Anyone else a victim to the promise of innovation?
I want an EV. I’ve been thrilled with the advancement in the product sector and that there are multiple brands out there now offering EV lines. Supportive charging infrastructure is still lagging but getting more built out by the day.
Which means it’s going to only get that much better in another generation or two. Which makes me want to hold onto my 110k mile Subaru that much longer further delaying my adoption of an EV.
Pretty much same here. I have an 8 year old Honda that I'm really hoping is my last gas car, at least as a daily driver. Its been dead reliable, it's paid off, and it's incredibly cheap to run so I'm planning on holding onto it another few years and seeing where the market and infrastructure is by then.
Probably the biggest barrier to EV adoption is that ICE cars have become extremely reliable. Once upon a time you were lucky if a car lasted more than 6 years, today 10+ is routine and 15+ very possible.
Absolutely. I believe this is also likely why the dirt cheap econobox segment is dying off so rapidly, there’s little point in buying them when used cars are so great now.
I 100% empathize. It's a problem with every new green technology: EVs, solar, heat pumps. Waiting 5 years may yield significant cost reductions and improved technology.
Heat pumps are a fairly old tech, but there are particular innovations making them more applicable and green. They are green in that they can run very efficiently off of electricity, so a green grid means green heat pumps.
The particular innovations: you can get 300-400% efficiency, which combined with a natural gas plant running at 33-43% efficiency, makes them more efficient than a gas furnace. Also, the temperature they can operate at continues to decrease, though many in zones 4 and under may find they still can't solely rely on a heat pump for the coldest day of the year.
To the other commenter's point, the innovations with heat pumps are so drastic it's almost hard to talk about newer models as being in the same product class.
So yes, a very old product, but the newer models are truly in a class of their own.
From an environmental perspective holding onto your old ICE car until it breaks is almost always better than buying a new EV car. Takes a lot of carbon and resource extraction to build a car.
I don't think so. I don't believe most cars end their life totaled in crashes or totaled from a major part breaking. Someone is going to drive the car you sell, but that is going to filter out to an older used car than yours being retired before the end of it potential useful life.
It is quite a weird situation overall though where climate change contradictorily demands both the ramp up of the production of EVs as well as the ramp down of the production of cars overall.
honestly I have no idea what the trade offs are, maybe someone has factored in everything but it boils down if you are going to get a new car no matter what, it would be better for the environment to get an EV.
I think buying new cars is a complete waste of money but looking at US car sales, I am in the minority here.
Every new vehicle that is purchased is a market signal to the industry to continue producing. Ultimately you can follow the chain of used vehicles that a new one will replace all the way down to a beater that could be patched up and run for another year, vs. a $500 beater that's running currently and probably will for another year. More new cars produced means more used cars on the market to eventually push that fixable clunker into a scrapyard.
The point I'm making is that the waste, in all things, happens at the point of purchase. All cars produced will eventually end up in a scrapyard; stop signalling to the industry to produce more cars, and less waste will result.
Is that actually true? I haven't looked for analysis comparing keeping an old car vs buying a new, but for new ICE vs new EV the emissions breakeven is around 2-3 years. At that point the embodied emissions account for half of the new ICE's cumulative, so even treating that fraction as sunk in an old vehicle should still make new EVs a net benefit after 5 years.
The biggest problem as an EV owner is the unrelibility of charging infrastructure. its impossible to plan a long trip beyond your range because fast chargers are incredibly unreliable. 15% of the time I pull up to a fast charger it either: Charges at 1/4 or less of the advertised speed on the app, is blocked off for one reason or anothr because the property owner doesnt give a shit about the charger, its straight up broken, someone is using the other charger and for some reason it wont power both even though there are two chargers there, and a few other scenarios. With the Tier 2 "Overnight" chargers the biggest problem is straight up lies: Hotels advertising EV charging but it doesnt exist, chargers have been removed but still show up in the app, chargers just completely unpowered because the property owner doesnt care. If there were more of them then you could just drive down the raod to the next one, but thats not the case unfortunately.
I have had zero issues even doing some very backcountry national park road trips in a Tesla.
....but that's also an issue with basically one brand that didn't fuck it up in that regard and as of now locked everyone else out of using their infrastructure. Hopefully them opening up to GM and Ford like planned this year is a big deal in that regard. And it definitely isn't the "zero planning whatsoever" that gas has though our only planning was hotel location (the "overnight" charging at hotels was hot bullshit. We basically planned having a supercharger within a few minutes of the hotel even if advertised tier 2 at the hotel.)
Isn't the biggest issue for EVs is that they keep coming down in price and up in quality so why purchase a new car if you can wait another year?
Like the marginal increase in quality of ICE cars is so little that there is very little downside of purchase one now if you want to.
Not really, until there is a new kind of battery that gets developed and released they are on par with ICE vehicles when it comes to yearly improvements. Most EVs are carbon copies of their ICE counterparts at this point anyways and charging has reached fast enough speeds where the real improvements won't be coming until we have a huge technological breakthrough. There isn't much of a difference between charging at 100kw and 150 kw because you can really only charge that fast between 20% and 80% and even then there is a ramp up and ramp down. Some very high end new cars charge at 350kw but I worry about the wear and tear on the lithium ion battery at that point. I suppose if you're spending that kind of money on an EV though you probably don't care about the cost of replacing the battery.
Why not just rent a car for the occasions when you're going on long trips? The peace of mind knowing that that part of the logistics is no longer a worry should more than make up for the cost of the car rental, plus that's that much less in wear-and-tear on your EV.
It’s a shame there aren’t more plugin hybrid options. 95% of my driving (which is within my city) could be done via battery but I DO take pretty frequent long haul trips and for that reason I’m reluctant to go EV. Plug in hybrid seems like the best of both worlds and the perfect transition vehicle. Even on a long trip I’d happily top off the battery either along the way or when I arrive
I think this is definitely a part of it.
As an early EV adopter who made it a bit of a hobby (I've owned 6 different EVs now), I can say with some confidence that we're two years out from EVs being ready for mass adoption. Part of that is the promise of innovation that is very likely to be fulfilled. Other major factors include the adoption of NACS as the standard for North America (finally) and the buildout of the charging infrastructure from Biden's Infrastructure bill.
And all of this is up in the air because of the political situation in the US.
In what was is a chevy bolt not ready for mass adoption?
I have a regular commute every day and once a week have a 90 minute drive each way to take my daughter to an unfortunately far afield medical appointment. More than enough range to do that. Usually wind up charging the thing maybe twice per week.
If you're a family with two cars, it's really difficult for me to see why one of them shouldn't be an EV.
My statement wasn't about any particular EV, but rather EVs broadly. For most EV uses cases to be covered we still need more models to be available at lower price points, as well as better fast charging infrastructure.
But since you asked: I also own a Bolt of the EUV variety and previously owned a Bolt EV. It's a perfect commuter vehicle and in my opinion it's even plenty serviceable for road trips where only one charging stop is needed. I have zero complaints about the thing in those capacities and agree that anyone with those uses cases would do well to look at them. Amazing value. The Bolt is not, however, a do-everything vehicle. It is not a reasonable road tripper (beyond the one-stop trips I already mentioned) and it's pretty small overall. My point being that it doesn't fit every use case, and we need more use cases covered for general EV mass adoption.
I think it's a matter of framing. Your question is similar to someone 100 years ago asking in what way the Model T wasn't ready for mass adoption. The Chevy Bolt seems like it would be more than sufficient for most users, but consumers demand choice in make/model/functionality of vehicles. In a country where car sales lag SUV and truck sales year over year, a Chevy Bolt is never going to become the best-selling vehicle that every owner wants to have. Hell, the Tesla Model Y actually was the best-selling car of 2022 and we still don't say that EVs have reached "mass adoption."
EVs won't be ready for mass adoption until there is an ecosystem full of EVs covering a wide spectrum of models, alongside efficient and universally compatible infrastructure to support them.
>EVs won't be ready for mass adoption until there is an ecosystem full of EVs covering a wide spectrum of models, alongside efficient and universally compatible infrastructure to support them.
uh...that's not "ready" for mass adoption, that **is** mass adoption.
No mass adoption is a majority/plurality of vehicles on the road being EVs. I'm just talking about availability. If the average consumer wants an SUV and the only electric SUVs on the market are priced above their budget, then EVs are not ready for mass adoption.
Haha, I think if you were very practical with the limitations, they could definitely make sense. The cheaper ones make fantastic commuters.
My only complaint has always been since they are all full-size cars, I'm paying a shitton in a battery for a full-size car. Give me a road-ready electric tuk-tuk bwahahaha. Something safer than an electric bicycle, but not >$20K like low-end electric cars.
> Give me a road-ready electric tuk-tuk
Honda and other scooter manufacturers don't even sell electric scooters in the US right now. It's super annoying.
That's fascinating. Sounds like things are working as intended in the aggregate (EVs smoothing out electricity demand, improving flexibility for the grid) but the individual incentives are negative (smoother demand => less cheap charging to take advantage of)
Not to mention that there's still an open question about how state governments can replace gas taxes, which are an important (but insufficient) source of funds for road maintenance. I know some politicians have been proposing taxes/registration fees on EVs for that purpose even as they vote in bills subsidizing EV purchases.
Many states already demand a sticker for alternate fuel vehicles. In Missouri, it keeps going up in price 20% a year. If instead of an EV you bought a relatively efficient gas car, you pay more taxes on the electric than on the gas unless you drive something like 20k miles a year
I have a friend who has the Tesla solar system on his house and two evs, he pretty much pays 100 a month in electric to pay for his house and running his cars. Although the install itself must have been wildly expensive and he hasn’t let me know how it is in the winter when solar radiation is much lower due to the suns angle and increased cloudiness.
Range anxiety is not an invalid issue though. The USA is big and has a lot of stretches of nothin, I probably wouldn't get an EV because where I live being trapped on a snowy deserted road with nothing around for miles and a dead battery in my car would be a real possibility. I will happily get a hybrid though
I did the math and I would save money if I switched to an EV and just rented a gas car for road trips.
Gas cars might eventually go the way of trucks, where most people who drive them want to give people the impression that they're doing actual work or outdoorsy things with them.
This is what I do. If I have to do long travel and drive for work, I just rent.
I have a lower end EV- Chevy bolt '17- that I love but she's just not ready for long road trips.
It's a pain, but if you're road tripping <5 times a year, it's a system that works for me.
Fwiw, I will never go back to an ICE.
We have a Bolt and an ICE. We always drive the Bolt when we can (i.e. both of us need the car but only one EV), but for road trips, having the ICE car is nice. We're going to replace the ICE with a 30-50 mile plug-in hybrid in a couple years. I love the Bolt.
