Electric Vehicles, the Wave of the Past

[Elderberry]

Powerline 5/9/2023

Governments keep trying to force us to drive electric vehicles, and it keeps not happening. From the thoroughly pro-EV Times of London:

    Fresh concerns have been raised about efforts to boost sales of electric cars after an industry trade body downgraded its forecast for demand.

    According to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), high energy costs and insufficient charging infrastructure will dampen demand for new battery electric cars this year.

    It predicted that registrations would fall in market share from 19.7 per cent of new cars to 18.4 per cent.

So EV market share, at least in the U.K., is declining, not rising. Meanwhile, the British government demands more EVs:

    From next year manufacturers must ensure that at least 22 per cent of new car sales and 10 per cent of new vans are emissions-free. This will rise every year incrementally to 80 per cent for cars and 70 per cent for vans by 2030, and 100 per cent for both by 2035.

Needless to say, those demands will not be met. Why not?

More: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/05/electric-vehicles-the-wave-of-the-past.php

[Elderberry]

The Daily Chart: Cars and Bagels 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2023/05/the-daily-chart-cars-and-bagels.php

Powerline by  Steven Hayward 5/9/2023

So we’re all supposed to be driving electric cars and trucks within a decade, but we’ll see how that goes in the heartland. I suspect if the government really goes through with this coercive utopianism, there is going to be a boom in demand for Cuban auto mechanics, who are the best at keeping old cars going without regular spare parts.

[PeteS in CA]

According to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), high energy costs and insufficient charging infrastructure will dampen demand for new battery electric cars this year.

While probably an allusion to the very limited charger network, many/most states' electrical grid could not sustain the power that would be demanded if EVs are truly embraced. That infrastructure would probably take a decade or two to build, even if the Enviros did not wage lawfare on the effort (which, in the real world, they almost certainly would, because Luddism).

[jafo2010]

It is NOT the lack of charging stations.  It boils down to one simple basic concept.  AFFORDABILITY!  AFFORDABILITY!  AFFORDABILITY!

EV vehicles on average are almost $20,000 more expensive than combustion engine cars.  And the fact is, unless you have solar panels at your home, your cost for electric will skyrocket over the next ten years, and make any advantage with EVs disappear. 

Then there is the fact that most people getting EVs are leasing and not purchasing the vehicle.  And when they come off lease, what happens to them?  Are they resold here?  Hell no!  They are loaded up on ships and sent to foreign countries to be sold almost like a new vehicle at high cost. 

When you drive about, look at the USED CAR lots.  You will be lucky to see 1 or 2 EVs sitting on any lot.  There is no secondary market in the USA for EVs.  Just does not exist.  Most folks buying cars each year are buying used cars, not new vehicles.  Why?  BECAUSE THAT IS ALL THEY CAN AFFORD.  The notion of buying new, let alone an EV vehicle is way beyond their purchasing power. 

Bottomline:  the market does NOT exist for EVs, and wishing it so will not make it happen, not even the government subsidizing the acquisition of them with TAX CREDITS.  So, this process benefits those with greater wealth in the USA and NOT the every day citizen.

But America will begin to look like Cuba with the lower classes driving vehicles that continue to get older and older, because they cannot afford EVs.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Where are you going to stand where it is 20 below outside, the wind is howling, and your car has to be charged? That is not uncommon, here, except for the "car has to be charged" part, because those vehicles will not bust drifts and run the heater and go to the next major town where you have an appointment with a medical specialist (130 miles, minimum).

Of course, the people pushing this nonsense either do not live in my climate, or will be somehow exempt from what they demand of others.

You can't see what happens in America from the window of your private jet.

Even if the chargers were present at the intervals needed, that (currently) two hour or so trip (and the two hour or so return trip) can be done handily with an internal combustion vehicle, in comfort and without the added stress that the battery might die and cause at the very best a miserably unpleasant day, at worst freezing to death.

Don't pooh-pooh that, I knew two people who did just that--froze to death.

The climate here doesn't suffer fools, and even those who know it make mistakes.

Not to mention the extra time needed to charge batteries, which could have been spent getting things done.

I have a 32 gallon tank on my vehicle. I get 16 MPG, which may not seem like much, but it is a very capable 4WD that my life has depended on more than once. I normally run on the 'top half' of the tank, a limitation self-imposed between fill-ups that means I fuel up with 16 gallons in reserve, or shortly thereafter. I can make the round trip to the next major town where there are additional medical services available without filling up, even in the dead of winter, in foul weather. But a fill-up can be accomplished in 5 minutes, a fraction of the time to charge an EV. Then I am back to having a roughly 500 mile range.

That's why I have the vehicle I have, not for the sunny days, but the really shitty ones. Not for pristine paved roads or freeways, but for gravel roads far from town during blizzards.

There is no public transportation that goes where I need to go, nor from where I go from, unless one counts the AMTRAK runs that are affected by derailments as far away as Chicago, and thus, are not completely reliable. Even then, walking to the train would be out of the question in winter.
(How far can you go on foot with 40 below zero--and colder wind chills?)

I refuse to own an EV, because it will not do what I need to do, but also because the whole premise that it will somehow affect a climate "too hot" by making it colder is nonsense, the very premise the whole climate panic and insane divestiture of systems that work for ones which do not is based upon.

I won't bet my life on the green new deal. 

[PeteS in CA]

The issues that make EVs NOT the car of the future are numerous.

Take away gooberment subsidies and tax games, and they are toys for people with $$ to burn.

While EVs have improved from when the Leaf had an advertised range of 45 miles and Teslas 100-150 miles, I doubt any could drive me from San Jose to Reno without several hours of recharging. Meanwhile, I might have to top off my gas in the Sacramento area, a 5-10 minute task, plus any optional restroom visits or pork rinds purchases. Once upon a time, my family drove from San Jose to Rawlins Wyoming in a "single" drive, stopping only for gas and meals. I think it took us on the order of 30 hours. That would be a multi-day trip for an EV.

The charger network in the US is so sparse, a person trying to do a trip from Utah or Nevada to Disneyland would literally plan it from charger to charger. And then while on the road, hope the chargers actually worked, and hope they were the fast charger rather than the type that would require an hours-long stop.

Chemical reaction rates vary with temperature. Lead-acid batteries have long been notorious for losing power availability of cold weather (remember the old TV ads for Sears "Die Hard" batteries? always in icy-snowy weather). Well, it turns out this is true of lithium batteries as well. Their range decreases in cold weather, and in hot weather. So the EV that will lose range in Minnesota winters will also lose range in Phoenix, AZ summers.

The current battery life for an EV is in the 8-12 year range. At battery end-of-life, the EV owner would face a choice: buy a new car or spend about the same amount of $$ to replace the battery. The batteries themselves are very expensive, and the battery basically is the full-length bottom of the car body. Replacing the battery requires revoving the body to get to the battery. The bottom line is that replacing the battery will cost much more than the car is worth (but replacement might increase the market value of the EV some).

Lithium batteries are ticklish things. They have to be charged according to a fairly careful profile. Charge too aggressively, and POOF! So chargers are programmed to do that. If that programming fails, ???. Lithium batteries also don't like violent shocks, such as might happen in a collision. This has been seen at accident scenes, and in tow yards days after an accident.

The lithium batteries in cars are designed and built for maximum range. But they are such a PITA to recycle that newly mined/refined lithium is much less expensive. So EVs batteries will be a double nightmare at battery end of life.

For those who don't "know" me or forgot, I'm no anti-technology Luddite. Those heavy grey boxes or plastic-cased "bricks" that power your computer or laptop have been my career since the end of the Carter Administration. Your desktop or laptop would weigh 10s of pounds  (a hundred or two?) if powered with old technology linear power supplies. I'm just realistic. I won't buy an EV for lots of good reasons.