EYE-OPENING FACTS ABOUT
ELECTRIC VEHICLES YOU NEED TO KNOW
Electric vehicles (EVs) are less expensive to operate and own
than the now outmoded combustion engine cars. Electricity is cheaper
per mile than gasoline, and electric motors are way more efficient
at moving you down the road than combustion engines (a motor wastes
very little fuel energy as heat, an engine wastes a lot).
EVs are capable of being much safer than combustion cars... there's
no engine under the hood that can be pushed into the passenger
compartment in a crash, plus there's all the safety and anti-collision
technology that takes advantage of an EV's design.
EVs have far fewer moving parts than gasoline-powered cars, so,
less to break and much less maintenance; change only tires and
wiper blades, no oil changes, belts, hoses, fuel and oil filters,
spark plugs, fuel injectors, timing chain, oxygen sensors, muffler,
radiator and transmission fluids, etc. Even brake pads and rotors
last a lot longer because electricity generated by the motor helps
to slow down the car when you want to slow down.
EVs take 12 seconds to charge: 6 seconds to plug it in when you
get home, and 6 seconds to unplug it the following morning...
less time than a gas station visit. And if you can't charge at
home, there are more and more public charging stations popping
up every day.
Just as cell phones now have "Turbo Charge", the modern
lithium-ion batteries in EVs can be charged very fast at charging
stations equipped with fast chargers, and there are plenty of
them. And there are EVs designed from the ground up allowing for
large battery packs, so no "range anxiety" on long trips
(especially if your EV automaker provides a worldwide
is now commercially viable, thanks in large part to the kick in
the automotive industry's pants by Elon Musk and Tesla Motors.
Affordable mass market EVs require economies of scale, and this
requires adoption. So when there's a choice between a gas powered
car and an EV, and the prices are close, we as tenants of this
planet have an obligation to give serious consideration to the
environmentally friendlier, non-harmful option. And we get a vehicle
that can last a lot longer than a gasoline fueled car.
Oil is not
an unlimited resource, so we must transition to sustainable transportation
eventually. And because of the changes happening to our climate
and the ones that will happen in the near future, it's not a case
of "the sooner the better," it's more like "we
need to do this now to avoid irreversible catastrophic consequences
down the road." I'm
not trying to use scare tactics, I'm just dealing with reality.
And speaking of reality...
But aren't the emissions still mostly just moved from the road
to the coal-fired power plant when switching from a gasoline car
to an EV?
Let's say you charge your EV at home, and your home gets its power,
not from a nuclear or hydroelectric power plant, but from a coal-fired
plant. You aren't simply moving the creation of greenhouse gases
from the car to the power plant in a 1:1 manner. Here's why...
of economies of scale, one gigantic power plant serving 1000 electric
vehicles can be more efficient than 1000 separate power plants
(one in each gasoline powered car). Think about what it would
look like if you collected all the tailpipe emissions in a huge
bag from a gas fueled car driven 100 miles. Now imagine the additional
smoke stack emissions from a power plant that's charging an EV's
battery to replace the energy it just used for a similar 100 mile
drive. The difference is like night and day, for reasons #1 and
2. An average
gas powered car can get 24 MPG, but an EV can get three to four
times that in MPGe. So, much less fuel energy required for those
1000 electric cars than for 1000 gas powered cars driven the same
distances, resulting in much less emissions (greenhouse gases
and air pollutants). If you use 10 gallons of gas to go somewhere,
8 of those gallons went to waste heat. For an EV, to use the gallons
analogy, 1 out of the 10 gallons went to waste heat. Big difference.
3. The emissions
from a power plant can be "scrubbed" to reduce air pollutants
and CO2, but this is not feasible for fossil fuel cars.
refining plants require lots of electricity to turn crude oil
into gasoline. Since this energy production is unnecessary with
an EV infrastructure, this needs to figure into a "well-to-wheels"
analysis when considering emissions.
5. And remember,
coal-fired plants can have fields of solar panels added to them
to reduce the amount of coal they burn (already being done). And
in the future they can be replaced by renewable energy power plants.
So your electric car runs cleaner as infrastructure improvements
And if solar
panels and an energy storage system are added to a home or business
(already being done), an EV can be recharged from the sun, or
from other zero emission sources, resulting in a "Zero Zero
Emissions Vehicle". And how about that, Tesla has pioneered
"The data show that cars with internal
combustion engines were not clean in the past, are not clean
today, and will not be clean in the foreseeable future.
The auto industry will always find new ways to circumvent
tests and optimize results. The only way to ensure cars
are truly clean is to accelerate the shift to zero-emission
technology and electromobility."
