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

[Tyson]

While they're making Cali healthier, they are also ruining other nations.

https://www.wired.com/story/workers-are-dying-in-the-ev-industrys-tainted-city/?bxid=5bea026724c17c6adf102b31&cndid=31738015&esrc=bounceX&mbid=mbid%3DCRMWIR012019%0A%0A&source=Email_0_EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_ZZ&utm_brand=wired&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_content=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_mailing=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=P4

I'll steel man this. I'm sure the byproducts of EV production are fairly minimal compared to the impact of climate change and the overall cleanliness of the local environment for those who drive them. And I'm not saying that byproducts industrial production in emerging nations is inherently bad by default. But this is one of the many hidden downsides of us trying to buy our way out of this mess by replacing the global fleet of vehicles with EVs.

It's like trying to overcome eating pounds of a sugar a day by also eating more carrots and running more. It would make far more sense to try to cut the sugar, both from a fiscal and health perspective, than to try to brute strength your way out of the sugar addiction.

Why does it have to be either or?  That's pretty binary thinking.  Why can't it be both?  We should convert everything to electric AND we should be taking steps to reduce vehicle use. 

[StashingAway]

While they're making Cali healthier, they are also ruining other nations.

https://www.wired.com/story/workers-are-dying-in-the-ev-industrys-tainted-city/?bxid=5bea026724c17c6adf102b31&cndid=31738015&esrc=bounceX&mbid=mbid%3DCRMWIR012019%0A%0A&source=Email_0_EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_ZZ&utm_brand=wired&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_content=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_mailing=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=P4

I'll steel man this. I'm sure the byproducts of EV production are fairly minimal compared to the impact of climate change and the overall cleanliness of the local environment for those who drive them. And I'm not saying that byproducts industrial production in emerging nations is inherently bad by default. But this is one of the many hidden downsides of us trying to buy our way out of this mess by replacing the global fleet of vehicles with EVs.

It's like trying to overcome eating pounds of a sugar a day by also eating more carrots and running more. It would make far more sense to try to cut the sugar, both from a fiscal and health perspective, than to try to brute strength your way out of the sugar addiction.

Why does it have to be either or?  That's pretty binary thinking.  Why can't it be both?  We should convert everything to electric AND we should be taking steps to reduce vehicle use.

It can be both. It should be both. I never said otherwise.  I'm pushing for two things here.

1) The focus on EVs in public discourse- both in policy and in private decisions, IMO (I am highlighting that this is an opinion here and welcoming countering opinions such as yours) overshadows more important policies that we should be making. Hence the eating sugar metiphor. I am not saying that eating veggies is bad; on the contrary, it is great! But it doesn't matter how many veggies we eat if we are still eating lbs of sugar a day.

2) It is highly unlikely that there is an even distribution of resources that need to be given to each problem. So why not both? Because this makes it sound like both options are on level playing fields. EVs are important, but even if we converted 100% of the world to EVs, we'd still have major consumption problems that we could have solved had we tackled the car problem in the first place. EVs are an incredibly inefficient way to address greenhouse gas emissions in that they are super expensive and come with a myriad of byproducts that are not good for us humans. They are resource hogs. E-bikes are way better. Walking is better. Etc.

I'm not articulating it well, but if the choice is switching to an EV or having access to transit that discourages the need for a personal vehicle, the latter is objectively better from an environmental standpoint (and personal health as well).

[Tyson]

While they're making Cali healthier, they are also ruining other nations.

https://www.wired.com/story/workers-are-dying-in-the-ev-industrys-tainted-city/?bxid=5bea026724c17c6adf102b31&cndid=31738015&esrc=bounceX&mbid=mbid%3DCRMWIR012019%0A%0A&source=Email_0_EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_ZZ&utm_brand=wired&utm_campaign=aud-dev&utm_content=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_mailing=WIR_Daily_022023&utm_medium=email&utm_source=nl&utm_term=P4

I'll steel man this. I'm sure the byproducts of EV production are fairly minimal compared to the impact of climate change and the overall cleanliness of the local environment for those who drive them. And I'm not saying that byproducts industrial production in emerging nations is inherently bad by default. But this is one of the many hidden downsides of us trying to buy our way out of this mess by replacing the global fleet of vehicles with EVs.

It's like trying to overcome eating pounds of a sugar a day by also eating more carrots and running more. It would make far more sense to try to cut the sugar, both from a fiscal and health perspective, than to try to brute strength your way out of the sugar addiction.

Why does it have to be either or?  That's pretty binary thinking.  Why can't it be both?  We should convert everything to electric AND we should be taking steps to reduce vehicle use.

It can be both. It should be both. I never said otherwise.  I'm pushing for two things here.

1) The focus on EVs in public discourse- both in policy and in private decisions, IMO (I am highlighting that this is an opinion here and welcoming countering opinions such as yours) overshadows more important policies that we should be making. Hence the eating sugar metiphor. I am not saying that eating veggies is bad; on the contrary, it is great! But it doesn't matter how many veggies we eat if we are still eating lbs of sugar a day.

2) It is highly unlikely that there is an even distribution of resources that need to be given to each problem. So why not both? Because this makes it sound like both options are on level playing fields. EVs are important, but even if we converted 100% of the world to EVs, we'd still have major consumption problems that we could have solved had we tackled the car problem in the first place. EVs are an incredibly inefficient way to address greenhouse gas emissions in that they are super expensive and come with a myriad of byproducts that are not good for us humans. They are resource hogs. E-bikes are way better. Walking is better. Etc.

I'm not articulating it well, but if the choice is switching to an EV or having access to transit that discourages the need for a personal vehicle, the latter is objectively better from an environmental standpoint (and personal health as well).

Oh I totally agree.  I really like Not Just Bikes as a good resource for concrete solutions and alternative approaches to these issues - https://www.youtube.com/@NotJustBikes

[Just Joe]

I would like people to understand the magnitudes of their basic energy consumption.

