GM is pulling back on EVs

[Gregs24]

I‘m going to own an ICE vehicle right up until the day that’s it’s no longer viable. It probably won’t be my primary mode of transport but I’ll continue to use the vehicle periodically, as I do now. Does that make me a hypocrite? No. It means that I’m doing exactly what I’m allowed to do under the laws that I’m advocating for.
We aren’t asking the government to confiscate cars, nor are we saying that people can’t have ANY CO2 emissions.

But that is the stance that many of the 'freedom freaks' on here keep trying to claim.

I too will be driving my V8, probably on renewable fuels before much longer. I don't do a huge mileage each year in that car, we use our PHEV mostly on electric for that, charged from our solar panels. We are doing MORE to reduce our CO2 output than most and yet some moron on here has accused me of hypocrisy - the irony!

Sponsored

 

[Skye]

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...r-insurer-may-have-junk-whole-car-2023-03-20/

While EVs have been around for some time, they are only now coming along at scale.

One problem associated with the machines is a lack of recycling and repair infrastructure: it's just not there yet.

Traditional junkyards to recover ICE-related materials exist everywhere. EVs? Little, if any. I think that can change over time, but as we're seeing on this topic in general, it won't happen right away. The handling of some EV items present unique challenges, not every municipality or country is prepared to deal with.

 

[Gregs24]

https://www.reuters.com/business/au...r-insurer-may-have-junk-whole-car-2023-03-20/

While EVs have been around for some time, they are only now coming along at scale.

One problem associated with the machines is a lack of recycling and repair infrastructure: it's just not there yet.

Traditional junkyards to recover ICE-related materials exist everywhere. EVs? Little, if any. I think that can change over time, but as we're seeing on this topic in general, it won't happen right away. The handling of some EV items present unique challenges, not every municipality or country is prepared to deal with.

That headline doesn't really match up with reality. There are now battery repair services in Europe that will replace individual cells if required rather than the whole battery. Not surprising really - demand related. A recent case of a Jaguar iPace driver who had an HV battery failure - Jaguar wanted £10k+ to fix (can't remember exactly) and he got it removed repaired and replaced for £3k ish. This will happen more and more as unsurprisingly demand drives new services.

Obviously EV's have been around in scale outside the US for some time so recycling / repurposing already happens

Electric car battery recycling: what happens to the dead batteries? | carwow

 

[K4fxd]

Now, if mandates were already in place, the range of options that we’d have to choose from would’ve made it so that there was a vehicle available that fit the bill.

That is wishful thinking. If mandates were in place you would have no options that fit your bill.

 

[sk47]

I wasn’t referring to range or any of the “issues” you guys keep harping on about.
I was referring to seating capacity, drivetrain configuration, towing weight limits etc.

Theses things will come when the market changes.

Hello; I also was not being specific about nor limiting to a few specific "issues" of EV's. You nailed it in that whatever the issues happen to be for your family can be met by an ICE, but not an EV. You are not the only one to reach such a conclusion. For you and most people the EV falls short where the ICE makes the grade.
Fear not. According to the Volvo study you can drive the new ICE up to somewhere around 68,000 miles and still be ahead of a comparable EV on overall emissions.

I do figure you do not yet have a grasp of what this mandated future will be like. Mandates will not change a physical reality. Nor will the scope of these mandates stop at the point where you will be comfortable.

 

[sk47]

It is just typical. If an EV cannot match or exceed what an ICE can do IN EVERY SINGLE WAY then it is no good. Even if the area it isn't as good is unimportant to you. Towing capacity is unimportant to me, but important to you - it doesn't mean either of us is wrong.

This is the stupid, black and white, head in the sand, I will never change attitude that typifies some of the fools on here. They simply do not understand incremental change - I suppose it is quite a big word!

Hello; If EV's are to replace the ICE it does need to do all the things an ICE can do at least on an even basic level. All EV's do not need to have towing capacity any more than all ICE's do. But if towing capacity and tow range is a need then the EV at least needs to match.

The question becomes for many if the EV will not match or beat the ICE, then why have an EV? The only real answer turns out to be we are to accept the EV limitations because they will "save" the planet. Were the save the planet plank of the agenda correct such might be a decent argument. Turns out the EV as a whole is not so green after all.

The incremental change option went out the window when anti ICE mandates hit the books.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Come on, I know you are more realistic than this.

WHUT?

Objection, your honor; assumes facts not in evidence!

 

[tripleyellowmustang]

But that is the stance that many of the 'freedom freaks' on here keep trying to claim.

I too will be driving my V8, probably on renewable fuels before much longer. I don't do a huge mileage each year in that car, we use our PHEV mostly on electric for that, charged from our solar panels. We are doing MORE to reduce our CO2 output than most and yet some moron on here has accused me of hypocrisy - the irony!

Name calling, lashing out, gnashing of teeth, all while you try to justify your ownership of ICE vehicles and convince yourself that you are a champion of the environment. Typical modus operandi. A raw nerve has been struck; guilt has set in. You don’t get a free pass just because you own a PHEV and solar panels, not when you lecture us on the environment and green energy. You’re a hypocrite. Own it.

