Would love to have a barebones, no frills EV. Just give me a dumb "thin-client" LCD screen that I can project CarPlay into, otherwise no fancy technology gizmos and doodats.
Current dream car would be something like an Elise or S2000, just electric. Ok, so it wouldn't be as light, and it wouldn't have a manual transmission.
Forget all that fluff. I don't need CarPlay. I have no desire for my car and phone to be in any sort of relationship. I need a car that starts when asked and gets me where I need to go. Electric or gas, I don't much care so long as the thing functions when needed.
That said, at the moment I haven't found any electric car that would handle winter where I am. Temperatures regularly below -30 and occasionally below -40c still seem a non-started for reliable electrics. They cannot be left unplugged/unpowered for more than a few days at such temperatures without issues.
CarPlay (and Android Auto) is not a relationship between your car and your phone.
It is a second screen for the phone that is restricted to certain functions and has a different UI. The only integration with the car that I have seen is knowing when the lights turn on so the screen goes into dark mode and vice versa.
Edit: I guess the other place it interacts with the car is for the steering wheel controls and maybe a microphone. But these all seem like pretty basic and reasonable integrations.
I'd actually be fine with a simple slot you can mount (and charge) an iPad onto. i.e. the whole "let's glue a fake tablet onto the dashboard" aesthetic some manufacturers, most egregiously Mercedes, did for a while.
Debating whether I'd want some basic steering wheel bluetooth-based controls to help operate it though. Maybe a simple 4-way arrow/directional pad and a "ok" button?
I always figured it was due to the heavy regulations on US car design that cover every aspect of it. The same kind of regulations that eliminated SRO housing.
For example, it would be much harder to make a small car as able to protect its occupants in a crash as a larger one.
It's mostly cultural I suspect. There are almost no technical reasons and very few financial reasons why it wouldn't be possible. But to get there you'd have to make cities (as that's where those ares are the most useful) a bit more like Europe and Japan (for living, not for driving around in a big car), and people don't like change and in the US it's even more of a dislike it the change seems to come from an example outside of the country.
Most of this suspicion is cobbled together from my own experience in the US (mostly the costs, not the middle part), and publications like NotJustBikes and about the way some US cities tend to grow outwards because investing in making what's already there healthy to live in is not as profitable as waiting for gentrification-ripeness and building around it in the meantime.
The existing cars on the road make at least some of that regulation necessary or at least not unmotivated.
That and consumers tend to want a bigger car than their neighbour either for safety or bragging rights.
One thing that always annoys me in the UK is people who buy big SUVs because they live on wet leaves and maybe a slightly muddy road. Totally ruins a lot of British roads (and kills people), and keep in mind that all modern cars have been worked on by a team of vehicle dynamicists to make sure they are safe and stable in slippy conditions.
The number of people I've spoken to who don't causally understand why the car has a gearbox (and thus what gear to be in, in said slippy road) is too many.
F1 cars have also gotten a lot bigger this year due to crash structures since there were a few pretty bad accidents involving cars basically splitting in half recently.
It's because culturally we don't like them because we grew up with space. Small cars don't have enough space. We dislike small cars same way we dislike the small hotel rooms in EU.
Also, why do you care about the small size of an ev? Since it is electric powered it's not more polluting. Yeah, you can't park as many but dig deeper or build up.
Big EV are absolutely more polluting. They require more resources in their construction — which is a major driver of overall pollution footprint. Larger EVs also require more energy (eg electricity) to propel them, and all electricity sources have a pollution footprint (sometimes directly but always at construction/clean up).
Even your “dig deeper/build taller” for parking carries additional pollution costs.
I’m not here to win an argument. I provided a fact and nothing more. If sports cars also burn through tires quickly they’re causing pollution of this type as well.
Digging deeper/building taller lets you removing parking roadside and street level though that makes things way more walkable and just better in a lot of places.
You need hard seperation on roads between cars and pedestrian traffic regardless of size. That has been shown to be true. Most european countries keep resisting this, again because their streets are way to small, but everyone would be happier if you fixed it.
There are situations where they can mix reasonably well, but it means making the roads uncomfortable for driving, something few authorities are willing to do. If you look at Autoluw streets they are narrow, have lots of visual obstructions (trees, etc.) and are the kind of place you only drive if you really need to. Which is why they're such nice places to walk!
Remember the Smart car? They're not sold in the US any more, but they're still produced, so it's entirely a demand issue; they're not worth the hassle of importing, marketing, selling, and servicing.
Like, I've done multiple drives across the US in various directions and most of your time is spent looking at trees or vegetation.
Meanwhile I've been watching robcdee this past month bike across Japan on roads that are virtually 99% in a town of some kind with very little time spent anywhere undeveloped.
so people overweight and not obese are less than 59%.
