Electric Cars: Can they finally become popular in the United States?

[bryan995]

There are threads here on an increasing basis where people want to trade in their perfectly good ICEs for new EVs because they think they're automatically better for the environment. It's like the recent memes shared in this thread that are at best misguided.

I just wanted to push back on that type of thinking a bit. EVs can certainly be good. There are some coming out that I find really desirable. But they're not just a couple of wires and some laptop batteries like so many people believe. They still require lots of resources to manufacture, including some that people don't readily consider. Consumption is bad for the environment, and anything that increases consumption is going to take a long time to payoff, if it ever does. So everybody here rushing into long range EVs might be misguided in the bigger picture. Keeping existing stuff going is pretty much always going to be better environmentally than being responsible for the creation of new stuff, even if the new stuff is more efficient.

This assumes that when a person trades in their working ICE for an EV, the ICE is sunk in the middle of the ocean and never seen again.  99% of the time someone else buys that vehicle, and continues to use it.
This is how the economy works.  There are lots of trickle down effects.  So moving from the ICE to the EV is not entirely wasteful, it prevented that other person from buying a new ICE/EV on their own, no?

[StashingAway]

This assumes that when a person trades in their working ICE for an EV, the ICE is sunk in the middle of the ocean and never seen again.  99% of the time someone else buys that vehicle, and continues to use it.

It's actually 95% of the time. 5% of the total vehicle stock is scrapped each year.

This is how the economy works.  There are lots of trickle down effects.  So moving from the ICE to the EV is not entirely wasteful, it prevented that other person from buying a new ICE/EV on their own, no?

It's not entirely wasteful in a vacuum. It is very wasteful, relative to the other opportunities those resources can be used. It's not entirely wasteful to burn a pile of potatoes, after all, it gives off heat. But it is when you consider that those potatoes could be eaten.

[StashingAway]

Ok so ban all plastics.  Now what?  Do you have a better polymer we should be using?  Its so very easy to strawman your way through life and only point out the negatives.  What is your solution? That works for 7B humans?  Of all income classes.

No one is saying to ban all plastics. No one. It's not even directly part of the conversation, just an example of how the promises of a technology don't usually include negative externalizes, some of which are irreversible and quite serious. Plastics can still be fine, we just need to have a serious look at the accounting of their benefits vs. burdens.

Bus will never work in non-dense citires.  Do you want to force all humans into dense sky-scrapers, with an assigned 48sqft per child, and 96sqft per adult .. + 12sqft for the dog?  We have public transport no? Very few opt to use it, unless forced.

Yes, the main point is that suburban sprawl is unsustainable (both financially and environmentally). Suburban sprawl that was almost entirely driven by vehicles and the auto industry. You can have very walkable/bikable and puclic transport-able small towns- they don't have to be dense packed cities. They don't exist in the US because of zoning regulations (can't walk to a restaurant from your house if it's literally not allowed to be build in a residential area).

EV taxis + FSD could help.  Public or private ownership, but vehicles that operate 24/7.  I'd personally buy 10 more tesla vehicles if Elon can bring that idea to fruition.

Yeah, more of the same. Doesn't solve the 1-person-per-2 ton vehicle issue.

All I know is that I've done part, to the best ability that I can at the present time.  I produce 22,000kwh of electricity per year via solar, and have 2 EVs.  I an NET negative on the CA grid. You are welcome.

So why are you so resistant to hearing that there are other options? If you are making genuinely your best effort, then no one is pointing a finger directly at you. Although you are coming off a bit like the Prius owners from South Park. None of this is your personal doing, it is just part of the great chug of civilization. We can do our best to point that effort in better directions, and if this is the first you're hearing about this it's totally understandable that it's overwhelming.

I, too, had some initial push back on Not Just Bikes, because his solution was just to move to Amsterdam. F That. I don't run from problems... I have family and friends and a life here. Which is why I want to make it better. It feels insulting to do your best and learn that much of it is a sunk cost.

But I'd highly recommend reading some Strong Towns content or NJB. It is very good stuff that could very well help you make good life decisions (similar to MMM).

Thanks for taking up the solar panels that could be used for a hospital and the batteries that could be used for 100 ebikes ;)

[JLee]

But I'd highly recommend reading some Strong Towns content or NJB. It is very good stuff that could very well help you make good life decisions (similar to MMM).

Thanks for taking up the solar panels that could be used for a hospital and the batteries that could be used for 100 ebikes ;)

MMM himself bought a new EV a few years ago.  Shame on him for using up e-bike batteries, aye?

[GuitarStv]

Ok so ban all plastics.  Now what?  Do you have a better polymer we should be using?  Its so very easy to strawman your way through life and only point out the negatives.  What is your solution? That works for 7B humans?  Of all income classes.

I'd like to take a moment of contemplation that your first sentence here is a straw man.  (I never suggested banning all plastics.)  Your fourth accuses me of using a straw man, which I absolutely have not done.

In response to the less ridiculous parts . . . I'd strongly suggest that we need to change the way we use plastic, and there are many ways to start doing that.

Manufacturers who produce recyclable plastic should be charged an amount for anything they produce (like a bottle return).  If they recycle the plastic, they can get the fee back.  Manufacturers who make non-recyclable plastic should be paying a higher fee.

Heavy plastic packaging on everything . . . needs to stop.  It never made sense to begin with.  Plastic straws, plastic forks, plastic bags . . . there's so much of this crap that's unnecessary and truly wasteful.  Make manufacturers (and therefore consumers) pay for this and we can end an awful lot of it.

Bus will never work in non-dense citires.  Do you want to force all humans into dense sky-scrapers, with an assigned 48sqft per child, and 96sqft per adult .. + 12sqft for the dog?  We have public transport no? Very few opt to use it, unless forced.

What happened to your policy of not only pointing out the negatives?  :P

The reason that people don't use public transportation more, is that it usually sucks here in North America.  There are better ways to implement and run public transit.  But to do a lot of them we need to stop pretending that it's normal and sustainable to build and maintain the massive amounts of our infrastructure purely dedicated to private automobiles.

Things become impossible only when people are unwilling to consider necessary changes.  And I get it.  Change is different.  It can be scary.

EV taxis + FSD could help.  Public or private ownership, but vehicles that operate 24/7.  I'd personally buy 10 more tesla vehicles if Elon can bring that idea to fruition.

