Evs right now are only practical imo if you own a home. I've seen zero apartments in my metro area with charging, if you want more adoption, require apartments to have charging on site , until then I'd bet most renters will chose the more convenient option.

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

M564038 wrote:

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

AABusDrvr wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

I wonder how vibrant the ICE rebuild market will be when car companies switch to mostly EVs. I would bet there is a lot of money to be made there.

The simple fact is that electric has vastly superior performance to ICE. The only thing it doesn't currently exceed ICE in is range and refill speed and range is nearing parity. That's it. For delivering power to the wheels and road, no ICE direct driven vehicle can compete against electric.

For me, I am waiting for hybrid option to rule the world. A simple HP generator, fueled with whatever fuel you wish, running at its peak efficiency rate to produce electricity for a battery that then powers the vehicle. I think this is how long distance trucking will be converted.

Tugg

AABusDrvr wrote:

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

You must drive a "Stellantis"! Honestly man, how could anyone say this, much less an actual conglomerate? You really think the explosion in EV sales and the massive investments in EV products (by almost everyone except Stellantis) is because politicians are forcing consumers to buy them? That's a bonkers claim.

AABusDrvr wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

Be ready then to shell out much more in taxes and other things as taxes will go up on ICE vehicles.

ICE cars are taxed here, and have been so for 35 years.
(They are less taxed than 10 years ago)
To compensate for the price difference, EVs are less taxed. As prices are getting lower, so are the incentives.
The days of driving in bus lanes and free parking are long gone!

Anyways, since the market is evened out, we can measure WHY most people are buying EVs now.

The most important factor has been the «neighbour factor» or plain old word of mouth if you will.
Your neighbour buys an EV, he is terribly pleased, you can see for yourself daily how little trouble he has with his car. So you buy a EV the next time.

This is why petrol and diesel cars together with non-plugin hybrids are now barely 10% COMBINED!

Delivery vans, taxis, city busses and small trucks??
Electric has totally taken over during the last couple of years!

[photoid][/photoid]

AABusDrvr wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Well, you can put me on the list as one of the People who don't want an EV. Hopefully in my mid 50's, I'm old enough I'll never have to have one forced on me by a politician, before my driving days are over.

Tesla's have to be the ugliest things on the road at this point.

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

And it seems both GM and Ford have had with their dealerships. Seems some of the dealerships have been marking up prices more than MSRP after getting into a contract with customers. Then the customer has usually no option but to cancel the contract and go to another vendor. Loss both ways to the vendors.

https://electrek.co/2022/01/21/gm-threa ... oming-evs/

Seems soon at least the above two vendors would try and emulate the same direct sales model as Tesla.

wingman wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

You must drive a "Stellantis"! Honestly man, how could anyone say this, much less an actual conglomerate? You really think the explosion in EV sales and the massive investments in EV products (by almost everyone except Stellantis) is because politicians are forcing consumers to buy them? That's a bonkers claim.

I didn't say people weren't buying them, I said I don't know anyone who wants one. For the people I know, they bring more disadvantages than advantages. They still suck for towing, traveling long distances and going "off the beaten path". All things the people I know do regularly.

If they work for you, great, but for many people it's a solution looking for a problem.

pune wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

M564038 wrote:

Any car you buy after 60 will be an EV guaranteed.
(Assuming your intelligence is stronger than hour stubborness)
It doesn’t have to be a Tesla. When you are 60 every single car maker will make a wide variety of EVs.
Many if the major ones will only make EVs.
Most of them have already stopped developing fossile engines.

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

Be ready then to shell out much more in taxes and other things as taxes will go up on ICE vehicles.

I'm sure I wont be alone. The EV owners will be paying mileage taxes or some such. No government is going to give up the tax revenue the gas taxes generate. Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

pune wrote:

And it seems both GM and Ford have had with their dealerships. Seems some of the dealerships have been marking up prices more than MSRP after getting into a contract with customers. Then the customer has usually no option but to cancel the contract and go to another vendor. Loss both ways to the vendors.

https://electrek.co/2022/01/21/gm-threa ... oming-evs/

Seems soon at least the above two vendors would try and emulate the same direct sales model as Tesla.

