Why are the USA taxpayers funding EV charging stations anyway? We all know every project like this the government takes on is fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse. The federal government isn't funding WAWAs and RaceTracs. If there is a market outside of Tesla for EV chargers, then let the private sector fund it.
Although EV charging stations are/will be a nice convenience, so are gas stations. I don't recall the government funding them. It seems like an EV charging stations would be a logical addition to a gas station or convenience store. I'm not familiar with EV chg stns but the appear to be more complicated and exotic than necessary. Educate me please, but isn't a electrical outlet all that is needed -- 110 or 220?
A wise government would support any industry that would help reduce carbon emissions . That would include the cement industry, the home building industry, transportation industry, etc. The Federal and local government did fund all the roads for ice cars and trucks. The 110 or 120 V outlets will not quick charge an EV. This is necessary for long distance travel.
As a licensed private pilot, this intrigues me. Let me make sure I understand what the current "idiot in charge" and his minions are saying. They want to afford all of the residents of Florida who today, on our roads, may speed, weave in and out of traffic at any speed, run red lights, drive without insurance or a license and even are driving as a DUI, the ability to do this in the sky over our towns and cities! If my understanding is correct and the FAA can stop laughing long enough to even consider the idea, then my flying days are over and I guess I need to leave Florida!
One piece of advice given to me by my flight instructor, "Remember, when something goes wrong in the sky, there is no place to "pull over" and call AAA for help or a tow. You will be back on the ground much faster than AAA can get to you!"
Its only going to be for mega wealthy people. Come on. Do you serio y sly think we'll have access? And funnily enough, they don't show who' "driving". It's a pilot.
Actually, if you define "flying cars" as "light aircraft with short takeoff and landing capabilities requiring no pilot's license," then they've been around since 1982. They're called "ultralight aircraft" and are governed by FAA Part 103 regulations. They can be, and often are (if you're suicidal enough), taken off and landed from ordinary paved and unpaved roadways. The hitch is that they are legally restricted to single-seat only, so you can't take your girlfriend for a spin. I say taking off and landing from paved and unpaved roadways is suicidal because an accidental interaction between an ultralight and a car would likely be fatal for the ultralight pilot. It is also against traffic laws in most jurisdictions. But, so is driving drunk!
BTW, ultralight aircraft have a very long history. One of the earliest aircraft to fit the ultralight description was the Santos-Dumont Demoiselle, first built in 1907. A beautiful replica was featured in Ken Annakin's hilarious 1965 film "Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines or How I Flew from London to Paris in 25 Hours 11 Minutes." Yes, it was the longest-titled film to be nominated for an Academy Award before 2021.
Stepping up to two-seater flying vehicles requires an FAA-registered light-sport aircraft and a light-sport pilot's license (20 hours of flight training). Most of those little kites would qualify as a "flying car" as well. Most of us real pilots cringe at the thought of a sky full of unqualified jamokes zooming around haphazardly in flying cars. Happily, being thousands of feet in the air with no wires holding you up scares the bejeezus out of most human beings, so the things are more popular in fiction than in fact.
In summary, there is no technical or legal impediment to owning a "flying car" today. It's just that most people don't really want to go anywhere near one!
As in all the other scams, it would be nice to know who will get the contracts on these giveaways. The grifters' supporters always make out like bandits with our tax dollars.
Keep one of the detention centers to house DeSantis, DDT, and all their cronies in and beneficiaries of their thefts and swindles. Let this all-electric facility be powered by their work at turning the generators. Let every inn-mate work 12 hours in 24 to “keep the lights on.” Let them repair the plumbing and patch the roof.
having a flying car would be super Duper cool I grew up watching the Jetsons. I could fly my car through those billion dollar arches that I paid for that are going up near the Trump library and I’m sorry if I’m wrong that the Arches were not paid for by taxpayers.
This is right on track. This childish level at which our politians, or so called leaders function. Eroding times for America. Two political parties, one totally incompetent, totally self serving and totally deranged. The other, incompetent and just self serving.
What baffles me is that it appears the federal government inserts no clause in the funding of these programs detailing the use of funds nor provides the states a timeline for implementing the equipment. A deadline, if you will for starting/completing these projects. It sounds like a lack of oversight as to how these funds are being spent on the specific projects for which they were intended. If a contract can be written in a sense where x amount of dollars are funded for x project and specifically for that project understanding that the penalties are severe for those x amount of dollars being appropriated for another project wouldn't that prevent those dollars from being spent elsewhere? Either use the money for said project or forfeit the money. Period. Wouldn't that dissuade state governments from using the money on projects for which it was not intended? A cmpletion date should also be furnished in these contracts to ensure appropriation of these funds be used in a reasonable amount of time to press the states to get these projects underway. Should the states need more time to complete the project then submit an extension to be reviewed by an oversight commission who would then, in turn approve or deny the extension. I don't see where that would be an issue. You can't just hand $10 over to someone in the street who claims they're hungry and expect them not to spend it on beer and liquor. The honor system is long gone in this world. The state government must be held accountable for appropriating the money as it was intentionally funded or not only lose that funding but suffer a great penalty, as well. Does that not make sense?
