Electric vehicles - what does the future hold? · Page 42

Well, you're right - I don't have a shred of proof on what you have posted - and neither do you!

Was there an actual point of contention, or is this just more DMV angst?

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#823

Well, you're right - I don't have a shred of proof on what you have posted - and neither do you!

Brewha wrote:

No, there's plenty just on this thread alone. We can dig into any Covid thread as well. It would be tiring on your part.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#824

Remember...Brewha believes that I'm the only one out there that says this isn't viable.

The Costs & Logistics Of Plugging In EVs Are About To Become Supercharged

U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm gave Americans an unintended glimpse of the future during her road trip this summer touting the wonders of electric vehicles. Far from spotlighting the promise of EVs, her public relations misadventure in Georgia involved one of her staff in a gasoline-powered vehicle blocking off a coveted charger in advance of her arrival, leading to frayed tempers and a local EV owner calling the cops. It was an illustration of the challenges drivers could face as governments push the public to embrace plug-in vehicles.

Hyped as technological marvels, EVs are boobytrapped with a host of inconveniences and tradeoffs. By now many people have heard about range anxiety, exploding lithium-ion batteries, and the environmental destruction caused by global mining for battery minerals.

But another wave of challenges is in the offing as the federal government and state officials pump in billions of dollars to build out a massive national infrastructure of charging stations to power the EVs.

The sheer scale of a charging infrastructure means recruiting retailers and businesses to install and maintain chargers that are expected to lose money in the near future, with some likely to be written off as economic losses.

In California, which is slated to ban sales of new gasoline-powered cars in just 12 years, government estimates indicate the state may need to install at least 20 electric chargers for every gas pump now in service to create a reliable, seamless network.

Massive public subsidies will be a crucial part of this effort because private industry is not willing to take the financial risks of betting on an uncertain future. Government subsidies mean complying with recordkeeping and reporting mandates and making sure chargers are online 97% of the time, while bearing the financial risk of vandalism, mechanical malfunctions, daily fluctuations in electricity pricing, and cashflow unpredictability.

A “net zero” society inherently favors the haves over the have-nots. Renters and low-income families aren’t as likely to own private chargers, and electricity purchased from public chargers can cost five to 10 times as much as charging privately in a garage at home. To avoid penalizing the little guy, federal EV mandates require that 40% of benefits pay for public chargers in disadvantaged areas, while California requires that at least half go to such “equity” communities, where relatively few people currently drive EVs.

The rapid transition from a reliable legacy energy infrastructure that’s more than a century old to emerging technologies in just a few decades will require the buy-in of virtually every American, including relearning driving habits and adopting charging patterns that right now constitute the leisurely prerogative of early adopters and trend-setters.

“We need to make sure the infrastructure is overbuilt, oversupplied and over-capacity so that nobody as a driver gets stranded,” said John Eichberger, executive director of the Transportation Energy Institute, a nonprofit research organization. “When you point out the challenges to a believer or a staunch advocate, well now you’re just being negative, you’re just trying to impede progress.”

The energy secretary’s imbroglio this summer encapsulates the logistical, financial and social challenges that get glossed over in a bid to win public support for creating a carbon-neutral society that could not happen without massive government underwriting. It’s a familiar pattern of selling complicated policies as simple fixes, where the cultural gatekeepers misrepresent EVs as a “net zero” technology, lowball the total land area needed to build out solar and wind farms, and make it difficult if not impossible for critics to question the apocalyptic assumptions and dystopian predictions of climate action advocates.

To curb greenhouse gas emissions, California, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, and other states have outlawed the sale of new gasoline cars starting in 2035, and similar EV mandates have been adopted by nearly 60 countries. The Biden administration is spending $7.5 billion on 500,000 EV charging ports as part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to boost EV sales targets to 50% of all new vehicle purchases by 2030.

EV sales are creeping up, but nowhere near the ambitious targets set by the policy experts, accounting for under 8% of new car sales in the third quarter, and rising to nearly 10% in September. California is at the vanguard of the nation’s EV transition, with more than 1 million electric vehicles among the state’s 31-million-plus registered vehicles, and EVs accounting for about 25% of new car sales in the second quarter.

California’s forecasts, investments, and challenges show the EV transition in a fuller light. To date, the state has committed at least $14 billion for EV infrastructure development and clean transportation, the money coming mostly from taxpayers. Other contributors include that state’s electric utilities, the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, as well as the state’s share of the $14.7 billion settlement with Volkswagen over the Dieselgate emissions cheating scandal.

“With so much money swishing around, especially government subsidy monies, why would anyone really want to sit back and say, ‘hold on a minute’?” said Robert Charette, President of the ITABHI Corporation, a management consulting firm based in Spotsylvania, Va., who writes about EV charging challenges. “The EV transition party is just starting, and no one wants the punchbowl to be taken away anytime soon.”

At some point, EV experts promise, the kinks will get worked out, and EVs will become as convenient as smartphones. But at the present, the EV industry has a classic chicken-and-egg problem on its hands. The current demand for EV charging does not economically justify rapidly expanding the nation’s charging infrastructure, but without an expanded charging infrastructure in place, most people won’t buy EVs for fear of being stranded.

