The company's CEO claims that affordable and reliable vehicles with combustion engines are a priority for US buyers:
Mazda is late to the electrification party. The MX-30 is far from being the roaring success the Japanese automaker had hoped it would be. It was axed from the United States at the end of the 2023 model year due to poor sales. The range-extending version with a rotary engine is only offered in certain markets, and the US is not on the list. In addition, the EZ-6 electric sedan isn't coming here either. However, the situation isn't all that bad.
Why? Because Americans primarily want gas cars. Speaking with Automotive News, Mazda CEO Masahiro Moro said ICE has a long future in America. Even at the end of the decade, traditional gas cars and mild-hybrid models will make up about two-thirds of annual sales. Plug-in hybrids and EVs will represent the remaining third. In other words, most vehicles will still have a gas engine five years from now.
Mazda's head honcho primarily referred to entry-level models, specifically the 3 and CX-30. Moro believes EV growth in the US has slowed down in the last 18 months or so, adding the trend will likely continue in the foreseeable future. That buys the company more time to develop a lithium-ion battery entirely in-house. The goal is to have it ready for 2030 in plug-in hybrids and purely electric cars. Expect a much higher energy density and "very short" charging times. Interestingly, the engineers already have a "very advanced research base for solid-state batteries."
In the meantime, work is underway on a two-rotor gas engine that will serve as a generator.
Related:
Related Stories
Three years ago, Subaru, Mazda, Toyota, Kawasaki, and Yamaha announced a joint development scheme for combustion engines based on alternatives to conventional fossil fuels i.e. synthetic fuels, biofuels and liquid hydrogen. Last Monday, May 28, Toyota, Subaru and Mazda unveiled the first results of that cooperation, a set of new ICE engines to go into production from 2026.
From the press blurb:
With the next generation of engines, the three companies will seek to not only improve standalone engine performance but also optimize their integration with electric drive units, harnessing the advantages of each.
While being highly efficient and powerful, the new engines will also revolutionize vehicle packaging by being more compact than existing models. Smaller engines will allow for even lower hoods, improving design possibilities and aerodynamic performance while contributing to better fuel efficiency. The development will also emphasize compliance with increasingly strict emissions regulations.
At the same time, the new engines will be made carbon neutral by shifting away from fossil fuels and offering compatibility with various alternatives, including e-fuel (synthetic fuel), biofuels, and liquid hydrogen. In doing so, these engines will contribute to the broader adoption of CN fuels.
Full video report of the press conference, along with detailed pictures of the new engines, here.
Last year, Toyota sold 2,248,477 cars in the United States, an increase of 6.6% compared to the year before, keeping its position as the number one passenger vehicle seller for the 12th consecutive year.
Only about 15,000 of those cars were BEVs.
While Canadians flocked to purchase gas-powered vehicles over the summer, electric vehicle sales continued to nosedive, according to new data from Statistics Canada:
Electric vehicle sales dropped 35.2 per cent in June compared to last year. Zero-emission vehicles comprised only 7.9 per cent of total new motor vehicles sold that month, with 14,090 entering the market.
Meanwhile, 177,313 new motor vehicles were sold in Canada in June, up 6.2 per cent from June 2024.
"In dollar terms, sales increased 3.1 per cent during the same period. In June 2025, there were more new motor vehicles sold in every province compared with the same period in 2024," reads the Statistics Canada data.
"Sales of new passenger cars increased 19.5 per cent in June 2025, marking the first gain in this subsector since November 2024. In June 2025, sales of new trucks (+4.3 per cent) were also higher than one year earlier."
Despite dwindling sales, the Carney government remains committed to its electric vehicle mandate of having 60 per cent of all vehicles sold be ZEVs by 2030 and 100 per cent by 2035, banning all motor vehicle sales.
Previously:
- Automobile Sales, Including EVs and Hybrids, Surge in 2024
- Mazda: Americans Want Cheap Gas Cars
- The EV Graveyard
- South Korean EV Battery Makers Reporting Big Losses as EV Demand Slows
Automobile Sales, Including EVs and Hybrids, Surge in 2024
EV Sales, Including Hybrids, Surge for Auto Giants Not Named Tesla:
General Motors and Ford Motor on Friday reported robust U.S. auto sales and electric-vehicle sales for the final quarter of 2024. GM more than doubled EV sales for the full year, while Tesla suffered a sales decline. GM stock edged higher on Friday, while Ford stock popped and Tesla jumped.
Toyota Motor posted declining U.S. new vehicle sales, but marked an EV sales milestone, including hybrid vehicles. Hyundai, which trades over the counter, and Honda Motor saw robust hybrid and EV sales, spearheading their overall sales growth.
GM, Ford report best annual U.S. sales since 2019 as auto recovery continues:
Sales of new vehicles in the U.S. continued to rise last year, rebounding from historical lows caused by the coronavirus pandemic and supply chain shortages during the past four years.
