California's gas prices to increase 65 cents per gallon with new fuel standards

Impact of Higher Gas Prices & Equity

• Many argue a sudden ~$0.65/gal increase is regressive, hitting low‑income and rural drivers with few alternatives.
• Others counter that current gas prices are artificially low, externalities are large, and higher prices better reflect true societal costs.
• Some note gasoline is a relatively small part of total car-ownership costs; those too poor for cars mostly rely on transit and are less directly affected.

Electric Vehicles: Adoption, Costs, and Range

• EVs are already ~20–25% of new CA sales; some point to generous subsidies and used EVs (e.g., Bolt, Model 3) being price‑competitive with comparable ICE cars.
• Critics respond that many can’t afford any new car, subsidies have been reduced or hard to access, and EV range/charging constraints remain an issue, especially in the US context.
• Debate over “range anxiety”: current 200–300+ mile ranges are seen as ample for most daily use by some, while others worry about long trips, charge times, and sparse infrastructure.
• Concerns raised about EV externalities (mining, child labor, heavier vehicles, battery supply geopolitics, tracking/telemetry).

Public Transit and Urban Form

• Strong support from many for using higher fuel costs to fund robust, safe, and clean transit; comparisons to Tokyo/NYC.
• Others argue most California metros are low‑density and car‑oriented, making transit unviable without massive, long‑term rezoning and redevelopment.
• Proposals include ending single‑family zoning, upzoning around transit, and government purchase of low‑density land; skepticism about feasibility and rural relevance.

Taxes, Externalities, and Policy Design

• Repeated theme: internalizing externalities (CO2, health impacts, pollution) via fuel standards, carbon pricing, or “sin taxes” (parallels to cigarettes and sugary drinks).
• Counter‑view: once you start taxing every negative externality (sugar, electricity, etc.) you risk runaway complexity and higher cost of living; some urge instead lowering taxes and improving government efficiency.
• Concern that fuel taxes can create perverse incentives for states to keep gasoline use high to preserve revenue.
• Suggestions for more targeted schemes: odometer×weight taxes (including for EVs), or taxes tied to electricity pollution.

Electricity Costs, Power, and Utilities

• Tension noted between discouraging gasoline and California’s very high electricity prices, which can undermine EV economics.
• Explanations offered: wildfire‑driven grid hardening (burying lines), historic utility mismanagement, and costly nuclear decisions.
• Some advocate heavy nuclear investment and even socializing utilities; others argue nuclear is uneconomical and would slow a solar/battery‑driven transition.

Health, Environment, and Long-Term Benefits

• Cited analyses (e.g., Clean Air Act) claim pollution controls’ benefits dwarf costs; participants expect similar health gains from tighter fuel standards.
• Air quality improvements are valued, especially in smog‑prone basins like Los Angeles, though some note US gains partly came from offshoring dirty industry.

Information Quality and Uncertainty

• Multiple comments state the “$0.65/gal” figure is speculative, not a formal tax, and rooted in assumptions about how refineries respond to the new fuel standard.
• Overall impact on prices, driving behavior, EV adoption, and transit use is viewed as significant but quantitatively unclear.