Electric vehicles, the sales of which grew 52% in America last year, are not continuing that. I won’t deal with what’s been happening with Tesla, because I don’t know any more than anyone else what CEO Elon Musk is trying to do, and why they would release the Cybertruck with more bugs than a Kolkata food stand. Individual companies will come and go no matter what, and Tesla, hardly assured of continuing to lead United States sales, is not the industry.
There has
been a gap for a while, as “What electric vehicle shoppers want isn’t what’s
for sale, and it’s hurting sales: poll”
(Medora Lee, USA Today, April 3rd). I wondered, when I got a non-plug-in hybrid
as a rental two years or so ago and enjoyed full convenience along with 60
miles per gallon, why that wasn’t the direction companies wanted to
follow. Instead, in this piece, an
Edmunds study said potential buyers wanted “lower prices” (which have improved slightly
in the weeks since), “cars and SUVs, not electric pickups” with the latter
getting buyer interest in EVs far lower than for liquid fuel ones, and “EVs
from the most trusted brands,” particularly Toyota and Honda, which combined at
article time for one model selling new in America. However, as a result, “the dearth of EVs for
sale that EV shoppers want has pushed them to hybrids,” also cheaper “and ease
people’s range and charger anxieties.”
A third
well-established company has discovered that, as “Ford Slows Its Push Into
Electric Vehicles” (Neal E. Boudette, The New York Times, April 4th). It has “delayed the production of at least
two new electric cars and said it would pivot to making more hybrids.” That will mean production of its “large
electric S.U.V.” will be put off two years at at least one plant. It may indeed be doing the right thing, as
“Hybrid vehicle sales revving up as EV demand sputters” (Brock Dumas, Fox
Business, April 11th); a Kelley Blue Book editor called 2024’s
“hottest auto trend… “Hybrids – a lot more hybrids.”” Another form of discomfort hybrids do not
cause is “time anxiety,” with “parents of young children wondering how they
would have to find an extra 45 minutes in their day for recharging their EV.”
Reaction to
the Environmental Protection Agency’s March mandate for automakers to produce
higher shares of EVs starting in 2027 has come in, and it’s not positive. The Wall Street Journal editorial
response was titled “Biden’s EV Mandate Blows its Cover.” The Washington Post’s was “The best
way to get everyone into electric cars? Hint: It’s not a mandate.” A piece in USA Today was “If you like
your car, good luck keeping it. Biden's EV mandate drives change people don't
want.” And national columnist George
Will, channeling an old Ford quip about providing vehicles only black, called his
writing “Biden’s impossible dream: Any
car you want, as long as it’s an EV.”
Will named several of the points I have made in this blog, and some
more: EV battery production requires
huge amounts of mining including new facilities, there will be more large truck
trips since battery weight reduces load capacities, we can expect extra roadway
damage and additional “particulate-matter pollution” from that and necessary special
tires, there will be massive electricity consumption, EVs have extra problems
in especially cold or hot weather, and currently they have high rates of
mechanical problems.
Even beyond
bipartisan issue-raising is concern on the left, as shown in a view “Inside the
Climate Protests Hell-Bent on Stopping Tesla” (Morgan Meaker, Wired.com,
May 7th). Demonstrators have
been protesting outside a German Tesla “gigafactory,” calling company
operations “”green capitalism,” a plot by companies to appear environmentally friendly.” The activists have cited excessive mining,
“the industry’s disruption of communities in the global south,” “unsafe working
conditions,” and not only “using up local water supplies but also the potential
that the company will contaminate them.”
If EV manufacturers cannot count on environmentalists’ support, they may
end up with no group of core adherents at all.
A recent news
item concerned a new set of import duties, as described in, among other places,
“Biden announces 100% tariff on Chinese-made electric vehicles” (The
Guardian, May 14th).
There are plenty of things wrong with tariffs, and one here is to raise
the prices of the cheapest EVs, further discouraging people from making that
transition. Per “Don’t Slam the Door on
Expensive Chinese Electric Vehicles” (Gernot Wagner and Conor Walsh, The New
York Times, May 15th), “a recent survey” determined that 83% of
US EV “drivers” were in the top half of national household income, with 57% with
over $100,000. Those numbers will not
drop much soon.
Are electric
vehicles moving in the right direction?
Not now. It would be wrong to say
they are in reverse – sales are still increasing, but they’re heading for a
stall. Do we want to almost require them
within a handful of years? It’s hard to
say yes. We won’t be ready, and the
chances are increasing that we won’t during our lifetimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment