4 ms·

>but remember that EVs would have to be 100% of the market for 12 years before they were a majority of vehicles on the road. Are you assuming a fixed rate of r

by xoa 6y ago

>but remember that EVs would have to be 100% of the market for 12 years before they were a majority of vehicles on the road. Are you assuming a fixed rate of retirement for ICE vehicles? I've long wondered if the growth line of EVs would end up being yet another example of an S-curve rather than linear as so many seem to expect. It definitely seems like there are potential tipping point factors on both sides of the equation, because fossil fuel infrastructure has a ton of capex and opex that works due to massive amortization across a big enough fleet. And simultaneously justification for huge EV infrastructure investments, and the mass manufacturing necessary to keep prices marching down, faces some level of bootstrapping and amortization issues too. Plus, lack itself is a hindrance if people aren't confident about charging up. But it's easy to see how that could flip, and then in a surprising hurry go in reverse. At some level of shrinking ICE usage a lot of gas stations themselves become non-viable. And then suddenly it starts to get harder to fuel up, in turn driving the dynamic even faster right? It seems probable that there will be some inertia due to lagging specialized applications, demand amongst niches like collectors, etc for a while. But it seems possible the new equilibrium might get reached non-linearly. And that's ignoring and political tipping points that could happen too, if a majority of people have EVs, or even a very sizable minority (say 20-40%), what happens to political support for current extensive systems of explicit and implicit subsidies fossil fuels enjoy?

dmurray 6y ago
> Are you assuming a fixed rate of retirement for ICE vehicles? Yes, that calculation assumes that, but it doesn't matter that much - if we take your alternative into account, either EVs have to be 100% of new cars for 12 years, or there has to be a big increase in new cars sold, which would be news in itself. Or some less likely alternatives, like a huge mode switch to public transport or a global pandemic causing a mode switch to working from home or something.
- xoa 6y ago
  >or there has to be a big increase in new cars sold, which would be news in itself. Sure, but seems feasible. I mean upfront, 10-year horizons during disruptive shifts absolutely can get a bit speculative. I don't mean to make any hard predictions here. But there certainly seems to be a ton of capital floating around right now that could get redirected given the right incentives. Privately, there seem to be a significant number of people who could buy new cars but aren't. Cars seem to last significantly longer these days [0, 1], and the burgeoning of EVs may itself act as a further deterrent. If minimum capex and TCO made major shifts, I could see that driving significantly faster replacement cycles temporarily until new market equilibrium and saturation was reached. Granted with some floors created by segments of the population who couldn't handle the capex even if the opex was favorable as is so often the case. But speaking of that there is the public side too. From what I can tell, a LOT of money continues to go into government subsidies of fossil fuels [2]. The politics will absolutely shift as the population shifts, and at some point it seems likely that "why not put those tens of billions into 'cash for clunkers' type schemes instead?" is going to make it one or another platform. Or all the platforms competing with each other. Of course that applies only to certain countries that can afford it. At any rate, it will be an interesting decade! ---- 0: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-are-kept-longer-200000-is-new-100000.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-are-k... 1: https://www.aarp.org/auto/trends-lifestyle/info-2018/how-long-do-cars-last.html https://www.aarp.org/auto/trends-lifestyle/info-2018/how-lon... 2: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/06/15/united-states-spend-ten-times-more-on-fossil-fuel-subsidies-than-education/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/06/15/united...
tialaramex 6y ago
Yes. There are communities where their fuel station isn't commercially viable but it's propped up because without it the community dies. They own their fuel station (often built by a chain or local owner which went out of business because it doesn't make commercial sense), a local is paid to run it, they buy fuel from a smaller supplier that doesn't have its own chain and then they retail it at either a modest loss or zero profit - because without fuel some residents would leave and having left they won't be replaced. I can see some of those communities deciding we'll go electric and divert the funding that keeps the fuel station alive to other things that help our community and have a future.
- CyberDildonics 6y ago
  Why wouldn't that station increase their gas prices to make it viable if the community depends on it?
  - Danieru 6y ago
    In the situation suggested above: because the owners are the consumers and thus have no inventive to charge themselves more for a later taxed payout.
scrollaway 6y ago
I agree with your general point but on the gas stations I don't think it holds. Gas stations will keep serving gas as long as there's even some vague demand for it, so they would start disappearing rather at the end point of such an s-curve, than at the beginning. And they'll still be around, they'll just serve electricity. Fun fact, a lot of gas stations used to serve as stables. When cars arrived, they served both and gradually stopped being stables. Though with electricity being overall so much easier to distribute than gas, I'm guessing a significant amount will indeed have to close, especially inside cities; no point going to a refueling station if a charger is available at nearly every corner, when you're parked while eating at the restaurant, or when you're home asleep and charging from your garage.

