The RV industry may soon be delivered a gut punch, and weirdly it’s not going to be from demand swings. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) has amended its regulations and will require the manufacturers of motorhomes with a gross weight of over 8,500 pounds to sell an increasing number of EVs. There’s just one problem: No RV manufacturer currently sells a heavy electric motorhome. In effect, California and five other states may inadvertently ban the sale of new motorhomes in only a few weeks’ time.
This news comes to us from SFGate and paints a dark picture for the battered but recovering RV market. RV sales hit all-time records during the COVID-19 pandemic, then fell off a cliff after people stopped buying RVs for numerous reasons. The RV Industry Association expects America’s RV builders to ship 324,100 units this year, far down from 2021’s all-time record of 600,240 shipments. To illustrate the change in demand, RV sales have plummeted to a level not seen since 2013.
Thankfully, the RVIA says, sales are trending in an upward direction with this year closing out better than 2023 and with next year looking to be an even better year. That might not be the case if California, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, and Massachusetts move forward on stringent emissions requirements that would push motorhome diesel engines out of the market.
I will be clear right from the bat. You’re going to read a bunch of headlines saying that California may ban the sale of new motorhomes. This is not strictly true. California did not ban motorhomes and motorhome manufacturers do have a path to continue selling ICE vehicles in these six states. However, California’s changes would make selling large motorhomes substantially harder, essentially giving the effect of a ban.
This breaking story was originally reported on by RV Travel early this month, but now thanks to SFGate‘s reporting we know a little more. According to SFGate, CARB has amended its Advanced Clean Truck regulations in late October. You can view the meeting by clicking here, just be aware it’ll take hours of your time to get through the whole thing. The rule will require the manufacturers of trucks and motorhomes with a gross vehicle weight rating of over 8,500 pounds to produce a percentage of zero-emission vehicles.
The new rules kick off in 2025 and the percentage of zero-emission vehicles that must be built by a manufacturer is set to increase gradually until 2035, the year when California hopes to completely phase out the sales of all other internal combustion vehicles. California plans that every truck sold in the state will be zero-emission by a later date.
The Advanced Clean Trucks rule was successfully adopted by CARB in 2020. According to the rule as originally adopted, makers of medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks were required to begin building a small percentage of zero-emission vehicles beginning in 2024 and gradually rising from there. Here’s a chart:
To help you read that a little better, I’ll give you a key. Class 2b-3 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR between 8,501 and 14,000 pounds. Class 4-8 is for on-road trucks with a GVWR greater than or equal to 14,001 pounds. Finally, Class 7-8 covers vehicles with a GVWR greater than or equal to 26,001 pounds.
SFGate says that the bulk of the RVs that would get caught up in this are primarily large Class A motorhomes and Super C motorhomes, the kinds of motorhomes rolling on specialized chassis. Technically, that 8,500-pound threshold would endanger far more RVs than just the biggest ones. Many Mercedes-Benz Sprinter camper vans have gross weight limits above 8,501 pounds. However, Mercedes-Benz should also sell enough EVs to offset selling vans, something the big RV chassis manufacturers currently cannot do.
There presently isn’t a single zero-emission Class A or Super C RV on the market, so if this regulation goes live in 2025, dealers will no longer be able to sell any brand-new Class A or Super C coaches. The market for zero-emission motorhomes is also remarkably tiny with startups like Grounded RV leading the way. As of publishing, no big brand sells a low-emission or zero-emission motorhome, though some are in development.
CARB does offer a path for builders wanting to sell large diesel-powered coaches, from SFGate:
CARB told SFGATE via email that “there is no motorhome ban.” A system of credits allows manufacturers that can’t meet the requirements to buy credits from those that do, giving them “the flexibility needed to sell as many internal combustion engines as is needed to meet market demands,” said spokesperson Lys Mendez. According to the board, manufacturers can also focus ZEV production on other vehicle types where that technology is more viable to meet the requirements.
The Advanced Clean Trucks rule sent shockwaves through the trucking world when it was first adopted, with lobbyists and truckers urging the states to reconsider. Now, the RV industry’s lobbying groups are trying to stop what they think will be an apocalypse.
The impact is already being felt. According to RV Travel, Spartan and Freightliner, two major diesel RV chassis builders, are deciding to pull out of the six states as they do not have a platform that would be legal. Newmar RV, which uses the aforementioned platforms, said on November 4 that it would no longer sell diesel RVs on those non-compliant platforms.
Thankfully, some class A RVs should be able to be sold in California and those other five states. For example, the Ford F53 Class A motorhome chassis (below) uses the 7.3-liter Godzilla gasoline V8 engine and reportedly, Ford has enough credits from selling electric cars and trucks that it can keep producing motorhome chassis for sale in the six states.
