Featured Why Hybrids Are Beating EVs In The U.S.

Wow, that's a lotta cars... Did the '91 Camry last the longest in your life? Kinda seems like it?

 

There's always someone to invoke the spirit of "freedom" and "free choice" when it comes being anti-progressive/anti-social about solving society's problems.

And if your neighbor wants to shoot his mortar rounds off in his back yard every night towards empty land he should have that right too, right? Where do we draw the line? I remember smog alerts with leaded gas in the 1970's where us elementary school kids weren't allowed to play during recess and we solved those problems in California by the time I was in High School. But not these days...

These days we think being a manly man is to not show consideration towards our future/our kids in the name of "freeedom" and "free choice" of the moment.

Same clueless anti-social sentiment was made by people who were against ending slavery, against giving women the right to vote, against black people and minorities having equal rights.

We're literally living through a time in history where the oil industry is accelerating production so rapidly while manly man teach us that this is about respecting people freedom. Wish these folks could spend more time with 100K homeowners in California who lost everything to to the worst weather for wilfires in more than 1500 years because every month sets another all time global heat record.

 

Very good observations. I hope EV prices keep going down.

Tesla's prices keep getting cut, but they still don't have what I would call an affordable EV. Their cheapest car is still over $40,000 including the destination charge for the base model. If you include the federal Tax Credit the cheapest new Tesla in the USA is $38,880.

In my state I could get another $5,000 off a Tesla Y making it $33,880. But a Prius Prime Is $34,070 without any incentives. A Camry hybrid is $29,950 and gets over 50mpg. The Corolla hybird is $24,595. A Nissan Leaf S with 100 miles range is $28,140 but in my state gets $5,000 off plus another $2,500 for being under $35k, making it cost (plus $1095 destination charge) $21,735.

But cars like the Nissan Leaf and BYD Seagull seem to show me a problem. That if you want a truely affordable EV, it ends up having very little range. Either that, or it doesn't become profitable, like the Chevy Bolt EV.

Except when I'm a used car buyer and those that buy new cars stop buying the kinds of cars I'm interested in.

 

Yes, it was a manual transmission Camry lost on a rain slick, down sloping exit ramp. The guy in front decided to stop at the bottom due to a 3d driver who was 'wandering' across two lanes of traffic and then decided to exit without benefit of an exit lane. Then the insurance company took it away.

I had continued 'collision' and did not realize the insurance company could declare the car a total loss and pay me 'salvage value' minus deductible, $1,100. Thereafter, I only carriy collision as long as the car is under a loan from my credit union. As soon as I could, I paid off the car and went to liability only.

After a minor door incident on my 2017 BMW i3-REx, collision with $500 deductible paid $267 on a $1,300 door repair. So I paid off the car and changed insurance companies. I only carry liability. IMHO, collision is a racket.

Bob Wilson

 

I'm in agreement with you here, at least until the car/truck/moto toy gets modded away from legal emissions.

Humorous forum usernames aside, I pay good money to maintain my machines so they run clean with respect to regulation. I wish everyone else would pull their own weight too.

 

People should have freedom to choose UNTIL their choices damage other people.
The question is, how obvious does that damage need to be?

Many studies have shown the damage done to people due to tailpipe emissions.
How much illness and death to reach that threshold?

 

That's a complicated one! Very controversial, I'd say.

On the one hand emissions hurt people. But on the other, the vehicles that make our food and bring it to us run on fuel.

What about car accidents too? Pedestrians getting creamed by SUV's, pickups and other vehicles is also a real problem, but on the other hand, ambulances and fire trucks are vehicles that save lives from accidents.

How about financial damage? For some people a car is a tool to make more money, well worth the investment even if it's just for commuting. For others it is a "necessity" created by society to force most every family into buying a car. And that "necessity" can represent a very large portion of one's income. This problem is further exasterbated by the increase of so many other costs, such as rent and real estate, which can all be traced back to the rich investing in either basic human necessities, like housing, or in artificial necessities they've created, like car ownership.

From the moment in the 30's when the minimum wage was enacted until around the early 60's a person could live off of minimum wage. Nowadays, me, and people like me, have to get second jobs just to make ends meet and wonder which bridge we'll end up living under one of these days.

 

Really the big offenders I see on pollution tailpipes are on either very old vehicles (>15 years) or those that have been modified to pollute more illegally. Tailpipe unhealthful emissions are only a tiny percentage in most of the country, but are significant in some areas like LA. National policies requiring plug-ins won't really reduce unhealthy pollution.

Poor maintenance at oil and gas facilities are a much bigger source of unhealthy pollution. Almost 40% of the pollution in Houston is illegally released during shutdowns and improper maintenance. Some of this causes Austin's pollution problems. I guess if there was less oil and gas used this might be reduced, but really the problem is the fines are ridiculously low so they save money until things break and pay the fines.

The whole premise of the CNBC blurb was misleading. EV sales are not declining they are growing in the US and world wide. The non tesla EVs aren't selling as well as hoped, but removing tesla the largest selling in North America (maybe world wide) distorts the figures. There were more hybrids sold than BEVs that is true, but then there were more plug-ins sold (BEVs and PHEVs) than non plug in hybrids, despite the 20 year head start of non plug in hybrids. At least hybrids are growing, but bevs are still growing faster if you remove seasonality. If we look 5 years down the line when many of these battery plants will be up and running costs will be down significantly for the non tesla ev makers, and experience should allow them to design better vehicles. Slower growth may be good. Choice is good.

 

Almost can't remember nowadays to back when the news was news ... not a platform to spew one side's / both side's agendas, or foment fake drama.
.

 

Well it is CNBC is a financial news channel and they were kind of right with the non tesla automakers. Toyota is being very profitable in the short term by not investing much in BEV tech. Ford invested $4B more in BEVs last year with much of it to sell at a lower price than their costs. GM had some stumbles and their customers would rather buy a tesla or hyundai than a gm bev, although my brother just purchased a heavily discounted Cadillac Lyriq which he really likes (his Camry hybrid was quite old). CNBC has had lots of tesla shorters and tesla bulls on the air. So I can't really think this was a hit piece, it was more of a pro hybrid and phev, and give the customers a choice piece. It was misleading though as many of the opinion news stories are.

 

Tesla shifted from their original business plan with the Semi and Cybertruck. Perhaps that isn't an impact on 'Model 2' development. It could rely on Tesla's infrastructure reaching a critical point for an affordable car to be profitable.

The Bolt was made on an ICE platform. That helps out the traditional car maker, as they can assemble to EV on ICE lines. Even make them along side the ICE. Move to larger production, and it can be a liability. As you are stuck with the ICE line, and adopting more efficient manufacturing techniques is more difficult than doing so with a clean sheet platform and new line for it.

I don't see a problem with affordable EVs having a relatively shorter range. It works for plenty of people looking for a second commuter car. Adding a range extender shouldn't be a major expense for those that want one as the primary car; the largest part maybe emission certification. I think the manufacturers we get are just hesitant to make them now. It does add a level of effort to the design process, and they a focusing on getting the EV side right; more than one has had issues with their new to them EV business.

Then crafting incentives for PHEVs is trickier. Europes lead to businesses buying them, but not plugging in, which lead to greater emissions over all. Then CARB went to other way. They were so concerned about people not plugging in the i3 REx with longish EV range, that BMW had to reduce hybrid performance in order to qualify for ZEV credits. This lead to them being sued over the car's performance being unsafe.

Get near that 100 mile EV range, and people do make more effort to plug in though. Such cars will have large enough batteries for incentives using that for qualifications. Then dropping battery costs and expanding public charging can make the issue moot.

PS: BYD's rivaling Tesla EV sales figures include several PHEVs.

 

Or catalytic converter thefts.

The Tesla Mission Statement pretty well describes their goal. So let's wait for the April, Q1 2024, financials for evidence of this concern. BTW, I'm not in the market for "Semi and Cybertruck" and plan to run my 2019 Model 3 until its 'end of life.'

Bob Wilson

 

i'm okay with not mandating hybrids as long as congress removes oil subsidies, then we'll really be 'free'

 

Now we understand the real reason Californian authorities aren't trying harder to stop catalytic converter thefts. (Just buy your mom an EV.)

Isn't that kind of how Norway got nearly the entire country to make the switch, they incentivized EV's while disincentivied ICEV's?

If gasoline were more expensive more people would change over.

The love affair most Americans have with SUVs and pickups is a sign that gasoline is very cheap in the USA. Chevy's cheapest econo car, the refreshed 2024 Chevy Trax, gets a measily 30mpg, and costs just over $20,000 when you account for the destination charge, yet it's selling pretty well as far as I've heard. But back in the 1990's 30mpg was considered good fuel mileage, yet back then GM marketed the Geo Metro XFI (made by Suzuki) which got an impressive combined average of 47mpg (and also cost less than $20,000 when adjusted for inflation from 1994). Obviously this is kind of an apples to oranges comparison as the Trax is much, much more spacious, but the point is, if fuel were $10 a gallon, we'd likely see more people wanting hybrids and cars like the Mitsubishi Mirage over the bloated wind bricks people are so fond of now.

 

Individual freedom ends when it harms others, and burning fossil fuels is causing harm.

The reason we even have hybrid options now is because of the soft mandates of incentives like CAFE.

There was, and there was employers giving company PHEVs to employees without home charging access. Public chargers might be more available, but that isn't going to help if the cars are given to people that didn't care about getting a plug in.

Maybe the outcome would have been different with an incentive for individuals instead of businesses. Though that wouldn't adjust the core flaw. Which is what flexfuel and bi-fuel ones had in the past, the incentive focused on getting cars on the road while ignoring making the alternative fuel accessible and used.

 

Like I said. If gasoline were more expensive, it would make much more sense to make the change.

I like the idea of a PHEV since as a renter, it's much easier for me to get access to a 120V outlet than a 240V. If I need a 240V EVSE or dryer outlet in order to charge up the battery, then that makes it much more difficult for me. But a PHEV could potentially do some 75% or more of my driving off of electricity.