 

[tripleyellowmustang]

WHUT?

Objection, your honor; assumes facts not in evidence!

Sustained.

 

[tripleyellowmustang]

Deleted as link already posted.

 

[K4fxd]

Oh boy, don't scratch your EV battery.

Scratched EV battery? Your insurer may have to junk the whole car | Reuters

"For many electric vehicles, there is no way to repair or assess even slightly damaged battery packs after accidents, forcing insurance companies to write off cars with few miles - leading to higher premiums and undercutting gains from going electric.

And now those battery packs are piling up in scrapyards in some countries, a previously unreported and expensive gap in what was supposed to be a 'circular economy.'"

"'We're buying electric cars for sustainability reasons," said Matthew Avery, research director at automotive risk intelligence company Thatcham Research. "But an EV isn't very sustainable if you've got to throw the battery away after a minor collision.'"

"Battery packs can cost tens of thousands of dollars and represent up to 50% of an EV's price tag, often making it uneconomical to replace them."

"Lauterwasser noted EV battery production emits far more CO2 than fossil-fuel models, meaning EVs must be driven for thousands of miles before they offset those extra emissions.

'If you throw away the vehicle at an early stage, you've lost pretty much all advantage in terms of CO2 emissions,' he said."

"The UK currently has no EV battery recycling facilities, so Synetiq has to remove the batteries from written-off cars and store them in containers. Hill estimated at least 95% of the cells in the hundreds of EV battery packs - and thousands of hybrid battery packs - Synetiq has stored at Doncaster are undamaged and should be reused.

It already costs more to insure most EVs than traditional cars."

"According to Bankrate, an online publisher of financial content, U.S. insurers know that 'if even a minor accident results in damage to the battery pack ... the cost to replace this key component may exceed $15,000.'

"A replacement battery for a Tesla Model 3 can cost up to $20,000, for a vehicle that retails at around $43,000 but depreciates quickly over time."

Hey now, don't let facts get in the way of emotions.

 

[Burkey]

Hello; I also was not being specific about nor limiting to a few specific "issues" of EV's. You nailed it in that whatever the issues happen to be for your family can be met by an ICE, but not an EV. You are not the only one to reach such a conclusion. For you and most people the EV falls short where the ICE makes the grade.
Fear not. According to the Volvo study you can drive the new ICE up to somewhere around 68,000 miles and still be ahead of a comparable EV on overall emissions.

I do figure you do not yet have a grasp of what this mandated future will be like. Mandates will not change a physical reality. Nor will the scope of these mandates stop at the point where you will be comfortable.

The issue isn’t what you think it is.
The issue is this -
There currently isn’t a seven seat, 4WD wagon, with the required towing capacity, in either an EV or Hyrbid, available in Australia.

The issue isn’t range, availability of charging stations or any of the crap you guys harp on about.

The problem is that the vehicle doesn’t exist.
The reason it doesn’t exist is because the car companies think the demand isn’t there yet and subsequently haven’t produced one. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not an EV/hybrid is a suitable solution.

 

[K4fxd]

1. Toyota Highlander Hybrid · 2. Ford Explorer Hybrid · 3. Toyota Sequoia · 4. Lexus RX L Hybrid.

None of these are sold in Aus?

 

[Burkey]

1. Toyota Highlander Hybrid · 2. Ford Explorer Hybrid · 3. Toyota Sequoia · 4. Lexus RX L Hybrid.

None of these are sold in Aus?

The RX350H is available, but it’s only 5 seats.
The rest don’t exist here.
Toyota do a seven seat hybrid, but it’s 2wd and suited for city driving.

 

[tripleyellowmustang]

The UN’s ‘scientific’ climate report is nothing more than confected hysteria (yahoo.com)

"Even worse, net zero is turning into an ideology, and one that, like most rigid belief systems, will waste resources on an epic scale while failing to even achieve its original goal.

With just the slightest of nudges, free markets and commercially-driven innovation are more than capable of delivering dramatic reductions in carbon emissions. And they could do it a lot more quickly and cheaply, and with far greater popular consent, than the top-down, state-led solutions pushed by the IPCC and its supporters."

"Right on cue, we were treated to yet more alarming headlines and news reports designed to build support for yet more state intervention and even higher spending."

"In reality, there are two big problems with the IPCC’s work, and indeed with the wider drive towards net zero. The first is that it is driven by grand-standing politicians, committees and global bureaucrats. There is constant pressure to ramp up the alarmism, to double down on hysteria, and to fix every problem with targets and more state spending.

The second is that, because it is driven by politicians, officials and lobbyists, it consistently under-estimates the ability of free markets and private industry to deliver solutions, and to do so far more efficiently and effectively than any global committee ever could."

"And yet none of that is acknowledged in the latest IPCC report. The real threat to sensible action on climate change right now is not that governments are moving too slowly. It is that they are making bad decisions, choosing the wrong technologies, wasting too much money, and creating a backlash among the people who will be forced to pay for it all."

Sponsored