LOL, funny how all of a sudden manufacturers are "concerned" about dealer markups after decades of turning a blind eye towards them

AABusDrvr wrote:

wingman wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

You must drive a "Stellantis"! Honestly man, how could anyone say this, much less an actual conglomerate? You really think the explosion in EV sales and the massive investments in EV products (by almost everyone except Stellantis) is because politicians are forcing consumers to buy them? That's a bonkers claim.

I didn't say people weren't buying them, I said I don't know anyone who wants one. For the people I know, they bring more disadvantages than advantages. They still suck for towing, traveling long distances and going "off the beaten path". All things the people I know do regularly.

If they work for you, great, but for many people it's a solution looking for a problem.

pune wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

Be ready then to shell out much more in taxes and other things as taxes will go up on ICE vehicles.

I'm sure I wont be alone. The EV owners will be paying mileage taxes or some such. No government is going to give up the tax revenue the gas taxes generate. Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

Somebody is full of fear. What is gonna happen is many people who would buy EV's would also buy batteries. How many people you know buy things, something as expensive as a car and do not make plans about it. Even for something simple as buying a laptop or a desktop computer tower people put hours to days of research and then they go out and get what is needed. Same thing with mobiles. This idea that people buy stuff without doing any research is nothing but crap. Especially when such kind of help and understanding is available.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_T0vahG6JPU

AABusDrvr wrote:

I'm reasonably confident I'll still be able to buy an ICE vehicle, if not new, there should be a robust used market.

I don't know anyone who "wants" an EV. Around here, it's the politicians that want to force them on the people.

Take M564038's comments with a grain of salt. In another thread, he told me that my next car will guaranteed be an EV and I'll probably be surprised and like them

pune wrote:

Somebody is full of fear.

The only ones full of fear are the ones refusing to realize that ICE vehicles will still be around for years to come and that EVs don't work for everyone nor does everyone want them - yet they choose to continue their relentless spread of the Gospel like a newly saved JW canvasing a neighbourhood.

T18 wrote:

Evs right now are only practical imo if you own a home. I've seen zero apartments in my metro area with charging, if you want more adoption, require apartments to have charging on site , until then I'd bet most renters will chose the more convenient option.

This is beginning to happen actually. In the UK, I had seen a few videos where the real-estate developer is putting heavy-duty chargers and whatnot so people who do come and can start plugging their EV's from day 1. They also had some solar done. I know a few societies n Pune that have also done some similar stuff. One of them was actually shown on Fully Charged a few years back (from my city).

Today or tomorrow it probably would also come into building codes as more and more people get into EV. It is just natural. For e.g. in my own state and city, about 15-20 years they made the change that RWH (Rain Water Harvesting systems) are needed for any new society. From that point on, any new society that does come up does have to do the needful. It also is the need of the hr. as we have water scarcity. So will this become. One could think of them as electricity poles, at one point in time people thought they were frivolous, expensive and waste of time and money and today nobody can live without it.

ACDC8 wrote:

The only ones full of fear are the ones refusing to realize that ICE vehicles will still be around for years to come and that EVs don't work for everyone nor does everyone want them - yet they choose to continue their relentless spread of the Gospel like a newly saved JW canvasing a neighbourhood.

I don't the bashing that goes on. Yes EV's had difficulties to over come and slow to start but like LED bulbs, it is obvious they are the technology that will be used and see development going forward. ICE is mostly dead as a "future/developing" technology.

An electric motor is just too simple (now). It is clean (design) and provides enormous toque and horsepower for its size. It eliminates the need for a transmission, the most mechanically complex components of a modern ICE vehicle (necessary due to the limited power band of an ICE). Electric also have significantly lower maintenance costs and failure points.

ICE just can't compete with that.

The only thing ICE has over electric is range (due to and extensive, old, place fueling distribution systems) and speedy "refill".

