Nobody “dabbles” in a marketable saleable good for decades, unless being forced or subsidized to do so. Shareholders don’t give away money for long periods even for supposedly amazing opportunities that never materialize.History, EV's are the alternative replacement choice for ICE vehicles now & in the past. Ad in the fact that the OEM's have been dabbling in electric cars for decades. The last two more so & the last ten years even more EV's offered/sold. Follow the trend. Will there be some sort of revolutionary alternative to EV's that are the majority offered I doubt it in my lifetime. The OEM's have basically hinted to us their path this & the next decade is electric. Toyota lagging to transition b/c they don't necessarily need to. They have the reputation of "reliability" that nets them good sales figures so they don't have a whole lot of incentive for a fast electric change up but they will eventually. I will say they better be prepared in case we get Chinese EV's in the US/CA.
not trueextreme cold; something that does not affect EVs at all.
trueEVs have battery issues in extreme temps.
Which incentivize costs taxpayers money.100% Agreed! This is why Gov't is best to incentivise but otherwise get out of the way!
More truth cannot be said on the subjectRemove the taxpayer-funded incentives and EVs shrink to maybe 5% of the market
Sure, inner city dwellers would do good with EV.And I’m fine with that.
Well unfortunately this is how the scientific process works. In any case it doesn't change "the why" although certain outlets have a financial incentive to generate outrage by suggesting otherwise.I made the same assumption as you did that he was speaking of the world market.
We will certainly disagree on the red highlighted portion. After over 40 imminent climate crises claimed by the UN since the late 60s with the earth still spinning along its axis, greener than ever in recorded time, I lean toward a vastly different position. Same boat as digital currency; controlling the masses is how it appears to my noodle. We don't have to hash that out publicly. I respect your posts and if you want to banter back and forth we can but let's do that on PM if you'd like. I'm prone to getting into trouble!
I would 100% agree with you, if EVs were more convenient to use than ICE (same time to fuel up, less shortcomings). ICE cars replaced horses quickly because they had so many advantages, like a longer operating range, etc. EVs are a novelty for MOST of the population at this point in time. Everyone I know who owns one either charges at home, charges at work, or has a second ICE vehicle. Those three things are not options for everyone like fueling up a gas car is. Manufacturers are jumping on board because of government regulations, and also the carrot of eventual enormous profitability from less moving parts has been dangled in front of them.History, EV's are the alternative replacement choice for ICE vehicles now & in the past. Ad in the fact that the OEM's have been dabbling in electric cars for decades. The last two more so & the last ten years even more EV's offered/sold. Follow the trend. Will there be some sort of revolutionary alternative to EV's that are the majority offered I doubt it in my lifetime. The OEM's have basically hinted to us their path this & the next decade is electric. Toyota lagging to transition b/c they don't necessarily need to. They have the reputation of "reliability" that nets them good sales figures so they don't have a whole lot of incentive for a fast electric change up but they will eventually. I will say they better be prepared in case we get Chinese EV's in the US/CA.
History, EV's are the alternative replacement choice for ICE vehicles now & in the past. Ad in the fact that the OEM's have been dabbling in electric cars for decades. The last two more so & the last ten years even more EV's offered/sold. Follow the trend. Will there be some sort of revolutionary alternative to EV's that are the majority offered I doubt it in my lifetime. The OEM's have basically hinted to us their path this & the next decade is electric. Toyota lagging to transition b/c they don't necessarily need to. They have the reputation of "reliability" that nets them good sales figures so they don't have a whole lot of incentive for a fast electric change up but they will eventually. I will say they better be prepared in case we get Chinese EV's in the US/CA.
Show me where I said there could be no incentive's to get there... I'll be here waiting.History? New technology still struggling to gain a real market share without massive incentivizing and you point to history as your rationale.
That’s the most absurdly disconnected thing I’ve heard in a while.
Year | Electric vehicle share of sales | Stock of electric vehicles |
---|---|---|
2011 | 0.17 | 22,000 |
2012 | 0.41 | 75,000 |
2013 | 0.74 | 172,000 |
2014 | 0.89 | 290,000 |
2015 | 0.78 | 400,000 |
2016 | 1.00 | 570,000 |
2017 | 1.20 | 760,000 |
2018 | 2.00 | 1,120,000 |
2019 | 2.10 | 1,450,000 |
2020 | 2.20 | 1,740,000 |
2021 | 4.60 | 2,020,000 |
Note: Electric vehicles include battery electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle models |
Ron Paul already has said that if the USA as a whole has 10 percent of registered vehicles as ev's we will exceed the Tokyo Climate agreement. Governments want to enforce unfortunately. If we could get politicians that said buy what you want not you have to have ev's by a certain date. I'm still waiting for Congress to get rid of the 25 year import rules. (Thanks Mercedes and Ferrari).I really dislike how it always seems to boil down to EV vs ICE. Both have benefits and both have lifestyles they suit well and visa versa. No one should be forced to buy either one is my main opinion.
