CONTRIBUTOR
Investors are backing off of electric vehicle (EV) charging companies, a key player in the Biden administration’s wider climate agenda, The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday.
Major companies in the industry— including ChargePoint, EVgo and Blink Charging— have seen their stock prices tumble over the past year as investors worry about their profitability, a sign of potential trouble for an industry that the White House is counting on to reach its aggressive longer-term EV targets, according to the WSJ. The administration has set aside billions of dollars to boost the industry, which it will need to thrive in order to develop a nationwide network of charging stations.
ChargePoint’s stock price is down 74% in 2023, while EVgo and Blink Charging have seen their shares lose 21% and 67% of their value, respectively, according to the WSJ. (RELATED: EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Ernst Is Pulling The Plug On Biden’s Electric Vehicle Charging Initiative)
Buttigieg says you don’t have to worry about gas prices if you buy an electric vehicle…someone should remind him how out of touch he sounds pic.twitter.com/tiJVkl7wB3
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) March 7, 2022
ChargePoint, which the administration has touted in the recent past, is also currently subject to a class action lawsuit that alleges company executives engaged in securities fraud by making misleading statements that unduly inflated the firm’s share price.
“I think the investor class has grown weary of the industry’s lack of profitability,” Blink Charging’s CEO Brendan Jones told the WSJ. EV charging companies once received lofty valuations from investors, Jones told the WSJ.
The Biden administration spent $7.5 billion in the bipartisan infrastructure law to help build out a nationwide network of 500,000 charging stations in order to help reach its goal of having 50% of all new car sales be EVs by 2030. McKinsey, a leading consulting firm, has estimated that there will need to be about 1.5 million public chargers installed by 2030 if that target is to be achieved, according to the WSJ. At present, there are nearly 160,000 public chargers available at approximately 60,000 locations nationwide.
EV charging companies are generally struggling to turn a profit right now, but they expect to attain profitability within the next year or two, according to the WSJ. However, the wider EV industry is lagging despite the Biden administration’s efforts to support it, and charging companies find themselves in a difficult bind: more consumers need to switch to EVs to help these companies improve their performance, but consumers may be hesitant to do so if the reliability of the nation’s charging infrastructure remains inconsistent.
Currently, the vast majority of charging infrastructure is concentrated in more densely populated coastal areas as opposed to more rural areas of the country, according to the Department of Energy (DOE).
ChargePoint, EVgo, Blink Charging and the White House did not respond immediately to requests for comment.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
There’s currently 150,000 Gas Stations in the US. Assuming each station has 12 pumps (6 pumps with 2 filling hoses 1 each side) There are close to 1,800,000 gas pumps in the US with the potential to turn over 10 cars per hour each pump (average 6 minute fill and exit) giving each fueling station the capacity to refuel 120 cars per hour. If each EV takes 1/2 hour minimum to recharge, and all 276,000,000 ICE cars are replaced by EVs they will need 1,800,000 (for fuel pumps) X 6 (for capacity) 10,800,000.
Presuming the same number of fueling stations 150,000, each station will need 12×6=72 charging points available to handle the same potential volume of vehicles per hour.
With potential charging capacity per charging port of either 72 kW (kilowatts), 100 kW, 150 kW, or 250 kW each station could see a potential for 250×72=18,000kW or 18MW X 150,000 stations 2700GW of potential dedicated on demand capacity.
For many states this means that, in the event of an emergency (brushfire, Hurricane, flooding, etc) cars need to be able to recharge quickly so people can escape to other states to ride out the storm. People out in Key West for example would need to recharge 4 times just to reach Georgia. The capacity needs to be there to allot for a large volume of EV charging in emergency situations.
EV drivers who can charge at home, will. On the other hand, petrol fuelling stations are a viable proposition anywhere, because every vehicle needs to use them – there is no home fuelling.
It seems to me as if the higher the density of EV chargers, the less profitable they will be. In fact, many will stand idle most of the time, and end up not paying for themselves, let alone making a profit. Certain locations will be profitable, maybe along long-distance routes. But even then, if there are “enough” chargers, there will be too many most of the time, and there will still be bottlenecks at Christmas.