House vs ev car vs ev truck vs ebike vs electric tea kettle

All reasons to walk/pedal more and drive less but my part of the world is not set up that way.

[englishteacheralex]

My husband and I just bought a 2020 Nissan Leaf to replace our 2007 Prius. After considering all of our options, only electric cars really appealed to us. We live on a small island with a moderate year-round climate, so we are ideal candidates. After having the Leaf for only four days, we're really pleased with our choice.

[Psychstache]

My husband and I just bought a 2020 Nissan Leaf to replace our 2007 Prius. After considering all of our options, only electric cars really appealed to us. We live on a small island with a moderate year-round climate, so we are ideal candidates. After having the Leaf for only four days, we're really pleased with our choice.

Yeah, I am coming up on the one year mark and the Leaf has been excellent.

[soulpatchmike]

I would like people to understand the magnitudes of their basic energy consumption.

To understand the magnitude of our basic energy consumption don't we need some gold standard to compare against?  What is that standard?

My household uses about 1500kWh of electricity per month on average.  Our peak month was around 2100kWh in August(A/C) over the past 12 months.  This is roughly 40% more than similar homes in my neighborhood.  However, we have 4 kids(+1 married and gone) and do not leave the house daily for work or school.  Therefore we end up driving our EV about 12k miles per year and our gas-guzzling suburban about 4-6000 miles per year for summer vacations towing our 35 ft hotel with us(we like to pretend we are homeless on summer weekends in the woods).  The kid cars don't get 5k per year either as they typically stay pretty close to home.

I wonder if we are using less or more net energy per person than DINKS or a single person(one person home) that commute to offices each day?  Even if they bicycle ride or walk to work, do they use more net energy per person than my household(~250kWh electricity per person) when adding the per-person workplace energy used to their home energy used?  We get to share in our excessive energy consumption where a single person or DINKs only have one or two people to share in their total consumption.

Fortunately for me and unfortunately for others, I am not motivated to use an EV by saving the planet, I am motivated to use an EV because I like electric motors and technological innovation.  Also, my $9500 used Nissan Leaf EV with 40k miles has been the cheapest total cost of ownership per mile vehicle I have ever owned when averaged out over the past 4 years(93k+ miles and counting!).

Cheers to the transition to EVs!

[Weisass]

I would like people to understand the magnitudes of their basic energy consumption.

To understand the magnitude of our basic energy consumption don't we need some gold standard to compare against?  What is that standard?

My household uses about 1500kWh of electricity per month on average.  Our peak month was around 2100kWh in August(A/C) over the past 12 months.  This is roughly 40% more than similar homes in my neighborhood.  However, we have 4 kids(+1 married and gone) and do not leave the house daily for work or school.  Therefore we end up driving our EV about 12k miles per year and our gas-guzzling suburban about 4-6000 miles per year for summer vacations towing our 35 ft hotel with us(we like to pretend we are homeless on summer weekends in the woods).  The kid cars don't get 5k per year either as they typically stay pretty close to home.

Cheers to the transition to EVs!

Average? Our household of six consumes an average of 790 kWh of electricity a month, nearly all of it covered by solar and nearly half of your usage. We have one car, which we drive a net total of 10k a year, and that is *with* commuting to work. That car is electric, btw, gifted by a deceased relative. 

Not trying to brag, but I am do happen to find those numbers crazy high. I also would argue that the biggest issue is that raised by folks earlier, and by our dearly departed @Syonyk. Consuming less and moving away from a world where we assume everyone has a giant death dealing metal box of their own to speed through life in is the work that is worth investing in.

[pecunia]

I would like people to understand the magnitudes of their basic energy consumption.

To understand the magnitude of our basic energy consumption don't we need some gold standard to compare against?  What is that standard?

My household uses about 1500kWh of electricity per month on average.  Our peak month was around 2100kWh in August(A/C) over the past 12 months.  This is roughly 40% more than similar homes in my neighborhood.  However, we have 4 kids(+1 married and gone) and do not leave the house daily for work or school.  Therefore we end up driving our EV about 12k miles per year and our gas-guzzling suburban about 4-6000 miles per year for summer vacations towing our 35 ft hotel with us(we like to pretend we are homeless on summer weekends in the woods).  The kid cars don't get 5k per year either as they typically stay pretty close to home.

Cheers to the transition to EVs!

Average? Our household of six consumes an average of 790 kWh of electricity a month, nearly all of it covered by solar and nearly half of your usage. We have one car, which we drive a net total of 10k a year, and that is *with* commuting to work. That car is electric, btw, gifted by a deceased relative. 

Not trying to brag, but I am do happen to find those numbers crazy high. I also would argue that the biggest issue is that raised by folks earlier, and by our dearly departed @Syonyk. Consuming less and moving away from a world where we assume everyone has a giant death dealing metal box of their own to speed through life in is the work that is worth investing in.

Now I feel good.  I just looked at my electric bill and used 229 kWH in January.  The short cold Winter days are the months for the most usage for lights and furnace blower.  I ran my air conditioner a few hours last Summer partly to ensure it still worked.

[LennStar]

I use 1500kWh. Per Year
Granted I am alone (and live in an appartment). And I don't have AC or electric car (my gas car has 4K-6K per year). But I work from home and donate CPU cycles, which uses electricity too.

[soulpatchmike]

Consuming less and moving away from a world where we assume everyone has a giant death dealing metal box of their own to speed through life in is the work that is worth investing in.

Why?
 
Not sure where you all live, but have you ever seen the beauty of natural America?  The ocean, the rocky mountains, the redwood forest, Yellowstone, the black hills, the grand canyon, the great lakes, the blue ridge parkway, Niagara falls, or any other beautiful places in America?  How and why would you stay in those places without a car?  Sometimes we drive 30 miles just to get to dinner when on vacation.  The journey is half the fun of the whole trip.

