American interest in electric vehicles short circuits for first time in four years

Interest in electric vehicles has waned slightly among US motorists for the first time since 2020 says Pew Research, with only three out of ten Americans right now saying they're considering a battery-powered ride for their next purchase. That's a drop of nine percent in the past year, according to the analysis, which found …

[cornetman]

It's clear to me that there is only a limited market for the very expensive models that have constituted the bulk of what has been available thus far. There are cheaper models but most of what I can see available are *way* more expensive than I could ever possibly afford. They are large bulky vehicles with a lot of bells and whistles that I (and many others) just don't want and we certainly don't want to pay for them.

I suggest that a lot of the Chinese vehicles that make up the bulk of their sales are lower-end models. They would sell a lot of those over in the west and I'm sure that is what is really behind the moves in the US to restrict their import. But what is the consumer to do, when the local manufacturers don't want to make the kinds of vehicles that we actually want to buy?

I would be quite interested in a fairly small, simple vehicle that is light, has decent mileage and just average power. Something bigger and better than a Leaf but honestly, nit *much* bigger. My other concern is the battery life. There are moves to solve this problem down the line, but at the moment it's just not a viable economic proposition.

What I *am* happy to see is the appearance of more affordable electric motorbikes now.

[Justthefacts]

Structural problem

So, one of the things that’s going on here is *structural* costs of the legacy automakers.

If you take an old ICE vehicle from forty years ago, most of the cost was chassis + engine. That was made in-house by the car marque, and even that which wasn’t, was made by machine shops that were essentially client vassals of the marque. There was plenty of profit to be made by the marque on *the part they actually made*. Spin time forward, a modern ICE is mostly *made* by the component subcontractors; apart from the engine, the marque *adds* very little value at all. The seats, the exhaust, the brakes, door assemblies, none of it is made by them.

And now Electric Vehicles. They don’t make the biggest cost element of the EV powertrain, which is the battery, they mostly buy it in. You know how much of total vehicle value comes from what *Volkswagen* does on an EV? 15%. Literally, that’s it. The rest is all bought-in. How can you *possibly* run a business that you don’t actually make any of your product?

So they’re *trying* to run a business where they just throw in a hundred “added value” widgets, mark them up, and pretend it’s a business. Then you get these ridiculous over-specified Hulk Smash trucks with Home Cinema systems that nobody wants or can afford. It’s a cope, and a failed one. Their whole supplier structure, isn’t a business in the new world, and never will be again. Nobody can live on the profit margin on only 15% of the vehicle, when you have to give the component manufacturers money to live on.

Whereas, BYD are vertically integrated. They make *70%* of the car in-house. They make the battery, which is the story the EU press want to tell….but they also make the seats. And the brakes. And they injection mould the trim. And they design and make their own electronics. In short, *they make the whole car*. And that’s what allows them to make a working profit at a much lower overall vehicle price. *Not* the self-seeking claim of the EU press about labour costs. There’s at least two investment banks (UBS and HSBC) who paid engineering firms to do complete tear downs and economic analyses. Both of them came to the same conclusion: BYD are building, build-quality-wise, *better cars* than VW at a 25% lower cost price, and that the 25% cost price reduction is sustainable long-term because it comes from the vertical integration.

BYD aren’t dumping, they’ve just decided to “manufacture cars in return for money”, a business model which VW, GM etc abandoned twenty years ago.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Structural problem

>Nobody can live on the profit margin on only 15% of the vehicle

No they live on 10-12% kickback from the finance company and charging $200/hr for dealer servicing to maintain your warranty ($800 to change the cabin air filter and check fluids ? Why thank you BMW)

Trouble with EVs is that you don't do much servicing

[Gene Cash]

Re: Structural problem

Trouble with EVs is that you can't do much servicing

If it breaks, you get to keep both pieces. It's all so proprietary, there aren't even service manuals available.

And in the case of a Tesla, even if you knew how to fix it, you couldn't buy the parts.

Edit: a friend woke up with his vehicle totally catatonic. Friday night, it was charging. Saturday morning, it was just dead. No response to anything.

He had to haul it into a dealership who had to (apparently) resort to heroic measures to get it to respond to a diagnostic laptop. They sent the logs to the manufacturer, who so far have gone "oh really? that's interesting" and that's it.

Edit part deux: Not a Tesla.

[Roopee]

Re: Structural problem

Very much like modern laptops vs old-school desktops then...

[Neil Barnes]

Re: Structural problem

kickback from the finance company

Wasn't it GM, back in the seventies, who pointed out that they were no longer a car maker, but a finance company with a sideline making cars?

When a car company - or at least the magazines that shill their products - tries to tell me that a vehicle costing a quarter the price of my house is an economical choice, I can't help wondering what they're smoking... makers of course love the idea of the Veblen good, and aspirational product that gets more attractive the greater the price, but I do have to wonder how many people have that kind of disposable income.

Meanwhile, my 30-year old Fiat soldiers on, still getting fuel economy almost as good as a modern car, but gradually being squeezed out of more and more city centres by virtue of age rather than measured emissions. It's going to be hard to persuade me to replace it with something that costs an initial fortune to purchase, that spies and reports on my every motion, and wants to automate my driving out of existence.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Structural problem

A $7500 dollar initial government subsidy appears to be the quick fix in the US. Which of course goes towards investing in the infrastructure for vertical integration in the US and Mexico stockholder dividends and/or well deserved executive bonuses.

[Cliffwilliams44]

Re: Structural problem

That is the dealership not the Mfr!

Toyota seems to make quite a profit selling cars and as someone who has owned Toyota products most of my life. I can tell you that I've probably had major repairs twice in almost 40 years!

I have not taken a car in for warranty service EVER!

A car mfr. that has to support their dealer network through service is not a car mfr. you want to buy a car from!

[MachDiamond]

Re: Structural problem

"No they live on 10-12% kickback from the finance company and charging $200/hr for dealer servicing to maintain your warranty ($800 to change the cabin air filter and check fluids ? Why thank you BMW)"

That's the dealer, not the maker. Many makers have a finance division so they get to pick and choose the best customers and take the interest. If you bought a BMW and didn't look into what the consumable items cost, that's your look out. I got an HP laser printer given to me and when I went to find a new toner cartridge for it, I found out why it was free. I did manage after a long look to find OEM toner at a good price, but I won't be making that printer my main unit. Had I been looking to spend money on a printer, I would look at the cost of new toner cartridges. If they were extremely dear, I'd keep shopping.

[cornetman]

Re: Structural problem

It has the ring of truth.

[Like a badger]

Re: Structural problem

"And now Electric Vehicles. They don’t make the biggest cost element of the EV powertrain, which is the battery, they mostly buy it in. You know how much of total vehicle value comes from what *Volkswagen* does on an EV? 15%. Literally, that’s it. The rest is all bought-in. How can you *possibly* run a business that you don’t actually make any of your product?"

You're so, so wrong. The skill, and the money are in design, integration, and brand. Not vertical integration in the manufacturing supply chain. Apple are a $3.2 trillion dollar company because they understand this. Samsung are worth about $370 billion because they don't.

[Richard 12]

Re: Structural problem

Apple are a trillion dollar company because of their vertically-integrated app store.

Only 50% of their revenue is iPhones, and in total only 75% of their revenue is from selling physical things at a claimed 37% gross margin. 25% is from services, at claimed 72% margin.

Samsung make actual stuff.

Apple have a net margin of 26%

Samsung, 9.2%

VW have a net margin of 4.5%

[Mage]

Re: Apple are a $3.2 trillion dollar company because

High margin (you can get the same functionality at 1/4 price).

Walled garden and profits from App store.

Carriers paying for them and bumping up the contract to give a €15 iphone.

They only make Macs because it would be embarrassing to stop.

Apple and Telsa shares are over valued, but for different reasons.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Apple are a $3.2 trillion dollar company because

"They only make Macs because it would be embarrassing to stop."

They have been engineering them to be less and less serviceable or upgradeable too. I just bought a 27" iMac for $25. The glass is cracked, but it didn't damage the underlying Retina display so it's annoying, but usable. The process to fit a new harddrive requires running a tape cutting tool around the display to get it apart, swapping the drive and applying a new tape kit to reassemble. With the glass cracked, I'm at the mercy of the MTBF of the drive for the longevity unless I can find replacement glass, donor unit. All for what? No screws showing on the back? Sheesh. At least the memory is behind a small door and will get maxed out once I make a run to pick up the new sticks from the post office. At least it has a standard drive. The newer Macs have proprietary SSD's so it's a sand-in-Vasoline bill to upgrade one of those or replace a dead one.

[Dog11]

Re: Structural problem

So you're saying the reason Western EVs have hideous prices is because Western companies don't have the skill in design, integration, and brand? I would suggest it's greed and the short-term focus that Western financial markets demand. There are some that clearly have the skill in design, but are undermined by the absolute disaster the management is. And there are some like Stellantis do not seem to have much ability in design and integration, and are in the process of destroying the brands. China has an advantage in labour costs, but labour costs are a relatively small percentage (maybe 15%) of selling price.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Structural problem

"China has an advantage in labour costs"

That hasn't been a big factor for ages now. Pay has been increasing in China and, as you point out, the labor component of many things is less than it used to be. Many firms in China are investing in lots of automation. While there's a big population, much of it isn't tech savvy so it's not a slam dunk to find people for mechanical/technical jobs beyond training them to do things by rote. Every other company is also looking for those people so engineering as many of them out as possible is a good move.

