Electric Mismatch Making
The switch still doesn't make sense for most Americans.
NYT (“Are You a Super Driver? Some States Want to Help You Go Electric.“):
The key to cutting emissions from cars and light trucks that are heating the planet could lie with the nation’s super drivers, the small percentage of American motorists who drive, on average, about 110 miles per day.
If more of those drivers switched to electric vehicles from gasoline-powered models, it would make a major dent in greenhouse gases from transportation, which have so far been slow to decline, according to a new analysis published on Wednesday by Coltura, an environmental nonprofit group based in Seattle.
While the average American driver travels about 13,400 miles per year, people who buy electric vehicles today tend to drive them less than that, limiting the climate benefits of switching to a cleaner car.
By contrast, the top 10 percent of motorists in the United States drive an average of about 40,200 miles per year and account for roughly one-third of the nation’s gasoline use. Persuading more of these “gasoline superusers” to go electric would lead to a much faster reduction in emissions, the Coltura report found.
This is followed by the unusual anecdotes. My instant reaction was that, while it makes sense that we’d want those who drive the most to switch to electric vehicles to maximize the advantage, those are the drivers for whom it makes the least practical sense.
My daily commute is roughly 30 miles each way and I drive more than 200 miles in a day maybe ten times a year. I’m an ideal candidate for electric but the handful of options that make sense for me—I frequently need to be able to seat 7—are considerably more expensive than the gasoline variants of the same model and, because they’re so expensive, are considered “luxury” vehicles and thus not eligible for federal subsidies.
Conversely, one imagines those who “average” over 110 miles a day frequently take trips that are beyond the range of an electric vehicle. Indeed, the report notes that they tend to be people who commute very long distances because they can’t afford housing near where they work or those in construction, delivery and other sectors requiring driving from job site to job site.
Many obstacles remain.
Charging is one. Even though the biggest drivers travel, on average, about 116 miles per weekday, well within the range of most modern electric cars, some may be worried about finding places to plug in. A recent report from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group, found that the increase in public charging stations in the United States has lagged far behind growth in electric vehicle sales.
Finding the right vehicle might be another. The Washington state study found that heavy users of fuel disproportionately drove pickup trucks and large SUVs. Electric versions of these vehicles are currently limited, though that is expected to change in the years ahead.
A large number of high fuel users are also lower-income Americans who are far less likely to purchase new vehicles. Many of these drivers are likely waiting for cars to filter into the used vehicle market, a process that can take years.
I live in the Washington, DC metro area, which has considerably better electric vehicle infrastructure than most places. It’s still woefully inadequate. My sister-in-law got a Tesla a year or so ago and was frequently forced to change her plans in order to avoid getting stranded. Ultimately, she broke down and installed a charging station at home.
It’s going to take quite some time—even with the considerable investment the Biden administration has made—to get the charging infrastructure in place to make “super drivers” willing to make the switch. So, those of us who drive more manageable distances would seem the more obvious target.
The price also has to come down considerably for electric to move beyond a niche option. Few of us are going to invest a huge up-front premium to save an indeterminant amount over time at the pump.
Further, I continue to think hybrid is the better option for most people. Toyota and others have perfected that technology even for large trucks, SUVs, and minivans and done so at a price point that’s comparable to gasoline-only models.
The original idea (planned by people knowledgeable about transportation) was to use EVs as commuter cars/downtown cars/vehicles that need to carry packages but don’t move that much during one day (UPS trucks).
Even hybrids were based on the same idea: use the EV part downtown and use the ICE part for long distance driving.
This…is just ridiculous. They’d do better a) insisting that ICE trucks not be used unless you are actually carrying stuff around in it as part of your work, or b) come up with one-man zeppelins.
My next vehicle will be an EV. My daily commute is 15 feet.
If I can walk there, I walk. It’s a 2 mile, 2.5 mile radius. Most stuff I want to/need to go to is within that radius.
