Let’s just say, hypothetically, you are an electric car startup that came into existence riding on the EV-hype train and all the financial investment that comes with it. You’ve built a great brand that builds great EVs, and all your marketing has been about how clean your vehicles are, how quiet they are, and how important electric cars are in the world’s push towards clean air and climate change mitigation. Let’s also say that your company has been bleeding cash for years, and now, given an American administration that doesn’t value EVs as much as the prior one, it looks like you’ll be bleeding cash for a while. Could you ever offer a hybrid?
Bank of America’s “Car Wars” industry outlook-report paints a grim picture of the near future for EVs, with The Detroit News breaking down that report:
Adoption of vehicles with all-electric powertrains has failed to meet industry expectations, with them comprising about 8% of annual U.S. sales. Limited access to charging stations, higher prices of EVs compared to gas-powered alternatives, range anxiety and more have limited adoption.
Car Wars is predicting 71 EV nameplates being offered over the next four years. That’s about half of what the forecast had expected two years ago.
[…]
Murphy underscored that automakers will best serve their shareholders by emphasizing their core business — which is gas- and diesel-powered SUVs and trucks — and leveraging connectivity to get customers returning to smaller, strengthened dealer franchises. From those revenues, then, it can invest in future technologies like EVs, autonomy and other software applications and brave threats like tariffs and Chinese competition.
Americans clearly don’t want expensive EVs (price is a big issue with EVs), but what about affordable ones? Sure! Some do. But high-range, affordable EVs are hard to pull off with an EV tax credit that may be circling the drain, and even if a company can pull it off, how many EV companies can fight for that slice of the American market looking for an affordable electric car? I don’t know the answer; maybe it’s more than I think.
But right now at this moment, being an EV company is hard. Lucid and Rivian have been burning through more cash than you can imagine, Tesla sales are dropping, and though other brands have been getting more involved in the EV market, consumer concerns remain about resale value, infrastructure, battery life (a concern that is really unnecessary, as modern batteries last way longer than anyone needs), charge times, and on and on.
None of this is obvious. Jumping from gas directly to EV is going to have growing pains (especially when you consider administration changes), and it’s no surprise that the bridge between the two — a bridge that we currently find ourselves on — is made of hybrids. Americans love hybrids.
Normally, a car company that’s burning cash and watching people buy a certain type of product would start offering its version of that certain type of product, but if you’re an EV company that has built its entire brand around a powertrain type, that becomes a bit tricky.
Both Lucid and Rivian officials have told me they’d never consider a gasoline range extender in their cars, which leads me to think they’d never consider any kind of gasoline engine. This brings me to today’s Autopian Asks: Would offering any sort of gasoline powertrain damage an EV company’s brand more than it would help its profits?
So many companies known for making internal combustion engine-cars invested in EVs when they became more popular/necessary to meet regulations, but zero EV companies have invested in gas cars now that it’s clear they’re going to be the moneymakers in the U.S. for the coming years
Could you ever see it happen?
Top Image: Rivian
Sadly I think it’s too late for the likes of Rivian to pivot to gas, hybrid, EREV, or whatever. As much as I would like to believe it could work, it’s not as simple as sourcing a power plant that fits and dropping it into their existing designs.
In the imaginary world where it could be done, I would sell it as an emergency range extender and power booster called “the Hunk”
Rivian R1, now with optional hunk in the frunk
One forgets that there’s an entire planet beyond the borders of this country where one can sell products not powered by fracked and refined Jurassic-juice to eager customers with money to spend living in EV-friendly jurisdictions.
It would be stupid and counter-productive for a corporation to regress simply because the government of the land under which they are originally formed is regressing.
If I were the CEO of Lucid or Rivian – I’d be sending staff around the world to lease storefronts for showrooms in strategically chosen cities around the planet right now – and would be looking long-term to relocate my business to someplace where the environment is more stable, less capricious, and closer to my new customers.
Along with the storefronts, how about a 3 year lease on an apartment to go along with the EV. I would be in for that.
3 years would put you 3/5 of the way towards Portuguese citizenship – all the while being eligible for EU healthcare.
Several major manufacturers already have plants there. That’s where I’d start my search for production facilities, as Portugal is quite business-friendly by making investments in tech and manufacturing as well as EV-friendly policies for consumers.
The only bad thing about Portugal I can see is that out of 138 international airports – Lisbon is ranked 138th, and Porto is ranked 132nd.
If they use ICE, how many states would revoke their direct-sale license and make them sell through dealerships? (i.e. Colorado allows direct sales for makers that only sell EVs). So on top of the engineering side of things, they will need to go through the franchise licensing and building out a dealer network. I don’t see this as being a good trade off unless the company is fully committed to going hybrid for a very long time.
Given the 3-5 year time-to-market for a new automobile, this seems like a risky proposition, unless something was already engineered, or the EV brand settles for a hasty re-badge.
-EV incentives in the USA (if they are truly slashed) could very well be re-instated in 4 years. (Pending constitutional crisis….)
-Solid state batteries will also be entering the automotive mass market as early as 2027. We’re talking double the range, or slashing battery pack cost & weight in half for the same capacity.
This may sound like vapourware, but looking back at the improvements from NiCad to lithium, (and even the improvements within lithium battery tech alone) we are on course for another generational jump in battery technology by the end of the decade. This WILL have a profound effect on the EV industry, likely tipping the market in EV’s favour regardless of the political climate.
Maybe I’m naive, but I just don’t see private industry embarking on this expensive transition without some expectation of the risks. The possible removal of EV incentives was a very predictable outcome.
Maybe if they could pivot it would move us closer to the universal 4 cylinder that torch suggested a long time ago.