[andrewclunn]

Passing laws now about what SHOULD be in the future is a way for politicians to make it seem like they're doing something when they have no real solutions. It will be technology and industry innovators and disruptors that make this possible, but I'm sure the intelligentsia and politicians will give "forward thinking policy makers" the credit.

[thesimon]

So instead of helping EV companies ("industry innovators and disruptors") by making their products more attractive, they should just do nothing and hope some "disruptors" come around?

[astrodust]

How many hundreds of millions more in tax breaks and subsidies does Tesla need?

They're getting a lot of help.

[Skinney]

Forget Tesla. Stuff like this makes it interesting for other companies to join the competition. And competition is good.

[Skinney]

1) This is not a law or a planned ban. It's a mission statement. A target. You'd be hard pressed to find a government more opposed to bans than the one we have right now. Chances are they will increase tax on emissions to reach this target, but they could also do nothing and hope the market will sort it out on its own.

2) Political bans, taxation or subsidies creates incentives. This has a habit of bringing innovators and disruptors out of the woodwork.