American legacy automakers General Motors and Ford Motor on Friday both reported their best annual U.S. new vehicle sales since 2019, led by growth of electrified vehicles such as all-electric and hybrid models.
Those results are in line with industrywide expectations for automakers. Market research firms expected U.S. automakers to report total sales of nearly 16 million vehicles in 2024, which would mark the industry's best year since selling roughly 17 million units in 2019.
[...] GM said sales were driven by increases in all four of its U.S. brands as well as a roughly 50% rise in sales of electric vehicles to more than 114,400 units.
Despite the notable jump in EV sales, the vehicles only made up 4.2% of the automaker's overall sales. GM estimated it achieved a 12% EV market share in the U.S. during the fourth quarter.
It was a similar trend at Ford, which reported a notable increase in sales of its "electrified" vehicles, including EVs and hybrids.
Mazda is Selling More Cars Than Ever—All Without an EV in Sight
However, EVs are not the focus of some auto manufacturers.
Mazda is defying industry trends with surging sales of its gas-powered SUVs. Can it keep the momentum going without a fully electric vehicle in its lineup?
While many automakers are racing toward electrification, Mazda is proving that there's still room for gas-powered success. The Japanese automaker is set to break its U.S. sales record from 1986, with over 420,000 vehicles expected to be sold in 2024—a 16% increase from the previous year.
Mazda's president of North American operations, Tom Donnelly, credited the popularity of its compact crossovers and mid-size SUVs for this growth, with a target of 450,000 vehicles for 2025. "We're growing our business in what has largely been a stable industry," Donnelly said, talking about the consistent sales volume that Mazda has seen from its compacts and mid-size SUVs.
[...] What's driving Mazda's success? Mazda's lineup relies heavily on a few key models. The CX-5, a compact crossover manufactured in Japan, remains its best seller, despite being one of the oldest vehicles in its lineup. A redesign is expected within the next two years. The CX-30 subcompact hatchback and the Alabama-made CX-50 have also contributed significantly to the brand's recent surge.
[...] With overall US auto sales projected by Kelley Blue Book to rise just 2.3% in 2024, Mazda's performance is a standout. However, challenges remain. While Mazda charts new territory for its U.S. sales, it still lags behind competitors like Subaru, Kia and even Nissan, which has struggled with a host of its own problems in 2024.
Previously: Mazda: Americans Want Cheap Gas Cars
Last week, the House approved a resolution to block the Biden administration's emissions rule that would require more than half of the automobiles sold in the new-car market to be electric by 2032. The 215 representatives who voted for the bill, including eight Democrats, are far more in tune with most of the country than the White House:
Nationwide, the inventory of unsold EVs had grown by nearly 350% over the first half of 2024, creating "a 92-day supply — roughly three months' worth of EVs, and nearly twice the industry average," says Axios, which is 54 days for gasoline-powered vehicles.
Ford, which lost nearly $73,000 on each EV it sold in the second quarter of 2023, continues to yield to reality, now ditching its plans to build a large electric SUV. This "course change," says Just the News, "comes amid lower-than-expected demand for electric vehicles."
[...] "Based on where the market is and where the customer is, we will pivot and adjust and make those tough decisions," said John Lawler, Ford's chief financial officer.
[...] "Of the U.S. consumers planning on purchasing a new vehicle in the next 24 months, only 34% intend to purchase an EV, down 14% from 48% in the 2023," says Ernst & Young's Mobility Consumer Index, "a global survey of almost 20,000 consumers from 28 countries."
The story is much the same in Britain. EVs "are losing value at an 'unsustainable' rate as a slowdown in consumer demand sends used car prices tumbling," the Telegraph reported last week. Meanwhile in France, "the EU's second largest market for battery electric vehicles behind Germany," deliveries have fallen by a third.
Germans are likewise losing interest, as the country has "suffered a 'spectacular' drop in electric car sales as the European Union faces growing calls to delay its net zero vehicle targets," the Telegraph said in a separate story.
Related:
- Stellantis Lays Off Thousands of Workers after Pocketing Hundreds of Millions in EV Subsidies
- VW Turns on Germany as China Targets Europe's EV Blunders
- South Korean EV Battery Makers Reporting Big Losses as EV Demand Slows
- Tesla Lays Off 'More Than 10%' of its Global Workforce
- Why are All the EVs so Expensive?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Frosty Piss on Thursday December 12 2024, @11:34PM (22 children)
The fact is, at the moment, EVs are for the most part a luxury item. As well, most people - while accepting that EVs may ultimately be the future - the "environmentally friendliness" factor is largely PR fluff, what with the nature of battery production and the current actual sources of electrical energy. In other words, for now they are Rich People Toys.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by aafcac on Friday December 13 2024, @02:07AM
They're mainly luxury goods because they're being priced like that. Sure, people in rural areas may need more than what an EV can do, but if you've got a charger at home and/or one at work you probably don't need massive batteries. Around here, the electric utility has been starting to install charging stations just on the side of streets in addition to the ones that have been installed in parking lots. Charging at home remains a serious issue as many people don't even have the option of installing one.
