‘A Lot Of Government Coercion’: Study Slams ‘Forced Transition’ To EVs Consumers Don’t Seem To Want

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

The push for electric vehicle (EV) adoption is largely premised on misleading claims, and could bring enormous costs for U.S. consumers and the economy, a new meta-study shared exclusively with the Daily Caller News Foundation found.

Federal regulators and multinational corporations have attempted to push EVs on the American public in recent years, with the Biden-Harris administration introducing strict tailpipe emissions standards, and major automakers implementing lofty electric production targets. However, widespread EV adoption may not be as feasible as lawmakers and auto executives once claimed, with a new meta-analysis from the Institute for Energy Research (IER) noting EVs can have a variety of drawbacks for consumers when compared to their gas-powered counterparts, including elevated upfront costs, lower resale values, limited driving range and a lack of charging infrastructure.

“We argue the EV transition is going to take a lot of government coercion to make happen,” Kenny Stein, vice president of policy at IER and the study’s lead author, told the DCNF. “It is a very difficult process, and it is not a very desirable process to force.”

When Government Chooses Your Car Study; Institute for Energy Research (IER)

Much of the reason a U.S. EV transition will not occur without government force, according to the study, is cost. The price of an average EV in the first quarter of 2024 was $53,048, compared to just $35,722 for conventional vehicles, according to car shopping guide Edmunds, meaning many EVs continue to be less affordable than their gas-powered counterparts even with the U.S. Treasury Department’s $7,500 tax credit.

The IER study also cites elevated depreciation as a constraint on EV adoption, noting that the average five-year depreciation for an electric car is $43,515 compared to $27,883 for a gas-powered vehicle, according to vehicle valuation company Kelley Blue Book. The rapid depreciation is largely driven by battery replacement costs, which range from $7,000 to as much as $30,000.

In addition to sheer cost, the study found “range anxiety” — the concern among drivers that they will run out of charge before reaching their destination or a charging station — is a major source of consumer reluctance to purchase EVs. While “range anxiety” can be reduced by increasing mileage, expanding an EV’s range requires a larger battery, which in turn drives up vehicle cost and creates a difficult tradeoff for consumers.

A lack of charging infrastructure also contributes to range concerns, and has proven difficult to fix despite ample government funding, the study found. For example, the bipartisan infrastructure bill of 2021 allotted $7.5 billion to subsidize thousands of new EV charging stations, but only seven stations in four states had been built as of April.

The combination of range issues and high costs has helped drive a slackening in EV demand, with EV sales growing 50% in the first half of 2023 and 31% in the first half of 2024, less than the 71% increase in the first half of 2022. Moreover, a June poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the University of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute found 46% of respondents were “unlikely” or “very unlikely” to purchase an EV, while just 21% were “very” or “extremely” likely to make the change.

If thousands of new charging stations are built and demand rises due to the alleviation of range concerns, the transition would create a variety of new infrastructural challenges, namely that it would reduce the reliability of an already constrained U.S. power grid.

“Up until two years ago or so, electricity demand in the United States was flat so nobody worried about running out of electricity. But with the data center boom and AI [artificial intelligence], there’s been a sudden spike in demand for electricity, and demand is expected to continue growing,” Stein told the DCNF. “Now you’re suddenly talking about not having enough electricity to supply everyday use at the same time we are trying to force pre-existing transportation systems to run on electricity. When you combine that EVs are more expensive and less flexible with the possibility we may be running out of electricity to keep homes cool and to operate industrial facilities, the logic of pursuing [the EV transition] gets even worse.”

Electricity demand has grown by 1.3% annually for the past three years — more than double the average growth rate from 2010 to 2019, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. The surge has been driven largely by a boom in artificial intelligence and data centers, with commercial electricity accounting for 60% of growth in total U.S. power demand between 2021 and 2023.

On the supply side, the Biden-Harris Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has pushed to reshape the power grid by effectively requiring America’s existing coal plants will have to use carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology to control 90% of their carbon emissions by 2032 if they want to stay running past 2039, and certain new natural gas plants will have to cut their emissions by 90% by 2032. The EPA rule “leaves coal-heavy regions, like the one covered by the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, vulnerable to reliability problems in the near future,” Isaac Orr, a policy fellow for the Center of the American Experiment who specializes in grid analysis, previously told the DCNF.