Things still get worse from there. You might think this wouldn’t be a big deal because you could just buy an RV from a state that doesn’t follow CARB rules and drive it back home. California says this will not be a workaround because if you buy a new RV that doesn’t comply with the rule, you won’t be able to register it in California.
During the CARB meeting about the rule, Joe Snyder, who represented Freightliner Custom Chassis, told the board:
Some of the vehicles we build are electric school buses, electric walk-in vans. We’re doing our best to meet the regulations. Currently we have no electric solution for Class A RVs and there are no credits, therefore no credits to build class a RV chassis, uh, with ICE engines. Additionally, there’s no infrastructure at camping locations where these future vehicles would be going to.
Please consider the following, the current law may incentivize older RVs to be purchased and thus going backwards on the emissions Act as it sits will stop nearly all sales of new Class A and super cvs. RVs are low mileage, low fuel, and thus low emission vehicles due to the low usage. Not allowing sales of new RVs doesn’t stop consumer demand.
Eliminating RVs from ACT will ensure clean diesel engines are operating in California. Keeping ACT as it is will ensure older vehicles are sold in state for the near future. Eliminating RVs from ACT will also allow enforcement officials to focus on larger fuel users. Additionally, CARB could add a limit of in-state miles and generator hours to prevent emissions of these vehicles.
I welcome the comments of the board on this topic. I’m thankful for the Clean Air programs. I’ve personally told thousands of people all over the US how clean our air is and that I can see the mountains every day and my kids don’t know what a smog day is. Help California RVs go out into our national parks all over the United States with clean diesel RVs, not older polluting RVs.
These rules can clean the air and demo jobs at the same time, or we can go out and be clean together.
Trevor Gasper, Senior Vice President and General Counsel of Thor Industries said:
I’m the Senior Vice President and general counsel of Thor Industries, the world’s largest producer of recreational vehicles. Thor owns a family of RV companies including Airstream, Tiffin, Jaco, Integra, and Thor Motor Coach, all of whom sell motor homes to dealers and consumers in the state of California so that they can better connect with nature in the outdoors as an industry.
We’ve spoken on several occasions about the concerns we have with the A CT and the amendments discussed today. Do not alleviate those concerns of the vehicles impacted by ACT. Motorhomes make up only one quarter of 1% of all miles driven on California, California roads. Unlike trucks at issue in the regulations, motor homes spend most of their functional life parked and not emitting GHGs.
Like all RV companies, we are a final stage manufacturer. We do not manufacture the chassis and engines that are utilized in our units because of this. We are currently beholden to the chassis produced for sale to us by our chassis OEMs.
We are being told by these major suppliers that due to the A CT and the unavailability of any electric or or zero emission or near zero emission, uh, product for the RV industry, that they simply will not sell us any products for resale into California or other states that have adopted the ACT beginning in 2025.
These chassis manufacturers are not interested in engaging in credit purchasing to our assist the RV industry. So even if we can buy credits, they don’t want to engage with us, they will not sell us chassis for sale in California. Period. I want carb to know that we are taking steps to develop zero emission and near zero emission solutions for the industry. Thor has a longstanding partnership with Harbinger Motors out of California to produce both near zero and zero emission options for the RV industry as we sit here today.
However, despite our best efforts over the last five years, these options are not available and will not be available in any meaningful number for at least 18… [mic cuts off].
In response to all of this, the RVIA SFGate: “While we are continuing to work with manufacturers, dealers, and CARB to find a solution, if nothing changes, motorhomes will not be able to be sold and registered in California beginning in 2025. The exact date is still to be determined.”
Lobbyists for the RV industry and dealers believe there is still time to change the rule. The goal is to get a waiver into the Advanced Clean Trucks rule for motorhomes, but if not, maybe convince lawmakers to kick the can down the road a little further. If the lobbyists are unsuccessful, at least buyers will still be able to get used motorhomes. There are also registration methods some RV owners may take that I will not discuss here.
If CARB does not grant an exemption to new motorhome sales, we could be seeing a very different future for the RV industry. Practically overnight, six large RV markets could dramatically change for a long time. Thor’s Mr. Gasper is correct, the vast majority of the RV industry isn’t ready to go zero-emission yet and won’t be for a while. We’ll be watching as this situation unfolds.
So what if I can’t have my massive RV. I’ve still got my mansion, yaught and private jet so I’m good.
Are you completely unaware of who the typical RV buyer is, or is making stuff up a hobby of yours?
My point is that rich people’s toys don’t get taken away. I agree with you
Most RV owners are average, middle-class Americans, especially those who drive these the most as full-timers. Also, creating a wealthy boogieman won’t change your personal economic situation.
Relax, it was a light hearted comment about how rich people’s toys never seem to be affected by stuff like this. I know that many middle class people drive these.
Yaught or yacht?
At least you don’t live in a manshin.
