The Obama administration’s electric-car mistake
Federal billions cannot overcome the fact that electric vehicles and plug-in electric hybrids meet few, if any, of real consumers’ needs. Compared with gas-powered cars, they deliver inferior performance at much higher cost. As an American Physical Society symposium on battery research concluded last June: “Despite their many potential advantages, all-electric vehicles will not replace the standard American family car in the foreseeable future.”
If you don’t believe the scientists, listen to Takeshi Uchiyamada, the “father” of the Toyota Prius: “Because of its shortcomings — driving range, cost and recharging time — the electric vehicle is not a viable replacement for most conventional cars.” …
Nor do electric cars promise much in the way of greenhouse-gas reduction, as long as they rely on a power grid that is still mostly fired by fossil fuels. …
I accept the president’s good intentions. He didn’t set out to rip off the public. Nor was the electric-car dream a Democrats-only delusion. Several Republican pols shared it, too.
Rather, the debacle is a case study in unchecked righteousness. The administration assumed the worthiness and urgency of its goals. Americans should want electric cars, and therefore they would, apparently.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
We’re only 4,999,000 cars short of Barky’s promise of 5 million electric cars on the road by now. The other 1,000 are rusting away in a government warehouse somewhere after the DOE bought them.
Bishop on February 12, 2013 at 10:09 AM
What difference does it make now?
We need ethanol made from corn stalks and stuff!!!!
trs on February 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM
Like unicorns, you cannot wish them into existence.
O’Bama has the mind of a child.
Open The Door on February 12, 2013 at 10:13 AM
Actually, we need a new government subsidized program to develop the Flux Capacitor.
singlemalt 18 on February 12, 2013 at 10:13 AM
I agree with this 100%.
Car manufacturers need to first sell a truly all-electric vehicle as the “second” family car – as the commuter car that one spouse just drives back and forth to work or shopping.
Extras should include a solar charging cell for when it’s parked for long hours outside and a small natural gas charging engine that simply supplements range (not something that allows the vehicle to sustain top speed on its own).
blink on February 12, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Lost me right there.
Bitter Clinger on February 12, 2013 at 10:14 AM
Well said.
blink on February 12, 2013 at 10:15 AM
Stupider than electric cars (if that’s possible): Wind farms
petefrt on February 12, 2013 at 10:16 AM
LOL. Right, and it was just a happy coincidence that most of the companies that have benefitted from this government boondoggle are Obama supporters/donors.
Tell us another fairy tale, Charlie.
AZCoyote on February 12, 2013 at 10:18 AM
The Tesla ‘S’ is the future of electric vehicles – and maybe cars themselves.
A friend of mine has one – he gets better than 225 miles per charge – (living in South Carolina) – and it is the best looking – fastest vehicles I have ever seen or ridden. Same friend also has the sports coupe – bought that one 2 years ago.
Tesla is magnificent.
jake-the-goose on February 12, 2013 at 10:22 AM
Physics and Economics defeat liberal delusions… As always…
mnjg on February 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM
The Obama Administration is a mistake.
tyketto on February 12, 2013 at 10:24 AM
I only live about 10 miles from where I work and all of that is 30-35 mph roads. I would have no problem using a cheap all electric two seat-er that has a top speed of 40 mph and good acceleration. Especially if it was able to supplement its charge via solar panels while sitting in the parking lot all day. The main thing would be cheap. Anything over 10 grand is a no go and for a slow short range car 5 or 6 grand would be better.
Dr. Frank Enstine on February 12, 2013 at 10:26 AM
I can’t believe Baier invites Lane on the Special Report panel on occasion. But when he does and the panel includes Krauthammer, I love it when Baier calls Lane “Chuck” to distinguish Lane from Krauthammer–the real Charles. You can see Lane wince when Baier says “Chuck.” I’ll bet Lane has insisted on being called “Charles” since he was five.
BuckeyeSam on February 12, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Of course. But not after wasting precious, hard-earned tax dollars.
visions on February 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM
BWAHAHAHA,,, Jake, your friend payed $100K for a car that you have to give a rest stop every 200 miles?
I would just as soon take a road trip with my mother in law, she doesn’t take an hour to pee.
I live in SC, most of us natives are not that stupid.
Your “friend”, he ain’t from round here is he?
Open The Door on February 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM
only after
visions on February 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM
You must be used to zooming around in Yugo’s; fastest car you’ve ever ridden? I have a Mustang that will blows the doors, hood, trunk, seats, pedals, and headlights off that “fast” Tesla while still in 1st gear, and I can gas-up anywhere while the Tesla is still trying catch up.
