Top 50 Metro Areas by Electric Vehicle Registrations:

[closetohumping 17433]

This is total, not per capita.  Not surprised by any except maybe Phoenix and Atlanta being ahead of Chicago.

 

1 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim 230,940
2 San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley 122,404
3 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara 73,810
4 New York-Newark-Jersey City70,943
5 San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad 51,616

6 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 43,183
7 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler 42,049
8 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue 41,755
9 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 40,232
10 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta 36,051

11 Chicago-Naperville-Elgin 32,775
12 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom 27,937
13 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro 27,525
14 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach 26,943
15 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 18,769

16 Denver-Aurora-Lakewood 17,648
17 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn 16,910
18 Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington 15,736
19 Boston-Cambridge-Newton 15,511
20 Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise 14,304

21 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura 13,080
22 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 12,842
23 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson 12,568
24 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk 11,724
25 Honolulu 10,539

26 Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater 10,401
27 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford 9,923
28 Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land 8,082
29 Salt Lake City 7,822
30 Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown 7,582

31 Tucson 7,353
32 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown 7,242
33 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia 6,858
34 St Louis 6,661
35 Raleigh-Cary 6,565

36 Nashville-Franklin-Murfreesboro 6,146
37 Columbus(OH) 6,093
38 Stockton 5,918
39 Fresno 5,481
40 Cincinnati 5,368

41 Pittsburgh 4,744
42 New Haven-Milford 4,675
43 Cleveland-Elyria 4,304
44 Ogden-Clearfield 4,289
45 Rochester(NY) 4,151

46 Jacksonville 4,064
47 Kansas City 4,040
48 Provo-Orem 3,876
49 Albany Schenectady-Troy 3,853
50 Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson 3,712

report and ranking here:
 

Link has been fixed

https://www.storagecafe.com/blog/best-us-metros-for-electric-cars/

Data is towards the top, click on "Electric vehicle adoption" to get rank. 

Edited August 22, 2023 by closetohumping

[DalTxHornFan 3097]

The Electric-Vehicle Bubble Starts to Deflate

By The Editorial Board

Aug. 21, 2023 6:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-vehicles-china-biden-administration-industrial-policy-754e1937?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

"It’s ironic, to say the least, that the U.S. is seeking to imitate China’s economic model at the moment that its industrial policy fractures. Look no further than its collapsing electric-vehicle bubble, which is a lesson in how industries built by government often also fail because of government." 

Snip:

"Cox Automotive reported this month that EV inventory had swelled to 103 days of supply in the U.S., about double that of gas-powered cars. Auto makers and dealers are discounting EVs to sell their growing supply. The average EV price paid by consumers has fallen 20% compared with a year ago to $53,438, driven by Tesla’s price cuts and dealer incentives.

Ford recently reduced its EV production targets as its losses and unsold inventory grow. At the end of June, it had 116 days of unsold Mustang Mach-Es, and GM’s electric Hummer had more than 100 days of supply. And this is in a growing economy.

Traditional auto makers will have to raise prices on gas-powered cars to compensate for their EV losses. A United Auto Workers executive said Sunday that Stellantis is threatening to move production of its Ram 1500 trucks to Mexico from suburban Detroit, no doubt to reduce costs. The EV jobs President Biden touts will come at the cost of union jobs building gas-powered vehicles."

Sorry if you can't get behind WSJ paywall.  If you can't, perhaps you could reconsider some of your life choices.

Edited August 22, 2023 by DalTxHornFan

[Dahobbs 17522]

29 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

This is total, not per capita.  Not surprised by any except maybe Phoenix and Atlanta being ahead of Chicago.

 

1 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim 230,940
2 San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley 122,404
3 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara 73,810
4 New York-Newark-Jersey City70,943
5 San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad 51,616

6 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 43,183
7 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler 42,049
8 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue 41,755
9 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 40,232
10 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta 36,051

11 Chicago-Naperville-Elgin 32,775
12 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom 27,937
13 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro 27,525
14 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach 26,943
15 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 18,769

16 Denver-Aurora-Lakewood 17,648
17 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn 16,910
18 Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington 15,736
19 Boston-Cambridge-Newton 15,511
20 Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise 14,304

21 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura 13,080
22 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 12,842
23 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson 12,568
24 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk 11,724
25 Honolulu 10,539

