Rowan Atkinson feels he's been duped by EVs

[Madman]

Many will know Rowan Atkinson as an actor and comedian.  But, in addition to that, he's a keen car enthusiast, collector, and racer who holds a degree in electrical engineering and a master's degree in control systems.  He is also an early adopter of electric cars, having bought a BMW i3 EV in 2014.  Considering all of these factors, I think Atkinson is uniquely qualified to assess the viability of electric cars and the electrified future we are being sold on.

Atkinson, for his part, is not convinced and says so in the article below...

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jun/03/electric-vehicles-early-adopter-petrol-car-ev-environment-rowan-atkinson


He makes a compelling argument and I have to say I find myself agreeing with him.  EVs are just not ready for prime time and I don't think they ever will be, for the very reasons Atkinson states.  For proof of this, consider that since this article was published, the UK had pushed back the date of the ICE-ban from 2030 (as mentioned in the article) to 2035.  And I wouldn't be surprised if the date were to be pushed back again.  And again.  And again.  Because banning internal combustion engines will ultimately prove to be an unworkable solution.

Needless to say, Atkinson has unleashed a firestorm of controversy over this article and has become public enemy number one among the legions of EV evangelists.

[ChrisV]

Let's see. He says this about EV batteries: "and they are estimated to last only upwards of 10 years" which has already proven to be false, with EVs over 10 years old running around, many with very high miles on them. Yes, the early low range cars will last less time, due to the number of charge cycles and range equalling fairly low overall miles. But on cars with 200-300 miles of range (unlike his i3) the number increases to half a million miles or more, which is 40+ years in normal use. Since we already see early Teslas over 10 years old and with 300k+ miles on them, THAT looks to be true, not his claim about "upwards of 10 years."

He also mentions hydrogen. The "hydrogen future" has been 5-120 years off for decades. It's just too energy intensive to get hydrogen from hydrocarbons or water. You'd use less energy just putting that electricity into batteries directly. As an electrical engineer, he should know that.

So I'm skeptical about the rest of his facts in that piece.

[GoCougs]

Yes, there were some exaggerations, but overall he is correct. It's been more than 10 years and EVs are still not ready for prime time, even setting aside the ever-increasing acknowledgement that they're probably not more environmentally friendly in scale (esp. NIMBY pollution transfer).

As most probably know, EVs have been around just as long as ICE-powered vehicles, however, they've always lagged in utility in general. Even so, they've stuck around because in isolated instances, they are better - such as electric forklifts inside a large factory. However, those instances are rare and so it goes with EVs.

[Morris Minor]

Yeah there was a lot of pushback on that.

My feeling is that few EV buyers suddenly become cognitively dissonant, lose all objectivity, yield to post-purchase rationalization, & ignore the faults in their new purchases. The people I know who have bought EVs tend to be engineers, left brain thinkers: nerds, techies & geeks who overanalyze the hell out of everything.

If they say they are delighted with their EV, it's not because they have suddenly lost all critical faculties. It's just possible they are delighted because their EVs are objectively and legitimately better than the ICE vehicles they had before.

[ChrisV]

Yes, there were some exaggerations, but overall he is correct. It's been more than 10 years and EVs are still not ready for prime time 

If you need to exaggerate like that to make a point as an engineer, you lost the plot already. If you're trying to sway people by pointing out facts, you don't do it with non-facts.

Prime time? When have edge cases become "prime time?" The majority of folks out there can use an EV as is right now. People who road trip weekly or tow 10,000 lbs plus every day aren't going to be well served by them, but those folks are NOT in the majority. The majority of drivers drive less than 1 500+ mile road trip annually and most never go beyond 200 miles, even in rural areas where you are rarely more than 100 miles from your town to do the weekly/monthly shopping. A LOT of studies have been done about this (studies that have nothing to do with EVs, but by insurance companies and outfits like AAA studying the driven habits of Americans).

Yes, 10 years ago, the only EVs were either old lead acid city cars and hobbyist conversions or the Tesla and Leaf (and the first gen Volt). And there were no DCFC sites anywhere, though Tesla was starting to roll out Superchargers. 5 years ago, you could (though not easily) travel from coast to coast, though there were a LOT of charging deserts and the fastest fast chargers were only 50kW units. 5 years later and there are tens of thousands of fast charge points in the country and you're never more than 50 miles from one. EVs have gone from 70-80 mile range compliance cars to the average EV having 250 miles of range, so you're ALWAYS within range of a fast charger. But we've also seen that, like with gas cars, most people rarely need to visit one as they rarely take road trips. They are proving to last way longer than early expectations.

[Morris Minor]

If, similar to what has happened in the UK, the USA were to backpedal on EVs, what would be the reasons?

