Electric vehicle sales hit new record in Q2
Despite supply shortages and high prices, many consumers are flocking to EVs.Published July 14, 2022
The number of battery-electric vehicles sold in the U.S. set a new record in the second quarter of this year, according to data released Wednesday by Cox Automotive, a global company that owns Autotrader and Kelley Blue Book among other brands. Sales rose more than 66% over the same period last year to 196,788 vehicles. For the first half of 2022, buyers snapped up 370,726 EVs.
The market share for pure electric vehicles reached 5.6% in the second quarter, more than double the 2.7% they accounted for in the second quarter of 2021.
[…]
Smart Cities Dive
“The market share for pure electric vehicles reached 5.6% in the second quarter”… 94.4% of vehicles sold in Q2 2022 were not battery-electric vehicles. However, the total US sales of all BEV makes and models has finally caught up to US sales of Ford F-series pickup trucks:
| F-Series | All BEV’s | |
| Q1 2022 | 140,701 | 173,938 |
| Q2 2022 | 158,644 | 196,788 |
| H1 2022 | 299,345 | 370,726 |
Technically, I should subtract 1,837 units from the Q2 2022 Ford F-Series total to account for Ford Lightning sales. Although 98.8% of Q2 2022 F-Series sales were still internal combustion engine (ICE) models.
The cost of catching the F-Series?
We keep hearing claims that battery prices are plunging. This is interesting because the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis seems to paint a different picture:
The 66% increase in sales of battery-electric vehicles appears to be accompanied by a fairly sharp increase in the battery manufacturing producer price index. Could it be that the raw materials for batteries are becoming more expensive as demand for batteries increases?
Events, Trends, and Issues: Excluding U.S. production, worldwide lithium production in 2021 increased by 21% to approximately 100,000 tons from 82,500 tons in 2020 in response to strong demand from the lithium-ion battery market and increased prices of lithium. Global consumption of lithium in 2021 was estimated to be 93,000 tons, a 33% increase from 70,000 tons in 2020.
Spot lithium carbonate prices in China (cost, insurance, and freight [c.i.f.] North Asia) increased from approximately $7,000 per ton in January to about $26,200 per ton in November. For fixed contracts, the annual average U.S. lithium carbonate price was $17,000 per ton in 2021, more than double that in 2020. Spot lithium hydroxide prices in China (c.i.f. North Asia) increased from approximately $9,000 per ton in January to about $27,400 per ton in November. Spot spodumene (6% lithium oxide) prices in China (c.i.f. China) increased from approximately $450 per ton in January to about $2,300 per ton in November. Spot lithium metal (99.9% lithium) prices in China increased from approximately $77,000 per ton in January to about $97,000 per ton in July.
USGS
According to Trading Economics, lithium carbonate prices have increased more than 400% over the past year.
Lithium carbonate prices in China moved sideways at the 475,500 yuan/tonne level in the first half of July, remaining near the record-high of 500,000 from March and 430% higher year-on-year as demand continued to increase. Data from the Shanghai Metals Market showed that demand for battery grade lithium carbonate increased during July as downstream battery factories and auto manufacturers increased their operating rates. At the same time, battery producers reported lower inventory readings as raw material purchases were not able to keep up with battery output. The higher output followed the rewarding of cash subsidies by local Chinese governments including Beijing, Shanghai, and Wuhan, for customers replacing petrol cars with new EV purchases. The measures were placed to revamp activity in the sector after demand for durable goods plummeted during the strict Covid lockdowns, in addition to contributing to China’s goal of cutting carbon emissions.
Trading Economics
But, but, but… Still becoming more economic than oil!
Maybe not… While crude oil prices are far more volatile than the battery manufacturing producer price index…
Crude oil prices have had a flat linear trend for the past 20 years and the ratio of the price indices of crude oil to battery manufacturing actually has a negative trend.
Oddly enough, the battery manufacturing producer price index more or less tracks the global market share of EV sales.
But, but but… Save the planet!
Addendum
Yes just made me think of a story I read on WUWT just last week….
Number of the Week: 85% more than total capability. In estimating how much electricity will be needed to operate electric vehicles at the same standard if all petroleum vehicles in the US were replaced by electric vehicles Joseph D’Aleo calculated:
“7.617 Trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity would be the energy equivalent required to replace petroleum fuel for transportation. 4.116 Trillion kilowatt-hours of electricity equals the total generation capability of the United States.”
The 7.6 Trillion kilowatt-hours is 85% more than total US electricity generation capability. See link under Alternative, Green (“Clean”) Vehicles.
Yep, save the planet.
Your numbers is wrong Aussiecol. Total miles driven annually in US is 3.3 Trillion miles.
