Demand For Electric Pickup Trucks Continue To Decline

[mikeru82]

Nobody is forcing anyone to use EVs.

While you’re correct if taken literally, no one is currently being forced to use EV’s, several state’s governments have mandated that all new car sales after a certain date will be EV only. No new ICE or even hybrids can be registered after this date. While it will still be okay to register older ICE and hybrid vehicles, those will eventually become unusable as they age. And at some point we’ll all be forced to buy an EV if we want to drive. Maybe your state hasn’t mandated this, but mine has. And depending on how elections go, this could eventually become a federal mandate.

 

[HSKR R/T]

While you’re correct if taken literally, no one is currently being forced to use EV’s, several state’s governments have mandated that all new car sales after a certain date will be EV only. No new ICE or even hybrids can be registered after this date. While it will still be okay to register older ICE and hybrid vehicles, those will eventually become unusable as they age. And at some point we’ll all be forced to buy an EV if we want to drive. Maybe your state hasn’t mandated this, but mine has. And depending on how elections go, this could eventually become a federal mandate.

I mean, there are still people driving around cars from 40s and 50s. Granted they don't have all the electronics if modern vehicles, but take care of your vehicles and they will last you for many years. No need to buy a new vehicle just because your current vehicle is getting older.

 

[mikeru82]

I mean, there are still people driving around cars from 40s and 50s. Granted they don't have all the electronics if modern vehicles, but take care of your vehicles and they will last you for many years. No need to buy a new vehicle just because your current vehicle is getting older.

Okay, if that’s the path you want to take I’ll play. That’s true, but the number of cars from that era has got to be less than a tenth of a percent of the total number of cars on the road. Statistically it barely registers. And it’s much easier to keep a car from the 50’s on the road than it will likely be to keep a 2024 Ram 1500 on the road in 50 years, because of the vastly higher complexity of them.

And deciding to buy a new car isn’t about need. It’s about choice. I have no problem with people choosing to buy an EV. My problem is not being able to choose the type of vehicle I want to buy. In the end it all comes down to freedom of choice. Maybe you’re okay with not having a choice, and that’s fine. I just happen to not be okay with that. EV’s may or may not be the future. But if they are it should be allowed to happen the same way most other new technology evolves. Let the market decide.

 

[Jako]

I mean, there are still people driving around cars from 40s and 50s. Granted they don't have all the electronics if modern vehicles, but take care of your vehicles and they will last you for many years. No need to buy a new vehicle just because your current vehicle is getting older.

I have an old fleet. Sometimes parts can be a problem, sometimes the problem isn't so easily diagnosed. Had a clogged check valve on the charcoal canister that created a vacuum in the gas tank. Had to have the gas cap cracked for a while. The charcoal canister is no longer available for a 1990 Celica, currently at 193k miles.

Had my 1994 Ford explorer sucking transmission fluid and putting it into the oil. The tranny worked on a vacuum and the vacuum diaphragm was bad.

If the car is a daily driver then you could be out of a car for a while.

Replaced a crank position sensor the other day on my 2001 Dodge Ram 1500 and the new part was bad. And the mechanic had to make some adjustments on the transmission coolant line to make it work.

Agree you can keep a vehicle running but some things can pop up that will side line the vehicle. Some people are not in a position to be without a vehicle or willing to spend more on a repair then the car is worth. A few break downs or repairs can push you into giving up on a vehicle.

 

[theblet]

Nobody is forcing anyone to use EVs.

Technically, not YET. However, if you look at states like California, it's coming. Right now it's no ICE vehicle sales after 2035, but what's next?

 

[HSKR R/T]

Okay, if that’s the path you want to take I’ll play. That’s true, but the number of cars from that era has got to be less than a tenth of a percent of the total number of cars on the road. Statistically it barely registers. And it’s much easier to keep a car from the 50’s on the road than it will likely be to keep a 2024 Ram 1500 on the road in 50 years, because of the vastly higher complexity of them.

And deciding to buy a new car isn’t about need. It’s about choice. I have no problem with people choosing to buy an EV. My problem is not being able to choose the type of vehicle I want to buy. In the end it all comes down to freedom of choice. Maybe you’re okay with not having a choice, and that’s fine. I just happen to not be okay with that. EV’s may or may not be the future. But if they are it should be allowed to happen the same way most other new technology evolves. Let the market decide.