While in US
The U.S. adult obesity rate tops 40 percent; highest ever recorded.
The U.S. adult obesity rate stands at 42.4 percent, the first time the national rate has passed the 40 percent mark, and further evidence of the country’s obesity crisis. The national adult obesity rate has increased by 26 percent since 2008.
so the difference is still significant.
average weight shows that
Europe 70.8 kg (156.1 lb)
North America 80.7 kg (177.9 lb)
European population 606 million adults, North America 263 million.
being overweight is not a severe condition, obesity is.
That's assuming that most people do long travels in the US, I'm not sure that's true and wouldn't be surprised that the main need is commuting which small cars are really sufficient for.
You're assuming that the daily commute is short for most people.
I live in a fairly dense US city, and there is a fair percentage of downtown office workers that live more that 40 miles out, which given the routes they have to take and the traffic involved can often take 45 minutes to an hour.
In Rome 1.5 million people a day come to the city to work, over a population of ~3 million residents.
In Milan it's 1 million people, over 1.5 million residents.
Still on average cars are much smaller than in NY or Los Angeles, I'll say that in Rome and Milan cars are much smaller than the Italian average, because parking space is very limited.
The western World is not that different everywhere you go, except some traits of US, which are not that western if you ask me, they are more similar to countries that just discovered market economy and consumerism.
There are folks out in the (mid)west who have 3-4 hour commutes to work.
In fact, the further you go in that direction up until a couple of hours from the west coast, that's closer to normal.
I wouldn't be surprised if it's the opposite -- public transit is much better in Europe and Japan and used for most daily commutes that in America would be by car, so cars are reserved for longer journeys.
While public transit is a lot better than in the US, a very large fraction of all commutes is still by car. Even in big cities like Berlin a quarter of the commutes is by car. In even slightly rural regions, it's a lot closer to 100%.
Long drives in SUVs are no ways better than in a decent sedan.
The real dynamic is carmakers promoting huge trucks as Patriotic and American, with super bowl ads showing these trucks moving houses around.
That leads to a significant number of people buying these massive vehicles.
And once these vehicles are on poorly designed American roads where safety is barely an afterthought, everyone driving in more normal sized cars feel even more unsafe, leading them to replace their sedans (which are already oversized compared to Sedans even a couple of decades ago) with CUVs, SUVs and trucks.
You will see this dynamic play out in household to household where people are essentially being forced into buying bigger, harder to handle, and more expensive cars because it truly feels unsafe to be driving in a normal car next to these monster trucks.
Because the people who buy new cars don't buy small cars. The USA is a horrible market for small cars, EV or no - most people who would like small cars already drive used cars.
And especially during a shortage, no manufacturer is going to prioritize low-margin product.
This looks awesome, and almost sounds too good to be true. Certainly I'll be investigating this one some more. I wonder what the expected lead time is for a pre-order? (and what the actual lead time might be). Couldn't quite tell from a quick glance if any have been delivered and what their run-rate is. Anyone know if it would qualify for the $7,500 federal tax credit?
I placed an order for an Aptera around 2008, but they never delivered and eventually refunded my $500 deposit in 2010. Rumor had it that they couldn't produce the body shell. After the Aptera debacle, I ordered one of the very first Nissan Leafs instead. I kept it for 8 years (about 60K miles) but ended up selling it when the range had dropped to around 50 miles. The 2011 Nissan Leaf had the worst depreciation of any car produced in 2011. I no longer own an electric car (but I'm no longer commuting).
Thanks for the first-hand insight into Aptera. Sounds like vapor-ware. For the Nissan Leaf, looks like the depreciation is still the worst, at least according to:
...would you say the depreciation was justified? Maybe mostly because of the battery range reduction? Did it start to need repairs or were other things generally wearing out? Other maintenance higher than expected? Do you think the $7,500 tax credit for new Leafs (Leaves?) is/was playing a part in suppressing costs for used Leafs? (as in, why by a used one, when you can get a new one with a $7,500 discount). I guess probably not, since that list isn't dominated by the other EV's eligible for the tax incentive. What was the range when it was new? I see this site says it was ~100 miles:
The US is all about Big and Powerful, and the last 20 years of SUV marketing did the job, too, so small cars simply don't sell.
But lest my fellow Europeans feel smug and superior: the same thing has been happening in the EU. What is being marketed is mostly SUVs and in lower-income countries (like Poland) they have become the "prestige" car to get as a result. And if you want to get an electric which isn't tiny and isn't an SUV either, you don't have a choice. There is no reasonable electric BMW 3 Touring.
