This is a frankly ridiculous amount of mileage, but there you go: it exists. A Rav4 might be able to get 35mpg if you're super lucky, so on a full tank that's about 500 miles. But realistically it's much less because real driving is full of traffic and other slowdowns that reduce efficiency. And most people these days are buying quite heavy trucks which get like 18-20mpg.
Since EV batteries are improving so rapidly, you will only continue to see EV range increase.
You think working class people can afford these outrageous vehicle prices?
EVs are currently too expensive, but that's mostly because they're being designed for a luxury market. We've seen EV costs drop quite a lot. If the US didn't have ridiculous import fees for European or Asian EVs, you could buy pretty cheap ones already. There is a 27.5% tariff on EVs from China, plus other costs from importing. But they have new EVs over there that you could buy for $10,000. Domestic EV production is increasing, but it takes some time to build those factories.
I read an interesting article recently: Electric cars are suddenly becoming affordable. A quote that stood out to me was:
Recently, Mr. Lawrence said, customers have been snapping up used Teslas for a little over $20,000, after applying a $4,000 federal tax credit.
“We’re seeing younger people,” Mr. Lawrence said. “We are seeing more blue-collar and entry-level white-collar people. The purchase price of the car has suddenly become in reach.”
Car dealers are seeing younger and more working-class people buying EVs because there is now a used market for them. Working class people are mainly buying used cars. That market just hasn't existed because EVs have mostly been a really new technology until recently.
The reason EVs are more expensive than ICEs is just the cost of the battery. But as stated previously, that cost has been dropping consistently over time, and there is no reason to assume we have hit a limit yet. There are all sorts of new chemistries being tested and deployed at scale to reduce costs.
Ultimately, an EV engine has fewer moving parts than an ICE (gas/diesel engine). You don't need a complicated multi-speed transmission in an EV. Because the engine is so much simpler, it's less expensive to manufacture. Because it has fewer parts, it has much cheaper maintenance. It is actually a good piece of technology from a purely financial perspective for this reason.
In another 10 years, we will certainly be seeing quite affordable EVs.
Many who already have to commute hours one way just to get to work?
In an ideal world you would never need to drive that far to get to work, or really not need to drive at all. One of the reasons the US is so car-dependent is because of its terrible zoning practices. I often advocate for transit-oriented development and the elimination of pointless restrictions on housing construction. This would make it much more affordable to live near work. Local governments just have to get their act together and stop being NIMBYs.
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, information, personal take Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none This is a pretty niche case for the overall population (most people live in a place...Comment box
- Scope: comment response, information, personal take
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
I typically end up driving 3+ hours split between highway and straight uphill, which is basically worst-case for EVs. Even if I kept a vehicle fully charged at all times, I'd probably need to stop along the way.
This is a pretty niche case for the overall population (most people live in a place that is fairly flat and rarely leave flat-ish places), but maybe that is not niche for people in your local community.
In theory a DC charger can get you charged in 15 minutes, or 10 minutes with upcoming technology. That's not substantially different than stopping for gas. An L2 charger could take like an hour maybe (@vord would know).
Modern EVs have 300+ mile ranges (on flat ground). I'm not sure how much an uphill drive would reduce range, but if we say 1/3 (IDK), then you would be looking at a 200-mile range. It is not usually that cold in CA so there shouldn't be big range reductions otherwise.
Looking at a map, I can't see a place in California where you would get anywhere near close to out of range between L2 chargers. If you are going from, like, Redding to Reno via 44/Susanville, you would probably have to stop at least once, but you could do it even on just DC chargers. But you'd probably stop once or twice anyway? So no problem?
I doubt the ICE ban would make an exception for personal vehicles like mine. But assuming there is an exception for government vehicles, I could drive an hour + out of my way to pick up a Sheriff's vehicle, but IDK how refueling those will work long-term.
The "ban" will apply to new cars sold and not existing cars, AFAIK. They are not going to just ban ICEs. It's more of a phase-out; the planned regulations are actually pretty reasonable.
I don't think they would exempt newly produced municipal vehicles, except for really specific cases like wilderness park rangers or search and rescue operators. I think anyone who is driving a regular car on regular roads would have to abide by the new regulations.
Be aware that 2035 is 11 years from now. The EV charging network is growing at a rate of 20% per year, which is astonishing. There are already almost no places in the US where you are more than like 50 miles from an L2 charger on the new J3400 standard. There are much bigger gaps in the DC network, but closing rapidly, especially along highway routes.
There are about 210,000 EV charging ports in the US right now at more than 8,000 locations (as of Q2 2024, so actually it's probably more like 230,000). If that were to continue to grow at a rate of 20% annually, which is actually pretty reasonable given the many billions of dollars recently invested by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act into the EV charging network (plus much private investment), that would put us at a ridiculous 1.4 million EV charging ports in 10 years. For reference, this is more than the number of charging ports that the Alternative Fuels Data Center believes is necessary to support a ~100% electric automobile fleet nationwide (they suggest a need for 1,067,000 L2 chargers and 182,000 DC fast chargers). There is a lot of money going into making this happen, and it has 10 years to materialize. If it becomes truly obvious that it is impossible, then the regulations will be rescinded. The California legislature is ambitious, not stupid.
