News Forum - Shocking slump: Thailand’s premium EV sales plunge 35%

[Thaiger]

Thailand has experienced a significant decline in the sales of premium electric vehicles (EVs), dropping 35% year-on-year in the first half of the year. Despite this downturn, BMW remains optimistic about its EV sales, banking on the appeal of its newly launched models in the Mini family in Bangkok. Sales of premium EVs fell to … …

The story Shocking slump: Thailand’s premium EV sales plunge 35% as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[Pinetree]

This should be no surprise to anyone. Any thinking person can see that EVs are not the answer.  Let's face it, most people can't tell you what the question is, let alone be in a position to say that EVs are the answer to that question.  EVs are no more than an interim fad, interim to Hydrogen probably, but too early to tell.  

[Khunmark]

3 hours ago, Pinetree said:

This should be no surprise to anyone. Any thinking person can see that EVs are not the answer.  Let's face it, most people can't tell you what the question is, let alone be in a position to say that EVs are the answer to that question.  EVs are no more than an interim fad, interim to Hydrogen probably, but too early to tell.  

 

The article identifies the PREMIUM end of the market. A slump in the premium end of the market has also occurred with ICE’s. The article says a lot more about the sales of premium vehicles than it does about EVs overall, which, by the way, have shown an increase in sales overall in the current year.

https://www.statista.com/outlook/mmo/electric-vehicles/thailand

 

[Marc26]

8 hours ago, Pinetree said:

This should be no surprise to anyone. Any thinking person can see that EVs are not the answer.  Let's face it, most people can't tell you what the question is, let alone be in a position to say that EVs are the answer to that question.  EVs are no more than an interim fad, interim to Hydrogen probably, but too early to tell.  

Everyone I know that has an EV loves it

 

 

[rattlesnake]

I was in Vientiane, Laos a couple of months ago and got chatting to a taxi driver. A friend of his bought an EV and after a couple of years, the battery died and the price to replace it was apparently 200,000 baht, a sum his friend could not even dream of and therefore the EV was rendered useless, a big source of stress and disappointment.

EVs are the product of an ideology, which, as all ideologies, is full of contradictions. It is gaining traction in Western countries because of government subsidies (Macron, for instance, has implemented a scheme where the average French household can lease one for €100 per month), but I am not surprised that it should quickly hit the wall of reality in the third world.

[Pinetree]

35 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

Everyone I know that has an EV loves it

Let's wait and see how much they love it in a few years time, when, together with possibly a billion or more other EV car owners,  the batteries are gone and cannot be replaced due to a Worldwide shortage of lithium, and the car has zero resale value and I do mean zero.

[Pinetree]

The first electric rechargeable vehicles appeared over 150 years ago, before the development of the much more practical and developable  ICE.  There is a good reason that the ICE became predominant, and that is the almost inexhaustible supply of the basic fuel, that does not require vast and expensive additional manufacturing to produce wheeled power. F1 is trying to find the compromise between the two, and also developing bio fuels, but we all know that bio fuel manufacture is a bad environmental option so....   We appear to be in the midst of human kind running around like headless chickens, egged on by idiot politicos,  trying to identify the 'way ahead', when there may not be an obvious one, yet,  short of match box nuclear power devices, that the World's Military already have. . EVs are not only not the answer (even if you believe that there is even a question to answer)  they are undevelopable, environmental damaging and expensive.  But of course, we are not supposed to say that, 

[Khunmark]

13 hours ago, Pinetree said:

The first electric rechargeable vehicles appeared over 150 years ago, before the development of the much more practical and developable  ICE.  There is a good reason that the ICE became predominant, and that is the almost inexhaustible supply of the basic fuel, that does not require vast and expensive additional manufacturing to produce wheeled power. F1 is trying to find the compromise between the two, and also developing bio fuels, but we all know that bio fuel manufacture is a bad environmental option so....   We appear to be in the midst of human kind running around like headless chickens, egged on by idiot politicos,  trying to identify the 'way ahead', when there may not be an obvious one, yet,  short of match box nuclear power devices, that the World's Military already have. . EVs are not only not the answer (even if you believe that there is even a question to answer)  they are undevelopable, environmental damaging and expensive.  But of course, we are not supposed to say that, 

This is all rubbish. It echos the sentiments of the pro horse carriage movement , who organised funeral processions for the unfortunate victims of car crashes. The obstacles that the pioneers of the automobile had to overcome far outweigh the issues facing EVs today. The financial capital underpinning the transition to electric vehicles will ensure its viability. 