The energy consumtion for an average ev, for example Tesla model Y, is 326 Wh/mile.
It is less in warm weather, but let us calculate for cold weather to be on the safe side.
That gives 1.1 trillion Kilowatt-hours annually.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA
https://ev-database.org/imp/car/1182/Tesla-Model-Y-Long-Range-Dual-Motor
That’s a pretty optimistic number for the Tesla. Perfect conditions and no accessories running.
The Tesla is also below average in terms of size.
It is below average for sedans. It is tiny compared to pick up trucks, vans, 18 wheelers etc.
Size matters, as do conditions. Here is a video in which a Ford F-150 Lightning and a Denali gas pickup truck each tow a 6,000 pound trailer (identical trailers) in a convoy from Denver to Colorado Springs. The F-150 has a range predictor which showed 280 miles for a full charge, unladen, and 160 miles when the trailer data were entered into the computer. Spoiler: the F-150 made it 85 miles, just barely. The Denali was on track to go 180 miles on its 20 gallon tank. It’s the best comparison test I’ve seen to date for an EV versus gas-powered vehicle. Nothing flashy, but very carefully done in terms of apples-to-apples comparison.
good thing not many people tow three ton trailers!
LOTS of people tow 3 ton trailers. I tow a 6 ton 5th wheel.
Drive in the US west and you will see a lot of over 3 ton private trailers.
Specious sophistry without evidence.
Trucks dragging heavy trailers/RVs are common on the road and very common as owned across the USA.
I almost never use 4 wheel drive. Does not mean do not. I also do not tow a trailer often. Then again, there are times I do. Since when is the idea that everyone should be identical to the average been a valid one?
Jan,
where does that 326 watt our figure come from it seems very low?
Consider that one horsepower equals 746 watts, essentially, from that figure, it takes less than half a horsepower to propel a model Y even at a modest 30mmph. The figures do not add up.
I suspect that you gave watt hours rather than kilowatt hours, even then with a 75 Kwatt hour battery capacity gives a theoretical range at that figure of23 hours.
I believe your figure is wrong, not Aussiecol’s.
Thank you Iain. The 326 watthour per mile is from the link I provided, and your calculation is wrong.
If you travel 30 miles per hour you use 326 times 30 Watts, or about 10 Kilowatt. That is 13 Hp.
Look into the links I provided.
Mark, Jan etc. Jan is correct. A mean power consumption of an EV is typicelly 3 to 4 miles per kW-hr. The comparison with petrol is spurious because a petrol engine is <40% efficient and an electric motor is > 90%
So what are you going to use to lubricate EVs?
How are you going to make tires without oil?
What will organic compounds will you use for wire insulation?
How will you strip mine without diesel engines.
You forgot to turn on the EV air conditioner, this will result in a reduction of at least 30%.
Whale oil?
Huh?
1) The only lubrication EVs need is for bearings; they don’t use oil to lube pistons, crankshafts, etc.
2) Yes, you’ll probably need oil to make synthetic rubber. So what? Nobody said we were going to get rid of all oil consumption, just (try) to get rid of burning oil. That may or may not happen, but it won’t fail because of tires.
3) Wire insulation: same answer as for tires, more or less. (Most medium size wires–like 12 gauge, for example–use plastic insulation, but same thing: it will continue to be made with oil.)
4) Mining equipment: Who knows. Could be a good use for IC engines for a long time.
5) No, the EV air conditioner does not “result in a reduction [of mileage] of at least 30%.” AAA estimates about 4%. Cold weather will affect mileage more, although newer EVs are using heat pumps and therefore losing less energy to the heater. (BTW, hot and cold weather also reduce mileage in your IC-powered car, too.)
mcswell, armchair mechanic.
Every moving part, including hinges, switches, knobs, actuators, brake components will need oil to operate.
Every IC component on their IC boards will require substantial fossil fuel investment for their manufacture.
Renewable energy sources produce unreliable inconsistent variable quality energy. Not usable for industry!
And all the losses in the electrical grid and transformers, and charging, battery losses etc. makes it LESS than 90% from the primary source.
There have been posts and comments here discussing these losses/
Drake, if you add the electrical grid losses, you also need to add the similar losses in fossil fuel production.
Both the oil production at well site and the oil transport, as well as the refining use huge amounts of energy.
Misinformation and gross assumptions.
Unlike renewable energy and eco-battery supply chains, the costs are included in the price per barrel. Both before and after refining.
Costs to individual users are miniscule. Unlike the conversion of AC grid electricity to DC battery charging current where the loss for charging any one vehicle is approximately 25%.
Your links above identify that they do not include these EV energy losses and costs. The EV vehicle charge is estimated at ideal conditions running at an ideal speed without accessories, starting, stopping, traffic jams, hills, etc.