Most months I drive less than a hundred miles. Quite often it’s 0. Some months it’s 600 and change. Averaged out over time it’s 32 miles a month excluding the obligatory twice a year trip north. That’s just baked in to the equation.
I could fly, but the door-to-door is four hours either way and driving is easier, I am in complete control, and I can blast my chosen music at high volume while driving. I prefer to drive.
I need a car if the destination is more than 2 miles away, or if I need to haul stuff.
You know, I read this and immediately saw it as an opportunity. If we can make a big dent by targeting a relatively small number of drivers, isn’t that a good thing? What do we know about them, aside from the fact that they spend a shit-ton on gas? How many are commuters and how many are commercial drivers. Different incentives for the two, different infrastructure needs.
I suspect people who deny climate change are largely people who find themselves overwhelmed by any difficult problem and react by sticking their heads in the sand. It’s why I don’t think Dems need to give up on the square states and the Midwest, or any state that has frequent sub-freezing weather. People there know they need to get things done if they don’t want to freeze to death, and don’t traditionally have a lot of time for whiners and complainers.
@MarkedMan:
But the thing is, we probably can’t. The “super drivers” being targeted are the drivers for whom electric makes the least sense, at least right now.
@James Joyner:
Sure, right now, but how do we change the equation? What if we subsidize charging stations in employer parking lots? What if we additionally subsidize those chargers if they let employees charge for free, or at cost? If it turns out a lot of these are people like uber drivers, door dash and the like, it means they are driving long distances but in a limited area. How could we incentivize them to switch to electric? A dozen uber/door dash/etc exclusive parking lots full of chargers in NYC with extra licenses for food trucks that service them? Any registered delivery driver can park there for an hours worth of high speed charging for up to an hour, while they get lunch?
You solve problems by understanding them, trying things, adapting, perfecting and then rolling out the things that work on a bigger scale. And there are many problems you don’t have to solve for 100 years all at once, but rather just for 5-20 years during which the capital costs are written down and you are readying the next generation solution, which hopefully is even better.
@MarkedMan: Here’s something odd that has happened 2-3 times over the past few days: I post a comment, I get a message saying I’m in moderation queue, but the post shows up anyway (or it least it does for me). Anyone else seeing this?
[Edit] So now that I have reloaded the page I don’t see my comment any more. James can you get me out of purgatory?
@MarkedMan:
Giving up, ceding the Midwest and the “square states”, as an electoral college gambit is pretty fucking stupid. Incredibly misguided. Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois are solid blue. (Michigan is a bit iffy). Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico are purple and entirely getable. Why would you want to leave easy EC votes on the table? That is beyond dumb.
You know how the electoral college works, I assume. Why would anyone dismiss/disregard EC votes for your preferred candidate just because they come from Midwestern or “square states”? That line of thinking is categorically stupid. EC votes are valid from whatever state.
Not every vote counts equally, as Dr. Taylor points out, but Electoral College votes are cumulative and not weighted by the perceived coolness factor of that state.
As I’ve said here before, all-electric is ultimately a toy for the wealthy. The working class, for the most part, have no place to go to charge an electric car, no matter how many chargers you put up. This is a bad example, but I live in a suburban condo community of roughly 120 households. How do we install charging stations? How do we pay for upgrades to our 70 year old electric panels? How many retirees and starting families afford these expenses, in addition to the absurdity of a $30-70k+ vehicle when your primary care is 15 years old? That’s the reality many “super users” face.
Multiply that by the number of apartments, etc in major and minor urban areas.
The ROI just doesn’t work for any (perhaps most) people.*
*In my more reactionary thoughts, I see this as a tool to segregate the poor/working class from the elites, or to limit the mobility of said class. But then again, I am a Luddite, and probably wrong.
@de stijl:
Do you think from my comment that I was proposing Dems abandon the midwest and mountain states? I wasn’t.
