[Holset]

Look at this retarded idea! 😂

https://electrek.co/2025/10/11/hear-...NfxPrBmbPIsTfQ

[M5Rick]

^ The greenies can try all they like

[W2k]

I've been owning and driving primarily BEVs for more than 5 years at this point, loving every bit of it. And the tech is well beyond where charging times are actually a problem that needs solving - but it's one of the few areas where there are still major technical gains to show, so of course every incremental step change from 200->300->400 kW gets wildly publicized. Speed parity with gasoline pumps will come eventually, for the people who incessantly claim to have that as their last major roadblock to buying an EV.

This has nothing to do with any of that. It's one random "journalist" using his platform at a major-ish EV news site to peddle an absolutely batshit insane idea. He has no power or influence to speak of, only a strong incentive from his employer to bring in the clicks; there is no actual proposal under consideration in any chamber of authority to do what he suggests. He knows full well that by posting it, he is ragebaiting people on the internet who don't realize that this is should simply be dismissed for the utter tripe that it is. Close thread.

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by M5Rick

^ The greenies can try all they like

Speaking of.
Isn't the UK implementing carbon scores on...
Wait
Almost there
...SANDWICHES!




*Cracks me up when someone doesn't like something and pulls out a "close thread" demand.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by gonzo

Speaking of.
Isn't the UK implementing carbon scores on...
Wait
Almost there
...SANDWICHES!




*Cracks me up when someone doesn't like something and pulls out a "close thread" demand.

Not for long, help is on the way in the months coming and it'll be a landslide according to the latest...

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by W2k

I've been owning and driving primarily BEVs for more than 5 years at this point, loving every bit of it. And the tech is well beyond where charging times are actually a problem that needs solving - but it's one of the few areas where there are still major technical gains to show, so of course every incremental step change from 200->300->400 kW gets wildly publicized. Speed parity with gasoline pumps will come eventually, for the people who incessantly claim to have that as their last major roadblock to buying an EV.

This has nothing to do with any of that. It's one random "journalist" using his platform at a major-ish EV news site to peddle an absolutely batshit insane idea. He has no power or influence to speak of, only a strong incentive from his employer to bring in the clicks; there is no actual proposal under consideration in any chamber of authority to do what he suggests. He knows full well that by posting it, he is ragebaiting people on the internet who don't realize that this is should simply be dismissed for the utter tripe that it is. Close thread.

In the USA, I believe the issue is charging speed combined with range recovery. EV are nowhere near on par with ICEV. I don't think physics and chemistry will allow for parity with ICEV at a comparative economical price.

[Efthreeoh]

Better idea let's just tax gasoline and diesel at $30/gallon.

Hence this comment:

"When the cost of pollution and carbon emissions is treated as zero, the market is not making an informed decision. We need to price in externalities of emissions, road damage, and danger to human life into the costs of purchasing and operating a vehicle. A hybrid or EV would then naturally become more attractive for a personal family vehicle than an oversized high-emissions pickup or SUV."

Progressives. LOL.

[W2k]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

In the USA, I believe the issue is charging speed combined with range recovery. EV are nowhere near on par with ICEV. I don't think physics and chemistry will allow for parity with ICEV at a comparative economical price.

I think the main "problem" with the USA is that y'all live in an absolutely massive (and beautiful) country and a lot of it just isn't very densely populated at all, so it's hard to get economies of scale in building lots and lots of EV charging infrastructure, like we have here in the richer bits of Europe.

I think EVs will eventually have good enough range and charge fast enough that this isn't much of an issue in practice, but I get that we're not there yet. Admittedly my post was written from a European perspective.

[thebmw]

The European perspective and the US perspective can be valid because we really do live in very different cultures and infrastructures. But the big issue is that EV's are still not clean energy. When articles like this come out, it continues to erode any credibility of the pro-EV movement. Only clean energy we have now is wind, solar, and hydrogen. Hydrogen being the only potential solution for vehicles. But since Elon bashed it, we've gone down this alternative EV path that has huge environmental and geopolitical impacts.

[W2k]

Originally Posted by thebmw

But the big issue is that EV's are still not clean energy.

