General EV sales topic

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
SageBrush said:
GRA said:
I've tried it long enough to know it would be constraining for me
So is walking and bicycling. And breathing.

We all make choices. Yours is to pollute, and then spend your life rationalizing them at MNL.


Are you seriously suggesting that walking, biking and using public electrified transit for virtually all of my local travel is more polluting or resource intensive than if I were to use a car, however powered, for all that?

Or that, given the limited number of miles I put on my car annually while I wait for a ZEV that's practical for me, that it makes more sense to buy a car which fails to meet my major requirements, in the certain knowledge that it would have to be replaced in just a few years, with all the energy and pollution entailed in building and eventually disposing of that extra car?

I'm curious, just how many new cars have you bought in the past 18 years? How about in your life?
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
WetEV said:
No, I get your point. But your point isn't the whole subject.

I've lived on L1 at home.
And now you don't,

And now I do. Or perhaps I should say the LEAF does. About 40 miles per day, 5 days a week, on L1, for almost two years now.


But you're not solely dependent on either the LEAF or L1, correct?
 
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57416829

The big worry for most people thinking about buying an electric car is how to charge the thing.

But the real question you should be asking is how you're going to refuel your petrol or diesel vehicle if you don't go electric.

That's because electric cars are going to send the petrol station business into a death spiral over the next two decades, making electric vehicles the default option for all car owners.

Why? Because charging electric vehicles is going to become much more straightforward than refuelling petrol and diesel cars.
 
Some of the first ICE vehicles had a special compartment to carry the gas can because of the lack of gas stations. They also advertised as "unlimited" range back then too. But, it still needed gas. That's marketing for you. ;)
 
WetEV said:
GRA said:
But you're not solely dependent on either the LEAF or L1, correct?

My son is solely dependent on the LEAF. He has L2 options and an EA station not too far out of his way.


And that makes a big difference. FTM, given my infrequent usage i.e. my car often sits in my driveway for weeks at a time, L1 would work for me for spontaneous trips IF I had reliable, convenient, reasonably-priced QCs and a BEV with a fast DC charge rate. We're now starting to get the latter, but the former's still a work in progress. The sites sort of near me aren't too inconvenient, but as yet they haven't demonstrated reliability, and their pricing is too high to be competitive, albeit improving.
 
knightmb said:
Some of the first ICE vehicles had a special compartment to carry the gas can because of the lack of gas stations. They also advertised as "unlimited" range back then too. But, it still needed gas. That's marketing for you. ;)


The difference being that carrying an extra 100 miles of gas was a hell of a lot more portable than the same amount of batteries, and refueling took almost no time. Also, there were zero compatibility issues when you did find a place to buy gas - nobody ever said "I wonder if this nozzle is compatible with my fill tube"; even if it weren't, the 'adapter' was a funnel, if necessary made on the spot from any non-porous material.

I look forward to the day when CCS is universal here. Despite my druthers, Tesla's connector obviously won't be.
 
GRA said:
knightmb said:
Some of the first ICE vehicles had a special compartment to carry the gas can because of the lack of gas stations. They also advertised as "unlimited" range back then too. But, it still needed gas. That's marketing for you. ;)


The difference being that carrying an extra 100 miles of gas was a hell of a lot more portable than the same amount of batteries, and refueling took almost no time. Also, there were zero compatibility issues when you did find a place to buy gas - nobody ever said "I wonder if this nozzle is compatible with my fill tube"; even if it weren't, the 'adapter' was a funnel, if necessary made on the spot from any non-porous material.

I look forward to the day when CCS is universal here. Despite my druthers, Tesla's connector obviously won't be.
I think history has quite the contrary. The best gas mileage for the first cars was under 20 mpg. The composition of these early fuels was unknown and the quality varied greatly as crude oils from different oil fields emerged in different mixtures of hydrocarbons in different ratios. The engine effects produced by abnormal combustion (engine knocking and pre-ignition) due to inferior fuels had not yet been identified, and as a result, there was no rating of gasoline in terms of its resistance to abnormal combustion. We take over a hundred years of improvement for granted now.
 
knightmb said:
GRA said:
knightmb said:
Some of the first ICE vehicles had a special compartment to carry the gas can because of the lack of gas stations. They also advertised as "unlimited" range back then too. But, it still needed gas. That's marketing for you. ;)


The difference being that carrying an extra 100 miles of gas was a hell of a lot more portable than the same amount of batteries, and refueling took almost no time. Also, there were zero compatibility issues when you did find a place to buy gas - nobody ever said "I wonder if this nozzle is compatible with my fill tube"; even if it weren't, the 'adapter' was a funnel, if necessary made on the spot from any non-porous material.

