Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
Published without comment on our mostly coal-fired and highly subsidized electric car fleet … well, to be fair, I suppose that is a comment …
My best regards to all,
w.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Um, perhaps these figures reflect the ownership demographic.
One fact is, as with solar panels, most people live in cities with no possibiity of accessing a charger on the street, or having a rooftop to collect their subsidised power on when it is working, or even the disposable income to pay for either electric cars or solar panels if they have managed to scrape together enough to afford an actual house in the burbs WITH a garage or driveway. So the mass of people all end up paying for the privileged few rich enough to profit from the subsidies, like SIera club members, Elon Musk, and those with off grid mansions that do. etc.
Q: Who are electric cars for?
A: The few rich people who can afford to use them. See % figures. QED
PS Many smaller US towns and so-called cities still have a mess of overhead power cables delivering electricity to save money. How soon to the installation of kerbside charging units on the pavements there? Perhaps a way of tapping the overhead lines with croc clips on sticks plus a transformer ac/DC converter? Cheap energy for hybrids, Life threatening Redneck style. “It’s electrifying”.
UPDATE: I should have said the AC/DC converter idea would leave one, obviously……… Thunderstruck! 😉
I like AC/DC electric but I like more FUEL nitro 🙂
I like Augus Young’s guitar work, but his “shorts” look dorky….
You may not have had such a school uniform? Brit Kids his age all did. Probably in colonial Oz as well. Yes its a look he could have lost without a problem, Bon SCott was a bigger loss, but Angus built the Brand and stuck with it by incremental development, like the Quo, Stones, etc. Evolution. Not everyone can be David Bowie. To me they never really recovered from Bon Scott’s death. His voice and stage presence had more character than Brian Johnson’s shouting at 11. His character also killed him. Sad. PS American trousers that don’t reach your shoes look weird too, look like they shrunk and they can’t afford replacements. But the Blue beat mod kids did that in the UK, even. White Jamaicans? Hardly, mon.
+100
I just love to drive my EV, not because it is green, but because it is so much more enjoyable to drive. All petrol cars feels so slow, noisy and sluggish after I have become used to the super smooth, noiseless and rapid acceleration of my EV.
A bonus is that electricity is much cheaper the gasoline, at least here in Europe, we does not have free gasoline like you have in the US.
Well, I know it is not totally free, but everything below 4 $ / gallon is virtually free compared to European prices.
/Jan
Interesting, anything that isn’t taxed to death, is free?
Enjoy your subsidies while the government can still afford them.
Is there a tamper proof and also privacy protecting way to tax “road consumers”, without taxing the energy source?
We still live in a free-market economy (relatively). If people wanted electric cars, we would have had them long ago. The principle is F.A. Hayek’s — “If socialists understood economics they would not be socialists.”
I like this website very much, but no one’s perfect. Wattsupwiththat really screwed it up here. Someone needs to say so, and I’ve designated myself as the messenger.
The graphic and the words badly misrepresent what’s really happening. In fact, sales of plug-in cars are surging. They are up 32% in the first quarter of 2018 compared to the first quarter of 2017, while sales of cars declined by 11%. As a result, plug-in vehicles (half fully electric, the other half plug-in hybrid) have gone from 2.8% of the car market to 4% of the car market in a single year.
It’s true that cars continue to decline as a share of the total passenger vehicle market. However, because of the limitations of batteries, plug-ins can compete only in the car segment, which accounts for about one-third of U.S. passenger vehicle sales. It is misleading to use a share of total vehicle sales for a product that competes in only one category.
I am not the electric car salesman. I do own one, just as the owner of this website does. I bought it not because I believe the anthropogenic global warming story — I do not — but out of sheer curiosity. It helped that the maker (Think) went out of business the year I bought it, so I acquired it for less than half price. I put the overwhelming majority of my total miles on my one-ton diesel Ram 3500 pickup truck, which is about as polar opposite as you can get from my EV.
