[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by UnknownJinX

I think some of the more expensive ones are status symbols. You know the reputations Tesla owners have. Actual cults can look at them and think they are messed up.

Of course, you can argue that expensive anything is status symbol, but I don't exactly consider Camaro to be "fancy". I would think a lot of people here have some passion for driving, in one way or another.



...Assuming you have a garage or a way to charge your EV reliably, that is. Not everyone has access to that. You gonna pay for that? 3 years of gas is still cheaper than building up a garage if you don't already have one.

There can be some issues with BEV on flexibility. A PHEV can solve this, but that still has an ICE.

I realize the advantages of EV but they just don't work for me. If I get one for commuting, the gas money I can save gets FAR outweighed by the purchase cost and the insurance cost.

Let people choose what works for them. This has been repeatedly said.

Sent from toaster or something

The part in bold is what gets constantly and consistently missed in these discussions. On one hand, BEVs are not for everybody. On the other hand, they are the much better option for many. People should purchase what works best for them. Yes, I know California and the states that follow them, plus China and parts of EU are talking “ban ICE”, but at this point, that’s all feasibility study. Until somebody codifies it in law it’s just out there as a big fat “maybe”.

We spend a lot of time (too much time) debating it’s gotta be this or it’s gotta be that. For the foreseeable future, it’s gonna be both. Now, from a car enthusiast’s standpoint there’s a different concern. Affordable ICE based performance cars could very well be approaching extinction. They will likely be replaced by BEV performance cars. Some will hate this, some will roll with it. I’m more than likely among the latter. Given competitive acceleration, solid handling characteristics, and decent range, I’m good. Would love to have V8 style exhaust sounds, but since there is no exhaust, it is what it is.

[90503]

Originally Posted by 95 imp

I read the actual executive order, and, yes, you are correct.

Whether it will pass as is, or a modified version, remains to be seen.

You got to be kidding, right? That executive order is just the start. It will likely be made even worse by the legislature.

Pretty weak argument to say it's just a proposal, or has no effect of law. Who is opposing it? GM? Some unknown representative in the Uber-left CA legislature??...A panel of circuit court judges?? lol...Answer: No one is opposing it, lest you run the risk of being doxxed or canceled by those for it. Ca and Newsome wanted to secede from the union, remember that? You think they are going to pass on an opportunity to act like heros saving the planet on the world stage?...lol

You ain't seen nothing yet. They are just getting started and no-one dare oppose their agenda.

[Petrol Head]

Originally Posted by 90503

You got to be kidding, right? That executive order is just the start. It will likely be made even worse by the legislature.

Pretty weak argument to say it's just a proposal, or has no effect of law. Who is opposing it? GM? Some unknown representative in the Uber-left CA legislature??...A panel of circuit court judges?? lol...Answer: No one is opposing it, lest you run the risk of being doxxed or canceled by those for it. Ca and Newsome wanted to secede from the union, remember that? You think they are going to pass on an opportunity to act like heros saving the planet on the world stage?...lol

You ain't seen nothing yet. They are just getting started and no-one dare oppose their agenda.

There has been serious discussion about dividing California up into 2 states over the last 20 years by a lot of Californians up north. North and west of Frisco, they're pretty sick of of the libs running the state. But they're outnumbered and have no clout. Of course, Sacramento will have none of that because that would take away almost half of their 55 electoral votes and basically neuter their stronghold on America at the federal level.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by Petrol Head

There has been serious discussion about dividing California up into 2 states over the last 20 years by a lot of Californians up north. North and west of Frisco, they're pretty sick of of the libs running the state. But they're outnumbered and have no clout. Of course, Sacramento will have none of that because that would take away almost half of their 55 electoral votes and basically neuter their stronghold on America at the federal level.

I remember Washington wanting to do that for years also but East/West - imagine trying to move anything past Seattle!?!?!?!

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by 90503

You got to be kidding, right? That executive order is just the start. It will likely be made even worse by the legislature.