I look forward to the day when CCS is universal here. Despite my druthers, Tesla's connector obviously won't be.
I think history has quite the contrary. The best gas mileage for the first cars was under 20 mpg. The composition of these early fuels was unknown and the quality varied greatly as crude oils from different oil fields emerged in different mixtures of hydrocarbons in different ratios. The engine effects produced by abnormal combustion (engine knocking and pre-ignition) due to inferior fuels had not yet been identified, and as a result, there was no rating of gasoline in terms of its resistance to abnormal combustion. We take over a hundred years of improvement for granted now.


There's no question that early gas was variable in quality, even when it wasn't watered down by the seller (which is one of the reasons why pumps with glass reservoirs were developed, so people could see what they were getting, and how much). Ultimately, it was companies like Standard Oil who provided a standardized product to branded stations, along with SAE standards that eliminated most of the variability, plus the usual technical improvements in cars.
 
WetEV said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57416829

The big worry for most people thinking about buying an electric car is how to charge the thing.

But the real question you should be asking is how you're going to refuel your petrol or diesel vehicle if you don't go electric.

That's because electric cars are going to send the petrol station business into a death spiral over the next two decades, making electric vehicles the default option for all car owners.

Why? Because charging electric vehicles is going to become much more straightforward than refuelling petrol and diesel cars.


Oh well then, it's a piece of cake. GCC:
CEC report finds California needs 1.2M public and shared EV chargers by 2030; 73k installed to date

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2021/06/20210610-cec.html


New analysis from the California Energy Commission (CEC) shows the state will need nearly 1.2 million public and shared chargers by 2030 to meet the fueling demands of the 7.5 million passenger plug-in electric vehicles (EVs) anticipated to be on California roads.

The inaugural Assembly Bill (AB) 2127 Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Assessment examines charging needs to support Governor Gavin Newsom’s executive order requiring sales of all new passenger vehicles to be zero-emission by 2035 including battery electric and fuel-cell technologies. The initial assessment projects electric charging requirements to meet demand in 2030, and future reports will analyze 2035 needs.

In addition to the 1.2 million chargers for passenger vehicles, the CEC expects 157,000 chargers will be required by 2030 to support 180,000 medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks and buses also anticipated.

We need to bridge the gap in electric vehicle charging or we won’t meet our goals for zeroing out harmful pollution from transportation. Building over a million chargers by 2030 is ambitious, but it’s also an opportunity to create good jobs and showcase California’s can-do spirit.

—CEC Commissioner Patty Monahan

More than 73,000 public and shared chargers have been installed to date, with an additional 123,000 planned by 2025. These numbers fall short of the state’s goal of 250,000 chargers by 54,000 installations—22%.. The Governor’s proposed 2021–22 budget includes $500 million to help fill the gap.

The report notes that the California Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Project (CALeVIP), the state’s incentive program for EV chargers, is oversubscribed by hundreds of millions of dollars, demonstrating strong market and consumer demand for public funding. Incentives for fast chargers regularly sell out minutes after applications open.

The assessment also found that in 2030, electricity consumption from passenger EV charging could reach about 5,500 megawatts (MW) around midnight and 4,600 MW around 10 a.m. on a typical weekday, increasing electricity demand by up to 20–25% at those times. . . .

862,000 ZEVs have been sold in California to date, including battery electric, plug-in hybrid and fuel-cell electric; ZEVs represented 9% of all new cars sold in Q1 2021.


There's a link in the article to the analysis.
 
Both IEVS:
France: Plug-In Electric Car Sales More Than Tripled In May 2021

https://insideevs.com/news/515076/france-plugin-sales-may-2021/


. . . The overall passenger car market in France rebounded 46% year-over-year in May to 141,041, while the plug-in electric car sales more than tripled.

In total, some 25,175 new plug-ins were registered last month (up 233% year-over-year). Passenger plug-ins (24,457) account for about 17.3% of the car market, which is one of the best results ever.