I am all for EVs but a life without a vehicle seems short-sighted.  I consume to create memories...sometimes excessively... 

I will also admit to trolling a bit about the electric bill, I know full well we use waaay too much electricity. Space heaters in the winter and AC in the summer are our nemeses, they too often get left on 24 hours per day, but -20F(-29C) and 90F(32C)+humidity are hard to get away from without them.

[nereo]

Consuming less and moving away from a world where we assume everyone has a giant death dealing metal box of their own to speed through life in is the work that is worth investing in.

Why?
 
Not sure where you all live, but have you ever seen the beauty of natural America?  The ocean, the rocky mountains, the redwood forest, Yellowstone, the black hills, the grand canyon, the great lakes, the blue ridge parkway, Niagara falls, or any other beautiful places in America?  How and why would you stay in those places without a car? Sometimes we drive 30 miles just to get to dinner when on vacation.  The journey is half the fun of the whole trip.

I am all for EVs but a life without a vehicle seems short-sighted.  I consume to create memories[i[/i]...sometimes excessively... 

The idea that we must use (and own) a personal car to visit these places is incredibly narrow minded. I’m actually typing this on my phone as I sit on a train traversing rural New England. Of the places you’ve mentioned I’ve traveled to the Grand Canyon, and Niagara via bus (and then backcountry backpacked), several spots along the both the Atlantic and Pacific by train, Yosemite via Amtrak and very recently two other national parks via ferry. I’ve also cycled and taken a quarter-gauge through the redwoods.  Not only is it currently possible and rather enjoyable to vacation this way, but it’s quite possible to design our systems to further such access. Most of Quebec’s excellent national parks (Sepaq) are easily accessed via train and/or ferry despite being in very remote places. I also traveled through the Scottish highlands via train and bus.

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

[soulpatchmike]

Consuming less and moving away from a world where we assume everyone has a giant death dealing metal box of their own to speed through life in is the work that is worth investing in.

Why?
 
Not sure where you all live, but have you ever seen the beauty of natural America?  The ocean, the rocky mountains, the redwood forest, Yellowstone, the black hills, the grand canyon, the great lakes, the blue ridge parkway, Niagara falls, or any other beautiful places in America?  How and why would you stay in those places without a car? Sometimes we drive 30 miles just to get to dinner when on vacation.  The journey is half the fun of the whole trip.

I am all for EVs but a life without a vehicle seems short-sighted.  I consume to create memories[i[/i]...sometimes excessively... 

The idea that we must use (and own) a personal car to visit these places is incredibly narrow minded. I’m actually typing this on my phone as I sit on a train traversing rural New England. Of the places you’ve mentioned I’ve traveled to the Grand Canyon, and Niagara via bus (and then backcountry backpacked), several spots along the both the Atlantic and Pacific by train, Yosemite via Amtrak and very recently two other national parks via ferry. I’ve also cycled and taken a quarter-gauge through the redwoods.  Not only is it currently possible and rather enjoyable to vacation this way, but it’s quite possible to design our systems to further such access. Most of Quebec’s excellent national parks (Sepaq) are easily accessed via train and/or ferry despite being in very remote places. I also traveled through the Scottish highlands via train and bus.

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

Thank you.  I totally understand how important public transit is now.  Alright, I am off to get the family on board with selling the camper and cars.  Enjoy your day!

[bacchi]

Thank you.  I totally understand how important public transit is now.  Alright, I am off to get the family on board with selling the camper and cars.  Enjoy your day!

One of the reasons we're here, on this forum, is to challenge our beliefs. That includes both how we spend and how we take care of the earth.

[StashingAway]

Thank you.  I totally understand how important public transit is now.  Alright, I am off to get the family on board with selling the camper and cars.  Enjoy your day!

I want to further add how you've kind of boxed this in a bit.

The majority of private use of private vehicles is running errands and work travel (and commercial, but that's a different animal). None of those things you listed make up for a large majority of personal vehicle miles in the US. If everyone just kept their gas vehicles and only used them for vacations while not using them for work or errands, we'd be in a much better place environmentally. For the reasons you mentioned, there's less payback for investing in the infrastructure to remote places, albeit it is safer and more reliable if done to modern standards. The romanticism personal freedom (pushed for by the motor industry) is what chains us to vehicles for daily use. You can break the chains without dismissing personal vehicles outright.

I will also raise you one. Have you ever taken a Euro trip without a personal car? Traveling by train, bus and on foot to visit the historical stone buildings built up over the centuries? Walked the Roman cobblestones that have been walked on for over 2,000 years? Visited the markets on bridges in Prague built by old Germanic kings? The beauty of many of these places is their walkability and accessibility. Because it is so much more developed, there are different rules for how private your land can be. While they are lacking in the wilderness compared to North America, you are welcome in the structures that have exists for so long because everyone knows that they're just passing through on the coattails of time. Visiting a mountain village in Switzerland by train and walking to the local cheese monastery is more rewarding on foot than by personal car. You can spend your energy reflecting on the surroundings rather than having to worry about road conditions or where to park.  As you said, it makes the journey part of the fun, rather than being strapped to a chair.

I've done a 48 trip state in a van. It was amazing. It wouldn't have been possible with an EV or a without a personal car in general. Although, while we did it, our carbon footprint was significantly less than that of the average American partially because we didn't have a house also eating resources. Our monthly electric usage from the grid was 0kWh.

Edit: unfortunate grammar

[nereo]

Thank you.  I totally understand how important public transit is now.  Alright, I am off to get the family on board with selling the camper and cars.  Enjoy your day!

One of the reasons we're here, on this forum, is to challenge our beliefs. That includes both how we spend and how we take care of the earth.

Exactly this.  I intend my posts to be challenging but not combative. I want people to realize that a lot of our societal norms are not necessities, and other options exist or could exist.

