GM Volt Forum banner

41 - 60 of 118 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Over 85% of the people that live in Colorado live in urbanized areas, areas around cities with a population of 50,000 or more. That's 15% above the national average. Urban Percentage of the Population for States, Historical | Iowa Community Indicators Program Where does "rare" start in your opinion?
You said "vanishingly rare" and not rare. Either way I do not consider 15% rare.

NO! "Greenies" say those situations are RARE. Stop being blinkered absolutist.
Saying it doesn't make it so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
"Greenies" ignore the fact that a significant number of people live outside cities. Their arguments are all based on what they see in the cities.
I am not even sure what definition of urban is being used in the reference. Here is Colorado's population breakdown by county:

Population of Counties in Colorado (2021)

As someone who lives in the Denver metro area and has traveled along the I-25 corridor I know several of these counties well. Aurora is perhaps the largest city in Colorado comprising three counties (Arapahoe, Adams, and Douglas):

Aurora, Colorado

I can tell you Aurora does not have a lot of high rises like you would find in downtown Denver or Colorado Springs. Residential property consists of single family homes, condos, townhomes, and apartment complexes. It is far from "big city" life as the provided study may suggest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
One in five EV owners switch back to gas due to hassle of charging.

The other four are still making payments.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,824 Posts
I ask so that I know exactly what they read so I can better address it. I refuse to form a rebuttle to something I have not seen myself.
So if you yourself have seen the study published last December by University of California Davis researchers Scott Hardman and Gil Tal (rather than just the review of it by Dominick Reuter in the link provided by the OP), then perhaps you could comment further on what they had to say about one of the conclusions. The study surveyed Californians who purchased an electric vehicle between 2012 and 2018. From the study’s Abstract: "...PEV discontinuance in California occurs at a rate of 20% for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle owners and 18% for battery electric vehicle owners. We show that discontinuance is related to [a number of factors, including] ...not being male."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I can see why one in five go back to ICE. We are still in the very early wild-west days of EV transportation. The best analogy I can think of would be similar to owning a 1905 Buick Model C.
If you could roll the clock back and experience this, you would find that it is more likely that you would buy your gasoline at a grocery store, mercantile or pharmacy and lug it out five gallons at a time to the vehicle yourself. In 1905, there were only a few hundred miles of paved roads in the entire country (if I remember correctly, I'll have to verify that) and the suspension of a 1905 Buick was basically spring-steel leaves and a few lag bolts. And this was considered a luxury vehicle for the time. Imagine riding in such a car with most road being cobbled, bricked or just plain graded dirt. Yikes!

A new Model C set you back about $1,200, more than the annual salary of most skilled laborers or about the same as a lawyer's annual pay. You were lucky if your bias-ply tires lasted longer than five to eight thousand miles. Is there mysterious smoke coming from the engine flap? Good luck getting that repaired since you probably didn't buy your Buick from a dealer and car repair shops were non-existent. Most cars in 1905 were repaired by blacksmiths or carpenters who side hustled working on the new horseless carriages. Chauffeurs were usually also mechanics.

Compare all that to a horse, which cost about a hundred dollars in 1905, or three thousand dollars today, which made a lot more sense. There seemed to be no future for these amusing but impractical "auto-mobiles" in a country criss-crossed with unpaved roads.

As much as I love my aging 2013 Volt, if I lived in an apartment with no ease-of-access charging solution, I would probably not drive an EV at all but that's just my personal feeling, everybody's different.

ref.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,423 Posts
When thinking about that Model C consider if it solves any of the limits below:
  • Average speed of horse&buggy on daily drive is about 3mph
  • Average daily maximum trip distance with horse & buggy is about 15-20 miles
  • Average daily maintenance of a horse is about 1-2 hours (multiple horses gets you a discount, 20 or so is 8 hours)
  • Someone needs to be available to tend the horses 24/7
  • Horse eats about 10-15kg of dry hay a day. That's 3 tons for you to dry with pole and pitchfork (pasture time deducted)
  • You had to grease the cart wheels after 10 to 15 miles
  • Buggies were non-suspended (with or without seat suspension) or suspended with.. leaf springs made of spring steel.

Now a car could
  • Have average speed of 20mph (top speeds over 30mph!)
  • Could travel 150 miles per day
  • Daily maintenance was 30 minutes
  • Car could sit in the barn indefinately
  • Would eat gasoline only when used (for added cost of 0.2$/gallon)

So considering that you saved 1-2 hours per day on maintenance, 2 hours on commute and several days on hay season. Plus you can utilize your barn as equipment store or work room. I'd say there is an incentive to trade the horse to a car if you can afford it.