Despite California’s massive infrastructure investment, now totaling nearly 94,000 public chargers, the state has fallen behind its goal of 250,000 public chargers by 2025 – and potentially 10 times that number by 2035, when the ban on new gasoline-powered cars takes effect.

Transition on a Massive Scale

The sweeping societal transition decreed by government fiat puts the onus on government officials to finance the buildout of a charging infrastructure as reliable as a utility service.

“Rarely has a government, at least the U.S. government, banned specific products or behaviors that are so widely used or undertaken,” the conservative Manhattan Institute said in a recent EV report. The report points out that EVs are unlike other emerging technologies that people buy willingly: More than a century ago, “to encourage adoption of the newly invented gasoline-powered cars, governments didn’t have to ban horses.”

The scale of the transition is so immense and involves such uncharted waters that there’s no consensus on the amount of public chargers that will be needed.

According to a California Energy Commission assessment, California will need more than 2.4 million public chargers to accommodate about 15.5 million electric cars, trucks, and buses by 2035. That breaks down to 2.11 million chargers (including 83,000 fast chargers) to support 15.2 million electric cars, as well as 256,000 depot chargers and 8,500 public chargers for 377,000 trucks and buses.

The 2.4 million chargers would serve only half the registered vehicles in the state. Many more will be necessary to complete the second half of the transition, from 15.5 million EVs to more than 31 million EVs by mid-century.

Those chargers will have to be installed at curbsides, parking lots, parking decks, grocery stores, restaurants, convenience stores, big box stores, office buildings, strip malls, shopping centers, movie theaters, and a host of other locations so that drivers always have ready access to plug-in.

By comparison, California now has about 11,000 gas stations, convenience stores, and other businesses that sell gasoline, which roughly converts to about 110,000 individual gas nozzles, according to an estimate by Jeff Lenard, vice president of Strategic Industry Initiatives at the National Association of Convenience Stores. That means the transition from fossil fuels to electrons will require California to install at least 20 EV charging ports for every gas nozzle by 2035.

Not all chargers are equal, so the new EV infrastructure will require significant changes in driving habits. While so-called fast chargers can bring a battery to 80% of capacity in under an hour, most of the new public chargers will be cheaper, Level 2 technology, which provides between 5 miles and 60 miles of range for each hour of charging, and isn’t practical for charging up quickly on a road trip.

What’s more, some of these Level 2 chargers will be “shared private” chargers, meaning that they are available at workplaces and housing complexes, and limited to employees, tenants, and visitors. Today, for example, more than half of California’s 94,000 chargers are “shared private.” As a result, many Americans will likely have to coordinate other activities with publicly charging their plug-in cars, such as shopping or eating out, which becomes more involved than a quick stop at the pump to fill it up.

(The state doesn’t keep track of the estimated hundreds of thousands of private chargers that are typically housed in someone’s garage and operate at 120 volts to provide between 3 miles and 5 miles of range for every hour of overnight charging.)

A High-Risk, Low-Margin Business

For the foreseeable future, chargers are expected to lose money until there are enough EVs on the road to justify the investment.

The cost of building a fast-charging station with four or more charging ports can range from several hundred thousand dollars to more than $1 million, depending on the cost of labor, trenching, and power grid upgrades.

Unlike gas prices, which are relatively stable, electricity prices vary during the day, so that fast chargers are subject to complicated peak demand price fluctuations and unpredictable monthly “demand charges” for the highest level of electricity needed from the local power company. Charging companies, utility regulators, and power companies around the country are trying out various solutions to help charging companies predict their costs in advance, such as variable pricing for customers, so they can manage their risk and set prices accordingly. Future strategies could include on-site battery backup and storage, combined with solar power generation, to shift load and even out demand during the day.

Electric utilities and charging companies are not always allied. Private charging companies sometimes refuse to compete directly against regulated utilities that have guaranteed profit. Last year, in a move to encourage charging companies to invest in the state, the California Public Utilities Commission barred the state’s utilities from participating a statewide five-year, $1 billion EV charging rebate program.

Wyoming officials commissioned consultants to assess the financial viability of chargers in their state, and the consultants said that seven remote sites would be used so infrequently they would lose from $285,000 to $372,000 per site over five years. EV industry analyst Loren McDonald, who is CEO of the consulting firm EVAdoption, wrote an analysis concluding that remote highway sites in states such as Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and others are not likely to break even for at least five years and possibly 10 years, even with 80% of the costs covered by federal subsidies.

McDonald and Charette both said this calculus is not limited to sparsely populated states, but also applies to “charging deserts” in larger states with large urban areas.

“I think it isn’t just an isolated issue but a larger national problem that is not being fully acknowledged,” Charette said. “Once outside the major travel corridors and urban/suburban areas, independent EV charging stations are not going to be economically viable for quite some time.”

California officials say that chargers operating at convenience stores and other retailers will have to depend on selling other amenities to make money, basically operating as loss-leaders. A 2022 report from the California Energy Commission notes: “Revenue from electricity sales alone is often not enough today for chargers to be profitable, especially for stations with lower utilization.”

