[Equilibrandt]

The same way tens of thousands of blue collar factory workers have worked with their employers to get CNC certified.

To work the jobs that the robots/CNCs took over.

Take the CHIPS Act that just passed. Tons of new jobs in the south, where labor revolution is needed. Cash influxes, training, all to make tech that we don't have here.

How do you get people to pursue qualification, training, or education in the power field that needs labor? The same way McDonalds somehow stays open: they up how much they'll pay the cooks and the invisible hand of economics (Economics 101, duh) ushers in new fry-oil experts. Stating that upping wages will never solve the problem is categorically false. Eventually, the money brings the labor. How long it takes to bring qualified labor is the question; you have to be paying well enough for long enough to entice anyone to pursue.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

If production and sale of ICE vehicles are being ended in 13 years then:

- production will be slowed as the deadline approaches, making supply smaller and prices higher

...of ICE cars, but not EVs.

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

- to minimize costs, ICE infrastructure - fuel stations / oil change businesses, parts warehouses, etc - will be maintained to a bare minimum and shuttered as demand wanes (business economics 101)

An obstacle, no question, but not a reason to not act

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

- ICE engineering jobs will be minimized and/or eliminated - along with those highly skilled professionals (hopefully) moving on to other industries

EV jobs will replace them, and those engineers can bring what they know, or adapt to new technologies, just like every other field when new technology creates a shift.

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

- factories and other production infrastructure will be retooled or abandoned and replaced.

...just like every other field when new technology creates a shift.

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

How do you reverse each of the above casualties of a hard changeover to EVs?

It's not a "hard changeover". We have 13 years to prepare.

Originally Posted by CarsAndGuitars

I work in software development. We do more than write code. Part of every release is a ROLLBACK PLAN, which is discussed and validated before each and every release. What if things don't go as expected? What if it is a big thing, or one small thing that has a snowball effect? If we need to, we can rollback some or all of the code, effectively undoing the errant part of the release.

With or without a plan to go forward, California and the other lemming states need a CTRL-Z keystroke combination. If they don't have it, they are betting the farm.

We have 13 years to make adjustments. Who knows, maybe in 7 years we will realize that we need to push the date. Legislature can be changed.

"lemming states" is relative. We will see who will be the ones jumping off the cliff by not keeping up. Who knows, maybe 2035 will work, and those who have gone through 13 years of growing pains will be ready for an EV majority public, have infrastructure that can handle the load, and plenty of charging options. Then there are the "lemming states" who don't have the grid capacity, little charging options, and have to deal with low ICE inventory because most manufacturers have switched to primarily EVs.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Equilibrandt

The same way tens of thousands of blue collar factory workers have worked with their employers to get CNC certified.

To work the jobs that the robots/CNCs took over.

Take the CHIPS Act that just passed. Tons of new jobs in the south, where labor revolution is needed. Cash influxes, training, all to make tech that we don't have here.

How do you get people to pursue qualification, training, or education in the power field that needs labor? The same way McDonalds somehow stays open: they up how much they'll pay the cooks and the invisible hand of economics (Economics 101, duh) ushers in new fry-oil experts. Stating that upping wages will never solve the problem is categorically false. Eventually, the money brings the labor. How long it takes to bring qualified labor is the question; you have to be paying well enough for long enough to entice anyone to pursue.

It's so hypocritical to uphold the "free market" when we discuss subsidies, but when the "free market" replaces jobs with technology, we sing a different tune.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Saying it can't be done has nothing to do with saying X is invalid.

Agreed. The next step is to find another way.

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Build an aqueduct to extract what water? Engineers can't made water from nothing. Focused on the cart and ignoring the horse that pulls it?

You're missing the point of the metaphor if you are asking this question, they still need the water.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by Equilibrandt

The same way tens of thousands of blue collar factory workers have worked with their employers to get CNC certified.

To work the jobs that the robots/CNCs took over.

Do you think that is an intellectual equivalent? Are you confidant you would you pass our entrance exam?

Eventually, the money brings the labor. How long it takes to bring qualified labor is the question; you have to be paying well enough for long enough to entice anyone to pursue.

We've been rising wages for the last 10 years and it's gotten worse, not better. The "worse" part seems to be accelerating because of what the school systems and society produce. Young students would rather program video games than design infrastructure.

You have <13 years to be done with this transition, when do you plan on starting their training?

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by jmg

You're missing the point of the metaphor if you are asking this question, but let's say there is a lake 5 miles away.

Or lets say there is no water and you already planted the crops. Engineering problem, or stupid farmer?

