EV makers delay and cancel models as US tax credits vanish under Trump's new bill

[p51d007]

There is hundreds of thousands of years of oil in the ground. It's NOT made out of dead dinosaurs. It's not "fossil" fuel.
If you want an EV or hybrid, go ahead. In a free market, let the market decide. But they gave credits for EV's to "push" their BS green agenda that they are better for the planet.
The amount of earth that is required to mine the materials to make the batteries (which they mostly do in China) would make the environmentalist freak out!
Until someone comes up with "a flux capacitor" ICE vehicles will be here a LONG time!

 

[CBTex]

Like everything the federal government does, by either party, the EV tax credits have been poorly designed from the start. The income limits were way too high. 42.6% of EVs are sold to households making $200,000 or more and 75.5% are sold to households making at least $100,000. Do we really need to take on more debt to subsidize higher income families purchasing new 2nd or 3rd cars? The limits basically allowed manufacturers to focus on building $80,000+, high performance models and have the sales subsidized. The whole point of EVs was to make eco-friendly models, not 10 second quarter mile rockets, although they are cool.

And, for the record, I’m seriously considering an EV for my next vehicle. But I’ll probably buy one that is 2-4 years old as depreciation on new EVs is crazy.

 

[toooooot]

Goes to show the actual interest in EVs appears to be largely synthetic, dependent entirely on tax breaks to attract customers.

I have a strong feeling that once budget EVs with 400 mile range batteries that also are guaranteed to last at least 12 years become available, the interest will be real.
I should say "if" rather than when. Judging by the evolution of EV batteries, we can easily conclude that improvement will not be very quick which means that to sell them at this rate, a credit will be required or else who knows how much further EV sales will fall.

 

[Liranan]

Everything has to be about Trump because, aside from a political ideology that demands everything be political, the all electric future has some serious inconvenient truths to deal with that nobody wants to discuss. Whether it be the high purchase costs, the difficulty in replacing the batteries, the technical problems, the lack of charging infrastructure, ece, its clear that EVs are still experimental and the ramifications for the lower class are rather disturbing.

Far easier to scream about the Cheeto then admit the Green Dream is rather flawed from the outset.
If EVs were so great, they wouldnt need the incentives to sell.
Every time you see someone say "I just dont get the hate?" you know they merely want to sound "intellectual" while adding nothing of value
Yeah, but with hybrids the tech was successful and able to run on its own four wheels without constant government handholding.

EV's OTOH, have seen billions in investment for development and infrastructure and still are not ready. Unlike hybrids, the flaws and drawbacks of EVs stand in the way of their use and enthusiasts seem really unwilling to address those concerns (oh range anxiety doesnt exist you just have to learnt he technology ece ece).

Perhaps if the billions upon billions the government spent on chargers had resulted in an actual charging network akin to what is seen in, say, norway, you'd see far better adoption numbers.

Exactly this. Subsidies are needed because people don't want EV's as they realise EV's are far, far inferior to ICE in every way.

 

[Rudyduu]

It won't disappear but I guarantee there will be a future movie with some environmental type driving an electric. That's where you will see most of them. I am hoping for gas to get so cheap they will build "muscle cars" again. No reason for taxpayers to support people buying EV's. I would rather my taxes went to protecting the country.

Why would an increased demand for fuel decrease the prices? If anything, a larger adoption of EV's would have led to decreased demand and decreased cost for gasoline. Look at what the lockdown did for lowering fuel costs. You think prices on fuel will go down with less EV adoption? Why would you think that?

 

[Rudyduu]

Exactly this. Subsidies are needed because people don't want EV's as they realise EV's are far, far inferior to ICE in every way.

That's just not true. EV's have instant torque, are quieter, cost less to maintain and less to run in commuting use cases. They are more costly to purchase and only convenient for people who don't drive that far, who control their parking and can control their charging. ICE vehicles aren't perfect for everyone, and neither are EVs.

 

[Liranan]

That's just not true. EV's have instant torque, are quieter, cost less to maintain and less to run in commuting use cases. They are more costly to purchase and only convenient for people who don't drive that far, who control their parking and can control their charging. ICE vehicles aren't perfect for everyone, and neither are EVs.

They also have far shorter range than ICE, long charge times, are heavily affected by temperature (they do not work in extreme cold weather), and best of all: spontaneous combustion.

A report in China proved that brand new EV's have the same rate of combustion as 15+ year old ICE. There are lots of videos of them on fire on trailers, before they've even arrived at the dealership. How many ICE catch fire before they've reached their buyers? I travel a lot and I see a lot of these EV's broken down, at the side of the road.

