BEV adoption rates and factors that enhance or detract 2

[Brian Malone]

The thread asking about layoffs in the automotive industry has taken a wide swing away from the OP's question but the data provided by many of the posts is intriguing and interesting. Certainly, some of the data is statistical interpretation and that can sway the conversation - what's the saying about statistics? Stats are like bikinis: What is shown can be very interesting - but what is hidden is crucial . . .

SwinnyGG, GregLocock, Littleinch, lucky-guesser have all put forth compelling data and analysis that show the original data posted by dik was not a complete story. It looks like Norway has some level of BEV adoption but it is not a run away overtaking of their auto market by BEVs.

China is leading the world in BEV adaoption, China also leads the world in electricity production. Could their BEV adoption rate be driven by the population is using what works best for the resource available (though 5/8 of China's electricity is from coal, they are working on other sources). Is it government incentives? Is it government mandates? Norway has relatively small population and derives 6/7 of its electricity from hydro power. Does this affect national adoption?

List of countries by electricity production - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think the US market is definitely affected by charger availability and vehicle price. Until a BEV does not cost a premium price and charging is not a possible headache for those who cannot afford to have their charger or do not have access to a location for a charger, BEVs are going to be only for a smaller segment of the population that can afford the vehicle and its charging. These are not the 'joe six packs'.

The links posted by GregLocock seemed to be a good place to continue the BEV discussion:

Trends in electric cars – Global EV Outlook 2024 – Analysis - IEA

Global EV Outlook 2024 - Analysis and key findings. A report by the International Energy Agency.

www.iea.org

Car Sales by Country | Global Car Sales Data | 1. China 2. US

Top 25 countries for car sales per year. This list of car sales by country includes global rank, number of units sold, and top car brands within each country listed.

www.factorywarrantylist.com

There many other good links in the 'Layoffs post - I just don't know how to bring them over enmasse . . .

 

[GregLocock]

Sales of new electric vehicles in Germany have plummeted, dropping nearly 37% in July 2024 from the same month one year ago.
One of the main reasons traces back to mid-December 2023, when the German government gave less than one week’s notice before ending its subsidy program for electric vehicles. The program had given drivers small grants (up to around €6,000) toward the purchase of new battery-electric and plug-in hybrid cars.

The end of the subsidy program isn’t the only factor contributing to Germany’s EV slowdown, but the abrupt axing certainly had an effect: While many countries across Europe saw steady or growing sales of new EVs in the past year, Germany’s sales fell. It’s not just Germany ending these subsidy programs, either. Sweden and New Zealand have also scrapped their schemes and seen a resulting slowdown or drop in sales. This all comes at a time when the world needs to dramatically ramp up efforts to move to zero-emissions vehicles and pull fossil-fuel-powered ones off the roads to address climate change.

From https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/09/23/1104247/ending-ev-subsidies/

Denmark is a prime market to understand how government policies affect market trends. In 2015 when the government announced plans to taper off EV subsidies by 2022, Denmark saw a huge reduction in EV adoption and between 2016 and 2017 EV ownership in Denmark remained flat. Now that the subsidies have been introduced, EV adoption is rising
From https://monta.com/en/blog/europe-best-ev-policies-welcome-evland/

“We are seeing consumer interest in electric cars decline,” said (Dutch) RAI Association chairman Frits van Bruggen. “This is partly due to unexpected cutbacks in incentive measures, such as the correction of the weight of electric cars for motor vehicle tax. But also because there is a lack of long-term perspective. The sector and motorists need clear and consistent government policy for the longer term.”
From https://www.iamexpat.nl/expat-info/...ectric-cars-netherlands-tax-breaks-set-be-cut

So far as I know the factors against are (in no particular order)

1. (still) range anxiety
2. purchase cost
3. insurance
4. cost of tires
5. depreciation
6. unable to charge at home
7. lack of available working public chargers at peak times

I think in most people who have driven them range anxiety is no longer a serious concern except for long trips due to 7
6 is not readily solvable for people who live in buildings without adequate parking spaces.


The optics of your average taxpayer subsidising the purchase of a well-off person's brand new second car has always been awful.

The IMF says Most notable are policies to induce additional renewable generation and to help decarbonize transportation. In fact, the most expensive are subsidies for electric vehicles.
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications...-reducing-greenhouse-gas-emissions-gillingham, which includes this table

So subsidising EVs is a pretty bad policy from at least two perspectives - it annoys voters and it is the most expensive way to reduce CO2 output.