Pretty weak argument to say it's just a proposal, or has no effect of law. Who is opposing it? GM? Some unknown representative in the Uber-left CA legislature??...A panel of circuit court judges?? lol...Answer: No one is opposing it, lest you run the risk of being doxxed or canceled by those for it. Ca and Newsome wanted to secede from the union, remember that? You think they are going to pass on an opportunity to act like heros saving the planet on the world stage?...lol

You ain't seen nothing yet. They are just getting started and no-one dare oppose their agenda.

It’s not a question of opposing it, it’s a question of making it a logical bill. If the fact-finding comes back with something like “BEV and ICE vehicles can both be sold, but place higher taxes on ICE vehicles help balance out the volume split at a level that still provides for Carbon Neutral”. Or it could come back with a logical step-down plan that gradually reduces the sales volume of ICE and increases the volume of BEV. There are innumerable other angles that can be investigated between now and when the revised bill comes forward for a vote.

[RagingHawk]

Originally Posted by NeverDie

I did. I know, for someone like you it might seem WAAAAY out on the limb to bring up the #1 use case for all vehicle purchases but to those of us capable of logical thought it is perfectly natural.

You need to re-read what you said:

While I do agree they are all ugly, they are far from inferior. Consider that not everyone has the same use case as yours, how would a Camaro SS be better at commuting around Washington DC? It wouldn't.

You were implying that I commute in a Camaro and am discrediting EV's on basis of ICE sports cars being available. Which is not the case. I am pitting those econo-EV's against their comparable ICE econo-counterparts.

Haven't you been? I think you can also probably commute on a bicycle, by foot, on a horse... but often times with advances in technology we get better tools for the job. THAT is my point, I honestly thought it was very simple but I don't always factor in the thoughts of the illogical.

You were implying that EV's are superior commuter cars, or that a plus side of an EV is that you can commute in it. They are neither superior commute cars to their ICE econo-counterparts and being able to undergo the basic function of a vehicle is not a plus-side, it's a standard function.

Were you? Because it very well appears that you were talking about the EVs and erroneously representing thier prices. Pretty sure that's all quoted previously in this thread if you need a reference.

I listed their MSRP prices and you went on about federal tax credits, some of which are no longer applicable to some of these vehicles. And they are expiring by the end of 2021.

That isn't correct for all use cases.

Yes it is, lol. EV's are more of a inconvenience compared to their ICE counterparts until the charging infrastructure is there, the range is improved, and the range isn't impacted by cold or hot weather.

They require significantly less maintenance, which for someone who lives in a large metro area can be a massive benefit in terms of convenience. Speaking of convenience, the ability to "fill up" at home in your garage or at work sure seems better than plugging in the old dinosaur line but maybe you're going there for cigarettes and lotto already so idk. There are plenty more, you don't have to agree with them for the rest of us to.

They do not require significantly less maintenance. ICE car maintenance is very simple for first 3-5 years. EV's after three years will be dealing with permanent range loss.

I have 3 gas stations right next to me and takes two minutes to fill up. How is that a daunting task?

OH, and the VW ID.4 comes with 3 free years of charging at Electrify America stations. I don't know any ICE cars with a free Shell card for 3 years, do you?

Lol, do you have any Electrify America stations near you? I just went on their website to locate stations near me and found only 3 stations in the whole city of Detroit. I can screenshot it for you if you'd like me to.

Just because you say things doesn't make them true. See above. I can very easily argue that not filling up from a dirty gas station every few days and not needing regular oil changes is absolutely more convenient. It's not even really an argument at all!

Man , you have a phobia from gas stations or something, it's not hard nor 'dirty' to fill up gas. It is very easy and cheap to do oil changes. Especially if you do your own. Many cars these days require them every 8,000 miles, anyways.

I'd rather fill up gas and do oil changes and have all the range I need in all climates rather than have an electric car that takes hours to charge every week if I can charge at home, and will cut range significantly in the winter. And if you use fast chargers(30 minutes charge still), you will degrade your battery quickly.

