14 ms·

America Has an Answer to the Biggest Problem with EVs

20 points by rayrrr 2y ago

kelseyfrog 2y ago
> Joe Biden’s climate agenda is all about new-EV sales. The unstated bit is American new-EV sales. > Electric vehicles made up about 8 percent of new car sales in the United States last year, compared with more than a quarter in China, where new EVs can go for about $10,000 or less. Except, we've also made those unaffordable by > Biden has quadrupled tariffs on electric vehicles from China — from 25% to an eye-watering 100% — in a move designed to bolster U.S. jobs and manufacturing.[1] If it was all about new-EV sales, we could set the EV tariff to 0%. A $10k vehicle would indeed increase sales in a way that's congruent to a climate agenda that's all about new-EV sales. The real story is that agendas are a function of politics, but we kind of already know that. The difference in outcomes ie: the differential gain in EVs being driven between these two scenarios is traded away in return for votes. 1. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/14/1251096758/biden-china-tariffs-ev-electric-vehicles-5-things https://www.npr.org/2024/05/14/1251096758/biden-china-tariff...
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  You can find balance. You can create a tariff structure where legacy auto is only protected if they’re producing the vehicles at the desired affordable price points. If they don’t produce them at that price point, you let China and BYD steamroll them to deliver the necessary consumer excess and climate goals. Otherwise, you’re just using regulatory capture to protect legacy auto profits and overly expensive vehicles. Protect US labor (within reason considering the value of a domestic manufacturing base and supply chain), but don’t protect the profits.
  - kelseyfrog 2y ago
    My point is that the climate is the loser in this story.
    - toomuchtodo 2y ago
      Always is.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - gary_0 2y ago
    > If they don’t produce them at that price point, you let China and BYD steamroll them The problem is that they've already proven themselves unable or unwilling to produce affordable EVs any time this decade, so allowing Chinese competition at any reasonable tariff level will almost definitely doom them. For the government, it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't". And the automakers are clearly betting that the government will protect them no matter what, even if they're suicidal. When companies like GM or Boeing play chicken with the government, they know the government will swerve first.
- asdff 2y ago
  If they actually cared about climate, they would let you take that $7k EV rebate they were dangling and apply it towards ebikes, all $7k of it. Of course this would be seen as rocking the boat too much, I am sure.
- freeopinion 2y ago
  Protectionism in general tends to irritate me. The kind of political nonsense exposed by the parent comment is particularly frustrating for me. That said, my own policy would result in even more extreme trade restrictions for completely different reasons. I think it is absurd to impose extensive regulations on some players but not all players. It makes no sense to me that I can walk or click into a store where two identical products are offered but the rules imposed on each producer are so different. One is regulated in the age of employees, the safety requirements for employees, the working conditions of employees, environmental protections, and so forth. The other is allowed to ignore all those considerations. When the US government imposes all those regulations on US players it is essentially making a rule that US companies are not allowed to compete. I think that USians like to complain about government interference but actually support most of the restrictions they suffer. They don't want to see 10-year-olds in factories, or toxic effluent flowing into waterways. We may not all agree on all the regulations but we generally agree on most of them. Yet we are not willing to impose those restrictions across the board on all participants in US markets. A company that plays by USA rules inside the USA cannot escape the costs imposed by those rules. So two identical products show up on the same shelf with drastically different price tags. It's no surprise that the higher-priced item does not sell. So if you want to sell your products inside the USA you are forced to move your production outside the USA and damage the labor force and ecology of some other part of the world. There are two obvious alternatives to the existing status quo. One is to remove restrictions from producers within the USA. I do not advocate for this and don't think most USians would tolerate this. The other obvious choice is to impose USA regulations on the production of any product sold inside the USA. I do advocate for this but I don't