You say that targetting only the top 5% restricts the adoption rate. Consider me shocked…
Automakers must build cheaper, smaller EVs to spur adoption, report says
Submitted 11 months ago by boem@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
ceiphas@feddit.de 11 months ago
harry_balzac@lemmy.world 11 months ago
It’s almost as if consumers influence markets.
blazera@kbin.social 11 months ago
unfortunately we have to have a competing option to vote for with our wallets. There is not a single affordable EV available in the US.
metaStatic@kbin.social 11 months ago
If we start with an expensive sports car we will make enough money that it will eventually trickle down to affordable vehicles.
Buffalox@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I think it is at least as much about maturity of the technology, and competition in the market. Obviously we all want better cheaper cleaner cars.
EatYouWell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
There are several EVs out now for under $50k, and a few under $40k, so things are improving.
eya@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
alternatively we could get rid of car dependency
kent_eh@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
That’s fine for people who live in cities (which I acknowledge is a lot of people), but for people who live in smaller more remote and more rural places, it will never be possible to fullly be free of personal vehicles.
Hyperreality@kbin.social 11 months ago
Electric bike solves a lot of those issues, but you are correct.
Zink@programming.dev 11 months ago
Maybe, but I feel like that ship has sailed in the US. Both for practical/economical reasons and because will resist. If half the people fought against wearing masks to protect vulnerable people from covid, good luck getting them to give up their "single family home with a yard + 2 cars” lifestyle. For those fortunate enough to have a single family home, that is.
I’m not saying it SHOULD be this way, and I’m not arguing against reducing cars with public transit and walkable/bikeable towns. However, from my perspective inside suburbia that borders rural areas, electrification of vehicles and supplying the grid with renewables is 1000x more likely as the path to fix this stuff environmentally.
And to get rid of cars for non-environmental reasons, I think that will be even more difficult. I mean, I visited Sweden earlier this year and for all the progressive stuff they’re way ahead of us on, there are still cars everywhere. They are smaller, more sensible cars with a much larger proportion being electric, but cars just the same.
bluGill@kbin.social 11 months ago
We are screwed in the US because one side is actively and honestly against transit. The other side plays transit lip service but their actions prove they only want transit as a way to funnel money to some supporter (and so projects cost far too much and what we have runs bad schedules)
TheHotze@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Start small, deregulate zoning so people can build more dense housing, and small corner shops in residential areas, that way it’s not so far to go places. Support bike lanes so people can ride safely if they want to ride. Support work from home to prevent people from having to go anywhere in the first place.
FapFlop@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Think of the shareholders!
Cylusthevirus@kbin.social 11 months ago
If we started now, we'd be ready in a couple decades in all but the most compact metro areas. And that's after we build the requisite political will. The US fucked itself hard leaning into cars as transport.
EngineerGaming@feddit.nl 11 months ago
neighborhoods are better for kid stuff
Maybe it’s just me growing up in the city, but I would not want to raise my kid in an American-style suburb. Imagine being a tween but never being able to go anywhere without your parents, because everything is too far away to walk or bike and public transport is not available. Yikes.
Mio@feddit.nu 11 months ago
Yes. One alternative is communal traffic. People are just to lazy so they can’t wait for it. If every car was indeed banned, goes how good the communal traffic would be then. Since need the increase a lot, they would be going a lot often and suddenly there are no more cars blocking the roads. Also note that you would not have to be driving so you could do other stuff than looking at the road. And you dont have to save up money for the cars. No need to fix the car when it breaks. No need to find a gas station in time. Just less things to think about. Just look at how the flying business work today, no average people own their own plane. But still people make use of communal planes.
calypsopub@lemmy.world 11 months ago
My city (Houston) had a bus system that goes everywhere, but the sheer size and the lack of logical routing makes it hard to use. My friend could drive 20 minutes to work (but cannot drive because of a mental disability) or take multiple buses for 3 hours each way. She now rides an e-bike, but it still takes nearly an hour and she is literally risking her life because there are no bike lanes. Plus the cost of the bike was $3000 and it regularly needs maintenance.
themurphy@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Nothing beats covinience. If it’s easy, people will pay up. That means you are right, that if the communal traffic improves as you say, it would get alot more people using it.