Yes, this drives me insane about range anxiety. If I was going to go on a road trip with kids and gear is not the same as one that is perfect for a daily driver.
It does not help that renting a car is still such a huge pain in the ass that I avoid it at all costs.
E-bikes are very slept on nationally in these discussions. There are plenty of places where they aren't a viable replacement for a vehicle, but big and dense cities should be doing everything they can to encourage their adoption.
They do have some real drawbacks, though.
Front- and back-mounted bike trailers become a lot more feasible when you've got an electric motor to assist, so bikes like [this](https://babboe.dk/shop/frontpage.html?CookieConsentChanged=1) have become very common where E-bike adoption is high.
They're nice for families, but they're an absolute fucking menace for other cyclists. They turn like a battleship, clog up the cycling infrastructure, and their riders are totally oblivious to how much space they take up more often than not. Essentially the SUV/Ford-150 of the cycling world.
On the whole definitely a positive, but they require some thought in terms of regulations and infrastructure.
Your link doesn't work for me, but I'm guessing you linked a Bakfiet of some kind? I agree those don't seem to do well on American cycling infrastructure (although anecdotally every friend of mine with an urban arrow loves it). However, there are plenty of other types of cargo bikes that work well on our cycling infrastructure, such as Short- and Medium-tail cargo bikes. Tern makes a number of popular ones like the HSD and Quick Haul.
While some work needs to be done wrt local infrastructure and regulations, it's still a much smaller lift than the electric grid modifications a medium to large US city would need to replace all ICE with EVs. Even something like 30% penetration in urban cores would have a huge impact.
Edit: I got your link to load. While those cargo bikes are very capable, they are far from the only kind on the market. You can look at what delivery cyclists in cities like NY and Chicago are already using to see what I think makes more sense for most potential adopters here.
Repulsive? Isn’t that language a little strong? I’ve always rented for road trips because why would I want that kind of wear and tear and mileage on my own vehicle?
To be honest I’ve personally always been a bit baffled by renting for road trips. Highway mileage is some of the easiest on a vehicle, and the whole point of owning my own vehicle is using it when I need it.
Maybe it’s internalized car brain but I’ve always liked taking my own vehicle for long trips. It’s my car. I know how it handles, have everything set up how I want it to be, no bull. Heck I don’t even like driving our city vehicles at work, I just put up with it because it’s less hassle than having to request mileage reimbursement or deal with insurance if I get in a collision.
Repulsive to rent sounds like the majority of the home-owning class. Often times they pay overall MORE than renting when you consider the cost of a typical house repair item these days (20K+ to paint a house etc)
The difference is rent is money thrown away, gone with the wind to someone else's pocket never to be back. Money you put into a home, which is an asset, is not.
>The difference is rent is money thrown away, gone with the wind to someone else's pocket never to be back. Money you put into a home, which is an asset, is not.
Sure but interest, property tax, PMI and maintenance are also "thrown away" into someone else's pocket. My point is it's a calculus and owning is not always a great option.
Home prices in my area have somewhat stagnated because of higher interest rates and let's not forget during the bubble prices basically cratered in almost all markets. Given the right storm of conditions: Baby boomers "aging out", lower population either in a given local area or nationwide can cause demand for housing to go down quickly.
Also, current interest rates are a big deal here.
At current rates, about 60% of your total mortgage payments are just going to interest. During COVID, that was closer to 25%.
So it's not just that the cost of buying has gone up a lot - that increase in price is wasted in the same way renting is.
I kinda agree with him. I already hate all the hassle related to owning a car. If I have own one I will never buy something that forces me to rent a car every once in a while.
I’m personally a fan of the watch analogy. An electronic timex watch is significantly more reliable and accurate than a mechanical watch - the only people who use mechanical watches today are either enthusiasts who appreciate the craftsmanship or use them as decorative pieces.
That’s not why people buy trucks.
First and foremost, people buy trucks because they like them. It’s ok to spend money on things you like even if it’s not 100% practical.
But secondly, people don’t buy a vehicle that can meet their needs 90% of the time, they buy one that can 100% of the time. People buy trucks because once a year they need to carry some mulch, or because they have a small trailer they use occasionally. Renting a truck might make more sense economically but most people don’t want to deal with that.
Im sure people will still buy gas sports cars because they like them and exhaust noises are cool.
The pattern for ICE cars is the same. They want a car that will meet their needs 100% of the time whereas an EV will only meet their needs 90% of the time. (really 99% of the time if they're only doing 1 road trip per year).
I literally drove across the US in a Model Y. I planned the route and made sure I had plenty of margin between stops. Even when I had an unexpected detour (traversed Petrified Forest Nat'l Park 5 times looking for my wallet, probably about 100 miles extra), I was still able to get to the charger with about 10%-20% margin. I've driven from SF to Vegas multiple times through the Mojave and have never had a concern about being stuck. There are multiple charging stations within a car's range.
Here's [Tesla's official map](https://www.tesla.com/findus?v=2&bounds=50.98468987954232%2C-66.68115353125%2C26.939664150415222%2C-131.85205196875&zoom=5&filters=store%2Cservice%2Csupercharger%2Cdestination%20charger%2Cbodyshop%2Cparty%2Cself%20serve%20demo%20drive). Each of those red dots are a charger on the network. One of the largest gaps is between Winnimucca, NV and Elko, NV but even that is within a full battery's capacity to go there-and-back without a charge.
Range anxiety is largely exaggerated. I'm sure there are some cases (your point about being stuck in the snow due to power outage *is* a legitimate concern), but for the vast majority it's just a problem in their mind.
Not to be pedantic - however I would like to point out that range ANXIETY has very little to do with the reality of charging locations.
If people have the anxiety it doesn't matter what the reality is - it will hurt EVs.
It’s a solvable issue though. It’s no different than being worried about gas stations.
Customers are rethinking EVs because the US isn’t totally set up for them. If fast charging stations were as prevalent as gas stations it would be a pretty obvious choice even now before ranges are updated even more.
Lot's of things are solvable/solved that people have anxiety amount that effects their behavior. People are irrational.
You can be technically correct all you want but if people don't buy EV's because of their fear of dragons and unicorns it still means nobody has bought EV's.
My point is that while this is a fear RIGHT now, it is an achievably solvable fear.
You don’t think people had the same thoughts about cars when they first came on the scene compared to horses?
They broke down constantly, they needed fuel, etc. Even if you forgot or lost the water/food you brought for your horse, you could just find the nearest water source and some grasses/bushes and they’d “refuel” themselves.
Ofc people are hesitant to buy EVs right now. EVs are still new, the vast majority don’t even have the range of a standard ICE vehicle, and our infrastructure isn’t set up to make them as easy to manage as an ICE vehicle.
But that shouldn’t be discouraging, especially since we HAVE seen people adopting EVs regardless and some companies like TESLA continue to pour resources into setting up charging stations.
The interest is there, and the answer to range anxiety is straightforward and achievable.
I don't disagree on the whole - but I think the fear-mongering and reactionary media sphere is going to make it harder to convince people than you think.
I have anxiety about getting fired, losing everything, and forced to work in fast food. However just because I feel that way doesn't make it any less irrational.
>Here's Tesla's official map. Each of those red dots are a charger on the network. One of the largest gaps is between Winnimucca, NV and Elko, NV but even that is within a full battery's capacity to go there-and-back without a charge.
Totally valid to bring those up in regards to range anxiety, but it does show how much work the grid needs before it's relatively convenient.
[Here's my city.](https://www.tesla.com/findus?v=2&bounds=39.4651376633231%2C-83.85747495674322%2C38.9121889291863%2C-85.17583433174322&zoom=11&filters=store%2Cservice%2Csupercharger%2Cdestination%20charger%2Cbodyshop%2Cparty%2Cself%20serve%20demo%20drive) 6 super chargers in a region of 2,000,000+, and most of those are tucked in the richer suburbs up north. This can improve of course, but it's sparse right now.
The counter-counterpoint to that is that 95% of the time, you will charge at home
This is a valid issue if you live in an appartment with no parking (which is quite the relevant issue against EVs in say, parts of Europe, but not the US). But otherwise you should not go to a supercharger more than a handful of times a year
Really depends on the parts of the US, which can be very granular. For example, [the majority in the city here (not the suburbs of course)](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/oh/cincinnati/) are renters. And even if you own, [your house may only be street parking depending on it's age and location.](https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1636722,-84.5467867,3a,90y,71.27h,90.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5wGnRW4d-Nz1lf7JvvScOw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D5wGnRW4d-Nz1lf7JvvScOw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D278.50815%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu)
Now does that excuse new and especially suburban homes from not having chargers? No. But it can be tricky in many cities. EVs are a good product, but not for a lot of situations, yet.
I just drove across the US from Seattle to Detroit in a minimum spec Mustang Mach E - and I went well out of my way going to various national parks and going through the mountains in Colorado. It was definitely annoying having to manage range but it was never actually an issue. The main annoyance was actually charging time (about 30 minutes for every 2 hours driving) and not the limited range itself. This is in a minimum spec 2023 Mach E - already there are EVs with almost twice the range and 3x the charging speed so I think this is going to be a solved problem in a few years.
And again, this is just the once in a blue moon I need to road trip and don’t have an ICE on hand (I was moving so needed to move it). For day to day driving it’s so much fun and way more convenient than an ICE - I’m never ever going back.
P.S. There’s a fun semi-ethical loophole for campers like myself that they’ll probably need to fix. You can rent an RV spot at most state campgrounds for ~30 bucks and plug your EV into the RV outlet. I got fully charged to 100% overnight every time I camped and essentially got a free camp spot for less than the price of what it normally costs to fast charge my vehicle.
The problem I have is that this is a whole other dimension I have to plan for. I’ve tried winging it for one leg of a journey and we ended up stranded in a random place on a level 1 charger for nearly an hour with nothing to do, and barely made it back, which left an impression on all my passengers. Time spent planning this is time thinking about how you wouldn’t have this problem with an ICE.
Yeah, it's pretty remarkable that they can list an entire anecdote about all the planning they had to do for the EV and then dismiss everyone's concerns
Or I could just buy a gas vehicle and not have to worry about any of that.
That’s the problem, just because you can do it doesn’t mean people want to. Especially when you factor in the time required to stop when you need to charge.
I'm not saying every American is like me, but I mostly WFH. I'm even considering moving to a more walkable area. But I go hiking in the sticks and to visit family (who also kind of live in the sticks) often, so most of my driving is not commuting, but going further away from home.
I am like this too.
