GM Is Pushing Hard to Tank California's EV Mandate
79 points by NN88 1 month ago | 121 comments- tzs 1 month agoI wonder if history is going to repeat itself?
In the '70s the US changed emission standards to be quite a bit more strict, as part of the Clean Air Act of 1970. The problem of smog in major cities was getting out of hand.
Also in the '70s there were periods of gas shortages and high prices due to world events that messed up oil markets, such as the Arab Oil Embargo in 1973 and the Iranian Revolution in 1979. This led to demand for more efficient cars.
US automakers were slow to respond. The often just retrofitted existing engines with emission control equipment that significantly lowered performance and reliability.
Japanese automakers, who at that time had only a small share of the US market and were not really taken seriously by most consumers, were also dealing with new strict emission standards in Japan. But they responded by quickly designing new engines designed with low emissions and better mileage. And they exported those cars to the US.
By the time US automakers finally started making new design decent low emission cars with better gas mileage instead of badly retrofitting existing designs those Japanese makers had established with the public a reputation for making reliable, efficient, low emissions, and affordable cars.
Some people said the Japanese cars were only affordable because of cheap labor in Japan. (Japan in the '70s was like China is today when it comes to manufacturing). But then the Japanese car companies started manufacturing many models in the US, showing that affordable, high quality, reliable cars that met emission standards and were efficient could be made with US labor.
I wonder if we are going to see the same thing with EVs?
- shawnb576 1 month ago100% this
I noted below that I have recently moved from US to Australia
The Chinese cars are taking over here: it’s a product people want at a price they like
GM wants to monetize yesterday’s market, and are just going to fall farther behind.
When these cars eventually come in, EV mandate or not, the US car companies will get crushed
- csa 1 month ago> The Chinese cars are taking over here: it’s a product people want at a price they like
If you can hazard a guess, which make and model is the “Tesla killer” for EVs, if such a car exists.
I frequently suggest to folks in the US (where I’m from) that BYDs in the US would change the competitive landscape, but I can’t reliably point to a make/model or two that they can check out online.
- shawnb576 1 month agoHonestly sort of all of them.
The Seal looks almost exactly like a Model 3 with better range Atto/Sealion are the SUV shapes that barely exist as EVs in US (Equinox maybe)
- shawnb576 1 month ago
- csa 1 month ago
- chneu 1 month agoIt's worth mentioning Harley Davidson here too.
They basically did the same thing but with foreign motorcycles. Harley lobbied haaaarrddd to get restrictions put on them. Harley got their way and still screwed it up, which left Americans paying more. Harley just declares bankruptcy and starts over cuz their cult of boomers will always buy a new hog with lots of chrome and saddlebags.
- shawnb576 1 month ago
- delichon 1 month ago> A GM spokeswoman said the company has long argued that the U.S. should have a single emissions mandate and that any regulations should factor in market demand.
Yes, let us stipulate that uniform regulations that disregard the federalist design of the constitution are more convenient and profitable for huge corporations with top flight lobbyists to write the one law to be enforced from sea to shining sea.
- heresie-dabord 1 month ago> Rep. Laura Gillen, a Democrat from New York, one of the states to adopt the mandate, said she supports the goal of reducing emissions but that the timeline is “out-of-touch with reality” and an undue burden on consumers facing a cost-of-living crisis.
US consumers are facing hardship directly caused by overtly erratic tariffing. US ICE makers are seeking protections. Consumers will not have smaller vehicles nor the affordable EVs they could use.
The air and water are fine, we never pollute, climate change is a silly leftist slogan, and Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
- CaliforniaKarl 1 month agoIf the EV mandate is killed, I could see the California state government making that case before the courts.
- Gibbon1 1 month agoCalifornia should just place an excise carbon tax on gas and diesel cars.
How about $100/ton of CO2.
At 30 mpg that's 60 tons of CO2 so $6k.
- lotsofpulp 1 month agoWhy on cars? If carbon emissions are the problem, why not tax fossil fuels themselves (or tax them more if emissions are still too high)?
