You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars

[easyrider]

Last I checked - Tesla is an American auto brand (among other tech), and is profitably manufacturing and selling EVs since 2019. Just because the legacy auto manufacturers can't figure it out, doesn't mean it's not possible. Sometimes progress requires rebirth. Many of the legacy auto manufacturers will not survive this transition - and making excuses that the transition should not occur because 100 year old companies can't figure it out - when Tesla/Rivian/BYD/others have already figured it out and are actually doing it - doesn't pass the sniff test IMHO. Tesla is competing just fine in the automotive market from all accounts, and the US/EU are so scared of the Chinese automotive brands that they are enacting tariffs in a failed attempt to prevent progress.

I guess it kind of depends on what you mean by the last time you checked Tesla. If you check now you might notice that Tesla's sales have been declining, with a 13% drop in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the last year. Tesla's EV sales share in the US has also been dropping, from 79.4% in 2020 to around 55% in 2023. Tesla's profits fell in the first quarter of 2024, to $1.13 billion, compared to $2.51 billion in 2023. Tesla's share price has fallen by more than a 25% since the start of 2024. Tesla has announced thousands of job cuts, including 10% of its global workforce.

Rivian lost $5.74 billion in 2023, even with $4.43 billion in revenue. In the first quarter of 2024, Rivian made about $1.20 billion in revenue but lost over $1.48 billion from operations. Rivian isn't expected to make a profit until 2027 and even then it would be only breaking even if it happens at all. Rivian is expected to loose another $8 billion before 2027 and many things could tank the expectations of profitability in 2027.

Even though there are tariffs on Chineese ev's, these tariffs are often circumvented by sending products to Mexico to be assembled for North American markets. Mexico allows Chinese ev's into Mexico so you could go there to try one out. I think you wouldn't like the Chinese EV.

Honestly, most people could care less about what anyone drives with the exception of those that think they are saving the planet by going to EV which is a false dichotomy given the facts that the ev's carbon footprint isn't too much different the an ice vehicle all things considered and that driving ev's doesn't create a reduction of greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere all things considered. CO2 is just one of the anthropogenic greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere and while the talking points are always about the release into the atmosphere the talking points never discuss that CO2 does absorb into the terrestrial and hydrosphere as a replenishing nutrient.

Bill

 

[HitchHiker71]

I guess it kind of depends on what you mean by the last time you checked Tesla. If you check now you might notice that Tesla's sales have been declining, with a 13% drop in the first quarter of 2024 compared to the last year. Tesla's EV sales share in the US has also been dropping, from 79.4% in 2020 to around 55% in 2023. Tesla's profits fell in the first quarter of 2024, to $1.13 billion, compared to $2.51 billion in 2023. Tesla's share price has fallen by more than a 25% since the start of 2024. Tesla has announced thousands of job cuts, including 10% of its global workforce.

This is all expected and baked into the Tesla business plan - since 2018 - which documents a falling market share down to roughly 20% of the market. This is tracking according to documented plans as more automakers bring BEVs to market. Since we're seeing more consumer caution, auto sales in general are pulling back a bit - so naturally this is going to impact the market leader in the BEV space the most. It's also why the legacy automakers are pulling back, at least in part, on their BEV plans, because of softening consumer demand for all vehicles, coupled with the fact that legacy automakers drastically underestimated the complexity involved in manufacturing BEVs at scale profitably similar to Tesla. Tesla is primarily a nextgen manufacturing behemoth that has built an entirely new (gigacasting) modernized manufacturing methodology that, to date, only the Chinese have been able to mimic. Any automotive manufacturer that doesn't make this transition, ultimately will fail as this transition proceeds forward - or will become a husk of what they are today.

While Tesla's market share is decreasing due to more competition and more consumer choice - which is a good thing all around - there's no arguing with the stats I posted above - that overall BEVs continue to sell more units year over year - even if the rate of market share increase and/or rate of year over year sales increase isn't as fast as many hoped. This is a complex transition with a ton of moving parts, so it is very difficult to predict future demand, not to mention macro conditions and impacts.