Bishop on February 12, 2013 at 10:35 AM
That Tesla would have come in real handy during the two weeks without power after Sandy.
ctmom on February 12, 2013 at 10:38 AM
Exactly right… Even at full efficiency a wind turbine generates no more than 60% of its “theoratical output”… The average traditional power plant (fossil fuel or hydro) in the US as 600 MW output, a wind turbine theoratical output is 2.5 MW and its actual full output is 1.5 MW, therefore you need 400 Wind Turbines to give the output of an average conventional power plant. Imagine just the land area that 400 Wind Turbines will cost and only to operate when there is wind…
Energy Efficiency = (Energy Output) / (Cost)
Higher Energy Output and Low Cost leads to Higher Energy Efficiency… and vice versa… There is no way with the current technology/physics (Energy Output) and economics (Cost) that wind or solar are going to be equal or better than traditional power (fossil fuel, hydro, nuclear)…
mnjg on February 12, 2013 at 10:44 AM
With all due respect to your Mustang – you’re dreaming
NOTHING beats a Tesla in the cold start or a quarter mile – NOTHING
Not even a Porsche GTS can match Tesla acceleration.
jake-the-goose on February 12, 2013 at 10:49 AM
It is not the proper constitutional role of our government to be involved in the automobile market, or any market for that matter. The sooper geniuses who run the government cannot now or ever make better choices than the market or than the actual experts within the industries they seek to manipulate and influence.
Just because a self-important, over educated, cloistered elite want something to be so, won’t all by itself make it so. I can crap in one hand and wish really hard for gold to appear in the other but all I will have is a really smelly hand.
Charlemagne on February 12, 2013 at 10:53 AM
BS on the 225 miles per charge and also how much does the Tesla S cost?… It cost $ 57,000… In other word it is too f***ing expensive for the vast majority of people and hence it cannot replace the internal combustion engine car that costs much less…
mnjg on February 12, 2013 at 10:54 AM
Unfortunately that is always the case…
mnjg on February 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Yeah but, Jake, you don’t get to go those 200 miles with that acceleration, the ‘Stang does.
Somebody wasn’t listening when they told that rabbit/turtle story.
Open The Door on February 12, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Except this Mach 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7u0jdfdd_tc
Of course we are dealing with road conditions, driver skill, weather, track, etc.; a lot of variables.
Bishop on February 12, 2013 at 11:04 AM
Well, the problem is the crash-test standards. The only way around them is to make the vehicle 3-wheeled, which probably wouldn’t sell well.
A $10,000 price tag limitation may be a bit too low.
blink on February 12, 2013 at 11:07 AM
He drives every weekend from Greenville SC to the Isle of Palms – SC – 230 miles – on a single charge
You speak with no knowledge of Tesla’s capabilities – but that’s OK. Most people know nothing about Tesla.
His ‘S’ model cost $87,000 – not $57,000 – which is just the base model price – you have go up from there.
jake-the-goose on February 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM
And you think this is the future of electric cars?
You speak with no knowledge of marketing…
blink on February 12, 2013 at 11:53 AM
Me too.
If you look out your window you will see a fleet of flying unicorns being ridden by manbearpigs.
CorporatePiggy on February 12, 2013 at 11:59 AM
Few people could afford telephones when they were first invented – marketing? try supply and demand – you will do better in the business world.
jake-the-goose on February 12, 2013 at 12:12 PM
Electric cars haven’t just been invented. They’ve been around for decades.
Try again.
No, marketing – as in market segmentation – which is the part of marketing that you obviously don’t know anything about.
But you probably thought that marketing was simply advertising and selling.
Ha! Hilarious!
blink on February 12, 2013 at 12:19 PM
Did not mean for you take my comments personally – I just do not think you know much about Tesla – it’s technology – or the emerging electic car industry/technology. (i.e the battery and drive train)
Tesla is unmatched at this point.
Again don’t take this personally, I simple suspect I know a little more about Tesla than you do.
I will give you the edge on marketing – I should not pretend to have any expertise there.
jake-the-goose on February 12, 2013 at 12:32 PM
It says in the video that the GTS beat it on the next run.
TexasDan on February 12, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Obviously, you’re ability to detect expertise is lacking.
I’m somewhat of an expert of: (1) the economics (the upfront and operational costs and the corresponding payback periods) of electric vehicles; (2) the technologies (the power/energy performances and balances, battery costs and life, and battery charging systems) of electric vehicles; and (3) the latest market research with respect to consumer market segmentation of electric vehicles.
Few will argue (and maybe you’re the only one to even try making this argument) that Telsa’s market segment is incredibly offset from the market segments that are expected to make a material impact on electric vehicle sales.
Try again.
Again, you need to learn the basics of market segmentation.
This doesn’t mean that Telsa can’t make an effort to build a completely different electric vehicle in order to target a completely different market segment, but that runs contrary to your original claim that, “The Tesla ‘S’ is the future of electric vehicles…”
This is funny. Sure, you might be more familiar with the actual product that I am, but your familiarization with the Telsa S gives you very little understanding of electric vehicles in general and the likely market for them in the future.
blink on February 12, 2013 at 1:34 PM