As I have noted in other threads, I do see much of the world moving to a hybrid system for an "electric car". One that has a basic compact, super efficient generator, that can run on whatever fuel is desired (propane?). It runs as needed, in the high efficiency RPM, and only to charge the in place battery that provides the juice to the electric motor. You get all the benefits of both systems. Generators are very efficient and reliable, can be placed where in the vehicle and are changed out easily. You get range and quick refill. You get power and simplified drive trains.

Tugg

Tugger wrote:

I don't the bashing that goes on. Yes EV's had difficulties to over come and slow to start but like LED bulbs, it is obvious they are the technology that will be used and see development going forward. ICE is mostly dead as a "future/developing" technology.

An electric motor is just too simple (now). It is clean (design) and provides enormous toque and horsepower for its size. It eliminates the need for a transmission, the most mechanically complex components of a modern ICE vehicle (necessary due to the limited power band of an ICE). Electric also have significantly lower maintenance costs and failure points.

ICE just can't compete with that.

The only thing ICE has over electric is range (due to and extensive, old, place fueling distribution systems) and speedy "refill".

As I have noted in other threads, I do see much of the world moving to a hybrid system for an "electric car". One that has a basic compact, super efficient generator, that can run on whatever fuel is desired (propane?). It runs as needed, in the high efficiency RPM, and only to charge the in place battery that provides the juice to the electric motor. You get all the benefits of both systems. Generators are very efficient and reliable, can be placed where in the vehicle and are changed out easily. You get range and quick refill. You get power and simplified drive trains.

Tugg

Again, its not the cars or technology itself - its the mantra behind it. As I've said before, I have zero issues with EVs - but they don't fit my criteria at what I need in a vehicle and that criteria is the same for countless people, but thats not good enough for the EV zealots - they'll argue about "driver profiles" and tell you that your criteria is "wrong" to the point it actually becomes quite nauseating. EVs will become more mainstream, there's no question about that - but they still have a ways to go - range and convenience of a quick charge need to be addressed as well as building a support infrastructure where charging is readily available in apartment buildings and workplaces. And thats the thing, I can accept that they will be mainstream one day, but the EV zealots can't accept the fact that it won't happen overnight.

Hybrids are great, other than the Prius - but thats purely a personal viewpoint based on its design. But now at least, Toyota is offering the same benefits of a hybrid system in normal cars like the Corolla, Camry and Rav4 and they sell extremely well - its just a shame that the Corolla only comes in the LE trim and not the XSE trim like the Camry and Rav4 do.

Kiwirob wrote:

Norway is an exception, the govt provided massive incentives for people to adopt BEV's they completely upended the market. When toll roads, bridges and ferries are free, allowed to use bus lanes, there no 1 off purchase tax and in the early days free parking you would have been mental to buy anything other than a BEV.

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

prebennorholm wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Norway is an exception, the govt provided massive incentives for people to adopt BEV's they completely upended the market. When toll roads, bridges and ferries are free, allowed to use bus lanes, there no 1 off purchase tax and in the early days free parking you would have been mental to buy anything other than a BEV.

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

Norwegians aren't doing that. Norwegian's are buying BEV's, they are buying very few ICE vehicles. 65% of all new vehicles last year were BEV, September was a record month where 77.5% of vehicle sales were BEV. It wouldn't surprise me is 2022 80% of all new Norwegian registrations were BEV's.

Gasoline and diesel cars are currently 3% and 2% of new sales, respectively.
Then you have an additional 5% of fossile non-plugin hybrids.
fossile plugin hybrids are around 25% and the rest is EVs.

prebennorholm wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Norway is an exception, the govt provided massive incentives for people to adopt BEV's they completely upended the market. When toll roads, bridges and ferries are free, allowed to use bus lanes, there no 1 off purchase tax and in the early days free parking you would have been mental to buy anything other than a BEV.

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

AABusDrvr wrote:

Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

M564038 wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Kiwirob wrote:

prebennorholm wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Norway is an exception, the govt provided massive incentives for people to adopt BEV's they completely upended the market. When toll roads, bridges and ferries are free, allowed to use bus lanes, there no 1 off purchase tax and in the early days free parking you would have been mental to buy anything other than a BEV.