[FoMoJo]

He makes some good points, especially that development should continue on various environmentally safe fuels for ICE cars.

My favourite Rowan Atkinson skit...

[Laconian]

I think the harsh truth is that no car-based solution can be environmentally feasible in the long run. It's not just the cars themselves, it's also how cities and societies need to build around them. This is especially true for for the places that are currently experiencing massive population explosions, e.g. sub-saharan Africa.

We are kind of kidding ourselves that EVs are a solution. At best they are a harm reduction measure. (They are comfortable, fun and convenient which is why I like mine.)

The government definitely shouldn't be paying for rich people's carbon-positive EV toys. An electric Hummer with its gargantuan 246kWh battery will NEVER break-even over an ICE counterpart. It's an abomination that perversely will still be used by yuppies to signal their environmental virtues. IMO a lot of the BEV stimulus bucks should go toward hybridization where a little bit of extra $ can go a long ways toward reducing emissions.

[GoCougs]

If you need to exaggerate like that to make a point as an engineer, you lost the plot already. If you're trying to sway people by pointing out facts, you don't do it with non-facts.

Prime time? When have edge cases become "prime time?" The majority of folks out there can use an EV as is right now. People who road trip weekly or tow 10,000 lbs plus every day aren't going to be well served by them, but those folks are NOT in the majority. The majority of drivers drive less than 1 500+ mile road trip annually and most never go beyond 200 miles, even in rural areas where you are rarely more than 100 miles from your town to do the weekly/monthly shopping. A LOT of studies have been done about this (studies that have nothing to do with EVs, but by insurance companies and outfits like AAA studying the driven habits of Americans).

Yes, 10 years ago, the only EVs were either old lead acid city cars and hobbyist conversions or the Tesla and Leaf (and the first gen Volt). And there were no DCFC sites anywhere, though Tesla was starting to roll out Superchargers. 5 years ago, you could (though not easily) travel from coast to coast, though there were a LOT of charging deserts and the fastest fast chargers were only 50kW units. 5 years later and there are tens of thousands of fast charge points in the country and you're never more than 50 miles from one. EVs have gone from 70-80 mile range compliance cars to the average EV having 250 miles of range, so you're ALWAYS within range of a fast charger. But we've also seen that, like with gas cars, most people rarely need to visit one as they rarely take road trips. They are proving to last way longer than early expectations.

Again, I agree, the piece was mos def not well thought out - even just the title was click baity. However, the conclusions are correct - many people could roll an EV but an EV is not equivalent to an ICEV and truly being environmental WRT personal transportation is buying a used efficient ICEV and driving less.

[Laconian]

Being truly environmental is ebikes everywhere and an infrastructure which allows people to ride them safely. A kilowatt hour of electricity is more than most people will need in a day. Even a modest solar panel would be enough to recharge a bike in just a few hours.

The two times I went to China were before and after mass ownership of cars. The mass mobility on bikes in the Before-Times was so much better than the stoplight gridlock I experienced a decade later.

[CaminoRacer]

I think the harsh truth is that no car-based solution can be environmentally feasible in the long run. It's not just the cars themselves, it's also how cities and societies need to build around them. This is especially true for for the places that are currently experiencing massive population explosions, e.g. sub-saharan Africa.

We are kind of kidding ourselves that EVs are a solution. At best they are a harm reduction measure. (They are comfortable, fun and convenient which is why I like mine.)

The government definitely shouldn't be paying for rich people's carbon-positive EV toys. An electric Hummer with its gargantuan 246kWh battery will NEVER break-even over an ICE counterpart. It's an abomination that perversely will still be used by yuppies to signal their environmental virtues. IMO a lot of the BEV stimulus bucks should go toward hybridization where a little bit of extra $ can go a long ways toward reducing emissions.

The level of car accidents that we find acceptable is crazy, IMO. Everyone hurtles along at 80 mph to and from work, burnt out and barely awake, just hoping no one else crashes into them.

[Eye of the Tiger]

The level of car accidents that we find acceptable is crazy, IMO. Everyone hurtles along at 80 mph to and from work, burnt out and barely awake, just hoping no one else crashes into them.

It is rapidly getting worse. Soon, I will have get something bigger than TUNDRA just to not die.

[Madman]

Before buying my Escape, I briefly thought about an EV.  After all, I'd love not spending money at least twice a week putting a smelly, expensive, and hazardous liquid into my car.  The savings on maintenance and servicing also appealed to me, too.  I have a long commute to work, consisting of mostly interstate driving, so my theoretical savings would be considerable.