Personal logistics aside; it seems odd that parties worried about big government want to use federal regulation to limit state regulation.
It's ideological/economic for the party that is trying to rescind these waivers. They hate California (right now) because the state doesn't vote for them. They aren't targeting Texas (right now) because Texas does vote for them. Politicians are pragmatic so they would immediately change course if it were the other way around.
I think it is a personal vendetta for Donald Trump though. Gavin Newsom's ex-wife is currently married to Donald Trump Jr. Newsom has been super vocal about California doing whatever it wants in Trump's previous term, which Trump didn't like. I think there is two-way enmity. Elon Musk also has some business beef with the state of California and he probably has some personal reason to hate Newsom too, and he currently has the ear of the president.
-
Comment on US Joe Biden administration grants California waiver to ban gas car sales in 2035 in ~transport
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response, personal feelings Tone: neutral, a little confounded or uncertain Opinion: yes? Sarcasm/humor: none I didn't know/forgot you could do that, but sure I will use...Comment box
- Scope: comment response, personal feelings
- Tone: neutral, a little confounded or uncertain
- Opinion: yes?
- Sarcasm/humor: none
I didn't know/forgot you could do that, but sure I will use an open comment box for future edgy comments.
To be honest I thought that comment was so obviously absurd that no one would be offended by it, and I thought my comment box would have removed any doubt. I occasionally make similar remarks on here and I assumed I post often enough, and am weird enough, that it is not a shocking kind of message. I mean what I said, in the sense that I don't approve of oil execs' decisions and I think they are knowingly making bad and even evil decisions (I'm sure they've read Eichmann in Jerusalem too; they all went to college, they simply do not care), but it was not supposed to be an antagonistic or attention-seeking remark per se because I thought everyone here was on the same page and okay with having a stupid laugh about something that is normally depressing and not funny. So I was surprised, but also not surprised, that the first and almost only response to the thread was a remark about that one paragraph and not the rest of it which I spent 30 minutes writing. Perhaps this is typical of liberal spaces: people, especially academics, have a specific way they like to communicate and aren't willing to look past violations of that structure.
I did play Disco Elysium years ago and enjoyed it. I have never played a video game that weird/cool, before or since. What a strange and unbelievable experience.
-
Comment on What are your predictions for 2025? in ~talk
scroll_lock LinkComment box Scope: comment response Tone: neutral Opinion: yes Sarcasm/humor: none I guess my predictions from last year were reasonably accurate, but they were pretty safe. After the election...Comment box
- Scope: comment response
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: yes
- Sarcasm/humor: none
I guess my predictions from last year were reasonably accurate, but they were pretty safe.
After the election happened I realized I was more out of touch than I thought, so I won't make any capital P predictions about the government.
My predictions for 2025:
Technology:
- By the end of Q4 2025, there are over 300,000 EV charging ports installed in the United States. We might not have the data by next year's thread, but for reference there are about 210,000 as of Q2 2024. They might linearly increase by ~5% per quarter on average, putting us at around 280,000 by the end of next year. So my prediction is that the EV market will accelerate slightly next year.
- I was completely wrong about my prediction for EV sales last year. This year, I think the EV market share will be roughly steady, even though the infrastructure and experience of using an EV will improve a lot.
Environment:
- Northern rockhopper penguin populations decline further. (again)
Personal:
- Will personally be hit by a car.
- Receive some kind of lower back injury (from the car or otherwise).
- I will continue to live in this godforsaken city.
- A cat will NOT be living with me by the end of the year, but I will be one step closer to that.
- Loss of employment or income 50/50
-
Comment on The destructive legacy of failed aquaculture in ~enviro
scroll_lock Link ParentComment box Scope: comment response Tone: thankful Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none Thanks for this resource. I found a fish search on the OceanWise website that lists whether the fishing...Comment box
- Scope: comment response
- Tone: thankful
- Opinion: none
- Sarcasm/humor: none
Thanks for this resource. I found a fish search on the OceanWise website that lists whether the fishing practices in certain regions are sustainable or not.
They also seem to have a list/map of partners including grocery stores and restaurants ("Partner map"), but it doesn't seem to include anything in my city.
Glad that someone is tracking this at least. Hope they can expand more.
-
Comment on Kansas City receives new streetcars for Main Street extension in ~transport
scroll_lock LinkComment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: not really Sarcasm/humor: none Kansas City is getting new streetcars! Nice to see this system being expanded. It seems like the new...Comment box
- Scope: summary, information
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: not really
- Sarcasm/humor: none
Kansas City is getting new streetcars! Nice to see this system being expanded.
The addition of eight new streetcars will also help to support the expansion of the KC Streetcar system, as it grows beyond its original downtown route to include the Main Street and Riverfront Extensions. The new vehicles will help to improve service frequency, reliability and capacity as ridership grows. With both extensions, the streetcar system will connect more neighborhoods, businesses and cultural destinations, making efficient, sustainable public transit accessible to more Kansas City residents.
