Kolodny, L. (2022, January 11). California’s blueprint budget has $6.1 billion for electric vehicle initiatives. CNBC. Retrieved February 5, 2022, from https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/10/california-proposes-6point1-billion-in-new-incentives-for-electric-vehicles-.html
The article outlines more parts of the $286.4 billion budget that included the $4.2 billion for the high speed rail build, highlighting spending on EV development and other electrification measures. 50% of California’s greenhouse gas emissions are from transportation, so this investment makes a massive difference in lowering California’s overall emissions. The article also mentioned the complete ban on selling new gas-powered vehicles by 2035. It also noted that California has a large supply of lithium, needed for construction of EV batteries and that California has a budget surplus of $45 billion, which Newsome plans to pay some back to taxpayers.
This article relates to environmental science in that it’s policy that works towards lowering greenhouse gas and environmental impacts from the transportation industry in California. I think that investment in EVs is extremely important and one of the best ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But, I think that moving away from natural gas as our main power source in California is more important, because an EV using power from natural gas is not really helping with greenhouse gas emissions. I commend Newsom for spending so much on renewable investments, but I’m not 100% confident that the money will be spent efficiently.
This was really interesting! I’d had no idea that California planned to focus more on electricity in terms of transport. A question I had was; do you think the proposed plan will last long term?
Thanks for reading. I think that if it’s implemented well, it will last.
Is the environmental cost of getting the lithium materials required worth the potential gain from more electric transportation?
Thanks for reading. Yes, because greenhouse gases are the most pressing problem we face.
I think that this is a good point and I agree with your argument, but I also think that it is much easier to say that we will move away from natural gas than it is to actually do it. So, what do you think we could do in order to make this happen?
Thanks for reading. I think that moving to nuclear will make this much easier, as evident in France who moved away from coal.