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
The first "horseless carriages" (automobiles) were electric,
as early as 1900. Only 60 miles of range, and only went 18 MPH
(but there were no highways back then), and they were way
easier to start than gasoline cars which had to be cranked (and
people broke their wrists and even died doing this, and women
couldn't start them, which is why ads for EVs back then were aimed
at women). The reason the EV car eventually died and the internal
combustion engine gasoline car took off was: 1) Many people's
homes didn't have electricity yet, so they couldn't charge an
EV, 2) Henry Ford's engineers invented the electric starter, which
made starting gasoline cars just as easy as starting an EV, and
3) Gasoline cars had more range (battery technology was in its
infancy back then).
A 1901 Waverly EV with its original motor, and
it still works
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 used for a similar 100 mile drive.
The difference is like night and day, for reasons #1 and #2.
2. An average
gas powered car can get 24 MPG, but an EV can get 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 possible for those thousands of fossil
fuel cars' tailpipes.
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
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
(TCO) of EVs increases, the curve will become more vertical (faster
adoption rate). And if you look carefully at the top graph, 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 charts has been Tesla (not GM, Ford, Toyota,
Myths About EVs
be understood that there are very powerful industries who
hate EVs, because the more EVs that are sold, the less profits
these industries make. So they will do everything they can
to convince people not to buy an EV, and they are not above
distorting facts and lying. And when the oil industry creates
a "front" organization with a name like Californians
for Balanced Energy Solutions, you wouldn't think the
oil industry is behind it. So when this organization that
appears to care about the environment says things about
EVs that would have you believe that EVs are actually bad
for the environment, don't be fooled. And since these industries
give lots of money to TV networks, you will likely hear
only anti-EV reporting, so don't rely on the mainstream
media for any truthful EV info. The fact is, you'll get
more honest info from this page and those like it than you
will from the corporate news media. (And you also will hear
the following falsehoods from people who've been taken in
by the lies.)
Since some EVs charge using electricity from coal-fired
power plants, they just move the same amount of pollution
and CO2 emissions from the tailpipes 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 battery pack, the less capacity it will lose
over time, and Tesla EVs do this for you automatically.
Do the other EV makers? No. Why? They will make money from
replacing your EV battery, and they have a "profits
over people" business model. With Tesla, people come
first. Refreshing, isn't it!
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 9-11pm). 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 less expensive). 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. (And utility companies
have been planning for the increase in EV adoption for many
years, just like they did for window air conditioners when
they were first planned.)
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 some EVs are less expensive
to operate and maintain than a comparable gas-powered car,
and then they drive an EV, 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 EVs will be sold as battery costs decline further,
reducing the retail price of the car (already happening).
So, demand for well-made and affordable EVs will be increasing.
But it is true that there is no demand for
a $68,000 Cadillac Lyriq EV or an $80,000 Polestar 3 EV,
or for the cheaply made EVs from VW and GM. So when these
other automakers say "We're slowing our EV production
plans because the demand for EVs is sluggish" they
mean there's low demand for their EVs. But
there is demand for EVs, like the ones made
by Tesla (and their sales are increasing).
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
fuel injectors or 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, and an EV doesn't have either of 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 can also happen because the EV manufacturer
bought batteries from the lowest bidder instead of buying
the more expensive 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).
EVs cost more to fuel than gasoline cars
False. Since electric motors are more energy efficient than
gasoline engines, and since electricity per unit of energy
costs less than gasoline's, this oil industry disinformation
(disinformation because they know it's BS) falls flat.
"I've heard that you can't take an EV through a car
wash because water and electricity don't mix."
False. And ridiculous. Gas-powered cars have lots of electrical
wiring and electrical components, and they
can go through a car wash. And would an automaker design
a car that couldn't go through a car wash? This myth is
ridiculous on its face. But it did make me laugh when I
heard it. And consider that a Tesla EV has "Car Wash
Mode" where you press a button as your car is about
to enter the car wash room, and all the windows roll up,
the automatic windshield wipers are disabled, the proximity
alert chimes are disabled, the charge port door is locked,
and the car shifts into Neutral so the car wash mechanism
can move the car through. So I guess this feature proves
that an EV can go through a car wash.
capture from a Tesla EV
and Negative Comments About EVs
"When there is a power outage, EVs can't recharge."
True, but gasoline pumps require electricity to pump, so
you can't "fill up" your gasoline-powered car
during a power outage. And if your EV is charged, it can
recharge your phones, and run some things in your home if
the EV 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, Tesla EVs were driving around
"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 like Teslas. 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 (but so
will production capacity). Due to the economies-of-scale,
as the costs of making them come down, the prices can come
down, creating increased sales.
is now at 100% of new car sales being EVs. And in 2023
there was a 10% reduction in gas stations there. As
their diesel car fleet ages out, more and more petrol
stations will close or convert to EV charging stations.
And as petrol stations become harder to find, and as
petrol prices rise, this will hasten the transition
from the installed base of diesel cars to EVs. So much
for the BS "The demand for EVs is softening"
narrative. The big question is: Would you rather have
a car that gets 28 MPG or 120 MPG? And would you rather
have a car whose fuel costs 1/3rd of what gasoline costs?
EVs can get the equivalent of 120 MPG, and electricity
costs way less than fossil fuels per BTU of energy.
Then factor in less parts to break, no brake jobs or
oil changes, and the $$$ savings over the life of the
car's ownership are obvious. (And which EV maker sells
the most EVs in Norway? You know who.)
"EVs are only for the affluent."
