Why The ZL1 is better than an EV

[genxer]

Originally Posted by silversleeper

If this is a Camaro only discussion why all the comments on side issues like mandates by law and electrical grid and overall mining or power supply pollution being brought up?


EV or at least hybrid isn't new. "Early adopter" doesn't apply for eg Tesla which started 20 years ago! Their roadster in 2008 was an early product and wasn't great at all. I agree with hesitancy on early products especially by a new company. There are plenty of examples even GMs first EVs and their problems despite having the advantage of a Tesla and many chinese BYD to copy. A plug in hybrid might be an ideal solution for the masses and trucks.

I might note the irony of those who argue the loudest against changing the Camaro have not voted with their dollars to get a 2023 or 2024 Camaro. So you're saying privately they aren't worth buying. I have after some many years upgraded to 3 new cars in the last year. Sales decide, not opinions or loud forum comments. I wanted to stay with GM and get a 2024 Equinox EV and waited and waited and waited (they STILL aren't available until someday), and with Y dropped prices and rebate not gone away which could happen any day as those things change with the wind I had to go with a brand that has a track record in EVs but not as long as GM in longevity.

Mandates won't happen, none of US are for that anyways, preaching to the choir.


Pollution yes that's debatable if you do high pollution mining vs drilling and accidents and coal fired power vs hydro or nuclear power and the list goes on. I don't think any of us cares to dive deep into those debates on this forum and this thread on ZL1 vs EV, which was the whole point of discussion. People who have longer experiences with both to compare. Tesla Y is the highest volume selling single car label in the world, Camaro is going out of production because of low volume sales. Yes the market dictates. Does that say to you the Camaro needs to catch up and make some changes? helloooo

Do you have an oil well on your roof and a refinery in your attic to fill your tank in the garage as you sleep? I do, got the big rebate on the EV and the solar panels I put on my roof a couple years ago after the technology greatly improved on them and price makes them worth it. Same issue; we aren't here to debate the fairness of rebates. I paid for others to get them for so many years, I'll take it now since they are handing it out, my turn and I should have no shame.

A few people don't want any changes or improvements to their lives or products. Fine but the products will then be unsellable. If someone doesn't want to entertain how an EV might improve a sports car or fit into their lives fine, don't think about it or read an EV thread or news article.

The topic of what the 6th gen should've been used to get beat to death on every sales thread.

The OP started on a not too serious tone. It's an apples and oranges comparison.

I don't think you can separate out the social divide aspect, even if the ZL1 dabbles into elitist acceptance. Feel free to rally Tesla admirers, but people wanting investment/gov EV spending flushed as sunk cost won't self-censure.

[Nataphen]

Feels weird quoting my own post from earlier but to reiterate, we’ve all been paying to help people afford ICE cars for decades. This is why I don’t understand the opposition to subsidies for a technology that’s very recently starting from nothing to compete against a century+ establishment. I don’t agree with outright bans of sales, but I’m fine with tax credits and things like that to help people who want to make the switch.

“There are good arguments against the way that some things are being done with a technology that’s still practically in its infancy, but I don’t understand the arguments against subsidies for it. Fossil fuels are the most heavily subsidized industry in the US and have been for a long time. It’s the main reason that the price of gas hasn’t been ~$10 per gallon on average for years now. Oil has had many years of government benefits and infrastructure building to get where it is now, so EVs are absolutely going to need some help to hope to compete with something that established.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nataphen]

And let’s be honest, for the average person who isn’t an enthusiast or towing long distances, we’re running out of reasons not to use EVs. As grids get cleaner, EV benefits for the environment increase. Currently we’re at ~50% clean energy in the US and ~85% in Canada. Even when you factor in mining and production and extra tire wear, most cases would require an EV to charge on only coal for its entire life to actually be worse than or equal to a similar ICE vehicle in regards to environmental impact. Oil and gasoline production have a carbon footprint too, and that has to be done for the entire life of the ICE car, not just for production.

