Ad: Get our free CNET Android app

Ten reasons electric cars still suck: We unplug the EV hype

Electric cars are arriving in force, and it looks like they're here to stay. The Nissan Leaf will launch in 2011, as will Mitsubishi's iMiev, and a host of other electric vehicles -- EVs for short -- from Renault, BMW, Volkswagen, Mercedes and others. In fact, just about every manufacturer worth its salt is investing in the technology, citing greener, zero-emissions driving as their motivation.

As exciting and as important as their arrival may be, we have major reservations they may not be the eco panacea the world has been waiting for -- at least not yet. We've spotted several crucial drawbacks in EVs that mean they're potentially more expensive to run and are, in some cases, more harmful to the environment than their gas-guzzling counterparts.

With that in mind, we've highlighted ten reasons you might want to think again before you take the electric car plunge.

10. They're expensive to buy

Electric cars are a total rip-off, often costing more than twice as much as their closest petrol counterparts. The G-Wiz, the cheapest electric vehicle on the market in the UK, costs a whopping £15,745 in lithium-ion form. For that sort of money, you could buy two Chevrolet Spark superminis -- an alternative that unlike the G-Wiz benefits from good looks, five seats, ABS brakes, six airbags, and a chassis that won't crack in half if someone sneezes on it.

The Nissan Leaf electric car offers all the requisite safety features, but predictably, you'll have to pay through the nose for the privilege of staying safe and driving in comfort. A Leaf will set you back £23,350 and that's after government incentives. Without Big Brother lending a hand, Nissan would charge you a whopping £28,350.

9. They're expensive to run

There's a common misconception that electric cars are cheap to run. They often are, but if you're not careful, they can end up costing you almost as much as a standard petrol car. Take the Nissan Leaf. Charging its 24kWh battery pack (which provides a 100-mile range) can cost you as much as £6 on British Gas' CO2-offsetting Future Energy tariff.

We've chosen this particular tariff as an example because British Gas claims all its electricity comes from green sources, and it would be ideally suited to electric car customers wishing to neutralise all their car-related carbon emissions.

It costs 25.114 pence per kilowatt hour (ppkWh) for the first 42kWh consumed per month, followed by 11.374ppkWh for any subsequent consumption. The total cost of charging a Nissan Leaf on this tariff works out to be a maximum of either £6.02 at the highest rate (24kwh x 0.25114ppkWh = £6.02) or £2.72 at the lowest (24kwh x 0.11374ppkWh = £2.72).

That doesn't compare very favourably to the cost of driving a highly efficient petrol car. The Volkswagen Polo Bluemotion uses 3.4 litres of petrol for every 100km driven. This works out to be 83.1mpg, which (using the magic of maths) equates to 21.95 miles per litre of petrol. Based on current fuel prices of £1.20 per litre, putting enough petrol in your Polo Bluemotion to travel the same 100 miles as a Leaf charged at the highest rate would cost a mere £5.46 (100 / 21.95 x 1.20). That makes the Leaf, on the higher tariff, 56p more expensive to drive per 100 miles than a filth-chucking petrol vehicle. 

  • To learn more about EV running costs, visit Ben Rose's excellent Jaffacake.net gadget blog.

8. Zero emissions is a lie

It's true that electric cars don't emit any exhaust gases, but the same can't be said of all the power stations generating the electrical energy they rely on. In the UK, the majority of our electricity comes from either coal or gas-fired power stations, which emit CO2 in the process of generating electricity.

According to the National Energy Foundation's CO2 calculator, providing a full charge to the Nissan Leaf's 24kWh battery pack creates 13kg of CO2. That's 13,000 grammes every time the Leaf is driven its full 100-mile range, or 130g per mile, or 81.25g for every kilometre it's driven. Compare that to the 89g/km emitted by the Toyota Prius and you'll start to see that EVs aren't particularly green -- unless you switch to a more expensive electricity tariff that offsets carbon emissions, which as we've seen make them more expensive to drive than some petrol cars.

As Ben Rose says of the Leaf, "Charging this thing is like boiling your kettle for 8 hours solid. Still sound green?"