Tesla lays off roughly 10-15% of the employment force every five years or so - this is a conscious choice by Elon to eliminate duplication and accelerate innovation. No one can really argue his methods don't work based upon his impact on the world's transition toward renewable energy at scale.

Rivian lost $5.74 billion in 2023, even with $4.43 billion in revenue. In the first quarter of 2024, Rivian made about $1.20 billion in revenue but lost over $1.48 billion from operations. Rivian isn't expected to make a profit until 2027 and even then it would be only breaking even if it happens at all. Rivian is expected to loose another $8 billion before 2027 and many things could tank the expectations of profitability in 2027.

Rivian should reach per unit gross margin profitability by year end 2024 - they shut down their entire factory for month earlier this year to modernize their manufacturing plant and improve costs roughly 30% of costs on a per unit basis. That makes the R1T/R1S reach per unit profitability. This doesn't mean the overall business will be profitable - but the estimate at this time for overall low gross margin business profitability is mid-2025. I am a Rivian stockholder and track this very closely as a result. Not sure where you are getting your data from?

Even though there are tariffs on Chineese ev's, these tariffs are often circumvented by sending products to Mexico to be assembled for North American markets. Mexico allows Chinese ev's into Mexico so you could go there to try one out. I think you wouldn't like the Chinese EV.

No idea since I've never been in one.

Honestly, most people could care less about what anyone drives with the exception of those that think they are saving the planet by going to EV which is a false dichotomy given the facts that the ev's carbon footprint isn't too much different the an ice vehicle all things considered and that driving ev's doesn't create a reduction of greenhouse gases in the upper atmosphere all things considered. CO2 is just one of the anthropogenic greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere and while the talking points are always about the release into the atmosphere the talking points never discuss that CO2 does absorb into the terrestrial and hydrosphere as a replenishing nutrient.

Bill

It's not just about the initial vehicle carbon footprint - when you take into account that BEVs are 95% recyclable - including the battery packs - this argument you are making becomes moot. Last I checked, carbon released into the atmosphere from ICE vehicles cannot be recycled - ever. Tesla already recycles battery packs at scale today. Many of the battery packs that are used to replace failed battery packs in older Tesla vehicles under warranty (or outside of warranty at cost to the owner), use recycled battery pack materials. The point being, the whole mining argument regarding carbon footprint becomes very different when you take into account that the primary fuel storage mechanism (the battery pack), is 95% recyclable - which means you now only need 5% net new mined materials to produce a "new" battery pack for either a new BEV, or to greatly extend the useful life of a used BEV.

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

This is all expected and baked into the Tesla business plan - Tesla's plan - since 2018 - documents a falling market share down to roughly 20% of the market. This is tracking according to documented plans as more automakers bring BEVs to market. Since we're seeing more consumer caution, auto sales in general are pulling back a bit - so naturally this is going to impact the market leader in the BEV space the most. It's also why the legacy automakers are pulling back, at least in part, on their BEV plans, because of softening consumer demand for all vehicles, coupled with the fact that legacy automakers drastically underestimated the complexity involved in manufacturing BEVs at scale profitably similar to Tesla. Tesla is primarily a nextgen manufacturing behemoth that has built an entirely new (gigacasting) modernized manufacturing methodology that, to date, only the Chinese have been able to mimic. Any automotive manufacturer that doesn't make this transition, ultimately will fail as this transition proceeds forward - or become a husk of what they are today.

While Tesla's market share is decreasing due to more competition and more consumer choice - which is a good thing all around - there's no arguing with the stats I posted above - that overall BEVs continue to sell more units year over year - even if the rate of market share increase and/or rate of year over year sales increase isn't as fast as many hoped. This is a complex transition with a ton of moving parts, so it is very difficult to predict future demand, not to mention macro conditions and impacts.