Full disclosure we own a car and we use that car for trips and commuting (mostly carpooling).  I also live in a rural district where there’s often no safe way to get to some addresses even a few miles away*. I just like to challenge this ingrained assumption that a car is your only or even the best option for getting  from one place to another.

*Thankfully I’m no the economic planning board for my town and we are making progress connecting previously fragmented neighborhoods with mixed-use paths. It’s frustrating how a lack of insight decade ago has led to adjacent homes being utterly segregated from each other except by car.

[BicycleB]

Thank you.  I totally understand how important public transit is now.  Alright, I am off to get the family on board with selling the camper and cars.  Enjoy your day!

One of the reasons we're here, on this forum, is to challenge our beliefs. That includes both how we spend and how we take care of the earth.

Exactly this.  I intend my posts to be challenging but not combative. I want people to realize that a lot of our societal norms are not necessities, and other options exist or could exist.

Full disclosure we own a car and we use that car for trips and commuting (mostly carpooling).  I also live in a rural district where there’s often no safe way to get to some addresses even a few miles away*. I just like to challenge this ingrained assumption that a car is your only or even the best option for getting  from one place to another.

*Thankfully I’m no the economic planning board for my town and we are making progress connecting previously fragmented neighborhoods with mixed-use paths. It’s frustrating how a lack of insight decade ago has led to adjacent homes being utterly segregated from each other except by car.

@nereo - AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!

That's really doing the work to make improvements. Well done!!!

[LennStar]

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

FunFact: The highest mountain in central Germany is acessible by (steam) train, but not by car.

[pecunia]

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

FunFact: The highest mountain in central Germany is acessible by (steam) train, but not by car.

An old steam train would be a lot more fun.  There are some things that I don't want the environmental cops to go after.

This trail thing makes me wonder if businesses like supermarkets could be required to be located where they are accessible by bicycle and foot traffic.  A lot of stress can be avoided if you don't have to drive.

[Just Joe]

I'd be happy if local retailers were required to provide a ring on the wall that I could chain my bike to. Right now - mostly - there is nothing anywhere. And my bike lock won't wrap around a big brick column.

[FINate]

I was please to read today that Idaho is getting funding as part of the Infrastructure Act to put towards the EV charging network over the next 5 years. It's not a lot of money, but every bit helps.

[StashingAway]

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

FunFact: The highest mountain in central Germany is acessible by (steam) train, but not by car.

...

This trail thing makes me wonder if businesses like supermarkets could be required to be located where they are accessible by bicycle and foot traffic.  A lot of stress can be avoided if you don't have to drive.

In some ways that puts the cart before the horse. There are some voluntary certifications (notably LEED) that try to promote walkability through individual building design. But buildings doing that are pushing against a lot of momentum and have to go over and beyond to try to meet this goal.

The real killer with all of this is our adherence to Euclidian zoning. If you are not living in an apartment/condo, in the US, you are 99% likely to be living in an area zoned for SFH (Single Family Housing). The one way to kill walkability and make us reliant on vehicles is to force a minimum living footprint for people. It forces people to have a weird choice; either a super dense apartment, or an isolated house. We've done this for so long and so well that most Americans don't even know that there are other options, and that they are not the disparate city hellholes that they envision.

Euclidian zoning:
https://www.planetizen.com/definition/euclidean-zoning

Due to this zoning, that market that we may want to force to be "walkable", still has to be located in an area zoned for that type of building. You cannot have a street corner mini mart under a 3 plex that you can have in the European walkable cities (which were developed before this zoning was invented). It is literally illegal to try to build a commercial building that would benefit a neighborhood in a neighborhood. No local coffee house and bicycle repair shop right next to a couple of duplexes. The even funnier kicker is that in the very limited neighborhoods who do have this type of building grandfathered in, the houses in those areas are valued at a premium. By forcing single family housing zoning, we are reducing the ability for local neighborhoods to prosper.

A side effect is that once people are already in their car, they're not going to stop in several isolated shops (as they might do on foot or bicycle), because parking and such is a hassle. So in reducing their shopping burden, they gravitate toward superstores like Wal-Mart.

This has created a huge "missing middle housing" deficit in the US. Missing middle referring to housing types in between a single family and an apartment (not referring to an economic middle). It plays more than a small role in our housing crisis as well. 

https://missingmiddlehousing.com/

In summary, instead of trying to force supermarkets to be located in walkable areas, we can start by just making it not illegal for them to be there in the first place.

[AlanStache]

I suspect that StachingAway is really just a GptChat bot trained exclusively on NotJustBikes, CityNerd and StrongTown :-)

[pecunia]

Look and you’ll frequently find these ‘remote’ locations are already accessible either in whole or predominately without a car. Look elsewhere and be inspired at how it can be done with much less damage to these beautiful places we are trying to visit.

FunFact: The highest mountain in central Germany is acessible by (steam) train, but not by car.

...

This trail thing makes me wonder if businesses like supermarkets could be required to be located where they are accessible by bicycle and foot traffic.  A lot of stress can be avoided if you don't have to drive.

In some ways that puts the cart before the horse. There are some voluntary certifications (notably LEED) that try to promote walkability through individual building design. But buildings doing that are pushing against a lot of momentum and have to go over and beyond to try to meet this goal.

The real killer with all of this is our adherence to Euclidian zoning. If you are not living in an apartment/condo, in the US, you are 99% likely to be living in an area zoned for SFH (Single Family Housing). The one way to kill walkability and make us reliant on vehicles is to force a minimum living footprint for people. It forces people to have a weird choice; either a super dense apartment, or an isolated house. We've done this for so long and so well that most Americans don't even know that there are other options, and that they are not the disparate city hellholes that they envision.