I do have a choice though. I can choose not to buy an EV and keep what I have or buy used. And with how many states are rolling back previous mandates, and auto manufacturers going away from EVs, it's not going to be like that, IMO

 

[HSKR R/T]

I have an old fleet. Sometimes parts can be a problem, sometimes the problem isn't so easily diagnosed. Had a clogged check valve on the charcoal canister that created a vacuum in the gas tank. Had to have the gas cap cracked for a while. The charcoal canister is no longer available for a 1990 Celica, currently at 193k miles.

Had my 1994 Ford explorer sucking transmission fluid and putting it into the oil. The tranny worked on a vacuum and the vacuum diaphragm was bad.

If the car is a daily driver then you could be out of a car for a while.

Replaced a crank position sensor the other day on my 2001 Dodge Ram 1500 and the new part was bad. And the mechanic had to make some adjustments on the transmission coolant line to make it work.

Agree you can keep a vehicle running but some things can pop up that will side line the vehicle. Some people are not in a position to be without a vehicle or willing to spend more on a repair then the car is worth. A few break downs or repairs can push you into giving up on a vehicle.

**** happens. Happens to brand new vehicles all the time as well. Having an older car that has something pop up isn't exclusive to older vehicles. Poor analogy.

Look at Cuba. There were embargoes that prevented new vehicles from being imported for decades. They oeecsme that and basically built their own vehicles with older chassis and what they had laying around.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Technically, not YET. However, if you look at states like California, it's coming. Right now it's no ICE vehicle sales after 2035, but what's next?

No "new" vehicles. Doesn't prevent used vehicles from being sold. And that's still 10 years away. A Lot can and will change in 10 years.

 

[Dewey]

Nobody is forcing anyone to use EVs.

Except California……eventually

Sure you can always buy a used vehicle but good luck buying a new one.
Wether or not this will ever happen only time will tell but guessing if any state mandates this it will be California.

Edit: I see somebody already posted this. I need to read replies first.

 

[mikeru82]

I do have a choice though. I can choose not to buy an EV and keep what I have or buy used. And with how many states are rolling back previous mandates, and auto manufacturers going away from EVs, it's not going to be like that, IMO

That’s great if you’re fine with buying used. Doesn’t solve the issue though because I don’t like buying used vehicles, and choose to buy new. I think it’s great that car companies are starting to push back some, but which states have rolled back these mandates? I guess the most important one is the state where I live, which hasn’t rolled anything back and has picked 2030 for the year that EV’s are mandated for new vehicle purchases. Don’t worry, you can’t win this argument. I’m not sure why you’re even trying to be honest. If covid should have taught us anything it’s that mandates are generally a bad idea.

 

[HSKR R/T]

That’s great if you’re fine with buying used. Doesn’t solve the issue though because I don’t like buying used vehicles, and choose to buy new. I think it’s great that car companies are starting to push back some, but which states have rolled back these mandates? I guess the most important one is the state where I live, which hasn’t rolled anything back and has picked 2030 for the year that EV’s are mandated for new vehicle purchases. Don’t worry, you can’t win this argument. I’m not sure why you’re even trying to be honest. If covid should have taught us anything it’s that mandates are generally a bad idea.

There's nothing to "win". There's facts, and there's fear. Most talking about why they don't like EVs are using, or bought into, the fear.

 

[mikeru82]

There's nothing to "win". There's facts, and there's fear. Most talking about why they don't like EVs are using, or bought into, the fear.

Nice deflection.

 

[mzflorida]

Nobody is forcing anyone to use EVs.

100%. But the govt is forcing EV mandates (which i think we all know will fail). Until the mandates fail, they have successfully stifled innovation to reduce emissions in the interest of political expediency. So in a backhanded way, they are strategically limiting choice or options. But you are correct, nobody is forcing us to drive EVs (yet maybe?).

 

[mzflorida]

There's nothing to "win". There's facts, and there's fear. Most talking about why they don't like EVs are using, or bought into, the fear.