I do support continued EV development and subsidy, but not for climate reasons. I have done extensive research on the issue, and in fact I’d be happy to write an article for Wattsup about it. When all factors are considered, electric motive power is 2 to 2-1/2 times as energy efficient as gasoline and diesel motive power. This is why I am in favor of electric vehicles. Given battery limitations, I think subsidies should be focused on plug-in hybrids with an all-electric range of at least 50 miles, with that number rising over time as battery costs decline.
Regardless of whether this site or its commenters agree with me about that, I expect Wattsupwiththat to be factual and more fairly representative than this article was. I see no reason to disparage electric motive power, which after all is that powers every freight train (ever heard the term “diesel electric?”) simply because the lunatic “greens” present it as the Answer to All the World’s Evil. I look at it in very old-school terms: “waste not, want not.” Climate aside, if you can go 2 to 2-1/2 times as far on the same number of BTUs with an electric system, that’s reason enough to encourage it.
THE FACTS BELOW
U.S. battery electric vehicle (“BEV”) sales were 27,751 units in the first quarter of 2018, compared with 21,061 units in the first quarter of 2017, an increase of 32%. U.S. plug-in hybrid (“PHEV”) sales were 27,516 units, compared with 20,860 in the first quarter of 2017, also an increase of 32%. This is from Inside EVs, an outfit that has tracked BEV and PHEV sales from the very beginning.
https://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/
U.S. car sales were 1,323,869 units in the first quarter of 2018, compared with 1,484,944 units in the first quarter of 2017, a decline of 11%. This is from CSI Market, which tracks vehicle sales.
https://csimarket.com/economy/Vehicle_Unit_Sales_glance.php
Combining the numbers:
BEV market share in 2018 is 2% of car sales. In 2017, it was 1.4%.
PHEV market share in 2018 is 2%. In 2017, it was 1.4%.
March was an improvement from Feb, and “light trucks” continue to dominate sales. It will be a long time before electric pickups become popular, or even SUVs. From your link:
March 2018 U.S. Car Sales
• U.S. Total Vehicle Sales 1,689,166 units up by 6.78 %
• U.S. Car Sales 537,750 units down by -8.71 %
• U.S. Domestic Car Sales 415,394 units down by -8.43 %
• U.S. Foreign Car Sales 122,356 units down by -9.65 %
• U.S. Light Truck Sales 1,109,516 units up by 15.86 %
• U.S. Heavy Truck Sales 41,900 units up by 19.19 %
Jake J April 18, 2018 at 11:15 am
Sorry, Jake, but the graphic IS what is happening. Those are the facts. Now you are free to spin them any way that you wish. And you are free to provide alternative facts to support your case.
But the ugly truth for you, what you can’t deny, is what the graphic shows—total sales of all types of electric vehicles have stayed at about 3% during the prior decade. And that is WITH a huge subsidy.
I note that you very carefully don’t mention that people are getting a subsidy of $7,500 to $15,000 per electric vehicle. You want alternate facts? Consider how many electric vehicles would have sold without the subsidy … and now consider how many conventional vehicles would have sold with a seven to fifteen grand subsidy. Reverse the subsidy and see what happens.
Sorry, amigo, but without the subsidy electric car sales would wither and die, as happened in Hong Kong and Denmark. You’re beating a dead horse to try to get it to move …
w.
This is worthless. To be accused of providing “alternative facts” is complete b.s.
I like the site here a lot, but the comments in this thread are loopy to the point of weirdness. Yes, I know there are a bunch of commenter who are on a rant about subsidies, etc., which I am often critical of. But I gave incontrovertible facts, and logical analysis based on them.
Carry on, then. You’re no better than the EVangelists. Sheesh.
Subsidies or not, Willis Eisenbach, EV sales in the U.S. are up 32% in 1Q18 compared to 1Q17, both for battery-only cars and plug-in hybrid cars. Even if we compared this to total vehicle sales, which I explained would be a misleading comparison, EV sales grew much faster than total U.S. passenger vehicle sales.