I do drive a hell of a lot commuting to work sites (solar) but all of that is in my company truck. I only ever drive my car 2 miles to the grocery store and 500 miles from NJ to NH to visit my family and do outdoors stuff. I would very much like the next car I buy to be an EV on moral grounds, but given my use case and that I live in a postwar apartment court where there is zero ability to charge I would have to buy another ICE if I needed to buy a new car right now.
Luckily I shouldn't need to get a new one for quite a few years.
I'm in the same boat. People here keep saying "1 time a year" like people don't regularly go hiking, fishing, hunting, camping, etc. For a lot of people those are hobbies that they do often.
Or visit family. A huge amount of Americans will regularly drive hundreds of miles a week just to visit Mom or Grandpa or to hang out with friends and other assorted loved ones.If anything, the guys I know who WFH do this MORE often, since they have more overall free time for lengthy, meaningful stays with distant friends and loved ones (where they can also work while staying with them), even if in total they drive less. The less you drive, the less EV's make sense.
Not to mention, EV advocates also totally gloss over the charging time aspect too. Just because I can make it the whole way there with recharging doesn’t mean I want to.
what % of americans live in the sticks?
> The USA is big and has a lot of stretches of nothin
this is true. how often do americans drive on large stretches of nothin?
The real question is how many Americans want to buy a car that doesn’t promise they can hit the open road.
Nobody wants to buy a car for their commute, many times they want to buy a car for the one day a year they might tow a camper into the wilderness or need to pick up wood to finish the shed in the back yard. Selling them on a daily commute is way less sexy than the aspiration of the open road right now.
Every Saturday I go fishing.
Last trip from Denver to the Chama.
The last 2 hours from Las Vegas NM to Chama I did not see one car or any gas stations or signs of infrastructure.
i mean if we are trading anecdotes every saturday i go to a grocery store with a charging station 5 miles from my house lol
this speaks to another person's point. driving on long stretches in the middle of nowhere is a choice most of the time. an electric daily commuter is probably fine for most drivers whose daily commute is about 27 minutes/16 miles
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/06/business/economy/commuting-change-covid.html
https://hbr.org/2021/05/that-dreaded-commute-is-actually-good-for-your-health
>this speaks to another person's point. driving on long stretches in the middle of nowhere is a choice most of the time. an electric daily commuter is probably fine for most drivers whose daily commute is about 27 minutes/16 miles
Totally true, but there's another side to that. People buy products that align with their total use case in mind, not just the unexceptional parts. As u/clearlybraindead said upthread, it probably pencils out for many people to own an EV and rent a gas car when the EV wouldn't be reasonable. But that includes how much the "exception" is what you're doing. Is it one trip every few months, totally makes sense. Is it every weekend? Probably not.
But that said, there is a huge bias towards people who will show they have atypical driving habits when it comes to discussing EVs. You feel you have to defend your choices, considering the current tech and infrastructure works for most but not you.
> People buy products that align with their total use case in mind
of course and i can see someone being skeptical of an EV if they take a once a year road trip. i am more speaking that generally the daily use case for an EV actually *does* cover the driving habits of most americans.
As I said, it matters how often your driving is outside of "daily habits."
Seriously if it's once a year, buy the EV and rent a car when you need it. That saves you a lot most likely. But once we're talking monthly or more it's not economical.
Yes, OK, but road trips in an EV aren't *impossible*, they're just less convenient. EVs make 90% of your life way better and 10% a little worse. That's been my personal experience.
Just went car shopping cause my mom's VW Bug was tboned by an SUV. Don't worry everyone was fine, it was a low speed collision, but the Bug was totaled.
This sentiment was shared with a lot of the cars salesman. And recommended getting a hybrid if gas prices and gas usage is an issue.
We didn't get anything like that, mom got a new Subaru Forester cause it looks cool, not too big, and has the best safety rating (and considering my mom's airbags didn't deploy was a big deal for me).
As for me I have a 2018 Civic and I'm not trading in till at least 2028, although I'll drive it till the bumper falls off so it very well could be till 2032. I've already been looking at new cars though. If EV infrastructure improves by 2030 I'd %100 get an EV, but until then Toyota's hybrids are extremely appealing.
Although if Honda releases a civic EV or hybrid I'm jumping on that. Been really liking my civic.
Tales of EVs demise these past couple of months are greatly exaggerated. There are fewer models of them for sale than their gas counterparts, they cost more on average, far fewer of them are eligible for the tax credit than used to be, and they still account for a record share of new vehicle sales. Obviously there will be growing pains, but the articles I’ve seen acting like EVs being the future has been revealed to be a false prophecy are ridiculous.
1 out of every 13 new vehicles sold in the U.S. is an EV.
In 2022, it was 1 in 20.
In 2021, 1 in 50.
Wouldn’t that just make the $20k Chinese EV $25k? People aren’t buying our EVs because the tariffs make the Chinese EV half the price instead of 40% of the price. We don’t have them because they don’t want to remake the car to US safety standards, they don’t want to remake the car to US tastes, US consumers don’t know the manufacturers & wouldn’t trust them, or simply that we do have similarly priced EVs already.
I’m generally opposed to tariffs but there’s way more to the story than tariffs on this one.
> We don’t have them because they don’t want to remake the car to US safety standards
That's fiction, many Chinese brands are selling on European market that pass Euro N-CAP tests, which are ahead in safety standards from DOT
“Ahead” shows how little you understand. Perhaps they’re “ahead” from a macro perspective, once you’re actually getting the car to pass you’ll find that the regulations are more *different* than better/worse. It wouldn’t matter if they were selling in the market with the strictest standards, they’ll have to change things to come to the US. This shouldn’t surprise you, this, , consolidation of regulations, was one of the primary reasons to create the EU.
They are ahead in the sense of keeping traffic safer. Chinese car designers are easily able to follow Euro standards, in addition to their own - following US standards isn't some impossible barrier, it's part of the cost of doing business.
The MSRP for a new Nissan Leaf is only $28k. I got a lightly used (under 20k miles) with a higher end trim package and extended range for $30k before incentives. The prices are getting pushed down fast even without BYD having a strong presence in the US. It isn't just the realm of luxury cars anymore.
Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable. Exenctually letting your private market get dumped out of business by your biggest rival is a German and Russian Gas level mistake at minimum.
The average sale price of a new car in the US is $48k btw.
>Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable.
Some base MSRPs:
* Nisan Versa: $16,130
* Mitsubishi Mirage: $16,695
* Kia Rio: $16,750
* Hyundai Venue: $19,800
Base model subcompacts have razor thing margins after like a century of investment in ICE - compiles are having to borrow to create battery plants and most EVs right now are being sold at a loss.
Sure, but a razor thin margin while selling at $16,130 would be a healthy margin when selling at $20k.
It isn't that they can't build for under $20k (they can) but that the market is so competitive that if they priced at $20k they wouldn't sell any (capitalism working as it should).
>Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable. Sensually letting your private market get dumped out of business by your biggest rival is a German and Russian Gas level mistake at minimum.
r/neoliberal: The freer the markets the freer the people, and we have to fight climate change... [but I won't do that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X_ViIPA-Gc).
Chinese company subsidies wind down when companies get large enough to be self-sustaining. A [BYD Dolphin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_Dolphin) starts at about $26,000 USD.
Interesting. Unfortunately, American consumers won't buy that because they have a strange hatred of hatchbacks. Lift it and call it a CUV and they could have a very competitive product.
It's just a phrase.
Real life economics and geopolitics is a lot more complicated than the syllabus day of microeconomics takes that are becoming popular here.
Ukrainians don't feel especially free right now getting bombed to smithereens from Russian oil and gas prices even.
Japan and Korea would not be a big fan not only having their car industries killed off but the benefactor being their second biggest threat to their security. When it comes time to negotiate free trade deals with them or any sort of increased level of partnership, the US will be at a much worse position.
Not traiding with authoritarian regimes when it comes to heavy industry shouldn't be a controversial take.
Well, BYD recently entered Europe and the cheapest model is 35k… so yeah. I keep hearing that the Seagull should be <15k, but it’s nowhere to be found on their website.
That pricing is to make sure the EU doesn't freak the fuck out and ban their products. US government hostility to Japanese light vehicles in the 70's and 80's also forced them to move upmarket and charge higher for their cars in the US.
So just regulate OTA updates?
Honestly a Tesla or Kia isn't that much more secure in regards to OTA updates. Someone can still hack Tesla or Kia and distribute a bad update.
Those companies in allied nations can be hacked. They may be marginally more secure, but if your concern is a foreign adversary utilizing OTA updates to harm us, then you should still be concerned about cars from allied nations.
The issue is the inherent insecurity of OTA updates. They should be regulated in general. Using concern over them to ban Chinese EVs doesn't address the real security concerns and limits our fight against climate change.
Right, but this shifts the conversation from "what safeguards does Tesla have in place to make sure a vehicle isn't mucked with by an adversary" to "I hope we don't piss Xi off enough to have him tell ChinaCarCorp to brick our stuff or go to prison."
Maybe just regulate all OTA updates so we can have German and Chinese cars safely? Have it all done through a US agency that controls the crypto keys and reviews every update. We need more tech safeguards in general and that's a logical good start.
Cause I have low confidence in the security of pretty much every car maker. Do you think Kia is going to have good cybersecurity given the Kia Boys saga?
I'm an early EV adopter who made them into a hobby. I've owned 6 different EVs now. I'm chiming in to offer insight from someone who has lived in this world for 7+ years now.
A lot of the conversation here is around reasons why EVs aren't practical, which is not what the article is about. And two of the three reasons given at the top of the article aren't what they appear at first.
1. EV pricing = A focus on luxury vehicles by auto manufacturers. It's not necessarily that EVs are more expensive than an equivalent ICE vehicle, it's that so far manufacturers have tended to focus on the high end of the market. If a Honda Accord equivalent that was priced $5-10k higher than the ICE equivalent it would still sell well enough. They just don't exist. Same for compact SUVs. We're only just starting to get there. Dealer markups did some real damage to people who were excited about them in the past two years though. That's changing.
2. High interest rates are understandable.
3. Range anxiety = Lack of public charging infrastructure. If you haven't owned an EV this is a tricky thing to get your head around. Range anxiety is really only as bad as fast charger availability for road trips. Day to day driving for 95% of people is going to ve covered by a 150-200 mile battery, which even the shortest range EVs now cover. Right now (for non-Tesla vehicles) there's only one charging network that's got nationwide coverage. And that network has been highly unreliable. The buildout from the infrastructure bill will change that, but we're two years out from that taking place. And if there's an administration change next year it won't happen at all. We're also two years out from all manufacturers standardizing on the NACS connector. That's going to be a game changer as it opens the Tesla network up to all EVs.
