Demand for EVs is nowhere close to projections so car makers are slashing production.
Ford Cuts F-150 Lightning Truck Production
CNN reports Ford is Cutting Back F-150 Lightning Electric Truck Production
Ford will shut down one of two production shifts in April at the Dearborn, Michigan, factory that builds the F-150 Lightning electric pickup. The move is part of “matching F-150 Lightning production to customer demand,” the company said Friday.
General Motors recently made a similar announcement about its Chevrolet Silverado EV, announcing it would postpone adding production facilities for the truck, which went into production last spring for corporate customers.
Ford still projects an increase in Lightning sales this year after a 55% jump to 24,000 trucks last year.
About That 55 Percent Jump
The EV advocates like to stress surging 55 percent increase in demand. I like to look at other numbers.
Ford went from selling 15,000 trucks to selling 24,000 trucks. Ford sold 750,000 trucks last year. EVs accounted for 3.2 percent of them.
That’s roughly going from 2 percent to 3 percent. Hooray?
The price of a Lightning starts at about $50,000 and is eligible for $7,500 in federal EV tax credits. Even with the tax credits, the price remains higher than the $34,000 base price of the gas-powered truck.
In July, Ford slashed the price of a Lightning Pro, following earlier increases, to about $50,000. [And customers still don’t want the damn things. OK. OK. 3 percent do].
About 1,400 workers will be cut from the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center, where the Lightning is built. About half of those employees will move to the nearby Michigan Assembly Plant, where production will increase for the gasoline-powered Ford Bronco and Ranger models.
While Ford has said it is building factories in Tennessee and Kentucky where a next-generation EV truck will be built, the company recently announced it would scale back plans for an EV battery plant in Michigan.
Could it Be the Product?
Scaling back the EV Battery plant. Gee. Who couldda thunk?
The more sales there are the more chance defects show up. Have we hit the point where defect stories have impacted sales?
The Wall Street Journal asks: Companies cut output amid flagging demand. Could it be the product?
The Biden Administration keeps throwing around billions in subsidies for electric vehicles, and the press corps keeps hailing them, but consumers don’t seem to want them. The evidence is building that this green industrial policy is a bust.
Ford Motor said on Friday that it’s slashing production of its F-150 Lightning truck amid flagging demand. The F-150 Lightning drew oohs and aahs from the press when it was unveiled in May 2021. Yet the electric pickup has been plagued with defects that have required recalls. It sold a mere 24,165 Lightnings last year and lost roughly $36,000 on each EV in the third quarter. [Wait a second WSJ. Hold on. You are not allowed to say only 24,165. Shame shame. You need to stress 55 percent growth!!!!]
Or consider General Motors, which last month told its Chevrolet dealers to stop selling its electric Blazer SUV owing to software and other problems. Consumer complaints have piled up on social media about glitches including inoperable window switches and batteries that won’t charge.
A Consumer Reports survey in November found that new EVs have 79% more problems than internal-combustion cars. “This suggests that legacy auto makers need more time to work out the kinks under the hood of their EVs,” the report noted. “What matters most to consumers remains the same: finding safe, reliable cars,” Consumer Reports CEO Marta Tellado said. People want safe, reliable cars—who would have thought?
None of this is stopping the Biden Administration, as this week the Environmental Protection Agency sent its final rule on auto greenhouse emission standards to the White House for review. This back-door EV mandate will punish Ford and other auto makers if they respond to consumer demand by selling more gas-powered cars. It will also compel the companies to roll out EVs before technological and engineering kinks are worked out. This is a recipe for making EVs less popular, not more.
Amid the private jet-set at Davos this week, Biden climate czar John Kerry attributed consumer resistance to EVs to “disinformation.” That’s hilarious. The automobile press couldn’t be more in the tank for EVs.
What Should Ford Do?
That’s easy. Ford should move to 100 percent production of EVs. Then by losing $36,000 per vehicle it can quickly declare bankruptcy and readjust the union contract it just worked out. Then perhaps it can break even selling EVs.
Alternatively, Ford can tell Biden to go to hell, produce cars and trucks it wants and take the case to the Supreme Court if Biden presses the matter.