Driving a car with >= 200 horsepower is fun as hell. Performance is one of the main reasons that Tesla stans are into the brand. Generally, people buy smaller cars because they can't afford larger ones.
I'm sure it is. But lots of people buy smaller cars because they're at least slightly better for the environment, or they just realize people generally don't need bigger cars.
People buy smaller cars because fuel is expensive, and repairs for the most popular small cars are cheaper since material costs predominate.
In the US, fuel is inexpensive due to a lack of fuel taxes, food and other house home goods are sold in large containers leading to a cost savings if you can buy them and your big car can transport them, and labor is relatively expensive so repair costs flatten out when comparing car models. Lastly roads are huge so no one feels a pinch driving a big SUV.
That’s basically it, the economics of the US make it reasonable to drive a big car.
Bigger cars are actually safer in accidents. Not just cowboys, soccer Mom favoring big SUV is practically paying life insurance by paying the cost of gas. My guess is this is more true in rural areas.
Mh, I'm European, I have two "SUV", I see USA vehicles in USA, yes they tend to be bigger but not that much these days, we are not in the '60s anymore, that's not size the real difference but engines: USA engines are terrible, big in physical size/weight, far less powerful than EU one for their size and consumption. That's the substantial difference.
A 4 liter Jeep can easy be towed by a 2 liter EU engine, one against the other, that's the point. Perhaps cheaper oil prices and lack of environmental regulations have made the industry far less interested in expensive engine research preferring just aesthetics and optional on board.
Oh, marketing really pushes the "prestige" line and you can clearly see people buying overly large cars just to show off how wealthy they are. It's a thing. We don't think this way, being rational human beings, but most people really do.
Small cheap cars have a margin around $100. It's hard to argue it's worthwhile to build and sell such a car when the total sales may be small and the factory costs $1B.
What's the range on those "small, cheap EVs"? For its many faults, gas has really high energy density, which is useful in a country where some people think it's reasonable to drive an hour commute to get to work, and actual trips can be longer still.
The issue is mostly the timeline. "recharging" your petrol car is a few orders of magnitude faster than an EV. If I'm doing a long drive of 100 miles, I now need to make sure I recharge before coming back to make sure I'm not stranded, since unlike a petrol car, if I run out of battery charge, I can't just have a friend drive out with a gallon of battery to get me going again.
Filling up a gas car is faster, but it's really not that much difference in real life usage.
I have a VW ID.3 (an electric hatchback). It can easily do a 100 mile round trip without worrying about running out. And if you go further, the car will just navigate you to the nearest rapid charger if it thinks you need charging to comfortably finish the trip. The car software makes it pretty hard to run out. You get back up to 80% charge in like 20 minutes on a 150kw rapid charger.
Caveat: This is in the UK where things are pretty dense and it take some real effort to run out of charge and ignore all the car's warnings without being near some kind of charging point.
Sure, but that caveat is pretty dang important. I'm in a part of the US where it's not hard to be on a highway where there's 10 miles between exits, and some of those exits won't even have a petrol station. I'm planning a road trip this summer that will easily be over 3000 miles, with many stretches through national parks or just barren desert where even my petrol car is going to require me to remember to refuel before I proceed.
Or if I want to go camping, I need to make sure there's either a charger in whatever small town is near the campsite, or make sure I have the charge for a full round trip.
I know a friend of mine with a full long-range Tesla literally carries all the cables to work out how to charge from a basic outlet because his family lives out in the country far from any charger, so often the only way he can get back to town reliably is to unplug an appliance at his family's house and run the cabling out the window to where he's parked his Tesla in the yard to make sure he can get home.
> I'm planning a road trip this summer that will easily be over 3000 miles
For a comparison, my annual mileage, including 1-2 driving holidays a year is about 4000 miles.
> many stretches through national parks or just barren desert where even my petrol car is going to require me to remember to refuel before I proceed.
Are any of those stretches longer than 300 miles without any refuels? Why is it ok to refuel and potentially run the entire range of your gas car, but not your EV?
> I know a friend of mine with a full long-range Tesla literally carries all the cables to work
And? Are you judging him for being prepared? I can make slights about people who drive with litres of water and foil blankets in case they get stuck in the wilderness, but that doesn't mean that they're not completely correct in being prepared for the situations they're facing.
Maybe an EV isn't for you. But for people who don't drive the width of the continental US on a vacation or do spontaneous driving trips that are greater than the range of a petrol car, (which I'd wager are far more common) they are.
You're imputing a lot of malice into what I've written that I didn't intend - I'm a big fan of EVs and would love to get one in the near future. I'm just outlining the sort of issues and complexities that come up if you live outside of the US east coast in terms of normal distances that you need to travel.
