Posts

Posted on

Here We Are… Sell To Us…

Last week, Kentucky announced the first round of National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure grant recipients. Sixteen projects submitted by six entities are now funded with $10.9 million in tax payer dollars. While I agree this is good for EV promotion and adoption, I was a little dismayed when a map of said projects showed an obvious lack of development east of Interstate 75, allowing eastern Kentucky to remain a public infrastructure wasteland.

Admittedly, I’m a bit of a conspiracy theorist only because so many theories have been proven as fact, so my default attitude is distrust and I am looking for ulterior motives especially when it comes to government activity. (I still have no idea who killed JFK, but I do have my suspicions). When the accompanying map showing the location of the projects was unveiled, I immediately began to question why the most rural parts of the state were being overlooked for infrastructure projects, even though I see more EVs on the road in my area daily. I settled on three possible causes: population density, median household income and political ideology. In this episode, we compare rural America and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) states in regards to these causes.

By the U.S. Census Bureau defintion, I don’t live in a rural area as there are more than 2,500 people in the region, BUT I do live in “small-town America” (STA). The population of Laurel County, where Brent and I live, is 62,000+ and we claim the original KFC although its in the next town down. There are fewer potential EV owners here than many “towns”, much less cities, in other states.

The mean annual income is less than a base model Tesla Model 3, another reason not to target this area. Financing over 72 months would require the populous to spend 20% of their pre-tax income on a vehicle. It’s a tough task given the fact that EVs are still proving themselves as a viable alternative, part of which is due to the next reason, political ideology.

Rural America is much more conservative than all of the ZEV states and this is demonstrated by any Red State/Blue State map. We’ve said all along, the environmental movement, including the promotion of electric vehicles, is deemed a Liberal idea and is quickly met with opposition “in these parts.” I think this is stupidity on display, but it is still an obstacle to EV adoption in STA.

Rural Americans deserve the benefits that EVs offer, but I have to remind myself that we are still in the infancy of this movement. Improved infrastructure in STA will come with time. Enjoy our discussion and let us know your thoughts.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Road Trip Problems Follow-Up: Playing Follow The Leader (Hint: Tesla Is The Leader… For Now)

Is Tesla really that much better or just that far ahead?

Elon Musk and his engineers did not invent the electric car. Steve Jobs and his engineers did not invent the cellular telephone. So why are Tesla and iPhone synonymous with EVs and cell phones? They’re not the only manufacturers, right?

I think the biggest reason that these two companies have such a market share is not because they were the first, but because they reimagined what existed, packaged it elegantly, made it exciting through innovation, and controlled the user experience. There you have it, the billion dollar formula to revolutionize any market you are in.

There are a lot of comparisons to be made between the two individuals and the two companies, but does that mean they will always be on top? Of course not, these two companies have maintained their positions by reinventing their products and updating them frequently. They are also responsible of making all of their competitors, including Samsung and *sigh* Chevrolet better. Granted, the competitors are playing catchup, but if Apple or Tesla get lazy or takes their eye off the ball, then they are one good idea from being obsolete.

For now, let Tesla lead the way. They’ve earned the right. If one day Ford, Chevy or some yet to be born upstart becomes the number one EV brand it the world, so be it. They will have to earn their place and right now that place is occupied by Tesla.

Tesla is not necessarily that much better, but they have been fully committed to the EV game longer than anyone else and that is why they are just that far ahead.

For the record, Chevy is much better at pickup trucks than Tesla… for now.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Road Trip Problems: Just Get Mad… That Helps. 🙄

Patience is Cumbersome.

That pretty much sums up this entire episode in three words. As we resume our discussion of the road trip recently taken by the Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, the author of the NPR article, Camila Domonoske, makes her arguments for why non-Tesla EVs have a “road trip problem”.

First, she sees planning a road trip as cumbersome. Second, there is a lack of infrastructure, which contributes to the first point. Third, the chargers are not fast enough. And finally, the charging infrastructure is unreliable.

She’s not wrong, but there are several things to consider. We are in the infancy of EV adoption. It seems like we are farther along, but realistically, we are just a toddler attempting the first steps of a marathon long course. JD Powers says that worry about public charging is the number one reason people are hesitant to change to electric. It is a concern, but remember 90% of charging is done at home.

But Ms. Domonoske’s points are valid. We want to go when we want to go and we don’t want anything to slow us down. Look at it this way, walking requires rest breaks, horses need water, cars need to refuel, and EVs will need to charge. As technology advances, this argument will become smaller and smaller, but all forms of travel require us to interrupt our journey at some point. There aren’t enough fast, reliable charging ports available, but that is why there is such a push to build the infrastructure to support a mass fleet of EVs.

The bottom line is this is a process and it requires patience. “Patience is when you’re supposed to be mad, but you choose to understand.” I don’t know who said it, but no truer words have been spoken.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Road Trip Problems: Don’t You Know Who I Am?

Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, set out on a whistle stop tour of the south east to promote EVs and EV adoption recently. Embedded in her caravan was an NPR reporter, who, like Madame Secretary, is a long time EV owner. The four day trip covered several stops for town hall style meetings from Charlotte, North Carolina to Memphis, Tennessee. Everything was business as usual, until a local sheriff department outside of Atlanta was called…

Okay, those are the facts of the story and in this episode, we look at what happened. Basically an over-zealous staffer thought he would do Mrs. Granholm a favor and save a charging port for her by ICE-ing out other people waiting to charge. For us, though, the bigger story is a statement made by the reporter, Camila Domonoske; “EVs that aren’t Teslas have a road trip problem…” This is the setup for a longer exploration of this question on the next episode. Ms. Domonoske makes some valid points and offers topics for consideration.

On a side note, Brietbart had a very different take on the story. In fact, after we recorded, they had three articles by three different people on the same story. None of them were positive toward EVs, once again proving that EVs are very political and have become a hot-button buzzword to activate the fringes of both sides of the political spectrum. From a common sense perspective, EVs are very practical but there is a long way to go before they become the first choice for consumers without any coercion. We think EVs will stand on their own merit once the infrastructure is in place and people can see how practical they really are.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Those Taxing Questions That Keep Us Up at Night

At 9:30 AM, the meeting started. Brent was attending in person and I remotely from my kitchen. Unbeknownst to me, Brent was supposed to be in the first half and I was supposed to be in the second half of the day long informational session.

These things are typically conducted in a less than artful or entertaining way. After I realized the first half didn’t pertain to me, I excused myself and rejoined after the lunch break. Brent ducked out of the second session where the basis of this episode originated.

I found out a new $ .03 per kWh tax on public charging is coming to Kentucky and wondered what that really means for EV drivers in the state. At first glance, it is designed to offset revenue generated by the $ .28.7 per gallon fuel tax, but does it really?

Unfortunately, my first question (one that any American citizen should be asking on any governmental decision) was what partisan political angle may be hidden in the new law. For the sake of this discussion, let’s assume it is born of pure motives. I think it’s a shame that we have to look at everything through this lens, but healthy skepticism toward all sides of the political spectrum and the media at large has been shown necessary. It’s a fact of human nature that people, most often, will find ways to benefit themselves and what they hold sacred, especially those in power.

Setting that aside, my more practical questions are “does this make sense and how will it impact EV adoption?” In reality, I don’t think this will be the big economic windfall law makers are expecting. They really don’t understand the nature of EV ownership and are approaching this with “gas-pump mentality.” Mathematically the logic is sound but in practicality is flawed.

Another piece of information that came out of this meeting was about the recently proposed EPA rules. The EPA is now tasked with sorting through the millions of comments received during the feedback portion of their proposal and must return with a “modified ruling” that then will become law. The rules, regardless, will impact the reliability, safety, and affordability of electricity in America.

How will this impact EV adoption? Only time will tell, but with all legislation by agency, it’s subject to change with each election cycle.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

“Biggest Scam of Modern Times”?

This episode is based on a Canadian F-150 Lightning owner and his bad experience on a recent road trip. More accurately, it is a discussion of a “hit piece” put out by Fox Business trying to tarnish electric vehicles’ worthiness in the marketplace and dissuade readers from purchasing EVs. It’s not the first time Fox has put out such content.

So the basics of the story are as follows: a gentleman in Canada purchased an F-150 Lightning because he wanted to be a “responsible citizen” but was met with unexpected costs upgrading his home’s electrical system and installing two chargers, one at home and one at his workplace. When he took his truck from Winnipeg to Chicago, he experienced several delays, including two charging installations that were inoperable. He was “helpless” to the point he felt like he needed to abandon his truck and rent a vehicle to complete his journey. Those are the facts. We report. You decide.

The color commentary added to the article paints a very different picture. First, the original article failed to point out the dollar amounts were Canadian dollars, but that has since been corrected. At the time of this writing, $1 CDN is roughly $0.75 US. The currency denominations, in our opinion, were intentionally hidden to make the cost look inflated. The gentleman spent $115,000 CDN for a standard range F-150. That is a lot different than saying $85,000 US. (We agree it’s still a lot for a truck, but come on, we see what you did.)

The article also states that the vehicle “compelled” him to install two chargers at a cost of $10,000 CDN and he had to spend another $6,000 CDN to upgrade his home’s wiring. The article then continues to tell the story of his trip. In one instance, the article says the gentleman spent $56 and two hours of his time to charge the vehicle from 10% to 90%. (Again, we don’t feel like this tells an accurate story and the problem lies within his charging network.) He attempted to charge at two other locations during the trip but both stations were inoperable. I could go on, but the article is full of opinions expressed as fact and inconsequential information designed to make the owner look like a victim.

Look, we were probably too hard on this poor guy and certainly didn’t adhere to the whole “judge not” way of living, but I can tell you a few things about him from this article.