- throw0101b 1 month ago> California should just place an excise carbon tax on gas and diesel cars.
They already have cap-and-trade:
* https://www.c2es.org/content/california-cap-and-trade/
* https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/cap-and-trade-progr...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_policy_of_Calif...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_policy_of_Calif...
- lotsofpulp 1 month ago
- Gibbon1 1 month ago
- dogma1138 1 month agoState regulations for such things are silly, you can’t have a product being legal in one state and not in another the US has a single market.
- jvanderbot 1 month agoWell, you can actually. That's how it works legally. It may be silly, but that's literally how it works.
- 1 month ago
- hellisothers 1 month agoWhy is it silly though?
- const_cast 1 month agoIt's certainly logistically complex and you're going to lose a lot of money just to handling regulations. This is generally why I'm in favor of greater federal protections and less per-state regulation. It has a lot of unintended consequences.
Also, companies are greedy. They can, and will, just move and leave you high and dry, if you regulate at the source (manufacturing). So you have to not regulate at the source, which is kind of worse. It leads to a lot of tragedy of the commons situations. Maybe Company X is poisoning the water supply and State Y says "no more!". They just move to Texas or some other state that doesn't give a fuck about it's residents and continue poisoning the water supply. State Y will still be affected, maybe they drink from the same water shed. And State Y is also economically harmed, while Texas comes out ahead.
- dogma1138 1 month agoBecause the US has a single market, what’s next you can’t drive to California because your car isn’t compatible?
- vinyl7 1 month agoIt depends on your view of who should have the most say...state gov or federal gov
- const_cast 1 month ago
- jvanderbot 1 month ago
- heresie-dabord 1 month ago
- alephnerd 1 month agoThere will be bipartisan support for this (only 164 Ds voted against repeal in the house) - as long as Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Illinois matter, California's EV mandate will be undermined.
Neither party dares alienate the UAW or Teamsters, and thousands of automotive employees.
HN needs to reconcile whether they support unions or whether they support EVs. It's a one or the other decision at this point in the US.
Amongst the younger (Gen Z/Gen Alpha) generations, the choice is unions due to idealism (despite havint positive sentiment for EVs). Amongst high earning members of Gen X (which I think seems to represent HN), the choice appears to be EVs.
- shawnb576 1 month agoI have recently moved from US to Australia and it is 100% clear to me the US automakers will get absolutely crushed by the Chinese companies if/when they are able to access US market.
Especially EVs and PHEVs. This place is awash with them, they are cars people want at the right price.
- happyopossum 1 month ago> Even in California, America’s EV market leader, sales are below the state’s own targets. Under the rule, in 2026, sales of zero-emissions vehicles should account for 35% of all vehicle sales. Right now, they account for 20% of the state’s automobile market.
Yikes. Sounds like if this mandate doesn’t get changed, Californians are staring down the barrel of a huge car buying crunch in ~7yrs, as people realize they only have a few more years to buy a gas vehicle.
I’m a fan of EVs - I think every family should have one or two, but I’d also never want to be without a gas vehicle. Not having the option to buy one under any circumstances is pretty onerous.
- Narkov 1 month ago> Californians are staring down the barrel of a huge car buying crunch in ~7yrs
Yay the free market, hey?
- SOLAR_FIELDS 1 month agoPHEV should be the intermediary solution IMO. It neatly solves 80% of the issues of owning either one or the other.
- MBCook 1 month agoShould have been. 15 years ago. We’re long past that point.
The automakers in the US mostly want to fight a war two wars ago. They’re careening towards international irrelevance fast with this crap.
And we’ll either be dominated by the players that saw the truth, or stuck with overpriced protectionist crap.
- Uvix 1 month agoThe US is certainly not "long past that point" in terms of charging infrastructure. So on their home turf, EV-only is a losing proposition.
Which may drive them towards international irrelevance, but if they have to sacrifice one market or the other, that seems like the easier one to choose to lose.