The county is just not prepared for vehicles that cost more, don’t get the mileage touted, won’t charge in the Winter, lack insufficient infrastructure, and have 79% more problems than internal-combustion cars.
Other than that, EVs are just great, especially for those who seldom drive, don’t go far when they do, and like reading books while waiting hours for their car to charge in the Winter.
$2 Billion in Subsidies, Only 2 EV Stations Opened
Meanwhile, despite $2 Billion in Subsidies, Only 2 EV Stations Opened, the Holdup is Social Justice
In yet another example of Biden incompetence, the administration is setting up rules making it harder to deliver EV charging stations.
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.
Both GM and Ford are scrapping targets.
Hertz planned to buy 100,000 Teslas. Instead it is selling 20,000 of them.
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?
Your posts are always a blend of thorough research and engaging writing. This one was fantastic!
Sounds like a great business model… Not!
The EV economic advantage over gasoline diminishes with payload. Small passenger cars are ideal. Heavier vehicles require a lot more battery power. Supplying that power is burdensome in weight, cost, and recharge time.
It’s not a coincidence that early EV cars were sports cars and relatively small cars. The initial test for Tesla’s tractor trailer involved hauling … wait for it … potato chips.
Ha, Ha! Fools!
Now for the truth
I worked in Ford product development in Dearborn Michigan for 27years and keep track of the company
Ford is not cutting Lightening production
They produce what they can sell to dealers
They are cancelling the original PLAN to double production in 2024, versus 2023, because sales have been poor
In fact, the current sales trend suggests they will have to eventually cut 2024 production in half, versus 2023, to match production and demand based on current sales trends.
That would be 1/4 of the original plan for 2024
The Mustang EV is selling well, but the Lightening truc is not.
The worst possible use for batteries is a heavy vehicle that may be used to carry a heavy load (trucks).
US BEV sales were up over +50% in 2023 versus 2022
Ford EV sales up only about +20% in 2023
Ford sold three EV models in 2023
Two were trucks
Big mistake
24,165 Lightnings, sold in 2023
160,000 original 2024 production plan
80,000 is the new 2024 production plan
Actual 2024 sales unlikely to reach 80,000
“Alternatively, Ford can tell Biden to go to hell, produce cars and trucks it wants and take the case to the Supreme Court if Biden presses the matter.”
Yes!!! This is what they should all do. It’s what they should have done from the start back in the 50s or whenever. Now that they’ve got decades of precedent obeying the gov mandates it’s harder to quit. But they still should. Just build and sell cars that people want to buy!
Here in Canada EV’s are a bit of a joke.
The local ford dealer brought in a F150 EV and a Mustang EV 9 months ago. Both are still there.
“95% of EV’s are still on the road the other 5% made it all the way home”
Honestly, EVs suck. They cost more, don’t go as far, take 10x+ longer to fuel, are reliant on inadequate infrastructure, are seriously unreliable in colder weather, can burst into unquenchable infernos and use a power source inadequate to the purpose.
The only way EVs will ever “succeed” is if they are mandated which is exactly what is unsurprising being done.
That said, buy one if you want too, I fully support the choice just not the corersion.
Extremely glad to hear this. My dad’s hybrid Maverick is impressive MPG-wise. Ford & GM should have been putting this tech into their midsized & big trucks for the last 2-3 years now. Most of the people who buy trucks don’t need to tow 10K+ lbs.
Great article! Keep ’em coming!
Ford CEO Admits ‘Reality Check’ When He Took Electric F-150 Truck on Road Trip
Jack Phillips
8/18/2023
Ford CEO Jim Farley admitted he underwent a “reality check” when he tried to make a cross-country road trip in the Ford electric F-150.
“Charging has been pretty challenging,” Mr. Farley said in a video on X, formerly known as Twitter. “It was a really good reality check of the challenges of what our customers go through and the importance of fast charging and what we’re going to have to do to improve the charging experience.”
In California, Mr. Farley said he encountered slow charging times. When using a low-speed charger, it took about 40 minutes for it to charge the electric F-150’s battery to 40 percent.
According to Ford, the company has said it partnered with Telsa to allow Ford customers to use the more than 12,000 Tesla Superchargers next year. Other electric vehicles have also announced partnerships with Tesla.