[Equilibrandt]

Originally Posted by jmg

Then there are the "lemming states" who don't have the grid capacity, little charging options, and have to deal with low ICE inventory because most manufacturers have switched to primarily EVs.

This is something I hadn't thought of; excellent point on your part. Regardless of which side of the issue everyone is on, this is something I'd be deeply concerned about.

Getting left behind, in my opinion, would pose a much greater risk to the people of those states than being a resident of one of the states that pursues EVs and fails (realistically, failure isn't an option and the dates will just slide to the right).

[Equilibrandt]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Do you think that is an intellectual equivalent? Are you confidant you would you pass our entrance exam?

Not sure why you're attacking me - I've got a Master's in Mechanical Engineering and, given time to educate myself and prepare (also assuming you'd pay me enough to leave my field), I, and many others, would have have no problem passing your fabled entrance exam.

There aren't infinite software engineering jobs to 'program video games', lol. I know a lot of them, and they all make $150k+, and it's an incredibly difficult field to break into. Simple supply and demand means there won't be a million software engineers out there, jobless, who should've pursued infrastructure. Sounds like your company might have to make the painful shift to apprenticeships to prepare its neophytes for the entrance exam. Invest in the new generation, reap the rewards of not needing labor.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by Equilibrandt

Not sure why you're attacking me - I've got a Master's in Mechanical Engineering and, given time to educate myself and prepare (also assuming you'd pay me enough to leave my field), I, and many others, would have have no problem passing your fabled entrance exam.

There aren't infinite software engineering jobs to 'program video games', lol. Simple supply and demand means there won't be a million software engineers out there, jobless, who should've pursued power.

No attacking you, pointing out not everyone qualifies even if they are smart enough. Unfortunately most aren't smart enough anyway. Average IQ is only 100, and that's way too low for this kind of work.

There aren't an infinite number of electrical workers either.

Would you even want to become an electrical worker? few do it seems. You chose your vocation for reasons that mean something to you. Was it money or something else?

While You may think you can turn a coal miner into a computer programmer by throwing money on a table, you can't expect it to happen quickly, or go smoothly.

[Equilibrandt]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/bu...n/10372794002/

From 2 hours ago:
"You all are going to be part of a network of 500,000 charging stations ... installed by the IBEW (labor union), who I owe a special thanks to for the last election," the Democratic president said.

Biden added: "The great American road trip is going to be fully electrified whether you're driving along the coast ... or on I-75 here in Michigan."

Grandad is talkin' about changes to infrastructure.

[Equilibrandt]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

No attacking you, pointing out not everyone qualifies even if they are smart enough. Unfortunately most aren't smart enough anyway. Average IQ is only 100, and that's way too low for this kind of work.

There aren't an infinite number of electrical workers either.

Would you even want to become an electrical worker? few do it seems. You chose your vocation for reasons that mean something to you. Was it money or something else?

While You may think you can turn a coal miner into a computer programmer by throwing money on a table, you can't expect it to happen quickly, or go smoothly.

I don't disagree with any of that.

About 50% of my career choice was because of what I liked to do as a kid.
The other 50% were purely driven by the fact that I wanted a house before age 30 in California and a BMW M3, and the jobs filtered themselves out.

The average person weighs their loves, their intellect and what they think they're capable of, and their salary targets and chooses a profession. I have a friend who, from the day I met them in high school, never had any aspirations outside of being a Subaru dealership mechanic. And here he is, doing that. If I were some CEO/COO/CFO, I'd be taking a hard look at why no one wants my company after high school, community college, trades, university, etc.

[H2O_Doc]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Come on man. Now you are just making shit up. You need to write movies. Lol.

Umm,this was figured out a while back. Really. It's interesting.

Do you know the history of how the periodic table was pieced together. It's a good example of how we can figure some interesting and complicated shit out. Really worth reading about. Yes, that's a tangent.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

Or lets say there is no water and you already planted the crops. Engineering problem, or stupid farmer?

Crops still need water. Can't go back in time.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by H2O_Doc

Umm,this was figured out a while back. Really. It's interesting.

Do you know the history of how the periodic table was pieced together. It's a good example of how we can figure some interesting and complicated shit out. Really worth reading about. Yes, that's a tangent.

The history of the periodic table is fascinating and a good example of inference. Scientists predicted elements that hadn't even discovered yet based on elements relationships with each other and the patterns formed with their properties.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Exactly my point; impossible.

