Limiting Factors in the Widespread Adoption of Electric Vehicles

In order to meet IPCC recommendations and limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius by 2050, it will be necessary for modern society to transition to a carbon-neutral lifestyle. One necessary step in decarbonizing the economy will be the mass transition from vehicles with internal-combustion engines to electric vehicles. The transportation sector is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, responsible for approximately 29% of emissions in the U.S.

Unfortunately, electric vehicles still have not taken widespread hold in the U.S. Currently, less than 2% of vehicles on the road are EVs. There are several limiting factors of growth and demand in the EV sector. These include factors that are current concerns, and factors that are projected to become concerns in the future. This article outlines these concerns and possible ways to overcome them.

Battery Limitations

Battery limitations are currently one of the most significant challenges facing the EV sector.

One oft-cited problem with electric vehicles is range, leading to the infamous “range anxiety” where EV owners worry about running out of charge on long trips. Currently, the Tesla Model S 100 has the maximum range of any fully electric vehicle on the market, with a listed range of 335 miles. This vehicle costs over $75,000, which puts it well out of the price range of most consumers. However, the average price of a new car sold in 2019 is $36,718, and many EVs with maximum ranges over 200 miles are now in this financial purview. For example, the Hyundai Kona Electric costs under $30,000 (after federal incentives) and can get up to 258 miles on a single charge.

That being said, these miles-per-charge figures are optimal estimates. In real life, ambient conditions can significantly hamper battery performance. In cold weather, the fluid electrolyte substrate of the lithium battery starts to congeal, causing the battery to be less efficient. Newer-model electric cars do have thermal management systems that warm the battery in cold temperatures. However, these systems take energy to run, which diminish the power available to the vehicle. A 2017 AAA study indicated that cold temperatures can reduce the range of a typical EV battery by about 12 percent.

A larger impact in battery performance comes from the use of internal cabin heaters in cold temperatures. These heaters use a surprising amount of energy. The same AAA study concluded that using the heater in an electric vehicle during cold weather can reduce EV range by over 40 percent.

Warm temperatures also have a negative, albeit less pronounced, effect on battery life. 95-degree temperatures cause range to drop by an average of 4%. When air conditioning is used, range is diminished by an average of 17%.

Temperature isn’t the only concern when it comes to EV batteries. The life of the battery itself is also a concern. For example, Tesla only warranties its batteries for 8 years. Tesla owners have varying reports of their battery performance after that 8-year warranty period. Some state that there has only been a negligible decrease amounting to a few miles of range, while others report a decrease of over 10% of range.

When EV batteries do die outside of the warranty period, the estimated cost to replace them can often approach the resale value of the car itself. Toyota charges over $4000 to replace the battery on a Prius outside the 8 to 10-year warranty period.

This exorbitant cost is more of a business decision than a practical necessity. EV batteries are comprised of a number of cells. When the battery fails, typically only some of these cells have gone bad. These cells can be replaced for around $25 each and the battery can then be reconditioned for a “second life.” Third-party mechanics offer this service for under $1000, much cheaper than the cost of replacing the battery with a new one.

Unfortunately, major vehicle manufacturers do not offer this type of replacement service. Most likely, they do not offer this service because it is much more lucrative to them if consumers instead buy an entire new car. Additionally, different brands have different battery configurations — individual cells in Toyota batteries generally can be replaced, while those in Honda batteries generally cannot be.

However, if vehicle manufacturers were to offer battery refurbishment services, and were to specifically design their batteries to be easier to refurbish, EVs would become a much more practical option, as well as a more eco-friendly one.

Solid-state batteries are projected to provide a more viable long-term solution to battery limitations. Solid-state batteries, as the name implies, are batteries where the substrate is a solid rather than a liquid. Solid-state batteries will be more reliable, stable, lighter, and longer-lasting than lithium-ion batteries. They will not have the risk of fire or explosion endemic to lithium-ion batteries. And, most importantly for the EV market, they will be able to get 500–1,000 miles on a single charge, and will be able to charge much more quickly than current batteries.