Personally, I live in an area with decent mass transit and I've contemplated getting something along the lines of an EV scooter to bridge the gap between what the buses and trains can do in terms of coverage and where I need to go, but unfortunately, the local laws are kind of weird in terms of what you're allowed to do where. You're not allowed to ride them on the sidewalks at all, or on the streets if the speed limit is over 34mph which means that if there isn't a bike lane, then you can't use them at all on that stretch of the street.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by stormreaver on Friday December 13 2024, @02:08AM (9 children)
I think he's partially right. I'm going to slightly rewrite the topic sentence to be correct:
"Affordable and reliable vehicles are a priority for US buyers"
Now that's correct. Few people can afford to care whether their vehicles are electric or gas. I can't, so I don't. I care about being able to afford it, and that it's going to last many years.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday December 13 2024, @03:58AM (8 children)
A priority for me is: a vehicle which can be repaired.
The mid-80s Mercedes diesels were just about peak of that curve, many still chugging along today with 400K+ miles.
Take that tech and instead of making it flashier, just keep making it run longer, easier to maintain, cheaper to repair.
Fuel economy be damned, chucking 5000lbs of steel and increasingly plastic into the waste stream every ten years or 200,000 miles is a crime against nature, un-necessary waste made un-avoidable in the pursuit of profits. Auto manufacturing is already a highly regulated, highly subsidized and incentivized game - turn longevity and low TCO into the prize for the manufacturers to compete for, instead of sales volume numbers.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:24AM
You are optimizing the wrong metric, my friend.
The world has moved onto expensive statusmobiles. If you're priced out, that's the point duh. Owning 2,3,4 Buhattis, a truck + trailer, 4 off-road trikes and a boat is the sweet spot. Fuck y'all. Sucks 2 be u.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:55AM
Death on four wheels. Unstoppable
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @11:06AM (3 children)
> A priority for me is: a vehicle which can be repaired.
How about a vehicle that doesn't need many repairs. Cue all the electric car fans (of course), but I'll go back to cheaper ICE (and hybrid Prius) days -- Toyotas from the 1990s up to about 2010. Those were the years when Toyota was focused on continuous improvement of the production process and on quality/longevity. Toward the end of that run the management could see that Toyota was in striking distance of GM in terms of number of vehicles made per year and they changed their focus to "winning" that competition. Yes, Toyota now makes more cars than any other company, but quality suffered.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday December 14 2024, @03:12PM (2 children)
No repairs is even better.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 14 2024, @03:17PM (1 child)
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday December 14 2024, @03:40PM
It's all about TCO. When the AI works for free, gathers its own materials and energy, leaves zero ecological footprint in the process, they yeah: turn 'em loose.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by stormreaver on Saturday December 14 2024, @02:02AM (1 child)
I agree that repairability is important. I lump that into affordability.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday December 14 2024, @03:30PM
All in the same vein. If you can run 200,000 miles without maintenance, that's a great achievement. Whether it's self-sufficiency requiring zero repairs, or modular design whereby I can pop the hood, pull out the worn component in 2 minutes or less, pop in a new one (delivered to my home via common carrier), and send back the core for a small refurbishing fee... either is fine.
I don't want to put mechanics out of business, but I do want their jobs made easier to where repairs are as fast, cheap and reliable as possible. Obviously independent mechanics should be on equal footing with dealerships in terms of access to information and parts. Parts themselves should be as universally compatible as possible.
All these things should be folded into a TCO metric, and the manufacturers should be incentivized to sell the vehicles with the lowest possible TCO. I like the following basic structures:
Progressive initial vehicle sales tax. In today's US market, that might look like: zero tax on vehicles up to $20K actual sales price, 5% on everything over $20K, an additional 10% on everything over $40K, an additional 20% on everything over $60K, an additional 40% on everything over $80K, and if you feel the need to spend more than $100K on a vehicle, an additional 25% (meaning a total of 100% tax) on everything over $100K. This means that a vehicle with $100K sales price would be taxed 5% of 80, 10% of 60, 20% of 40, 40% of 20 and 25% of nothing, or +$26K, but a vehicle with an initial sales price of $120K would be taxed $46K, $150K would be +$76K or a net tax rate of 50.6%, $200K would be +$126K or 63%, and by the time you're in McLaren territory you're paying close to double for your luxury vehicle. Trust me, if you can afford the McLaren, you can afford the tax - even if you're pissy about it.