There really isn’t any need to lie to people. The EVangelists do it, but this site has rarely done it. Until now. Why don’t you have a second look, and then write the rarest words on the Internet: “I was wrong.” That would be you. You were wrong.
Jake J April 18, 2018 at 3:29 pm
Whoa, cowboy, cool your jets. That was not meant as an insult. “Alternative facts” simply mean other facts than the facts I put forwards, facts that support an alternative conclusion. That’s what you put forward. Or you could equally say that you put forward facts and I put forward alternative facts to support my conclusions. In any case, my apology for the misunderstanding.
I do note that rather than address any of the substantive points I raised, you simply declare that the comments are “loopy” and you high-tail it for the nearest exit … I hope you are not under the misconception that your actions in doing that impress anyone. They just make you look like a man who can’t stand the heat and is getting out of the kitchen …
Meanwhile, if conventional cars got subsidies and EVs didn’t, the EV sales would crater and you know it. Which of course is among the reasons for your hasty dash to the egress …
w.
Jake J April 18, 2018 at 4:36 pm
Say what? That figure is not “Subsidies or not”, that’s ludicrous. That figure is WITH SUBSIDIES, and damn big subsidies at that.
You get your own theories, but not your own facts.
w.
JakeJ, I love the way you claim that subsidies are irrelevant to the point of whether EV cars are a success.
Speaking of being impervious to facts, you really should check out a good mirror.
Willis, the subsidies don’t stop once the EV is purchased.
IC cars have to pay road taxes, EVs don’t.
EVs don’t have to pay tolls on many government owned toll roads.
In many places EVs are permitted to use HOV lanes even if they only have one driver.
Etc.
EV car owners also can save time and power by using car pool lanes in many jurisdictions.
Don’t panic, Elon….:=))
So you know, I despise Elon Musk to the degree that I was banned from his sites a long time ago. I think he’s a b.s.-er from the word “go.” When I talk to people about EVs, I always tell them to avoid Tesla EVs, period. If you’re going to buy a car, I say get a car made by a car company. If I were going to buy an BEV these days, I’d get a Chevy Bolt. If I were going to buy a PHEV, it’d be either a Prius or a Volt. Those cars are real. Elon Musk is a hot air merchant.
He left his native South Africa because he wanted to avoid conscription. Obviously he is not the sort of guy who had the courage to say “Right or wrong – my country”. I expect him to run again when Tesla stikes colours. I’ll call him Elope Musk then..
Jake J April 18, 2018 at 2:53 pm
Jake, if they are so good … why do sales crater when the subsidies are removed, as has already happened in Hong Kong and Denmark?
You seem to think that some theoretical efficiency is the be-all and end-all of value. In fact, to succeed they need to be economically competitive in the open market. This means that their overall performance (range, range using heater or aircon, charging time, cost per passenger mile, carrying capacity, appearance, weight, availability of charging stations, and many more) must be better than ordinary cars.
And as the graph in the head post shows … EVEN WITH SUBSIDIES, this is still not the case. So it appears that pure efficiency may not be as important as you seem to think.
w.
Jake, here is an extremely detailed well-to-wheel efficiency analysis done by the Japanese. It basically agrees with your conclusions.
NOTES: FCHV – Fuel Cell Hybrid Vehicle; HV – Hybrid Vehicle; CNG – Compressed Natural Gas; BEV – Battery Electric Vehicle
I note that battery electric vehicles are about twice as efficient as diesel engines, and on the order of 2.5 times as efficient as gasoline engines, so they basically agree with you.
However … please note what I said above. There are many, many other factors in whether an electric or a gasoline car is chosen by the buying public.
Best to you, I always admire a man who runs the numbers himself.
w.
I have all the numbers for EV v gas. I think fuel cells are a joke, so I didn’t even bother. Anyone who takes a serious and practical look at the issues surrounding hydrogen fuel cells collapses with laughter even faster than I did once I decided to take a serious and practical look at the anthropogenic global warming fraud, er hypothesis.