“Long hauling in an electric truck is an act of pioneerism, not because it’s hard or dangerous, but because it’s a new way to experience America,” Mr. Farley wrote in a LinkedIn post on Aug. 7. “Shifting from fueling stations to charging stations requires new behaviors and opens new possibilities.”
…
link to theepochtimes.com
Just try charging when it’s sub zero. Like a huge portion of America mid winter.
At this point the only EV news that matter is about Tesla, and possibly Rivian. All others don’t matter. The Tesla EVs work with Tesla chargers informing the driver the distance to the nearest station. Other brands can use Tesla chargers, but pay a surcharge.
The EVgo chargers are indeed a joke.
And one other brand to pay attention to is Chinese BYD.
Assuming that EV sales begin to falter, which they already are, and PHEV sales will soon exceed EV sales, then Tesla’s big growth days are behind them.
Depends on the type of vehicle a driver demographic. Take Toyota Tacoma, which is known for reliability, but lagging in fuel consumption.
The latest models have 8-gear automatic with fuel injection and optional hybrid. More fuel efficient, but how is it going to improve reliability is an open question.
And we are still only talking about one region: NA.
China vs US. The battle to dominate clean energy and lower emissions vehicles.
China has been investing 4x to 6x what the US has been investing for the last decade. And it shows.
China produces 80 percent of the world’s solar panels, 80 percent of EV batteries, 60% of the world’s EVs, and processes 90% of the world’s rare earth metals.
In 2023 alone they added 230GW of wind power. Twice what the US and Europe combined added.
They also added 100GW of solar and have 4x what the US has installed.
Their push into renewables is necessary as they also need to import a crap load of coal, oil, and gas to help supplement their domestic production. The more renewables they have, the less fossil fuels they have to import. And the less dependent they are on others.
Here in the US, we are lucky because we are self-sufficient in coal and natural gas, and close to self-sufficient in oil.
The future will definitely be more renewables and eventually less fossil fuels. But it is going to be a long and slow transition lasting 50+ years. The question is whether it is worthwhile to try to compete with China, when we are already so far behind and have a big competitive disadvantage.
I would prefer to allow Chinese batteries, solar panels, rare earths etc to arrive here tariff free. Trying to prop up a domestic industry when it is unable to compete seems like a waste of money. Particularly since we are close to self sufficient in energy overall. It isn’t a security of supply problem for us. Even if it is for China.
Once again, Papa Dave and I think alike.
Maybe I will interview him one day.
I would like to see that.
Free trade, free slaves. Our dependence on China was growing too fast.
Useless platitude.
Throughout human history, trade has been a key in mankind’s progress; as individuals, groups, communities, states, and countries.
Life without trade is a life of deprivation and isolation.
Trade wasn’t the issue, and usually never is. It is how the trade is accomplished, tariffs, labor, give and takes, and all the dealing that goes into it.
We want trade, and we should push trade, but fair trade in both directions is what we need and should ultimately desire. That which will benefit everyone.
Papa you asked, whether it is worthwhile to try to compete with China, when we are already so far behind and have a big competitive disadvantage.
This is an excellent question, and I would, on its surface, say no. We already can’t compete in labor cost. We can’t provide enough of our own materials, and as pointed out, we are already way behind.
Again, as you point out, we are energy independent in some areas, so I say we scrap Windmills, Solar & EV’s for now. Place that money into research and infrastructure, and in that order. The research will tell us what we need, and how much of it. The infrastructure will put it all into play.
I am thinking that the old carpool lanes become the new EV lanes. Place chargers in pull offs, of the center highway areas, where feasible and in all rest areas.
Work on more efficient transportation and storage, of the power windmills and solar panels can harness. Maybe they work in conjunction with the EV highway infrastructure?
I just know, that right now anyway, we are pushing technology that we are not yet ready for and haven’t even found the best and proper way to use it all most effectively, I don’t think. Maybe placing the horse before the cart in these instances, will yield much better results…
Mostly agree. It will take time to figure out where we can compete.
No need to scrap anything though. And no need to mandate anything extreme either.