They have no resale value and lose 90% of their value within a year. I know people who bought an EV for 30 thousand USD and now can't even sell them for 3 because nobody trusts second hand batteries. Second hand dealers don't accept EV's as it can take 6 months to a year to sell whereas ICE sell quickly.

Finally we have cars that have a range of 1000KM, until you turn them on and then reach 300KM at the most and have a recharge time that is over 4 hours. Every taxi driver I've spoken with complains that they have to recharge their cars twice to thrice a day as they run out of power very quickly. My 500CC ADV has that range, can refuel within minutes and be back on the road. I can ride over 900KM a day so the minuscule range of these vehicles drives me crazy.

This doesn't even take into account the environmental devastation that the mining of these minerals leaves behind. This technology is only good for those who want to live in a 15 minute gulags.

And the videos of these cars on fire with passengers who weren't able to escape... they give me nightmares as battery fires can't be extinguished.

 

[lonetac]

Exactly this. Subsidies are needed because people don't want EV's as they realise EV's are far, far inferior to ICE in every way.

you realize the entire gas industry is subsidized too, right?

 

[scavengerspc]

And, for the record, I’m seriously considering an EV for my next vehicle. But I’ll probably buy one that is 2-4 years old as depreciation on new EVs is crazy.

The depreciation is misleading though because as we could expect, earlier EVs were way overpriced compared to where they are now. The curse of any brand-new product.
Now, 3 year old Mach-Es are going for about 75% of their sticker on average, and same age Model 3s are going for 71%. Those are the only ones I'm sure of, but it would make sense if that average is holding.
BUT I think your idea to buy used first is a good one. That's what I did, and I really went bottom of the EV barrel when I did it. A 5-year-old Ford Focus EV.
But even at that, it only took me about 2 weeks to realize that an EV is far superior to the smoke pumps. The only areas of weakness are long distance travel planning has to much more in depth, and even then might not be possible yet, and needing to rely on public chargers if your apartment doesn't have them.
The smoke pumps are fossils. (see the pun?).

you realize the entire gas industry is subsidized too, right?

Look at his post before yours.
I doubt there is much @Liranan realizes on this topic.
Dude still believes the drop in range is much worse than gasoline vehicles suffer in extreme cold, as an example.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a60344222/does-an-ev-work-as-well-in-cold-weath

Consider that all batteries suffer in the cold, combined with the cars' heater being powered by the battery also, I just took consolation in the fact that in 29000 miles no drivetrain maintenance was needed and that it cost me $11 to drive 280 miles.

 

[axiomatic13]

you realize the entire gas industry is subsidized too, right?

Well, it's not the entire O&G business. Sadly, the big O&G companies have lobbied those subsidies only for themselves. Little companies like mine get nada, zip, nothing, bupkis. But the bizarre fealty to O&G continues in these forums.

 

[passingposeidon]

Exactly this. Subsidies are needed because people don't want EV's as they realise EV's are far, far inferior to ICE in every way.

The thing is, who cares what the individual person wants? At a certain point, societal change focused on reducing emissions has to be prioritised over the individual who, given the choice, would not recycle, would eat steak daily and would drive a massive 4x4. I want the governments of the world to be looking at the big, multi-decade picture, and be making the right decisions. Maybe this is a good decision, I don't know, but I don't think the short-term desires of the consumer should be the ultimate deciding force in what we as a society do to stop climate change.

 

[lonetac]

Well, it's not the entire O&G business. Sadly, the big O&G companies have lobbied those subsidies only for themselves. Little companies like mine get nada, zip, nothing, bupkis. But the bizarre fealty to O&G continues in these forums.

Fair point, thanks for keeping me honest.

It just blows my mind how folks are against subsidies to help people but are ok with subsidies for multi billion dollar profit industries...

 

[Liranan]

The thing is, who cares what the individual person wants? At a certain point, societal change focused on reducing emissions has to be prioritised over the individual who, given the choice, would not recycle, would eat steak daily and would drive a massive 4x4. I want the governments of the world to be looking at the big, multi-decade picture, and be making the right decisions. Maybe this is a good decision, I don't know, but I don't think the short-term desires of the consumer should be the ultimate deciding force in what we as a society do to stop climate change.

A large volcano puts out more 'emissions' in a single hour than humans have over the past 100 years. Ban volcanoes!

Don't think, just follow the climate change lies, and definitely don't look how all the planets in the solar system are experiencing climate change.

 

[scavengerspc]

A large volcano puts out more 'emissions' in a single hour than humans have over the past 100 years. Ban volcanoes!

I admit to wondering what It's like to live in a true world of make believe such as the MAGA's, but I could never get past the talking out the *** part of actually being a MAGA. Not to mention the complete disregard for what I would sound like to the people who know better than to believe that stuff.

Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human activities?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year.

www.climate.gov

"Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions."
One hour of a volcano ejects more carbon dioxide than humans
combined in the last 100 years? PLEASE tell us where you get this garbage.

and definitely don't look how all the planets in the solar system are experiencing climate change.

The mouth, vs the facts will always amaze the people that consider learning far more valuable than just posting what makes someone feel good, even at the risk of all remaining credibility.
You truly have no idea that climate change can have many leading causes, even though end results can be the same.

Some examples:

What climate change is happening to other planets in the solar system?

<p>There are three fundamental flaws in the 'other planets are warming' argument. Not all planets in the solar system are warming. The sun has shown no long term trend since 1950 and in fact has shown a slight cooling trend in recent decades. There are explanations for why other planets are...

skepticalscience.com

"Martian climate is primarily driven by dust and albedo. Global dust storms increase the surface albedo by settling brighter dust on dark surfaces."

Just to get you started, Mars climate change has a completely different cause than climate change on Earth. Others are also listed.

Just an incredible lack of knowledge.

 

[Liranan]

I admit to wondering what It's like to live in a true world of make believe such as the MAGA's, but I could never get past the talking out the *** part of actually being a MAGA. Not to mention the complete disregard for what I would sound like to the people who know better than to believe that stuff.

Which emits more carbon dioxide: volcanoes or human activities?

Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year.

www.climate.gov

"Human activities emit 60 or more times the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes each year. Large, violent eruptions may match the rate of human emissions for the few hours that they last, but they are too rare and fleeting to rival humanity’s annual emissions."
One hour of a volcano ejects more carbon dioxide than humans
combined in the last 100 years? PLEASE tell us where you get this garbage.


The mouth, vs the facts will always amaze the people that consider learning far more valuable than just posting what makes someone feel good, even at the risk of all remaining credibility.
You truly have no idea that climate change can have many leading causes, even though end results can be the same.

Some examples:

What climate change is happening to other planets in the solar system?

<p>There are three fundamental flaws in the 'other planets are warming' argument. Not all planets in the solar system are warming. The sun has shown no long term trend since 1950 and in fact has shown a slight cooling trend in recent decades. There are explanations for why other planets are...

skepticalscience.com

"Martian climate is primarily driven by dust and albedo. Global dust storms increase the surface albedo by settling brighter dust on dark surfaces."

Just to get you started, Mars climate change has a completely different cause than climate change on Earth. Others are also listed.

Just an incredible lack of knowledge.

I agree you have an incredible lack of knowledge. While you mention mars you ignore Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune. Explain the man made climate change on those planets. And also explain how man made climate change caused mass extinctions of the past, especially the one 65 million years ago when the solar system flew through Orion's nebula.

As for MAGA: there is only MIGA, always has been and always will until we change the system that Roosevelt warned us off and JFK was assassinated for, so take your trolling elsewhere.

 

[scavengerspc]

While you mention mars you ignore Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune.

Again, the point flies over your head. You want to know about any changes on Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune? Then just look it up and read it! I just did in minutes and there is a lot to learn but it's laid out well. Any climate change that may happen anywhere has a driving force, but the same, or similar results can be reached through entirely different methods. You don't even know just how clueless you are.

And also explain how man made climate change caused mass extinctions of the past

See, absolutely clueless. But what I would like you to do is explain to me WHO says man did that 65 million years ago, and what climate change you are speaking of that we caused way before we were even here.

so take your trolling elsewhere

Factual information is never trolling to thinking humans.

But I laid out my side above, and I'm not going to sit here and repeat myself to someone that hasn't a clue, so you take the last word, and we can let others here take care of your idiocy on this subject.

Edit:
Of course any reputable proof you have for what you say would be welcome...... and unheard of.

 

[Liranan]

Again, the point flies over your head. You want to know about any changes on Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune? Then just look it up and read it! I just did in minutes and there is a lot to learn but it's laid out well. Any climate change that may happen anywhere has a driving force, but the same, or similar results can be reached through entirely different methods. You don't even know just how clueless you are.


See, absolutely clueless. But what I would like you to do is explain to me WHO says man did that 65 million years ago, and what climate change you are speaking of that we caused way before we were even here.


Factual information is never trolling to most thinking humans.

But I laid out my side above, and I'm not going to sit here and repeat myself to someone that hasn't a clue, so you take the last word, and we can let others here take care of your idiocy on this subject.

Edit:
Of course any reputable proof you have for what you say would be welcome...... and unheard of.

LOL, I knew you'd come up with some pseudo scientific nonsensical answer such as 'driving force' without specifying that that force is the sun. If they're experiencing climate change then the sun is the main factor but that gets in the way of your narrative, thus it's just a 'driving force'.

Anyway, I concede, you are right. Man made climate change is so severe that it's affected the entire galaxy since its formation.

