« Return to Thread: Did consumers kill the electric car?
Re: Did consumers kill the electric car?
by gary k
::
Rate this Message:
I'm sure someone can correct my comments and add more but it seems like
there can be a sound response to this well-written misinformation.
>
> After an early wave of interest, enthusiasm for the EV1 subsided because
> of the car’s limitations. First, EV1s were expensive; they cost two or
> three times as much as comparable gasoline powered cars. They could be
> leased (but not sold) for $400-600 per month.
- it would be more useful to use second generation EV's for comparison.
For example the Toyota RAV4 has proven to be exceptionally economical
both in terms of operating costs and resale value. The long-term cost
benefits are what really count. There is generally much less
maintenance, much lower fuel costs and longer life. In comparison to
ICE maintenance costs, resale values, and longevity, EV's are a great
value. (add some average cost information. average lifespan of EV
drive vs ICE. resale of RAV4 increased while SUVs have very high
depreciation).
> Second, the batteries
> “could not supply the range or durability required by the mass market.”
>
- range, durability and mass market should be quantified, and again if
the RAV4 is used as an example then this is not true. The durability of
the RAV4 battery has proven to be exceptional - over 100K miles and
several years old with no signs of degradation and no servicing
required. Range is over 100 miles (?) which should certainly satisfy
the mass market especially as a second vehicle.
> Third, the infrastructure for recharging was not in place.
- the infrastructure for recharging is an electrical outlet and they are
more abundant than gas stations. Normal recharging occurs overnite at
home. Friends and relatives are typical destinations and they have
outlets. Many people arrange to recharge at work or nearby businesses
and shopping areas can easily add EV parking with outlets provided as
some are already doing (I have no specific examples but they can be added).
> Fourth, the
> high voltages and operating temperatures of the batteries presented some
> unique safety hazards, and “only a relative handful of mechanics knew
> how to work safely on the powerful batteries.”
- the hazards are different but no worse than the explosive nature of
gasoline. Mechanics have to respect limitations on smoking, welding,
and creating sparks. Many people have been killed from gas tank
explosions. Vehicles require high energy density and no matter in what
form, it can be very dangerous. One of the benefits of EV's is that
they should require very little maintenance. Batteries and electric
motors very rarely require "working on".
> Fifth, the EV1 was a tiny
> two-seater that simply did not work for families with children.
- again, RAV4 as an example. Also, a two-seater may actually be
preferred for commuting and errands, and there are a lot of households
without children.
> Finally,
> the car was fast, but the handling was odd because of the heavy battery.
>
- in comparison to today's typical SUV or a sports car? I bet the
handling is "odd" in a hummer (it's easy to start sounding sarcastic but
I'm sure it can be written more objectively). I have not heard about
the handling of a RAV4, but if it is used for comparison vs the EV1 then
a lot of this argument just seems to go away. It may raise the question
of "what ever happened to the battery that was used in the RAV4"? and
it would be nice if more people questioned that.
> These limitations prompted an alternative-fuel specialist at J.D.
> Power & Associates to conclude that EV1s “are just not acceptable to
> consumers.”
- even though those consumers loved them and offered to buy them?
> Honda had even less success with its electric vehicle, the
> Plus, leasing just 300 in three years.
>
> The final nail was driven into the electric car coffin by hybrid
> gas-electric cars like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight, which
> have maintained great popularity partly due to their ability to recharge
> while cruising down the road.
- but mostly due to their good gas mileage.
> Other automakers took note. Now virtually
> every manufacturer has announced that it will produce a hybrid vehicle
> by the end of the decade.
>
- largely because hybrids can increase performance without decreasing
gas mileage. this is another benefit of electric motors, however the
largest benefits are long-term fuel savings, reliability and very low
emissions vehicles.
> Thus, as one commentator noted, it is likely that market forces, not
> nefarious tactics, killed the electric car: As the market success of
> cars like the Prius and the market failure of cars like the EV1
> illustrate, it wasn't a shortage that prevented battery electric
> vehicles from selling and it wasn't a desire not to offer clean vehicles
> that prompted manufacturers to stop producing them. The reason for the
> market response to these vehicles is because, if given the option, the
> general public would buy environmentally friendly automobiles if the
> sacrifices that had to be made to drive them were minimal. Accordingly,
> the level of sacrifices that has to be made to drive battery electric
> vehicles discourages all but the most enthusiastic consumers from
> leasing them.
>
>- there was no market failure of the EV1, it was never offered for
sale. All EV's that were ever offered for sale were sold and continue
to hold very high resale values.