Florent Grelier, Clean Vehicle Engineer,
Transport & Environment
Do you see
the trend. This is the beginning of the "S curve". As
costs of making EVs come down (which results in the retail price
coming down), and governments institute EV financial incentives,
and as public's awareness of the lower Total Cost of Ownership
of EVs increases, the curve will become more vertical (faster
adoption rate). And if you look carefully, you'll see two 10x
increases, both about 5 years apart. One more 10x increase, maybe
over another 5 years, and that would bring it to 100% adoption.
And keep in mind that the biggest contributing factor to the above
chart has been Tesla (not GM, Ford, Toyota, etc).
Myths About EVs
Since some EVs charge using electricity from coal-fired
power plants, they just move the same amount of pollution
and CO2 emissions from the tailpipe to the smoke stack
False, as mentioned above in the Q&A.
EV batteries will need replacing after 3-5 years
False. If you buy a new EV today, odds are the battery pack
will last as long as you own the vehicle. Yes, as the pack
ages, it will lose some capacity, which translates into
some lost range, but only a small amount. And the "healthier"
you charge the pack, the less capacity it will lose over
time, and Tesla EVs do this for you automatically. Do the
other EV makers? No.
If everyone had EVs, we'd overload the energy grid
False. As EVs increase, the energy needed to refine crude
oil into gasoline decreases, and our energy grid's capacity
increases thanks to the addition of solar arrays. Plus,
when charged at home overnight, EVs use the underutilized
capacity of energy generation plants (called "off-peak
charging"). Tesla EVs can be set to start charging,
not when you plug them in, but when your off-peak rates
start (typically around 9pm). A report just out shows that
power plant profits vs costs for EV charging is very high
on the profits side because EVs tend to use the underutilized
capacity of the grid because they charge at night (when
rates are cheaper). So, some nice revenue for the power
utilities that wasn't there before, and without them having
to increase their generating capacity... but they are increasing
their capacity because some EVs will charge during the daytime.
(Utility companies have been planning for the increase in
EV adoption for many years.)
There's no demand for EVs
False. Yes, when people believe untrue things about EVs,
they are understandably wary of them, but when they discover
the truth about EVs, and about how EVs are less expensive
to operate and maintain, and then they drive one, they are
won over easily. Happens every day. That's why there are
five million Teslas on the roads today (Tesla doesn't do
any advertising), and why so many more will be as battery
costs come down, reducing the retail price of the car (already
happening). So, demand for well-made EVs will be increasing
(there are crappy EVs being made, like from GM and VW).
EV's are less reliable than gasoline-powered cars
False. And ridiculous on its face. EVs have no engines,
no transmissions, no exhaust systems, no high pressure cooling
systems, no belts to break, no fuel filters to clog, no
spark plugs to foul, etc, etc. Let's look at golf carts
as a perfect example: There are gasoline-powered golf carts
and electric golf carts. They look the same on the outside,
and they've both been around for a long time, and it's common
knowledge in the golf cart industry that the electric carts
are far more reliable than the gasoline-powered carts.
EVs weigh 30-50% more than gas-powered cars
False. The thought is that this additional weight would
cause more damage to bridges and roadways and who's going
to pay for that! But this is not true: FACT: Tesla Model
3 EV curb weight = 4,065 pounds. BMW 3 Series gas car curb
weight = 4,138 pounds. And according to JD Power, the average
weight of a gas-powered car in 2022 was 4,094 pounds. Remember,
two of the heaviest components of an internal combustion
engine vehicle are the engine and transmission. An EV doesn't
have these, and its electric motor can be lifted by any
reasonably in-shape adult. Yes, an EV has a heavy battery
pack, but that weight is countered by the loss of the weight
of the engine and transmission (and as battery pack chemistries
improve, their weight can improve too).
EVs catch on fire too much
False. It only appears that way. Who's responsible
for this overblown depiction of EV fires? Those who are
charged with spreading FUD about EVs (Fear Uncertainty Doubt),
and they do this on behalf of those who stand to lose a
lot of money as EV adoption grows. But yes,
some EVs catch fire, but this is due to an accident where
there is damage to the battery pack, and when this happens
there is usually a fire, but no explosion as there can be
with gasoline cars, so people easily survive slow-to-start
EV fires. And EV fires also happen because the EV manufacturer
bought batteries from the lowest bidder instead of buying
well engineered batteries, so there have been spontaneous
combustion fires that have burned down people's homes. But
only a few. And you can bet that this EV manufacturer (and
others) learned their lesson. So, let's put things in perspective...
there are way more gasoline car fires than EV fires as a
percentage of total sales (which is the correct way to look
at this issue, not how many fires are given media attention).
and Negative Comments About EVs
"When there is a power outage, EVs can't recharge."
