Except for Seahawks fans or those who appreciate a stingy defense, the action on the field of this year’ Super Bowl left a lot to be desired. But off the field, between the kickoff and the final score, this year’s Super Bowl sent a message that didn’t need words: the moment for electric vehicles is over.
For the first time in years, there was no Super Bowl advertisement featuring an EV in a starring role. No celebrity endorsements, no sweeping promises about the “future of driving,” and no multimillion-dollar attempts to convince Americans that electric cars are inevitable. The only trace of an EV during the entire broadcast was a split-second glimpse of Volkswagen’s electric van, which is struggling with low sales, recalls and reportedly will not receive a 2026 version.
That brief cameo stood in sharp contrast to previous Super Bowls, when EVs were front and center. For several years, automakers used the biggest advertising stage in America to promote electrification, leaning heavily on celebrity appearances and high-production storytelling. The message they pushed was that electric vehicles were not only the future, but they were already mainstream.
Welcome to the reality of 2026.
The retreat began last year, when electric-focused car ads largely disappeared after surging during the Biden administration. Just as notable as the absence of EV ads was the absence of major automakers themselves. Ford and General Motors did not run headline-grabbing automotive campaigns at all.
That decision is difficult to separate from the financial reality facing both companies with EVs. Ford has lost nearly $20 billion on its EV business, while General Motors has reported losses around $6 billion. When EV divisions are bleeding cash, spending millions on Super Bowl commercials becomes increasingly difficult to justify. Advertising budgets shrink when the product being promoted isn’t delivering returns.
EV advocates argue that the slowdown is the result of fading federal subsidies rather than weak consumer demand. But sales data tell a different story. Even during the Biden years of generous tax credits, aggressive mandates, and saturation advertising, electric vehicles never captured more than a modest share of the market. According to Cox Automotive, EVs accounted for just 8.1% of total U.S. vehicle sales at their recent peak. The trajectory tells a better story. EV sales in the United States cratered 46% between the 3rd to the 4th quarter of 2025 as the government giveaways dwindled.
That figure came after years of extraordinary policy support and cultural promotion. If billions in taxpayer subsidies and relentless marketing still produce single-digit adoption, it’s clear we have a lemon on our hands.
For many Americans, the hesitation is practical, not ideological. Higher purchase prices, limited charging infrastructure, range concerns, and cold-weather performance remain obstacles that glossy commercials cannot erase. These are everyday considerations for families, commuters, and rural drivers who are the people automakers once hoped to reach through Super Bowl ads.
The absence of EV marketing during suggests the industry recognizes this reality. Companies do not abandon the most valuable advertising platform in the country unless its effectiveness is in doubt. If electric vehicles were flying out of the stores, automakers would be competing aggressively for airtime. Instead, they stayed silent.
The Super Bowl has long mirrored consumer culture. This year, that mirror reflected a shift away from electric vehicle hype and toward something more grounded. After years of promotion, EVs failed to justify their place on the biggest stage in advertising.
The message wasn’t delivered by a commercial. It was delivered by the absence of one.
The free market remains undefeated.
Larry Behrens is an energy expert and the Communications Director for Power The Future. He has appeared on Fox News, ZeroHedge, and NewsMax speaking in defense of American energy workers. You can follow him on X/Twitter @larrybehrens
This article was originally published by RealClearEnergy and made available via RealClearWire.
Fifteen years from now; every electric car you see will only be worth its value as scrap, because very few people are going to be willing to spend twenty thousand dollars on a new battery for a fifteen year old car.
I doubt you will even be able to get a replacement battery.
EVs make absolutely no sense in the US, except as a glorified shopping cart.
The distances people like to drive, make them pointless
I’d say there’s a niche for them as glorified muscle cars for virtue signaling middle-aged white guys with issues. In this regard, they’ve largely supplanted BMWs in my neck of the woods.
Those would be the “White Guys for Harris” guys right???
Have you not heard of CATL’s latest sodium-ion battery? This is already being mass produced and will be featured in the first car, the Changan Nevo A06, which is expected to be lauched in mid-2026.