But unfortunately, cars are just so, so convinient, it’s almost impossible to beat, if you don’t straight up outlaw them.
EatYouWell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
We can’t, though. It would cost trillions of dollars and massive population relocation for it to happen.
Cars are here to stay. The only reduction I can see happening is if fully autonomous cars are a thing. I’m betting they won’t be sold to the public and will be used like Uber.
bluGill@kbin.social 11 months ago
Not really. It would cost trillions of dollars - but it would be cheaper than car infrastructure. The key is to start building and running using transit now where it makes the most sense and expand that.
eronth@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I just want more car options and less truck/SUV options
JudahBenHur@lemm.ee 11 months ago
hear hear.
I want to buy a honda plug-in hybrid.
they only make a fucking SUV plug-in hybrid.
philodendron@lemdro.id 11 months ago
I just want a Citroën Ami in America
LordKitsuna@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This is exactly what I want, I don’t need 300 miles of range, I don’t need luxury entertainment systems. I need a simple vehicle with decently comfortable seats and a shitty Walmart $80 bluetooth head unit. In Europe and various parts of China / Japan you can get a small electric vehicle for like 8,000 US dollars and that’s what I want here God damn it
Da_Boom@iusearchlinux.fyi 11 months ago
Honestly that would be great - make the head unit similar to a car from '07/'08 and then if we want to upgrade it wity something aftermarket, we can. Then we can choose what bells and whistles we want.
No autopilot, not internet connected BS. Heck I’d even go without adaptive cruise control and lane assist.
07/08 really was one of the best eras for car interior, because the head units weren’t usually integrated into the dash, meaning you didn’t have to replace trim pieces with your unit in order to upgrade the damned stereo.
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Heck the lane assist, adaptive cruise, and auto pilot isn’t that crazy pricy either.
The comma 3 plus harness is 1500.
Blooper@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I think a large part of the move towards integrated head units had to do with the mandated rear backup camera that necessitates a decent sized screen in the dash in order to use it. The death of CD’s and CD changers also allowed for the screens to grow in size. Lastly, the touchscreens themselves are ever cheaper to manufacture. I love the giant screen in my Chevy Bolt - especially given the Google integration means I don’t have to use the nonsense baked in apps from Chevy.
OhmsLawn@lemmy.world 11 months ago
300 is more than I need, but I do want 200 miles of range.
I would absolutely buy the Mini if I could expect to go over a hundred miles from 80-20% for 10 years, but with a 110 mile range on day one, that just isn’t happening. The 2025 model is rumored to have increased range. If that’s the case, I’ll probably get one.
Garbanzo@lemmy.world 11 months ago
but I do want 200 miles of range
But why?
It seems like many people (me too) base what they think they’ll need off of what they’re accustomed to. My car will get 275-300 miles out of a tank of gas so it just seems crazy to accept less than half of that. But I don’t actually drive that much. Trips where I start full and have to refill before my destination are very rare. Doubling the refueling stops and extending their length wouldn’t actually bother me much, especially considering that for my day to day my car would just charge overnight and I never have to go out of my way for it. I guess what I’m getting at is that if I really think about it, a 110-150 mile range is probably about as much as I should be paying for.
Iceblade02@lemmy.world 11 months ago
An Electric car for 8k€? Where, how, what? Cheapest new I’ve seen is roughly 35k
LordKitsuna@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The Citroen Ami is one, starts around £7700 last i saw
Techmaster@lemm.ee 11 months ago
In China they’re more like $1000
Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Don’t they also burst into flames though? I’m not sure that’s the one for me.
corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Asia didn’t have so many dodge rams.