Correct for much of the EU as well, not every country here runs on non-fossil fuel energy, far from it. That said, it's fair to say that cars that run off electricity are cleaner in the long term than those that don't, because the whole energy chain is more efficient.

Originally Posted by thebmw

When articles like this come out, it continues to erode any credibility of the pro-EV movement.

Agreed. Which is why I'm a bit annoyed that this type of useless article gets shared in the first place. It helps literally nobody except the owners of scummy online news sites who get some short-term ad revenue.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by W2k

I think the main "problem" with the USA is that y'all live in an absolutely massive (and beautiful) country and a lot of it just isn't very densely populated at all, so it's hard to get economies of scale in building lots and lots of EV charging infrastructure, like we have here in the richer bits of Europe.

I think EVs will eventually have good enough range and charge fast enough that this isn't much of an issue in practice, but I get that we're not there yet. Admittedly my post was written from a European perspective.

Yes, I understood that. The technical problem I see for the USA is cost and speed for fast DC EVSE. There is no argument that home charging an EV on a L2 EVSE overnight and "waking up with a full tank every morning" is the ideal operational scenario, especially when the use case is less than 150 miles daily. However, in the USA recharging an EV on the public network costs per-mile the same as fueling an ICEV, so the 3x time it takes to refuel just to some 200 - 250 mile range is not an incentive to adopt to EV. Further, to get EV nearly on par with ICEV in the USA on both speed and cost basis will take a generational leap in battery technology AND a tech refresh of the public charging network. Again, it is a cost problem. Being the USA economy is based on private equity investment, charging hubs are just not profitable. The USA public network has difficulty enough getting private capital to fund its expansion but then ask to tech refresh the network to drop charging speed in half, there are no economics for it.

The suggested solution then is to ask the US Government (US Taxpayers) to pay for the infrastructure in the same idea that the USA funded its interstate highway system. Perhaps this is how most European nations such as Sweeden solve the problem. Our government does not do a good job at maintaining infrastructure. Availability of functioning EVSE (i.e. knowing the targeted EVSE is functioning when the driver gets there to recharge) is already an issue with the USA private network. Put the responsibility of the availability of the network on the back of the government, well that is asking too much, especially when the traditional Government acquisition process would be used for operations and maintenance. Non-functioning chargers would take months to repair. I work within that industry, so I know firsthand.

Owning and operating a ICEV in the USA is simply just easier and less expensive for most of the US citizenry.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by W2k

Correct for much of the EU as well, not every country here runs on non-fossil fuel energy, far from it. That said, it's fair to say that cars that run off electricity are cleaner in the long term than those that don't, because the whole energy chain is more efficient.


Agreed. Which is why I'm a bit annoyed that this type of useless article gets shared in the first place. It helps literally nobody except the owners of scummy online news sites who get some short-term ad revenue.

I'd like to understand the cost and charging environment that is Sweeden. Since I can't trust the internet to provide unbiased (non-agenda) information, given the majority of vehicle ownership in Sweeden is now EV, what is the availability of public charging infrastructure and cost delta (if any) between electrons being delivered at one's home VS. the Swedish public network?

[BlkGS]

We should revisit that regulation. And remove it effectively immediately.

[W2k]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

I'd like to understand the cost and charging environment that is Sweeden. Since I can't trust the internet to provide unbiased (non-agenda) information, given the majority of vehicle ownership in Sweeden is now EV, what is the availability of public charging infrastructure and cost delta (if any) between electrons being delivered at one's home VS. the Swedish public network?

Sure, no problem.

1) Sweden is not majority BEV ownership. As of the beginning of 2025, 78% of the total fleet was still ICE including PHEVs. Sales of new cars are 60% BEV+PHEV, but only 36% BEV, although the trend suggests more BEVs going forward.

You may have been thinking of our neighbor Norway - 98% of new cars there are BEVs. In Sweden, the politicians haven't pushed EVs to nearly the same degree.

2) Sweden has about 56k public charging points, or .006 per human living here. By comparison, the US has about .0007 charging points per human. Most of the ones here are clustered around major freeways (we are a small country - there aren't that many!), densely populated areas and typical tourist destinations.