Plug-in hybrids continue to sell at a slightly higher volume than all-electric:

Passenger BEVs: 11,564 - up 181% at 8.2% market share
Passenger PHEVs: 12,893 - up 321% at 9.1% market share
Light commercial BEVs: 656 - up 65% at 1.8% market share
Light commercial PHEVs: 62
Total plug-ins: 25,175 - up 233%

So far this year, the plug-in segment increased 140% year-over-year to over 111,000.

Sales year-to-date:

Passenger BEVs: 51612 - up 65%
Passenger and Light commercial PHEVs: 55689 - up 328%
Light commercial BEVs: 4,335 - up 89%
Total plug-ins: 111,636 - up 140%
Cumulatively, more than 600,000 plug-in cars were sold in France, including almost 394,000 all-electric and almost 188,000 plug-in hybrids. . . .




US: BEV Market Nearly Doubled Through April 2021

https://insideevs.com/news/515422/us-bev-sales-april-2021/


BEV market share increased to 2.3%.

The all-electric car segment is booming in the U.S., according to the latest report on car registration from Experian (via Automotive News).

During the first four months (January-April) of this year some 133,509 new BEVs were registered, which is 95% more than a year earlier (about 68,466).

The growth of the all-electric segment is three times higher than the overall market, which increased 36%. It allowed an expansion of BEV market share from 1.6% in 2020 to 2.3%.

The data reveals that the most popular model is the Tesla Model Y, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which however decreased slightly year-over-year:

BEV registrations in the U.S. - January-April 2021

Tesla Model Y - 53,102 (up from 2,260 in 2020)
Tesla Model 3 - 35,468 (down 12% year-over-year from about 40,300)
Chevrolet Bolt EV - 13,611
Ford Mustang Mach-E - 6,104 (including 1,675 in California and 604 in Michigan)
Nissan LEAF - 5,023
Audi e-tron - 4,321
Porsche Taycan - 3,002
Hyundai Kona Electric - 2,192
Tesla Model X - 1,730 (down 75%)
Tesla Model S - 1,633 (down 63%)
other - 7,323
Total - 133,509

Overall, Tesla registrations stand at 91,933, which is 71% more than a year ago, however, it's associated only with the Model Y, as the remaining three models noted a decrease.

One of the most important metrics is that Tesla holds over 68.8% of the all-electric car segment in the U.S.

Besides the three Teslas, only the retired Volkswagen e-Golf noted a year-over-year decline, which means that all other models are up. . . .

In terms of geographical results - California accounts for 38% of all BEV registrations, which is significantly less than a year ago (45%). It's interesting because registrations in California increased 64% year-over-year. Other states probably are expanding much faster.

The second biggest market is Florida (7.2% share in BEV segment), followed by Texas (5.9%).

No info on PHEV sales in that article.
 
GCC:
IHS Markit: hybrids outperform EVs in US in April; overall electrification rate at 8.4%
https://www.greencarcongress.com/2021/06/20210624-ihs.html
New analysis of the latest IHS Markit new vehicle registration data in the US indicates vehicles with a hybrid powertrain (both gasoline and electricity) are out-performing EVs, based on several metrics. In April, hybrids accounted for 6.1% of all new vehicles registered, more than double EVs’ share of 2.4%. The share of hybrids in the US market has more than doubled compared to the same time frame in 2020, climbing from 2.3% a year ago; their volume rose more than five-fold from 17,591 a year ago to 92,865 this past April (based on CYTD figures for each year).

This growth in the popularity of hybrids has driven the overall electrification market share (when combining hybrids and EVs) to a record 8.4% in April (approaching the milepost at which electrified vehicles account for one of every ten new vehicles sold in the US.). This follows growth of more than 6% in March.

April was the seventh consecutive month in which the combined EV and hybrid share surpassed 5%, a threshold not previously reached.

More than half of this rapid hybrid growth (year over year) has been driven by Toyota, where hybrid volume jumped more than six-fold to just more than 51,000, led by Sienna, Venza and RAV-4, with additional volume from Highlander, Prius Prime and Prius, in that order.

Honda hybrid deliveries also rose in April, led by a near ten-fold jump in CR-V hybrids and a four-fold increase in Accord hybrid deliveries since the same timeframe last year. Ford, Jeep and Lexus rounded out the top five brands in April 2021 year-over-year hybrid increases.