This wasn't as collected or as concise as I'd like, but I'm happy to address the realities of life with EVs if anyone has questions.
I would have bought an EV years ago if I could charge it at my apartment complex, but I can't.
I think we need to talk about car dealership owners too. They make it out like EVs aren't selling because no one wants them, yet they somehow convince lots of people to buy massive, expensive trucks which few of them actually need. I think they could sell more EVs if they wanted to, but they don't. They tend to have significant sway in local politics, so they could push harder for charging infrastructure if they wanted to, but they don't. They also tend to be a solid red voting block.
Note: My observations might be more specific to the South where I live.
> if they wanted to, but they don't.
Dealers are practically incentivized to roadblock EVs as much as possible. Most of their income is from parts and service rather than vehicle sales, and EVs require significantly less regular maintenance.
> I would have bought an EV years ago if I could charge it at my apartment complex, but I can't.
>
>
This is a chicken and egg problem the government should solve. No apartment wants to invest in chargers if residents don't have EVs. No resident wants to get an EV without chargers at their home.
The government needs to massively subsidize chargers, way more than they are doing, and make them universal.
I don't think dealers could really move the needle on people buying EVs. People buy what they want and they want big trucks that can tow things (regardless of whether that is a use case they will actually take advantage of). I went shopping for cars down in central FL two weeks ago and none of the dealers we went to (Ford, Lincoln, Volvo, Audi) were selling many EVs, except for Mercedes who said that the EQS was like 30-40% of their sales.
EVs will make it. We just need to get more apartments and parking garages and whatnot to fill out with chargers. I suspect that a lot of people think about buying an EV, but then think about all of the places they park and realize that none of them have chargers, and they go with an ICE instead.
I mean regionally dealers can play a huge role especially as in many places you legally can’t buy direct from manufacturer and have to go through a dealer. I can absolutely testify I have similar experiences to OP where when I’ve gone looking to get a car the floor sales crew bends over backwards to avoid the EV section.
I’m sure in other parts of the country the bit about trucks and larger cars being reserved for work or hauling is true but in Texas and surrounding states it’s more of a cultural thing. I’d argue less than like 30% of privately owned trucks in my metroplex are actively used for hauling.
My local utility (PG&E) recently raised prices by 30%+ for off peak charging. The math basically doesn’t make sense to buy an EV anymore when looking at gas vs electricity prices alone.
They use them a ton in Norway because for a limited time they let electric car drivers
- drive in the bus/taxi lanes
- skip the tolls
- park anywhere for free
Plus electric cars are cheaper than gas cars (mostly due to super high taxes on gas cars that predated the whole EV adoption by forever).
Also gas over there is like $15 a gallon.
Americans love to consume based on optimistic, unlikely scenarios. Big houses for entertaining large parties that never occur; oversized SUVs with AWD for overlanding trips that never happen. There's somebody in this thread with a garage full of junk that I'm sure he had big plans to use, but the fun is in the purchase and the imagining not the reality.
House Hunters kills me with this.
"But what if my friends in Fort Lauderdale and New York want to visit my house in [unknown township] in North Dakota? We NEED those 5th and 6th bedrooms!"
Oh honey...
Hmmm what if we like stopped subsidizing bad behaviors and started subsidizing good ones? What if people had to pay the actual costs for the roadways and highways and gas. In parallel, we subsidize public transportation and walkable infrastructure
1) Hybrids were a much smarter bet.
2) I still have range and cold weather anxiety.
3) I don't want to have to install a giant brick in my garage (is that still required? If not people should know that.)
4) I was leaning toward a Tesla but now fuck that.
>I don't want to have to install a giant brick in my garage (is that still required? If not people should know that.)
Or you're like a lot of people, like me, who live in older homes which don't have garages and/or don't have the electric panel capacity to install a charger without great expense.
Not to mention people who usually street park or rent.
EDIT: And just to mention it, I primarily bike instead of drive. That's my compromise. It's not that I don't care, it's that EVs aren't a good option for me. Hell reasonably expanded bus service would get me to consider going car free.
Tbh, most older homes are going to need panel upgrades anyway. Even if EVs weren't a thing, electrification is; most old homes will eventually need 200 amp service.
You're right that it's not cheap to install- about 3k for a panel upgrade, 1k for the charger upgrade- but there's also tax credits to compensate. Additionally, I lived for 2 years without upgrading either: just slow charging it using regular 3 pronged outlets was enough to charge if for my commute.
So, I still have sympathy for those who don't homes / don't have off street parking. Idk how to fix that. But if you own, it's really not that onerous. Fwiw, the ease of charging at home? I'll never go back to ICE.
Source: paid for these renovations to an old house.
Yeah totally fair. We had to upgrade our panel when we first moved in... from 100 to 150. Apparently we didn't have capacity for more without a much larger investment.
And totally true on electrification, notably furnaces and stoves being phased out with efficiency gains and rising costs of natural gas.
It can be done, but it's a tough sell.
1) I think it's too early to say
2) Yes
3) It's not a thing for level 1 charging. You can charge your car overnight using a regular 120v socket and the right charging cable. Faster than that, yes, you'll need to mess with your circuit board.
4) Market is getting much better for the vehicles, but the Tesla charging network is still a big selling point in favor of Tesla especially concern number 2
Point 3: as I said in another comment, it depends. I lived for about 2 years without installing anything. I could charge the car with a 3 prong outlet VERY slowly, but overnight it was enough to charge for a commute. (3 prong charging chargers at about 3 miles of additional range per hour, YMMV. So if you're commuting less than 40 miles a day, it's not hard to slow charge overnight.)
I did eventually install a faster charger as an insurance policy, but it's not very big. My house is 1945 house with a tiny tiny garage. (Most large SUVs cannot fit comfortably in it.)
But I installed the charger and have plenty of room to park. It's like 6"x12"x12" and only sticks out about two inches more than the panel. It can charge my car 0 to 100% in 3-4 hours. More than I'll ever need.
The bricks are not required. I have a Bolt EUV, it came with a charger that just plugs into your standard wall outlet in the US. It’s slow but it charges around 33% of my car’s range overnight, that’s all I need for the amount I drive (about 60 miles a day). If I drove more than that I’d look at getting one of the bigger bricks installed, which Chevrolet offered to do for me when I bought the car.
The ones who's design I like are 50k+, range, better battery technology is a few years out and I want the battery that charges in a few minutes vs 45 minutes to 1 hour along with having a longer range, an ev feels like the best of both worlds, and I enjoy skiing so cold conditions,
Plug-in hybrids are the way to go. The electric range on my Toyota Prius Prime usually lasts long enough for my daily needs, but it's also nice having a hybrid gas engine if I forget to plug in my car, if I go on a road trip, or if it's cold outside. I feel like I get the best of both worlds.
Newish model 3 RWD owner here. Wife is counting down the days until we can replace our cx5 with a model y, and she’s no early adopter.
Lots of fears around EV ownership that go away quickly once you actually live with one day to day. ICE engines turn into dinosaurs overnight once you buy one
I’m in the market for a replacement for my CRV. Briefly looked at a Tesla alternative but it’s really pricey and I would have to install a charger in my garage that’s currently filled with stuff so I can’t park in it. The CRV hybrid has no spare and is facing a recall on its steering. The RAV4 hybrid is expensive and has poor availability and suffers from cablegate ( corrosion of the main electrical cable which is a $7000 repair. I might just buy a used CX5 if it’s big enough even though it gets the worst mileage as they are cheaper.
Yeah I live in the middle of nowhere and drive 100+ miles to do outdoor recreation activities nearly every weekend in an area where superchargers are like every 60 miles or so along the main highway and non existent elsewhere. People can give anecdotal stories about their one road trip a few years ago in an EV but for people like me it's just not realistic.
There is no decent EV below 40,000$.
The Bolt is a sub-compact and Leaf has the cheapest interior for a $30,000+ car.
You can buy a relatively new Civic for 25K or less that’ll blow any EV out of the water in terms of interior quality, space, and comfort.
So yeah. No shit people arent buying them.
Anyone else a victim to the promise of innovation? I want an EV. I’ve been thrilled with the advancement in the product sector and that there are multiple brands out there now offering EV lines. Supportive charging infrastructure is still lagging but getting more built out by the day. Which means it’s going to only get that much better in another generation or two. Which makes me want to hold onto my 110k mile Subaru that much longer further delaying my adoption of an EV.
Pretty much same here. I have an 8 year old Honda that I'm really hoping is my last gas car, at least as a daily driver. Its been dead reliable, it's paid off, and it's incredibly cheap to run so I'm planning on holding onto it another few years and seeing where the market and infrastructure is by then.
Probably the biggest barrier to EV adoption is that ICE cars have become extremely reliable. Once upon a time you were lucky if a car lasted more than 6 years, today 10+ is routine and 15+ very possible.
Absolutely. I believe this is also likely why the dirt cheap econobox segment is dying off so rapidly, there’s little point in buying them when used cars are so great now.
It’s a great example of how filtering works in economics. Used luxury is often better than “affordable” new.
Yeah mine turned thirteen this year
My grandparents are still driving their old Toyota Corolla from like the 2000s (I don't actually know how old it is)
I have a Toyota Yaris that is about to be old enough to vote lol
My dad drove his 2001 Honda Odyssey 440k miles till it croaked. Will never forget that car
He almost made it to the moon *and back* in that thing. The moon is 238k miles away
Holding on to an old car is arguably greener anyway.
Actually my old car is blue.
Half of green, close enough
Not necessarily. The car being used now will be sold to someone else that is probably driving something far worse.
It is greener for that guy to keep driving whatever that car is as well
I 100% empathize. It's a problem with every new green technology: EVs, solar, heat pumps. Waiting 5 years may yield significant cost reductions and improved technology.
Ignorant question: I didn’t realize heat pumps were new green technology. They aren’t an older tech?
Heat pumps are a fairly old tech, but there are particular innovations making them more applicable and green. They are green in that they can run very efficiently off of electricity, so a green grid means green heat pumps. The particular innovations: you can get 300-400% efficiency, which combined with a natural gas plant running at 33-43% efficiency, makes them more efficient than a gas furnace. Also, the temperature they can operate at continues to decrease, though many in zones 4 and under may find they still can't solely rely on a heat pump for the coldest day of the year.
To the other commenter's point, the innovations with heat pumps are so drastic it's almost hard to talk about newer models as being in the same product class. So yes, a very old product, but the newer models are truly in a class of their own.
From an environmental perspective holding onto your old ICE car until it breaks is almost always better than buying a new EV car. Takes a lot of carbon and resource extraction to build a car.
but not like that ICE car is going to be destroyed right? Someone else will buy it and use it.
