I’m surprised a company hasn’t swooped in to make small affordable EVs with low ranges for local use. A neighbor has a vehicle that was briefly made in the early 2000s that went out of business but he still uses it. I’d buy one if it was in business. The majority of Americans live in metro areas and the majority of drives are shortish commutes. Lots of people are buying e bikes for this reason. But if a Tesla that has wayyyyy too much tech goes for $40k it stands to reason that a very simple small battery vehicle could go for under $10k, use 1/5 of the battery minerals and actually save families money by allowing them to replace one of their gas cars with something cheaper. Personally I’d love a car with zero tech, just a golf cart with some windows that gets me across town. It’s odd no company is trying to fill this. It’s either a $2k e-bike or a $40k+ supercharged iPhone on wheels. I don’t need a 10 second quarter mile to go to the grocery store.
Can't the Fed simply print electricity and wires and transformers and pylons and robots to assemble it all and computers to run it all? Maybe Jared Bernstein (or other Bidenenomics geniuses) can figure it all out, since to him (them) the who and why money is printed and what is the relationship between printing and to the bond and general markets seems too complex.
It’s always interesting to see how figures are used to support a belief. The author’s bias is clear throughout.
No talk of how petro companies shut down early EV attempts, then claims EVs have been available for 100 years with insignificant success. No talk of how Tesla’s vehicles are out of reach of most people. No talk of the rapidly lowering prices of EVs.
Perhaps better to use a comparison date of less than ten years to analyse the success of the international EV market. The USA seems to have structural issues in purchasing from China but the rest of the world is rapidly increasing their EV purchases.
I was in Durham, NC recently, where I saw one of these Cybertrucks ahead of me in traffic. Yep, it was every bit as "butt-ugly" as it is in the above photo. My personal wish for all this climate fraud is that the EV industry will lead the way in total and painful crashes of the wind / solar / EV industries. Without EVs to drive a need for "clean electric generation", lots of the arguments (real or imaginary) for wind & solar will also disappear. And remember, a true disruptor like Donald Trump might be all that's necessary to start the crashes of these Democrat / government-caused disasters, and a return to fossil fuels- with a resurrection of our nuclear industry around small modular reactors.
Not optimistic, stupid. At least to any remotely informed, rational human being, even at the time. I assume he’s still on the prognostication circuit getting paid a lot to talk shite to gullible liberals.
As far as chart 8 , the Green Goo is the centerpiece to China's bribery of Biden (and about 1000 or more other actors entrusted by the public who have done nothing more but sold that trust to the highest Chinese bidder )
The TESLA TRUCK is designed to meet the needs of the para military militias that are preparing for the Civil War here in the USA … ever wonder why they made the truck bulletproof???
The problem with this analysis is it ignores the highly likely near-term revolution in battery technologies -- which promises to make batteries (40% of the cost of EVs) cheaper, faster charging, more durable (more recharges), better in cold weather, more energy dense (making them lighter and offering better range) and most of all -- cheaper. There are many candidates (in chemistry and format) and how many of them will succeed -- if ever -- is unknown, except for the likelihood some will succeed. Sodium-ion batteries are already real, with continuing progress on lithium-sulfur and others. Once cheap long range EVs arrive, the days of traditional gasoline cars is over. Adoptions curves tend to be slow, slow, slow... then overnight. Remember film cameras? Replaced by digital cameras, and now largely replaced by phones. The triumph of EVs may be more swift.
Thanks, Robert. I point folks to your work because you put so much into objective analysis and presentation of the energy issues.
Coming out of a nuclear power life, besides the large stack of issues addressed (and even my constant chant of “don’t use electricity to make heat” - just for 2nd Law of Thermodynamics reasons), I also lived in risk analysis world.
From this, I note that shifting our transportation systems’ energy source from petroleum to electricity pushes the consequences of disturbances in the electric grid to also disrupt the transportation of people and goods, and it does this for illusory benefits. Whereas leaving their energy sources separate maintains good immunity for transportation. The electric grid has many potential modes of disruption. I wouldn’t want to drive transportation into taking on those vulnerabilities unless the benefits were very large and low cost and they are neither. We don’t need to lose everything from a power outage.
We have a large, mature fuel distribution system for petroleum. BTW: there’s a simple answer to any response that says that gas pumps need electricity. I can bring my portable generator over to power their pump.