When you can do more with less effort it's just a killer app.

Funny though, it was not until 1923 for peak-horse after which the tractors and heavy trucks surpassed the horse and caused decline to 1/20th the numbers and moved the horse to a luxury item.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
So if you yourself have seen the study published last December by University of California Davis researchers Scott Hardman and Gil Tal (rather than just the review of it by Dominick Reuter in the link provided by the OP), then perhaps you could comment further on what they had to say about one of the conclusions. The study surveyed Californians who purchased an electric vehicle between 2012 and 2018. From the study’s Abstract: "...PEV discontinuance in California occurs at a rate of 20% for plug-in hybrid electric vehicle owners and 18% for battery electric vehicle owners. We show that discontinuance is related to [a number of factors, including] ...not being male."
What further comment would you like? Also I didn't limit my opinion based on just the link provided in the OP. There are other sources regarding the study. One I found interesting, at least the comments, was Bad infrastructure and not being male among reasons people give up EVs at Ars Technica.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
110v charging tops out at about 5 miles per hour of charging. Get home at 6:30 PM and leave the next morning at 7:30 and you will get at most 65 miles of charging. For about 95% of the workforce this will cover their daily driving needs. It won't cover everyone, nor will it cover any weekend travel.

Now for those living in attached/duplex homes. These properties almost always have "street" parking, requiring an extension cord which creates a tripping hazard for everyone. This isn't a solution.
Depends were you live I guess. Back in the 70's I owned three duplexes in Calgary. They all had off street parking except one but there was no side walk so running a cord to the house from the street wasn't a problem. Most residential in Alberta have back alleys with garages both old and new. All family and in laws there have garages, both old and new. I lived in a fourplex there and it also had off street parking. I currently live in BC where all the new duplexes have garages (they used to have carports back in the day). I converted my two car carport in my house into a two garage around the turn of the century. The only places that don't have plug in capability are older apartments and WWII houses in the old part of town.
 

·
Registered
2017 Volt Premier 80k+ Miles
Joined
·
593 Posts
For people who don't have charging at their home, either in their garage or parking space, it IS a hassle. Those people simply made a bad decision & bought the wrong car.

As I said before when people have posted the "should I buy" question, I would never buy an EV without the ability to charge at home. An EV is not the right vehicle for everyone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,374 Posts
Depends were you live I guess. Back in the 70's I owned three duplexes in Calgary. They all had off street parking except one but there was no side walk so running a cord to the house from the street wasn't a problem. Most residential in Alberta have back alleys with garages both old and new. All family and in laws there have garages, both old and new. I lived in a fourplex there and it also had off street parking. I currently live in BC where all the new duplexes have garages (they used to have carports back in the day). I converted my two car carport in my house into a two garage around the turn of the century. The only places that don't have plug in capability are older apartments and WWII houses in the old part of town.
Completely different in the US. Multi-family dwellings do not have garages and they're almost always "on-street" parking. By this I mean there are pull in parking spots that abut the curb and there's a sidewalk along the curb. This is true even for brand new complexes except in California, which mandated EV charging in the past 18 months.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volty25

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
For people who don't have charging at their home, either in their garage or parking space, it IS a hassle. Those people simply made a bad decision & bought the wrong car.

As I said before when people have posted the "should I buy" question, I would never buy an EV without the ability to charge at home. An EV is not the right vehicle for everyone.
Unfortunately they are to greenies and governments are attempting to push the technology on people regardless if it's not the right thing for someone.
 

·
Registered
2013 Volt
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
If someone else in the first 51 posts already mentioned this and I missed it, forgive me. I find the slanted title "strange". Why not a title of "Fully 80% of EV owners refuse to return to ICE," instead of focusing on the minority segment?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
If someone else in the first 51 posts already mentioned this and I missed it, forgive me. I find the slanted title "strange". Why not a title of "Fully 80% of EV owners refuse to return to ICE," instead of focusing on the minority segment?
It's called click bate. The more clicks, the more money from the advertisers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: obermd