think most USians would tolerate this either. The obvious effect on prices would be untenable for most USians. It would be political suicide to support such an action. Yet, as the parent comment highlights, we see arbitrary trade restrictions for politically powerful industries despite the effect on prices. Clever appeals to nationalism and other hideous ideologies can sometimes produce public support for good policies for terribly wrong reasons. In the case of EVs you have a very interesting conflict of choosing to allow irresponsible companies to do irresponsible things in order to create cheaper products that might save the environment. Or do you force companies to be environmentally responsible even if it makes environmentally safer products more expensive. (This ignores, of course, the whole debate about whether EVs are, in fact, environmentally safer. It also ignores other price factors like labor which might have a greater effect on prices than environmental protections. But it makes interesting conversation.) If a non-USA producer can play by the same environmental protections and most of the same labor protections as the USA producers and still put a less expensive product on store shelves in the USA, I don't mind allowing their product into the USA. Of course, if that ever came to be the general case we could start worrying about the rest of those labor rules. But right now we are so far away from a level playing field that an abrupt leveling would cause too great of a shock. I wonder if USians could agree on what constitutes low-hanging fruit in any effort to level the playing field.
thebeardisred 2y ago
My meta-takeaway is that it behooves* the industry to further standardize on the interfaces between components. That will increase repairability over time when coupled with the correct legislation. *Based on the current OEM/supplier relationship, network of repair shops, etc. All of the post sales businesses built up to support the initial sale.
- sitkack 2y ago
  > My meta-takeaway is that it behooves* the industry to further standardize on the interfaces between components. This is what the government along with standards bodies and manufacturers should be doing. It shouldn't be a market decision, because the market can't optimize this outcome.
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    How do you do this without stifling innovation? The government will always be slow to respond and if they're the ones setting standards they would first have to know what is currently the optimal component interface for every major component on an EV. At that point you end up with the government asking the industry to tell them what the standards should be and how to regulate it, likely they ask the industry to regulate itself then as well. Why have the government involved at all?
- Zigurd 2y ago
  Despite BYD being vertically integrated, the reason why there are dozens of Chinese EV brands is the Chinese are doing what you describe: Standardized chassis, batteries, motors, etc. It's a horizontalized ecosystem like desktop PC were when everyone was starting a PC company.
romwell 2y ago
TL;DR: used EVs are "cheap" these days. As in, they're finally getting into a sub-$30K range. Meanwhile, I'm going to drive my 2010 Honda Fit (that I bought for $5K in 2017) practically forever. I'm making 6 figures as a software engineer, as does my wife. We have no kids. I have no idea who are these people buying new cars, or who are all these people for whom $30K is "cheap". I can pay that out of pocket, but unless held at gunpoint, I won't. There are many ways to make EVs marketable, but the key is make them goddamn cheap FFS. And the answer to that is infrastructure, not technology. We could make $5K glorified golf carts street-legal, and not requiring a license. For many people, that's enough for their grocery store runs / work / school commute. Oh, they won't fare well in a collision with F-150? Then maybe we can remove those from the streets outside specific delivery and maintenance hours, and impose a lower speed limit for heavier cars. That's before we get to the dangerous idea that we could charge the EV's as they go if we put wires into our streets... And perhaps add electronic signaling to make self-driving an easier problem to solve.. Maybe even a guiding rail (or two) to define lanes instead of paint that the weather can strip away... And if I may dream, this would enable us to replace tyres for traction with higer-efficiency rolling stock, and even link up cars going in the same direction on regular routes to reduce drag (and traffic). If only! I've lost all hope. Even thinking about it is tramatizing.
- thechao 2y ago
