How California Advanced Clean Cars II rules may guarantee a Maverick PHEV very soon [WARNING: NO POLITICS]

[Tommy2]

What are the businesses and say contractors gonna do. They are faced with vastly upgrading their electrical services. Having to charge a dozen F-150 Lightnings with extended batteries or more? All at the same time overnight. Each Level 2 charger requiring 50A @ 240V single phase. If they are lucky and have 3 phase available at their location that will help a lot but still.

Is any thought being given to this? A 3 car house no way their 200A service will suffice. What about the grid? Transformers too small now on the poles not to mention the increased demand on the HV transmission lines. We are being led by first graders who cannot even think for themselves.

Right now on average it will cost someone over $6,000 to upgrade their service from 100A to 225A and this is a simple overhead drop to a meter socket and then the panel. Then add the power source for the charger which will most likely require a sub panel to meet NEC in the garage.

Whoa Butch, you're interrupting the Eco wet dream with reality and facts!

Sponsored

 

[OleFordGuy]

on California

 

[FriscoTXJoe]

All this reminds me of 10-15 years ago when many people were bitching and moaning about how the world was going to end when incandescent bulbs were phased out.

Some things never change.

I remember them bitching that the world would end if we didn't phase em out.

Funny how that works, ain't it?

 

[Bob The Builder]

Whoa Butch, you're interrupting the Eco wet dream with reality and facts!

I'm sorry. Guilty as charged. Now, let's get back to Mavericks. When in the devil are we ever going to be able to order ours.

 

[gte105u]

The light bulb red herring isn't relevant. That was a reduction in power draw with a minor inconvenience of a different bulb. This is expecting the entire power infrastructure to magically be able to handle massively more draw than currently on it with no plan.

Here's the problem, the delivery of power is finite. Without major whole sale advancements in power production (I. E. Significant new nuclear power, efficiency in solar, wind turbines everywhere, etc.) you can't just increase power production. This isn't an answer that can be fixed in a few years. Even if we had the answer it would take many years to actually design and build it.

You can't say something silly like batteries will get better or charging will be more efficient (oh the magic smart grid! Yay!) There are fundamental scientific principles at work here over conservation of energy. It takes an amount to move a car, which in turn must be stored, and which in turn produced. The power has to be generated and there is no plan even close to on the horizon to get there... The smart grid isn't some magic solution, and anyone who says something like that shows how ignorant they are on this issue (or are spouting propaganda).

Then you have delivery of power. As was stated there just isn't the indtrastrucitre to deliver this much power, not by a long shot. I build aparmnent complexes. We are starting construction right now one a new one. It is costing mid 6 figures to put in the ability for 10% of the vehicles to be electric at this apartment. For 100%, the panels, transformers hell power coming to the property are nowhere close. We are 50+ years away from where we could consider going fill electric minimum.

 

[Snax]

Here's a good article that sheds some light on grid capacity.
Mileage From Megawatts: Study Finds Enough Electric Capacity To 'Fill Up' Plug-in Vehicles -- ScienceDaily

 

[gte105u]

Here's a good article that sheds some light on grid capacity.
Mileage From Megawatts: Study Finds Enough Electric Capacity To 'Fill Up' Plug-in Vehicles -- ScienceDaily

As I said ignorant or propogamda. This falls on latter.

 

[Snax]

As I said ignorant or propogamda. This falls on latter.

I'm not sure what "propogamda" is, but the article is pretty objective about pros and cons, limitations, etc. Lots of facts, data, and solid analysis.

 

[Milton Jeff]

We are 50+ years away from where we could consider going fill electric minimum.

Nope.. 50 years is wayyyy too pessimistic. Think how far we have come in the past 50 years and compare to the past 20. Advancements are speeding up rapidly, maybe not exponentially but the speed of changes surprises us all.
Have a look at this Canadian article. I'm thinking that large cities with shorter commutes will see the change quicker.
https://emc-mec.ca/wp-content/uploads/Electric-Vehicles-and-the-Grid-2009-07.pdf

Note that this was 14 years ago and we are well on the way, especially in Canada.

Perhaps by 50years from now we will have teleportation. Ok maybe I won't see it but perhaps my grandkids...

 

[Mav as heck]

It's easy to write pie in the sky legislation and hope for the best. The truth is California has zero chance of successfully phasing out ICE vehicles in the stated time frame.

Anyone who thinks otherwise might be interested in this electric bridge I have for sale.

 

[TheSEARCH]

With some 17 states likely to follow the new California Advanced Clean Cars II rules just adopted today, some big changes are coming to market. With this many states jumping on board, this will create a critical mass for manufacturers to ramp up electrified versions of current models, particularly plug-in versions – in addition to all-new electric vehicles.

The ruling states that by 2035, 100% of all new cars, trucks and SUVs sold in California (and following states) will need to be Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEV).

The ruling states that the ZEV requirement can include a mix of both 100% battery electric vehicles (BEV) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEV). A car company can sell up to a 20% mix of PHEV to meet the regulation so long as it gets up to 50 miles EV range.

The new rules begin phasing in starting 2025 with a requirement that 35% of all new vehicles be ZEV and that gradually grows to 100% as defined above by 2035.

How does this relate to a Ford Maverick PHEV?

1) It means that in a very short time, it will be essentially a requirement that a PHEV Ford Maverick exist if Ford wants to sell the model in California and the other 17 states long term. So look for it likely by 2024 or 2025 at the latest.