@Flat Earth Luddite:
An insistence that there is only one solution that must be work for everyone or it is worthless strikes me as defeatist. The insistence that the technology we have today is the only technology that will be available strikes me as short sighted.
Will 100% electric work for everyone? No. Will it work for many people and businesses? Yes, even given current technology. And if the ability to charge 200 miles of range in 5 minutes becomes cost effective? A heck of a lot more people.
Targeting Super Drivers, has a gnome underwear problem.
The Chicago area, Tesla dominated charging horror show that received wide coverage area this week, will negatively impact EV sales in the snow belt. EV’s make lots sense as second cars for those who have a driveway or garage next to their home and can charge overnight, but for those who must rely on the public charging network, owning an EV requires a commitment far greater than many people are willing to make.
While EV sales are faltering, PLEV sales are taking off, the benefits of an EV with the security of an ICE. Though as a car guy, a vehicle with 2 different power units is the potential for twice the problems.
@MarkedMan: @de stijl:
I re-read your statement. I am stupendously sorry! I missed the “don’t”. I wrote my response as if you didn’t say “don’t”. As if you were advocating for something you’re against.
I’m an idiot. I apologize. Truly sorry!
@MarkedMan:
Yeah, I pretty much fucked that up hard. I do heartily apologize.
My eyes elided over the “don’t” and thought you were advocating the opposite.
I fucked up. I’m sorry.
EVs went on an unprogrammed PR campaign in Chicago during the recent cold
Someone driving 110 miles a day likely doesn’t have the spare time to deal with dead charging stations and cold weather. Of course, hot weather is bad for EVs as well.
@Sleeping Dog:
While this is most certainly true, it should be pointed out that many, many people who had ICE engines parked outside also had cars that didn’t start. My nephew, for example, had a Honda Civic that wouldn’t start. 50% of his ICE cars wouldn’t start.
As a side note, what is it with people who have a frickin’ three car garage, attached, fill it so full of junk that they can’t park their cars inside, even in Chicago in the winter? I will never understand this.
@MarkedMan:
I really don’t think that’s the primary case anymore. Or rather, I think those folk’s rejection manifests in different ways.
Based on a lot of online discussions with hardcore deniers (including some here and who may pop up in this thread), I think ultimately it gets back to the Bircher idea that it’s a conspiracy to advance government control over individual lives.
Granted there is some crossover of this into the more agnostic folks (i.e. the it’s happening but it won’t be that bad) who are overwhelmed by the idea of it.
Hal, if you read this, I’d love your take on this because I know you’ve dealt with those people than most of us have.
@de stijl: For the record, Colorado and especially New Mexico are both quite blue these days.
@de stijl: No worries. I knew you were not a crazy trumper, so assumed you had misread or, just as likely, I had written it so that while I understood what I meant, no one else did. Wouldn’t be the first time.
@Matt Bernius: You may be right, but FWIW my opinion on this doesn’t just come from electric cars or climate change. The Republican Party seems to have become the repository for people who firmly believe that no ill can be addressed in any way, and only losers think it can. Infant mortality, poorly performing schools, decaying infrastructure, China’s rise, the list goes on and on. In their eyes all these problems are intractable and only losers and suckers would even try. Defeatists from the get go.
In reality, successful societies deal with all kinds of seemingly intractable problems and have for millennia. But we should never underestimate the destruction that the defeatists can cause. There is a (controversial) theory that the kingdoms of Rapa Nui (Easter Island) engendered their own destruction and marched the populace back to the Stone Age by insisting on following their traditions despite the increasing damage to their ecology, until it all collapsed.
Bought a Volvo EV (small SUV) and liked it a lot. I love me some torque. And it was fine when we had our own garage and had installed 220 and were just driving in LA. Then we tried driving it between LA and Vegas. A pain in the ass. Then we went condo where charging would mean making sure the valets plug it in, and decided fuck it, and dumped it for a BMW X3 M40i. (Which, by the way, is outstanding aside from the active lane-keeping which I’m going to have to turn off before it kills me).