Just allow tariff free imports of solar panels, windmills, EVs etc. from China or anywhere else. Use them where appropriate and cost effective. If people want EVs, then let them buy them. But no need to mandate EV sales. If you want to encourage EV sales, go ahead and subsidize them a bit.
The big investments by government should be in a major build out and improvements to the country’s electrical infrastructure. Which is a good investment.
Let private companies build the charging infrastructure.
And let private companies figure out where they can compete effectively in this area of renewables and EVs.
Of course, I have no say in this. And I don’t expect it to happen.
So I will continue to base my investments on what is actually happening, rather than what I think should happen.
Doug 78 : in the Gilded Age the RR co got millions acres of Indian land for free if they
build RR, which are military pipelines with veins and capillaries to the west and the south, imitating Bismarck’s RR network, financed by a Jewish banker. The Barons didn’t know how to operate them, but it didn’t matter. their contractor made millions, using Chinese coolies. The RR hubs attracted farmers and investments, which built the cities of the west. The RR carved the Indian territories. They also killed the cowboys shipping longhorns to St Louis and cows to Chicago slaughter houses. CA was a bust until WWII, until general Marshall built the war industries in the west.
Yes, those were the sweeteners of the deal to get the railroads to invest. It did do harm to others as of course but if you tell me your nationality, we can talk about all the horrors and injustices your people have done over the centuries.
The RR ended the 400 years war with the Indians.
A bot! Do you realize how much death and destruction your kind has caused? More and more people want you to rot in Hell and are making plans for your demise. Your reign is just about over now.
Just bought a 2024 2SS Camaro with a V-8. It is a hybrid. It burns gas and rubber.
And Dollars too!
Macho man?
No, it’s my wife’s.
And I just picked up an Audi E-tron GT after considering a Camaro ZL1… The deals that Audi gave were amazing and brought it in line with a ZL1.. but the instant torque is fantastic. Plus getting a full tank at 250miles is only $15. So I can just enjoy it as I like.. I hear ya I’ve always had V8s, but this tech is next level. And unless you’re faster than the speed of sound everyone including cops will hear you actually getting that 500hp in the Camaro as you’ll be high on the revs. Silent speed is a game changer…
I had no interest in the environmental side of EVs but the drive quality and performance really surprised me.
Audi E-tron GT is, IMHO, the most beautiful car on the road. Congratulations!!
One problem Hertz had with EVs is that they had to take time to explain how to use the EVs to customers, many whom had never before used one before. The younger ones took to EVs like a duck takes to water but the older ones had to be shown how the things worked.
It’s actually easier. You just literally ask the car for a Tesla super charger then plug it in. It’ll automatically bill your card on file with Hertz. The non Tesla’s are much harder though.
“Amid the private jet-set at Davos this week, Biden climate czar John Kerry attributed consumer resistance to EVs to “disinformation.””
When all else fails, resort to the Gaslight.
The gaslight does burn cleaner!
Prius still the best.
“..Ford can tell Biden to go to hell, produce cars and trucks it wants..”
Not competitively. If American automakers could do that, there would have been no need for a Battery Car push in the first place.
The only thing America can produce competitively, is dollars. Handed to an almost exclusively middlebrow-or-dumber “investor” class completely incapable of doing anything productive nor valuable at all.
Battery car fairytales are specifically dependent on exactly the existence of a very flush such class of illiterate and incompetent “investors”: They can’t profitably sell product; so the hucksters instead sell paper. Since that is something anyone can do, as long as enough debasement theft is reliably channeled useful idiots’ way.
Biden supports ev the same way the Gided Age supported the railroads.
It didn’t work for decades. Build a bridge to the world. Free trade, free slaves. Is Mexico a friend or foe. Mexico might imitate China, choke supply and Zimmermann James Polk. Why don’t we diversify with Argentina, Venezuela, Santo Domingo and Puerto Rico..
The EV adoption has nothing in common with how the railroads became profitable. The early builders of the railroads invested a lot and had to charge too much to recuperate that investment. Consequently the market remained small so they went bankrupt. The new owners bought the infrastructure a high discount and were able to charge low prices and the market took off. Then the government put in subventions and the payoff was very positive as it facilitated settlement and commerce. The EV revolution is about better use of existing infrastructure.