The California Energy Commission describes other potential risks, such as state-subsidized, money-losing chargers being decommissioned.

“It is also a risk that chargers are not operated beyond the required term of the agreement if utilization is not high enough,” the report advises. “These risks are higher in areas with lower population density and travel demand.”

In response to questions from RealClearInvestigations, the California Energy Commission said by email that not every charger has to be profitable in order to have a profitable network.

“In addition, profitability of charging in and of itself may not be the primary goal of an installation,” the agency said. “For example, charging installed at a workplace, retail establishment, or apartment or condo building may be part of an attractive package of benefits and to drive customers to shopping centers and restaurants or local residents to parks.”

Among the major charging companies, Electrify America does not publicly report its finances, but EVgo and ChargePoint have consistently reported operating losses and negative cashflows since their founding in 2010 and 2007, respectively, according to financial disclosures filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

“This partly fuels my hunch on why station operators have historically been slow to repair non-working stations,” blogged Chris Kaiser, who leads the EV charging practice for Sona Energy Solutions, a consulting and contracting firm. “If they don't make money on station operations they are better off having a broke station!”

Undependable, Unavailable

Reliability remains a persistent problem, one that will shadow the industry as chargers are built out in remote areas, low-income areas, and other out-of-the-way places.

Tesla’s proprietary charging network, which has operated as a walled garden for Tesla owners, is the notable exception, consistently yielding high satisfaction scores. Tesla’s proprietary super chargers, which number 21,789 ports at 1,968 locations nationwide, are being opened up to non-Tesla owners around the country as the charger industry inches toward standardization. Currently different cars use different apps and networks, creating a replay of the VHS/BetaMax problem.

The federal National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program, approved as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, requires federally funded chargers to operate at a 97% reliability standard for at least five years. And California’s state-funded chargers would have to operate at the same standard for six years.

As a stand-alone number, 97% sounds near-perfect, until one reads the small print. Downtime doesn’t count if the malfunction is caused by vandalism, natural disasters, power outages, scheduled maintenance or limited hours of operation. Downtime begins when a driver or someone else reports the nonoperational status, not when the charger breaks down. And it’s not clear what the consequence would be for failing to meet the standard, as there is no penalty, likely because imposing additional costs would only increase risks and deter private investment.

Reviewing the public documents on EV chargers evokes memories of neglected and abused public payphones that stood exposed to harsh weather conditions and didn’t produce a dial tone. According to a California Energy Commission report issued in September: “EV charging stations are typically uncovered and unprotected from the elements. Connectors can be bent or run over by vehicles. Cables can be cut as acts of vandalism or stolen for copper. EV charging stations frequently incorporate screens that are necessary for operation, but screens can fade in sunlight, break, or be smashed.”

There’s a huge perception gap on this issue. When EV service providers were surveyed about reliability, they said their equipment works 95%-98% of the time. “The data from the two surveys suggest there may be a disconnect between what drivers are experiencing and what the EVSPs are reporting,” the CARB report drolly stated.

What drivers are experiencing has been abundantly documented. The analytics firm J.D. Power said this year that 20% of all EV drivers reported visiting a charger that did not or could not charge because it wasn’t working or there were long lines. The dissatisfaction rates ranged from 12% in the Cleveland-Akron-Canton area to 35% in South Florida. The firm said the trend is moving in the wrong direction: As more people buy EVs, “overall satisfaction continues to decline.”

A University of California, Berkeley, study last year found similar results: only 72.5% of chargers in the Bay Area were functional. A newspaper columnist in California described the charging experience as miserable. “The misery was meted out in several ways,” he documented. “Charging stations were hard to find. Maps that locate stations were not reliable. Paying for a charge with a credit card often proved troublesome, sometimes impossible. Worst of all, way too many chargers were broken or otherwise out of order.”

He warned of a public backlash against the state’s mandate banning the sale of non-electric cars in 2035 if the situation doesn’t improve.

This year, an exasperated Los Angeles Times columnist declared she’s ready to trade in her EV because charging is such a hassle. She wrote that chargers are sometimes blocked by cars that aren’t charging, exposed to blistering sunlight, charging at lower levels than advertised, or “it may shut off mid-charge with no warning or reason.”

The frustration seems to have no expiration date. As Jonathan Levy, EVgo chief commercial officer, told the New York Times last year: “Where there’s a screen, there’s a baseball bat.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/mega-jolt-costs-and-logistics-plugging-evs-are-about-become-supercharged

LOL!!! All anyone has to do is just look at the costs associated and its a no-brainer. The cost of being Trendy is already in the billions. It's becoming clear at this point that those driving them...there's your Biden supporters!

Edited by user 2 years ago | Reason: Not specified

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#825

NOT ME DEPARTMENT

Auto execs are coming clean: EVs aren't working

At earnings this week, several auto execs pulled back on EV targets.

Dealers have been warning of slowing EV demand for months.

"This is a pretty brutal space," Mercedes-Benz's CFO said this week.