Take those high initial cost of purchase taxes and re-distribute them back, to the manufacturers, for vehicles still in service - with bonuses for vehicles on the road meeting modern emissions and fuel economy guidelines. No credit in the first year on the road. 1% of the tax pool goes back to the makers of all vehicles which have been in service for more than a year, proportionally based on the number of their vehicles still in service and the miles they have driven (50% of the credit just for being registered and insured, the other half to be distributed proprotionally based on total miles driven of vehicles in the group). An additional 1% for vehicles that have been in service more than 2 years, an additional 1% for 3 years, and so on up to 50 years or more in service. For vehicles in service that demonstrate meet TODAY's emissions and fuel economy guidelines, bump that 1% to 2%.
Big changes are a shock to industry, roll that scheme in over the next 20 years with a linear ramp up, and linearly ramp down all other incentives, tax convolutions, etc. currently propping up the automotive and truck industries, including electric incentives. If electrics really are better, let them earn their returns on low TCO. I'm assuming that vehicles which are difficult (aka expensive) to repair will be the ones being sold for scrap, falling out of the manufacturer's bonus tax return pools.
🌻🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ledow on Friday December 13 2024, @08:18AM (8 children)
I want an EV for reason entirely unrelated to anything to do with the environment.
I want one because:
- They're cheaper to run.
- You can "fuel" them up at home. At work. Anywhere you have a plug.
- Vastly reduced maintenance and moving parts.
- They're just as - and often far more - performant.
People want gas cars because:
- They make a noise like brrm, brrm.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by driverless on Friday December 13 2024, @08:27AM
And, specifically for the US, people want F150s, which are essentially 1970s gas-guzzlers moved into a form factor that bypasses CAFE requirements.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday December 13 2024, @11:42AM
I've been driving fairly small hybrids for over a decade for similar reasons:
1. It gets extremely good distance per amount of fuel: About 1.6 * gas powered sedan, and about 2.5 * a pickup. That's extremely handy when gas prices skyrocket like they do periodically because of reasons that are totally not price gouging or weird stuff on the commodities markets.
2. Since I'm not infrequently on the road for distances beyond the range of a single tank, refueling time matters. That's why a full EV isn't yet really suitable.
3. Maintenance has not been substantially worse than a gas-only vehicle.
It's one of those cases where "spend money up front to save money in the long run" is very much in play.
And I'll add that if you're in one of the more enlightened locations, it's fairly easy to add solar power generation capacity to your home, and that brings your running cost to fuel an EV or plugin-hybrid down even more, even to $0.
"Think of how stupid the average person is. Then realize half of 'em are stupider than that." - George Carlin
(Score: 2, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Friday December 13 2024, @01:06PM (4 children)
You've never own an EV have you? Almost half the people who have wouldn't buy another one.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/jun/22/46-of-us-electric-car-owners-want-to-switch-back-t/ [washingtontimes.com]
Now that the truth is out, they have to practically give them away.
https://www.aiada.org/ev-leases-go-as-low-as-20-a-month-to-help-dealers-clear-their-lots/ [aiada.org]
(Score: 1, Troll) by Frosty Piss on Friday December 13 2024, @07:56PM (1 child)
A yes, the Washington Times, which seems to be your favorite source of Right Wing Propaganda. Very "reliable" - defiantly in quotes.
(Score: 1, Troll) by DadaDoofy on Saturday December 14 2024, @11:59AM
Before you regurgitate your spoon fed CNN/MSNBC talking points, maybe you should crack one open and see for yourself. About half their "news" comes from Associated Press articles they reprint. So yes, you'll need to avoid those if you are concerned about reliability. If that's too heavy a lift for you, here is a link directly to the cited study.
https://executivedigest.sapo.pt/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Mobility-Consumer-Pulse-2024_Overview.pdf [executivedigest.sapo.pt]
(Score: 2, Touché) by cmdrklarg on Friday December 13 2024, @08:50PM
You obviously haven't either. That also means that over half WOULD buy another one.
And where exactly are these $20/month leases?
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 2) by ledow on Saturday December 14 2024, @04:22PM
Strange, because similar surveys in the EU said that 1% of EV owners would change back to an ICE.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by vux984 on Saturday December 14 2024, @12:12AM
but they cost more upfront; you aren't really saving money if the financing costs are eating those savings
Yeah, anywhere you have a plug, which is actually a major issue. Most people in townhouses/condos/apartments and renting basement suites do not have access to a plug at home or at work.
I had nowhere to plug in when i lived in a townhouse, not at home, nor at work. I have a garage now, but my kids park on the street, and they don't have access to plugs at work either. I doubt if even half the urban population can actually can plug in "conveniently", and this is a HUGE deal. If you can't plug in I'm not sure an EV makes any sense at all. From what I've read - the VAST majority of EV owners can charge at home suggesting pretty clearly that people who don't have access to a plug at home aren't buying EV cars.