The main features of this new battery are impressive. It has a highly durable lifespan, capable of over 10,000 charge/discharge cycles, which translates to a projected road life of 3.6 million miles.
For most drivers, such a car would be good for a lot longer than 15 years.
What’s also amazing is that it operates reliably even under extreme cold, delivering nearly triple the discharge power of equivalent LFP batteries at minus 30 degrees Celsius, while maintaining over 90% capacity retention at minus 40 and stable power delivery at temperatures as low as minus 50 degrees.
The battery also has a much lower risk of thermal runaway, compared with Lithium-ion and LFP batteries. Tested under tough conditions such as crushing, drilling, and sawing, the battery stays smoke and fire-free and continues to provide power, according to the test results.
The following site provides more details.
https://www.catl.com/en/news/6720.html
Just for some laughs.
Triggered by a remote hole punch, doing several punches. And then the fireworks started and just kept on going.
Thermal runaway is still a feature of these batteries….. unless of course someone has a ‘different’ sodium ion battery.
Looks safe enough for government work.
wow!
If that went up under your hood, you’d have a 1-vehicle Guy Fawkes celebration day.
Fun for all the family 🙁
So what? ICEVs have fires too.
ICVs have fires too…
.
But never while just driving down the road without an accident. Or parked in a driveway recharging. And an ICV fire can be extinguished in minutes often with a simple fire extinguisher. An EV fire could burn for Hours on end and can often reignite days later spewing highly toxic fumes in the process.
The Tesla in this footage was later determined to have driven over some road debris about three hours prior to igniting.
To be fair ICE cars can spontaneously catch fire while just sitting or driving down the road. Generally though it’s an electric fire, years ago Ford had a faulty ignition system that would start a fire while sitting there turned off.
Looks like they shot the thing with .22 caliber bullets, and that it took a lot of shots to create that fire. What’s the point, that an everyday item can be hazardous? Gee, who would have ever guessed?
Yep. Try shooting a bullet through a full gas tank and see what happens. And ICE cars have proportionally way more fires than EV’s.
I don’t think we have enough data on EVs v ICEVs fire-wise to draw any reliable conclusions. Still, the idea that shooting a battery full of .22 caliber bullets and watching it catch fire somehow indicts batteries is ludicrous.
Myth busters already did…guess what, no fire
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ECR3IC02pqQ
And why is this? Simple gasoline needs oxygen to burn hence the air cruel mix at the carburetor. The fuel in the tank has displaced the oxygen containing air in the empty tank with gasoline fumes once filled. The oxygen needed for combustion isn’t in the tank so the tank can’t explode.
Now shoot a gas can with .22 caliber rounds, and do report back. LOL
100-150 Wh/kg … the car will weigh in impressively.
Where did you get that information from? The new Naxtra battery I’m referring to is claimed to have 175 Wh/kg, which is similar to current LFP batteries, but not as good as Lithium-ion. However, this Naxtra battery has much better performance in both very low and very high temperatures.
There is no way they could have tested 10,000 cycles in real world conditions. But the good news is that after modeling and accelerated life testing they declare the technology to be safe and effective.
Call me skeptical.
lots of promises there
Oh Great another “New” Chinese piece-o-crap EV. Probably built on a copied chassis and frame from Tesla. Or nicked from some other automaker.
It won’t even be worth scrap metal because of all the plastic. Plus, you will have to pay to have the battery disposed of just like you do tires today. You may not be able to “give” it away to a scrap yard. A gift that just keeps on giving!
Batteries will be recycled, just as lead-acid are.
Batteries aren’t being recycled now. Even the “White Gold” Li-Ion batteries are seldom recycled. Far too costly when compared to the cost of extraction and refinement of new raw lithium deposits
.
According to GreenPacks.org
What Percentage Of EV Batteries Are Recycled?
Not yet enough EVs out there for battery recycling to be big. That will change.
Wouldn’t bet on it. Just another “In Ten years it’ll happen” much like Fusion Power that produces more energy than it takes to initiate and sustain the reaction.