From you EV-database link:
Desktop jockey ‘estimates’ based on assumptions.
These assumptions are based upon a vehicle operating at high speed, without stopping/starting or interior comfort battery drains.
Nor are any of the energy costs from generation through charging the vehicle included. Their “Charging Losses” appear to solely include charging one vehicle and not the impact/cost to the entire grid.
ICE vehicle estimates based upon steady speed dyno testing are equally misleading.
Typical semi-fictional eco boosting assumptions and calculations.
Michael S. Kelly has it correctly. Real world is wildly different that some marketing agent’s advertisement claims.
Nor are the EPA and DOE neutral parties.
From you EV-database link:
Desktop jockey ‘estimates’ based on assumptions.
These assumptions are based upon a vehicle operating at high speed, without stopping/starting or interior comfort battery drains.
Nor are any of the energy costs from generation through charging the vehicle included. Their “Charging Losses” appear to solely include charging one vehicle and not the impact/cost to the entire grid.
ICE vehicle estimates based upon steady speed dyno testing are equally misleading.
Typical semi-fictional eco boosting assumptions and calculations.
Michael S. Kelly has it correctly. Real world is wildly different than some marketing agent’s advertisement claims.
Nor are the EPA and DOE neutral parties.
Until the number of EVs put in service exceeds the number of IC vehicles take out of service, C02 emissions will continue to rise. that day is a long way away.
No, until a way is found to produce the electricity for the replacement EVs is found, CO2 will continue to rise as wind and solar ain’t gonna do it. We’ll just have to burn more natural gas and coal.
And nuclear. Don’t forget nuclear.
Unfortunately, it seems like the west has forgotten nuclear:
https://pris.iaea.org/pris/home.aspx
Oh I don’t think the west has forgotten nuclear, it never really got traction at any point. The EU is actively shunning nuclear but it was never big in North America. I suspect we agree it is actually the way to move forward. But my tinfoil hat says the current regimes have little interest in moving forward.
Burn more gas and use nuclear
They count as environmentally friendly now
Thankfully. We need more CO2 not less.
Yeah, 1200ppm sounds good.
And I could care less about CO2 concentrations. Call be when they get to 3000ppm.
And what is wrong with that?
It’s worse than that. Volvo has calculated, for the US grid, that an EV needs to travel 60,000 miles before it breaks even with a gas car because the production of EVs emits far more CO2 than gas cars. It will be about 5 years, at 15,000 miles per year, before an EV breaks even with a gas car. As more and more EVs get produced, there will be a large net increase in CO2 emissions – you could calculate it with a spreadsheet, but I’m guessing two or three decades.
Meab
MIT came to about the same conclusion comparing a Tesla S to a Toyota Camry.
Note that they assumed neither vehicle would require any major repairs [battery or engine/transmission, respectively] during its usage.
https://energy.mit.edu/insightsintofuturemobility
EVs are “displaced emission vehicles” – it depends greatly on how you get your electricity to the battery: fossil fuels vs wind/solar [aka unreliables], hydro or nuclear.
The new F-150 R is out…$109,000……700 hp….independent rear suspension…will consumers be enthusiastic for it?
If I had $109k set aside for a new toy… Yes. Until then, I’ll stick with my 2013 Jeep Rubicon.
If I had a spare $109k sitting around, I’d put it into my retirement fund. Repair a small fraction of the damage Brandon has done to it.
F-150R. Cost $109,000 and only has a range 85 miles towing a trailer? What a waste of money. 🙄 🤣 🤣 🤣 My $200 1992 F-150 could go 500 miles between fill-ups with the same trailer. Of course I have to admit that my truck has two tanks. Takes 4.5 minutes to fill both from empty. The $108,800 I didn’t spend on the EV will buy me a lifetime of fuel refills. 👍 😎
This is a well planned double pronged tactic by the government.
Attack with taxes, refusals, negative marketing and use all stops to limit existing carbon based energy delivery
Divert funding towards, reduce taxes, free marketing, and tax rebates and to award people to increase use of battery powered energy delivery
Thanks for the post, David. The fact that electric vehicle sales have finally caught those of the Ford F-series pickups makes me smile.
BTW, I enjoyed my F150 (a company truck while I was playing project manager), except when it snowed.
Regards,
Bob
PS: I also miss the Texas phenomenon of a tiny young lady hopping down from the driver’s seat of an F150, then wandering into a bar, where she places her purse down on the bar with a heavy thud, the thud an indication that she’s carrying.