It is 100% true the electric drive train needs virtually no service. But its also true that gas car drive trains are pretty bullet proof too, especially for the first 10 years. There's a reason they have the longest warranty on the car. So you don't have to replace the timing chain or clutch every 10-20 years in your EV, hurrah.
The suspension will still collapse, the tires wear out, the autolevelling headlight will fail, and lane keeping sensors will work intermittently, the sunroof jams, the power door lock on the rear passenger stops working, the mirror adjustment motor breaks, the seat adjustment controls don't work, the rear view camera cover intermittently doesn't open, the air conditioning condenser dies, the ventilation fan in the rear driver side climate zone starts buzzing, bluetooth keeps resetting the connection to your phone during calls, the app won't unlock the doors, the wiper fluid tank cracks and leaks... EV cars are still chock FULL the stuff that breaks.
I have 3 cars, and drive train issues is simply not where I'm spending money on them. The 23 year old one has had its timing belt replaced twice as part of regular service intervals, and its clutch replaced once. And I've spent a few thousand over the years fixing oil leaks and doing the regular drive train maintenance. But the cost of that is dwarfed by the 'other stuff' i've had to do over the years. And at 23 years I'd probably be into a new battery pack on an EV.
Yea, markedly faster off the line than most cars especially cars at similar price points, with a low centre of gravity. Fun to hit the gas and feel the torque hit right away. I'll give you that.
But most are also limited by thermals (ie most can't be driven aggressively for long without overheating), and thus can't really be used as weekend track toys at all.
And most are really heavy making them land yachts in comparison to actual performance cars.
Bottom line, If you want an actual performance car, you probably aren't buying an EV.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Username on Friday December 13 2024, @06:18PM
I think they work well for delivery vehicles. Amazon runs them all the time. I'd love to know what their mechanics think. I think they just rotate them on each load. If i were them, they'd drive two hours, come back and put on charger, pickup other van that's loaded and repeat.
(Score: 2) by corey on Sunday December 15 2024, @10:21PM
I’ve seen analysis by experts in the field that conclude over the lifetime of an EV, they are much better for the environment - carbon emissions. This idea that the battery manufacture offsets the CO2 emissions from ICE cars is not true.
But more to the topic at hand, I think EVs in the US are rapidly becoming affordable for average people, same as here in Australia, due to Chinese imports. But Trump will change that when he gets the reigns of power.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 12 2024, @11:37PM
Cars? or batteries? Not both.
Focus: Let battery makers make batteries, and as a car maker it should make cars. If the batteries are so good, then become a battery company and sell them (with customizations..) to every EV maker. (Or spin it off.) (But why hasn't every other car-battery-company developed an awesome, outstanding technology that Mazda hasn't thought up yet, or is able to license because patents? ho-hum.)
If you're a car maker, then make cars, make them aerodynamic, reliable, focus on eeking the most performance from the engine.
Focus on both, and things will most likely fail. Unfortunately the most stable companies are focused on one thing that they do well -- and a lot of unstable companies, ... fail.
Good luck!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Thursday December 12 2024, @11:47PM (6 children)
Oh he's going to get it, for years all that's been permitted is virtue signalling nonsense along the lines of "The emperor has no clothes" and daring to tell the truth or talk about the real world is going to result in every other automaker ganging up on him LOL. It'll be fun to watch. Maybe I'll buy a Mazda next, because of it, LOL.
The real killer for EVs is insisting on adding hypercomplicated and expensive to maintain AI driving nonsense nobody wants and enormous insane huge batteries no one needs nor can afford. It's been at least since covid that I've driven more than 60 miles in a day, so 100 mile range new would be reasonably sufficient for me. I would imagine there's no profit in a car like that so we're only going to be offered weird smart cars with hundreds of easily broken expensive to replace self driving sensors and batteries with 600 mile range that cost as much as a house.
So a Toyota 2024 BZ4X might replace my old Yaris commuter car. The problem is the cost is well over $50K delivered and has a range over 250 miles. Most of the money is in the battery and I would be VERY happy to pay, $10K for a 50 mile range BZ4X. I have no interest in paying an extra $40K or so to drive an extra 200 miles. Also with 1/5 the battery pack size it would probably drive like an absolute bat out of hell, which would be fun. Its like a 4500 pound car with only a 200 HP electric motor like one of those 1970s land yachts from GM that were so slow they could barely get out of their own way. With a smaller lighter battery that thing might be fun. Not $50K worth of fun, hell no.