I watched the Motor Trend channel a lot over the years, where old cars are restored to better than new, and I have seen exactly one episode that dealt with rebuilding an electric car, and that was several years ago.
I think the used electric car market is going to be problematic. I wouldn’t want one.
Yes, I agree, and it will become more problematic in proportion as governments are able to compel takeup of them, because then the two real problems with them will become overwhelming. One being the length of time it takes to refuel, two being the capacity of the local grid to recharge them during the peak hour. But do not expect any of this to deter people like Ed Miliband in the UK whose latest move, while he waits for space generated solar to become a thing, is to cover the UK with solar panels. Without providing any significant storage, and in a country which is the second worst in the world for solar power generation. After Ireland.
My AI found some EV price information … Baker Electrics from the nineteen-teens —
Price Range SummaryBased on the last several years of sales:
You’re right. The current generation of electric cars have terrible residual value, so are costly for consumers. Many manufacturers lose money on each unit sold also. Advertising to boost their sales only shortens the road to bankruptcy.
Perhaps Tesla, BYD and a few others are able to survive and even thrive in this niche market, and certainly technology will improve. Personally, I’d rather not drive an EV for my needs. I definitely don’t want to be forced to do so.
Very much depends on a) how much you drive and how far each time, and b) having a house with a 240v/30A electric dryer circuit. The current generation of EVs are well suited for short trips (150-200 miles total in most places and most weather) but not for road trips.
Once solid state (including semi-solid state) appears that will start to change.
Most EV charging cables are 120V and take about 4 days to recharge. Most 240V or 480V cables are 50A or up to 90A and need dedicated circuits and breakers. 480V chargers need upgraded services, panels and meters along with, in most cases, dedicated 480V Transformers and potentially separate services from 120/240V house serice.
You obviously know nothing about EVs and don’t want to know anything.
As so often the canary to watch is the UK.
Four years from now it will be, if current legislation remains in force, impossible to buy a pure ICE car. PHEVs will still be legal for a while longer. Its going to be interesting to see if this holds up. I suspect it will – this is a government whose Energy Minister is reported to be considering, as part of his Net Zero drive, generating UK electricity from solar power…. from space!
That’s right, solar panels in space, beam it down by microwave, What could possibly go wrong? Its going to be cheap and unlike land based solar available 24 x 7 including at night. Which may solve the previously unacknowledged problem of storage. This last being a word that is banned from being uttered in polite circles, the thing that it refers to being so problematic, and the great thing about space solar is that we will not need any of that damned st….ge.
That’s all right then.
So you see that any small difficulties with demand or usability of EVs are not going to make the slightest impression on Mr Miliband. He is after all the Energy Minister of a country that is going to lead the world in
saving the world from climate change[sorry that was so last year] moving the world to secure and cheap electricity obtained from space.One small glitch and you can get microwaved from space, cooked to perfection.
The Chinese claim they will put a demonstration Solar Power Satellite in orbit by the year 2030.
Maybe Mad Ed can get electricity from them.
Is 2030 too late to save Mad Ed’s plan?
I’m not sure Mad Ed and his plans will make it that far.
Scunthorpe one day mourning
Because your jobs are all gone
Mad Ed and the plans he made
Put an end to you
I seem to recall that the book in which this concept was first seriously advanced, first built colonies in space to manufacture the collectors/transmitters with material mined on the moon. The lift from earth’s gravity well was just too much for the then current rockets.
The microwave ‘transmission in atmosphere’ test was performed at Goldstone Tracking Station – it was successful.
A better way to build a solar power satellite is to use a balloon as the central structure.
Cover the outside of the balloon with flexible solar panels, fold the balloon up and put it in your launcher of choice, launch it into orbit where it inflates itself and starts collecting solar energy.
A study was done on this concept and it was estimated that a balloon of this type that measured one mile in diameter could be launched in the Space Shuttle, and would require about 40 pounds of helium to inflate the balloon to full size when in orbit.
