Is It True? California Fears If It Stopped Nursing EV Sales The Segment Will Fail

There is truth to this concern. If EVs and their components were not subsidized, then the EV landscape would look quite different. For starters, the purchase price would be significantly higher.

Similarly, if governments did not subsidize oil, natural gas, coal, etc., then the true cost at the pump would be noticeably higher.

Of course it will fail if there are no subsidies. The technology isn't mature enough to compete with (subsidized or even unsubsidized) oil.

That's not to say subsidies are always bad. If done properly they can be pretty effective. American farming for example is much cheaper than it would be in a completely free market system. Both parties did a lot of bribing to get farmers on their side. This (unintentionally) led to massive investments and economy of scale that made food in America much cheaper than in other places.

There should be no subsidies for EVs. If EVs are the "right" thing to do, then why do people have to be bribed to buy one? Oh that's right! I forgot. Liberals only do the right thing when bribed and in their supreme hypocrisy they bitch at others for being immoral.

Gawd you're a blithering idiot, Darringer! You think only Liberals buy EV's? You think petroleum for ICE automobiles isn't subsidized and what about the materials that go into making a car? You think that's not subsidized? The only thing that's really immoral is the fact that your creator forgot to give you a sentient mind and/or a scintilla of common sense....in other words, you're a Trump loving buffoon.

@pentupnrgy69

Show me where I said petroleum wasn't subsidized.

Show me where the government is paying people to buy ICE cars. It isn't.

The only thing is that you believe being angry is a virtue when in reality people like you who are perpetually angry merely show lack of intelligence.

fiftysix: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/06/upshot/do-oil-companies-really-need-4-billion-per-year-of-taxpayers-money.html?_r=0

Link goes to article from July 2016 about "Trump is winning". Doubt you wanted that. So where is the data on oil being subsidized by how much? Not all oil goes into transportation fuel. Tons of other societal uses. And fuel taxes subsidize EVs that use the road.

First - Virtually ALL manufacturers have or do receive government subsidies/tax abatements - etc - for employing people and or building factories and other ratables. AN example of a subsidy for OIL is in pipelines going in land taken by the government when the real owner refused to sell. ANother example is a ten year abatement of property taxes to build a refinery.
Second - the subsidies for Buying an EV or even a Hybrid - are not the only subsidies we give the Electric industry - among them the ability to put up poles without paying the land owners - PLUS in virtually all areas - a local monopoly on distribution. In some areas - deregulation and the ability to choose an electric supplier has not yet taken place either.

However - the real purpose of the "TITLE" of the article has validity. There are only so many people (THeir political affiliation could be anything - does not have to be liberal - being green is NOT the only reason to buy an EV.) who will buy these vehicles initially - JUST to be green - or JUST to save money over GAS OR Diesel vehicles (Electric cars are cheaper to fuel - but the payoff is WAY down the road) --IE - without being given an incentive. Lots of people cannot afford them - and others are happy with the type of car they have. Many will wait for better choices(I expect Matt will wait until TVR makes one) - and there are those who simply do not want to be the pioneers - and will wait until the vehicles are better proven as well as the technology will become less expensive over time.

While My own objection remains the lack of infrastructure support which means that these cars are not good for very long trips yet. I doubt that this will be fixed during MY lifetime. I remember having a Mercedes Diesel car and having to plan a trip around a book of stations that would sell Diesel Fuel to private car owners - and most required cash. (Regular gas stations did not have diesel pumps back then). Most were also filthy - truck stops. I would still want a way to re-charge a vehicle in a short - maybe 1/2 hour might be short enough - time. I still suspect that this will be decades away.

Will the segment fail - Until there is a "segment" to talk about - with competitive offerings from a number of major manufacturers - we will not know - because Hydrogen cars - and Solar - and nuclear - are still possibilities (Imagine a car - that never needs refueling). But until competition happens many people will stand at the sidelines waiting for a better time to try. And that would doom a number of startups depending on sales volume to eventually make a profit ONLY on electric vehicles.