On average, I drive about the same amount as you. I have a 8 year old car with around 50,000 miles on it. The issue is that there's a range of common-enough activities outside of my day to day driving that make a 300 mile range more difficult.
I bring up my friend's Tesla situation only to point out the complexities. For a lot of the more rural midwest, there's not charging options that aren't bringing your own cables and hoping there's a plug you can use near where you can park your car. The reason he does it is that the closest charging station that's meant for EVs is nearly 50 miles in the wrong direction, so unless he wants to spend most of 3 hours recharging his car for the drive home, he has to get creative. I certainly didn't mean it as a slight to anything but the US EV infrastructure.
The reason I bring up the distances involved is not to brag about my driving or anything, but to illuminate the differences between EV viability in the US vs. Japan or the UK in the earlier replies. If I had an EV, this trip (to see my family for the first time in 3 years, and an old friend for the first time in 10) would be thousands of dollars in plane flights that are quite a bit worse for the environment.
For right now, as you point out, relying on an EV puts constraints on your life. The long drive to see my family again would go from 14 hours to 16+ if I had to work in stops to fully re-charge my EV. Or I could take a flight, but wouldn't that nearly undo all of the environmental benefit of having driven my EV for the rest of the year?
> For a lot of the more rural midwest, there's not charging options that aren't bringing your own cables and hoping there's a plug you can use near where you can park your car.
Sure, so EVs aren't for the rural midwest then. Living in actual rural areas means travelling with jerry cans in case you get stuck, and keeping emergency packs in case you're caught without transit.
> Or I could take a flight, but wouldn't that nearly undo all of the environmental benefit of having driven my EV for the rest of the year?
Unless you're driving a hyper efficient vehicle already, for a drive that long, depending on how many people you're driving, you would be better off flying. It's ~1.3 tonnes of CO2 for a 2500 mile drive and about 0.6kg CO2 per person to fly the same distance. Cars are a remarkably bad way to travel.
> The long drive to see my family again would go from 14 hours to 16+ if I had to work in stops to fully re-charge my EV
That doesn't sound unreasonable to me, to be honest? Driving 14 hours has got to be in the top percentile of non-commercial trips, and it only being ~15% longer on probably the worst case imaginable is pretty good.
Well that's not what the parent criticised, it was the range. It's not a replacement that you can treat exactly the same way but it does have other advantages. One, you don't need to detour to refuel before you leave. I don't know about you, but my nearest gas station is about a 10 minute drive in the opposite direction of where I want to go when I'm driving any distance trips, and always has 10-20 minute queues on Friday afternoons/ weekend mornings.
> If I'm doing a long drive of 100 miles, I now need to make sure I recharge before coming back to make sure I'm not stranded.
If your car has a range of 220 miles, you can do a 200 mile round trip without recharging in between. If 100 miles is considered a long drive for you then an EV is almost guaranteed to be good enough in range for your normal usage. If you're driving 250 miles or so in a one trip, you're likely stopping at some point along the way for 20-30 minutes _anyway_.
> I can't just have a friend drive out with a gallon of battery to get me going again.
Which friends of yours would you call to drive 100 miles to give you a fuel top up if you ran out on the way? Frankly if one my friends called and told me they ran out of petrol 90 minutes away from me and they wanted me to come rescue me I'd help them call for recovery, not drive 3 hours and go get them
Sure, but range and timeline to refill that range are intimately linked. You can think of it as "time spend refueling per mile driven". My current ICE car, I spend maybe 5 minutes refueling every 300 miles. Looking at the spec for the VW ID.4, the fast charging mode they highlight is 70 miles in 10 minutes. There's certainly advantages in being able to get in charge on your EV while you're in a shop or otherwise, but that requires ubiquitous infrastructure that's only just becoming a thing in the US.
EVs, for good reason, are mostly optimized for smaller trips where you top-up the battery after. If you're doing a trip that's beyond the range of the car, then you have to factor in the recharge time to go the rest of the required distance.
> If your car has a range of 220 miles, you can do a 200 mile round trip without recharging in between.
That may be true, but I don't know if I'd trust the range estimate to be that accurate. And yes, I'd likely just stop to charge somewhere before coming back, but that's the point - I'd need to make sure I'm going for dinner somewhere with a charger, or that the friend I'm visiting has a way to let me charge. It's not insurmountable, but it's a new wrinkle when gas stations are everywhere for the most part.
I, likewise, don't have a convenient gas station near where I live, but that's not an issue, since I can just stop once I'm on the highway at the cheapest price I see. That's not really an option in an EV. If you don't top up before a longer trip, you'll just have a bad time.
> Which friends of yours would you call to drive 100 miles ... I'd help them call for recovery.