With signs of growing inventory and slowing sales, auto industry executives admitted this week that their ambitious electric vehicle plans are in jeopardy, at least in the near term.

Several C-Suite leaders at some of the biggest carmakers voiced fresh unease about the electric car market's growth as concerns over the viability of these vehicles put their multi-billion-dollar electrification strategies at risk.

Among those hand-wringing is GM's Mary Barra, historically one of the automotive industry's most bullish CEOs on the future of electric vehicles. GM has been an early-mover in the electric car market, selling the Chevrolet Bolt for seven years and making bold claims about a fully electric future for the company long before its competitors got on board.

But this week on GM's third-quarter earnings call, Barra and GM struck a more sober tone. The company announced with its quarterly results that it's abandoning its targets to build 100,000 EVs in the second half of this year and another 400,000 by the first six months of 2024. GM doesn't know when it will hit those targets.

"As we get further into the transformation to EV, it's a bit bumpy," she said.

While GM's about-face was somewhat of a surprise to investors, the Detroit car company is not alone in this new view of the EV future. Even Tesla's Elon Musk warned on a recent earnings call that economic concerns would lead to waning vehicle demand, even for the long-time EV market leader.

Meanwhile, Mercedes-Benz — which is having to discount its EVs by several thousand dollars just to get them in customers' hands — isn't mincing words about the state of the EV market.

"This is a pretty brutal space," CFO Harald Wilhelm said on an analyst call. "I can hardly imagine the current status quo is fully sustainable for everybody."

EVs are getting harder to sell

But Mercedes isn't the only one; almost all current EV product is going for under sticker price these days, and on top of that, some EVs are seeing manufacturer's incentives of nearly 10%.

That's as inventory builds up at dealerships, much to the chagrin of dealers. While car buyers are in luck if they're looking for a deal on a plug-in vehicle, executives are finding even significant markdowns and discounts aren't enough. These cars are taking dealers longer to sell compared with their gas counterparts as the next wave of buyers focus on cost, infrastructure challenges, and lifestyle barriers to adopting.

Just a few months after dealers started coming forward to warn of slowing EV demand, manufacturers appear to be catching up to that reality. Ford was the first to fold, after dealers started turning away Mach-E allocations. In July, the company extended its self-imposed deadline to hit annual electric vehicle production of 600,000 by a year, and abandoned a 2026 target to build 2 million EVs.

In scrapping plans with GM to co-develop sub-$30,000 EVs, Honda CEO Toshihiro Mibe said the shifting EV environment was difficult to gauge.

"After studying this for a year, we decided that this would be difficult as a business, so at the moment we are ending development of an affordable EV," Mibe said in an interview with Bloomberg this week.

For some, this pullback is no surprise.

"People are finally seeing reality," Toyota Motor Chairman Akio Toyoda said at the Japan Mobility Show, the Wall Street Journal reported. Toyoda has long been skeptical of his peers' pure-electric blueprints.

https://www.businessinsider.com/auto-executives-coming-clean-evs-arent-working-2023-10

Imagine the "cost savings" of buying your Trendy McFart Car now? 😣 Wonder when the govt. subsidy rebeat gets yanked how the sales go then?

Listen to Baghdad Brewha Bob though.[gonzo]

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#826

All that gushing talk about affordability and cost effectiveness from Brewha in Texas with EV's....huh....

https://www.texaspolicy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/2023-10-TrueCostofEVs-BennettIsaac.pdf [/i][/color]

Weird

BuckyB93
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

2 years ago

#827

All vehicles are application sensitive - You won't win a road race with a pick up truck (although many try) and you can't hall a boat with a Boxter.

Brewha wrote:

Agreed but current gas and diesel vehicles hit more check boxes for needs and options than EVs. Fact not opinion.

Because I have a garage and don't normally drive more than 200 miles a day - I never have to spend 5 minutes at a gas station. Never.

Brewha wrote:

That is a pretty self centered look at things. Hint, not everyone is like you (thank God). What about the folks that live in apartments, condos, rentals and so on... where can they plug in their car to charge it over night? Who is gonna pay for getting the private apartment building that has 100 apartments put in the numerous charging units for everyone's cars? Where do they put it? One charging unit at every parking spot? Gonna have to runs some more power lines into the apartment complex, condos, rental house to feed the electricity. Sorry honey, can't go grocery shopping, I'm 3rd in line to charge the car. It's a 6 hour wait. So in about 8 hrs, hopefully it will be charged enough to get to the grocery store and get the baby food by midnight. Then Ill have to get up around 4 AM (with a half charged car) to move it so the next person in line can charge their car. Oh, $hit... It's snowing out. We got 6 inches of snow since I plugged in my car. I'll have to shovel out my car from the charging station in order to let the next guy in to charge his car.

Reality... not a dream.

Maintenance is a good point. EV's need almost none compared with ICE vehicles. They don't have a transmission, water pump, belts, need a tune up, oil change...... Really they just need tire rotation and wiper fluid refills. That's about it.
But it's like an Italian sports car; if you live in the toolies, it will be hard to get it fixed if you wreck it.

