Democracy finished in California

[Loren Pechtel]

2) Electric cars aren't particularly green so long as the power is coming from fossil fuels.

But how green are they? Has anyone Calculated the difference in mass of CO2 per mile between electric cars run by fossil fuel power plants versus cars operating on gasoline?

Someone must have done this calculation?

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

 

[Shadowy Man]

2) Electric cars aren't particularly green so long as the power is coming from fossil fuels.

But how green are they? Has anyone Calculated the difference in mass of CO2 per mile between electric cars run by fossil fuel power plants versus cars operating on gasoline?

Someone must have done this calculation?

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Citation?

 

[KeepTalking]

States are not the federal government, and as many a conservative will explain to you at length powers not specifically granted to the federal government in the constitution are reserved to the states.

Sure, I know. But I'm not sure how that is relevant to the point I was making.

I assumed that the following question indicated a belief that the EO was doing something that it is not Constitutionally allowed to do (regarding the US Constitution):

Has Trump used EO's to restrict people's freedoms in a way that either usurps the prerogatives of Congress, or does something the federal government is not constitutionally allowed to?

It seems you clarify your meaning below, however, so I apologize for the mistake.

I believe that most of Trump's executive orders have been in the vein of cancelling EOs from the Obama administration, so that tells you how threatening EOs are to the functioning of our democracy (not at all).

But the EO in the OP usurps a power of the legislature. It damages democracy by going against the separation of powers.

I think that would depend on the California Constitution, with which I am not familiar. Are you making the assertion that the EO violates the California Constitution? If so, could you provide some info backing up that assertion?

 

[Gun Nut]

The United States has its own set of emissions standards that all new vehicles must meet. In the United States, emissions standards are managed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under federal law, the state of California is allowed to promulgate more stringent vehicle emissions standards (subject to EPA approval), and other states may choose to follow either the national or California standards. California had produced air quality standards prior to EPA, with severe air quality problems in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. LA is the country's second-largest city, and relies much more heavily on automobiles and has less favorable meteorological conditions than the largest and third-largest cities (New York and Chicago).

It's because the OP lives in a shithole that has an exception due to their shitholliness.

 

[KeepTalking]

The United States has its own set of emissions standards that all new vehicles must meet. In the United States, emissions standards are managed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Under federal law, the state of California is allowed to promulgate more stringent vehicle emissions standards (subject to EPA approval), and other states may choose to follow either the national or California standards. California had produced air quality standards prior to EPA, with severe air quality problems in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. LA is the country's second-largest city, and relies much more heavily on automobiles and has less favorable meteorological conditions than the largest and third-largest cities (New York and Chicago).

It's because the OP lives in a shithole that has an exception due to their shitholliness.

Oh so the objection is based on California basically setting emissions standards for the rest of the country as a result of their ability to set lower emissions targets for themselves. Well, I guess the fossil fuel evangelists better get busy:

a) Changing the law that gives the California the ability to set their own standards.
b) Electing a new Governor in California who will reverse the EO.
OR
c) Convincing car companies not to punish everyone in the country by only selling cars that meet the standard in California.

They better get busy, they only have 15 years to do it, or presumably Democracy will be finished.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I think that would depend on the California Constitution, with which I am not familiar. Are you making the assertion that the EO violates the California Constitution? If so, could you provide some info backing up that assertion?

I'm not an expert in the California Constitution, either, but it says the following:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/home.xhtml

ARTICLE IV LEGISLATIVE

SEC. 1. The legislative power of this State is vested in the California Legislature which consists of the Senate and Assembly, but the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum.

ARTICLE V EXECUTIVE

SECTION 1. The supreme executive power of this State is vested in the Governor. The Governor shall see that the law is faithfully executed.


Here the government is making a general rule, namely banning ice cars from 2035 on. That's not a case of seeing that the law be faithfully executed, but is a case of making the rules.

 

[KeepTalking]

I think that would depend on the California Constitution, with which I am not familiar. Are you making the assertion that the EO violates the California Constitution? If so, could you provide some info backing up that assertion?

I'm not an expert in the California Constitution, either, but it says the following:

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/home.xhtml

ARTICLE IV LEGISLATIVE

SEC. 1. The legislative power of this State is vested in the California Legislature which consists of the Senate and Assembly, but the people reserve to themselves the powers of initiative and referendum.