Geographically, hybrid year-over-year growth in April was strongest in the Midwest (up 215%) and the Southwest (up 210%). Of note, EV growth in the same time period was also highest in the Midwest (up 126%), followed by the Northeast (up 121%).

The demographic profile of the hybrid buyer falls somewhere in between that of the EV buyer and the ICE (internal combustion engine) customer. Based on the analysis of April registrations, the customer age of the hybrid buyer is more similar to that of the gasoline consumer than that of the EV buyer: 46% of hybrid buyers are age 55 or older, while 45% of gasoline buyers fall in this category but just 34% of EV buyers.

To which one of the regular posters there commented:
But, but, but.... Toyota know nothing about cars and what sells! long range BEVs are on course for world domination by next Tuesday!


I had originally assumed that "EVs" in the above meant "PEVs", but re-reading it and also looking at the original IHS article, I think "EVs may refer to just "BEVs", with "hybrids" meaning HEV & PHEV. That's based on this quote above:
vehicles with a hybrid powertrain (both gasoline and electricity) are out-performing EVs,
and this quote from the IHS article:
In addition, the hybrid option gives consumers an opportunity to test the idea of an electric powertrain without assuming the perceived risks and reservations toward EVs in the market today.



IEVS:
Netherlands: Plug-In Sales Tripled In May 2021

https://insideevs.com/news/515132/netherlands-plugin-sales-may-2021/


. . . Plug-in electric passenger car registrations in the Netherlands tripled year-over-year in May to 5,986, which is the best result so far this year.

According to EV Sales Blog, market share is also quite impressive at 24%, including 13% for all-electric cars and 11% for plug-in hybrids.

The total number of registrations so far this year stands at 23,258 and the average market share is 18% (including 7.9% for all-electric cars). . . .
 
Both IEVS:
California: Plug-Ins Capture Almost 11% Of The Market In Q1 2021

https://insideevs.com/news/516906/california-plugin-car-sales-2021q1/


In Q1 2021, the overall light-vehicle sales in California amounted to 507,646 units, which is 2.9% less than in 2020. Meanwhile, the share of electric cars in California hit an all-time high.

According to the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA)'s report, some 53,261 plug-ins were sold in the Q1, which is 10.8% of the total market. We don't know exactly how it compared to 2020, as plug-in numbers were not released a year ago.

However, taking into consideration 132,772 units in four quarters of 2020, we guess that the rate of EV growth might be above 100% year-over-year.

All-electric cars stand for 8.1% of the total number, which is a new record, although the gap to hybrids (also at a record high level) increased! Currently, more than one in five new cars in California is at least a hybrid.

Plug-in electric car sales in California - Q1 2021

BEVs: 39,946 (market share of 8.1%)
PHEVs: 13,315 (market share of 2.7%),
Total plug-ins: 53,261 (market share of 10.8%)
HEVs: 48,330 (market share of 9.8%)
Total xEVs: 101,591 (market share of 20.6%). . . .




China: Plug-In Electric Car Share Increases To 12% In May 2021

https://insideevs.com/news/516858/china-plugin-car-sales-may2021/


In May 2021, plug-in electric car registrations in China increased about 146% year-over-year to over 190,000, which accounts for 12% of the overall car market.

It seems that after 11% share in March, 10% in April and 12% now, China might be above 10% permanently now.

All-electric cars not only remain in the majority (9.4% share), but also expands at a faster rate - 153% year-over-year.

Year-to-date sales of new passenger plug-in electric cars amount to over 856,000, which is also 10% of the total market (including 8.3% for BEVs). . . .
 
GRA said:
SageBrush said:
WetEV said:
BEV sales are not subsidized or taxed in Norway. ICE sales are taxed. Polluter pays.
Nice graphic. Since the CO2 and NOx taxes are itemized, I would call the VAT savings a subsidy.
I've read before that Norway wants EVs to be the same cost or cheaper than the ICE twin. I imagine the numbers are massaged until that is true.

Last, I do think it is true that Norway has made the rational market decision to sell its fossil extractions outside the country rather than consume them locally. Some of the Emirate countries have come to the same conclusion. However, that economic choice to convert to EV would not change if Norway did not have fossil resources, it would simply be a case of saving on imported oil costs. Netherlands is a good mini-Norway example without the fossil resources. Iceland is an even better example.

So as usual, GRA is barking up the wrong tree. The main drivers [sic] for Norway are inexpensive clean energy and a willing populace.