Grid reliability is already wavering, with hundreds of millions of Americans at risk of experiencing power shortages this winter if weather conditions are harsh, according to power grid watchdog the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).

The IER study also identifies a set of “myths fueling electric vehicle policy,” including that EVs are necessarily better for the environment.

“One of the biggest sources of emissions from vehicles is tire wear, because tires are made primarily from oil, and as your tires roll along the ground, they degrade and release particulates into the air,” Stein told the DCNF. “Electric vehicles are much heavier than gas-powered cars due to their batteries, which requires them to have heavier tires that wear faster, so EVs actually have much higher particulate emissions than comparable internal combustion engine vehicles.”

A 2020 study from environmental engineering consultancy Emissions Analytics found particulate wear emissions were 1,000 times worse than exhaust emissions, with later research conducted by the consulting firm finding a Tesla Model Y produced 26% more tire emissions than a comparable hybrid vehicle.

Additionally, the IER study notes EVs require six times the mineral inputs of conventional cars, which in turn calls for emissions-intensive mining processes that produce toxic waste.

“For average Americans, the tradeoff calculation obviously is not working,” the study’s authors wrote. “This is not due to misinformation; indeed… there is plenty of pro-EV misinformation. It is simply that…there are negative tradeoffs to EVs. In designing policy, these negative factors must be considered rather than simply ignored.”

Up Next

Military may be ground zero for the war on woke

Don't Miss

DOGE Must Focus On Big Picture To Achieve Big Change

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

EXCLUSIVE: Former Biden Climate Czar Apparently Pushed Homeland Security To Ease Up On Chinese Company Linked To Slave Labor

COVID-19 / 1 hour ago

Esteemed UK Doctor pleads with governments to cancel COVID-19 vaccines

Brownstone Institute / 4 hours ago

A Potpourri of the World’s Unexposed Scandals

Alberta

Your towing rights! AMA unveils measures to help fight predatory towing

Published on December 16, 2024

Todayville

From the Alberta Motor Association

Know Before the Tow: Towing Rights in Alberta

Predatory towing is a growing concern in major cities across the province. The Alberta Motor
Association (AMA), in partnership with the Calgary Police Service and Calgary Fire Department,
wants to ensure Albertans are not only aware of this emerging issue but also know how to stop
it.

Today, AMA launches Know Before the Tow—a new, provincewide awareness campaign that
empowers Albertans with the knowledge needed to stay confident and in control when faced with
a tow scam. The campaign features a list of five key towing rights that every Alberta driver should
know:

1. You have the right to refuse unsolicited towing services.
2. You have the right to choose who tows your vehicle, and where, unless
otherwise directed by police.
3. You have the right to access your vehicle to retrieve personal items during a
storage facility’s business hours.
4. You have the right to ask if the towing company receives a kickback for taking
your vehicle to a particular storage facility or repair shop.
5. You have the right to a quote prior to service, and an itemized invoice prior to
making payment.

“Being in a collision or broken down at the roadside is stressful enough; the last thing any Albertan
needs is high pressure from an unscrupulous tower,” says Jeff Kasbrick, Vice-President,
Advocacy and Operations, AMA. “These towing rights are clear and remind every Albertan that
they’re in the driver’s seat when it comes to who they choose to tow their vehicle.”

Edmonton and Calgary in particular are seeing increasing reports of predatory towing. Unethical
operators will arrive at a collision or breakdown scene uninvited, create a false sense of urgency
to remove the vehicle, and ultimately leave drivers facing huge fees.

Starting today, Albertans can visit ama.ab.ca/KnowBeforeTheTow to download a digital copy of
their towing rights, helping them feel confident if faced with a tow scam. And soon, all AMA centres
will offer free print versions, which are small enough to tuck in a glovebox.

“Alberta’s towing industry is still highly reputable, with the vast majority of operators committed
to fair and professional service. In fact, AMA and our roadside assistance network is proud to
represent 80% of all private-passenger tows in the province, so our members can be confident
that we’ll always protect them—just as we have for nearly 100 years,” says Kasbrick.

