https://www.techspot.com/news/101491-hertz-180-rental-giant-sell-20000-evs-replace.html
Electrics marked for sale will continue to be eligible for rental during the sales process, the company added.
IMHO the full title should read, "Hertz replaces shoddily built and expensive-to-fix cars, which just happen to be EVs, with more reliable models, which happen to be ICE cars."
That, and there was something about charging infrastructure.
Exactly. Hertz vocally blames higher repair costs and long repair times for the Teslas that make up the bulk of their EV fleet. Other EV manufacturers don't share those problems.
Amended title: Rental giant to take a huge step back in climate change fight and generate more GHG to protect their bottom line.
EV cars have a lower cost of ownership than ICE cars, especially for high-use cars like taxis and rentals. Hertz is just pushing the cost to the customer here.
EV cars have fewer moving parts and maintenance items. Most notably there's no need to replace the engine oil, and it's rare to need to replace the brakes. Battery degradation is probably on par with engine rebuilds. Only limitation is maybe the tires due to the high torque and increased weight, which is exacerbated by it being a rental car. But Hertz could always just limit the torque in software. Vehicle maintenance is clearly cheaper for EV cars than ICE cars.
The biggest difference in cost of ownership though is the cost of gas. 80 kWH is much much cheaper than 25 L of gas, so the biggest savings from the EV car are felt by the person renting instead of Hertz. By switching back to ICE cars, people renting their cars will have to pay a lot more to drive, due to the increased fuel costs.
I'm not sure what economic calculations Hertz is doing here, they're citing higher repair costs due to Tesla's repair monopoly, and other people have mentioned the value depreciation of the car as battery prices go down. But the cynic in me says that Hertz can get away with renting a ICE car for the same price as an EV car and pass the increased cost of ownership of ICE cars onto the driver.
The upfront cost is a tough pill to swallow though. I drive a 20 year old Toyota SUV that I bought in 2018, and now has 190,000 miles. I bought it for $3,000 in 2018. In that time, I’ve personally replaced the radiator and brakes and changed the oil when it needs it, maybe twice a year since I use synthetic.
Sure, I’ll readily admit that my vehicle is terrible on gas mileage, but I work from home and drive about 5k miles per year on average. The initial cost of a new EV is a dealbreaker, let alone one that can handle 4 kids. And the thought of possibly having to suddenly replace a Li-Ion battery on a used one with degraded performance is a non-starter for me.
I’m not against EVs, and they certainly aren’t practical for everyone, yet at least. The dependability has to improve, and then I’d consider it. I still can’t see how it makes sense for a regular person like myself to dump $40k-$50k into a car because it doesn’t run on dinosaur juice. Especially in my situation.
Tesla’s build quality is shit anyways, on top of blaming drivers’ habits for their engineering mistakes and then refusing to fix it. Then there’s the fit and finish part of it, where the panel gaps don’t line up on this piece of shit $100k “truck”, that has no truck capabilities that apparently can’t drive in the snow. Elon Musk is a snake oil salesman, but I’d be willing to listen to an argument where I can get 5 years out of an EV for under $6k + the cost of gas.
I'm not even sure it's just that. A guy i know had to wait a couple of month until he could get his tesla windshield replaced. I still don't really know where all these tesla owners around here go to service their cars, because i only know of a dealership, but that's no garage. The only people i know with a teala bring their car there and they bring it somewhere from there. And service and shit takes for ever.
Took 11 months to get my Tesla repaired because they were waiting for suspension parts from Tesla. There are only three Tesla certified repair shops in my whole city (of 2 million people) but that wasn't the issue. The issue was Tesla.
If the EV's they're talking about in the article are Teslas, then I can understand why they would want to get rid of them.
And to be clear, I love my Tesla, but nobody should be buying one until they get their supply chain shit together. I already passed on buying a Tesla when I had to replace my second car recently. (Went with a PHEV because I need to road trip regularly and non-Tesla charging is still pretty terrible in that area.)
In Seattle, there is a dealer in the city, then there is a repair center in the city across the lake (Bellevue). There used to be a repair center in Seattle, but Tesla closed it. It is a terrible service model and like you said, everything takes forever.
Real alternate title: EV manufacturers are trying to be like apple and misrepresenting your ability to repair your shit for profit.
If you read the article, it's nothing to do specifically with EVs, they just had an unusually high crash rate.
“Likelihood of crashing” is part of the cost of ownership (regardless of engine type). For example, suppose a particular model comes with certain features that are more likely to distract the driver, thus increasing the rate of highway collisions, thus either increasing the cost of repairs over the life of the vehicle or just shortening the life of the vehicle—all else equal, this vehicle has a higher cost of ownership than a different model with fewer distractions, collisions, repairs, etc.