- Uvix 1 month ago
- MBCook 1 month ago
- kjkjadksj 1 month agoThis is why the automakers will win. People are turning on Tesla. And the rest of automakers offerings aren’t half as good. Automakers can put on the squeeze now by just continuing to let this market segment languish and then the legislature will have to do something in 2035 when not near enough people are switching to EV and there hasn’t been near enough infrastructure built due to the segment underperforming expectations and not getting sufficient infrastructure investment.
It was one thing to mandate emissions when it was just a question of a cleaner gas car. We are retooling with evs effectively. I think the legislature bit off more than they can chew with this unless they start heavily subsidizing this industry themselves maybe even making a public ev company. Hard to do in times of austerity when everything that presently exists is in need of money let alone new expensive ideas.
- jkachmar 1 month ago> And the rest of automakers offerings aren’t half as good.
This was true maybe even as recently as 5 years ago, but it certainly isn’t true now.
Tesla, at the top end, hasn’t been an attractive luxury proposition at least since the Hyundai Genesis & Mercedes EVs started rolling out. They had a shot at capturing the mid- to low-end market, but it looks like they’re in the process of blowing that as well.
> Hard to do in times of austerity [..]
The average American’s lifestyle is hardly austere — it _is_ precarious for very many (most?), but I don’t think that’s the same thing.
You can now get refurb EVs (e.g. a Hyundai Ionia) with <50k miles for <$15k, and that’s in a not-inexpensive part of the US (northeast).
Over the course of the next 10 years that used market is going to only grow, and I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect that a battery swap will be less costly than the sorts of overhauls high-mileage gasoline cars require so there _will_ be a solid used market.
- kjkjadksj 1 month agoThe austerity I refer to is in government budgets in california and its municipalities.
- kjkjadksj 1 month ago
- rangestransform 1 month agoThe fact that the existing automakers do not have competitive offerings when the model S came out in 2012 is entirely their own fault. For not figuring out where the wind is blowing and massively reorganizing their entire company, they deserve to die to Tesla, BYD, Xpeng, Nio, and everyone else who figured out how to build a usable EV. They could’ve also built charging infrastructure at their own expense, like Tesla did before the charging infrastructure tax credits.
- kjkjadksj 1 month agoWell this isn’t a nation that lets its automakers die. We bail them out and let their lobbyists craft almost all relevant legislation.
- kjkjadksj 1 month ago
- jkachmar 1 month ago
- Narkov 1 month ago
- madhacker 1 month ago"GM believes in customer choice" when it suits them. The state of EVs in America is akin to food desert, intentionally by design.
- chambers 1 month agoI was in Beijing last year. Many, many EVs on the road, far more than the Bay Area. About half of China's Market is EV's now[1]
The Chinese Government backed up their mandate with money. Lots of money, allocated well, over a long period of time. In the absence of that sustained political will, I think this initiative would have succumbed the infighting and finger-pointing that the article above describes.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle_industry_in_C...
- mitchbob 1 month ago
- rayiner 1 month agoWe can’t keep kicking this can down the road. We are going to have to transition away from ICE vehicles and we should do it asap. At the very least sales of new ICE vehicles should be banned; people can keep their grandfathered ones as long as they work.
- genocidicbunny 1 month agoUnless we also significantly improve charging infrastructure, and more importantly, disallow grandfathering of the lack of charging infrastructure, that's going to be a very difficult sell. If you live in an apartment, you probably do not have reliable charging access at home. Newer buildings might have some charging spots, but you would need _all_ parking spots to have it available. Older apartments would need to somehow retrofit charging infrastructure as well, and it can't just be giving every parking spot access to a 120v socket. In a similar vein, not everyone has the ability to charge at work either, whether due to a lack of infrastructure, or their employer not being willing to pay for the electricity or the cost to install metered chargers.
Chargers also need to get much, much faster; 15 minutes for 80% might be fine if you're at a charging station that doesn't get that much traffic, but think of somewhere like the Costco gas stations. Imagine accommodating that many people charging for 15 minutes at a time instead of 3-5 minutes at a time. Not everyone can afford to spend that much time on charging their car.
There's also the fun bit about how charging an EV in some places is more expensive per mile than an ICE car, though that does often depends on the time of day you charge and what the exact price of gas is.