Lmao I am stupid
Shit, I don’t care for the reason. I hate the Class As, the van conversions I don’t mind. These barns-on-wheels are always seemingly captained by the least qualified, most geriatric monkey that the DMV gave a license to, taking up two lanes, going 30 mph below the speed limit, or riding your ass.
Besides, the build quality on these are atrocious. It’s a sort of low that not even 70s Chrysler could achieve. Why do people buy them? Whatever, it’s their money being wasted. I guess towing a normal sized caravan isn’t expensive enough.
There’s a big division in quality and capability of Class A’s between the gassers and the diesel pushers. The gas ones are often pushing their gross weight limit when loaded. The diesels have the torque and horsepower to keep up with grades and traffic while fully loaded. The problem is that the big diesel pushers are beyond the budget of a lot of Class A buyers, and the gas-powered ones are often built to a price point — with corresponding compromises on quality and power.
As for drivers, well, motorhome travel tends to be more popular with an older age bracket –not that younger families don’t enjoy them too, but the demographics are kind of undeniable. With age comes varying effects on driving capability, but I’d hate to paint all Class A drivers with too broad of a brush. Yes, some folks have no business behind the wheel of something the size of a bus. But some of those same drivers are behind the wheel of class C’s and class B vans, and they’re no better. Or worse, they’re towing a trailer or 5th-wheel with an overloaded pickup, and an un-skilled driver with a combination vehicle can be even more of a hazard.
Motorhome drivers do self-select for size, to some degree. There are some who absolutely won’t drive a class A of any sort; a big van cab is as far as they’re willing to go and so they’ll stick with C’s and B’s. Meanwhile, class A diesel pushers have a stronger following among former commercial drivers who are more likely to know how to handle them.
And don’t forget, fuel economy on class A’s is anywhere from “meh” to abysmal. In some cases, even an experienced driver will set the cruise control at an economical speed and stick to the right-hand lane. And that can mean sticking to the posted 55 or 65 for real, while all the traffic wants to go through at 75. Annoying? Maybe, but the big rigs may be doing the same thing for the same reason. There are also times and places where high-profile and heavy vehicles should slow down — even if it means dropping below the posted speed limit. Pass when it’s safe and let the slower vehicles have their space.
I keep my distance and I know that it’s safer that these things aren’t going at the same speed the rest of traffic is. However, anecdotally, the Class As seem to be always less capable than semis. (Yes I know anecdotes do not constitute everyone’s experience.) The topography can get a little tricky and hilly around here; they slow down and I’m fine with that. But going 50 in a posted 80, weaving between a lanes, on a perfectly straight highway? Come on. Let’s agree that if you want to drive a class A, you need a CDL.
I am not a fan of just about anything with the RV experience nor being behind them…
…so, anyways.
This whole thing just seems so poorly thought out. Like a higher gas tax with subsidies could accomplish the same goal and more without all the economic friction.
And if california were really serious about greenhouse gasses they would allow trading between classes of vehicles or industries.
My guess is that a handful of container ships emit more than all of the slightly driven RV’s in the state.
I have no skin in the game but I really hate how it’s been drilled over and over there is no ICE ban, but it’s basically an ban in everything but name.
A gas tax is regressive and it’s disproportionately burdensome on the poor. I’m not sure what you mean by “tax with subsidies” though – raise the taxes, but then also provide a means to be excluded? If so, why not go directly after the issue, especially if it’s one that’s dependent on the discretionary income of those wealthy enough to buy into it?
Personally, I think gas should be way more expensive, but not without a UBI and some kind of public transportation. Too many people drive to work just to be able to afford the gas to drive to work
Honestly I’m not sure there is one easy right answer, I only proposed a gas tax because it’s easy to implement.
An easy subsidy for states to implement would be a credit to registration based on income. Back of the napkin math, this system could work up to about $0.3/gal That way it is no longer regressive and you still end up with less gasoline use.
I will say I used 90% less gas when I worked from home, that alone in the sectors it makes sense could make this whole point moot when it comes to CO2 reductions.
There is a gasoline tax on the rich, to a certain extent. Wealthy areas have higher gas prices than many others. San Diego’s prices, for example, are a buck and a half per gallon higher than other parts of the state.
Shell has a station a mile from its refinery that has the highest prices for miles around. It’s a strange economic phenomena, with greed and price gouging the most likely cause.
I have no sympathy. These manufacturers could have spent the last five years demanding a gasoline powered series hybrid. Who gives a flying fuck about the extra cost when these things cost so much money already?
Instead they maximized quarterly earnings without investing in R&D for the future. Thor can take Mjölnir’s handle and jamb it up their figurative butthole with this whining about only being a chassis buyer. They could have easily told the chassis builders what they will and won’t buy starting in 2025. Thor and others knew they would need a solution but just ignored that fact.