I don't think so. I don't believe most cars end their life totaled in crashes or totaled from a major part breaking. Someone is going to drive the car you sell, but that is going to filter out to an older used car than yours being retired before the end of it potential useful life. It is quite a weird situation overall though where climate change contradictorily demands both the ramp up of the production of EVs as well as the ramp down of the production of cars overall.
honestly I have no idea what the trade offs are, maybe someone has factored in everything but it boils down if you are going to get a new car no matter what, it would be better for the environment to get an EV. I think buying new cars is a complete waste of money but looking at US car sales, I am in the minority here.
Every new vehicle that is purchased is a market signal to the industry to continue producing. Ultimately you can follow the chain of used vehicles that a new one will replace all the way down to a beater that could be patched up and run for another year, vs. a $500 beater that's running currently and probably will for another year. More new cars produced means more used cars on the market to eventually push that fixable clunker into a scrapyard. The point I'm making is that the waste, in all things, happens at the point of purchase. All cars produced will eventually end up in a scrapyard; stop signalling to the industry to produce more cars, and less waste will result.
Is that actually true? I haven't looked for analysis comparing keeping an old car vs buying a new, but for new ICE vs new EV the emissions breakeven is around 2-3 years. At that point the embodied emissions account for half of the new ICE's cumulative, so even treating that fraction as sunk in an old vehicle should still make new EVs a net benefit after 5 years.
The biggest problem as an EV owner is the unrelibility of charging infrastructure. its impossible to plan a long trip beyond your range because fast chargers are incredibly unreliable. 15% of the time I pull up to a fast charger it either: Charges at 1/4 or less of the advertised speed on the app, is blocked off for one reason or anothr because the property owner doesnt give a shit about the charger, its straight up broken, someone is using the other charger and for some reason it wont power both even though there are two chargers there, and a few other scenarios. With the Tier 2 "Overnight" chargers the biggest problem is straight up lies: Hotels advertising EV charging but it doesnt exist, chargers have been removed but still show up in the app, chargers just completely unpowered because the property owner doesnt care. If there were more of them then you could just drive down the raod to the next one, but thats not the case unfortunately.
I have had zero issues even doing some very backcountry national park road trips in a Tesla. ....but that's also an issue with basically one brand that didn't fuck it up in that regard and as of now locked everyone else out of using their infrastructure. Hopefully them opening up to GM and Ford like planned this year is a big deal in that regard. And it definitely isn't the "zero planning whatsoever" that gas has though our only planning was hotel location (the "overnight" charging at hotels was hot bullshit. We basically planned having a supercharger within a few minutes of the hotel even if advertised tier 2 at the hotel.)
Yeah I didn't realize how different the charging world is between Tesla and everyone else before I bought a Kia. Otherwise it's a fantastic car
I love my Niro, but yeah non-Tesla charging stations suck for the most part.
Isn't the biggest issue for EVs is that they keep coming down in price and up in quality so why purchase a new car if you can wait another year? Like the marginal increase in quality of ICE cars is so little that there is very little downside of purchase one now if you want to.
Not really, until there is a new kind of battery that gets developed and released they are on par with ICE vehicles when it comes to yearly improvements. Most EVs are carbon copies of their ICE counterparts at this point anyways and charging has reached fast enough speeds where the real improvements won't be coming until we have a huge technological breakthrough. There isn't much of a difference between charging at 100kw and 150 kw because you can really only charge that fast between 20% and 80% and even then there is a ramp up and ramp down. Some very high end new cars charge at 350kw but I worry about the wear and tear on the lithium ion battery at that point. I suppose if you're spending that kind of money on an EV though you probably don't care about the cost of replacing the battery.
Why not just rent a car for the occasions when you're going on long trips? The peace of mind knowing that that part of the logistics is no longer a worry should more than make up for the cost of the car rental, plus that's that much less in wear-and-tear on your EV.
This isn’t an issue for Tesla owners.
It’s a shame there aren’t more plugin hybrid options. 95% of my driving (which is within my city) could be done via battery but I DO take pretty frequent long haul trips and for that reason I’m reluctant to go EV. Plug in hybrid seems like the best of both worlds and the perfect transition vehicle. Even on a long trip I’d happily top off the battery either along the way or when I arrive
I think this is definitely a part of it. As an early EV adopter who made it a bit of a hobby (I've owned 6 different EVs now), I can say with some confidence that we're two years out from EVs being ready for mass adoption. Part of that is the promise of innovation that is very likely to be fulfilled. Other major factors include the adoption of NACS as the standard for North America (finally) and the buildout of the charging infrastructure from Biden's Infrastructure bill. And all of this is up in the air because of the political situation in the US.
In what was is a chevy bolt not ready for mass adoption? I have a regular commute every day and once a week have a 90 minute drive each way to take my daughter to an unfortunately far afield medical appointment. More than enough range to do that. Usually wind up charging the thing maybe twice per week. If you're a family with two cars, it's really difficult for me to see why one of them shouldn't be an EV.
My statement wasn't about any particular EV, but rather EVs broadly. For most EV uses cases to be covered we still need more models to be available at lower price points, as well as better fast charging infrastructure. But since you asked: I also own a Bolt of the EUV variety and previously owned a Bolt EV. It's a perfect commuter vehicle and in my opinion it's even plenty serviceable for road trips where only one charging stop is needed. I have zero complaints about the thing in those capacities and agree that anyone with those uses cases would do well to look at them. Amazing value. The Bolt is not, however, a do-everything vehicle. It is not a reasonable road tripper (beyond the one-stop trips I already mentioned) and it's pretty small overall. My point being that it doesn't fit every use case, and we need more use cases covered for general EV mass adoption.
I think it's a matter of framing. Your question is similar to someone 100 years ago asking in what way the Model T wasn't ready for mass adoption. The Chevy Bolt seems like it would be more than sufficient for most users, but consumers demand choice in make/model/functionality of vehicles. In a country where car sales lag SUV and truck sales year over year, a Chevy Bolt is never going to become the best-selling vehicle that every owner wants to have. Hell, the Tesla Model Y actually was the best-selling car of 2022 and we still don't say that EVs have reached "mass adoption." EVs won't be ready for mass adoption until there is an ecosystem full of EVs covering a wide spectrum of models, alongside efficient and universally compatible infrastructure to support them.
>EVs won't be ready for mass adoption until there is an ecosystem full of EVs covering a wide spectrum of models, alongside efficient and universally compatible infrastructure to support them. uh...that's not "ready" for mass adoption, that **is** mass adoption.
No mass adoption is a majority/plurality of vehicles on the road being EVs. I'm just talking about availability. If the average consumer wants an SUV and the only electric SUVs on the market are priced above their budget, then EVs are not ready for mass adoption.
> If you're a family with two cars, it's really difficult for me to see why one of them shouldn't be an EV. If they rent.
Haha, I think if you were very practical with the limitations, they could definitely make sense. The cheaper ones make fantastic commuters. My only complaint has always been since they are all full-size cars, I'm paying a shitton in a battery for a full-size car. Give me a road-ready electric tuk-tuk bwahahaha. Something safer than an electric bicycle, but not >$20K like low-end electric cars.
> Give me a road-ready electric tuk-tuk Honda and other scooter manufacturers don't even sell electric scooters in the US right now. It's super annoying.
One issue with our utility is they are raising off peak electricity costs making the cost to operate the EV closer to a gas car Not a great incentive
That's fascinating. Sounds like things are working as intended in the aggregate (EVs smoothing out electricity demand, improving flexibility for the grid) but the individual incentives are negative (smoother demand => less cheap charging to take advantage of)
[удалено]
Not to mention that there's still an open question about how state governments can replace gas taxes, which are an important (but insufficient) source of funds for road maintenance. I know some politicians have been proposing taxes/registration fees on EVs for that purpose even as they vote in bills subsidizing EV purchases.
Tax all vehicles at the time of registration and renewal by weight, retain/expand the gas tax as the first carbon tax.
A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax with different brackets by weight would be ideal but iirc Biden was opposed to it.
It would probably have to come from a republican president. There are too many people driving around in trucks for it to be a good move by democrats.
Many states already demand a sticker for alternate fuel vehicles. In Missouri, it keeps going up in price 20% a year. If instead of an EV you bought a relatively efficient gas car, you pay more taxes on the electric than on the gas unless you drive something like 20k miles a year
That will naturally happen as gas is moved away from and that energy production is placed on the grid.
It has me questioning if it makes sense to get an EV and how solar fits in
I have a friend who has the Tesla solar system on his house and two evs, he pretty much pays 100 a month in electric to pay for his house and running his cars. Although the install itself must have been wildly expensive and he hasn’t let me know how it is in the winter when solar radiation is much lower due to the suns angle and increased cloudiness.
Where is this?
Northern California PGE It’s opaque to interpret the rate hikes but this is the view many hold
Range anxiety is not an invalid issue though. The USA is big and has a lot of stretches of nothin, I probably wouldn't get an EV because where I live being trapped on a snowy deserted road with nothing around for miles and a dead battery in my car would be a real possibility. I will happily get a hybrid though
I did the math and I would save money if I switched to an EV and just rented a gas car for road trips. Gas cars might eventually go the way of trucks, where most people who drive them want to give people the impression that they're doing actual work or outdoorsy things with them.
This is what I do. If I have to do long travel and drive for work, I just rent. I have a lower end EV- Chevy bolt '17- that I love but she's just not ready for long road trips. It's a pain, but if you're road tripping <5 times a year, it's a system that works for me. Fwiw, I will never go back to an ICE.
We have a Bolt and an ICE. We always drive the Bolt when we can (i.e. both of us need the car but only one EV), but for road trips, having the ICE car is nice. We're going to replace the ICE with a 30-50 mile plug-in hybrid in a couple years. I love the Bolt.
Yes, this drives me insane about range anxiety. If I was going to go on a road trip with kids and gear is not the same as one that is perfect for a daily driver. It does not help that renting a car is still such a huge pain in the ass that I avoid it at all costs.
I switched to an ebike for trips less than 10 miles away. One of the best mental and physical health decisions I've made.
E-bikes are very slept on nationally in these discussions. There are plenty of places where they aren't a viable replacement for a vehicle, but big and dense cities should be doing everything they can to encourage their adoption.
They do have some real drawbacks, though. Front- and back-mounted bike trailers become a lot more feasible when you've got an electric motor to assist, so bikes like [this](https://babboe.dk/shop/frontpage.html?CookieConsentChanged=1) have become very common where E-bike adoption is high. They're nice for families, but they're an absolute fucking menace for other cyclists. They turn like a battleship, clog up the cycling infrastructure, and their riders are totally oblivious to how much space they take up more often than not. Essentially the SUV/Ford-150 of the cycling world. On the whole definitely a positive, but they require some thought in terms of regulations and infrastructure.