ARTICLE V EXECUTIVE

SECTION 1. The supreme executive power of this State is vested in the Governor. The Governor shall see that the law is faithfully executed.

Seems very much like Article II Section 3 of the US Constitution, so EOs seem just as valid there as on the Federal level.

Here the government is making a general rule, namely banning ice cars from 2035 on. That's not a case of seeing that the law be faithfully executed, but is a case of making the rules.

Seems to be a something for the California Supreme Court to work out, if no applicable precedent has been set regarding EOs in California. It certainly doesn't portend the end of Democracy.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Seems very much like Article II Section 3 of the US Constitution, so EOs seem just as valid there as on the Federal level.

Sure, but EOs may not replace the laws. They may implement them. There is some room for decisions from the executive based on what the laws say. And there is power-grabbing that violates the constitution. Now I don't know how much of that Trump has done. He probably did some (e.g., the wall), though I do not know of a case in which he would restrict freedoms. But then, I'm not following so closely what he does, so he may have.

Seems to be a something for the California Supreme Court to work out, if no applicable precedent has been set regarding EOs in California. It certainly doesn't portend the end of Democracy.

It's up to the court, and it might get to the Supreme Court, or it might not. But so far, he seems to be moving ahead unimpeded. As I mentioned, it's not going to end democracy. It does some damage as the governor grabs more power. But there are different degrees. Over here, for example, concentration of political power in the Executive is much more pronounced than it is in California, and still much less than in Venezuela.

 

[horhangi]

Big problem with this: Ca does not have the electricity infrastructure to handle it. Every year we go throu rolling blackouts because there is not enough energy in the grid. Our system is old and has to be shut down for high winds. Today parts of San Diego County had power shut down in a prevention move against fires. No effort is being made to upgrade the system and add electricity production, yet the governor wants to make all cars sold in 2035 be electric. Not hybrid but electric.
Multiple problems with this. First the electricity production and distribution system. Second problem is range of electric vehicles and time required to recharge. To visit my parents in Az would require a 4 day Round trip as the drive would exceed the range that an electric car can travel, and would require essentially an overnight charge.

 

[Politesse]

Big problem with this: Ca does not have the electricity infrastructure to handle it. Every year we go throu rolling blackouts because there is not enough energy in the grid. Our system is old and has to be shut down for high winds. Today parts of San Diego County had power shut down in a prevention move against fires. No effort is being made to upgrade the system and add electricity production, yet the governor wants to make all cars sold in 2035 be electric. Not hybrid but electric.
Multiple problems with this. First the electricity production and distribution system. Second problem is range of electric vehicles and time required to recharge. To visit my parents in Az would require a 4 day Round trip as the drive would exceed the range that an electric car can travel, and would require essentially an overnight charge.

Are you suggesting that, absent the car issue, it would be fine to just let the electricity grid problems go unresolved for the next 15 years? I don't see how the car industry is any more or less impacted than all the others dependent on our creaky power grid.

 

[Derec]

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Yeah, that's BS. Electric cars are much more efficient than regular gasoline or diesel cars.

From here.

This chart is for EU and breaks down emissions by production and runtime separately.

From here.

I am not a fan of legislating by executive order, but electric cars are a very sensible technology. My next car will almost certainly be an electric, although I do not see myself in the market for another car until 2025 or so.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Big problem with this: Ca does not have the electricity infrastructure to handle it. Every year we go throu rolling blackouts because there is not enough energy in the grid. Our system is old and has to be shut down for high winds. Today parts of San Diego County had power shut down in a prevention move against fires. No effort is being made to upgrade the system and add electricity production, yet the governor wants to make all cars sold in 2035 be electric. Not hybrid but electric.
Multiple problems with this. First the electricity production and distribution system. Second problem is range of electric vehicles and time required to recharge. To visit my parents in Az would require a 4 day Round trip as the drive would exceed the range that an electric car can travel, and would require essentially an overnight charge.

I don’t know why you would have to charge overnight. Superchargers will take you to 50% capacity in 40 minutes and 100% in 75 minutes. But if you do find yourself staying overnight, I believe hotels comp the charging stations for their guests. My info may be dated. The technology is improving rapidly.

 

[TV and credit cards]

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Yeah, that's BS. Electric cars are much more efficient than regular gasoline or diesel cars.
View attachment 29529
From here.

This chart is for EU and breaks down emissions by production and runtime separately.
View attachment 29530
From here.