I am truly shocked to hear that on November 1, 2024 that RV manufacturers suddenly learned that they would no longer be able to sell RVs in 5 states because those states whimsically imposed EV mandates. It is crazy that no one saw this coming until now.
They’ve had 4 years which, while not a lot of time at all from a powertrain design standpoint, also is a long way from “in two months you won’t be able to sell vehicles”…
How much are they willing to bribe Trump for him to fix their problem.
I’m sure they’re already doing their best to see how much it will take.
Welcome to American democracy, the best government money can buy…
Until California and the rest of those states (I live in one) ban private jets, and boats over 30 feet that aren’t required for some sort of fishing industry, I don’t want to hear a damn thing.
Of course, they will continue restricting private citizens choices and lives, while letting the uber rich destroy everything and lecture us all the while.
Who do you think own these things?
Not the uber rich, just the middle old regular rich. Uber rich has mansions wherever they are flying to, or stay in a buddies, they aren’t in these pieces of shit. These are for the guy who “did well” and wants to retire with maybe 2-10 mil in the bank. Not Jeff Bezos making 10 mil a minute.
Rather than sitting through that video (thanks for the warning) I found this regarding ACT:
What is ACT?To reduce emissions, ACT requires original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles to sell zero-emissions vehicles (ZEVs) or near-zero-emissions vehicles (NZEVs) such as plug-in electric hybrids as an increasing percentage of their annual sales from 2024 to 2035. The regulation uses a cap-and-trade system, capping the number of fossil fuel vehicles sold by stipulating annual sales percentage requirements. The rule allows manufacturers to comply with the regulation by generating compliance credits through the sale of ZEVs or NZEVs or through the trading of compliance credits. ACT defines ZEVs and NZEVs as follows:
Zero-emission vehicle: A vehicle that produces zero tail-pipe emissions, including battery-electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles.Near-zero-emissions vehicle: A vehicle with an internal combustion engine and an electric energy storage system, including plug-in hybrid vehicles and hydrogen internal combustion engine vehicles.https://rmi.org/understanding-californias-advanced-clean-truck-regulation/
I understand that RV makers don’t think pure BERVs are possible but since there is already a carve out for near-zero-emissions vehicles what about ERRVs, PHRVs and HFCRVs? As we’ve (OK maybe just me) has pointed out before since RVs need a generator anyway, why not double duty it as a range extender and heater?
As much as I don’t care for Class A RVs, I do find this interesting because ACT is after the OEMs, the RV/coach builders are just caught in the mix. OEMs aren’t seeing all the profit from the RV sale, they’re just seeing the profit from the coach builders buying the chassis and/or engine, which I can’t imagine is a massive portion of their revenue. The OEMs just aren’t selling their chassis/engines to the coach builders – only for those 6 states. Maybe they’re willing to spend their credits on work trucks that they make way more of but not to the few RV builders?
That said, Class A RVs are basically just tarted up busses which I would’ve thought OEMs have ZEV/NZEV options since so many metro areas have started using electric or hybrid busses in their fleets so IDK why the coach builder couldn’t have started designing the 2025 coaches on one of those platform. They didn’t because they rode that COVID wave right into the suits & shareholders pockets, so I don’t pity them at all.
I was at a national park recently that had just put into service a fleet of battery electric shuttle busses. I didn’t catch the make. The styling looked Chinese so maybe BYD. One broke down while I was on it. I asked the driver his thoughts on the fleet. He said such breakdowns were common.
On the bright side when they did work they were very quiet, especially when braking.
I never said they were quality, only that they existed lol.
I’m all for electrification and a cleaner future, but we’re just not there yet. The capability isn’t there for HD work yet. The infrastructure is nowhere near ready on a national scale. This push is premature imo. I get necessity breeds innovation. But rushing, perhaps to meet arbitrary governmental deadlines, also breeds sloppy work and cutting corners.
Well to be fair “quality” is a flexible concept in the RV world.
I saw a picture of a van that said “Mercedes Streeter” right below and did a double take.
Thankfully the picture was of a Ford or I would have thought it was the latest Mercedes van model.
Haven’t had enough coffee today…
We must ask ourselves why do any car people support the party of cars must be banned? Second since according to all experts California will be underwater by August 2025 why are we worried about what laws they pass? Third when the Governor in the interest of lowering gas prices for the workers allows his hand picked henchmen to increase gas prices by 85 cents a gallon and in addition passing laws required to set up a reserve of gas that will cause even more shortages that will increase costs about another $1.50 a gallon you got to say WTF.
I DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER BUT THIS AIN’T IT.
No experts say California will be underwater by 2025. A lot Florida, portions of Texas, Newport News Naval base perhaps. A couple more beachfront home in California will erode into the water.
Rancho Palos Verdes is my favorite monthly youtube binge.
I like having ambient temperatures that humans can survive in. Why, it’s even more important to me than my ability to own overpriced toys.