One imagines therefore that the EV charger companies are actually in the game of farming subsidies, not building a viable product. That makes them dependent on favourable political environments, and that is not guaranteed.
By the way I did a similar sum to yours but for the UK here: https://cliscep.com/2023/01/08/on-the-soaring-demand-for-evs/
Actually, Jit, there is “home fueling.”. For instance I keep a large gas storage plastic container, with a pouring spout, filled with high-octane gasoline and stabilizer. I can pour it in (2 minutes) and get at least 125 miles (2 hours) away.
“there is no home fuelling”
gas cans! easily hold enough in one for 100 miles or more
“Certain locations will be profitable, maybe along long distance routes..”
Gasoline stations near Interstate exits ALWAYS have higher prices compared to other stations in the area. That will undoubtedly be the case for EV stations also, and thus the estimated costs by EV enthusiasts for long distance travel who use an “average” cost may end up being too low.
SMMT reported in October that the North of England had 105 chargers taken out of service in the previous quarter, whilst Yorkshire and Humberside had only 13 new chargers installed compared to the 4740 installed in London and the South East despite the region accounting for fewer than 2 in 5 new EV registrations during the period.
The North South divide is still very apparent in the UK!
should read “despite the latter region”
But does the North Side, in general, have homes with space for at home recharging where the south does not?
Asking for a friend.
40% of UK households have no off-road, on premises parking – 40% of UK cars are parked on the road. Without public chargers EVs are not practical based purely on that. I was in London a couple of weeks ago and some lampposts had chargers – also saw four black cabs queuing for a public charger at 7 am going into rush hour)
Thanks Bill, good information.
BUT does London and the South End have like 90% without off street parking and the North mentioned above have like 80% WITH off street parking?
The rich will find a way to charge their virtue signaling devices, the everyman, not so much. It seems that London just wants to keep the riff raff from contaminating THEIR territory, unless, of course, they are there as servants. Much like Royalty or house slaves on plantations.
You would need more than 10,800,000. Because their range is less, so they have to refuel more often. When you refuel an EV for 30 mins what you get in miles is not the same as what you get by refueling an ICE care for 6 minutes.
Then there is the other problem: local capacity of the local cabling and sub-stations. You are talking, for these 30 minute charges, huge power draws. In the UK that has emerged as a problem, with reports of charging points being fuelled by diesel generators because the national power distribution company can’t keep up with demand.
And finally, lets imagine all these EVs lined up and rapidly charging in these additional millions of charging points. How often is there going to be a battery malfunction, and one of them bursts into flames with no warning?
The conclusion however is not that these objections will be decisive and it won’t happen. Governments can indeed ban ICE cars if they want to. In the UK, starting Jan 1, 22% of cars sold have to be EVs, and if a manufacturer ships more than 78% of ICE, each one over quota will attract a fine or tax of 15,000 UK pounds. The EV quota rises to 80% in 2030. All political parties are in favor of this (except Reform, which is at the moment a tiny outlier). There is no prospect of a revolt in the Commons on this. So it will happen. And similar measures are under consideration for heat pumps.
The only question is what the country will look like as it happens. And it will be very different. Think fewer cars, massively fewer. Think massive shrinkage of the auto industry as sales collapse. They collapse because the cars are far more expensive and not as useful. Also think colder houses. And think power rationing and blackouts. In the UK expect more demand for trains, except that the trains are massively expensive and overcrowded already, so think a lot less mobility.
If you want to know what Britain will look like after the political class gets through with Net Zero, go back to the late 1940s. A very local life. There will not be enough supply of electricity to run the only heating systems and cars you are allowed to buy, so the world will shrink and the economy with it.
What America will look like after similar measures? Much harder to forecast, but probably have to go even further back. Distances are greater, the climate is colder, the population is less docile, cars are more dominant. Probably have to think about 1920, with blackouts. America however is much more likely than the UK to have an electoral revolt before it gets even close to Net Zero. The UK a lot less likely, given the unanimous commitment to it by Conservatives, Labour, Greens, Plaid, SNP, Liberals. At the moment there is no-one to vote for who will even talk about stopping the madness. The prudent resident of the UK may fume about it, but they would do better to put their energy into preparing for it, because all the indications are that its coming.