Brewha wrote:

Do you honestly believe that in the life time of your car the only preventive maintenance is just tires, wiper fluid and windshield wiper blades? You can't be that stupid.

I do understand the dislike for government mandates - all of them. I do not agree with your assessment of how mature the technology or what it will take to make it a "viable solution for 98.5% of the people".

You can disagree, that's fine but the facts are that if we go down that path it's gonna cost a ton of money (where it comes from, I don't know) and decades of time to make dreams into reality.

[quote=Brewha]Anyway - many of the car makers are moving to go all electrice before the few mandates even come into play.
Perhaps DMV would like to tell us how stupid the car makers are now....

Brewha wrote:

Truth be told, many of the car makers are backing off of the electric car thingy. It's not viable in the near future. It's decades away. Be it US car manufactures, German manufactures, Japan manufactures, Korean manufacture.. they know this, common people know this. Fact not opinion. Read up on it. It's all out there.

Until a viable and sustainable system is in place for a reliable EV vehicle and EV support networks it's not gonna happen. Let's fund technology for alternative energy. Again something that is viable and dependable. Let's not bow down to the clowns in government force it upon us when there is no clear path to get there.

Edited by user 2 years ago | Reason: Not specified

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#828

Agreed but current gas and diesel vehicles hit more check boxes for needs and options than EVs. Fact not opinion.

That is a pretty self centered look at things. Hint, not everyone is like you (thank God). What about the folks that live in apartments, condos, rentals and so on... where can they plug in their car to charge it over night? Who is gonna pay for getting the private apartment building that has 100 apartments put in the numerous charging units for everyone's cars? Where do they put it? One charging unit at every parking spot? Gonna have to runs some more power lines into the apartment complex, condos, rental house to feed the electricity. Sorry honey, can't go grocery shopping, I'm 3rd in line to charge the car. It's a 6 hour wait. So in about 8 hrs, hopefully it will be charged enough to get to the grocery store and get the baby food by midnight. Then Ill have to get up around 4 AM (with a half charged car) to move it so the next person in line can charge their car. Oh, $hit... It's snowing out. We got 6 inches of snow since I plugged in my car. I'll have to shovel out my car from the charging station in order to let the next guy in to charge his car.

Reality... not a dream.

Do you honestly believe that in the life time of your car the only preventive maintenance is just tires, wiper fluid and windshield wiper blades? You can't be that stupid.

I do understand the dislike for government mandates - all of them. I do not agree with your assessment of how mature the technology or what it will take to make it a "viable solution for 98.5% of the people".

Truth be told, many of the car makers are backing off of the electric car thingy. It's not viable in the near future. It's decades away. Be it US car manufactures, German manufactures, Japan manufactures, Korean manufacture.. they know this, common people know this. Fact not opinion. Read up on it. It's all out there.

Until a viable and sustainable system is in place for a reliable EV vehicle and EV support networks it's not gonna happen. Let's fund technology for alternative energy. Again something that is viable and dependable. Let's not bow down to the clowns in government force it upon us when there is no clear path to get there.

BuckyB93 wrote:

Let’s talk about “viability”.
For a rich man a Bentley is viable. If you live in a van down by the river, EV’s will never be viable because you can’t afford a car or electricity.
10 years ago there really were no EV’s that a normal person could afford and no charging network. Today there is a growing network and the number one selling vehicle is an EV.
10 years from now the percentage of the population for which an EV is “viable” will be far greater - but never 98.5% - as there are more than 1.5% of the population that won’t be able to afford a car - any car.

Now I don’t think it is self centered to say that I’m a home owner and it works for me. The big shift will be when it works for apartment dwellers - and that day is coming.

Legacy car manufacturers almost never build a ground up new car. So changing over to EV’s is against their corporate culture. And they will stumble and fall some while Tesla and BYD take over the markets.
But people are going to figure out how much better EV’s are. Considering the average intelligence of the consumers - this will take some time.

As far as maintenance, I was speaking of schedule maintenance not repairs. Any car can have a ball joint fail and need repairs. But an EV can’t have a transmission or water pump go bad. Give it some thought - there is far less that could fail. And my maintenance schedule does include servicing the brake fluid and air conditioner desiccant canister - like yours does.
When is your next oil change?

Edited by user 2 years ago | Reason: Not specified

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#829

DrMaddVibe wrote:

Wow, so we should stop undoing gas car makers through CAFE? Kewl - sign me up!

As to the rest, I guess my year plus real world cost just don’t look as cool as colored graphes.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#830

Wow, so we should stop undoing gas car makers through CAFE? Kewl - sign me up!

As to the rest, I guess my year plus real world cost just don’t look as cool as colored graphes.

Brewha wrote:

No, you're ignoring real engineers in a field that you're clearly not. Listing facts. You? No. Your experiences are here are jaded as f@ck. Don't blame me or get it twisted. You don't have any factual proof. You're as emotional as a post partum 1st time mother with your Trendy McFart Car. You espouse feelings, but even Bucky punctured your "zero maintenance" balloon. Its laughable at this point, the degree that you're willing to bury your head in the sand and preach about the viability of EVs. Even the auto makers see what I've been telling you on this thread. They're losing money. Esurping taxpayer funds to prop up an administrations unrealistic CAFE standards so they can ram this crap down your throat. Just like the Covid vaccines...you lept head first into before you ever researched a single side effect. Face it. You're a useful tool of the Biden Administration. A sucker. The emperor isn't wearing clothes, but here you are on yet another thread telling everyone how magnificent they are and you can see them. Describe away. We all see you again, looking as dumb as you did before. Carrying water for a man that cannot walk, talk and feels up little kids.