Well there are things to "fear." Imagine a hurricane hitting south Florida (whatever natural disaster you want to choose). Now imagine just 25% of the vehicles evacuating were EVs. Now think about charging times. How will the infrastructure ever support that level of true need? Lines to charge could be half a day long, or more, or less, but long. Then you have traffic stopped blocking egress. Then the govt will have to provide law enforcement, water, sanitation for the lines at each of the charging stations while they are best served delivering other more valuable services. How do you propose they evacuate? I don't think anyone fears EVs. I do think they fear their impacts in many other ways. Like I said in my previous post, innovation, which has successfully solved for problems across the history of mankind, has been stifled. Everyone should resent that.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Well there are things to "fear." Imagine a hurricane hitting south Florida (whatever natural disaster you want to choose). Now imagine just 25% of the vehicles evacuating were EVs. Now think about charging times. How will the infrastructure ever support that level of true need? Lines to charge could be half a day long, or more, or less, but long. Then you have traffic stopped blocking egress. Then the govt will have to provide law enforcement, water, sanitation for the lines at each of the charging stations while they are best served delivering other more valuable services. How do you propose they evacuate? I don't think anyone fears EVs. I do think they fear their impacts in many other ways. Like I said in my previous post, innovation, which has successfully solved for problems across the history of mankind, has been stifled. Everyone should resent that.

Exactly, unsubstantiated fear. People have the same issues with ICE vehicles in those situations. Cars left dead on the highways because they run out of fuel and no power at gas stations to pump it. Lines hours long to get fuel at the few stations that have power. Infrastructure isn't there to support ICE vehicles in those extreme circumstances either.

A fully charged EV can power a house for a few days. Let's see your ICE vehicle do that

 

[theblet]

It’s not just about fear(even though there’s a lot to be afraid of). It’s govt overreach.

They won’t just cut ICE off completely. Ever hear of boiling a frog? That’s their approach. Most are too smart for this thank goodness

 

[mzflorida]

Exactly, unsubstantiated fear. People have the same issues with ICE vehicles in those situations. Cars left dead on the highways because they run out of fuel and no power at gas stations to pump it. Lines hours long to get fuel at the few stations that have power. Infrastructure isn't there to support ICE vehicles in those extreme circumstances either.

A fully charged EV can power a house for a few days. Let's see your ICE vehicle do that

Sorry. Please do not take this as confrontational, but you are incorrect. This is not an unsubstantiated fear and is a strategic element of public safety planning in every fusion center across the USA. Just because you feel it is unsubstantiated does not make it so. The issues that are presented by EV's in the circumstances I presented are not presented for ICE engines, at least not nearly to the same degree. Have you ever seen emergency sanitation facilities installed for a gas line? Does not happen because the vehicles move through in about 7 minutes. Here in Florida, many, perhaps most, fueling stations have generators. I was in Gateway for Hurricane Irma, and right here in Estero for Ian; never went without fuel in either event...direct hits during both (call them Cat 4s for the sake of argument). However, one thing we did not have was electricity, for an extended period of time. Plus, most residents have the ability to plan for an evacuation ahead of time, fuel their ICE vehicles, bring along another 5 or 10 gallons of fuel, and get to a place of safety, or another fueling station. The charging infrastructure dilemma leapfrogs across the evacuation routes and increases factorially when EV operators enter a region with fewer charging stations than are required to meet the demand. Smaller communities, fewer available services, what do we do then? On the subject of power being out, how would you propose that an EV recharge if the power is out? How about out across an entire region for an extended period of time? What do we do then? If you are interested, go over to scholar.google.com and see the peer reviewed positions made by guys and girls who know a lot more about this than either you or I do. You seem like a really bright guy, but you are doing exactly what you are accusing everyone else here of doing; anchoring your positions in a bias, just in your case a bias favoring EVs. Neither of us are fully informed. I'm 100% for alternative energy vehicles, they are nowhere close to being ready widespread adoption as the sole source of transportation. That is a long time off, love it or hate it.

If you are using your car to power your home, how do you propose to use the vehicle for its primary purpose of transportation, then return home, uncharged because there is no power, and repower the home again?

Do you know what the response is for the EV owners stuck at charging stations? ICE buses to get the vehicle occupants to a shelter.

 

[HSKR R/T]

Sorry. Please do not take this as confrontational, but you are incorrect. This is not an unsubstantiated fear and is a strategic element of public safety planning in every fusion center across the USA. Just because you feel it is unsubstantiated does not make it so. The issues that are presented by EV's in the circumstances I presented are not presented for ICE engines, at least not nearly to the same degree. Have you ever seen emergency sanitation facilities installed for a gas line? Does not happen because the vehicles move through in about 7 minutes. Here in Florida, many, perhaps most, fueling stations have generators. I was in Gateway for Hurricane Irma, and right here in Estero for Ian; never went without fuel in either event...direct hits during both (call them Cat 4s for the sake of argument). However, one thing we did not have was electricity, for an extended period of time. Plus, most residents have the ability to plan for an evacuation ahead of time, fuel their ICE vehicles, bring along another 5 or 10 gallons of fuel, and get to a place of safety, or another fueling station. The charging infrastructure dilemma leapfrogs across the evacuation routes and increases factorially when EV operators enter a region with fewer charging stations than are required to meet the demand. Smaller communities, fewer available services, what do we do then? On the subject of power being out, how would you propose that an EV recharge if the power is out? How about out across an entire region for an extended period of time? What do we do then? If you are interested, go over to scholar.google.com and see the peer reviewed positions made by guys and girls who know a lot more about this than either you or I do. You seem like a really bright guy, but you are doing exactly what you are accusing everyone else here of doing; anchoring your positions in a bias, just in your case a bias favoring EVs. Neither of us are fully informed. I'm 100% for alternative energy vehicles, they are nowhere close to being ready widespread adoption as the sole source of transportation. That is a long time off, love it or hate it.