by xoa 6y ago

dmurray 6y ago

> Are you assuming a fixed rate of retirement for ICE vehicles? Yes, that calculation assumes that, but it doesn't matter that much - if we take your alternative into account, either EVs have to be 100% of new cars for 12 years, or there has to be a big increase in new cars sold, which would be news in itself. Or some less likely alternatives, like a huge mode switch to public transport or a global pandemic causing a mode switch to working from home or something.

xoa 6y ago
>or there has to be a big increase in new cars sold, which would be news in itself. Sure, but seems feasible. I mean upfront, 10-year horizons during disruptive shifts absolutely can get a bit speculative. I don't mean to make any hard predictions here. But there certainly seems to be a ton of capital floating around right now that could get redirected given the right incentives. Privately, there seem to be a significant number of people who could buy new cars but aren't. Cars seem to last significantly longer these days [0, 1], and the burgeoning of EVs may itself act as a further deterrent. If minimum capex and TCO made major shifts, I could see that driving significantly faster replacement cycles temporarily until new market equilibrium and saturation was reached. Granted with some floors created by segments of the population who couldn't handle the capex even if the opex was favorable as is so often the case. But speaking of that there is the public side too. From what I can tell, a LOT of money continues to go into government subsidies of fossil fuels [2]. The politics will absolutely shift as the population shifts, and at some point it seems likely that "why not put those tens of billions into 'cash for clunkers' type schemes instead?" is going to make it one or another platform. Or all the platforms competing with each other. Of course that applies only to certain countries that can afford it. At any rate, it will be an interesting decade! ---- 0: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-are-kept-longer-200000-is-new-100000.html https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/18/automobiles/as-cars-are-k... 1: https://www.aarp.org/auto/trends-lifestyle/info-2018/how-long-do-cars-last.html https://www.aarp.org/auto/trends-lifestyle/info-2018/how-lon... 2: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/06/15/united-states-spend-ten-times-more-on-fossil-fuel-subsidies-than-education/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesellsmoor/2019/06/15/united...

tialaramex 6y ago

Yes. There are communities where their fuel station isn't commercially viable but it's propped up because without it the community dies. They own their fuel station (often built by a chain or local owner which went out of business because it doesn't make commercial sense), a local is paid to run it, they buy fuel from a smaller supplier that doesn't have its own chain and then they retail it at either a modest loss or zero profit - because without fuel some residents would leave and having left they won't be replaced. I can see some of those communities deciding we'll go electric and divert the funding that keeps the fuel station alive to other things that help our community and have a future.

CyberDildonics 6y ago
Why wouldn't that station increase their gas prices to make it viable if the community depends on it?
- Danieru 6y ago
  In the situation suggested above: because the owners are the consumers and thus have no inventive to charge themselves more for a later taxed payout.

scrollaway 6y ago

I agree with your general point but on the gas stations I don't think it holds. Gas stations will keep serving gas as long as there's even some vague demand for it, so they would start disappearing rather at the end point of such an s-curve, than at the beginning. And they'll still be around, they'll just serve electricity. Fun fact, a lot of gas stations used to serve as stables. When cars arrived, they served both and gradually stopped being stables. Though with electricity being overall so much easier to distribute than gas, I'm guessing a significant amount will indeed have to close, especially inside cities; no point going to a refueling station if a charger is available at nearly every corner, when you're parked while eating at the restaurant, or when you're home asleep and charging from your garage.