Toyota claim the EV market will sit around 30%

I think we are all aware that countries and governments moving to regulations such as Euro 7 have all but ended ICE production for many companies.

There is a very interesting development in the UK right now where car values across the board have dropped sharply with EVs being hit the hardest.

I will try to get this right because I believe it’s a very strong case of political well meaning causing unintended consequences.
60% of all EV sales as said to be fleet. There was a weird situation where high end Evs were purchased as fleet or company cars because of the kickbacks on offer. The equivalent of our wholesale business wont touch them now because they don’t know or don’t understand what demand there might be. Complicating this is a requirement to sell new Evs to count towards targets. Supposedly second hand Evs don’t get treated the same way under the guise of saving the planet.

The UK spec mustang V8 is Euro 6.2 complaint if that gives one an idea of how much it lost out to the US version. Euro 7 is a completely different beast

Seems like a month is a long time in EV musings.

This time it is Mercedes rolling back a previous commitment. No long 100% EV powered by 2030 but instead claiming around 50%.

Further there is no time line to going 100%

Honda has backed out of a 5 billion batter deal with GM.

And, I haven’t verified this yet, but the Biden administration is said to be rethinking their targets.

FFS. It’s not like peoples lives are important here.

I think there is alot of re thinking.
Sure EV's gonna grow in sales but its not going to be the be all as it has been forced down our throats.

More me I can't be bothered getting into this argument. Maybe it's the cynical businessman in me. Forget the product and understand the "why". If you live in the city, the infrastructure is there, and you do average kilometres then it makes sense. Do the math. Take the emotion out of it. For me, I do shitloads of km's in rural areas or highways with very little infrastructure at times, so it makes no sense even if I wanted to go that way. Hybrids also don't work because the ICE is doing the work on the highway, when I carry a load, or towing. This is why I won't grab the hybrid Ranger. Manufacturers and government are throwing a blanket over a marketplace that is diversified. It doesn't work. For me I am more interested in synthetics and how they can/could be integrated into existing and future ICE. This way it improves the hybrid argument, potentially allows traditional motors to be extended, and maybe provides time to establish a decent infrastructure to support future EV's.

Luv ya mate and hear you loud and clear.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's crazy how electronic media is manipulating perspective.

Hear me out.

If you seem like you spend a fraction of a second paying attention to an article or thought process you then get subjected to saturation on that topic.

If you glance at anti Ev expression you will then get bombarded with thus to the point you will be convinced it's thr end of the world and reality.

If you do the same but for pro EV the same thing happens.

Lately I have been the subject of pro Ev exposure. If you sit in the middle you can't fathom how both are correct.

It's insane.

Anyway.

The latest is the US are looking to pass the strictess emission laws yet all but ending ICE engines

M I didn't see it as an argument.

I do see it as a huge flag to muddy the water on what facts actually are. There isn't currently a better topic to.witness a willingness for something to fail and I don't understand why.

I am against governments creating policy to bring about results. That won't work.

If they continue there is a very good chance car companies will go broke. I can't see how that's a win.

I think direction is best served by the industry coming up with the solutions in their time. Whatever that is to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HSE2

M I didn't see it as an argument.

I do see it as a huge flag to muddy the water on what facts actually are. There isn't currently a better topic to.witness a willingness for something to fail and I don't understand why.

I am against governments creating policy to bring about results. That won't work.

If they continue there is a very good chance car companies will go broke. I can't see how that's a win.

I think direction is best served by the industry coming up with the solutions in their time. Whatever that is to be.

---

If it wasn't for California's EPA in the 1970s in the US, we'd all be driving cars with 3sp FMX boxes and 385 series V8s with carburetors doing 35L/100km.

It forces their hands to do something, if you don't they just crank out diesel shitbox body on frame utes for eternity, ala the only thing Ford Australia sells.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HSE2

M I didn't see it as an argument.

I do see it as a huge flag to muddy the water on what facts actually are. There isn't currently a better topic to.witness a willingness for something to fail and I don't understand why.

I am against governments creating policy to bring about results. That won't work.

If they continue there is a very good chance car companies will go broke. I can't see how that's a win.

I think direction is best served by the industry coming up with the solutions in their time. Whatever that is to be.

---

I think you have it pretty covered hoiw it should be last sentence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

If it wasn't for California's EPA in the 1970s in the US, we'd all be driving cars with 3sp FMX boxes and 385 series V8s with carburetors doing 35L/100km.

It forces their hands to do something, if you don't they just crank out diesel shitbox body on frame utes for eternity, ala the only thing Ford Australia sells.

---

Well, the issue with this is that when rules put pace what’s actually possible, you get cheating. It’s only now being discovered what manufacturers did to get inside regulations while not actually achieving a damn thing. Sure they will get fined but if the goal was the environment what change actually occurred.


Perception becomes the reality. We have seen this time and time again but I don’t think we have ever lived or been subjected to promotion of perception in the same way as we have today via our feeds.

The first rule in setting goals was always be realistic and achievable. Politics over science has determined that there needs to be a time on action.

Those setting those policies are never around to be accountable for these false steps and the consequences are profound.

Let’s bring in the death penalty for politicians who set agendas based on science and the promotion of a consequence that fails. Do you think we would then see the same lack of accountability in policies? I tend to think not.

In fact there is a distinct lack of consequence in today’s society.

What happened to chosen directions needing to be sustainable?

And then there is the truth. Who’s truth?

You mentioned California. Fords latest supercharger kit is 49 state legal. Yep you guessed it. Not legal in California. So what? Are we going to put up a bubble over that state and say well done? Any time anything gets out of step, it gets omitted from consideration.

It’s not like there isn’t history here.

Petrol heads hate EVs because.
EVs hate the thought of hydrogen being the solution because.

Anyone who talks balance has to be wrong because that’s not quick enough as determined by a politician who has their Job because they were elected on a platform of equal parts concern and fear, and as mentioned who will never be held accountable.

Australia isn’t a big enough market to determine who wins or what direction will win out. The climate council has said we need to ban ICE by 2035.
11 years. This is despite the nations who will determine this feasibility as not being as realistic as the political spin they ran on!

Are we meant to ignore what is happening around the world?

It’s seems to me we are. We are continually being challenged to not think.

Let’s take nuclear energy as an example. Those against it point to outdated safety concerns, because covid showed us fear sells.

They say it’s too expensive and will take too long. That’s meant to be the discussion killa. It’s inconvenient to point out other countries, countries in our region have come to a different conclusion.
The simplest of thought challenges points to those saying it’s not viable to go to those countries and pull their argument and decision to pieces. Stop saying things you can’t substantiate on the biggest stage. Go tell those Asian countries who are current,y building nuclear plants how they got their sums wrong, then promote your success to Australians. Get an admission by those investing in nuclear that we are smarter then they are!

We have lost the ability to debate let alone think.

This fracturing is across some many aspects that impact lives at a time where the ability to determine real merit is at its lowest.