La_Verdad wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:

I would be 100% supportive of that as long as it covers the true cost. Cost of land, construction, operations and maintenance, overnight parking benefit, etc... And of course the electricity.

I don't trust the city to run this out directly but they could enter into a franchise agreement with a for-profit company.

Why hold the electric vehicle industry to a standard so much higher than that of the oil industry (and by extension, the internal combustion car)?? No one would be able to afford gasoline if oil companies were forced to bear the full cost of the pollution they spew, the associated health issues and premature deaths, the wars that are fought on behalf of access to oil, the various price subsidies it enjoys throughout much of the world...

JCGuys wrote:

I would be 100% supportive of that as long as it covers the true cost. Cost of land, construction, operations and maintenance, overnight parking benefit, etc... And of course the electricity.

I don't trust the city to run this out directly but they could enter into a franchise agreement with a for-profit company.

caj11 wrote:
Getting back to the charging station issue, if people are so concerned about the city subsidizing something that only rich people own, couldn't these charging stations have credit card readers on them, so people actually pay to use them? The city could charge enough for both the operation of them and to recover the cost of installing them. Or does someone with more insight on this topic want to tell me that is not realistic?

JCGuys wrote:
Tesla crashing and burning today with proposed ends of subsidies. lol

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/11/ ... are_price_drop_tax_break/

"The proposed House tax bill calls for an immediate repeal of the $7,500-per-vehicle credit: something that would have an immediate knock-on impact for Tesla given that it only produces electric cars.

Its share price fell more than seven per cent to about $296 apiece from Wednesday's $321. The draft law emerged as the Elon-Musk-led automaker announced its worst-ever quarter, recording a $671m loss and admitting it had not met its production target for its new Model 3 car, producing just 220 of them against its 1,500 target."

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Nothing without the billions in government subsidies

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11 ... -3-delivery-stock-tumbles

The whole finance model is a pyramid scheme... with taxpayers assuming all the risk. That is why Musk is all in with running Puerto Rico power grid on batteries.

As long as Musk can keep finding investors (see China move), he is solvent. No legitimate energy company is going to "bid" on the restoration job without Fed guarantees. Musk knows that some piece will got to "green" energy companies.

BTW Take a close look at your 401K Mutual Funds... just noticed I had one with my money on Tesla stock as part of the portfolio. Dumped it quick.

JCGuys wrote:
Nothing without the billions in government subsidies

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11 ... -3-delivery-stock-tumbles

JCGuys wrote:
I also want to add that the installation of electric car charging stations is a subsidy to the rich, who are more likely going to be owning that electric Tesla or Prius. Why are we providing subsidy in this area? A privately-owned gas station must purchase land and install equipment in order to service cars, why can't the same be for electric?

Would it still be such a good deal if electric car owners bear the true costs associated with their vehicles by getting private industry to purchase the land and construct the car charging stations? Why is this a government function? And if you're a resident of Jersey City that relies on transit or biking, the much more efficient options, this is just a giant F U.

I hate pet projects that benefit 0.01% of the population at the expense of everyone else. I'm sure Wards A,B,C,D and F are going to love this investment in the neighborhood... It might score a few political points with the ivory tower folks in Ward E though, so that makes it alright.

mcgsp wrote:
Quote:

light12v wrote:
BIG WOW

I am sure that those in less affluent areas of the city who can't afford their rising rents, no less new cars, will be doing happy dances !

So many bad assumptions in your response as well as others, that to get to the gist of all of them, could take all day.

1st. If needs to buy vehicle for transportation which many in all wards of the city need to do they could for the same price as a used ICE vehicle puchase a used electric one. Electrics have been out since 2010 and there are plenty to be had for reasonable prices

2. The up keep of an electric is so much less than a ICE car, there are no oil changes, few fluids in which to replace, brakes may last for as much as 100,000 miles do to regenerative braking and less to go wrong on the motor an engagement to the wheels.

3. If money is the issue, home charging for electrics is so far less than a ICE vehicle, it costs on average $1.20 to charge a chevy volt to .03? a mile for a tesla S with home charging , while the average ICE car is around .20? a mile.

4. And then there is the small issue of air quality issues in urban confines. JC has an alarming rate of children with asthma and yet little has been done to remove the major source of the air pollutants in this region which in no small part is do ICE vehicles and trucks.

5. ICE vehicles are also a major factor to the degradation of our infrastructure including bridges, roads and our buildings. The pollutants including new cars let off acidic pollutants, much of the discoloration and degradation of our buildings is do to the pollutants emitted by ICE vehicles.

And then the people who say its big car companies that are pushing EVS, oh I wish they were. GM, Nissan, VW, Mercedes, BMW and others advertising budget for their EVs is a fraction of Chevy's Impala. So lets blame the major manufacturers for producing EV cars and Vans but not blame them for pushing ICE cars onto us.

I know forums are usually for the ill informed and the disgruntled but please don't take it out on EVs they just want a chance to be on the streets and have access to charging as many of your ICE driven cars that have options of gassing up.

Be nice to them they just want a chance to play with the older kids on the block.

mcgsp wrote:
Quote:

light12v wrote:
BIG WOW

I am sure that those in less affluent areas of the city who can't afford their rising rents, no less new cars, will be doing happy dances !

So many bad assumptions in your response as well as others, that to get to the gist of all of them, could take all day.

1st. If needs to buy vehicle for transportation which many in all wards of the city need to do they could for the same price as a used ICE vehicle puchase a used electric one. Electrics have been out since 2010 and there are plenty to be had for reasonable prices

2. The up keep of an electric is so much less than a ICE car, there are no oil changes, few fluids in which to replace, brakes may last for as much as 100,000 miles do to regenerative braking and less to go wrong on the motor an engagement to the wheels.

3. If money is the issue, home charging for electrics is so far less than a ICE vehicle, it costs on average $1.20 to charge a chevy volt to .03? a mile for a tesla S with home charging , while the average ICE car is around .20? a mile.

4. And then there is the small issue of air quality issues in urban confines. JC has an alarming rate of children with asthma and yet little has been done to remove the major source of the air pollutants in this region which in no small part is do ICE vehicles and trucks.

5. ICE vehicles are also a major factor to the degradation of our infrastructure including bridges, roads and our buildings. The pollutants including new cars let off acidic pollutants, much of the discoloration and degradation of our buildings is do to the pollutants emitted by ICE vehicles.

And then the people who say its big car companies that are pushing EVS, oh I wish they were. GM, Nissan, VW, Mercedes, BMW and others advertising budget for their EVs is a fraction of Chevy's Impala. So lets blame the major manufacturers for producing EV cars and Vans but not blame them for pushing ICE cars onto us.

I know forums are usually for the ill informed and the disgruntled but please don't take it out on EVs they just want a chance to be on the streets and have access to charging as many of your ICE driven cars that have options of gassing up.

Be nice to them they just want a chance to play with the older kids on the block.

light12v wrote:
BIG WOW

I am sure that those in less affluent areas of the city who can't afford their rising rents, no less new cars, will be doing happy dances !

JPhurst wrote:
This administration has required amenities to go in every ward even if demand is higher in particular areas. That was the case with Citibike and is the case for the charging stations.

If the city didn't do that, the inevitable complaint would be "the city just cares about downtown."

And yet when the city does that, the complaint is "the residents of those wards don't care about that."

ahab wrote:
...Nothing? C'mon guys, where is the cavalcade of callous commenters??

I guess I'll start:

Ummm.. something something, electric cars are terrible, something something, climate change is a hoax, something something parking!1!!!, something, Fulop and his developer buddies are to blame, something something, property taxes.