I dunno.  That's what everyone said about uber and lyft when they started up.  There are going to be less cars on the road because people will take these cheap rentals instead of driving.  And yet . . . study after study has shown that traffic increased, rather than decreased because of the reduced costs associated with them.  It doesn't make sense to me that self driving vehicles would radically change that outcome.

All I know is that I've done part, to the best ability that I can at the present time.  I produce 22,000kwh of electricity per year via solar, and have 2 EVs.  I an NET negative on the CA grid. You are welcome.

I live in suburban sprawl, where everything is designed around the expectation that you drive a car.  Despite this I have have travelled less than 6000 km in the past two years by motorized means (put about twice that distance on my bicycle though).  By the calculations I can make, doing this has benefitted the environment more than buying an EV.  FWIW - the solar panels on my roof here in Canada produce more electricity than our house uses each year too.

Please, hold your thanks and applause.  They shouldn't be necessary for doing the bare minimum that someone aware of the current state of our environment should be doing.

[ATtiny85]

This seems like a good point in history to encourage everyone to limit themselves to one child...

Or less. (Or fewer, depending and how you consider children…)

It is weird to contemplate an economy with a decreasing population.

[Paper Chaser]

But I'd highly recommend reading some Strong Towns content or NJB. It is very good stuff that could very well help you make good life decisions (similar to MMM).

Thanks for taking up the solar panels that could be used for a hospital and the batteries that could be used for 100 ebikes ;)

MMM himself bought a new EV a few years ago.  Shame on him for using up e-bike batteries, aye?

Yeah.
MMM now is not the same as MMM a decade ago. He's upgrading flights and luxury lodging these days too. His changes also seem to be reflected in general attitudes here. He's not some infallible demi god whose choices cannot be questioned or concluded to be divergent from his historical attitudes. It seems we all get more hedonistic as we get wealthier. He more or less admitted it in the related blog post:
https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2016/10/04/so-i-bought-an-electric-car/

[clifp]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

From the CDC

-Adults ages 55-69 have the highest bicycle death rates.
- Adolescents, teens, and young adults have the highest rates of bicycle-related injuries treated in emergency departments (EDs).
- People ages 10-24 account for nearly one-third of all bicycle-related injuries seen in US EDs.
This fits with my anecdotal evidence. In addition to the friend's brother who died in bicycle accident last week. I have 8 friends (mostly folks I keep in contact via Facebook) age 50-72 who routinely do century rides. While it is true that are in far better physical shape than most of their peers, six of the eight have been hospitalized due to bicycle accidents in the last decade.

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

[AccidentialMustache]

Bus will never work in non-dense citires.  Do you want to force all humans into dense sky-scrapers, with an assigned 48sqft per child, and 96sqft per adult .. + 12sqft for the dog?  We have public transport no? Very few opt to use it, unless forced.

People don't use our public transit most places because it is garbage. Go somewhere it isn't garbage and magically it gets massive use. Where it is garbage is pretty much a direct result of the auto-industrial-complex interference (eg, buying then destroying street car lines).

Your hyperbole about density is just that. Amsterdam is ~13,500/mi2 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam. That's slightly more than DC, and while you can complain about a lot of things in DC, one thing you can't complain about is a concrete jungle. Ref: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/dec/density-data-text.html Sure, there are tall buildings (if you consider 15 stories tall), but there's a couple dozen of them, not 80+ that are 20+ stories like Chicago (and the list on wikipedia for Chicago doesn't go lower than 21 stories).

You also don't need absurd density to make non-car transportation a thing. It doesn't (shouldn't?) have to be bus. Walking and biking in mixed-used, dense urban neighborhoods will be preferable to the bus since you don't need to go all over the place.

Of course if you went to college in the US, you likely already know this, but have forgotten it. I walked/biked/rode the bus most places in college, except for larger shopping trips (because the grocery stores were all multiple miles away down car infested stroads with no bike infrastructure at all). You'll see the big-10 towns winning transit awards, despite being 1/100th the size of Chicago or NYC. Of course you'll also see dedicated bus infrastructure (no-car roads), frequent schedules, and well maintained infrastructure.

[nereo]

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

….huh? How do you account for all the people who do not fit this demographic that nonetheless use a bicycle for transportation?  Are you speaking for and only about people within the US?

[GuitarStv]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

From the CDC

-Adults ages 55-69 have the highest bicycle death rates.
- Adolescents, teens, and young adults have the highest rates of bicycle-related injuries treated in emergency departments (EDs).
- People ages 10-24 account for nearly one-third of all bicycle-related injuries seen in US EDs.
This fits with my anecdotal evidence. In addition to the friend's brother who died in bicycle accident last week. I have 8 friends (mostly folks I keep in contact via Facebook) age 50-72 who routinely do century rides. While it is true that are in far better physical shape than most of their peers, six of the eight have been hospitalized due to bicycle accidents in the last decade.

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

If bike trips were normalized, going from 1-30% I strongly suspect that you would see a massive decline in accidents per trip basis simply because drivers have been repeatedly shown to reduce their bad behaviour around cyclists when they are exposed to more cyclists (incidentally, this is why helmet laws tend to not work with bikes - they reduce the number of people who ride, which increases the risk of accident as drivers stop expecting a bike to be there and stop paying attention for the cyclists).

Danger while cycling is rarely danger because of the cycling.  It's because of drivers of cars.  And how drivers of cars interact with cyclists is entirely dependent upon how we design our roads and how we police vehicle/bicycle interactions.  Most roads are designed car only, a few roads are designed car centric, and it's almost unheard of to be held accountable for dangerous driving when there's a cyclist around.

So the number of dead children that would happen from more cycling is largely a matter of what society wants to prioritize.

[StashingAway]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

Yes, but contrary this line of thought, bicycle and pedestrian safety increases as usage increases. The more bicycles and walkers on the road, the safer it is per mile to travel. It's unsafe in the US primarily because it is not used much (because it's unsafe... it's a viscous cycle).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1731007/

[StashingAway]

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

….huh? How do you account for all the people who do not fit this demographic that nonetheless use a bicycle for transportation?  Are you speaking for and only about people within the US?

Yes... I have about 30 papers of reference for a research paper I've done on this subject. Bicycle & pedestrian usage is most strongly correlated to infrastructure. Family units, weather, health, etc are all rounding errors in magnitude compared to simple access of the means of transportation.