I'll probably end up IRL with a nice Corolla that cost a hair over $20K and I can buy $30K of gas with my savings of not buying an EV which at $5/gallon for gas (LOL much lower where I live) that's 6000 gallons of gas which at minimum 32 MPG would be 192K miles. So if I drive the car longer than 200K miles or so, it would be cheaper to buy the EV. My Yaris has about 55K miles on it which is about 5500 miles/year (I WFH most of that time) and at 5.5K miles/year 190K miles would be 34.5 years, lets round down, so if I buy a BZ4X in 2025 it'll start saving me money over buying a Corolla in ... the year 2059. Yeah I don't think so.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @01:02AM (3 children)
Insurance
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Reziac on Friday December 13 2024, @02:50AM (2 children)
That's true. I once did the math on my truck that I had for 34 years, and something like 80% of the cost of ownership was insurance. (No accidents, bottom tier cost.)
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:29AM (1 child)
Well, insurance by definition is going to cost you more than the price of an oopsie over the long run. Duh. That's how they make their bonuses, as well as denying you claims of course. Duh. What did you think they do?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:57AM
They got states to mandate you had to have it. "Duh"
(Score: 3, Interesting) by deimtee on Friday December 13 2024, @09:02AM (1 child)
It's longer than that. You haven't counted the cost of the electricity. Don't know what it is where you are, but here it's about 25% of the cost of petrol. So extend that 192K miles to about 233K miles.
Also, the time cost of money. I worked out it wouldn't ever be worth me getting one. The interest on the difference would pay much more than the petrol difference forever.
Also here in Oz we have a surcharge on EV registration to cover the cost of the taxes on petrol that you aren't paying. You have to submit the mileage each year and they add it to the bill, which makes it even worse.
200 million years is actually quite a long time.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Saturday December 14 2024, @08:10PM
I live in a "big recreational state" and our state paid to maintain our roads, which are driven on by out-of-state peeps, via a relatively high gas tax, so regardless of your mailing address if you drive on our roads you burn our overtaxed gas to pay for road wear and tear.
The state's solution to freeloading EVs is an ever increasing flat annual tax surcharge on state resident EV owners, I just checked today and it's now nearing $20/month going to the state road maintenance fund as a surcharge on top of existing registration fees. Its kind of wild, they only recently increased it from $4 to $5 per month for gas-burning cars. There is also a hybrid tax surcharge in between.
As a WFH guy, I'm only burning about $40/month of gas, so even if my electricity were free (it is not) then I'd only "save" $20/month due to the EV registration surcharge.
My guess is they'll eventually give up on gas taxes to fund road repair, and simply increase the sales tax so as to capture the cost of having out-of-state visitors on our roads. It seems more direct, if they drive to some resort just tax the heck out of the resort directly rather than elaborate schemes involving gas station taxes.
I would agree with the assessment that as currently designed and marketed I could never save money or the environment by replacing a gas commuter car with an EV. If they would sell short range EVs... then maybe, but they refuse, so people respond by refusing to buy EVs.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday December 12 2024, @11:53PM (20 children)
An ICE powered vehicles using synthetic fuel and lubricants can be as Carbon neutral as an EV.
We don't need to replace every vehicle with an EV to be Carbon neutral. We just need to replace the fuels.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2, Touché) by fliptop on Friday December 13 2024, @12:08AM (2 children)
And plant trees.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:33AM (1 child)
The world can't accommodate 65 million years' worth of trees that we're burning presently. Next idea.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @09:04AM
Of course it can. You just need to grow bigger trees.
(Score: 5, Touché) by Frosty Piss on Friday December 13 2024, @12:17AM
EVs are not carbon neutral, and wont be for many many years, if at all.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @01:13AM
Still should have a battery or capacitor for regenerative braking, acceleration bursts. Maybe some models could have a big enough battery for short/commute distances.
(Score: 3, Informative) by nostyle on Friday December 13 2024, @01:15AM (1 child)
So here's the kicker. The reason that we still pump oil out of the ground is because it's cheaper to get fuels from that than it is to synthesize then in a Carbon neutral fashion. If we ever manage to switch to green syn-fuels, expect to pay _way_ more for them since we will no longer be externalizing the environmental costs.
That said, as an American, I would love to own a hybrid vehicle that gets 50+ miles to the gallon and gave a driving range of 500+ miles. I simply cannot afford these, and so I drive a twenty-year old ford sedan. The USA will need to pay its workers more if it ever hopes to kick its fossil fuel addiction.
--
"Don't let the sound of your own wheels drive you crazy" -Jackson Browne, Take It Easy
(Score: 3, Touché) by mhajicek on Friday December 13 2024, @06:25AM
First generation Honda Insight could do that. 60 mpg easy, 80 mpg drafting behind a truck.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday December 13 2024, @02:52AM (12 children)
What is this synthetic fuel made from?
How much energy does it take to make it?
