Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One should take a course in economics to understand what negative externalities are and why there should be a financial penalty in proportion to their severity. EVs getting a temporary rebate does essentially that.
When EV prices reach parity with ICE, and then drop under ICE, the demand shift will be dramatic. Heck, we are already seeing a demand shift and it's only 2021. In a few years. ICE sales will be under pressure due to lessening demand even without enough EV supply.
EV sales will probably only 20% of new sales and auto companies will be begging for bailouts because their profit margins are going to tank on ICE due to lessening demand.
It was predictible 2 years ago, now it's pretty obvious.
Maybe yes, maybe not. All depends on the availability of fuel and a big drop of EVs' prices. The vehicles that sell in larger numbers, if you add all of them together, are automobiles that cost around $25,000 and under $30,000. As it is now, a small automobile such as the Civic, Corolla, and a few others (ones that have non-turbo 4-cylinder motors), average 40 MPG (combined mileage), and most have a 13-gallon tank. 13 gallons can get you over 500 miles on the road. Then in places where it gets very cold or hot, nothing beats an ICE motor to keep you warm/cool depending on the season. But there is something else that should be taken into consideration, and that applies to vehicles with light bars for night driving sports off road, and so on. These make good use of the ICE's alternator. These light bars aren't the best thing to install on EV's, specially if very cold or hot out there.
The goalposts will move, but GM claims they will be all electric in 14 years. I'll never buy GM again.
I'll never buy a Mercedes either, they're just about done with ICE or so they claim.
I like both GM and Mercedes, and won't have an option to buy one with an engine in the not-too-far-distant future. That's being pressured into an EV. Every night on the news I have to hear the words "climate change" and we have a president and administration who wants us in EVs and constantly harps on about electric cars.
I think you should take that up with Mercedes and GM. You still will have plenty of ICE options. But ultimately, they will probably go away just like manual transmissions are going away. They are being replaced by a better product. Being married to a gasoline engine for no reason other than nostalgia isnt something to be proud of. Im sure when the horse drawn carriage was being replaced by cars, many people felt cars were being forced on them also.
One should take a course in economics to understand what negative externalities are and why there should be a financial penalty in proportion to their severity. EVs getting a temporary rebate does essentially that.
When EV prices reach parity with ICE, and then drop under ICE, the demand shift will be dramatic. Heck, we are already seeing a demand shift and it's only 2021. In a few years. ICE sales will be under pressure due to lessening demand even without enough EV supply.
EV sales will probably only 20% of new sales and auto companies will be begging for bailouts because their profit margins are going to tank on ICE due to lessening demand.
It was predictible 2 years ago, now it's pretty obvious.
I dont agree with this post. The US government isnt entitled to bring in or give out more money based on some general concept of negative externalities of gas engines. Why does the US government get the right to divy up money based on that? Are they doing that based on an actual defensible calculation tied directly to the dollar amount given or taken? Nope. But some people support that because they have some principles they believe aligns with the government action (which they dont really since the US government doesnt do anything to benefit anyone but themselves).
When someone says something like "I dont like giving $7,500 to people for buying electric cars" I am somewhat sympathetic but ultimately our taxes dollars taken arent linked to what they are spent on. The governent forcibly takes our money and then spends our money plus a lot more on things that we dont usually want them to do. For me, it bothers me that the US government spends $1 trillion+ a year on mass murdering innocent people in countries too weak to defend themselves. But its not about the money stolen from me, its about the evil the government does. The US government giving tax credits for the purchase of a specific type of car is wrong but its hardly your taxes being spent and its also a lot less offensive for what the government spends on hurting innocent people.
I think you should take that up with Mercedes and GM. You still will have plenty of ICE options. But ultimately, they will probably go away just like manual transmissions are going away. They are being replaced by a better product. Being married to a gasoline engine for no reason other than nostalgia isnt something to be proud of. Im sure when the horse drawn carriage was being replaced by cars, many people felt cars were being forced on them also.
This is such a cliche'd, stupid argument.
It's 2021. You can go buy a 3500 diesel domestic truck that weighs over 8000lbs, can tow 30k lbs, and will smoke fast luxury cars from 20 years ago at the track. All while delivering 16-18 MPG unloaded.
Show me an EV "better product" than that? That is the equivalent to a horse and buggy? How far will the electric F-150 tow my boat in the dead of winter through mountains???
EV is not better than ICE, that's a joke. The treehuggers are all brainwashed by the news and democrats. Cars have NEVER been cleaner.
AAA is pretty non-partisan (if political at all) and according to their research EVs lose 41% of range if it drops to 20 degrees and you use the heater. So about every human being at or above where I live that's an issue for. We all know decent hot or cold does this anyway, but here's proof for you people in denial.
I think you should take that up with Mercedes and GM. You still will have plenty of ICE options. But ultimately, they will probably go away just like manual transmissions are going away. They are being replaced by a better product. Being married to a gasoline engine for no reason other than nostalgia isnt something to be proud of. Im sure when the horse drawn carriage was being replaced by cars, many people felt cars were being forced on them also.
The horse buggy/ICE transition is not comparable to the ICE/EV transition in my opinion. When we switched from the buggy to the automobile it was a drastic difference, replacing an animal with a machine. An ICE and an EV will eventually give you about the same performance. From the driver's perspective, ideally there would be no practical difference between driving an ICE and an EV. The difference is all under the hood. It may be a technological revolution from an environmental perspective(a debate for another thread) but it won't really revolutionize how we travel the way switching from the buggy to the auto did. Once you introduce self driving vehicles to the mix it becomes a different story, but that's a whole other battle.
It's 2021. You can go buy a 3500 diesel domestic truck that weighs over 8000lbs, can tow 30k lbs, and will smoke fast luxury cars from 20 years ago at the track. All while delivering 16-18 MPG unloaded.
Show me an EV "better product" than that? That is the equivalent to a horse and buggy? How far will the electric F-150 tow my boat in the dead of winter through mountains???
EV is not better than ICE, that's a joke. The treehuggers are all brainwashed by the news and democrats. Cars have NEVER been cleaner.
AAA is pretty non-partisan (if political at all) and according to their research EVs lose 41% of range if it drops to 20 degrees and you use the heater. So about every human being at or above where I live that's an issue for. We all know decent hot or cold does this anyway, but here's proof for you people in denial.
Its a great argument. Let's be honest, the only reason you dont like the argument is because you are on the opposite side of it.
I dont see electric as a tremendous improvement over other options. I see it more as an incremental improvement (and one I expect to continue to get incrementally better). So over time, I would imagine it would slowly but steadily pull market share away from ICE. I dont really care either way, I am not biased by dreams of saving the environment or anything like that. You are a comedy with your need to make this about treehuggers and democrats. It just seems like protecting the gasoline engine is something you mistakenly believe is a conservative/republican ideology that you must stand behind. Its funny how so many people cant think on their own so they need to frame everything into partisan positions and then accept the position that they believe aligns with their party affiliation.
The horse buggy/ICE transition is not comparable to the ICE/EV transition in my opinion. When we switched from the buggy to the automobile it was a drastic difference, replacing an animal with a machine. An ICE and an EV will eventually give you about the same performance. From the driver's perspective, ideally there would be no practical difference between driving an ICE and an EV. The difference is all under the hood. It may be a technological revolution from an environmental perspective(a debate for another thread) but it won't really revolutionize how we travel the way switching from the buggy to the auto did. Once you introduce self driving vehicles to the mix it becomes a different story, but that's a whole other battle.
I agree with you but I still believe it is applicable since it is an improvement over the older product. It just isnt as drastic of an improvement, just incrementally better. But still better so I assume over time the market share will move towards EVs.
Its a great argument. Let's be honest, the only reason you dont like the argument is because you are on the opposite side of it.
No, it's not. It is stupid almost beyond comprehension. Of course you won't even acknowledge the many valid points I have made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyaleWithCheese
I dont see electric as a tremendous improvement over other options.
Then what's the problem? It's not an improvement; most people who live in reality know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyaleWithCheese
I see it more as an incremental improvement (and one I expect to continue to get incrementally better). So over time, I would imagine it would slowly but steadily pull market share away from ICE. I dont really care either way, I am not biased by dreams of saving the environment or anything like that. You are a comedy with your need to make this about treehuggers and democrats. It just seems like protecting the gasoline engine is something you mistakenly believe is a conservative/republican ideology that you must stand behind.
LOL you play the oldest (and stupidest) card in the book pro-ev and then try to take the high road?
I'm not making it about anything. The bolded is the funniest thing I've read on here all week, thanks.
There are these things, human beings that are called car enthusiasts. Many, MANY of us don't care about flashy golf carts running on batteries. But yes, I am a conservative. I don't like president Eggplant who doesn't even know his name telling me I should be driving an EV, or should prepare for it.
How is propulsion that loses 41% (that's almost half) of range in cold weather when god forbid the driver uses the heat "better" or "an improvement"??? I posted a credible link, and gave credible examples in my last post which of course you skip and don't reply to.
It's 2021. You can go buy a 3500 diesel domestic truck that weighs over 8000lbs, can tow 30k lbs, and will smoke fast luxury cars from 20 years ago at the track. All while delivering 16-18 MPG unloaded.
Show me an EV "better product" than that? That is the equivalent to a horse and buggy? How far will the electric F-150 tow my boat in the dead of winter through mountains???
EV is not better than ICE, that's a joke. The treehuggers are all brainwashed by the news and democrats. Cars have NEVER been cleaner.
AAA is pretty non-partisan (if political at all) and according to their research EVs lose 41% of range if it drops to 20 degrees and you use the heater. So about every human being at or above where I live that's an issue for. We all know decent hot or cold does this anyway, but here's proof for you people in denial.
Well how many 1 ton pickups make up the new car market? How many people need the ability to tow 30k lbs? And who cares if a truck will smoke 20 year old cars? What a bizarre rationale
No, it's not. It is stupid almost beyond comprehension. Of course you won't even acknowledge the many valid points I have made.
Then what's the problem? It's not an improvement; most people who live in reality know that.
LOL you play the oldest (and stupidest) card in the book pro-ev and then try to take the high road?
I'm not making it about anything. The bolded is the funniest thing I've read on here all week, thanks.
There are these things, human beings that are called car enthusiasts. Many, MANY of us don't care about flashy golf carts running on batteries. But yes, I am a conservative. I don't like president Eggplant who doesn't even know his name telling me I should be driving an EV, or should prepare for it.
How is propulsion that loses 41% (that's almost half) of range in cold weather when god forbid the driver uses the heat "better" or "an improvement"??? I posted a credible link, and gave credible examples in my last post which of course you skip and don't reply to.
Dont say this stuff and I wont accuse you of clinging to a bad argument simply because you perceive it as aligning with your party's ideology. I am not a democrat or a tree hugger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister 7
The treehuggers are all brainwashed by the news and democrats.
Your great point is that a 8,000 pound diesel truck can tow 30k pounds? What % of the market is that? I said the EV is incrementally better and will continue to improve. So today its not the best for that use case (and today I fully agree it doesnt work for everyone). However, the number of people it will work for will expand over time and gradually take market share from ICE vehicles.
I remember when I was young those people called "car enthusiasts" insisted that you must have a manual transmission on a sports car. What % of sports cars are sold today with manual transmission? What is the trend on that? Did the democratic tree huggers kill your manual transmissions also? The reality is that it was old technology being clung to by people who are bothered by change even if it is improvement.
I dont believe I lose 40% of range in cold weather. I can also adjust my range loss by using less heat. However, even if I lose 40% range it wouldnt make a difference since I would still have enough range to finish my commute and make it home to charge fully overnight. My commute is about 100 miles a day and I put on about 22,000 miles per year. So I am driving significantly more than your average person and yet I never have to worry about running out of electricity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