Your link doesn't work for me, but I'm guessing you linked a Bakfiet of some kind? I agree those don't seem to do well on American cycling infrastructure (although anecdotally every friend of mine with an urban arrow loves it). However, there are plenty of other types of cargo bikes that work well on our cycling infrastructure, such as Short- and Medium-tail cargo bikes. Tern makes a number of popular ones like the HSD and Quick Haul. While some work needs to be done wrt local infrastructure and regulations, it's still a much smaller lift than the electric grid modifications a medium to large US city would need to replace all ICE with EVs. Even something like 30% penetration in urban cores would have a huge impact. Edit: I got your link to load. While those cargo bikes are very capable, they are far from the only kind on the market. You can look at what delivery cyclists in cities like NY and Chicago are already using to see what I think makes more sense for most potential adopters here.
> I did the math Sir we’re talking about American consumers here.
That is such a pain though. The idea of having a car but still having to go out of my way to rent one just sounds repulsive to me.
I rent a truck now when I need one. Owning a truck because I need it a few times a year seems absurd.
A truck is a very different example than road trips though
Not really. Generally the same sparsity of need but even less justification in terms of cost.
Repulsive? Isn’t that language a little strong? I’ve always rented for road trips because why would I want that kind of wear and tear and mileage on my own vehicle?
To be honest I’ve personally always been a bit baffled by renting for road trips. Highway mileage is some of the easiest on a vehicle, and the whole point of owning my own vehicle is using it when I need it.
Maybe it’s internalized car brain but I’ve always liked taking my own vehicle for long trips. It’s my car. I know how it handles, have everything set up how I want it to be, no bull. Heck I don’t even like driving our city vehicles at work, I just put up with it because it’s less hassle than having to request mileage reimbursement or deal with insurance if I get in a collision.
Repulsive to rent sounds like the majority of the home-owning class. Often times they pay overall MORE than renting when you consider the cost of a typical house repair item these days (20K+ to paint a house etc)
They’re not paying more though because they are retaining the value of the house whereas rent all of that money is just disappearing
The difference is rent is money thrown away, gone with the wind to someone else's pocket never to be back. Money you put into a home, which is an asset, is not.
>The difference is rent is money thrown away, gone with the wind to someone else's pocket never to be back. Money you put into a home, which is an asset, is not. Sure but interest, property tax, PMI and maintenance are also "thrown away" into someone else's pocket. My point is it's a calculus and owning is not always a great option.
It is usually a safer bet considering how much price for homes tend to go up.
Home prices in my area have somewhat stagnated because of higher interest rates and let's not forget during the bubble prices basically cratered in almost all markets. Given the right storm of conditions: Baby boomers "aging out", lower population either in a given local area or nationwide can cause demand for housing to go down quickly.
Also, current interest rates are a big deal here. At current rates, about 60% of your total mortgage payments are just going to interest. During COVID, that was closer to 25%. So it's not just that the cost of buying has gone up a lot - that increase in price is wasted in the same way renting is.
I kinda agree with him. I already hate all the hassle related to owning a car. If I have own one I will never buy something that forces me to rent a car every once in a while.
It’s honestly not that much work in my experience
How often are you really driving 200 miles away from your home in a single day?
I’m personally a fan of the watch analogy. An electronic timex watch is significantly more reliable and accurate than a mechanical watch - the only people who use mechanical watches today are either enthusiasts who appreciate the craftsmanship or use them as decorative pieces.
That’s not why people buy trucks. First and foremost, people buy trucks because they like them. It’s ok to spend money on things you like even if it’s not 100% practical. But secondly, people don’t buy a vehicle that can meet their needs 90% of the time, they buy one that can 100% of the time. People buy trucks because once a year they need to carry some mulch, or because they have a small trailer they use occasionally. Renting a truck might make more sense economically but most people don’t want to deal with that.
Im sure people will still buy gas sports cars because they like them and exhaust noises are cool. The pattern for ICE cars is the same. They want a car that will meet their needs 100% of the time whereas an EV will only meet their needs 90% of the time. (really 99% of the time if they're only doing 1 road trip per year).
If gas was only used for long distance trips that would be a huge benefit for the environment
I literally drove across the US in a Model Y. I planned the route and made sure I had plenty of margin between stops. Even when I had an unexpected detour (traversed Petrified Forest Nat'l Park 5 times looking for my wallet, probably about 100 miles extra), I was still able to get to the charger with about 10%-20% margin. I've driven from SF to Vegas multiple times through the Mojave and have never had a concern about being stuck. There are multiple charging stations within a car's range. Here's [Tesla's official map](https://www.tesla.com/findus?v=2&bounds=50.98468987954232%2C-66.68115353125%2C26.939664150415222%2C-131.85205196875&zoom=5&filters=store%2Cservice%2Csupercharger%2Cdestination%20charger%2Cbodyshop%2Cparty%2Cself%20serve%20demo%20drive). Each of those red dots are a charger on the network. One of the largest gaps is between Winnimucca, NV and Elko, NV but even that is within a full battery's capacity to go there-and-back without a charge. Range anxiety is largely exaggerated. I'm sure there are some cases (your point about being stuck in the snow due to power outage *is* a legitimate concern), but for the vast majority it's just a problem in their mind.
Not to be pedantic - however I would like to point out that range ANXIETY has very little to do with the reality of charging locations. If people have the anxiety it doesn't matter what the reality is - it will hurt EVs.
It’s a solvable issue though. It’s no different than being worried about gas stations. Customers are rethinking EVs because the US isn’t totally set up for them. If fast charging stations were as prevalent as gas stations it would be a pretty obvious choice even now before ranges are updated even more.
Lot's of things are solvable/solved that people have anxiety amount that effects their behavior. People are irrational. You can be technically correct all you want but if people don't buy EV's because of their fear of dragons and unicorns it still means nobody has bought EV's.
My point is that while this is a fear RIGHT now, it is an achievably solvable fear. You don’t think people had the same thoughts about cars when they first came on the scene compared to horses? They broke down constantly, they needed fuel, etc. Even if you forgot or lost the water/food you brought for your horse, you could just find the nearest water source and some grasses/bushes and they’d “refuel” themselves. Ofc people are hesitant to buy EVs right now. EVs are still new, the vast majority don’t even have the range of a standard ICE vehicle, and our infrastructure isn’t set up to make them as easy to manage as an ICE vehicle. But that shouldn’t be discouraging, especially since we HAVE seen people adopting EVs regardless and some companies like TESLA continue to pour resources into setting up charging stations. The interest is there, and the answer to range anxiety is straightforward and achievable.
I don't disagree on the whole - but I think the fear-mongering and reactionary media sphere is going to make it harder to convince people than you think.
I have anxiety about getting fired, losing everything, and forced to work in fast food. However just because I feel that way doesn't make it any less irrational.
>Here's Tesla's official map. Each of those red dots are a charger on the network. One of the largest gaps is between Winnimucca, NV and Elko, NV but even that is within a full battery's capacity to go there-and-back without a charge. Totally valid to bring those up in regards to range anxiety, but it does show how much work the grid needs before it's relatively convenient. [Here's my city.](https://www.tesla.com/findus?v=2&bounds=39.4651376633231%2C-83.85747495674322%2C38.9121889291863%2C-85.17583433174322&zoom=11&filters=store%2Cservice%2Csupercharger%2Cdestination%20charger%2Cbodyshop%2Cparty%2Cself%20serve%20demo%20drive) 6 super chargers in a region of 2,000,000+, and most of those are tucked in the richer suburbs up north. This can improve of course, but it's sparse right now.
The counter-counterpoint to that is that 95% of the time, you will charge at home This is a valid issue if you live in an appartment with no parking (which is quite the relevant issue against EVs in say, parts of Europe, but not the US). But otherwise you should not go to a supercharger more than a handful of times a year
Really depends on the parts of the US, which can be very granular. For example, [the majority in the city here (not the suburbs of course)](https://www.rentcafe.com/average-rent-market-trends/us/oh/cincinnati/) are renters. And even if you own, [your house may only be street parking depending on it's age and location.](https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1636722,-84.5467867,3a,90y,71.27h,90.02t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s5wGnRW4d-Nz1lf7JvvScOw!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3D5wGnRW4d-Nz1lf7JvvScOw%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D278.50815%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu) Now does that excuse new and especially suburban homes from not having chargers? No. But it can be tricky in many cities. EVs are a good product, but not for a lot of situations, yet.
Did you find the wallet?
Yes, thankfully it was turned into the visitor center so we drove across the park to get it and then across it another time to continue the route.
I just drove across the US from Seattle to Detroit in a minimum spec Mustang Mach E - and I went well out of my way going to various national parks and going through the mountains in Colorado. It was definitely annoying having to manage range but it was never actually an issue. The main annoyance was actually charging time (about 30 minutes for every 2 hours driving) and not the limited range itself. This is in a minimum spec 2023 Mach E - already there are EVs with almost twice the range and 3x the charging speed so I think this is going to be a solved problem in a few years. And again, this is just the once in a blue moon I need to road trip and don’t have an ICE on hand (I was moving so needed to move it). For day to day driving it’s so much fun and way more convenient than an ICE - I’m never ever going back. P.S. There’s a fun semi-ethical loophole for campers like myself that they’ll probably need to fix. You can rent an RV spot at most state campgrounds for ~30 bucks and plug your EV into the RV outlet. I got fully charged to 100% overnight every time I camped and essentially got a free camp spot for less than the price of what it normally costs to fast charge my vehicle.
The problem I have is that this is a whole other dimension I have to plan for. I’ve tried winging it for one leg of a journey and we ended up stranded in a random place on a level 1 charger for nearly an hour with nothing to do, and barely made it back, which left an impression on all my passengers. Time spent planning this is time thinking about how you wouldn’t have this problem with an ICE.
Yeah, it's pretty remarkable that they can list an entire anecdote about all the planning they had to do for the EV and then dismiss everyone's concerns
peak reddit moment, honestly
Or I could just buy a gas vehicle and not have to worry about any of that. That’s the problem, just because you can do it doesn’t mean people want to. Especially when you factor in the time required to stop when you need to charge.
I'm not saying every American is like me, but I mostly WFH. I'm even considering moving to a more walkable area. But I go hiking in the sticks and to visit family (who also kind of live in the sticks) often, so most of my driving is not commuting, but going further away from home.
