EV Disruption

[wdolson]

What about disruptions from EV vehicles to the society/economy at large? Let's say we see market penetration of 50% or more with EV, even 90%. What would happen to our economy and jobs? What would change?

Obvious examples would be gas stations and their convenience stores. How about auto parts stores? Tires should be fine. Car dealerships? Guess that depends on whether they embrace or reject EVs.

How about state taxes and revenues? Gas taxes for roads would fall. Emissions testing revenue. I'm sure this would be offset by some new EV tax.

I'm just wondering how a complete or high level of transition to EVs would affect the average person, and our current economy.

One positive I can think of would be a possible decrease in hospitalization for asthma and respiratory issues from automobile exhaust. Possibly decreased cardiac disease, maybe even birth defects and childhood related illness (for those old enough to remember, childhood lead levels from leaded-gasoline). Maybe even some decrease in cancers, since gasoline and related agents have carcinogenic potential. So we may all be able to live longer and better lives with a transition to EVs.

Since we are all going to get new jobs or find new income sources, what would replace the gas stations? What would replace auto parts stores or would they just evolve?

Any other thoughts?

I am just trying to think of how our world would look as we transition to EVs, and possibly think ahead to how we could smooth out the human impact such a disruption may have on our society.

The entire world economy would be completely transformed for one thing. Oil is traded in US dollars and that is a major thing keeping the value up. With the world moving away from oil, it would hit the economies of the Middle East very hard. The countries that foresaw the end of oil like Saudi Arabia and invested in infrastructure will make it through, but some countries will implode when the market for oil goes away. On the upside, the west will largely ignore them this time.

There will still be some need for auto parts. You do have to change wiper blades and EVs can break. There are fewer moving parts to break, so there probably would be a shake out of the market and a reduction in stores.

Some states are already shifting to milk EV owners as a trade off for reduced gas tax revenue. Washington state has an EV surcharge on vehicle registrations and other states will follow suit. The states will use it as an excuse to effectively raise taxes as the new registration fees will likely be higher than what revenue the state would have gotten from the gas tax. That's the case in Washington. Other states are talking about mileage based fees. You report to the DMV how many miles you drove each year and they tax you accordingly.

The transition isn't going to be all that fast. In most countries there is a huge number of ICE cars and it's going to take a long time for all those to cycle out of use, even if there are a lot of new EVs available. And the ramp up for new EV availability will take decades to get to even 50% market share. The world currently makes about 100 million cars and light trucks. To convert all that production to EVs would require the equivalent of 200 Gigafactories. That requires a lot of capital investment and a fair bit of time to build that many factories and get production going. We're looking at a project that is probably bigger and more expensive than the US Interstate highway system and that took over 30 years to complete phase 1 (the last of the original highways laid out in the 1950s was completed in the early 1990s).

Respiratory problems from air pollution would improve as fewer cars with oil burning engines were on the road, though we might see an increase in leukemia rates from people riding or driving EVs with little shielding from the electrical noise generated by the motors. This probably isn't a problem with metal bodied cars like the Model S, but it could be a problem with cars like the i3. The i3's Am radio is disabled because the electrical noise from the motor is so bad it swamps the AM radio spectrum. It's not settled science, but there is some speculation that exposure to those levels of EM noise can raise the risk of cancers like leukemia. It is pretty well proven that industries that require being around high EM fields like aluminum smelting (which is done electrically) have higher cancer risks.

At the moment this is an unknown that we will probably be learning more about as EVs become more common. I am less concerned about the EM fields in the passenger compartment of Model S and Xs because I have seen people report that the AM radio works in their cars with maybe a bit of a buzz or hum from the electric motor. Unlike the i3 where it is unusable.

The transition will be slow enough that the shake out will be over a generation instead of all at once and it likely won't upset the economy too much. There will still be a need for oil for some time to come. Batteries powered aircraft are going to remain a curiosity for some time to come. Weight is a huge issue in aircraft and a plane carrying a big load of batteries is not going to be able to carry much else. Also battery powered aircraft can only drive propellers, and jets need to continue to burn some kind of liquid fuel. Biofuels for aircraft are possible, but the tradeoff in range is not viable for most aircraft application and they will continue to need the highest energy density fuel, which is oil based.

Also oil will continue to be necessary for long distance commercial travel until a battery is invented that can charge as fast as you can fuel a truck. Commercial vehicles only make money when they are moving and sitting for hours recharging is not economically viable. For local delivery vehicles that are idle for half the day or more, EVs can be a good option and will probably become common in some European cities in the near future.

