If this is so important, why wait so long?
In a significant move to help improve air quality in New York City and drive down planet-warming pollution, Mayor Eric Adams has signed a bill that will require all vehicles in the city’s government fleet to be electric or zero-emissions by 2038.
“This is a huge, bold step that we are taking because we are making history and taking a big, bold step towards the city’s electric future,” Adams said, per CBS News.
New York City will be the first city in the nation to implement such a strategy. In addition to improving the lives of residents affected by vehicle pollution — and reducing its impact on increasing the Earth’s temperatures — Adams said the policy would help to save $90 million in taxpayer funds in the space of four years.
“When it comes to delivering greener city vehicles, New York City is leading the charge,” said Mayor Adams in a statement. “Electric vehicles reduce emissions and make our air cleaner, helping us meet our sustainability goals and improving quality of life for countless New Yorkers.”
On one hand, this is the type of thing that a city like NYC should do: regardless of your opinion on climate doom, fossil fueled vehicles do put out lots of smog and pollutants (CO2 is not a pollutant). Yes, they are a lot cleaner than they used to be, but, in a city like NY it is all condensed into a small area. I’ve always thought that NYC should ban most private vehicles cruising around the city. Sheesh, they could go back to using more streetcars like there used to be, to supplant the subway and buses. You could also reduce engine noise.
But, of course, once you start yammering about global boiling, well, did CBS News or any outlets covering the story ask Hizzoner when he will forgo traveling in fossil fueled vehicles? It’s not like the city is spending almost $400k so Adams can travel around in fossil fueled SUVs, right?
Meanwhile, she also observed that Black, Brown, and low-income communities are among those most at risk when it comes to extreme heat or flooding exacerbated by human-caused pollution.
Of course they had to drag raaaaacism into the story, which is always interesting, as it shows just how little respect climate cultists and leftists in general think of “black and brown” people.
80% of all Tesla owners charge their cars overnight at their homes. This allows them to also save money by using off peK electric rates.
92% of Tesla owners would never buy another Tesla. If you can pull figures out of your ass so can I.
My own father who as you know recently purchased a Mercedes-Benz EV SUV that couldn’t make it from his home in Palm Beach to my home in Tampa on a full charge has decided to get rid of the Mercedes in favor of a IC vehicle. He figures to lose about $100,000+ on a 5 month old car. But he says it’s worth it for the Peace of Mind that comes with owning a stable, reliable vehicle.
I suggested he just use it around town to go to the golf course or go the two blocks to Mar-a-Lago for lunch or dinner but he says he has a golf cart for that. And he’s right why pay $190,000 for an electric golf cart when you can buy a real fancy one for 10,000?
I’m certain that you haven’t purchased the electric vehicle yet have you H? Oh the typical leftist all talk no action.
My deer hunting buddy, an electrical engineer, bought a Tesla about 5 years ago and recently bought a Tesla SUV for his wife (they have 2 kids with another on the way!). Every year he drives his old one deer hunting (100+ mi trip one-way, 200+ mi round trip) from St Louis to a farm in SE MO.
So your daddy’s super-expensive Mercedes SUV couldn’t drive 200 mi from Trumpland to Tampa?? And he’s going to lose $100k selling it?? And he has lunch with the ex-president? No “disrespeck”, but daddy shoulda done a bit of research. The 2023 EQS MBs claim over 300 mi range and only 20 min to recharge on a fast charger. Did he buy an older used one and overpay? We’re throwing a penalty flag on this one.
Maybe you can threaten my grown children again.
I’ll be in the Tampa area this winter, let me buy you lunch.
Chicken Little
“Every year he drives his old one deer hunting (100+ mi trip one-way, 200+ mi round trip) from St Louis to a farm in SE MO.”
How many times does he charge it????
Cap’n Shit for Brains,
He plugs it in at the farm!!!!! Why wouldn’t he?????
What percentage of urban dwellers have access to a charger at home? Not many I bet. You have to get out into the ‘burbs before homes have room for that kind of infrastructure. That’s assuming the local transformers can handle the load.
Teach it makes a lot more sense, to anyone who isn’t blinded by absolutes, to phase them in gradually the city of NY. Owns or leases over 30000 passenger cars. It will take years before there is enough infrastructure in place to enable that plan to succeed.
The electrification of automobiles simply can not be done immediately.
H it makes a lot more sense to anyone who isn’t blinded by a cult or by brainwashing to use whichever form of transportation costs taxpayer the least and does the best job for the money. That means the least in initial outlay, the least in maintenance & repair, and the longest length of service time. None of which are spelled EV.
You’re the one blinded by absolutes. You’re the one who wants all vehicles electric. We on the other hand believe there are room for electric vehicles and gas vehicles and any other type of vehicles that operate well under whatever conditions.
Johnny-you keep forgetting to come up with a valid reason that the “electrification of automobiles” needs to be done.
It makes sense to gradually replace vehicles as they wear out. It also makes sense that a vehicle fleet that never needs to leave the city can be EVs. Finally, it makes perfect sense that a city government that is constantly crying about lack of funds, will promise to buy overprices vehicles in the future because it makes them look virtuous today. After all, it isn’t their money.
But who is really behind this? The NYC public services unions who now have another permanent excuse for why they can never show up on time and have to wait another hour or two before rolling out.
You are correct, Professor. As a ‘recovering’ municipal manager, the vast majority of our fleets never left the corporate limits and many seldom went beyond the area where they were assigned and housed. A notable exception was my heavy equipment and support vehicles. However, some municipal vehicles are on duty/call 24/7, EV’s might not be the best solution due to charging issues. Of course, the rate payers of NYC will rejoice in the added expense of the conversion, as will their children.
As a footnote, not all areas have off-peak rate schemes. All of the ones I’ve ever used did not have one. I’ve heard that some do, can’t speak from experience. Also, a level 1 charger will only provide a minimal overnight charge, you really need level 2 or access to a level 3 charger.
Teach whines “what’s the hurry on the global warming hoax”, then stupidly whines “if it’s so important why don’t they fix it today”????
It’s been obvious for decades that the left and right sides of connie brains are not connected.
Mr Teach: (CO2 is not a pollutant)
It certainly can be a pollutant if there’s too much of it. Man is generating carbon dioxide from burning coal, oil and gas at a rate exceeding the Earth’s capacity to absorb it. The increased CO2 is causing the Earth to warm with no scientific reason to expect the warming to stop.
1) The increased CO2 is man-made and 2) is causing damage. Sounds like a pollutant.
Rimjob: It certainly can be a pollutant if there’s too much of it.
Like H2O and/or O2.
Rimjob logic.
MyLilStalker: Like H20 and/or O2.
Are human actions causing a significant increase in O2? If we were, O2 certainly could be a pollutant. A 50% increase in oxygen concentration would cause significant lung damage in animals, including conservatives.
Even a 20% increase in oxygen levels increases the fire hazard! If the concentration went from 21% to 25% fires would be more likely and would burn hotter!
The water (vapor) concentration in air is variable but dependent on temperature. Warm air can hold more water than cold air. Kids in elementary schools learn that water naturally cycles, evaporating from Earth and then falling out of the atmosphere as precipitation! Water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas and is increasing with increasing air temperature, so we humans are contributing indirectly to the increase!!
Humans have caused a 50% increase in carbon dioxide.
Keep making it up as you go along, hey Rimjob?
Cry harder, chubby.
MyLilStalker could look it up himself but he prefers the life as a shit for brains.
Such harder, CankerSore.
Now, if only there was evidence that the increased CO2 is causing the earth to warm….
The evidence is overwhelming that CO2 is causing warming. Did you mean there is no “proof”, your usual refrain?
What evidence?
There’s no cause-effect evidence
One might ask, “What warming?”
https://wattsupwiththat.com/global-surface-temperature-comparison/
#BelieveTheLieNoLonger
Bwaha! Lolgf
MyLilStalker denies the Earth is warming!!
