In my country the main issue with EVs is that they are just out of pretty much everyone's price range. The vast majority here buy used cars because new ones are just too expensive and used EVs aren't really a thing. Like seeing 20 year old cars is a common sight here while I have seen 1 EV in the capital over the last 5 years.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
122 points (96.2% liked)
[Dormant] Electric Vehicles
3187 readers
1 users here now
We have moved to:
A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.
Rules
- No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, casteism, speciesism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- No self-promotion.
- No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
- No trolling.
- Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is why I buy 10-20 year old cars. I can get something decent and within my budget ($10-15K), and it will generally still be safe enough in a crash (especially if you have side airbags).
Let me know when I can buy a convertible sports car EV for under $15K, and I'll trade my 350Z that same day.
Around here most used cars go for around 5000 euros so, yea, EV mass adoption ain't coming here in the next 2 decades.
Yes I'm aware and I am envious. Europe has excellent used car prices compared to the states. You have to pay $10K minimum here for anything that isn't covered in rust. ~15 years ago you could buy a decent 5-6 year old car for $3000, but those days are long over.
Well, good luck finding one with a decent battery, or one you can replace on your budget.
This seems pretty easy to me... If the number sold in some time period is less than the number sold in the previous time period, then sales dropped. If it's greater, then sales rose. I'm having trouble seeing where the confusion is coming from.
Because it's not always that simple. If the sales for the last 2 years are as follows:
2022 Q1: 0.8m, Q2: 0.7m, Q3: 1.0m, Q4: 1.1m 2023 Q1: 0.9m, Q2: 0.8m, Q3: 1.1m, Q4: 1.2m 2024 Q1: 1.0m
You'd be "technically correct" (the best kind of correct!) to say that sales dropped from from 2023 Q4 to 2024 Q1. But in all likelihood, no sales didn't drop.
(edit: dear god the markdown on this site is fucked.)
dear god the markdown on this site is fucked
| | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |
|
|
|
|
| | 2022 | 0.8m | 0.7m | 1.0m | 1.1m | | 2023 | 0.9m | 0.8m | 1.1m | 1.2m | | 2024 | 1.0m | | | |
Better?
Wow, this chart is great. Thanks.
It seems the pattern here is that people buy more electric cars later on in the year. Q1 sales are always lower than Q3 and Q4 sales, but I don't want to draw a hasty conclusion. We need more data.
Given that @[email protected] said "If the sales for the last 2 years are as follows", I'm not sure whether this is actual data, or just an example.
Does not match 40% increase, Q4, YoY
I wonder if what we should be looking at is proportion of sales that are EVs instead of absolute numbers.
I've made a fix so tables in markdown work now.
It's those that want to paint EVs as failing causing problems. There's been a spate of stories suggesting companies are changing their mind about EVs. They're not, I think they've just had to make lots to satisfy pent up demand and now they ongoing sales rate is lower.
However, more companies are entering the market, and dividing an increasing market between more of them.
The tax credit nonsense sucks, it should just be a simple subsidy such that the sticker price goes down. Also shift funds from directly subsidizing the cars and use it to put in chargers, offer loans for landlords to install them in rental's parking spaces and transit and protected bike lanes to reduce the need for cars in the first place
On paper, that’s a great idea.
In practice though, you can expect the dealers to markup the difference, so the consumer pays exactly the same.
At least with the tax credit, dealers still have to account for sticker shock.
Edit: Looks like you’ve edited the message since my reply. So continuing:
They do offer subsidies on home chargers, both installation and the device itself, also through tax credits. Though you have to be careful, if your tax credits on the car exceed your taxes for that year, the credit for the charger is worthless.
I may be smart to make your EV purchase towards the end of one tax year, and the charger at the beginning of the next.
The public charger situation is still a mess. The more cars are sold, the more the demand will go up. On weekends, many are full, especially along popular road-trip routes. Sort that out and it will help unblock mainstream adoption.
I find it odd to compare the US and European situations with infrastructure.
US: two companies have national networks, with a hundred miles between each site.
Europe: about 20 different sites between 50kW-350kW withing 10 miles of me, run by 10 different companies.
I know we have different requirements, but it's really getting that chargers are as frequent as fuel stations in some areas.
Wouldn't the slashing prices mean a short term increase in sales? I don't see how that proves sales aren't dropping long term (or that they didn't drop before the sales).
Prices were also raised. I think the Ford Lightning with the price cuts is still more expensive than at release.
1.4M for new EVs seems like a good number for the US. Were used EV sales counted and included? I suspect many who want an EV and balk at the lame dealer shenanigans (from dealers who aggressively gouge or disincentivize EV sales) are finding their ride in the used market.