Euclidian zoning:
https://www.planetizen.com/definition/euclidean-zoning

Due to this zoning, that market that we may want to force to be "walkable", still has to be located in an area zoned for that type of building. You cannot have a street corner mini mart under a 3 plex that you can have in the European walkable cities (which were developed before this zoning was invented). It is literally illegal to try to build a commercial building that would benefit a neighborhood in a neighborhood. No local coffee house and bicycle repair shop right next to a couple of duplexes. The even funnier kicker is that in the very limited neighborhoods who do have this type of building grandfathered in, the houses in those areas are valued at a premium. By forcing single family housing zoning, we are reducing the ability for local neighborhoods to prosper.

A side effect is that once people are already in their car, they're not going to stop in several isolated shops (as they might do on foot or bicycle), because parking and such is a hassle. So in reducing their shopping burden, they gravitate toward superstores like Wal-Mart.

This has created a huge "missing middle housing" deficit in the US. Missing middle referring to housing types in between a single family and an apartment (not referring to an economic middle). It plays more than a small role in our housing crisis as well. 

https://missingmiddlehousing.com/

In summary, instead of trying to force supermarkets to be located in walkable areas, we can start by just making it not illegal for them to be there in the first place.

I realized that areas are often zoned commercial or residential, but never realized what was being given up.  It is indeed the way you describe where I live.  Businesses are much isolated from the housing.  However, I'm lucky enough that most of the businesses are accessible by bike paths.  That post was a bit of an eye opener.

[nereo]

Toyota's new CEO is taking full-electric EVs seriously again, after spending the company spent the last decade or so focusing on fuel cells.

Frankly, Toyota has stood out in recent years (and not in a good way) for being one of the only companies that does not have a full electric BEV available now (not counting the bZ4X because it's production is so limited they are essentially unicorns in the NA market) and their 2024 pipeline is not any better.


https://www.autonews.com/manufacturing/how-toyotas-new-ceo-koji-sato-plans-get-real-about-evs

[TomTX]

I was please to read today that Idaho is getting funding as part of the Infrastructure Act to put towards the EV charging network over the next 5 years. It's not a lot of money, but every bit helps.

Every state is getting EV charging money from the Feds and had to submit a plan for Federal approval.

[nereo]

Directly addressing the subject question - at what point do we declare EVs are popular in the US?  Is it #s of BEVs sold in a year?  A % of BEVs on the road?  Multiple Super Bowl ads?

If we haven't hit "popular" yet, it seems we are getting awfully close....

[TomTX]

Directly addressing the subject question - at what point do we declare EVs are popular in the US?  Is it #s of BEVs sold in a year?  A % of BEVs on the road?  Multiple Super Bowl ads?

If we haven't hit "popular" yet, it seems we are getting awfully close....

Well, the Car and Driver "top 25 models" for 2022 had just 2* EVs, with the highest being at #9.

*Yes, the "F-series" is listed, but if you split out just the EV version it would need to increase sales roughly 10x to make it into the top 25.

[nereo]

Directly addressing the subject question - at what point do we declare EVs are popular in the US?  Is it #s of BEVs sold in a year?  A % of BEVs on the road?  Multiple Super Bowl ads?

If we haven't hit "popular" yet, it seems we are getting awfully close....

Well, the Car and Driver "top 25 models" for 2022 had just 2* EVs, with the highest being at #9.

*Yes, the "F-series" is listed, but if you split out just the EV version it would need to increase sales roughly 10x to make it into the top 25.

Right, so.... what's the answer?  I read the above as "one of the top ten cars for 2022 was an EV, according to Car and Driver".    That seems pretty significant to me.  How many top-ten models do we need before we call them 'popular'?  Three? Five?  More than five?

[neo von retorch]

In 2018, just under a quarter million EVs were sold in the U.S. About 75% of those were from Tesla. In that same year, over 5.3 million total passenger cars were sold, and another nearly 12 million light trucks, just in the U.S.

The 25 Bestselling Cars, Trucks, and SUVs of 2022

15. Tesla Model 3 (198,200 units sold)
9. Tesla Model Y (231,400 units sold)
6. GMC Sierra (241,522 units sold)
3. Ram Pickup (468,344 units sold)
2. Chevy Silverado (513,354 units sold)
1. Ford F-Series (653,957 units sold)

Ford has also started selling an electric version of the F-150 called the Lightning and says it has sold 15,617 electric pickups so far.

The above totals do not specify if they include hybrids or electric versions, but there are very few full sized pickups that fit either label.

In a Down Market, EV Sales Soar to New Record

According to the latest counts from Kelley Blue Book, total new-vehicle sales in the U.S. fell in 2022 to 13.8 million units, down from 15 million in 2021 and well down from the 17.3 million the market delivered five years ago in 2018.

EV sales in the U.S. in 2022 soared, as new models and high interest pushed sales volumes past 800,000 for the first time, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates, an increase of 65% versus 2021. EV share of the total market hit 5.8%, up from 3.2% in 2021.

Tesla’s share of the EV market continues to tumble, as forecast, falling below 60% for the first time in Q4 of 2022

United States Total Vehicle Sales

New light-vehicle sales in the United States rose on a seasonally adjusted basis by 4.2% to 15.74 million units in January 2023 from a year ago...

The wording is a bit confusing, but that's annualized sales. At any rate, 800,000 is about 5.1% of 15.74 million, though an earlier article claims 5.8%. Comparing that to 2018, which is 250,000 being just 1.4% of 17.3 million in sales. So there's definitely significant growth there. Tesla is still selling more than 1 out of every 2 EV in the U.S. And Ford is almost selling one Ford F-series pickup for every EV being sold (with GM's combined full-size truck models being even higher in sales). Still a marked improvement from 4 years prior.

No End in Sight: New-Vehicle Transaction Prices End 2022 at Record Highs...

The average transaction price (ATP) of a new vehicle in the U.S. hit a record high in December at $49,507, an increase of 1.9% ($927) from November and up 4.9% ($2,297) from year-earlier levels.