I am not a fan of legislating by executive order, but electric cars are a very sensible technology. My next car will almost certainly be an electric, although I do not see myself in the market for another car until 2025 or so.

And the UCS article does not even factor in maintenance and repairs which will be much higher with an GPV. After initial growing pains, such costs for an EV should be negligible.

 

[KeepTalking]

Seems very much like Article II Section 3 of the US Constitution, so EOs seem just as valid there as on the Federal level.

Sure, but EOs may not replace the laws. They may implement them.

There are emissions laws in California. This could be seen as implementing those laws, could it not?

There is some room for decisions from the executive based on what the laws say.

I'm not saying I know what the emissions laws say, and I think we are both arguing somewhat from a position of ignorance here, but it is possible the the EO in question is based on California emissions laws.

Seems to be a something for the California Supreme Court to work out, if no applicable precedent has been set regarding EOs in California. It certainly doesn't portend the end of Democracy.

It's up to the court, and it might get to the Supreme Court, or it might not. But so far, he seems to be moving ahead unimpeded. As I mentioned, it's not going to end democracy. It does some damage as the governor grabs more power. But there are different degrees. Over here, for example, concentration of political power in the Executive is much more pronounced than it is in California, and still much less than in Venezuela.

The Executive being checked by the Judicial being checked by the Legislative being checked by the Executive is how our Democracy is designed to work.

 

[Shadowy Man]

To visit my parents in Az would require a 4 day Round trip as the drive would exceed the range that an electric car can travel, and would require essentially an overnight charge.

Then you can buy a gas car in Arizona. They won’t be banned from being used in CA just from being sold.

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's hilarious to read on here about the republican threat to democracy when here in California, we really do have an actual tyrant in control;

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday issued an executive order requiring the sale of all new passenger vehicles to be zero-emission by 2035, a move the governor says would achieve a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, improve air quality, and move the state further away from relying on climate change-causing fossil fuels. “This is the most impactful step our state can take to fight climate change,” Newsom said.

SacBee

So he came to power through a military coup I presume?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

There are emissions laws in California. This could be seen as implementing those laws, could it not?

I'm not saying I know what the emissions laws say, and I think we are both arguing somewhat from a position of ignorance here, but it is possible the the EO in question is based on California emissions laws.

True, but only if the laws already made open delegations to the executive that allow for very broad bans like this - in which case, constitutional or not, the damage to the separation of powers is already done, and the governor is just showing an example of it.

The Executive being checked by the Judicial being checked by the Legislative being checked by the Executive is how our Democracy is designed to work.

The Executive grabbing power from the legislature and leaving it up to the courts to decide is not how it's supposed to work. If the courts stop the power grab, then yes, the backup system worked when something already failed, and the damage is fixed. The problem is if the courts do not stop him - which they might not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Citation?

I'm not finding the 20mpg part, but the rest of it:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/08/tes...ts-singapores-carbon-emissions-surcharge.html

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Yeah, that's BS. Electric cars are much more efficient than regular gasoline or diesel cars.

Note that these numbers are a factor of the power on the grid. Nuke-powered and hydro-powered EVs are quite green. Coal powered EVs are not at all green. Note that what really counts is the type of powerplants built to cover the new load--and we aren't building nuke or hydro plants. It's a small percent solar/wind and the rest fossil fuel.

 

[Jokodo]

I forget the details but some country treated cars differently based on emissions--but traced to the source. A Tesla? owner objected because his car wasn't considered green. IIRC it had emissions equivalent to a 20mpg car.

Yeah, that's BS. Electric cars are much more efficient than regular gasoline or diesel cars.

Note that these numbers are a factor of the power on the grid. Nuke-powered and hydro-powered EVs are quite green. Coal powered EVs are not at all green. Note that what really counts is the type of powerplants built to cover the new load--and we aren't building nuke or hydro plants. It's a small percent solar/wind and the rest fossil fuel.

The second graph in Derec's post includes figures for Poland. Poland effectively runs on nearly 100% coal generated electricity. So even when you derive your electricity from carbon heavy sources, the overall efficiency is still higher for electrical vehicles - because a large power plant is intrinsically more efficient than hundreds of thousands of small combustion engines, enough so to more than make up for grid losses. With Poland's electricity mix (70% coal, 7% natural gas, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Poland#Electricity) , there's still an overall lifetime reduction of emissions of 29% - of course more modest than if you charge your car in Sweden or France, but still better than directly burning fossil fuels in your own car.