2) It also means than when a Maverick PHEV is offered it will likely need to have an EV range of at minimum 50 miles to continue on long term. This may be why we haven't seen or heard much about it if they are needing to ramp up its capabilities from the current powertrain sold in the Escape PHEV which does not offer 50 miles EV range.

3) Because a standard hybrid model (HEV) as it exists now will likely make less sense in the long term to offer along side a PHEV, the PHEV may become the only electrified version available. Obviously, like all gas powered vehicles, eventually the only Maverick powertrain available.

So rejoice, a PHEV is almost a certainty and likely to be the only choice a decade from now.

Well there most likely will be an EV mav. CA law wont stand. in 3 years 35 percent has to be EV no way no how is that even possible . The law will be changed or removed.

Just reread OP post. Is it PHEV which is plug in hybrid? by 2025 Or is it EV battery car. To many abbreviations .

 

[TonyS]

It's like so many want to be a Negative Nancy. And everyone is so certain of what cannot be done. Nothing mentioned as problems are anywhere close to an unsolvable problems. Especially not a problem that is 25 years in the making. 25 years to adapt. And I'd add prosper.

We are not trying to solve faster than light travel. We are talking generating electricity. Which we already know how to do. Building charging stations. Which we already know how to do. And 25 years before 51% of the cars on the road are BEV.

IMHO, this reminds more of excuses than reasons. Because the truth is a lot of people simply don't want to give up their gas powered cars. I get it. The sound. The smell of exhaust. But progress moves on. BEV's are faster. BEV's are going to be less expensive to drive and maintain. And yes, BEV's pollute less. And there is a lot of GOOD STUFF in the latest bill as far as BEV manufacturing goes for America. Not Eco stuff, good paying JOB stuff. Check most auto sites. Over the next several years, the tax credit incentives are going to drive the manufacture of BEV's and batteries back to North America. Going to drive the sourcing of materials away from adversarial countries like China and Russia and to America and friendly countries. It's going to be lots of good jobs yanked away from China and Russia and put right here.

Which brings me to the last thing I'll say. It's become populist nonsense to talk about how the government only does harm. Reagan's worst flaw (and I voted for him the second time) Look around. The reason cars are safer to drive, the reason water is safer to drink, the reason factories are safer to work in is government involvement. The best outcomes have come in government/private business cooperation. Where the government funds basic research and sets some direction. America's the only country to put men on the moon. Who won WW 1 and WWII? Who built the interstate highway system?

Battery electric vehicles are here, they are better - and they have reached the critical mass of adoption. Not only is there no going back, there's no particular reason to want to go back other than people's general discomfort with change. So now it's a matter of how to best steer that. We have about a 25 year period of adoption and I'm sure that between private enterprise looking to make money and government looking to make sure basic infrastructure is around and the jobs are in this country things will be just fine.

Of course, we won't know who's right and who's wrong for 25 years. I doubt I'll be around by then.

 

[Scott Asheville]

About 80% of Americans live in stand alone houses. And the appeal of a PHEV is that it can run on gas when the battery is depleted.

PHEV vehicles don't need infrastructure. With their much smaller batteries they don't need fast charging. Which is why if Ford offers a 2023 PHEV Maverick I will order one and decide what to do with my 2022 Hybrid when the blessed day comes it is actually at my dealer waiting for me to pick up. Probably buy it and drive it until the PHEV gets built.

This posting caught my eye and I was interested in researching it a bit. I found the quote below from a few years ago. It seems to imply that the percentage of Americans in detached housing is lower than 82.4%. Because 82.4% was for owned housing - a subset of all housing (renters).

"The US preference for detached housing remains strong, according to the newest data just released in the 2014 American Community Survey, by the United States Census Bureau. In 2014, detached house and represented 82.4 percent of owned housing in the United States."

I think the best answer I found was below? It looks like 60%? I was interested because I'm a BEV fan and I read a lot that charging is a challenge when you don't own your own detached home. I tend to ignore this because I own a home. But I remind myself to consider others not so fortunate. Well, maybe they're more fortunate, because homes are money pits.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?webmap=15503e12eeda4373830f5a0cea6dd206

 

[Bob The Builder]

The light bulb red herring isn't relevant. That was a reduction in power draw with a minor inconvenience of a different bulb. This is expecting the entire power infrastructure to magically be able to handle massively more draw than currently on it with no plan.

Here's the problem, the delivery of power is finite. Without major whole sale advancements in power production (I. E. Significant new nuclear power, efficiency in solar, wind turbines everywhere, etc.) you can't just increase power production. This isn't an answer that can be fixed in a few years. Even if we had the answer it would take many years to actually design and build it.

You can't say something silly like batteries will get better or charging will be more efficient (oh the magic smart grid! Yay!) There are fundamental scientific principles at work here over conservation of energy. It takes an amount to move a car, which in turn must be stored, and which in turn produced. The power has to be generated and there is no plan even close to on the horizon to get there... The smart grid isn't some magic solution, and anyone who says something like that shows how ignorant they are on this issue (or are spouting propaganda).

Then you have delivery of power. As was stated there just isn't the indtrastrucitre to deliver this much power, not by a long shot. I build aparmnent complexes. We are starting construction right now one a new one. It is costing mid 6 figures to put in the ability for 10% of the vehicles to be electric at this apartment. For 100%, the panels, transformers hell power coming to the property are nowhere close. We are 50+ years away from where we could consider going fill electric minimum.

Absolutely correct in all regards. Mid six figures for 10% EV capability? That is most likely the maximum the power company would approve to the engineers. I'm surprised the powers that be did not mandate that the power company go higher and just put bigger fuses in the HV cutouts.

Sponsored