Tesla lays off roughly 10-15% of the employment force every five years or so - this is a conscious choice by Elon to eliminate duplication and accelerate innovation. No one can really argue his methods don't work based upon his impact on the world's transition toward renewable energy at scale.

Rivian should reach per unit gross margin profitability by year end 2024 - they shut down their entire factory for month earlier this year to modernize their manufacturing plant and improve per unit costs roughly 30% of costs on a per unit basis. That makes the R1T/R1S reach per unit profitability. This doesn't mean the overall business will be profitable - but the estimate at this time for overall low gross margin business profitability is mid-2025. I am a Rivian stockholder and track this very closely as a result. Not sure where you are getting your data from?

No idea since I've never been in one.

It's not just about the initial vehicle carbon footprint - when you take into account that BEVs are 95% recyclable - including the battery packs - this argument you are making becomes moot. Last I checked, carbon released into the atmosphere from ICE vehicles cannot be recycled - ever. Tesla already recycles battery packs at scale today. Many of the battery packs that are used to replace failed battery packs in older Tesla vehicles under warranty (or outside of warranty at cost to the owner), use recycled battery pack materials. The point being, the whole mining argument regarding carbon footprint becomes very different when you take into account that the primary fuel storage mechanism (the battery pack), is 95% recyclable - which means you now only need 5% net new mined materials to produce a "new" battery pack for either a new BEV, or to greatly extend the useful life of a used BEV.

"Last I checked, carbon released into the atmosphere from ICE vehicles cannot be recycled - ever. "

Utter nonsense. Ever heard of plants?

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

I'm philosophically neutral about BEVs, personally. If they had long enough range for my purposes. If they had as many charger sites available as I see Gasoline stations. If the battery packs lasted a long time, and were stable. (The 15 year pack sounds good in a durability sense). I'd have no problem with owning a BEV. The long term repair cost should be less, electronics excluded, as they have many fewer moving parts, and those could be made more durable,

But as Captain Seas said in the Doc Savage movie, things are not the same. So I will wait years until they are at least similar. My ICE car keeps chugging along. . .

 

[LannyPC]

Is there anyone here who owns a BEV but does not have battery charging ability at home? The building where we live does not have charging. If I were to buy a BEV, I would have to rely on public charging stations and the one at work.

I'm just wondering if there is anyone in this situation and how things work out for you having to rely on places away from home to charge your vehicle.

 

[easyrider]

I am a Rivian stockholder and track this very closely as a result. Not sure where you are getting your data from?

You could Google this and find that Rivian looses about $32,000 on every EV they produce or that there is no stock pile of parts to repair Rivians.

I did look at "The 4th Turning" and it is definitely a piece of pseudo scientific nonsense. An accurate idea of observable human cycles would be " hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times".

Bill

Rivian Is Still Losing More Than $32,000 On Every EV Sold

Good morning! It’s Wednesday, August 7, 2024, and this is The Morning Shift, your daily roundup of the top automotive headlines from around the world, in one place. Here are the important stories you need to know.

autos.yahoo.com

 

[HitchHiker71]

I'm philosophically neutral about BEVs, personally. If they had long enough range for my purposes. If they had as many charger sites available as I see Gasoline stations. If the battery packs lasted a long time, and were stable. (The 15 year pack sounds good in a durability sense). I'd have no problem with owning a BEV. The long term repair cost should be less, electronics excluded, as they have many fewer moving parts, and those could be made more durable,

But as Captain Seas said in the Doc Savage movie, things are not the same. So I will wait years until they are at least similar. My ICE car keeps chugging along. . .