[Ian Johnston]

Re: Structural problem

How can you *possibly* run a business that you don’t actually make any of your product?

Maybe ask Dell? What does Apple actually make in house?

[VicMortimer]

Re: Structural problem

"How can you *possibly* run a business that you don’t actually make any of your product?"

Apple builds 0% of their product.

It's an incredibly bad way to run a manufacturing business, but it makes a lot of money.

And BYD absolutely IS dumping. I don't blame China for doing it, they're doing what countries do, subsidizing domestic production to destroy manufacturers in other countries. But the obvious and necessary answer is in fact massive tariffs on Chinese cars. And all countries should implement a "wage tariff" - calculate the percentage of work that went into building a product, and use tariffs to adjust the price of that product to reflect what it would be if it was produced by domestic labor paid domestic union wages.

[sgp]

Re: Structural problem

Yes they are dumping, just like they did with steel and solar. For these cases it's worth defending the own industry with tariffs. But tariffs on everything is not a great idea. You just can't or should make everything domestically.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Structural problem

"You just can't or should make everything domestically."

I can agree with that when it comes to finished products, but not for base materials. It's ok not to make car stereos, but not making 1/4W resistors is a problem. The same goes for metals and other raw products.

[Missing Semicolon]

Re: Structural problem

It's dumping if it is subsidised. Chinese car companies are not some economic miracle. https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/09/14/everything-we-know-about-the-eu-inquiry-into-chinese-electric-cars

[MachDiamond]

Re: Structural problem

"They don’t make the biggest cost element of the EV powertrain, which is the battery, they mostly buy it in."

It's a specialist part so having that in-house means a large investment and the need to find top talent which is a chore with such a small pool and everybody else courting those people too. If an outside vendor makes a breakthrough, a vehicle maker can pivot to their batteries far more quickly and for less capital cost.

For something like seats, the technology is quite old and the market isn't going to shift on some new "seating solution" coming into the market. Once at a certain level, even doubling production doesn't net much of a cost savings so outsourcing to a contract seat maker just means there's a component of the cost that's going to pay their SGA and executive bonuses. For a new or small company, not spending the time and money to make seats can be a good move. Even a big company that has a flagship sports car that sells in the thousands per year and changes the finish often might find outsourcing more capital efficient. It's a good exercise for companies to know where the breakpoints are. It's like my house that all fitted out with LED lights except for the family bath. To replace the fixtures would take a decade to amortize since I don't use it that often and during the day, there's plenty of light from the window. Yes, the power draw would be lower with LED lamps when they're on, but I'd only save a few dollars each year.

[MachDiamond]

My other concern is the battery life."

There's still residual value in a used EV battery since they don't just go flat one day but tend to fade over time until they don't give enough range. KGM is offering their EV's with a 10year 1,000,000km warranty and use BYD Blade cells in their pack.

I agree that the "feature" bloat is horrible. I see those things as more items to cause problems as they die and pull the CAN bus down with them. Samcrac did a repair video of a BMW SUV where the sunroof leaked internally, rotted out a black box under the driver's seat and caused the car to run poorly and not shift properly. After fixing a kinked down tube so water drained away properly, the replacement BCM was ~$35ish. The troubleshooting was an epic PIA and cost way more to get to that point. It also helped that it rained and water inside the car gave him a big hint. Self-diagnostics were useless.

[John Robson]

Or maybe

If you slap stupid tariffs on imports of goods then those goods become less attractive...

I don't know about anyone else, but it's hardly rocket surgery to consider that those tariffs will have affected how people view EVs in general.

[TimMaher]

Re: rocket surgery.

I used to say “It’s not rocket science. It’s not even domestic science!”

But now I prefer your version.

[Ace2]

No no no. Lots of commentards have gone to great lengths to educate me that EVs are bad and dumb and they kill kittens. Plus, the new V12 Cadillac Escalade runs on pure unicorn farts, which are a renewable resource, so we should just give up on EVs and go back to gas.

[Anonymous Coward]

pure unicorn farts

is a common fuel for the many, many EV haters on this site. (ok, you can begin downvoting)

Trump is the biggest consumer of those unicorn farts which he recycles with gusto.

To him and his ilk, with their pockets lined by Big Oil/Gas and other vested interests, Climate Change does not exist and any rise in sea levels presents a fantastic real estate opportunity with all that new sea front properties. Personally, I hope that Mar-a-lardo is one of the first to go underwater...

I am on my second EV and will not be going back to ICE. Like most people, the vast majority of journeys are within the range of the EV even in winter and I can charge at home. Yes, I'm one of the lucky ones. My home is fossil fuel free in that it is all electric. I have solar (more downvotes), a Heat Pump and 33kWh of home battery storage. This is the direction that we should be going in. (keep downvoring folks)

As for the US market... (I'm in the UK and yes Solar does work here) Tesla is its own worst enemy. Not introducing a Model 2 (or whatever) smaller and cheaper car 2 or 3 years ago is in my mind criminal. But Musk is only interested in milking the company of as much $$$$ as possible. The other major players in the US are IMHO, farring around while Rome (or at the moment, New Mexico) burns. Most of the non Telsa options that are US/north American made are poor by European standards. The exception is Rivian.

Meanwhile... in Europe, I'm seeing more and more EV's on the road and not just the featureless blobs that are Tesla's (the Model S is a fine looking car). It is not just cars but vans and busses that are going electric. Now we have refuse trucks that are battery powered.

Ikeep downvoting folks)

I hope that Trump and his ilk rot in jail. If he becomes POTUS again and impliments even 20% of Project 2025 then the USA is doomed and by implication, so is the rest of the world. You won't have migrant caravans trying to get into the US, you will have them trying to get out.

[Korev]

Re: pure unicorn farts

I felt bad upvoting you!

Have a downvote icon instead -->

[trindflo]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Your point about using solar to charge the car is a big deal. If you have free electricity to spare, the electric vehicle starts making all kinds of sense.

[John Robson]

Re: pure unicorn farts

It makes sense even on an oil fired grid.

In the UK we can export to the grid at reasonable rates... If you have a decent sized array there are tariffs which encourage users to export at peak times, so there is actually no incentive to self consume.

It's better for both the electricity bill and for the grid overall to export at peak demand and import at low demand. Those times will shift over the next decade, and the tariffs will have to shift, probably becoming quite dynamic.

[MachDiamond]

Re: pure unicorn farts

"It makes sense even on an oil fired grid."

Are there places that use petroleum as the fuel for power generation? There are small places that use a primitive form of diesel, but petrol, kerosene (jet fuel) and diesel have a fair bit of electricity added in the refining process so it isn't efficient to run that way.

What I like are the solar products that can route power around the house first and send it to the grid as a last resort. A bit of AI/ML on the water heater (dual zone) can manage energy expended there based on usage/needs with an EV as a really good place to shove spare electrons. I'm building some thermal batteries to store heat, but right now I need a way to store cold as it's going to be very hot for the next couple of days. It might make sense to have a big thermal mass under the house to even out the inside temperature without resorting the the grid as much as possible. It takes looking at an entire home system to eek out the best efficiencies. An EV can be a good part of that in certain situations.

[John Robson]

Re: pure unicorn farts

I did say oil rather than petrol - though actually you'd probably get slightly better efficiency out of a petrol fired power station than an oil one, so it's still better to burn petrol in a power station than in a car.

Of course noone would do that, oil can be burned pretty easily without the extra refinement needed to get petrol/diesel pure enough for an ICE to cope.

[Justthefacts]

Re: pure unicorn farts

So- what is the (second) EV which you bought, and now recommend? And what was the *first* one you bought, why did you sell it?

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: pure unicorn farts

My current EV is a KIA EV-6. (2023)

The previous one was a Jaguar I-Pace. (2019)

The jag was by far the better car to drive. The handling was superb but slow by modern standards to charge.

The EV-6 is good and charges much much faster. The EV technology has moved on in leaps and bounds since the release of the Jag. I sold it because I felt that it was time for a change and I got a good deal in the Jag in March 2022. I made do with a 2011 Prius. Terrible to drive and frankly an awful car,

I do charge the EV-6 from the sun on days like this. I've added over100 miles of range this week.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: pure unicorn farts

100 miles in one week from solar? So I'd have to charge it for 2 weeks in order to be able to spend 1 eco-friendly weekend in the country? Sure, sign me up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Not the point. ALL electricity is more eco-friendly than gasoline - even if you're burning coal to make it it's more eco-friendly than gasoline or diesel burned in the car.

And in the US, most electricity is NOT made by burning coal any more, there's more nuclear than coal, there's more renewable than coal.

So yes, sign up already, don't be an idiot.

