In yet another example of Biden incompetence, the administration is setting up rules making it harder to deliver EV charging stations. 
Politicizing EV Charging Stations
The Wall Street Journal comments on The Politicized EV Charger ‘Revolution’
The government rollout of EV chargers has been a slow-motion affair, and as you’d expect the reason is politics. The feds are throwing billions of dollars to build charging stations, but they’ve added social-justice and union mandates that make the build-out more complicated than necessary.
It’s the latest payout from $7.5 billion in funding from the 2021 infrastructure spending blowout. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg spoke of handing out the money as a triumph in itself; “We have a chance to lead the world in the EV revolution.”
But the revolution’s been a long time coming. Despite the $2 billion of subsidies already authorized, only two federally funded stations have opened.
The bureaucrats are getting in their own way. The FHWA issued a rule requiring that workers for most projects be certified by the electricians union, or another government-approved training program.
States have also blasted the program for its lack of flexibility. Florida’s Transportation Department said projects were stifled by guidance that stations be 50 miles apart. Pennsylvania lamented restrictions on building stations with fewer than four charging ports. Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas and Wyoming all begged for relief from the Buy America requirement for steel and iron components, which the agency waived temporarily last year.
The latest funding comes with rules that will make sure charging station customers are even scarcer than workers. Half of the grant money is set aside for “disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment,” which by the agency’s description includes Alaskan and Arizonan Indian tribes and urban parks and libraries.
Half of the money will be spent where no one can afford an EV.
NADA Market Beat 2023 Numbers
- Light Vehicle Sales: 15.46 million
- EV sales: 1.1 million (actually 1.2 million)
- EV sales 7.12 percent
There are about 292 million vehicles on the road according to Hedges. That number does include medium and heavy duty trucks.
Cars last about 13 years on average.
Edison Electric Institute Projections
The EEI Projects 26.4 Million Electric Vehicles Will Be on U.S. Roads in 2030.
- The number of EVs on U.S. roads is projected to reach 26.4 million in 2030, up from the projected 18.7 million in the 2018 report.
- The projected 26.4 million EVs will make up nearly 10 percent of the 259 million light-duty vehicles (cars and light trucks) expected to be on U.S. roads in 2030.
- Nearly 12.9 million charge ports will be needed to support the projected 26.4 million EVs that will be on U.S. roads in 2030. [Biden added 2 stations, perhaps 8-10 ports]
- Approximately 140,000 DC fast charging ports will be needed to support the level of EVs expected to be on U.S. roads in 2030.
- It took eight years to sell one million EVs and fewer than three years to sell the next million. EEI projects the next one million EVs will be sold by the end of 2022.
That last line is interesting. What happened to the rate of growth? In 2023 only 1.2 million sold.
The Math
There are about 1.7 million total EVs in the US out of 292 million vehicles. That is a penetration rate of 0.58 percent.
Let’s add another 1.1 million for 2024. That will bring the total to 2.8 million or about 0.95 percent.
If we just count light vehicles, by 2030 EVs will be about 10 percent, assuming the EEI projections hold, but they already missed 2023.
Only 6 Percent in the US want an EV for their Next Vehicle
Yesterday, I wrote Only 6 Percent in the US want an EV for their Next Vehicle
Demand for EVs is crashing in the US. Only six percent want an EV for their next vehicle but 67 percent want an ICE up from 58 percent last year.
I should have said the rate of increase in demand is crashing. But it’s possible the statement is accurate as is. We will know in a year.
Eight Inconvenient EV Truths
- EVs are more expensive
- EVs are inconvenient for anyone who needs a public charger
- EVs are inconvenient for anyone who drives long distances
- Insurance costs are higher
- Maintenance costs are higher
- Repairs take longer and parts are in short supply
- Minor accidents can be very costly requiring a new battery
- Consumers don’t want the damn things and rightfully so
Several readers moaned about point 8.
