CBS News: Electric vehicles fall drastically short of Obama's 1 million goal

Cwerdna – Another example of the government “Trying To Sell Ice To Eskimos” or building a “Bridge To Nowhere” or you name it. First off, the government cannot “invest” in anything --- IT AIN’T THE GIMMIT’S MONEY – IT IS TAXPAYER’S MONEY. The government can only “spend” taxpayer money not “invest” it. If the government truly invested taxpayer money, then all the money it has “invested” over the decades should be reaping “investor profits” not the “investor indebtedness” of $15 Trillion Dollars we see.

The CBS piece is not “negative,” it is just reporting that the government spending $2.4 billion in “Other People’s Money” is not going to be “profitable” for either the Guv or us taxpayers. Trying to build and sell all-electric cars in the millions, without building a concomitant charging infrastructure to support them is a loser venture. I would rather invest in “loser” Facebook than in a “loser” EV-Venture. The government needs to do what it does best, build an electric vehicle charging-infrastructure. The government should not be trying to pick winners or trying to create a demand for electric vehicles. IF YOU BUILD IT (EV INFRASTRUCTURE) THEY (EVs) WILL COME.

ELECTRIC TRANSPORTATION ANECDOTE: When I was a kid in Chicago, the city had electric streetcars, and a network of streetcar tracks that crisscrossed the city. Lotsa people rode streetcars back then. In the name of “investing” in transportation progress, “Genius Government Leader” politicians tore up all the streetcar tracks, and today no one rides electric streetcars. Barry Obama was schooled and mentored by the same political machine that tore up all the streetcar tracks and turned the streetcars into razor blades. Yeah, the government is really a savvy “investor” (cough, choke, gag).

DATA POINT: Back in May, my church held their 12th Annual, $50 per ticket, three tickets for $100, new Car Give-Away Raffle 2012 fundraiser for our church school. The winning raffle ticket holder could pick either, an All-Electric Nissan Leaf, or a Gas-Electric Hybrid Toyota Prius Two Sedan Two, or Toyota Prius V Two. The winning ticket holder passed on the All-Electric Leaf and Hybrid Prius Sedan, and picked the Hybrid Toyota Prius V Wagon. Even at the nearly “FREE” $50 per ticket, three tickets for $100 cost of acquisition, the winning ticket holder, Marcia Fogerty, passed on the $30K Electric Vehicle Leaf with a $7,500 Government Rebate. If people will not select an All-Electric Vehicle for nearly “FREE,” you will have a hard time selling millions of them.

 

I was aware of the goal, and actually laughed when I heard it. That's not to say I don't want EVs on the road, much the contrary. I just don't feel the masses or cars (as a whole - infrastructure, knowledge, battery tech, etc) as a whole are just yet ready for that. I hold out hope they will be at some point. It'll take a lot of learning the general public, and maybe a total shift in behavior and commuting ideology.

 

When the goal came out, like many government goals it was unrealistic. That cbs chart though is also very flawed, it doesn't even have the prius phv or any of the ford energis.

2017 is the likely year to hit a million plug ins. The biggest subsidy, the tax credit only gets spent when the cars are actually bought. But the unreasonable goal did cause money to be spent ahead of time on battery plants.

Pike Research Forecasts 1 Million Plug-in Electric Cars by 2016 | PluginCars.com

Its tough to forecast though.

 

....if Toyota makes plug-in Prius version the standard Prius offering by 2014 or so (not hearing too much about this plan lately) then there is a chance at a million vehicles by 2017. Presuambly if Toyota does this the cost of a plug-in would be lower, more like a standard Prius hybrid today.

 

This NEGATIVE sensationalist wreaks of the days YELLOW JOURNALISM.

They don't mentaion anything about The Prius Hydrid; the most successful system in the world.

When Benjamin Franklin visited France and saw the Montgofier baloon, one observer commented, "What good dose it serve. What purpose does it have?"

Franklin responded, "What good is a newborn baby."