The average new EV sold for $61,448, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates, still well above the industry average.

EVs are popular, in that people want them, and they are willing to pay a lot for them, if they're available. (Though in general, car prices are just crazy!) Certainly, the variety has increased a good amount in the past 4 years.

[Tyson]

EVs are popular, in that people want them, and they are willing to pay a lot for them, if they're available. (Though in general, car prices are just crazy!) Certainly, the variety has increased a good amount in the past 4 years.

Not true anymore.  After the recent (steep) price cuts from Tesla, the Model 3 is now $5k less than the average cost of a new (ICE) vehicle:

https://fortune.com/2023/02/21/tesla-model-3-sells-5000-less-average-us-new-car-price-cuts/

[neo von retorch]

https://electrek.co/2023/01/09/the-top-10-best-selling-electric-vehicles-in-the-us-of-2022/

1. Tesla Model Y
2. Tesla Model 3
3. Ford Mach-E 39,458
4. Tesla Model S
5. Chevy Bolt 38,120
6. Tesla Model X
7. Hyundai Ioniq 5 22,982
8. Kia EV6 20,498
9. Volkswagen ID.4 20,511
10. Rivian R1T 20,332
11. Ford F-150 Lightning 15,617

(Tesla numbers were not included...)

[neo von retorch]

EVs are popular, in that people want them, and they are willing to pay a lot for them, if they're available. (Though in general, car prices are just crazy!) Certainly, the variety has increased a good amount in the past 4 years.

Not true anymore.  After the recent (steep) price cuts from Tesla, the Model 3 is now $5k less than the average cost of a new (ICE) vehicle:

https://fortune.com/2023/02/21/tesla-model-3-sells-5000-less-average-us-new-car-price-cuts/

The average price of a Model 3?

Tesla’s cheapest vehicle starts at $42,990

You (and the article) word it as if there is a single price for the Model 3, regardless of trim levels and options. Why is that? (It's not accurate.)

[Tyson]

EVs are popular, in that people want them, and they are willing to pay a lot for them, if they're available. (Though in general, car prices are just crazy!) Certainly, the variety has increased a good amount in the past 4 years.

Not true anymore.  After the recent (steep) price cuts from Tesla, the Model 3 is now $5k less than the average cost of a new (ICE) vehicle:

https://fortune.com/2023/02/21/tesla-model-3-sells-5000-less-average-us-new-car-price-cuts/

The average price of a Model 3?

Tesla’s cheapest vehicle starts at $42,990

You (and the article) word it as if there is a single price for the Model 3, regardless of trim levels and options. Why is that? (It's not accurate.)

That's $5k less without the $7500 tax incentives.  If you include the tax incentives, then the Model 3 starts at $12,500 less than the average ICE car. 

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.  I'm just pointing out that you can get a new Model 3 for $35k after incentives.  That's pretty affordable for a new car, regardless of engine type.

[neo von retorch]

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.

Where did I say that? The article linked said the average price for an EV in 2022 was $12,000 higher than the industry average. I simply quoted it. The prices paid in 2022 do not change because Tesla changes their starting price in 2023.

The average transaction price (ATP) of a new vehicle in the U.S. hit a record high in December at $49,507, an increase of 1.9% ($927) from November and up 4.9% ($2,297) from year-earlier levels.

The average new EV sold for $61,448, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates, still well above the industry average.

[Tyson]

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.

Where did I say that? The article linked said the average price for an EV in 2022 was $12,000 higher than the industry average. I simply quoted it. The prices in 2022 do not change because Tesla changes their starting price.

The average transaction price (ATP) of a new vehicle in the U.S. hit a record high in December at $49,507, an increase of 1.9% ($927) from November and up 4.9% ($2,297) from year-earlier levels.

The average new EV sold for $61,448, according to Kelley Blue Book estimates, still well above the industry average.

Oh, I just took your initial statement to mean that all EV's are expensive vs. ICE cars.  In that case, the Model 3 (or the Bolt or the Leaf) would certainly show that you can get cheap EV's.  But it's clear now that you meant the average cost of EV's are higher than the average cost of ICE.  Yep, that's true and you won't get an argument from me over that. 

Not that any of that would apply to me personally as I have never bought a car new, and don't plan to, ever.  I'll just wait on the sidelines till volume production is achieved and then the used prices come down and I'll snag one used eventually.  But that's mostly just becuase I am a cheap bastard :D

[neo von retorch]

Same! I did buy a brand new car once... 2007 Honda Fit for about $15.7k. Sold after putting 60,000 miles on it for $11k. Not completely horrible cost per mile. Shouldn't have sold it, but that's a story for another thread.

Anyway, I think the real takeaway from the transaction amounts in 2022 is that people are buying expensive EVs... in part due to selection and availability. Of the top 4 selling EVs in the U.S., the lowest starting price is the Model 3, followed by the theoretical $46k starting price of the Mach-E. But real world availability of the lowest trim levels is very low, and in the case of Ford, probably completely non-existent, or altered by dealer markup.

Top Selling EVs in 2022 in the U.S. w/ current starting price
1. Tesla Model Y $54,990
2. Tesla Model 3 $42,990
3. Ford Mach-E $45,995
4. Tesla Model S $94,990
5. Chevrolet Bolt EV/EUV $26,500 / $27,800

[Just Joe]

Not that any of that would apply to me personally as I have never bought a car new, and don't plan to, ever.  I'll just wait on the sidelines till volume production is achieved and then the used prices come down and I'll snag one used eventually.  But that's mostly just becuase I am a cheap bastard :D

Same. Am not spending that much money on a depreciating asset when a much, much cheaper vehicle serves our modest day to day needs.

I'd love to have a nice new EV but don't need one enough to absorb the cost to play.