A good analysis, michel. As you say, none of the current parties, have any interest in highlighting the problems, just spouting the usual rhetoric, more jobs, growing economy and a cleaner, greener environment.
These liars, are aided and abetted by the media, who likewise, follow the narrative.
Until, there is a party that actually speaks out publicly on an MSM channel, the relentless march to Armageddon will continue. And by the time ‘Joe public’ realises they’ve been had, it will be too late.
“there is no home fuelling”
gotta save the planet! 🙂
oops– my paste was from the previous paste
should have been
“spouting the usual rhetoric”
gotta save the planet!
I think you are suggesting that Brits are more accustomed to quiet desperation than us cowboys across the pond. Perhaps, but it seems to take more and more bullpucky to get us riled up than it used to.
Not just huge but tremendous power draws multiple MWhs worth. Likely requiring dedicated generation and substations.
Neither car dealerships or people are that stupid. Smart dealerships will allow people to sign up for waitlists for the next measurement period.
When they have buyers for ICE vehicles lined up for years, government will look foolish,
Police and other fleet operators will soon determine that EVs aren’t meeting their needs and return a substantial portion of their fleet to ICE vehicles.
Eventually, even the dimmest prejudiced government representatives will realize their idiocy.
True enough, but people can also vote in new governments and reverse prior policy.
You do realize the easier solution is to get rid of the people?
I’m sure that’s oxcurred to them.
Oxcurred? That’s a new one – occurred of course.
Oxcur.
Would that be a cattle dog?
Another aspect, that’s never considered. Many, are now talking about fast charging stations, but fail to draw attention to the implications. Such as fast charging frequently, can reduce the capacity of the battery.
And if there were a line of fast chargers, all being used at the same time, the power would have to be distributed between them all, thereby negating the fast charging capability. If they were to install a bank of fast chargers, that truly delivered the claimed power to each station, the supply cable would be very expensive, equating to more expensive charge costs.
probably need a ff power station dedicated to it- I think there’s one like that now in CA?
Small Nuclear would suffice
Hundreds of “Small Nuclear would suffice”.
There, fixed it for you.
I was thinking 100MW per recharging hub with any extra for the grid
“People out in Key West for example would need to recharge 4 times just to reach Georgia.”
and of course that charging won’t be available after a major hurricane or earthquake or whatever
Never said they get to return home, just bug out.
2700GW = 2700 1 GW power stations, probably coal fired.
TVA just shut this one down near me: https://www.tva.com/energy/our-power-system/coal/bull-run-fossil-plant.
They’ll have to hunker down in Key Largo for a while, maybe do some snorkeling, waiting to charge.
The Biden administration’s desire to build charging stations is just as stupid as it’s belief that EV’s are “zero emissions”.
The electricity to power these vehicles has to come from somewhere, and unless they are charged in areas where nuclear reactors are prevalent, EV’s pollute more than ICE vehicles.
Likewise, you can install a million more charging stations, but the electricity again has to come from somewhere. Biden hasn’t got a clue how to supply that electricity.
“Biden hasn’t got a clue how to supply that electricity.”
I would say the Biden Administration and his allies. Biden hasn’t got a clue about anything.
“Never underestimate Joe Biden’s ability to f#ck things up”.
– Barack Obama
Except, Biden is doing Obama’s bidding. That’s why we are going down the tubes.
Jim, the issue of “Biden hasn’t got a clue about anything.” may get a test in a few months. If the House of Representatives impeaches Biden for various charges, they may have legal standing to order a Cognitive Decline Exam, in order to determine if he is able to participate in his own defense. This would be a back door application of the 25th Amendment.
Your point about pollution – including CO2 “pollution” may be correct, but they do not care. They just want control and their actions prove that.
John – “Biden hasn’t got a clue how to supply that electricity.”
Seems to not have a clue how to build a charging station either, by current results.