Don't forget a willingness to dump most of their oil and gas emissions in other countries. Not that we are any better, of course, but I'd be a lot more impressed with Norway's environmental commitment if they stopped extracting oil and gas from the North Sea, and paid for the EV subsidies out of their own pockets. This site says 14% of Norway's gov't revenue comes directly or indirectly from oil and gas, and that it's the largest single source:

https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/ec...'s total net cash,to the National Budget 2021


It appears that some Norwegians are raising the same point re using fossil fuel exports (i.e. dumping their emissions elsewhere) to support their green transition:
Analysis: Greener oil or green industry? Gridlock puts Norway in a bind

Norway is one of the world's top oil and gas producers

https://www.autoblog.com/2021/06/27/norway-green-energy-oil-industry/


Norway's oil and gas industry is counting on renewable power from hydro plants to cut emissions from its offshore platforms but rival demand from the green economy is putting a spanner in the works.

The decision to keep investing in new oil and gas projects flies in the face of growing global pressure to shift away from fossil fuels and Norway's own reputation as a pro-green economy with more electric cars per capita than any other country and a reliance on renewable hydropower for virtually all of its electricity.

But Oslo is loath to relinquish Norway's lucrative position as one of the world's top oil and gas producers, accounting for over 40% of its exports, and instead wants to make the industry greener.

"The Norwegian parliament has set a target of 50% reduction in emissions on the Norwegian continental shelf by 2030. Power from shore is the only technology that can deliver cost-efficient cuts that can get the industry close to this target," Deputy Oil and Energy Minister Tony C. Tiller told Reuters.

There's a practical problem with the plan. Norway's electricity grid is constrained at some junctures and the needs of other industries, particularly green economy players such as battery factories and hydrogen plants, have to be factored in.

Earlier this year, the national grid operator Statnett told Norway’s state-owned oil firm Equinor and partner Aker BP to look elsewhere for power capacity, something that could add "nine zeros" to a current 50 billion crown ($6 billion) project cost estimate for electrifying some of their platforms, according to Aker BP CEO Karl Johnny Hersvik.

Statnett's recommendation was a rude awakening for the oil industry, which has made Norway one of the richest countries in the world. Without access to cheap, renewable energy some of its oil fields might have to be shut prematurely due to rising emissions costs, analysts say.

Environmentalists say that is what should happen, and that renewable energy should not be used to extend the life of the fossil fuel industry.

"We call it greenwashing because we believe that the oil and gas industry should be phased out, not expanded, and since it should be phased out, it doesn't make sense to invest in marginal improvement," Truls Gulowsen, the head of Friends of the Earth Norway, told Reuters.

The measure would only address a fraction of total oil and gas emissions, while sucking power from shore that is essential to develop new, green industries, he added.

Norway's oil and energy ministry told Reuters it "categorically" rejected accusations of "greenwashing", because electrification would address a significant part of the country's total emissions.

The industry's greenhouse gas emissions stood at 13.3 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2020, or 27% of the country's total, according to the statistics office.

Electrification could potentially reduce the industry's emissions to around 11.5 million tonnes in 2025, and just under 9 million tonnes by 2030, the government has said. . . .

Tapping renewable sources of energy to make heavy-polluting industries greener is one of the more controversial aspects of the transition to a lower-carbon world.

Norway, along with many other oil-producing nations, shrugged off an appeal by the International Energy Agency this year to stop investing in new fossil fuel projects.

Oslo has pledged to reduce its national emissions by 50-55% by 2030, in line with European Union targets but not as ambitious as the UK, which is second to Norway as the largest oil and gas producer in western Europe.

Like other oil-producing countries, Norway's targets do not take account of emissions from the oil and gas that it sells to other nations.

The government anticipates oil and gas extraction will naturally decline by 65% by 2050.

In the meantime, producing petroleum with the lowest possible carbon footprint could help the country market its products as cleaner than competitors and cut the industry's exposure to expected sharp increases in carbon taxes in coming years. . . .

Renewable power demand in Norway is set to increase from an average 135 terrawatt-hours (TWh) during the last five years to between 170 and 190 TWh by 2030, a recent report by Norwegian industry lobby group NHO and the country's biggest labour union LO showed. The country had a surplus of around 20.5 TWh in 2020.