You sure about the tiny 6 car?
guacupado@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The problem is they’re also adding all this other shit that adds up costs. Just make a car, but it doesn’t use gasoline. That’s it.
indigomirage@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
I got a barebones Chevy Bolt. Simple car - absolutely perfect for the city at times when public transport isn’t an option.
What’s more - it has AndroidAuto/Carplay (mandatory in any future car purchase for me).
GM subsequently cancelled the model (though rumours say they’ll bring it back?) and are building bigger cars instead. Ridiculous.
What we need is a smaller, practical EVs and a robust charging infrastructure. (especially in condos/rentals)
thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
Similar experience from a European.
I own a 2015 Vauxhall Adam. It’s a brilliant little petrol car, 3 doors, very small and very reliable.
GM canned the model in 2019. It makes no sense to me, if they had stuck a battery in it for an electric version I’d have been sold in a heartbeat.
But no, GM wants to focus on big cars that I don’t want. I don’t want anything bigger than a 3 door hatchback, I’m only 20 and have no kids, why do I need some massive fuckoff SUV???
residentmarchant@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I will never understand how the same people that made the Volt and the Bolt made the Hummer EV
It’s such a different style, architecture, and platform that you practically can’t share any parts. So whatever they learned from 10 years of selling EVs went out the window.
mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Unfortunately, GM wants to get rid of Android Auto and Apple Carplay. They want to exclusively use Android Automotive. It looks like Android Auto but it’s standalone. GM cities needing more tighter integration with smart software for their reasoning.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I suspect that Chevy is worried they won’t be able to compete against the Kia EV price point, but that’s just speculation.
mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 11 months ago
But don’t you want your car to sing to you while it drives like a maniac during rush hour because the AI literally wants to beat traffic (very physically).
Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Og VW Beetle, but aluminum and EV please.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Same for the VW Golf
residentmarchant@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I’m so confused why they don’t sell the id4 as a sporty hatchback and call it the GEI or something. It’s the same platform, just tweak the suspension and add some more beefy motors, kinda like the whole idea behind the GTI
Tikiporch@lemmy.world 11 months ago
We, the consumers, have also been saying that. Like, for a while.
indigomirage@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Yes - but a quick glance at the insane profit margins on large SUVs/trucks will tell you why this hasn’t happened.
Something’s gotta give though…
Sensitivezombie@lemmy.zip 11 months ago
They are giving americans what they want. The real problem is continuing to feed the deep rooted car addiction brought on by lobbying and corporate greed. There has not been a better time to instead invest heavily on public transportation, build extension inter-state, inter-city train systems, subway or rail systems for cities. Overtime phasing out freeways and replacing them walkable districts. I understand this won’t happen over night and cities like Houston and LA are sprawling cities of 100s of miles but it needs to start somewhere and it starts with heavy investment from the federal government. Time to finally invest the tax money back to the taxpayers not defense, wars (direct, proxy or funded) and foreign affairs in the name of “national security”. How about domestic security from corporate greed, price gouging, poor education, horrible Healthcare are system, costly drug prices to say the least. I understand for all these there’s need to be a massive social change booth in the country and in the world’s largest retirement home, US Congress.
atrielienz@lemmy.world 11 months ago
They aren’t. They are making larger vehicles to keep up with the demands for fuel efficiency (in gasoline vehicles) and max range in electric vehicles because of NHTSA regulations.
There absolutely have been better times to invest in public transit and expansion of transit systems. You require skilled man power for those things. Not just to build them but to upkeep them. And we’re at a time where there are a lot of things that will need to be fixed first or we won’t be able to have nice things. The mental health crisis for one, and homelessness/ rising housing costs for another. Adding infrastructure skyrockets the cost of living making affordable housing farther out of reach, and that adds fuel to the fire where the mental health crisis is concerned. You touch on corporate greed but you don’t outright say we need more regulation. We do. But to get it we have to have people to enforce it. We don’t have that either.