My 2016 Taurus SHO cost me $30k and now has 30k miles. It is great in snow, gets 25-26mpg at 75mph, close to 5 seconds in the 0-60mph, has a huge trunk, and can haul four people (five if three are kids in the back seat) quite easily. Tell me why I would want a small, over-priced EV as a replacement? Gas prices and oil changes are not enough to change my mind. If I needed the engine replaced after 150k miles, that might run 50-75% of a battery pack for a comparably sized vehicle.
Most modern engines are manufactured to much higher tolerances and I have regularly seen 300,000-400,000 miles before a major failure as long as they get regular oil and filter service.
“except when it snowed.”
You need to put some concrete blocks in the truck bed, Bob. 🙂
Or a couple of good friends.
50# pound bags of play sand.
They have lower center of gravity, are heavier, don’t scratch the paint, slide less and are usable in the garden at winter’s end.
Price is currently near $5 for local big box hardware store 40# pound bags of play sand.
Five bags locally run under $30 and put 200 pounds in the back as ballast and balance.
There is a product that is essentially a big watertight bag that you put in your pickup bed and fill with water to give yourself traction during the winter. When it warms up a little, you can let the water out of the bag.
Of course, matching the sales of ONE series from ONE manufacturer is rather meaningless.
Actually, unless you want to mess with tie-downs and red flagging, my wife’s RAV4 hauls just as much “stuff” as a 6′ bed pickup. (More than the ridiculous 5.5′ beds that I see running around town.)
This is a biased comparison.
EV sales are in an uptrend
F150 sales are in a downtrend
F150 sales have been weak compared with 2019 and earlier years:
Ford sold nearly 900,000 F-150s in the 2019 model year. The 896,526 units was actually slightly down from the 2018 model year by 1.4%.
Ford sold more than 1.075 million F-Series trucks globally in 2018, averaging a sale every 29.3 seconds.
Sales of the electric F150 Lightening (and production) are not impressive so far:
“The electric pickup truck battle is in full swing, and the 2022 Rivian R1T is currently in the lead. It has more sales than the 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning. According to Auto Guide, the R1T sold about 4,401 units during the second quarter of the year.
This is compared to the 2,296 Ford F-150 Lightning units that were delivered. However, Rivian has a bit of an unfair advantage because the F-150 Lightning wasn’t available for the entire second quarter.”
SOURCE:
The Ford F-150 Lightning Can’t Catch the Rivian R1T (motorbiscuit.com)
Hope they liked those (affordable) Chevy Bolts and (unaffordable) Teslas. The Tesla weighs more than an F150 (road damage) and isn’t so great at hauling sheets of plywood.
The F150 downtrend is in the past two years, as your chart shows, while EV sales are in a sharp uptrend.
Annual F150 sales peaked in the early 2000s,
The comparison is meaningless click bait anyway
— all BEVs from all manufacturers compared with
one pickup truck from one manufacturer.
Apples and oranges.
The news is EV sales increasing rapidly.
The comparison with F150 sales is just
a biased comparison meant to make
the EV sales total less impressive.
Richard,
Don’t be so sarcasm-challenged. The obvious joke is that all BEVs combined just barely exceeded one model of one make of pickup truck after years of trying. Woo hoo!
Alarmist tools in the propaganda media routinely pump out ridiculous headlines like this. It’s ridicule to mimic it.
In a similar vein to your criticism of David Middleton, “What’s all this I hear about youth in Asia? And violins on television?”
The rapid increase of EV sales
while overall auro sales are quite weak,
is big news.
It is big news: The the costs in terms of your tax dollars and energy (and all other) prices is staggering.
EVery time the subsidies are cut, even a little, sales of EVs plummet.
When I can fully charge in <10min, have charge stations as plentiful as gas stations as we do today I'll be ready to buy. Until then? Not a chance. I live in the northland.
I think you mean “a biased comparison to make the EV sales total MORE impressive” in that last sentence. The comparison is a bit over 600,000 to more than 15,000,000 new consumer vehicle sales. (Not to mention the nearly 41,000,000 used sales – of which I suspect VERY few were EVs.)
Ford has passed Rivian for the last month of the quarter. In the 2nd quarter Rivian built about 4 days production for a truck assembly plant. Now they are laying off employees. it doesn’t sound like Rivian is going to be much of a player for quite a while.
I went to the battery PPI source. It is all batteries, both primary and secondary. Primary includes the familiar disposable AA, C, and D cells. Secondary would be mainly PbA for vehicles. The EV battery market is dwarfed by these, and must have costs rising much faster based on lithium and cobalt prices.
Primary battery market 2022 ~$22 billion. PbA market 2022 ~$48 billion. Global EV battery market 2022~$24 billion (supposedly—there are no hard numbers as Tesla makes it’s own with Panasonic).
For some time I’ve been arguing that EV ownership is only going to be a thing for the very affluent. By the time an EV works its way down to where it’s expected to be an affordable used car, they won’t really be all that affordable. Or usable.
