TRENTON, NJ— Governor Phil Murphy’s recent announcement to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035 has ignited a firestorm of criticism from various sectors. While the governor asserts that the move is essential for combating climate change and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, opponents argue that the plan is overly ambitious, economically burdensome, and logistically flawed.

Critics first point to the economic implications of such a ban. Transitioning from gasoline-powered vehicles to electric ones will require substantial investments in new infrastructure, such as charging stations, which could be costly for taxpayers and businesses. Additionally, electric vehicles (EVs) are currently more expensive than their gasoline counterparts, potentially placing a financial strain on middle- and lower-income families who may not be able to afford the higher upfront costs despite long-term savings on fuel and maintenance.

Automakers and industry experts have also raised concerns about the feasibility of meeting the 2035 deadline. The shift to electric vehicles requires significant advancements in battery technology, supply chain adjustments, and increased production capacity. Critics argue that the state’s infrastructure and market readiness for such a rapid transition are questionable, potentially leading to supply shortages and increased costs. Furthermore, the automotive industry, a significant employer in New Jersey, might face job losses or upheaval as the market shifts away from gasoline-powered vehicles.

Environmentalists and energy experts have voiced skepticism about the environmental benefits of the proposed ban.

While EVs produce zero tailpipe emissions, the electricity required to charge them often comes from non-renewable sources. Without a concurrent and substantial investment in clean energy, the environmental gains from switching to EVs may be less significant than projected. The production and disposal of EV batteries pose their own environmental challenges, including resource extraction and hazardous waste management.

Rural communities and those without easy access to charging infrastructure are particularly concerned about the practical implications of the ban. For residents in these areas, long distances between charging stations and extended charging times could pose significant inconveniences, making EVs less practical than gasoline-powered cars. This could exacerbate existing disparities between urban and rural areas, where infrastructure investments are already lagging.

Additionally, the rapid push towards an all-electric future raises questions about energy grid capacity and reliability. The increased demand for electricity to charge millions of EVs could strain the existing grid, leading to potential blackouts or the need for expensive upgrades. Critics argue that the state has yet to present a comprehensive plan to ensure that the energy grid can handle this added load without compromising reliability.

There is the issue of public readiness and acceptance. Many New Jersey residents remain skeptical of EVs due to concerns about range, charging times, and overall convenience compared to gasoline-powered cars. Critics of the ban argue that more needs to be done to educate the public and incentivize the transition to EVs rather than imposing an outright ban.

Governor Murphy’s 2035 gasoline car ban is rooted in noble intentions of addressing climate change, the plan faces significant opposition due to its economic, logistical, and practical challenges.

A more gradual and well-supported transition, coupled with investments in clean energy and infrastructure, may be necessary to achieve the desired environmental benefits without imposing undue burdens on New Jersey’s residents and economy.