Future of driving a "classic" car

[Tweeds]

Stringent regulations on classic cars would be one of the last boxes to check along the logical progression in the war on climate change. As someone said earlier, classic cars are a very small percentage of cars on the road. There are far bigger problems that would need to be assessed first, and to regulate classic cars right off the bat would be like spraying a burning house with a water hose thinking it'll make a difference, or to restore a crumbling building firstly by painting it, that way you at least won't notice the deteriorating walls. The only reason I can imagine classic cars would be regulated prematurely is so a politician can look like they're making a difference or an effort when in reality they hardly accomplished anything substantial. At any rate, I live in a small town where large trucks blow out black smoke (roll coal) and while this, too, is a minor problem in the grand scheme of climate change, it is marginally bigger than classic cars. I'll begin to worry we're next once these trucks are put under the political and ecological microscope. Until then, I'm more worried about ethanol ruining my car than I am about the government regulating it.

[Pilgrim]

Agreed, classic and collectible cars are not significant contributors to climate issues. There aren't enough of them to matter, and they aren't being driven 10-20,000 miles per year. 

The availability and price of gas is much more likely to become an issue. As with most things, gas is only going to get more expensive. However, there's such a large installed base of gasoline-based vehicles that I don't foresee a supply problem in the next decade or two. The faster electric vehicles come on, the sooner gas production will become an issue. 

[Captain Obvious]

So why should we have environmental restrictions in the US that they don't impose in other countries? Someone answered that question earlier... "US, Europe are the cleanest on the planet, and have improved drastically."

Sounds like if you want to live in the cleanest part of the world, you have to work at it and pay for it. If you allow a free-for-all with no restrictions, you get what people are complaining about in other parts of the world. There are compromises between many competing priorities that have to be made in order to enjoy the benefits.

And I agree with several of the posters above when it comes to classic cars. I have zero fear that there will be restrictions on my use of my classic Z that would hamper my use of it.

I'm not alarmist. I'm not worried about my Z.

[Tweeds]

5 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

The availability and price of gas is much more likely to become an issue. As with most things, gas is only going to get more expensive. However, there's such a large installed base of gasoline-based vehicles that I don't foresee a supply problem in the next decade or two. The faster electric vehicles come on, the sooner gas production will become an issue. 

You make an interesting point, but I don't see gas availability or taxation becoming a problem even in our lifetimes. In order for the government to ween us off of gasoline, everything that relies on gas  must become electric - that includes boats, cars, bikes, and, most importantly semis (lorries for the Europeans). In such a case, we'd see gasoline transition from an essential consumer commodity to a luxury item. If it were a luxury item, then they could tax the dog wizz out of it like cigarettes, weed, and booze. But, even then, the government would have to be comfortable enough to make such an egregious decision knowing they won't wizz off the whole nation and, more importantly, Wall Street. A government's laws ought to represent the sensibilities of its people, and most people like their gasoline cars, or are otherwise impartial. Also, most of our society own gasoline powered cars, and therefore have a vested interest in the supply of gas. To cut us off would not fly well - nobody anytime soon would vote for someone who runs on a platform which conspires to suffocate petrol cars, and no politician is dumb enough to champion such an ideal (except maybe an extremist or third party politician would, but they'll never win anyways). It's only when the majority of US citizens daily drive electric cars,  and no longer see their gas engine as a necessity that 'gas as a luxury' will become a reality. At that point though, I hope I'm long dead.

Lastly, and most importantly, the global economy runs on gasoline, and I don't see that changing anytime soon. Planes, freight ships, and semis need gas, and if gas is phased out, how will international commerce continue? Maybe the government will pitch it as, "gas is a necessity for commercial use, not private use (i.e. cars)." And if that's their argument, and the American people are dumb enough to buy that half assed reason as a means to save the penguins, then I really hope I'm dead.

[Pilgrim]

Well, I can comment about this, but it will sound like the setup for a dystopian novel.

So here goes.....

There are people who think oil will last forever; I have spoken to them and marveled at how resistant to reality they are. The fact is, oil is a finite resource. I've often wondered if the US really, truly wants to hurry and deplete its oil supply, because when oil starts to run out, I expect a major world war to be fought over the remaining oil.  (Very dystopian, right??) At that point, it would be a lot better for the US to have the remaining supply than to be one of the outsiders trying to get at it.

But no, we need to tap our oil as fast and as thoroughly as possible, which at some remote time will leave us totally dependent on other countries for oil, IF (and this is a big IF) oil is still the most standard energy source at that time. It sure would make more sense for us to transition away from oil well before that happens.

The bad news is that there's a basic truth: oil will run out IF we keep using it.

So if you don't want to have a dystopian novel on your hands, it makes perfect sense to pursue electricity, solar, hydrogen, fusion energy, and wireless transmission of energy through the radio spectrum.

Part II (or alternative scenario) of that little situation springs from the scarcity of rare metals and their critical use in all kinds of electrical battery packs. (This is real, and is A Thing even today!) Just as an aside, the US has very few of the rare metals that are needed for those batteries that we currently use in cell phones and other portable devices.  I could easily set up a different dystopian novel around the fight for access to the rare metals needed to support the use of electronic devices and transportation, and that novel could be set in the next 30 years.

Now that I've ruined your day with the setup for two dystopian novels about prophesized world war, I'll go have my second cup of coffee. Maybe that will cheer me up.

[grannyknot]

4 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

I could easily set up a different dystopian novel around the fight for access to the rare metals needed to support the use of electronic devices and transportation, and that novel could be set in the next 30 years.

That's one of the reasons why we're heading back to the moon,  despite the agreements that were signed 60 yrs ago about no country claiming mineral rights or territory on the moon, you can bet your life that if a cost effective way is found there will be mining.

[siteunseen]

[Tweeds]

@Pilgrim Good argument, I had completely forgotten that fossil fuels will inevitably run out. Oil is projected to run out in something like fifty years I read if we continue at the rate we do. When the reservoir is alarmingly low, I can't imagine how the world is going to adapt. It'll force the governments' hands, sure, but what they'll do is beyond me. I'd be interested to know what entities consume the most gas - is it the conglomeration of all gas burning cars, or everything industrial such as shipping vehicles? Consumers shifting to renewable resources seems a whole lot more feasible than industries. I just don't have enough faith in the US, China, or India beginning the shift before they absolutely have to. Too much money's involved. Who knows though, maybe technology will advance enough that renewable resources are so widely available, it wouldn't make sense not to use them. Funny, when it's all said and done, the only thing left green on this Earth will be a US dollar bill. 

[Pilgrim]

In the meantime, I need to finish the sound deadening in my 280ZX while the weather permits driving!!  😎

[Dave WM]

took my z out and burned some gas, pumped out some carbon, and loved every minute of it. 75 mile round trip so I could feed some tree rats some pecans, harvested no doubt by some huge combine like machine. Now going to change the engine oil after 2500 miles cause it looks a bit brown.

[Captain Obvious]

And I put a furry blue sour cream container in the trash can today that I should have recycled. @Dave WM and I are clearly wildmen living the American dream!!

In my own defense, out of the corner of my eye, I think I saw it move under it's own power. I didn't want to stick anything in it to clean it out.

[AK260]

Imagine what that would do to the price of precious metals if it was possible to get a fraction of it to earth!!?