[Martinjlm]

I wouldn’t take Andy Palmer’s perspective based on the production —> lifecycle example of one vehicle to draw a conclusion that 100,000 miles is the break even for all EVs. I’d say that he was a bit heavy handed in the example he chose. As BEVs mature, the processes to produce them will also become more efficient. Both GM and Ford are focused on the plants that will produce their BEVs being carbon neutral. Much different than the Volvo example Palmer uses. Let’s think about it for a minute…Andy Palmer talks about the payback period of an electric vehicle. And what is he doing now? Head of a company that produces what? Electric buses.

Originally Posted by sandm

ev's fit a need for some and if used in the right way, can be a net zero on the environment once they are put into service.

ex- guy at work has a tesla model 3. he works overnights. he charges his car during the day off his solar on his house. that's environmentally good for the world compared to ice's.

but that's not everyone....

in the end, I think ev's can coexist with ice's but to sell the as the end all be all... that's not speaking the whole truth on how treehugger-friendly they really are...

This is the guidance I give most of my clients when we discuss the impact electrification will have on their businesses. There will be some ICE vehicles around for at least the next couple decades because BEVs don’t cover all uses cases. For the use cases they do cover they are much more efficient than an ICE, but for the ones where they are not well suited, ICE will stick around, but at much lower volumes.