7. They take forever to recharge

It takes around two minutes to refuel a car that uses an internal combustion engine. It can take over two days to fully recharge a Tesla Roadster. 48 hours is a worst-case scenario, but that's the amount of time you'd be looking at if you plugged a Roadster into an ordinary 120 Volt, 15 Amp household wall socket in the US.

Let's do the maths: ordinary US household sockets deliver a maximum of 1.8kW (120V x 15A = 1,800W or 1.8kW) and the Roadster uses a 56kWh battery pack. 56kWh / 1.8kW = 31.1 hours to recharge -- but that's only a best-case scenario, assuming the Tesla's Roadster's charger and battery pack are 100 per cent efficient at receiving electrical charge. The reality is no device is 100 per cent efficient. Heat generated during the charging process, as well as the increasing resistance of a charging battery, means a full charge could take two full days.

We have things a little better here in the UK, but even so it'll take over 17 hours, again assuming peak efficiency, to charge your Tesla Roadster on a domestic 240V, 13A outlet. Fast chargers are available, but these only drop the charge time to 3.5 hours and if you run out of juice in an area where there isn't one (ie almost everywhere in the UK) you're up the creek without a paddle.

6. Quick charging can damage batteries

High-capacity quick chargers make it possible to charge the batteries of an electric vehicle relatively quickly. In the case of the Leaf, one can charge the battery to 80 per cent capacity in as little as 30 minutes. As attractive as quick charging is, however, it's not something EV owners should rely on exclusively, as excessive quick charging can affect a battery's lifespan.

After ten years of use, one can expect the battery in a Nissan Leaf to degrade to around 80 per cent normal capacity, meaning you can reasonably expect to be doing 80 miles on a single charge rather than the full 100. Frequent quick charging can degrade the battery to 70 per cent in the same space of time, according to our colleagues at CNET.com.

5. The driving range is pathetic

48 miles. That's how far you can drive a G-Wiz before it leaves you stranded in the middle of the road. More modern electric cars can go for twice this distance, but it's still not good enough, when you consider the Volkswagen Passat set a single-tank distance record of 1,527 miles on one tank of petrol. For a more realistic comparison, the Prius has a range of around 800 miles -- and can be refuelled at any petrol station.

4. EVs make other appliances more expensive

Owning an electric vehicle can increase your electricity bill, that's obvious. What's less apparent is that owning an EV can make your other electrical appliances more expensive to use. Many electric car advocates suggest EV owners switch to an Economy 7 tariff, which provides cheaper electricity for seven off-peak hours during the night. While this decreases the cost of charging your EV overnight, however, it actually increases the cost of using your ordinary gadgets if you switch them on at any time before bedtime. Economy 7 costs vary from supplier to supplier, but it could be as little as 2.5p per unit for the cheaper night rate and as much as 8p per unit for peak hours.

3. EVs could raise electricity taxes

The government taxes fuel very heavily. In September 2009, when unleaded petrol cost 105.64p at the pump, 56.19p of that was fuel duty, while another 13.8p was VAT, charged at 17.5 per cent. Currently, domestic electricity isn't taxed as heavily as fuel. UK residents normally pay VAT at 5 per cent instead of the usual rate, due to the fact us humans tend to rely on the stuff to keep us warm and fed.

If there was to be a massive uptake of electric vehicles that resulted in fewer people buying petrol, the government would have to replace that revenue -- presumably by taxing the electricity we use to recharge our EVs. A blanket tax increase on all electricity is very unlikely, but it's a distinct possibility EV owners would be required to have a dedicated meter, which would allow the application of a higher rate of tax to all electricity that ends up in a vehicle. 

2. Where's the resale value?

So you've bought your electric car, you've had it five years and you're bored with it. It's a simple case of selling it on or trading up, right? Wrong. As we've already mentioned, EV batteries slowly lose their ability to store energy over time. Buyers in the second-hand market will be aware of this and may balk at having to pay through the nose for an EV that's out of warranty and whose battery has lost nearly a third of its storage capacity.

The obvious solution in this case is for owners (or buyers) to replace the battery before a change of ownership, but doing so is hugely expensive. It's estimated that the battery in the Nissan Leaf costs $18,000 (£11,180). We can't imagine many people will want to spend that sort of cash on a five- or ten-year-old car. The price of a replacement battery will fall over time, but even if it's halved in the next five years, you're still looking at a £5,500 bill plus labour charges. 