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

Norwegians aren't doing that. Norwegian's are buying BEV's, they are buying very few ICE vehicles. 65% of all new vehicles last year were BEV, September was a record month where 77.5% of vehicle sales were BEV. It wouldn't surprise me is 2022 80% of all new Norwegian registrations were BEV's.

As Stellantis pointed out, the Norwegian car buyers are not the main ones choosing BEV. It is the Norwegian government ministers who created a subsidy formula that favors EV relative to ICE.

I understand people are gaslighting (pun intended?) saying oil is subsidized indirectly, so we can never speak about EV subsidies. I understand that removing the EV subsidy information is a super important part of the narrative. I am just saying that, if you analyze Norway subsidy versus peers, there cannot be a more perfect factual illustration of Stellantis' point. A country like Norway can be either 5% BEV or 80% BEV depending on the preferences of the policymakers. And they have chosen BEV for Norway, despite the low population density and harsh climate.

The US cannot go to 80% because of manufacturing ramp up alone... then there are grid concerns, meaning that it doesn't save much CO2 anyway. BEV is more the province of the extremely wealthy right now. As iPhones were in 2008... we are at the very beginning of EV adoption across a huge fleet. In the US, of 300 million cars, maybe 1.5 million are EV (0.5%). This will be mainstream when that hits 30-60 million. Which won't be for another 5-10 years, but it will happen.

This could all be much more efficiently done with a carbon tax. If this were really about CO2... but it's not. It is about showing off your affluence and your political credentials, to enhance your status. I support EVs, but subsidies should taper to zero (and, as I just said, carbon tax should be implemented instead).

You are getting at it the wrong way.
Completely upside down to be exact.
What economic incentives does, is prove that the concept works if priced competetively.

Which technology makes the best car is a question that needed solving?
This is about economics of scale, and how to make technologies compete evenly and fairly when one technology has fine-tuned every economic and logistic cog in the wheel for more than a hundred years. The norwegian incentives has been a way to look a few years in to the future as batteries, sensors and other components that make up the perfect EV, has been steadily decreasing for years and years. What we see is this: Once logistics are up and running so the economics are evened out, the ICE-concept is completeley left in the dust. It is an idiotic way of propelling road transportation devices.

As for the other factors:
EVs are not inherently more expensive than ICE in manufacture. Rather the opposite. The complexity is a fraction of that of a dinosaur car.
This reduces maintanance, increases reliability, they are also a lot safer. One thing we have seen is that EVs don't go up i flames like ICEs do.

Car culture:
EVs are more fun. Acceleration heaven. And they do it without making disgusting farting noises.

The energy need for actual usage is a lot less problematic than with fossil fuels:

Might be challenging with widespread EV-adoption:
-Electricity in some areas, although the problem is a lot less than the grim pictures being painted by some. Folks overestimate the amount of energy needed by A LOT.
-Resources for battery production. Mostly a question of production capacity, but some battery designs rely on rare resources that can't be used in the future. A work in (succesful) progress.

Challenges with fossile.
-Global Warming
-Local pollution forces city development
-Trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars used on wars over resources needed.
-Oil interests has trumped human rights and democracy and stifled human progress for a century
-Millions of deaths every year from air pollution

LCDFlight wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

prebennorholm wrote:

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

Norwegians aren't doing that. Norwegian's are buying BEV's, they are buying very few ICE vehicles. 65% of all new vehicles last year were BEV, September was a record month where 77.5% of vehicle sales were BEV. It wouldn't surprise me is 2022 80% of all new Norwegian registrations were BEV's.

As Stellantis pointed out, the Norwegian car buyers are not the main ones choosing BEV. It is the Norwegian government ministers who created a subsidy formula that favors EV relative to ICE.

I understand people are gaslighting (pun intended?) saying oil is subsidized indirectly, so we can never speak about EV subsidies. I understand that removing the EV subsidy information is a super important part of the narrative. I am just saying that, if you analyze Norway subsidy versus peers, there cannot be a more perfect factual illustration of Stellantis' point. A country like Norway can be either 5% BEV or 80% BEV depending on the preferences of the policymakers. And they have chosen BEV for Norway, despite the low population density and harsh climate.