[LybsterRoy]

Re: pure unicorn farts

I'm impressed ..... by the amount of money you have to spend. Psst wanna buy a bridge?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Not necessarily EV haters, just engineers who can do math.

[Brave Coward]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Sorry, Sir, but you're wrong.

Trump and Musk are all about making a merry car great again.

[Binraider]

Re: pure unicorn farts

An EV is only as clean as the power source used to drive it. And by definition, any additional load added to the network MUST mean an increase in Coal or Gas generation - because Wind and Nuke were already operating IF they were able to do so.

EV's are perfectly decent vehicles, arguably smoother to drive than any mechanical clunker and very quiet (which some might say is a negative). I *abhore* the Euro/US marques insistence on putting in tonnes of stuff "just so the car needs servicing". A Dacia Sandero EV would be a hot seller. For our USian readers - they are a VERY cheap, basic manufacturer related to Renault - where their philosophy is do nothing but the job of the car to keep costs low. They happen to be quite good at it. Citroens EC3 is a going that direction, though not quite there.

The convenience factor of the infrastructure already being geared for burnable chemicals is a major bugbear; and from my POV, it's also hopelessly shortsighted to have to lug a 300+ mile range battery around. Put a distribution facility INTO the major roads, and have a 50 mile battery for those bits that aren't covered. Voila; you cut the weight (therefore waste) and cost of the vehicle enormously.

For anyone that needs a demonstration of this idea, see the dodgems at your local funfair.

With Trump (likely) incoming, however, it's just another 5 years delay and, another 5 years of the US sticking its head up it's arse when it should be out there leading the world like it used to.

[Justthefacts]

Re: pure unicorn farts

“Put a distribution facility INTO the major roads”

There’s a famous meme “Silicon Valley reinvents the railway…..again”. You just won the daily prize.

[Binraider]

Re: pure unicorn farts

There are few objects designed to move that are more energy efficient than a wheeled cart on some bearings. How you get the power to the cart is the only question.

[David Hicklin]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Lucky you being able to afford to shell out on Solar, Heat pumps and battery storage

Many people today are struggling to barely exist financially, and for them an EV is totally out of reach. I believe that most EV sales so far have been by those people who can afford them but that pool is getting saturated, so unless smaller, cheaper EV cars become available things will stagnate for a while until the 2nd and 3rd hand markets become large enough - and even they will reply on cheaper replacement batteries as the early models don't have much life in them compared to what is around currently.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: pure unicorn farts

not to mention that due to feed in tarrifs he actually is draining money from people who are less well off.

I like to call em eco-selfish twats

[John Robson]

Re: pure unicorn farts

What do you think feed in tariffs actually are?

And how long do you think they last?

The very early adopters did very well, but their FiTs ended years ago. The later adopters had absolutely rubbish payments, such that I've just taken one house out of their FiT payments in favour of a better default tariff.

[MachDiamond]

Re: pure unicorn farts

"The very early adopters did very well, but their FiTs ended years ago. "

Some places have the early adopters grandfathered in. I've never thought that FiT's were a good thing to base a solar install upon. I knew they'd get axed at some point. Why would the electricity company pay you retail prices for power when they can buy wholesale for so much less? The answer was that they had do and it was such a small thing that they saved up for a battle later one and now it's here. That's why there's a growing market for power management systems that only feed the grid when every other use has been exhausted.

My aim is to generate 90% of all my needs on-site and the last 10% coming from the grid. That's last 10% is expensive and where I live requires I have service or they'll condemn the house as not fit for occupation. Those sorts of laws are part of the problem. If it made financial sense to fit more panels and a healthy battery, I should be allowed to cut the cord. I think my base charge is around $15/month. I'm not that bothered and certainly not going to spend a gazillion bucks in blood sucking lawyers to fight it. I'm better off just paying the standby money and not going anywhere near a lawyer.

[John Robson]

Re: pure unicorn farts

"where I live requires I have service or they'll condemn the house as not fit for occupation. Those sorts of laws are part of the problem."

Yep - that's just stupid.

But actually getting to 100% self sufficient, guaranteed, year round... is more difficult than it appears.

If you get any reasonable export rate then it makes sense to connect and export as needed.

My export rate is between my off peak import and my peak import, so I do export for much of the summer.

[Scoular]

Re: pure unicorn farts

Real data from real owners of EVs indicate that battery life is FAR better than many claim.

Cars doing 400,000km on the original battery are real. A little searching will reveal so they can be assessed.

I only have 50,000km on mine and the indicated range is still well over 500km. (Tesla S with 100kWh battery). I charge at home from solar so the cost is minimal to zero given the amount I get for exports. As with any vehicle energy usage varies with use. Hot Wheels Harry driving may be fun but it costs as does lots of AC or heating. Passing every Volvo on the road is satisfying but has a minor cost too.

[Anonymous Coward]

The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"US Democrats continue to have a rosy picture of the EV infrastructure rollout that President Biden promised in 2022 when the government earmarked $900 million for EV infrastructure expansion around the US with plans to hand out an additional $4 billion."

As someone who's working in the EV charging industry, I can tell you right now that none of that money is available to anyone planning projects that are based on available systems and actual EV usage. It's narrowly targeted to benefit a small handful of very large corporate donors, and the areas that would benefit the most like retail, restaurants, multi-family housing, etc. are more or less completely cut out. There are some good state / county / city / utility programs that are beneficial to jump start things in many regions, but at the federal level it's mostly pure graft.

[Joe W]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

That. Quoting the article "only seven charging stations had been built using the EV infrastructure funds". The question immediately arises how many have been built not using the EV infrastructure funds. It is a lie through omission.

Took a road trip with my brother, who is on his second EV (first was a lease, this one he bought). It was actually quite relaxing. Yes we had to charge, went for a coffee, had a nice relaxed chat, continued. I'm really thinking about getting an EV next... (despite not being able to charge at home).

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"Yes we had to charge, went for a coffee"

And as long as EVs are relatively few then that's fine. If you had to queue you might have been able to have dinner and an overnight stay. With a majority of vehicles being EVs the existing charging structure would become a bottleneck.

[VicMortimer]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

And more charging structure is being built. This particular program got a slow start, but as more EVs show up, more chargers show up.

Five years ago, there wasn't a L2 EVSE in my driveway. There is now.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

There will be bottlenecks all the way down: if it isn't the charging points, it will be the power network, if it isn't the network, it will be generation capacity. Charging stations are cheap, but the capital costs for new networks and generation capacity, so that everyone can charge went they want are staggering and the price per kWh will have to rise accordingly.

[John Robson]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

Wow - so it's only possible to expand one thing.

Do you really think that a meagre 5kWh/day is going to cripple the grid?

How much energy does refining petrol take?

Estimates range up to 5kWh/gallon - that's half of the electricity needed right there, and then there is the transport and pumping of said petrol...

There will also be new generation capacity, and upgrades to grids - because we need those anyway (though actually we could deal with EVs easily because the energy distributed around the grid has dropped significantly over the last twenty years due to other energy efficiency measures).

[Col_Panek]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

The real problem with the grid is peak load, when everybody is running their air conditioner or taking showers in the evening when the sun is too low to generate solar power.

The real answer is that almost everybody is charging at night when rates are cheap because everything else shuts down yet base load generators are still turning. Evening out the load is a huge benefit for the grid that EVs provide, If we ever get them.

[John Robson]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

Particularly since EVs *really* ought to have V2H at least, and V2G even better. Then they can not only "fill in" the low demand but shave the high demand as well.

Equally they can charge at times of high supply and discharge at times of low supply.

My electricity provider already controls my EV charger, and it wouldn't take much more for me to say "keep charge above 40%" and just let it do it's thing across the week - I could then say "I want it full by Thursday" and let them decide when in the week to put more juice in. At the moment they only have flexibility over a single day (and usually more like 12 hours), but they can improve that.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"How much energy does refining petrol take?

Estimates range up to 5kWh/gallon - that's half of the electricity needed right there, and then there is the transport and pumping of said petrol..."

In a study by Argonne National Laboratory, the figure was 7.46kWh/USgallon. If I find it again, I'll keep a link handy. It was some time and a few computers ago that it was done so the report might be on a backup drive somewhere in the office.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"I'm really thinking about getting an EV next... (despite not being able to charge at home)."

Charging at home is really the "killer app". It might be worth waiting until you can do that before buying an EV unless you have issues with no-petrol zones and so forth. For me, that's a big part of why I want one. The vast majority of the time I'd not need to stop at a public charging site and wouldn't need to worry about scheduling a petrol stop when I started getting low. The other day I had a 435 mile tip in one day, but that's far off the left hand side of the curve. There was also plenty of handy charging along the route so when I stopped for lunch, I would have chosen a charger near a good place to eat. I'd be all set if I started off at 100% and plugged in during lunch. Maybe there would have been a short additional stop if I cranked the AC and had a head wind.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"That. Quoting the article "only seven charging stations had been built using the EV infrastructure funds". The question immediately arises how many have been built not using the EV infrastructure funds. It is a lie through omission."