In extreme cold, EVs on average lose 30% range now. That’s still 190 miles of range at the current range average, more than enough for typical daily use. Air pollution is localized to fossil fuel factories with EVs, so that benefits areas with high population densities greatly. We all know how bad the air quality can be in bigger cities. It also makes things like carbon capture technologies much more feasible since it can target the source of emissions so much more effectively.

If you look at the studies of projected grid expansion and private solar/wind adoption compared to the rate of EV changeover, it looks like we’re going to be in a very comfortable position to handle the extra power demand as the expected market share increases. It sucks to lose cool ICE vehicles, I’m right there with those of that mindset. I love my ZL1 and plan to keep it for as long as I possibly can. I bought a manual because it sucks to lose manuals too, even though I know the A10 is faster and is a really good transmission. I do believe we have to make a shift to cleaner transportation though, and as long as they tighten up the charging speeds and networks, continue to improve affordability and cold weather performance, and figure out the long range towing issues, there’s really not much more than sentiment left. I believe those things will be figured out fairly soon considering the massive improvements we’ve seen already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Malbjey]

Originally Posted by Nataphen

If you look at the studies of projected grid expansion and private solar/wind adoption compared to the rate of EV changeover, it looks like we’re going to be in a very comfortable position to handle the extra power demand as the expected market share increases. It sucks to lose cool ICE vehicles, I’m right there with that mindset.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are certain people on these forums who don't believe the grid will ever expand. They think electric cars will be shoved down our throats while the country suffers rolling blackouts. You have to realize that is the level of stupidity you're dealing with here. The government apparently wants the country to suffer rolling blackouts and forced electricity rationing. Nevermind the fact that would bring the economy to a screeching halt. Apparently the government wants that too, because 'reasons' I guess.

[Nataphen]

Originally Posted by Malbjey

There are certain people on these forums who don't believe the grid will ever expand. They think electric cars will be shoved down our throats while the country suffers rolling blackouts. You have to realize that is the level of stupidity you're dealing with here. The government apparently wants the country to suffer rolling blackouts and forced electricity rationing. Nevermind the fact that would bring the economy to a screeching halt. Apparently the government wants that too, because 'reasons' I guess.

I mean, can’t win’em all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[silversleeper]

Originally Posted by Malbjey

There are certain people on these forums who don't believe the grid will ever expand. They think electric cars will be shoved down our throats while the country suffers rolling blackouts. You have to realize that is the level of stupidity you're dealing with here. The government apparently wants the country to suffer rolling blackouts and forced electricity rationing. Nevermind the fact that would bring the economy to a screeching halt. Apparently the government wants that too, because 'reasons' I guess.

Dr Seouss green eggs and ham came to my mind now

[genxer]

Originally Posted by Nataphen

Feels weird quoting my own post from earlier but to reiterate, we’ve all been paying to help people afford ICE cars for decades. This is why I don’t understand the opposition to subsidies for a technology that’s very recently starting from nothing to compete against a century+ establishment. I don’t agree with outright bans of sales, but I’m fine with tax credits and things like that to help people who want to make the switch.

“There are good arguments against the way that some things are being done with a technology that’s still practically in its infancy, but I don’t understand the arguments against subsidies for it. Fossil fuels are the most heavily subsidized industry in the US and have been for a long time. It’s the main reason that the price of gas hasn’t been ~$10 per gallon on average for years now. Oil has had many years of government benefits and infrastructure building to get where it is now, so EVs are absolutely going to need some help to hope to compete with something that established.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Electricity prices are controlled also. That's an equivalent subsidy.

The D.o.E. has over the years has allocated funds for plenty of alternative fuel or energy project concepts.

The 200,000 per automaker limit years for battery/electric credits tested the idea on a fleet basis and were largely not profitable sales.

Tesla has since shown BEV profitability. Credits became just a giveaway to a clique in the social divide.