However as the world's transportation needs switch away from oil, it will hit the oil companies hard. Some very rich people will be faced with their cash cow going away and they will likely fight back very hard. Usually by buying politicians. I expect a lot of political fighting because of it. The US will be especially torn because many of the world's largest oil companies are based here. The Seven Sisters aren't really the seven anymore, but five of them were American.

There are convenience stores around that don't have gas pumps and that sort of store will probably still be around. I never go inside the store as the places I fill up now, so that probably wouldn't be much of a big deal for me.

There will be multiple phases to the EV market evolution. In the first phase EVs are going to continue to have shorter ranges than ICE and will take a while to recharge. Oasis of entertainments will pop up around fast charging sites like superchargers to give people who are stuck charging something to do. Right now a lot of SCs are near restaurants and malls, which will continue, but there will probably be other tourist attractions.

As EVs get longer range, fewer people will be using fast chargers on the road and instead destination charging will become the big thing. Hotels and motels will start offering charging like they advertised free HBO 20+ years ago. It will be something more and more hotels offer until most of the spaces at hotels and motels will offer EV charging. The road side attractions that sprang up to entertain people at fast chargers will fall on hard times and many will fold.

As EVs become more common, a whole lot of infrastructure is going to have to be built to support EV owners who don't have garages. There will be pushes for cities to put in charging for people who can only park on the street and apartment complexes will start offering EV chargers to residents.

There will be a boom industry in building EV infrastructure. Anyone put out of work by the decline of the ICE will be able to get work, at least for a while, putting in EV infrastructure.

We also have no idea what kind of side industries will spring up because of EVs. Whenever technology changes, there are always entrepreneurs who think of things nobody ever thought of with the new technology.

 

[RobStark]

Convenience stores can make more money on someone charging for 30 minutes than filling up for 5.


Auto parts stores can still sell windshield wipers and their fluid, deep cycle 12 volt batteries, and their new source of revenue will be selling and/or installing refurbished battery modules and/or packs. Various sundry of other parts will need minimal replacement on BEVs. That is a lot less business and ~90% of auto part stores will close and eventually 100% of the fast lube places.

Oil for plastics, jet & rocket fuel, fertilizers and various chemicals will keep Big Oil in business for the foreseeable future. They will become,like Big Railroad Companies, less and less important over time. They will go from being the key global industry to a medium importance one.

High cost well sites in the Western World will shut down. Norway will really need to diversify their economy. Scotland's dream of funding Independence with oil money is dying. Countries with States and Provinces that are highly dependent on oil will find the switch easier I think. There are more Americans working in the solar industry than the oil industry today. That disparity will only grow.

 

[jerry33]

Convenience stores can make more money on someone charging for 30 minutes than filling up for 5.

Although they will probably transition into something other than convenience stores because who wants to spend more than a couple of minutes in one?

 

[RobStark]

Although they will probably transition into something other than convenience stores because who wants to spend more than a couple of minutes in one?

IMO Yes and No.

As we move from niche BEVs to mass market BEVs we also move from the gelato crowd to the slurpee crowd.

People will have more time to spend more money on whatever at the convenience store.

And it does not matter what amenities are offered for people that prefer staring at their phones, which is a large and growing population.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Funny thing is I can really only think of the benefits. Especially AutoPilot and autonomous driving. Having this feature takes one of the greatest fears of aging away. Losing one's independence, especially not being able to drive somewhere.

I am always interested in trying to figure out the chains of social disruption that occurs with new technology or economic change, especially having witnessed the creation of the rust-belt. Factory closes, jobs lost, secondary businesses close, property values plummet, tax base goes away, crime, etc... Guess the most recent was the housing implosion, but that was a financial mess. That's a whole discussion in itself.

Like wdolson said this will probably occur over generations and hopefully this will mitigate the disruptive effects of EVs. Instead, I like the idea that a whole new infrastructure will develop spurring additional growth and transitions in the economy.

 

[mknox]

Interesting article on how long it may take for these types of transitions to occur:

How long does it take for 50% of cars to comply with a new law?

 

[wdolson]

Interesting article on how long it may take for these types of transitions to occur:

How long does it take for 50% of cars to comply with a new law?

Very good article that is applicable to any major change in the car industry, not just changes in the law. Note that's if the supply chain for the new parts is already there and ready. If you're looking at something to convert to BEVs, the supply chain knows what to build, but the supply isn't there and there are currently no plans to expand it very fast other than Tesla's Gigafactory.

