The share of gasoline cars in global vehicle sales fell below 50% for the first time ever as the Hormuz shock and the resulting record-high fuel prices accelerated the previously sluggish shift toward EVs outside China.
But this assumes that the higher fuel prices are the main driver for the switch and I personally don’t think this is the case.
Why Tesla took off was not because it was electric - we’ve had electric cars before. The real reason was that it’s actually a good car and a viable alternative to an internal combustion one. People weren’t just buying them to save the environment or save on the fuel costs. They were choosing the superior product.
Nowadays this is the case with pretty much all EVs. It’s not a gimmick anymore but you can actually daily drive one and it’s in many ways superior to the internal combustion alternatives. If they were still slow, small, ugly and with a low range I don’t think the cheaper cost of “refueling” would matter.
It’d be hilarious (annoying, but hilarious) if he gets remembered in history for that reason.
Seems more likely that it’s Elon who get credited with that.
Musk barely hit 7% market share, it was gas prices that increased EV sales.
Also, Musk did not start, nor was a founder of Tesla, that’s another lie he propagates.
Idk. Elon had a hand in popularising EVs before he went nuts, but Trump’s the one who destabilised the world fuel markets.
He has always been nuts, it was just hidden before
But this assumes that the higher fuel prices are the main driver for the switch and I personally don’t think this is the case.
Why Tesla took off was not because it was electric - we’ve had electric cars before. The real reason was that it’s actually a good car and a viable alternative to an internal combustion one. People weren’t just buying them to save the environment or save on the fuel costs. They were choosing the superior product.
Nowadays this is the case with pretty much all EVs. It’s not a gimmick anymore but you can actually daily drive one and it’s in many ways superior to the internal combustion alternatives. If they were still slow, small, ugly and with a low range I don’t think the cheaper cost of “refueling” would matter.
I mean, that’s the thrust of the whole article. Not just price, but stability and energy independence for govts.
The article says that high-gas prices is what pushed the sales below 50% - not that high fuel prices are the main driver of EV adoption.
I’m literally not seeing the difference between the two statements.
The straw that breaks the camel’s back isn’t any heavier than the pile of straw already loaded on it.