this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2024
58 points (93.9% liked)

[Dormant] Electric Vehicles

3193 readers
1 users here now

We have moved to:

!electricvehicles@slrpnk.net

A community for the sharing of links, news, and discussion related to Electric Vehicles.

Rules

  1. No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, casteism, speciesism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
  2. Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
  3. No self-promotion.
  4. No irrelevant content. All posts must be relevant and related to plug-in electric vehicles — BEVs or PHEVs.
  5. No trolling.
  6. Policy, not politics. Submissions and comments about effective policymaking are allowed and encouraged in the community, however conversations and submissions about parties, politicians, and those devolving into general tribalism will be removed.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sunshine@lemmy.ca
Ceres@lemmy.world
58
Honda U.S. Execs Say Most Drivers Don’t Want EVs Yet (insideevs.com)
submitted 3 months ago by MyOpinion@lemm.ee to c/evs@lemmy.world
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Honda has pledged to invest $64 billion to develop seven bespoke electric vehicles, which it plans to launch by 2030 on its way to selling only EVs and fuel-cell vehicles after 2040. However, there doesn’t seem to be a consensus within the company that there is enough demand for EVs, which is reflected in its limited selection of available battery-powered models.

This is true for Japan’s home market but also for North America, where Honda sells two vehicles (the Prologue and the Acura ZDX), both of which are made by General Motors on the Ultium platform. Whenever Honda’s top executives come out to speak about selling fully electric vehicles, it always sounds like a mixed message that, in part, reaffirms the brand’s commitment to electrification while also suggesting it’s not yet convinced this is the way.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] OminousOrange@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

For sure, a level 2 is much faster. My point was more if you go to say a cottage for the weekend, you're still able to plug in there and would likely be close to full in the 2-3 days you're parked there.

In my Ioniq 5, I'd be pretty much full with level 2 (240V) overnight, but the level 1 (120V) would only get around 20%. But, the slow charging isn't too much of a concern if I'm staying somewhere for a couple days.

All I'm saying is that it's possible to fuel your car nearly any time it's parked.

[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It sounds like we're on exactly the same page here and we simply have different usage expectations. We definitely agree on the value of being able to fuel the car anytime it is parked. One of the best things about EVs!

I tend to drive frequently to different attractions while on vacation, while it sounds like you might be the type of person who likes to get away to a cabin and try to avoid hustle and bustle for a few days. In your scenario the level 1 charging has plenty of time to do the job, whereas I'd have range anxiety the whole time because I'm usually on the go. 😅

[–] SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you had a daily driver EV that was smaller and met your regional range requirements, then rented a long range combustion vehicle for occasional excursions, you would still be saving a lot of money and carbon (plus NOx etc.).

It depends on your lifestyle in the end.

[–] unconfirmedsourcesDOTgov@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 3 months ago

Agree that it depends on decision factors relating to my lifestyle. This may be an unpopular opinion around here, but I bought an EV for the performance, convenience, and maintenance advantages. Solving for decreased carbon emissions was not really a factor in the decision.

I don't really buy into the "individual responsibility" argument that many environmentalists put forward as a solution. The solutions I consider most viable all require changing incentives at the societal level, such as subsidizing carbon free energy production, increasing taxes / decreasing tax breaks for petroleum products, etc. Stuff that impacts the way millions of people make decisions that impact the environment.

The statement you're making probably isn't factually incorrect, it just isn't relevant to my situation.