I feel like you've entirely missed the point. I'm not trying to compare what my friends are willing to do for me. As far as I know, I can't get anyone, friend or professional, to re-charge an EV by the side of the road. At very least, I need someone who is specifically prepared to do so. The odds that the auto shop in whatever small town I've run out of charge near has the equipment to drive out and recharge me seems low, but maybe that's more common that I expect?
E-bikes are an even better alternative for most tasks we do around town. BUT: Bike thieves. I'd be riding my e-bike everywhere if we actually held bike thieves accountable to the same level of car thieves. If I leave my e-bike outside alone for more than 30 minutes it's virtually guaranteed to be stolen.
I feel theft, portability, and price are the big reasons why E-scooters are taking off like crazy while E-bikes are not.
You can just fold up and bring a $500 E-scooter into your apartment and office, and also charge it while you work. Not to mention onto public transportation.
Unless you're very lucky to have an accommodating place of work and home, you probably can't do that with a E-bike.
Yes I know folding bikes exist (I personally have a Brompton), including folding E-bikes, but they're still not as convenient as a scooter. As much as I love my Brompton, I'm tempted to replace it with an E-scooter.
Edit: all of the above applies in comparison to normal non-electric bikes too.
The Bolt has been sold in the US for years - prior to this supply chain nonsense, you could easily buy a Bolt in the Midwest for low ~30k USD ish, new.
Bolt sales were very low. Then came the fire recall and supply chain issues. The mid cycle refresh Bolt is now in production but dealers are asking $37K.
I think doing your part in driving a smaller vehicle works until you adopt the soccer mom mentality.
That is, there are a lot of other trucks and SUVs on the road. So you look at the risk of being in a sedan that crashes into a heavier vehicle. Do you really want to fall behind in that arms race with your own kids?
The old electric Chevy Spark was a great one for an around-town car.
But the new gas Spark gets the same fuel economy as the Saturn I bought in 1999, which--to drive the point home on how zero we've come in terms of compact car fuel economy--was 23 years ago.
It's a pity about lack of smaller cars in the US. I've always preferred them, whether cross country or around town. Cheaper to buy, cheaper to own, easier to park, harder to crash.
In Thailand they use Toyotas as Taxi Cabs. They have a drop in electric engine for the Toyotas and replace the gas tank with batteries and have a small palm tree like device that has solar panels on it. One charge lasts all day. Why can't we do that for old cars in the USA?
...because mostly cultural trends towards ever more inefficient (but peakcockishly loud) big vehicles (e.g. SUVs) and the political football that is saving the petrochemical industry from those dirty commie renewable energy...companies.
IMHO, they should just put a curb weight restriction on non-commercial vehicles. 1000kg should be plenty enough, although I would like to see even smaller cars on the roads in the range of 700kg, at least within city limits.
It does plenty of things at once: reduces emissions and pollution, improves safety for everyone, decreases congestion and decreases wear and tear on roads.
But it can only work if everyone is driving the same size of car/truck.
In any case this stupid arms race to get the most imposing vehicle on the road needs to end.
Because US average family size is 3.3, especially in suburban areas, while Europe is 2.7, less in the wealthier countries. Ever tried fitting 3 car seats in a Nissan Leaf?
Moreover, US suburbia, with its huge distances between home, school, sports and entertainment centers, has a tradition of kids car pooling. In Europe distances are shorter and biking or walking are more popular.
These, with proper marketing, almost forces US families to have at least one large car. Whether it's gas or electric is a matter of status, disposable income, area of living (suburbia has less charging stations because population density makes it less profitable) and local political climate.
112 comments
[ 0.24 ms ] story [ 230 ms ] threadCurrent dream car would be something like an Elise or S2000, just electric. Ok, so it wouldn't be as light, and it wouldn't have a manual transmission.
Though it looks like an electric refresh of the Elise (probably renamed) is coming in a few years.
That said, at the moment I haven't found any electric car that would handle winter where I am. Temperatures regularly below -30 and occasionally below -40c still seem a non-started for reliable electrics. They cannot be left unplugged/unpowered for more than a few days at such temperatures without issues.
It is a second screen for the phone that is restricted to certain functions and has a different UI. The only integration with the car that I have seen is knowing when the lights turn on so the screen goes into dark mode and vice versa.
Edit: I guess the other place it interacts with the car is for the steering wheel controls and maybe a microphone. But these all seem like pretty basic and reasonable integrations.
Debating whether I'd want some basic steering wheel bluetooth-based controls to help operate it though. Maybe a simple 4-way arrow/directional pad and a "ok" button?
Or the Skoda CITIGOe iV version https://www.skoda.co.uk/used-cars/citigo
No touchscreen, just basic dashboard in both versions https://cdn.skoda-storyboard.com/2019/09/11_CITIGOe_iV_inter...