Of course there are use cases where people can't bike, just as there are for people who can't drive or fly or walk or swim. But the primary deciding factor is unarguably infrastructure.

[RWD]

[...] and during decent weather.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

[LennStar]

Bus will never work in non-dense citires.  Do you want to force all humans into dense sky-scrapers, with an assigned 48sqft per child, and 96sqft per adult .. + 12sqft for the dog?  We have public transport no? Very few opt to use it, unless forced.

Typical american reaction. It may surprise you, but there are other variants of living space than suburbia with big houses on big lots between big streets, where buses are indeed economically unsustainable (as are cars, but that is always ignored. How many private cars make a profit?) and equally stupid skyscapers. Practically everything in between.

"Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.

No, it's still cars that are deadly. They just hit bikes instead of other cars. On every crash statistic you see that the collision partners are overwhelmingly cars. Like in 80% of the cases - and that are Netherlands numbers! Other bikes and pedestrians that cause serious accidents are far far less.

"The Netherlands is one of the safest countries in the world for riding a bike, with only 3.8 road deaths per 100.000 inhabitants. In comparison, the United States of America has 12.4 road deaths per 100.000 inhabitants"

So even while there are what, 50 times more miles traveled by bike in the Netherlands per capita, they have far less death. Are bikes dangerous?

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

Is that a joke? If not you should watch the Not Just Bikes video titled "Why Canadians can't bike in the winter and Swedens can" or something like that.

[BDWW]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

From the CDC

-Adults ages 55-69 have the highest bicycle death rates.
- Adolescents, teens, and young adults have the highest rates of bicycle-related injuries treated in emergency departments (EDs).
- People ages 10-24 account for nearly one-third of all bicycle-related injuries seen in US EDs.
This fits with my anecdotal evidence. In addition to the friend's brother who died in bicycle accident last week. I have 8 friends (mostly folks I keep in contact via Facebook) age 50-72 who routinely do century rides. While it is true that are in far better physical shape than most of their peers, six of the eight have been hospitalized due to bicycle accidents in the last decade.

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

Let me see if I'm parsing this right.  I claim car-centric infrastructure is incredibly dangerous.
You respond with "Look how many bicyclists are killed currently!"  -Yes, you get it! It's a problem we should address, hooray!
 
... 

But, then you completely 180 and lose the plot somehow and try to make the claim that if we make it less car-centric more people will die?

I mean I get it. Car-centric development is all you know and you imagine we're all a bunch of crazies trying to take your cars away. And on a thread like this with like minds, I can probably get carried away. But if you look back just a page or two in this thread, you'll see me admitting to owning an F150. 
I was an ASE certified tech. I managed an auto-parts store for 3 years in college. I've auto-crossed and done some amateur road-racing. I literally have a Ford flathead V8 on an engine stand in my garage right now. I don't think it's too much hubris to say I appreciate cars more than most.

But, I walked to school as a kid. Something like 75% of Silent and Boomers did. GenX and Millenials it dropped to 47%. Currently it's something like 27% and getting worse. People currently have to buy a car to participate in society. You mention how you believe cycling to be a young fit persons game.  Yet, right now we isolate our youth, the elderly and the disabled because if they can't drive they can't get anywhere.  If your under 16 and in suburbia, you're stuck with Mom or Dad chauffeuring you around (all the while exacerbating traffic problems).  To old or unable to drive? Too bad, you're stuck unless you can get someone to drive you.

Too poor to afford a car? Sucks to be you!  You need a car to get to a job to pay for the car...  Gas prices skyrocket due to factors far outside your control? Again sucks to be you because there's no alternative.  The literal financial cost is massive both for people and society(taxes).

And then of course there's my original point, the frankly IMO horrific death count.

As much as I appreciate cars, I can still see the problem. We've sacrificed too much to cars. I want my kids to be able to walk to school without courting death. I want the elderly in my town to be able to walk outside the nursing home grounds. Maybe -crazy I know- be able to travel somewhere on reliable public transit.

The rest of the developed world is miles ahead of us in these areas. In the relatively car-centric UK, the rate of traffic fatalities is a fifth what it is here for example. If we could get even to that, we'd save 30,000+ lives a year.

My fellow Americans subscribe to the idea that a car is freedom, but I've come to see it as a gilded cage that makes us poor er, less safe, and less healthy. And I suppose as a nod to topic of this thread, it's not doing the planet much good either.

[Shane]

The city where we live is totally fine. What's not fine is the distracted, entitled sub/exurbanites zooming through our neighborhoods in their cars like the city's their own little private race track. Also feeling triggered by seeing pictures of village idiot Joe Biden posing in a new Hummer EV with a big smile on his face. He has to know that that shiny, new, 9Klb EV is going to kill even more people than the ICE ones. Our children, old people, handicapped people, and poor people who have to catch buses and trains, shouldn't have to die just to shave a few minutes off of entitled suburbanites' commute times. The battery in the Hummer EV alone weighs 2Klbs - more than many entire cars. The Hummer EV weighs as much as an actual tank. We could make 4 Nissan Leaf batteries or 380 e-bike batteries, with the same amount of materials it takes to make the battery for just one Hummer EV. I'm sorry, but EVs like this are NOT an improvement over conventional ICE vehicles. In some ways, EVs can be worse than ICE, because they lull Americans into believing it's just fine to continue consuming multiples more resources from our planet than most other humans. That our president is seemingly placing his seal of approval on this monument to American gluttony is sad, imho. Instead, as the people's representatives, our government should be taxing the shit out of anyone who thinks it might be a good idea to drive around in something like this, and our government should be locking drivers up when they murder our children and old people with their make-believe-military-style vehicles.

"Rather than celebrating the Hummer EV, the Biden admin should be proposing weight-based fees to restrain truck bloat and encourage smaller cars. A promising model: The District of Columbia’s new sliding scale of car registration fees."

There's some hyperbole in there (Even at 10k lbs, the Hummer doesn't weigh anywhere near as much as an actual tank, and no car in the US has weighed under 2k lbs in a very long time), but I actually agree in general. It's way excessive, and potentially worse for the environment than something like a Prius. I also have concerns about giving Joe Schmoe the keys to 5-10k lb machines with 700+hp (ICE or EV) without increasing licensing requirements.