I'm a recent New Jersey transplant so that should give you enough for you to hate me. However, I feel slightly compelled (an oxymoron) to comment on the flying cars. As a disclosure I already invest in Archer Aircraft, an EV flying taxi stock. There is also Joby Aviation and at least one British company developing these vehicles. Flying cars, albeit taxis do exist and are close to deployment. Besides wanting to make some money, I invested because these company's product are electric driven and good for the environment. Contrary to the Arizona professor they carry 4 passengers and a pilot. They are also being developed for commercial payload carrying and military uses. Development is further projected to make these vehicle pilotless Archer has joined in development with the US government to jointly fund landing pads. In sum these are environmentally friendly and hopefully time saving devices. These are not gas burning, noisy helicopters.
But all that being said I am not aware of anything but a few pie in the sky visionaries trying for flying cars. Why transfer the havoc of Florida highways to Florida sky's ! Nothin g like a collision that will ultimately fall from the sky. While I don't yet own an electric car (I'm too cheap so far) I think they are a great idea. Everything should be done to further encourage their use. If DeSantis is in any way in his right mind he should use the money for the charging stations. Florida has enough vehicles to support these. I don't know if there is any State tax on the charging but if not they are missing a beat. How about tourism. Am I going to think about a Florida vacation if I can't drive my EV from up north or the Midwest. Unfortunately stupidity is one thing but corruption is another. Let private industry build heliports for taxis and DOT build charging stations. Maybe it won't eventually be so hot if we take charge of our environment
When I visited a friend in Lake Worth, FL, he took me around to a neighborhood where many people had runways for their private airplanes in their backyards. Maybe this could morph into a way to reimburse those people for their runways.
Misappropriation of funds seems to be the name of the game these days and you mentioned a few here in Florida. What comes to my mind is the recent revelation of Trump moving millions from the national parks budget to fund his vanity projects in DC.
So glad these clowns are almost out of office. David Jolly for governor! ----Citizens For Normal Humans in Office
Why are the USA taxpayers funding EV charging stations anyway? We all know every project like this the government takes on is fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse. The federal government isn't funding WAWAs and RaceTracs. If there is a market outside of Tesla for EV chargers, then let the private sector fund it.
Although EV charging stations are/will be a nice convenience, so are gas stations. I don't recall the government funding them. It seems like an EV charging stations would be a logical addition to a gas station or convenience store. I'm not familiar with EV chg stns but the appear to be more complicated and exotic than necessary. Educate me please, but isn't a electrical outlet all that is needed -- 110 or 220?
A wise government would support any industry that would help reduce carbon emissions . That would include the cement industry, the home building industry, transportation industry, etc. The Federal and local government did fund all the roads for ice cars and trucks. The 110 or 120 V outlets will not quick charge an EV. This is necessary for long distance travel.
As a licensed private pilot, this intrigues me. Let me make sure I understand what the current "idiot in charge" and his minions are saying. They want to afford all of the residents of Florida who today, on our roads, may speed, weave in and out of traffic at any speed, run red lights, drive without insurance or a license and even are driving as a DUI, the ability to do this in the sky over our towns and cities! If my understanding is correct and the FAA can stop laughing long enough to even consider the idea, then my flying days are over and I guess I need to leave Florida!
One piece of advice given to me by my flight instructor, "Remember, when something goes wrong in the sky, there is no place to "pull over" and call AAA for help or a tow. You will be back on the ground much faster than AAA can get to you!"
Its only going to be for mega wealthy people. Come on. Do you serio y sly think we'll have access? And funnily enough, they don't show who' "driving". It's a pilot.
Actually, if you define "flying cars" as "light aircraft with short takeoff and landing capabilities requiring no pilot's license," then they've been around since 1982. They're called "ultralight aircraft" and are governed by FAA Part 103 regulations. They can be, and often are (if you're suicidal enough), taken off and landed from ordinary paved and unpaved roadways. The hitch is that they are legally restricted to single-seat only, so you can't take your girlfriend for a spin. I say taking off and landing from paved and unpaved roadways is suicidal because an accidental interaction between an ultralight and a car would likely be fatal for the ultralight pilot. It is also against traffic laws in most jurisdictions. But, so is driving drunk!
BTW, ultralight aircraft have a very long history. One of the earliest aircraft to fit the ultralight description was the Santos-Dumont Demoiselle, first built in 1907. A beautiful replica was featured in Ken Annakin's hilarious 1965 film "Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines or How I Flew from London to Paris in 25 Hours 11 Minutes." Yes, it was the longest-titled film to be nominated for an Academy Award before 2021.