The US cannot go to 80% because of manufacturing ramp up alone... then there are grid concerns, meaning that it doesn't save much CO2 anyway. BEV is more the province of the extremely wealthy right now. As iPhones were in 2008... we are at the very beginning of EV adoption across a huge fleet. In the US, of 300 million cars, maybe 1.5 million are EV (0.5%). This will be mainstream when that hits 30-60 million. Which won't be for another 5-10 years, but it will happen.

This could all be much more efficiently done with a carbon tax. If this were really about CO2... but it's not. It is about showing off your affluence and your political credentials, to enhance your status. I support EVs, but subsidies should taper to zero (and, as I just said, carbon tax should be implemented instead).

"GM to invest historic $7 billion in 4 facilities across Michigan, creating 4,000 jobs"
Excerpt - In a big win for Michigan, General Motors will invest $7 billion in four manufacturing facilities, making the state the "hub" of electric vehicle development and manufacturing.
GM calls it the "single largest investment announcement in GM history," saying the move will create 4,000 jobs and retain 1,000 others.

Looks like GM is all in for EV's.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ ... 619862001/

M564038 wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

You suspect all those chargers, and the energy production and delivery they will require will be free? Supply and demand and all that. And as traditional sources of electric production are forced to shut down in favor of "green" energy thats going to drive prices up.

I had a heat pump in my old house, it was terrible, and I'd never own another. Split system with dual gas furnaces and air conditioning compressors in our current home. Works great.

Yeah, well. I don't know if I'll bother to go through this again. But full electrification of road transport demands suprisingly little of the grid.

I'll give you the following: 2 TWh per million cars in cold climate is a real life number.

The reason I mentioned heat pumps is going to them for supplementary (not main) heating in winter in our apartment complex of 500 apartments more than compensated for EV charging of a couple of hundred cars, it dwarfed it, actually.

AABusDrvr wrote:

M564038 wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

You suspect all those chargers, and the energy production and delivery they will require will be free? Supply and demand and all that. And as traditional sources of electric production are forced to shut down in favor of "green" energy thats going to drive prices up.

I had a heat pump in my old house, it was terrible, and I'd never own another. Split system with dual gas furnaces and air conditioning compressors in our current home. Works great.

LCDFlight wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

prebennorholm wrote:

mental to buy anything other than a BEV.....? Nah... not sure about that.

If I happened to be a Norwegian (which I am not), then I would do the same thing as most Norwegians do these days. They buy an EV and use it as their second car in addition to their ICE car.

And then they go and buy a new ICE when needed.

Norwegians aren't doing that. Norwegian's are buying BEV's, they are buying very few ICE vehicles. 65% of all new vehicles last year were BEV, September was a record month where 77.5% of vehicle sales were BEV. It wouldn't surprise me is 2022 80% of all new Norwegian registrations were BEV's.

As Stellantis pointed out, the Norwegian car buyers are not the main ones choosing BEV. It is the Norwegian government ministers who created a subsidy formula that favors EV relative to ICE.

I understand people are gaslighting (pun intended?) saying oil is subsidized indirectly, so we can never speak about EV subsidies. I understand that removing the EV subsidy information is a super important part of the narrative. I am just saying that, if you analyze Norway subsidy versus peers, there cannot be a more perfect factual illustration of Stellantis' point. A country like Norway can be either 5% BEV or 80% BEV depending on the preferences of the policymakers. And they have chosen BEV for Norway, despite the low population density and harsh climate.

The US cannot go to 80% because of manufacturing ramp up alone... then there are grid concerns, meaning that it doesn't save much CO2 anyway. BEV is more the province of the extremely wealthy right now. As iPhones were in 2008... we are at the very beginning of EV adoption across a huge fleet. In the US, of 300 million cars, maybe 1.5 million are EV (0.5%). This will be mainstream when that hits 30-60 million. Which won't be for another 5-10 years, but it will happen.

This could all be much more efficiently done with a carbon tax. If this were really about CO2... but it's not. It is about showing off your affluence and your political credentials, to enhance your status. I support EVs, but subsidies should taper to zero (and, as I just said, carbon tax should be implemented instead).