  > Oh, they won't fare well in a collision with F-150? Then maybe we can remove those from the streets outside specific delivery and maintenance hours, and impose a lower speed limit for heavier cars. A few things: 1. We should tax vehicles according to their road damage, i.e., O((weight/axles)^4*axles); 2. Vehicles with bumpers/hoods higher than Xcm should never be allowed in the left lane; 3. Vehicles with gas mileage worse than 3g/100miles shouldn't be allowed to go over 45mph. My neighbors almost universally run small businesses; and, almost universally, slap their business sticker on their 100k$+ 250s & 350s and then take the whole cost as a "write off" for "tax purposes". If the IRS was doing their jobs, these fuckers wouldn't be on the road — they'd be paying off fines and/or in prison for fraud.
  - romwell 2y ago
pedalpete 2y ago
https://archive.is/96yi1 https://archive.is/96yi1 I feel what this article fails to mention is how the depreciation of EVs compares to depreciation of gas cars. Apparently, based on google searches, cars depreciate 15% when driven off the lot, and then a further 15% per year after that. So it looks like EVs are depreciating quicker. This would definitely be a good deal, as they also have lower operating costs.
- hindsightbias 2y ago
  This is why used hybrid RAV4’s with 40K miles are selling over MSRP. I think these stats are biases towards junky brands with high turnovers.
- asdff 2y ago
  I'm really curious to see how the used market shakes out when it becomes time to play hot potato with the inevitable battery array replacement. Gas cars need work to but that work is less costly and they can take a whole lot of neglect.
  - Clubber 2y ago
    The battery is the achilles' heel of EV's. An ICE engine can last 20+ years if you take care of it. An EV needs a battery replacement at the tune of $10K+ after 10 years at best. I think once they make longer lasting and/or cheaper batteries, this difference will level out. FWIW I drive a Toyota ICE and fully expect it to last to 200K+ miles and 20 years. If I decide to trade it, it would keep a heck of a lot of its value vs a Tesla. Those things depreciate like produce.
    - asdff 2y ago
      If theres no road salting a car can last literally forever. Especially older cars that were built on solid platforms. So many old big block trucks or diesel mercs in socal still working fine after 40-50 years. I see even older cars too, some of them beat to absolute crap with hardly any paint left on the metal but still in service.
janalsncm 2y ago
> China, where new EVs can go for about $10,000 or less This is the part that hit me. In America we have no idea how much we are overpaying for things. There are plenty of reasons, sure, but at the end of the day things are wildly expensive with little to no acknowledgment from the government.
- adam_arthur 2y ago
  The government is more interested in protecting autoworker jobs in the US than lowering the cost to a broader set of consumers, unfortunately. If we allowed Chinese autos into the country free of tariffs, prices would almost certainly decline materially in real terms over the next few years.
  - bb88 2y ago
    Many Chinese goods are great. But if it's an end run around regulation, it is not in the US's best interest. Ralph Nader already fought this fight and won back in the 1960's with the Chevrolet Corvair. The Ford Pinto had the gas tank between the rear axle and the rear bumper, creating a death trap on rear collisions. These are a few issues of goods from China being an issue in the past: A) Toys with lead paint being recalled. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749118313988 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02697... B) Dog Food linked to China killing pets. https://truthaboutpetfood.com/how-many-pets-have-ingredientsproducts-from-china-killed/#:~:text=Before%20it%20was%20over%2C%20more,vegetable%20proteins%20contaminated%20with%20melamine https://truthaboutpetfood.com/how-many-pets-have-ingredients....
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- reaperman 2y ago
  The government is doing what it can to keep things expensive to insulate domestic industry from global changes. This is entirely on purpose. 266% tax on chinese steel, 25% tariff on pickup trucks, 30-50% tariffs on washing machines, 100% tariffs on electric vehicles, 50% tariffs on solar panels, etc. This isn’t even getting into the regulatory capture which prevents foreign products from being used/sold in USA.
cameldrv 2y ago
Does anyone know what collision repair costs are like on non-Tesla EVs? This seemed to be Hertz's biggest problem with Teslas, and I've heard many horror stories of high costs and long waits for Tesla repairs. As far as Teslas go, they seem to follow a similar value curve to German luxury cars -- you can get them very cheaply if they're 5-10 years old, because the parts are so expensive to keep them running, and a lot of the status wears off when they're not visibly the newest model. This I suppose is less true with Teslas where the visual style isn't that different from 9 years ago.

