California Can't Tell Me What To Do!!

[nissangirl74]

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/10 ... n-vehicles


Last Friday, the influential California Air Resources Board adopted new emission rules that will require carmakers to sell increasing number of zero-emission vehicles in the state, starting in 2018.

By 2025, fully 15.4 percent of the cars sold annually in California must be zero-emission vehicles--either battery-electric and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, or plug-in hybrids that can run electric-only for at least several miles.



OK, does this statement sound threatening to anyone else?

How are they are going to REQUIRE carmakers to sell something? By 2025, a certain percentage of the cars MUST BE zero-emissions? How does that work? What if I, the customer, don't want to buy an emissions friendly vehicle? You can't force me to buy one. How can they force the carmakers to sell something if there isn't enough demand for it?
California is broke and so are a large number of people living in that state. The people with no money aren't going to trade in their paid for cars for an environmentally friendly one just because CARB thinks they should and (many, not all) of the wealthy residents are driving sports cars, many of them gas guzzlers. Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius?

Your thoughts?

[dre1507]

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius? Tesla sales will skyrocket leaps and bounds.

[Bubba1]

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius? Tesla sales will skyrocket leaps and bounds.

I think CARB is foolish trying to manipulate the market. At the end of the day, consumers are gonna buy what they want.

Based on what little info we have, I'm guessing this only applies to new car purchases made in California, so I'd expect the used car market will probably heat up as a result. Plus California pricing of zero-emission vehicles (or whatever ends up qualifying as zero-emissions vehicles there) will drop. And non-hybrid prices increase significantly (perhaps) to the point where the state forces non-hybrid new car consumers (as well as used cars for that matter) to border states for the best deals.

For a interesting parallel , one can at look at cigarette sales. NJ State government has been trying to get people to stop smoking by slapping on increasingly more taxes which have driven up tobacco products significantly. The Governor and NJ Legislators have been patting themselves on the back because their graphs/charts, bells & whistles show evil cigarette sales dropping significantly in NJ as a direct result of their legislation. In reality, all they've done is force smokers to cross the border to nearby Pennsylvania to purchase their cigarettes in bulk for considerably less money. Every border town in PA has opened multiple tobacco stores and are generating some nice revenue for Pennsylvania. Thank you State of NJ, you're doing a fine job there. .

[frapjap]

Its days like this that make me want to drive my cat-less V8 to California and let it burn oil and smoke on start up in front of as many people as possible.

[300ZXttZMAN]

Hell no the people driving sports cars will not trade in for a damn Prius...

That is so crazy its upsetting me just thinking about all the enthusiasts in Cali that are going to have to fight that.

I <3 Louisiana for LIFE.

[Dattebayo]

In this county, Maryland requires that restaurant owners sell a certain percentage of food (not monetarily adjusted) compared to alcohol in order for them to keep their license.

All it does is skew the price of drinks higher, make happy hour shorter and piss off the customers. This is related!

[Bubba1]

Hell no the people driving sports cars will not trade in for a damn Prius...

That is so crazy its upsetting me just thinking about all the enthusiasts in Cali that are going to have to fight that.

What does the CARB mandate have to do with that?

[Dattebayo]

Hell no the people driving sports cars will not trade in for a damn Prius...

What does the CARB mandate have to do with that?

Yeah, he definitely mis-read this:

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius? Tesla sales will skyrocket leaps and bounds.

Or he doesn't know what a Tesla is, I dunno...

[the converted]

This state. If they want to do something to make it a better place, maybe car safety inspections would be nice. Take two extra minutes while getting a smog check done.

[THawks]

So if car companies can't (won't/don't) comply with this, will they just not sell cars in California?

[Bubba1]

So if car companies can't (won't/don't) comply with this, will they just not sell cars in California?

Good question. We'll need to read the fine print. My guess is the manufacturers would be subject to some sort of fine for each non-hybrid new car sale that puts them under the targeted % of sales.

[IBCoupe]

So if car companies can't (won't/don't) comply with this, will they just not sell cars in California?

Too many lost revenues. If they can't pump out enough of their hybrids and plug-ins to comply, they'll just pay the fines and call it a cost of doing business. Alternatively, they'll just find a way to comply. Even if they have to give the hybrids away to the dealers to allow them to cut juicy deals, they'll do it if the profits made off of everything else would more than compensate them.

California's free to do what it wants. This might not affect us, but its emmission standards do. Its market share influences what the rest of us can buy, too, but that's just how the market works. Similarly, the Texas state school board wrote your kid's biology book. Which pisses you off more?

[themadscientist]

Carmakers can just choose not to play along. They don't have to sell cars there. I would set up dealerships in neighboring states and offer incentive packages for Kalifornia people to come over and buy. The states where the cars are sold will realize the sales tax revenue and Kali can suck a nut.

This state continues to respond to the lightheadedness by tightening the tourniquet around its neck. Hilarity ensues. NoCal should try to secede to Oregon.

[Bubba1]

I don't think carmakers will simply grab their ankles and accept the fines as a cost for doing business in California. California is a too big a market. What I see happening are car manufacturers simply adding a price premium to new non-hybrid cars they sell in California to cover the cost of any anticipated fines the CARB rules generate. There is nothing about these CARB requirements to stop you from buying whatever the heck you want in California. It just means if you want to buy a new non-hybrid in CA, it's eventually gonna cost you more.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Ferrari is screwed. I agree with Joel, they'll just jack the price up to offset the fines they'll incur when they tell California to suck their Italian chest hair.