Very hard to convince drivers who own a vehicle capable of going 300 miles on a tank of gas, and can then refill that gas in 5 minutes at any of a billion locations, that it’s just as convenient to go 300 miles and then spend two hours locating a charger, waiting for a slot to be open, then wandering around some big box store parking lot while it charges. The infrastructure simply is not there. It’s not even close, not even in progressive California.
I think there is no better lesson than Solyndra. Republicans campaigned continuously and furiously during the Obama years that it was pouring money down the toilet, that renewables were a joke, that it would be a half century or more before renewables could ever hope to replace coal. What actually happened? Two thirds of new power generating capacity in the US in 2022 were renewables, mostly wind and solar with a smattering of other things. Installed renewables in 2022 generated more power than coal and more power than nuclear. A fifth of our power came from renewables (and should be close to a quarter in 2023), from a start of almost nothing. And, tragically, most of the solar panels are made in China because the Republicans won and a US response to the huge subsidies Chinese companies received from their government. Most of the wind technology comes from outside the US because Republicans successfully beat back efforts to invest in this area on a national basis, while the Chinese, Danes, Spaniards and Germans poured money into it, with a great ROI. By 2020 only one US company were in the top ten of Wind Energy suppliers. Thanks, Republicans! You successfully crushed US renewable manufacturing and gave a massive head start to everyone else!
Republicans are defeatists. They have no vision or ambition. They are losers.
@Michael Reynolds:
So we should just abandon the concept?
I used to believe in electricity, but then big whale oil consortium had a new influx of rendered whale fat oil for sale cheap and my wall sconces do need a top off.
Why would I need electricity if I have easily refillable oil lamps?
My brother owns the family construction business and is one of these drivers. A lot of his driving, as well as his employees, is to job sites and to meet clients. Much of the time, he needs a truck. The place and previous places where he leases his office space don’t have chargers. The jobs sites and client locations (future jobs sites) don’t have chargers.
More generally, I think there are still three big hurdles for greater EV adoption currently:
– Lack of charging networks and standards, especially for people who live where they can’t install in charger.
– Expense
– Lack of model variety. Most EV’s are sedans. There needs to be more variety.
I’m very bullish on EV’s, but it’s going to take time.
@Andy:
im not sure where you are getting this. Last year, of the top 10 EVs sold in the US two were sedans, two were trucks, and the rest called themselves either crossovers or SUV.
I think you correctly point out, James, one of the two key issues in EV adoption. The infrastructure just isn’t there. Secondly, they are still economically and environmentally substandard. Hence subsidy, dictates and hidden data on full environmental impact. (read: a sham) M Reynolds hits on it.
It would be far better if environmentalism and EV’s hadn’t become a religion, fueled (like religion) by (never arriving) Armageddon predictions. There is absolutely no reason EV’s can’t or won’t become the preferable option in time, at least for niche applications. I suspect no one reading or writing here will be alive when that date arrives. But it probably will at some time.
In the meantime, so much waste. So much fraud, and loss of faith in institutions. So much economic dead weight loss.
Its a ship of fools world.
@Andy: Also, this list of all EVs available in the US shows a lot of trucks, SUVs and crossovers and not very many sedans. Although, since it is ranked by range, sedans take the first five spots, just as they would for gas mileage in an ICE list.
@MarkedMan:
Look at the unit’s sold numbers and add them all up. The Model Y is barely an SUV and it is basically a Model 3 with a different body. The truck numbers sold are tiny. Most of the rest of the vehicles are sedans or very small vehicles.
I think what’s needed is substantial availability of electric versions of the most popular types of gasoline vehicles. We’re slowly moving in that direction, but we’re clearly not there yet.
@Sleeping Dog: plev == phev?