20 points by rayrrr 2y ago

> Joe Biden’s climate agenda is all about new-EV sales. The unstated bit is American new-EV sales. > Electric vehicles made up about 8 percent of new car sales in the United States last year, compared with more than a quarter in China, where new EVs can go for about $10,000 or less. Except, we've also made those unaffordable by > Biden has quadrupled tariffs on electric vehicles from China — from 25% to an eye-watering 100% — in a move designed to bolster U.S. jobs and manufacturing.[1] If it was all about new-EV sales, we could set the EV tariff to 0%. A $10k vehicle would indeed increase sales in a way that's congruent to a climate agenda that's all about new-EV sales. The real story is that agendas are a function of politics, but we kind of already know that. The difference in outcomes ie: the differential gain in EVs being driven between these two scenarios is traded away in return for votes. 1. https://www.npr.org/2024/05/14/1251096758/biden-china-tariffs-ev-electric-vehicles-5-things https://www.npr.org/2024/05/14/1251096758/biden-china-tariff...

toomuchtodo 2y ago
You can find balance. You can create a tariff structure where legacy auto is only protected if they’re producing the vehicles at the desired affordable price points. If they don’t produce them at that price point, you let China and BYD steamroll them to deliver the necessary consumer excess and climate goals. Otherwise, you’re just using regulatory capture to protect legacy auto profits and overly expensive vehicles. Protect US labor (within reason considering the value of a domestic manufacturing base and supply chain), but don’t protect the profits.
- kelseyfrog 2y ago
  My point is that the climate is the loser in this story.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    Always is.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- gary_0 2y ago
  > If they don’t produce them at that price point, you let China and BYD steamroll them The problem is that they've already proven themselves unable or unwilling to produce affordable EVs any time this decade, so allowing Chinese competition at any reasonable tariff level will almost definitely doom them. For the government, it's a "damned if you do, damned if you don't". And the automakers are clearly betting that the government will protect them no matter what, even if they're suicidal. When companies like GM or Boeing play chicken with the government, they know the government will swerve first.
asdff 2y ago
If they actually cared about climate, they would let you take that $7k EV rebate they were dangling and apply it towards ebikes, all $7k of it. Of course this would be seen as rocking the boat too much, I am sure.
freeopinion 2y ago
Protectionism in general tends to irritate me. The kind of political nonsense exposed by the parent comment is particularly frustrating for me. That said, my own policy would result in even more extreme trade restrictions for completely different reasons. I think it is absurd to impose extensive regulations on some players but not all players. It makes no sense to me that I can walk or click into a store where two identical products are offered but the rules imposed on each producer are so different. One is regulated in the age of employees, the safety requirements for employees, the working conditions of employees, environmental protections, and so forth. The other is allowed to ignore all those considerations. When the US government imposes all those regulations on US players it is essentially making a rule that US companies are not allowed to compete. I think that USians like to complain about government interference but actually support most of the restrictions they suffer. They don't want to see 10-year-olds in factories, or toxic effluent flowing into waterways. We may not all agree on all the regulations but we generally agree on most of them. Yet we are not willing to impose those restrictions across the board on all participants in US markets. A company that plays by USA rules inside the USA cannot escape the costs imposed by those rules. So two identical products show up on the same shelf with drastically different price tags. It's no surprise that the higher-priced item does not sell. So if you want to sell your products inside the USA you are forced to move your production outside the USA and damage the labor force and ecology of some other part of the world. There are two obvious alternatives to the existing status quo. One is to remove restrictions from producers within the USA. I do not advocate for this and don't think most USians would tolerate this. The other obvious choice is to impose USA regulations on the production of any product sold inside the USA. I do advocate for this but I don't think most USians would tolerate this either. The obvious effect on prices would be untenable for most USians. It would be political suicide to support such an action. Yet, as the parent comment highlights, we see arbitrary trade restrictions for politically powerful industries despite the effect on prices. Clever appeals to nationalism and other hideous ideologies can sometimes produce public support for good policies for terribly wrong reasons. In the case of EVs you have a very interesting conflict of choosing to allow irresponsible companies to do irresponsible things in order to create cheaper products that might save the environment. Or do you force companies to be environmentally responsible even if it makes environmentally safer products more expensive. (This ignores, of course, the whole debate about whether EVs are, in fact, environmentally safer. It also ignores other price factors like labor which might have a greater effect on prices than environmental protections. But it makes interesting conversation.) If a non-USA producer can play by the same environmental protections and most of the same labor protections as the USA producers and still put a less expensive product on store shelves in the USA, I don't mind allowing their product into the USA. Of course, if that ever came to be the general case we could start worrying about the rest of those labor rules. But right now we are so far away from a level playing field that an abrupt leveling would cause too great of a shock. I wonder if USians could agree on what constitutes low-hanging fruit in any effort to level the playing field.

