Auto Execs Are Coming Clean: EVs Aren't Working
businessinsider.com
businessinsider.com
https://www.forbes.com/wheels/news/chevrolet-bolt-discontinu...
"Automakers have been ditching small, affordable, low-profit vehicles for larger, pricier and higher-profit ones (gas-powered and electric) for years, but the process has greatly accelerated since 2018. In March of that year, cars costing less than $25,000 made up 24% of the car market, but they make up just 4% today, according to data from Edmunds.com."
We've got a Bolt EUV and it's a fantastic car. Bought it because it had some of the best legroom for our rather tall children.
We don't need or want some monster SUV.
which is huge.
and exactly what i don't want or need. le sigh.
BRING BACK SMALLER CARS!!!
A reasonably priced EV sedan.
An EV family car — 7 seats, not too large. A minivan or a wagon would work.
A small utility vehicle. Telo is on to something IMO.
Finally, there’s a huge elephant in the room: NACS. J1772 lost. It’s the living dead. Selling a new EV right now with only a J1772 (or J1772+CCS) jack is like selling a very expensive phone with only a 3G radio a couple years ago. No one who is paying attention would want to own it and be stuck with it. If I were running the show at any of these companies, I would switch production to NACS ASAP. I don’t care if it would take a loss, or if a major change is awkward in the middle of a model year. Throw in an adapter so the cars can charge from J1772 as well (Tesla makes these). Heck, have both jacks. But I think that essentially every single J1772 car that rolls off the production line right now is a mistake, and every would-be customer who reads some FAQ about how there will probably be an adapter available to charge today’s brand-new car from NACS in “Spring 2024” would quite reasonably say no.
Sure, this would add maybe $100-$200 in BOM cost during the transition period. But I think that’s better than failing to produce credible cars at all. And then the cars could be sold as “already compatible with Tesla level 2 chargers and ready for Tesla-compatible supercharging with an OTA upgrade”, which is a lot better than “not compatible, and we’ll probably have an adapter available next year for an unknown price.”
(The adapter will surely cost more than the added parts for an extra jack. An external adapter would need to make all the protocols work and may also need a relay to switch between AC and DC modes.)
https://electrek.co/2023/10/26/volvo-expects-ev-momentum-con...
There will eventually be a "new" Bolt to replace it, but it will be built on a completely different platform, and there's no word on whether it will hit the same price point.
https://www.media.stellantis.com/em-en/citroen/press/citroen...
Highly unlikely to come to the US, of course.
No, if you exclude pickups but include SUVs (have to do the latter for the Model Y to even qualify), the Toyota RAV4 was; other cars ahead of the model Y included the Toyota Camry and Honda CR-V.
True, last year it wasn’t but this year it was the best selling vehicle of any type, EV or not, including trucks.
This year isn't over. The story is about Q1, not the year.
EVs sell like hotcakes in China and Hong Kong.
Those three were indeed odd choices for a response to your claim, but still, the other seven stand.
expensive to fuel - Money problem -> Subsidies,
expensive to repair - Money problem -> Subsidies,
expensive to maintain - Money problem -> Subsidies
unreliable - So you need more than one. Money problem -> Subsidies
can't be used on poor roads. https://www.ferrari.com/en-EN/auto/ferrari-purosangue
hard to get into - See link above. Not at all.
have no luggage space. You can overnight your stuff. Money problem -> Subsidies
only hold two people - So you need more than one Money problem -> Subsidies
If you throw more than 100% of the value of the vehicle at owners, it's no longer just a "subsidy" and is elevated to "a free money scheme". (Which is also exactly what happened with the bananas, why it was insane, and how it ended up in the news).
1: impractical free car = still impractical
2-4: expensive to fuel, expensive to repair, expensive to maintain: the three things I was agreeing with you about
5: unreliable free car = lots of waiting on a highway for the repair people when it breaks down.
