Prediction, in Which Year Will New Electric Vehicle Sales Exceed 50% in the United States "Poll"

[SDRick]

When will EV's outsell gas, never, IMO. I do not think EV's are any answer, the complete supply chain is WAY to damaging!! Can we give one example, CFL's

Never say never.

When you say you do not think EV's are "any answer", do you mean vehicles with electric motors, or EV's with today's battery technology? I believe, setting the fuel source aside, it is difficult to argue that the internal combustion engine is better than an electric motor on almost any metric one can think of.

For me, and possibly millions of others, EV's are already the answer. Not only does my solar array cover the house but also the Tesla as well. Even if I had to pay for the energy, the Plaid is way more fun to drive than any other vehicle I've had in my relatively long life.

 

[David_Cary]

Using an example of a completely different technology that got replaced fairly quickly isn't particularly helpful when discussing EVs.
CFL's died quickly because they weren't great and LEDs were better in nearly every way. I don't think it was supply chain environmentally damaging issues.

The mercury was always a concern for sure. Enclosing something hazardous in glass certainly is a problem. Not sure how that relates to an EV.

The right answer depends on the question of course. We have lots of competing problems in the environment to address. Lots of serious well informed people are concerned about the damage of the lifecycle of large batteries. And those serious people agree that it is still worth it for our current state of things. People using public transportation, travelling less miles and using smaller vehicles are undoubtedly better ... but also harder to implement in a short time scale.

The best arguments against EVs compared to ICEVs today would be few. One is if you make money selling oil or are somehow involved in the status quo of oil=power which most americans are by default as we are the largest oil producer in the world. The other good arguments are for an e-bike instead of an EV or an old ICE driving relatively low mileage rather than a new EV.

If you drive very short distances and need a new car, then a small ICE may make sense. It would be best financially and for the environment to buy used for sure in that situation. But there can be no environmental argument for buying a new large ICEV today. Many wiill choose that by neglecting the environment in their decision of course. But if the question has anything to do with what to purchase in the new car market taking all environmental effects into account, the answer is EVs. And presumably that is the answer we are talking about.

Of course, clouded in the whole argument is that somewhere around 50% of adult US citizens own stock in oil companies. Some people a lot more than others. The transition to EVs is hurting all auto manufacturers (excepting EV ones) and 50% of us own them too. In the current state, Tesla gains probably do not make up for the other's losses so we all lose by this. Some lose significantly more than others. Money flows into large think tanks that work to preserve the status quo.

Unless you actively work to avoid oil companies and legacy auto, you are likely an investor in those things. And even if you try, every company that has a delivery system is benefiting from subsidized oil. Heck, I have a vacation rental and my realtor for that would always say that gas prices were the best predictor of how good the rental season would be.

 

[SDRick]

htofun,

I see you gave me a "disagree" for post number 481. Was your disagreement with the whole post or something in particular?

 

[ThomasD]

I have V A and Medicare. When I go to the V A they bill my Medicare. The bad thing about Medicaid is the Government can come and seize any assets you may have had when you die. to recoup the money they spent on your care.

 

[h2ofun]

htofun,

I see you gave me a "disagree" for post number 481. Was your disagreement with the whole post or something in particular?

I do NOT believe EV's are the answer, and with such a very very small percentage of cars, for now, IMO, proves it.

 

[E90alex]

I do NOT believe EV's are the answer, and with such a very very small percentage of cars, for now, IMO, proves it.

What is the answer then? Certainly not hydrogen. And we can’t just do nothing.

 

[h2ofun]

What is the answer then? Certainly not hydrogen. And we can’t just do nothing.

No idea, but look through history, new things come up that NO one thought of.

 

[FastEddieB]

No idea, but look through history, new things come up that NO one thought of.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Or, in this case, don’t let “new things that no one has thought of” be the enemy of the good?

I’m really having trouble discerning what you’re going after here.

 

[David_Cary]

When you think of the potential arguments against EV's in 2023, you can only come up with a few things.

New batteries will be so much better in lifecycle emissions - ok but they are still EVs
Hydrogen - hard to overcome the horrible efficiency as well as other problems
No new personal cars at all - ok that is reasonable but not what I think H20fun is after
Oil consumption at current rates is not a problem (and accelerating with economic and population growth). - I think this is where H20 is at. It is really indefensible but it requires the least change and will keep him wealthy. This combined with "the sacrificie is too great" or "neither India nor China will change so it won't matter that much" is seemingly a majority opinion among elites in the US. It would be nice if he would just admit this instead of being the occassional pot-stirrer without being transparent about his opinion.