thebeardisred 2y ago

My meta-takeaway is that it behooves* the industry to further standardize on the interfaces between components. That will increase repairability over time when coupled with the correct legislation. *Based on the current OEM/supplier relationship, network of repair shops, etc. All of the post sales businesses built up to support the initial sale.

sitkack 2y ago
> My meta-takeaway is that it behooves* the industry to further standardize on the interfaces between components. This is what the government along with standards bodies and manufacturers should be doing. It shouldn't be a market decision, because the market can't optimize this outcome.
- _heimdall 2y ago
  How do you do this without stifling innovation? The government will always be slow to respond and if they're the ones setting standards they would first have to know what is currently the optimal component interface for every major component on an EV. At that point you end up with the government asking the industry to tell them what the standards should be and how to regulate it, likely they ask the industry to regulate itself then as well. Why have the government involved at all?
Zigurd 2y ago
Despite BYD being vertically integrated, the reason why there are dozens of Chinese EV brands is the Chinese are doing what you describe: Standardized chassis, batteries, motors, etc. It's a horizontalized ecosystem like desktop PC were when everyone was starting a PC company.

romwell 2y ago

TL;DR: used EVs are "cheap" these days. As in, they're finally getting into a sub-$30K range. Meanwhile, I'm going to drive my 2010 Honda Fit (that I bought for $5K in 2017) practically forever. I'm making 6 figures as a software engineer, as does my wife. We have no kids. I have no idea who are these people buying new cars, or who are all these people for whom $30K is "cheap". I can pay that out of pocket, but unless held at gunpoint, I won't. There are many ways to make EVs marketable, but the key is make them goddamn cheap FFS. And the answer to that is infrastructure, not technology. We could make $5K glorified golf carts street-legal, and not requiring a license. For many people, that's enough for their grocery store runs / work / school commute. Oh, they won't fare well in a collision with F-150? Then maybe we can remove those from the streets outside specific delivery and maintenance hours, and impose a lower speed limit for heavier cars. That's before we get to the dangerous idea that we could charge the EV's as they go if we put wires into our streets... And perhaps add electronic signaling to make self-driving an easier problem to solve.. Maybe even a guiding rail (or two) to define lanes instead of paint that the weather can strip away... And if I may dream, this would enable us to replace tyres for traction with higer-efficiency rolling stock, and even link up cars going in the same direction on regular routes to reduce drag (and traffic). If only! I've lost all hope. Even thinking about it is tramatizing.