 

[Brian Malone]

Yes, very interesting data - trends highly affected by government subsidies. Government subsidies for EV purchases are, in my opinion, an inappropriate use of government resources and tax dollars that benefit those who are in an income bracket that does not need assistance. Subsidies will never work for lower income levels because the true cost of ownership is much higher than any subsidy could ever offset. So, until the cost of EVs drops to a range of affordability for the average person EVs will not achieve mass market acceptance. Of course, this all changes if by government mandates EVs are all that are offered.

 

[Brian Malone]

A few market research articles strongly indicate for the US market household income plays a significant role in deciding whether to purchase an EV - and this probably goes to a deeper level: whether to even think about buying an EV.

$150k per year average income is a big hurdle for massmarket adoption.

Tesla Demographics 2024 by Age, Income, Gender, Home Value

Tesla owners have a median age of 48 and an annual income of over $150,000. Learn more demographics about Tesla owners in this free report.

hedgescompany.com

A typical Tesla owner is a rich white male homeowner in his 50s, a study says

A white male homeowner in his 50s with a high household income, is this what you'd imagine a typical Tesla owner to be like?

wired.me

The early EV adoptors probably leaned a litte more toward consumers who felt an electric vehicle was an environmentally sound purchase. I believe that demographic has shifted toward well-heeled buyers who are able to purchase the expensive EV and not worry about the cost and enjoy the cachet of a luxury-cost vehicle. Once again this segment of the population will not drive mass market adoption.

 

[3DDave]

For certain the entire market was warped by the car makers realizing they could make similar profits while selling fewer cars by cranking up the options level and leaving the cheap seats market. This moved the buyers to those who were largely unaffected by inflation or job disruption during the pandemic.

What I foresee as a bigger problem, worse for EVs, is that makers have leaned heavily into custom designed/proprietary highly integrated and complex parts so that, by the time vehicles are making it to the used car market parts will not be available and even the smallest failure might total the car.

The classic is some taillight assembly that included the LEDs, the custom LED controller, the CANBus controller chip, all in a weld-sealed housing that incorporated the reflector and lens assembly. Bad news - it looked like thermal cycling causes a trace on the circuit board to crack. As made the assembly was on the $500 each scale; they cannot be repaired as the weld ensures they will be ruined trying to get them open and, being so custom, the cost to tool up an aftermarket version won't pay off. Since it communicates with other computers one cannot simply wire in a replacement bulb. So now the car, with a tiny crack, cannot meet any inspection. Being a design flaw that happens long after the warranty is up the maker doesn't care and picking them from the parts yard only means getting one that is going to fail.

Imagine the sophisticated battery management and motor management computers. All the maker needs to do is to make the slightest effort and they become entirely irreparable, much the way that some videogame cabinets brick the controller if the controller is opened. Makers will say it's for theft proofing, but it means eliminating the secondary market for used cars.

 

[Brian Malone]

I observe many newer model cars being driven with one headlight assembly inoperative and have wondered if the lack of replacement or repair of this is driven by the high cost of the headlight module which is specific to that make/model vehicle. With the increased use of LEDs, styling options have made standard bulbs and sockets passe. EVs have pushed the styling concepts with the use of light bars, highly distinctive headlight designs, etc. - all innovative but without standardization to allow for secondary market support/products.

 

[GregLocock]

"For certain the entire market was warped by the car makers realizing they could make similar profits while selling fewer cars by cranking up the options level and leaving the cheap seats market. "

To be honest that is capitalism 101 and is not driven by EVs necessarily, they've been talking about it for decades and the parts shortages from 2020 actually pushed them into doing it. Raise prices, raise profits, re-optimise your production methods around lower volumes, let somebody else play in the cost driven arena.

 

[LittleInch]

My 2917 Golf is full of LSD lights. I'm really going none get damaged as it looks like they cost a helm of a lot more than a decent bulb....

 

[BrianPetersen]

All modern cars have bespoke headlight and taillight assemblies. This isn't an EV issue, it's a "modern cars" issue.

 

[CWB1]

I've heard similar complaints about vehicle and part prices my entire life, and similar predictions about the demise of the aftermarket but have yet to see any of it happen.

30 years ago a 5th gen Bronco was $25k, our 6th gen was $36k and is far more capable onroad and off, with more and nicer options. My folks have been griping the last few years about "skyrocketing" pickup prices, swearing they'd keep the old one and wouldnt pay $70k+. When they finally replaced the bare-bones regular cab fleet model that was $27k 11 years ago, they spent $35k on a loaded quadcab. Yup, "skyrocketing."