Vehicle manufacturers are investing hundreds of millions of dollars into solid-state battery development, and researchers have created fledgling prototypes of the technology. However, a commercially viable solid-state battery is still years away. Experts predict that solid-state EV batteries will be commercially available starting in the mid-2020s.

Charger Availability

Of course, plug-in electric vehicles, no matter what their range, do require regular charging. An estimated 80% of EV charging occurs at home.

There are currently two types of home chargers available for electric cars. Level 1 chargers come with the car and work with any 120V home outlet. They can add about 124 miles of range in 20 hours. Level 2 chargers use a 240V outlet and charge 3–7x faster than Level 1 chargers. However, they have to be specially installed by an electrician and usually cost around $1000-$2000.

These charging options are all well and good — for people who have access to them. Even if someone cannot afford to install a Level 2 home charger, most people will be able to acquire enough charge for daily driving from overnight charging on a Level 1.

However, not everyone has access to home charging. Only 63% of American homes have dedicated private garages or carports. While some apartment buildings do have shared garages, many do not. Even buildings that do have shared garages generally do not have electrical outlets, unless the building owners opt to install EV charging stations. This means that 37% of American households would have to rely on public chargers if they were to own a plug-in EV.

There are three types of public chargers, found in places such as retail parking lots. Levels 1 and 2 parallel those which are available for home charging. Level 3 chargers use a 480V outlet and can add about 124 miles of range in 30 minutes. This makes them by far the most practical option for outdoor charging. However, most EVs on the road today cannot accept Level 3 chargers. Additionally, Level 3 chargers can only charge efficiently until the battery is 60–85% full. After that, charging slows to Level 2 speed, making further charging a waste of both time and money.

Level 3 chargers have additional problems caused by differences in proprietary technology. There are three major types of Level 3 chargers available — Tesla Superchargers, CHAdeMO chargers (Toyota, Nissan, Mitsubishi), and SAE Combo CSS chargers (Volkswagen, Ford, BMW, Hyundai). These chargers are generally not cross-compatible between brands, although Teslas can be used with CHAdeMO chargers with the use of an adapter. This further limits the availability of fast charging to the EV driver on the go.

Levels 1 and 2 public chargers can provide sufficient charge overnight, but for someone to use them in that manner, they must live close enough to the charger to be able to leave their vehicle there overnight and come back to it. Additionally, they run the risk of another driver occupying the charger at the time they wish to use it. Although public charging stations are becoming more prevalent across the country, they are generally located in places like commercial parking lots and car dealerships, which may not even be open overnight, let alone near enough to residences for practical charging.

Overall, it is highly unfeasible for most people to rely on public chargers for all their EV charging needs. This means that nearly 40% of American households are automatically shut out of the plug-in EV market just because of where they live.

Studies indicate that charging limitations are a major reason why Americans do not purchase electric cars. According to one study, about 60% of Americans believe electric cars are sub-optimal for long-distance journeys. About the same proportion say that concerns about charging are one of their primary reasons for not purchasing an electric car.

Again, solid-state batteries provide the most promising long-term solution to this problem. With solid-state batteries, drivers will be able to go 500 to 1,000 miles between charges, which means that charging will be a relatively rare occurrence. They will also be able to charge their vehicles more quickly than they can today. In addition to that, if manufacturers were to strengthen and standardize the Level 3 charger network, and make all new EVs Level 3 charger compliant, that would go a long way towards making EVs a feasible option for more American households.

Electric Grid Capacity

Electric vehicles use a great deal of power. Currently, with EVs comprising under 2% of cars on the road in the US, the impact of EVs on the electrical grid is negligible. But as penetration of EVs into the vehicle market increases, we can eventually expect that they will cause infrastructural strain. A Citylab study estimated that if every car on the road was an EV, electrical grids would need to increase capacity by 25 to 55% (depending on region) to accommodate the additional electricity usage.