It seems like the new streetcars are being tested without passengers currently. Some of the cars they've recently ordered have already seen service, but the most recent batch will take at least a few months.
You can read more about KC's streetcar project here: Working to connect the River to the Roos.. Or here for the project where these cars will be used in the near term: Main Street Extension.
This project will extend the streetcar 3.5 miles south on Main Street, adding 16 stops and connecting the Downtown starter line to Midtown, Westport, the Art Museum District, the Plaza and UMKC. Construction officially kicked off in April 2022. The full extension is anticipated to be open in 2025.
The Main Street Extension will change the layout of the construction corridor. Once complete, 22 percent of the extension will be dedicated transit lanes.
22% is a lot better than 0%! Ideally, a perfect streetcar network would have a higher proportion of transit lanes. However, even just a few dedicated lanes at important sections makes a big difference. And as they redo the streetscapes, it seems like they are also making a lot of nice pedestrian improvements.
-
Kansas City receives new streetcars for Main Street extension
12 votes -
Comment on More riders than expected have used Oklahoma City's RAPID NW bus line in ~transport
scroll_lock LinkComment box Scope: summary, information Tone: neutral Opinion: none Sarcasm/humor: none "Bus rapid transit" theoretically means a transit line for buses with some sort of guideway, grade...Comment box
- Scope: summary, information
- Tone: neutral
- Opinion: none
- Sarcasm/humor: none
"Bus rapid transit" theoretically means a transit line for buses with some sort of guideway, grade separation, or other infrastructure that increases average bus speeds, like level boarding platforms to make boarding faster, bus station turnstiles like you would see in the metro (rather than bus payment, also to make boarding faster), traffic signal prioritization for buses, etc.
Oklahoma City's new BRT line has surprisingly exceeded expectations! (by about 22%)
After one year of operation, the BRT route along Northwest Expressway has seen an average of 1,220 riders per day. According to Jesse Rush, director of Oklahoma City's public transportation system EMBARK, only 1,000 riders per day were expected when the service launched in December 2023.
About 37,000 riders traveled the RAPID NW route over the past year. In total, Rush said the line serviced over 443,000 riders.
On average, EMBARK saw a 2% growth in ridership each month. The RAPID NW line also enjoys significant customer satisfaction over the national average for public transit, including the city's fixed route bus service.
It seems like the city will be doing much more to expand BRT service in the near future:
Earlier this year, the Oklahoma City Council unanimously approved a 17-mile route for the planned MAPS 4 BRT line in the city's northeast and southwest sides.
The new BRT route will connect northeast Oklahoma City's Adventure District to SW 89 and Portland Avenue near the Amazon fulfillment facility. Other major destinations along the new corridor will include Automobile Alley, Capitol Hill, the Innovation District, Integris Southwest Medical Center, Oklahoma City Community College and the Ralph Ellison Library.
The city's voter-approved MAPS 4 program included $61 million to build the new BRT line connecting northeast and south OKC, and the city will leverage MAPS funding to apply for federal grants. The approved BRT line could be constructed in two phases starting in 2028, will include 26 stop locations and is expected to connect to an estimated 50,000 jobs.
I think transit advocates are usually very train-centric, and for good reason, but a good bus system can be more feasible to implement in many cases. Also, every train system is necessarily supported by a bus system, so it makes sense to improve the infrastructure for both. If a corridor does really well, they can turn it into light rail: with level boarding and other infrastructure, much of the work will have been done at that point.
-
More riders than expected have used Oklahoma City's RAPID NW bus line
11 votes
Comment box
My hope is that cultural preferences for ICEs will be overridden by future EVs that are ultimately cheaper to buy and maintain than ICEs. While ICEs are indeed nestled into American culture, I think really... cars (any cars) are nestled into American culture.
Also, EVs are quieter, smoother to drive, and don't smell bad. These are small things, but they give the cars a more modern feel, even to people who don't care about the environment. Anyone who genuinely likes loud, bumpy, and smelly cars cannot be convinced - but I don't think there are a lot of people who will really die on this hill.
10 years is both a very short time and a very long time. The one thing about culture worth mentioning - lots of people who might be sentimentally attached to gas cars are (let's be honest) rural and therefore less wealthy than average, and therefore more likely to buy a used car. This regulation only targets new sales. So if we're talking about whether this regulation will "survive," really the people who need to be convinced ASAP are the people buying new cars - they're setting the tone for the market that automakers and legislators are responding to.
I'm confident that all the so-called "coastal elites" can be fully convinced to go full-electric within 10 years and probably sooner, in a practical sense, as well as a large portion of upper-middle class people just about anywhere in the country. If it takes the rest of the country another 5-10 years for ICEs to lose their luster and start to feel antiquated, that's probably okay.
People used to love muscle cars from the 1960s. Some people still drive them (because they are cool). But most people don't care, and aren't voting for a politician who wants to "bring back muscle cars." Like, it just doesn't matter.