Thanks for posting.

 

[GoTslaGo]

Interesting article on how long it may take for these types of transitions to occur:

How long does it take for 50% of cars to comply with a new law?

Wow, thanks for posting!

 

[jkn]

This link has been posted already but perhaps not noticed. 97% EV Autonomous by 2030

Analysis predicts extremely disruptive, total transition to EV / autonomous vehicles in 13 years
...
"The report is based on an analysis of the so-called technology-adoption S-curve that describes the rapid uptake of truly disruptive technologies like smartphones and the internet."
...
"A side effect is the abandonment of internal combustion engine vehicles—around 97 million will be stranded by 2030, creating a gigantic surplus as demand evaporates. Car dealerships are toast—the report predicts that new vehicle annual unit sales will plummet by 70 percent. To drive that point home, it also says demand for new internal combustion vehicles as a platform will disappear by 2024. Used cars will plunge to zero, or even to negative value."

 

[wdolson]

It's possible the demand will be there by 2030, but the capacity to build enough batteries won't.

Humans can also be fickle in their tastes. Sometimes people embrace radical shifts in technology, and others are very, very slow to develop. The Millennials are less into cars than the GenX or Boomers were, but in the US especially, there is a very large and deep car culture. The entire US infrastructure is built around cars. A lot of people baby their cars and do things to trick them out and make them unique.

Switching to a world where everyone just borrows cars when they need them is a radical shift. Uber and other ride sharing companies have shown there is some interest in the ride sharing idea, but it could become universal, or it might top out with only a segment of the population being interested.

Autonomous cars is also a major shift in the infrastructure. It's easy to visualize the end point where every car is autonomous, but getting from here to there is a very, very difficult technological and regulatory challenge. A system in which every car is communicating in real time with all the cars around it and all cars are cooperating with one another is actually not that tough to do with existing technology, but add just one "dumb" car driven by a human and the equation gets a lot tougher. The complexity of the problem gets geometrically worse the higher the percentage of dumb cars, which is precisely the problem the first autonomous cars have to exist in.

So they have to solve the worst case scenario first and get it much more reliable than humans can be, then graduate to easier scenarios later.

And laws always lag technology. We have the technology to build every new car with cameras in place of outside mirrors tomorrow. Most car makers have tested the technology and it would be easy to implement. It would reduce one of the worst sources of drag on a car, improving economy on cars by probably 10% minimum, but only one country has passed laws allowing them.

The car companies are pressuring law makers to approve autonomous technology because everyone sees it as the next big thing that could drive car sales for the next decade or more, but regulators are cautious about this sort of thing and whenever there is a mishap with an autonomous vehicle, it's big news all over the country if not the world.

It's the same phenomenon with air crashes. Commercial aircraft are safer than any other form of transportation, but a lot of people are afraid to fly in large part because every air crash is big news and car accidents rarely make the news. It's the phenomenon that the unusual makes the news and gets sensationalized. A story with the headline "Dog Bites Man" is not news, but "Man Bites Dog" is.

 

[jkn]

It's possible the demand will be there by 2030, but the capacity to build enough batteries won't.

I don't think increasing battery production capacity 60% yearly is too much. Continue that 13 years and capacity is 450 times larger. That would be roughly enough, if all battery manufacturers participate. Mining lithium and other elements needed could set limit.

 

[wdolson]

I don't think increasing battery production capacity 60% yearly is too much. Continue that 13 years and capacity is 450 times larger. That would be roughly enough, if all battery manufacturers participate. Mining lithium and other elements needed could set limit.

Tesla's production will increase to meet their needs and Chinese production for domestic consumption is increasing, but the announced plans for increases outside of those two areas is very modest. The Chinese market is pretty much separate from the rest of the world. They have a mandate to make a large segment of new cars as EVs and production is being scaled up to meet that mandate. That means very few of the batteries made in China by Chinese manufacturers will be available for car manufacturers outside of China.

 

[voyager]

It's going fast now. Tesla's impact has been huge. It caused for turnaround thinking among car makers. Volvo says it will abandon ICE drive entirely. More and more countries have set a specific year in which the gasoline car needs to be phased out (i.e. no longer sold).

But what I don't understand is that Tesla is not making more efforts to really popularize electric drive, by making them way more affordable to purchase. If Tesla has to establish a sub-brand or partner with another OEM, in order for it not to lease appeal as a posh car brand, so be it.

