strykeroz
Member
So far I don't see anyone cancelling their M3 reservation due to this. That's sad. I hoped this thread would be full of cancellations, causing deliveries to my country to move months nearer. I dared to dream...nevermind.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
The only impact it might have is less compliance vehicles and more demand for Model 3.
And the contention that Tesla might move to Europe is beyond retarded.
And the contention that Tesla might move to Europe is beyond retarded.
I don't see how Trump's actions can/will affect the demand side of the equation. What's the logic?
N5329K
Active Member
McHoffa
CyberOwners
Big three will stop making compliance EVs and stop trying to increase gas mileage in their ICE cars (VW still will because they're in Europe)
Gas will eventually be really expensive again
Tesla will still be the only company making really great EVs
Sounds like a win for Tesla
Gas will eventually be really expensive again
Tesla will still be the only company making really great EVs
Sounds like a win for Tesla
Reciprocity
Active Member
Sadly what's bad for the environment is good for Tesla. Fuel economy standards getting worse makes Tesla far more appealing to consumers. The model 3 should be the first car that can compete for the mass market. I've seen TCO numbers that show the 3 could be as economical as a 25k Toyota carolla. As fuel costs rise, due to more gas guzzlers on the road, the higher value the 3 will carry over is life.
People used to only by electric cars/hybrids to save the Earth. Now, with Tesla, they are buying them because they are superior in almost every way. Higher gas prices will only hell this equation. People who actually care about the environment have a legit alternative that actually makes sense economically and they are dead S3XY.
Government shouldn't be mandating companies do this stuff any way. The free market will always find a better way. Elon and the ever increasing competition is proof of that. Any time government gets involved, failure is guaranteed.
Don't kid yourself, it's the demand for better from consumers that was not there 10 years ago, that is causing this revolution. Elon is just filling that demand. He knows the cars have to be better and sexier, not just electric.
People used to only by electric cars/hybrids to save the Earth. Now, with Tesla, they are buying them because they are superior in almost every way. Higher gas prices will only hell this equation. People who actually care about the environment have a legit alternative that actually makes sense economically and they are dead S3XY.
Government shouldn't be mandating companies do this stuff any way. The free market will always find a better way. Elon and the ever increasing competition is proof of that. Any time government gets involved, failure is guaranteed.
Don't kid yourself, it's the demand for better from consumers that was not there 10 years ago, that is causing this revolution. Elon is just filling that demand. He knows the cars have to be better and sexier, not just electric.
No, nobody believes that.
A certain fraction of the people believe the government has a responsibility to act in the best interest of its constituency, especially when the voice of the constituency lacks parity with the incumbent entity. Such is the case with environmental regulations versus the legacy auto industry (and the fossil fuel industry).
Electromotive propulsion is a superior method of powering cars. Currently it has two problems, price and range performance.
You have the choice of the carrot or the stick to accelerate EV adoption, most people in this thread are stick-people. I'm a rabbit.
And most people in this thread would prefer the fastest possible adoption of electromotive automobile propulsion. Which is why they're stick people, not rabbits.
Most were not stick people when they were still driving ICE cars.
There are Born Again Christians, Born Again Vegans, Born Again Ex-Smokers, and Born Again EV Adopters.
They are 99% identical.
What the Born Again EV folk cannot see is that as of 2017, a 5% drop in tailpipe emissions (dictated by a 20 year lifespan of ICE cars) does more each year for the earth than EV adoption does at this point. It's not because EVs as a group still use fossil fuels, nor that the extra money spent towards an EV would help more by putting up PV. It's due to shear volume. Like filling a swimming pool using a teaspoon.
I'm EV by ownership and choice, not religion or diet. Green when I was growing up was a bicycle, motorcycle, bus, VW, a 45+ mpg Sprint, etc.. I don't feel a need make others suffer for my choices, or pretend I stand on a higher moral ground than they do.
Reciprocity
Active Member
The problem is that the government was not able to force anything, they only cars invented to date have been compliance cars and truly mundane hybrids. This is not actually progress. Higher fuel prices would be the fastest way to EV adoption. People can believe in Global warming and still not do anything about it, but impact their pocket book and you will see a change in behavior.
Your dismissive approach aside, that's pretty short sighted logic; You can't solve human-induced climate change with a solution that only makes sense for today.
Your logic is analogous to the economic concept of 'throwing good money behind bad money'. Barring mankind's ability to thwart the linearity of time, those 20 year ICE vehicles already exist. We're not going to do anything about them. They're sunk cost, as it were. People are going to use those vehicles as they always have, then sell them as they always have. The vehicles will last as long as they always have, and pollute as much as they always have. We can't change that.
Environmentally--again, long term, not today or tomorrow or next month--what's important is to maximize the odds that the NEXT car people buy is BEV. The way you do that is to push as many EVs onto the road as soon as feasible such that when people go to buy, they actually have an economically attainable option. By pushing the industry into the future you ramp up auto manufacturers, the supply chain, adjacent markets (pickups, busses, municipal, long haul, etc.) and most importantly public awareness and acceptance of EVs SIGNIFICANTLY faster than had you allowed the legacy auto and fossil fuel industries to buy time in the market through lobbying and other special interest pandering.
Right now the average person really doesn't have a BEV option, and there are few or no viable commercial/municipal options available , which means right now we're selling your 20 year ICEs. In 10 years hardliner 'no regulations' governance will produce a market that doesn't look appreciably different from today, which means we'll still be dealing with those ICEs in 30 years and more.
Contrary to your assertion above, that's a terrible course of action. Environmentally speaking, of course.
Of course you stand on moral high ground. Yours is just a different hill.