What could be easier? The flexible solar panels are the small hurdle, but there has been much progress on this front since the time of the study.
One launch and one working Solar Power Satellite in orbit.
G’day Tom…
I’m trying to visualize it. A sphere, 50% illuminated, 50% not. Some way to attach it to the equipment to generate the microwave beam, and some way to maintain the beam to a particular receiving antenna layout on earth. Assuming a synchronous 24 hour orbit. A lower orbit? A series of balloons and a series of receiving fields? An intermittent ‘renewable’?
(One of Asimov’s short ‘robot’ stories dealt with the robots ‘revolting’, reasoning that they could control the aiming of the beam better than humans could. Spoiler alert: they did.)
The cells in these cars all fall prey to one or more common faults. In particular, everyone is trying to make the cells cheaper so that the cars can be sold for less or make more profit. This has consequences. In the attached video you can see the defects in the batteries available for sale domestically, (in US). Some of these faults are an inconvenience, some are fires waiting to happen.
If the car has multiple cells, then there are multiple points of failure. Maybe ALL the cells in the car you buy are good, maybe one is bad. The consequences can be the same. It’s just a matter of time and probability where the defective cell lands and the brand/reputation may just mean the odds are in your favour but by how much?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Y23nfAOiXQ&t=2s
The benefit of all this is that an ICE car has ONE engine and it can be serviced using well defined/distributed knowledge and is likely to leave the car intact if it fails. A battery…. well who knows.
Great video.
Interesting.
we had EVs before we had ICE cars and the battle was decisively won by ICE and the same reasons are still here today so the results will be the same
My uncle built himself an electric car back in the 1950’s. He used lead-acid batteries. He was an engineer, and a creative guy.
ICEV won because battery technology was primitive. Things have changed in 100+ years.
And of course the ICE never moved on from that initial engine.
The battle is over, electric lost. It’s not coming back without legislation.
Of course ICEV moved on, and by the way I have no more against ICEVs as I do against other old technology. Right now, I own two ICEVs. Its had its glory, but it’s near the end of its run. This will play out very much like the end of the steam locomotive.
In 1922, Electro Motive Corp. was formed, and along with Winton Engine Corp., they produced the first locomotives powered not by coal and steam, but by gasoline and diesel that ran generators connected to traction motors produced by General Electric. General Motors bought Electro Motive and Winton in 1930-31, merged them and operated them as GM divisons. By the mid-’30s they were cranking out diesel-electric locomotives.
By 1950, the steam locomotive was kaput. All heavy rail moved by electricity, with the diesel engines serving to run generators that sent power to electric motors that turn the wheels. It took about 30 years for steam locomotives to become obsolete, and it’s going to take about 30 years for ICEV road vehicles to become obsolete.
The big issue for ICEV is battery energy density, but that’s already being solved right now by solid and semi-solid state batteries, which should be fully commercial by the mid-30s. Other issues — safety, operating temperature range, longevity, charging time — will be solved by solid state batteries.
We have a cohort of wingnuts who got sucked into the politics. I’m something of a wingnut myself, but not that crazy. This is ENTIRELY engineering. Consumers will demand electric road vehicles once battery energy density is much higher, which is what solid state will do. In every other respect, electric motive power is superior. More torque, cheaper to operate, smoother ride.
If you find a list of the top 10 car maintenance operations, NONE of them apply to EVs. No oil changes, no tuneups, no exhaust system, no transmissions. Downvote me and shake your fist at the sky, but it’s going to happen. It won’t “save the climate” nor will governments have to force them on people. If you have another 20 years left, you will see. Again, this is ENTIRELY engineering and NOTHING else.
Of course ICEV improved. That’s not even remotely the point. Look, electric motive power has been firmly established for 90 years. From the start in 1922, it took the diesel-electric locomotive 30 years to kill off steam. That’s about how long it will take EVs to kill off ICEVs.