[BicycleB]

Directly addressing the subject question - at what point do we declare EVs are popular in the US?  Is it #s of BEVs sold in a year?  A % of BEVs on the road?  Multiple Super Bowl ads?

If we haven't hit "popular" yet, it seems we are getting awfully close....

Really interesting question! Here's a draft scale.

"Buyers" here means "new car buyers". I put "popular" at step 6 in a proposed 10 stages of a transition from all ICE to nearly all EV/PHEV.

10) Predominant - 97% or more vehicle miles traveled are traveled under electric power not ICE, over 90% of licensed vehicles are EVs or PHEVs, gasoline is rare enough that some areas can't easily be traveled to by ICE vehicles.
9) Dominant - 90% VMTs electric, 80%+ licensed vehicles EV/PHEV, charging is far easier to find than gasoline
8) Ascendant - 50% VMTs electric,  75%+ vehicles sold are EV/PHEV with no subsidies needed, charging is findable for almost any journey in US (range anxiety dead, excepting old farts). ICE owners probably complaining about fewer gas stations available.
7) Leading - 50%+ vehicles sold EV/PHEV, 90% of on-road locations in US accessible by 90%+ of EVs/PHEVs using ranges discounted for used batteries. Probably some gas stations under economic pressure unless they shift to charging, but still the majority of VMTs likely ICE.
6) Popular - 2/3 or more of buyers state they prefer EVs/PHEVs to ICE, majority of buyers who prefer EV/PHEV buy EV/PHEV, 75%+ of on-road locations accessible by 2/3 of licenced EVs/PHEVs per manufacturer stated ranges. Likely most vehicles on road still gasoline at this point though. Due to thin margins, convenience store industry websites probably discussing changes needed to survive electric transition if they haven't already done so, but fuel volumes sold still likely over 80% of peak. Subsidies might still be critical at this point for median buyers.
5) Desirable - Majority of buyers state they want EV/PHEV, but also say if conditions prevent them, they'll buy ICE instead.
4) Aspirational - EVs sell for more $ than ICE, but over 50% buyers say they can't afford one, or hesitate due to charging issues/ range anxiety. (now?)
3) Respect growing - EVs/PHEVs seen as specialty products and some non-techie, non-green consumers want them, but majority of buyers state they prefer ICE. (2018-202x?)
2) Niche only - Less than half of techies and environmentalists choose EVs/PHEVs, most people view them as weird and don't want them, but they're known to exist and enthusiasm is growing in viable consumer niches (2013-2017?)
1) Bleeding edge - few vechicles available, many barriers; buyers rare, most people have never seen an EV; DIY is a thing. (1990s-2012?)

Maybe we're in 3 and 4 at once for now?

[Paper Chaser]

EVs are popular, in that people want them, and they are willing to pay a lot for them, if they're available. (Though in general, car prices are just crazy!) Certainly, the variety has increased a good amount in the past 4 years.

Not true anymore.  After the recent (steep) price cuts from Tesla, the Model 3 is now $5k less than the average cost of a new (ICE) vehicle:

https://fortune.com/2023/02/21/tesla-model-3-sells-5000-less-average-us-new-car-price-cuts/

The average price of a Model 3?

Tesla’s cheapest vehicle starts at $42,990

You (and the article) word it as if there is a single price for the Model 3, regardless of trim levels and options. Why is that? (It's not accurate.)

That's $5k less without the $7500 tax incentives.  If you include the tax incentives, then the Model 3 starts at $12,500 less than the average ICE car.

I'd bet the Model 3 (being a mid-sized sedan)is a different type of vehicle than "the average ICE car" that's sold today too. Even before pandemic supply shortages, OEMs were moving toward prioritizing trucks and SUVs with a bunch of luxury features. That accelerated over the last couple of years. Comparing a base trim Model 3 to a high level pickup or crossover is kind of apples to oranges.

[nereo]

Thankfully we don’t have to compare a Model 3 Tesla to a Pickup or SUV.  We have well defined vehicle classes - in the model 3’s case it’s apparently a “compact executive sedan” .  It includes the Audi S4, Mercedes C300, Volvo S60, Jaguar XE and several others.

[neo von retorch]

25 Best-Selling Cars of 2022

6. GMC Sierra (241,522 units sold)
5. Toyota Camry (295,201 units sold)
4. Toyota RAV4 (399,941 units sold)
3. Ram Pickup (468,344 units sold)
2. Chevy Silverado (513,354 units sold)
1. Ford F-Series (653,957 units sold)

Of the top 6, 4 are full-sized pickup trucks. The slightly smaller Tacoma is #8.

So in the top 25, 5 trucks, 14 SUVs (or large wagons), and 6 are mid-sized sedans.

[LennStar]

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.  I'm just pointing out that you can get a new Model 3 for $35k after incentives.  That's pretty affordable for a new car, regardless of engine type.

WHAT??? facepunch

Get a used one for 5K and save the 30K for 100 dollar each month for free!

I wonder how BYD will fare in the US ocne they come over. I guess their prices will be lower.

[RWD]

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.  I'm just pointing out that you can get a new Model 3 for $35k after incentives.  That's pretty affordable for a new car, regardless of engine type.

WHAT??? facepunch

Get a used one for 5K and save the 30K for 100 dollar each month for free!

I wonder how BYD will fare in the US ocne they come over. I guess their prices will be lower.

Tyson said it was affordable for a new car. Comparing used cars there are several EV options in the $5k-10k range (Leaf, Spark, Focus, 500e, i-MiEV).

[TomTX]

Agree with RWD here.

[Frugal Lizard]

Is the actual availability of EV's either new or used impacting their popularity? 

Anec-data
We ordered our EV6 in mid March. It was delivered in mid-December. Had it not arrived by Christmas we would have bought any vehicle. Our son was starting a job in January in another city and we couldn't stomach being car-less all week in the winter. I am recovering from an injury and can only walk short distances slowly. No walking in slush (really really hurts) or ice at all.