Edited by user 2 years ago | Reason: Not specified

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#831

NOT ME DEPARTMENT

EV Skeptic Toyota Chairman Says People Are 'Finally' Waking Up To Reality Of Electric Vehicles

Toyota's chairman and former CEO, Akio Toyoda, told reporters at an auto show in Japan this week that waning demand for electric vehicles (EV) is a sign that people are waking up to the reality that EVs aren't the silver bullet against the supposed ills of carbon emissions they're often made out to be.

"People are finally seeing reality" about EV technology, Mr. Toyoda told reporters ahead of the Japan Mobility Show in Tokyo this week, speaking in his capacity as the head of the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association, the organizer of the event.

Mr. Toyoda, a long-time skeptic of a full-steam-ahead adoption of EVs, stepped down from his role as CEO of Toyota this year amid criticism that he wasn't serious enough about pushing the company into a quick adoption of battery-powered cars.

Asked by reporters at the auto show on his thoughts about falling EV demand, Mr. Toyoda's response implied that he feels vindicated in his reluctance.

"There are many ways to climb the mountain that is achieving carbon neutrality," he said while suggesting that consumers are finally waking up from a dreamscape pushed by climate change alarmists that puts EVs on a pedestal and overhypes their benefits while downplaying their drawbacks.

His remarks came as demand growth for EVs in various markets has slowed, leading some companies to dial back their electrification plans.

Waning Demand

Market research firm Canalys estimates that global sales of EVs rose 49 percent in the first half of this year, down from last year's 63 percent pace of growth.

Honda and General Motors announced on Wednesday that they were scrapping a $5 billion plan to develop EVs together, while GM said on Tuesday that it was slowing its electrification strategy.

GM is "moderating the acceleration of EV production to protect our pricing, adjust to slower near-term growth in demand and implement engineering changes that will bolster profits," GM Chief Financial Officer Paul Jacobson said in an Oct. 24 earnings call with reporters in which he revealed that the weeks-long strike by unionized auto workers had already cost the company $800 million and counting.

Ford said earlier this month that it would temporarily cut one of three shifts at a plant that builds its electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck after slowing its EV ramp-up in July. remove

"EV demand next year could be lower than expectations," Lee Chang-sil, chief financial officer at South Korean battery maker LG Energy Solution said on Wednesday, per Reuters.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who has been helping the Biden administration push EVs onto reluctant drivers, recently acknowledged some their drawbacks, saying he's had trouble finding reliable EV charging stations. His admission came as the federal agency he helms announced $100 million in funding for EV charging stations.

'Automotive Seasoning'

Mr. Toyoda's remarks at the auto show that people are becoming more clear-eyed about the drawbacks of EVs stood in some contrast to an EV-boosting speech given by the current Toyota CEO and President, Koji Sato.

Mr. Sato spoke at an Oct. 25 press briefing at the Japan Mobility Show, kicking off his presentation by hyping up EVs.

"The first story is our future life with battery EVs," he said, according to a transcript of his remarks. "They are not only eco-friendly. Electric cars also offer their own flavor of driving fun and automotive seasoning."

However, in order to execute on "our vision for battery EVs," Mr. Sato said that Toyota would be "revisiting the fundamental principles of car making" in order to overcome the known drawbacks of EVs like limited driving range.

He talked up an apparent benefit of EVs, namely lower center of gravity and a more spacious interior, calling it "value that only battery EVs can offer."

"In these cars, the scenery looks completely different," he said.

But while lower center of gravity and more roomy interiors will likely be welcome by some drivers, unless automakers can figure out how to overcome "range anxiety," they may find EV adoption will wane further.

Range Anxiety

A major worry among Americans considering the wisdom of switching to an EV is range anxiety, which is the fear of driving an EV and running out of power without being able to find a charging port—and ending up stranded on the side of the road.

A recent study by the American Automobile Association (AAA) found that EV range can fall by up to a quarter when the vehicle is carrying heavy loads.

“Range anxiety remains a top reason consumers are hesitant to switch from gasoline-powered vehicles to EVs,” Adrienne Woodland, spokesperson for AAA, said in a statement.

Another recent study by consultancy Ernst & Young—in collaboration with European energy industry body Eurelectric—found that range anxiety is the second-most cited concern about switching to an EV, with a lack of public charging stations in the top spot.

The study points to an estimated need for 68.9 million chargers across the United States and Canada by 2035 to support the pace of the EV transformation.

President Joe Biden has set a goal of 50 percent of all new vehicles by 2030 being either EVs or plug-in hybrids.

https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/ev-skeptic-toyota-chairman-says-people-are-finally-waking-reality-electric-vehicles

Ya gotta wonder if Trendy McFart Car gets a special rebate for being a "Pal of Pete"?