[NeverDie]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

You need to re-read what you said:



You were implying that I commute in a Camaro and am discrediting EV's on basis of ICE sports cars being available. Which is not the case. I am pitting those econo-EV's against their comparable ICE econo-counterparts.

Except I didn't imply a thing. I asked a question, one which you still haven't provided an answer to: How is a Camaro SS better than any of the EVs you mentioned for people commuting in large metro areas such as Washington DC? I mean you even quoted it twice, so tell me? I don't believe it is, but I can be convinced. Go for it.

You were implying that EV's are superior commuter cars, or that a plus side of an EV is that you can commute in it. They are neither superior commute cars to their ICE econo-counterparts and being able to undergo the basic function of a vehicle is not a plus-side, it's a standard function.

False. I made a direct comparison to the vehicles you listed and one of the ones I personally own. I believe all of the vehicles on your list, bar the Lotus, are far superior for commuting. I know that there is this whole area that many of you don't want to talk about, because like reasons or whatever, but a LOT of us do happen to care about particulate emissions in densely populated areas. Imagine that! But I also believe that not having to stop for gas, having the convenience of being able to charge up at home, and very rare maintenance are also massive benefits when considering a commute. A commuter vehicle is a tool, appliance if you will... tell me how more moving parts and stopping for gas improves the experience?

I listed their MSRP prices and you went on about federal tax credits, some of which are no longer applicable to some of these vehicles. And they are expiring by the end of 2021.

I'm not really willing to explain this again, so read it slowly and have an adult help if you still don't get it: These are the prices for purchase or order today that the consumer pays for these vehicles. If you intended to specify MSRP, on the road pricing, or anything else in your initial comment you sorely missed that window.

Yes it is, lol. EV's are more of a inconvenience compared to their ICE counterparts until the charging infrastructure is there, the range is improved, and the range isn't impacted by cold or hot weather.

These are only issues for people without actual experience with EVs, who have never owned one, and who make assumptions based on the biased information they read which agrees with thier opinions. It is so much less of an issue for me to pull in the garage, attach a plug, and then go on about my life than any other option.

They do not require significantly less maintenance. ICE car maintenance is very simple for first 3-5 years. EV's after three years will be dealing with permanent range loss.

Mostly false. While the maintenance might be "mostly simple", and you're about to tell me to change my own oil (which incidentally I do) in the same post as saying EVs are inconvenient because not everyone has a garage or driveway aren't you?

I have 3 gas stations right next to me and takes two minutes to fill up. How is that a daunting task?

Why should I tell you why it is something I haven't ever implied or stated? I don't need to prove to you what you're saying for me, that's illogical.

Lol, do you have any Electrify America stations near you? I just went on their website to locate stations near me and found only 3 stations in the whole city of Detroit. I can screenshot it for you if you'd like me to.

I have several. I also have ChargePoint and other options as well, some as close as 1/4 of a mile. Turns out we aren't all the same, how about that! I guess maybe what works for you doesn't work for me, and now we're really getting somewhere! The use case!

Man , you have a phobia from gas stations or something, it's not hard nor 'dirty' to fill up gas. It is very easy and cheap to do oil changes. Especially if you do your own. Many cars these days require them every 8,000 miles, anyways.

I'm going to change that oil in the non-garage, non-driveway where I can't charge my EV, huh? Lmao.

Also nice labeling with the phobia thing, seems you've got a long way to go learning lessons on ASSumptions.

I'd rather fill up gas and do oil changes and have all the range I need in all climates rather than have an electric car that takes hours to charge every week if I can charge at home, and will cut range significantly in the winter. And if you use fast chargers(30 minutes charge still), you will degrade your battery quickly.

You do you, at no point are you being forced to even own a vehicle so really it's all choice isn't it?

Also, what proof do you have that all EVs will degrade batteries if they charge quickly? I believe we are in the age where that is all very well metered by the onboard electronics, but maybe you have some data backed by research that I haven't seen? Are Teslas having half-life issues after using Superchargers?