Trollception@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I always see the argument for making areas more walkable. But I like a good chunk of Americans live in a subdivision and unless they tear down my neighbors homes to build stores I need to walk like 20 minutes to get anywhere I can purchase something. That said I used to live in Chicago and everything was walkable, however the population density made it possible. I don’t think you can simply make a place more walkable unless the population density supports it.
thoughts3rased@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
I feel a way to combat suburban hellholes is to at least make it more cycle-friendly in those areas. Big stroads kill any chance of people being able to cycle to stores, I feel a lot of people don’t want to have to drive to get to a Walmart, especially in hot months and would probably prefer to bike it instead. There’s obviously also the health benefits of people cycling too. For those more lazy individuals, e-bikes and e-scooters are a good idea that can help them rely less on their car too, and are far cheaper to run than a full car.
Eliminating huge sprawling suburbs is a monumental task, but we can at least apply patch fixes for some things at the moment.
Goodtoknow@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Why tear anything down? With zoning changes we could re-allow neighbors to build Front yard businesses like small grocers and cafes again
Shortbus@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I can’t be the only one who has noticed the uptick in the negative EV press lately. Is this the same death throws akin to the buggy whip lobby of yore?
evranch@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
People are genuinely unimpressed with the high prices and low range numbers on what are supposed to be the next generation of vehicles. Volume and tech advancement were supposed to make them cheap and practical, but all that’s gone up is the price.
Especially with talk of banning the sale of gas vehicles in the fairly near future, they are going to have to do a lot better than this or a lot of people are just going to end up without any vehicle at all.
Myself living in a rural, cold climate, 200km from any major center, nobody has made any practical vehicle for me yet. I even already own an EV, but it’s really just a powerful golf cart. Once it gets much below freezing, I’m lucky to make it to a neighbour’s place and back.
dan1101@lemm.ee 11 months ago
I think the lack of charging infrastructure charging time, and range make EVs impractical for many in the USA. Many could commute in one just fine but for long trips they just would be a hassle. Plus they are on average way too expensive.
joelfromaus@aussie.zone 11 months ago
Everytime I consider buying an EV I do some research and they always seem to have all of the bells and whistles. Then I get to price and it’s like $60,000+ and I can’t help but wonder how much cheaper it could be without all of the added features.
Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 months ago
This. Just this, so much. How much would a battery, an electric engine and safety shit cost?
evranch@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
I’ve seen conversion kits for old trucks under $10k. So there’s your answer.
Unfortunately said kits are often lacking in range unless you’re willing to fill your truck box with batteries, because you can’t really retrofit a “skateboard” style battery.
I literally want that skateboard with seats and a steering wheel. Hell, give me a diesel burning heater and a washer fluid bulb I have to stomp on like I have in my old truck, I’m not picky
capital@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I just bought a used 2022 Polestar for $35k.
Acters@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Chevy bolt at least has half of the features but still quite a few, I would say a very set of features to include, but I do imagine it would only shave less than 5k if the bolt had the most basic of features. That means it would be 1-2k cheaper as a used vehicle. I do think it’s the more reasonable priced vehicle, and we need more competitors to this vehicle. On the other hand, most of the cost is the battery and it just something researchers must be paid to bring innovations for and its just not reasonable to pay them cheap as they are doing a great thing for humanity. However, this forces companies to charge higher prices and should instead be subsidized without trademark/IP protections restricting its adoption.
ExLisper@linux.community 11 months ago
Last year I bought new Citroen e-berlingo for 25.000€. It would be €32.000 without subsidies but still not 60.000.
BilboBargains@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Lithium ion battery technology is not a good fit with the type of vehicles we currently produce. The energy density is nowhere near fossil fuels and this implies a big battery, which also adds mass. By 2027, Land Rover and other makers of SUV will be nudging 3000kg for some of their models.