  1. He does not subscribe to the EV Diaries. If he had, he would have checked his electrical box and expected that cost. We can’t say it enough.
  2. He may have went with a less expensive charger. My JuiceBox 40 was $500 on Amazon. He apparently paid almost $4,000 for two. I expect he got two 90A EVSEs from Ford, which is unnecessary for a standard range pickup.
  3. He didn’t understand his network. Some chargers are set up to share the available power instead of providing the rating on the signage if more than one EV is present. Also, others charge for time plugged up and not for the energy delivered.
  4. My biggest problem with this story is that the owner never takes responsibility for his actions. Whether the words are his, or Fox Business led him in his statements, the owner blamed the truck, Ford and the government for what he thinks was misinformation. Basically he was duped into buying the truck and it was everyone else’s fault he had such a hard time.

Honestly, I feel sorry for the guy but his experience came directly from his decisions. He didn’t do his homework. He failed to plan and as a result planned to fail. True- the fact the chargers were not operational was beyond his control, but there may have been other options. We are still early in EV adoption. There are going to be hiccups and things to learn. It’s part of it. What I don’t feel sorry about is his need to basically slander EVs and to not take ownership of his own life. That might be the first step to owning an EV.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

So, What Is Your Reason?

Last week we discussed the BMW tweet where they called everyone “boomers”. We found out after the fact that the article was almost two years old but we thought the question they asked was still valid and relevant- “What’s your reason not to change?”

After much thought, the answers to such a question are varied. Perhaps the idea of being an early adopter (yes, it’s still early) seems daunting and you want to see what other people do. Or, maybe, there’s too many things to consider and staying with gasoline or diesel seems the easiest route. It could be you have a tinfoil hat and EVs are just a government conspiracy to control where we go and what we do by forcing us into them and then limiting the energy to use them. (You’re not alone.) Conceivably, you’re not comfortable with change or what it may bring with it. Whatever the reason, it all boils down to FEAR; fear of being first, fear of the unknown, and fear of making a mistake. Sometimes fear is justified, but most often it’s not. It’s an internal dialogue you have with yourself that can blow things out of proportion and cloud your judgement.

I’ve found, as it is often expressed, that the best way to overcome fear is to take action. I’m not saying you should face your concerns by going out and buying a Tesla, but you can start doing research on one. You can investigate available charging networks in your area or talk to your EV owning co-worker. Identify your concern, clearly assess the situation and look at the evidence. I promise you that you are not the first EV owner and seldom is adopting one going to prove fatal. You can always go back to ICE… for now, but that’s another topic for another day.

EVs are coming because change is coming. You can let the change happen or you can control the change. For us the answer is “There is no reason not to change. Bring it on!”

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Screw It! Let’s Go To Buc-ee’s.

An article came to our attention that we thought was recent only to find out that it was from Fall 2020. That being said, it was a good article regarding a marketing campaign that BMW launched to showcase their new EV line up, replacing their previous offerings of the i8 performance hybrid and the i3; both of which are now discontinued.

BMW has 10 years of experience in the EV market place. They also have a history of redesigning their iconic grill to resounding love/hate responses from the brand loyalists. The all electric iX is no exception. Claiming that the predominant grill was inspired by “beaver teeth”, the new design met some resistance. Factor into the fact that BMW took to twitter with “OK, Boomer. And what’s your reason not to change?” to invite potential customers to view the marketing copy on BMW’s website. To say the least, it did not go over well.

The result was some hilarious responses, but mostly it was a lot of angry tweets about the ageism and BMW back-peddling, but offering no real apology. Either way, we think it is a good question to explore and will be a topic for future discussion. For now, enjoy the story and some of the tweets as we look at the article from Autoweek.com.

Who knew social media could be so divisive?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

At 6 Years Old, My BMW is Still A Head Turner…

This episode is just a wrap up of EVolveKY’s EV education event hosted in conjunction with the Laurel County Kiwanis Club. There was a bevy of EVs from A to Z (Nissan Ariya to many other Zero emission vehicles.)

Ben and Brent discuss their impressions and take aways from the event.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted on

Don’t Say “Lambo” If You’re Not From Wisconsin

It’s the end of an era. Lamborghini, one of the most iconic sports car companies ever, after 60 years of business, has announced they will no longer be making strictly internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Instead, they will focus on electrifying their fleet starting with the Revuelto plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Interestingly enough, Revuelto is a famous Spanish fighting bull, which fits perfectly with their bull logo. Revuelto is also translated from Spanish as “scrambled” or “mixed-up”, which describes the battery-ICE combination. Clever…

In a previous episode, we talked about how Ferrari, a direct competitor to Lamborghini, has no plans of pursuing EVs at this time. Without being mandated, Lamborghini is banking on a market for an $890K plug-in hybrid as a first step in electrification. Will it be accepted?

Brent surprised me (Ben) with this article and the episode is my reaction. I definitely want to do more research on this topic because the idea of high performance hyper-cars is intriguing, but for goodness sake, can we stop saying “Lambo”?

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS