Featured Reasons behind the slowness of EVs adoption in US

Tax incentives were one thing...but let us not forget the all important "car pool lane" incentives.

 

It's ok guys...horse and buggies were awesome, too.

 

But in these cases EV sales didn't "totally go away". Just as hybrid sales didn't when their incentives went away.

California does have very generous incentives for EVs. And just as the incentives were intended to do, this has accelerated adoption of EVs. When incentives disappear, sales will slow, temporarily, and then they will resume their upward trend.

 

if that's a reasonable benchmark - ok.
Model X, S, & 3 customers are still waiting, no more incintives - even with 1,000's per week being produced - with $0.00 incentives from the fed's now, & just a few states doing rebates. That's not good? Even though the incentive deck is seriously stacked in favor of honda/toyota type fuel cells? Fed $$$ higher? No prohibition against high income? Giving away free fuel? Seriously subsidized price? Yet lease/sales still mediocre to put it mildly? Should gvt unplug life support for all? including infrastructure? or not. Looks like there would be 'some' survivors that can now stand on their own 2 feet.
Impressive?
10% due in large part to the state with the overwhelmingly largest amount of cars seems noteworthy. Meh .... maybe not - according to some;

hard to get this .... most hybrid owners were ecstatic when Calif hit 2% hybrid sales & beyond (even tho there were some incentives) ...... hybrid owners took the plunge for beliefs/reasons like less fuel costs, clean air (& CO2 ?), geo-political, etc. Yet plugins .... seems like to many, they're the redheaded stepchild.
.

 

and HEVs

A few of those had regen brakes.

 

Tesla still has half the rebate, which will drop to a quarter July 1st. Tesla will have zero rebate Jan 1st 2020.
We will have to wait till then to see what John’s next spin will be

 

oh! that's right - 200,000 threshold simply meant it's headed downward at light speed..
So I guess that means the same is true with the Chevy Bolt as well ... ½ the amount, & falling after that. It's a decent argument that the demise of the subsidy is a good thing - as long as it goes away for all.
.

 

No amount of "totally go away" spin can evade acknowledgement of my years and years of expressing concern that only affordable choices will survive the expiration of tax-credits. There were many short-sighted people who focused exclusively on the tax-credit dependent sales, absolutely refusing to recognize how few 200,000 actually is with respect to ordinary business-sustaining profitable sales. I most definitely was not part of that group-think crowd. I spoke out loudly against them... and you know it.

I was one who said Volt would die if GM didn't spread their plug-in hybrid technology prior to the approach of tax-credit phaseout. I kept posting "too little, too slowly" over and over and over again, warning of the consequences of inaction. For that, I got attacked relentlessly. Vindication now from having correctly spelled out that situation is bittersweet. Supposed leadership from GM didn't actually change the status quo. Something not dependent upon tax-credits still needs to be delivered.

Seeing Toyota have to deal with rhetoric for taking their time to do it right is annoying. How is rushing into a money-losing approach going to get dealers to embrace the idea of stocking & selling inventory that necessitates a subsidy? That never made any sense and GM's colossal screw up with Volt overwhelming concerns how terrible of a choice that was. GM violated basic business principles to push an expensive compact hatchback, something that stood no chance of actually appealing to their own Pickup & SUV wanting customers.

You know all too well that Toyota's effort to always focus on affordability and finding a way to spread their technology across the entire fleet at minimal cost has always been the better strategy for a legacy automaker. Is the effort to distribution a hybrid platform capable of plug easy augmentation to a wide variety of vehicles sizes & shapes prior to actually offering a plug that slow? Can you honestly claim that their long-term goal of achieving that diversity by 2020 was a waste of time & resources?

I'm tired of dealing with the nonsense of not taking market reach seriously. That smug from enthusiasts can finally end by us not feeding them with material like "allude" when you know quite well that wasn't the case. You are well aware of my background and my purpose.

 

You know all too well I was correct about Two-Mode, correct about Volt-1, and correct about Volt-2. Each of those technologies had a fatal shortcoming... being too expensive. Each time the evidence became so abundant that their shortcoming could no longer be denied, something else came about to fill the void. Now for GM, that's Bolt.

In other words, there hasn't been any spin from me. It's the same old argument. I say the technology must be affordable, period. GM is the one providing spin. I could point out some old posts about me getting complaints for repeating the same old argument over and over and over again, like a broken record. You know that isn't necessary though. You too are well aware of my background and purpose.

I want a wide variety of affordable choices for consumers. They must be capable of competing directly with traditional vehicles, so those new clean & efficient choices can become the replacement. That means none of the activity so represents the change needed. It paves the way, but subsidized sales are sustainable... hence the concern about tax-credit dependency.

As for your obvious attempt to divert attention away from discussion of legacy automaker approach, that's disappointing. We need well informed people like you to help with the effort to get those traditional sellers (dealers) to embrace change they can actually influence. They won't ever have a business model like Tesla, so it makes no sense treating them that way. In other words, I reject your spin. Legacy automaker finances & distribution are quite different.

 

then the same goes for prime. how many are they selling outside cali without massive discounts?

what will toyota do when the $4,500. fed credit goes away?