1. They're useless for inner-city inhabitants

Electric cars are aimed at people who live in cities -- their short range and absence of exhaust emissions make them ideal for such folk. Sadly, most people who live in cities can't actually use an EV because only a privileged few have a garage in which to charge the car. Even houses with driveways, which are slightly more common, aren't ideal. Charging your EV on a driveway would involve snaking a cable from your hallway through your letterbox and outside, where mangy foxes and errant rats will gnaw at it.

And what are the rest of us supposed to do? Trail a 50-foot length of electrical cable down the side of our high-rise block? It's possible to install infrastructure to allow easy on-street charging, but at the moment that is very much in its infancy.

Conclusion

Electric cars have a long way to go before they're viable alternatives to cars that use internal combustion engines. We welcome their development and in many cases remain hugely impressed by the best examples of electric vehicles, such as the Nissan Leaf and Tesla Roadster. The simple fact, though, is EVs still have numerous flaws that seriously restrict their appeal.

All the problems we've mentioned above can be fixed, but some will take longer than others to solve. Until that time, it looks as if hybrids and old-fashioned gas-guzzlers are a much more sensible bet for the average punter.

Comments 38

Add your comment

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 8 November, 2010 16:38

Worst EV hit piece yet. Oh well I still get my LEAF in December here in the states. No big oil propaganda hit piece will change my mind.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 8 November, 2010 17:01

Maybe what you write applies in the UK but in Portugal it's different. The Nissan LEAF fits in all my needs. Let me do some remarks to your points:
1. I live in Portugal and in here a diesel VW Golf equipped as it is the LEAF is basically the same price. So it's not expensive.
2. In here our renewable energy production is 42% of all our consumption and in a couple of years it will be 60% and growing, so we are producing much less CO2 than you there in UK. Besides aren't you forgetting the CO2 produced in the production of fuel and all the CO2 associated to the transport of the oil and and then the fuel to the pump. I wiil 8 cents x 24KW = 1,92 Euros and a fast charge of 28 minutes to get 80% full (as you can see it doesn't take forever to charge) (130 km) will cost me 3 Euros, much less than the best of the eco diesel engines available let's say 4 liters/100 kms x 1,19 €uros = 4,76 for 100 kms. Just do the math.
3. Usually fast charge is only used between towns. Daily it's used the slow charge during the night at better rates. 160 kms available every day more than enough for my daily needs and not pathetic at all..
4. I already use electricity economy tarifs and I'm payng less than before because I use my dishwasher and other more powerfull appliances at that low cost tarifs.
5. Increase electricity taxes will happen anyway but not so soon.
6. I'm sure I will get a good resale value by the time I want to sell it because it's such a well equipped car and batteries replacement is planned by NISSAN and therefore I'm sure the price of it will be lower.
7. I live almost inside Lisbon and have plenty of chargers all over to pick and charge.
Conclusion: This is the time for the EV's to start the slowest and assured "killing" of the ICE gaz guzzlers.
I invite you to move to Portugal and enjoy how good is to drive a much nearer Zero Emission vehicle than any of the Internal combustion engines. Lets make this Planet better for our children in small steps.

notshaun's avatar

notshaun 8 November, 2010 17:10

Written with help from the Energy Lobby?

Oh and No. 11 - Its still a car and we need to stop designing and planning everything around cars.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 8 November, 2010 17:27

"...mangy foxes and errant rats will gnaw at it."?

Really? This is the news equivalent of trolling for comments. Maybe your next article could be, 'Top 10 ways to troll for pageviews by writing like sniveling git.'

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 8 November, 2010 18:17

that was harsh, none of your arguments really fit together. its as if you copy and pasted these one by one from different places, you sound like a little boy who is scared of losing his toy porsche. i'm dissapointed Rory

thedarklaith's avatar

thedarklaith 8 November, 2010 21:28

lol, if you're interested in saving the environment just use used cooking oil with diesel cars

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 8 November, 2010 21:59

10. Nope. Not expensive with government help. And why is that your business anyway?
9. You are trying to be funny. I suggest you stop. EV's are extremely cheap to run and I suspect you know that.
8.Who cares they aren't perfect. They are way way way better. You know that. It's dino-cars that suck.
7. By your logic, I take forever to sleep. Perfect fit!
6. While true, this is also besides the point. Who cares! Driving your dino-car too fast damages it too, does that make it suck? Ha.
5. The driving range is awesome! 100 miles! More than I ever drive to work! Are you kidding?
4. Again, you are talking about the cost. I'd like to talk about transmissions, and clutches, and oil changes and then you can talk about that. Again, it's dino-cars that literally suck.
3. What a non-argument. Ev Cars suck because we need to keep passing gas tax? What are you smoking, I want some! :)
2. The resale value of a car is the business of the people buying the car. Even dino-cars lose a massive amount of value driving it off the lot. You know that, and that's why you can't use this argument.
1. If you can't park it/charge it, you won't buy it. That applies to accessibility, not suckability, right?

In short, think before you right. Electric cars are the future, be they be fuel cell, spinning wheel, battery, or some other process. This is the beginning. Welcome to the future.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 8 November, 2010 22:22

Articles like these will soon to look like that bad night out you posted on facebook - yes, the one your next potential employer is looking over right now... oops.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 00:59

Your math is wrong in # 8. While the Leaf has a 24-kWh battery pack, the maximum discharge is about 80% (per Nissan). So that means that the most energy you can put into it for that 100 miles is 19.2 kWh, not the 24 on which your calculation is based.

That takes it down to 10 kg of CO2, or 100 g/km. You're entirely correct that the Prius is better at 89 g/km, but it's a lot closer than your calculation indicated.

What this goes to show is two things: (a) The U.K. has exceptionally dirty power compared to the U.S. (which uses lots of natural gas, has a fair bit of hydro, and increasing amounts of solar and wind); and (b) electric cars are a dead cert winner there, where the fleet average is roughly 30 mpg (Imperial).

It's a tougher call in the U.K., as you highlight. And that's a valid discussion point. Just get yer maths right!

bobbyllew's avatar

bobbyllew 9 November, 2010 06:50

Yawn. Seriously, big, dull yawn. Every single point in this nonsense technophobic rant is utterly refutable. I drive an electric car every day, I don't live in a big city, I have saved thousands of pounds in the last year, the batteries haven't worn out, the range is fine, the car is reliable, I've done over 9000 miles and it's cost me £110 on my electricity bill. Obviously as always the writer did not take into account the amount of electricity used to refine petrol. Oh, wait, they use electricity to refine petrol? Oh, he didn't mention that. How much? 7.5 kilowatt hours to produce one gallon. Yes, enough electricity to drive my stupid failed electric car 30 miles. Well a gallon of petrol will drive most cars 30 miles, ahh yes, but before you use the electricity to refine the fossil fuels you have to find the fuel, drill a hole, pump it out of the ground, (electricity) store it, pump it onto a ship (electricity), ship it on massive tankers which burn huge quantities of heavy fuel oil, pump it (electricity) into storage tanks, refine it, which uses so much electricity big refineries run their own power stations, or have their own string of pylons from the nearest power plant, then pump the fuel (electricity) onto trucks which do 8 mpg, deliver it to a petrol station, which is when we put it in our cars. The real C02 output of an average family car is between 350 and 500 grams of Co2 per K. At the very worst, if I charge my electric car from an unfiltered coal burning power plant, the screaming, ranting pro oil worst it can do is below 100 grams.
This article will be indirectly funded by oil companies who have spent over 2 billion dollars in the last year on 'PR' nothing in this article has one scintilla of truth. CNET should be deeply ashamed of having this rubbish on their site.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 08:25

But where DO we draw the line here?

I went for a walk yesterday and, being a modern human, I wore a pair of shoes. The upper part of those shoes is made from leather, which is made from the hide of cows. Cows spend their days eating grass and expelling methane gas, which is one of THE worst greenhouse gases. Do we factor in the life of the cow when calculating how green my shoes are?

Worse still, the sole of my shoes is made of rubber. Do you know what they make rubber from? Crude oil. The real heavy fractions of crude oil. The ones that are hardest to refine and take the most energy to extract. Of course, before we refine that, we have to find the crude oil, drill a hole, pump it out of the ground, store it, pump it onto a ship, ship it on massive tankers which burn huge quantities of heavy fuel oil, pump it into storage tanks and only then can we refine it. Then we have to tank it up onto trucks and ship it to the shoe factory, which may even be overseas.