As to your assertion of EV batteries being undevelopable, environmental and expensive, MIT estimate that at $100 per KWh lithium ion batteries become comparable to ICE’s on price per energy output basis. They anticipate this will happen by 2030.Furthermore, lithium batteries are now being recycled. Redwood industries the world first recycling plant claims that the metals used in EV batteries are 95% recoverable. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2024-04-18/redwood-material-s-nevada-ev-battery-recycling-facility-attempts-to-rival-china?embedded-checkout=true

And advances are also being made on the development of sodium ion batteries which are another potential game changer for the EV industry.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/pinch-salt-could-unsettle-electric-car-order-2024-02-07/

 

 

The only reason ICE’s gained the ascendancy in the race to capture the automobile market was because Henry Ford invented the production line. Prior to that there were more EV’s on the early roads than there was ICE’s.

[Ikariotiko]

38 minutes ago, Khunmark said:

As to your assertion of EV batteries being undevelopable, environmental and expensive, MIT estimate that at $100 per KWh lithium ion batteries become comparable to ICE’s on price per energy output basis. They anticipate this will happen by 2030.Furthermore, lithium batteries are now being recycled. Redwood industries the world first recycling plant claims that the metals used in EV batteries are 95% recoverable. 

When industry sources use words like "estimate", "anticipate', and "claim", it is wise to be very cautious.

I love the concepts of EVs, but the sticking point right now are the batteries - heavy, short-lived, slow to charge and very resource-heavy. The typical EV battery includes 35 kilograms of aluminum, 29kg of nickel, 20kg of copper, 20kg of steel, 10kg of manganese, 8kg of cobalt, 6kg of lithium and 5kg of iron. Compare that with an ICE with a simple steel tank of fuel.

In his book 'Profiles of the Future', published as long ago as 1973, science guru Arthur C. Clarke wrote that "a breakthrough in battery technology is 100 years overdue.". It still is.

[Khunmark]

1 hour ago, Ikariotiko said:

When industry sources use words like "estimate", "anticipate', and "claim", it is wise to be very cautious.

I love the concepts of EVs, but the sticking point right now are the batteries - heavy, short-lived, slow to charge and very resource-heavy. The typical EV battery includes 35 kilograms of aluminum, 29kg of nickel, 20kg of copper, 20kg of steel, 10kg of manganese, 8kg of cobalt, 6kg of lithium and 5kg of iron. Compare that with an ICE with a simple steel tank of fuel.

In his book 'Profiles of the Future', published as long ago as 1973, science guru Arthur C. Clarke wrote that "a breakthrough in battery technology is 100 years overdue.". It still is.

Except that MIT isn’t an industry source. And you obviously haven’t read the sources I’ve link for your benefit. And lithium ion batteries are a breakthrough whether you believe it or not.

[Ikariotiko]

1 hour ago, Khunmark said:

And lithium ion batteries are a breakthrough whether you believe it or not.

No, they're not - they're part of an evolution, from Ni-Cad and even lead-acid. What we need is something that is an order of magnitude better when it comes to Wh/kg, say around 5Kwh/kg to 10Kwh/kg.

 

 

[Pinetree]

4 hours ago, Khunmark said:

This is all rubbish. It echos the sentiments of the pro horse carriage movement , who organised funeral processions for the unfortunate victims of car crashes. The obstacles that the pioneers of the automobile had to overcome far outweigh the issues facing EVs today. The financial capital underpinning the transition to electric vehicles will ensure its viability. 

As to your assertion of EV batteries being undevelopable, environmental and expensive, MIT estimate that at $100 per KWh lithium ion batteries become comparable to ICE’s on price per energy output basis. They anticipate this will happen by 2030.Furthermore, lithium batteries are now being recycled. Redwood industries the world first recycling plant claims that the metals used in EV batteries are 95% recoverable. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2024-04-18/redwood-material-s-nevada-ev-battery-recycling-facility-attempts-to-rival-china?embedded-checkout=true

And advances are also being made on the development of sodium ion batteries which are another potential game changer for the EV industry.

https://www.reuters.com/breakingviews/pinch-salt-could-unsettle-electric-car-order-2024-02-07/

 

The only reason ICE’s gained the ascendancy in the race to capture the automobile market was because Henry Ford invented the production line. Prior to that there were more EV’s on the early roads than there was ICE’s.

As usual your comments are worthless and uninformed.  I've noticed before that critical thinking is totally absent and you blindly follow what others say, instead of having a valid opinion of your own, hence your constant  need for links to others. 

[Ikariotiko]

9 minutes ago, Pinetree said:

As usual your comments are worthless and uninformed.  I've noticed before that critical thinking is totally absent and you blindly follow what others say, instead of having a valid opinion of your own, hence your constant  need for links to others. 

Pure projection, there, folks.

[Khunmark]

19 hours ago, Pinetree said:

As usual your comments are worthless and uninformed.  I've noticed before that critical thinking is totally absent and you blindly follow what others say, instead of having a valid opinion of your own, hence your constant  need for links to others. 

Yep. I follow others e.g. Science Direct and formulate my opinions around inputs from credible sources. As opposed to you who, in absence of a counter argument, runs with a vibe. It’s ‘the vibe man’. Either put up something of substance to substantiate your claim or STFU.