I have no issues at all with EV subsidies, when has new technology gone without subsidies. FYI, even LED bulbs here are subsidized in my country. Now by your inference, it shouldn't even though we know that both, in short, medium, and long-term LED bulbs, tube lights and systems are more efficient than incandescent bulbs. And this was done by the Ministry of power. In the U.S. you had a president who for four years said no to EV, hence obvious they are gonna miss and sooner or later all the Chinese EVs will come and eat the American market except for Tesla. And btw all the other manufacturers' people are talking about, all of them are in China and that is only where they are making money, otherwise, all of them will be bankrupt and that was shared by stats. by Sandy Munro.

Then there is another point, it is not just Norway which you can say is an outlier but a whole bunch of countries, China, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark and so and so. Are all the people in all these different countries (and more) trying to show their affluence? In all of thee countries, the only sales have been EV sales. In China, they have already done public transport and have thousands of buses and have been for a decade. Even many commercial trucks and whatnot are all EV. Are people trying to say that somehow China has been able to crack infrastructure in a way that other countries cannot ???

This is how the Chinese have been ramping up -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P7fTPLSMeI

Tugger wrote:

ACDC8 wrote:

As I have noted in other threads, I do see much of the world moving to a hybrid system for an "electric car". One that has a basic compact, super efficient generator, that can run on whatever fuel is desired (propane?). It runs as needed, in the high efficiency RPM, and only to charge the in place battery that provides the juice to the electric motor. You get all the benefits of both systems. Generators are very efficient and reliable, can be placed where in the vehicle and are changed out easily. You get range and quick refill. You get power and simplified drive trains.

Tugg

I have long been expecting that sort of thing, but no manufacturer so far has 'bit'. It would also be nice to have such a system for my boat. My suspicion is that battery prices and better charging stations are improving too fast. We live in the center of a metro area, but like to take road trips to rural and isolated areas. Charging stations are not good for that yet. I am hoping that will improve by the time my Tesla CT is delivered.

And this is where they are going, autonomous vehicles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Rp0J7xt7Qs

Kiwirob wrote:

M564038 wrote:

AABusDrvr wrote:

Not to mention the inevitable increases in the prices of electricity the necessary changes to the infrastructure to support all those EV's is going to bring.

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Manufacturers seem to be looking at better faster chargers and ever cheaper batteries rather than hydrogen. But speaking of batteries: like real estate the big deal is batteries, batteries, batteries. That is the limit of how many personal, business, commercial (short and long haul) vehicles will be sold in the next five years. Some next generation batteries don't mind being charged to 100% and then mostly drained. That along with more charging stations likely will be what relieves 'range anxiety'.

And the Chinese technology goes on marching -

https://autobala.com/a-chinese-parts-su ... ng/309756/

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

M564038 wrote:

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Manufacturers seem to be looking at better faster chargers and ever cheaper batteries rather than hydrogen. But speaking of batteries: like real estate the big deal is batteries, batteries, batteries. That is the limit of how many personal, business, commercial (short and long haul) vehicles will be sold in the next five years. Some next generation batteries don't mind being charged to 100% and then mostly drained. That along with more charging stations likely will be what relieves 'range anxiety'.

Agreed, there is LFP, sodium and today I hear about some semi-solid batteries all of which offering more power density while remaining safe. While cars would be exciting, it would be better if these next-gen batteries also power our electronics. That will mek our electronics safer and longer-lasting. Although some manufacturers might not like that.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

M564038 wrote:

How much electricity do you really think these EVs use? Do you have a heat pump in your home for heating

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Manufacturers seem to be looking at better faster chargers and ever cheaper batteries rather than hydrogen. But speaking of batteries: like real estate the big deal is batteries, batteries, batteries. That is the limit of how many personal, business, commercial (short and long haul) vehicles will be sold in the next five years. Some next generation batteries don't mind being charged to 100% and then mostly drained. That along with more charging stations likely will be what relieves 'range anxiety'.

You still need a crap load of power to charge them.