That being said, the lack of tailpipe emissions from the Hummer EV is still a huge improvement over a comparable ICE vehicle (HD pickup truck, potentially diesel).

Agree that zero-emission EVs are generally better than ICE vehicles. Just think it's good, at least every once in a while, to take a step back to look at the bigger picture. The low-hanging fruit in North America is voluntary reduction of use of personal automobiles, not just switching from ICE to EVs. We need to stop assuming that the default transportation mode for everyone has to be a car or truck, and start designing our world starting from the assumption that the lives of people not inside 4Klb+ metal boxes are just as valuable as those of people driving cars.

[Shane]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

From the CDC

-Adults ages 55-69 have the highest bicycle death rates.
- Adolescents, teens, and young adults have the highest rates of bicycle-related injuries treated in emergency departments (EDs).
- People ages 10-24 account for nearly one-third of all bicycle-related injuries seen in US EDs.
This fits with my anecdotal evidence. In addition to the friend's brother who died in bicycle accident last week. I have 8 friends (mostly folks I keep in contact via Facebook) age 50-72 who routinely do century rides. While it is true that are in far better physical shape than most of their peers, six of the eight have been hospitalized due to bicycle accidents in the last decade.

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

Dude, you need to get out more. I mean, by North American standards, The Bus isn't horrible, but public transit on Oahu, generally, is a joke compared to the rest of the world. The fact that, after over 50 years of planning, Oahu still hasn't even managed to complete a single light rail line, is a pretty clear indication of how entrenched car culture is on the island. Maybe, try visiting Copenhagen or Amsterdam or Berlin or London or Oslo or Hong Kong or, literally anywhere not in North America, and you'll see that it's completely possible to live a good quality life without needing to own a personal automobile.

[nereo]

43,000 people died in traffic violence in 2021 in the US. 8000 of them children. That's > 21 children a day, or a Uvalde every day on our roads.  I apologize that some might find the comparison crass, but I find it appalling how this country just seems to be fine with this. Car-centric development has to go. Much of the rest of the developed world is realizing this, but like many things the US seemingly will be 50 years late.

According to the CDC, "Nearly 1,000 bicyclists die and over 130,000 are injured in crashes that occur on roads in the United States every year." even though bicycle account for 1% of all trips. This means on trip bases bikes are twice as deadly as cars.  The normal metric in transportation measurement is passenger seat miles.  e.g. US airlines get 58 MPG/passenger seat miles. Since bike trips are much shorter than automobile trips, and cars can carry multiple people per trip. On a passenger seat mile basis bike are 3-5 times more deadly. So if bike trip rose went from 1 to 30% of all trips we expect to see 63,000+ total transportation deaths and at least 1,200 dead children.

From the CDC

-Adults ages 55-69 have the highest bicycle death rates.
- Adolescents, teens, and young adults have the highest rates of bicycle-related injuries treated in emergency departments (EDs).
- People ages 10-24 account for nearly one-third of all bicycle-related injuries seen in US EDs.
This fits with my anecdotal evidence. In addition to the friend's brother who died in bicycle accident last week. I have 8 friends (mostly folks I keep in contact via Facebook) age 50-72 who routinely do century rides. While it is true that are in far better physical shape than most of their peers, six of the eight have been hospitalized due to bicycle accidents in the last decade.

Bikes are really only viable transportation method for young folks, without kids, in some areas of the country, and during decent weather.

Dude, you need to get out more. I mean, by North American standards, The Bus isn't horrible, but public transit on Oahu, generally, is a joke compared to the rest of the world. The fact that, after over 50 years of planning, Oahu still hasn't even managed to complete a single light rail line, is a pretty clear indication of how entrenched car culture is on the island. Maybe, try visiting Copenhagen or Amsterdam or Berlin or London or Oslo or Hong Kong or, literally anywhere not in North America, and you'll see that it's completely possible to live a good quality life without needing to own a personal automobile.

It’s also quite possible to live a car free (or “car-lite”*) lifestyle in many areas of the US, and not just in NYC, Boston or DC. It’s feasible across many cities and towns, especially those with colleges.


* I’m arbitrarily defining “car-lite” as a family Who owns one car and drives fewer than 6,000 miles per year actoss all family members. If you prioritize living close to where you need to go on a daily basis (eg work/school) it’s remarkable how little you actually need to drive, and renting a car or taking Uber suddenly makes more economic sense than owning. 

[RWD]

* I’m arbitrarily defining “car-lite” as a family Who owns one car and drives fewer than 6,000 miles per year actoss all family members. If you prioritize living close to where you need to go on a daily basis (eg work/school) it’s remarkable how little you actually need to drive, and renting a car or taking Uber suddenly makes more economic sense than owning. 

We've averaged 3,400 miles per year over the last four years (two working adults). Officially nereo-certified car-lite™! If you exclude road trips it's probably closer to 1,500-2,000 miles/year.

[Just Joe]

This seems to be a nonsensical argument -- I can't think of anybody I've ever met who would scrap a car they could sell or trade.  P

Actually I've witnessed multiple people over the years park a car that had something break that they could not repair cheaply. If they had sold it immediately it might have been worth $1500 or more. Instead it sat there until it was covered in mold and began to rust. Rather than take a discount on the car - they let it rot. I could point out a dozen+ cars within a few miles of where I live where this has happened. We even have a local man that is buying antique cars to place around his property and then letting them rust away. These were restorable cars - one is a 1960s convertible. The convertible is parked with the top down. It has a full interior that is going to ruin.

So yes, people do this...

[JLee]

This seems to be a nonsensical argument -- I can't think of anybody I've ever met who would scrap a car they could sell or trade.  P

Actually I've witnessed multiple people over the years park a car that had something break that they could not repair cheaply. If they had sold it immediately it might have been worth $1500 or more. Instead it sat there until it was covered in mold and began to rust. Rather than take a discount on the car - they let it rot. I could point out a dozen+ cars within a few miles of where I live where this has happened. We even have a local man that is buying antique cars to place around his property and then letting them rust away. These were restorable cars - one is a 1960s convertible. The convertible is parked with the top down. It has a full interior that is going to ruin.

So yes, people do this...

After they broke, sure -- but the implication I was responding to was that people would scrap perfectly good cars (instead of continuing to drive them) to buy a shiny new EV.