- smileysteve 1 month agoYou can give every parking spot a 15 amp 120v and it would fit more ~95% of driving use cases. Even more likely in urban areas. Average daily round trip commutes are 52 minutes (approx < 30 miles)
You also don't need to have every parking spot to have an outlet, that is not the status quo; if 50% of vehicles charge at single/multi-family homes and 50% charge 2-3x a week at a fast charger for 15 minutes; then that's the best chance for local gas stations to stay in business (local stations are going to struggle if the 20% rate of EV purchases and everybody has a non gas station outlet continues)
- genocidicbunny 1 month agoYou would have to provide every parking spot an outlet unless you're willing to deal with having to potentially reshuffle renters' parking spots whenever someone needs one with an outlet. A lot of apartments also have outdoor or carport parking, which means the outlets are easily accessible to others. You can mitigate that somewhat by putting locks on them, but that's only useful when they're not being used. When in used they will by necessity need to be unlocked and can then be hijacked by someone else. You would also have the massive capital outlay from the owner(s) to install the infrastructure, since it will be a significant amount of electricity that is being used, and will thus need to be attached to each units' electrical meter. Not every building may have room for adding that kind of service as well, plenty of older apartment buildings that are maxed out on how many amps each unit gets. I've lived in places where I had to choose between running the heater or running the stove because both at the same time would blow the master breakers. And even if that's not the case, the building/complex as a whole may not be able to install even 50% outlets that support the full 15A. In a 100 unit building, even with just a single spot per unit, if half those spots add 15A per spot, the incoming service from the street may not be able to handle that without upgrades either; another massive capital outlay that no one will want to do unless forced to.
I think there are too many edge cases to outright ban ICE cars so soon. That's why I say that there needs to be a push to also improve infrastructure, including forcing older infrastructure to also be improved. It can be done, but with the scope of the problem, it will not be nearly as soon as the proposed bans would have taken effect. It would also take probably an impossible amount of political will. You'd have to grab the proverbial third rail and hang on long enough to make things happen before it fries you, but fry you it will.
- genocidicbunny 1 month ago
- smileysteve 1 month ago
- meroes 1 month agoYes ban them so new cars are even more out of reach for many (the cheapest electric cars are too expensive still and might not come with enough base range for long commuters).
And those low earners will keep driving their shit boxes.
What got me to give up my ‘98 emission hog wasn’t electric because they were too expensive. It was a rebate for taking old cars off the road and a cheap combustion civic. Ban those civics and I’d still be driving something horrendous for the environment.
- NN88 1 month agoHybrids might be as far as the USA goes given China controls the resources and supply chains.
- Uvix 1 month agoHybrids need the same rare earth resources for batteries as EVs do, they just need less.
- Uvix 1 month ago
- alephnerd 1 month ago> We are going to have to transition away from ICE vehicles and we should do it asap
How do you do so without making the party that passes such legislation politically toxic for a generation? Heck, 49 Dems broke ranks and voted in favor of repealing California's waiver in the House.
Plug-in Hybrids and EVs require significantly less parts and have fairly automated manufacturing processes, so thousands of voters will lose jobs.
This is why you see the UAW and Teamsters leadership back the incumbent admin.
- happyopossum 1 month ago> Plug-in Hybrids and EVs require significantly less parts
PHEVs definitely do not require fewer parts - they’re more complex to build, maintain, and repair. You take an ICE vehicle annd add a big battery, a motor, a complex way of interfacing that motor with the existing drivetrain, and additional computers to manage it all.
- happyopossum 1 month ago
- genocidicbunny 1 month ago
- baggy_trough 1 month agoThe law is an absurd overreach. The EV demand isn’t there, although it’s growing. There will be political consequences for trying to ram it through.
- josho 1 month agoWell if the demand isn't there then I suppose there's no need to have a 100% tariff on Chinese EVs, right?
The reality is the legislation was to push industry and it seems industries response was ‘nah dawg we’ll just lobby our way out of this one’
- MBCook 1 month agoThe people of California voted for it (through their representatives).