The range is "up to" 170 miles (270km) in both
For example, it would be much harder to make a small car as able to protect its occupants in a crash as a larger one.
Most of this suspicion is cobbled together from my own experience in the US (mostly the costs, not the middle part), and publications like NotJustBikes and about the way some US cities tend to grow outwards because investing in making what's already there healthy to live in is not as profitable as waiting for gentrification-ripeness and building around it in the meantime.
US car regulations grew up around larger cars.
Reminds me of the side-effect of car-centric urban designs where it apparently is 'not news' to have people crash their cars into buildings.
That and consumers tend to want a bigger car than their neighbour either for safety or bragging rights.
One thing that always annoys me in the UK is people who buy big SUVs because they live on wet leaves and maybe a slightly muddy road. Totally ruins a lot of British roads (and kills people), and keep in mind that all modern cars have been worked on by a team of vehicle dynamicists to make sure they are safe and stable in slippy conditions.
The number of people I've spoken to who don't causally understand why the car has a gearbox (and thus what gear to be in, in said slippy road) is too many.
F1 cars have also gotten a lot bigger this year due to crash structures since there were a few pretty bad accidents involving cars basically splitting in half recently.
Also, why do you care about the small size of an ev? Since it is electric powered it's not more polluting. Yeah, you can't park as many but dig deeper or build up.
Even your “dig deeper/build taller” for parking carries additional pollution costs.
Because European and Japanese towns/cities are much closer together whereas in the US they're much further apart with much more rural/wilderness land?
Long drives in cramped cars _suck_.
Meanwhile I've been watching robcdee this past month bike across Japan on roads that are virtually 99% in a town of some kind with very little time spent anywhere undeveloped.
https://obesity.procon.org/global-obesity-levels/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_obesity_r...
US ranks very high
First European country is Ireland at #51, first continental Europe country is Greece, at #54, my country is ranked #107.59% of the EU measures as overweight, per the WHO this month.[1]
Globally, human beings are moving in this direction and the reasons why are quite poorly understood.
[1]:https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220503-world-health-org...
so people overweight and not obese are less than 59%.
While in US
The U.S. adult obesity rate tops 40 percent; highest ever recorded.
The U.S. adult obesity rate stands at 42.4 percent, the first time the national rate has passed the 40 percent mark, and further evidence of the country’s obesity crisis. The national adult obesity rate has increased by 26 percent since 2008.
so the difference is still significant.
average weight shows that
European population 606 million adults, North America 263 million.being overweight is not a severe condition, obesity is.
https://www.tfah.org/report-details/state-of-obesity-2020/
you're right
I've missed them
Anyway the difference is negligible.
I live in a fairly dense US city, and there is a fair percentage of downtown office workers that live more that 40 miles out, which given the routes they have to take and the traffic involved can often take 45 minutes to an hour.
In Rome 1.5 million people a day come to the city to work, over a population of ~3 million residents.
In Milan it's 1 million people, over 1.5 million residents.
Still on average cars are much smaller than in NY or Los Angeles, I'll say that in Rome and Milan cars are much smaller than the Italian average, because parking space is very limited.
The western World is not that different everywhere you go, except some traits of US, which are not that western if you ask me, they are more similar to countries that just discovered market economy and consumerism.
And second, you seem to be quite an outlier when it comes to USA commute. The average daily commute in the USA seems to be over 40 miles [1]
[1] https://www.answerfinancial.com/insurance-center/which-state...
Never been to USA but <10km here (CEE) is short distance even for bicycle.
The real dynamic is carmakers promoting huge trucks as Patriotic and American, with super bowl ads showing these trucks moving houses around.
That leads to a significant number of people buying these massive vehicles.
And once these vehicles are on poorly designed American roads where safety is barely an afterthought, everyone driving in more normal sized cars feel even more unsafe, leading them to replace their sedans (which are already oversized compared to Sedans even a couple of decades ago) with CUVs, SUVs and trucks.
You will see this dynamic play out in household to household where people are essentially being forced into buying bigger, harder to handle, and more expensive cars because it truly feels unsafe to be driving in a normal car next to these monster trucks.
And especially during a shortage, no manufacturer is going to prioritize low-margin product.
https://aptera.us/
https://www.youtube.com/c/ApteraMotors
https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/taxevb.shtml
I don't think it will qualify unless they are successful with lobbying the government.
https://caredge.com/ranks/depreciation/popular/5-year/worst#...