The packs in most consumer vehicles today are designed to last the lifetime of the vehicle (not the warranty - two different things). The vast majority of 2012-2014 Tesla MS vehicles are still using their original battery packs today - and these are the oldest vehicles Tesla made - so one could argue these packs would be the least reliable compared to newer/current packs that have many lessons learned and newer technologies embedded within them. You don't need as many gas stations when most consumers will charge from home and that alone covers 90% of their daily driving. We only use public chargers maybe once a month when we travel for weekend getaways - outside of that - 100% of our charging occurs overnight at home - my wife wakes up to a full tank every day for all intents and purposes. The packs are much more stable than ICE vehicles - as the fire data clearly demonstrates - and let's put this whole fire argument into real world perspective - how many of us have literally ever experienced a vehicle fire throughout our entire lives? I'd guess almost none of us. They are exceedingly rare regardless of the type of vehicle in question. They are even less likely for BEVs as the stats clearly demonstrate - so why does anyone even bring this up? It's just a talking point really. BTW this isn't aimed at you - just the larger talking point about pack stability that keeps coming up in threads like this.

Lastly, what is "long enough range for your purposes?" The new Tesla Model 3 Long Range, was just tested here:

Out of Spec ran a three year old M3 (previous model) against the new M3 model in their real world constant 70mph test. The three year old M3 went 296 miles before dying. They literally drive from 100% charge until the car dies on the road in these tests. The new M3 went 370 miles (way above EPA ratings). That's pretty impressive IMHO - at a constant 70mph on the highway will little to no regen braking. 370 miles is more than enough for most folks even when taking longer road trips. BEVs aren't for everyone, but a lot of the FUD talking points are just that, FUD, and oftentimes parroted by people who have literally never owned or even driven a BEV in the real world. Experience counts in this world.

 

[HitchHiker71]

You could Google this and find that Rivian looses about $32,000 on every EV they produce or that there is no stock pile of parts to repair Rivians.

Yes, that's what happens when you shut down your entire factory for 1/3 of the quarter (Q2) - your costs go up while you're not producing any product - which the article you linked to clearly states. Fortunately, none of the data in that article takes into account the recent factory shutdown since the vehicles Rivian was selling through the end of Q2 were existing inventory vehicles built up in advance of the factory shutdown to ensure inventory was available for sale while the factory retooling was taking place - which means all of the vehicles sold through the end of Q2 had the same much higher cost basis. The cost improvements will be reflected in Q3 and Q4 of this year. Let's wait and see what Q3 looks like and revisit this topic next month - I think you'll be eating your words here with that in mind.

Parts availability is a known issue for most BEV manufacturers - it's an early adopter issue for every manufacturer in this segment from what I've observed - including the legacy auto manufacturers.

I did look at "The 4th Turning" and it is definitely a piece of pseudo scientific nonsense. An accurate idea of observable human cycles would be " hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create hard times".

Bill

Rivian Is Still Losing More Than $32,000 On Every EV Sold

Good morning! It’s Wednesday, August 7, 2024, and this is The Morning Shift, your daily roundup of the top automotive headlines from around the world, in one place. Here are the important stories you need to know.

autos.yahoo.com

One man's trash is another man's treasure - and if you'd actually read the entire series - there's a ton of data behind the generations analysis that is pretty compelling. It's also worth pointing out that the quote you used - also has four archetypes and four stages - just like the book series you claim has no validity. To each his own of course.

 

[easyrider]

BEVs aren't for everyone, but a lot of the FUD talking points are just that, FUD, and oftentimes parroted by people who have literally never owned or even driven a BEV in the real world. Experience counts in this world.

Have you considered that most people can differentiate the problems versus the benefits without having to experience them first hand ? Your explanation of fud is a bit condescending considering that no one cares if anyone drives an ev. If you are happy with your Tesla I am happy for you.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

It's also worth pointing out that the quote you used - also has four archetypes and four stages - just like the book series you claim has no validity

I said it is pseudo science. Like most pseudo science there are portions that are valid. I would also point out, that what you are pointing out, isn't so much a generational ideology but more of a leadership ideology.