And that’s assuming that you’ll even be able to get a replacement battery. This family bought an 8-year-old used Ford Focus EV, only to have the battery fail shortly thereafter. The reality is that this family learned the hard way that they paid way too much for a car with a well-worn battery and no replacements available.
Florida family drives into electric car problem: a replacement battery costs more than vehicle itself
Yes. The Ford Focus EV battery was LiIon. The inherent problem is EV by definition drains the battery, and even with the best engineering draining LiIon provides a finite battery life. Fast charging shortens it more.
OTOH, a full hybrid floats the traction battery near half charge (40-60 or 45-55). That results in a massive increase in battery life. My MY 2007 Ford Hybrid AWD Escape is now 14 years old, and the NiMH traction battery shows almost no signs of deterioration. Slightly increased leakage current, noticable only if it sits more than a week between starts so have to now use the convenient ‘jump start’ button Ford engineered in in 2007. We expect to get another ten years out of the car, having just repaired all the minor rust problems from our Oceanside salt spray location. Has already saved us over $10k in gas, about 40% of the original cost
And your 8-track tapes don’t have to be replaced.
Hybrids are economical and make sense in many ways. The far left hates them because… CO2
Rud, if I were to buy a 2007 Ford Hybrid AWD Escape that needed a battry pack, could I get one for it?
I saw a story the other day where someone bought a used Ford electric vehicle that cost about $12,000 and was told a new battery pack would cost $14,000, if they were available, but they were not available.
Tom, if you were to buy a 2007 Ford Hybrid AWD Escape, I would feel very sorry for you.
And the dealer offered the family $500 for it, as-is; a terminal loss of $11,500 in only 6 months of use! Also worthy of further research are the reports of EV car tires wearing out faster than those on a conventional weight ICE vehicle.
They hybrids seem to make wayyyyyyyy more sense to me. I don’t want to be stuck in the middle of nowhere with no place to charge a vehicle and then have to wait 10hrs for it to charge. Nope.
Kim Komando recently bought a Tesla and now has it up for sale,,,,she says it is just not for her. She says it is too fast and hints that she doesn’t like the long inconvenient charge times…..didn’t mention insurance.
They do take off like a bat outta hell. My buddy has one and they are dangerously fast. But that does not make up for charge times, long distance trips one might take and winter weather. For tooling around town? Perhaps but that is about it.
Anti
In 2020 I got 2 insurance quotes for a used [1-2 yrs old] Tesla 3 vs a new Sonata hybrid and the Tesla was ~$600 more per year.
I procrastinated, so I’m still driving my 2011 Sonata hybrid. The price of cars has gone crazy [along with everything else – thanks Brandon!] but I have not repeated the insurance quotes. [Does anyone think it’s less? LOL]
Go to a website promoting EVs, John, and the first advantage of EVs over ICE vehicles on the list is invariably savings in fueling costs over the life of the vehicle. My question is, would someone who is willing to pay a 40 percent greater purchase price for an EV over the price of a comparable ICE vehicle really be all that worried about fueling costs? It would seem unlikely.
In Canada, 70 percent of cars on the road have been bought used. That is, only a minority of Canadian buyers can afford a new car. So, when you make comparisons between new vehicle sales of EVs and ICEs, your base for the comparison, buyers of new cars, is already limited by purchase price.
Another datum that is routinely omitted is, how many purchasers of EVs own second vehicles? I suspect that this number is high, and goes unmentioned because it is a giveaway of the stark income disparity between EV and ICE owners.
And Tesla has recently sharply increased its prices, which does not bode well for increased market share.
Either EV prices must come way down for significant gains in market share, or governments must deliberately, by means of such measures as fuel taxes, make operating an ICE car much more costly. The latter could be a political impossibility and, if it were possible, would clearly be regressive.
Funnily enough, Professor Miles Allen of Oxford told me how save the planet on my radio today. Allen, an attendee at the infamous La Jolla symposium where the groundwork was laid for the attempt to shake down Exxon and other oil majors, said we must make the oil and gas companies extract the CO2 they produce from the atmosphere and store it. That’s it, no detail. I assume he means that they must be made extract the CO2 inferred from their oil and gas sales each year. No details about how they would do this or the economics of it.
Two things I take from this. First, he must realise the shake down attempts are doomed. Second, he accepts that we are going to need oil and gas for decades to come. Tell it to the loonies, prof.
Geologically storing the CO2 is the easy bit.
Catching it is the tricky bit.
Ocean coccolithophores (and the like) catch it easily. The result is limestone. They just don’t do it real fast, which is the really tricky bit.
Trees and vegetation are the easy for bit.for sequestering CO2 .