Parts are similar, every few years old and ignorant men prattle about how owners are going to be forced to buy <insert pricy & complex OEM part>, then a month after launch the aftermarket comes out with a replacement for a fraction of the cost. The same group also usually criticizes the latest design of <insert part that hasnt commonly been replaced in decades> based on an imagined need to replace it, and the imagined difficulty of quickly doing so in their driveway without common shop tools.

 

[GregLocock]

In April 1999, the cheapest car in Australia – the Daihatsu Sirion – was $11,990 before on-road costs. So with ABS (to make it equivalent to a modern car) and on road costs it comes to $14,000, about $27,692.98

Another data point - in 2020, the Kia Picanto cost $16,490 which is equivalent in purchasing power to about $19,217.03 in 2024

The current cheapest car in Australia, which is $18,990 drive-away is the MG3. A truly miserable car, I had the dubious pleasure of driving one for 7 weeks - it did have 40000 miles on it but even so. Looks good in the showroom, and doesn't use that much fuel. Oh and the onboard nav is quite usable. That is the end of the good news.

The reason for the significant drop 1999-2020 is that the genii in Canberra decided to get rid of tariffs on imported cars and various dubious subsidies for domestic manufacturers, and as predicted the Australian motor industry evaporated. Then the next wave of closures came. The ecosystem of suppliers. Followed by the big tooling machine shops. They had a sideline in building stuff for airliner maintenance, so that went as well. I would agree that in the 1990s the Australian motor industry was a bit of a mess (5 competing companies F GM T Nissan Mitsu), but overall it provided good jobs for many people.

So yes, the cheap car space is getting cheaper, and on the basis of those 3, probably nastier.

 

[dik]

Another bit of a problem is that the US 'shipped' a lot of their manufacturing capability offshore to save a few bucks. This will likely come back and 'bite them on the...'

 

[LittleInch]

Some more "technical" numbers which tell their own story.

Charging rates.
My estimate from filling my car with petrol is that is goes in at about 1litre a second. In energy terms that's about 32 MW or 32,000 kW. Now that is raw energy and given the overall efficiency of a ICE is about 20 to 25% for a similar operation for electric vehicles this is about 6MW or 6,000kW. Given that even a "rapid" charger is generally reckoned to be 50kW, with ultra ones still only 150kW, you can see the issue. Basically "most" chargers are 120 times slower than a petrol pump equivalent. Add in that charging the last 20% takes an eternity and this is a massive shift to the established method of getting energy into your vehicle.

As / if BEVs get more common then the wait time and the sheer space required for all these vehicles sitting there slowly charging starts to get to be a significant issue. More chargers equals more power needed in sometimes remote locations (motorway service stations etc).

Then there is the storage capacity / range issue. A good rule seems to be 3 to 4 miles per kWh. So apart from the super cars, battery capacity seems to be about 60-75kWH for anything considered affordable and often a lot less. So at 60kWh, that's maybe 200 to 250 miles on a good day (not cold, wet, raining). Plus getting to 100% power is often difficult and takes a long time. Again this is a massive shift in thinking compared to ICE vehicles where you can easily go 350 to 400 miles on a tank full and get to 100% without an issue.

I don't know how vehicles tend to be "sold" in the US, but in the UK I think it is now somehting like >75% are "sold" on either lease packages or what they call here PCP or Personal Contract Plan. What that is is a small ish lump sum, then three years at something quite affordable, then a "balloon payment" at the end if you want to keep the car. So many just roll it over. In essence you're paying for the depreciation, same as a lease vehicle. So with BEVs having lower % depreciaiton, the lease / PCP costs can be become much more affordable, especially as they all give you the monthly sum which people seem not to times by 36 to get the total price they are paying to "rent" their car.

So where am I going with this? Not sure really other than I think the focus on BEVs is limited, they will not replace the need and desire for longer distance transport and I'm not sure why larger battery hybrids are not being a bit more favoured, so the ICE bit is more of a get you home / limited power option and you spend most time around town on electric. The recent price cuts and discounting is bringing lease costs etc for BEVs into the realm of more people here for sure, but ignoring the charging times and trying to wish them away don't really work. Just thought I would throw some numbers into the mix which are worth thinking about.

 

[dik]

but it is not a run away overtaking of their auto market by BEVs.

If you look into it, it is a 'runaway'... way up at the high end.

 

[Brian Malone]

Some more "technical" numbers which tell their own story.

