QOTD: Is Your (Green) People's Car Already Here?

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

A reader linked me to an article last week that started off strong but went downhill near the end. I agree with the main thrust, though.

Mainly, that Elon Musk’s Tesla Model 3, in yet-unattainable base form, is wholly unnecessary. We’ll leave the company financials aside — Musk claims high-zoot Model 3s are necessary to keep the cash-burning company afloat, and there’s little reason to doubt it — and focus on the broader argument.

Electric cars are nice, but you don’t need one to save the planet.

Most of the public’s driving duties are easily accomplished by a plug-in hybrid with a Honda Clarity or Chevrolet Volt-type range, the author states, and this is certainly true. The vast majority of driving miles — commuting, running errands — can be handled with a vehicle that doesn’t entirely dispense with gasoline, but doesn’t need it for trips of roughly 50 miles.

If those trips suddenly went electric, we’d all be breathing easier, Mother Earth would smile (maybe less in areas with mineral extraction), and drivers could feel good about themselves. There’d also be gas left in the tank for those longer drives.

Last fall, while testing Hyundai’s all-electric Ioniq variant, I got to talking with a soon-to-be-retired man who lived with his wife in a downtown condo. Super keen on electrics, this man wanted a battery-powered vehicle as his next ride (his current car of choice was an entirely sensible Toyota Corolla). There’s a neat factor at work with EVs, sure. But the man’s wife didn’t want to spend her golden years figuring out the distance to the nearest public recharging station, nor did the idea of kiboshing certain road trips due to lack of infrastructure strike her as appealing. Also, no one wants to cool their heels next to a highway as a 240-volt connection slowly replenishes their battery’s juice.

My entirely predictable advice? “Get a Volt.” The husband would get his EV kick without sacrificing the range needed for a trip to Boston or Stowe or New York City, and his household would still end up about 90 percent gas-free.

Yes, it’s a pain to battle with the condo board for a hookup point in your urban parking spot, but outfitting an ordinary home with a Level 2 charger isn’t the Apollo 11 mission. You’ll just need to upgrade your breaker panel, probably, and run wire to the garage. Depending on a number of variables, it can be done for less than $1,000.

While the author of the piece advocates dumping the cost of electric vehicle charging infrastructure on every new home buyer and parking lot user, that’s simply not my policy cup of tea. Feel free to disagree on the urgency of the matter. What I do agree with, however, is that the base Model 3 — still months away from production — is only necessary for PR purposes. Consumers already have plenty of choice. It’s likely that more than a few $35,000 Model 3 reservation holders have taken notice.

What’s your take?

[Image: Kia Motors]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 64 comments
  • SCE to AUX SCE to AUX on May 29, 2018

    "Electric cars are nice, but you don’t need one to save the planet." Your underlying premise - that EV buyers are a monolithic bunch of tree-huggers - is false. I like EVs for the instant torque, low- to near-zero maintenance, quieter ride, and substantially lower operating cost. Personally, I am unconcerned with GW, CG, ACG, or whatever the latest eco-panic is called. My only concern with EVs is depreciation. Rationally, there is no doubt that keeping an economy car in running order makes better sense from a microeconomic perspective. But car buying often isn't rational, which is easily observed in the volume of trucks sales in the US. If we're going to argue that the best green choice is to simply stick with economy cars, let's open the discussion to include all vehicle choices.

  • Brandloyalty Brandloyalty on May 29, 2018

    Absolutely. Replace the awd Escape Hybrid with an Outlander PHEV. The Mitsubishi has electric range for city use, battery capacity to recapture energy during long descents in the mountains, store/hold/discharge control, variable regeneration braking, and it can't possibly be less reliable than the Escape. The only downside is the Outlander's poorer gas-only mileage.

  • Jeff JMII--If I did not get my Maverick my next choice was a Santa Cruz. They are different but then they are both compact pickups the only real compact pickups on the market. I am glad to hear that the Santa Cruz will have knobs and buttons on it for 2025 it would be good if they offered a hybrid as well. When I looked at both trucks it was less about brand loyalty and more about price, size, and features. I have owned 2 gm made trucks in the past and liked both but gm does not make a true compact truck and neither does Ram, Toyota, or Nissan. The Maverick was the only Ford product that I wanted. If I wanted a larger truck I would have kept either my 99 S-10 extended cab with a 2.2 I-4 5 speed or my 08 Isuzu I-370 4 x 4 with the 3.7 I-5, tow package, heated leather seats, and other niceties and it road like a luxury vehicle. I believe the demand is there for other manufacturers to make compact pickups. The proposed hybrid Toyota Stout would be a great truck. Subaru has experience making small trucks and they could make a very competitive compact truck and Subaru has a great all wheel drive system. Chevy has a great compact pickup offered in South America called the Montana which gm could be made in North America and offered in the US and Canada. Ram has a great little compact truck offered in South America as well.
  • Groza George I don’t care about GM’s anything. They have not had anything of interest or of reasonable quality in a generation and now solely stay on business to provide UAW retirement while they slowly move production to Mexico.
  • Arthur Dailey We have a lease coming due in October and no intention of buying the vehicle when the lease is up.Trying to decide on a replacement vehicle our preferences are the Maverick, Subaru Forester and Mazda CX-5 or CX-30.Unfortunately both the Maverick and Subaru are thin on the ground. Would prefer a Maverick with the hybrid, but the wife has 2 'must haves' those being heated seats and blind spot monitoring. That requires a factory order on the Maverick bringing Canadian price in the mid $40k range, and a delivery time of TBD. For the Subaru it looks like we would have to go up 2 trim levels to get those and that also puts it into the mid $40k range.Therefore are contemplating take another 2 or 3 year lease. Hoping that vehicle supply and prices stabilize and purchasing a hybrid or electric when that lease expires. By then we will both be retired, so that vehicle could be a 'forever car'. And an increased 'carbon tax' just kicked in this week in most of Canada. Prices are currently $1.72 per litre. Which according to my rough calculations is approximately $5.00 per gallon in US currency.Any recommendations would be welcomed.
  • Eric Wait! They're moving? Mexico??!!
  • GrumpyOldMan All modern road vehicles have tachometers in RPM X 1000. I've often wondered if that is a nanny-state regulation to prevent drivers from confusing it with the speedometer. If so, the Ford retro gauges would appear to be illegal.
Next