Even after harvest the timber is a carbon sink for many many years when it is used for building or treated fence posts .
We harvest 3.5 rotations of Radiata pine trees per century in New Zealand .
Treated fence posts last over 50 years and most houses will still be in good order after 100 years .
CO2 is not a problem unless it becomes too little….the Amazon produces 20% of world O2….people need O2, no? We need the Amazon for O2 – not ridding CO2.
I agree that CO2 is never going to be a problem .
BUT why go all out to capture carbon at horedous expense from coal and gas power generating when plants and trees will do it for you and generate an profit at the same time .
There is no climate crisis .
There will never be a climate crisis .
If these green tainted governments who are working towards world wide poverty and hunger are not removed we will have a REAL emergency.
For some reason, I’m getting a mental image of a ninja using chopsticks to catch flies.
Myles Allen was one of the authors of a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in June 2007 which was critical of climate models saying, amongst other things, that
“Complex climate models, as predictive tools for many variables and scales, cannot be meaningfully calibrated because they are simulating a never before experienced state of the system; the problem is one of extrapolation. It is therefore inappropriate to apply any of the currently available generic techniques which utilise observations to calibrate or weight models to produce forecast probabilities for the real world. To do so is misleading to the users of climate science in wider society”
He is now an IPCC lead author but perhaps is still rooted a little more in reality than his compatriots.
The paper was ‘Confidence, uncertainty and decision-support relevance in climate predictions’, Stainforth et al Phil. Trans.R. Soc A (2007) 365, 2145-2161
EV sales going up, or reported as such, reminds of the old saying, “a fool and his money are soon parted”. Or something like that.
Most liberals still don’t understand where electricity, even for vehicles, comes from other than a receptacle in the wall or a dispenser at a service station. They don’t seem to understand that fossil fuels supply the juice which makes their machines go.
We live in interesting times which get much more so if the green idiots get their wishes.
Yes EV sales are increasing but according to the IEA there were only 16.5m EVs worldwide at the end of 2021 compared to over 1.4 billion ICEVs. Many of these EVs were small cars and three wheelers produced in China. They anticipate there will be around 200-250m EVs by 2030 (To meet net zero targets this figure should be around 350-400m)
Interestingly the IEA report also says that in Japan EV sales barely increased in 2021 and have remained at below 1% of new car sales for the last three years
As you certainly know, there is NO such thing as net-zero CO2.
Yes. That’s the IEA’s net zero target.
You can purchase a replacement ICE after 150K miles for a lot less than a replacement battery pack… so don’t buy a used EV.
In general, today’s ICE automobiles will last at least several hundred thousand miles (unless, perhaps, used where salt is heavily used on road during the winter).
An acquaintance of mine purchases an ICE .He was bragging about how cheap it was to run.
I asked him what about a new battery pack within 10 years?
His reply was “I will sell it before then ” He had not calculated that any one buying a second hand ICE would deduct the price of a new battery pack from the price that they could offer for the car .
It’s now being reported that President Biden will declare a national climate emergency within the next several days.
In the expectation that sooner or later Biden would be making such a declaration, I had previously written two long essays posted as comments to articles written by others here on the ‘Watts Up with That’ climate blog. These two are:
‘West Virginia versus EPA is Not an Impenetrable Barrier Against Aggressive Carbon Regulation’
and
‘The Supply Side Carbon Emission Control Plan (SSCECP): a fast track approach for eliminating fossil fuels from America’s economy’
Both of my commentaries make the point that Biden’s policy goals for climate action cannot be met without imposing stringent and far-reaching energy conservation measures on the American people and on America’s entire economy as a whole.
If Biden formally commits the US to a 50% reduction in our carbon GHG emissions by 2030, as now seems probable, then America must be consuming half as much energy in the year 2030 as we do today in the year 2022, if we are to reach his stated goal.
It sounds like the smartest man he knows is advising him.
Brandon weren’t too bright even before his brain turned to oatmeal.
“Pete Buttigieg is grilled by Rep. Gimenez over the costs associated with buying an electric vehicle: “The more pain we are all experiencing from the high price of gas, the more benefit there is for those who can access electric vehicles.”
So Pete’s a sadist not a masochist, even though he uses the word “we” to pretend to be one, as he’s
part of the team inflicting pain.
https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1549451603991793664
Look on the bright side: The lawsuits over Brandon’s declaration of a “Climate Emergency” will force a quantification of the true costs and benefits of Net Zippy.
Should be good for a couple of extra Republican Senators and at least half a dozen more Republican Representatives come November.
Yeah, take away the subsidies and tax incentives for electric vehicles then get back to me.
And for the unreliable energy sources.
In the UK fuel duty and ‘road tax’ brought in £37 billion to the UK Treasury in 2019-2020. EVs are currently exempt from these charges.