All that for a pair of shoes? What on earth could the carbon footprint of those shoes be? And the soles even wear out in a year.

As well as supplying the obvious fuel and lubricants we need, crude oil is also a vital raw material in the manufacture of plastics used in car bodywork, dashboards and artificial fibres for seat materials and carpets. If that’s not enough, add in paints, detergents, solvents, adhesives, rubber and even bitumen for tarmac. Whatever fuel we use to power our cars, Crude Oil and refineries are going to be required for decades yet.

Whilst you may make some valid points about the production of petrol/gasoline, there really is no point in throwing that fraction in the bin whilst we extracts other heavier organic compounds.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 9 November, 2010 12:36

This article is complete and utter rubbish. During the last weekend I travelled a total of 527 miles using electricity produced from UK wind and solar power. I travelled at motorway speeds from Bath to Portsmouth to Brighton to London to Portsmouth to Bath. I spent a total of 10 minutes plugging in the charging cable before retiring to bed or having a meal. While the author of this piece cannot see the bigger picture I know from the hundred or so people I talked to in Regents Street on Sunday that they love the idea of Electric Cars and cannot wait to buy them.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 14:12

Dear Cnet UK,

Irony is a difficult thing to convey on the internet. After reading the greatest part of the above article I thought that, in spite of all the convoluted and obviously erroneous points, you were serious. That is, until I reached the part about the "mangy foxes and errant rats" as being a problem for British urban dwellers wishing to charge their cars whilst parked in their driveways. Then I laughed.

Very cheeky indeed. But please, next time, please make the irony a bit more discernible from the start.

Thank you,
Domenick

DannyFleet's avatar

DannyFleet 9 November, 2010 14:38

Irony aside, 5 years ago I replaced driving a Subaru into central London with an EV. I've saved £60,000 in the interim and plenty of oil. Guess it makes sense from my perspective.

simon_films's avatar

simon_films 9 November, 2010 15:16

This really is some abysmally researched rubbish, if you're going to quote statistics can you give references and full comparisons, half truths are worse than out and out lies. The only points I can see that are even vaguely valid are: 1. Charging infrastructure for those without domestic charging options this is a major barrier to entry and 2. Cost of purchase, but this is due to me buying second hand and there is a massive head start for conventional engines.
The battery lifetime is not a major issue as they don't actually physically wear out so they can be easily refurbished/recycled into new batteries and replaced through a trade in deal. EVs have a much lower maintenance cost than conventional cars which over a 10 year period will have much more wear and tear on the larger number of moving parts.
The tax point is a ridiculous argument about a worse case theoretical future which really is clutching at straws. The spreading of the load on the grid to different times of day with time flexible appliances is one of the corner stones of the smart grid. If energy is stored and distributed more evenly and is managed in response to time specific demand then the base load generating capacity of the grid can then be greatly reduced. Why would the government create a disincentive for this, it will allow them to reach their carbon commitments quicker than anything else.
Personally I think fuel cells (not just hydrogen based) have a longer term future due to high energy density and transportability of fuels, the energy efficient creation of these new chemical fuels is the biggest stumbling block. In the world of battery systems the basic Lithium Ion based systems will soon be replaced by super capacitors (already in testing phases) which are much cheaper, have a longer working lifetime and can charge quicker than you can fill your tank. And before the obvious criticism, not from a 13Amp socket but by using charge transfer systems which is very fast, clean and efficient.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 16:29

Lame article. Why the anti-electric propoganda? Do you work for an oil company?

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 17:31

Here in the U.S., our cities are sprawling. A young country, we did most of our growing after the advent of automobiles. We need vehicles with longer range than electrics can provide. Now, I'm all for light-rail and public transportation when I'm in town, but if I'm visiting family in another part of the state, I want to drive. My car is fairly fuel efficient (Volkswagen Jetta), and very reasonably priced. Morover, it is cheap to maintain. I live on the third floor of my building, so charging an electric would certainly be a problem. My commute is only about 15 miles; I could ride my bike for the few months where the weather cooperates, but that's not a year-round solution. My family's lifestyle requires that we own a car. So far, we've limited it to one car. Anyway, my point is that many factors need to be considered before jumping on the electric bandwagon.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 9 November, 2010 23:01

In response to you insights. I have been driving an electric vehicle for the past three months:

10. They're expensive to buy
Electric cars are expensive. New technologies often are. “Big Brother” already supports gasoline/petrol based cars … maybe you just don’t want a level playing field. Failure to recognize government subsidies for petroleum based transportation seems to be a common malady.

