We bought a new vehicle to replace an old one. We looked at pure EVs and, for the first time, I had to confront whether we wanted to buy one. We ultimately bought a traditional internal combustion engine (“ICE”) vehicle, and here's why.
Before I get into the weeds, however, let me say I've done a ton of thinking, reading, and due diligence. There will be people who smugly will say that I'm wrong while they talk about alleged adoption curves, scaling of infrastructure and manufacturing, repurposing of minerals and batteries, reductions in price, etc., etc., which is all part of “the dream.” I'm not persuaded.
At the end of the day, regardless of what we can afford, I'm convinced pure EVs will have limited appeal long-term and, at least in the United States, only be adopted as a luxury (during my lifetime, anyway). That said, I *do* think the market for *hybrid* plug-ins will continue to accelerate and probably dominate.
There are several reasons pure EVs will be limited, in my opinion, and here is a non-exclusive list in no particular order:
* A huge number of people do not live in a place where they can realistically charge EVs. Many people live in apartments, rental homes, or homes with only street parking; none of which will provide the infrastructure on a broad scale for them to charge an EV.
* EVs are useless bricks when the battery dies, the life of their batteries is truly unknown, their re-charging performance is shown to go down considerably over time (i.e., more charge cycles, less performance), and the cost to replace the batteries is astronomical and likely not worth doing for most people. That is, unlike an ICE vehicle, which can be rebuilt indefinitely at a low cost, replacing an EV battery is about $40K to $50K in today's dollars, battery warranties are all over the map, and whether you will even want to replace the batteries when they are worn out (or whether the vehicle has any residual value with a dead battery) is debatable (recent articles show EVs lose as much as 50% of their value in only one year).
* In many places, the power grid, such as it is, is already strained to provide the basic electrical power needed for running air conditioners and washing machines. How will people cope with rolling blackouts or power shortages that prevent them from charging their vehicles? Indeed, we happen to live in a place where most people have backup generators because we lose power in the winter. And, on that note, extreme temperatures (both hot and cold) also drain batteries and wear them out faster.
* Even with so-called fast-charging capabilities, who wants to wait 20 minutes while on the road to charge an EV? And, if EVs really did take off, what makes anyone think they will roll into a convenient “fast-charging station" and not have a line of other EVs needing 20 minutes to charge before them? By the way, fast charging is harder on the batteries (i.e., reduces their life) and you can only charge a battery so fast without damaging it (i.e., it's an energy-density thing). So, for those dreaming of “60-second charges,” it's not happening.
* The environmental argument for EVs is simply not reason enough to buy one for most people, but even if it were, the argument is rubbish as we will inevitably burn fossil fuels to create the additional electricity to charge all these batteries. And then there is the disposal of the used batteries—we can't even figure out how to properly dispose of laptops and mobile phones safely, so how will we handle old vehicle batteries any better? As someone said to me recently, “EVs were invented to save the auto industry, not the earth.”
* I recently rode in a friend's Rivian SUV. Yes, it was luxurious as hell, fast as fuck, built like a tank, and amazingly spacious and comfortable and fun. But, it weighs 7,100 lbs (that's 30% more than a Hummer!) and, as a result, its tires wear out quickly (and, of course, it causes more road wear as well, which will need fixing). In fact, EVs are so heavy that there are already reports that car garages will need reengineering to support their weight.
* On that note, Rivian also just reported that it loses over $33K per vehicle it sells (Lucid Motors loses even more per vehicle). That does not represent a compelling argument for investors or for the future viability of the company, which could then leave you with an unsupported expensive vehicle.
* The Rivian, like other EVs, is also stupidly complex. It's gorgeous but it is not going to be easy or cheap to fix. Try Googling the cost to fix a Rivian and you will see how just a small, cosmetic fender bender (that would have been a few thousand on a typical car) caused a huge bill due to Rivian's complex unibody construction. And then consider what happens to batteries in EVs during a serious collision—you will learn that damage to the batteries in a collision is a huge problem for EVs in terms of cost to repair and fire danger (which is an unknown risk for EVs as they age).
* And all this is before the juicy government financial incentives are, as they must ultimately be, removed. Does a $7,500 refund from the government really make an EV more attractive? It does, to a degree, but most EVs are priced at luxury levels (because it's mostly luxury shoppers who are buying them!) and don't even come with a charging cable (incredible, I know) and the Level II (220 volt) charging cables cost about $750, plus at least that much to install in your home. Oh, and most states charge an extra fee on your registration for driving an EV, allegedly because of lost revenues from gas taxes. Could that amount ever go up, perchance? And how much more often will you have to change the tires on your EVs? This goes on and on.
* Speaking of government, some people argue EVs are destined for success, based on government mandates, like California or Norway. This is a ridiculous argument since we all know such mandates can change or be entirely eliminated (see, for example, what's going on in Virginia right now where they're trying to repeal mandates). Rest assured, for better, or for worse, the government will not be able to force the success of EVs if even *some* of what I'm saying is accurate.
Indeed, the whole EV thing feels like a weird virtue-signaling flex that's going to lose the "head of steam" it's been surviving on until now. “Hey, look at me, I paid 25% to 50% or more for a luxury vehicle that runs on pure electricity so I don't have to pay for gasoline!?” And, "after I drive it for 8-10 years or about 100K miles, it will be a worthless brick because I cannot afford a new battery, they don't make them anymore, the company is out of business, and the vehicle is dead and stuck in my driveway and no one wants to buy it.” Where are the cost savings for real consumers?
Again, I think hybrid vehicles are a great alternative (but try finding one that is available immediately these days) and, as a result, ICE vehicles are a bargain by comparison (I'd expect prices on hybrids to continue to fall as they become more available). In fact, with folks splurging on EVs and hybrids, the cost of gasoline should stay low … so thanks to them, I guess!
So yeah, EVs are cool, fast, and fun to drive, but I don't see the long-term appeal to consumers beyond a limited market share to a certain wealthy demographic because of all the stuff above (i.e., not just limited to range, environmental issues, cost, but all the other things). And yes, I am aware of the analogy to the horse and buggy versus the automobile. But, unlike the switch from a horse to an automobile, the switch from an ICE/Hybrid vehicle to an EV does *not* provide quantum leaps in comfort, range, or safety without the need for huge investments in infrastructure.
It's actually the opposite. Horses can only go 30-40 miles per day, it's an uncomfortable way to travel, and potentially dangerous. Even the original Model-T had a 200-mile range (they actually got 20 mpg!) and you could refill them over and over to go indefinitely. They were far more comfortable than riding horses, far more capable and prestigious, and, of course, not easily spooked by noises, etc. You simply cannot compare the arrival of EVs to the arrival of the automobile.
Anyway, not that anyone asked, but that was our thinking on not buying an EV.
p.s. Notice I didn't even mention things like the Tesla lawsuit concerning their “diversions team” for fraudulently handling complaints about false driving-range information, or Ford's halting its $3.5 billion battery plant project, or GM and Honda scraping their plans for “affordable” EVs, or Toyota's CEO having been a long time skeptic of EVs … Be it corruption or economics, EVs are already looking like a failure and folly for the rich, at least for the time being. |