Bill

 

[emeryjre]

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/us-opens-probe-into-more-than-781000-stellantis-vehicles-over-underhood-fires-2024-09-09/

ICE vehicle fires and their impact
In the last six months there have been two incidents of ICE vehicle fires impacting friends and family

First incident burned down a house in the early morning hours
By the grace of god, none of the six family members were injured and were able to escape before the entire house burnt down
Cause was traced to an F150 Ford Pickup parked in the garage

Second incident was 2021 Jeep Grand Cherokee about 2 weeks ago
Vehicle had been purchased a week earlier by my niece
Her prior vehicle had been totaled by hitting a deer
Vehicle was purchased at a Chrysler dealership
Had less than 20K miles and was in excellent condition
The dealer was located over 200 miles from home and she had found it via the internet
A week after purchase, the vehicle suffered an underhood fire while she was driving
She had a fire extinguisher in the car and one of the passengers put out the fire with nobody injured
The car will be out of service for at least 3 months due to lack of repair parts
Chrysler would not provide a loaner during this process
This story will not make headlines
If it had been an EV
Likely would have been a headline somewhere

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

Is there anyone here who owns a BEV but does not have battery charging ability at home? The building where we live does not have charging. If I were to buy a BEV, I would have to rely on public charging stations and the one at work.

I'm just wondering if there is anyone in this situation and how things work out for you having to rely on places away from home to charge your vehicle.

LannyPC, you are assuming that the car will only be used to and from the home. That assumption is a non-started from my perspective. If I want to go on a 300 mile road trip (one way), home charging is not an option.

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

The packs in most consumer vehicles today are designed to last the lifetime of the vehicle (not the warranty - two different things). The vast majority of 2012-2014 Tesla MS vehicles are still using their original battery packs today - and these are the oldest vehicles Tesla made - so one could argue these packs would be the least reliable compared to newer/current packs that have many lessons learned and newer technologies embedded within them. You don't need as many gas stations when most consumers will charge from home and that alone covers 90% of their daily driving. We only use public chargers maybe once a month when we travel for weekend getaways - outside of that - 100% of our charging occurs overnight at home - my wife wakes up to a full tank every day for all intents and purposes. The packs are much more stable than ICE vehicles - as the fire data clearly demonstrates - and let's put this whole fire argument into real world perspective - how many of us have literally ever experienced a vehicle fire throughout our entire lives? I'd guess almost none of us. They are exceedingly rare regardless of the type of vehicle in question. They are even less likely for BEVs as the stats clearly demonstrate - so why does anyone even bring this up? It's just a talking point really. BTW this isn't aimed at you - just the larger talking point about pack stability that keeps coming up in threads like this.

Lastly, what is "long enough range for your purposes?" The new Tesla Model 3 Long Range, was just tested here:

Out of Spec ran a three year old M3 (previous model) against the new M3 model in their real world constant 70mph test. The three year old M3 went 296 miles before dying. They literally drive from 100% charge until the car dies on the road in these tests. The new M3 went 370 miles (way above EPA ratings). That's pretty impressive IMHO - at a constant 70mph on the highway will little to no regen braking. 370 miles is more than enough for most folks even when taking longer road trips. BEVs aren't for everyone, but a lot of the FUD talking points are just that, FUD, and oftentimes parroted by people who have literally never owned or even driven a BEV in the real world. Experience counts in this world.

All those models mentioned are running NMC batteries, which deteriorate more rapidly when either they are charged to 100% (least deterioration at 80%) and also at being run down to 0% (least deterioration at 20%), LiFePO4 (lithium iron phosphate) don't have this problem, but store less energy.

I've been tracking battery technology for years.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Have you considered that most people can differentiate the problems versus the benefits without having to experience them first hand ? Your explanation of fud is a bit condescending considering that no one cares if anyone drives an ev. If you are happy with your Tesla I am happy for you.

