Yep, this is for real. It’s been floating around the Twitterverse for a while. The reason the quote was so high was that the Volt was discontinued and GM no longer makes that battery. So, even though most batteries wouldn’t quite cost that much, it speaks to a problem that I haven’t heard a lot about, but that policymakers must grapple with. Let me digress...
There’s a swath of the population that depends on the “very-used” car market. These folks buy cars whose inspection sticker expiration date is in the ad. They drive them until they drop because not having a car isn't an option in rural Maine and this is the best they can afford. I know this lifestyle well and I’m worried for those who depend on these end-of-life cars.
These are the folks who flip hamburgers, dress your elderly relative, guard convicts, and help disabled children at school. We need them to do their jobs as much as they need those paychecks - we just learned this lesson the hard way, right?
This segment of the population is going to be negatively impacted as we transition from cars powered by internal combustion engines (ICE) to electric vehicles (EV). Charging stations are rare in rural areas and installing one at home may be impossible, particularly for renters. Range anxiety is real, and as batteries get older and when the weather is cold, the situation is apt to become dire. But beyond that, there are key differences between older ICE cars and aging EVs which policymakers should be thinking about.
Most of the discussion we hear around EV policy is centered on new and late-model vehicles. The much-bandied “Total Cost of Ownership” model touts EVs as a great financial win over ICE cars, but it only looks at a lifespan of, at most, seven years. The people I’m worried about have never owned a car that new.
We’re talking about ICE cars that still get you where you want to go, but with quirks that range from annoying to dangerous. The door handle is broken or the window doesn’t roll up. The heater fan squeals constantly. There might be a hole in the floor behind the driver’s seat. The radio doesn’t work or the Bondo job is rough, or maybe all that and more. One of my more memorable drives was in a car with no defroster, driving from Portland to Falmouth with freezing rain coming down - windows open and foreheads glazed with ice. It wasn’t comfy but we knew the car would get us there if we kept it on the road.
You can put a rebuilt transmission in your old Buick for under $3000. You can get a motor out of a car at the junkyard that will give your old car a new lease on life. Those repairs are likely to be less than the cost of another beater, and if so, the car is often worth the investment. It may have problems, but they’re the problems you know you can deal with, and you might well get another several years out of that car.
The story around the EV lifecycle is different. It will always center on batteries. When the car really starts to show its age, the problem is all about range, not just creature comforts. The cost of a new battery isn’t comparable to the cost of another old beater; it’s well out of range for the folks I am talking about.
I’m worried. I don’t hear politicians talking about safeguarding the people on the lowest tier of the car market. This part of the economy needs structural defenses, not handouts. We need to regulate this industry in a way that protects consumers and the environment.
The public’s love of the newest and shiniest combines too well with the manufacturers’ love of selling fancier, shinier goods. Manufacturers are intent on glitz and on selling subscription-based upgrades1 like heated seats or power efficiency. If left unfettered, capitalism is always going to shape a market that caters to the wealthy, maximizing profits at the expense of workers, end-users, and the environment.
We know better than to allow that to happen, yet here we are. And we’re talking about setting fleet requirements to force more EVs onto a market that in no way accommodates the needs of low-income rural people.
The nearly-dead EV will struggle to make it from charging point to charging point and the owner’s life choices may be shaped by range limitations. Advancing technologies and empowered capitalism have been closing the door on the DIY-or-live-with-it approach to car ownership, and the transition to EVs could very well lock that door for good.
With EVs, the very-used market is going to look very different. We’re going to have junkyards full of lovely cars that all have the same problem: it costs more to replace the battery than the car is worth. It’s potlatch for the wealthy and purgatory for the poor.
There is no natural economic pressure to maintain a livable cost of entry into the car market. We have to think about government’s role in protecting the people who will be harmed by this. There is a focus on the environmental impact of creating batteries but the problem extends also to the use of harmful manmade chemicals and materials whose useful life will be more limited in EVs than in ICE cars. That’s a an affront against the Mother Earth we claim we are trying to protect, and it needs to stop.
We need to deal with the environmental issues, but we also need to pay attention to the people who will no longer have a workable means of transportation.
https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/automotive-industry/why-you-might-need-to-subscribe-to-get-certain-features-on-your-next-car-a6575794430/
Sister Tina, I've told you before and I'll say it again, the state needs you in the Blaine House for eight years.
Hi Tina,
It's always great to hear from you. I really appreciate your writings and this one really spoke to me.
I spent 10 years driving a car that was truly dangerous as I looked for ways to save for a different car. This car would randomly stop in the middle of the road with trafic all around it and me relying on the generosity of strangers to assist to get it out of harms way. Needless to say, I stayed home, shopped only in town and ordered a lot from Amazon for whatever couldn't be found in Jay. The last two years, I drove 288 miles in 2021 and 213 miles in 2022.
Everytime I thought I'd saved enough to get a different car, I'd find the prices had gone up beyond my purse strings. At the age of 70, I really didn't want to take out a loan. But being ill, needing to get to doctors who are likely beyond the borders of Jay, and the constant hazard of a vehicle I couldn't trust, I found I had no choice but to take out that loan. I'll be tightening the belt hard for the next 4 years. But I will be safe from stalling in the middle of the road.
I was so fortunate to find a vehicle that was well cared for by the previous owner, had low mileage for it age of 10 years, and a few features that really help my physical circumstances. It's not an EV and I don't care. In my circumstances, I couldn't even afford a test drive of such a vehicle. Nor could I charge one up in the complex where I live.
The new vehicle is really big. It's bigger than anything I've ever driven. It will likely cost me more in gas. But I can make reasonable adjustments to my budget for that cost. Well, that is until the government decides to impose some fee for not driving an EV. But for now, I have the joy of driving a safe vehicle to important appointments and maybe for a little pleasure once in a while.
In the end, I don't see that this plan was thought out before the government pushed so hard on it.