Part of the infrastructure funding for EVs was targeted to help landlords and HOAs. Plus my state had landlord incentives similar to those for purchasers. Yes we know those need a kickstart
The other thing is the timing. None of those mandates were immediate. Most of them were ten years or more, only affecting new cars. So we have a full decade to get chargers in more places and at least another decade where most cars were still ICE: we can do it
The logical answer here is to make the EV mandate tied to actual infrastructure build-out milestones then. Build the infrastructure then mandate EVs, rather than mandating EVs and hoping that infrastructure gets built out quickly enough.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Trick question: You need both.
It’s not realistic to build the infrastructure first, then transition: no one could afford that. It would be a huge waste and a boondoggle.
However I do think it was well planned: even the Chinese government would be surprised at our planning…… if we had actually followed through.
In addition to the decades long transition, there was
subsidies for car manufacturers to retool and retrain
incentives for EV buyers
incentives for home charger installers, from consumer to landlord to business
infrastructure money to start building out trip chargers along interstates
So yes, the infrastructure would have grown with the market, more smoothly than the market alone could have. Yes American companies would have solid business advantages in new technologies. Yes, American car companies would still be relevant at that point
This is a big argument against EV mandates that several U.S. states have proposed. Where the fuck do people in apartments and condos charge?
The excuses by EV supporters don’t cut it either.
Part of the infrastructure funding for EVs was targeted to help landlords and HOAs. Plus my state had landlord incentives similar to those for purchasers. Yes we know those need a kickstart
The other thing is the timing. None of those mandates were immediate. Most of them were ten years or more, only affecting new cars. So we have a full decade to get chargers in more places and at least another decade where most cars were still ICE: we can do it
The logical answer here is to make the EV mandate tied to actual infrastructure build-out milestones then. Build the infrastructure then mandate EVs, rather than mandating EVs and hoping that infrastructure gets built out quickly enough.
Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Trick question: You need both.
It’s not realistic to build the infrastructure first, then transition: no one could afford that. It would be a huge waste and a boondoggle.
However I do think it was well planned: even the Chinese government would be surprised at our planning…… if we had actually followed through.
In addition to the decades long transition, there was
So yes, the infrastructure would have grown with the market, more smoothly than the market alone could have. Yes American companies would have solid business advantages in new technologies. Yes, American car companies would still be relevant at that point