When Americans are asked why they haven’t yet switched to an electric car, there is one answer that appears more than almost everything else: Range. Charging an electric car, after all, isn’t like filling a tank with gas; fast charging takes at least 20 minutes, and slower charging can take hours. People worry about getting stranded, or having to vie for a charger. So automakers have started producing ever more gigantic batteries, using large caches of minerals to satisfy the American need for distance. This year, one EV on the market — the sleek $140,000 Lucid Air Grand Touring — boasts a whopping 516-mile range. Toyota recently announced that it had achieved a breakthrough with solid-state battery technology, saying it will soon be able to produce electric cars that can go 746 miles on a single charge. But some analysts say that all that range — and all that battery — misses the point, and wastes resources. Only 5 percent of trips in the U.S. are longer than 30 miles. The vast majority of big batteries will never be used — particularly if the owner has a place to plug in their car every day. “People need to hit the pause button in terms of how much range they actually need,” said Robby DeGraff, an industry analyst for AutoPacific. At this point, it’s a cliché to point out that the American auto market thrives on size. U.S. cars are big, and are only getting bigger — from the massive, boxy Hummer to the gigantic, snub-nosed Ford F-150 truck. And that uniquely American calling card has carried over into electric cars. Ten years ago, the median range of an electric car in the United States was just 82 miles; in 2021, it had reached 234 miles. Those batteries are massive, in every sense of the word: the battery on the electric F-150 Lightning, which allows the car to go more than 300 miles on a single charge, weighs a whopping 1,800 pounds. [Which electric vehicle is right for you? Check out our guide.] But is all that necessary? Americans drive a lot, but most of our trips are not very long. According to data from the U.S. Department of Transportation, 95.1 percent of trips taken in personal vehicles are less than 31 miles; almost 60 percent of all trips are less than 6 miles. In total, the average U.S. driver only covers about 37 miles per day. And there is evidence that much smaller batteries could do the lion’s share of the work. In a study published in 2016, researchers at MIT found that a car with a 73-mile range (like an early version of the Nissan Leaf), charged only at night, could satisfy 87 percent of all driving days in the United States. Providing Nissan Leafs to everyone whose driving fit that pattern, the researchers found, would cut 61 percent of U.S. gasoline consumption by personal vehicles. (Longer trips, obviously, use up more gasoline.) As long as you can get a good charge overnight, “the vast majority of trips are covered” by electric vehicles, said Jessika Trancik, a professor at the Institute of Data, Systems, and Society at MIT and one of the authors of the study. So most of the time, drivers are lugging around giant batteries but only using 10 to 15 percent of their actual power. And those big batteries require mining a lot of metals, damaging the environment and workers’ health. Just an average-sized EV battery requires about 18 pounds of lithium, 77 pounds of nickel, and 31 pounds of cobalt. Overall, EVs are still better for the planet than gas-powered cars — but those minerals don’t come cheaply. And much bigger batteries will require proportionally more metals. In a report by researchers at the University of California at Davis, the Climate and Community Project, and Providence College, experts found that simply switching to smaller EV batteries — batteries that could give a small car a range of 125 miles or so — could cut lithium demand by 42 percent. Switching to other modes of transport, like trains, buses, or e-bikes, could cut that number even more. “We’re doubling down on the worse tendencies in our transportation sector in the mission of electrifying it,” said Thea Riofrancos, a professor of political science at Providence College and one of the report’s authors. And the trade-offs matter. In 2025, Dodge is expected to begin selling the Ram 1500 REV, a sleek electric truck that will have an optional 229 kilowatt-hour battery and about 500 miles of range. That battery, DeGraff points out, is roughly equivalent in terms of resources to 16 batteries for the Prius Prime plug-in hybrid. And the Prius Prime still has a range of about 44 miles — enough for the vast majority of American driving days. Electric vehicles are new technology — it’s normal for people to worry about charging, range anxiety, and adapting to a different kind of driving experience. But DeGraff says the key is evaluating how much you actually drive: How many road trips do you take in a given year? How much is an average day’s driving? For those who need to take frequent long road trips and don’t want to have to plug in, a plug-in hybrid can be a good option. But for most Americans, an EV with medium range will do just fine. “You really need to slow down and see how much driving you do,” he said. “The vast, vast majority of Americans are not driving 200-300 miles in a single day.”

  • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The US doesn’t have trains though, so if you live in the central USA you’re kinda fucked if you need to go to another town. You can rent, but that makes weekend trips far more annoying.

    In California and the east coast I fully agree though

    • Link.wav [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s true that we need more and better public transportation infrastructure in the rural midwestern US, but typically towns are within EV range. I’d much rather see resources being directed towards alternatives to personal vehicles. The status quo is inaccessible and, to be blunt, straight up discriminatory to certain demographics.

      • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agree. Sadly though until I get my train I need a car with 400 mile range twice a month 😅

        • Link.wav [he/him]@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s a sad fact that the rural midwest has become very car-centric, to the point that there are actual work duties requiring that type of travel

          But I get it, because I’ve been in a similar position myself

  • Aftermath6187@vlemmy.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I posted this article, so obviously I mostly agree with it. But…

    It says the MIT study found that a car with 73 mile range could cover 87% of all driving days. But to cover 73 miles, you might need something like 120 mile range in the middle of winter and freeway driving. If a car loses 10% capacity by 100k miles, you may need 135.

    It’s always a little scary to pull in to your driveway with 5%, so you need a little cushion on top too.

    I think having 150ish miles is probably a good target.

    • cosmic_skillet@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      For typical commuting needs, you don’t need very large range. Your 150 mile number seems reasonable. However the article points out trucks with larger ranges and here these are actually reasonable.

      Trucks are often used to carry and haul loads. Recent testing is showing that carrying a loaded bed reduces range by a third and towing a heavy trailer reduces range by more than half. When your 300 mile-range truck starts getting 120 miles of range when towing a trailer, your start to get range anxiety. That’s only a 60 mile round trip.

      But like you said, for commuter vehicles 150 miles is probably a good enough goal.

  • I can see one very slight advantage to having a larger battery even if you’re not using it: using 10% of a battery will cause less degradation than using 20 or 30%, so over time a larger battery will be cycled fewer times and should retain more capacity.

    I still agree that pulling so much dead weight around is ridiculous. Makes me think of rockets, where you end up with vehicles that are 90%+ fuel, because you need fuel to propel more fuel. These batteries could definitely be better utilized elsewhere.

  • TheWorstMailman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The YouTube channel Technology Connections had made incredible videos on EVs.

    He did a video about a road trip that he took in his EV and IIRC he “loses” about an hour/day of driving by having to stop to recharge as compared to don’t up at had stations. He also has a video about how you can definitely use a household circuit to do all the charging that you’d need for day to day travel. And another video about how, depending on circumstance and if you’re smart about it, you probably already have enough electrical service in your house to accommodate an EV.

    He makes other great videos about random technology stuff but I really think that his videos on electrification, whether for vehicles or homes, are important

  • quixotic120@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    But a lot of buyers are conditioned to think of “what will I need eventually” and not “what will I need the overwhelming majority of the time” thanks to constant upselling from like every retailer ever

    Like try to buy anything ever and you’ll get pressured on some pointless spec. “Oh the terabyte of storage in your phone might be a limiting factor for you, you should really consider the next model for $99 more”, “the base streaming plan is great but if you ever watch on two tvs you’ll want the next package, it’s only $2.99 more a month”. Never mind you sync your photos and apps to cloud storage and live alone, you buy the upsell anyway because you feel pressured and have social anxiety

    • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      a lot of buyers are conditioned to think of “what will I need eventually” and not “what will I need the overwhelming majority of the time

      And what is it that you do when you “eventually” need it?

      • quixotic120@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Rent, borrow, public option, etc?

        If your needs are covered by the lower option 99% of the time why spend a ton more when you could just do one of the above the once in a blue moon you’ll need the additional power? But we’re brainwashed to think we need to have that additional capacity at our fingertips at all times

        I will concede with a vehicle is the one of the options where it potentially can make sense. I for example live in a rural area with basically no public transportation options. So while 99% of my vehicle trips are as the article describes I could still understand how someone in my situation would value range for emergency planning, trips, etc.

        • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Rent, borrow, public option, etc?

          Don’t know about you but there is no public transit to speak of where I live. Renting is very inconvenient to do on a regular basis. Borrowing comes with a whole lot of liability issues.