Yes, but gasoline pumps require electricity to pump, so
you can't "fill up" during a power outage. And
if your EV is charged, it can recharge your phones, and
run some things in your home if the car has a 120 volt outlet.
And if you have a generator at home, you can refuel your
EV at home. Can't do that with a gasoline car. And gas stations
often run out of gas during natural disasters. Just say'n.
(Note: During gasoline shortages in Georgia USA and the
UK, Teslas were driving around just fine.)
"EVs are demand limited, i.e., there is no demand for
them other than the early adopters who love new gadgets."
False. EVs are production limited. As fast as they
are made, they are bought... at least the better designed
ones. When people discover that a Tesla is way better than
a Chevy Bolt, Bolt sales go down, but not because there
is no demand for EVs. Tesla has more orders than they can
fill. And as more people discover the truth about EVs, demand
will rise even further (and so will production capacity).
Due to the economies-of-scale, as the costs of making them
come down, the prices can come down, enabling increased
"EVs are only for the affluent."
False. When you factor into the sticker price of an EV the
Total Cost of Ownership (operation and maintenance), an
EV is a better deal than a gasoline car over the life of
the vehicle. And we're getting close to price parity between
gasoline cars and EVs (selling price). At that point it
will be a no brainer to buy an EV over a gasoline car (and
as of mid 2023, we've arrived). But true, when Tesla sold
its first EVs, they were $160,000. But they had to do that
to raise the capital needed to make their Phase 2 cars that
sold for $90,000, and they did that so they could ramp up
to make their Phase 3 $45,000 cars, and next up is their
Phase 4 $25,000 car coming end of 2024. This is the only
business model that works. And other EV makers are following
it. And consider that the average price for new car in the
U.S. is $48,000, and Tesla already has a model that is below
"There's no charging infrastructure for EVs" /
"EVs can't do roadtrips."
False. There are plenty of public charging stations, and
Tesla has its own charging stations. And more are being
built all time to keep up with their increasing EV sales.
And unlike a gasoline car, EVs can fill up at home and at
many work-places. In fact, about 95% of charging is done
at home. And Tesla owners have no issues doing long road
trips. Other EVs can have issues because of the poor quality
of the third-party charging companies, but Tesla is letting
other EVs charge at their chargers.
"EVs are just glorified golf carts."
Seriously?! Have you driven in one?!! Anyone who has would
never say this. In fact, EVs have better technology and
are more reliable than gasoline cars... and safer too.
"Since EVs are silent, there will be more pedestrians
hit by EVs."
First, this possibility is not a reason to not have EVs
on the roads. I was taught as a child to look both ways
before crossing a street. Do we as a society try to make
society as safe as possible? Sure! And replacing all gas
powered cars with EVs will make us safer (no street level
pollution which causes lots of premature deaths, and less
negative climate change impacts), even though there will
be more pedestrian deaths due to people not looking both
ways before crossing a street. And surely governements can
air Public Service Announcements alerting the public to
the existance of these silent cars, or they can enact regulations
that all EVs make some kind of noise at low speeds (already
done). And consider that most gasoline cars
today are very quiet at low speeds. So this
ridiculous fossil fuel industry talking-point is not appreciated
by rational-thinking people.
"EV manufacturing is less green than the manufacturing
of Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicles."
False. When you take a cradle-to-grave look at the two,
you will find that EVs, on balance, are greener. And as
their source of energy gets greener (their recharging electricity),
the EV gets even greener (because of power utilities adding
renewable energy sources to their mix). And although some
EV makers have a manufacturing process that is less green
than ICE vehicle makers, some EV makers have a greener manufacturing
process, like Tesla. Note that there is an "environmental
payback" with EVs. Now, after 1,000 miles driven, the
car is less damaging to the environment than gasoline cars
for the remainder of their miles driven (which can be about
500,000 miles if it's a Tesla). And as manufacturing processes
improve (as far as their impact on the environment), soon
that 1,000 miles will come down.
"All EV batteries require mining for the rare earth
elements they use, and this mining exploits young children
and harms the environment."
False. Cobalt is the material in question, and Tesla's newest
battery technology doesn't even use cobalt. And if theirs
doesn't, no other EV maker need use it in all their batteries.
And unlike gasoline, EV batteries can be recycled back into
new batteries. There are already companies doing this. Elon
Musk CEO of Tesla estimates that in the future, there will
be very little mining of anything needed because of the
robust recycling industry. And circulating the "young
children" meme was courtesy of the fossil fuel industry.