Perhaps you feel differently. You’ll probably demand to be saved when the wet bulb temperature in your town becomes unbearable and you finally face the consequences of your actions.
People currently live in the Sahara and Phoenix, AZ. There will never be ambient temperatures that people can’t survive in, because people can survive in ridiculously high ambient temperatures.
There are many effects of climate change that scientists are very afraid of. Being too hot to survive is not one of them.
1. Because CARB quite literally fixed a huge portion of Californias air quality problems and directly lead to the creation of the EPA improving the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
2. Strawman.
3. Taxes are a method of changing or incentivizing behavior. We can argue about how regressive gas taxes are however I assume you’re not interested in that.
The California Air Resources Board is non-partisan.
Without them, there would be no improvement in air quality – it would be horrendous.
The fewer of these abominations on the road the safer for the rest of us. Old people can always flush away their life savings with better financial investments like casinos, time share condos and subscriptions to brain improvement vitamins.
That said, the mobile meth lab is going to get more expensive in the future.
Hey I owned my own business that requires delivery vehicles. It needed a 20 foot box truck and 12,000 pound cargo capacity. I used a Ford E350SD. There is no EV vehicle in even experiment stage to handle this.
Show me an E-350 “SD” that has a 12,000 pound cargo capacity. I think you are talking about a gross vehicle weight rating. There are electric Transit and Sprinter vans that exceed the cargo capacity that I think you are talking about. Again, maybe there is an “E350SD” that can carry 12,000 pounds and I am ignornant.
As a mobile meth lab market analyst, this news may bring market inflation to mobile meth labs’ biggest markets; New Mexico and California. For those on the fence as to whether they should purchase a mobile meth lab, I highly recommend buying one soon.
Older mobile meth labs may become too expensive for the common cook to afford. Expect a mobile meth lab shortage and high prices.
Plus the mold issues. Really screws up the brew.
Apologies if I missed it in there, but every 3/4 and 1 ton consumer truck is over 8500 GVWR and a lot of people rely on them for work, besides those who just like driving them. And there aren’t any electrified HD trucks either.
Unless the percentages in the table are for a manufacturer’s entire line of vehicles and not just their 8500+ trucks? Can Ford sell 100% gas/diesel F350s because it sells Mach Es?
This would seem to me to be a bigger deal than toys like Class A RVs.
I know that some Ford lightnings can be up to 8550 GVWR. If the Machee doesn’t count maybe that will be enough.
It’s ok, all of California’s state owned trucks will be registered in Montana via a holding company going forward, thus solving the problem for government procurement and operations
Correct! Ford can sell big RV chassis because it sells EVs in other segments. Freightliner sells some EVs (school buses) but apparently not enough to comply with the regs and neither does Spartan.
It’s an OEM issue but the RV builders’ problem. I’m pretty sure the OEMs have a handful of electric and hydrogen semis and public busses out there so they’ve got the credits to spend on the medium class trucks. They just don’t want to waste the credits just so they can sell a non-conforming chassis/engine to a relatively small market of Class A RV/coach builders.
As mentioned in the article, Ford does have a compliant chassis AND credits to boot (iirc at least). If the RV builders would have paid attention instead of themselves thru the lucrative COVID era, they would have had the foresight to work out contracts to use Ford exclusively and designed their RV on that platform. This wasn’t sprung on them. They had 5 years to react and they didn’t try hard enough.
Again, no pity from me for stupid corporations.
There ARE electric HD trucks (well, 26000 gross at least). I work for a body builder in KS. We have a large client that does nationwide business. Last year we put van and flatbed bodies on 10 each Peterbilt and Freightliner fully electric chassis destined for their CA branches.
They are definitely new tech (with the associated teething problems). They were constantly throwing codes. None of them showed more than 125 miles for a range estimate. I’m sure that will change as they are actually driven and the computer learns the actual power usage.
I do think that change is coming, whether we like it or not. But, government forcing it along isn’t helping with the quality of that change!
My parents purchased a rental property in Delaware to get residency there.
At the end of the 20 years driving around the country in their 40′ motorcoach they sold the Delaware house for a tidy profit – having using other people’s money to pay the mortgage.
That said – I doubt many San Franciscans, Angelinos, San Diegans or Bostonians will be much affected – as big RVs rolling across the Midwest aren’t something most strive for.
Yes but any middle income people in California need an RV or move to another state
Buy used?
I have to think the diesel pusher segment of the market is far from the majority of units sold, and the price is so gd high for those that they could come up with a propulsion system that is compliant and still allows for someone to sell it profitably.
Of course, RV manufacturers do not usually develop their own chassis. The companies that build their chassis should have more than just RV reasons to come up with a compliant chassis. If sales in those 6 states are not worth developing compliant RV’s, then they can just abandon them to whatever company springs up in their place.