If there is another argument that I am missing - let me know. A mysterious something better will come along at some point that will be cheap and proven to have longevity and safety and low lifecycle emissions/environmental damage is going to take way too long. Especially something that isn't just another version of EV.

Medicaid is a program for the poor. I think it is perfectly reasonable that it gets paid off with a dead person's assets. Why is that so bad? It is state dependent and in my state, you have to have less than $15k in assets to get coverage (but not sure if that applies to long-term care). If Medicaid paid $100k for my long term care and then got that back by forcing the sale of my house and taking it after I died - I would not object - because I would be dead. The piper needs to be paid. Government helping that along at the end of life sounds pretty reasonable. The alternative would be my family borrowing the money and the end result is the same. But in this case potenitally greedy relatives can't refuse to pay.

 

[kpanda17]

Guys, let’s l be on rhe same page with hydrogen
In its current spin, it’s a scam as it is typically brown, using coal, natural gas to make hydrogen

If there are use cases for hydrogen, it must be green hydrogen not the brown scam
Here’s why they prefer brown, cheap

But only green is earth friendly

 

[cwerdna]

MSN is yet another barrier esp. for those who live in multi-unit dwellings. That story points to Herndon resident upset with HOA's electric vehicle charging station restrictions with a video showing context.

 

[cwerdna]

FWIW, I started a similar poll over at Log in (you need to have a free account to see the thread). The answers were quite different. I originally didn't let people change their vote and I think I didn't let them see the results before voting. But, someone wanted Never as a choice. So, I added it and let people change their vote. Here's where it stands, so far.

Keep in mind that TCF is US-centric with a few folks from Canada and a tiny # outside the US and Canada. My vote was 2040+ and I still stand by it.

Nobody voted 2027 or before. The largest bucket was 2040+ at 24.2%. 7.7% voted never.

Here's where the TiVocommunity poll stands now, esp. since I've let people change their votes until near the end of March 3, 2024.

Largest bucket is still 2040+ has grown to 25.9% and never has grown to 9.8%.

 

[David_Cary]

2018 - 140 million housing units in the US. 82 million are SFH. 58%. Now those 42% have a barrier like this HOA story but most of the time, money is their barrier.

The preference of most US population if money is not a barrier is SFH.

New cars cost a lot of money. I bought a SFH years before I bought a new car. Specifically, I bought a townhome in 1998 (just checked - $300k today - the story is more like a $500k townhome); SFH in 2000; New car 2004. I would have had the same issue possibly with an HOA when I lived in a townhome. I had never stepped in a new car dealer at that time. I drove at least an 8 year old car. This is financially logical.

Yes in NoVA and NoCA - you will see relatively wealthy people in older townhomes - but that is not the norm. There are other areas too of course.

I live in a relatively HCOLA - and what I see is Tesla's parked outside of SFH. Never seen so many before. But it is very expensive here and so wealthy people sometimes don't have garages. But the vast majority of my MSA has garages once you get above $100k income - ie new car buyers. I found an average (would have preferred median) of $124k.

I have a wealthy colleague that rents in a high-rise. Kids moved out and sold his large SFH. He showed up at work a few months ago with a Taycan. It is a modern building so I guess it just has chargers - I'll have to ask him. He is a MAGA republican who definitely doesn't care about his carbon footprint. I bet the chargers are unmetered and he enjoys the "free" charging.

I suspect less than 10% of the US has the money for a new car and lives in older multifamily/townhome. So it is a barrier for getting to 100% but it is a very small barrier in getting to 50%.

 

[winfield100]

When will EV's outsell gas, never, IMO. I do not think EV's are any answer, the complete supply chain is WAY to damaging!! Can we give one example, CFL's

@h2ofun
CFL's contained Hg (Mercury) which is toxic. try recycling them. __poor__ example

 

[winfield100]

When will EV's outsell gas, never, IMO. I do not think EV's are any answer, the complete supply chain is WAY to damaging!! Can we give one example, CFL's

@h2ofun
true dat. fossil fuels are way too expensive & damaging, find, transport, refine, transport, etc, burn once & done

manufacture your fuel from free renewable energy
your expensive lawn ornament will sit, not moving rusting with no fuel to be found anywhere

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

@h2ofun
CFL's contained Hg (Mercury) which is toxic. try recycling them. __poor__ example

Also, the amount of Mercury was reduced over time. But then we got LEDs, which are functionality better and more efficient, improving certain things like car headlights and flashlights. However, they have the major disadvantage that people now have more Christmas lights.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

@h2ofun
true dat. fossil fuels are way too expensive & damaging, find, transport, refine, transport, etc, burn once & done

manufacture your fuel from free renewable energy
your expensive lawn ornament will sit, not moving rusting with no fuel to be found anywhere

Estimated 3.2 million abandoned oil and gas wells in the USA, with a lot of them leaking. Never mind the other impacts. But, hey, mining and processing materials for EVs is terrible. Even though when we look at mining in 2022 ...