Politico – 12/05/2023 05:00 AM EST
Congress at the urging of the Biden administration agreed in 2021 to spend $7.5 billion to build tens of thousands of electric vehicle chargers across the country, aiming to appease anxious drivers while tackling climate change.
Two years later, the program has yet to install a single charger.
How supercillious can you get? How dense and self-absorbed, to come to the conclusion that “the investor class” had their expectations ruined.
What I wouldn’t give to have this man in my lounge, where I can accellerate a polypaginate introduction to primary school physics at his misanthrope skull.
But then again, the Holy Investor is the only one with enough brains to deserve life.
That pic in interesting..
Psychologists rationalising why they are so UNHAPPY about their MEANINGLESS lives.
Heaves huuuuuuge sigh of relief – it’s all over people – The Fat Lady is on song
♫ ♪ la la lah de dah
We are saved: “”Volkswagen set to introduce two-factor authentication for climate control
BBC Top Gear
Well, I’ll not be buying a EVW any time soon, I sometimes go to places which don’t have mobile phone cover, and anyway I don’t have a mobile phone. I’ll stick with my diesel Merc. which apparently manufactures diesel. Over Christmas we left home according to the car’s computer with enough fuel to drive 375 miles, drove 320 miles and arrived home again with enough fuel to drive 426 miles and we didn’t refuel anywhere.
Magic.
Lol! My truck does that too!
We left the cabin, at 8600 feet, with 480 mile range. By the time we got to St George over 100 miles away we were still above 480 mile range. My wife suggested we stop and sell some diesel before our tank overflowed.
Not many investors are excited by “…struggling to turn a profit…” as an incentive for investment. Those that do are either Virtue Signalers or dysfunctional and proud of it.
Investors will take risk if they think it’s the next big thing. Politics and public marketing are the only reasons this is made to look like the next big thing. The more the virtue signaling asses are exposed, the better.
The economics of public chargers is largely awful except for Tesla initially in order to sell their cars but even that is changing with capital install subsidy and open access-
$100 Million To Fix Broken EV Chargers Could Be The Wrong Approach (forbes.com)
The upshot is city chargers will have to cross subsidise remote and rural chargers big time and forever unless EVs are naturally limited to second car shopping trolleys for city households with home charging capability.
The lack of on the road EV fast chargers is not a major problem because no one in their right mind takes long trips in EVs. At least 96% of EV owners also own an ICE or hybrid vehicle.
I was getting feedback from a Ford electrical engineer working on a 2026 model Ford EV throughout 2022. He retired about a year ago
My full article written this morning is here:
The Honest Climate Science and Energy Blog: Every few months we find out EVs are wrorse than we thought
My conclusion:
The Climate Howlers are always publishing new “studies” claiming the future climate will be worse than previously thought. Total BS
With EVs, every few months we actually do find out EVs are worse than we originally thought.
let the wealthy find out first- before the non rich are forced to buy them
“The lack of on the road EV fast chargers is not a major problem because no one in their right mind takes long trips in EVs”
Don’t agree. Or rather, don’t agree that its going to stay this way. The aim is to take all cars to EVs. At that point, because of the smaller range, you’ll have three times as many refuelling stops, and each one will take about 5 times as long. And this is with fast chargers. So if you don’t have fast chargers the whole thing comes to a halt. Even with fast chargers the pattern of use has to change radically, and the consequent changes in society and the economy will be huge.
It really will be going back, in the US, to the 1920s, or maybe even earlier. The adjustment will be huge. It will have to both adjustment to far less mobility, and also to greatly increased public transport, longer distance trains, local mass transit systems.
From articles I’ve read about nightmare long EV trips in 2023 and 2022, I doubt if many EV drivers will be taking more than one long trip, and only if they have lots of time to waste.
EV annual mileage averages 9000 versus over 13000 for ICEs, and 96% current of EV owners have a ICE and/or hybrid in their household too.
There are busses, trains and planes.
The major problem with EVs is not the lack of on the road fast chargers. It is the overcharging problem.