...would you say the depreciation was justified? Maybe mostly because of the battery range reduction? Did it start to need repairs or were other things generally wearing out? Other maintenance higher than expected? Do you think the $7,500 tax credit for new Leafs (Leaves?) is/was playing a part in suppressing costs for used Leafs? (as in, why by a used one, when you can get a new one with a $7,500 discount). I guess probably not, since that list isn't dominated by the other EV's eligible for the tax incentive. What was the range when it was new? I see this site says it was ~100 miles:
https://www.cars.com/research/nissan-leaf-2011/
But lest my fellow Europeans feel smug and superior: the same thing has been happening in the EU. What is being marketed is mostly SUVs and in lower-income countries (like Poland) they have become the "prestige" car to get as a result. And if you want to get an electric which isn't tiny and isn't an SUV either, you don't have a choice. There is no reasonable electric BMW 3 Touring.
Many Americans have a fundamental psychological insecurity that they try to hide by driving large vehicles.
In the US, fuel is inexpensive due to a lack of fuel taxes, food and other house home goods are sold in large containers leading to a cost savings if you can buy them and your big car can transport them, and labor is relatively expensive so repair costs flatten out when comparing car models. Lastly roads are huge so no one feels a pinch driving a big SUV.
That’s basically it, the economics of the US make it reasonable to drive a big car.
A 4 liter Jeep can easy be towed by a 2 liter EU engine, one against the other, that's the point. Perhaps cheaper oil prices and lack of environmental regulations have made the industry far less interested in expensive engine research preferring just aesthetics and optional on board.
Hmm? A recent Ford F-150 won't fit in any parking space you can find in the EU.
I have a VW ID.3 (an electric hatchback). It can easily do a 100 mile round trip without worrying about running out. And if you go further, the car will just navigate you to the nearest rapid charger if it thinks you need charging to comfortably finish the trip. The car software makes it pretty hard to run out. You get back up to 80% charge in like 20 minutes on a 150kw rapid charger.
Caveat: This is in the UK where things are pretty dense and it take some real effort to run out of charge and ignore all the car's warnings without being near some kind of charging point.
Or if I want to go camping, I need to make sure there's either a charger in whatever small town is near the campsite, or make sure I have the charge for a full round trip.
I know a friend of mine with a full long-range Tesla literally carries all the cables to work out how to charge from a basic outlet because his family lives out in the country far from any charger, so often the only way he can get back to town reliably is to unplug an appliance at his family's house and run the cabling out the window to where he's parked his Tesla in the yard to make sure he can get home.
For a comparison, my annual mileage, including 1-2 driving holidays a year is about 4000 miles.
> many stretches through national parks or just barren desert where even my petrol car is going to require me to remember to refuel before I proceed.
Are any of those stretches longer than 300 miles without any refuels? Why is it ok to refuel and potentially run the entire range of your gas car, but not your EV?
> I know a friend of mine with a full long-range Tesla literally carries all the cables to work
And? Are you judging him for being prepared? I can make slights about people who drive with litres of water and foil blankets in case they get stuck in the wilderness, but that doesn't mean that they're not completely correct in being prepared for the situations they're facing.
Maybe an EV isn't for you. But for people who don't drive the width of the continental US on a vacation or do spontaneous driving trips that are greater than the range of a petrol car, (which I'd wager are far more common) they are.
On average, I drive about the same amount as you. I have a 8 year old car with around 50,000 miles on it. The issue is that there's a range of common-enough activities outside of my day to day driving that make a 300 mile range more difficult.
I bring up my friend's Tesla situation only to point out the complexities. For a lot of the more rural midwest, there's not charging options that aren't bringing your own cables and hoping there's a plug you can use near where you can park your car. The reason he does it is that the closest charging station that's meant for EVs is nearly 50 miles in the wrong direction, so unless he wants to spend most of 3 hours recharging his car for the drive home, he has to get creative. I certainly didn't mean it as a slight to anything but the US EV infrastructure.
The reason I bring up the distances involved is not to brag about my driving or anything, but to illuminate the differences between EV viability in the US vs. Japan or the UK in the earlier replies. If I had an EV, this trip (to see my family for the first time in 3 years, and an old friend for the first time in 10) would be thousands of dollars in plane flights that are quite a bit worse for the environment.
For right now, as you point out, relying on an EV puts constraints on your life. The long drive to see my family again would go from 14 hours to 16+ if I had to work in stops to fully re-charge my EV. Or I could take a flight, but wouldn't that nearly undo all of the environmental benefit of having driven my EV for the rest of the year?
Sure, so EVs aren't for the rural midwest then. Living in actual rural areas means travelling with jerry cans in case you get stuck, and keeping emergency packs in case you're caught without transit.
> Or I could take a flight, but wouldn't that nearly undo all of the environmental benefit of having driven my EV for the rest of the year?