Also, "so you need more than one" is an absurd reaction when you yourself have also written "50% of people in EU live in an apartment" and "Like those massive commie blocks in Berlin with parking lots planned for 1 car per 3 apartments? Yeah sure, please step out of your bubble, you have no clue what are you talking about" and still would be even if you have (silently) updated your world view based on what I said in that instance.
6: free car that can't be used on poor roads / 7: free car that's hard to get into: your link to a sales pitch does not actually answer anything about #6, though that picture looks like it might solve #7
8: free car that has no luggage space: overnight… to the vet? Overnight… from the supermarket? Overnight… on a ferry or to the airport? Overnight… to the beach or hike, with your sports gear? Overnight… to the campsite? If you're ever taking stuff in a car rather than a delivery/movals van, you probably want to use or hand over the luggage immediately, not pay sometime to attempt to deliver it the next day.
9: free car that only hold two people, et cetera: I see you have no idea why people might want to hold more than two people. Hint: one category takes 9 months, and not only do they really not like being alone, the police take a dim view to it too — and when they need attention, they really need it, even if you can't take your hands of the wheel because you're driving and there's only the two of you in the car. A further category dies of old age before being old enough to get a licence, though they'd never pass the test anyway, and also hates being alone or even just away from their people.
And finally, the bit that subsidies make worse:
10. "Their main appeal is that they signal status. And if they were cheap, they don't do that."
Make it free, even more so.
People just don't appreciate how much money the wealthy need!
PS: I do want to buy an EV. I'm not one of those ICE-only people.
The few times a year I do drive more than 150 miles in a trip, I've already found my favorite DC fast charging stations in each direction along the interstate. The car's navigation system takes into account the car's battery life, expected range, and available charging stations, so it does most of my route planning for me.
If I'm really in a crunch for time or going on an extra long haul, the cost of the occasional rental car is still cheaper than what I was spending on gas each year. I know my experience isn't the same as other parts of the world, but the range anxiety of owning an EV quickly fades after it becomes part of your routine and you get a feel for the actual limits of your car.
The Chinese auto makers, like BYD and MG, are also giving the US and Europeans are hard time.
A leading indicator is surely the wealthier suburbs where EVs seem to be every where. Anyone that doesn’t have an EV is just holding onto their ICE car until the lease expires or it dies and they churn to an EV.
Maybe the market for cars with limited charging networks is the real problem?
Guess the margins for them aren’t enough when you have to try really hard to spend more than $12k
Depending on your sector you can also package restaurant meals, rent/mortgage, laptops - all sorts of stuff.
This means you pay for them from your pre-tax income. There are a bunch of limits and a fringe benefits tax year that ends in March that you have to deal with as part of it though.
The most immediate need (utility) for green hydrogen is replacing fossil fuels in the production of methane and ammonia. This must be done asap.
Once that hydrogen production and transport infra is in place, it'll be relatively easier to pivot to using H2 as a fuel.
In other words, electric batteries are a bridge (stop gap) tech on the road to our glorious hydrogen economy.
Storing hydrogen is hard because it's low density until it approaches absolute zero and is smaller than and embrittles the best materials we have to store it.
If batteries are a worry for replacement, imagine leaking embrittled pressure tanks that have to be checked every year and replaced sooner than every 5.
Hydrogen has a far lower boiling point (=volatility). Or did you mean how explosive it is? Hydrogen has a far wider range of explosive concentration than gasoline.
Autoignition point is lower for gasoline than hydrogen if you meant that, but the wide range of explosive concentrations for hydrogen seems like it would pretty much negate that safety benefit.
40kph cars slam into each other. gas leaks out, maybe eventually starts a fire.
meanwhile the hydrogen batteries, some already fragile, just explode. on the plus side the blasts and fire make the pile up a lot more visible.
I think range anxiety is already mostly a nothingburger and as battery capacity improves and people realize being limited to X miles is hardly a limitation for their use case at all, it will become a non-issue.
Using electricity directly is just easier and more efficient than transporting hydrogen that was made from electricity, unless for some reason hydrogen truly is more economic than battery for your use case.