The government is currently looking for ways to speed up much-needed grid fortifications, but for the time being, the conundrum of conflicting interests remains a headache.

"The electrification of the shelf provides major cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, but it is important that it does not come at the expense of restructuring and business development on land," BKK, Statnett’s regional partner on the west coast, said in a statement.
 
GRA said:
WetEV said:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-57416829

The big worry for most people thinking about buying an electric car is how to charge the thing.

But the real question you should be asking is how you're going to refuel your petrol or diesel vehicle if you don't go electric.

That's because electric cars are going to send the petrol station business into a death spiral over the next two decades, making electric vehicles the default option for all car owners.

Why? Because charging electric vehicles is going to become much more straightforward than refuelling petrol and diesel cars.


Fixed the bolding for you. For free.

GRA said:
Oh well then, it's a piece of cake. GCC:
CEC report finds California needs 1.2M public and shared EV chargers by 2030; 73k installed to date

So 1.2M/73k is about 16. Yea, sounds about correct. Four doublings in 10 years. The kind of problems a new technology wants.
 
WetEV wrote:

The big worry for most people thinking about buying an electric car is how to charge the thing.

But the real question you should be asking is how you're going to refuel your petrol or diesel vehicle if you don't go electric.

That's because electric cars are going to send the petrol station business into a death spiral over the next two decades, making electric vehicles the default option for all car owners.

Why? Because charging electric vehicles is going to become much more straightforward than refuelling petrol and diesel cars.



Fixed the bolding for you. For free.


If it happens, terrific, although unless fossil fuels are completely banned before then it will take more than 20 years from now to complete the transition, given the size of the fleet and the replacement rate. You know this.


WetEV wrote:
GRA said:
Oh well then, it's a piece of cake. GCC:
CEC report finds California needs 1.2M public and shared EV chargers by 2030; 73k installed to date

So 1.2M/73k is about 16. Yea, sounds about correct. Four doublings in 10 years. The kind of problems a new technology wants.


And the kind of problem that a government, with lots of other calls on the money and no profitable business case for private building of DCFCs (at least), has difficulty solving. Not that it can't be solved, only that it will be difficult. But I and many Californians are game to try.
 
GCC:
ICCT report finds US domestic EV production and investment continues to fall; only 5% of global EV investment to go to US EV assembly plants

https://www.greencarcongress.com/2021/06/20210629-icct.html


The United States is the third-largest electric vehicle (EV) producer behind China and Europe; a new study from the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) finds that the gap has widened. The ICCT study finds that the United States’ share of cumulative global EV production decreased from 20% to 18% since 2010 and only 15% of the approximately $345 billion in global automaker EV investments are flowing to the US.

Based on company announcements through 2020, about 5% of this global total is actively being invested in local US assembly plants. Just seven of the 44 major US vehicle assembly plants are slated to be making all EVs by 2025.

Comparatively, EV manufacturing has increased at a faster rate in China, which made up 44% of global EVs manufactured through 2020, up from 36% in 2017. Similarly, European manufacturing accounted for 25% of global EVs through 2020, up from 23% in 2017. In terms of annual EV production, Europe’s 1.1 million nearly matched China’s 1.27 million in 2020, followed by 450,000 in the US and about 110,000 each in Japan and South Korea.

The research on electric vehicle uptake around the world is clear: electric vehicle manufacturing growth happens where there are strong national policies designed to spur the market forward.

—Nic Lutsey, Program Director at ICCT

Of the 10 million cumulative EVs sold globally, 80% were produced in the same region in which they were sold. The US market has remained steadily behind with fewer than 360,000 EV sales annually from 2018 through 2020, whereas Europe saw explosive growth from 390,000 to more than 1.3 million and China grew from about 1 million to more than 1.25 million over the same period.

Recent policy action focused on the transition to zero-emission vehicles is responsible for the latest EV trends, the report concludes. In Europe, automakers deployed dozens more new models—and with greatly increased volume compared to the US—to meet the vehicle emission standards. China has the most comprehensive system of demand- and supply-side policies and has extended its consumer incentives and is implementing stronger EV regulations.

Similarly, of the automakers’ announcements that together total 22 million annual EV sales by 2025, about 2.3 million (or about 10%) are slated to be manufactured in US. Automakers based in China and Europe have made more substantial commitments to EVs.