We'll find out soon enough. The $7,500 federal rebate will be phased out for Tesla next year. Most Tesla buyers already do not quality for CA rebates due to income requirements. I still think a $35k fully unsubsidized Model 3 will do pretty well as will the $100k+ Teslas where rebates would not have made an impact on the buying decision. I think the entry level Model S would be the car hit the hardest ($70k base), but now at least there is a decent used market for the Model S (no subsidies there).

EVs are inevitable with or without subsidies and we are close to the point where an EV powertrain with 200+ miles costs the same as an ICE powertrain to manufacture. At that point, all cars will rapidly shift to EVs. The sooner it happens, the better for pollution, safety, etc. I'm not a huge fan of subsidies for anything, but if it impacts health and pollution then I can live with it. You can deny global warming, but you cannot deny ICEs create a ton of pollution in populated cities.

Aim.
Pull the trigger.
Pop the popcorn.
Enjoy.

Automakers are fully capable of designing desirable EVs just like they can normal ICE cars, but they choose not to. The market is littered with these cars: BMW i3, Chevy Bolt, Nissan Leafs, ... Until they start making EVs that look and drive as well or better than traditional cars, no amount of subsidies can save them.

It is well known that traditional automakers have to chose profitability for today over investment for the future in EV. Fortunately, Tesla and to some extent VAG Dieselgate open the EV field wide open. It's a matter of time we will reach the point of no return for EV. Based on announcements from various companies that time is 2020, 2025 at the latest. Companies no longer can do lazy EV design and expect to survive. Once consumers have real options to chose from, their perspective on EV will change and widespread adoption will take place.

A successful release of the Model 3 will be the catalyst, and it's only a matter of months if not weeks that we will witness it.

Exciting times!

Bob: instead of an intelligent question "why 2020?", you asked a dumb question for me to "share these announcements" - all you need to do is ask Google for "EV 2020" - it will show you a long list of plans major automakers have for their EVs. Heck, even Ford has plan for electric F-150 and Mustang by 2020.

Before you even commit yourself to this "research", check the posts right here on Autospies - there are several of them posted over the last year or so.

Now, do you know why 2020 an important date ? I leave it a challenge for you to find out.

Jury is still out on the Model 3's success - or failure if you're so inclined. Even if the take rate is 40% based on your own estimate, over 100K orders for a car not yet released is still unprecedented. GM would jump for joy if they have 10% of that number. Five months into 2017, they still have not cracked 6000 units so the modest goal of 30K units seems too lofty.

Your use of obscured websites to back up your "facts" has been called out many times before. Need I do it again here ?

Take your article "Best Summary of Why Self Driving Cars Are A Long Way Off" posted right here a few days ago.

You borrowed someone's summary of well known criteria for autonomous driving, who then declared that "Computer simulation may be the only way to test all of the potential combinations of conditions". That's a bold statement, until one realized that this guy sells simulation software - and this article is nothing more than a sales pitch.

Then in your own comment above regarding MIT review, you borrowed someone's opinion and presented it as what ?

@HenryN, how are the websites "hidden"?

He uses dark web

@HenryN...Good one

@BobM...@HenryN made a grammatical error that I was referring to.

I know Bob why has lost his mind - Trump pulled his prescription for psychotic disorder and now he's out of meds.

Hey Bob, now you can get admitted back to an institution to complete your research on dark web.

Bob, I have a challenge for you: write a few paragraph describing the most affection or admiration you have for a person (any person of your choice), no insult - direct or implied, and show us the other side of you.

My bet is you can't do it. And that will prove that you do have psychotic disorder. Here are the symptoms if you didn't notice:

Anxiety - it's obvious
Anger - Bigly
Bullying - another Bigly
Impulse Control - another one
Parenting Skills - nah, are you kidding ?
Social Skills - what skills ?
Stress - you can keep it
Depression - that too
Grief and Loss - you're beyond this stage, you don't even know it.