15% isn't TOO far out of the question for the entire industry in Cali, considering how many hippies there are there, but it would a tough mark to hit for every automaker. Toyota, Nissan, and Tesla (obviously) will have a much higher margin. Aston Martin... not so much.

[Jesda]

California may be full of hippies, but most of them ride their bicycles. Getting them to pony up for a ZEV is highly unlikely.

It won't stick. Reality will set in and they'll back off... again.

[Yanos_S13]

In light of that news, it would seem USED cars will hold more value longer as CARB and the DOT continue to "force" manufacturers and ultimately, buyers, into a corner. Then there is bound to become a point where CARB forces ALL cars in CA off the road over a certain age either by heavy taxation (aka registration renewal fee) or a strict adherence to upgraded emissions standards regardless of the age of the car.

While I understand some need for emissions control, I have never agreed with the way CARB handles the subject, let alone itself as an entity.

Makes me very happy to be out of that political s**t-hole of a state...makes me sad thats what has become of my home state. When it comes to the state level, you get what you vote for.

[PoorManQ45]

You can get fined $1000 for throwing a Frisbee on the beach.

It's California

[300ZXttZMAN]

Hell no the people driving sports cars will not trade in for a damn Prius...

That is so crazy its upsetting me just thinking about all the enthusiasts in Cali that are going to have to fight that.

What does the CARB mandate have to do with that?

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius?

Your thoughts?

I was just replying to that^

[300ZXttZMAN]

Hell no the people driving sports cars will not trade in for a damn Prius...

What does the CARB mandate have to do with that?

Yeah, he definitely mis-read this:

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius? Tesla sales will skyrocket leaps and bounds.

Or he doesn't know what a Tesla is, I dunno...

No I know what a Tesla is I was replying to Bex's question

Think they are going to trade up 400hp for a Prius?

Your thoughts?

So I am sorry guys I should quoted it.

[BigTDogg (MA)]

You can get fined $1000 for throwing a Frisbee on the beach.

It's California

So what's the point of living there again?

-no frisbee throwing
-piss 91 octane fuel
-earthquakes
-smog nazis
-insane traffic
-hippies
-douchenozzlewannabecelbrities

Did I miss anything?

[Bubba1]

You can get fined $1000 for throwing a Frisbee on the beach.

It's California

So what's the point of living there again?

-no frisbee throwing
-piss 91 octane fuel
-earthquakes
-smog nazis
-insane traffic
-hippies
-douchenozzlewannabecelbrities

Did I miss anything?

how about California's Supreme Court and Proposition 8

[alphapig]

What if I, the customer, don't want to buy an emissions friendly vehicle? You can't force me to buy one. How can they force the carmakers to sell something if there isn't enough demand for it?
Your thoughts?

No demand for it? 20% of cars in Northern California are already Leafs and Teslas.

I, for one, would love to see some hydrogen infrastructure develop.

You don't need to worry about consumers. This is WAY above consumers. These are interactions of legislation, anti-christ lobby groups, and bloated industries.

[alphapig]

how about California's Supreme Court and Proposition 8

I'm not even sure what the implication is. It does seem that you are slightly behind in the news though.

Not that the US Supreme Court won't overrule the 9th Circuit. As usual.

[Bubba1]

How did you come up with 20% in northern California?


Tesla sold maybe 2400 vehicles and Nissan sold maybe 4000(?) Leaves NATIONWIDE this past year. There are about 1.5 million new cars sold last year in California, of which only a percentage were sold in the northern part of the state. Even if every single Tesla and Leaf made were sold exclusively to Californians, which they weren't, you're talking about maybe .4% statewide sales (that's a decimal point in front of the 4).

There's no way the car manufacturers are gonna get remotely close to the CARB rules unless they amend the rules to include every single HYBRID, diesel, and 40+mpg car. Even then, they probably are not gonna make it. This is why most percieve the CARB rules as an old fashioned political money grab.

[Bubba1]

how about California's Supreme Court and Proposition 8

I'm not even sure what the implication is. It does seem that you are slightly behind in the news though.

Not that the US Supreme Court won't overrule the 9th Circuit. As usual.

If you call 72 hours after the 9th circuit's ruling that Prop 8 was unconstitutional being slightly behind the news, I guess so. I agree it seems inevitable SCOTUS will end up with it as both sides are willing to go the distance, but I'm not so sure SCOTUS will overturn this one.

[S133P3R]

This is why my smog cost "mas, señor, MAS."

[ponchs13]

California

[Encryptshun]

Meh, I don't see what the big deal is.

At the current trajectory of zero-e and low-e vehicles becoming available, 15.4% within 13 years isn't earth-shattering. That's barely over a 1% year-over-year increase, and by 2025 more than 15.4% of Californians will probably WANT to buy one.

I see this more as a way to try to drive prices down by forcing supply up. We're not talking about a home computer or a cell phone here -- $50K is outside the comfortable price point of 85% of consumers who might want to buy a zero-emission vehicle. I don't prefer government intervention, but I don't think it's quite a sinister as the reactionaries would have you believe.

[Z31toZ32]

You can get fined $1000 for throwing a Frisbee on the beach.

It's California

So what's the point of living there again?

-no frisbee throwing
-piss 91 octane fuel
-earthquakes
-smog nazis
-insane traffic
-hippies
-douchenozzlewannabecelbrities

Did I miss anything?

astronomical taxes?