Even after a $7500 tax credit, the price of an EV is much more than the price of a similar sized ICE or hybrid. That fact did not stop US EV sales from rising up to 60% in 2023 versus 2022 (ICE sales up only 1% to 2%) but how much is EV virtue signaling really worth? Nothing, in my opinion. Half of Buick dealers seem to agree. Also half of Ford dealers who chose not to sell Ford EVs in 2004.
rose 60%? and now make up what % of total sales? that is relevant
Inflation. It was just under 50% a few weeks ago.
50% was EVs and PHEVS combined estimated for full year 2023
I think BEVs are about 6% of uS sales
PHEVs are about 3% of US sales
The dales growth is more important.
BEVs alone are up 60% through 3Q 2023
Combining BEVs and PHEVs in statistics is common and I decided that’s a little deceptive.
That equates to 6.29% of market share in the US … ICE has the other 93.71%
Read it again. He used the weasel words “up to”. That could mean 10 EV companies increased less than 2% and one company increased the up to 60%.
I guess this is the Richard Green personality that is mostly a Green(e).
Right! I didn’t catch that.
60% gain in 2023 is all EVs sold in the US through 3Q 2023 versus the same three quarters in 2022
I don’t use weasel words except to call you a weasel.
OK Mister weasel words. By the numbers provided by car edge, the actual % increase first 3 quarters of 22 to first 3 quarters of 23 is about 55%.
So your UP TO 60% were and are full blown weasel words.
By the way, do you have different names for the different voices in your head? Who is typing NOW?
https://caredge.com/guides/electric-vehicle-market-share-and-sales
Experian said 61% based on auto registrations. I said up to 60% to be conservative. Full year data will be available in January
Link?
I provided mine, where is your?
When i took basic economics at college back in the 60’s, we learned two basics of the relationship between the economy and government.
One is government engendering a virtuous cycle in the economy via rational policies.
The other is government engendering a vicious cycle in the economy via irrational policies.
A virtuous cycle builds on itself growing the economy.
A vicious cycle builds on itself destroying the economy.
The Democrats and their policies concerning Net Zero is engendering a vicious cycle in the economy. Higher prices on virtually everything driving down demand. That lower demand driving higher prices as business attempt to survive in the face of higher taxes and inflation. And the higher prices drives the economy future down.
Inflation is not bad in and of itself, BUT it must be matched to growth in the economy. Inflation today is being driven, not by growth in the economy, but by government policies such as spiking government debt while also printing money that devalues the currency.
The US *is* in an economic vicious cycle at present. It’s going to take a major event to turn this around, such as what happened in the 20’s and 30’s. Lots of pain in the future of the US. Gird your loins.
Inflation is not bad in and of itself,
It is if you are interested in saving or are on a fixed income. The vaunted Goldilocks desired 2% inflation goal is meant to discourage saving and produce velocity in monetary exchange, keeping the economy humming. A virtuous cycle, growing the economy. sounds great as long as the demographics support it. In the case of the US, to sensibly support a 2% annual inflation rate would mean an increase in population of 6 million more producers/consumers annually. Government figures indicate that the population has increased by 1,729, 205 in the last year but 1,056,000 of that number were immigrants, a large portion of which were only consumers, not producers. Of course, a significant percentage of the existing population were not productive either. For a country that has and does worship the Protestant work ethic, facts like these are disturbing.
It may be that academic economists, who have unrivaled influence on national policy, see increased immigration as a solution to falling fertility rates in the US. Consumption by recent immigrants might be viewed as a partial remedy to a decline in exports of goods and the subsequent trade imbalance that has plagued the country in recent decades. Trade has become an exchange with new residents who buy locally produced products, perhaps, rather than make purchases from what were once their own producers. However, they are buying them with money that was already in the US economy, not sent there from their countries of origin. This process can’t be anything but inflationary.
It’s understood that an increase in population will, if living standards are generally similar, mean an expansion of the economy. But that result shouldn’t inevitably include inflation. The Fed destroys what little credibility it has by its misguided fantasy of trying to stabilize inflation while enpixelating trillions of digital dollars.
It is if you are interested in saving or are on a fixed income.”
Interest paid on savings is not only tied to inflation but also to demand for you money for the bank to lend.
Even if inflation is zero, there will be a demand for your money from banks so they can lend it out in a growing economy. That demand from the bank should always be a premium over inflation. If that premium goes away, as it has for years, it’s because it is cheaper to borrow printed money from the FED than to pay individual savers a premium for their money. Government policy boosting a vicious cycle!
“The vaunted Goldilocks desired 2% inflation goal is meant to discourage saving and produce velocity in monetary exchange, keeping the economy humming.”
2% inflation does *not* have to come from discouraging savings. Nor does it have to come from increasing population. The invention of the transistor was a big economic growth bump to the economy and had nothing to do with population growth. So was the introduction of the personal computer. The economic growth from those two things alone justified a 2% inflation growth AND more than paid for it as well!
Inflation can come from increasing productivity as well as from government policy affecting the velocity of money. Both of those things above boosted productivity, and therefore wages, which caused inflation. That inflation was part of a virtuous cycle however, not a vicious one.
Even if inflation is zero, there will be a demand for your money from banks
Well, yes, if they’re going to stay in the banking business. But if there is no inflation there’s no penalizing savings even if they aren’t invested. Why should anyone’s money decrease in value if it’s hidden under the mattress?
Interestingly, the transistor and the PC are both very much cheaper than they were after being introduced. The microwave oven, too. Automobiles are very much more expensive but it isn’t because of inflation. Government mandates on auto design and the addition of expensive features like motor-driven windows, heated seats, and many others add to the price, which people seem willing to pay for an asset that decreases in value for every mile it’s driven.
Something that has been mysteriously overlooked in the economic debacle of 2007 is the role played by portable phones. Many consumers had three significant monthly payments, mortgage or rent, automobile payments and cell phone contracts. The recession’s inception and continuance were driven in part by the fact that portable telephones had become perceived as a necessity. When crunch time arrived people felt that they could walk away from a mortgage and even sleep in the car but couldn’t live without the car or the portable phone. Phone contracts are cheaper now, just like microwave ovens.
Digital money is the cause of inflation, period. If higher wages actually had a role in the devaluing of currency an even bigger factor would be rising stock prices. When a stock holder sells shares for more than he paid for them, in economic terms it’s the same as a window washer getting a raise. The investor has more money. The shares of the company may or may not reflect the real value of its assets because shares aren’t generally purchased for present value, including expected dividends, but for future expectations. It’s speculation, betting. The aggregate value of the assets of the most active common stocks is almost always far less than its market capitalization. The difference is an abstraction, imaginary money that feeds inflation.
Higher prices on virtually everything driving down demand. That lower demand driving higher prices as business attempt to survive in the face of higher taxes and inflation. And the higher prices drives the economy future down.
Taxes and inflation should be the same for every business in an economy but the government uses taxes not to pay for aircraft carriers but to redistribute income for favored constituentcies. Another way of saying “buying votes”. Inflation is the same for everyone but those who get the digital dollars first. They’re the beneficiaries of inflation. The farther down the line one is, the bigger the bite. It’s a tribute to capitalism, warped as it is, that the US economy continues to function while undergoing an inflation of over 3000% since the 1913 birth of the Federal Reserve Bank, only 110 years ago.
Unfortunately, the usual diagnosis for the health of the economy is the profitability of the banking system, which may not mean all that much to the man on the cul de sac.
And remember, the current Fed is the 3rd iteration. The other 2 were repealed quickly. Only Roosevelt as POTUS allowed the Fed to stay in place as it caused the depression, that, due to the influence of the US on the world economy, became a worldwide depression.
It is funny that then big US housing loan “crises” did not occur in Canada since their regulations still required 20% down to get a loan to buy a house. In the US 3% or even 0% could get you into a house. Banks forced by Clinton to loan to POC or his Attorney General (Eric Holder) would sue them lead to the debacle.
Th US economy is currently so healthy that the next trend is likely to be down
Inflation excluding shelter was only +1.4% year over year in November 2023
Unemployment is low
The stock market is high
Real estate prices are high
Deficits are too high but the Fed is not financing them, so inflation is low.
Give Joe Bribe’em time and he will screw up the economy. It just has not happened yet.