About 33% of General Motors’ $27-billion EV commitment is being invested in specific US assembly plants. While Ford has pledged to offer all-electric variants for every model it sells in Europe by 2030, it has not made similar commitments in the US, and only about 6% of its $30-billion EV investment is actively being made in US plants.

Great promotional events and bold aspirational statements by the domestic auto industry can’t mask the facts. This is a huge missed opportunity. Continuing on this path would hurt the domestic US auto industry’s prospects for decades.

—Nic Lutsey

Of the seven US EV-only assembly plants, representing about 16% of US vehicle production and capacity, three are owned by General Motors, two by Tesla, and one each by emerging EV companies Rivian and Lucid Motors. Five automakers (Ford, Fiat Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, and Nissan) that each produce about 900,000 to 1.5 million vehicles annually in the US have not announced plans for EV-only assembly plants. . . .
 
ABG:
Electric car sales surge as Europe's climate targets take hold

The uptick has already caused a 12% drop in average CO2 emissions of new cars sold

https://www.autoblog.com/2021/06/29/eurpe-electric-vehicle-sales-climate/


One in every nine new cars sold in Europe last year was an electric or plug-in hybrid vehicle, with low-emission car sales surging even as the COVID-19 pandemic knocked overall vehicle sales, the European Environment Agency said on Tuesday.

The uptick in electric car sales caused a 12% drop in average CO2 emissions of new cars sold in Europe last year, compared with in 2019, reversing a trend that had seen such emissions increase for three consecutive years.

It was the biggest annual drop in such emissions since the EU introduced its car CO2 standards in 2010.

Of the 11.6 million new cars registered in the EU, Iceland, Norway and Britain last year, 11% were fully electric or plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, according to the provisional data.

Those vehicles tripled their share of new car sales, from 3.5% in 2019.

Tougher CO2 targets for carmakers came into force last year, pushing carmakers to curb their fleet-wide emissions by selling more low-emission vehicles, buy credits from other carmakers that overachieved their targets, or face fines. The EEA did not confirm which carmakers met their targets.

Countries including France and Germany also included electric vehicle subsidies in COVID-19 economic recovery packages last year.

While overall new car sales dropped, Europe's electric and plug-in hybrid car sales increased to more than 1 million in 2020.

Campaign group Transport & Environment said the data showed the emissions targets were working, but urged Brussels to propose CO2 standards that would ban new petrol and diesel car sales by 2035, when it announces a package of climate policies next month.

EU officials said policymakers have not yet confirmed which specific car CO2 targets the Commission will propose.

The average car stays on the road for 10 to 15 years, and campaigners say selling polluting vehicles after 2035 would thwart the EU's target to have net zero emissions by 2050.

Average emissions for new cars registered in Europe were 107.8 grams of CO2 per kilometer in 2020, a decrease of 14.5 grams compared with 2019.
 
GRA said:
WetEV wrote:

The big worry for most people thinking about buying an electric car is how to charge the thing.

But the real question you should be asking is how you're going to refuel your petrol or diesel vehicle if you don't go electric.

That's because electric cars are going to send the petrol station business into a death spiral over the next two decades, making electric vehicles the default option for all car owners.

Why? Because charging electric vehicles is going to become much more straightforward than refuelling petrol and diesel cars.



Fixed the bolding for you. For free.


If it happens, terrific, although unless fossil fuels are completely banned before then it will take more than 20 years from now to complete the transition, given the size of the fleet and the replacement rate. You know this.

You know that Europe is ahead of the USA on this, and while I think it likely that it will take more than 20 years, I'm not sure I can exclude 20 years. And gas stations might be having economic issues long before the transition is complete.

PEV market share is about 14% in the UK, and the average age of a car in the UK is 8.4 years. Higher PEV percentage today, faster growth and a faster fleet turnover. Yes, looks like rapid decline in ICE cars on the road in around 20 years is at least possible.

As the number of gasoline cars falls, the gas stations will see declining business. They can either close or raise prices to take advantage of less competition. Both make gasoline cars even less attractive, so soon even fewer gasoline cars. Spiral accelerates.


GRA said:
And the kind of problem that a government, with lots of other calls on the money and no profitable business case for private building of DCFCs (at least), has difficulty solving. Not that it can't be solved, only that it will be difficult. But I and many Californians are game to try.

GRA knows that DCFCs were not profitable in 2012, so doesn't need to update. GRA's world doesn't change.
 
Back
Top