If RV sales in those states are worth the effort, they’ll come up with an appropriate solution.
This is literally the free market people claim they want, where localities can determine their own destiny. You know, states’ rights and such. If you can live on your non-ca / non-New England sales then go right ahead.
I’m not trying to be an a-hole (no need to try, comes natural), but every company gets to decide where they choose to participate (or not). In general, I’d be opposed to these rerstrictions. Currently, let Indiana starve.
Montana LLC. Get your vacation bus registered and skip sales tax. Win win. Maybe refurbishing old motorhomes will be a big business so we can keep older RVs with less stringent emissions control on the street belching diesel fumes rather than replacing them with updated emission regulated rigs. Global warming is a hoax, but I really value clean air. Government stupid, business smart.
> Global warming is a hoax
It really isn’t.
Yes it is. Temperatures were far higher than now during the dinosaur ???? age. And there were no people. In the 1970s they warned of the next ice age, did I miss it before are current global warming scare? Frankly ignore the weatherman that can’t predict tomorrow’s weather and embrace science that says for the last million years the earth has gone from molten surfaces to an entire iceball before us puny humans surfaced. We can’t control it and screwing ourselves is not a solution. Sure work towards better air but we are here for a brief period. Party while we can
Correct. 13,000 years ago, a mere blip in the Earth’s existence, Chicago was under 1 mile of ice. How did the ice melt? Native American campfires?
Moses and his Jewish Space Lasers melted that ice cap…
Read your Talmud you smuck…/s
sorry that joke seems to live forever to me.
I apologize for my cultural ignorance.
All hail Talmudic Space Lasers.
The only people worried don’t know about the Torah Freeze Ray.
Even if the climate is warming purely due to natural processes (it isn’t), why do you want to throw gasoline on a fire by adding CO2 to the atmosphere?
If you don’t believe man is causing climate change, you don’t believe in physics or chemistry, so you should stop driving cars and using computers, because you shouldn’t believe in those either.
I believe in science and have a sign to prove it.
we are here for a brief period.
So is that oil. Regardless of what happens to the climate fossil fuels are a finite resource anyway. And most of that oil is in OPEC countries:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranking-the-countries-with-the-largest-proven-global-oil-reserves-in-the-world/
One benefit of moving to electricity, especially renewable electricity – less dependence on OPEC.
Something to keep in mind: When other people use less oil that leaves more oil AND cleaner air for you too.
Agree. The purchase of foreign oil has been the largest transfer of wealth the world has ever known. I prefer to source my energy locally via nukes, hydro, and solar.
Manmade climate chicken little sky is falling nonsense started in the late 1940s.
It actually started in the 1890s. And they were correct, it’s happening now.
Lmao good. These poverty traps are such a drain on society.
“i don’t like a thing, so I’m happy that other people are indirectly prohibited from buying them by nonsensical legislation”
Damn right.
Will you be happy when more nonsensical legislation prohibits the thing you like? Or will you be wishing that we had intelligently written laws?
Eh, politicians have removed access to plenty of things I hold dear- Stuff that actually matters, like women’s health care. People find a way to move forward.
It’s refreshing to see something stupid and deserving banned for once.
What a joke, least people can vote.
Name me one of these eco-nazis that was voted in by the public. Nope, CARB is headed by appointed nominees.
Then vote against the appointers. Nobody promised you the ability to micromanage the government.
I live in California, I have complete taxation without representation. Not only did I not vote for everyone in power, I voted for their opponent. We’re too far gone.
Like I said. Democracy means not getting what you want. You want different, convince enough of your fellow state citizens to agree. Preferably with truth, not lies.
I know there is a lot of pearl clutching about this but seriously what would be the fallout? Some people in a few states have to buy a smaller or used RV, rent one, or use AirBnB. Or move. And some RV companies will book lower profits. Maybe some people in Indiana get laid off. Of course this is only for a couple of years until alternatives arrive or the law is changed.
I know, I know, Freedom and all that which is important. However, they elected their representatives and collectively decided this was a good idea. Maybe they will elect better people. Maybe they will discover that no one really needs to travel in their own private bus. Let the system work it out.
Are you the self-appointed Tsar of What the People Need for Private Travel?
I neither wrote or supported this legislation. I didn’t vote for the politicians that did. That is why I can sit back and watch the shit show.
As I have stated elsewhere, mandated percentages of EVs is a bad idea. Many lawmakers have a God complex thinking their poorly crafted legislation will have exactly the intended effect. You can’t tell them anything so best just to watch it fail.
He’s not, but I am.
And RV’s are not a necessity. So I declare it to be no big loss.
RV makers can get their asses in gear and procure some commercial BEV and hybrid trucks.
And they absolutely do exist.