Kiwirob wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Manufacturers seem to be looking at better faster chargers and ever cheaper batteries rather than hydrogen. But speaking of batteries: like real estate the big deal is batteries, batteries, batteries. That is the limit of how many personal, business, commercial (short and long haul) vehicles will be sold in the next five years. Some next generation batteries don't mind being charged to 100% and then mostly drained. That along with more charging stations likely will be what relieves 'range anxiety'.

You still need a crap load of power to charge them.

And yet they are somehow able to charge them in China without breaking a sweat.

https://electrek.co/2022/01/10/2021-ev- ... yers-grew/

No. It is not a big problem at all. People in general are grossly overestimating the need.

Kiwirob wrote:

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Kiwirob wrote:

Heat pumps are more energy efficient than electric panel and oil column heaters. My energy bill dropped significantly after we installed a heat pump.

BEV's aren't an issue right now but they will become an issue when HGV's, light commercial vehicle and buses are all BEV.

An article I read recently discussed motorway truck stops, to provide truckers with the same service today each truck stop would require 50 - 100 1MW fast chargers, Germany has approx. 100 major truck stops on the Autobahn network, each truck stop would have the energy requirements of a 15,000 - 20,000 person town. there are 1.3m trucks using Germany's autobahn daily.

IMO heavy truck, buses and long distance passenger vehicles will become hydrogen powered, city cars and light inner city delivery vehicles will be BEV's.

Manufacturers seem to be looking at better faster chargers and ever cheaper batteries rather than hydrogen. But speaking of batteries: like real estate the big deal is batteries, batteries, batteries. That is the limit of how many personal, business, commercial (short and long haul) vehicles will be sold in the next five years. Some next generation batteries don't mind being charged to 100% and then mostly drained. That along with more charging stations likely will be what relieves 'range anxiety'.

You still need a crap load of power to charge them.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I have no objection to EVS, if a buyer wants one and it serves their purpose, fine. I do object to paying higher taxes to subsidize the wealthy person’s car, however. EVs are pricier and overwhelmingly purchased by the wealthy, as they are expensive.

Elon Musk’s wealth is derived from the Federal subsidies on his cars—selling credits.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-car ... than-cars/

I agree, and also I dislike the politicians that push the EV agenda. Due to my current commute, an EV would literally not work.

B777LRF wrote:

On an international board such as this, people need to be careful with generalisations. What is true in one country may not be true in another, and a perfect example of that is the consistent statements that EV’s are more expensive than ICE’s. It all depends on the taxation and, the willingness of the local market to pay a premium and the eagerness of the OEMs to penetrate a given market.

To give you an example, here are prices for the near-identical Mercedes GLC and EQC. Basically the same car, except one is ICE and the other is EV.

Germany
EQC 400: EUR 75K
GLC 400d: EUR 83K

Denmark
EQC 400: DKK 733K
GLC 400d: DKK 944K

United Kingdom
EQC 400: UKP 69K
GLC 300de: UKP 51K

So, no, EV’s are not always more expensive. In countries with heavy car taxes, they are quite frequently much, much, cheaper as they attract lower taxation. In countries with less heavy taxes they might still be cheaper, either through subsidies or a desire from the OEM to gain market share. And in some countries they are indeed more expensive. But there’s no “golden rule” saying EVs are more expensive than ICEs.

Are those prices before or after subsidies?

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

I honestly don't get why we're putting all our eggs in one basket and focusing only on electric vehicles. Why not spread the risk and work on hydrogen fuel cells too?

Besides, has anybody made any calculations as to the environmental impact if the world goes fully electric and we now have 52 million electric cars being sold?

I've been waiting for hydrogen cars for the last 20+ years when I first heard about them.

Then you should go out and buy one while they are still available. They are on their way out. A colleague bought 2. worked OK until the local refilling-station blew up.
Those things are dangerous a.f.

ItnStln wrote:

I've been waiting for hydrogen cars for the last 20+ years when I first heard about them.

What is your current commute, if I dare ask?

ItnStln wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I have no objection to EVS, if a buyer wants one and it serves their purpose, fine. I do object to paying higher taxes to subsidize the wealthy person’s car, however. EVs are pricier and overwhelmingly purchased by the wealthy, as they are expensive.