 

Toyota is doing it already. They are spreading their hybrid technology as widely as possible, striving to establish a customer base readily acceptable to change by offering that variety of affordable choices... each capable of offering a plug later. Making Prius into Prius PHV was basically just a matter of introducing that one-way clutch. We're about to see the same upgrade play out with Corolla PHV.

It's easy to see how RAV4, C-HR, Camry... could all follow the same path. That's how you successfully implement economy-of-scale cost-reduction is achieved... exactly what's needed to overcome any type of subsidy... which Toyota has already demonstrated with the low MSRP for Prius Prime.

The problem with your perspective is that you're treating the market of 2 years from now when the tax-credits are used up as if it is still 2018, not acknowledging how much change that's about to happen as a result of seeing so many new plug-ins on the road. It's that big curve upward we are about to hit in the product life-cycle that will introduce a market you are quite unfamiliar with. That's an exciting time to look forward to if you are *NOT* an early-adopter.

Remember that sales in high-volume to ordinary consumers is profoundly different. Far too many here assume mainstream appeal is just a matter of delivering enough capacity at a reasonable price... hence the technology being affordable. If it isn't, all those other purchase priorities people have can't also be delivered. Early-Adopters are willing to compromise. Buyers on the showroom floor are not... which is why Toyota is already working to deliver a variety of choices.

 

Yeah, end it or extend it.

 

Sales in Japan on the prime are already down, because ... of the longer range 62 kwh leaf. I believe john's argument was that batteries are too expensive so small batteries will be better once tax credits end. Of course Nissan and Tesla have already proved this argument completely false. In the US without competition from the volt, and tesla dropping to $1875 tax credit, I expect prime sales will increase, but it is likely to be short lived. In california at the second half of the year a tesla model 3 long range will be subsidised by $4375, a prius prime $6000. It costs no where close to $6000 more to make a prime than a regular prius liftback.

It may be too little too late, but toyota has pre announced a deal that they say will happen next year to work with panasonic on bigger batteries. By 2025 Analysts expect tesla to drive down battery costs to $100/kwh at the pack level. A 50 kwh battery at that time will only cost tesla $5K, not much reason to go much smaller as they already seem to be able to carry a heavier 80.5 kwh in the best selling plug-in world wide the model 3.
Tesla Model 3 = #1 Best Selling Electric Car in World, 7% of Global EV Market in 2018 | CleanTechnica
The model 3 though of course was constrained by manufacturing, numbers should be much higher this year as the lower cost standard pack is introduced and tesla ramps production from its current level at around 6000/week to around 9500/week by the end of the year.

Top 10 Best Selling Plug-In Vehicle Brands In 2019 | CleanTechnica

There is a good place for the <40 mile phev like the prime, but these designs are better from the ground up. By the time toyota gets its battery production together with panasonic my guess is they will be able to produce 30 mile phevs with battery packs that are lighter, smaller, and cost less than the 25 mile one in the current prime. BMW is leading on the <40 mile phev train promising to make a phev version of all their cars, while also working on a bev strategy.

IMHO a 10 kwh CUV phev whether a tall car hatchback or something like a rav 4 would sell extremely well.

 

You've know me for how many years? That has never been my stance. I have always said we need a variety of affordable choices. Not at any time have I stated a relational between PHEV & EV with respect to tax-credits.

As for Nissan & Tesla proving it, you've lost touch with the big picture... the market as a whole. There haven't been any non-subsidized sales yet. So far, all we have seen is early-adopters taking advantage of tax-credit opportunity. The stage where mainstream consumers make the choice on the showroom floor with traditional, PHEV, and EV all there as part of the decision with none getting special government incentive hasn't even begun yet.

PHEV will have a place for many, many years to come still. Our infrastructure (all locations: home, work, businesses, public locations, and roadways) is only in the earliest stages of building and becoming green for transportation. So, the very idea that all could be served in the near future by just EV isn't constructive in any manner.

It isn't just the expense of batteries either. There's the problem of production-capacity and energy-density as major holdbacks. Overcoming that still leaves us with the liquid-electrolyte limitation. It will all happen, but claiming "completely false" already is absurd. What has been proven is being at the "lots of potential" point with a great deal of effort required to achieve all those goals.

 

Why do you state something that nobody promotes?

 

Use of "from the ground up" doesn't actually mean anything. People have come to recognize it as representing only a first-generation model. Why? Anything built upon with the original intent there from the start is dismissed. Again, why? Upgrades are an expectation with other technologies, why not with automotive design?

Looking at Prius, we see the design way back in 2003 offering up to 100 km/h travel in EV mode. It was pressed for power with batter-technology of the time; nonetheless, it was indeed built from the ground up. Potential from the system has always been limited that way. The most recent generation, we know as "Prime", was clearly it was configured to fit 4 stacks nicely inside the cargo area. The choice to add a 5th just prior to rollout for more range & power doesn't change the propulsion system. All it did was cause a loss of interior space.

Toyota's approach of a drop-in battery-pack means they will be able to take advantage of lighter, smaller, lower cost later. No where does it say they have committed to older cells. Newer will be used as the technology improves. Those cells will be arranged in the stacks to create battery-packs for newer models of Prime. Their design is already capable.

 

I didn't. I do respond to others though. Read more carefully for context. My focus was and continues to be mainstream consumers following the expiration of tax-credits.