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/VCE_All_the_Metals_We_Mined_2022-Nov-14-1.jpg

And we haven't even got advanced at battery recycling yet.

The only question to ask is "When will EVs become significantly cheaper?" If it's never, we never get there. Otherwise take that date and add 5 to 10 years, because China and other countries aren't going to stop electrifying, and cheaper makes things happen really, really fast.

 

[kpanda17]

Estimated 3.2 million abandoned oil and gas wells in the USA, with a lot of them leaking. Never mind the other impacts. But, hey, mining and processing materials for EVs is terrible. Even though when we look at mining in 2022 ...

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/VCE_All_the_Metals_We_Mined_2022-Nov-14-1.jpg

And we haven't even got advanced at battery recycling yet.

The only question to ask is "When will EVs become significantly cheaper?" If it's never, we never get there. Otherwise take that date and add 5 to 10 years, because China and other countries aren't going to stop electrifying, and cheaper makes things happen really, really fast.

If Elon cannot pull off the Model 2 at $25K
And GM/Ford cannot copy and be successful
China is coming by way of Mexico and will provide
Rooting for the USA

 

[David_Cary]

Interesting that "Itsnotaboutthemoney" says it's all about the money.

It is really hard to make an aerodynamic brick be an EV for cheaper than an ICE with good range. It is fairly easy to make a sports sedan an EV for cheaper. It is also really hard to make a tiny car cheaper as an EV - but that is probably ok because there aren't that many tiny cars sold in the US.

But $7500 goes a really long way on a tiny car. It can make all the difference.

The real issue, and it is really tough, is US consumers fascination with poor aerodynamics and size. That can be legislated away but it won't be. 200 kwh batteries will take many many years to be cheaper than an ICE powertrain.

What will the turning point be? I assume it will gradually worsen and progress in other countries will be counteracted by us.

2023 saw 750,000 buy an F-150 truck with about 25,000 of them EV. This EV option is not getting cheaper anytime soon.

The thing is people wealth signal by their car purchase. China will take a while to change that. Cheaper is not what a lot of people want. Tesla does well because it is seen as expensive still - even as it is the cheapest cars in high income areas.

 

[kpanda17]

Interesting that "Itsnotaboutthemoney" says it's all about the money.

It is really hard to make an aerodynamic brick be an EV for cheaper than an ICE with good range. It is fairly easy to make a sports sedan an EV for cheaper. It is also really hard to make a tiny car cheaper as an EV - but that is probably ok because there aren't that many tiny cars sold in the US.

But $7500 goes a really long way on a tiny car. It can make all the difference.

The real issue, and it is really tough, is US consumers fascination with poor aerodynamics and size. That can be legislated away but it won't be. 200 kwh batteries will take many many years to be cheaper than an ICE powertrain.

What will the turning point be? I assume it will gradually worsen and progress in other countries will be counteracted by us.

2023 saw 750,000 buy an F-150 truck with about 25,000 of them EV. This EV option is not getting cheaper anytime soon.

The thing is people wealth signal by their car purchase. China will take a while to change that. Cheaper is not what a lot of people want. Tesla does well because it is seen as expensive still - even as it is the cheapest cars in high income areas.

Interesting to see how Tesla is hanging in there, competing inChina
But times are a changing, BYD is increasing quality and marginally beating Tesla in China in the higher end
Once they enter the low end with rhe M2 and hopefully FSD in China, it should provide a competitive edge

In the USA, once Chinese Geely/Volvo/Polestar start building EVs in the USA, they will use the fake out, not Swedish, to be accepted and have access to IRA $7500

BYD via Mexico will also gain access to IRA $7500

Then BYD and Geely will attack that “cheap” EV category
Hoping Tesla M2 will be there in time

Hard to see how anyone else will survive this

As the EU legacy manuf are struggling to survive for the same reasons

Only China knows how to make real cheap EVs
Hopefully more non chinese will follow