Adoption Rate
One of my readers commented “1.2 million people bought one this year.”
Another commented “Every EV sold is not an ICE sale.” Brilliant!
A third commented “If 1.2 million in one year is a close approximation of nothing, I’ll concede defeat.“
That comment is interesting because I never used the word “nothing” in my article. I did say consumers don’t want the damn things while pointing out 6 percent do. So “nothing” is quite a bit out of context.
I do not believe 6 percent is a lot, and if that’s accurate, it’s down from about 7.12 percent.
EVs sales are exploding! Growth is phenomenal! Hooray!
Note when numbers are tiny, always refer to percentage growth to make things look better.
1.2 million is a 250% growth rate according to a Hertz report (The irony is staggering). Will there be any growth in EV sales in 2024?
Assume 50 percent growth. That would put another 1.8 million EVs on the road making a total of about 1.2 percent. That’s greater than nothing (a word I did not use) by 1.2 percentage points.
What About Insurance?
Some readers objected to my point about insurance being higher. MoneyGeek reported the costs are about the same on average down from a 15 percent premium two years ago.
But it also says “Of the electric vehicle models that had corresponding combustion models, MoneyGeek found that most electric vehicles had higher insurance premium costs, ranging from 3% to 12% more expensive than their combustion counterparts. The only exception was the Ford Mustang Mach E, which is 18% cheaper to insure than its combustion counterpart, the Ford Mustang.”
I have no idea why Mustang would be different. Also, “Teslas are amongst the most costly electric vehicles to insure. MoneyGeek’s analysis found that four of the five electric cars with the highest insurance costs were Teslas.”
Most of the EVs on the road are Teslas.
Kelley Blue Book reports “Even though they don’t run on fossil fuels or require oil changes, and they have fewer moving parts to break, electric vehicles cost more to buy than their internal-combustion counterparts. Since they tend to cost more, they cost more to insure.“
What About Repairs?
Kelley Blue Book reports “Generally, higher-priced vehicles cost more to insure because they also cost more to repair or replace. Today’s electric vehicles also have fewer moving parts than conventional automobiles, but those parts can be pricey. If the battery pack is damaged, certain safety protocols are often necessary, adding more to the repair bill.”
The report adds, “There aren’t as many shops with technicians trained to fix electric vehicles versus traditional vehicles. That means those qualified facilities may charge more for repairs because of the specialized training required.”
The report was a reference to Hertz. I cannot verify the claim of Hertz. But to me it makes sense. If you need a repair, it’s likely to be more expensive.
Actions Speak Louder Than Projections
The adoption rate of EVs, actions by Hertz, actions by GM, action by Ford, and survey of intensions speak loud and clear.
That is despite massive incentives, subsidies, and outright coercion in California.
Hertz Is Selling 20,000 EVs Due to Lack of Customer Demand
On January 11, I noted Hertz Is Selling 20,000 EVs Due to Lack of Customer Demand
Hertz said Thursday that it would sell about 20,000 EVs in the U.S., and use some of the proceeds to purchase internal-combustion-engine vehicles. The company in a regulatory filing cited weaker demand for electrics, and their higher operating costs.
The company said it would log a $245 million incremental net depreciation expense related to the sale of the 20,000 electric vehicles.
Do you believe actions or what you want to hear?
Front-End Collision Hoot of the Day
Reuters noted “Hertz even limited the torque and speed on the EVs and offered it to experienced users on the platform to make them easier to adapt after certain users had front-end collisions.“
Hertz has to limit the speed to prevent crashes. What a hoot.
EV Expectations and Repair Costs
Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas said in a note Hertz’s move was another sign that EV expectations need to be “reset downward”.
While consumers enjoy the driving experience and fuel savings (per mile) of an EV, Jonas said there are other “hidden costs to EV ownership“.
“Expenses related to collision and damage, primarily associated with EVs, remained high in the quarter,” Hertz said in a regulatory filing on Thursday.