9. They're expensive to run
Where I live, 75% of power comes from hydro and wind. My costs per ‘electric’mile are $0.01 to $0.015. My gasoline costs are ~10-12 per mile. Maintenance for an electric car is much less.

8. Zero emissions is a lie
See above, I have no coal-fired power stations in my region. You sound like you are angry about something. Want to talk about it?

7. They take forever to recharge
I charge at home (at night) for an hour or two. I can charge at work for 45 min to 1.5 hr.

6. Quick charging can damage batteries
I think you are really fishing now!!

5. The driving range is pathetic
I have only a 25 to 30 mile range. It is a minor limit depending on what you do. I travel ~30-40 miles per day, I have many shorter trips (2-10 miles) during the day and recharge easily at my main workplace. For many that would not be practical, for others no big deal.

4. EVs make other appliances more expensive
Well, I do end up having about 2-3 people try to take smart-phone photos of me nearly every mile - everywhere I go … another uncounted cost???

3. EVs could raise electricity taxes
It’s about a penny a mile where I live, gasoline is 10 to 12 pennies per mile.

2. Where's the resale value?
I bought my car used (3 years old, and had it reconditioned (one of 19 batteries was replaced). Price drop percentage was what any similar gas powered car might be (or less!). Drives fine – 600 miles (960 km) per month. No more gas (petrol).

1. They're useless for inner-city inhabitants
Huh? Unless you mean rats, I think you are confused. I drive from a house in the country into the city and can do quite well.

Respectfully,

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 10 November, 2010 01:54

"I drive from a house in the country into the city and can do quite well."

WELL LAH DI DAH

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 10 November, 2010 19:37

Electricity advocates are out in force. I notice that none provide a particularly adequate refute. Electric cars are expensive to buy and not cheap enough to run and offset the cost. Charging is difficult and if you make a long journey and wish tonfill up you have to stop off for the night or use a quick charge which does damage the battery. The electricty that the uk produces is inefficient and the environmental impact of making the batteries has caused some concern.
At this moment in time the majority of road users are better off with petrol or probably diesel.
Money should be invested in better public transport and moving cars toward hydrogen (which has been a moderate success in california) which would improve practicality. This would help to reduce the damage to the environment more than this ridiculous fad of electric cars.

Grier78's avatar

Grier78 11 November, 2010 13:34

If none of the reasons in the article were true then we would all be driving electric cars by now, but were not.
In Jan I bought a new family car and with only £12k to spend would have loved to find an electric or hydrogen car, that came anywhere near to fitting my needs, but alas there was nothing available.
In 7 years time when I replace this car I really want to buy an electric/hydrogen car and hope the availability/price/infrastructure is available by then.

MLM's avatar

MLM 12 November, 2010 20:26

Wouldn't say they suck. We're just not "there" yet. Electric motors are not new and have been capable of pushing cars for a long time. The batteries and recharging same are the problems. I hope these first efforts are a success and the early adopters with the deep pockets enjoy them. Next-gen versions will continue to get better. For now, for my purposes, either a hybrid or a diesel (still rare in the U. S.) would be the best range-stretcher.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 14 November, 2010 13:21

very biased. Quotes worst case electic car data every time while comparing with best petrol car data! shame on you!

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 16 November, 2010 16:10

I see what you're doing and it's lazy - once i've hit submit you can consider yourselves one unique user down. Comments about range are pathetic and easy, and show no sophistication as a journo. You're attempt to be extreme are tiresome. Of course the EV is not perfect, no one thinks it is, but it's progressing at an incredible rate and that is a good thing. Goodbye.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 16 November, 2010 22:11

STOP complaining the EV technology and STOP lobbying for the gas and oil companies, looks at the spills in Mexico, and more to come around the world, the costs to the environment and livehood for the fishermen, and economy as a whole. These costs must be factored in calculating the use of petroleum-based vehicles. The EV is here to stay and its technology will be improved and its cost will be significantly reduced based on economy of scale, in production cost, if EVERY ONE of us starts using the electric vehicle. SAVE our chidren's FUTURE today, DRIVE an EV.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 23 November, 2010 14:05

For gods sake at least try for consistency. One moment complain about the cost of CO2 free energy, next complain about the emissions. Complain about a 30% loss of battery over ten years then suddenly it happens in three. I'm only surprised you didn't complain about the huge cost of rewiring your house to US standards in order to get the world's slowest charge.