Unless you're driving a hyper efficient vehicle already, for a drive that long, depending on how many people you're driving, you would be better off flying. It's ~1.3 tonnes of CO2 for a 2500 mile drive and about 0.6kg CO2 per person to fly the same distance. Cars are a remarkably bad way to travel.
> The long drive to see my family again would go from 14 hours to 16+ if I had to work in stops to fully re-charge my EV
That doesn't sound unreasonable to me, to be honest? Driving 14 hours has got to be in the top percentile of non-commercial trips, and it only being ~15% longer on probably the worst case imaginable is pretty good.
> If I'm doing a long drive of 100 miles, I now need to make sure I recharge before coming back to make sure I'm not stranded.
If your car has a range of 220 miles, you can do a 200 mile round trip without recharging in between. If 100 miles is considered a long drive for you then an EV is almost guaranteed to be good enough in range for your normal usage. If you're driving 250 miles or so in a one trip, you're likely stopping at some point along the way for 20-30 minutes _anyway_.
> I can't just have a friend drive out with a gallon of battery to get me going again.
Which friends of yours would you call to drive 100 miles to give you a fuel top up if you ran out on the way? Frankly if one my friends called and told me they ran out of petrol 90 minutes away from me and they wanted me to come rescue me I'd help them call for recovery, not drive 3 hours and go get them
EVs, for good reason, are mostly optimized for smaller trips where you top-up the battery after. If you're doing a trip that's beyond the range of the car, then you have to factor in the recharge time to go the rest of the required distance.
> If your car has a range of 220 miles, you can do a 200 mile round trip without recharging in between.
That may be true, but I don't know if I'd trust the range estimate to be that accurate. And yes, I'd likely just stop to charge somewhere before coming back, but that's the point - I'd need to make sure I'm going for dinner somewhere with a charger, or that the friend I'm visiting has a way to let me charge. It's not insurmountable, but it's a new wrinkle when gas stations are everywhere for the most part.
I, likewise, don't have a convenient gas station near where I live, but that's not an issue, since I can just stop once I'm on the highway at the cheapest price I see. That's not really an option in an EV. If you don't top up before a longer trip, you'll just have a bad time.
> Which friends of yours would you call to drive 100 miles ... I'd help them call for recovery.
I feel like you've entirely missed the point. I'm not trying to compare what my friends are willing to do for me. As far as I know, I can't get anyone, friend or professional, to re-charge an EV by the side of the road. At very least, I need someone who is specifically prepared to do so. The odds that the auto shop in whatever small town I've run out of charge near has the equipment to drive out and recharge me seems low, but maybe that's more common that I expect?
Bike thieves are the scum of the earth
I feel theft, portability, and price are the big reasons why E-scooters are taking off like crazy while E-bikes are not.
You can just fold up and bring a $500 E-scooter into your apartment and office, and also charge it while you work. Not to mention onto public transportation.
Unless you're very lucky to have an accommodating place of work and home, you probably can't do that with a E-bike.
Yes I know folding bikes exist (I personally have a Brompton), including folding E-bikes, but they're still not as convenient as a scooter. As much as I love my Brompton, I'm tempted to replace it with an E-scooter.
Edit: all of the above applies in comparison to normal non-electric bikes too.
I thought that was default, given how dirt cheap they are per employee vehicle stored.
Is it just an outdoor space or rack you lock your bike to? If so, no.
https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=lit+motors&ia=web
Bolt sales were very low. Then came the fire recall and supply chain issues. The mid cycle refresh Bolt is now in production but dealers are asking $37K.
That is, there are a lot of other trucks and SUVs on the road. So you look at the risk of being in a sedan that crashes into a heavier vehicle. Do you really want to fall behind in that arms race with your own kids?
But the new gas Spark gets the same fuel economy as the Saturn I bought in 1999, which--to drive the point home on how zero we've come in terms of compact car fuel economy--was 23 years ago.
It's a pity about lack of smaller cars in the US. I've always preferred them, whether cross country or around town. Cheaper to buy, cheaper to own, easier to park, harder to crash.
It does plenty of things at once: reduces emissions and pollution, improves safety for everyone, decreases congestion and decreases wear and tear on roads.
But it can only work if everyone is driving the same size of car/truck.
In any case this stupid arms race to get the most imposing vehicle on the road needs to end.
Moreover, US suburbia, with its huge distances between home, school, sports and entertainment centers, has a tradition of kids car pooling. In Europe distances are shorter and biking or walking are more popular.
These, with proper marketing, almost forces US families to have at least one large car. Whether it's gas or electric is a matter of status, disposable income, area of living (suburbia has less charging stations because population density makes it less profitable) and local political climate.