The only reason I’m not puking it all out right now is that I honestly don’t see the point in doing so for the benefit of maybe 5 people who’ve made it this far down a comment thread. To go get the numbers and then put it in readable language is something of a chore, and too much of one for this format. If Watts is interested and will jump in and say so, I am quite willing to lay it all out in a posting for this site.
Look, we don’t know each other but I have a long background in facts, regardless of where the chips may fall.
Jake J April 18, 2018 at 6:38 pm Edit
Jake, since I just posted numbers that agree with yours, I’m not sure what the point would be. The Japanese numbers appear to agree with yours, and they include numbers for a variety of other types of prime movers (hybrids, fuel cells, CNG).
However, people make buying decisions on a variety of things. Let’s take one of them, like say payload. Gasoline weighs about six pounds per gallon, so a 15-gallon tank full of fuel weighs about 90 pounds. On average, therefore, the fuel weight in a car might be about 60 pounds.
The battery for a Tesla Model S, on the other hand, weighs about 1,200 pounds, and it weighs that whether full or empty. This means that a battery-powered car is hauling around something over 1,100 pounds (500 kg) of useless extra weight. Now, some folks will prefer to use that hauling capacity for something more useful than carrying around a battery …
Or take range on one charge. Here in the US, I and many others routinely take long drives in the country … where there are no charging stations. So an electric car is out of the question for me.
Or take running out of fuel. If I run out, I grab the gas can out of the back of my truck and pour it into the tank. Or if I’m in my gorgeous ex-fiancee’s car, I hitchhike or walk to the gas station, buy a can, fill it with gas, and go back to the car and put it into the tank. Or I call a buddy to bring me a can full of gas. But it’s kinda hard to travel with a can full of electrons … them tiny buggers tend to leak out of the can.
These kinds of considerations, rather than well-to-wheel efficiency, are what has kept electric cars restricted to 3% of the market over the last decade.
I don’t say any of this to discourage you from running your own numbers, however. Like you, I suspect, I don’t believe anything until I’ve actually done the calculations myself.
Best to you,
w.
I’m not saying they are “good.” That’s virtue-signaling b.s. I got one because I’m a car nut and was curious. Period. It’s one of 16 cars, a motorcycle, and a UTV that I’ve owned over the years. I don’t put value judgments on vehicles. I have liked some more than others, but in the end they are transportation.
As for subsidies, that’s a long discussion. I’m fine with the subsidy schedule right now, because it’ll end for Tesla pretty soon but it did get the industry off the ground. Going forward, I’d yank subsidies for any EV costing more than the average non-electric car, and plow the subsidies into cheaper EVs and especially PHEVs. Not because they are “good,” but because you can travel farther (2 to 2-1/2 times as far) per BTU in an electric car. This is a fact, and since this country’s founding we’ve subsidized a whole lot of things that offered less benefit than that.
Over time, subsidies ought to decline as manufacturing scale economies and improving battery technology makes them unnecessary. I don’t know what the “end all and be all is,” but I do think that doubling (at minimum) the energy efficiency of the passenger fleet is worth the cost.
As for performance, I am the very first to say — much to the consternation of EVanglelists — that the current crop of BEVs are not suitable complete substitutes for petroleum-powered cars. But in the predominant application, which is urban use, even when you strip away all the range hype and worst-case it, which I always do, a PHEV represents a big advance in energy efficiency, and BEV range in the very newest models makes them viable metropolitan vehicles.
New advances always start slowly. EVs are creatures of the lithium-ion battery, and really didn’t appear until 2011 or so. From nothing at all, they now constitute 4% of U.S. car sales. I think that, by 2030, they’ll be at least at the 25% mark, and maybe higher. Maybe a lot higher. I am quite well equipped to have a rational, factual discussion about all of these issues, but there’s a contingent here — apparently you included — that takes an ideologue’s view. I take a practical, engineering-based view of it. I place no inherent value on the type of fuel, and I laugh at the save-the-climate side of it.