3) The cost delta between charging at home and on a public charger is huge. The reason BEVs make more sense in Sweden is really more due to the fact that gas and diesel are very expensive here, about twice what you might pay in the US. Also, electricity can be very cheap if you charge during off-peak hours, or have rooftop solar.

Average cost/kWh charging at home: $0.04 or SEK 0.3752
Average cost/KWh on a public charger: $0.48 or SEK 4.5
One liter of gas: $1.69 or SEK 15.99 (per gallon: $6.40)

Taking my car as an example, using BMW's reference figures for the BMW i5 xDrive40 (BEV) vs the 540i (PHEV):

i5 xDrive40: 17.92 kWh/100 km: driving 100 km costs me $8.60 (public charging) or $0.72 (charging at home)
540i: 6.3 l/100 km: driving 100 km costs me $10.65

Obviously all these are rough estimates and I used EU units because they're easier for me to work with, but I tried converting to Freedom Units where relevant.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by W2k

I think the main "problem" with the USA is that y'all live in an absolutely massive (and beautiful) country and a lot of it just isn't very densely populated at all, so it's hard to get economies of scale in building lots and lots of EV charging infrastructure, like we have here in the richer bits of Europe.

Na, did a gas station exits out woop woop? Did that road run past it? It was all built.

Issue is a leader who thinks EVs are BS even if his best old mate wanted to reshape the world with them. Add existing and well established fossil fuel companies heavily woven through politics, media magnates printing BS that stains EV are garbage, and you have an economy of 330 million leaning towards staying put. Or even a global market as many manufacturers dropped their EV platform on the uttering of "drill baby drill".

But when 1.3 billion who see EV's and batteries completely different, and can deliver quality at affordable prices I reckon the game will change. Especially as that country lifts internal standards. People are also growing acutely aware house or car insurance is climbing fast due to fires, floods, storms etc. Most of us have some inkling the weather was not like that as a kid. And everyone LOVES the idea if charging a car from the sun in you can. I'm still at a loss why tesla doesn't make that glass roof solar, especially when many cars park in the sun, and most roads are exposed.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by thebmw

The European perspective and the US perspective can be valid because we really do live in very different cultures and infrastructures. But the big issue is that EV's are still not clean energy. When articles like this come out, it continues to erode any credibility of the pro-EV movement. Only clean energy we have now is wind, solar, and hydrogen. Hydrogen being the only potential solution for vehicles. But since Elon bashed it, we've gone down this alternative EV path that has huge environmental and geopolitical impacts.

Sadly if hydrogen is not made from sun or wind it too is as dirty as coal. The reality is you don't even have sun or wind without coal or other fossil fuels. But its a step by step thing as humans aren't great at change. I imagine the first motor car suffered from fake news derived from the horse and cart camp.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

Yes, I understood that. The technical problem I see for the USA is cost and speed for fast DC EVSE. There is no argument that home charging an EV on a L2 EVSE overnight and "waking up with a full tank every morning" is the ideal operational scenario, especially when the use case is less than 150 miles daily. However, in the USA recharging an EV on the public network costs per-mile the same as fueling an ICEV, so the 3x time it takes to refuel just to some 200 - 250 mile range is not an incentive to adopt to EV. Further, to get EV nearly on par with ICEV in the USA on both speed and cost basis will take a generational leap in battery technology AND a tech refresh of the public charging network. Again, it is a cost problem. Being the USA economy is based on private equity investment, charging hubs are just not profitable. The USA public network has difficulty enough getting private capital to fund its expansion but then ask to tech refresh the network to drop charging speed in half, there are no economics for it.

The suggested solution then is to ask the US Government (US Taxpayers) to pay for the infrastructure in the same idea that the USA funded its interstate highway system. Perhaps this is how most European nations such as Sweeden solve the problem. Our government does not do a good job at maintaining infrastructure. Availability of functioning EVSE (i.e. knowing the targeted EVSE is functioning when the driver gets there to recharge) is already an issue with the USA private network. Put the responsibility of the availability of the network on the back of the government, well that is asking too much, especially when the traditional Government acquisition process would be used for operations and maintenance. Non-functioning chargers would take months to repair. I work within that industry, so I know firsthand.