Even without the added strain of EVs, the US electrical infrastructure is currently in dire need of upgrades. The American Society of Civil Engineers gives American energy infrastructure a grade of “D+,” stating that the grid is currently at “full capacity,” that most transmission and distribution lines are well past their life expectancy, and that the grid will need at least $177 billion in repairs by 2025. The US has largely avoided sufficient investment in infrastructure over the past several decades. Adding 25 to 55% more capacity to the electrical grid in the next couple of decades, on top of all of the existing issues, is a tall order.

As one might imagine, EVs could also pose significant challenges in disaster management. For example, blackouts could turn into even worse disasters than they currently are, if they result in a total crippling of all transportation infrastructure.

Public Education

One oft-overlooked factor that limits demand for EV sales is lack of public education on electric vehicles. A significant percentage of Americans have a factually inaccurate perception of what it is like to own an electric vehicle.

These inaccurate perceptions are wide-ranging. A study conducted by Ford indicated that 42% of Americans believe electric vehicles cannot run without gas. While both plug-in and regenerative-braking hybrids do require gas to run, this is not the case for fully plug-in EVs. A British study indicated that 42% of respondents believed EVs cannot be driven through a car wash. Electric vehicles can be driven not only through a car wash, but through all the same conditions gas-powered vehicles can.

Many Americans also have inaccurate perceptions about electric car performance. The Ford study also found that the majority of Americans believe that electric vehicles are insufficiently powerful for extreme weather, rough terrain, and towing and hauling. Over 90% of Americans are also unaware that electric vehicles have “instant torque” and can accelerate more quickly than gas-powered vehicles.

The public also sees electric cars as less reliable and safe than gasoline-powered cars. It is untrue that electric cars are unreliable compared to gasoline-powered ones. Conversely, due to a more simplistic drive train structure, electric cars are actually less likely to need repairs than gasoline-powered ones. Electric cars are also not unsafe compared to gasoline powered cars — “[t]he top five most popular combustion vehicles in the US all rank lower than the most popular electric cars in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s testing.”

Additionally, Americans are skeptical about whether EVs will take widespread hold in the next few years. More Americans believe that self-driving cars will become prevalent in the next decade, than that electric cars will. This perception exists despite the fact that self-driving technology is still in development, while electric-vehicle technology has existed for years.

Cultural Attitudes Towards Environmentalism

Currently, there is a prevalent negative cultural sentiment about environmentalists in the West. Many Westerners, especially men, see concern for the environment in general as being “weak” and “feminine” (femininity being seen as a bad thing due to internalized misogyny). They tend to see electric vehicles in much the same way, since those are a visual representation of the environmental movement. This is likely the origin of some of the inaccurate popular beliefs about EVs listed above, such as that they are less powerful and reliable than gas-powered vehicles.

“Rolling coal” and “ICEing” are two examples of anti-environmentalist actions that display disdain for the “weak” and “feminine” environmentalist stereotypes. “Rolling coal” refers to a person modifying a diesel-powered vehicle so that it produces more pollution, including clouds of black smoke. The driver often intentionally produces these clouds when he spots a hybrid or electric vehicle, as a form of protest and trolling.

Rolling coal has its origins in truck-pulling competitions. In these competitions, drivers compete to see who can pull a weighted sled the fastest and farthest. They modify their vehicles for this purpose, and these performance enhancements have the side effect of causing them to “roll coal.” In a Vice article about the practice, one truck rally vendor described this effect as “horsepower that is going to be seen.” It is therefore very clear how “rolling coal” plays into the traditional “American masculine” ideals of strength, power, and independence, and implies that electric vehicles represent the opposite.

“ICEing” (the “ICE” standing for “internal combustion engine”) refers to when a person uses their gas-powered vehicle to block public EV chargers so that drivers cannot access them for their intended use. Generally, the drivers who do this are driving large vehicles such as trucks or pickups, and the implied disparity in strength and power is evident. For example, in one tweet from an ICEd Tesla driver, the driver comments that their vehicle looks “so small” next to the pickup truck blocking the charger. One comment on the tweet states “I guess some truck owners have some serious manhood issues.”

These perceptions of different vehicle types go back farther than most people may realize. Researcher Virginia Scharff found that even prototypical EVs of the early 20th century were primarily marketed to women, while gas-powered vehicles of the same period were marketed towards men.

In order to dispel these stereotypes, vehicle manufacturers could work to bolster the positive image of electric vehicles, and change their image to be associated with power and strength. Marketing and advertising goes a long way in telling most people how to think. For example, Tesla has, by most accounts, contributed more than any other vehicle manufacturer to giving EVs a positive public spin, and helped to make even non-Tesla EVs seem like a more attractive option for consumers. Tesla’s branding relies heavily on objective positive attributes of their vehicles, such as superior torque and battery capacity, and works to present the brand as sleek and cutting-edge.

Marketing

As mentioned above, the United States has a heavily advertising-driven culture. Oftentimes, a good advertising campaign is all that is needed to drive up sales of a previously underperforming product. Electric cars are not only a good product, but in many ways, they are a necessary product. Yet demand for them, although increasing over time, remains low. Therefore, the question becomes obvious: is lack of advertising a factor in slow EV sales?

The evidence indicates that the answer is yes. A Sierra Club study found that car manufacturers air significantly fewer television advertisements for their electric vehicles, as compared to similar gas-powered vehicles in their line. Some EVs got no television airtime at all, while comparable gas-powered cars by the same brand did.

Even worse, dealerships seem to be making EVs less attractive to potential buyers, whether purposefully or not. The Sierra Club sent “secret shoppers” to over 300 car dealerships and found that the presentation of EVs by car dealers is, on the whole, sub-optimal. In 42% of the dealerships, EVs were not displayed as prominently as gas-powered vehicles. 14% of the dealerships had EVs on the lot that were not charged, making a test drive impossible. 33% of the dealers did not tell buyers about federal EV tax incentives, and 50% of the dealers did not tell buyers how to charge the EV on the go. Many shoppers reported that dealers had no EVs in stock at all. Many of the salespeople stated that they had little knowledge about EVs, encouraged buyers to purchase gas-powered vehicles instead, or even made disparaging comments about EVs (such as one salesperson calling them “go-karts”).

To make matters worse, the study excluded vehicle brands that have a low share of the US EV market — it only focused on dealerships for brands that are considered to be prominent and cutting-edge in the development of EVs. That means EV purchasing conditions may be even less optimal for brands that do not fall into that category.

EVs have a smaller profit margin for vehicle manufacturers compared to gas-powered vehicles, both because they cost more to manufacture, and because they require fewer repairs over the life of the vehicle. Therefore, it is indeed possible that the poor promotion of EVs is purposeful on the part of dealers. Car dealerships and companies are highly incentivized by the bottom line, and are not particularly incentivized to promote eco-friendly initiatives.

Vehicle manufacturers have a history of questionable actions when it comes to environmental initiatives, which lends more credence to this theory. Many of the world’s major vehicle manufacturers have spent large sums of money on lobbying in opposition to climate action, and even lobbying that promotes climate change denial. VW, BMW, and Daimler were accused recently of colluding to prevent development of emission and particular reduction technology, in order to keep vehicle manufacturing costs down. Volkswagen was already embroiled in a similar scandal a few years ago, when it was found to be cheating on emissions tests.

Ultimately, vehicle manufacturers have the lion’s share of the influence in determining whether EVs go mainstream, as well as a significant share of influence in determining government action on climate change in general. If they are disincentivized to promote EVs, and find it in their best interest to promote anti-environmentalist actions, they will continue to do so. In order for EVs to gain a greater share of the market, this balance of incentives needs to change.

The EV market has a great number of challenges facing it in the years to come. But there are also viable solutions to these problems. We, as a society, just need to invest the time, money, and effort to enact these solutions. Our future, in many ways, depends on it.