I own two ICEVs. I like them. Still, its glory is coming to a close in the light duty road vehicle segment, meaning sedans, SUVs, pickups, and delivery trucks and vans. The key will be the solid and semi-solid state battery, now starting to enter the market (semi solid state) and which will double and then triple (or more) battery energy density and thereby vehicle range, while solving the other EV issues including safety, longevity, operating temperature range, and charging time.
Governments won’t have to force or lure people into them. They will be superior, with more torque, a smoother ride, and much lower operating costs. Customers will demand them. The biggest issue will be the follow-on demand for high-voltage chargers. You can shake your fist all you want, but it’s coming.
This is not political, the various attempts to make it political notwithstanding. It is ENTIRELY engineering.
Not that there have been other disruptive transitions. You know, like steam and then diesel replacing sailing ships; lightbulbs replacing oil lamps; LEDs replacing incandescent and cathode ray; calculators replacing slide rules and adding machines; refrigerators replacing iceboxes; cars replacing horses; jets replacing propeller planes except for short hops. It goes on. And EVs will replace ICEVs, whether you like it or not.
If what you say is true, why are EV sales flatlining or even declining? Why are resale values of EV’s so poor?
They are flatlining because the ones with liquid electrolytes are Model Ts. The next two waves will change all of that.
So when I hook onto a horse trailer that weighs 12000 lbs fully loaded with horses, feed and gear. A load that I have to take 500 miles in one day through stop/go traffic, flats, mountains, gravel/dirt road and desert. A trip that’s going to need me running either the AC or the heater and maybe both. Which is going to make it there by nightfall? A ICE pickup or an EV pickup? Each and every time the EV will be found lacking.
Until EV’s can do the same drives in the same amount of time as ICE vehicles they are not ready for prime time. Heck I can jump in a 50 year old pickup and still make that drive today but there isn’t a single EV that can make it. Sure on paper they can but real life driving will have those batteries flat in no time. FYI I’ve done this drive multiple times and guess what, there also isn’t a charging station at the far end of this trip but I can always get fuel.
Today, that calls for an ICEV. No question about it. I wouldn’t even think of claiming that any of today’s electric pickup trucks can handle your requirements. Not even close.
In 20 years, it will be very different. The battery’s energy density will be at least triple what it is now. There will be bigger batteries as options, just as HD ICEVs have bigger diesel tanks as standard equipment and can be outfitted with extra tanks.
By the way, as the owner of a Ram 3500 with 129,000 miles on the odometer, a 32-gallon tank, and many a long trip to show for it, I can say without a doubt that you are not driving your diesel rig for 500 miles at a stretch unless you have installed an aftermarket auxiliary tank.
As solid state comes to fruition, the next thing to happen will be demand for high-voltage chargers that can fill the battery in 10 minutes without damaging it — a characteristic of solid state.
Given the installed base of light-duty passenger vehicles (your rig and mine are “light duty” for this purpose), along with over the road semitrucks, ICEVs and gas stations will be around for decades, with diesel around for as far as the eye can see.
Thermodynamics has not changed in 100 years. Hydrocarbon fuels have about 50 times the energy density of even the best Li batteries, and there is simply no way round that.
An ICEV engine sends an average of 75% of that energy into the air as heat and vibration. Electric efficiency is often overstated by what I call the “EVangelists,” but a belt and suspenders efficiency number is at least 75% and actually higher depending on what’s included in the calculation. Therefore, the energy density comparison is of quite limited utility.
I don’t believe EVs should be mandated and I don’t believe CO2 is a problem. However. EV technology has advanced and continues to advance. The SSB (Solid State Battery) and the new electric motor technology seems to be the future. Electric power in aviation is advancing. Solar power technology …..all technology is advancing including ICE engines. Let the best tech win.
Not sure about electric power in aviation advancing.
Here in the UK Dale Vince has just wound up his Ecojet project to develop an electric aircraft after failing to raise capital and get regulatory approval from the UK’s air regulator.
Joby Aviation in the USA has a future and there are others – Archer – it is short range machines – no one is trying to fly the Atlantic.