Methinks that would just shove the costs "out of sight" much as EVs do.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Friday December 13 2024, @03:46AM (11 children)
You can make biodiesel from vegetable oils and you can even modify diesel cars to run directly off of filtered vegetable oil. Gas cars are a little trickier, but I'm sure you could convert various vegetable and animal oil into an acceptable gas substitute.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday December 13 2024, @04:09AM (6 children)
Am aware of biodiesel, but that's not 'synthetic'. And yeah, you could probably crack waste fats much as is done with petroleum, to get something chemically similar to gasoline (itself a mix of long-carbon chains), tho I expect the same treatment would be needed to get rid of the acids. But would fat-gas that cost more net energy than just using oil-gas?
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Friday December 13 2024, @04:23AM (4 children)
It probably would be less efficient than oil gas, but it also wouldn't require either digging more oil or replacing a bunch of ICE vehicles that are set up for gas rather than other fuels.
And most of the carbon released would at least come from the supply that's been recently circulated.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by acid andy on Friday December 13 2024, @10:34PM (3 children)
What difference does that really make though? A CO2 emission is a CO2 emission whether it comes from ancient fossils or a recently living crop. I get that the idea is the harvested crops get replanted to absorb CO2 over and over again, but where are we going to grow all these crops given the level of demand for fossil fuels?
"rancid randy has a dialogue with herself[...] Somebody help him!" -- Anonymous Coward.
(Score: 2) by aafcac on Saturday December 14 2024, @04:09AM (1 child)
The difference is the stuff in the ground hasn't been in the atmosphere and as such results in increased concentration in the atmosphere, the stuff that you get from plants was recently in the atmosphere, so it's much closer to being neutral. It's just whatever fossil fuels need to be burned to make and distribute the fuel that it increases emissions by.
Honestly, it's not that complicated.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Saturday December 14 2024, @09:28PM
I think it depends what if anything was growing on that patch of land before the crops were planted. At the worst case, if they slash n burn a forest to grow biofuels, it would be difficult to legitimately claim being carbon neutral.
"rancid randy has a dialogue with herself[...] Somebody help him!" -- Anonymous Coward.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday December 14 2024, @03:19PM
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @05:43AM
Hear me out, what if we liposuck the fuck out of all the obese Americans at the poor end of the food chain to extract their lipids which we burn for fuel to power our fucking Peloton video livestreams so we can broadcast our zero fucking carbon workouts and sell fucking lycra leotards like fucking saviors of Western civilization.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by mhajicek on Friday December 13 2024, @06:28AM (3 children)
Biodesil is only cheap if you can get the feedstock for free or next to free.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aafcac on Friday December 13 2024, @07:01AM
So? It doesn't need to be cheap, nor should it be. A lot of why we're in this position is unreasonably cheap oil based fuels. If we subsidized that other stuff, we be collectively better positioned. We outright should not be subsidizing oil or coal anything at this point.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 13 2024, @11:19AM (1 child)
Waste cooking oil for Biodiesel is now in such demand that the refiners have contracts with restaurants. Most telling is that the waste cooking oil is now being stolen!
https://www.cheektowagabee.com/articles/used-cooking-oil-thefts-continue-in-erie-county/ [cheektowagabee.com]
At least around here, it seems like we're at "peak cooking oil" now, and have reached the max amount of feedstock available from making Buffalo wings and other deep fried food.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Friday December 13 2024, @10:36PM
"My retirement grease!!!"
"rancid randy has a dialogue with herself[...] Somebody help him!" -- Anonymous Coward.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Skwearl on Friday December 13 2024, @03:50AM (3 children)
I was shopping for a new car to replace my aging 2002 Nissan Sentra Spec-v in 2019. I had been to the Toyota and Honda dealership that day, and saw the Mazda on the way out of town. I stopped in, and was blown away with the quality of the interior compared to the previously mentioned brands. I came back the next weekend and took a Mazda 3 for a testdrive. The vehicle wasn't amazing for handling, but I'm getting on in the years, so engaging isn't as important to me as it was in my Late 20's. It has just as much oomph, but it showed at the limits. But I digress, I wanted an auto, not a manual, and this car came with leather, AWD, and was nice to look at, inside and out.....and was $30k CAD, $15,000 less than the plastic Honda and Toyota. 5 years into the ownership, I don't regret it, I enjoy it. Mazda prices are starting to creep up these days thou. The mileage is great...I did a 6000km vacation this summer, and averaged 7L/100km driving on average at 130km/h.
The total cost of ownership has been higher than a Honda or a Toyota(I think), I average around $1500 a year spent at the dealer for service.
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Friday December 13 2024, @05:22PM (1 child)
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by Skwearl on Friday December 13 2024, @08:13PM
210,000 km driven atm.