[Nataphen]

I’m not necessarily saying it’s equivalent subsidization at this given moment, I’m saying that it isn’t out of line in my mind when you’re talking about subsidies for electric cars and the requisite infrastructure to hope to compete with ICE options with a one hundred year head start, much of which was helped by subsidies all along the way. If EVs are going to be a player, they’re going to need help. Think of the early adopters of EVs. Who’s going to buy a car that has no fueling infrastructure, that you can only reliably fuel overnight at home, and is limited to 100-200 mile round trips if you’re lucky? Rich people who can buy a new gadget or toy. The incentives helped sell the earlier expensive options so that the development could be made more affordable in the future. Now you can buy one for the price of the average vehicle. New tech pretty much always starts as an option for only the wealthy and elite. Since this technology was something that pointed to a cleaner transportation option, the government felt that it was worthwhile to boost demand for it. I don’t think that was incorrect personally.

Electricity production in the US is still about half fossil fuel, so those subsidies for fossil fuels apply to helping with electricity costs also. When you have a greener energy option from the electricity provider, even with subsidies, the cost is usually higher, so the take rate isn’t going to be as high. Again, newer tech that’s more expensive to produce, at least for the time being. To switch more people over to cleaner options we will have to put some extra tax money into it. I know some don’t agree that it’s the right thing to do, but it is required in order for it to succeed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GreenZLE]

Originally Posted by docwra

Are you genuinely that stupid? Theres no ban on ICE vehicles, they just wont be sold new. In 11 years time. If the law doesnt get changed again.

This is exactly what Im talking about, once again Ill leave you to it.

Thats a ban.

[CalgaryZL1]

I got a kick out of the alert that came across my phone the other month, urging us to turn off lights and unplug electric cars because of possible grid overload, good thing that was only 1% electric vehicles being asked to unplug. Can’t wait to fire up my natural gas back up generator when it’s 10% electric vehicles on the grid. Government always puts the cart before the horse.

[genxer]

Originally Posted by Nataphen

I’m not necessarily saying it’s equivalent subsidization at this given moment, I’m saying that it isn’t out of line in my mind when you’re talking about subsidies for electric cars and the requisite infrastructure to hope to compete with ICE options with a one hundred year head start, much of which was helped by subsidies all along the way. If EVs are going to be a player, they’re going to need help. Think of the early adopters of EVs. Who’s going to buy a car that has no fueling infrastructure, that you can only reliably fuel overnight at home, and is limited to 100-200 mile round trips if you’re lucky? Rich people who can buy a new gadget or toy. The incentives helped sell the earlier expensive options so that the development could be made more affordable in the future. Now you can buy one for the price of the average vehicle. New tech pretty much always starts as an option for only the wealthy and elite. Since this technology was something that pointed to a cleaner transportation option, the government felt that it was worthwhile to boost demand for it. I don’t think that was incorrect personally.

Electricity production in the US is still about half fossil fuel, so those subsidies for fossil fuels apply to helping with electricity costs also. When you have a greener energy option from the electricity provider, even with subsidies, the cost is usually higher, so the take rate isn’t going to be as high. Again, newer tech that’s more expensive to produce, at least for the time being. To switch more people over to cleaner options we will have to put some extra tax money into it. I know some don’t agree that it’s the right thing to do, but it is required in order for it to succeed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I disagree and think EV is well past the early adopters and doesn't need help. 3 and Y are into their mainstream. For several years, a lot of the easy new dollars went to Tesla stock. Wealthy Elites use investment as a tool toward their goals. Tesla will be fine if they screw up some models.

If they are worried about infrastructure, green investors are hype buying fools for not putting their $chips on Voltec.

Elite and wealthy circles taking prerogative away from the masses to push their values is the crux of this issue.