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
If someone else in the first 51 posts already mentioned this and I missed it, forgive me. I find the slanted title "strange". Why not a title of "Fully 80% of EV owners refuse to return to ICE," instead of focusing on the minority segment?
Because such a discussion wouldn't really be newsworthy.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,658 Posts
The article gives "conservatives" another excuse not to conserve and continue to pollute without feeling bad about it. A focus on the edge cases that switch back to ICE to justify an existing bias against EV's. Remember when a certain Presidential candidate said EV's can't run on windmills? “You can’t drive a car with a windmill on it.” Totally ignored that EV's could be charged with electricity from renewable sources including windmills. Recently he's saying 90% of cars will be EV in the next 10 years which is likely too optimistic. But at least he's seen the (sun)light or has the wind(mill) at his back now when it comes to EV's, haha.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
The article gives "conservatives" another excuse not to conserve and continue to pollute without feeling bad about it. A focus on the edge cases that switch back to ICE to justify an existing bias against EV's. Remember when a certain Presidential candidate said EV's can't run on windmills? “You can’t drive a car with a windmill on it.” Totally ignored that EV's could be charged with electricity from renewable sources including windmills. Recently he's saying 90% of cars will be EV in the next 10 years which is likely too optimistic. But at least he's seen the (sun)light or has the wind(mill) at his back now when it comes to EV's, haha.
And here it is, the unsupported accusation by a greenie that "conservatives" are merely anti-green and unable to think for themselves and therefore you know what's right for them. You have yet to demonstrate that their situations are edge cases. IMO 20% is not an edge case. I see these "edge" cases all over the place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,824 Posts
What further comment would you like? Also I didn't limit my opinion based on just the link provided in the OP. There are other sources regarding the study. One I found interesting, at least the comments, was Bad infrastructure and not being male among reasons people give up EVs at Ars Technica.
Seems to me that if "being not male" was one of the significant conclusions from a study devoted to learning why people who had started driving plug-in electric vehicles then later switched back to gas cars, perhaps the study authors had concluded that driving an electric car had a "macho" aspect to it. I thought perhaps someone who had read the study could provide some additional comment on how the authors reached this particular study conclusion.

Via the Ars Technica link you provided, I was able to view the study itself, which concludes by saying the reasons why women are more likely to discontinue ownership of BEVs and PHEVs, and why so few owners of them are women, remains unclear. The basis for including "being not male" among the study conclusions was more on a socioeconomic basis. People who "abandoned" their EV ownership "were more likely to have smaller households and have fewer vehicles in the household; they were younger, earned less, rented more, were less likely to live in a detached house, and were less likely to be male than the Californians who stuck with EVs."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,824 Posts
If someone else in the first 51 posts already mentioned this and I missed it, forgive me. I find the slanted title "strange". Why not a title of "Fully 80% of EV owners refuse to return to ICE," instead of focusing on the minority segment?
The "minority segment" was the object of the original study, intended to help analyze the current state of development. The "slanted title" at least maintains the focus on the study conclusions. From the Abstract of this university study: "Although much research has focused on the reasons for, and barriers to, initial PEV purchase, less has been devoted to the reasons for discontinuance—abandoning a new technology after first purchasing it."

The study authors determined there was a significant portion of PEV owners who "discontinued" their ownership, and came to some conclusions as to why. As might be expected, many of the concerns are related to recharging the vehicles (especially since recharging methodology has changed very little over time when contrasted to the expanded capabilities of the vehicles themselves), and you see those concerns reflected in the comments being made here and to the various articles being published on the results of the study.

I find one conclusion interesting, that "discontinuance is related to having other vehicles in the household that are less efficient." This seems to be a reference to multi-vehicle with low gas mileage owning households where the electric vehicle apparently could not meet the family’s needs for number of passengers being transported or vehicle handling capabilities (towing, hauling, etc.) that were being met by their gas powered vehicles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
415 Posts
Seems to me that if "being not male" was one of the significant conclusions from a study devoted to learning why people who had started driving plug-in electric vehicles then later switched back to gas cars, perhaps the study authors had concluded that driving an electric car had a "macho" aspect to it. I thought perhaps someone who had read the study could provide some additional comment on how the authors reached this particular study conclusion.

Via the Ars Technica link you provided, I was able to view the study itself, which concludes by saying the reasons why women are more likely to discontinue ownership of BEVs and PHEVs, and why so few owners of them are women, remains unclear. The basis for including "being not male" among the study conclusions was more on a socioeconomic basis. People who "abandoned" their EV ownership "were more likely to have smaller households and have fewer vehicles in the household; they were younger, earned less, rented more, were less likely to live in a detached house, and were less likely to be male than the Californians who stuck with EVs."
You're welcome.
 
41 - 60 of 118 Posts
Top