_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
there can be a sound response to this well-written misinformation.
>
> After an early wave of interest, enthusiasm for the EV1 subsided because
> of the car’s limitations. First, EV1s were expensive; they cost two or
> three times as much as comparable gasoline powered cars. They could be
> leased (but not sold) for $400-600 per month.
- it would be more useful to use second generation EV's for comparison.
For example the Toyota RAV4 has proven to be exceptionally economical
both in terms of operating costs and resale value. The long-term cost
benefits are what really count. There is generally much less
maintenance, much lower fuel costs and longer life. In comparison to
ICE maintenance costs, resale values, and longevity, EV's are a great
value. (add some average cost information. average lifespan of EV
drive vs ICE. resale of RAV4 increased while SUVs have very high
depreciation).
> Second, the batteries
> “could not supply the range or durability required by the mass market.”
>
- range, durability and mass market should be quantified, and again if
the RAV4 is used as an example then this is not true. The durability of
the RAV4 battery has proven to be exceptional - over 100K miles and
several years old with no signs of degradation and no servicing
required. Range is over 100 miles (?) which should certainly satisfy
the mass market especially as a second vehicle.
> Third, the infrastructure for recharging was not in place.
- the infrastructure for recharging is an electrical outlet and they are
more abundant than gas stations. Normal recharging occurs overnite at
home. Friends and relatives are typical destinations and they have
outlets. Many people arrange to recharge at work or nearby businesses
and shopping areas can easily add EV parking with outlets provided as
some are already doing (I have no specific examples but they can be added).
> Fourth, the
> high voltages and operating temperatures of the batteries presented some
> unique safety hazards, and “only a relative handful of mechanics knew
> how to work safely on the powerful batteries.”
- the hazards are different but no worse than the explosive nature of
gasoline. Mechanics have to respect limitations on smoking, welding,
and creating sparks. Many people have been killed from gas tank
explosions. Vehicles require high energy density and no matter in what
form, it can be very dangerous. One of the benefits of EV's is that
they should require very little maintenance. Batteries and electric
motors very rarely require "working on".
> Fifth, the EV1 was a tiny
> two-seater that simply did not work for families with children.
- again, RAV4 as an example. Also, a two-seater may actually be
preferred for commuting and errands, and there are a lot of households
without children.
> Finally,
> the car was fast, but the handling was odd because of the heavy battery.
>
- in comparison to today's typical SUV or a sports car? I bet the
handling is "odd" in a hummer (it's easy to start sounding sarcastic but
I'm sure it can be written more objectively). I have not heard about
the handling of a RAV4, but if it is used for comparison vs the EV1 then
a lot of this argument just seems to go away. It may raise the question
of "what ever happened to the battery that was used in the RAV4"? and
it would be nice if more people questioned that.
> These limitations prompted an alternative-fuel specialist at J.D.
> Power & Associates to conclude that EV1s “are just not acceptable to
> consumers.”
- even though those consumers loved them and offered to buy them?
> Honda had even less success with its electric vehicle, the
> Plus, leasing just 300 in three years.
>
> The final nail was driven into the electric car coffin by hybrid
> gas-electric cars like the Toyota Prius and the Honda Insight, which
> have maintained great popularity partly due to their ability to recharge
> while cruising down the road.
- but mostly due to their good gas mileage.
> Other automakers took note. Now virtually
> every manufacturer has announced that it will produce a hybrid vehicle
> by the end of the decade.
>
- largely because hybrids can increase performance without decreasing
gas mileage. this is another benefit of electric motors, however the
largest benefits are long-term fuel savings, reliability and very low
emissions vehicles.
> Thus, as one commentator noted, it is likely that market forces, not
> nefarious tactics, killed the electric car: As the market success of
> cars like the Prius and the market failure of cars like the EV1
> illustrate, it wasn't a shortage that prevented battery electric
> vehicles from selling and it wasn't a desire not to offer clean vehicles
> that prompted manufacturers to stop producing them. The reason for the
> market response to these vehicles is because, if given the option, the
> general public would buy environmentally friendly automobiles if the
> sacrifices that had to be made to drive them were minimal. Accordingly,
> the level of sacrifices that has to be made to drive battery electric
> vehicles discourages all but the most enthusiastic consumers from
> leasing them.
>
>
sale. All EV's that were ever offered for sale were sold and continue
to hold very high resale values.
_______________________________________________
For subscription options, see
http://lists.sjsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/ev
« Return to Thread: Did consumers kill the electric car?
| Free Forum Powered by Nabble | Forum Help |