26 Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater 10,401
27 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford 9,923
28 Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land 8,082
29 Salt Lake City 7,822
30 Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown 7,582

31 Tucson 7,353
32 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown 7,242
33 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia 6,858
34 St Louis 6,661
35 Raleigh-Cary 6,565

36 Nashville-Franklin-Murfreesboro 6,146
37 Columbus(OH) 6,093
38 Stockton 5,918
39 Fresno 5,481
40 Cincinnati 5,368

41 Pittsburgh 4,744
42 New Haven-Milford 4,675
43 Cleveland-Elyria 4,304
44 Ogden-Clearfield 4,289
45 Rochester(NY) 4,151

46 Jacksonville 4,064
47 Kansas City 4,040
48 Provo-Orem 3,876
49 Albany Schenectady-Troy 3,853
50 Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson 3,712

report and ranking here:
https://www.storagecafe.com/blog/bes...electric-cars/ 

That article (link is broken BTW) and the numbers are from 2021. 

[Dahobbs 17522]

3 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

The Electric-Vehicle Bubble Starts to Deflate

By The Editorial Board

Aug. 21, 2023 6:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-vehicles-china-biden-administration-industrial-policy-754e1937?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

Sorry if you can't get behind WSJ paywall.  If you can't, perhaps you could reconsider some of your life choices.

Personally, I would reconsider life choices that led you to posting a link to a WSJ opinion piece, particularly without providing the text in spoilers or at least some sort of summary. Anyway, my prediction is that the article is mostly bullshit. 2023 Q2 EV sales are up 50% over 2022. 

[Foosters 17824]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Personally, I would reconsider life choices that led you to posting a link to a WSJ opinion piece, particularly without providing the text in spoilers or at least some sort of summary. Anyway, my prediction is that the article is mostly bullshit. 2023 Q2 EV sales are up 50% over 2022. 

Some people can't help it. They see "EV" and get irrationally angry.

Imagine if OP posted a thread about top cities with playground structures and some super smart guy posted an op-ed about leftist education policy.  That's what @DalTxHornFan just did. 

[Telegraph_it 3357]

The article talks about China mostly, which is something completely different. 

[BamaATL 16593]

A couple of reasons as to why Atlanta does well in this.

1.  The area in question, Atlanta, Sandy Springs, Alpharetta is the tech sector here

2.  Power rates in Georgia are among some of the lowest in the country.  

[gmr548 16576]

1 hour ago, BamaATL said:

A couple of reasons as to why Atlanta does well in this.

1.  The area in question, Atlanta, Sandy Springs, Alpharetta is the tech sector here

2.  Power rates in Georgia are among some of the lowest in the country.  

Atlanta is a top 10 MSA, extremely car dependent (especially relative to most of the MSAs that are larger), and does not have the anti-EV O&G presence that sinks DFW and Houston. I would expect it to be right where it is. 

There's also a lot of investment in GA when it comes to battery manufacturing and energy storage. 

[Reynolds Woodcock 4739]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

Personally, I would reconsider life choices that led you to posting a link to a WSJ opinion piece, particularly without providing the text in spoilers or at least some sort of summary. Anyway, my prediction is that the article is mostly bullshit. 2023 Q2 EV sales are up 50% over 2022. 

As an avid reader of the WSJ, I can confirm that their opinion section is suited for people with 2 digit IQs. It’s basically the Tyler Morning Telegraph opinion section with mass distribution. About once a year I accidentally read something so mind-numbingly stupid that I cancel my sub. They always get me back with some silly promo a few days later. 

[TwiceHorn 31438]

1 hour ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

As an avid reader of the WSJ, I can confirm that their opinion section is suited for people with 2 digit IQs. It’s basically the Tyler Morning Telegraph opinion section with mass distribution. About once a year I accidentally read something so mind-numbingly stupid that I cancel my sub. They always get me back with some silly promo a few days later. 

Is that mostly post-Murdoch?  Or has it always been like that.  My sense of it is that it hasn't, but I'm not sure.

[Reynolds Woodcock 4739]

10 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Is that mostly post-Murdoch?  Or has it always been like that.  My sense of it is that it hasn't, but I'm not sure.

I assume the former, but I became a reader post-college, which was after the News acquisition. 

[RPM 26316]

We just installed 4 charging stations in the parking lot at work.