(Score: 2) by sgleysti on Saturday December 14 2024, @12:23AM
Similar years for me. Replaced a 2002 Saturn in 2019 with a lightly used 2017 Toyota Yaris. Happy with it. Main criteria were a small, reliable commuter car that I could buy without financing ($11,000 USD).
The interior isn't anything special; I'll give you that.
Had to get a wheel bearing replaced ($800) and recently new tires ($1100). That's been it over 5 years. I drive very little and change my own oil.
An EV would be cool, but the prices are higher than I want to spend, including installing a level 2 charger in my garage. The wiring is old, and I wouldn't want to run level 1 for long periods of time over what's currently installed.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Friday December 13 2024, @11:12AM (1 child)
a car that respects my privacy.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Friday December 13 2024, @04:24PM
Yes, want much more than just transportation. Privacy, status signalling, comfort, and practically a mobile office and entertainment center. Europeans have said that Americans want jackrabbit starts and want to drive all day long. One other thing I want is low maintenance costs, and on that I got a nasty surprise. In recent years, manufacturers have been building things into the windshield, such as cameras for reading speed limit signs. A rock in that kind of windshield will cost you 5x as a basic windshield without fancy features. Oh, and don't lose that key fob! A duplicate key costs less than $5. A replacement fob is at least $100.
Also, we don't want to be fed a load of bull, and EV manufacturers have been pushing it with exaggerated range claims. As I've said before, for several reasons the usable range of an EV is roughly half the ideal range. The latter is of course what manufacturers advertise. I do want to help, want to do my part, but not at the expense of being played for a sucker.
Commercial peddlers of environmental products play up their wares, like so many other businesses do, but they also play on our environmentalism. It's just the sort of thing to turn people more skeptical and anti-environmental, and I wish they'd stop. I keep looking at rooftop solar, and keep concluding that it's just not worth it. They aren't asking $10k for an installation, they're asking $40k. Too much, too risky, too long a payback. I worry how much an installation would hike my property taxes and home insurance rates. They ignore such considerations in their overly rosy calculations of payback periods. I worry that a hailstorm could wipe it all out before I've had it for 5 years. I don't need such worries. Another are all these sellers of double pane windows.
Practical environmentalism can be had without the fancy, expensive product. Changing from incandescent to LED lighting is a big one. When LED lights were very expensive, it was doubtful, but now that LED lighting is quite reasonably priced, it's a no brainer. Flat screen monitors have completely displaced CRTs. Computer power supplies went from a terrible 60% efficient to now all being 80% or better. That's the kind of quiet change that doesn't cost outrageously and makes a big difference. Another really good idea is to air dry clothing, not use a clothes dryer. That's a win all around. Clothes last longer, and you save the expense of running and even buying and owning a clothes dryer.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by ElizabethGreene on Friday December 13 2024, @03:00PM (3 children)
I want a cybertruck, but I can't cost justify $80k for it when I can get a new Nissan Versa for under $20k. What I really want is a sub-$20k pickup truck, preferably with a lay-flat bed like on the Kei trucks, that gets the mileage of that Nissan.
For perspective, I'm driving a 2008 F-250 Diesel today. I need the pickup capability a couple of times a week, but I only need its absurdly high towing capacity four or five times a year. I get 19 MPG with it by careful hypermiling. I'd move to a smaller truck if I could for a reasonable price.
(Score: 2) by fliptop on Friday December 13 2024, @05:27PM (2 children)
You can't have both? One smaller good mileage run-around truck and a 3/4 ton for towing.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Friday December 13 2024, @08:59PM
If she were going to do that, she may as well get a sedan with good mileage for everyday, and keep the F250 for when it's needed.
Even so, if she's in the US they don't really sell small trucks, and the mid-size ones can be just as expensive as the big ones.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Friday December 13 2024, @09:37PM
If I got another car for free today it would still cost me a thousand dollars a year in insurance and taxes. That pays for a fair amount of gas (Diesel).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Gaaark on Friday December 13 2024, @10:05PM
Tried to buy a new Mazda a year ago (Canada) and was told there was up to a year wait.
Well, spank you, no. Toyota said 3-6 month wait. Well, spank you, no.
Went to Honda and got one in 3 weeks. Could have got a used one immediately for MORE than new, but decided to wait because.... I'm not STUPID!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. I have always been here. ---Gaaark 2.0 --
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 14 2024, @09:11PM
As others have said, affordable, repairable, dependable, but i'll add utilitarian, and preferably open source. I don't want paper thin leather seats. i want thick canvas or something that costs $20 to re-cover and lasts decades. I don't want electric motors, sensors and switches where a heavy duty hinge and spring used to be that lasted 100 years, but required one to use their arm. I don't want your stupid proprietary spyware/subscribeware infotainment system. I want a FOSS ecosystem for the car i bought. I don't want a leaky sunroof, I want a roll bar. I like to drive with vigor.