You always have to adjust when renting a car.
The only difference with EVs, the functions aren’t in buttons, but touchscreen a voice recognition.
That is a no-go with my wife.
If Mexico Zimmermann James Polk we are sinking in the mud.
Bot talk gibberish Mish forum Zimmerman Pold dead soon bot dead?
You’re losing it, bro. Your stream of consciousness blather is getting less and less intelligible.
This is the first real shakeout in the EV industry as marginal players are being forced out. As always, the low-cost producer wins hands down. In spite of their debt, the legacy carmakers still have access to capital so there will be another round and this time maybe one or two will get the manufacturing right and start to compete.
I live in Canada and I could have made that prediction. The distant between major cities in this province alone not to mention country is beyond what people think. And the winters can be brutal that alone does not help batteries. If your battery power EV runs out power and needs to be recharged in the middle of nowhere, then they will use a gasoline-powered generator towed behind a truck for your recharge rescue. Ironic maybe?
I recently bought a PHEV (Benz GLE450e) and I love it. Most of my driving is local and I get 59 miles per charge. I buy 40 gallons of gasoline a year – for road trips.
Gas savings had little or no effect on my decision. Rather, I love the quiet of driving electric around town and the responsiveness of the PHEV. I can’t imagine ever going back to an ICE vehicle.
PHEVs can sell themselves to most drivers. The problem is that the evangelical adherents of the green cult simply won’t push them because they are not completely green. They don’t scream virtue. I could care less.
Ford and the other traditional manufacturers were merely manufacturing credits for their traditional business. The loss per EV was made up by the mileage credit that seems to be going away, plus carbon credits.
Everybody knows that if you want an electric car, there is only one manufacturer, and that’s Tesla. And they aren’t even that much more money than what Ford, etc. can do. But most people wouldn’t even consider a Tesla unless they are fairly rich and as a second or third vehicle. Very few people are going to make an electric car their only car.
The F150 Lightning is a dead idea because it cannot tow. Around the block, sure, but serious towing requires serious energy and people don’t want to spend all day at charging stations. It’s terrible for productivity.
Add to this the fact that electric car batteries only last 7 years, maybe 10, but at much reduced range, and these things are a no-go. Everyone knows the first thing to go on your laptop is the battery. 8 hours becomes 6 hours becomes 2 hours in just a few short years.
You are vastly overstating the case on battery degradation. No one knows for sure how many cycles it will take a lithium battery to degrade to 70%, but 1,000 is a reasonable guess based on my reading and experience.
If that’s correct, a 65 kWh battery typical of the latest generation sedan EVs will roll the wheels for at least 175,000 miles (and probably a good deal more) in a temperate climate if the owner pays attention to charging, i.e. isn’t constantly topping them off from a high state of charge.
EVs definitely have their downsides, the Ford F15 Lightning disaster being a notable example, but short battery life in normal use is not one of them. I don’t think BEVs work for light trucks, and don’t think they will work (meaning deliver the performance and range that customers rightly expect) in light trucks, but they are fine in sedans used as urban and suburban second vehicles.
still no one have addressed
1) high costs of maintenance
2) Recycling of dead vehicles/batteries
Not that it will have any effect whatsoever on your professed opinion, because once you’ve said something dumb, nothing on this earth will ever make you admit it, but here’s a maintenance schedule:
link to tesla.com
Feel free to interpret this as “OMG! Electric cars run on the blood of the unborn!” or whatever it takes to maintain the delusion that you didn’t just say something dumb.
Missing parts, long waits, and a dead mouse: The perils of getting a Tesla fixed
Tesla wants to eliminate the need for service. Recode obtained customer complaints to the FTC that suggest this isn’t happening — yet.
By Rebecca Heilweil
Aug 24, 2022, 6:00am EDT
link to vox.com
Tesla owners share some of the unexpected headaches of owning the EV
Grace Kay
Jul 24, 2023, 2:05 AM PDT
– Over a dozen Tesla owners told Insider about some of the headaches of switching to the EV.
– Issues they described included dealing with slow Tesla service centers and quality-control fixes.
– Take a look at some of the issues and surprise expenses of owning a Tesla.
…
link to businessinsider.com
Tesla blamed drivers for failures of parts it long knew were defective
Wheels falling off cars at speed. Suspensions collapsing on brand-new vehicles. Axles breaking under acceleration. Tens of thousands of customers told Tesla about a host of part failures on low-mileage cars. The automaker sought to blame drivers for vehicle ‘abuse,’ but Tesla documents show it had tracked the chronic ‘flaws’ and ‘failures’ for years.
Dec. 20, 2023, 11 a.m. GMT
…
link to reuters.com
Recycling will happen once there are enough spent batteries.
3. High insurance 4. No parts, 5. Requires EV certified technicians 6. Can’t be serviced or repaired by owner 7. Requires additional home charger 8. They suck in cold and hot climates, with reduced battery life. Etc.
The goal of zero emissions vehicles, while a good goal, is not worth the effort. Whether it’s EVs, FCVs, or something else. While the vehicle itself is 100% emission free when operating, there is an emission price to pay for the production of the electricity or H2 needed to run them.
Only 20% of US electricity generation is renewable; 20% is from nuclear and the remaining 60% is from fossil fuels. So EVs are no where close to being emissions free.
The production of each vehicle and all the components that go into it requires a lot of fossil fuel use, for mining, smelting, transport etc.
We need a lot of fossil fuels to produce all the plastics that go into each vehicle. And a lot of fossil fuels to produce the lubricants and tires. And more fossil fuels to produce the replacement tires and lubricants.
There are many studies that attempt to compare the lifetime emissions of ICE vs EV given all the above factors plus others. The results range from NO difference (when coal is the sole electric source) to 50% less lifetime emissions (when using 100% renewables). Assuming the best case scenario of 50% emission reduction: and since road transport produces 15% of all emissions; cut it in half and you save 7.5% of total emissions.
It will take a century to replace all ICE vehicles with EVs. And to produce all electricity with renewables. And to build out all the necessary new electrical infrastructure to support EVs. All for a 7.5% reduction in emissions.
Or, we can spend a decade replacing all coal use with natural gas and reduce emissions by 20% in a short period of time.
The logical solution is to replace coal with natural gas. Coal is dirty. Causes smog and health problems. And is the biggest source of greenhouse gases.
Regarding vehicles. PHEV is the way to go. All the benefits and emissions reductions of EVs over 90% of the time. But no need to build out massive charging infrastructure and electrical grid improvements right away. Less demand for battery metals. No range anxiety.
I expect PHEV sales to exceed EV sales in the next few years.
Coal burns clean when properly scrubbed.
Try again.
Increased efficiency means advanced coal can produce 40% less CO2 than conventional plants. This is impressive, but it’s not enough. Even the most advanced coal plant produces around 30 times more CO2 than wind and hydro, twenty times more than solar and geothermal, and 50% more than natural gas.
Co2 is a good thing
Again, this is not difficult. Look at the electoral map. When you get outside the taxpayer financed university indoctrination zones and the large cities filled with tech/finance companies and the politically-connected elitists, the map is red. Those folks out there are more conservative. Those folks drive further distances and do more “pickup-type” work. Even when you get in suburbia, the trades are using trucks to do trade work. America isn’t just cities with us Deplorable MAGA Republicans in the flyover-land between those EV-pushing political hubs. Many of us are being lectured to about things that are just not true for us. They may be true for them. I won’t buy there are 83 genders. I won’t buy that our border is secure. I won’t buy that inflation is vanquished and it was only 17% over 3 years. Because they are not true. Well the product of the Ford or Chevy truck is aimed at the consumer base in that alleged vast red wasteland that hauls a lot of materials large distances daily in extreme weather conditions and they want and need a vehicle that works all the time, 24×7, without concern for whether it will perform in -20F or 100, if it will peform at all given the range, and surely don’t need to buy an experiment for them when all day long they are doing the work of fixing other things that are broken in need of repair.
In other words, the EV may be fine for a certain demographic and user at the moment but out here we need the power, reliability, range, cost, and less-risk of the ICE truck. TIme is money, the tradesmen say it all the time–they need their tool to be ready to work within 10 minutes of exhausting the fuel tank. Forcing folks to buy something they don’t want or need may sell okay to the subsidy-loving blue-pill city driver who actually does benefit from the EV’s daily commute between home and desk in their often overpaid heavily connected political-narrative-loving corporate gig but it won’t work on blue collar folks that need something different and are confident in that decision.
There may be a day when the advances are sufficient to meet the typical truck-buyers’ needs, where the cost equation in all aspects works. That’s not today. The auto manufactuers are just saying “enough” in this regards, finally.
I guess when you look at how companies are viewing their typical customer these days, their target audience–when you see the ads where you don’t see the typical truck consumer, to be candid–you can see how they missed the mark on EV trucks. Companies not in tune with what customers want and need cannot survive without massive subsidies or coerced-taxpayer-dollars shoved their way in some other fashion. I mean when your ads show you don’t even know WHO your customer is how can you make a product for them?
I would NEVER buy a EV truck unless it could do what the diesel or gas trucks I’ve had in the past can do. Why would I spend that amount of money–they are all quite proud of their product–and not get what I want and need?
This is simply how commerce is supposed to work.
“University Indoctrination Zones”
Like the place I learned engineering?
EV propoents.are like Bitcoin propoents…..a religious cult that can never see the downsides.
Comparing EVs to bitcoin is like comparing a car to an expensive picture of a car.
Saw that Norway is the leader in EV use. They pointed out that people in Norway primarily live in single family homes. This, charge the car at home, seems to be the key to more adoption.
Actually someone a couple of articles ago on Mishs site posted a link that explained why.
EV’s in Norway don’t pay road tolls and a host of other taxes that ICE vehicles do. That’s why they are being adopted there and in fact it’s had the opposite effect of what they wanted because homes aren’t switching but are rather buying an extra car simply because it’s an EV and they want to not get charged tolls and other taxes.
It’s mostly now because of the ease of home charging and a dense network of rechargers. In Norway in winter, filling your gas tank outside is no fun so charging at home is a tremendous advantage.
Why Norway — the poster child for electric cars — is having second thoughts
Electric cars are crucial, but not enough to solve climate change. We can’t let them crowd out car-free transit options.
By David Zipper Oct 31, 2023, 7:00am EDT
OSLO, Norway — With motor vehicles generating nearly a 10th of global CO2 emissions, governments and environmentalists around the world are scrambling to mitigate the damage. In wealthy countries, strategies often revolve around electrifying cars — and for good reason, many are looking to Norway for inspiration.
Over the last decade, Norway has emerged as the world’s undisputed leader in electric vehicle adoption. With generous government incentives available, 87 percent of the country’s new car sales are now fully electric, a share that dwarfs that of the European Union (13 percent) and the United States (7 percent). Norway’s muscular EV push has garnered headlines in outlets like the New York Times and the Guardian while drawing praise from the Environmental Defense Fund, the World Economic Forum, and Tesla CEO Elon Musk. “I’d like to thank the people of Norway again for their incredible support of electric vehicles,” he tweeted last December. “Norway rocks!!”
I’ve been writing about transportation for the better part of a decade, so all that fawning international attention piqued my curiosity. Does Norway offer a climate strategy that other countries could copy chapter and verse? Or has the hype outpaced the reality?
So I flew across the Atlantic to see what the fuss was about. I discovered a Norwegian EV bonanza that has indeed reduced emissions — but at the expense of compromising vital societal goals. Eye-popping EV subsidies have flowed largely to the affluent, contributing to the gap between rich and poor in a country proud of its egalitarian social policies.
…
link to vox.com
“With motor vehicles generating nearly a 10th of global CO2 emissions…”
If only there was interest in having war machines and private jets switch over to electric (eyeroll)
As for Norway being any kind of example, a small population with significant wealth derived from the extraction and sale of petroleum isn’t doing anyone any favors by taking some of the $ from those sales to subsidize EVs for the local population. Even if the focus was centralized transit options and all citizens had equal income due to “perfect” social policies, funding it on the back of oil sales while feigning distress at the increase of atmospheric CO2 due to anthropogenic activities is ludicrous.
PS. The first 200 cars off Saturn assembly line cost $140,000 each and we lost money on every from 1990 – 1996. The reasons we lost money that long had little to do with UAW and 99% stupid management decisions. $3 BILLION lost trying to sell RH drive Saturn’s in Japan. Multiple other genius decisions.
We’ll probably have to see gas over $6-7 (and it will) during next inflationary impulse for EV demand to re-materialize. Question is, will electricity prices double or triple too?
Nope. Gas prices are unlikely to go that high again unless there is a big disruption in oil supply.
The amount of oil being used every day goes up by around 1% a year. All that oil must be refined into products. For every 42 gallon barrel of oil that is refined you get 19-20 gallons of gasoline. So the amount of gasoline produced also goes up by about 1% per year.
But gasoline demand is beginning to decline as more EVs and PHEVs are sold each year. ICE sales are declining.
So more supply of gasoline but less demand each and every year going forward. Which means downward pressure on gasoline prices. (Not counting taxes, which can always go up).
I’ve read your blog for years. I get that you hate Unions. As someone who did 25 years on a UAW assembly line, used tuition assistance to get a degree with no loans, and retired as Lean Manufacturing coordinator from GM Spring Hill I can tell you that the $36,000 per vehicle is high but not significantly so in first year or so of a ramp up of production. Everything in auto industry as a function of scale. It’s why at Saturn the famous commercials we ran about us Union workers being able to stop the assembly line and fix problems didn’t last long as it cost $5000 a minute for downtime in 1991. EVs are coming but 100% is likely unattainable but problems like they have are not uncommon they just don’t normally get press. They’ll work through them and whichever company comes through with the battery and a 400+ mile range and 20 minute or less charge time will make a fortune. I see a lot of people who will go EV for 1 of their 2 cars. Needs to be done without a $7500 tax incentive but from the railroad Baron’s forward tax incentives are a staple of American industry and their ownership of Congress.
Your ilk are why my 1976 Oldsmobile was the last Detroit iron I’ll ever own.
Just looking at the number of models available for the size of the market, there just isn’t room for everyone. There’s room for half a dozen, not 25 or more.
“matching … production to customer demand”
Corporate-speak. Translation – “People don’t want what we’re selling, so we’re going to sell fewer of them.” These car companies and the fedgov that controls them really don’t have a clue about truck people.
Slight correction, nobody wants EVs from anyone but Tesla and BYD. Those two are doing just fine. Ford and Chevy started too late and screwed themselves.
They are not doing fine in the winter. Range is still cut in half.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aIUrOkttv7g&t=629s&pp=ygUSdGVzbGEgY29sZCB3ZWF0aGVy
three season car.
Not 3 season really. Even at 175-200 miles of range, which is about what we had at -10F, good enough for a commuter car. 90% of my driving is under 75 miles, the other 10% we use the other car anyway.
You still definitely want access to charging at home.
Hyundai is second I believe and in a position to beat out Tesla. BYD is beating about everyone.
At the moment, Hyundai is turning into the market leader oddly enough (outside of China)
A little more time is all we need – Biden assured us Mary Barra was leading the US into the new and wonderful EV era so it won’t be long now. Maybe next year?
This will ripple back to China where raw materials for batteries are mined and electronic components are manufactured. Then again, the latest opinion poll shows people from China are 4-5 times as likely as those in the West to buy an EV as their next car. I have a somewhat cynical view that EV’s are used as a Chinese propaganda tool and weapon of economic destruction.
“we’ll make it up on volume”
Ford doing a bad job doesn’t mean EVs are hard.
Look up the BYD Bao 5. It is a long range high performance plug in hybrid chunky off-road SUV.
Drive electric 99% of days, use the onboard charger to go anywhere. And priced reasonably.
The Ramcharger is planning to do the same for full size trucks.
Full electric is great for city cars. EVs with onboard generators are a better fit for rural.
Yeah, and look at Chinese communist factory worker pay and conditions… LOL
Ford had a profit last year of ~ 4.6 Billion. With their EV push, they were projecting a LOSS of MINUS $4.2 BILLION. With their scalded back EV program, they may show a slight profit. Or not.