I don’t understand why Musk focused resources on the stupid Cybertruck instead of a $25,000 small suv or sedan which would have been an instant winner.
The data shows that Tesla sales are getting squeezed by other luxury carmakers that can produce EVs in roughly the same price range. This doesn't say much about the state of the EV industry except that people that can afford EVs are not always choosing Tesla anymore. Chart (and a response to some of the other EV industry assertions) here: https://futurepositiveinvestor.substack.com/p/evs-a-statement-or-solution
A few quibbles. NdFeB magnets are also used in ICE vehicles. Only DC motors in EVs use them. The bigger issue is lithium for which South America is the greatest source . There is a huge amount of unmined lithium in the U.S. but environmental concerns prevent its mining. China is making a huge play for SoAm.
I drive an EV (not a Tesla) and believe they are here to stay. They will eventually displace most ICE vehicles for a variety of reasons, but such change takes longer than the government wants. We are seeing a market anomaly from government intervention and from Tesla’s dominance.
The next wave will be steady innovation with the occasional “breakthrough” (solid state batteries for instance). Tesla’s slump is as much about their stale models as it is about EVs. And the carmakers have been betting wrong. Kia is practically giving away EV9s when this huge SUV is arguably a great car but a heavy leviathan is not where the market wants to go.
Give it 15-25 years and things will look vastly different. In 5 you won’t recognize the market. EVs have to get lighter, easier on tires, faster to charge. These are not barriers from first principle physics but they are engineering challenges.
Also, watch fire trucks. When most fire engines are electric, that’s when you know the ICE days are ending.
Biden's EV mandates seem impossible. They may be highly impractical but I think they are necessary. It will force innovation and reinvestment in the electrical grid and charging stations. The IRA would ideally help bridge the gap in funding. Furthermore, your point about EVs being 25-33% heavier is valid as well. There may be a solution to that issue. America's infrastructure is in terrible shape overall. I think road engineers should take the new EV weights into consideration when designing new roads and make that their baseline for vehicle weight. Also, new factories in the Midwest are producing computer chips so that will reduce the dependence on China for supplies. It's a difficult task, but I think we can rise to the occasion.
I’m surprised a company hasn’t swooped in to make small affordable EVs with low ranges for local use. A neighbor has a vehicle that was briefly made in the early 2000s that went out of business but he still uses it. I’d buy one if it was in business. The majority of Americans live in metro areas and the majority of drives are shortish commutes. Lots of people are buying e bikes for this reason. But if a Tesla that has wayyyyy too much tech goes for $40k it stands to reason that a very simple small battery vehicle could go for under $10k, use 1/5 of the battery minerals and actually save families money by allowing them to replace one of their gas cars with something cheaper. Personally I’d love a car with zero tech, just a golf cart with some windows that gets me across town. It’s odd no company is trying to fill this. It’s either a $2k e-bike or a $40k+ supercharged iPhone on wheels. I don’t need a 10 second quarter mile to go to the grocery store.
Can't the Fed simply print electricity and wires and transformers and pylons and robots to assemble it all and computers to run it all? Maybe Jared Bernstein (or other Bidenenomics geniuses) can figure it all out, since to him (them) the who and why money is printed and what is the relationship between printing and to the bond and general markets seems too complex.
It’s always interesting to see how figures are used to support a belief. The author’s bias is clear throughout.
No talk of how petro companies shut down early EV attempts, then claims EVs have been available for 100 years with insignificant success. No talk of how Tesla’s vehicles are out of reach of most people. No talk of the rapidly lowering prices of EVs.
Perhaps better to use a comparison date of less than ten years to analyse the success of the international EV market. The USA seems to have structural issues in purchasing from China but the rest of the world is rapidly increasing their EV purchases.
Chart 8 should say “upstream”
I was in Durham, NC recently, where I saw one of these Cybertrucks ahead of me in traffic. Yep, it was every bit as "butt-ugly" as it is in the above photo. My personal wish for all this climate fraud is that the EV industry will lead the way in total and painful crashes of the wind / solar / EV industries. Without EVs to drive a need for "clean electric generation", lots of the arguments (real or imaginary) for wind & solar will also disappear. And remember, a true disruptor like Donald Trump might be all that's necessary to start the crashes of these Democrat / government-caused disasters, and a return to fossil fuels- with a resurrection of our nuclear industry around small modular reactors.