It's a demonstration of why the US government shouldn't be anywhere near EV's. Many times the issue with building a station is the red tape. If they worked on clearing that away, they'd save taxpayers billions. One of the reasons there have been more giant charging stations is that dividing up the spaces across town means a duplication of approvals, permissions and permits all around. Not just for the charging company, but the power company as well if they need to add or shift lines. It Would make more sense to have 5x 10 space stations than one 50 stall lot that isn't near anything.

[gandalfcn]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

"EV-charging stations cannot be deployed at rest stops under existing federal highway rules."

"As of December, the United States had 183,000 public charging ports and since the start of the Biden administration, the number of publicly available fast-charging ports has increased by 90%, Bhatt said, adding he is confident the United States will hit the 500,000 charging port goal."

"changing from the established Combined Charging System (CCS) connector to Tesla’s North American Charging Standard (NACS)" Why?

" Tesla would lay off the team responsible for its Supercharger network."

"Lindsey Perkins, director of communications and marketing at Plug In America. “It takes time to build infrastructure. If you look at bridges or highway projects from the same timeframe, they aren’t built yet... More than $300 million has been awarded to states, so things are happening—only much of it is behind the scenes. In the next few years, we expect to see many NEVI-funded chargers go online.”"

[MachDiamond]

Re: The infrastructure plan is a clusterfscked boondoggle

""EV-charging stations cannot be deployed at rest stops under existing federal highway rules.""

Many rest stops are on long stretches of highways with limited services. That can mean cheap cheap land so an enterprising company could purchase land near one of those rest stops, install a field of solar panels and battery storage to run a charging stop and just not put any fencing up that would prevent people from walking to the rest stop next door to use the facilities. Spots could be leased out to food trucks so there would be some manned presence at the site to mitigate against thieves chopping off the leads for the copper.

[DS999]

Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

I know three people who were considering EVs about two years ago at this time - I know because that's when I started looking at cars and while I wasn't considering an EV we were all bouncing info we learned off each other.

Two of them sounded like they were almost certain to buy a Tesla at first - one was actually on the waitlist - but the more Musk opened his mouth on Twitter that fall the less likely that became. In the end two bought EVs, neither a Tesla, the third bought a hybrid. That's two or three sales Musk cost just among people I know. There's further proof in how the waitlist for buying a Tesla went from as long as a year depending on model/specs to nearly immediate availability over the space of six months. Fanboys have claimed that was because they stepped up production so much, but the proof is in the sales figures since those price cuts. They were really satisfying all this pent up demand Tesla's sales would have been increasing, instead of falling.

This isn't to say that other EV brands don't have their issues as well (one of my friends is very happy with the EV he ended up buying, the other is mixed about hers) so it can't solely be laid at Musk's feet, but it is clear when people talking about EVs falling short of growth projections most of that is due to Tesla, and I would lay pretty much all of that at Musk's feet.

I think he's even responsible for the cratering of used EV prices, which again is almost entirely Tesla. Some of that is of course because Tesla has repeatedly lowered prices - which in turn is because he badly damaged their market for new cars so they went from a huge waitlist and selling them at whatever price they asked to having to cut prices to make them attractive enough for someone to want them. But a lot of that I believe is because people decided to get rid of their Teslas because they didn't want to be associated with the brand anymore, due to Musk. I have two friends who bought Teslas 3-5 years ago, one sold his because his wife (a local democrat politician) said "I never want to be seen in that car ever again" the other has a bumper sticker that says "I bought this before we knew Elon was crazy". That's not the only Tesla I see that bumper sticker on around here lol

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

The choice of EVs is definitely an issue.

Tesla - unreliable + Elon factor

A dozen identical Korean minivan-SUVs that are too big for driving around town

A handful of euro hatchbacks that have an EV version because the Eu/Ca insist on it. But tiny batteries and zero range.

Nissan leaf - the Austin Princess of EVs

[MachDiamond]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

"Nissan leaf - the Austin Princess of EVs"

If you just need a commuter car to get to work and back 5 day a week, a 1st gen Leaf might be a great fit if it means you aren't putting rush hour miles on a much nicer car. It can also make a good second vehicle for a stay at home spouse or teenager with a freshly minted license and doesn't need to be driving hundreds of miles. I was considering just this when I was supposed to get a job not too far away. The benefit was also that there was free charging at work so a cheap car with free fuel that doesn't need much maintenance. The job wound up going to somebody higher up's family member so I didn't get the job nor the car.

[Ace2]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

I love my Tesla. It’s awesome. But I bought it before the worst of the Twitler stuff started, and there’s a good chance I wouldn’t have made the same choice six months later.

IMO this is reason #1 why Twitler needs to get the boot as CEO. He is the (publicly-traded!) corporation’s biggest liability. Nobody would be allowed to behave the same way at Ford, or Pfizer, or Cisco.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

"IMO this is reason #1 why Twitler needs to get the boot as CEO. He is the (publicly-traded!) corporation’s biggest liability. Nobody would be allowed to behave the same way at Ford, or Pfizer, or Cisco."

Yeahbut, in the examples you give, the CEOs don't generally own the company and can be voted off when they go batshit crazy :-)

[DS999]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

Musk doesn't own a majority of Tesla. Even when he receives and exercises the option to buy the $45 billion in shares the shareholders stupidly decided to award him, he'll own less than 25%.

The shareholders have the power to give him the boot, but a few weeks ago they voted to reward him with more shares by diluting their own ownership percentage! So there is no chance of him being voted off, no matter how batshit crazy he goes. They worship him every bit as much as the MAGA cult worships their orange jesus.

[cornetman]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

I find it very difficult to believe that people interested in buying a Tesla factor into their decision the political and personal opinions of Elon Musk.

Most of the people that I know that own Teslas really like them. They would not be for me. Too fancy and too much to go wrong. And too expensive.

[Joe W]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

The cabbies in Norway I talked to are really unhappy with their companies' decision to buy those as a fleet vehicle... they are pretty competitively priced (it were, when I looked), as the tax on gas guzzlers is quite high....

[Korev]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

> I find it very difficult to believe that people interested in buying a Tesla factor into their decision the political and personal opinions of Elon Musk.

I absolutely wouldn't buy a Tesla (or subscribe to Starlink) with him in charge. I've also more or less given up Twitter...

[DS999]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

Agreed. If Tesla addressed a few issues (most especially the glaring problems with build quality) I would have considered them in the past.

But now, not a chance as long as Musk is CEO or even if he's a major shareholder. I won't hand my money to him. I feel the same way about Trump, I've played Turnberry in Scotland twice before he bought it but I would never play it again or his other golf courses because I would never hand that crook a single penny of my money. Obviously neither are going to be hurting by me withholding my money, but it is my money my choice.

Some people still feel that same way about Sony ever since the rootkit thing, or feel that way about Google or Microsoft or Apple, so it isn't always a personality thing but people have a right to decide who earns a profit off their consumer spending.

Musk has badly damaged Tesla as a brand through his antics, and a significant segment of those who don't subscribe to his hard right politics will never consider buying a Tesla as a result. Heck I'm not even a liberal, I have been a registered republican for half my life (and was registered independent before that) but I don't consider myself one now - just too lazy to change my registration since it doesn't affect anything other than voting in primaries in a futile attempt to bring the party back to what it was before the religious right (and now MAGA) took it over. So if I wouldn't consider Tesla because of him, imagine how a true card carrying liberal feels about Tesla!

[The Real SteveP]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

"But now, not a chance as long as Musk is CEO or even if he's a major shareholder. I won't hand my money to him. I feel the same way about Trump, I've played Turnberry in Scotland twice before he bought it but I would never play it again or his other golf courses because I would never hand that crook a single penny of my money. "

And yet I'll bet you still use Sky...

[DS999]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

I live in the US, I couldn't use Sky even if I wanted to.

[Chet Mannly]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

I think the problem is that when people ask what kind of car you drive and reply Tesla the next thing you will hear is 'did you hear what brainfart Musak posted on X last week?'

Not saying it's a reason not to buy a car, but surely that gets old pretty fast.

[Charlie Clark]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

Given his prominence and personal engagement with the brand, I'm sure it's a factor, but I think that you're probably right that, overall, it won't be the reason they don't.

Tesla is being priced out of the market and out innovated by Chinese manufacturers. The proposed EU-tarrifs give an idea of what the level of subsidies are and these are not as high as many would claim. The much higher US tarrifs won't really help the US auto industry either, because if it's not forced to compete on both price and quality, it won't compete at all.

[gandalfcn]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

"Tesla would lay off the team responsible for its Supercharger network."

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Right on the mark about Musk being responsible

why would anybody buy any product from a facist nazi bastard and drive around advertising that they support that xhit

fuck all tesla drivers

[Withdrawn]

Everyone is right so far.

All of the comments above are factors in the issue, as I observe it. Infrastructure anxiety, lack of affordable desirable options (and tariffs), and politics. Musk specifically has really made enemies on both sides of the political spectrum here: the right dislikes him because he took advantage of subsidies, snubbed trump, and he is trying to make fossil fuels obsolete The left dislikes him because he doesn't ban people for saying things the left doesn't want people to be allowed to say. The demands from both sides are ridiculous, but not unknown to anyone who pays any attention and Musk just couldn't help himself.