“By knowing your rights and choosing trusted providers like AMA, you can avoid unnecessary
stress, costs, and uncertainty. Because the road to recovery after a collision shouldn’t have to
include fighting for your vehicle.”

Sergeant Brad Norman, Calgary Police Service Traffic Section, says law enforcement continues
to work diligently with first responders and community partners like AMA to put the brakes on
predatory towers, who “are showing up at collision sites and pressuring overwhelmed and
frightened victims into paying high towing rates.”

“Our priority is to ensure the safety of collision victims, the public, and first responders at
collision sites. Part of this effort is educating motorists about their rights so that they Know
Before the Tow that they can say no to unsolicited towing services and choose a reputable
tower of their choice instead,” says Norman. “No one deserves to be taken advantage of after
being involved in a collision.”

To learn more, and to view an expanded version of Alberta towing rights, visit
ama.ab.ca/KnowBeforeTheTow

Automotive

Trump’s proposed EV subsidy cuts and tariffs could upend BC’s electric vehicle goals

Published on December 12, 2024

Todayville

From Resource Works

Canada’s regime of electric vehicle subsidies is facing a crisis with United States President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to end his own country’s EV incentives. Trump has proposed eliminating the $7,500 USD tax credit for those who purchase EVs, as well as threatening to impose a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian and Mexican imports.

Considering the interconnection of the North American automotive industry, this has the potential to severely disrupt Canada’s ambitious goals for widespread EV adoption. In British Columbia, whose provincial government has fully embraced the EV transition, the consequences of Trump’s presidency will be felt the strongest.

Trump’s pledge to eliminate the subsidies comes from his economic vision of a reduced role for the federal government in the American economy. This does resonate with vast segments of the U.S. market, but how it will impact Canada’s automakers is far less clear-cut.

EV subsidies in Canada, either at the federal or provincial level, are essential for the EV industry’s momentum to be maintained. Rebates of $5,000 are offered federally, and $4,000 under the CleanBC “Go Electric” program.

BC consumers can afford to buy EVs at a higher rate, and that helps sustain sales.

If Trump terminates the subsidies, automakers like General Motors, which are already dealing with slower EV production, will be reluctant to stay the course. The EV supply will fall, causing higher prices.

BC is Canada’s trailblazer in the EV market, accounting for almost 1 in 5 EV registrations across the entire country despite making up less than 14 per cent of the population. Policies like CleanBC have made EVs an attractive, affordable option for middle-class buyers, and the provincial government is committed to building up EV infrastructure.

The provincial government’s interim mandates are designed to align with federal goals, which aim for 10 per cent zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) sales by 2025, 30 per cent by 2030, and then 100 per cent by 2040.

BC’s progress will be derailed by market turbulence triggered by Trump’s proposed policies. The removal of U.S. subsidies will be paired with his threat of 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian imports.

In addition to the likely reduction in EV supply, automakers like GM and Ford, which produce many of the EV models partially made in Canada for export to the American market, will be made more expensive and price Canadian-made EVs out of competition.

In BC, the EV battery plants being built in Ontario and Quebec will be delayed or even cancelled due to the lack of economic viability. Manufacturers will shift back to producing hybrid or gas-powered cars, hampering BC’s EV and ZEV targets.

As a result, BC consumers will be hit hard by the twin blows of inflated EV prices and slashed rebates. Provincial and federal budgets are already stretched, and CleanBC could be on the chopping block for cuts if the North American EV industry stagnates.

Charging infrastructure, another key component of BC’s EV strategy, might also suffer. As manufacturers like Tesla and GM scale back production, investments in public charging stations could decline, perpetuating range anxiety and further slowing EV adoption rates.

Trump should be taken at his word when he says EV subsidies will be slashed and tariffs will be imposed on Canadian markets. For BC, the stakes are even higher, and the choices made by the province’s leaders may determine if the CleanBC regime and the EV program will survive the next few years.

One thing is clear, the North American automarket is more unpredictable than it has ever been since NAFTA, and Canada as a whole does not hold the balance when it comes to leverage.