However, after looking at all the available options and crunching the numbers, I quickly determined going electric would actually cost me more money on a per-mile basis than sticking with gasoline.  The biggest contributing factor was the cost of the EV itself.  All of the affordable models had inadequate range for my needs while the ones with sufficient range were outrageously expensive.  The up-front costs more than wiped out any savings in fuel and servicing I would experience.  Simply put, the positives didn't outweigh the negatives.  Or, as the cool kids would say, "The juice ain't worth the squeeze!"

I can see an EV working as a second or third car in a multi-car household.  But even then, I think an EV has too many limitations compared to an ICE car that can be had for far less money.  I can buy a lot of unleaded with the money I save on an ICE car and not have to worry about pre-planning my route or being stranded somewhere with a depleted EV battery and no fast charger in sight.  Maybe things will be different in ten, twenty, or thirty years time but, in the here-and-now, an EV just isn't a viable option for me, nor for a lot of other people.

[AutobahnSHO]

Fact is, MANY people in our country can't realistically charge an EV unless it's at work. More people live in apartments than some people (especially law makers) realize.

I'm convinced hybrid is the immediate best solution. Small batteries. No charging infrastructure needed. Double the mpg of a regular ICE vehicle.

[Morris Minor]

Fact is, MANY people in our country can't realistically charge an EV unless it's at work. More people live in apartments than some people (especially law makers) realize.

I'm convinced hybrid is the immediate best solution. Small batteries. No charging infrastructure needed. Double the mpg of a regular ICE vehicle.

This will be the answer given to my backpedaling question above. "The infrastructure isn't there" and "Hybrids are the answer."

This will satisfy the established car makers, unions, oil companies, dealers, and their political representatives.
It will not satisfy health advocates & climate campaigners.

The market for pure EVs will be ceded to Tesla, BYD and a couple of other Chinese brands I can't even name.

[Madman]

Oh, yes.  Predatory Chinese carmakers are watching Western manufacturers abandon entire vehicle segments, and you can bet they are rubbing their hands with glee, ready to pounce.  They can hardly believe their luck!  They're already flooding Latin America and Europe with cheap EVs and it's only a matter of time before they set their sights on North America.  You heard it here first!

BTW, another expense I had to consider when I was contemplating an EV was installing a wallbox charger in my garage.  I also considered the possibility of charging at work, too.  However, without any fast charging facilities at work to rely upon, the best I could hope for was being granted access to a conventional 120v electrical outlet.  Hardly ideal, but better than nothing.  At least I'm in the fortunate position of being a homeowner with a garage, thus making fast charging at home a realistic proposition.  But what are people who live in apartments or high-rise buildings to do?  Public chargers are few in number, expensive and are often occupied or broken when needed.  It seems to me, unless you are able to charge at home, running an EV is a non starter.

I might have been willing to modify my driving habits if there were a real, demonstrable environmental benefit to EV driving but, yet again, the reality has not lived up to the promise.  The environmental and human costs involved in the manufacture of EV batteries has been well documented and is far from the clean and green magic bullet they were cracked up to be.

Carbon neutral synthetic fuels show much more promise.  The problem with the internal combustion engine is not the engine, it's the fuel that goes in it.  To address this, Porsche has a pilot plant in Chile using wind power and carbon capture technology that removes CO2 from the atmosphere to make synthetic motor fuel.  It may be expensive to produce now but it's only a matter of time before production can be scaled up to the point where the cost will come down.  Most of us already run synthetic oil in our engines, so it's hardly a giant leap of imagination to think of putting synthetic fuel in our tanks someday.

In closing, It seems I'm not the only EV sceptic out there.  A new Yahoo Finance-Ipsos poll shows 57% of Americans say they are unlikely to buy an EV.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/new-yahoo-finance-ipsos-poll-shows-over-half-of-americans-unlikely-to-buy-an-ev-130040140.html

[giant_mtb]

Correct. Until the charging infrastructure is there to support a massive, massive number of EVs (think, truck-stop sized places necessary for all the people that can't charge at home), it's a complete non-starter.

The people that can afford a $50k+ EV that has an adequate range are likely homeowners that can afford to also have a proper charger installed in their garage.

This is not the everyman. Only 66% of Americans actually own their home, and not all of those are wealthy people in a suburb with a garage and money to burn.

[r0tor]

Oh, yes.  Predatory Chinese carmakers are watching Western manufacturers abandon entire vehicle segments, and you can bet they are rubbing their hands with glee, ready to pounce.  They can hardly believe their luck!  They're already flooding Latin America and Europe with cheap EVs and it's only a matter of time before they set their sights on North America.  You heard it here first!

Motortrend did some investigation on China EVs and how they intend to take over the US market.  I posted it on the EV thread, but in short they are investing massive money in Mexican factories as their entry fee for US distribution.