Bill

That’s certainly true and I agree to some extent - but real world experience matters regardless. At the same time statistics indicate that the average consumer doesn’t drive more than 165 miles one way more than one week per year. That means the other 51 weeks of the year make the whole range anxiety issue moot. Again, these are averages. Even with the one week per year, most folks still don’t drive more than 250 miles in one day.

However, the basis of this thread was largely FUD, and most of the posts about BEVs on this board prove to be FUD at least in part, and I will continue to point out the FUD when such posts occur. Perhaps if no one cares then posts like this wouldn’t occur in the first place? So clearly someone cares, despite your claim otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HitchHiker71]

All those models mentioned are running NMC batteries, which deteriorate more rapidly when either they are charged to 100% (least deterioration at 80%) and also at being run down to 0% (least deterioration at 20%), LiFePO4 (lithium iron phosphate) don't have this problem, but store less energy.

I've been tracking battery technology for years.

Actually NMC batteries aren't inherently less reliable - it all depends on the design of the cell really - but there are certain inherent differences between NMC and LFP without a doubt. Most of the Tesla base models now use LFP packs. They are considerably less expensive to manufacture, have almost no combustion risk when compared to NMC packs, experience less degradation over time (typically about 10% within the first few years and then the pack levels off until it expires), and have much higher cycle lives (3000-4000 cycles as opposed to 1000-1500 cycles for NMC packs), and are designed to charge to 100% for daily usage.

You are correct that NMC packs are best when kept between 20-80% - the Tesla in-vehicle software tells the owner this right on the charging menu - however what most people don't understand that don't own BEVs - is that this isn't a hard and fast rule and really only applies to daily usage (as is also clearly stated in the in-vehicle Tesla charging menu). It's fine to charge up to 100% periodically as needed when traveling longer distances, in fact it's actually recommended to do this at least once a month in the Tesla vehicle manuals to ensure the BMS works well and stays in good shape and manages the actual pack energy properly. We set our MY LR at 70% SOC for daily driving - which is more than enough for work commute and various errands that my wife does day to day. Typically she will consume between 20-30% of the pack daily depending on usage. This includes preconditioning prior to leaving work, temperature management during the day on hot days (keeps the cabin under 100 degrees at all times), etc. Perfection for a NMC pack is to average 50% SOC - ours is averaging about 55-60% for daily usage - which gives my wife some wiggle room and won't materially impact the life of the pack.

It's also not well understood with NMC packs that it's fine to go up to 100% or down below 20% as long as you don't leave the pack in either an overcharged or undercharged condition for more than 24-48 hours ideally (in other words don't leave it sitting at 100% or 1% for days or weeks at a time). Many people seem to be under the impression that you literally should never exceed 100% and that if/when you do - you should only do so for minutes or maybe an hour or so - which really isn't true. That said, at least with Tesla - it's really easy to set the charging to 100% and have it hit that 100% right before we are scheduled to leave for a big trip - right in the mobile app while sitting comfortably where-ever we happen to be at the time.

One of the niceties of LFP packs is that your effective driving range for daily usage is higher - since you can charge to 100% daily - which means you literally can have a full tank of gas every day when you leave - the only downside is you lose a bit of maximum range for long trips - but for the vast majority of consumers, at least statistically - having that extra 30-50 miles of range really doesn't make any real difference.

 

[HitchHiker71]

LannyPC, you are assuming that the car will only be used to and from the home. That assumption is a non-started from my perspective. If I want to go on a 300 mile road trip (one way), home charging is not an option.

Well - you can charge to 100% for your trip leaving home - and likely charge up once to make the 300 mile journey and have some semblance of charge left when you arrive at your destination, assuming destination charging isn't available or there's no plugs available at your destination that can be used with a mobile charger (even a 110v plug gives 3-4 miles per hour of charge worst case - or 30-40 miles of charge overnight after arriving at your destination).