Flying the Atlantic has already been done. They didn’t use a battery either. The first non-stop transatlantic flight was completed by John Alcock and Arthur Whitten Brown on June 14-15, 1919, flying from St. John’s, Newfoundland, to Clifden, Ireland, in a Vickers Vimy biplane.
I strongly agree with you about light vehicles (sedans, SUVs, pickups, delivery trucks) but quite skeptical with respect to aircraft. Also, I haven’t seen any material improvement of the conversion of photons to electrons in solar panels, but maybe that’s because I haven’t paid attention like I have with EVs.
Too many people conflate politics with EVs. First it was the lefties, and then the ‘wingers reacted. I view all of it strictly in engineering terms. SSBs will improve energy density, which will translate to range, and will be superior in a number of other ways including safety, charge times, longevity, and operation at wider temperature ranges.
I think ICEVs will go the way of sailing ships, steam locomotives, oil lamps, incandescent lightbulbs, cathode ray tubes, and newspapers. I doubt that new ICEVs will be on car lots by 2040 and definitely not by 2050. No one will be forced into it; consumers will flock to the SSB-equipped EVs.
SSBs – solid state batteries are the technology of the future . . .
. . . and always will be.
My skepticism is motivated by repeated announcements, over the last 10 years, by major EV manufacturers that mass deployment of SSBs is imminent, only to see such rollouts postponed.
Perhaps one day . . .
What is this new electric motor tech to which you are referring?
A link would be appreciated.
Electric powered aviation will remain a fantasy, and a goldmine for promoters, until electric batteries attain the energy density of aviation fuel.
Semi-solid state is already here and will shortly be in many more EVs. Full SSB at popular prices by the mid-’30s at the latest. Both are game-changers.
Mercedes has an “axial” electric motor that is lighter and more powerful than conventional motors. A SSB will be used in a Corvette hybrid model….Lamborghini has a hybrid model that uses a new type electric motor – expensive limited production. China BYD and Cherry Motors will be producing SSB models…there are 2 main types of SSB and the problem has been no. cycles before deterioration….needs development….and Tesla has a new battery but it is not hugely different from its current one – customers don’t like to buy a new car and then be told about the next improved model. You learn about new tech simply by searching the web – Youtube alone has tons of material. China is a copycat and makes lots of junk but they do move fast…..You can order (I’m not) your own Jetson type flying machine now….in fact you may have several to choose from.
Sure . . . any day now.
I get my information from science and engineering journals, not the general web and Youtube hype.
That electric motors can be improved upon is no surprise, the challenge for EVs has been and remains the low power density of batteries.
I’ll believe that SSBs are real when I see them powering EVs not breathless press releases.
As one of my science mentors used to say, “Show me what you’ve done, don’t tell me what your going to do”.
Gel electrolyte (a/k/a “semi solid state”) batteries are already starting to go into EVs. So you’ll be on the trailing edge. I understand. It reminds me of when I had a house built in 2017.
When you do that, you wind up visiting a lot of places and talking to a lot of people: flooring, roofing, lighting, wood, the list is endless. I recall the lighting place. They were high on L.E.D., and I was negative because I’d tried some L.E.D. bulbs six or eight years before then and hated them.
The guy said that L.E.D. had made big advances. He showed us, and I went with L.E.D. Other than one floor lamp, every light in the house is L.E.D. If you’re under the age of 50 and maybe even 60, you will be driving an EV with a solid state battery before you die.
p.s.: I might add that, after 8+ years, I haven’t needed to replace a single L.E.D. light. And they use 1/8 the electricity as incandescent. If you’re young enough for an EV when the technology has matured, you will enjoy not only the range and driving characteristics, but you’ll like not having oil changes or maintenance or replacement of engines, fuel injectors, transmissions, or exhaust systems. Or maybe that will be your children or grandchildren.
J.P. Morgan was a big believer in electricity, especially for lighting. His father scoffed, and thought it was a fad. LOL
The LED analogy is cute, but flawed as the challenges in increasing the energy density of batteries are far more significant.