I rented a Bolt EV from Hertz once. The car was fine, but the charging stations in the area were mostly broken, or they required downloading an app and giving personal information to charge.
I got the feeling the charging networks are all about collecting government incentives and the sale of private information from subscribers, and not at all about service.
My new preferred rental car is no rental car at all.
charging stations in the area were mostly broken, or they required downloading an app and giving personal information to charge.
My experience with this is that some places have chargers figured out and some don't.
I live in the NL, I rent cars from SIXT Share on occasion, and the charging network is seamless. I can just roll into anywhere and there is bound to be a charger on every street corner, and each only need the RFID tag on the car keys to start charging. BTW, I've never seen a Tesla charger in the country.
OTOH, I've been over in Hungary, and it's a complete shitshow. My host drove us around in his Tesla, and chargers were few and far between, with Tesla ones being somewhat reliable, others worked as often as they didn't, and they all had their shitty apps that didn't work either.
EVs are a greenwashing scam. Mass transit is the only way that is sustainable for our population.
Edit: I will add mass transit plus better city planning to increase density. Cars in general require so much infrastructure not to mention what we will have to do to get ready for mass EVs.
Mass transit is the only way that is sustainable
EVs cut lifecycle emissions to about 45%. [UCS][ANL][MIT][IEA]
Public transit cuts lifecycle emissions to... about 45%. [IEA][AFDC][USDOT]
Neither is a magic bullet. Both get their asses kicked by bicyles. Both get better with increased passengers per vehicle. Both can be fueled with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both can be manufactured with renewable energy for additional reduction. Both take surprisingly equivalent amounts of steel, aluminum, and glass.
Public transit offers unique advantages from an urbanist perspective and the liveability of cities, but that's objectively different from sustainability.
EVs make a difference for anyone in an area with low density. I live in the country relatively close to population centres, but it's impossible for me to ever imagine transit being even near me.
We will literally always have a need for small, individual vehicles of some kind for most the population. If we could reduce that to one car, then supplement with transit, where available, or carpooling? Then also make that car an EV instead of ICE? That's a huge emissions reduction
They are not a scam in general, though one could easily say that about Tesla. The reality is we need both EVs and mass transit. The mass transit infrastructure we need will take time, and EVs are a good stopgap. You are not going to have a good bus or train infrastructure tomorrow, but if you're car shits the bed tomorrow you can get an EV. Plus there are always going to be a need for some people to have cars, and going electric is better even after manufacturing factors are taken into account. Think fleet vehicles and people that require a lot of tools and supplies for their job.
The mass transit infrastructure we need will take time, and EVs are a good stopgap.
I'd say yeah, walk and chew gum at the same time. On the other hand though, have they already closed off a lane and started on laying tram tracks where you live? Did the government pass resolutions to start procuring buses?
I have the feeling that these days with today's media and everyone focusing on "owning the moment", something like better public transit is either happening right now, or will never happen until those in power get replaced.
On the other hand though, have they already closed off a lane and started on laying tram tracks where you live?
Funny you should mention that. My city just made a lane on a major thoroughfare bus only and put a express bus to downtown Seattle that uses that lane. The regional transit system is also expanding light rail quite a bit here, so it is happening. It just takes time. The light rail has been almost a decade in the making.
Global EV production is so focused on making and meeting the demand for more vehicles on the road that the after market is handled as an after thought. This is partly offset by EVs being mechanically simpler and more reliable (mechanically) but that is little comfort when you do have an issue that needs parts to fix. And for Hertz it hurts when a car is out of commission for an extended period, so this is a very reasonable action in my opinion.
The problem isn't the mechanics, the problem is getting repair parts. Tesla is the only one who makes Tesla parts and they've decided that those parts are going toward new Teslas, not repairs. (My Tesla was in the shop for 11 MONTHS thanks to this fun state of affairs.)
While EV's that share a platform with ICE cars are generally worse than ground-up EV's, the nice thing is there are plenty of repair parts available.
There were four problems with their decision:
They chose the most expensive car to fix, and that it can't be fixed in independent shops. So, a small dent after a parking where everyone else says "well anyway the insurance pays for it" becomes a $3000 expense
They gave those expensive cars in lease to Uber drivers, meaning instead of having $100 of profit a day, they get a tenth of that, plus they get back a car with thousands and thousands of miles. And those drivers when they get a small dent after a parking they say "well anyway the full cover insurance (Hertz) pays for it"
They gave those cars with a new charging infrastructure to people with no experience at all, which is a shock for someone new. A bit of training is required
They purchased those expensive cars at full MSRP which IMHO is insane because any other automaker CEO would have done everything (=steep discounts) in order to sign such a deal
An EV engineer friend of mine said that this is specifically the Hertz Teslas because Tesla parts are expensive and sometimes hard to get. So when a Tesla breaks, they sell it rather than repair it.