[Ace2]

Re: Everyone is right so far.

“The left dislikes him because he doesn't ban people for saying things the left doesn't want people to be allowed to say.”

What a deeply dishonest recounting of the situation.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Re: Everyone is right so far.

>saying things the left doesn't want people to be allowed to say.”

Specifically the people presenting their opinion that 6million was insufficient ?

[VicMortimer]

Re: Everyone is right so far.

Yep, those people.

I own a Ford, but I wouldn't have owned one while Henry was alive. Same reason.

[cornetman]

Re: Everyone is right so far.

> What a deeply dishonest recounting of the situation.

Really? I think it's pretty much on the nose.

[NapTime ForTruth]

How much is "who" and how much is "what"?

Note to moderator: what follows is unquestionably immoderate and might require moderate immoderation. Or immoderate moderation - I'm not telling you how to do your job.

I'm not entirely shocked at the argument that people buy or don't buy specific vehicles based on (e.g., Elon Musk's) image, but I'm inclined to think that MOST of us choose our transportation by some significant component of need. For instance, one might consider buying a Corvette E-Ray to impress the neighbors, or at least the neighbor's kids, but having to get all four of your own kids to band practice three days a week, pick up groceries, take the dogs/goats/chickens/spouse to the veterinarian rules the Corvette right out even if you are a complete and dedicated douche, er, "social media influencer".

I've just read that the latest BMW M5 hybrid - which is VERY fast and reasonably practical for a family of five ostensibly upstanding Deutsche people (probably) - weighs 2445kg (5390lbs). That plus your spouse totals out only slightly less than a Ford F150's 2628kg (5794lbs), or approximately the mass of a mid-sized country home. And at least the F150 could carry that home along on holidays and/or pull an actual train*, which is a kind of practicality, however improbable. Improbacticality, I guess, after which you really should wash your hands.

What I'm getting at is this: buying hypothetical environmental cleanliness and virtue at the price of vast road hugging weight and sheer straight-ahead-ing-ness doesn't feel like a meaningful gain. Except in mass, obviously, or en masse if you lean that way, évidemment.

----

* hypothetically, and more likely downhill

[Paul Crawford]

Re: How much is "who" and how much is "what"?

I'm not entirely shocked at the argument that people buy or don't buy specific vehicles based on (e.g., Elon Musk's) image

Have you ever seen a car advert made in the last 20-30 years? They tell you bugger all about the car's performance or capabilities, it is all about image, either a lone image-conscious tosser or a happy-clappy family driving around deserted roads rather than real world city traffic jams and limited parking place. They know people buy on image, which is why Elon's antics have had such an impact, not just his politics but also the general lack of trust.

[Pascal Monett]

Now that is the truth. I have never seen a car advert where the vehicle is sitting in a traffic jam.

Yet, that happens to me every day.

But yeah, it ain't sexy.

[Anonymous Coward]

The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

A Reddit answer to a Reddit Question whether it is worth buying a used Telsa and replacing the battery: My advice. Buy the cheapest NEW RWD Model 3 you can find from Tesla inventory. It will probably cost close to $30K after tax incentives to bring home a brand new 2023 vehicle. It’s just not worth bothering with a 5 year old car with an expired bumper-2-bumper warranty and aging battery to save $3K. Just found one a few seconds ago for $36,260 which would be a net of $28,760 after the $7,500 IRS tax credit. This car would come with 6 months of free Supercharging as long as you take delivery before the end of the year.

My take on this is the economics of EV's dictates they are disposable vehicles to be thrown away when the battery wears out. This is further borne out by the aftermarket for used Telsa's which are simply not selling. Considering that EV's start their life at carbon deficit relative to ICE's due to the energy costs (not to mention the environmental costs) of building the battery, that crimps the carbon benefits of EV's.

A few weeks ago PGE in California upped the base fixed rate of most (non-poor people) electricity bills to $25 a month and lowered the per KwH cost. That of course disincentives saving electricity, as many pointed out. PGE said it is to encourage EV ownership, since they use so much electricity, so they need to make electricity cheaper for EV owners. And this week PGE announced up to $4000 free electricity for anybody buying a used EV.

Last winter I was standing by an intersection when a Telsa jumped on the green to make pole position at the next red which was only half a block away. It's acceleration was incredible - must having been putting out the full 1/2 million watts limit because I was treated to a wave of heat even a distance of 15 feet. There was not a squeak of tire noise, thanks to the enormous battery weight, but there was a very strong smell which I had trouble placing. But then I read about tire pollution:

Smaller bits of tire particulate linger in the air, where they can be inhaled, and the smallest of this particulate matter — known as PM2.5 because each particle is 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter — can directly enter the bloodstream. A 2017 study estimated that tire wear is responsible for 5 to 10 percent of oceanic microplastic pollution and 3 to 7 percent of airborne PM2.5 pollution ... Emissions Analytics has found that adding 1,000 pounds to a midsize vehicle increased tire wear by about 20 percent, and also that Tesla’s Model Y generated 26 percent more tire pollution than a similar Kia hybrid. EVs’ more aggressive torque, which translates into faster acceleration, is another factor that creates more tire particulate mile for mile compared to similar internal combustion engine cars.

Sometimes I feel that overemphasis on EV's is just fiddling around the margins while ignoring more plausible, effective, and fair solutions to reducing energy usage. Mainly, changing zoning laws to allow people to subdivide their properties, cut on street parking, and encourage denser population so people don't have to commute as far. That would also make public transport more economical.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

What would you say about retrofitting a car with recycled EV components and only increasing the curb weight of the vehicle by ~25 kilos?

[cyberdemon]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

> What would you say about retrofitting a car with recycled EV components and only increasing the curb weight of the vehicle by ~25 kilos?

That it sounds like the sort of thing that only a YouTuber could pretend to pull off..

[Steve Davies 3]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

There was a TV show based at a company in Mid-Wales (UK) that did EV conversions. On one job they weighed the vehicle before and after. The 'after' weight was almost the same as the 'before' weight AND it was more evenly distributed.

It isn't fantasy.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

i'd say bollocks, unless they are running it on a couple of AA batteries and the range is 10cm

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

ECC is the company.

And they do beautiful work, with the entire conversion being bolt in - so it could be reversed... though why you'd ever want to I don't know.

They took a pair of teslarossa's to a swiss alpine pass to have some fun, and they had serious fun all day, using relatively little of their battery capacity.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"They took a pair of teslarossa's to a swiss alpine pass to have some fun, and they had serious fun all day, using relatively little of their battery capacity."

Those are great episodes. Richard talks about how they initially charged at a place with outrageous prices but then showed how stations in France have the same signs displaying rates just like a petrol station. It's also good when he points out how charging at the hotel overnight is super convenient.

I did a test run with A Better Route Planner to see if buying a used Bolt some distance away was financially viable (taking the train to go pick it up as well). The program keeps improving over time, but I'm still not seeing an option to look for hotels with charging along the route and a way to tell the planner to travel a certain number of hours each day and take into account the overnight charging to start the next day at 100%. I have to do that manually in chunks right now. I'm not going to make a 1,500 mile trip in one go so the numbers could look better than what they show for a total trip time discounting the time to charge overnight and maybe even during meals (which need a way to plan to be near charging). I think it would have to consider that a meal break will take more time so the fastest charging might be inconvenient. Better to pick a slower charger and not have to run out to move the car.

[cyberdemon]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

> It isn't fantasy.

And was the power and range of the newly electrified car equivalent to the original? Was the cooling system up to the same spec in terms of time at full power at max ambient temperature? Does it meet the same safety standards?

Or, in saving weight for a :face_with_symbols_on_mouth: youtube video, did they install a low-powered motor and an undersized battery, skimp on the cooling, and forget about safety?

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Power generally more.

Range varies by model, but can be considerable. The Telsarossa's didn't take many stops to get to Switzerland.

Cooling is better than the original, and there are no safety half measures.

Electric Classic Cars, it's not hard to see what they do.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"There was a TV show based at a company in Mid-Wales (UK) that did EV conversions. On one job they weighed the vehicle before and after. The 'after' weight was almost the same as the 'before' weight AND it was more evenly distributed."

Electric Classic Cars. They have a YouTube channel with some good content.

[cornetman]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

> What would you say about retrofitting a car with recycled EV components and only increasing the curb weight of the vehicle by ~25 kilos?

There is a burgeoning market for ICE car conversion kits and a few YouTube videos popping up. Has the usual requirements of a kit car I would imagine.

Not a project for the inexperienced mind you.

[cyberdemon]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Upvote for mentioning tyre pollution. The heavier the cars and the faster they accelerate, the faster the tyres (and the roads) wear out.

Although one interesting point is that a significant (though not as significant as tyres) proportion of road particulates comes from brake pads. EVs in theory -should- never need their mechanical brakes, except in a dire emergency. Except for maniac drivers who take off like a rocket straight into a red light, have to stop so hard that it will probably make any car think it is a dire enough emergency to use its mechanical brakes. And the thing weighs so much that it perhaps uses them even more than a similar ICE vehicle. (IF driven by a nutter)

I think there needs to be some sort of tax on overpowered EVs, or at least the profligate driving of them, spending their kilowatt-hours tearing up the roads instead of conserving the energy for long trips. e.g. take the time-integral of the square of acceleration and tax that.