[Dahobbs 17522]

17 hours ago, DalTxHornFan said:

The Electric-Vehicle Bubble Starts to Deflate

By The Editorial Board

Aug. 21, 2023 6:38 pm ET

https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-vehicles-china-biden-administration-industrial-policy-754e1937?mod=hp_opin_pos_1

"It’s ironic, to say the least, that the U.S. is seeking to imitate China’s economic model at the moment that its industrial policy fractures. Look no further than its collapsing electric-vehicle bubble, which is a lesson in how industries built by government often also fail because of government." 

Snip:

"Cox Automotive reported this month that EV inventory had swelled to 103 days of supply in the U.S., about double that of gas-powered cars. Auto makers and dealers are discounting EVs to sell their growing supply. The average EV price paid by consumers has fallen 20% compared with a year ago to $53,438, driven by Tesla’s price cuts and dealer incentives.

Ford recently reduced its EV production targets as its losses and unsold inventory grow. At the end of June, it had 116 days of unsold Mustang Mach-Es, and GM’s electric Hummer had more than 100 days of supply. And this is in a growing economy.

Traditional auto makers will have to raise prices on gas-powered cars to compensate for their EV losses. A United Auto Workers executive said Sunday that Stellantis is threatening to move production of its Ram 1500 trucks to Mexico from suburban Detroit, no doubt to reduce costs. The EV jobs President Biden touts will come at the cost of union jobs building gas-powered vehicles."

Sorry if you can't get behind WSJ paywall.  If you can't, perhaps you could reconsider some of your life choices.

Rather than relying upon an unsupported opinion piece, why not go to the source?

https://www.coxautoinc.com/market-insights/q2-2023-ev-sales/

Quote

 

Nearly 300,000 new electric vehicles (EVs) – full battery-electric vehicles – were sold in the U.S. in Q2, a record for any quarter and an increase of 48.4% from Q2 2022. Tesla, again, was the largest seller of EVs in the U.S., with more than 175,000 sold, an increase of 34.8% quarter over quarter. Sales growth at Tesla, and the EV segment overall, was aided by sizeable price cuts by some automakers (Tesla, really) and incentive levels well above the industry average. In June, the average price paid for an EV was down nearly 20% year over year. EV share of the U.S. market in Q2 was 7.2%, up from 5.7% a year ago and down from the high in Q1 of an upwardly revised 7.3%.

* * *

EV sales growth and filling the gaps in infrastructure to support EV mobility continue to be the industry’s leading story. Cox Automotive expects the country to welcome 1 million new EVs to its roads in 2023, which will fuel the budding used EV market further. 

* * * 

In a recent Cox Automotive survey, more than 50% of shoppers were interested in adding an EV to their stable. Being interested is easy, of course, but far fewer people actually buy. And in the same survey, 53% of consumers agreed that EVs will eventually replace traditional ICE-powered vehicles. Dealers were more cautious, with only 31% agreeing on an all-EV future. Dealers have a front-row seat to the many challenges ahead. And many dealers, recently, have been watching EV inventory building.

In late June 2023, the days’ supply of EVs was over 100, whereas industry-wide inventory levels were closer to 53 days. When it comes to EV sales, the market is likely heading into its Trough of Disillusionment (hat tip to the Gartner Hype Cycle), where collaboration across many parties will be necessary to push through. Building EVs is one thing, and many in the industry are proving excellent at that skill. Selling EVs is something different altogether. Yes, EV sales records will continue to be set, and EV growth will continue to outpace overall industry growth, but the days of 75% year-over-year growth are in the rearview mirror. The hard-growth days are ahead.

 

Notably on the dealership supply, the data from Cox doesn't include Tesla. And, a lot of the problem is less about the vehicles and demand and more about the dealerships themselves. EVs require less of the type of maintenance that is the bread and butter of the current dealership model. Some are reluctant to adapt. 

https://www.kbb.com/car-news/electric-car-supply-piling-up-at-some-dealerships/
 

Quote

 

At the end of the second quarter, Cox Automotive reports, car dealers nationwide had, on average, 51 days’ worth of new cars to sell. But they had 92 days’ worth of EVs.

That doesn’t mean EVs outnumber gas-powered cars on lots. It simply means that manufacturers have built them too fast for their current sales rate. But that sales rate is accelerating.

* * *

The thick supply of EVs also doesn’t mean you can easily find one at your local dealership. The vehicles are concentrated in certain parts of the country.

A recent survey sponsored by the Sierra Club found that two-thirds of dealerships had no electric vehicles or partially-electric plug-in hybrid vehicles on their lots, and many didn’t want one.