The company, which had earlier planned to order 100,000 Tesla vehicles by 2022 end and 65,000 units from Polestar over five years, said it would focus on improving profitability for the rest of its EV fleet.
Despite Huge Incentives, Supply of EVs on Dealer Lots Soars to 92 Days
On July 13, 2023, I noted Despite Huge Incentives, Supply of EVs on Dealer Lots Soars to 92 Days
EV inventory is piling up on dealer lots. Hello car manufacturers, what are you going to do with all that inventory?
Firm Answer to My July 13 Question
- October 24, 2023: GM Scraps EV Target, Ford Scales Back Electric Trucks, Musk Warns of Challenges
- To Shore Up Share Price, GM Decreases EV Investment in Favor of Buybacks
Both GM and Ford are scrapping targets.
Hertz planned to but 100,000 Teslas. Instead it is selling 20,000 of them.
Do you believe actions or what you want to believe?
How Fast is Eventually?
EVs are coming, by government coercion if necessary. I never said otherwise. But is government coercion the right way?
Eventually cars will get more miles per charge. Eventually, there will be more chargers. Eventually there will be more models to choose from.
It’s going to happen. The amusing thing is adoption is slower than I expected.
The ineptitude of this administration is staggering. The Inflation Reduction Act passed August 16, 2022. And there was fiscal stimulus in 2021. We have a whopping 2 public charging stations to show for it. What a hoot.
China has cheaper EVs but neither Biden nor Trump will allow them. We want adoption, but heaven forbid anything that most can afford. Nearly, everything this president does is inflationary. The border, EVs, and regulations in general are examples.
If Trump wins the election this year, he is certain to immediately roll back all of Biden’s energy regulations and mandates.
California mandates 35% of new 2026 car models sold in California must be zero-emissions, climbing to 68% in 2030 and 100% in 2035.
Nationally, the 2030 projection was for 10 percent EVs by 2030. Will we even reach that?
If Trump is president, this will get interesting.
[…] $2 billion in subsidies, only 2 EV stations opened, the holdup is social justice. The FHWA issued a rule requiring that workers for most projects be certified by the electricians union, or another government-approved training program. States have also blasted the program for its lack of flexibility. Florida’s Transportation Department said projects were stifled by guidance that stations be 50 miles apart. Pennsylvania lamented restrictions on building stations with fewer than four charging ports. Half of the grant money is set aside for “disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment,” which by the agency’s description includes Alaskan and Arizonan Indian tribes and urban parks and libraries. […]
China and Europe have EV battery exchange facilities. Switching out batteries takes about 15 minutes, with an option of installing extended range units. EV taxi drivers in China’s big cities prefer exchanges, because they don’t loose billable time waiting for a charge. Battery exchange appears to be the objective for EV business in cities, as it requires a monthly battery lease. Government prefer leases, that could be taxed to fund road fees.
“China has cheaper EVs but neither Biden nor Trump will allow them. We want adoption, but heaven forbid anything that most can afford.”
Let’s clarify the issue: what people want isn’t really adoption of electric vehicles. What people want is to be told that (a) gasoline or electricity or whatever fuels a car will be cheap forever (not going to happen) and (b) cars will be cheap forever (not going to happen, either).
Gasoline can’t be cheap forever because worldwide oil production is in a plateau and going downhill soon. So, by the law of offer and demand, refined oil products can’t remain cheap forever.
Electricity can’t be cheap forever because producing electricity is becoming more expensive. Even coal is more expensive, because the best coal was burned long ago. Fossil fuels are running out, nuclear has always been expensive, and renewables are relatively expensive, though wind power is the best option.
Cars can’t be cheap forever, either, because relying on international trade imbalances to get cheap stuff won’t last forever, either. People are starting to realise that the barrel of oil isn’t priced in dollars, the dollar is priced in oil barrels. When people stop thinking of money as credit (the way they think about it in times of prosperity) and they start thinking of it as physical commodities (the way they think about it in hard times), the dollar isn’t going to remain strong.