Why not use the VLSI circuit analogy? If battery progress were as rapid, we’d have batteries with the energy output of a nuclear power station.
Gel electrolyte batteries:
Lithium-Ion Polymer (Gel): Modern commercial lithium polymer batteries typically offer 0.54 to 0.95 MJ/kg (150–265 Wh/kg).Advanced Lithium-Metal (Gel): High-performance pouch cells have achieved energy densities of approximately 1.77 MJ/kg (up to 490.8 Wh/kg).Lithium-Sulfur (Gel/Semi-Solid): Theoretical densities are much higher, but current prototypes like those from Gelion have recently demonstrated 1.45 MJ/kg (402 Wh/kg).
Reality check. Even the best lab-based gel electrolyte batteries have nowhere near the energy density of fossil fuels as per the attached plot below.
Anyways, top marks for gee-whiz enthusiasm, unfortunately a failing mark in physics and chemistry.
You are not incorporating the fact that electric engines and drivetrains are at least triple the efficiency of ICEVs. Probably higher depending on what’s included in the calculation.
Let’s see.
Gasoline Engines: Generally 20-30% efficient.Diesel Engines: Generally 30-40% or up to 45% efficient.Modern Engines: Some advanced gasoline engines can achieve thermal efficiency exceeding 40% (e.g., Toyota’s 2-litre engine) or even over 50% in specialized cases.What about electric motors?
Operational Range: While peak efficiency is high, efficiency can vary, often operating between 85% and 96% depending on RPM and torque.Lets take the midpoint at 91%
So electric motors are 0.91 / 0.30 = 3.0,
Your claim is correct. Electric motors are brilliant in term of both efficiency and torque. That is why electric motors are used exclusively in high speed rail systems.
However, three time a small number is still a small number.
3.0 x 1.45 MJ/kg [lithium gel battery] = 4.35 MJ/kg
So even taking relative efficiencies into account EVs fall short by about a factor of 10.
The low battery relative energy density is why EVs have to carry such massive battery packs – Tesla tires have to be specially engineered to handle the weight. So most of the energy is expended in moving the power source, the batteries, from place to place.
The range issue along with the recharge time issue are two key problems limiting EV adoption.
Basic numeracy counts in all amounts.
I have consistently identified battery energy density as the EV show-stopper or at least show-slower. I see no need to flex my elbows and do the joules conversions for these purposes. Instead, I focus on solid state (when it arrives commercially) battereies having triple or better energy density than liquid electroyte batterries, along with several other critical advantages.
This will take the usable (10%-90% of capacity) ranges from 200-250 miles to 600-700 miles on a charge, with the battery being the same weight. Yes, the batteries are heavy (800-1,000 lbs for a 65kW battery, vs 225 lbs for a gas tank holding 20 gallons), but when other components are compared, the gap isn’t that wide: electric motors are much lighter, and there are no fuel lines, transmissions, radiators, or exhaust systems.
You might counter that even with solid state, diesel pickups and light delivery vehicles will need batteries much bigger than the 65kW ones that are pretty much standard in sedans now, which effectively will become 200kW. This would be correct, but I would note that, when installed in a pickup truck, a diesel engine adds 1,000 pounds of weight.
Today, EVs are niche vehicles, and I have never said anything but that. If solid state winds up being a pipe dream, it will stay that way. I have gone from skeptic to believer on solid state, but we shall see. In any case, yes, hydrocarbon motor fuels are much more energy-dense than batteries, but if we triple battery energy density it won’t matter insofar as light road vehicles are concerned.
Two more things. First, I am very much a NON-believer when it comes to the AGW hypothesis, including the idea that EVs are somehow climate savers. I’m stating that mildly in the belief (maybe mistaken) that WUWT has a vulgarity blocking filter. Secondly, I am every last bit as numerate as you or anyone else here.
Understand the focus on US domestic car companies, but you left out Stellantis’ trophy performance.
THEIR EV loss? $26B.