[Khunmark]

20 hours ago, Ikariotiko said:

No, they're not - they're part of an evolution, from Ni-Cad and even lead-acid. What we need is something that is an order of magnitude better when it comes to Wh/kg, say around 5Kwh/kg to 10Kwh/kg.

I’d be interested to hear where you’ve plucked these figures from.

[Ikariotiko]

1 hour ago, Khunmark said:

I’d be interested to hear where you’ve plucked these figures from.

https://www.epectec.com/batteries/cell-comparison.html

 

[Khunmark]

2 hours ago, Ikariotiko said:

https://www.epectec.com/batteries/cell-comparison.html

No, I’m interested in how you reached the conclusion that the volume/energy density is the metric to determine viability? The metric you should be looking at is cost and environmental impact. These are the important considerations for the consumer. Not the weight of the battery. People aren’t turning away from buying EV’s because they end up with a heavy car.
 

As I previously stated the cost per unit of energy is expected to reach parity with gasoline by 2030. There’s plenty of scope for efficiency increases through the improvements to the anodes of l/o batteries. And the recently developed battery recycling technology will be a game changer for materials supply and carbon footprint.

There are other factors like supporting infrastructure, including charging stations and battery replacement facilities and EV insurance issues. But these are peripheral to the issues previously identified.

[Ikariotiko]

3 hours ago, Khunmark said:

No, I’m interested in how you reached the conclusion that the volume/energy density is the metric to determine viability? The metric you should be looking at is cost and environmental impact.

Because the energy density is closely and unavoidably linked to the cost and environmental impact.

[SnapDragon]

We have an electric vehicle. The wife uses it every day. 

 

I prefer the pick-up. Good for simply chucking tools and stuff into, and going to the farm.

 

Only problem we have had with the EV is a couple of punctures.

[McTavish]

On 7/23/2024 at 8:33 PM, Marc26 said:

Everyone I know that has an EV loves it

Of course they do ...  until they try to insure, repair, or sell. 

 

A certain large US motor company conducted a survey in Australia decades ago to find out which brand and models were most popular and for what reasons.  Vauxhall came up trumps by quite a margin and close analysis by independent sources found that Ford and Holden (GM) owners ridiculed their mates for buying Vauxhall (UK) so much those owners were constantly defending their vehicles.  I daresay this may apply to EV's although the acceleration and sheer joy of a new car helps.

[Marc26]

36 minutes ago, SnapDragon said:

We have an electric vehicle. The wife uses it every day. 

I prefer the pick-up. Good for simply chucking tools and stuff into, and going to the farm.

Only problem we have had with the EV is a couple of punctures.

This year we have seen a ton of Rivian pick-ups hit the streets in Canada 

 

Gorgeous looking trucks but fairly expensive 

 

 

[Marc26]

20 minutes ago, McTavish said:

Of course they do ...  until they try to insure, repair, or sell. 

A certain large US motor company conducted a survey in Australia decades ago to find out which brand and models were most popular and for what reasons.  Vauxhall came up trumps by quite a margin and close analysis by independent sources found that Ford and Holden (GM) owners ridiculed their mates for buying Vauxhall (UK) so much those owners were constantly defending their vehicles.  I daresay this may apply to EV's although the acceleration and sheer joy of a new car helps.

I've only been in Teslas

Never driven one

 

I wouldn't be adverse to buying one fi I liked it, we have charging stations in my apartment building 

 

Especially if I could quality for any tax rebates but I don't because it is income based and I make a bit too much to get the rebate (I'm not rich!)

[McTavish]

Just now, Marc26 said:

I've only been in Teslas

Never driven one

I wouldn't be adverse to buying one fi I liked it, we have charging stations in my apartment building 

Especially if I could quality for any tax rebates but I don't because it is income based and I make a bit too much to get the rebate (I'm not rich!)

'averse' mate ...  

Tesla's are probably the least favoured of all EV's now, except in US(?), and when you see the build quality of BYD it's not surprising they outsell all others.  

I have solar and could run an EV for zero cost, other than tyres and insurance but it's the potential delay in repairs (if required) plus massive depreciation that puts me off.  EV's are a stepping stone like VHS/Beta but I'll wait on the CD player.  Tech evolves fast nowadays.

[Khunmark]

22 hours ago, Ikariotiko said:

Because the energy density is closely and unavoidably linked to the cost and environmental impact.

Both of these issues I addressed in an earlier post, we are going around in circles. Never mind.

[AdvocatusDiaboli]

On 7/23/2024 at 11:46 AM, Pinetree said:

most people can't tell you what the question is,

The earth was built to tell us what the Question is … we know the Answer is 42. 
As EV’s devalues quicker than an ice cube left out in the Thai heat, buying one definitely has risks attached. WHO would want to purchase something with a limited shelf life where the cost of replacement batteries would make you think why bother.