[Just Joe]

[...] and during decent weather.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

875 km of bike paths in one city... My town has 4 miles. -eye roller-

[Paper Chaser]

This seems to be a nonsensical argument -- I can't think of anybody I've ever met who would scrap a car they could sell or trade.  P

Actually I've witnessed multiple people over the years park a car that had something break that they could not repair cheaply. If they had sold it immediately it might have been worth $1500 or more. Instead it sat there until it was covered in mold and began to rust. Rather than take a discount on the car - they let it rot. I could point out a dozen+ cars within a few miles of where I live where this has happened. We even have a local man that is buying antique cars to place around his property and then letting them rust away. These were restorable cars - one is a 1960s convertible. The convertible is parked with the top down. It has a full interior that is going to ruin.

So yes, people do this...

After they broke, sure -- but the implication I was responding to was that people would scrap perfectly good cars (instead of continuing to drive them) to buy a shiny new EV.

Buying new stuff leads to old stuff getting trashed somewhere down the line. Usually that old stuff has some usable life remaining. It's pretty consistent across all material goods.  Cars are no different from blenders, electronics, tools or clothing in that regard. Environmentally speaking, it's almost always better to use all of the useful life of the item (including repairing any damage to prolong that life) than it is to replace that item.

It's Reduce, Reuse, Recycle in that order for a reason. Reducing demand(consumption) is the most effective. Reusing items that still have usable life remaining should be the next priority, and then finally Recycling anything possible at the end of the product's life.

Thirsting after EVs for environmental reasons (when they won't reach environmental payoff for lots of mustachians for a very, very long time if ever) is just greenwashed consumption in many cases. That's not saying that EVs aren't cool, or that they can't be beneficial financially and/or environmentally. But the gains from an EV come on a per mile basis. The more you drive, the more benefit they have. If you barely drive, then the EV's initial financial and environmental costs aren't going to be offset for a very long time. If you're switching from an efficient ICE to an EV with a huge battery the same is true.

[Just Joe]

This seems to be a nonsensical argument -- I can't think of anybody I've ever met who would scrap a car they could sell or trade.  P

Actually I've witnessed multiple people over the years park a car that had something break that they could not repair cheaply. If they had sold it immediately it might have been worth $1500 or more. Instead it sat there until it was covered in mold and began to rust. Rather than take a discount on the car - they let it rot. I could point out a dozen+ cars within a few miles of where I live where this has happened. We even have a local man that is buying antique cars to place around his property and then letting them rust away. These were restorable cars - one is a 1960s convertible. The convertible is parked with the top down. It has a full interior that is going to ruin.

So yes, people do this...

After they broke, sure -- but the implication I was responding to was that people would scrap perfectly good cars (instead of continuing to drive them) to buy a shiny new EV.

That's not how I read that at all. I read that as people unnecessarily upgrading their vehicle to posses an EV. The old car will be resold of course.

My example was about $1500-$2500 cars that need a transmission or a head gasket. Perhaps not economical to pay a shop $2K for a repair but still there sits a perfectly good vehicle that could be economically repaired by a DIY type and have cheap transportation that could last 2-5 years more perhaps.

Many of my neighbors would benefit from $500 in their pocket today from a junkyard (parts yard) rather than letting their car waste away until it is worth $50 at the scrapyard (crusher).

That's money in the bank for a motivated person as they won't have any car payments (and the required insurance upgrades) for 2-5 years if not more. 

But people teach each other that cars are too complicated to repair in 2022. They aren't. We have the internet. I guess the DIY gene is recessive in 2022.

https://locations.lkqpickyourpart.com
https://www.pullapart.com
https://www.ebay.com

Also, are the average junkyards elsewhere stripping plastic parts for recycling b/c I'm not seeing that at all. Perhaps when the cars are shredded the materials are better sorted?

[AccidentialMustache]

Agree that zero-emission EVs are generally better than ICE vehicles. Just think it's good, at least every once in a while, to take a step back to look at the bigger picture. The low-hanging fruit in North America is voluntary reduction of use of personal automobiles, not just switching from ICE to EVs. We need to stop assuming that the default transportation mode for everyone has to be a car or truck, and start designing our world starting from the assumption that the lives of people not inside 4Klb+ metal boxes are just as valuable as those of people driving cars.

Unfortunately due to the design of urban spaces in NA, voluntary reduction isn't low hanging fruit. Urban NA is too designed for the car and it is going to take time we don't have (environmentally speaking) to get them reconfigured to support bus/bike/walk. We should be pursuing that in parallel (and, perhaps, more vigorously than) with electrification, but let's be honest with ourselves that "less car" isn't low hanging fruit ripe for the picking. Even if you could wave a wand and make the best separated bike infrastructure on the public right of way, the design of the suburb subdivision is such that it extends the distance a bus/bike/pedestrian must travel to render such a journey impractical. Between non-mixed-use zoning (destinations are further away as the crow flies to start with) and the intentionally twisty and opaque subdivision street design (to eliminate through traffic), the vast majority of urban area we have simply can't support non-car lifestyles.

If you hold the people near-constant (US at < 1% pop growth rate), then your only option is less area. To achieve that you basically need to bulldoze modern subdivisions (and the power centers/strip malls while you're at it) and rebuild denser, over less area. And to do that you encounter "but mah land rights" NIMBYs.

What we really need is a bunch of like-minded folks with location flexibility and a surplus of free time (perhaps from early retirement?) to pick one city to all move to and get active in local politics to convert it into a Dutch-style mobility paradise. Proof is in the pudding, as they say, and too many Americans have never left the country, so they have no idea things can be different and better.

[JLee]

This seems to be a nonsensical argument -- I can't think of anybody I've ever met who would scrap a car they could sell or trade.  P

Actually I've witnessed multiple people over the years park a car that had something break that they could not repair cheaply. If they had sold it immediately it might have been worth $1500 or more. Instead it sat there until it was covered in mold and began to rust. Rather than take a discount on the car - they let it rot. I could point out a dozen+ cars within a few miles of where I live where this has happened. We even have a local man that is buying antique cars to place around his property and then letting them rust away. These were restorable cars - one is a 1960s convertible. The convertible is parked with the top down. It has a full interior that is going to ruin.

So yes, people do this...