The truth is, rich people will have electric cars, poorer people will have scooters (powered by whatever) or pedal bikes, and the poorest will have their feet. That’s where things are going.
Maybe this is part of the plan to force **** us into 15 min cities? Being ‘forced’ isn’t something many of us are going to put up with for much longer.
I think to be fair, your analysis should also consider EVs resale value. Everything I have read indicates that EVs have extremely strong resale value, beating almost all gasoline powered vehicles except maybe Porsche.
This is the real reason Hertz is selling its used Teslas now, to sell them now when their resale value is at a premium so Hertz can plow that money back into its business.
Right?
If you think EVs have strong resale value then think again.
Wrong. This is from Britain but I don’t suppose that the US would be too different.
——
Electric vehicles lose HALF their value in less than a year… as worst offending models are revealed
September 6, 2023
ELECTRIC vehicles have lost as much as half their value in under a year as the worst offending models can be revealed.
Drivers of the cars with the worst re-sell value could find themselves seriously out of pocket by thousands of pounds.
The worst offending model was the Seat Mii electric which has lost 50.3 per cent of its value since October 2022.
The Renault Zoe’s value fell by 44.2 per cent and the Nissan Leaf dropped by 42.7 per cent, according to figures from the trade price experts Cap HPI.
In overall cash terms, the EVs that have lost the most amount of money are the Audi e-tron GT, which has fallen by an average of £27,629, the Mercedes-Benz EQC, by £20,275, and the Audi e-tron Sportback, by £18,929.
In the meantime, over the past 12 months, petrol cars have risen 0.6 per cent and diesels are up 0.5 per cent.
…
link to the-sun.com
The mustang E is an ugly 4-door SUV style car
‘the “mustang is a sports car”
that’s the difference
Example of “central Planning” and its horrible consequences.
That’s what we get when the Govt gets much too big, and interferes.
EV’s sales are going to continue to decline in the US. I’m guessing that less than 10% of the US population could get qualified for a loan on an EV with current interest rates for autos and that doesn’t even take into consideration the auto insurance.
I do agree Laura, EV Sales will continue to decline.
You do point out some potential good news however, if you’re correct. Only 6% of Americans currently wish to own an EV, then that would mean only 10% of them would qualify for the loan!! I feel much better about that…
There are only so many really stupid people … once they all get suckered into buying EVs… the sales will collapse
The EV market is going to tank this year. Tesla has been dropping the prices of their vehicles by thousands or tens of thousands of dollars all of 2023. Why? To sell the darn things. BEVs for other manufacturers are sitting on their lots collecting dust. Why? No one wants them, for a multitude of reasons. Everyone that wanted a Tesla, pretty much bought one last year. Their demand is basically dried up. Rental car companies won’t be buying them anymore.
No one that rents, wants one. NO ONE. Where are they going to charge it?
No one that wants to tow anything, more than 50 miles, wants one. NO ONE.
The ONLY people that want them are city dwellers or people that live close to a city that own a home that can install a charger. Or the federal government, because they just don’t care how much money they waste.
97% of people that own a BEV, own it as a second car. So basically the only people that want them are people that want them as a second car.
Amazon canceled their BEV fleet order. Why? Because they get no range, especially if the driver uses air conditioning.
BEVs need to be slow charged, otherwise their battery life decreases significantly.
I’ll translate second car for you. Second car means an expensive gold cart. A golf cart that dealers are now refusing to take as trade-ins.
“Half of the money will be spent where no one can afford an EV.”
That is social justice. Speaking of which, i was just reading that Rice University has a course called Afrochemistry. Maybe atoms and molecules behave differently in marginalized communities.
Well, according to economic geniuses like the New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize winning economist Paul Krugman, the value of government spending is not in the value of the infrastructure that is built. It is in the multiplier effect.
Famously, Mr. Krugman noted that government spending — stimulus — would add value to the economy even if it was spent on digging a gigantic hole; and then, filling that same gigantic hole.
Looked at in this respect — and come on, you know the O’Biden Administration is this economically illiterate — all the billions of government debt spent to temporarily prop up Green industries like EVs, trickle down. So, yes, at least half should trickle down to the less “privileged” as determined by the liberal intelligentsia.
Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg spoke of handing out the money as a triumph in itself; “We have a chance to lead the world in the EV revolution.”
Well, it seems TSPB is getting an EV revolution that he didn’t anticipate, as the public currently isn’t all that interested in buying one.
Purchasing a low mileage used EV at reasonable cost is a very practical choice for those in a situation to take advantage of EV benefits. I have one now which I use for short trips and charge at night at home while I sleep. Energy costs to run it are 1/10th the cost of ICE car. It is a joy to drive. Insurance, driving technique, and repairs are not a problem. However the current technology is not up to EV use as a direct replacement for ICE cars. It is sad that this technology has been made a political thing. I made my choice because it made sense practically in my situation. I am making no political statement with my EV. I just want a nice way to get around town. With the amount of used EVs coming on the market it may be worth thinking about finding a good deal and adding to your own fleet of cars.
Until you have to replace the battery. Do an internet search and you’ll find that batteries are only available from the manufacture of the EV and they cost thousands of dollars (a Testa @$14,000). And EV automobiles have both batteries and motors albeit an an electric motor.
Used EVs will not be a good deal, if the cost of battery replacement is calculated in.
The battery has 10 year warranty so that should take me to eight years of usage on my used car. I charge at home so I don’t fast charge. That should extend battery life. Eight years from now there should be an excess of battery making and repair capacity which should reduce the costs of replacement as well. Its like anything else you make your choice and take your chances. I will be better off if the mid-east situation blows up the supply of oil since the energy for electric can be coal, gas, nuclear, or renewable. I am old enough to remember to oil boycotts and gas lines. How nice it would have been back then to simply not worry about what was happening with OPEC and just plug my car in at night.
Being an engineer in the field, I can promise you that the excess of battery making and repair facilities will never happen. In your case, if it fits you, then good for you, but do not expect things to actually get easier or better. It will most likely get worse, and a glut of unrecyclable batteries and EVs will spot the landscape. There is no current mass recyclable technology for batteries ,and battery materials are becoming scarce and more expensive. Reserves of natural gas in this country are more than enough not to worry about having to plug your car in at night, BTW. For someone who says they make no political statement about their EV use, you defend it quite well. Albeit not accurately.
BTW – EVs in America are powered by fossil fuels… a bit of an inconvenient truth
Nice of you to ignore these:
Inconvenient EV Truths
What benefits?
Inconvenient EV Truths
1- Used prices for BEV are ok, Yes new prices are too high.
2- Only practical for overnight home charging. On the road charging is too slow / inconvenient.
3- Yes, use a BEV for short distance trips and charge overnight. If you can fit all your errands into a 100 mile round trip you’ll be fine. That covers my personal situation well.
4- Higher cost insurance has not my experience.
5- Primary maintenance worries center on the battery. I don’t fast charge and have remaining 8 years battery warranty so on balance I think I have a fair deal even if I end up with only 8 years usage on the car.
6- In 3 years only one trip to dealer. Standard rip off rates on charges typical of any service at a dealer. Electric seat warmer failed which is not specific to BEV anyway.
7- Accidents are costly in any vehicle – ICE car can be totaled if the frame or engine damaged as well.
Because the usages of BEV is limited there should be plenty available on the used market at a good price. They are pleasant cars to drive, energy costs to run 1/10 of ICE and totally practical if you can use them within their limits.
“I have no idea why Mustang would be different.”
Because the Mustang is a “performance car.” Bought by “performance minded” drivers; with attendant driving styles.
