Ford is not the only automaker enduring huge losses on its investment in electric vehicles. Apparently, Tesla is the only EV maker that currently sells its product at a profit, and just barely so.
EVs are inherently expensive today because the technology is still developmental. Some people hope that EV prices will fall as industry standards, economies of scale, better technology and alternative supply chains all evolve. Others note that the raw materials production, infrastructure construction and maintenance and product disposal requirements to support widespread use will make EVs uneconomical for the foreseeable future.
I’m in the latter camp. History shows that there is a solid, if small, market for uneconomical vehicles, and that wherever a market exists innovation will operate. Instead of using government to force EVs into the mainstream, we should just wait.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
“EVs are inherently expensive today because the technology is still developmental. ”
Wasn’t the same thing said about the internal combustion engine in the early 20th Century? Didn’t it get better and more economical over time? Can’t the same thing happen with EV’s? Asking for a friend.
…”hope that EV prices will fall “…
And they ARE falling as supply chain issues resolve, more resources found for production, and manufacturing become more ubiquitous. And FORD, in it’s infinite reach for market share, is STILL building a HUGE EV factory in Tennessee.
https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2021/09/27/ford-to-lead-americas-shift-to-electric-vehicles.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Wasn’t the same thing said about the internal combustion engine in the early 20th Century?”
I have never heard that. The problem with EVs is that they can never be as physically efficient at gas cars. Consequently, the long-term economics are unfavorable. The main reason companies like Ford are bringing them to market is because state and federal governments are in the process of banning gas cars. Without that, the billions of dollars in investments would be too risky.
LikeLike
Nice to know that YOU are much smarter than Ford.
Until Henry Ford developed the assembly line to mass produce automobiles, it was completely unaffordable to the average American family. Then engineers kept developing better and more efficient ways for the combustion engines to work and for autos to be built. Improvements across the board continue to happen in both the gas-burning auto industry as well as the EV. And Ford is late to the EV game. (As is Chrysler-Fiat and others.)
If you don’t believe in the idea of R&D growing an industry, then say that. The rest of your drivel is just anti-environmental claptrap cloaked in economic voodoo.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “If you don’t believe in the idea of R&D growing an industry, then say that.”
Pay attention to my actual words: “History shows that there is a solid, if small, market for uneconomical vehicles, and that wherever a market exists innovation will operate. Instead of using government to force EVs into the mainstream, we should just wait.”
LikeLike
“The problem with EVs is that they can never be as physically efficient at gas cars.”
That is total nonsense. There are already vehicles that store electricity from their own solar cells. And we are still in early days.
Your never having heard that internal combustion vehicles were considered with the same disdain in their early days that you exhibit towards electric propulsion is a sign of profound ignorance.
https://www.supercars.net/blog/early-1900s-cars/
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “There are already vehicles that store electricity from their own solar cells. And we are still in early days.”
So what? There isn’t enough solar power on the Earth to operate a population-sized fleet of EVs.
RE: “Your never having heard that internal combustion vehicles were considered with the same disdain in their early days that you exhibit towards electric propulsion is a sign of profound ignorance.”
Disdain is your word, not mine. What I wrote is that I had never heard that early gas cars were expensive because the technology was still developmental. Maybe you are the one suffering from profound ignorance.
LikeLike
Internal combustion engines were so much cheaper than maintaining horses inside a city that the changeover was limited only by the capital investment.
LikeLike
“There isn’t enough solar power on the Earth to operate a population-sized fleet of EVs.”
You are vastly underestimating the amount of solar energy constantly bombarding the earth.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“ There isn’t enough solar power on the Earth to operate a population-sized fleet of EVs.”
https://www.freeingenergy.com/the-earth-gets-more-solar-energy-in-one-hour-than-the-entire-world-uses-in-a-year/
About a decade ago, I saw and article that said a 100 mile square, 10,000 square miles, in the Mojave Desert, covered with solar panels creates more electricity than the US consumed in a year.
Obviously, there are transmission issues, but the point was clear. Harnessing solar is a virtually limitless source of energy.
Ignoring solar and other renewables is just putting off the inevitable as technology advances.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The internal combustion engine was so superior to horses that people switched as soon as they could. No subsidies, mandates or other government programs were needed.
LikeLike
“No subsidies, mandates or other government programs were needed.”
Uh, the greatly improved and expanded network of roads that automobiles needed to be attractive did not build themselves. Duh! Just as it did with the canals and later the railroads, government made the essential investments required to support the new technology.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Uh, the greatly improved and expanded network of roads that automobiles needed to be attractive did not build themselves.”
Which came first, the family car or the interstate highway system?
LikeLike
“Which came first, the family car or the interstate highway system?”
So, government built no roads before 1956? Who knew!
As a matter of fact, the FEDERAL government financed its first road in 1811. It was called the National Road and evolved into what we now know as U.S. 40.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “So, government built no roads before 1956?”
It is foolish to pretend that the only truth is that chickens came before eggs.
LikeLike
“It is foolish to pretend that the only truth is that chickens came before eggs.”
The point was clear. Government was very much involved with MAJOR subsidies in the spread of automobiles. It was not JUST market forces. The claim made – “No subsidies, mandates or other government programs were needed.” – is demonstrably false.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Constitutionally speaking, Post Roads were the pre-cursor to hi-ways and the interstate system
LikeLiked by 1 person