“even when you strip away all the range hype and worst-case it, which I always do, a PHEV represents a big advance in energy efficiency”
I fundamentally agree with that statement, and it solves W.E. problem of carrying around the ‘can full of electrons’. The Plug-In Hybrid Vehicle (PHEV) is definitely the clear winner in both worlds. A small pure EV for a town runabout also makes sense, although I don’t see a technical challenge in adding a micro ICE generator to make them all PHEV’s. Lower the battery weight that gets lugged around and most of the miles will be on batteries, since the average car trip is less than 40 miles a day.
Most of the negativity here for EV’s come purely from the subsidization of such. Once the subsidy is over, then market forces should move the percentage of EV and PHEV’s up as the price of mobile FF such as gasoline/diesel goes up. And it will over time. However, and here is the sticker, if the price of mobile FF goes up because of an ‘artificial’ carbon tax, then that too is a market distortion just like a pure subsidy is to EV’s because the carbon tax makes FF artificially higher and penalizes the traditional gas/diesel auto makers. And those (carbon tax) proceeds are being used to win elections by funnelling the carbon tax into general revenue where it can be used to ‘subsidize’ (buy) votes for the governing party, at least in most other countries than the USA that have a carbon tax or similar. Talk about muddy waters trying to get to the bottom of subsidization. So WUWT commenters are still mainly correct that some type of subsidization is at the root of the problem and why they rail against the technologies that get these massive subsidies. Including Big Solar and Wind. And protesting the case for a carbon tax, which kills everything to do with economic growth.
One more thing.
It seems as if some of this peanut gallery thinks I’m some alternative energy evangelist, when it’s just not true. I’ll give one more attempt at a proof statement, and if it doesn’t work I will give up.
Where I live — out in the countryside in Washington State, having escaped the insane clutches of the People’s Republic of Seattle — the local solar evangelists aren’t happy with me. Why? Because I spoke out in support of my local utility’s decision to end its 1:1 “net metering” program, in which people who send a kilowatt to the grid are entitled to get a kilowatt from the grid.
I live in a sprawling county: 1,900 sq mi, with 21,000 people. It costs a lot to deliver electricity. Infrastructure maintenance and administration costs are about 60% of the electricity price here. Kilowatt for kilowatt pays solar panel users the retail rate, which gives them the grid for free. This means that the people without panels pay the costs for people with panels, most of whom are richer and above all smugger about themselves.
I suggested a compromise, in which grid charges would escalate with solar panel penetration. No sale. The panel people think they are entitled to a free ride, the whole thing. To say that it sticks in my craw would be the understate the case, considerably. It’s even worse here, because 89% of our power is hydro from the Columbia River dams, and another 8% is from a nuclear plant 100 miles away. In reality, people with panels in these parts actually add to CO2 emissions (as if I care) when you consider how panels are made, and shipped on diesel-powered boats from East Asia, then trucked to where we are.
So: It pains me, and outrages me, to think that anyone here might regard me as some Kool Aid-drinking zealot. Yep, I take it kinda personally. In the end, I am a fact-based guy, and will take my facts where I get them. I feel like a vanishing breed.
Consumer adoption of new tech appears to take a lazy “S” curve with a slow and then accelerating ramp up. I guess the question is how much do subsidies skew adoption and what will happen if they stop or taper off. Or, alternatively if oil returns to a $100/bbl range. As a car buyer, I have looked at electric twice and passed. The “value” proposition did not seem to be there for me. Prius, Leaf, Bolt, Volt etc. are too small or inconvenient. Whereas, other upscale cars seem to come with cost premiums for me; plus, lack of convenience. But, I anticipate the lines will cross and I, along with others will be buyers.
Interesting to see: versus money spent on these boutique cars.
I’m all for using electric motors, but until we can use the same infrastructure we have today (meaning liquid / gas fuel—all with MUCH higher energy densities than batteries) that is more efficiently converted into electricity. SOFCs have the potential to do this, and the combination could result in 10-times the fuel efficiency, allowing me to drive from coast to coast on one tank of fuel.
Otherwise we’re just wasting resources on salesmanship.