If you are using your car to power your home, how do you propose to use the vehicle for its primary purpose of transportation, then return home, uncharged because there is no power, and repower the home again?

Do you know what the response is for the EV owners stuck at charging stations? ICE buses to get the vehicle occupants to a shelter.

I'm not advocating for EV being sold means of transportation. I'd water a vast majority of EV owners also own ICE vehicles.

As far as power being out and recharging EVs, you already said most gas stations there have generators. Did you ever think the same could be used for charging stations? I know it's a stretch to actually think the same solutions used for ICE vehicles can be used for EVs as well. Especially when you are trying to use worst case scenario events to anchor your position.

 

[Jako]

**** happens. Happens to brand new vehicles all the time as well. Having an older car that has something pop up isn't exclusive to older vehicles. Poor analogy.

Look at Cuba. There were embargoes that prevented new vehicles from being imported for decades. They oeecsme that and basically built their own vehicles with older chassis and what they had laying around.

What do you consider "new"?
I don't need Cuba. Poor analogy.

 

[mzflorida]

I'm not advocating for EV being sold means of transportation. I'd water a vast majority of EV owners also own ICE vehicles.

As far as power being out and recharging EVs, you already said most gas stations there have generators. Did you ever think the same could be used for charging stations? I know it's a stretch to actually think the same solutions used for ICE vehicles can be used for EVs as well. Especially when you are trying to use worst case scenario events to anchor your position.

Of course I have thought of charging stations being tied to generators. But most are not. Look at Detroit last year as an example and also public data here in Florida. There are very few gas stations that are EV charging stations, at scale. Look at the data. With ~70% of vehicles charging at home we would need over 1 million more public charging stations to be built to support EV adoption at scale only to support the 20% of charging that occurs at public stations. How do we charge the other 70% , after building 1million more charging stations, if the grid goes down for whatever reason? Not my data, but the consensus across alternative energy advocacy groups. The 10% excluded are charged at other locations like work or airports.

I am not anchoring my position on EVs to the worst case scenario, I responded to your position that fear of moving to EVs was unreasonable. I've said this a few times now, I am 100% in support of alternative energy vehicles. I'm entirely uncertain how you would arrive at a conclusion that I am anchoring in a bias toward a disaster scenario as discounting the value of alternative energy vehicle; it was a contextual response not an overall position on EVs or other alternative energy vehicles. I am not going to be a cheerleader for EVs when they don't yet deserve that level of support. I'm even more confused that you just did not say, "Huh. I never knew that. I should probably learn more." It seems, not sure, you were unaware that the facts I presented were an element of public planning.

Here is my position. Alternative energy vehicles are a great idea, they are decades away from widescale adoption, and today, like our trucks, they are purpose built; EVs for regional commuting our trucks for utility ( i know most trucks neve haul much of anything). This year 2 trillion dollars, not a typo, will be spent on alternative energy; that is in addition to the nearly 2 trillion spent in 2023. Would you not expect to see great advancements and returns, heck...even good news...with that staggering level of investment? Globally, we could have spent those dollars in a more meaningful and impactful way.

There is a risk management model anyone can use called failure modes and effects analysis. It's free anywhere you look on the web. Actually, FMEA is a required (legislated) process in automobile manufacturing, interestingly enough. FMEA allows anyone to do their own analysis of the risks of adopting EVs and also maintaining ICEVs (pretty much any process or product can be evaluated). Much is learned from going through the FMEA critical thinking process. Like Mike Tyson said, "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face." Accelerated adoption model for EVs, mandates, ridiculous levels of public investment with little optimism toward a strategic return, and failure to recognize alternative energy shortcomings are the proverbial punch in the face.