SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
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:
(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.