Sincerely,
Manwich… the Tsar of What The People Need (vs what they want)
The main fallout would be lower sales for the overall industry, which, eh, they’ll survive. Though, small dealers will definitely want to change up their inventory.
Actually global warming flooding California is a benefit if we can keep the Californians in California when it happens. I don’t want them to perish but they are so friggin stupid we can’t let them infect smart people.
Hey Hey! You win the prize for the most wrong-headed statement I’ve read today!
what do expect from 1978fiatspyderfan, one of the worst cars ever made. my 1974 Alfa Spyder was like a space ship compared to those rusting ox carts.
I am actually a 124 Spider fan too, but mostly just the early, chrome-bumper cars. The 1975-78 “big bumper” cars are pretty lame in stock form.
in 1974 – mech. fuel injection 2.0 twin cam, 5 speed, 4 wheel disc brakes, indy suspension, limited slip, large oil capacity for engine cooling, and far more beautiful. it’s not a fair fight. but like what you like
My only sportscar these days is a 2000 Boxster S 6-speed, which would murder an Alfa Spider on a road course but that’s not the point of either car…
Only the most wrong in this particular sub-thread. They have plenty of others that are even more wrong in other parts of this comment section.
I guess it would really suck for RV dealers and their employees. Maybe they can survive off campers and Ford conversions, but some will probably go under.
It is dumb as hell you don’t need a special license for one of these monsters. My grandma bought one for 200k new back when she was 85. She thought she was going to drive the country with her friend. She was so scared of driving it that it never went anywhere and she wasted all that money. We all sighed with relief.
That’s the story of many of them. Older people buy them to see the country, use them a few times, but discover that they’re terrifying to drive, then park them in the side yard to rot for the next few decades until sold to some YouTuber for a “will it start” video and one final ride to a NASCAR race
Sold by an RV dealer that was happy to use the 30-year mortgage clause to finance it for her. They are now crying because they thought they could bluff California into rescinding the EV mandate. I am shedding so many tears for those poor RV dealers at the moment……
My uncle went down there and ripped them out because they clearly took advantage of her. They ended up buying it back eventually but it took some legal persuasion.
Even very large trucks are not especially difficult to drive, any competent driver should have no issue piloting an RV.
The real problem is that we give licenses to people who aren’t competent drivers. And then wonder why car crashes are a leading cause of death in the country.
I don’t agree at all. I used to work for a surplus and salvage place. They gave the keys to the truck to the office worker one day and he immediately backed it into a tree which stabbed the limb through the box truck. It is not that they are hard to drive. They are hard to drive safely and aware.
That office worker was an incompetent driver, and not able to safely drive even the vehicles that he is legally permitted to drive on his Class D license(which includes extremely large vehicles if you didn’t know).
I work on a potato farm. We have a fleet of ~25 ten wheelers. These are 50,000lb GVWR trucks which require a CDL driver unless they are operating under Idaho’s agricultural exemption. We have a lot of seasonal employees who drive the trucks, none of them have CDLs. It’s fine. The trucks are not highly difficult to drive safely. They are certainly more difficult than your Corolla, and they require a lot more attention and brainpower. But they do not require anything beyond good common sense. Special training is simply not necessary, which I know because none of the drivers have special training.
If you can’t drive a large RV, it is simply because you lack commons sense and attention to detail. And if you lack common sense and attention to detail, then I don’t trust you to drive ANY motor vehicle, of any size.
“, it is simply because you lack commons sense”
Common sense isn’t as common as many think it is.
yep, I see so many huge rv driven by some white-knuckle old person who has never driven anything bigger than a camry in their lives. No training just typical upper middle class overconfidence.
And Massachusetts too.
Aw darn! We just did Washington dirty there. Fixed, thank you! 🙂
From Massachusetts, yes we are important enough to count double…
Ye all scoffed at hydrogen powered vehicles and now ye shall reap the whirlwind. Just not a Four Winds.
Hydrogen is made from fossil fuel.
Mostly, but it doesn’t have to be.
yeah, why would you want to use the most abundant substance in the universe? that can be made from water? what kind of logic is that? oh, right, actual logic
i really hope this is a joke and you’re not actually buying all of the “most abundant substance in the universe” and “can be made from water”
Hey, it’s technically true! You just need to make sure your RV has Bussard ramscoops and you’re home free!
uh yep. I am. not a joke. why?
Yes, hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, but that is quite irrelevant, because elemental hydrogen is not remotely abundant on Earth. So you started off strong with a pointless and irrelevant point, which is nice.
Yes, hydrogen can be made from water. Another thing which is technically true, yet very much not a point in favor of hydrogen. Because, hydrogen cannot be made from just water. Hydrogen can be made from water AND huge amounts of electricity. Considerably more electricity, in fact, than it takes to just drive an electric car. Making hydrogen cars rather stupid and pointless.