[trm2]

Originally Posted by 90503

A few well timed volcanic eruptions, an unavoidable asteroid strike, or maybe even a limited nuclear exchange here or there, and all the worries over global warming will quickly come to an end. Electric vehicles, solar and wind energy will not stop any global warming, either. Once another mini-ice age starts, or a regular ice age, we will be clamoring for the good old days of global warming.

We are actually still in an ice age.

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

Yes it is, lol. EV's are more of a inconvenience compared to their ICE counterparts until the charging infrastructure is there, the range is improved, and the range isn't impacted by cold or hot weather.



They do not require significantly less maintenance. ICE car maintenance is very simple for first 3-5 years. EV's after three years will be dealing with permanent range loss.

EVs are much more convenient than an ICE. Get home, plug in and have a “full tank” in the morning. My Model S is a beautiful car (I know that is subjective), but is also mediocre in a lot of ways and Tesla sucks as a company, so there is that. Doing a road trip is really quite easy and convenient, which I was worried about at first. Drive a couple of hours, stop to grab a bite to eat and hit the restroom, repeat.

A touch over three years and zero degradation - not that it can’t happen in the future. My wive’s Volt is almost 5 years and no battery degradation.

But when I want to drive for driving’s sake, I use my Vette.

[UnknownJinX]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

The part in bold is what gets constantly and consistently missed in these discussions. On one hand, BEVs are not for everybody. On the other hand, they are the much better option for many. People should purchase what works best for them. Yes, I know California and the states that follow them, plus China and parts of EU are talking “ban ICE”, but at this point, that’s all feasibility study. Until somebody codifies it in law it’s just out there as a big fat “maybe”.

We spend a lot of time (too much time) debating it’s gotta be this or it’s gotta be that. For the foreseeable future, it’s gonna be both. Now, from a car enthusiast’s standpoint there’s a different concern. Affordable ICE based performance cars could very well be approaching extinction. They will likely be replaced by BEV performance cars. Some will hate this, some will roll with it. I’m more than likely among the latter. Given competitive acceleration, solid handling characteristics, and decent range, I’m good. Would love to have V8 style exhaust sounds, but since there is no exhaust, it is what it is.

I don't think people will ever be able to convince each other.

It's whatever. Just drive what works for you.

Personally I will hold onto an ICE performance car until it's no longer feasible. Then I'd probably set up some VR thing to enjoy it. Electric motor whine is just sad and annoying to me.

Originally Posted by NeverDie

These are only issues for people without actual experience with EVs, who have never owned one, and who make assumptions based on the biased information they read which agrees with thier opinions. It is so much less of an issue for me to pull in the garage, attach a plug, and then go on about my life than any other option.


...
You do you, at no point are you being forced to even own a vehicle so really it's all choice isn't it?

Also, what proof do you have that all EVs will degrade batteries if they charge quickly? I believe we are in the age where that is all very well metered by the onboard electronics, but maybe you have some data backed by research that I haven't seen? Are Teslas having half-life issues after using Superchargers?

I mean, there are people who had a few good points. What if you need to use your car suddenly and it's still not quite charged? Flexibility remains a weak point. That's where PHEV can help. This is why emergency vehicles will remain to be ICE for quite a while.

Extreme temperatures also remain a concern. You ever been to northern Alberta? A BEV will NOT survive a winter there.

On the plus side, you could have your car preheated or precooled in the garage without wasting gas and poisoning yourself.

For EV batteries, I think it depends on your use case. People draw parallel between smartphone battery degradation, but usually people charge their smartphones to 100% full and discharge it to single digits. This hurts the battery a lot. This is why the earlier Nissan Leaf short range version suffered much more from degradation over the long range version. For a Tesla with a massive battery, I don't think it's any concern for just short daily driving when you can keep the car charged at 40% to 80%(you can set up a charging threshold on Tesla's). Batteries don't degrade much when you keep it from being fully charged or discharged.

Originally Posted by trm2

EVs are much more convenient than an ICE. Get home, plug in and have a “full tank” in the morning. My Model S is a beautiful car (I know that is subjective), but is also mediocre in a lot of ways and Tesla sucks as a company, so there is that. Doing a road trip is really quite easy and convenient, which I was worried about at first. Drive a couple of hours, stop to grab a bite to eat and hit the restroom, repeat.