A recent Cox Automotive survey found similar results, with less than a third of dealers saying EVs are the future of transportation.

Shoppers More EV-Focused Than Dealers

Shoppers are more convinced than dealers. More than half of 1,024 shoppers surveyed by Cox Automotive said EVs are the future. More than half said they would consider an EV purchase in the next 12 months – up from 38% in the same survey last year.

* * *

The companies [and shoppers] that build cars seem more enthusiastic about EVs than the people that sell them. More than 80% of dealers surveyed said their automaker required them to make an investment in infrastructure to sell and service EVs.

 

Some more context from Ford:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/07/27/ford-evs-earnings/

Quote

 

Ford Motor pushed back its production timeline for electric vehicles and said customer demand in the near term will be “a little slower than expected,” sounding a note of caution about one of the auto industry’s biggest bets.

Ford now expects a production rate of 600,000 EVs a year at some point in 2024, CEO Jim Farley said Thursday while discussing the company’s latest earnings report. The company previously said it would reach that pace by the end of this year.

While EVs now generate 7 percent to 8 percent of new vehicle sales a month in the United States, Farley said, more than 30 percent of consumers say they intend to buy one. But price is still an obstacle for some buyers, he said.

“There are plenty of customers,” Farley said. “The issue is, the price they are willing to pay has come down. But it’s very, very lumpy. It’s not consistent across all segments.”

 

Ford's losses on EVs are entirely driven by capital investment, not a failure to generate sales. 

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/27/ford-pushes-back-ev-target-warns-of-wider-losses.html#:~:text=Ford now expects to be,about %244.5 billion this year.

Quote

 

But Lawler emphasized that Ford’s EV spending plan and its profitability goal for its electric vehicle unit haven’t changed. He said that Ford is still targeting an 8% operating margin for its EV business, and that it isn’t planning to reduce its capital spending on the vehicles.

“We’re going to find a way to get to that 8%,” Lawler said.

In a statement, CEO Jim Farley argued that the more gradual ramp-up of electric vehicle production could be a boon for Ford.

“The near-term pace of EV adoption will be a little slower than expected, which is going to benefit early movers like Ford,” Farley said, noting the success of Ford’s first generation F-150 Lightning and Mustang Mach-E EVs. “While others are trying to catch up, we have clean-sheet, next-generation products in advanced development that will blow people away.”

 

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/08/01/ford-restarts-expanded-rouge-electric-vehicle-center--f-150-ligh.html

Quote

 

FORD RESTARTS EXPANDED ROUGE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CENTER; F-150 LIGHTNING PRODUCTION CAPACITY TRIPLED BY THIS FALL

F-150 Lightning production resumes at Ford’s Rouge Electric Vehicle Center following six-week retooling and expansion project; facility is now on track to triple its production capacity to a targeted annual run rate of 150,000 units by this fall

Layout improvements and new tooling at the plant are designed to help boost efficiency and bolster quality 

Capacity increase at the Rouge Electric Vehicle Center enables the delivery of high-demand trim levels like XLT; Lightning Pro units are now available for retail customers in limited quantities and new trim levels are set to join the lineup soon 

Lower prices help drive threefold increase in web traffic and sixfold increase in orders, over 50% for XLT trim level

Essentially, we're seeing large increases in yearly sales and growing demand for EVs. We just also see that production has slightly overshot that demand. So, it isn't, as your article suggests, that EV demand is collapsing. Rather, demand is increasing by a significant amount. Production just increased more recently. That dealership supply number is going to level out as we get into the heavier sales months. 

Further, consumer interest suggests sales are still being throttled by lack of faith in existing charging networks. It appears the manufacturers agree, which is why pretty much all the majors have announced new deals to adopt Tesla's "North American Charging Standard" connector for new vehicles starting in 2025 in order to gain access to the Super Charger Network. Presumably, this change will also force other charging networks (cough, VW & Electrify America) to improve the reliability and accessibility of their networks to match Tesla's. 

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/07/our-big-unanswered-questions-about-the-switch-to-tesla-style-ev-plugs/

Quote

 

The mass sponge EV charger plug migration continues to gather steam. Since we last wrote about the topic, first Polestar and then Mercedes-Benz also announced that they're dropping the Combined Charging Standard 1 (CCS1) connector in favor of Tesla's North American Charging Standard (NACS). Sometime next year, non-Tesla electric vehicles from those makes, as well as Ford, General Motors, Volvo, and Rivian, will be able to start making use of Tesla's Supercharger network. In 2025, those automakers—and probably a few more—will start building cars with NACS ports built in.