If what you’re really after is fuel made from water, good news! We can make fuel from water, without the ludicrous quantities of electricity! You will need sunlight and air, too, but I think that is reasonable. And then that fuel can even be carried in, like gas tanks! And jugs, and other containers that actually exist!
you’ll love my answer. Nuclear energy to make the electricity to make the hydrogen. but you have all the answers.
Makes far more sense and is far more efficient to take that nuclear-generated electricity and put it into the grid and use it for everything including storing some of it in battery packs in BEVs.
Hydrogen only “makes sense” to those who don’t understand basic science and basic economics.
right. you know more about science and basic economics than Toyota and Hyundai. Why are you wasting your incredible brilliance here? maybe you should go back and teach where you studied? had to be either harvard or yale? don’t say stanford, they will be so dissapointed in you
Well based on the actual sales flop that the Mirai and Nexo has been, apparently I do know more abut basic science and economics.
Or maybe they know too… but carry on with hydrogen mostly for political reasons.
But understanding the basics is not brilliance.
I know these things aren’t related in any way, shape, or form, but I’d feel a lot worse if RV manufacturers had done anything more than sell cheap-shit luan and particle board trash-bins-on-wheels.
The common thread, I guess if you had to find one, is the complete lack of goodwill they’ve earned. I’m not exactly pouring one out for those poor RV manufacturers that have been ripping people off with dogshit dog houses.
Amen
“there is no motorhome ban.” we’ll just make it impossible to buy one.
Buy one acre of land in Montana, register rv to that address. Rv is the house in Montana. Californians have been doing that forever.
Even easier: Register it in South Dakota. 😉
Bingo. Register elsewhere, problem solved. Well, it is ruining CARB’s plan to reduce emissions, but CARB enforcement is a joke.
a little trickier. have to stay in the state one night. and you have to sign a statement that you don’t own any physical property/real estate. not an atty, but you could put you property in an LLC maybe that owns the property? SD program is designed for those who live and travel in the vehicle. program provides those people with a legal mailing address.
Pretty sure everybody at CARB is going to be looking for a new job by February 2025
State =/ Federal
Carb is only allowed to exist because the federal government gives the state a waiver. Anything that crosses state lines is federal jurisdiction, so the state has actually no power to regulate any of this without federal permission.
Plus the original EPA regulations that CARB has a waiver from were never passed by Congress, so they’re illegal. The CARB death watch began last week.
All regulations. So pretty soon automakers could be looking at a chaotic situation. Medical devices, RF spectrum, the works.
And it’s not like Congress is functional enough to write and pass bills to restore even the really criticial regulations by drafting them into law.
Really feeling good about not having kids at this point.
1970’s era, eye-watering smog, here we come! Woohoo!
And you thought your kid’s asthma was bad now…
…oh well – removing fluoride from the water will fix that for sure.
CARB regulates a ton of in-state emissions, so I highly doubt they’re going away any time soon. As much as I think some of their decisions are boneheaded and mostly for show, I’m old and remember how fuckin’ awful the air quality was in the 70’s, so I don’t hate on CARB.
CARB can continue to regulate any engines produced in the state of California, just not those produced in another state
Increase states’ rights unless we disagree with that state’s decision, ammirite?
Man I hope so, but I think we’re going to need legislation to remove the waiver process or they’ll be back like a zombie at some point
I doubt that any legislation relating to CARB could be passed under budget reconciliation so it does not need 60 votes in the senate. I think it is much more likely that the supreme court confirms that states are not allowed to ban any product legally produced in another state.
“electric school buses, electric walk-in vans”
These are actually needed, whereas giant RVs for rich people… aren’t.
Sadly most traditional school busses I see are pretty awful. They’re super high up so much so you need stairs to get in them.
Busses with low floors and air suspension make a lot more sense as school buses, and for kids in wheelchairs you don’t need a heavy, bulky, and complex lift, you just have a fold out or slide out ramp that extends and retracts with one button.
Those should be what electric school busses are, instead most school busses are of the archaic design we’ve been using for longer than I’ve been alive, including the overwhelming majority of electric school bus designs I see.
Yeah, low-floor buses would be good, but I think schools typically don’t get the fancy stuff you see in public transit buses, like extendable ramps, kneeling, or low floors.
Kids in wheelchairs mostly get the small vans with lifts, don’t they?
I suppose for a school you know who needs accommodation and exactly where they are, so it’s more economical to get some special vans. Public transit you never know who’s going to be riding, and never know where they’ll get off and get on, so it’s more important to have the accommodations built in to the baseline vehicle.
they get the short bus
Welcome to the United States, where we don’t require anyone to demonstrate a need to own a particular type of vehicle. Living full-time in a motorhome, as many people do, is not limited to the wealthy either.
Multi-stop service over a fixed urban or suburban route is an ideal use case for electrification, too, where an RV isn’t.