And these are the numbers for NEW car sales. If you add the second-hand car sales (which is roughly 41mln per year), then the market share of EV’s is even smaller. I have no numbers, but I think the number of used EVs that are being sold is very small.
And the sales of used F-150’s would be huge…
Yes I understand annual used vehicle sales in Oz run at 3 to every 1 new sale so trickle down or supercharge down will take quite a while.
ICE new cars sales will be banned nationwide soon enough, no later than 2030 IMO
New business opportunity, buy ICEV for scrap value and export the best and dismantle the others for spare parts and ship to developing nations.
How many spare parts are exported from Cuba? None. We’ll need them here, too, if we are even going to keep a third-world economy limping along.
Maybe. Considering people won’t be able to charge them because the grid is overloaded would result in politicians clamoring for more oil production just like they are doing now.
Most people cannot afford a new car and never will buy one in their lifetime. Until there is a valid second hand car market for old EV’s they will never penertrate very far into the % of actual vehicles on the road. Question would anyone want a car with a 10 year old battery.
Lot’s of people, maybe even me. A 10 year old $60,000 EV needing a $20,000 battery pack replacement will find lot’s of willing buyers provided the used price is <$1,000. $5,900/year depreciation sounds about right. About twice the depreciation rate of an ICE vehicle.
I was talking to a tradesman the other day who had a new VW van. How many miles do you get from a full charge says I.
He said 80 miles in summer and 5 5 miles in winter.
We both laughed.
Good comparison between F series and ALL EVs.
But really need full Apple to Apple compare.
Could be ALL Trucks vs ALL EVs
Or matching size and cost, say Tesla3 vs MB c class, BMW 3 series.
Here in Australia ALL trucks are still betting ALL EVs
I could just compare F-Series vs BEV F-Series… Oh wait… I did…
The Ford F-150 Lightning is really cool… Maybe when they make one that I can charge up, on the road, as quickly as I can fill up my Jeep .. 😎
The Ford F150 Lightning is an Edsel. An independent testing group tested its pulling power towing a box trailer. I think the Lightning made it about 87 miles before it had to recharge. Not exactly a cross-country record, eh?
https://www.westernjournal.com/journalists-tow-camper-behind-electric-truck-end-stunning-failure-make-85-miles/
Initially, the F150 said it had 160 mile range.
Would have been a more valid test if the ICE towing vehicle had been an F-150.
Do you think the Rivian would do any better? Maybe when they make a few we will start seeing tests like this.
This is only because stupid public sector bodies and government fleets are spending taxpayer $$$ on these boondoggles.
Unless someone has money to burn or has their identity all wrapped up in what they drive, the only reason to buy a vehicle is the deal. CNG cars built with the CNG tank placed somewhere other than the trunk, would be a much better deal than EV. CNG is less than half the price of gasoline In addition, the MPG for CNG vehicles is approximately 25-32% better than gasoline. Finally, you don’t have to pay the up front premium price on an EV. Higher gas prices have made the the EV a better deal, but the CNG car beats it all hallow. Meanwhile, few of us expect that gas prices will remain at an all time high. Politicians yap about a forcing total transition to EV for political reasons but if they are not careful they will incite their people who have to work for a living to flee the West coast into the Midwest and South.
Ummm… Even fewer places to refuel your CNG than there are for an EV.
Have not read all the comments, so maybe this is redundant:
In Canada, the average total government tax on gasoline is C$0.37/liter or C$1.39/US gallon. Add to that the corporate income taxes paid by the oil companies and refining companies.
Motor fuel taxes in Canada – Wikipedia
EV’s typically pay NO fuel taxes. In many provinces the electrical utilities is are provincial Crown corporations that pay NO corporate income taxes.
So in Canada EV’s get an effective government subsidy of approx. $2/US gallon that will have to be charged some way, some day as more and more EV’s hit the roads.
Also, many governments provide a cash subsidy when people buy their new EV. All this for imbecilic, corrupt politicians to encourage the decades-old fraud of catastrophic human-made global warming.
______________
Most people have no critical thinking skills – they believe any falsehood if it is repeated often enough, and the Climate Scam has been promoted by billions of dollars of false propaganda.
CLIMATE REALITY IS “WOLVES STAMPEDING THE SHEEP” – IT’S ALL FALSE!
And once a dumb sheep gets hold of an idea, nothing short of brain surgery will dislodge it.
NO EVIDENCE OF CLIMATE CRISIS
World Commerce Review, June 23, 2022
https://www.worldcommercereview.com/html/macrae-no-evidence-of-a-climate-crisis.html
[excerpt]
Our scientific predictions on climate are infinitely more accurate than the mainstream narratives, which have been false and baselessly alarmist to-date. In 2002 and again in 2013, we published the earliest and most accurate predictions of climate and energy, as follows:
• There is no real global warming crisis.