They’re free to change it at any time.
It’s not the federal government’s job to mess with it just because it doesn’t align with head-in-the-sand worldview on electric vehicles.
California didn’t mandate anything for any other state. The fact the automakers don’t want to bother to implement “the winning strategy” for every other state of pretending EVs suck either indicates it’s a terrible strategy or they think there is a benefit to their bottom line to follow demand.
How horrible!
- baggy_trough 1 month agoThe representatives of the people of California make many inane and destructive decisions, of which this is one. Once the consequences start to bite, they may come to regret it, and I hope they do.
- baggy_trough 1 month ago
- WWLink 1 month agoRAM IT THROUGH! Like a drunk ram 2500 driver lol.
- josho 1 month ago
- stickfigure 1 month agoThis is all so stupid. If we want to move people to EVs, put incrementally severe taxes on gasoline. "Mandates" without economic incentive are pure nonsense.
- bumby 1 month agoThat creates a whole different problem. Gasoline taxes are a major contributor to infrastructure. If everyone moves to EVs, we need a an alternative, like a mileage tax.
- neltnerb 1 month agoWhat we need is fewer roads to maintain, but as you say a whole different problem.
It took a while to find numbers, but it seems like ~$80B in total gas taxes in a year is probably close. Meanwhile state and local governments (alone) spend over $200B on road maintenance and construction while the federal government spent about $60B on the interstates.
$80B is a lot, but if gas taxes covered even just car infrastructure it'd be an extra $1 a gallon already. Even without EVs. In case anyone was under the misapprehension that roads are budget neutral. Frustrating (to get more off track) that other transit is expected to somehow be profitable when roads are subsidized so heavily. I wish it wasn't so critical for our supply chain, EV trucks probably works a lot better between a train terminal and final destination than it does hauling across I-40.
Sources:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/gasoline/use-of-gasoline...
https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiative...
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-03/D...
- chneu 1 month agoOh wow I've never thought of it the way you did, that roads are subsidized so heavily vs public transit being expected to break even.
That's a great take. Thanks.
- chneu 1 month ago
- stickfigure 1 month agoThat is an entirely separate issue and would need to be addressed even if the mandates were to be magically effective.
- bumby 1 month agoIt’s directly related to your point about increasing gas taxes as an incentive to build demand for EVs (and eventually reduce gas tax revenue). If it gets to the point where the only people paying gas taxes are ICE hobbyists, the scale won’t support the needs of infrastructure.
- bumby 1 month ago
- neltnerb 1 month ago
- bumby 1 month ago
- WWLink 1 month agoGM just making some fucking cars people want to buy. Nobody wants to look like a fat grandma driving a Tahoe or a racist uncle driving a Silverado lol.
I mean I wouldn't mind a corvette if they didn't cost 80 fucking thousand dollars.
- nichos 1 month agoPlease have a look at the guidelines before posting: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- nichos 1 month ago
- gotoeleven 1 month agoCalifornia has proven time and again that they are great at economic regulation so I think we should just go with it.
- dyauspitr 1 month ago>Warren Buffet doesn’t know how to manage his money
- dyauspitr 1 month ago
- jmclnx 1 month agoSo isn't every other fossil fuel based transportation manf.
20 years ago this would upset me a lot.
Now I am resigned to the fact 2 or 3 generations from now people will live through a time that will make the mongol invasions look like a tea party ran by three 7 year old girls :(
No stopping Climate Change now
- toomuchtodo 1 month agoI am hopeful China’s EV, battery, and renewables manufacturing machine steamrolls the world. Developed world fossil fuel and legacy auto will try to slow down the transition, so only overwhelming force solves for it.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/byd-ai...
https://www.iea.org/news/more-than-1-in-4-cars-sold-worldwid...
https://about.bnef.com/blog/china-already-makes-as-many-batt...
https://e360.yale.edu/features/china-renewable-energy
Current US admin only has 3.6 years left, ~2M voters 55+ age out every year, etc. Maintain momentum, be ready to spin up faster after regime change.