          But we’re brainwashed to think we need to have that additional capacity at our fingertips at all times

          You are the one who has been brainwashed to think that everyone else’s needs/situation are the same as yours.

          I could still understand how someone in my situation would value range for emergency planning, trips, etc.

          Duh. No one needs 300 miles of range to pick up a pizza. They need it for long distance trips.

  • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah this is a tired argument that I strongly disagree with.

    Yes, it can cover the “average” driver’s daily needs. What about ALLLL of the above-average drivers? What about the other 10% of their needs? Are they supposed to go out and rent another car every time they want to go on an extended drive? What about when it gets cold? What about when the winds are high? What about when you want to put a bike on the back? What about when you want to tow a trailer? What about those that don’t have level 2 charging at home? What about when the car gets older and loses 20% of it’s capacity? What about the fact that 30% of that capacity needs to be reserved, because you don’t want to run your battery below 10% or charge above 80%? What about when it’s all of the above?

    • nikscha@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      When was the last time you went 500 miles in a single trip without stopping?

      And if you are so scared of charging your car for a few minutes while on toilet brake or getting some food, may I recommend a plug-in hybrid? You can do long distance trips on gas only (and it’s still more efficient than ICE cars, I get 45mpg out of my phev at 90mph on long trips), and for all your day-to-day driving you can go fully electric.

      I regularly (once every 2 months) do ~1000 miles round trips in my phev, so I probably am one of your “above average drivers”.

      My phev also comes with a tow-hook btw.

      Last, you’re contradicting yourself. You realize that the “reserved 30%” don’t get counted towards the advertisemed range? You realize that because of this measure, the “wear” on the battery is greatly reduced as well? Oh and wanna talk about wear? What about when my ICE car has to go maintenance after a month because one of the gazillion moving parts broke?

      • Nicadimos@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        For me it’s really a winter problem. 100+mi winter ski trips are fairly common. With cold weather range reductions and heat going hard it really eats into the range quickly. Being able to go up the mountains and back without charging is ideal.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        When was the last time you went 500 miles in a single trip without stopping?

        Never? Who’s talking about 500 mile legs? The article in question specifically asks if 300 miles of range is “really necessary”.

        And if you are so scared of charging your car for a few minutes while on toilet brake or getting some food, may I recommend a plug-in hybrid?

        I am not “scared of charging”. There are places I literally cannot go because there’s not sufficient charging infrastructure along the way. And there are others that require detours that cost several hours. I speak from experience.

        You can recommend whatever you like. I had a Volt at one point and it was great but 30 miles is simply not enough for most days. Plus it was otherwise an incredibly boring car to drive. And I had several very expensive engine issues.

        Last, you’re contradicting yourself. You realize that the “reserved 30%” don’t get counted towards the advertisemed range?

        Huh? What are you talking about?

        Oh and wanna talk about wear? What about when my ICE car

        You realize your PHEV has all the same moving parts as your ICE car + many more, right?

    • buzzywuzzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      All your what-ifs are answered with: you’ll lose some range doing so and will probably have to charge sooner and more frequently. But they are no showstoppers. The only showstopping they do is make sure the driver gets a necessary stop from driving hours on end, making the roads a bit safer for everyone.

      • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        All your what-ifs are answered with: you’ll lose some range doing so and will probably have to charge sooner and more frequently.

        That’s incorrect. What it means is that:

        1. there are more places you either literally cannot go to, because you won’t make it, or

        2. you have to take massive detours that cost you several hours because you won’t make it from one charger to the next along the fastest route.

        I speak from experience.

        But they are no showstoppers.

        What is a “showstopper”?

        • buzzywuzzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not sure where you are from, but I’m driving EV since 2019 and drove all over Europe in any season and there has been literally nothing stopping me from reaching my destination. I’ve never had to make a detour for charging my car. Granted, the first 2 years I drove and charged exclusively at Tesla superchargers, but later on I could pick from multiple charging station providers and locations along the way. As European, I’ve yet to encounter a negative in driving EV.

          • HughJanus@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I live in Texas. Bought my Volt is 2017. So I’ve been driving them longer than you. I enjoy owning and driving them but pretending like they don’t have any drawbacks is not doing any favors to the movement.