Electric cars have their problems, why not write about them.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 23 November, 2010 14:26

Interesting pro-oil article. It seems that all the points are based on cost or expectations of what are car should be/do. Are EV's green? NO. Are they Greener than petrol/diesel IC engined cars? Hell YES! By your own argument, Zero Emissions is as much of a lie as the CO2 figures quoted by IC car manufacturers. Range and charge availability are okay for many people as they stand at the moment but as EV take up increases, so will range and charge points. Do you think petrol stations all appeared overnight? Basically, you need to change how you see a car (status symbol/speed demon/road warrior) and start seeing it for what it is. Attitudes and expectations need to shift before you can be ready to move to EV.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 24 November, 2010 12:54

Interesting article. Your points are all valid, i suppose, if you simply expect to buy the car and continue on as normal. Most of them can be easily overcome without much fuss or expense. I must admit kerbside inner-city parking could be a deal-breaker if i lived in the city. It wouldn't be too bad if you were allocated a parking spot, but that's not always the case.

But really. Your arguments boil down to "The infrastructure isn't there yet, so we shouldn't bother trying." But that's circular logic, because if nobody buys EVs then no company or government will invest in installing said infrastructure. The same could have been said about the internet 15 years ago, or mobile phones 20 years ago, or petrol cars 100 years ago. (Or any major technological advancement since (and including) the industrial revolution.

But debate is always good! If nothing else it brings EVs into the minds of the general public.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 24 November, 2010 15:15

10, The best 3d t.vs cost 3 grand. You can buy a 15inch OLED for £1500. The first Motorolla mobile phone cost 10 grand,at a time when you could make a phone call for less than 10pence...New technology costs money

9, . I see the environmental aspects as a positive but they aren't the reason why I like the tech.
As others have pointed out, when charging off peak using a normal standard service the price is massively lower and the emissions are also still lower. It pays to shop around for the best deal like anything

8, Assuming you bought it for green reasons, not geo political/ national securtiy, independence from forecourts, technology or cost saving reasons.
The C02 argument has been exploded countless times. Even when charged from dirty coal fired stations the C02 levels are still lower than an equivalent car. This number increases when you include the petrol well to wheel figures that are often left out of the equation.

7, add another 2 minutes waiting for a space, add another 3-4 minutes for queing and paying, more nearer to 10minutes. I agree though this is one of the downsides...However, there are fast charging possibilities that can charge from 0 to 80% in half an hour, pretty poor yes...but JFE engineering have a 5 minute fast charger in the works which brings us into the next point ...

6,.... we have one game changer... graphene. Graphene capacitors, anodes etc,

5,For the amount of energy it takes to to go a hundred miles in an e.v you can go a gallon of fuels distance in a fuel burner. , the model s will travel 300 miles and beyond. Again the advances in ICE cars has continued un interupted for over a hundred years with trillions invested, E.v's have some catching up to do.


2, Early adopters and especially new car buyers get hit in the pocket with any new tech. Cars lose half their value as soon as they role out the lott. There is a hidden benefit, most of the price of the car is down to the battery pack, this means wide scale adoption of e.v cars that are affordable. Apparently Nissan plan to refurbish batteries a s well as give the choice to replace. Suppose you do have to pay £5000 for a new battery. Will that battery be the same specs as todays? I highly doubt it.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 25 November, 2010 01:11

How much does Big Oil pay you?

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 25 November, 2010 22:02

Why do these nonsense electric car bashing articles always make false comparisons? Polo blue motion is a small city car (and an expensive one too compared to the standard polo), Nissan leaf is a c-segment family car. Compare the leaf to the passat or mondeo.

Unlike petrol cars, an electric car will get cleaner and greener over time (as the grid gets cleaner). And by the way, there are a lot more competitive green energy tariffs than the British gas tariffs you used for your comparison.