Orwell was a seer.

 

[lonetac]

LOL, I knew you'd come up with some pseudo scientific nonsensical answer such as 'driving force' without specifying that that force is the sun. If they're experiencing climate change then the sun is the main factor but that gets in the way of your narrative, thus it's just a 'driving force'.

Anyway, I concede, you are right. Man made climate change is so severe that it's affected the entire galaxy since its formation.

Orwell was a seer.

Well he presented arguments and facts to contradict your "trust me bro" statements and even supplied supporting evidence to back them up.

All you have done is "trust me bro" by making invalidated claims with no supporting evidence.

So we have person running his mouth and person countering with supporting evidence.
At least have some integrity and back your ridiculous claims up with your source. This isnt even an argument at this point, its a shelacking.

Id walk away too, just like I am after this comment because its clear you are not interested in rational scientific conversation.

 

[Liranan]

Well he presented arguments and facts to contradict your "trust me bro" statements and even supplied supporting evidence to back them up.

All you have done is "trust me bro" by making invalidated claims with no supporting evidence.

So we have person running his mouth and person countering with supporting evidence.
At least have some integrity and back your ridiculous claims up with your source. This isnt even an argument at this point, its a shelacking.

Id walk away too, just like I am after this comment because its clear you are not interested in rational scientific conversation.

Anton Petrov posted a video detailing that the solar system passed through Orion's cloud 65 million years ago, which could very well have been the cause of the mass extinction of that era, which means it's scientific theory. And I have stated that all planets in the solar system are experiencing climate change. All four gas giants have developed new storms.

As I said, man made climate change is so severe it affects the entire galaxy.

Personally I couldn't care less whether you think that my proof is 'Trust me Brah' as a cursory glance at the data that the ESA and NASA will prove me right and that the sun and the galaxy at large are the drivers of climate change. But that is too hard for those whose every thought comes from the main stream liars, who have an anti-humanist agenda.

Ignorance is strength.

 

[scavengerspc]

Ignorance is strength.

Coming from the one that said a volcano puts out more carbon dioxide in one hour than all mankind in the last 100 years? Then you must be a superhero.

 

[lonetac]

Coming from the one that said a volcano puts out more carbon dioxide in one hour than all mankind in the last 100 years? Then you must be a superhero.

dude followed up with "trust me bro" after he was called out for "trust me bro" and wants to act like an authority.

Talk about ignorance at its core. Dude just x100 that.

 

[trents]

Credits vanish across entire economy, like farts in the wind, is all Trump's doing.

His actions remind of an old saying -

As in, steal or damage economy in the region - you'll be jailed. But go f-k up economy of the entire country for many years to come, they will call you a reformer.

In the meantime, people in US are losing interest in EV-s, tired of the preached false good, shoved down their throats.

The truth is, the economy as a whole is actually prospering and regaining health. And we are beginning to discover alternative sources of rare earth metals. REM mines and processing plants are beginning to open/reopen even in the U.S. It will take time, but we will eventually wean ourselves from dependence on China for certain raw materials and this needs to happen. People need to be willing to bite the bullet for a while and be patient in order for this shift to reach a tipping point, however. In the meantime, hybrids and gas vehicles will fill the gap.

 

[J Oelschl]

I love the idea of an EV but the battery replacement costs are the biggest hindrance to adoption. An ICE car retains some value for many years. A used EV does not have much value if the battery is near EOL. Then you have the battery fire issues. I would never park one in my garage. The mandates will most likely affect lower income people disporportionately. Many can only afford to buy a used car. Now imagine using your very limited dollars to buy a used EV and then the battery pack goes bad. You now have to come up with $15000 + to get that replaced. They probably will not have the money to do that. A wealthy person will simply buy a NEW EV and happily drive it for 5-8 years until the battery ages. Granted, you can buy a used ICE car and have repair bills but rarely would they be anything close to what a new battery pack would be. And I see huge risks with buying "refurbished" battery packs.

My use case is that I am retired and I drive very little so gas costs do not play into my equation that much. I love the lower maintenance aspects of an EV. My current vehicle is 19 years old with about 40,000 miles on it and it runs just fine and looks new. would an EV battery last that long even if it was not used that much? My old iPhone that was not used much got the bulging battery issue simply because of the age of the battery. Chemicals degrade and fail whether used or not. Are EV batteries that are kept that long going to become potential incendiary devices because of chemical aging?

My other anxiety would be that living in FL there is a real possibility I will have to evacuate because of a hurricane. An EV taking hours to charge is going to be problematic when i95 is backed up for miles with everyone trying to leave at once.... and then is is 90+ outside so you have to run the A/C and you drain the battery sitting in the traffic.... or you have power failures becaused of the hurricane and cannot charge the car.