Inflation is caused by the supply of money growing faster than the supply of goods and services.
Inflation is not caused by Nut Zero or even high oil prices. Inflation is a monetary phenomenon
I wrote the for profit newsletter ECONOMIC LOGIC for 43 years and would be glad to answer any economics questions.
Real estate prices are high
Why is that a good thing, if it’s true? No house should be worth more than it costs to build plus the purchase price of the lot it sits upon, in other words, it’s replacement value. Sadly, home prices are blown up by restrictive zoning, onerous permitting, unrealistic building codes and refusal to acknowledge innovative materials and techniques. The situation is designed to produce a shortage of affordable housing.
Mortgage lenders, burned by bogus tranches and unqualified home buyers in the 2007 disaster, are uninterested in financing mortgages on single family homes. That’s why there are thousands of apartment complexes under construction everywhere. When a renter doesn’t make payments no foreclosure is needed. Theoretically at least, only an eviction is required. A real estate company buys the complex from the developer and operates it. Everybody makes out fine, except those with the anti-deluvian desire for a home of their own. If the development doesn’t succeed the whole thing can be sold to another real estate company.
And what about some forms of commercial real estate? Warehouse and fulfillment centers seem to be in demand but downtown office space isn’t. Shopping centers will need to be destroyed or turned into senior living facilities, high schools, libraries or other forms of public buildings since retailing won’t function in the malls or downtown, having moved to the world-wide web. Downtown office buildings are being re-fitted as apartments now as if families would like to live in urban areas where people are trapped after dark in their hutches surrounded by crime in a J. G. Ballard dystopia.
Here’s what the most important Fed official has to say about it.
Now that is funny, in that he lied to cover his ass, and I don’t remember hearing about that anywhere.
OK that explains it.
The only “professional” that is more often wrong in their predictions than “climate scientist” is “Economist”!
2 things.
As long as “money” can be created from nothing, it will ultimately be worth nothing.
Real estate prices are high? But sales are DOWN so like tulip bulbs, if you can’t sell the asset at the price asked, then the value is not what it is thought to be.
But the Fed has actually done well to “crush” inflation just in time to rapidly reduce interest rates to get the economy moving by the end of summer so that things will look good for Brandon by the election, since inflation will not become apparent until after the election. As we all know, the Fed is part of the global cabal, and is trying to keep a Democrat POTUS in office.
I am looking forward to the reduced interest rates from a personal perspective. I will be selling a house this summer, and the lower the home mortgage rate, the better the price I will be able to get in the current low inventory market in Vegas.
Be aware of unintended consequences. Rapidly reducing interest rates may not actually result in increased home sales if those homes on the market 1) were purchased at a higher price or 2) are valuated higher by the seller than what the market will bear.
Because of the high inflation and now the higher interest rates, fewer starter homes are being produced than in the past. Those are the homes that typically benefit most from reduced interest rates and if there is a lack of of them on the market, home sales may not skyrocket like Brandon and the Dems hope.
If reducing interest rates gets Joe Bribe’em reelected, that will make me sick
Elon and Tesla did charging right — they sell home-chargers (the most logical place to charge an EV) and built charging stations where they will be needed for long trips — along interstate highways.
Anyone buying an EV should plan on charging at home and look at where they are likely to travel (vacation? Grandma’s house? cabin in the mountains) to make sure that charging is available — available now, not at some indefinite future date.
Charge at home. Home every night.
Over a year ago I met with my financial advisor and told her to get any money of mine OUT of all “green” investments and concentrate on Oil, natural gas, coal and munitions/weapons producers. Last June I told her to get my money out of any companies involved in DIE racist crap. I am not losing money. Wake up, people. We actually do have the power, use it.
The sweet spot for EVs is short trips and home charging. Charging stations are for long trips and emergencies and today used very little except by those that cannot charge at home (like renters). There have been reports of choke points at rural charging stations over holidays and then they return to be relatively unused. Where they are really needed is the rural areas and with little use they will not be profitable.
Idea for a new website for profit.