[Ace2]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Ah, cyberdemon, there you are! One of El Reg’s leading anti-EV FUD merchants.

[cyberdemon]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

I'm not anti-EV, i just think they should be smaller, lighter and less powerful (along with cars in general). Large long distance vehicles such as trucks and lorries should not IMO be electrified using batteries, due to the weight and (environmental) cost of the battery that they have to lug around, which increases their energy and pollution impact. SUVs (of all types, electric and otherwise) should be taxed, because they are a profligate waste of resources and a danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Currently electric SUVs pay little or no extra tax compared to more responsible EVs, and I think that needs to change.

It's not FUD to point out that electrification won't save the planet if it causes us to use more resources and not less.. That's why I have criticised EV zealots in the past who seem to think it is feasible to replace all petrol/diesel pumps with 300kW+ fast chargers, while continuing our current road usage

[alisonken1]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"It's not FUD to point out that electrification won't save the planet if it causes us to use more resources and not less."

I think the FUD factor is in this line.

Technically, you are correct about the "... if it causes us to use more resources ..." - but the "IF" is doing a _very_heavy_load_ of work here.

Curious: are you not looking at the actual numbers? And are these numbers from actual (impartial) studies or are they from (I have an agenda) studies?

I'm not a zealot, but I have studied the situation. And I don't just "follow the crowd" when looking at EV TCO (including carbon issues).

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"If" usually has to do a lot of heavy lifting.

[Chet Mannly]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"are these numbers from actual (impartial) studies or are they from (I have an agenda) studies?"

Where are the impartial studies? Pretty much every study I've seen has either been from an EV/battery booster or an anti-EV mob. There's very little research I've seen that appears impartial on this subject...

[Binraider]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

300kW * say, 100,000 vehicles using them. = 30,000,000 kW = 30GW.

Now, that's probably an overestimate of the number of chargers needed, but it is a HELL of a lot of distribution infrastructure that cannot remotely deal with even 1/4 of that level.

As I commented above (and got a load of slaps for), why does the distribution have to rely on battery? Take the power to the vehicle direct at point of use instead. Reduce the weight and cut out the charging infrastructure problems (and the peaky loads that are bad for hardware like transformers & batteries).

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

So you envisage a thousand chargers at every motorway service station, all being used at full rate? I like your ambition, but question your maths.

The issue here is that those chargers will be needed *so* infrequently.

Currently EVs make up 3% (and climbing pretty fast) of cars in the UK... The only location I've had an issue with recently is Exeter, because there simply hasn't been much infrastructure to the west. Now there are a couple of open Tesla chargers to the west as well, so I expect that "last station" effect to dissipate - additionally BEV range is now generally higher than it was, so the "last station" effect gets diluted even further. And on that occasion I noticed several people trying to fill to 100%, despite having more than enough juice to get to their destination - the petrol "top it up" habit needs time to change.

Pantographs just aren't going to be widespread, and certainly not for cars. It's possible that some motorways might get stretches of pantograph for trucks, but even that isn't likely - Lorries have to spend time loading and unloading, and they do that at defined locations - those are the places for serious lorry charging infrastructure.

The system I see being more widely deployed is actually wireless charging at bus stops.

[MachDiamond]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"The system I see being more widely deployed is actually wireless charging at bus stops."

A pantograph at a bus stop might be better than inductive charging. A city bus using LiTiN chemistry batteries can charge like stink so a better connection is ... better. City busses also can charge at each end of the route with charging at a timed stop somewhere in the middle if needed. Drivers get breaks to spend a penny and the end points are also given slack so a slow run doesn't stack up a time slip that just gets worse as the day goes one. A city bus is very low hanging fruit given how the routes are well known and it can make sense to put in the infrastructure.

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

I see things being thrown at a pantograph by idiots.... high speed inductive charging is about as efficient as a cable nowadays, with the separation being well defined it can be tightly tuned.

But it doesn't really matter, so long as the connection is automated.

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

"Large long distance vehicles such as trucks and lorries should not IMO be electrified using batteries, due to the weight and (environmental) cost of the battery that they have to lug around, which increases their energy and pollution impact"

Really - have you actually thought that through? A 40+ tonne vehicle carrying a couple of tonnes of battery doesn't actually make that much difference.

And the reduction in energy usage and pollution is very substantial.

"won't save the planet if it causes us to use more resources"

IF is the point here. It doesn't, and it won't.

All the metals we mined in 2022

And the fossil fuels mined in 2021

In 2021, the world produced around 8 billion tonnes of coal, 4 billion tonnes of oil, and over 4 trillion cubic meters of natural gas (~3.5 billion tonnes).

We mined less than 3 billion tonnes of metal in 2022, and the *vast* majority of that was iron - all the "precious and technology" metals were ~1.5 million (not billion) tonnes.

It's a literal drop in the ocean compared with the mining for fossil fuels.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

I think there needs to be some sort of tax on overpowered EVs - how about just getting rid of the purchase price subsidies?

[John Robson]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Unfortunately for the haters EVs don't chew through tyres substantially faster than ICE vehicles - my last EV did over 30k miles before the front tyres (on a FWD vehicle) needed replacing.

Now you *can* burn out and eat all your tyres in either an ICE or an EV.

You can also avoid using brakes in an EV almost entirely - it's very rare than I use the brake pedal, despite that pedal being a blended brake. This also helps with tyre wear - aiming to look past your own bonnet allows for a much more relaxed and less reactive driving experience.

[Ace2]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

“…is just fiddling around the margins while ignoring more plausible, effective, and fair solutions to reducing energy usage”

Which you people would also bitch about, because the fossil fuel interests that have built our whole built environment are DESPERATE that we not successfully implement anything else.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

How does higher population density and the resulting increased efficiency of public transportation count as supporting " fossil fuel interests that have built our whole built environment are DESPERATE that we not successfully implement anything else". The fact of the matter is that, in the US, millions of lower middle class workers are commuting and traveling for work on freeways for two or more hours a day due to the sprawl of low population density. EV's don't work for them even with $7500 subsidy.

It's a chicken and egg problem for sure, but EV's are evidently not the singular solution.

Take a look at Japan where 80% of the land is uninhabitable very steep mountains, forcing high population density in the remaining 20%. Per capita energy usage is half that of the US, and you can get anywhere by public transportation. Also very few zoning restrictions on building new housing - mostly height restrictions imposed by earthquake safety.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Take a look at Japan where 80% of the land is uninhabitable very steep mountains, forcing high population density in the remaining 20%.

Japan must also be an interesting case for EVs given the extra energy needed to go up hills. I think Canada had a fun problem when it bought some EV fire trucks for Vancouver(?). They struggled to get up hills when carrying full water tanks. And also a few.. snags with energy to pump water. So ended up needing ICE powered generators or pumps or the EV couldn't get back to the station.. where it'd then need a few hours to recharge before it could go out again.

[Jellied Eel]

Re: The sight of a Telsa accelerating with a half million watts of power is heartwarming

Which you people would also bitch about, because the fossil fuel interests that have built our whole built environment are DESPERATE that we not successfully implement anything else.

Ah, paranoid conspiracy theories. These have lead to eco-terrorists using fossil fuel derived products to attach themselves to fossil fuel derived road surfaces. Won't someone free them from bondage and save the planet by banning fossil fuels? If we did, then they could probably use animal glues to glue themselves to concrete roads instead. Or we could have 'sustainable' bitumen production-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitumen#Alternatives_and_bioasphalt

Although uncompetitive economically, bitumen can be made from nonpetroleum-based renewable resources such as sugar, molasses and rice, corn and potato starches.

Yey! Wiki gives 2019 bitumen production as 164,000,000t. That's an awful lot of food that we'd need to convert into asphalt, roof shingles or all the other stuff bitumen is currently used for. Roads being a pertinent one given obese EV's wear out roads faster, requiring more resurfacing. Then there's the 28m tonnes of rubber, with over 50% being synthetic and a product of the hated fossil fuel industry. The rubber meets the road and there's wear. So bloated EVs need new tyres more frequently. This is fine. Land that isn't being used to plant palm oil trees can be cleared to plant rubber trees. That's if it isn't being used for cane, corn, or rice to produce bio-asphalt.

So that's just a problem where the rubber meets the road. Then there's the small matter of finding and processing all the lithium and copper needed for EVs, and their 'renewable' support infrastructure. This is also very polluting. Or slightly less polluting but far more expensive. But fear not, EV owners are 'saving the planet', and most of the strip mining is happening out of sight and out of mind. Battery recycling might be happening much closer to home, but when those plants catch fire, just obey the instructions to close your windows and doors and you'll be fine.

And we've only barely scratched the surface of the EV 'revolution'. This 19th Century technology's day has finally come!

[martinusher]

Why make it personal?