A touch over three years and zero degradation - not that it can’t happen in the future. My wive’s Volt is almost 5 years and no battery degradation.

But when I want to drive for driving’s sake, I use my Vette.

Model S looks handsome, and Model X looks good for an SUV. Model 3 and Y look like knockoff Porsche, and that's far from a compliment.

That's the thing with EVs. Just design a normal f**king car instead of the whole "fUtUrIsTiC" crap that looks horrible. "Oh but EVs don't need grilles", yeah well, technically men don't need nipples, but you are still gonna freak out a bit when you see a guy without nipples.

(I wish I can think of a less weird analogy, but I am struggling.)

Sent from toaster or something

[RagingHawk]

Originally Posted by NeverDie

Except I didn't imply a thing. I asked a question, one which you still haven't provided an answer to: How is a Camaro SS better than any of the EVs you mentioned for people commuting in large metro areas such as Washington DC? I mean you even quoted it twice, so tell me? I don't believe it is, but I can be convinced. Go for it.

That’s not how it works, your post is there for everyone to read. And even in this post you are arguing that EV’s are far superior for commuting compared to their ICE counterparts. And this simply is not true. No one said anything about the Camaro for commuting.

False. I made a direct comparison to the vehicles you listed and one of the ones I personally own. I believe all of the vehicles on your list, bar the Lotus, are far superior for commuting. I know that there is this whole area that many of you don't want to talk about, because like reasons or whatever, but a LOT of us do happen to care about particulate emissions in densely populated areas. Imagine that! But I also believe that not having to stop for gas, having the convenience of being able to charge up at home, and very rare maintenance are also massive benefits when considering a commute. A commuter vehicle is a tool, appliance if you will... tell me how more moving parts and stopping for gas improves the experience?

You see, here you are making the argument again, yet denying having made that argument right above. I am for better air quality, and it can be achieved without a pure EV accelerated push. An electrified approach is a better one, not a complete and accelerated phasing out of ICE technology.

Like I said before, there is nothing inconvenient about filling up a car once a week by making a two-minute stop at a gas station. So, you need a stronger argument about how EV’s are far superior to commuting than comparable ICE variants. Maybe you could argue that instant torque makes for a smoother ride. Otherwise, I do not see what you have. Plugging in at home is not any more convenient than filling up once a week at a gas station 1 minute from home.

I'm not really willing to explain this again, so read it slowly and have an adult help if you still don't get it: These are the prices for purchase or order today that the consumer pays for these vehicles. If you intended to specify MSRP, on the road pricing, or anything else in your initial comment you sorely missed that window.

Again, this is not true, most of those cars are pushing 40K even with those tax credits. Tax credits are no longer offered on any Tesla’s as well, which I assume is what you drive. Federal tax credits expire at the end of the year, and with more EV adoption, because of sales unit’s cap, they become like regular incentives on vehicles until they become zero once they hit the cap.

If EV’s make up 5-10% of new car sales the tax credits will be used up quickly, and everyone will have to pay MSRP. Also, assuming you own a Tesla, you can purchase directly through a manufacturer, and they will not negotiate off that price.

With dealerships and ICE vehicles, you can get plenty of rebates and incentives. A lot of ICE vehicles are heavily marked off. Some between $1500-7,000 in incentives, rebates, and sales. So we can argue that the true price of ICE is less than MSRP as well.

These are only issues for people without actual experience with EVs, who have never owned one, and who make assumptions based on the biased information they read which agrees with thier opinions. It is so much less of an issue for me to pull in the garage, attach a plug, and then go on about my life than any other option.

No, they are not, you assume everyone can afford a Tesla like you. You assume every EV has a range of 300-400 miles. You assume everyone works during the day. You assume everyone has a garage. You assume cold weather will not affect range. You assume people only drive 10 miles a day. You assume that the charging infrastructure is sufficient. All these factors matter and will cause people inconveniences.