KingoftheCove
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#832

Gas bad
Electric good
Stop it DMV
Go stand in the corner….

BuckyB93
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

2 years ago

#833

Let’s talk about “viability”.
For a rich man a Bentley is viable. If you live in a van down by the river, EV’s will never be viable because you can’t afford a car or electricity.

Brewha wrote:

10 years from now the percentage of the population for which an EV is “viable” will be far greater - but never 98.5% - as there are more than 1.5% of the population that won’t be able to afford a car - any car.

Brewha wrote:

Source to support your claims?

Now I don’t think it is self centered to say that I’m a home owner and it works for me. The big shift will be when it works for apartment dwellers - and that day is coming.

Brewha wrote:

Source to support your claims? An apartment complex, condo units and so on will not install "electric gas stations" for every parking spot. I don't have a source but common sense. The costs to do so will be enormous and require the electric utility companies to install and/or upgrade the infrastructure to do so. Then where does the extra electric supply come from? Larger plants to make the electricity. Wind, solar, geothermal, and hydroelectric plants are very location specific. These have their place but they are not the solution.

Legacy car manufacturers almost never build a ground up new car. So changing over to EV’s is against their corporate culture. And they will stumble and fall some while Tesla and BYD take over the markets. But people are going to figure out how much better EV’s are. Considering the average intelligence of the consumers - this will take some time.

Brewha wrote:

Corporate culture is based on profits. That doesn't differ from the local Mom & Pop pizza joint. They are in business to make profit. If they don't then they go out of business. Average consumer attitude is based on how much we can afford and save. So far EV's are not hitting most of the check marks that consumers are looking for and need. EV production and sales are currently buoyed by tax payer money. This will come to an end and they will have to take on the expenses without government money. All the car makers have been saying that. The big 3 in the US have cut production of EV's. Japan, Korea have also cut back production of EV's. Why? because they don't sell as well as other models. They have publicly said so. Fact not opinion

As far as maintenance, I was speaking of schedule maintenance not repairs. Any car can have a ball joint fail and need repairs. But an EV can’t have a transmission or water pump go bad. Give it some thought - there is far less that could fail. And my maintenance schedule does include servicing the brake fluid and air conditioner desiccant canister - like yours does.

Brewha wrote:

Again picking and choosing. So are EV's less susceptible to repairs or getting into and accident? What's the cost to repair or replace a ball joint on your Tesla? Is your Tesla less susceptible of a bad ball joint? Less susceptible of issues with your suspension system (hint, your car weighs more than a similar car that has a ICE), less susceptible to tire wear? Less susceptible for steering issues? How many local shops can fix such issues? Very far less than those than can with ICE vehicles. If you need a new battery how much does that cost and how long will it be in the shop to fix it? ICE batteries can be replaced within an hour or so (including going to buy a new one at any parts store). Fact, not opinion.

When is your next oil change?

Brewha wrote:

Maybe in a couple months and I can do it in my driveway. I also refill the windshield wiper fluid and windshield wipers all by myself, I don't take it to the shop to do so. Why would you take it to the shop to do so? Maybe you are not mechanically proficient enough to open the cap on a bottle of windshield fluid to top it yourself. If so, I feel sorry for you.

I don't expect you to provide solid sources for your above claims. You don't do that. You just provide your personal experience and opinions and want everyone to get in line with what works for you. That is a self centered attitude.

Edited by user 2 years ago | Reason: Not specified

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#834

Gas bad
Electric good
Stop it DMV
Go stand in the corner….

KingoftheCove wrote:

Are they though?

Really?

General Motors: Sorry Your EV May Have a Defective Battery, Here’s $1,400

General Motors is offering $1,400 to owners of the 2020-2022 Chevy Bolt to entice them to install a diagnostic program that will determine if their battery is defective. The move is reportedly part of an anticipated class action settlement related to the battery problems that have plagued GM’s all-electric car.

In exchange for installing diagnostics software that GM says will detect whether batteries require a full replacement, the company is offering $1,400 yo ’20-’22 Chevy Bolt owners, according to a report by Electrek.

GM was forced to recall all of its Chevy Bolts after some of the electric vehicles were found to have a battery defect from supplier LG. The company now has to take the model out of production for a number of months, and later promise battery replacements to all affected owners.

Over the summer, GM said it would stop replacing 2020-2022 Chevy Bolt Batteries and instead verify the battery’s durability with software that monitors the battery over 6,200 miles, during which time Chevy Bolt owners are only allowed to charge the batteries up to 80 percent, further limiting the range of their EVs.

“GM will provide owners of certain 2020-2022 Chevrolet Bolt EV and EUVs covered under a previously announced recall a new advanced diagnostics software,” a GM spokesperson said. “The software will continually monitor the battery to detect any potential anomalies and, if none are detected after approximately 6,200 miles (10,000 km) of use, the battery will automatically return to 100% state of charge without a return trip to the dealer.”