In my area Tesla's cars are very common, they're everywhere and so we know a number of Tesla owners. The cars are well liked by their owners, they're quiet, comfortable and are rapid when necessary. There are some snags with them (IMO) such as tires and the absurd cost of repair of even minor accident damage but overall they're reliable transportation that meets many people's needs. Yet when I read these articles its all about Elon Musk, not about the cars.

Lots of people worked hard to make this product successful. Musk may have had the profile and drive to build the enterprise -- no mean feat in today's business climate -- but he's like a Henry Ford. Unfortunately these days our lives are shaped by propagandists -- "influencers" -- who's job appears to be to create negativity and divisiveness, a fear of change, because it serves entrenched interests. Its difficult to describe adequately how our entire society and its economy revolves around oil but it and its relationship to road transportation is so fundamental to the world as we know it that anything that threatens it will have no expense spared to counter it -- anything from an informal whisper campaign to a full scale war.

Understanding this is the key to regaining your independence. So, a Tesla's a fine car for many but not for me. It has nothing to do with Musk, though.

[StrangerHereMyself]

Re: Why make it personal?

What really strikes me about Teslas is that they're cars designed and made by a technology company which refuses to copy solutions developed by established car companies over more than a century and is therefore condemned to have to invent the solution all over again.

And another thing that reminds me of Tesla is their sloppy workmanship and fit-and-finish, akin to 1970's American dreadnoughts. And of course their insane single-stamped frame which turns small accidents into major financial dire straits for their owners.

I'm steering well clear from Teslas, I can tell you that.

[Grunchy]

Re: Why make it personal?

“What really strikes me about Teslas is that they're cars designed and made by a technology company which refuses to copy solutions developed by established car companies…”

Did you know Tesla scalped most of the Lotus design team for the original roadster?

Teslas are practically off-brand Lotus, mechanically-speaking. Of ~2010 vintage. The control scheme is pure garbage. I am bothered by the “steer by wire” insanely stupid scheme, I might be wrong about this, but it seems to me the steering is literally disconnected from the front wheels, all so a little boy ceo can play video games on the dash panel of the Tesla.

(I am not sure about how factual that is, seems bizarre such a scheme would be allowed on the roads, but it is something I heard about somewhere.)

[Chet Mannly]

Re: Why make it personal?

Tesla actually bought the entire mechanical design from Lotus - it was a superceded model.

It's actually not unusual. IIRC the Chrysler Crossfire was a superceded Mercedes SLK chassis design, and half the small cars in Europe are either VW Golf or Polo designs underneath.

[Fred Daggy]

Re: Why make it personal?

And if there was a practical EV in more or less the same design as a Golf, SWMBO would replace her petrol Golf in a heartbeat. Ok, she'll replace it when the current one starts to get a bit geriatric.

(I think she's had ... 6 Golf's now. I am beginning to suspect she's a bit of a Golf fan).

Not a Tesla, not a Yank Tank and not something that looks like a shoe box that had wheels stuck on. Something that fits nicely in to the smaller European parking spots, but with power to enjoy the (sometimes) open road.

[John Robson]

Re: Why make it personal?

So the eGolf?

[MachDiamond]

Re: Why make it personal?

"Tesla actually bought the entire mechanical design from Lotus - it was a superceded model."

As a start-up, that made all sorts of sense. The technology Marc and Martin were basing the core of the company around was the drive train. Having a rolling chassis ready to go was a huge time/money saver.

[Anonymous Coward]

EVs are nothing more than debt and status symbol

I don't think EVs are for people like me, people who've never owned a brand new car in their life and have never paid more than £12k for a second hand car, that includes the cost of the Haynes workshop manual!

I can't imagine getting into a 5 years of debt simply to pay £35k for something that's just to gets you from A to B and depreciates by 50% the second the tyres hit the road outside the forecourt where you bought it. EVs at the moment seem to be just nothing more than status symbols for people to love to claim their saving the planet and then those same people happily spend £10k jetting off on foreign holidays to the other side of the world. I don't care what you do with your money or how much debt you want to saddle yourself with, but don't be a hypocrite and say your greener than me 'cos you bought a Tesla and then spew shit into the atmosphere so you can sun yourself on some Carribbean beach twice a year.

[Bebu]

Re: EVs are nothing more than debt and status symbol

One might christen a vehicle Fernando.

Why? It's something that's just to gets you from A to B and from B back to A. (ABBA :)

Seriously though taking a strictly utilitarian approach to transport viz that vehicles are purely abba devices rather than an expensive and by any financial criterion, an extremely foolish investment in something that is peddled mostly as a status enhancing accessory.

Living now in a large city with fairly decent and improving, public transport options, the practical justifications for purchasing an new or replacement vehicle, ICE or EV, are virtually nonexistent.

We still run (~8,000km/yr) a 20+ year old JP 2L/4 cyl. sedan that we acquired second hand, 14 years ago while we were living in a rural community.

If that vehicle had to be replaced I could not rationally justify the expenditure. Apart from the lack of utilitarian reasons, my spouse's eyesight now precludes her driving and glaucoma will likely prevent my driving in less than three years.

I suspect courage would fail me if I were vision impaired and faced with the prospect of being chauffeured in self driving vehicle.

[John Robson]

Re: EVs are nothing more than debt and status symbol

"I suspect courage would fail me if I were vision impaired and faced with the prospect of being chauffeured in self driving vehicle."

I suspect the independence it would get you would override that fear pretty quickly.

[John Robson]

Re: EVs are nothing more than debt and status symbol

You can get an EV for substantially less than £12k

A good one even.

50% depreciation is a little OTT, but it's not really relevant here - you're clearly a second hand coward and that's fine (coward, as in Anon. Coward not a judgement on your vehicle history).

[ecofeco]

Lies, damn lies and statistcs

Funny what happens if you take Tesla out of the numbers, though

Exactly.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Lies, damn lies and statistcs

If the Musk/Tesla explanation is correct why aren't the missing Tesla customers buying other makes?

[Col_Panek]

Re: Lies, damn lies and statistcs

In the USA, there's terrible selection. The best cheap EV is ... WAS, the Bolt.

[jlturriff]

Another reason for not wanting to modernise

Here in the US, people are also becoming more and more skeptical of overbearing automotive industry and their participation in mass data collection and remote control of vehicles that "feature" continuous network connections. These connections allow the companies to spy on their customers' (victims'?) use of their vehicles, track their locations, make features "rent-only," prevent maintenance by independent mechanics, and even brick them for late payments. There is a growing number of potential owners who are reluctant to buy these vehicles.

https://pluralistic.net/2023/07/24/rent-to-pwn/#kitt-is-a-demon

(Okay, Cory Doctorow comes off sounding rather manic, but he's not wrong.)

[llaryllama]

The problem I have with EVs in 2024 is that too many people see them as a drop-in fix for all of our environmental issues. Make no changes to your lifestyle whatsoever - just buy a heavy EV, drive it with a lead foot then hang out on forums bashing ICE vehicles as scourge of the planet.

I own an ICE car that does fewer than 2500km/year and a motorcycle that does less again. Most of the time I'm on foot or bicycle.

I've done the math before and I guarantee that my emissions are much lower than most of the people crowing on EV forums about how environmentally friendly they are.

What the world needs is not this frantic sudden demonization of ICE and emergency push to get everyone into electric cars, but sensible changes to urban areas so that walking/cycling is seen as the safer/more pleasant option.

As it is right now I often get bullied on my way to work by impatient Tesla drivers who I can't help imagine are rushing to get online and tell someone how great they are for saving the planet.

[John Robson]

What we need is *both* a rapid, and complete, move away from burning crap AND a move to more efficient vehicles (primarily pedal cycles and walking, with public transit following up and private cars as a last resort).

[VicMortimer]

It's Turdla

As an American, my next car will be a full EV. I'm not just considering it, the decision is made, I'm just waiting on prices to drop on used ones.

But it WILL NOT BE A TURDLA.

And that's mostly because of the elongated muskrat. I'm not going to buy a car made by a neo-Nazi's company.

I'm also not going to buy one because I hate the interiors. Minimalism does not appeal to me at all. I have no problem with screens, but I want LOTS of them, not a single one in the middle of the car. And I insist on having a turn signal stalk. Turdlas just don't cut it. Oh, and it's idiotic to control the HVAC vents from the screen.

(Not kidding about lots of screens. My current car has 6, it came with 3, and I'm thinking about adding more.)

[StrangerHereMyself]

Free will

The people in China have no say in all this. Their government more or less forces EV's down their throats, whether they like it or not. It's advantageous for them because it reduces their dependency on imported fossil fuels and reduces local pollution, like smog.

However, there are also significant drawbacks, like limited range, slow charging, not enough charging stations and batteries and electric motors that wear out. EV's are relatively new. And even though I see the car companies iron out the drawbacks within a decade or two many people will opt for gasoline powered cars for now.

[Anonymous Coward]

Splash and dash + long long distances

Get back to me when you’ve got these things covered by EVs.

Oh, and affordability would be good too.

[Fred Daggy]

Re: Splash and dash + long long distances

Long range is a concern. But there are alternatives.