After they broke, sure -- but the implication I was responding to was that people would scrap perfectly good cars (instead of continuing to drive them) to buy a shiny new EV.

That's not how I read that at all. I read that as people unnecessarily upgrading their vehicle to posses an EV. The old car will be resold of course.

My example was about $1500-$2500 cars that need a transmission or a head gasket. Perhaps not economical to pay a shop $2K for a repair but still there sits a perfectly good vehicle that could be economically repaired by a DIY type and have cheap transportation that could last 2-5 years more perhaps.

Many of my neighbors would benefit from $500 in their pocket today from a junkyard (parts yard) rather than letting their car waste away until it is worth $50 at the scrapyard (crusher).

That's money in the bank for a motivated person as they won't have any car payments (and the required insurance upgrades) for 2-5 years if not more. 

But people teach each other that cars are too complicated to repair in 2022. They aren't. We have the internet. I guess the DIY gene is recessive in 2022.

https://locations.lkqpickyourpart.com
https://www.pullapart.com
https://www.ebay.com

Also, are the average junkyards elsewhere stripping plastic parts for recycling b/c I'm not seeing that at all. Perhaps when the cars are shredded the materials are better sorted?

The post literally said 'scrapping':

Scrapping perfectly good older vehicles to buy shiny new EVs is going to be very difficult to overcome environmentally speaking.

I absolutely agree that DIY types can do tons of work.  New cars are going to be purchased regardless, and if those new cars (that eventually become affordable used cars) are electric instead of ICE, that's a good thing.

[Shane]

Agree that zero-emission EVs are generally better than ICE vehicles. Just think it's good, at least every once in a while, to take a step back to look at the bigger picture. The low-hanging fruit in North America is voluntary reduction of use of personal automobiles, not just switching from ICE to EVs. We need to stop assuming that the default transportation mode for everyone has to be a car or truck, and start designing our world starting from the assumption that the lives of people not inside 4Klb+ metal boxes are just as valuable as those of people driving cars.

Unfortunately due to the design of urban spaces in NA, voluntary reduction isn't low hanging fruit. Urban NA is too designed for the car and it is going to take time we don't have (environmentally speaking) to get them reconfigured to support bus/bike/walk. We should be pursuing that in parallel (and, perhaps, more vigorously than) with electrification, but let's be honest with ourselves that "less car" isn't low hanging fruit ripe for the picking. Even if you could wave a wand and make the best separated bike infrastructure on the public right of way, the design of the suburb subdivision is such that it extends the distance a bus/bike/pedestrian must travel to render such a journey impractical. Between non-mixed-use zoning (destinations are further away as the crow flies to start with) and the intentionally twisty and opaque subdivision street design (to eliminate through traffic), the vast majority of urban area we have simply can't support non-car lifestyles.

If you hold the people near-constant (US at < 1% pop growth rate), then your only option is less area. To achieve that you basically need to bulldoze modern subdivisions (and the power centers/strip malls while you're at it) and rebuild denser, over less area. And to do that you encounter "but mah land rights" NIMBYs.

What we really need is a bunch of like-minded folks with location flexibility and a surplus of free time (perhaps from early retirement?) to pick one city to all move to and get active in local politics to convert it into a Dutch-style mobility paradise. Proof is in the pudding, as they say, and too many Americans have never left the country, so they have no idea things can be different and better.

Okay, let's do it! :)

[AccidentialMustache]

What we really need is a bunch of like-minded folks with location flexibility and a surplus of free time (perhaps from early retirement?) to pick one city to all move to and get active in local politics to convert it into a Dutch-style mobility paradise. Proof is in the pudding, as they say, and too many Americans have never left the country, so they have no idea things can be different and better.

Okay, let's do it! :)

I wish. With parents nearby (2-3 hrs) and DW and DS and friends here, I'm not currently mobile enough to pull it off, even with a fully-remote position.

I do need to drop a mail to some of my city council folks and start poking around the, "Have you heard of strong towns? What's your plan for dealing with the infrastructure replacement costs due to the sprawl that started in the 80s? How are you going to prevent that problem getting worse and prevent more cashflow-negative sprawl?"

So unless everyone picks where I am, that'll be a tough sell with DW. Now, I'm not in an awful place -- at a big 10 college town. We actually have good bus service, at least in the core of downtown/campus. It's the sprawl at the edges where it get sketchy. And they are starting to get good, at least Dutch-adjacent bike infrastructure going around campus. It is out into the community that good bike infra is lacking.

[BicycleB]

What we really need is a bunch of like-minded folks with location flexibility and a surplus of free time (perhaps from early retirement?) to pick one city to all move to and get active in local politics to convert it into a Dutch-style mobility paradise. Proof is in the pudding, as they say, and too many Americans have never left the country, so they have no idea things can be different and better.

Okay, let's do it! :)

I wish. With parents nearby (2-3 hrs) and DW and DS and friends here, I'm not currently mobile enough to pull it off, even with a fully-remote position.

I do need to drop a mail to some of my city council folks and start poking around the, "Have you heard of strong towns? What's your plan for dealing with the infrastructure replacement costs due to the sprawl that started in the 80s? How are you going to prevent that problem getting worse and prevent more cashflow-negative sprawl?"

So unless everyone picks where I am, that'll be a tough sell with DW. Now, I'm not in an awful place -- at a big 10 college town. We actually have good bus service, at least in the core of downtown/campus. It's the sprawl at the edges where it get sketchy. And they are starting to get good, at least Dutch-adjacent bike infrastructure going around campus. It is out into the community that good bike infra is lacking.

Bolded - well worth doing!

Lots of the modest bike infra and related zoning improvements that occur simply occur because people make their desires known, and vote. Dutch cities sucked too until they did a long slow grind of improvements - in other words, decisions and implementation. You may find that they're already occurring in your town because some like-minded people have already been advocating. Join them, and good luck!  :)

-intermittent activist, former aide to relevant local officialdom, etc.

[TomTX]

Yes... I have about 30 papers of reference for a research paper I've done on this subject. Bicycle & pedestrian usage is most strongly correlated to infrastructure. Family units, weather, health, etc are all rounding errors in magnitude compared to simple access of the means of transportation.

Of course there are use cases where people can't bike, just as there are for people who can't drive or fly or walk or swim. But the primary deciding factor is unarguably infrastructure.