My suggestion would be to make EVs more appliance-like, that means lighter (still safe) and therefore a lot smaller. We shouldn't forget that most trips are done all alone. So, having fewer seats would suffice in most cases. Need a big car to take the family out? Use Tesla's car sharing program.

The less a car weighs, the fewer batteries it needs to score a decent range. The Tesla Model S weighs approx. 2200 kg (sorry for the metrics). A more 'appliance-like' EV could weigh as little as 700 kg (maybe less). Lightweight also means that less 'building materials' will be needed to manufacture such a Next-Gen EV. This can even go together with having a Next-Gen EV deal more easily with autonomous drive, since it will feature a much smaller footprint (i.e. occupies less space on the road).

 

[SwTslaGrl]

It's going fast now. Tesla's impact has been huge. It caused for turnaround thinking among car makers. Volvo says it will abandon ICE drive entirely. More and more countries have set a specific year in which the gasoline car needs to be phased out (i.e. no longer sold).

But what I don't understand is that Tesla is not making more efforts to really popularize electric drive, by making them way more affordable to purchase. If Tesla has to establish a sub-brand or partner with another OEM, in order for it not to lease appeal as a posh car brand, so be it.

My suggestion would be to make EVs more appliance-like, that means lighter (still safe) and therefore a lot smaller. We shouldn't forget that most trips are done all alone. So, having fewer seats would suffice in most cases. Need a big car to take the family out? Use Tesla's car sharing program.

The less a car weighs, the fewer batteries it needs to score a decent range. The Tesla Model S weighs approx. 2200 kg (sorry for the metrics). A more 'appliance-like' EV could weigh as little as 700 kg (maybe less). Lightweight also means that less 'building materials' will be needed to manufacture such a Next-Gen EV. This can even go together with having a Next-Gen EV deal more easily with autonomous drive, since it will feature a much smaller footprint (i.e. occupies less space on the road).

In the worlds largest car market, other carmakers could need all the help they can get next year. Like a Tesla designed "OEM EV package"

Virtually all automakers (except for Tesla) are asking China to slow down electric car mandate

 

[wdolson]

It's going fast now. Tesla's impact has been huge. It caused for turnaround thinking among car makers. Volvo says it will abandon ICE drive entirely. More and more countries have set a specific year in which the gasoline car needs to be phased out (i.e. no longer sold).

But what I don't understand is that Tesla is not making more efforts to really popularize electric drive, by making them way more affordable to purchase. If Tesla has to establish a sub-brand or partner with another OEM, in order for it not to lease appeal as a posh car brand, so be it.

My suggestion would be to make EVs more appliance-like, that means lighter (still safe) and therefore a lot smaller. We shouldn't forget that most trips are done all alone. So, having fewer seats would suffice in most cases. Need a big car to take the family out? Use Tesla's car sharing program.

The less a car weighs, the fewer batteries it needs to score a decent range. The Tesla Model S weighs approx. 2200 kg (sorry for the metrics). A more 'appliance-like' EV could weigh as little as 700 kg (maybe less). Lightweight also means that less 'building materials' will be needed to manufacture such a Next-Gen EV. This can even go together with having a Next-Gen EV deal more easily with autonomous drive, since it will feature a much smaller footprint (i.e. occupies less space on the road).

SmartCar is really the only player in the really tiny car market and Daimler has been losing its shirt with the division. They have announced all SmartCars will be electric soon.

Tesla is positioning itself in sectors of the EV market nobody has challenged until recently, the performance EV and long range EVs. There are a lot of options out there if you want a small EV for around town driving. Most of them are weirdmobiles, but there are a lot to choose from. Until late last year, there was no other EV in production that could go more than 200 miles and there still isn't any other brand with the long distance support Tesla offers through the supercharger network.

North American is much more spread out then Europe is and the passenger rail network is not very extensive. The only option when you want to go to another city is either fly or drive. I live in a metro area of about 2 million people. If I look at how far I have to go to get to other population centers with more than 1 million people, it's 3 hours north, about 10 hours south, and 12 hours to the nearest city of 1 million people to the south east. Due east it's about a 2 day drive. And that's driving around 150 KM/hr.

You can't make it to Seattle (3 hours north) from here in a Leaf without stopping to charge at least once.

Tesla is trying to make cars that people can use as their primary car for all their driving needs. In spread out places like North America and Australia, you need range to be able to make day trips even if you fly to places more than 5 hours away. GM has shown that you can shoehorn 200+ mile range into a small package with the Leaf, but while the passenger compartment is roomy, the cargo space with the seats up in back is not huge and the car is expensive for what you get.