Stepping up to two-seater flying vehicles requires an FAA-registered light-sport aircraft and a light-sport pilot's license (20 hours of flight training). Most of those little kites would qualify as a "flying car" as well. Most of us real pilots cringe at the thought of a sky full of unqualified jamokes zooming around haphazardly in flying cars. Happily, being thousands of feet in the air with no wires holding you up scares the bejeezus out of most human beings, so the things are more popular in fiction than in fact.
In summary, there is no technical or legal impediment to owning a "flying car" today. It's just that most people don't really want to go anywhere near one!
As in all the other scams, it would be nice to know who will get the contracts on these giveaways. The grifters' supporters always make out like bandits with our tax dollars.
Keep one of the detention centers to house DeSantis, DDT, and all their cronies in and beneficiaries of their thefts and swindles. Let this all-electric facility be powered by their work at turning the generators. Let every inn-mate work 12 hours in 24 to “keep the lights on.” Let them repair the plumbing and patch the roof.
Don't forget clean the toilets.
DeSantis is just emulating another grifter he admires. What a stupid idea and yet another waste of money. We can't get rid of DeSantis fast enough.
having a flying car would be super Duper cool I grew up watching the Jetsons. I could fly my car through those billion dollar arches that I paid for that are going up near the Trump library and I’m sorry if I’m wrong that the Arches were not paid for by taxpayers.
See my essay for my contribution to the dream.
This is right on track. This childish level at which our politians, or so called leaders function. Eroding times for America. Two political parties, one totally incompetent, totally self serving and totally deranged. The other, incompetent and just self serving.
What baffles me is that it appears the federal government inserts no clause in the funding of these programs detailing the use of funds nor provides the states a timeline for implementing the equipment. A deadline, if you will for starting/completing these projects. It sounds like a lack of oversight as to how these funds are being spent on the specific projects for which they were intended. If a contract can be written in a sense where x amount of dollars are funded for x project and specifically for that project understanding that the penalties are severe for those x amount of dollars being appropriated for another project wouldn't that prevent those dollars from being spent elsewhere? Either use the money for said project or forfeit the money. Period. Wouldn't that dissuade state governments from using the money on projects for which it was not intended? A cmpletion date should also be furnished in these contracts to ensure appropriation of these funds be used in a reasonable amount of time to press the states to get these projects underway. Should the states need more time to complete the project then submit an extension to be reviewed by an oversight commission who would then, in turn approve or deny the extension. I don't see where that would be an issue. You can't just hand $10 over to someone in the street who claims they're hungry and expect them not to spend it on beer and liquor. The honor system is long gone in this world. The state government must be held accountable for appropriating the money as it was intentionally funded or not only lose that funding but suffer a great penalty, as well. Does that not make sense?
I believe there are time and place requirements imposed by the feds. However you have to keep in mind who's running the feds.
True
Well, its not a car and the only ones who will have access are the very wealthy.
I guess they will be safe on their flat planet.
I'm a recent New Jersey transplant so that should give you enough for you to hate me. However, I feel slightly compelled (an oxymoron) to comment on the flying cars. As a disclosure I already invest in Archer Aircraft, an EV flying taxi stock. There is also Joby Aviation and at least one British company developing these vehicles. Flying cars, albeit taxis do exist and are close to deployment. Besides wanting to make some money, I invested because these company's product are electric driven and good for the environment. Contrary to the Arizona professor they carry 4 passengers and a pilot. They are also being developed for commercial payload carrying and military uses. Development is further projected to make these vehicle pilotless Archer has joined in development with the US government to jointly fund landing pads. In sum these are environmentally friendly and hopefully time saving devices. These are not gas burning, noisy helicopters.
But all that being said I am not aware of anything but a few pie in the sky visionaries trying for flying cars. Why transfer the havoc of Florida highways to Florida sky's ! Nothin g like a collision that will ultimately fall from the sky. While I don't yet own an electric car (I'm too cheap so far) I think they are a great idea. Everything should be done to further encourage their use. If DeSantis is in any way in his right mind he should use the money for the charging stations. Florida has enough vehicles to support these. I don't know if there is any State tax on the charging but if not they are missing a beat. How about tourism. Am I going to think about a Florida vacation if I can't drive my EV from up north or the Midwest. Unfortunately stupidity is one thing but corruption is another. Let private industry build heliports for taxis and DOT build charging stations. Maybe it won't eventually be so hot if we take charge of our environment
When I visited a friend in Lake Worth, FL, he took me around to a neighborhood where many people had runways for their private airplanes in their backyards. Maybe this could morph into a way to reimburse those people for their runways.
Misappropriation of funds seems to be the name of the game these days and you mentioned a few here in Florida. What comes to my mind is the recent revelation of Trump moving millions from the national parks budget to fund his vanity projects in DC.