When I'm asking about whether someone should seriously consider BEV ownership - in general - my recommendation is don't buy a BEV unless you can charge at home at a less expensive rate than what you'd pay for gas for an equivalent vehicle. For us in our area - it's a no brainer since we enjoy relatively low per kwh rates - but that's not the case for everyone - I know folks in Cali that pay upwards of 50 cents per kwh at home - which is what I'd pay in our area for public L3 charging for example (Tesla Supercharger rates in our area however around 40-50 cents per kwh at present). The issue with always using public L3 charging is that it's typically considerably more expensive than off-peak residential per kwh rates and most L2 public charger rates. So you pay a lot more to charge your BEV if you're only ever using public L3 chargers. Do you have public L2 chargers in your area that you could use? There are more public L2 chargers than most people realize. @LannyPC I see you are from BC - so I'm not familiar with BC charging infrastructure, rates, comparative residential rates, etc. - and BC is a huge area - so I'd do the math/homework to see whether or not it would be worth consideration.

 

[easyrider]

That’s certainly true and I agree to some extent - but real world experience matters regardless. At the same time statistics indicate that the average consumer doesn’t drive more than 165 miles one way more than one week per year. That means the other 51 weeks of the year make the whole range anxiety issue moot. Again, these are averages. Even with the one week per year, most folks still don’t drive more than 250 miles in one day.

However, the basis of this thread was largely FUD, and most of the posts about BEVs on this board prove to be FUD at least in part, and I will continue to point out the FUD when such posts occur. Perhaps if no one cares then posts like this wouldn’t occur in the first place? So clearly someone cares, despite your claim otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I doubt that real world experience matters regarding Tesla's because even though a Tesla is a nice car, it's still only a car. A car that depreciates quickly. The sedan market is about dead because no one really wants them. Making an expensive EV sedan doesn't really change the sentiment. It's still a sedan.

Like I said earlier, if your happy with it I'm happy for you. What others like regarding vehicles is their choice.

The thread is about " you're being lied to about electric cars". To me this means lies told in support of ev's so I think the claim of fud, considering the topic, is unwarranted. What does " you're being lied to about electric cars" you ?

Bill

 

[Ralph Sir Edward]

Well - you can charge to 100% for your trip leaving home - and likely charge up once to make the 300 mile journey and have some semblance of charge left when you arrive at your destination, assuming destination charging isn't available or there's no plugs available at your destination that can be used with a mobile charger (even a 110v plug gives 3-4 miles per hour of charge worst case - or 30-40 miles of charge overnight after arriving at your destination).

When I'm asking about whether someone should seriously consider BEV ownership - in general - my recommendation is don't buy a BEV unless you can charge at home at a less expensive rate than what you'd pay for gas for an equivalent vehicle. For us in our area - it's a no brainer since we enjoy relatively low per kwh rates - but that's not the case for everyone - I know folks in Cali that pay upwards of 50 cents per kwh at home - which is what I'd pay in our area for public L3 charging for example (Tesla Supercharger rates in our area however around 40-50 cents per kwh at present). The issue with always using public L3 charging is that it's typically considerably more expensive than off-peak residential per kwh rates and most L2 public charger rates. So you pay a lot more to charge your BEV if you're only ever using public L3 chargers. Do you have public L2 chargers in your area that you could use? There are more public L2 chargers than most people realize. @LannyPC I see you are from BC - so I'm not familiar with BC charging infrastructure, rates, comparative residential rates, etc. - and BC is a huge area - so I'd do the math/homework to see whether or not it would be worth consideration.

Sigh. You viewpoint is using a car for a daily commuter vehicle. To me, that is a unwanted straightjacket. As a Texan, I am used to "going yonder" when and if I feel like it. (and yonder can be a far ways away, indeed. As a travel oriented site, getting the "wild hare" and boogieing should not be an alien concept.). With an ICE, this is no problem, there are a wide variety of refueling stations, everywhere; and almost always with no waiting (and less than 5 minutes to fuel). Despite the growth of charging station, I have no confidence I can do that without lots of extra time and effort, in advance (where is the charging station? I've never been to that area, where's the map? Is there a line? Do the chargers work there? Ect.)