Tesla's goal is to make cars cheaper not by making the car itself all that much cheaper, but to make the use of a car cheaper. With autonomous cars and ride sharing applications, it will be possible (in urban areas at least) to live without a car and just rent rides as needed. That makes a smaller fleet of cars work harder and the cost is spread out among many users.

I think that will be a solution that may work well in fairly built up areas, but it may not work as well when you get out into rural areas and there will be people who just want to own cars whether because they love cars or because they have issues sharing a car with a sea of strangers. For people who only drive locally, there are already a number of EVs that would suit their needs and there will probably be more in the coming years. Making a 100 mile range EV is not very difficult. Making one with more than 200 miles range that is even marginally affordable ($35K range) is difficult right now, but should get easier as batteries get cheaper. GM was the first to make an affordable EV with 200+ mile range , but they are losing money making it. Tesla will probably be the first company to turn a profit on making a 200+ mile EV under $40K.

 

[jkn]

Tesla's production will increase to meet their needs and Chinese production for domestic consumption is increasing, but the announced plans for increases outside of those two areas is very modest. The Chinese market is pretty much separate from the rest of the world. They have a mandate to make a large segment of new cars as EVs and production is being scaled up to meet that mandate. That means very few of the batteries made in China by Chinese manufacturers will be available for car manufacturers outside of China.

Chinese can grow so large in their domestic market, that it is easy expand globally. Start with buying Volvo and converting it to an EV manufacturer.

EV Sales: France
France Renault Zoe
2016 : 11648
Jan-May 2017: 7360 (7360 * 12 / 5 = 17664, + 52%)

I don't know if they can keep that up. They have support from state:
France to end sales of petrol, diesel vehicles by 2040

EV Sales: China
China 2017 Jan-May:
BAIC EC180 15376
Zhidou D2 EV 13979
BYD e5 7620
Geely Emgrand EV 7504
...
Too long list.
I estimate 100000 excluding hybrids. Whole year 200000.

Tesla at least 100000. Total Tesla + China 300000

Prediction of Tesla + Chinese EV sales with 60% yearly growth:
y. million, +60% from previous year
2017 0.30
2018 0.48
2019 0.77
2020 1.23
2025 12.88
2030 135.11

135 million is much more than current total car market.

Don't underestimate power of exponential growth!

 

[jkn]

In the worlds largest car market, other carmakers could need all the help they can get next year. Like a Tesla designed "OEM EV package"

Virtually all automakers (except for Tesla) are asking China to slow down electric car mandate

I didn't notice any Chinese on that list. So 'Virtually all automakers (except for Tesla)' is incorrect. China supports their own production...

There are two ways to lower cost of EVs: 1) Increase production with automation. Tesla is doing that. 2) Develop better chemistry for batteries. Panasonic is certainly doing it.

I think Tesla has sold OEM EV packages. But not many buyers.

Tesla vs State of Michigan: car dealers fear disclosure of their role in banning Tesla’s sales

 

[voyager]

SmartCar is really the only player in the really tiny car market and Daimler has been losing its shirt with the division. They have announced all SmartCars will be electric soon.

Tesla's goal is to make cars cheaper not by making the car itself all that much cheaper, but to make the use of a car cheaper. With autonomous cars and ride sharing applications, it will be possible (in urban areas at least) to live without a car and just rent rides as needed. That makes a smaller fleet of cars work harder and the cost is spread out among many users.
.

That is a very valid vision... leaving open nonetheless other ways of filling in the EV market. Like you said, for commuting, day to day shorter runs, etc. This is what I mean, a much more "shrink-to-fit, almost appliance-like EV.

 

[wdolson]

That is a very valid vision... leaving open nonetheless other ways of filling in the EV market. Like you said, for commuting, day to day shorter runs, etc. This is what I mean, a much more "shrink-to-fit, almost appliance-like EV.

Just a minor correction on my earlier post, I said 150 Km/h was common on the highways between cities, it's more like 125-130 Km/h.. I did the conversion in my head wrong.

The US has pretty strict accident safety laws. I think Europe has largely adopted the US standards, but I remember back in the 70s and 80s Mercedes had a program where Americans could fly to Europe, pick up a new Mercedes at the Factory in Germany, then drive around Europe on their holiday. When they were done, the car would be shipped back to the US, but on arrival in the US additional safety gear had to be added to the car like heavier bumpers because the European Mercedes did not meet US safety standards. You can spot these "gray market" Mercedes from this time period because they have things like bumpers that look a bit out of place.