Oh, and by the way if you run out of petrol in the middle of nowhere, you are also as screwed as you are in an electric car.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 5 January, 2011 18:54

WHEN YOU ALL STOP GLOBAL WARMING BY GOING ALL ELECTRIC OR BATTERY. REMEMBER BATTERIES DON'T WORK WELL IN COLD WEATHER. IF YOU HAVE TO REALLY GET THERE YOU MIGHT BE BETTER TO USE GAS. ALSO YOU CAN USE GAS TO MAKE A FIRE TO KEEP WARM AND MOLOTOV COCKTAILS TO KEEP SAFE. THINK ABOUT IT.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 31 January, 2011 10:57

Electric cars are not there yet and may never be that is a fact. As of right now there is no 100% clean energy source wind, solar and water energy sources all have major issues with how they impact the environment and natural ecosystems. The intermittency of these energy sources on a day to day basis makes them best used to supply a low proportion of total demand which in turn leaves you still relying on energy sources that pollute. Another problem is Lithium-ion batteries, they're made from natural resources that are orders of magnitude more scarce than oil and even if production was increased to meet the demand if Electric cars replaced ICE's it would make many of the ecosystems it was mined out of unsustainable, not to mention again we would be reliant upon foreign materials.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 2 March, 2011 19:16

I find this article to be a great read and a decisive instrument in deciding if I should buy a new electric car or buy a gasoline car. I just wish you would have went into the reliability of the cars a little more. The Top Gear episode 12 season 7 reviewed the Tesla Roadster, and the reliability of the car was a bit wary, by my account that is. Best read in a while, Will go with German Automobile Engineering instead.
Thanks.

Anonymous's avatar

Anonymous 15 April, 2011 11:49

Guys .... come on -- Technology has moved on now (Apr-2011) & petrol price is shooting up (and will be going up even further)... So this article is irrelevant now. Comparing to the new available electric cars in market now, most of the claims made in this article are just wrong. So it's time to investigate our own selves rather than relying on outdated articles.

Cheers

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 31 December, 2011 14:48

This article is retarded, electric vehicles/battery technology are still in their infancy in can do nothing but improve

antwerp's avatar

antwerp 13 February, 2012 22:25

This conversation is really about energy...
We want somehow to believe that if we just invent another device, just create another technological solution we can just keep on living the way we have been. We can't. Not every one on earth can own a car- there are definitely not enough resources for that. The whole point of having a military is to keep as much of the available resources for yourself. If I own a 1990 Honda Civic, maintain it, and drive it sparingly there is no way any brand new electric car will ever be able to touch it from a cost benefit perspective. The Honda has paid off its embodied energy cost, and I can rebuild any part of it for tiny fractions of what a new anything would cost. Bolivia is going to be raped, because it is a gold mine of lithium- all because people believe building a sh**tload of new cars is going to be part of a better world. I suggest going to low tech magazine and reading the articles " the status quo of electric vehicles", and, " who killed the electric grid." Electric car people, and alternative fuel people are certainly well intentioned folk, just not very well educated. The best, most efficient vehicle is the one you already own. A kilowatt and a horsepower are just different ways of measuring the same thing. People who espouse this concept of building a new widget to make the world better are ignoring or not seeing what is right in front of their faces-
1. We are using too much energy.
And B.(Ha-ha) A new car( of any flavor) is not the solution. It is a further squandering of energy.
If your wealthy, and you want to keep buying something new our society says that is okay. Just don't think you're doing the world any favors.

anonymous's avatar

anonymous 18 March, 2012 01:07

lecie cars will never work you need a petrol engine to run them ? you need to plug them in? until a true lecie car is made and doesnt run out after ten foot then stick to petrol or diesel. these hybrids are taking the pee out of every body. have you got one! sucker!! now your paying for fuel and lecie youve been suckered

Post your comment

Make your comment count. Log in or register to skip the 'Are you human?' question and get an avatar

Your email will not be displayed with your comment

Copy the letters and numbers to prove that you're human. You won't have to do this if you log in or register

Your comment must comply with the Terms of Use

About CBS Interactive

Copyright © 2012 CBS Interactive Limited. All rights reserved.