At metric bucketload of journeys involve one or more of these things: Work, Shops, Kids (School + activities) and home again. At least one of those probably has a charging station. Less so the school but Shops or Work, more chance. If you could get 95% + of journeys with those types of destinations, then an EV is the pony for you.

Alternatives for the 5% of exceptions include some form of hire car. Either commercial car hire or via cooperative.

(Yes, that 95% statistic was pulled out of thin air, I'd like to know the real stats on that, but I am too lazy to Google).

Or, your driving pattern just does not suit EVs. ICE vehicles are probably for you.

Lithium and rare earths are also a concern. But, as demand for EVs goes up, then alternatives will become economically viable. As will research into alternatives, driving (oh, punny!) the science on battery tech forward.

Right tool for the job and all that.

[John Robson]

Re: Splash and dash + long long distances

Have you heard of trains - excellent long distance EVs

But actually long distances and volt&bolt are already possible in EVs.

Take any 800V architecture vehicle... 350kW is more than 20 miles a minute of charging (just shy of 6kWh)

So to charge enough for three hours at motorway speeds will take less time than it takes to stand around at a fuel pump, then go to the loo and grab a coffee.

That 'not standing around' is a factor that EV bashers always forget. It might take ten minutes for an EV to charge, but we aren't charging it for that long - we're going to the loo, and grabbing a coffee to dispose of at our next stop.

And since most people aren't urinating in a bottle whilst driving - the stop is usually called for by the bladder rather than the car, and the car is ready before the driver.

[Grunchy]

I’m buying Aptera

I’m an engineer so naturally I’m a fan of the Aptera trike.

I think it’s super-wizard!

(It would be better with “Freegen” intelligent braking system, but that tech is only brand-new, needs some testing etc.)

https://youtu.be/bLu6H-K4L2Y

[John Robson]

Re: I’m buying Aptera

I'd love an aptera, but really do need four seats, and space for a wheelchair, so not just volume, but volume in the right shape.

[Tim99]

The principal of the local big chain dealership told a friend of mine that was on his sales training course "Remember that the car is just the vehicle to sell our finance packages" (pun intended).

[hairydog]

The issue isn't simple CO2 per mile driven. It's more matter of embedded carbon in making, running and disposing of the vehicle.

Even on that metric, a small EV is good, particularly in comparison to the ludicrous tanks Americans choose.

However there is also the environmental impact of the raw materials mining and the tyre dust emissions.

Comparison with ICE vehicles is a bit silly, though. Private cars are completely unsustainable, and we as a species urgently need to find an alternative we can accept - or we shall face extinction in one or two lifetimes.

[John Robson]

> The issue isn't simple CO2 per mile driven. It's more matter of embedded carbon in making, running and disposing of the vehicle.

Yes, and an EV will be up within a couple of years... And most of it can be recycled, whereas most of the mining for an ICEv is once only.

> Even on that metric, a small EV is good, particularly in comparison to the ludicrous tanks Americans choose.

Even a large EV is better...

> However there is also the environmental impact of the raw materials mining and the tyre dust emissions.

Tyre dust is no different, and of course none of the oil which is mined in the world has ever had an environmental impact.

> Comparison with ICE vehicles is a bit silly, though. Private cars are completely unsustainable, and we as a species urgently need to find an alternative we can accept - or we shall face extinction in one or two lifetimes.

I don't think they're completely unsustainable - but we certainly do need to be doing more "other" modes of transport, and reducing the size of private vehicles where we can.

[b.trafficlight]

It's the economy plus software

They are running out of people who can buy a car for $50-70k+ USD. Upper middle class with families who wanted one already got Tesla, Rivian, BMW or similar. The rest of the schmucks are getting Model 3, Ioniq 5-6 and stuff for $40k+ but it's not very practical car for a family with children.

Aside from infrastructure, the article should have pointed out that 1) there is not enough lithium to convert all cars to EV and 2) today's EVs suck because car manufacturers suck at developing software. "Car + computer = computer" (Alan Cooper, "The inmates are running the asylum"). Tesla is the only one who was built with that focused (it also sucks due to the whole spying and i-want-to-suck-like-Apple attitude). Other car makers are just begining to figure it out. I mean, they don't even develop their ICE infotainment systems (which suck beyond anything). It will take them half a decade or more to figure out software, security etc and probably with the shove from the regulators in the process.

[John Robson]

Re: It's the economy plus software

"there is not enough lithium"

Source needed - along with an explanation of the difference between reserves, resources and deposits.

"Most analysts suggest lithium will never see shortages, cartels or sale restrictions that oil does – so really, there is no need to worry about the world running out of lithium – worry about petrol and diesel instead."

Of course you could have said the same about cobalt (which is relatively rare), but we've moved away from cobalt in batteries.

Sodium is also a viable alternative, and there are sodium ion EV batteries already on the market.

[Cliffwilliams44]

The SPIN in this article is impressive!

"Nonetheless, the data does not suggest that EVs are inherently worse for the environment."

As long as you do not take into account that the materials for these cars is obtained from environment destroying mining in places inhabited by the black and brown people the acolytes of the Church of Climatology claim to care so much about. In some instances, mined by child slave labor!

"Take Tesla out of the mix, according to data [PDF] from Cox Automotive, and EV sales in the country actually increased 33 percent from Q1 2023 to Q1 2024."

Did the author go to the Joe Biden school of statistics? Take the most popular manufacturer of EVs out of the picture to show sales are up? This is a false twist to change the narrative. If people are going to buy EVs they are going to buy the EV they view as "the best".

The fact is Americans don't want these cars, the certainly don't want then crammed down their throats by the self-righteous priests of the Church of Climatology!

[John Robson]

Re: The SPIN in this article is impressive!

>>"Nonetheless, the data does not suggest that EVs are inherently worse for the environment."

>>As long as you do not take into account that the materials for these cars is obtained from environment destroying mining in places inhabited by the black and brown people the acolytes of the Church of Climatology claim to care so much about. In some instances, mined by child slave labor!

Wow - you going for as much wrong as you can get?

Cobalt is being rapidly phased out of batteries, and you seem to have forgotten the damage that mining for oil does.

But don't worry - if you keep chugging that kool aid then idiocracy will be too good for you.

[salticid]

Not all EVs

Tesla has become a dumpster fire, with all sorts of mechanical failures, to say nothing of their ludicrous sales policy and of course the unpopularity of their leader. Since they were the first major company out of the gate, their failure has a large effect on the entire industry. And, the infrastructure in many parts of the country is seriously lacking. That said, I paid a reasonable price for a Chevrolet Bolt, charge it at home, and love it (platonically). It gives me a greater range than I need and has never given me a bit of trouble. As the technology and the infrastructure improves (vote blue!) EVs will continue to take a larger part of the automobile market. Just be glad that you folks across the water have this thing called "public transportation".

[KLane]

I'll buy an EV when...

- You can charge it in front of your apartment

- You can go get a 'gallon of battery' if the battery dies in a traffic jam, etc.

- The prices are more affordable, as well as less depreciation, and battery replacement cost/disposal/recycling

- The maintenance is affordable

-K-

[druck]

In the land of the V8...

...who the hell would want a whiny battery monstrosity?

[Anonymous Coward]

This EV crap is ridiculous

Just checked around....

You know the closest charging station is for 1 vehicle and it's a 60 mile round trip from my area?

It's also at a scary location.....some almost abandoned campground on the edge of a small town around here.

Our elec grid is just barely holding up atm with the heat wave...with many power outages happening...

Adding a bunch of ev's to the mix won't help us at all.

[AlbertH]

CO2 is NOT a problem

When are people (including The Register) going to realise that CO2 is neither a "greenhouse gas" nor a "pollutant"? It's essential for plant life, and makes up an insignificantly small part of our atmosphere, especially when compared to the only significant greenhouse gas - water vapour! I'm really looking forward to the "Greens" complaining about clouds....

It really doesn't matter how much CO2 your vehicle emits, or how much is emitted by the power stations used to charge the ridiculous EVs. More CO2 just means a greener planet. CO2 concentration follows global temperature, it doesn't cause temperature changes. It's about time that everyone stops worrying about the non-problem of "climate change". It has always changed, and always will!

[Col_Panek]

Re: CO2 is NOT a problem

We found the Luddite/Denier/Petroshill.

[Libertarian Voice]

Re: CO2 is NOT a problem

The scale used to determine a greenhouse gas is in itself a con as it is a constant derived from a variable (The Effective Radiative Forcing of Co2). This is proven because while co2 will always have a GWP of 1, at the other end of the scale the GWP of SF6 has gone up by 1,500 (and they still haven't got it right because, largely thanks too the way that co2 interacts with water storing vegetation its impact is negative rather than positive).

The problem for the Cliars is that were they to have chosen a more appropriate baseline then co2 would always be negative and the lie would have been exposed decades ago.

[Libertarian Voice]

For a product to evolve from another it must, in some way, be an improvement on it's predecessor. In that respect EV's are a bit like minidiscs or digital compact cassettes and that is where they are heading unless they become autonomous rather quickly. Once they can take themselves off to be charged it may very well be a different story.