Owning and operating a ICEV in the USA is simply just easier and less expensive for most of the US citizenry.

similar to down here in Australia. Plenty of tax breaks (or no tax) for big fossil fuel companies though. Furthermore I can't even get the grid interested in getting me sorted for a charger. Trying to set up an EV truck here is pointless.

[NickyC]

Why does the answer for so many seem to be shared misery?

[RM7]

This is like mutual masturbation of the people who think ICE engines are sustainable long term? No kidding, no one is going to "slow down" gas pumps, that's ridiculous...nor is any government proposing this. It's just a hit-piece to get views and have people pile on in an orgy. EVs won't be practical in all roles for a long time...maybe never, but they are practical for certain things now and will keep improving on that in the future. That isn't going to change.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by W2k

Sure, no problem.

1) Sweden is not majority BEV ownership. As of the beginning of 2025, 78% of the total fleet was still ICE including PHEVs. Sales of new cars are 60% BEV+PHEV, but only 36% BEV, although the trend suggests more BEVs going forward.

You may have been thinking of our neighbor Norway - 98% of new cars there are BEVs. In Sweden, the politicians haven't pushed EVs to nearly the same degree.

2) Sweden has about 56k public charging points, or .006 per human living here. By comparison, the US has about .0007 charging points per human. Most of the ones here are clustered around major freeways (we are a small country - there aren't that many!), densely populated areas and typical tourist destinations.

3) The cost delta between charging at home and on a public charger is huge. The reason BEVs make more sense in Sweden is really more due to the fact that gas and diesel are very expensive here, about twice what you might pay in the US. Also, electricity can be very cheap if you charge during off-peak hours, or have rooftop solar.

Average cost/kWh charging at home: $0.04 or SEK 0.3752
Average cost/KWh on a public charger: $0.48 or SEK 4.5
One liter of gas: $1.69 or SEK 15.99 (per gallon: $6.40)

Taking my car as an example, using BMW's reference figures for the BMW i5 xDrive40 (BEV) vs the 540i (PHEV):

i5 xDrive40: 17.92 kWh/100 km: driving 100 km costs me $8.60 (public charging) or $0.72 (charging at home)
540i: 6.3 l/100 km: driving 100 km costs me $10.65

Obviously all these are rough estimates and I used EU units because they're easier for me to work with, but I tried converting to Freedom Units where relevant.

Thank you.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

This is like mutual masturbation of the people who think ICE engines are sustainable long term? No kidding, no one is going to "slow down" gas pumps, that's ridiculous...nor is any government proposing this. It's just a hit-piece to get views and have people pile on in an orgy. EVs won't be practical in all roles for a long time...maybe never, but they are practical for certain things now and will keep improving on that in the future. That isn't going to change.

I agree with this entirely.

EVs will be a part of the mix, but ICE will be around for basically ever as well. The biggest issue we have with EVs is this "all or nothing" approach. People expect it to be the only option, and that's just dumb. We really should be pushing for PHEVs or EREVs if we actually cared about emissions and/or transitioning to EVs... But we don't, it's all a freaking cash grab.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I agree with this entirely.

EVs will be a part of the mix, but ICE will be around for basically ever as well. The biggest issue we have with EVs is this "all or nothing" approach. People expect it to be the only option, and that's just dumb. We really should be pushing for PHEVs or EREVs if we actually cared about emissions and/or transitioning to EVs... But we don't, it's all a freaking cash grab.

Isn't it interesting that the man who road the coat tails of all this is now the richest man in the world due to almost entirely public funding?

He got tax credits from CA to build his business... then US/EV tax credits and then bounced from CA to avoid paying taxes lol... oh and in the meantime he got into the govt and got funding for his other companies from the govt... If there is ever a fleece of the taxpayer... this one is certainly towards the top lol... oh and by the way, said man and his buddies all fly private gulfstream jets all over.