“If an anomaly is detected, the software will alert the owner via a message on the driver information center and the owner should then contact their dealer to schedule a battery or module replacement,” the spokesperson added.

Many customers were reportedly upset about not receiving a new battery after being promised one from the automaker. Moreover, customers were not pleased with having to restrict charging their EVs for several months while the software monitors their battery.

Therefore, the company appears to be trying to lure customers into installing the software — which GM bills as a “remedy” — by offering the payment early and upfront.

“GM is announcing a compensation program for 2020-22 Bolt EV/EUV owners upon installation of the final advanced diagnostic software as part of the original battery recall,” a GM spokesperson said on Sunday. “Owners are eligible to receive a $1,400 Visa eReward card upon installation. This applies to Bolt EV/EUV owners in the US only.”

But customers have to install the software before December 31, 2023, as well as sign a legal release associated with taking the money, in order to get the early compensation. If they don’t, then they will have to wait and see what happens with the class action lawsuit, Electrek reported.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2023/10/27/general-motors-sorry-your-ev-may-have-a-defective-battery-heres-1400/

Once again, this is from the NOT ME DEPARTMENT!

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#835

Picking and choosing the extremes aren't you? So far with the current technology and the technology on the horizon, an EV will not meet the needs for the average person regarding cost of ownership, convenience and costs for fill up and stuff.

Source?

Source? An apartment complex, condo units and so on will not install "electric gas stations" for every parking spot. I don't have a source but common sense. The costs to do so will be enormous and require the electric utility companies to install and/or upgrade the infrastructure to do so. Then where does the extra electric supply come from? Larger plants to make the electricity. Wind, solar, geothermal, and hydroelectric plants are very location specific. These have their place but they are not the solution.

BuckyB93 wrote:

In case you haven't, take a look at the report I referred to a few post back. It details with facts exactly the details you refer to.

KingoftheCove
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#836

Gas bad
Electric good
Gas bad
Electric good
Gas bad
Electric good

If you say it enough times, it will be so!

BuckyB93
Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter

2 years ago

#837

I prefer a gas stove over an electric stove. Does that count?

I'd like EVs become more adopted into every day life. They have some benefits and fit into niche areas but let's face it, they cannot replace ICE anytime soon or in my lifetime. Slowly and surely we can get there but forcing the issue is not the right choice. There is a long way to go for the technology, and even a longer way to go for the infrastructure to support it.

I'd like "green technology" be more popular but again, any green technology on the table cannot compete with fossil fuels. Fact not opinion.

Green technology has been around for many decades. Decades after decades but with all the research advancements, all the government based incentives, tax breaks, rebates and all that stuff it has yet to become competitive. Fact not opinion.

It has not become a viable solution to replace current fossil fuel technology. Fact not opinion.

Do we stop working on it? Nope.

Until green technology becomes a reliable and viable solution for the masses, we still need fossil fuels to live. Cutting off that source of energy before a sustainable replacement is in place along with the infrastructure and reliable distribution to access such sources is premature and shooting ourselves in the foot.

Proof is in the pudding. Show me proof and then I'll buy in. Until then you are just blowing smoke out your ass (which is a natural source of energy so bottle it up and grill some food with it).

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#838

though this has nothing to do with what individuals decide to do about what they purchase, are we not at all peeved that fossil fuel industries get billions and billions of dollars direct from the gub, rather than individuals getting rebates for individual purchases? Cuz both are happening.

Having our money handed to mega-profitable corporations vs using the promise of our money to individuals for individual purchases.

That's some choice right there...but one is not advertised in commercials.

MACS
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#839

Sorry, Frankie... we're on opposite sides on this one. (are you shocked?!)

I would 100% prefer that the governemnt stayed the fook OUT of it. Free market will decide.

IF that were the case, electric would sink faster than the Titanic with 6 Iceberg holes in it.

The grid can't support it. Wind/solar can't provide the power to charge the batteries. And the mining of all the cobalt, copper, etc... does more harm to the environment than mining coal or drilling oil... and you can't charge the batteries without the fossil fuels.

Those are the actual factuals. Like it or not.

frankj1
Herf-A-Holic

2 years ago

#840

shocked!!!
HA!
neither of us would learn anything if we always agreed.

I was kinda going around the question of what people want to buy and wondering why all the outrage about $1,500 or a few thousand rebated on your taxes as incentive to grow a less polluting industry... yet not a frankin' word about the (20?) billions handed over to the fossil fuel industries that are making yuuuuggggge profits without underwriting...worldwide I believe it's in the trillions!

Electric will eventually find a way. A plant is being built right now in MA that will manufacture batteries that will allow cars to go twice as far as current (I chuckled at "current") batteries.
Imagine if that emerging technology was getting the filthy money that fossil fuel industries have been getting for many years simply because they donate to politicians.

Or even if neither were getting it as you'd like to see...if politics were removed from the equation... wouldn't most rational people be rooting for the less polluting choice?
True, this would not eliminate the need for fossil fuels...yet...but we know Capitalism will solve that problem (and it is a big problem) as long as the big money wasn't trying to block it's development.

Consumers would always choose the smahter choice, all things being equal.

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: