26 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Yeah. Why shouldn't they? 

 

Electric cars are fine, but I think we need to wait until the battery life on them is improved. Plus, electric cars aren't popular enough yet for them to be mass produced for police departments, right we just have to stick with gas cars, simply because it lasts a lot longer. You also have to take cost in too, departments have limited budgets, and mass buying electric cars is going to be very expensive. 

1 minute ago, TheSandwichStealer said:

 

Electric cars are fine, but I think we need to wait until the battery life on them is improved. Plus, electric cars aren't popular enough yet for them to be mass produced for police departments, right we just have to stick with gas cars, simply because it lasts a lot longer. You also have to take cost in too, departments have limited budgets, and mass buying electric cars is going to be very expensive. 

Supply and demand. If government agencies started demanding more and better electric cars, it would create far more competition among electric manufacturers.

2 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Supply and demand. If government agencies started demanding more and better electric cars, it would create far more competition among electric manufacturers.

 

I don't think that's how technology works bud.

1 minute ago, TheSandwichStealer said:

 

I don't think that's how technology works bud.

No, that's how capitalism works. Companies don't advance technology unless there is a profit motive. The risk of losing government contracts is a profit motive.

Governments aren't going to buy electric vehicles until their usage and associated costs are low enough over their lifespan to make them a viable alternative to conventional options.

 

Never mind the range issue electric autos face, which is a major factor in rural policing.

 

For as much as the government spends money, it's notoriously cheap as well...

Figured I'd bump this , I didn't see the newest replies to this.

 

In regards to electric cars in fleet use within 10 years, I'm not so sure. Especially with a Republican led government now, I notice that green car incentives and tax breaks are being taken away. They were set to expire anyway, but now they're deliberately being attacked. 

1 hour ago, Original Light said:

Figured I'd bump this , I didn't see the newest replies to this.

 

In regards to electric cars in fleet use within 10 years, I'm not so sure. Especially with a Republican led government now, I notice that green car incentives and tax breaks are being taken away. They were set to expire anyway, but now they're deliberately being attacked. 

Gotta keep that oil money hitting the veins.

11 hours ago, Riley24 said:

Gotta keep that oil money hitting the veins.

 

 Big Oil is the backbone of the Republican Party.  I believe that's where most of their funding comes from.

 

No worries from me, I love V8 engines and gas guzzling vehicles.  

3 hours ago, Original Light said:

No worries from me, I love V8 engines and gas guzzling vehicles.  

 

Not so sure the environment shares your love for those though.

3 hours ago, Original Light said:

 

 Big Oil is the backbone of the Republican Party.  I believe that's where most of their funding comes from.

 

No worries from me, I love V8 engines and gas guzzling vehicles.  

Of course, gas guzzlers are a lot of fun. But pretty soon, we're going to have to trade in the fun of a purring engine for the fun of having a planet.

2 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Of course, gas guzzlers are a lot of fun. But pretty soon, we're going to have to trade in the fun of a purring engine for the fun of having a planet.

 

I  highly doubt they're going to bust into people's homes and take away their Plymouth Cuda's and Model T's. They're not daily drivers, so their impact is minimum. 

 

Maybe in Europe, but definitely not in the U.S. 

Just now, Original Light said:

 

I  highly doubt they're going to bust into people's homes and take away their Plymouth Cuda's and Model T's. They're not daily drivers, so their impact is minimum. 

Of course not. Its all about financial incentives/disincentives for energy companies and car manufacturers, mostly through subsidizing clean energy providers. Our politics have swung so far to the right that subsidizing clean energy has become a progressive's wet dream. We will never ban gas guzzlers in this country.

Just now, Riley24 said:

Of course not. Its all about financial incentives/disincentives for energy companies and car manufacturers, mostly through subsidizing clean energy providers. Our politics have swung so far to the right that subsidizing clean energy has become a progressive's wet dream. We will never ban gas guzzlers in this country.

 

I think that eventually, it may prove difficult finding a gas station to refuel a gas or diesel vehicle (unless gas stations retrofit mostly to electrical charging stations, and keep maybe 1 or 2 gas pumps for the rare customer).  But who knows how far off that may be. 

2 minutes ago, Original Light said:

 

I think that eventually, it may prove difficult finding a gas station to refuel a gas or diesel vehicle (unless gas stations retrofit mostly to electrical charging stations, and keep maybe 1 or 2 gas pumps for the rare customer).  But who knows how far off that may be. 

Sounds good to me. That scenario would only happen if electric cars were able to out-perform conventional vehicles in the marketplace. I'm not sure who loses in that scenario, because everyone benefits from reducing our carbon footprint.

Edited May 9, 20178 yr by Riley24

15 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Sounds good to me. That scenario would only happen if electric cars were able to out-perform conventional vehicles in the marketplace. I'm not sure who loses in that scenario, because everyone benefits from reducing our carbon footprint.

 

Electric vehicles make up about 1% of yearly auto sales. In 5 years, they may make up about 10%, and that's being optimistic.  

 

As of now, a $100,000 Tesla with the best available battery can go about 300 miles on a single charge, and recharge in about 2-3 hours. Until we have more charging infrastructure, and reduce the charge time to about 10 minutes instead of several hours, I think our internal combustion engine vehicles have a clear advantage.

Right now, they're really hard to beat. We have three cylinder and four cylinder engines putting our 250-300 Horsepower, which is simply amazing. And they're able to go about 500 miles on a tank of gas. I think that as long as these engines keep improving in efficiency and power, other emerging technologies will find it hard to compete.  

 

I'm not sure how true this is, but I read that by 2025-2030, the air coming out of the exhaust on a new gas vehicle will be cleaner than the air that it took in. So by driving it, you'd technically be cleaning the air. And then it could become a clear target for Republicans and Big Oil to discourage or even "ban" electric vehicles.  

Just now, Original Light said:

 

Electric vehicles make up about 1% of yearly auto sales. In 5 years, they may make up about 10%, and that's being optimistic.  

 

As of now, a $100,000 Tesla with the best available battery can go about 300 miles on a single charge, and recharge in about 2-3 hours. Until we have more charging infrastructure, and reduce the charge time to about 10 minutes instead of several hours, I think our internal combustion engine vehicles have a clear advantage.

Right now, they're really hard to beat. We have three cylinder and four cylinder engines putting our 250-300 Horsepower, which is simply amazing. And they're able to go about 500 miles on a tank of gas. I think that as long as these engines keep improving in efficiency and power, other emerging technologies will find it hard to compete.  

 

I'm not sure how true this is, but I read that by 2025-2030, the air coming out of the exhaust on a new gas vehicle will be cleaner than the air that it took in. So by driving it, you'd technically be cleaning the air.  And then it could become a clear target for Republicans and Big Oil to discourage electric vehicles.  

Yeah, those are all reasons why we need to invest in clean energy (except for the last one, I'm doubting that a little bit. And even if its true, its pretty sad that exhaust will be cleaner than the air we breathe).

 

The disadvantage electric cars have in the marketplace is because of lack of subsidizing, I don't see that as an argument for not subsidizing them. The other reason that conventional vehicles out-perform electric vehicles is that electric vehicles are a far newer technology, and do not have the same decades of advancement and subsidization that conventional vehicles have enjoyed. Regardless of how well Teslas perform currently, it would be absurd to describe Chevy Tahoe as the "car of the future" instead of a Tesla. The government should act in the best interest of the people, and obviously the best interest of the people is combating and reducing climate change. If Republicans really want a free market and capitalistic society, they'd stop subsidizing Big Oil (and clean energy), and let clean energy naturally (and gradually) beat Big Oil in the marketplace. But I don't want a true capitalistic society, I want my government to be looking out for us and investing in our future.

 

7 minutes ago, Riley24 said:

Yeah, those are all reasons why we need to invest in clean energy (except for the last one, I'm doubting that a little bit. And even if its true, its pretty sad that exhaust will be cleaner than the air we breathe).

 

The disadvantage electric cars have in the marketplace is because of lack of subsidizing, I don't see that as an argument for not subsidizing them. The other reason that conventional vehicles out-perform electric vehicles is that electric vehicles are a far newer technology, and do not have the same decades of advancement and subsidization that conventional vehicles have enjoyed. Regardless of how well Teslas perform currently, it would be absurd to describe Chevy Tahoe as the "car of the future" instead of a Tesla. The government should act in the best interest of the people, and obviously the best interest of the people is combating and reducing climate change. If Republicans really want a free market and capitalistic society, they'd stop subsidizing Big Oil (and clean energy), and let clean energy naturally (and gradually) beat Big Oil in the marketplace. But I don't want a true capitalistic society, I want my government to be looking out for us and investing in our future.

 

I really like the choice we currently have in America. And while I realize this may not last forever, automakers really do cater to consumer's individual tastes.

 

Want to drive an electric Tesla? You can.

Want to drive a 707 HP Dodge Challenger with a turbocharged 6.2 Liter V8? You can.

 

Want to drive a hybrid Prius? You can.

 

The day anything is forced down our throats or banned, I think that may leave a sour taste in a lot of our mouths. Maybe you could call me a Libertarian, but I highly believe in individual choice, free markets, and minimum regulation. What I see going on with India, where they're talking about banning all gas and diesel vehicles by 2030, just doesn't seem very democratic. 

 

Daily drivers will naturally go green over time, I don't think it has to be forced like India or Germany are doing.  It's very artificial, and impacts more jobs and businesses when you force it short term, rather than a more natural long term transition. 

4 minutes ago, Original Light said:

 

 

I really like the choice we currently have in America. And while I realize this may not last forever, automakers really do cater to consumer's individual tastes.

 

Want to drive an electric Tesla? You can.

Want to drive a 707 HP Dodge Challenger with a turbocharged 6.2 Liter V8? You can.

 

Want to drive a hybrid Prius? You can.

 

The day anything is forced down our throats or banned, I think that may leave a sour taste in a lot of our mouths. Maybe you could call me a Libertarian, but I highly believe in individual choice, free markets, and minimum regulation. What I see going on with India, where they're talking about banning all gas and diesel vehicles by 2030, just doesn't seem very democratic. 

 

Daily drivers will naturally go green over time, I don't think it has to be forced like India or Germany are doing.  It's very artificial, and impacts more jobs and businesses when you force it short term, rather than a more natural long term transition. 

I would rather err on the side of environmentalism than consumer choice, but that's my personal opinion. Its all about priorities.