When these safety laws kicked in, car makers just added the heavier bumpers and such to existing car designs and they ended up with bloated, overweight monsters. I had a 1974 Chevrolet Caprice made during that time and it was the only full sized GM car I've ever seen that I was glad to be rid of. It had a 6.6L engine and got 8 mpg around town with 12 mpg on the highway and it weighed more than a Model S. And this came out right about the time of the oil crisis. I got it up to 117 mph (190 Km/h) once, but the steering became terrifying over 130 Km/h.

The car makers began to engineer cars to meet the new safety standards without adding so much extra weight. They hit their limit though with making ICE any more efficient. My large 1992 Buick got 18 mpg around town and 25 highway. The Model S is one of the few modern sedans as large, but the largest lCE sedans are about the same as my 25 year old Buick was.

There will be a market for smaller cars that are more economical and Daimler has done quite well to make such small cars as the Smart line that meet US safety regulations. But Smart cars don't sell well in the US. I see them less often than I see Teslas and I live in one of the most progressive areas in the US. I just looked it up and most years Smart sells less than 10,000 cars a year, last year was only a little over 6000 cars.

3 of the best selling vehicles in North America (both the US and Canada) are giant pickup trucks. These vehicles dwarf the Model S and X. Driving a small car in traffic around these much larger vehicles is both frustrating because you can't see further than the tailgate of the truck in front of you and it can be terrifying because those vehicles could crush you with an unexpected lane change. The rest of the US vehicle market is also large to keep up.

As you get into the city core of Portland (the metro area I live in), you see a lot more smaller cars because a lot of the neighborhood streets are small and maneuvering a bit truck is difficult. As you get out of the city core into areas built after WW II, 9-12 meter wide streets are common. In most places the minimum width for new streets is 8.5 M. This makes maneuvering large pickups fairly easy and large vehicles are common.

For households with more than one car, it makes sense to have a city car and one for road trips. And that is becoming more common. Most households with shorter range EVs have an ICE or a Tesla for road trips. But there is also a trend with an increase in single vehicle households. It's more common in urban areas where public transportation is better, but it also is coming about because more Americans are single.

Where I live, there are very few city cars. In the houses immediately around mine, there are at least three neighbors with daily commutes of 50 miles each way. I don't know how far a couple of neighbors commute and one is a real estate agent who is on the road a lot showing properties to clients. One family has 4 kids and the father commutes 60 miles each way. They have a Toyota Corolla sedan for the father and a minivan to haul the entire family.

That's life in the suburbs of a lot of American cities. The outer suburbs tend to have good schools and a nice living environment (the local schools here are considered some of the best in Washington State), but the commute to work can often be grueling. I'm fortunate to work from home, so I don't have to drive anywhere, but I'm the exception.

We have two cars, my Model S and my SO has a Subaru Impreza. She would be open to replacing it with an electric, but she doesn't want a weirdmobile and it has to handle well in wet and snow (she wants all wheel drive). A 100 mile electric would be fine for her driving around town, but she does have to go to Seattle once or twice a year and she wants to take her car. She's sticking with her ICE for now.

Single passenger or two passenger cars are logical commuter cars, but getting Americans to buy them is difficult. People want vehicles that are flexible for most situations they might find themselves in. About 1/2 of the American pickup fleet are owned by individuals and 99% of the time the beds on those vehicles is completely empty, but people will drive a 12 mpg truck for the 1% of the time they need to haul something. Logically it's ridiculous, but try convincing them of that.

I'm not that nuts, but my Model S is our shopping vehicle and in the last couple of weeks we've gotten some bulky things in my car we never would have gotten in many other cars. I do run around with the car's cargo area mostly empty most of the time, but that's the trade off for the utility.

The energy economy of my car is 4-5X what I would have gotten from any other ICE I was looking at. I have very long legs and a messed up tailbone. If I'm stuck in a car too long without adequate legroom I end up with pains shooting down my legs. Last time we took the Impreza on a road trip I was walking funny for a month after we got back. I'm a bit of an unusual case, but I need a car with more legroom than most and few smaller cars fit that bill.

 

[voyager]

@wdolson
I'm not saying you're wrong (all solid points in fact), but that there's a vast EV void that needs filling in. At least in the city where space is at a constant price. And while we're at it, automakers should come up with other automotive formats than the 2- or 3-box shape. Generally, people don't like to drive or own a tiny vehicle that's somehow derived from something more substantial.