• Green energy is not green and produces little useful (dispatchable) energy.
• Climate is insensitive to increasing atmospheric CO2 and the burning of fossil fuels.
• Climate at the century-scale IS sensitive to small changes on solar activity.
• Earth will start natural solar-driven cooling by ~2020 or sooner.
• Grid-connected green (wind and solar) energy will prove a huge failure by ~2020.
Contrast the abysmal failure of the global warming alarmists’ predictive track record:
“Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”
For 60:40 predictions, the odds of being this wrong for this wrong are 1 in 13 quintillion; for 70:30 predictions, the odds are 1 in 13 septillion. It’s not just climate scientists being randomly mistaken – they must have known they were not telling the truth.
To conclude, the alleged fossil-fuel-caused Global Warming Crisis does not exist in reality. The only real, measurable impact of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations is improved crop yields – which are hugely beneficial.
But improved crop yields means we can eat more meat, less bugs and have plenty of food for a big global baby boom. This is the anthesis of their program. Keeping gasoline high prices via taxes pays for all the mean green income redistribution and tax subsidy scams and keeps the votes coming. Meanwhile, crops yields just keep growing. Mine coal and frack on! LOL
How many of the electric vehicle owners got a $12,500 (I think that’s the number) federal subsidy for buying an electric vehicle?
Well, at least, these buyers are not being forced to buy. They can be our crash-test dummies.
Not yet but maybe soon, 12 states are seeking to ban internal combustion vehicles.
https://joinyaa.com/guides/states-banning-ice-cars/
How would they make up the tax short fall when the sales of gasoline drops like a rock after banning ICE vehicles. They’ll just put tax meters on the EV charging units to pay increased electrical generating capacity and if not nuke, then pay for the carbon those new generating plants are generating.
Something to consider about going EV:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/florida-family-electric-car-problem-replacement-battery-costs-more-vehicle
Until I can ‘fill’ an EV in less than 10min…fully at a ‘charging’ station that are as common as gas stations are today, I have zero interest.
What will they to do with potentially millions of dud batteries every 8 years or so landfill ?
Will it be another “Green” caused environmental disaster
Who will want a battery dump (that could burn for ever) near their property and possibly polluting the water table to boot, if not stored “sustainably”
What’s going to happen to all those old solar panels & turbine blades landfill again.
Green waste may well be the next emergency !
I have noticed over the years that the F150 is a popular choice for comparisions.
People like to compare their bad choice to a worse choice. An F150 is a bad choice. It is not a serious truck. No 1/2 ton is.anti=
It comes down to tires. It does not take much to over load tires on a passenger car or light truck. I travel in a motor home and tow my car. I visit truck scales and adjust air pressure based on a table. I also drive slower.
So until they make a battery that is light, BEV are DOA.
Building nukes to power them is not an issue, but the pro EV crowd is anto nuke.
Buyers snapped up?
As in some buyers pay cash, the rest enter into a loan/lease agreement?
Unidentified are how many of these vehicles are actually delivered to people to drive wherever they please…
What I am trying to identify is that the car manufacturers have a bad habit of listing vehicles delivered to dealers as ‘sold’…
That the actual number of vehicles sold to users who drive the vehicles as they like, wherever they like are not fully accounted for until several months after their fiscal year ends.
Dealers take ‘ownership’ of vehicles delivered by manufacturers. Vehicles, that the dealers ‘pay’ monthly loan fees to the manufacturer. These monthly payments are part of the settlement price between dealers and manufacturers.
This whole dealer/manufacturer complex agreements are kept hidden from ordinary purchasers buying vehicles.
Vehicles that sit on a dealer’s lot for months aggregating loan fees are those vehicles pushed by manufacturers at the fiscal year’s end as “End of Year”” sales.
Manufacturers collect vehicles sitting on dealer lots for redistribution to dealers that are selling their allotment of new vehicles.
Commercial entities virtue signaling through purchasing EVs for fleet use plus dealers/manufacturers offering ‘lease’ deals and EV vehicles sitting on dealer lots likely make up the bulk of those “EV sales”.
Not people buying EV vehicles outright through cash purchase or loan agreements for personal use.
A large part of those vehicles actually leased/purchased by individuals are driven by an individual’s desire to take advantage of state/locality EV/hybrid vehicles HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) commuter lanes.
That is, lone individuals driving a EV/Hybrid vehicle utilize HOV lanes without passenger quota penalties.
Government mandates/edicts meant to penalize internal combustion engine vehicle drivers, unless they meet the HOV passenger qualification.