You’re a complete and total shit for brains.
Thanks Rimjob for another of your unverified unscientific opinions.
Perhaps you might read the citation provided before proving again how incredibly stupid you are even allowing for your 12yr old mentality.
Thanks for the advice MyLilStalker but WUWT is hardly a scientific source.
So comparing anomalies to absolute temperatures both provided by the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) for the entire globe isn’t quite scientific enough for you?
Seriously, Rimjob?
No wonder Galera is in the toilet.
MyLilStalker doesn’t seem to understand that the Earth is warming. In fact, the US far-right has buried their heads in the Saudi sands on the issue.
But why? Because they don’t want to face the truth, which is change. Note that the US far-right is the mentally ill offspring of American conservatism.
The science is clear, regardless of what former TV weatherman Tony Wuwt intermittently claims. No “disrespeck” but his willfully ignorant followers don’t want anything to change, evuh, and importantly want to “pwn the libs”.
Recall, at first Tony wouldn’t admit the Earth was warming, blaming the dishonest placement of temperature stations, then Tony and some actual skeptics like Professors Richard Muller and Roy Spencer led large studies on placement and concluded that there was no significant issue. Tony then reluctantly admitted That the Earth WAS actually warming, prompting most of his followers to agree with him – “Of course it’s warming, we’ve known that, we’re only questioning the cause.” But now it looks as if Tony is reverting to form and now is once again denying it’s warming – “An average person can’t even differentiate between 53 from 55 degrees Fahrenheit”, which is true! But that’s not the point is it? That increase over this entire enormous Earth – oceans, land, atmosphere – represents an incredible increase in energy.
When MSN starts to question…. you know the balloon is shrinking..
https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/mega-jolt-the-costs-and-logistics-of-plugging-in-evs-are-about-to-become-supercharged/ar-AA1kBzl0?ocid=winp2fptaskbar&cvid=3b3bc82b5eda41c0bfead83163f96bce&ei=29
We are getting to the point where only the completely brainwashed and the complete cultists are the only ones believing in EV’s. Here’s an interesting blurb short but interesting.
https://youtu.be/7FXZT5IP1_8
and here’s one of H’s next door neighbors. Another well educated genius from a blue state.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-noNxJE6fSY?feature=share
The article was from Real Clear Policy not MSN. Real Clear Policy leans right.
This is a common misattribution to a news aggregation site.
The transition from gas cars will be bumpy but we’ll survive. You probably remember when dobbin was replaced by the flivver. Of course people back then were less whiny and just rolled up their sleeves and did what had to be done.
Chicken Little
“Are human actions causing a significant increase in O2? If we were, O2 certainly could be a pollutant. A 50% increase in oxygen concentration would cause significant lung damage in animals, including conservatives.
Even a 20% increase in oxygen levels increases the fire hazard! If the concentration went from 21% to 25% fires would be more likely and would burn hotter!”
You are so full of shit.
“Thus, global warming can reduce oxygen in the ocean, lakes, rivers and streams, leading to changes in species populations. Increases in the amount of nutrients, especially nitrogen and phosphorous, in the water can lead to decreased oxygen levels.”
Chicken Little
“Are human actions causing a significant increase in O2? If we were, O2 certainly could be a pollutant. A 50% increase in oxygen concentration would cause significant lung damage in animals, including conservatives.
Even a 20% increase in oxygen levels increases the fire hazard! If the concentration went from 21% to 25% fires would be more likely and would burn hotter!”
You are so full of shit.
“Thus, global warming can reduce oxygen in the ocean, lakes, rivers and streams, leading to changes in species populations. Increases in the amount of nutrients, especially nitrogen and phosphorous, in the water can lead to decreased oxygen levels.”
Cap’n Shit for Brains,
You are so full of shit.
Yes, global warming can reduces the solubility of oxygen in water. Do you have a point?
Here’s an interesting blurb:
https://youtu.be/3dY2OxXR5us
“WUWT is hardly a scientific source”. Another unsupported assertion. Is that all you alarmists have?