Seems they have a lot to lose as more EVs are sold versus
fossil fuel cars, so they'll say anything to slow that growth.
I'm not saying that such deplorable and exploitative mining
practices don't exist; they do, and it's beyond shameful.
But those who bring this up don't also mention that there
is also responsibly mined cobalt, and Tesla makes sure to
source any cobalt they do use from such places. The company
pays more for such cobalt, but obviously it's the right
thing to do, and that's what Tesla does. Do car companies
that are laser-focused on profit do this? I have to wonder.
At the annual shareholder meeting, Musk pledged to put cameras
at the mines that supply Tesla with any cobalt, with the
feed viewable online. And as far as mining being bad for
the environment; compared to how bad fossil fueled vehicles
are for the environment, and how bad crude oil refining
(into gasoline) is for the environment, it's no contest.
It's a night and day difference. The fact is, transitioning
to clean energy will mean we no longer have to mine and
extract vast quantities of fossil fuels each year, and a
clean energy transition will help us and future humans avoid
the worst effects of climate change; it will save millions
of lives currently lost to air pollution each year; and
it will reduce the total amount of environmentally and socially
harmful mining each year. So the above statement is simply
another attempt to slow the demand for EVs so as to slow
the profit loss of some some very powerful industries. And
quite frankly, if someone is not going to buy an EV because
there might be irresponsibly mined cobalt in the battery,
then they would have to give up their cellphone and laptop
or tablet. How about making the "source of cobalt"
an EV buying decision, and in that case, Tesla wins.
COMMENT ABOUT THE EV LIES
Those automotive industry analysts who go on mainstream
financial business shows and knowingly say lies about EVs
and Tesla and give disinformation about them should be charged
with crimes against the people, and put in prison for at
least five years. Why? Tesla is trying to help the world's
population by dramatically lowering CO2 emissions and air
pollutants, and these so-called analysts are trying to harm
Tesla on behalf of short-sellers, Big Auto, the American
Automobile Dealers Association, and Big Oil. And if they're
successful, this harms the environment, and therefore the
people. I'd say that they should be ashamed of themselves,
but they don't have the capacity to be ashamed of themselves,
nor the capacity to care about anyone other than themselves...
it's all about money and personal gain... as it is with
those above-named entities. You can strike a blow for the
people and give a middle finger to those above-named folks
by getting an EV.
cars that drive themselves
will end up killing some people!
Musk, the CEO of Tesla (an EV manufacturer) was asked about
any fatalities that would be caused by a Tesla self-driving
car. He said, "Even if all the Teslas in autonomous
driving mode cut auto accident fatalities by 90%, the 10%
that were the result of the computer making a mistake, you're
still going to be sued. Those 90% that are alive because
of the computer doing the driving don't even know they're
alive because of it. So even though we'll be sued, it's
more important to save those lives ... the reality of doing
the right thing matters more than the perception of doing
the right thing."
Musk created autonomous driving software to save lives,
not to make profit, as the other developers of autonomous
driving systems are doing. Motivations matter. And this
I think is the main reason to give money to Tesla versus
other EV makers when considering what EV to buy. But this
reason never gets discussed when comparing EVs from different
manufacturers; range, battery life, features, and options
get talked about, but not the motivations of the company
that you're going to give a large amount of money to.
new car is the second largest purchase most people will
ever make. Me? I'd care who I give that kind of money to.
Tesla's mission statement: "Accelerate the adoption
of sustainable energy technology." All the legacy
automakers' mission statements: Maximize profits.
media lies about EVs
is from a recent article in Car & Driver. And at this
time, most EVs have a minimum of 240 miles of range, some
reaching 400. The Tesla with the lowest range goes 272 miles.
do they lie? Money. Their major advertisers are the legacy
auto manufacturers, so Car &
Driver (and other such publications) wants to keep
them happy, and the legacy auto makers hate EVs and hate
Tesla (for forcing them to start making EVs). Legacy automakers
want to sell what they've been selling... fossil fuel cars.
So they want to keep EV sales as low as possible, so they
do their best to talk down EVs, and the media is happy to
don't believe what you read in mainstream media outlets
about EVs, because they can't be trusted to do truthful
of a legacy automaker (VW) skimping on the quality of a
part to increase the profit margin of an EV while at the
same time screwing the customer by pretending to fix the
problem, creating an unsafe situation. This is one of the
differences between Tesla and all other legacy automakers.
Tesla is "people-over-profits" and legacy automakers
more about the best EVs and the best EV company
worldwide charging infrastructure mentioned above
proof for the above? It's here