Part of the infrastructure problem of EVs has to do with the nature of their energy source.
Back when the first gas cars turned up (there were a few wood and coal burning steam cars before then), there were no gas stations to service them. I’ve read about all sorts of unlikely places where one could fill up (or at least buy gasoline), from drugstores to hardware stores.
But suppose back in the early 1900s you wanted to go for a long drive and had no idea where you might obtain fuel for the return trip. No problem, you could carry along a can of gasoline, then refill your tank for the trip back.
Can’t do that with en EV*. Trying to bring along more charged batteries would reduce your range (due to the higher weight you’d carry), cost a lot of money, and require a fair deal of time and effort to swap the batteries.
Earlier this century, it looked as though hydrogen fuel cells would be the thing. That still would have meant a problem with infrastructure, but more in converting or adapting existing gas stations, assuming wide adoption. In the end, I think hydrogen may not contribute much to decarbonizing the world.
*Ok, you could carry gas along in an EV, but it would do you no good. I don’t see why you even bring it up.
@Andy: Two of the top 10 best selling EVs in the US are trucks. And yes, if you change the original “sedans” to “sedans, crossovers and small SUVs”, then yes, those account for most of the vehicles. As would be true of ICE vehicles too.
In the last year, I’ve made the switch to an EV. First with my EM Solo, then with the 2019 Nissan Leaf I bought when the Solo was recalled and repurchased by EM.
I’ll never go back to an ICE car for local driving. I’ve sold both my Cayenne and 997, I’m currently saving $700 per month on gasoline alone. My EV will pay for itself in less than 25 months (18 months left) with the gasoline savings. My range is about 155 miles when it’s fully charged. I have driven it non-stop to Palm Springs, San Diego, Santa Barbara, and even Bakersfield over the Grapevine. On those trips, I have to recharge before returning home, but have not found it hard to do yet. Additionally, those destinations tend to be overnight stays, so recharging isn’t an issue.
I take advantage of alot of free charging near me, mostly at the LA Fitness in Northridge, the Whole Foods in Porter Ranch, and the Northridge Mall. My transportation costs have been cut from about $.11 per mile to about $.015 per miles. Huge difference.
My wife uses my EV whenever she has to drive locally, and I use her BMW Z4 ragtop for any places I need to drive more than 150 miles away. Last week, I drove her car to Utah. We will always keep an ICE car for that reason – long drives.
Most people drive less than 40 miles per day. EVs would be fine for most of them.
@JKB: I didn’t realize ICE engines were perfect in extreme cold and extreme hot conditions! Especially diesels!
Oh, but they’re *better*, you say? Well, I guess that’s what happens with a hundred extra years of development.
@MarkedMan:
You’re absolutely correct. My big complaint is that we seem to be targeting one solution fits all. This works almost as well as one size fits all in t-shirts. I’m afraid I wasn’t clear in my initial comment. I’m just tired of the one size fits all paradyme that only works for a limited group.
5 minutes charging? Public access charges? Cool and I’m sure it’ll happen. Not in my lifetime, but I’m an old Luddite. Maybe Daughter of Luddite…
@Sleeping Dog:
I think this is more of a design bias with Tesla’s than anything else. I’m prepared to be that cold weather was not a significant design scenario for them (in part, because of where the design took place–in CA). We’re seeing similar biases in the design of the cyber truck and all the “truck” use cases they ignored while optimizing for being able to survive being shot with a bow and arrow.
I’ve seen these sorts of issues with product design for years.
When temperature is taken into consideration, EVs ultimately can match the performance of traditional ICEs in cold environments. See for example this study of EV Buses in Vermont:
https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/aqc/mobile-sources/documents/VEIC_Final_VT_Electric_Bus_Pilot_Report_and_Appendices.pdf?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
@de stijl:
I don’t recall saying we should abandon the concept. What I’m saying is that as a practical matter, right now, @Flat Earth Luddite: is right, EVs are for people with money. They are expensive to buy, installing a new electrical panel is also expensive, and they only really work out if you are in a single family home with a garage.