Recent polling that helps highlight differences has been going around: https://highlandcountypress.com/opin...-war#gsc.tab=0
quote: "To illustrate the scale of the gap between the elite 1 percent and the rest of the country, consider the elite 1 percent’s views on climate issues (and understand that these ideas are opposed by 63 percent to 83 percent of most Americans):

• 77 percent of the elite 1 percent would like to impose strict restrictions and rationing on the private use of gas, meat, and electricity.

• 72 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning gas-powered vehicles.

• 69 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning gas stoves.

• 58 percent of the elite 1 percent favor of banning sport utility vehicles.

• 55 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning non-essential air travel.

• 53 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning private air conditioning."

[Nataphen]

Originally Posted by genxer

I disagree and think EV is well past the early adopters and doesn't need help. 3 and Y are into their mainstream. For several years, a lot of the easy new dollars went to Tesla stock. Wealthy Elites use investment as a tool toward their goals. Tesla will be fine if they screw up some models.

If they are worried about infrastructure, green investors are hype buying fools for not putting their $chips on Voltec.

Elite and wealthy circles taking prerogative away from the masses to push their values is the crux of this issue.

Recent polling that helps highlight differences has been going around: https://highlandcountypress.com/opin...-war#gsc.tab=0
quote: "To illustrate the scale of the gap between the elite 1 percent and the rest of the country, consider the elite 1 percent’s views on climate issues (and understand that these ideas are opposed by 63 percent to 83 percent of most Americans):

• 77 percent of the elite 1 percent would like to impose strict restrictions and rationing on the private use of gas, meat, and electricity.

• 72 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning gas-powered vehicles.

• 69 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning gas stoves.

• 58 percent of the elite 1 percent favor of banning sport utility vehicles.

• 55 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning non-essential air travel.

• 53 percent of the elite 1 percent favor banning private air conditioning."

First off, I’ll admit I’ve never heard of Voltec. I’d have to look into that before I could even hope to comment.

Most corporate benefits go into stock buybacks and pumping up brand values, that’s not unique to EV builders. Tesla is absolutely established, and maybe there’s a case for scaling back some of their subsidies, but they’re probably the biggest reason that EV charging infrastructure and tech is beginning to be competitive. Since they’ve recently opened up their network to nearly everyone, that’s tripled IIRC the non-Tesla charging network in a matter of weeks. I do think that’s something they should do considering the government assistance that they’ve had to develop this over the years. Creating this tech with the help of subsidies and then closing the door behind them was a big criticism I had of Tesla, so I’m glad to see that’s changing to some degree.

I’m not here to defend wealthy elites. Most of their stances are out of touch with reality and they can’t even relate to the average person, much less sympathize with their struggles. I don’t agree with many things that are being done, such as banning the sales of new ICE vehicles in the near future as California is currently planning to do. I don’t agree with prohibitively expensive carbon taxes when there’s no good alternative. Taxing the bejesus out of gas heating when it’s the best affordable option, especially for extremely cold climates, is asinine. I do feel that we need to increase the adoption rate of cleaner energy and transportation through incentives though, and this is where the issue changes more from helping an industry to helping with emissions. My preference would be to make the cleaner options more attractive than the alternatives by way of making them cheaper, not by making the alternatives unaffordable. The investment to speed up the changeover is seen by many to be worthwhile, but I’m not under the illusion that I can change anyone’s mind about that here.

US EV market share was just over 8% in Q4 of 2023. The highest ever, but that’s still moving along pretty slowly if we’re actually wanting to use this to help with emissions. In theory, streamlining tax credits for ease of redemption and limiting them to lower cost vehicles should help without continuing to lopsidedly assist the rich. Climate change isn’t seen as an immediate problem by the less wealthy, I completely understand that. It’s not like having to use a credit card to afford groceries, or scrounging to cover the house payment each month. Can’t be too worried about dying from climate problems when you’re already dead from starvation or lack of shelter. That doesn’t make it a bad thing to invest in when looking forward in my opinion. I believe, even if it’s not at the forefront of everyone’s mind, it is helpful for everyone to improve on carbon emissions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk