roflwaffle wrote: ↑
Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:23 am
I agree that car companies are greedy, but that doesn't mean EVs aren't viable. Most car companies have to decades of time and billions of dollars invested in ICEs, and being greedy, they would rather drag their feet on EVs and minimize the risks to those investments than aggressively push a product that could undermine their other products. They also have to appease their customers, dealers, who make most of their money off of maintenance.
The question is surely not if EVs are viable?
They most assuredly are. Tesla among others has proven that. And the need for an EV solution has not gone away - in fact it is getting more urgent. The speed of mass adoption, when it comes, will blind us. I freely admit that is likely to be after 2030 not immediately after 2018.
The US is actually a bad place to develop an EV ecosystem. Distances are very large and petrol (gasoline) prices are low by developed country standards. The average distance travelled per day by commuters and for shopping etc. must be quite high. The environment is extreme, so heating and AC use are de rigeur? That cuts range.
Most other developed countries are much closer to the ideal circumstances. Shorter distances, less use of climate control. Higher gasoline prices. China is becoming an EV leader - they have the air pollution problems to necessitate action.
The issue is more whether Tesla is the one to lead that revolution.
That's a much harder call. I look at the finances of the company, the quality control issues, the record of missed targets, the enthusiasm for tangential deals (Solar City) and prototypes as product announcement (heavy trucks), and think ... overvalued and could be bust.
Enthusiasts look at the demand for the cars and the way it has set a whole new tone for the industry and think the opposite. The BMW i3, say, is just not much of a car compared to a Tesla. Neither is the plug in Prius.
As for this being the moves of a single state, there are 13 section 177 states following CA's emissions regulations that represent about a third of the US population. I support these regulations because they reduce pollution and increase energy independence.
The weird thing is the US is becoming the world's largest oil producer. Again. Thus the energy independence argument is not as strong as it was. It is not, however, dead-- because of course the US could save that consumption and export it instead.