Friends have ordered their EV but in the meantime replaced their dead Subaru with another old Subaru. They were told in Nov 2022 that the wait would be as long as 2 years.

The sales statistics don't show a wait list, or the KIA website crashing for pre-order due to demand to put down $500CAN for the option to order a car when they start taking orders.

[Tyson]

You said EV's are expensive vs ICE cars.  I'm just pointing out that you can get a new Model 3 for $35k after incentives.  That's pretty affordable for a new car, regardless of engine type.

WHAT??? facepunch

Get a used one for 5K and save the 30K for 100 dollar each month for free!

I wonder how BYD will fare in the US ocne they come over. I guess their prices will be lower.

I think you missed my follow up post:

Not that any of that would apply to me personally as I have never bought a car new, and don't plan to, ever.  I'll just wait on the sidelines till volume production is achieved and then the used prices come down and I'll snag one used eventually.  But that's mostly just becuase I am a cheap bastard :D

[FINate]

I was please to read today that Idaho is getting funding as part of the Infrastructure Act to put towards the EV charging network over the next 5 years. It's not a lot of money, but every bit helps.

Every state is getting EV charging money from the Feds and had to submit a plan for Federal approval.

Yes, I'm aware of that. It's just nice to see the money making its way down to actual local budgets. I think charging infrastructure is the key to getting more EV adoption, so happy to see this happening. And glad that Tesla is opening up at least part of their charging network so they can access these funds.

[BuffaloStache]

In unrelated but relevant news to this thread; I ordered a Chevy Bolt EUV ~2.5 months ago, and it's supposed to arrive sometime in the next 2 weeks. This is primarily because my 17 year old Subaru is finally starting to go on me (engine overheating/seal issue so it can't be driven more than ~30 min at a time). I'm pretty stoked!

During December and January I test drove lots of EVs: Nissan Leaf, VW ID.4, Polestar 2, Volvo XC40 Recharge, Chevy Bolt (regular), and the Bolt EUV. I tried very hard (called over 10 Ford dealerships in 2 states) but failed to secure a test drive for a Mustang Mach-e. As luck would have it I also went on a business trip to LA recently and had a Tesla Model 3 as a rental car (Hertz gave it to me for no added cost!), and I was able to test drive a Tesla Model Y from a friend who recently got one. If people are really interested I can post my notes from most/all of those test drives.

In the end I picked the Bolt EUV because the Bolt/Bolt EUV options really just seemed to be the best value, they were available with relatively low wait times (3 months -vs- 12+ months for some, as Frugal Lizard states), and we have an ICE car already so this will never be used for road trips (almost exclusively for commuting, around-the-town driving, and drives to hikes with the family). I'm getting a dedicated Level 2 charger installed in my garage and future-proofing the installation to allow for higher amperage in the future (+ a much needed panel upgrade at ~50% of cost thanks to local rebates!) so the slower Level 3 charging speeds of the Bolt EUV shouldn't impact me much. When I test drove most of the other cars, I kept thinking that even without the Federal Tax rebates, the Bolt EUV delivers ~80% of the features and drive experience of most of the other EVs with a very respectable range, for >$15,000 less than most of the other comparable options. I'll report back here in a month or so to report on my initial experiences.

Final point- I definitely wanted an EV so I sought one out, but this is the first time that I went to buy a car and felt like there were at least a couple of options in the price range I was considering with ~250+ mi range. I also never thought that I would be someone to buy a Chevy... To me that's a win overall.

[2sk22]

In unrelated but relevant news to this thread; I ordered a Chevy Bolt EUV ~2.5 months ago, and it's supposed to arrive sometime in the next 2 weeks. This is primarily because my 17 year old Subaru is finally starting to go on me (engine overheating/seal issue so it can't be driven more than ~30 min at a time). I'm pretty stoked!

During December and January I test drove lots of EVs: Nissan Leaf, VW ID.4, Polestar 2, Volvo XC40 Recharge, Chevy Bolt (regular), and the Bolt EUV. I tried very hard (called over 10 Ford dealerships in 2 states) but failed to secure a test drive for a Mustang Mach-e. As luck would have it I also went on a business trip to LA recently and had a Tesla Model 3 as a rental car (Hertz gave it to me for no added cost!), and I was able to test drive a Tesla Model Y from a friend who recently got one. If people are really interested I can post my notes from most/all of those test drives.

In the end I picked the Bolt EUV because the Bolt/Bolt EUV options really just seemed to be the best value, they were available with relatively low wait times (3 months -vs- 12+ months for some, as Frugal Lizard states), and we have an ICE car already so this will never be used for road trips (almost exclusively for commuting, around-the-town driving, and drives to hikes with the family). I'm getting a dedicated Level 2 charger installed in my garage and future-proofing the installation to allow for higher amperage in the future (+ a much needed panel upgrade at ~50% of cost thanks to local rebates!) so the slower Level 3 charging speeds of the Bolt EUV shouldn't impact me much. When I test drove most of the other cars, I kept thinking that even without the Federal Tax rebates, the Bolt EUV delivers ~80% of the features and drive experience of most of the other EVs with a very respectable range, for >$15,000 less than most of the other comparable options. I'll report back here in a month or so to report on my initial experiences.

Final point- I definitely wanted an EV so I sought one out, but this is the first time that I went to buy a car and felt like there were at least a couple of options in the price range I was considering with ~250+ mi range. I also never thought that I would be someone to buy a Chevy... To me that's a win overall.

I would be very interested in your notes about the driving experience on these cars - do post. As it happens, I have independently come to the conclusion that the Bolt EUV is the only EV that on the market that currently appeals to me. I don't want a big battery but I do want a high level of utility. Hopefully more such vehicles will come on the market in the next few years when we are ready to buy an EV in household.