It's not just the car makers. Charger manufacturers and charging networks have also been announcing new NACS products, and it feels like enough critical mass is building that CCS1 might be headed for extinction. Or at least it may be relegated to curio status alongside CHAdeMO. Things are looking even better now that SAE International is taking over the management of NACS, so it will no longer be under the control of a rival OEM run by a billionaire known for impulsive and often arbitrary decisions. At this point, many are merely waiting to see if Hyundai Motor Group or Volkswagen Group will be the next big convert.

The justification for dropping an entrenched standard and switching to NACS, from Ford and others, was as much about obtaining access for their EV owners to Tesla's Supercharger network, and why not? Even the most hardened partisan from the EV brand flame wars has to concede that not only are there far more Superchargers out there, but they offer a vastly superior charging experience to any of the public charging networks.

 

For reference, here is the Tesla connector in comparison to the CCS1 connector:

[RPM 26316]

I like Ford, but their EV game is all fucked up. That "Mustang" Mach E is an insult to any Mustang fan. The F150 Lightning is severely underperforming at work (gets around 30% range towing or loaded). They need better batteries.

[Biff Tannen 45664]

Dahobbs putting the smack down in this thread.

[Dahobbs 17522]

40 minutes ago, RPM said:

I like Ford, but their EV game is all fucked up. That "Mustang" Mach E is an insult to any Mustang fan. The F150 Lightning is severely underperforming at work (gets around 30% range towing or loaded). They need better batteries.

Ford has one of the strongest EV strategies of the traditional manufacturers. Whatever your feeling on the name, Mach-E has sold well. Are you saying you have a Lightning at work? If so, I'd like to hear more about your experience. The towing issue with the F-150 Lightning is going to be the same with any EV (or really any vehicle at all). Towing reduces range, sometimes dramatically so. But that 30% number isn't consistent with the testing I've seen,  and I assume may be talking about a worse case scenario involving towing large objects with unfavorable aerodynamics. 

Below is some testing from Edmunds and another group, getting ~40% of normal range (or ~120 miles) when towing large boxy trailers loaded at around 7,000 lbs.

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-tow-test-ford-f-150-lightning-vs-rivian-r1t.html

https://www.outmotorsports.com/2022/12/ford-f-150-lightning-towing-review-range-enclosed-trailer/

Edmunds did a prior test on the F-150 Lightning with a smaller and more aerodynamic load (3,120-pound open-air trailer carrying a Tesla Model 3 ballasted to 3,855 pounds) and got 74% of normal range. Also notable in that test,  various ICE trucks had similar range reductions. The primary issue is that ICE Trucks have a much larger unladen range.  For most work vehicles, I wouldn't think that towing range reduction is really an issue. They typically aren't driving 120+ miles a day. But certainly for those needing longer haul distances, EV trucks are a poor match until battery energy density is greatly increased. 

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/ev-tow-test-ford-lightning-ev-versus-the-world.html 

[Biff Tannen 45664]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

Ford has one of the strongest EV strategies of the traditional manufacturers.

I think they will be the top dog in EVs within a decade.  

[animaltobacco11 107]

1 hour ago, RPM said:

I like Ford, but their EV game is all fucked up. That "Mustang" Mach E is an insult to any Mustang fan. The F150 Lightning is severely underperforming at work (gets around 30% range towing or loaded). They need better batteries.

https://autos.yahoo.com/fords-ceo-had-charging-reality-165440187.html

Quote

 

Ford CEO Jim Farley experienced the headache of electric-vehicle charging firsthand and acknowledged there was much to do to improve the experience for his customers.

Farley hit the road in an F-150 Lightning last week, traversing Route 66 and the American West to put the electric truck through its paces. He documented his trip on LinkedIn and X, the social-media website formerly known as Twitter.

At the end of the trip on Sunday, Farley shared his experience with charging the massive electric pickup truck.

"Charging has been pretty challenging," Farley said in a video posted on X. "It was a really good reality check of the challenges our customers go through and the importance of fast charging."

Farley said he visited a popular charging depot on Interstate 5 in Coalinga, California, where there were plenty of Tesla Superchargers. The Ford CEO, however, had to use a low-speed charger that he said delivered him a 40% charge in about 40 minutes.

