Are EVs dying out? Not so fast. Experts say the future is still electric as car makers pour billions into new models: “After a record year in 2023, EV sales are expected to set another record in 2024.” @NPR @camilareads https://www.npr.org/2024/02/07/1227707306/ev-electric-vehicles-sales-2024
Most vehicles are not available as an EV yet. Want a minivan - VW says this summer you can get the first one. Want a truck - has to be the Ford F150 - which is in short supply and only available as a crew cab no long box. Want a car - limited choices and all luxury (except the leaf which is very limited range)
And of course most cars are old - most car buyers don't even have as many options as the above as EVs are not yet on the used market in as great numbers.
The problem is EVs are not the answer we are all pretending they are. Moving away from the car model altogether is what we need. Offer tax credits to businesses that go full remote. Offer credits for people that get rid of their cars and/or move to a more densely populated area. This is not trickle down climate saving time. This is fucking Hail Mary, spend ourselves to the poorhouse to change things time.
How are EVs not the solution for people who need vehicles?
Everytime I hear this, the response is "we need better public transit, and EVs for all the people who can't effectively be serviced by public transit"
Which is like sure, if we had more money we could solve both, and many places are trying to solve public transit (but it's slow and expensive to do right).
EVs are part of the solution. But there are many parts to this solution. Pretending that EVs aren't needed doesn't actually help at all.
Yeah, I’m not saying they’re inherently a bad thing. But this is another greenwashing technique
We won’t buy our way out of climate change. We need drastic change. Not a shift over, but a complete turnaround. Consumerist solutions are a pipe dream, and they presuppose time we just don’t have.
In the meantime, they’re a distraction. They’re a pacifying technique from the owner class. We need a halt and a turnaround, not a slow shift toward something less harmful.
In an ideal world, yeah, we’d have the time to slow emissions through incremental change. But we are less than a handful of years away from what could very realistically be a major tipping point. And these, I’m sorry, greenwashing pacifications from business titans promising we can continue on our path with some ornamental changes just isn’t realistic. People are gullible and all too willing to take the easy out with climate change. When EV availability struggles a little bit, or the cost goes up, people just keep buying cars. I’ve seen it happen with every single friend I have that’s bought a car. They want an electric vehicle, they’re cost prohibitive or there’s a waitlist, and they all bought ICE vehicles. Continuing on with the car model is at least two steps removed from something even resembling a true step in the right direction. Pumping EVs is of course better than fighting them in favor of ICEs. But it also doubles down on a flawed system. People live forty miles from work in so many places in the US. It’s not nearly unheard of for long commutes. CHANGE THE BASE CONCEPTS, NOT JUST THE ORNAMENTS OF THIS WASTEFUL LIFESTYLE.
WFH. More condensed living. These are the base problems to which EVs are a secondary solution. We don’t have time for eating around the edges. This is my point. Drastic, radical change immediately. That’s what we need. And pacifying people with feel good changes that maintain their comfort is a fuckin cop out.
And that’s just a small part of the problem, the thrust of which is we need to radically change our habits like yesterday. Not alter buying patterns so the stock price keeps going up and we all still get to drive everywhere. Not to mention way too much of our electricity is still coming from nonrenewable sources. It’s almost like just removing ourselves from blame. We can say, “well, it’s not my fault I drive an EV.” Powered by a grid that still relies largely on natural gas and coal, with nuclear and renewables accounting for roughly 40% in the US.
Again, electric cars, in essence, aren’t a bad idea. But it’s way too little and decades too late and I believe their use is slowing and distracting from the radical change we need.
Isn’t the Pasifica Plug in famously plagued by major reliability issues, and still has only a thirty mile electric range before you might as well have gone for the cheaper version. Given no small part of a minivan’s expected use if for medium to long road trips, as well as things like shuttling a bunch of kids around after school between houses where your probably not going to have much chance to charge, I wouldn’t exsacly call it a replacement for a proper EV. Better yet, we could even get more than one possible option of which car to buy, like if two or maybe even three different companies had competing products.
While it will depend on use case, 30 miles isn’t all that much when the average US commute is 41 miles, and that’s not including that if your moving kids around town your likely going between more than just school work school home, and so will will need more range given the three for four trips on a single charge.
Say for example you start at home, you go five miles to school, another ten to work, ten back from work to school, and your out of battery even before any moving kids aroud town to friends or activities can start. Never mind that the Pasifica lacks a heat pump, so if you live in a place that gets cold your going to be spending a decent slice of that battery on heating.
The lack of competitive minivans, hatchbacks, coupes, long-bed trucks, and station wagons really hurts uptake. While crossovers are all the rage for the average consumer, EV adopters trend away from the average, and having a wide selection can make a huge difference when it comes to overcoming the price barrier or difference in capability.
Case in point, I've seen motorheads swear they'd never touch an EV with less than 500 miles of range, only to recant the moment they saw a Honda E.