Negative EV press blitz

[ads75]

There is not significant negative public sentiment nor was there a negative natural reaction to people buying EVs. You all are seeing a public relations campaign that began in 2022.

The campaign is funded by the API and other fossil fuel interests. Yes, the WSJ is part of the problem. They published the OG negative article late last year.

The saddest part is how many Rivian owners posted here that they think these stories have some credibility.

And now you’re here to complain that everyone was right when they warned you that EV road trips are not like ICE road trips. Got it.

In your first post in this thread, you say there is a campaign "funded by the API and other fossil fuel interests". In my post, I said that I, and most other people, don't want to add 2-3 hours to a road trip waiting around in parking lots. Let me be clear, that is my opinion and the opinion of the majority of others. No one is paying me to say that. Evs are great for daily driving, but have a lot of challenges when it comes to road trips. Here in the US we don't have the rail system other countries have. A lot of people, including myself, don't want to spend our vacations hanging out in parking lots. Again, no one is paying me to say that. You may chose to bury your head in the sand when people talk about the problems they have, but that doesn't mean they are paid to talk about their problems.

Sponsored

 

[Fmc]

my local utility company uses natural gas, nuclear, and renewables. I find it funny when people say ev’s are anti-oil. I understand the spark plug lobby and catalytic converter thiefs being mad.

 

[mtberman]

In your first post in this thread, you say there is a campaign "funded by the API and other fossil fuel interests". In my post, I said that I, and most other people, don't want to add 2-3 hours to a road trip waiting around in parking lots. Let me be clear, that is my opinion and the opinion of the majority of others. No one is paying me to say that. Evs are great for daily driving, but have a lot of challenges when it comes to road trips. Here in the US we don't have the rail system other countries have. A lot of people, including myself, don't want to spend our vacations hanging out in parking lots. Again, no one is paying me to say that. You may chose to bury your head in the sand when people talk about the problems they have, but that doesn't mean they are paid to talk about their problems.

It is only a problem if you make it one. I have road tripped in EVs and it went as I expected.

You are comparing it to a gas car road trip. That does not make sense. It’s an EV. They are different. You know that, but yet you complain.

I knew I’d have to plan carefully and limit to 500-550 miles per day. Because that is how EVs work. It was a known thing back in 2019 when I got my first EV and drove it to the west coast from Denver. It’s still a thing today.

I know road trips in EVs can suck. That is why my first EV was an Audi e-tron. It maintains 150 kWh DCFC speeds to 80% SoC and over 100 kWh to 90%.

Road trips are all about charging speed, not EPA range, DCFC stops are 30 minutes or less in my e-tron. Sadly the Rivian is not capable of that and thus not as capable for road tripping.

I am not burying my head in the sand. I know the DCFC experience on my Rivian is going to be more about charging from 20% to 70%. The difference is that I know it, and thus I have no real cause to complain. Because it’s an EV and that is how they work right now.

 

[A Land Rover Forever]

it's the oil cronies, blitzing BIG TIME!! Lots of fools out there that don't know better

 

[shap]

It is only a problem if you make it one. I have road tripped in EVs and it went as I expected.

You are comparing it to a gas car road trip. That does not make sense. It’s an EV. They are different. You know that, but yet you complain.

It 100% make sense for any person who is not EV enthusiast - aka 90% of consumers.

 

[izgoy]

This is 100% it. I really wanted my wife to get an EV as she only does local driving maybe hitting 150 miles a day. I use my vehicle for all the long trips and all trips where we go as a family.

Because she didn't want an EV I bought the R1S which fits our needs but my wife is so worried we kept the Ascent for my older son to drive who just got his license. I have already made multiple 200+ mile trips where charging is needed and there are a lot of issues here on the East Coast.

I think the location of where you are makes a big difference as to the charging networks and how well they work. When driving south from Maryland the chargers have typically been derated and slow. Luckily I normally pulled in before the rush where a line would form. Going North toward Albany is similar. Again I was lucky but I spent a lot more time charging than I thought I would on these trips. I don't mind it but the others in the car do.

The CCS charging infrastructure is not robust enough and not reliable enough for some people who don't want to plan ahead or always worry and EVs aren't for them yet.

I still wonder why Rivian is only putting in 4-6 chargers at each location when I already know if they open it up these to other brands all the chargers will be taken by non Rivian vehicles immediately. EA, EVgo and others do the same thing we need large charging stops with multiple chargers so people don't have to think about it and if one or two don't work it doesn't matter as much.

The Albany, NY CCS EA location is a big disaster. Most cabinets are broken or severely derated.

