Bigger (EVs) are not better!

A few days ago, Electrek reviewed GMC's Hummer EV Super-truck and concluded that they love the Hummer EV because "just like the 620-mile, 0-60 in under two seconds Tesla Roadster was supposed to be, this is a battery electric vehicle that destroys all of the gas competition to the point that there’s no longer any question if gas should survive. And the best part? GM is actually making (a few) of them." In fact, GM announced that reservations of 65,000 exceeded their expectations and that this might lead to expanded production.

Early adopters of new technology are often wealthier and the same is likely true for technologies to help reduce GHG emissions. The well-to-do are able to pay a premium for more environmentally friendly products and account for a disproportionate share of greenhouse gas emissions. Tesla's Model S allowed Tesla to get to the Model 3. Similar strategies can work elsewhere in the energy transition. For example, the investment by Mercedes in H2Green Steel could well lead to (almost) GHG-neutral steel having an important early market that allows for scaling and learning, which in turn could lead to lower cost and hence the ability to use green steel beyond the luxury car segment.

However, for this to work to reduce GHG emissions, such new products not only have to pave the way for mass adoption, they also shouldn't have offsetting side effects. And cars are a great example of exactly such offsetting effects. It would be fine if there were always a small number of consumers who want large, gas (or electricity) guzzling vehicles. Some people really do need to tow thousands of pounds of goods and equipment and some people really do need to drive off-road.

But the reality is that SUVs and to a lesser degree "light" (pick-up) trucks, first introduced as niche products, have become the "new normal" for many consumers in the United States and elsewhere. In the US, since 1989, the average passenger vehicle has increased 24% in weight, added 90% of horsepower and 37% of acceleration speed. If the success of early EVs like the Tesla S or the Hummer EV Super-truck leads to even more people buying this kind of vehicle -after all, they are electric and so no need to be worried about their environmental impact,right? - it could make lowering global GHG emissions harder.

In fact, much harder: The Hummer EV Super-truck is advertised as having a 200 kWh battery and a range of 300 miles. This means you will be able to drive about 1.5 miles/kWh. By comparison, the most "fuel" efficient EVs on the road today, the Tesla 3 Standard Range Plus and the Fiat 500e, each get just a tad over 4.5 miles/kWh. In other words, they are three times more energy efficient, per mile driven, than the Hummer EV. If the electricity used to charge these vehicles is non-emitting, one could argue that as long as consumers are willing to pay more (for the cars and the electricity), there is nothing to worry about. Yet, powering a fleet of Hummer EVs with renewable electricity would pose a vastly more complex challenge than doing the same for the more fuel efficient EVs. Take the US, with a fleet of about 275 million passenger vehicles. If each of those got replaced with an efficient EV like the Tesla 3 or the Fiat 500e and if we further assume that each car will continue to drive about 13,500 miles per year, the US would have to add enough renewable generation to produce 830 TWh of electricity, or 22% of current total US electricity generation of 3,802 TWh. If, by contrast, everybody replaced their current vehicle with a Hummer EV Super-truck, the increase in electricity generation needed would be 2,489 TWh, 65% of current US power generation.

Given that the US and world are currently very far from being on track to decarbonize its electricity system by 2050, adding enough additional renewables (and other non-emitting resources) to satisfy widespread demand for EVs like the Hummer EV or other electricity guzzlers would be almost impossible. To provide some perspective, AEP just completed the 998-MW Traverse Wind Energy Center in Oklahoma, the largest single wind project in the US. The project is expected to generate 3.8 TWh of electricity per year. Just to make up the difference between an all-Fiat and an all-Hummer EV fleet the US would have to add an additional 431 Traverse Wind Centers! Given how hard it is to build just one, this would impose a burden on our capacity to ramp up the deployment of renewable energy that may well simply be too hard to overcome.

How can we reverse the trend of the past 30 years to make cars ever bigger, heavier, faster, and instead get mass-adoption of electricity-efficient EVs? I think Italians 30 years ago could be very macho in the tiny original Fiat Cinquecento (500) (or even on a Vespa) - What has changed and how can we undo it?