 

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood today.
But I'm tired of this debate.
So there won't be a Million EV's on the road by the year 2015. And our Government invested money into at least partial support of this goal, and
encouragement of battery technology advancement.
IMO the only reason this is even being reported is it allows certain news outlets the opportunity to put EV, Failure, and Obama all in the same sentence.
Personally, as far as battery technology advancement and support of EV development, I'd rather set an unrealistic goal and fail in the attempt, than succeed in say, building better weapons of mass destruction. But that is just me.
Also I don't think there is any way of discussing this without on some level it becoming a political discussion. Because the choice of reporting this in the manner it is being reported- is political.
We are being given precious little more detail than the gasp inducing figure of 2.4 billion evidently being invested, alongside the supposed specific goal of 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015 . But we shouldn't miss the few words most people will ignore- "as part of"...which means there is more to this 2.4 billion dollar investment than just the goal of 1 million EV's being on the road by 2015.
As I said before, in a different thread. I have no problem with investment into battery technology and supporting the development of alternative vehicles. I even have no problem with setting goals and reaching them, or setting goals and falling short.
But what I'm getting tired of, is specific news outlets, picking certain specifics to create headlines that they know will paint not only the Obama Administration in a negative light, but the entire EV, alternative automobile industry.
The government under ANY administration throws a lot of money down the toilet. Be it Democratic or Republican. It kind of boils down to what do you want to support?
To be honest? Before I could either fully defend the spent 2.5 Billion, or fully condemn it...I'd need to know far more details about the entirety of the investment. What we are being told here are just the specifics that only make EV's look like a foolish investment, and that make the Obama administration look bad. When someone slaps blinders on me, and say's "Look at That!" my reaction is always to want to take a better look at EVERYTHING around me....

 

Wouldn't the Fed's spending on the Hoover Dam and the Tennessee Valley
Authority qualify as "investments?"

Hoover Dam--It Will Be Paid Off in Full Today - Los Angeles Times

TVA: Frequently Asked Questions About TVA

 

CATGIC, when our government invests, the goals are different. We (our government) invests in highways, in electrification, in water delivery. The ROI on these investments are often extremely high. You can't even calculate the ROI of our highway system, for example.

America needs to reduce gasoline consumption. More to the point: America WILL reduce gasoline consumption. We have already reached Peak Oil. Look at where the new drilling is targeting: The tar sands of Canada, northernmost Canada, and 5,000 feet below the sea floor.

WAKE UP!!! The world is obviously running out of oil. Of course the oil industry doesn't care; they want to sell as much as they can right now, this minute. And they need high prices to support the crazy-high investments needed to drill in the hostile remote places they're in. But we need to reduce consumption, and EV's and PHEV's are the only clear way to do it.

 

Cwerdna, I absolutely agree that plug compatibility is essential if we are to have a charging infrastructure. I saw a Model A Ford the other day. Over 75 years old, and it fuels up at any gas station. So you see, an infrastructure can be built, and our beloved government must seize the initiative and mandate standard compliance.

For heaven's sake, after all, we're only feeding electrons into the car. We don't need new plug formats every year. J1772/Chademo should be the worldwide, end-all-be-all from now on. I so decree it. Done.

As for fast charging, it is something I partially oppose. It is necessary to enable long trips, but it shouldn't be the daily means of charging cars. The daily means should be off-peak, because off-peak uses idle power; it can charge millions of cars without building any new generation or grid capacity.

 

The "too little, too slowly" concern simply isn't being taken seriously. Sadly, those responsible for business decisions now will be long gone by the time the resulting problems become apparent.

It's all about offering something the masses will embrace, not necessarily the fastest or most powerful or largest capacity.

 

Part of it is the price, part of it is simple laziness. The regular Prii sell well because they achieve excellent MPG numbers without requiring the buyer to do anything special other than going to the gas station less frequently! I've talked to many people and the big problem for them is having to make the effort to actually plug in a car to charge it. Yes, for the people on this forum that sounds ridiculous, but it's a fact! Add the 30k+ price for mostly compact or sub compact EV and PHEV's and it's just not appealing to the average consumer yet!

 

Not everyone lives in California, and the people who can take advantage of all the tax credits aren't the ones who would benefit the most from not buying $4.00 gas.

 

The tax credits are not about helping people pay for gas, they were/are to get an infrastructure out to get away from gas. This takes time and is in the initial adopter phase. Whether you agree with the policy or not the numbers were high because of the techological phase the the plug in technology is in.

There is an L2 standard out there. Its fine for the government to wait for SAE to come up with an L3 standard. More government involvement is not going to get it to happen faster.

