Maybe blame consumers rather than manufacturers. And if a government sets up incentives incorrectly, blame the government schemes, not those using such badly designed incentives.
The buyers wanted a petrol car. And they choose to fill with petrol. You need your own garage to make plugging in worthwhile (and avoid getting charging cable nicked). Consumers perhaps prefer to avoid the hassle of plugging in?
In New Zealand there's a visible disincentive of a yearly tax on pluggable hybrids (to pay for road use). In NZ roads are paid by taxes earmarked for that.
> In NZ roads are paid by taxes earmarked for that.
It would be better to say that all of the money from road use and petrol taxes are spent on the roads. Those taxes don't actually cover the cost of maintaining the road system.
At which point it kind of becomes moot that those taxes are ring-fenced for paying for roads. Since I've lived here people keep repeating that ring-fenced fact like its some kind of special thing. General taxation and council taxes are subsiding just the road maintenance, and completely paying for new build roads.
> Those taxes don't actually cover the cost of maintaining the road system
Yes they almost did.
Only a few years ago the National Land Transport Fund (NLTF) was almost entirely self-sustaining, funded by road users.
Recently Crown funding (grants and loans) expanded significantly to ~40% of fund income.
But approximately 30% of government transport spending is being spent on rail (to placate voters I think). Before the Land Transport (Rail) Legislation Act 2020, not much we spent by the NLTF on rail.
Currently ~3% of driven kilometres by car use electricity - so as that number increases, BEV and PHEV vehicles will need to have increased taxation. Presumably something like $700 per annum (currently about how much a person driving a petrol car pays on excise tax).
Ultimately it is almost tautological that road users pay for roads, since government spending comes from taxes, and most people use cars. How things get earmarked is just sophisticated accounting.
I find that strange just looking at my current PHEV the engine now is at 75,000 miles or what my previous one was at only 30,000 miles. Most trips we barely use the intent if we use it at all, but every once in a while we do go on the long road trips. Plus, they are great for Americans who normally don't do those long trips, but they don't get rained to anxiety or any other issues with charging.
1. you are you and your data and your use. I believe you, but thats not useful compared to the real world data from "981,035 vehicles across Europe".
2. i suspect but i have no way to prove... the PHEVs sold in america tended to be way better EVs - there's no similar total fleet emissions laws so no incentive to subsidize shitty/fraudulent PHEVs in the US.
I think they were trying to say that it's surprising the Lightning sold so poorly considering the popularity of the ICE version.
I do think F-150 buyers tend to be more conservative than average car buyers and more receptive to anti-EV FUD for both political and cultural reasons.
The US has been doing air strikes in the Middle East on a regular basis since ~1990, and they extensively support the military adventures of allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Absolutely not. It will takes months to years to rebuild onshore infrastructure, and shipping companies will be very reluctant to send tankers into the Gulf. Negotiations may collapse and hostilities resume at any moment, especially since Israel does not know the meaning of the word ceasefire.
I assume you are aware that "they" are the Republicans? The Harris campaign avoided talking about it whenever possible, while Republican groups spent $200 million on anti-trans ads.
Why restrict it to the Harris' campaign? Democrats made it an important issue during Biden's administration, and even nominated a transgender secretary of health.
Yes and they celebrated him as the "first female four-star officer of the USPHSCC" despite the fact that he is male. As if this is somehow an achievement for women.
Maybe? I wouldn't count on it. The US may be a net petro exporter, but it's about 1% of GDP. The other 99% are not going to do well with inflated energy prices. So exports might net go down.
Under the SAVE act, you kind of have to have a passport or don't vote in some states.
Which is why I'm pretty sure it's not gonna pass. Both republicans and democrats depend heavily on mass votes from, let's just say, a lot of people who are, generally speaking, not the sort to have passports.
I would think to most people, (myself included!), it's just a 'dash'. A sentence was written with a dash - you could just ingest and read past it, like a comma.
Not saying this is accurate usage, maybe just real world usage.
I would hope most people can distinguish between the really short dash and the longer forms, even if they don't know any of the rules around them. But n versus m I don't expect people to notice.
I’m not sure I’m representative of “most people” in this respect (I have always used both n and m dashes), but I personally find the difference between n and m dashes bigger and more noticeable than the difference between regular and n dashes.
Because most people are ESL and really don't care.
I didn't even know there are multiple types of dashes.
I did know about multiple types of quotes because they kept breaking code on blogs. Still didn't care, but at least I learned how to spot and fix them.
Really looking forward to having the wrong kind of dash in code, but at least with current tech that seems like it won't happen.
Why wouldn't they. Never studied them. Never even thought twice about the dashes in a sentence. Didn't realize they were different till like a few months ago when everybody suddenly started focusing on how "AI" it makes everything look
Military ships don't run their radio beacons in combat zones. (There was an incident last year where the USS Theodore Roosevelt collided with a civilian cargo ship at night at least partially because it tried to approach the Suez canal with it's beacon off.)