- mulderc 1 month agoI have zero interest in an any car from an American company and by far the most exciting cars I have seen in recent years come from Chinese companies.
- alabastervlog 1 month agoI’m excited about lower prices from Chinese brands. The hikes in car prices in the US over the last decade or so have priced me out of new cars entirely, and I just about get sick even looking at used car prices these days. Need some price pressure on that crap.
- alabastervlog 1 month ago
- gowings97 1 month agoMillennial here, 3x Trump voter.
"Current US admin only has 3.6 years left, ~2M voters 55+ age out every year, etc. Maintain momentum, be ready to spin up faster after regime change."
The majority of Boomers are liberal - the demographic shift you perceive is not going to work out the way you think it will. Gen-Z is increasingly leaning right, especially males.
Most people just want a 2018 era car (there's diminishing returns for vehicle technology at this point and average vehicle selling price trajectory, Post-Covid, is unsustainable) at a decent price - something with a six cylinder engine that can be easy serviced / repaired.
- jemmyw 1 month ago> Most people just want a 2018 era car ... at a decent price - something with a six cylinder engine that can be easy serviced / repaired
I've talked to a lot of people about their cars and car choices over the years, and that's not what people want. You can look up some surveys too, although quite a few results are obviously from one survey, you can dig a bit deeper and find older survey results or segmented surveys. What people don't really mention: engine, maintenance, servicing. I think for most people those things aren't that big of a deal, modern cars have satisfactory performance and longevity when compared to cars pre-2000. What people say they want: heated seats and steering wheels, places to charge their phone(!), car play or android auto(!), space and safety for kids and dogs, something that looks nice.
I don't think price is a mentioned factor because right now it seems like you pay more for pretty arbitrary stuff.
I want what you want, with a manual transmission for preference. It's just not what most people want.
- erkt 1 month agoYeah, I have zero interest in an electric vehicle, nor a new ICE vehicle. They are all shit boxes designed to monetize everything they can from remote start, to your GPS location, to heated seats. No thanks, I'll take the 2004 Tacoma getting 16mpg that will run until the body rusts off.
- 1 month ago
- pixl97 1 month agoSo we shut off cheap EVs from China so American car makers can charge as much as they want without changing their behaviors.
America doesn't have competition. You're prices aren't going to get cheaper. Meanwhile in China internal competition in battery chemistry and packs has massively dropped costs.
It's sad when the groups we call commies have a more open market than us.
Unfortunately we're going to wake up to that too late.
- lolcatzlulz 1 month ago[dead]
- jemmyw 1 month ago
- mulderc 1 month ago
- morkalork 1 month agoWorse than choosing to do nothing, people chose to fight those who tried to fix it. Everything that happens will be deserved.
- sneak 1 month agoCollective punishment was banned by reasonable humans for a reason.
Most of the people who will suffer have done nothing wrong.
- ninetyninenine 1 month agoWe are all guilty in a way.
- ninetyninenine 1 month ago
- sneak 1 month ago
- ninetyninenine 1 month agoPeople don’t like what you’re saying even when it is the statement most likely to be true.
- toomuchtodo 1 month ago
- bluGill 1 month agoThey can and the mandate but consume demand is under your control. If people buy EVs that matters. If enough buy EVs (which likely has happened) politicians dare not ban them.
- lmz 1 month agoBan EVs? I think most of the work was to ban ICE cars, despite enough people buying them.
- bluGill 1 month agoThere are people who want to ban EVs. I'm not sure how many, but they exist
- bluGill 1 month ago
- happyopossum 1 month agoNobody is talking about banning EVs - what are you on about?
- linotype 1 month agoThey’re already floating a $200 a year federal fee for EVs.
- happyopossum 1 month agoThat’s minuscule compared to federal gas tax, which that fee intends to offset. EV owners pay no gas tax, gas taxes pay for roads, ergo EV owners should probably pay a tax toward road use somehow.
- happyopossum 1 month ago
- bluGill 1 month agoThat is a next step. Some people are like that even if the media ignors them
- linotype 1 month ago
- lmz 1 month ago