False. When you factor the sticker price of an EV into the
Total Cost of Ownership (TCO, which includes operation and
maintenance), an EV is a better deal financially than a
gasoline car over the ownership life of the vehicle. And
thanks to Tesla, we're now at price parity between gasoline
cars and EVs (selling price). At this point, now it's a
no-brainer to buy an EV over a gasoline car. 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 $35,000-$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 now following it (or at least trying to). And
consider that the average sales price for a new car in the
U.S. is $48,000, and Tesla already has two models that are
below that (and consider that an EV is less
expensive to fuel and maintain than a gas-powered car).
average price is for all cars, not just for
"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 network of charging stations. And more
of them 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 15,000
of their chargers. So while "range anxiety" was
once an issue, it isn't anymore. But it is part of the oil
"EVs are just glorified golf carts."
Seriously?! Anyone who has ever driven in one would never
say this. In fact, EVs have better technology and
are more reliable than gasoline cars... and safer
"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 may
be more pedestrian deaths due to people not looking both
ways before crossing a street. And surely governments can
broadcast Public Service Announcements alerting the
public to the existence of these very quiet 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 oil 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 types
of cars, 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 production
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), that 1,000
miles will soon 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 oil 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
video 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.
Did you know that cobalt is used by the oil industry to
remove sulfur from crude oil when refining it into gasoline?
Where are they getting their cobalt from?
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 generations 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
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 and not buy anymore
gasoline. 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 the more
success they have, the more harm is done to the environment,
and therefore to 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.
lies and misinformation can
affect people's buying decisions
lies and misinformation can have an effect on people's buying
decisions if those people believe the inaccurate info. Look at
the results of these surveys... the results would have been different
if there were no lies or misinformation. And consider that the
more cars with tailpipes on the road versus EVs, the more air
pollutants there are that harm people, and the more CO2 there
is that negatively affects the environment's impact on all living
An EV survey
eReadiness 2023 Report, by Strategy&,
EV Owners: Those people who
currently own an EV: 6%
EV Prospects: Will buy an EV within the next 5 years:
EV Skeptics: Those people
who will not buy an EV: 32%
How many of those 32% who said 'no' to EVs decided this based
on the above lies and misinformation? According to the survey,
the three key barriers to buying an EV were: charging duration,
range, and battery life. All of these have tons of misinformation
This survey was an unbiased survey. Now let's look at one done
by an organization that is biased against EVs (you can tell by
if this graph is an accurate representation of those demographics
(which it isn't), another way to look at the graph is: 31% of
those people ARE considering an EV! Right
now in the U.S. only about 8 out of 100 new car sales are EVs,
so there's plenty of room for EVs to grow into that 31% market-share
shown above. And what do you think the people in those two "not
likely" groups will be thinking when the current 8% ramps
up to 31% and there are tons of EVs seen everywhere (like in California
right now). That's when many of those anti-EV mindsets will change
because those folks will eventually discover that many of the
things they believed about EVs were false. No one likes being
motivated people to buy an EV?
The main reasons
that above survey...
Fuel economy / cost per mile
63% Higher reliability of an EV
44% I can charge at home
36% Reduced environmental impact
30% Lower overall maintenance cost
25% Driving experience
17% I can charge at my workplace
Note: Oddly "safety" wasn't a
choice on that survey. But if it was, and people felt
that safety was a high priority, then it's good to know
that the safest cars in the world are EVs, and the safest
EVs are Teslas.
EV survey, the majority of participants said that when choosing
among EV models, overall price, safety, and battery range
were the key criteria, in that order. (Personally, I'd place
safety first, but that's me.) But the good news is that
for all those three key criteria, Tesla EVs are in first
place... best TCO (total cost of ownership), best battery
range (and best ability to charge at public stations), and
best in safety. And these "bests" are not opinions;
they are facts.
cars that drive themselves
will end up killing some people!"
cars are coming (actually, they're here). Technology, brilliant
engineers, and tons of driving data make this possible.
Self-driving cars are safer than human drivers. Why? They
can see in 6 different directions simultaneously (which
means they never take their eyes off the road),
they can't fall asleep, they can't be distracted, they have
better night vision than humans, and their reaction time
is way better than any human's. And they've
already saved lives (about 14,000 Tesla EVs are driving
around in the U.S. under computer control, and that would
not be allowed if the regulatory agencies deemed them to
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...
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
Musk created autonomous driving software to save lives,
not to make profit, as many of 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 you buy an EV. 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 huge amount of money to.
new car is the second largest purchase most people will
ever make. Me? I care who I give that kind of money to.
Tesla's mission statement: "Accelerate the adoption
of sustainable energy technology." All the legacy
automakers' unwritten mission statements: Maximize profits.
you're seeing in the above photo is the "mind"
of the computer. It's what the computer is seeing put into
a form that we can recognize when we see it on the dashboard's
screen. It shows us that, yes, the computer is seeing the
traffic lights. And notice, the computer can see if the
cars' brake lights are on. Why can it do this? Because it
means something to the computer when a car in front of it
hits their brakes, just like it does for us (assuming we're
The red car represents the Tesla self-driving car.
media lies about EVs
is from a recent article in Car & Driver. Keep
in mind that 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 help.
don't believe what you read in mainstream media outlets
about EVs, because they can't be trusted to do truthful
if you can spot the lie in the screen capture below
(Hint: It's at the bottom)...
and GM both have warned of "slowing EV demand" but Tesla
has not. In fact, Tesla's sales are increasing. What "EV
demand" is Ford and GM referring to? It's the demand for
their EVs. It seems that when people discover how
much better Tesla's EVs are, and they hear about the issues with
Ford and GM EVs, their sales naturally drop and Tesla's sales
increase. But since Tesla gives no ad money to mainstream media
(including business media), and since Ford and GM do
give lots of money to them, the media will tout Ford and GM's
narratives. And Ford and GM want everyone to think that there
is no demand for EVs... for anyone's EVs (because
they don't want to make them). That's why you see that lie.
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 of this articles info? It's here