IMHO the only viable solution for li-ion is ultralight vehicles. Bicycles and Velomobiles are light enough to get decent range at speed. A bicycle used with integrated high speed rail would solve most of our commuting problems. The fact is, whether you are making tailpipe emissions or not, F=ma. Moving a 3t mass around for one person is always going to use an extravagant amount of energy and that energy has to come from somewhere.
Work from home, eat less meat, make fewer journeys, use a bike more often, make fewer children. Those are some things most of us can do.
JackbyDev@programming.dev 11 months ago
Honestly, cheaper and smaller cars across the board would be nice. Everything is a fucking tank now.
magnetosphere@kbin.social 11 months ago
The last paragraph of this article is right on. Don’t just tell people to buy EVs and then call it a day. Improve the infrastructure. Make buying an EV feel like less of an unsupported risk.
hark@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I understand that automakers don’t want to make plug-in hybrids because of the complexity, but mine has served me well and most of the time I can stay within the electric range (where sometimes I go a whole year without having to fill up on gas). With my use case, it’s actually better for the environment than a full EV since the battery doesn’t have to be so huge.
Regardless, if these automakers don’t get their act together, they’re going to be destroyed by cheap Chinese EVs, just like how US automakers got destroyed by Japanese vehicles during the oil embargo and periods of high gas prices. Maybe they’ll just lobby the government to lock out the Chinese competition one way or another.
nbafantest@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Donald Trumps tariffs have been a disaster
There are great EVs out there but trump blocked them. We have all lost out
Buffalox@lemmy.world 11 months ago
That’s actually what they did before the Tesla, and the result was the cars were so useless nobody wanted to buy them.
Most carmakers make small subcompact EVs, and they are way more useful now, but even Dacia which is probably the cheapest European made EV, isn’t competitive against similar sized or prized ICE cars.
ICE cars have a century of iterations and optimizations on cost effective production, it will take a while longer to get the EVs to the same level.
Batteries are getting both cheaper and better and safer, so there is no doubt EVs will ultimately surpass ICE in probably every segment.a9249@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Nissan leaf… IS FIFTY GRAND?! +custom charger +shit range… yeah I’ll keep my 10yr old dino burning corolla mate.
irotsoma@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Or, ya know, invest in battery tech so it’s more convenient to charge cars and push for gas stations and parking lots to all have chargers.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 months ago
Or people need to give up the idea of taking three tons of metal to work with them every day.
Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Best thing for consumers and environmental would be conversion. We already have the cars. I like my 2003 Golf. I won’t be getting rid of it until I need to.
Why replace 8 billion cars when we can convert them. Yeah they won’t be nearly as efficient but it’s a stop gap between scrapping that many cars. Also I can’t afford a new ev. I need a small run around with 259 miles.
Blademax@lemmy.one 11 months ago
Auto Dealers : (adds “Market Adjustment” $$$ to offset the cheaper EV prices…) “Hey, why no one buy EV? We need a bail out!”
/s
verdantbanana@lemmy.world 11 months ago
$7.25 minimum wage
Walmart is paying about $14
not sure cheaper, smaller EVs will help spur adoption better wages will
Jolteon@lemmy.zip 11 months ago
It’s almost like the people who buy EVs are doing it to save money.
RedTie13@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I do miss smaller cars and if they were electric too? Count me in! The 80’s economy cars were the best.
blazera@kbin.social 11 months ago
nah, they've made their evil choice, just let me import a small cheap EV from some country that cares. Just liquidate US automakers churning out larger and larger ICE trucks and SUV's.
Nougat@kbin.social 11 months ago
Because those will sell great in a market filled with massive SUVs and pickup trucks.
EatYouWell@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Honestly, I’d love a smart car sized EV. If I’m just running errands I don’t need my truck (it’s a Santa Cruz, not a gas guzzler).
And my wife has to commute 40 miles a day, which makes her jeep kinda impractical.
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 11 months ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Earlier this week, we learned of an effort by some auto dealers to pump the brakes on the US government’s electric vehicle adoption goals.