I would love to see those papers @StashingAway

[TomTX]

What we really need is a bunch of like-minded folks with location flexibility and a surplus of free time (perhaps from early retirement?) to pick one city to all move to and get active in local politics to convert it into a Dutch-style mobility paradise. Proof is in the pudding, as they say, and too many Americans have never left the country, so they have no idea things can be different and better.

Okay, let's do it! :)

Been working on it for 2 years now with some great success. Website is linked below, and I'm totally onboard if people want to use the name (insert your city here) and set up your own local chapter. Site needs to get updated, but I'm spending most of my current advocacy time participating in local government meetings and such.

https://www.wyld.net/atacp/

[AccidentialMustache]

Been working on it for 2 years now with some great success. Website is linked below, and I'm totally onboard if people want to use the name (insert your city here) and set up your own local chapter. Site needs to get updated, but I'm spending most of my current advocacy time participating in local government meetings and such.

https://www.wyld.net/atacp/

I have a local similar group (they're bike focused and expanded to walking) but they lack the transit focus (bus/light rail) just as yours seems to. I think strong towns is much more up my alley. Conveniently, strong towns sets everything up to be bikeable/walkable/transit as a side-effect and seems like it should be easier to get the team-red crowd onboard, because municipal-bankruptcy-is-bad-mkay?

On one hand you'd look and think that my town is doing pretty good and on the other hand wait for winter, when the bike gutters and sidewalks are a snow dumping ground (and, let's be real, we don't get that much snow, not like further north does). Most people don't shovel sidewalks and even if they did, the road crews will leave heaping mounds of snow at any path-road intersection. Some areas downtown have snow clearing requirements, and the campus does a decent job. Outside of those core areas though, forget it.

[jrhampt]

Has anyone had any experience with the Kia Niro?  Apparently it's a small SUV that comes in three options - all electric, hybrid, or PHEV.  The plug in version for 2023 gets 33 miles of electric range and 53 mpg.  I believe it's also eligible for the full tax credit, and is around $30k before any credits.  I understand Kia has become more of a reliable brand, although I have no experience with it personally.

[Just Joe]

What is the difference between a Kia Niro and a Hyundai Kona? Same car in a different wrapper?

[jrhampt]

What is the difference between a Kia Niro and a Hyundai Kona? Same car in a different wrapper?

The two hybrids look pretty similar in terms of fuel economy, but I don't think the Kona comes in a plug in version.

[MoneyTree]

Has anyone had any experience with the Kia Niro?  Apparently it's a small SUV that comes in three options - all electric, hybrid, or PHEV.  The plug in version for 2023 gets 33 miles of electric range and 53 mpg.  I believe it's also eligible for the full tax credit, and is around $30k before any credits.  I understand Kia has become more of a reliable brand, although I have no experience with it personally.

Do you have sources that it is eligible for the tax credit? From everything I’ve heard around the inflation reduction act, Kia and Hyundai vehicles are NOT eligible.

[jrhampt]

Has anyone had any experience with the Kia Niro?  Apparently it's a small SUV that comes in three options - all electric, hybrid, or PHEV.  The plug in version for 2023 gets 33 miles of electric range and 53 mpg.  I believe it's also eligible for the full tax credit, and is around $30k before any credits.  I understand Kia has become more of a reliable brand, although I have no experience with it personally.

Do you have sources that it is eligible for the tax credit? From everything I’ve heard around the inflation reduction act, Kia and Hyundai vehicles are NOT eligible.

I think they would be eligible for the tax credit under the current year.  Next year I don't think so.

[MoneyTree]

Has anyone had any experience with the Kia Niro?  Apparently it's a small SUV that comes in three options - all electric, hybrid, or PHEV.  The plug in version for 2023 gets 33 miles of electric range and 53 mpg.  I believe it's also eligible for the full tax credit, and is around $30k before any credits.  I understand Kia has become more of a reliable brand, although I have no experience with it personally.

Do you have sources that it is eligible for the tax credit? From everything I’ve heard around the inflation reduction act, Kia and Hyundai vehicles are NOT eligible.

I think they would be eligible for the tax credit under the current year.  Next year I don't think so.

Unless something changed, the final assembly requirement was in effect the moment Biden signed. Meaning all Kia and Hyundai vehicles and many others were immediately disqualified from the old credit.

edit:found this link https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/electric-vehicles-for-tax-credit

[Just Joe]

What is the difference between a Kia Niro and a Hyundai Kona? Same car in a different wrapper?

The two hybrids look pretty similar in terms of fuel economy, but I don't think the Kona comes in a plug in version.

I was curious during lunch so I did some reading. Plug in version = BEV?
There is a Kona ICE and Konda BEV. No PHEV version though available in the USA. It exists elsewhere.
https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/vehicles/2021-kona-electric

The Niro comes as hybrid, ICE, PHEV and BEV.

Hyundai Kona = Kia Seltos. Same platform, different bodywork.

[nereo]

What is the difference between a Kia Niro and a Hyundai Kona? Same car in a different wrapper?

The two hybrids look pretty similar in terms of fuel economy, but I don't think the Kona comes in a plug in version.

I was curious during lunch so I did some reading. Plug in version = BEV?
There is a Kona ICE and Konda BEV. No PHEV version though available in the USA. It exists elsewhere.
https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/vehicles/2021-kona-electric

The Niro comes as hybrid, ICE, PHEV and BEV.

Hyundai Kona = Kia Seltos. Same platform, different bodywork.

Interesting. There’s a PHEV Kona in my neighborhood (2022…?). Wonder where s/he  got it.

[BuffaloStache]

Sorry if I'm derailing the discussion here and/or asking something that's already been answered, but....

Does anyone know of a good website that maintains a list of all currently available BEVs in the US, and their general specs (range, MSRP, MPGe, etc?).

My old ICE car is on it's last legs, but I'm hoping to have it limp along for another 12 months or so. Since the wait-lists/time seem to be so long for most EVs, I figured I'd start looking around now and potentially put down a deposit for a car that can be delivered to me sometime next year.

I don't want a 'higher end' EV, don't want a Tesla, but also don't think I want to buy a Nissan Leaf due to the lack of active battery cooling/management. I would be open to getting a used EV, has anyone in this thread done that before?

Just trying to start laying out my option space before I really start investigating. Thanks!

