Eight U.S. States Now Have Plans to Ban Sales of Gas-Powered Cars

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scope of the bans

  • States mentioned: Rhode Island, California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington, and DC.
  • Target: end of new gas-car sales around 2035; existing ICE cars not outlawed.
  • Some policies classify certain plug‑in hybrids as “zero‑emission” under CA’s Advanced Clean Cars II rules.

Technology trajectory: batteries and charging

  • Optimists: Expect rapid advances—500–600 mile ranges, 500kW+ fast charging, cheaper LFP and future solid‑state/sodium batteries, BEV refueling time approaching ICE.
  • Skeptics: Doubt range, charge speed, and reliability will be sufficient, especially for long‑distance and rural driving by 2035.

Infrastructure and grid capacity

  • Concerns:
    • Insufficient home electrical capacity (esp. older homes, apartments, urban areas).
    • Grid upgrades, local transformers, and generation capacity may lag.
    • Question whether governments have concrete grid plans, not just aspirations.
  • Counterpoints:
    • Smart panels, managed charging, and 100A service can be sufficient.
    • Examples like Norway suggest smart meters + off‑peak pricing can avoid major upgrades.
    • EV load often compares favorably to air conditioning and can be shifted to nights.
    • Distributed solar + home batteries and “virtual power plants” are proposed mitigations.

Bans vs. incentives and market design

  • Some see bans as heavy‑handed, implying alternatives aren’t yet good enough and risking higher prices and resentment.
  • Others argue bans correct mispriced externalities; gas taxes exist but may be too low.
  • A “far‑future” ban is framed by some as a planning signal to automakers rather than a near‑term constraint.

Hybrids vs. BEVs

  • Strong support from some for plug‑in hybrids as transitional tech: lower battery material demands, 120V home charging, no range anxiety.
  • Others argue BEVs are already cheaper to produce or will be soon, and PHEVs add complexity and cost without commensurate benefit for many users.

Costs, equity, and low‑income drivers

  • Worries that bans and EV‑only future will hurt poorer households: higher upfront prices, rising used‑car costs, penalties like elevated EV registration fees.
  • Counterarguments: EV prices are falling, used EVs are already cheap in some markets, and older ICE vehicles will remain legal.

Energy mix and nuclear power

  • One thread: if climate risks are as severe as claimed, an immediate and large nuclear build‑out is argued as mathematically necessary.
  • Others respond that nuclear is slow, expensive, politically difficult, and that renewables + storage + gas (with caveats on methane emissions) can be more practical.
  • Disagreement over whether nuclear is indispensable or just one option.

Policy seriousness and politics

  • Some see 2035 bans as symbolic, likely to be rolled back, or used for “virtue signaling.”
  • Others point to existing EV incentives (tax credits, charging funding) as more impactful than the bans themselves.

Miscellaneous

  • Post‑apocalyptic angle: several note gasoline’s short shelf life vs. EVs paired with solar as more resilient.
  • Registration in other states is discussed but generally noted as illegal or impractical in the long run.