Not optimistic, stupid. At least to any remotely informed, rational human being, even at the time. I assume he’s still on the prognostication circuit getting paid a lot to talk shite to gullible liberals.
As far as chart 8 , the Green Goo is the centerpiece to China's bribery of Biden (and about 1000 or more other actors entrusted by the public who have done nothing more but sold that trust to the highest Chinese bidder )
ICEVs should be called GVs.
The TESLA TRUCK is designed to meet the needs of the para military militias that are preparing for the Civil War here in the USA … ever wonder why they made the truck bulletproof???
The problem with this analysis is it ignores the highly likely near-term revolution in battery technologies -- which promises to make batteries (40% of the cost of EVs) cheaper, faster charging, more durable (more recharges), better in cold weather, more energy dense (making them lighter and offering better range) and most of all -- cheaper. There are many candidates (in chemistry and format) and how many of them will succeed -- if ever -- is unknown, except for the likelihood some will succeed. Sodium-ion batteries are already real, with continuing progress on lithium-sulfur and others. Once cheap long range EVs arrive, the days of traditional gasoline cars is over. Adoptions curves tend to be slow, slow, slow... then overnight. Remember film cameras? Replaced by digital cameras, and now largely replaced by phones. The triumph of EVs may be more swift.
Thanks, Robert. I point folks to your work because you put so much into objective analysis and presentation of the energy issues.
Coming out of a nuclear power life, besides the large stack of issues addressed (and even my constant chant of “don’t use electricity to make heat” - just for 2nd Law of Thermodynamics reasons), I also lived in risk analysis world.
From this, I note that shifting our transportation systems’ energy source from petroleum to electricity pushes the consequences of disturbances in the electric grid to also disrupt the transportation of people and goods, and it does this for illusory benefits. Whereas leaving their energy sources separate maintains good immunity for transportation. The electric grid has many potential modes of disruption. I wouldn’t want to drive transportation into taking on those vulnerabilities unless the benefits were very large and low cost and they are neither. We don’t need to lose everything from a power outage.
We have a large, mature fuel distribution system for petroleum. BTW: there’s a simple answer to any response that says that gas pumps need electricity. I can bring my portable generator over to power their pump.
It won't be hard at all for EVs to replace ICE vehicles. All they need to do is invent free batteries, and everyone will buy them.
I don’t understand why Musk focused resources on the stupid Cybertruck instead of a $25,000 small suv or sedan which would have been an instant winner.
The data shows that Tesla sales are getting squeezed by other luxury carmakers that can produce EVs in roughly the same price range. This doesn't say much about the state of the EV industry except that people that can afford EVs are not always choosing Tesla anymore. Chart (and a response to some of the other EV industry assertions) here: https://futurepositiveinvestor.substack.com/p/evs-a-statement-or-solution
A few quibbles. NdFeB magnets are also used in ICE vehicles. Only DC motors in EVs use them. The bigger issue is lithium for which South America is the greatest source . There is a huge amount of unmined lithium in the U.S. but environmental concerns prevent its mining. China is making a huge play for SoAm.
I drive an EV (not a Tesla) and believe they are here to stay. They will eventually displace most ICE vehicles for a variety of reasons, but such change takes longer than the government wants. We are seeing a market anomaly from government intervention and from Tesla’s dominance.
The next wave will be steady innovation with the occasional “breakthrough” (solid state batteries for instance). Tesla’s slump is as much about their stale models as it is about EVs. And the carmakers have been betting wrong. Kia is practically giving away EV9s when this huge SUV is arguably a great car but a heavy leviathan is not where the market wants to go.
Give it 15-25 years and things will look vastly different. In 5 you won’t recognize the market. EVs have to get lighter, easier on tires, faster to charge. These are not barriers from first principle physics but they are engineering challenges.
Also, watch fire trucks. When most fire engines are electric, that’s when you know the ICE days are ending.
Biden's EV mandates seem impossible. They may be highly impractical but I think they are necessary. It will force innovation and reinvestment in the electrical grid and charging stations. The IRA would ideally help bridge the gap in funding. Furthermore, your point about EVs being 25-33% heavier is valid as well. There may be a solution to that issue. America's infrastructure is in terrible shape overall. I think road engineers should take the new EV weights into consideration when designing new roads and make that their baseline for vehicle weight. Also, new factories in the Midwest are producing computer chips so that will reduce the dependence on China for supplies. It's a difficult task, but I think we can rise to the occasion.