Collect a list of homeowners that will allow, for a fee, travelers to use their home chargers to recharge. Sort of like Harvest Hosts for RVers.
An added service would be a room or rooms for let so the idiot EVers can spend the night (another fee) while their vehicle’s battery gently recharges overnight. (Hint: Don’t include the term Idiot EVers in your advertising, it may be a put off to Idiot EVers.)
Add breakfast for another added fee and the traveler could skip all the hassles of finding an open charging station, making regular motel reservations, and stopping at a restaurant for breakfast, etc.
Heck, why not provide dinner also, for another fee so one stop covers all the evening to morning needs of a traveler.
All this to save time so they can stop at lunch for couple of hours to recharge at midday for those “long” trips. (Long trip EV = short jaunt ICE)
Heck this service would most certainly add a BUNCH (technical term) of potential charging points in towns just off interstate all across the country. Once the ball gets rolling, I am sure farmers and ranchers all across the great expanses of flyover country would see the benefit of adding a charger of two to their farms for an added profit since to be a successful farmer or rancher, you must be at first a successful businessman.
Maybe Rud can comment.
Make sure you provide me 1% of Gross revenues since it is MY IDEA.
Thanks,
Drake
I think it’s already being done, sort of.
Quite a few small motels now have an EV charge point, largely to tick a box on the accommodation search consolidation sites.
And they could call it, Holiday Inn Express with EV Chargers.
“The sweet spot for EVs is short trips and home charging”
The sweet spot for new EVs is in the EV dealers parking lot, unsold.
“At present, there are
nearlyless than 160,000 public chargers available atapproximatelyway less than 60,000 locations nationwide.”I have only seen 1 public charging location that only had ONE charger in McDermitt Nevada. Every Tesla location I have seen had at least 4 charge points and often 6 or more so I call BS on the 60 K points for 160 K chargers. It amazes me (not) that they fudge everything to the benefit of EVs and away from “The Truth”.
It’s amazing that investors can be swept up in the manufactured excitement of folks fully confident of the imminent end of fossil fuels and the wonderful life we’ll all have with all those cheaper-than-ever electrons pushing our cars around.
You’d think they’d defend their wealth with some homegrown skepticism towards all those breathless exclamation points and gasps of windandsolar, windandsolar, thank you Lord for windandsolar.
Yes, our peerless ‘news’ media should also get a swift kick in the behind for their disinterest in (or concealment of) the heavy costs of rebuilding the whole grid and the as-yet undiscovered means to store up gigawatts for when the sun don’t shine. But my Lords Investors are supposed to be smart enough to investigate those aspects. Guess they’re finally learning, judging by those plummets in the market.
Net Zero can only be accomplished through drastic energy conservation measures, including direct rationing of all forms of energy. Which is just what will happen as the shutdown of our fossil energy infrastructure moves relentlessly forward.
The world’s renewable energy industrial base is nowhere near capable of delivering the enormous supplies of RE systems and technology needed to achieve Net Zero in the western industrial nations, let alone the entire world as a whole.
The RE industrial base isn’t capable now, and it won’t be capable in the foreseeable future. If it ever gets there at all, which in all probability it won’t simply because renewable energy has such low energy density.
And so the damage Net Zero can do is self-limiting — except if western governments choose to retire fossil fuel power plants and other fossil energy infrastructure without adequate replacement. If these retirements continue, then we are Net Zero toast.
The damage Nut Zero can do is called fascism
Nut Zero can not be accomplished with over 7/8th of the world’s population living in nations that could not care less about Nut Zero. but they’ll take Green Slush Fund handouts if any are available.
My belief for the past few years is that Nut Zero was never intended to succeed. It is a strategy for leftist control of the private sector (aka fascism)
In a few years when it is obvious Nut Zero has no hope, the failure of Nut Zero will be spun as a second climate emergency. Two climate emergencies are better than one to implement fascism. Maybe we’ll have more Covid scaremongering too. Three emergencies at the same time.
EVs are a lose lose no matter how you look at it. If they weren’t the government would not have to prop them up with billion/trillions of dollars. Damn we are dumb.
In many places electricity prices are going up faster than gas prices.