[bryan995]

Sorry if I'm derailing the discussion here and/or asking something that's already been answered, but....

Does anyone know of a good website that maintains a list of all currently available BEVs in the US, and their general specs (range, MSRP, MPGe, etc?).

My old ICE car is on it's last legs, but I'm hoping to have it limp along for another 12 months or so. Since the wait-lists/time seem to be so long for most EVs, I figured I'd start looking around now and potentially put down a deposit for a car that can be delivered to me sometime next year.

I don't want a 'higher end' EV, don't want a Tesla, but also don't think I want to buy a Nissan Leaf due to the lack of active battery cooling/management. I would be open to getting a used EV, has anyone in this thread done that before?

Just trying to start laying out my option space before I really start investigating. Thanks!

What's your budget?  What size vehicle?

There are probably 10,000 lists out there - here is one :)
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/rankings/electric-vehicles

Have a friend that has this, loves it! https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/vehicles/ioniq-5

I have one of the $39k Standard range Tesla Model Y and now a Ford F150 Lightning.  The Tesla is the better vehicle by far, but the F150L is simply massive (main reason we bought it). 

You'll need to do some careful digging to ensure you can qualify for the $7500 federal tax credit + potential state credits.
Some states have an additional $7500 credit if you qualify!  That's $15k off !

And if Tesla brings back a standard range plus 3/Y model, they it would complete with more of the 'non-luxury' vehicles on the market, price wise.

[soulpatchmike]

Sorry if I'm derailing the discussion here and/or asking something that's already been answered, but....

Does anyone know of a good website that maintains a list of all currently available BEVs in the US, and their general specs (range, MSRP, MPGe, etc?).

My old ICE car is on it's last legs, but I'm hoping to have it limp along for another 12 months or so. Since the wait-lists/time seem to be so long for most EVs, I figured I'd start looking around now and potentially put down a deposit for a car that can be delivered to me sometime next year.

I don't want a 'higher end' EV, don't want a Tesla, but also don't think I want to buy a Nissan Leaf due to the lack of active battery cooling/management. I would be open to getting a used EV, has anyone in this thread done that before?

Just trying to start laying out my option space before I really start investigating. Thanks!

Here is the list of US BEVs

If you do any kind of serious looking for new models you will find that most everything is 'higher end' depending on your definition(the avg cost of all types of new vehicles is over 40k).  You either have the bolt, leaf in the 25-40k base range or you have everything else(including Tesla) in the 40-60k base range.

I got a used 2015 leaf 4 years ago for $9500 with 40k miles and it now has 90k miles on it with no hassles.  It only has about 65 usable mile range in the summer and 45 in the winter, but avg of 40 miles per day is 12k miles per year.  It works for our around town needs.  For the same 3-4 year old leaf today it costs around 25-30k depending on what you get because the range is a lot higher, either 150 or 210 usable summer miles depending on the battery you get.  I want to buy another BEV, but cant justify the crazy used car market right now.  The bolt is the most attractive for new right now since you can get them cheaper than used in a lot of cases, but overall if you are looking at most of them, they are all over 40k new and generally the 30s or more used.

[Shane]

I have one of the $39k Standard range Tesla Model Y and now a Ford F150 Lightning.  The Tesla is the better vehicle by far, but the F150L is simply massive (main reason we bought it). 

Why would you intentionally buy a vehicle because it's "massive"?

[Telecaster]

I don't want a 'higher end' EV, don't want a Tesla, but also don't think I want to buy a Nissan Leaf due to the lack of active battery cooling/management. I would be open to getting a used EV, has anyone in this thread done that before?

I bought a used EV, a Leaf as it turns out, thanks to some good advice provided by @sol .   Model year 2016 Leafs got a battery upgrade, so as the 2013 era Leafs came off lease many owners upgraded to the new model.   As a result, dealers were dumping them in huge numbers.   I'm happy with it.  Very little battery degradation and right now a 2013 Leaf with the same trim sells for more than I paid. 

[dandarc]

I have one of the $39k Standard range Tesla Model Y and now a Ford F150 Lightning.  The Tesla is the better vehicle by far, but the F150L is simply massive (main reason we bought it). 

Why would you intentionally buy a vehicle because it's "massive"?

The battery being massive + ProPower (really hoping this is available after market in the near future - I'd love to put on a Leaf or other hatchback) would make it so I don't have to store gas at our house for our generator. Or have a generator. Top of mind right now - path shifted but was looking like a fairly likely and urgent need for the generator was headed our way as recently as  a day or two ago.

[bryan995]

I have one of the $39k Standard range Tesla Model Y and now a Ford F150 Lightning.  The Tesla is the better vehicle by far, but the F150L is simply massive (main reason we bought it). 

Why would you intentionally buy a vehicle because it's "massive"?

Hah. Fair response :).

We have 3 kids under the age of 5. 3 bulky car seats. 2-3 strollers. Assorted baby items. Snacks galore. We wanted a vehicle that could fit everyone and wanted that vehicle to be an EV. The F150L just so happened to be the best option.  Plus now we have a truck which makes larger purchases much easier to transport (Costco, homedepot, plants, mulch etc).

And as others pointed out. It has a absolutely massive battery and 9.6kw of pro power on board. I could use it to power basically anything anywhere. And I assume at some point it will be capable of powering my home (seamlessly) or acting as an additional TOU buffer. Lots of value in the lower trims. I did not buy the $92k variant :)

It was also a value play. Huge demand for the F150L. So I expect the depreciation to be minimal if not negative.

[dandarc]

"At Some Point" - is the V2H setup not actually available yet? The fancy charger (with a fancier price I'm sure) was one of the big selling points.

[LennStar]

I have one of the $39k Standard range Tesla Model Y and now a Ford F150 Lightning.  The Tesla is the better vehicle by far, but the F150L is simply massive (main reason we bought it). 

Why would you intentionally buy a vehicle because it's "massive"?

Hah. Fair response :).

We have 3 kids under the age of 5. 3 bulky car seats. 2-3 strollers. Assorted baby items. Snacks galore. We wanted a vehicle that could fit everyone

Something like this fits your needs. finger facepunch 
edit: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Focus#/media/Datei:Ford_Focus_wagon_silver.jpg
My boss drives a similar one with 3 kids under 10.
Not EV of course.