hskrdu said:
The author, at least, wasn't surprised, remarking that CA was a "special case." Some thoughts and questions:
I probably wouldn't be as surprised if I lived on the West coast or some other place where you see a million EVs on the road every day. Still, 25% is a pretty good chunk of new car sales.
When they're given preferential treatment across the board in certain areas, of course they'll proliferate. It's just another form of subsidy. I agree California is not a metric by which the industry can be compared as a whole.
Is this close to a "tipping point," and how is that defined?
I think so. Clearly the tipping point has already been reached in much of Europe and China. I would simply define "tipping point" as the point on a graph depicting EV sales that the line jumps toward a parabolic trajectory.
I don't think we're even close. The infrastructure doesn't exist on any appreciable scale to come close to a tipping point. While EV sales may be increasing, it's due to organizational manipulation rather than organically happening.
Is this tipping point / some threshold of car sales being EV's a wholly good thing?
For the most part, yes, imo. Not so great for those who tinker on combustion engines or sell petroleum products for a living perhaps, but for the greater good of the environment and society.
Being "good" for the environment and society is one of the most heavily debated topics today. High initial carbon footprints of EV's is difficult to overcome given their lifespan, which is projected (theoretical) rather than actual. The high cost of batteries, not only in replacement but initial cost and disposal, coupled with their dwindling material construction, again show they are not currently a viable long term strategy. We all hear that "technology" will invent something better, and while that is true, it is also true on the ICE side.
To what extent have government subsidies / tax credits / financial incentives played in EV sales?
Hard to say. To some extent, for sure.
Be honest here, it's a huge factor. It's not hard to say at all, I'm not sure why some people can't simply admit it.
Is it surprising that EV sales and fleet penetration continue to grow during a period where the marketplace is responding both to federal (and some state) messaging regarding ambitious goals on lowering ICE passenger vehicle sales, as well as the EV offerings that are more palatable to consumers who (often rightfully so) had concerns over some EV characteristics?
Nope, not surprising, the growth is inevitable.
Only if the growth being inevitable means being forced down that path. Yes, there are more incentives for EV's, even my work considered one due to the reduced pricing (subsidies) and was going to 'give it a try' due to the artificial benefit/loss ratio.
EVs seem to be (generally) purchased by consumers who have the ability to charge the vehicle battery at home, at work, or have arranged neutral site charging. What percentage of US car owners does this comprise? Will the poorest Americans be most hard hit by mandates which promote EV's?
The proposed mandates are just for new car sales as far as I know. The poorest Americans generally buy used cars or none at all. I imagine the poor will do just as well, or poorly as they have in the past. Maybe there will be a glut of cheap, used ICE vehicles that nobody wants any longer.
I don't think there will be a glut of cheap ICE vehicles, at least not until charging costs come down, efficiency goes up, charging becomes more commonplace, and mileage between charges grows exponentially. I know a number of people with solar, us included, and the EV market is just not palatable yet for many factors. It's still a niche market and I don't see that changing anytime soon due to the disflavoring pressure of doing away with ICE vehicles. Americans want to make their own decisions and not have them made for them. Recent companies found this out the hard way and are paying the price.
The cost of charging an EV battery can be offset for owners who can use solar or other lower-cost sources of electricity, but many consumers will be charging off a municipal electric grid. What should consumers expect for the cost of electricity as EV sales climb and demand for electricity rises? Will utility revenues outweigh increased utility costs, leading to lower rates for electricity as some models show, or will rising demand for electricity coupled with the cost of grid enhancements and upgrading transmission and distribution lead to significantly higher costs?
That's difficult to predict. But longer term, electricity will probably get cheaper as the cost of renewable energy from wind and solar continues to plummet, and grids get smarter.
Oh please, you live in a state where they just increased their electric rates 49% for the Standard Offer (supply), or 27% overall (supply & demand combined), at one time! And there is talk of it going up again next year, to the point the State is considering a takeover. The Grid cannot handle the electric load now, and we've been over this a number of times, so until it's upgraded (at a massive expense), it's just wishful thinking. Once it is upgraded, which I do believe will happen over time with Billions of taxpayer (federal) money, they'll charge a premium due to that upgrade. Wind and solar will help but the demands of the people, along with millions of people entering the country every year (over 2.76 Million illegals last year alone according to the US Customs & Border Protection) and they all consume electricity. The overall US population is far outstripping the ability to produce enough electricity, putting more of a strain on an already stressed system. So while the capital cost of EV charging will come down due to efficiencies and innovation, the costs to use them will increase at a much higher rate.
insideevs.com