Charging rates.
My estimate from filling my car with petrol is that is goes in at about 1litre a second. In energy terms that's about 32 MW or 32,000 kW. Now that is raw energy and given the overall efficiency of a ICE is about 20 to 25% for a similar operation for electric vehicles this is about 6MW or 6,000kW. Given that even a "rapid" charger is generally reckoned to be 50kW, with ultra ones still only 150kW, you can see the issue. Basically "most" chargers are 120 times slower than a petrol pump equivalent. Add in that charging the last 20% takes an eternity and this is a massive shift to the established method of getting energy into your vehicle.

As / if BEVs get more common then the wait time and the sheer space required for all these vehicles sitting there slowly charging starts to get to be a significant issue. More chargers equals more power needed in sometimes remote locations (motorway service stations etc).

Then there is the storage capacity / range issue. A good rule seems to be 3 to 4 miles per kWh. So apart from the super cars, battery capacity seems to be about 60-75kWH for anything considered affordable and often a lot less. So at 60kWh, that's maybe 200 to 250 miles on a good day (not cold, wet, raining). Plus getting to 100% power is often difficult and takes a long time. Again this is a massive shift in thinking compared to ICE vehicles where you can easily go 350 to 400 miles on a tank full and get to 100% without an issue.

I don't know how vehicles tend to be "sold" in the US, but in the UK I think it is now somehting like >75% are "sold" on either lease packages or what they call here PCP or Personal Contract Plan. What that is is a small ish lump sum, then three years at something quite affordable, then a "balloon payment" at the end if you want to keep the car. So many just roll it over. In essence you're paying for the depreciation, same as a lease vehicle. So with BEVs having lower % depreciaiton, the lease / PCP costs can be become much more affordable, especially as they all give you the monthly sum which people seem not to times by 36 to get the total price they are paying to "rent" their car.

So where am I going with this? Not sure really other than I think the focus on BEVs is limited, they will not replace the need and desire for longer distance transport and I'm not sure why larger battery hybrids are not being a bit more favoured, so the ICE bit is more of a get you home / limited power option and you spend most time around town on electric. The recent price cuts and discounting is bringing lease costs etc for BEVs into the realm of more people here for sure, but ignoring the charging times and trying to wish them away don't really work. Just thought I would throw some numbers into the mix which are worth thinking about.

The hybrid vehicles make more sense to me. The electric drive handles the more inefficient stop-n-go short distance travel and ICE for longer range travel. The charging infrastructure need and dependence is reduced. Unfortunately in some areas the zero-emission mindset has been distracting the market focus and creating bad government legislation.

Your charging analysis hits at two more of the major hurdles to mainstream BEV adoption: charging dwell time and charging anxiety. Range anxiety is becoming reduced but how/when/where to charge is not going to resolve easily.

 

[GregLocock]

" BEVs having lower % depreciaiton" Not according to industry figures.

MSN

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362502742_Empirical_analysis_of_the_depreciation_of_electric_vehicles_compared_to_gasoline_vehicles#:~:text=Earlier%2C%20Lukas%20Schloter%2C%20in%202022,%25%20per%20annum%20%5B135%5D%20.

MSN

The difference in costs between an EV and an ICE

Explore our detailed comparison of costs between electric vehicles and traditional internal combustion engine cars. Discover the financial advantages and make an informed choice for your next vehicle.

www.ayvens.com

 

[dik]

The hybrid vehicles make more sense to me.

Not if the object is to get rid of fossil fuels. It only prolongs the problem.

 

[Brian Malone]

The idea to eliminate petroleum based fuel from transportation is still a bridge too far. The replacement energy sources are either inadequate in capacity, or time of day / weather dependent or if using a petro/carbon based fuel for energy production just shift the pollution/environmental impact from distributed dispersion to centralized locations or have their own environmental impacts (hydro for example). Doesn't developing hybrids with reduced carbon emissions make sense? Not every solution is going to be a win-win - the best solution may be a compromise of the competing goals.

 

[Brian Malone]

I got off on a tangent - BEV vs. Hybrid - back to the question at hand.

This energy company consortium info is BEV optimistic:

Electric Future in Flux: What is Slowing Down E.V. Adoption?

This white paper explores the EV industry's slowdown due to inflation, rising interest rates, regional disparities, supply chain challenges, the impact of these factors on EV adoption, and what it means for the future of green energy.

energycentral.com

There is sales data info on this same site:

Tracking global data on electric vehicles

Explore data on electric car sales and stocks worldwide.

ourworldindata.org

I have to do a little digging to find out if the BEV adoption rates in Norway, Sweden, and China are purely market driven or is there governmental influence in the mix.

 

[dik]

The idea to eliminate petroleum based fuel from transportation is still a bridge too far.

I concur... we'll have to wait and see if this comes to fruition. There's a lot of momentum.