 

[ads75]

@mtberman
Your original post said it was a negative campaign by the API (I don't even know what that is) and fossil fuel industry to discredit EVs. I merely brought up that most people, including myself, who aren't paid by those industries, don't want to wait around for hours in parking lots to charge. Its ok that you are ok with that. I am ok waiting, to a point. Most people, are not willing to wait, especially after decades of gas and go. Why do you think it is a negative campaign by the "API" and fossil fuel industry that long charge times are inconvenient?

 

[mtberman]

@mtberman
Your original post said it was a negative campaign by the API (I don't even know what that is) and fossil fuel industry to discredit EVs. I merely brought up that most people, including myself, who aren't paid by those industries, don't want to wait around for hours in parking lots to charge. Its ok that you are ok with that. I am ok waiting, to a point. Most people, are not willing to wait, especially after decades of gas and go. Why do you think it is a negative campaign by the "API" and fossil fuel industry that long charge times are inconvenient?

I am not disagreeing with you. Everything you said is true.

The difference is that a few years ago I accepted the facts you describe as my reality. Maybe we are at different places on the same journey.

When I map my route on ABRP it shows how long it takes. It’s right there. If I can’t do what ABRP says, I rent a car or fly. Audi used to give you free 7 days Audi gas car rental which was perfect for that.

DCFC, especially on a vehicle with the Rivian’s steep charging curve, is an ordeal and it always has been. I guess i’m wondering what exactly you are at, other than to say you wish it was not so. I am with you and wish it was different, too.

The negative press plays this sort of thing up but when you break it all down logically it’s a choice. Choose ICE or choose EV, I know lots of folks who have both.

 

[mtberman]

It 100% make sense for any person who is not EV enthusiast - aka 90% of consumers.

You don’t have to be an enthusiast. We have gradually gotten 50+ drivers to plug in the PHEVs in our fleet after driving them. It took help but people figure it out fast.

It is different. For sure. People are going to need to learn and I’m happy to show them. Most of our fleet drivers are keeping their gas cars but they’re asking questions.

We checked a car out this week and the driver said she has an EV and she didn’t need training. That’s progress.

 

[shap]

You don’t have to be an enthusiast. We have gradually gotten 50+ drivers to plug in the PHEVs in our fleet after driving them. It took help but people figure it out fast.

It is different. For sure. People are going to need to learn and I’m happy to show them. Most of our fleet drivers are keeping their gas cars but they’re asking questions.

We checked a car out this week and the driver said she has an EV and she didn’t need training. That’s progress.

PHEV is a different story - my second car is PHEV and it works great. My wife love it (she mostly drive electric 35 miles car can do). If I will need to divorce - I will give Rivian to my wife and ask her to DCFC charge.

IMHO current administration should put more focus on Hybrids and PHEV’s than BEV.

 

[mkhuffman]

Public charging sucks and the entry cost of purchasing a BEV is higher than the ICE equivalent. Most of us here overlook those two facts because we overly appreciate the benefits.

For example, I love the fact I can go 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. My wife hates it when I do anything but slowly accelerate. I appreciate the speed, she doesn't at all.

I love the fact I can refuel at home. My wife really doesn't think that is a big deal.

She hates taking my car on trips because of the charging experiences we have had. And it is not getting better. It is getting worse, and fast. I see so many new cars clogging up the stations. It is horrible, actually.

I am glad there are negative stories because then people are not surprised when they try to take their fancy new cars on a trip. And maybe all the negative reporting will cause the car companies to speed up improving range and charging infrastructure.

We need longer range cars more than we need more DCFC stations. If I can avoid a charging stop, and L2 charge at my destination, it reduces the need for DCFC stations. This is the primary reason I am interested in the Max Pack, and the primary reason I am so disappointed they didn't add more capacity to the pack.

 

[Hillbilly]

Is it just me, or is there a crescendo in EV negative PR campaigning going on right now? My news feed is overrun with EV hit pieces by The Sun, Oil Price, etc. I understand I've been over feeding the algorithm for awhile, but I suspect the fossil fuel industry is ramping up spending on PR, perhaps indicating their level of anxiety right now.

I get approached at the car wash weekly when detailing the interior at least a couple of times by different people. Super curious about the truck and I know they can tell I love it. Free advertising for Rivian.

 

[BigSkies]

we overly appreciate the benefits.

For example, I love the fact I can go 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. My wife hates it when I do anything but slowly accelerate. I appreciate the speed, she doesn't at all.

I love the fact I can refuel at home. My wife really doesn't think that is a big deal.

She hates taking my car on trips because of the charging experiences we have had. And it is not getting better. It is getting worse, and fast. I see so many new cars clogging up the stations. It is horrible, actually.