Mostly false. While the maintenance might be "mostly simple", and you're about to tell me to change my own oil (which incidentally I do) in the same post as saying EVs are inconvenient because not everyone has a garage or driveway aren't you?

It is not false; most vehicles today are reliable and only require basic maintenance for first 3-5 years of ownership. I did not say you cannot charge an EV in a garage. I said it is not inconvenient to fill up once a week at a gas station.

Why should I tell you why it is something I haven't ever implied or stated? I don't need to prove to you what you're saying for me, that's illogical.

You keep saying that it is an inconvenience to have to fill up at a ‘dirty’ gas station, lol. It is not.

I have several. I also have ChargePoint and other options as well, some as close as 1/4 of a mile. Turns out we aren't all the same, how about that! I guess maybe what works for you doesn't work for me, and now we're really getting somewhere! The use case!

I will attach a file of charging stations in Arizona, so I reckon you live in Phoenix? Even if you have one close to you, I would not call that ‘several’. I can also say I have several charging stations near me but there are only 3 in my city and all are 1-2 hours away from me. For most people that free 3 years of charging will mean little to nothing.

I'm going to change that oil in the non-garage, non-driveway where I can't charge my EV, huh? Lmao.

Again, I did not say you can’t charge an EV in a garage. Look at a couple paragraphs above for reference.

Also nice labeling with the phobia thing, seems you've got a long way to go learning lessons on ASSumptions.

Diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirty gas stations.

You do you, at no point are you being forced to even own a vehicle so really it's all choice isn't it?

Yes, we are being forced, fuel subsidies will be removed, registering ICE vehicles will no longer be allowed past 2030. Fuel will be heavily taxed like in Europe. ICE vehicles will be outright banned by 2040, even if not part of new car sales. ICE development is regulated to an end. Automakers have to comply with government regulations and these regulations will get worse for the consumer from now up until 2030 where they will introduce much more aggressive regulations to make it too costly if not outright illegal for the average joe to own and operate an ICE vehicle. Only the really rich can get away with it.

Also, what proof do you have that all EVs will degrade batteries if they charge quickly? I believe we are in the age where that is all very well metered by the onboard electronics, but maybe you have some data backed by research that I haven't seen? Are Teslas having half-life issues after using Superchargers?

"On average, an EV saw its battery degrade 2.3% each year, which is so minor it doesn't reflect an outright reduction in usable range." -CNET

That is 10% plus degradation in 5 years with people charging from home mostly and not using fast chargers as frequently. With more widespread EV adoption, especially pickup trucks and performance EVs, workers on the site will be fast charging much more, and you can imagine what towing will do to range. Performance EV’s will lose range quickly and many more people will be fast charging. Taxi’s and those driving for Uber/Lyft will have to charge much more often as well. You will have a 10-20% degradation by 5 years which is not minor, it is a lot. That’s going down from 250 mile range to 200 mile range. And if you have to drive in cold weather, cut that range by half. Also real-world range is always less than advertised range.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/e...y-degradation/
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/fi...udy_fs_50k.pdf

According to this study, the Tesla had 10% battery degradation after 160,000 miles. He drove it for 400,000 miles which is impressive, but also claims the car had $29,000 in repairs in services. I don’t know if that includes replacing some of the battery’s or not:

https://electrek.co/2020/06/06/tesla...n-replacement/

Car and Driver had this Tesla lose 7% of it’s range over 24,000 miles:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a3...loss-warranty/

[RagingHawk]

Originally Posted by trm2

EVs are much more convenient than an ICE. Get home, plug in and have a “full tank” in the morning. My Model S is a beautiful car (I know that is subjective), but is also mediocre in a lot of ways and Tesla sucks as a company, so there is that. Doing a road trip is really quite easy and convenient, which I was worried about at first. Drive a couple of hours, stop to grab a bite to eat and hit the restroom, repeat.

A touch over three years and zero degradation - not that it can’t happen in the future. My wive’s Volt is almost 5 years and no battery degradation.

But when I want to drive for driving’s sake, I use my Vette.