The argument about anthropogenic climate change is the Earth's temperature rise of just a few degrees C over a few centuries will drastically change inhabitation scenarious for humans. That was the concern 20 years ago. Now the argument is the rate of change is much faster because the previous story didn't take hold with well educated skeptics. The mantra even reached a point where just 3 years ago they climate fearers drew a line in the sand that stated in 12 years we will have reached to point of "critical mass", the "point of no return" where reversing anthropogenic climate impacts will not be possible.

Please, not almost of us are that stupid and gullible.

I posted this earlier:

Originally Posted by jmg

Skeptics who dismiss scientific models wholesale by using self-correction as proof of ineptitude don't understand how necessary self-correction is to science. It's a contradiction. The ability to change actually makes it more credible since the priority is truth, not dogma, even if they have to admit they were wrong in the past.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by jmg

Crops still need water. Can't go back in time.

So plant the crops and expect a miracle? "Don't worry, the engineers will find the water for my crops"? "I already planted them so now they will be highly motivated to find it if they expect to eat".


That's not just irresponsible, it's magical thinking.

This is why I call it an invented crisis. Not because I don't believe the planet needs these changes, but because the timeline is forced and in error, and will cause unnecessary suffering if we try to comply with the mandate as written.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by jmg

The history of the periodic table is fascinating and a good example of inference. Scientists predicted elements that hadn't even discovered yet based on elements relationships with each other and the patterns formed with their properties.

Many elements exist in theory just fine, but in reality are highly unstable and decompose rapidly and violently when brought into actual existence. This can be predicted and anticipated without having got "try it" with simple calculations, and is at present, is unavoidable.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

So plant the crops and expect a miracle? "Don't worry, the engineers will find the water for my crops"? "I already planted them so now they will be highly motivated to find it if they expect to eat".


That's not just irresponsible, it's magical thinking.

It's a simple metaphor, I didn't write a whole backstory. Let's assume it was planted in a wet area and it became dry over time. One of the solutions might be to move, but that didn't invalidate that the crops need water. It doesn't matter who's fault it was in this case.

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

This is why I call it an invented crisis. Not because I don't believe the planet needs these changes, but because the timeline is forced and in error, and will cause unnecessary suffering if we try to comply with the mandate as written.

I don't know the timeline is in error, but at least we can agree that there needs to be a change.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by jmg

It's a simple metaphor, I didn't write a whole backstory. Let's assume it was planted in a wet area and it became dry over time. One of the solutions might be to move, but that didn't invalidate that the crops need water. It doesn't matter who's fault it was in this case.

It brings up the question about why the crops were planted there in the first place without a plan to water them. The obvious answer is that a plan needs developed, but that's not the solution, it's just a step in the right direction. Without a plan, you are just risking everyone's food supply.

poor planning rarely results in good results.

I don't know the timeline is in error, but at least we can agree that there needs to be a change.

I do, because I'm one of the guys that has to deliver on this magical thinking.

[jmg]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

It brings up the question about why the crops were planted there in the first place without a plan to water them. The obvious answer is that a plan needs developed, but that's not the solution, it's just a step in the right direction. Without a plan, you are just risking everyone's food supply.

poor planning rarely results in good results.

Sometimes problems are inherited. Maybe when the farm was started, there was water, and the river was dammed to divert water to a major city. Who knows. All the famer knows is, they need water. Poor planning is good to recognize in retrospect so we don't repeat a mistake, but the problem remains.

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

I do, because I'm one of the guys that has to deliver on this magical thinking.

To be honestly blunt, this is why there is a chain of command. You might not like it, but someone is often making promises that the workers in the trenches feel like it's impossible to meet. Ideally, these people see a bigger picture, often playing a chess game with expectations vs promises vs reality to get a project done. It's often above the scope of the ones that are actually doing the grunt work, and leads to a lot of drama and finger pointing. aka the metaphor I mentioned earlier in the thread: a project leader sets an impossible goal, the engineers protest and say it's impossible, then somehow a dance between the engineers, investors, and project leaders begins, and in the end success is somewhere between possible and impossible.

I've seen it too many times in my business. My team says something is not possible, and I come up with a game plan that they didn't consider and make it possible.

[chad86tsi]

Originally Posted by jmg

Poor planning is good to recognize in retrospect so we don't repeat a mistake, but the problem remains.

To be honestly blunt, this is why there is a chain of command. You might not like it, but someone is often making promises that the workers in the trenches feel like it's impossible to meet.

You talking about Putin?

[jmg]

Originally Posted by chad86tsi

You talking about Putin?

lol no... but the military often functions like this with varying degrees of success.