 

 

[Guest]

17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Is that mostly post-Murdoch?  Or has it always been like that.  My sense of it is that it hasn't, but I'm not sure.

It’s not like that. He compared opinion notes to those of the Tyler paper. That’s insane hyperbole and just a stupid comment. 

[Guest]

5 hours ago, RPM said:

We just installed 4 charging stations in the parking lot at work.

We have two in my garage and I always ensure I park my Yukon or Bronco in one of those two spots. 

[G650 14231]

20 hours ago, BamaATL said:

2.  Power rates in Georgia are among some of the lowest in the country.  

What's the kwh rate?  That was a huge factor for me, we pay below 13 cents or so.

[G650 14231]

17 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Is that mostly post-Murdoch?  Or has it always been like that.  My sense of it is that it hasn't, but I'm not sure.

It's gotten way worse. I let my sub lapse years ago because it became worthless

[Dahobbs 17522]

23 minutes ago, animaltobacco11 said:

https://autos.yahoo.com/fords-ceo-had-charging-reality-165440187.html

 

Yeah, that is what I covered above. It isn't really a Ford issue, but rather a charging network issue (apart from Tesla's Supercharger Network). The new infrastructure act has an uptime requirement for any charging stations that get Federal funding. Combined with the manufacturers gaining access to the Supercharger Network, there is going to be a lot of pressure on the other charging networks to improve their quality and user experience. 

23 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

It’s not like that. He compared opinion notes to those of the Tyler paper. That’s insane hyperbole and just a stupid comment. 

Yeah. The Tyler paper is lot less insane than the editorials in the WSJ. 

[fattyflattie 4639]

36 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

For most work vehicles, I wouldn't think that towing range reduction is really an issue. They typically aren't driving 120+ miles a day. But certainly for those needing longer haul distances, EV trucks are a poor match until battery energy density is greatly increased. 

It all depends on what your using it for, of course.  Shouldn't be “working” a half ton that hard anyhow, ICE or otherwise. A 40-50% reduction wouldn’t be out of bounds on a ICE 150 with any real load behind it. 
 

34 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I think they will be the top dog in EVs within a decade.  

Agree.  Ive been dumping $$ into them for awhile now, hoping they do.  I’m far from a Ford guy but they’ve been doing a lot “right” lately.  

[Al_4_ISU 12450]

22 hours ago, closetohumping said:

This is total, not per capita.  Not surprised by any except maybe Phoenix and Atlanta being ahead of Chicago.

 

1 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim 230,940
2 San Francisco-Oakland-Berkeley 122,404
3 San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara 73,810
4 New York-Newark-Jersey City70,943
5 San Diego-Chula Vista-Carlsbad 51,616

6 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria 43,183
7 Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler 42,049
8 Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue 41,755
9 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario 40,232
10 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Alpharetta 36,051

11 Chicago-Naperville-Elgin 32,775
12 Sacramento-Roseville-Folsom 27,937
13 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro 27,525
14 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach 26,943
15 Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington 18,769

16 Denver-Aurora-Lakewood 17,648
17 Detroit-Warren-Dearborn 16,910
18 Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington 15,736
19 Boston-Cambridge-Newton 15,511
20 Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise 14,304

21 Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura 13,080
22 Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington 12,842
23 Baltimore-Columbia-Towson 12,568
24 Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk 11,724
25 Honolulu 10,539

26 Tampa-St Petersburg-Clearwater 10,401
27 Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford 9,923
28 Houston-The Woodlands-Sugar Land 8,082
29 Salt Lake City 7,822
30 Austin-Round Rock-Georgetown 7,582

31 Tucson 7,353
32 Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown 7,242
33 Charlotte-Concord-Gastonia 6,858
34 St Louis 6,661
35 Raleigh-Cary 6,565

36 Nashville-Franklin-Murfreesboro 6,146
37 Columbus(OH) 6,093
38 Stockton 5,918
39 Fresno 5,481
40 Cincinnati 5,368

41 Pittsburgh 4,744
42 New Haven-Milford 4,675
43 Cleveland-Elyria 4,304
44 Ogden-Clearfield 4,289
45 Rochester(NY) 4,151

46 Jacksonville 4,064
47 Kansas City 4,040
48 Provo-Orem 3,876
49 Albany Schenectady-Troy 3,853
50 Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson 3,712

report and ranking here:
 

Link has been fixed

https://www.storagecafe.com/blog/best-us-metros-for-electric-cars/

Data is towards the top, click on "Electric vehicle adoption" to get rank. 