How many miles are you driving? If you are driving fewer miles it's possible you don't have much more than 1-2% degradation.

As I said to the other guy, I believe in global warming and climate change. I am for pure EV down the road. I just believe the accelerated pure EV push is unrealistic and harmful to the environment and consumers. We should have an electrification push, hybridizing more vehicles and offering pure EV trims as well. For the next 15-20 years. Before we fully transition to pure EV. However, because of regulations, automakers are phasing out ICE completely by 2025. It will happen earlier than people think it is a wrong approach which will cost them financially and cost us ordinary people.

Toyota CEO gives good input on this:

The automobile world is going electric quickly—with technological advances that make electric vehicles cheaper by the day and regulators around the world pushing for a blanket ban of gasoline vehicles. But the boss of the world’s largest automaker isn’t buying the hype. “The current business model of the car industry is going to collapse,” Toyota president Akio Toyoda warned, if the industry shifts to EV too hastily.

At a news conference on Thursday, Toyoda, the grandson of the automaker’s founder, Kiichiro Toyoda, said Japan would run out of electricity in the summer if all cars were running on electric power. The infrastructure needed to support a 100 percent EV fleet would cost Japan between 14 trillion and 37 trillion yen ($135 billion to $358 billion), he estimated. And most of the country’s electricity is generated by burning coal and natural gas, anyway, so it’s not necessarily helping the environment.


“The more EVs we build, the worse carbon dioxide gets…When politicians are out there saying, ‘Let’s get rid of all cars using gasoline,’ do they understand this?” Toyoda said at the event as chairman of the Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association.

His comments came just weeks after the Japanese government teased a plan to ban the sale of new gas cars starting in 2035, mirroring similar moves by the British government and the state of California recently.

Toyota is a leader in hybrid gas-electric cars, which will still be allowed under the government’s plan. But the company doesn’t have a fully electric vehicle for the mass market just yet. During Toyota’s third-quarter earnings call last month, Toyoda generously praised Tesla’s leadership in the battery EV sector, saying there’ a lot his company can learn from Elon Musk. Yet, he’s confident that Toyota will win out in the long term with its robust and diverse product mix.

.....
https://observer.com/2020/12/toyota-...an-transition/

[Martinjlm]

Just a few things to consider...

• Toyota has a reason to bash on EVs. They are all in on Fuel Cells. Makes sense for Japan (big island...only needs a few hydrogen reforming / refueling stations)
• Until Fuel Cells gain a foothold in the market, Toyota would love for Hybrids to be the solution, seeing as how they are far and away the biggest and lowest cost producers of hybrids.
• Toyota typically hates anything with a plug.

I was at the press days for Beijing Auto Show one year. I think it was 2016, because I remember the first thing that came across my iPhone when I turned it on after the plane landed was that Prince had died. Anyway, at the Auto Show, every manufacturer except one had PHEVs and CUV BEVs in their stands. That one was Toyota. All the vehicles in their display were white Hybrid vehicles. In China. There were veritable tumbleweeds blowing through their display area. Meanwhile all the other booths had press crawling all over each other to see the PHEVs and BEVs. So after the press days are over and I’m on my way home, I’m on the plane, ready for taxi to the runway, doing my last info searches before the “airplane mode” announcement and the story that’s popping on all my sources is “Toyota announces they will develop PHEVs and BEVs for markets where they are required”. Apparently they paid attention to the lack of attention at their Auto Show display. They are doing BEVs, but as if they have a gun to their heads. And I guess in China, they kinda do.

[FarmerFran]

Originally Posted by RagingHawk

Toyota CEO gives good input on this:


.....
https://observer.com/2020/12/toyota-...an-transition/

I do not have a dog in the fight but I find it funny, he is claiming it will never work but they have no EV to base it off.

I read it like this...

Uhhhh, we do not have an EV so it will never work.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by FarmerFran

I do not have a dog in the fight but I find it funny, he is claiming it will never work but they have no EV to base it off.

I read it like this...

Uhhhh, we do not have an EV so it will never work.

@FarmerFran, see my post above yours.