EVs are sitting too long on dealership lots, they say, and the public just isn’t ready to switch.
But the industry has some work to do if it wants to smoothly transition from those early adopters to the “early majority” phase, and JD Power’s advice sounds a lot like what we constantly hear in the comments: build smaller, cheaper EVs.
And mainstream customers have to pay a lot more for the privilege of going electric; an EV powertrain only adds about $4,000 to the price of a comparable premium SUV, but the gap between a mass market compact crossover and one with an internal combustion engine is around $18,000.
Like it or not, EV buyers have some legitimate concerns not shared by people buying conventionally powered vehicles.
“The sooner EV stakeholders focus on consumer education and significant investment in EV charging infrastructure, the sooner mass market consumers will follow,” JD Power said.
The original article contains 378 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 53%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
runeko@programming.dev 11 months ago
Thought that image was of a rad Winamp equalizer at first. Was disappointed.
Satelllliiiiiiiteeee@kbin.social 11 months ago
Sorry, best we can do is massive, expensive pseudo-luxury SUVs
grayman@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I wouldn’t call Kia nor Hyundai nor Toyota nor Honda anything close to pseudo luxury. Has the bar been lowered because of all the plasticated electronics and DUAL ZONE AC?
lemann@lemmy.one 11 months ago
The fit and finish of interiors in general has really fallen… literally plastic everywhere. Uphostery, leather, wood/wood-effect etc are all mostly gone
Nollij@sopuli.xyz 11 months ago
There’s quite a wide range within those brands. Is it safe to say that you would consider Lexus or Acura to be at least pseudo luxury? What about their entry models that are just a rebranded version of the Honda/Toyota model?
Hell, how do we even define luxury? You can get heated leather seats in just about anything these days, and a few decades ago those were both ultra premium options.
SlopppyEngineer@discuss.tchncs.de 11 months ago
Small cars, small profits.
dubyakay@lemmy.ca 11 months ago
Lots of small cars sold, lots of small profit.
ElegantBiscuit@lemm.ee 11 months ago
The large profit margin SUVs are necessary for a company to achieve scale to then be able to produce the smaller cheaper stuff. Fixed costs like the factory, tooling, training, designing, that all takes a lot of money up front before even selling a single vehicle, and the smaller and cheaper the vehicle coming out of that production pipeline is, the longer the payback period will be. And when we’re talking about billions of dollars in cost, it’s hard to remain solvent when interest payments on the debt grow exponentially over time.
It’s why before tesla there had not been an American auto company startup for like 70 years, Tesla almost went bankrupt, and Rivian is just starting to head in the right direction. Lucid is probably fucked and they’re mostly Saudi owned these days anyways, and the rest of the US EV startup space ranges from a joke to a scam.
What legacy automakers already have in staff and part of the production line established is actually kind of useless when they have to wait to establish their electric motor, battery, and chassis production, which probably just means a new factory anyways. Give it a few years and the cheaper smaller stuff will come, because right now AFAIK only tesla actually has the free cash flow to fund an EV economy car at scale. Everyone else is still sinking billions establishing any EV production at all, and interest rates aren’t helping the speed of their progress either.
cyd@lemmy.world 11 months ago
There’s more than one way to skin a cat. The Chinese EV companies that have come up in the last few years use a diversity of business strategies, not all involving high margin SUVs. BYD’s cars, for example, are spinoffs of its battery manufacturing business.
notonReddit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 months ago
Aaand just like thst the actual thoughtful response is downvoted in the comment section. This places becomes more reddit each day.
Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 months ago
I’m not sure you understand economies of scale and profit margin.
USSEthernet@startrek.website 11 months ago
I wouldn’t even call Tesla expensive or luxury. Every Tesla I’ve been in has seem empty, plain, and feels cheap. The only expensive part about it is the batteries and the labor to make it. I’m sure the price is just inflated due to all of the attention and hype that company has received over the years.