We need to build out the infrastructure. This is not analogous to 1900 when we had early cars and no gas stations because in 19oo very few people were reliant on a car. They really were just toys for rich people. Most people, if they buy a car today, need that car. It’s not a toy, it’s a necessity. We are trying to bully people of limited means to invest more than they can afford in a system that for many if not most people just does not work. Infrastructure first, then car. Or infrastructure and car simultaneously. But car now and infrastructure maybe someday? No.
@EddieInCA: My wife and I lived in houses the whole time we had kids living with us, so EV’s would have been no problem. My commute has Benn pretty consistently been 20-25 miles each way, and remains so today. But ow that the kids have moved out we switched to a rental row house in the city with street parking so we are thinking that EV’s are out of the question (except for PHEVs) because of the charging issue. We have a four space charging setup right across from our house, but if we move, who knows? Also, I have the expectation that gas savings would be eliminated because the charging stations would hose you. What are your thoughts?
@Michael Reynolds:
There are a lot of expensive EV’s, algthough that should be put in the context that in 2023 the average price paid for any car is north of $50K. I hear a lot of people talking about a $40K EV is so expensive not realizing that most buyers are spending that to drive a RAV4 out of the dealer lot. Still, Lucid, Rivian, Porsche, etc are all expensive. But here are nearly a dozen cars that are range from $20K to $41K. Prices shown don’t include subsidies, but the least expensive, the Bolt, goes for close to $20K after US government subsidy.
@Flat Earth Luddite:
It’s not as far away as you might think. In this list of real world testing using the fastest chargers available to the list, a version of the Hyundai Ioniq 6 (hardly an exotic) added 193 miles of range in 15 minutes. Yes, infrastructure is a problem, but Biden’s build out is ahead of schedule.
I’m not trying to be Pollyanna here, but don’t let the relentless drumbeat of Republican “Can’t do it, shouldn’t even try” mask the incredible progress we’ve made to date. There are five electric daily drivers in my work parking lot with about fifty cars, and they range from the CEO (no surprise there) to a beginning engineer, single, buying her first new car. All daily driving from 1-5 years and all perfectly happy with their choice.
I think many people here would be well served by at least reading the executive summary of the underlying report, rather than spouting off their gut opinions.
This is doable. Not for 100%, and probably not even for 86.1%, but easily 50%. Which would be a big dent.
Doing it would require a bit of creativity, and needs to be balanced against other areas where we might get more carbon savings for less, but it is certainly doable.
@MarkedMan:
The formulation I have settled on is that conservatives (small c) have a fundamentally zero-sum view of the world. They believe that not only is one person’s gain necessarily someone else’s loss, but that this is true over all time horizons of relevance. The idea of investing to make everyone better off in the not-so-distant future sounds like voodoo to them, and they never trust it — despite the fact that today essentially everyone in the US is better off than they were 100 years ago, or even 50.
Most Republicans have never forgiven FDR for proving that massive public spending can work.
For a two-car family, one EV and one ICE should probably do nicely. Eddie did a great job of describing the lower operating costs, but I’m not sure he’s included the lower maintenance costs that will accrue because electric engines are just a lot simpler and less likely to break.
Not “never break”. Less likely. A lot less likely. I’ve had “sensors” fail on my Toyota, which has a reputation for reliability, and deservedly so. What are these sensors even for? Probably to run the fuel injection, which is another complex (and beautiful, I get it) piece of machinery.
I had a car die on the freeway in the middle of nowhere with my wife and baby in it because the timing chain broke. An EV doesn’t have a timing chain. It doesn’t have an alternator, which is another component that has caused me (and my dad) misery. Those can’t fail on an EV because they don’t exist.
Still, range is an issue. Road trips are an issue. I think right now, though, there are some very good use cases.