Yeah 690,000 vehicles were junked in the USA not sure about Europe. The vast majority were perfectly fine for commuting or for reliable transportation. The unfortunate caveat was that they had to be running and titled.Which incentivize costs taxpayers money.
The last plan "Cash for Clunkers" destroyed many good vehicles. Where did the cash come from? Me and you.
Ron Paul already has said that if the USA as a whole has 10 percent of registered vehicles as ev's we will exceed the Tokyo Climate agreement. Governments want to enforce unfortunately. If we could get politicians that said buy what you want not you have to have ev's by a certain date. I'm still waiting for Congress to get rid of the 25 year import rules. (Thanks Mercedes and Ferrari).
Show us where they "forced" you to take advantage of that program. Surely you brought your car in if it was "forced" right? Otherwise that is pure political nonsense carried as fact by some here. Folks were not taking in their well conditioned vehicles in droves so let's not act like they were good vehicles with high resale value. The ones I saw were not in good shape & they were getting a good trade-in value then what they otherwise would have not been able to trade them into the dealer.Yeah 690,000 vehicles were junked in the USA not sure about Europe. The vast majority were perfectly fine for commuting or for reliable transportation. The unfortunate caveat was that they had to be running and titled.
Well unfortunately this is how the scientific process works. In any case it doesn't change "the why" although certain outlets have a financial incentive to generate outrage by suggesting otherwise.
Actually "But why did taxpayers, having already bailed out GM and Chrysler once, have to do so again to the tune of $3 billion through the $3,500-$4,500 C4C incentives? This taxpayer money simply enabled the dealers to avoid having to offer discounts off sticker prices and to extract higher profit margins than they would have otherwise obtained on the qualifying new cars". Apparently you missed the "Taxpayer " part of this which yes means I and everyone else was forced to subsidize this.Show us where they "forced" you to take advantage of that program. Surely you brought your car in if it was "forced" right? Otherwise that is pure political nonsense carried as fact by some here. Folks were not taking in their well conditioned vehicles in droves so let's not act like they were good vehicles with high resale value. The ones I saw were not in good shape & they were getting a good trade-in value then what they otherwise would have not been able to trade them into the dealer.
Does not surprise based on a couple things. Some you point out. Like you, I too am in no need or position any time soon to where I could see an EV enter the life of myself and the wife. We barley drive 10,000 mi a year with TWO cars so... Another reason for No Surprise of this from Toyota is the numerous articles and videos I have run across the last 2-3 years from Toyota explaining all the work and even showing design drawings and plans they have either on paper or in actual works involving "other fuel" type of vehicles. Vehicles that are not powered by normal gasoline and not battery powered EVs.In a previous post I mentioned the area I lived in (lower Dutchess Cty, NY) was ripe for charging infrastructure but overall rather lacking. I questioned barriers to entry or ROI simply not high enough for businesses to invest. I believe that was two days ago. On the news of all places, this morning I heard a snippet stating Toyota CEO from Japan reports EV's max out at 30% of the overall vehicle market. Now that makes sense to me.
EV's are not for me in my current driving habits or geographical location. I could see the utility if I were urban. But I'm not. More I learn the more I'll stay away but no issues if EV's work for you. Not a bash here as I won't spend my money on one but to each their own. EV's don't hinder me in any way just the possibility of Govt mandating them.
EVs Will Max Out At 30 Percent Market Share: Toyota Chairman
Also, online used car retailer Vroom is dead, and Boeing may not hit its production goals because of recent issues.jalopnik.com
It's one thing for many of us to say EV sales have cooled significantly or no way EV's are more popular than ever; another when a business titan has these words to say.
But according to others on this site nobody wants PHEV.I would agree with Toyota's CEO, however would be great if their current hybrid offerings had better availability. RAV4 Primes are out 3 years to get one as an example. At least in my area.
*autistic screeching*
That's a pathetic way of communicating to quote me as saying something I didn't. That's right you don't have anything to show except personal attacks.. sad!All those pretty graphs just to show a 4+% percent share of overall sales despite the governments boot on the neck of the auto industry.
EV may be the future. Widespread adoption of current battery tech isn’t likely.
Yes, you do have a point about taxes. I could think of worse ways to spend though. I didn't necessarily agree with the long-term outcome of the bailout either.Actually "But why did taxpayers, having already bailed out GM and Chrysler once, have to do so again to the tune of $3 billion through the $3,500-$4,500 C4C incentives? This taxpayer money simply enabled the dealers to avoid having to offer discounts off sticker prices and to extract higher profit margins than they would have otherwise obtained on the qualifying new cars". Apparently you missed the "Taxpayer " part of this which yes means I and everyone else was forced to subsidize this.