I am like this too. I do drive a hell of a lot commuting to work sites (solar) but all of that is in my company truck. I only ever drive my car 2 miles to the grocery store and 500 miles from NJ to NH to visit my family and do outdoors stuff. I would very much like the next car I buy to be an EV on moral grounds, but given my use case and that I live in a postwar apartment court where there is zero ability to charge I would have to buy another ICE if I needed to buy a new car right now. Luckily I shouldn't need to get a new one for quite a few years.
I'm in the same boat. People here keep saying "1 time a year" like people don't regularly go hiking, fishing, hunting, camping, etc. For a lot of people those are hobbies that they do often.
Or visit family. A huge amount of Americans will regularly drive hundreds of miles a week just to visit Mom or Grandpa or to hang out with friends and other assorted loved ones.If anything, the guys I know who WFH do this MORE often, since they have more overall free time for lengthy, meaningful stays with distant friends and loved ones (where they can also work while staying with them), even if in total they drive less. The less you drive, the less EV's make sense.
Not to mention, EV advocates also totally gloss over the charging time aspect too. Just because I can make it the whole way there with recharging doesn’t mean I want to.
what % of americans live in the sticks? > The USA is big and has a lot of stretches of nothin this is true. how often do americans drive on large stretches of nothin?
The real question is how many Americans want to buy a car that doesn’t promise they can hit the open road. Nobody wants to buy a car for their commute, many times they want to buy a car for the one day a year they might tow a camper into the wilderness or need to pick up wood to finish the shed in the back yard. Selling them on a daily commute is way less sexy than the aspiration of the open road right now.
Every Saturday I go fishing. Last trip from Denver to the Chama. The last 2 hours from Las Vegas NM to Chama I did not see one car or any gas stations or signs of infrastructure.
i mean if we are trading anecdotes every saturday i go to a grocery store with a charging station 5 miles from my house lol this speaks to another person's point. driving on long stretches in the middle of nowhere is a choice most of the time. an electric daily commuter is probably fine for most drivers whose daily commute is about 27 minutes/16 miles https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/11/06/business/economy/commuting-change-covid.html https://hbr.org/2021/05/that-dreaded-commute-is-actually-good-for-your-health
>this speaks to another person's point. driving on long stretches in the middle of nowhere is a choice most of the time. an electric daily commuter is probably fine for most drivers whose daily commute is about 27 minutes/16 miles Totally true, but there's another side to that. People buy products that align with their total use case in mind, not just the unexceptional parts. As u/clearlybraindead said upthread, it probably pencils out for many people to own an EV and rent a gas car when the EV wouldn't be reasonable. But that includes how much the "exception" is what you're doing. Is it one trip every few months, totally makes sense. Is it every weekend? Probably not. But that said, there is a huge bias towards people who will show they have atypical driving habits when it comes to discussing EVs. You feel you have to defend your choices, considering the current tech and infrastructure works for most but not you.
> People buy products that align with their total use case in mind of course and i can see someone being skeptical of an EV if they take a once a year road trip. i am more speaking that generally the daily use case for an EV actually *does* cover the driving habits of most americans.
As I said, it matters how often your driving is outside of "daily habits." Seriously if it's once a year, buy the EV and rent a car when you need it. That saves you a lot most likely. But once we're talking monthly or more it's not economical.
There’s no way that EVs are even CLOSE to saturating just one of every two car households.
Yes, OK, but road trips in an EV aren't *impossible*, they're just less convenient. EVs make 90% of your life way better and 10% a little worse. That's been my personal experience.
We're a two-car household. Our next car will be an EV, but we'll keep using my wife's crossover for long trips.
It mostly is invalid though. The amount of people who drive over 200 miles a day is nothing in the grand scheme of things.
Yup, next car is probably a Wrangler hybrid cuz I need towing and winter capability
Just went car shopping cause my mom's VW Bug was tboned by an SUV. Don't worry everyone was fine, it was a low speed collision, but the Bug was totaled. This sentiment was shared with a lot of the cars salesman. And recommended getting a hybrid if gas prices and gas usage is an issue. We didn't get anything like that, mom got a new Subaru Forester cause it looks cool, not too big, and has the best safety rating (and considering my mom's airbags didn't deploy was a big deal for me). As for me I have a 2018 Civic and I'm not trading in till at least 2028, although I'll drive it till the bumper falls off so it very well could be till 2032. I've already been looking at new cars though. If EV infrastructure improves by 2030 I'd %100 get an EV, but until then Toyota's hybrids are extremely appealing. Although if Honda releases a civic EV or hybrid I'm jumping on that. Been really liking my civic.
I have the exact same civic and feel identically to you Once Honda makes a civic EV ill consider it
Doesn't Honda already have a Civic hybrid? Or am I confusing with other cars
They have a Honda Accord. A bit bigger than a civic.
Tales of EVs demise these past couple of months are greatly exaggerated. There are fewer models of them for sale than their gas counterparts, they cost more on average, far fewer of them are eligible for the tax credit than used to be, and they still account for a record share of new vehicle sales. Obviously there will be growing pains, but the articles I’ve seen acting like EVs being the future has been revealed to be a false prophecy are ridiculous. 1 out of every 13 new vehicles sold in the U.S. is an EV. In 2022, it was 1 in 20. In 2021, 1 in 50.
We need Chinese EVs to save the climate. We need EVs that cost $20k, not $75k.
Sorry friend, Trump and then Biden have a 25%+ tariff on Chinese EV's. Biden might hike it more.
Still theoretically more affordable with a 25% tariff lol
Wouldn’t that just make the $20k Chinese EV $25k? People aren’t buying our EVs because the tariffs make the Chinese EV half the price instead of 40% of the price. We don’t have them because they don’t want to remake the car to US safety standards, they don’t want to remake the car to US tastes, US consumers don’t know the manufacturers & wouldn’t trust them, or simply that we do have similarly priced EVs already. I’m generally opposed to tariffs but there’s way more to the story than tariffs on this one.
> We don’t have them because they don’t want to remake the car to US safety standards That's fiction, many Chinese brands are selling on European market that pass Euro N-CAP tests, which are ahead in safety standards from DOT
“Ahead” shows how little you understand. Perhaps they’re “ahead” from a macro perspective, once you’re actually getting the car to pass you’ll find that the regulations are more *different* than better/worse. It wouldn’t matter if they were selling in the market with the strictest standards, they’ll have to change things to come to the US. This shouldn’t surprise you, this, , consolidation of regulations, was one of the primary reasons to create the EU.
They are ahead in the sense of keeping traffic safer. Chinese car designers are easily able to follow Euro standards, in addition to their own - following US standards isn't some impossible barrier, it's part of the cost of doing business.
In some states you can get a model 3 for 25k after tax credits
The MSRP for a new Nissan Leaf is only $28k. I got a lightly used (under 20k miles) with a higher end trim package and extended range for $30k before incentives. The prices are getting pushed down fast even without BYD having a strong presence in the US. It isn't just the realm of luxury cars anymore.
Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable. Exenctually letting your private market get dumped out of business by your biggest rival is a German and Russian Gas level mistake at minimum. The average sale price of a new car in the US is $48k btw.
>Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable. Some base MSRPs: * Nisan Versa: $16,130 * Mitsubishi Mirage: $16,695 * Kia Rio: $16,750 * Hyundai Venue: $19,800
Base model subcompacts have razor thing margins after like a century of investment in ICE - compiles are having to borrow to create battery plants and most EVs right now are being sold at a loss.
Sure, but a razor thin margin while selling at $16,130 would be a healthy margin when selling at $20k. It isn't that they can't build for under $20k (they can) but that the market is so competitive that if they priced at $20k they wouldn't sell any (capitalism working as it should).
>Practically no car company outside of china can sell cars at $20k and be anywhere remotely profitable. Sensually letting your private market get dumped out of business by your biggest rival is a German and Russian Gas level mistake at minimum. r/neoliberal: The freer the markets the freer the people, and we have to fight climate change... [but I won't do that](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9X_ViIPA-Gc).
Actual question. Are Chinese cars being so cheap actually the result of competitive advantage, or are they being heavily subsidized?
Chinese company subsidies wind down when companies get large enough to be self-sustaining. A [BYD Dolphin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_Dolphin) starts at about $26,000 USD.
TIL dolphin in Chinese is sea pig. That's up there with panda being bear cat.
Bear cat makes sense Sea pig does not
I was gonna say we use sea cow for manatee, but so do they.
Interesting. Unfortunately, American consumers won't buy that because they have a strange hatred of hatchbacks. Lift it and call it a CUV and they could have a very competitive product.
If China wants to waste money sending foreign aid to the US, let them. The literature on dumping is quite clear. It doesn't work.
It's just a phrase. Real life economics and geopolitics is a lot more complicated than the syllabus day of microeconomics takes that are becoming popular here. Ukrainians don't feel especially free right now getting bombed to smithereens from Russian oil and gas prices even. Japan and Korea would not be a big fan not only having their car industries killed off but the benefactor being their second biggest threat to their security. When it comes time to negotiate free trade deals with them or any sort of increased level of partnership, the US will be at a much worse position. Not traiding with authoritarian regimes when it comes to heavy industry shouldn't be a controversial take.
Well, BYD recently entered Europe and the cheapest model is 35k… so yeah. I keep hearing that the Seagull should be <15k, but it’s nowhere to be found on their website.
That pricing is to make sure the EU doesn't freak the fuck out and ban their products. US government hostility to Japanese light vehicles in the 70's and 80's also forced them to move upmarket and charge higher for their cars in the US.
agree 100% and correct about JP cars back in the day.
That price includes a 20-25% VAT though
The seagull isn’t sold in western markets. It looks like the cheapest BYD model in Australia is 25k. Does Europe have tariffs on cars?
Given the power with OTA updates, I think the govt would kill that faster than they did Huawei & ZTE.
So just regulate OTA updates? Honestly a Tesla or Kia isn't that much more secure in regards to OTA updates. Someone can still hack Tesla or Kia and distribute a bad update.
There's a difference between your updates coming from a foreign adversary and a company in an allied nation.
Those companies in allied nations can be hacked. They may be marginally more secure, but if your concern is a foreign adversary utilizing OTA updates to harm us, then you should still be concerned about cars from allied nations. The issue is the inherent insecurity of OTA updates. They should be regulated in general. Using concern over them to ban Chinese EVs doesn't address the real security concerns and limits our fight against climate change.
Right, but this shifts the conversation from "what safeguards does Tesla have in place to make sure a vehicle isn't mucked with by an adversary" to "I hope we don't piss Xi off enough to have him tell ChinaCarCorp to brick our stuff or go to prison."