People in Phoenix and Atlanta don't need AWD.

[Guest]

No way is Austin 30th on that list. I see 7,582 Teslas on my way back and forth from HEB.

47 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

We have two in my garage and I always ensure I park my Yukon or Bronco in one of those two spots. 

[Dahobbs 17522]

2 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

No way is Austin 30th on that list. I see 7,582 Teslas on my way back and forth from HEB.

As I pointed out, it is 2021 data. 

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

No way is Austin 30th on that list. I see 7,582 Teslas on my way back and forth from HEB.

Not trying to; just flatly stating what I do. 

[Dahobbs 17522]

5 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

Not trying to; just flatly stating what I do. 

Wait, you were serious? What is wrong with you? 

[Homercles 10205]

1 hour ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

No way is Austin 30th on that list. I see 7,582 Teslas on my way back and forth from HEB.

Just waging his own little war

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Wait, you were serious? What is wrong with you? 

Absolutely. I’m an unapologetic dick. And, my building (which we own), gets a lot of unwanted solicitations from EV drivers that charge up there. 

At some point when I have sole authority on what to do with them, I’ll have them removed. 

[elfenix 34223]

Not trying to; just flatly stating what I do. 

Well in that case

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Homercles said:

Just waging his own little war

Not really. Just parking in a spot. 

[Dahobbs 17522]

8 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

Absolutely. I’m an unapologetic dick. And, my building (which we own), gets a lot of unwanted solicitations from EV drivers that charge up there. 

At some point when I have sole authority on what to do with them, I’ll have them removed. 

I'm sure people just love working with you. You sound like a real peach. Being an asshole for absolutely no fucking reason at all. No wonder your takes on everything are wrong. You're an actual psychopath. 

[Biff Tannen 45664]

I know I park in handicap spaces "on accident" and don't care.  I mean...they are spaces after all!

Edited August 23, 2023 by Biff Tannen

[BamaATL 16593]

2 hours ago, G650 said:

What's the kwh rate?  That was a huge factor for me, we pay below 13 cents or so.

Variable is at 8.25 and fixed is 8.95, but increases were approved over 2024 and 2025 by the board.  

[G650 14231]

2 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Variable is at 8.25 and fixed is 8.95, but increases were approved over 2024 and 2025 by the board.  

Yeah thats pretty good

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I'm sure people just love working with you. You sound like a real peach. Being an asshole for absolutely no fucking reason at all. No wonder your takes on everything are wrong. You're an actual psychopath. 

Lol. My takes on energy aren’t wrong. You’re guilty of constantly manipulating numbers that fit your narrative.

 

19 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I know I park in handicap spaces "on accident" and don't care.  I mean...they are spaces after all!

I’d never do that. Those people I respect. And there is nothing accidental about where I park. It’s very intentional. 

[G650 14231]

There's actually people on this site that are just now finding out Porterhouse is a grade A shitstain? Lol.

[Dahobbs 17522]

12 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

Lol. My takes on energy aren’t wrong. You’re guilty of constantly manipulating numbers that fit your narrative.

I posted numbers directly from official sources like US Department of Energy and ERCOT. I didn't manipulate them at all. You've never identified a problem with any of the numbers I've used or any sources for your information. You choose to be willfully ignorant. And what's extra sad is that you can't ever claim to rely on alternative facts. You just rely on your feelings. 

[troph 24781]

allowing all brands to use tesla super chargers makes sense, but that infrastructure still isn't close to enough with the rate of growth.  I've been a tesla owner since 2016 and it used to be the super chargers were empty. now there is always multiple cars there, sometimes you have to wait.  so good for all of us that a standard is coming out, but damn, put more in everywhere.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I posted numbers directly from official sources like US Department of Energy and ERCOT. I didn't manipulate them at all. You've never identified a problem with any of the numbers I've used or any sources for your information. You choose to be willfully ignorant. And what's extra sad is that you can't ever claim to rely on alternative facts. You just rely on your feelings. 

I’ll start paying more attention to your posts and respond in great detail. I’ve been unable to do so really for the last year or so. 