I am not an urbanite, both by culture and preference.

 

[Brett]

I doubt that real world experience matters regarding Tesla's because even though a Tesla is a nice car, it's still only a car. A car that depreciates quickly. The sedan market is about dead because no one really wants them. Making an expensive EV sedan doesn't really change the sentiment. It's still a sedan.

Like I said earlier, if your happy with it I'm happy for you. What others like regarding vehicles is their choice.

The thread is about " you're being lied to about electric cars". To me this means lies told in support of ev's so I think the claim of fud, considering the topic, is unwarranted. What does " you're being lied to about electric cars" you ?

Bill

You ask why does this thread exist?

why???


The oil and gas and coal industry are supporting their .................... "________ " !

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/fossil-fuels-received-5-9-trillion-in-subsidies-in-2020-report-finds

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_depletion_allowance

 

[dagger1]

You ask why does this thread exist?

why???


The oil and gas and coal industry are supporting their .................... "________ " !


View attachment 99445

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/fossil-fuels-received-5-9-trillion-in-subsidies-in-2020-report-finds

View attachment 99446

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_depletion_allowance

Let’s see an itemization of those $5T in “subsidies”. Is it that they are responsible for all hurricanes, typhoons, tropical storms,fires, I.e. all natural disasters….

 

[Brett]

Let’s see an itemization of those $5T in “subsidies”. Is it that they are responsible for all hurricanes, typhoons, tropical storms,fires, I.e. all natural disasters….

Wikipedia is a conspiracy !!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_subsidies#:~:text=11 External links-,Definition,in a much larger total.



(hint: old depletion allowance)

 

[dagger1]

Wikipedia is a conspiracy !!


View attachment 99454

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_subsidies#:~:text=11 External links-,Definition,in a much larger total.



(hint: old depletion allowance)

Debunking Myths About Federal Oil & Gas Subsidies

In any presidential election year it is inevitable that candidates on both sides of the political spectrum will begin hailing or bashing tax breaks, subsidies, and regulations throughout the US business landscape.

www.forbes.com

From Forbes

 

[dagger1]

Wikipedia is a conspiracy !!


View attachment 99454

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_subsidies#:~:text=11 External links-,Definition,in a much larger total.



(hint: old depletion allowance)

“Depletion Allowance ($1 billion subsidy – low estimate is $900 million) The depletion allowance allows companies to treat reserves in the ground as a capitalized asset that may be written down by 15% per year. The government only allows the “subsidy” for independent producers. Integrated oil companies such as Exxon, BP etc. are not allowed the exemption. Companies across the US are allowed a depreciation deduction for taxation purposes. The oil & gas industry should not be an exception.”

FORBES

 

[dagger1]

Debunking Myths About Federal Oil & Gas Subsidies

In any presidential election year it is inevitable that candidates on both sides of the political spectrum will begin hailing or bashing tax breaks, subsidies, and regulations throughout the US business landscape.

www.forbes.com

From Forbes

And:

“Now let’s analyze what the oil & gas sector pays in taxes. In 2012 the top two corporations paying federal taxes in the US were ExxonMobil and Chevron paying a combined total of $45.2 billion. On average, the industry pays a 45% tax rate when all state, federal, and foreign taxes are totaled up. By comparison the Healthcare Industry pays a total rate of 35% and the Pharmaceuticals pay an estimated rate of 21%. Based upon these numbers it’s hard to believe which business sector is criticized the most for “subsidies”.”

FORBES

 

[dagger1]

Wikipedia is a conspiracy !!


View attachment 99454

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_subsidies#:~:text=11 External links-,Definition,in a much larger total.



(hint: old depletion allowance)

FYI, ALL other industries (no matter what size) get a “depreciation” tax break. Same as a “depletion” tax break SMALL Oil/Gas/Mining companies get (not major companies as stated above.