@MarkedMan:
I’ve commented here many times that the standard conservative response to everything is, “That’s just the way things are. Nothing can be done.” A corollary is that they fetishize the market with no faith in the market. Perhaps it’s of a piece with not grokking evolution.
@DrDaveT:
I can’t recall where, but a few days ago I read a conservative writer complaining that liberals have a zero sum view. I read it shaking my head, “Does this conservative writer know any conservatives?” The attitude is, “If anyone, anywhere gets something more it will cost me, an upper class white guy.”
I am recently retired but when working I averaged about 100 miles per workday. However, that varied a lot. On somedays it was 20 miles and others it was over 300. AN EV as primary vehicle wasn’t going to work. My nephew has a hybrid. Lives in a row home in Philly. We talked about his buying an EV (wife subsidizes him) but just couldn’t figure out how to reliably charge it.
Steve
@DrDaveT:
So true. One of my college professors had huge beef with FDR. My professor hit all the right wing talking points involving FDR including how he caused/extended the great depression via his unlimited government spending and expansion…
The guy was amazing when it came to the history of the southwest but my god his GOP fandom came through hard when you got to the 19th century and newer. I legit passed one of his tests just by selecting the answers that made democrats/FDR look bad. He never outright rewrote history but he definitely came close and his interpretation of things were “creative”.
Maybe JKB will swing by and tell me how that conservative Professor was really an antifa BLM trans liberal plant that was intentionally making conservatives look bad. Because you know there’s no conservatives allowed to teach in colleges!!
@MarkedMan:
FTFY. (Many people who need cars will never own a new one during their entire lives. Quite a few will live their entire lives outside the zone of people who buy late-model used cars at bargain prices below $30 k, also.)
@steve:
Hybrids are the right interim solution. Still niche, still selective. Still with certain technical and geopolitical issues. But something to work with to solve problems. These EV directives from zealots in government, and pandering by woke corporate America, are stupid beyond rational comment. Its like an episode of Seinfeld.
@Jay L Gischer:
Huge understated value to EV’s. My 2019 Leaf still has the original brake pads at 44K miles. I rarely have to touch a brake pedal, given the strength of the regenerative braking. I can go from 70 mph to 0 mpg on the freeway off ramp without ever once touching the brakes. I can control my speed on a downhill with only the acceleration pedal.
Rare brake work needed.
No oil needed.
No alternator, starter, compressors, etc that can cause problems. Minimal hoses.
To date, I’ve had to replace the cabin air filter, and rotated the tires. It’s on it’s 2nd set of tires at 44K miles. First set lasted almost 35k miles. I rotate them like clockwork every 5000 miles. EV have alot of torque on the rear wheels so wheel tread needs to be rotated often to get the most out of your tires.
When it gets to 50K miles, I’ll probably drain all the coolant fluids, flush, and replace them all.
Again, for short trips, if you have access to a regular 110V plug, its much preferable to an ICE car. If
If I have to pay for high speed charging, it takes about $12 and 30 mins at the most expensive charger nearby. That buys me about 150 miles. In my [former] Cayenne that same 150 miles would cost me, at current Los Angeles gas prices, $52.50-$60. I rarely pay for charging, Looking at my chargepoint account, I average about $5.42 per month for paid charging. That’s a whole lot better than $600-$800 per month for gasoline.
PLUS – I love riding in the HOV lane ALL THE TIME.
@EddieInCA: My Honda(2018) 4cyl has the original brake pads from the showroom floor. I’ve lived in a city the entire time I’ve owned it and it’s at a bit over 61k miles now. I’m probably going to have to replace the front pads within the next year or two. I checked them last summer and there’s still a good amount of pad left. I haven’t replaced any cabin filters etc. I have replaced the tires a few times because city delivery driving means extra wear and tear combined with road debris and surprise potholes. Potholes being such an issue in the city that some streets are basically just patches on top of patches.