Elon Musk’s wealth is derived from the Federal subsidies on his cars—selling credits.

https://www.autoweek.com/news/green-car ... than-cars/

I agree, and also I dislike the politicians that push the EV agenda. Due to my current commute, an EV would literally not work.

cpd wrote:

However we are planning to make electric car buyers pay a tax based on the distance they drive in order to make electric cars so costly people will not buy them and existing owners will sell them.

Good! Non-EV drivers should not be subsidizing EV drivers when it comes to fuel taxes which go to fund the roads. The EV drivers are getting a subsidy in this regard.

It seems amazing that people have issues with cars EV but when it comes to buses and trucks they are silent. And this is when I have shared above how people have successfully run it for a decade. One would have thought that if cars have range anxiety then it would be for buses and trucks too but that seems to be not the case. Doesn't that sound strange? Add to that even taxi fleets.

MohawkWeekend wrote:

"GM to invest historic $7 billion in 4 facilities across Michigan, creating 4,000 jobs"
Excerpt - In a big win for Michigan, General Motors will invest $7 billion in four manufacturing facilities, making the state the "hub" of electric vehicle development and manufacturing.
GM calls it the "single largest investment announcement in GM history," saying the move will create 4,000 jobs and retain 1,000 others.

Looks like GM is all in for EV's.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ ... 619862001/

Who's going to fill these jobs in the current labor shortage? You can't just expect to have an infinite supply of employees. We might run into the problem of having too much work for too few people.

mxaxai wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

"GM to invest historic $7 billion in 4 facilities across Michigan, creating 4,000 jobs"
Excerpt - In a big win for Michigan, General Motors will invest $7 billion in four manufacturing facilities, making the state the "hub" of electric vehicle development and manufacturing.
GM calls it the "single largest investment announcement in GM history," saying the move will create 4,000 jobs and retain 1,000 others.

Looks like GM is all in for EV's.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ ... 619862001/

Who's going to fill these jobs in the current labor shortage? You can't just expect to have an infinite supply of employees. We might run into the problem of having too much work for too few people.

Actually, in the future, the opposite will happen, too few people would be needed on the factory floor. Elon Musk has already hinted at it but that is not all. There is more and more automation creeping in all the time. Elon Musk had shared about universal credit as something by the Govt. as jobs would not be so easy in the future. The only job will be of A.I. designers and data analysts but that too only till sometime once it achieves singularity. Each new A.I. research project pushes it that bit more. What will happen afterward is anybody's guess.

ItnStln wrote:

Are those prices before or after subsidies?

As far as I’ve been able to understand from the MB websites, those are net prices.

Supply and demand of labour will always go up and down.
There are 3 important things to understand:

The most modern society will always be the richest one.

The society that keeps the most folks working for the highest possible wage, with the best social security net will always be the most stable and safe ones

Those 2 go hand in hand.

EVs are not a threat to this, but could be part of just YOUR society’s path to it.

mxaxai wrote:

MohawkWeekend wrote:

"GM to invest historic $7 billion in 4 facilities across Michigan, creating 4,000 jobs"
Excerpt - In a big win for Michigan, General Motors will invest $7 billion in four manufacturing facilities, making the state the "hub" of electric vehicle development and manufacturing.
GM calls it the "single largest investment announcement in GM history," saying the move will create 4,000 jobs and retain 1,000 others.

Looks like GM is all in for EV's.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/ ... 619862001/

Who's going to fill these jobs in the current labor shortage? You can't just expect to have an infinite supply of employees. We might run into the problem of having too much work for too few people.

Pune - I trust you are not in the United States.
Your quote - . In the U.S. you had a president who for four years said no to EV, hence obvious they are gonna miss and sooner or later all the Chinese EVs will come and eat the American market except for Tesla.

One - approx 770,000 EV's were sold in the US during Trump's term. While he did not actively promote them, he didn't stop their sale as you infer.
Two - The Chinese have been unable to crack the US automarket other than parts and a few thousand Buick's. And they never will because politicians both Republican and Democrat will not allow it. Period.