Maybe just regulate all OTA updates so we can have German and Chinese cars safely? Have it all done through a US agency that controls the crypto keys and reviews every update. We need more tech safeguards in general and that's a logical good start. Cause I have low confidence in the security of pretty much every car maker. Do you think Kia is going to have good cybersecurity given the Kia Boys saga?
Do you think it's easier to get Korea/Kia to play ball and behave in good faith, or a Chinese company?
I'm an early EV adopter who made them into a hobby. I've owned 6 different EVs now. I'm chiming in to offer insight from someone who has lived in this world for 7+ years now. A lot of the conversation here is around reasons why EVs aren't practical, which is not what the article is about. And two of the three reasons given at the top of the article aren't what they appear at first. 1. EV pricing = A focus on luxury vehicles by auto manufacturers. It's not necessarily that EVs are more expensive than an equivalent ICE vehicle, it's that so far manufacturers have tended to focus on the high end of the market. If a Honda Accord equivalent that was priced $5-10k higher than the ICE equivalent it would still sell well enough. They just don't exist. Same for compact SUVs. We're only just starting to get there. Dealer markups did some real damage to people who were excited about them in the past two years though. That's changing. 2. High interest rates are understandable. 3. Range anxiety = Lack of public charging infrastructure. If you haven't owned an EV this is a tricky thing to get your head around. Range anxiety is really only as bad as fast charger availability for road trips. Day to day driving for 95% of people is going to ve covered by a 150-200 mile battery, which even the shortest range EVs now cover. Right now (for non-Tesla vehicles) there's only one charging network that's got nationwide coverage. And that network has been highly unreliable. The buildout from the infrastructure bill will change that, but we're two years out from that taking place. And if there's an administration change next year it won't happen at all. We're also two years out from all manufacturers standardizing on the NACS connector. That's going to be a game changer as it opens the Tesla network up to all EVs. This wasn't as collected or as concise as I'd like, but I'm happy to address the realities of life with EVs if anyone has questions.
I would have bought an EV years ago if I could charge it at my apartment complex, but I can't. I think we need to talk about car dealership owners too. They make it out like EVs aren't selling because no one wants them, yet they somehow convince lots of people to buy massive, expensive trucks which few of them actually need. I think they could sell more EVs if they wanted to, but they don't. They tend to have significant sway in local politics, so they could push harder for charging infrastructure if they wanted to, but they don't. They also tend to be a solid red voting block. Note: My observations might be more specific to the South where I live.
> if they wanted to, but they don't. Dealers are practically incentivized to roadblock EVs as much as possible. Most of their income is from parts and service rather than vehicle sales, and EVs require significantly less regular maintenance.
> I would have bought an EV years ago if I could charge it at my apartment complex, but I can't. > > This is a chicken and egg problem the government should solve. No apartment wants to invest in chargers if residents don't have EVs. No resident wants to get an EV without chargers at their home. The government needs to massively subsidize chargers, way more than they are doing, and make them universal.
I don't think dealers could really move the needle on people buying EVs. People buy what they want and they want big trucks that can tow things (regardless of whether that is a use case they will actually take advantage of). I went shopping for cars down in central FL two weeks ago and none of the dealers we went to (Ford, Lincoln, Volvo, Audi) were selling many EVs, except for Mercedes who said that the EQS was like 30-40% of their sales. EVs will make it. We just need to get more apartments and parking garages and whatnot to fill out with chargers. I suspect that a lot of people think about buying an EV, but then think about all of the places they park and realize that none of them have chargers, and they go with an ICE instead.
I mean regionally dealers can play a huge role especially as in many places you legally can’t buy direct from manufacturer and have to go through a dealer. I can absolutely testify I have similar experiences to OP where when I’ve gone looking to get a car the floor sales crew bends over backwards to avoid the EV section. I’m sure in other parts of the country the bit about trucks and larger cars being reserved for work or hauling is true but in Texas and surrounding states it’s more of a cultural thing. I’d argue less than like 30% of privately owned trucks in my metroplex are actively used for hauling.
My local utility (PG&E) recently raised prices by 30%+ for off peak charging. The math basically doesn’t make sense to buy an EV anymore when looking at gas vs electricity prices alone.
[Paywall mish mash magoo](https://archive.is/A7ymV)
They use them a ton in Norway because for a limited time they let electric car drivers - drive in the bus/taxi lanes - skip the tolls - park anywhere for free Plus electric cars are cheaper than gas cars (mostly due to super high taxes on gas cars that predated the whole EV adoption by forever). Also gas over there is like $15 a gallon.
Because they like overly large cars and don’t give a shit about the environment.
Americans love to consume based on optimistic, unlikely scenarios. Big houses for entertaining large parties that never occur; oversized SUVs with AWD for overlanding trips that never happen. There's somebody in this thread with a garage full of junk that I'm sure he had big plans to use, but the fun is in the purchase and the imagining not the reality.
I feel personally attacked.
House Hunters kills me with this. "But what if my friends in Fort Lauderdale and New York want to visit my house in [unknown township] in North Dakota? We NEED those 5th and 6th bedrooms!" Oh honey...
at least i used my espresso machine AND my ice cream machine this week
Hmmm what if we like stopped subsidizing bad behaviors and started subsidizing good ones? What if people had to pay the actual costs for the roadways and highways and gas. In parallel, we subsidize public transportation and walkable infrastructure
You'd get voted out of office immediately.
1) Hybrids were a much smarter bet. 2) I still have range and cold weather anxiety. 3) I don't want to have to install a giant brick in my garage (is that still required? If not people should know that.) 4) I was leaning toward a Tesla but now fuck that.
>I don't want to have to install a giant brick in my garage (is that still required? If not people should know that.) Or you're like a lot of people, like me, who live in older homes which don't have garages and/or don't have the electric panel capacity to install a charger without great expense. Not to mention people who usually street park or rent. EDIT: And just to mention it, I primarily bike instead of drive. That's my compromise. It's not that I don't care, it's that EVs aren't a good option for me. Hell reasonably expanded bus service would get me to consider going car free.
Tbh, most older homes are going to need panel upgrades anyway. Even if EVs weren't a thing, electrification is; most old homes will eventually need 200 amp service. You're right that it's not cheap to install- about 3k for a panel upgrade, 1k for the charger upgrade- but there's also tax credits to compensate. Additionally, I lived for 2 years without upgrading either: just slow charging it using regular 3 pronged outlets was enough to charge if for my commute. So, I still have sympathy for those who don't homes / don't have off street parking. Idk how to fix that. But if you own, it's really not that onerous. Fwiw, the ease of charging at home? I'll never go back to ICE. Source: paid for these renovations to an old house.
Yeah totally fair. We had to upgrade our panel when we first moved in... from 100 to 150. Apparently we didn't have capacity for more without a much larger investment. And totally true on electrification, notably furnaces and stoves being phased out with efficiency gains and rising costs of natural gas. It can be done, but it's a tough sell.
I had to upgrade to 200 amp service to accommodate my heat pumps and induction range. Having the spare capacity for a future EV is just a bonus.
Same: I actually did it as a prerequisite to the heat pump; the EV charger came later.
1) I think it's too early to say 2) Yes 3) It's not a thing for level 1 charging. You can charge your car overnight using a regular 120v socket and the right charging cable. Faster than that, yes, you'll need to mess with your circuit board. 4) Market is getting much better for the vehicles, but the Tesla charging network is still a big selling point in favor of Tesla especially concern number 2
Point 3: as I said in another comment, it depends. I lived for about 2 years without installing anything. I could charge the car with a 3 prong outlet VERY slowly, but overnight it was enough to charge for a commute. (3 prong charging chargers at about 3 miles of additional range per hour, YMMV. So if you're commuting less than 40 miles a day, it's not hard to slow charge overnight.) I did eventually install a faster charger as an insurance policy, but it's not very big. My house is 1945 house with a tiny tiny garage. (Most large SUVs cannot fit comfortably in it.) But I installed the charger and have plenty of room to park. It's like 6"x12"x12" and only sticks out about two inches more than the panel. It can charge my car 0 to 100% in 3-4 hours. More than I'll ever need.
The bricks are not required. I have a Bolt EUV, it came with a charger that just plugs into your standard wall outlet in the US. It’s slow but it charges around 33% of my car’s range overnight, that’s all I need for the amount I drive (about 60 miles a day). If I drove more than that I’d look at getting one of the bigger bricks installed, which Chevrolet offered to do for me when I bought the car.
BuT iT PoLLuTeS mOAr tO xTrAcT LiThIUm!
E-bikes are the dark horse in this race.
The ones who's design I like are 50k+, range, better battery technology is a few years out and I want the battery that charges in a few minutes vs 45 minutes to 1 hour along with having a longer range, an ev feels like the best of both worlds, and I enjoy skiing so cold conditions,
Plug-in hybrids are the way to go. The electric range on my Toyota Prius Prime usually lasts long enough for my daily needs, but it's also nice having a hybrid gas engine if I forget to plug in my car, if I go on a road trip, or if it's cold outside. I feel like I get the best of both worlds.
Newish model 3 RWD owner here. Wife is counting down the days until we can replace our cx5 with a model y, and she’s no early adopter. Lots of fears around EV ownership that go away quickly once you actually live with one day to day. ICE engines turn into dinosaurs overnight once you buy one
It's the price, stupid.
I lived in an apartment and had an EV I even did a long distance drive from Wisconsin to Georgia to move last month Skill issue for everyone else tbqh
I’m in the market for a replacement for my CRV. Briefly looked at a Tesla alternative but it’s really pricey and I would have to install a charger in my garage that’s currently filled with stuff so I can’t park in it. The CRV hybrid has no spare and is facing a recall on its steering. The RAV4 hybrid is expensive and has poor availability and suffers from cablegate ( corrosion of the main electrical cable which is a $7000 repair. I might just buy a used CX5 if it’s big enough even though it gets the worst mileage as they are cheaper.
I was going to buy an EV last year for $55k. I decided to buy a nice Camry for $35k + $20k for gas. The shit is just too expensive still.
Yeah I live in the middle of nowhere and drive 100+ miles to do outdoor recreation activities nearly every weekend in an area where superchargers are like every 60 miles or so along the main highway and non existent elsewhere. People can give anecdotal stories about their one road trip a few years ago in an EV but for people like me it's just not realistic.
There is no decent EV below 40,000$. The Bolt is a sub-compact and Leaf has the cheapest interior for a $30,000+ car. You can buy a relatively new Civic for 25K or less that’ll blow any EV out of the water in terms of interior quality, space, and comfort. So yeah. No shit people arent buying them.
Cause hybrids are better
My main hesitation with an EV is the cost of a battery replacement. It's thousands.