I am glad there are negative stories because then people are not surprised when they try to take their fancy new cars on a trip. And maybe all the negative reporting will cause the car companies to speed up improving range and charging infrastructure.

@mtberman
Your original post said it was a negative campaign by the API (I don't even know what that is) and fossil fuel industry to discredit EVs. I merely brought up that most people, including myself, who aren't paid by those industries, don't want to wait around for hours in parking lots to charge. Its ok that you are ok with that. I am ok waiting, to a point. Most people, are not willing to wait, especially after decades of gas and go. Why do you think it is a negative campaign by the "API" and fossil fuel industry that long charge times are inconvenient?

I don't care to get involved in this specific spat, but I think the missing component in the discussion is how information travels on the modern internet. You can more obviously see it around election related topics, but it happens with topics like EV's as well.

What gets promoted on the internet is largely based on what other people (or bots) click on and what topics get engagement. Many times the topics can be hyper focused to a particular demographic (like conspiracy theory related stuff), or sometimes it's broader.

People are posting about positive and negative EV experiences online all the time.

So the question is, why do the algorithms decide to heavily focus on anything with an anti-EV theme? The answer to that question is frequently an organized and paid campaign to promote that content. It's fairly trivial for those with access to a budget, bots, and the right media experience to promote a topic enough for newsrooms to take notice and to pick up on the theme.

So the fact that there was a ~$40k Rivian repair due to a fender bender was a legitimate post and negative experience on these forums. This $40k repair bill being repackaged and republished across hundreds or thousands of places on the internet was an organized effort.

On the bright side, these campaigns usually have a pretty limited shelf life. People get bored of the topic and move on to something else eventually.

 

[WorldComposting]

The Albany, NY CCS EA location is a big disaster. Most cabinets are broken or severely derated.

Good to know, NY really needs to get more chargers at the rest stops that are high capacity.

Public charging sucks and the entry cost of purchasing a BEV is higher than the ICE equivalent. Most of us here overlook those two facts because we overly appreciate the benefits.

For example, I love the fact I can go 0-60 in 3.6 seconds. My wife hates it when I do anything but slowly accelerate. I appreciate the speed, she doesn't at all.

I love the fact I can refuel at home. My wife really doesn't think that is a big deal.

She hates taking my car on trips because of the charging experiences we have had. And it is not getting better. It is getting worse, and fast. I see so many new cars clogging up the stations. It is horrible, actually.

I am glad there are negative stories because then people are not surprised when they try to take their fancy new cars on a trip. And maybe all the negative reporting will cause the car companies to speed up improving range and charging infrastructure.

We need longer range cars more than we need more DCFC stations. If I can avoid a charging stop, and L2 charge at my destination, it reduces the need for DCFC stations. This is the primary reason I am interested in the Max Pack, and the primary reason I am so disappointed they didn't add more capacity to the pack.

I agree public charging either works really well or seems to be slow to horrible But I disagree that we need more range. We need better batteries that can charge faster or at least more working chargers. Having more range is only helpful on long trips but very wasteful for shorter trips to lug around a massive battery. That or we need new/lighter battery technology.

Does it need to be as fast as filling up an ICE no I don't think so but it would be nice to not have to stop for 30+ minutes to charge up and doubly so when you need to wait for a charger to open up. I'm thinking 15 minutes max to charge to 80%. Right now I tend to stop for 40 minutes for a charge which is long when you need to stop twice.

 

[mkhuffman]

I agree public charging either works really well or seems to be slow to horrible But I disagree that we need more range. We need better batteries that can charge faster or at least more working chargers. Having more range is only helpful on long trips but very wasteful for shorter trips to lug around a massive battery. That or we need new/lighter battery technology.

Does it need to be as fast as filling up an ICE no I don't think so but it would be nice to not have to stop for 30+ minutes to charge up and doubly so when you need to wait for a charger to open up. I'm thinking 15 minutes max to charge to 80%. Right now I tend to stop for 40 minutes for a charge which is long when you need to stop twice.

Most people can tolerate a 20 minute refueling stop. Most people cannot tolerate a 40-60 minute refueling stop. I agree faster charging is needed, but if you can skip the charger and stop less frequently, why isn't that a good thing? Sure bigger batteries add weight, but to me range is more important than weight.

There are people who live in situations that do not allow them them to charge at home. For those people, longer range cars are very beneficial even if they stay local. Being able to drive around town for a month before you have to find a DCFC station is much more preferable than needing to find a charger every week, or every few days.

More range vs. more chargers - it is a debate that will never end, I think. So we can agree to disagree. Personally I want as long range as possible, because public charging sucks. Longer range = less public charging.

Sponsored