My assessment of you, right or wrong, is a champion of renewables and you have a very unrealistic view of them, specifically their utility, reliability and cost. A more specific example might be that you think demand for oil and gas is going to decrease in our lifetimes. I think that is a foolish wishcast, because it won’t, and will only increase in most years. Another assessment is you're much more well versed in electricity generation and transmission (I doubt you know much about transportation fuels), but you pick and choose things to discuss that only serve to forward your narrative.

Still laughing over the psychopath comment. Get a grip dude. 

[closetohumping 17433]

1 hour ago, Porterhouse said:

Absolutely. I’m an unapologetic dick. And, my building (which we own), gets a lot of unwanted solicitations from EV drivers that charge up there. 

At some point when I have sole authority on what to do with them, I’ll have them removed. 

 

16 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I’ll start paying more attention to your posts and respond in great detail. I’ve been unable to do so really for the last year or so. 

My assessment of you, right or wrong, is a champion of renewables and you have a very unrealistic view of them, specifically their utility, reliability and cost. A more specific example might be that you think demand for oil and gas is going to decrease in our lifetimes. I think that is a foolish wishcast, because it won’t, and will only increase in most years. Another assessment is you're much more well versed in electricity generation and transmission (I doubt you know much about transportation fuels), but you pick and choose things to discuss that only serve to forward your narrative.

Still laughing over the psychopath comment. Get a grip dude. 

May want to take your own advice.  EV is coming.  Even to Texas.  Yes, we understand you'll be the last to adopt, as the data above shows.  But it's happening.

 

 

Wait do we have a real liffe rolling coalster here?

Edited August 23, 2023 by closetohumping

[RPM 26316]

3 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Are you saying you have a Lightning at work? If so, I'd like to hear more about your experience. The towing issue with the F-150 Lightning is going to be the same with any EV (or really any vehicle at all). Towing reduces range, sometimes dramatically so. But that 30% number isn't consistent with the testing I've seen,  and I assume may be talking about a worse case scenario involving towing large objects with unfavorable aerodynamics. 

No, we don't have one at work. I watched a video of a guy that bought one. Could be total BS, but I believe him.

 

[fattyflattie 4639]

5 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

Wait do we have a real liffe rolling coalster here?

You’re talking to a guy who makes his living off producing assets. Not works with them, owns interest in them.  He’s probably not wrong, either.  There’s going to be a lot more EV going forward. But fossil fuel use isn’t going to decrease; it’ll increase if anything.  

1 minute ago, RPM said:

No, we don't have one at work. I watched a video of a guy that bought one. Could be total BS, but I believe him.

 

They ended up buying his back or swapping it, iirc. Was a total shittastic pos.   

[Guest]

22 minutes ago, closetohumping said:

 

May want to take your own advice.  EV is coming.  Even to Texas.  Yes, we understand you'll be the last to adopt, as the data above shows.  But it's happening.

 

 

Wait do we have a real liffe rolling coalster here?

I never said otherwise. But it’s not coming at the rate the Administration and Thunbergs of the world would like - not even close - and ICEs will be prevalent and relevant until you and I die.  

Coalster?  No idea what you’re talking about. 

[closetohumping 17433]

5 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

I never said otherwise. But it’s not coming at the rate the Administration and Thunbergs of the world would like - not even close - and ICEs will be prevalent and relevant until you and I die.  

Coalster?  No idea what you’re talking about. 

Tesla is the #1 selling car in California.  It’ll spread soon. What starts here eventually spreads across the country 

[Guest]

Teslas aren’t good looking cars. EVs won’t catch on MTM the degree most people think. I mean they could, but I doubt it here in the US. It’s a meaningless argument because of China and India, and oil being a global commodity. 

Edited August 23, 2023 by Porterhouse

[closetohumping 17433]

 

coasts vs middle America 

[Dahobbs 17522]

50 minutes ago, RPM said:

No, we don't have one at work. I watched a video of a guy that bought one. Could be total BS, but I believe him.

I believe him too. He bought the shorter ranged version (230 miles) with the smaller battery pack (98 kwh), didn't fully charge it, loaded it up, and then drove 70 mph on the highway 30 miles each way. Nothing about the result should have been surprising. From the various trip screenshots, it looks like he was getting .8 kwh per mile. That means fully charged it would have been expected to go 78 miles, which is essentially what he got. If he had kept the speed to 55 mph (towing speed limit in lot of places), he'd likely have gotten closer to 1.5 kwh/mile, consistent with the Edmunds test. He might have been able to complete the planned 120 mile trip in that circumstance if he fully charged the battery.