Larry, Larry, Larry. Im sorry, but my favorite team kicking the tail of the Patriots was something to much be desired. Agree, didn’t see over the top push for EV sales, especially the ads where supposed 4 wheel drive vehicles are miles from a charging station on the top of some remote mountain, that always made me laugh.
There was no EV advertising because there is no adequately-sized US market for them in the 1st place. This is more than evident if even at their peak less than 1 in 12 new vehicles sold was an EV and when sales again plummeted when subsidies ended. Incidentally we’ve seen this phenomenon years before this in Ontario, Georgia, Hong Kong and Denmark. Unfortunately some countries like Canada haven’t realized this since only 10% of sales have been EVs and now the country has set an impossible goal of 90% of sales being EVs by 2040. The irony here is even in the US with a climate more favorable to EVs they can’t be sold, so what makes anyone believe with Canada’s lower temperatures they’d attract any more buyers, particularly when the things tend to be overpriced from the outset and the subsidies will be gradually removed over a 5-year period?
GM produced the EV1 years ago as a leased car experiment – some of the people did not want to return the cars after the lease – GM concluded that there was about 10 -12 % of the population that wanted electric. However. that was lead acid batteries and old tech motors. SSB and new tech motors may be of interest to more of the population. The latest ICE tech is a new spark ignition – it sounds good but you spell it more complex and expensive -it is not just direct injection but will have another injector per cylinder involved. It is about emissions and fuel economy – EVs don’t have the emissions problem. If the same vehicle could be produced as an ICE or EV. I believe the EV could be produced about 20% cheaper.
EV’s do have emissions both local and exported emissions. Tire and brake wear locally. Then electricity is imported for charging from other locations. Mostly gas and coal then at lesser amounts nuclear and hydro. Green dream of solar and wind is barely worth mentioning.
That’s going to change in a major way in the next 10 or 15 years, as new technology radically increases battery energy density and therefore vehicle range, while solving the other EV issues including safety, longevity, operating temperature range, and charging time.
This is going to look amazingly like the replacement of steam locomotives with diesel-electric, which took about 30 years. No one will have to be forced or lured into it. ICEV’s day in the sun is coming to a close. It won’t be instantaneous, but it’s going to be quick.
If the technology improves steadily, we’ll probably see your predictions fulfilled; but unless numerous negative factors are overcome including more recharging facilities, lower new EV prices, greater cruising ranges, better cold-weather capabilities, higher resale values, etc. these products might not become widespread until mid-century or beyond.
It’s always difficult to predict timing. I think solid state will be here and cost competitive in 10 years, but who knows, maybe 15. We shall see exactly when, but it’s really very much on the way. This isn’t fusion; the research is pretty much done, and they’re now mostly in the development phase.
More good news.
What? There was loads of EV adds. Didn’t you hear them in Bad Bunny’s songs. Just after the bit about uniting America (as in all of America).
I didn’t see Dumb Bunny. I turned the channel to Newsmax and watched the pro-American alternative half-time show with Kid Rock featured. I think about 20 million other viewers did the same.
Dumb Bunny’s viewership was less than last year’s Super Bowl halftime show.
Roger Goodel, NFL Commisioner, thought he was increasing viewership but the opposite happened.
Real Americans don’t like Dumb Bunnies and their Anti-American Delusions.
What does this have to do with EVs?
But Kid Rock sings about celebrating being a pedophile…. how could you like that when all the Epstein stuff is going on. I just don’t get it.
and Bad Bunny was the fourth most watched half time in US history. Not bad for a Spanish speaking show. I watched it… not my music thing, but it was a spectacular show for sure.
No clue what Bad Bunny sang as it was all in Spanish. What I did notice was tons of crotch groping and pelvic thrusts. Way to go for what was suppose to be a family friendly half time show.
And Kid Rock singing “I like ’em underage, see some say that’s statutory (but I say that’s mandatory),”
All good with that are we…… Maybe look up the word hypocrite?
And oh the irony of the groper-in-chief, and pedo buddy, Trump, saying it was not good for children. I mean come on…… that is funny.
golf would be played faster in a Tesla