There is only a Japanese standard for L3, and this requires a entire second plug and is slower than cars like the tesla S need. Its better to get the standard right than just to copy what the japanese have out there. Given that there are few cars with L3 now, I don't see a big rush to build many L3 chargers, especially given that infrastructure is not there for massive daytime charging. NRG and a few states are choosing to put in a small number of Chademo until that standard is adopted. I like the european plug more than frankenplug, but I am not on the standards committee.

 

Good goal. Good policies. Looking at SpaceX and Tesla as good examples. Its high risk for low investment as far as the government so I don't get too excited about the failures like Solyndra or Fiskar. 1 in 10 success rate would be a good investment.

The problem is more the issue of range and refuel with electric vehicles. I'd change the goal posts to include plug-in hybrids if it doesn't already.

I'd double down policy and the goals, we really need to cut our oil use by 50%. Jump the tax credits for EV's and hybrids, all cars based on mileage. Be easier to get a 10 million more Prius on the road with a $5K tax credit in addition to the loans to US companies to compete, Tesla, Solyndra, Fiskar. Give more to Ford and GM to get them into the EV and hybird game as now they are barely players.

 

Fast charging is essential for EV's to be viable. For one thing it enables all the people who don't have garages for a charging station to buy one and have it useful.

People will of course charge at home if they can but without ability to refuel and have range, EV's will not be mainstream.

Volt is actually the ideal with a 50 mile range that means most people would not use gasoline on a day to day basis. If $7,500 is not getting them off the lot then make the tax credit $15K. GM made the investment, made the right car for US needs and government needs to push that solution to one of the US most pressing economic and national security problems.

 

1) have checked the calendar twice and have verified we are MORE than 40 months away from the end of 2015 so since CBS knows whats gonna happen, i'd like to know who they think is going to win the 2012 World Series which should be easy for them because its only a mere 4 months away

2) Nissan could sell 25,000 Leafs this year if they had 25,000 to sell which they dont. now they will sell much more than that worldwide

3) wick1ert; there is no such thing as "free" cars. the winner would still be responsible for a littany of fees and taxes probably close to $10,000. and besides, no matter the cost; if the car does not work for you, it does not work for you. keep in mind the MOST POPULAR CAR IN THE WORLD is rejected by more than 14 of every 15 people

the headlines are really made to generate interest. "drastic" and "goal" is not really defined here. i can EASILY see half a million by Jan 1, 2016 or more. it really all depends on the next year when there will be no supply excuses for Nissan, Ford, Tesla and the other "maybes" (Audi excluded) that are supposed to have EVs on the road.

Legalities and Red Tape have yet to make any concessions to EVs. we still see charging stations, ICE'd and ya we also see handicap parking violations but they sure dont happen as much as they did back in the late 80's. all that will boost EVs even more. the public charging station rollout has been waaaay less than stellar. (ok, pathetic is a much better word!)

but there is one single undeniable fact here. there are people who signed up within 5 mins of noon on April 20, 2010 who are STILL WAITING FOR THEIR EV

 

In my one and only experience with a rental LEAF it was more like 40-45 minutes although I forgot to time it carefully. Although CHAdeMO is rated for up to 500V at 125A (62 kW) it started off charging my LEAF at around 390V at 90A or around 35 kW and then slowly ramped down as the battery filled up. The charging voltage is dependent on the pack design and the rate is limited by the battery's ability to accept the charge (along with cooling considerations, etc).

One of the reasons Tesla ignored CHAdeMO and created their own fast charging system was because they needed to charge at 90 kW to keep the time under an hour with the Model S 300 mile pack. The SAE level 3 design will support 90 kW. This may be important to the adoption of EVs with larger packs and ranges but it may also be important for recharging less efficient vehicles with shorter ranges such as busses or heavy trucks. Also, future batteries may well support faster charging rates even for LEAF-sized pack capacities thereby allowing a charge in 10 minutes rather than 40 (the LEAF pack can't utilize the full CHAdeMO rate).

Maybe it's possibly to revise CHAdeMO in a compatible way to support faster charging rates but I have never seen any discussion that suggests that is possible. I don't know what the limiting factors would be (presumably the TEPCO connector has a design limitation of some kind and maybe it is already being fully utilized).