thechao 2y ago
> Oh, they won't fare well in a collision with F-150? Then maybe we can remove those from the streets outside specific delivery and maintenance hours, and impose a lower speed limit for heavier cars. A few things: 1. We should tax vehicles according to their road damage, i.e., O((weight/axles)^4*axles); 2. Vehicles with bumpers/hoods higher than Xcm should never be allowed in the left lane; 3. Vehicles with gas mileage worse than 3g/100miles shouldn't be allowed to go over 45mph. My neighbors almost universally run small businesses; and, almost universally, slap their business sticker on their 100k$+ 250s & 350s and then take the whole cost as a "write off" for "tax purposes". If the IRS was doing their jobs, these fuckers wouldn't be on the road — they'd be paying off fines and/or in prison for fraud.
- romwell 2y ago

pedalpete 2y ago

https://archive.is/96yi1 https://archive.is/96yi1 I feel what this article fails to mention is how the depreciation of EVs compares to depreciation of gas cars. Apparently, based on google searches, cars depreciate 15% when driven off the lot, and then a further 15% per year after that. So it looks like EVs are depreciating quicker. This would definitely be a good deal, as they also have lower operating costs.

hindsightbias 2y ago
This is why used hybrid RAV4’s with 40K miles are selling over MSRP. I think these stats are biases towards junky brands with high turnovers.
asdff 2y ago
I'm really curious to see how the used market shakes out when it becomes time to play hot potato with the inevitable battery array replacement. Gas cars need work to but that work is less costly and they can take a whole lot of neglect.
- Clubber 2y ago
  The battery is the achilles' heel of EV's. An ICE engine can last 20+ years if you take care of it. An EV needs a battery replacement at the tune of $10K+ after 10 years at best. I think once they make longer lasting and/or cheaper batteries, this difference will level out. FWIW I drive a Toyota ICE and fully expect it to last to 200K+ miles and 20 years. If I decide to trade it, it would keep a heck of a lot of its value vs a Tesla. Those things depreciate like produce.
  - asdff 2y ago
    If theres no road salting a car can last literally forever. Especially older cars that were built on solid platforms. So many old big block trucks or diesel mercs in socal still working fine after 40-50 years. I see even older cars too, some of them beat to absolute crap with hardly any paint left on the metal but still in service.

janalsncm 2y ago

> China, where new EVs can go for about $10,000 or less This is the part that hit me. In America we have no idea how much we are overpaying for things. There are plenty of reasons, sure, but at the end of the day things are wildly expensive with little to no acknowledgment from the government.

adam_arthur 2y ago
The government is more interested in protecting autoworker jobs in the US than lowering the cost to a broader set of consumers, unfortunately. If we allowed Chinese autos into the country free of tariffs, prices would almost certainly decline materially in real terms over the next few years.
- bb88 2y ago
  Many Chinese goods are great. But if it's an end run around regulation, it is not in the US's best interest. Ralph Nader already fought this fight and won back in the 1960's with the Chevrolet Corvair. The Ford Pinto had the gas tank between the rear axle and the rear bumper, creating a death trap on rear collisions. These are a few issues of goods from China being an issue in the past: A) Toys with lead paint being recalled. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749118313988 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S02697... B) Dog Food linked to China killing pets. https://truthaboutpetfood.com/how-many-pets-have-ingredientsproducts-from-china-killed/#:~:text=Before%20it%20was%20over%2C%20more,vegetable%20proteins%20contaminated%20with%20melamine https://truthaboutpetfood.com/how-many-pets-have-ingredients....
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
reaperman 2y ago
The government is doing what it can to keep things expensive to insulate domestic industry from global changes. This is entirely on purpose. 266% tax on chinese steel, 25% tariff on pickup trucks, 30-50% tariffs on washing machines, 100% tariffs on electric vehicles, 50% tariffs on solar panels, etc. This isn’t even getting into the regulatory capture which prevents foreign products from being used/sold in USA.

cameldrv 2y ago

Does anyone know what collision repair costs are like on non-Tesla EVs? This seemed to be Hertz's biggest problem with Teslas, and I've heard many horror stories of high costs and long waits for Tesla repairs. As far as Teslas go, they seem to follow a similar value curve to German luxury cars -- you can get them very cheaply if they're 5-10 years old, because the parts are so expensive to keep them running, and a lot of the status wears off when they're not visibly the newest model. This I suppose is less true with Teslas where the visual style isn't that different from 9 years ago.