While the Mustang E is a soccer-mom CUV…… It’s a “Mustang” in some marketing dweeb’s feeble mind, only.
The push for EVs in order to reduce emissions is at best a distraction, and quite likely a huge waste of resources. There are far better and less expensive ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As I have mentioned before, switching from coal to natural gas could reduce global emissions by as much as 20% and it can be done in less than a decade. It will take a century before EVs can reduce emissions in a similar fashion.
The push for EVs, is already running into reality. After an initial surge, the EV momentum is already fading. Lack of charging infrastructure, and range anxiety, are making people think twice about buying an EV. They are looking at PHEV instead. (I see Ford just announced a reduction in F150 EV production as an example).
PHEV sales will soon surpass EV sales in both in the US and China.
PHEVs can run on the gas engine or the battery. As a daily commute vehicle, they can easily be charged at home, so they don’t require lots of charging stations to work. When the battery drains, they simply switch over to the gas engine. No range anxiety concerns, and a lot of gas station infrastructure already exists. No worries about if there are enough battery materials as each PHEV uses a battery that is roughly 1/10 the size of an EV battery. So you can build as many PHEVs as needed without straining battery metals supply. And the smaller battery is much cheaper to replace when it reaches the end of its useful life.
Both PHEVs and EVs will make a tiny contribution to reducing emissions. Neither will make a big enough difference to warrant all this attention.
Their biggest effect will be a small annual reduction in gasoline consumption, resulting in lower gas prices, because refineries have very little leeway in how much gasoline they produce from each barrel of oil they refine.
You had me at “they’re more expensive…”; I suspect that will be the main reason for most people.
A LOT more expensive
The simplest solution to reducing carbon emissions would have been to switch from SUVs to compact cars. Fuel efficiency would improve 15 to 25%. That’s far better than the NHSTA report (previous MISH post) that showed EV’s take nearly 7 years of service before their carbon footprint exceeds that of ICE vehicles.
To get there, the negative-intellects occupying various “safety” bodies would first have to achieve sufficient economic literacy to realize it is the safety of OTHERS which need to be protected by government. Not the safety of the driver and his passengers. The latter will be considered by car buyers regardless. That follows from basic self preservation.
Meaning: Safety standards need to encourage buying vehicles which minimize risk and inconvenience imposed on other motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. As well as wear and tear on infrastructure.
A bit much to expect of well indoctrinated, logically utterly inept, card carrying children of the #DumbAge, I suppose….
In addition to Stuki Moi’s comments, cars have been made less efficient due to safety standards. Cars from the 80s using a carburetor and four speed transmission got 50 MPG because they weighed a lot less. Trucks & SUVs got a pass, at least for a while.
Similarly, cars have become smaller and less useful for families. When was the last US made station wagon built? And now the government has killed off the last V8 family car.
Jumpin’ Joe Bribe’em Maladminstration announced 100% growth of goobermint funded EV charging stations in just one month (from 1 to 2)
When EV owners finally need a new battery, will the cost of a new the battery be higher than the Blue Book value of the car? and don’t forget labor for removal/install and disposal on top of the battery cost (assuming that a battery is even available).
——–
Visualized: How Much Do EV Batteries Cost?
October 15, 2023
By Bruno Venditti
The cost of an electric vehicle (EV) battery pack can vary depending on composition and chemistry.
In this graphic, we use data from Benchmark Minerals Intelligence to showcase the different costs of battery cells on popular electric vehicles.
Size Matters
Some EV owners are taken by surprise when they discover the cost of replacing their batteries.
Depending on the brand and model of the vehicle, the cost of a new lithium-ion battery pack might be as high as $25,000:
…
link to visualcapitalist.com
Other claims are data free BS
I agree with this. It’s just that the life of an EV is much shorter than the life of a gas engine. Per this article, the average age of a car on the road today is 13 years. In 2037, how many 2024 electric cars will still be on the road? If you saw one, it’d be like seeing someone making a phone call with an old Motorola flip phone today (if the network still supported it) – rare as seeing a Model T now.
I have a ’12 v8 gas, an ’01 v10 gas, a ’96 v8 diesel, and a ’65 four cylinder diesel, none with less than 150,000 miles. All are paid for. None are clunkers and I expect them to last at least another decade of regular use without catastrophic drivetrain failures. Show me an electric car that is superior long term (i.e. over three decades) to a gas or diesel car that has been used regularly – daily commuter, cross country road trips, errand runner, etc….
Concur. I have a 2000 Lincoln with 175K miles on it and averages 24mpg (honest injun) and a 2003 GMC Envoy with 207K and both run fine. Both engines are still strong, don’t use oil, and have many more miles in them. But I’m fortunate in that I can do all my own repairs. And it’s cheap if you are patient and use Rock Auto.
I don’t know if I could repair an EV, except for brakes, etc. Those batteries are dangerous!
I do all my repair too except for the ’12 (the wife’s Land Rover), but I do the routine maintenance on it. Only thing with RockAuto to watch out for is the cheap Chinese parts. I’ve had new AC Delco drum brake hold down springs fail after a year, locking up the rear brakes.
Hmmmm
Inconvenient EV Truths
“Last” doesn’t mean that you want to drive them. The ability to hold a charge will significantly decline as the years pass, which means that a battery car will have to spend more time on the charger and be less able to make longer trips.
It will NOT happen!
I repeat what I have posted in the past – EV’s are a temporary step to H2 fuel cell cars.
The vast majority of people have better and more enjoyable things to do with their time than sit around a charging station waiting for their car to juice up.
Then there is the cost factor. Here in CA, I am reading projections that electric rates will go up to $0.45 kwh in 2024! Perhaps not a problem if you have a solar hookup but most people don’t.
Buy an EV now! Keep it clean. It will be an investment, a collectors item a few years down the road.
——–
BMW’s hydrogen-powered iX5 SUV survives brutal desert heat
By Michael Franco
October 19, 2023
link to newatlas.com
“EV’s are a temporary step to H2 fuel cell cars…”
Or simply synthetic hydrocarbons. Less exciiiting for the Flash Gordon set perhaps, but an awful lot easier to store and handle than H2. Especially where tank space, and vehicle price, is at a premium, as is the case for Vespas and personal cars.
As a complement to Batteries, H2 makes more sense: It starts coming into it’s own when tanks can be physically larger. Exactly the opposite of batteries.
Fuel cells _are_ more efficient, round trip, than ICEs burning synthetic HCs. But still plenty less efficient than running on continuously powered, “hot” highways. While being nearly as problematic in less-than-safe-and-stable jurisdictions: Just imagine a Merkava with a suitably giant H2 tank being hit by one of those home-made missiles…… Diesel, even if it must be produced synthetically at some point in the future, is still nice for many uses and environments. And for those where it’s not: Nothing beats not needing to carry fuel for the long, fast, powerhungry parts of a trip at all.
Even more so, since the continously-connected-by-necessity topology of a hot highway, means those fast, powerhungry parts can be reliably auto routed at very high speeds and efficiencies, with presumed safety. Obviating the need for crash structures to protect passengers, as well as explosive H2 tanks, in the case of high speed crashes. Efficiency wise, it’s hard to beat an electric Vespa having Paris-to-Shanghai range at 300mph (in a windp rotected cocoon, I would hope….). Then 70 miles of last-mile range, while sipping battery.
“California mandates 35% of new 2026 car models sold in California must be zero-emissions, climbing to 68% in 2030 and 100% in 2035.”
Dealerships in Arizona, Oregon,and Nevada will do a brisk business.
GR_FT
You miss out one more disadvantages. The resale value of EV.
Buyers of new EVs are stupid/delusional… Buyers of used EVs are hyper-stupid/delusional