It's not surprising less than 60% of Americans would consider an EV.  Only 63% of households have a garage or carport (many of which are just a single car space as well).

[GoCougs]

The Lucid Sapphire is pretty sweet tho. But it takes $250k to get there, and even then Lucid will not survive on its own. The majority of the USA (probably 60% at least) is somewheres between paycheck-to-paycheck and worse than broke.

Despite many years, the dismal state of non-Tesla fast charging infrastructure is predictor of the eventual level of adoption of EVs (= small, and otherwise not near to the extent justifying the destruction of the US auto industry via mandates and regulation).

[Morris Minor]

They issued the mandates without sitting down to figure out who would build the EVs.

[Laconian]

I don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?

Not every American owns a home and has a garage, sure. But a majority of Americans do! And in-home charging is really where EVs shine. Charging happens invisibly, slowly, and off-peak. It's an amazing convenience when it all works, and there are many many millions of households that are eligible.

For folks that don't have access to garages and whatnot, they can all benefit from hybridization which reuses the very same fruits of the R&D tree as BEVs.

[Laconian]

Honestly if China cracks the market of lower end cars then they deserve it.

For too long US automakers have cynically deprived Americans of right-sized transportation in the name of maximizing sales of profitable barn-door behemoths.

[GoCougs]

I don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?

Not every American owns a home and has a garage, sure. But a majority of Americans do! And in-home charging is really where EVs shine. Charging happens invisibly, slowly, and off-peak. It's an amazing convenience when it all works, and there are many many millions of households that are eligible.

For folks that don't have access to garages and whatnot, they can all benefit from hybridization which reuses the very same fruits of the R&D tree as BEVs.

Thing is, to build affordable vehicles of any motorvation takes immense time, money and resources. The only way EVs become both affordable and a viable business is fairly widespread adoption.

[Morris Minor]

You don't need to look any further than the engagement rate on this Electric Power board in the 'SPIN to see where things are going. EVs pique spinners' interest and several of us have already made the jump.

My argument that we'll backpedal on pure EVs is not to do with the shortcomings of EV hardware & (crucially) software. I'm not worried about that; stuff is being fixed, the pace of development over the last 10 years has been rapid, and I don't see it slowing down.

I think we'll backpedal because EVs are such a threat to established players and all the livelihoods tied up in ICE manufacturing: automakers, suppliers, dealers... millions of folks whose skills will not be required. This is worth watching. It covers some of it, highlights VW, but ignores VW's struggles to sell its current EV offerings, which are largely hobbled by crap software.

[GoCougs]

I'm still calling it - Detroit planned this strike in order to break the UAW and EVs is a big part of it.

[Madman]

Motortrend did some investigation on China EVs and how they intend to take over the US market.  I posted it on the EV thread, but in short they are investing massive money in Mexican factories as their entry fee for US distribution.

I found the article you mentioned.  Yep, you called it!

Mexico will be the Trojan Horse from which the Chinese carmakers will invade America.  The Detroit Three have already been complicit in clearing a path for them by abandoning passenger cars altogether and affordable vehicles in general.  Detroit's motto should be "If you can't compete, retreat!"

Yes, the Chinese have come a long way over the last few years.  Of course, that's pretty easy for them to do when their Western partners are forced to hand them all of their technology and intellectual property.

Oh, and don't think for one minute the Chinese will limit themselves to EVs in America, either.  As the video attached to the article made clear, many of the Chinese transplant factories in Mexico are building ICE cars, too.  If the Chinese come to dominate the affordable vehicle segment in the US, you can expect to see the Detroit Three retreat even further behind their tariff-protected truck sales.

[CaminoRacer]

Nah, China has no chance against VinFast!

[veeman]

I don't think China will make significant inroads into the U.S. auto market in terms of Chinese branded cars. As the article mentions,

"In simple terms, it comes down to whether the U.S. government will allow Chinese automakers to establish American operations; considering today's political tensions, it's unlikely we'll see Chinese cars here any time soon."

I think Congress and/or the next POTUS will alter the rules of the Inflation Reduction Act and the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA - which replaced NAFTA) to prevent a Chinese takeover of the EV market. Also from the article: "The U.S. will end up with expensive electric vehicles because of this determination to protect the domestic market..."

 

[Eye of the Tiger]

I want a cheap EV. I can't afford a 'merican one.

[Madman]

I don't understand why a good solution needs to be perfect for everyone?

Because if governments around the world are hell-bent on banning ICE cars, EVs will NEED to be perfect for everyone.

Alternatively, we could just allow the engineers and scientists work out more practical and effective solutions, free from political interference.  But why would we want to do that, right?