Rivian CEO issues strong statement about people who purchase gas-powered cars: ‘Sort of like building a horse barn in 1910’::“I don’t think I would have believed it.”
I just looked up the price for a Rivian truck and holy shit is this guy for real? Lmao. Just another out of touch CEO virtue signaling. If he really felt this way he would make them affordable lol
What he actually meant to say was:
“I’ve got my head so far up my ass that I think everybody should be spending $100k+ on a truck regardless of their need or financial circumstances. I’m also incapable of doing my job, which is why my company can’t produce enough units, even though it’s largely a solved supply chain problem. This is how I cope with my shitty existence on this planet.”
deleted by creator
How to tell the entire world that you’re rich and entitled.
Have you seen the price of electric cars it’s ridiculous. No way I can afford one.
Also never mind the fact I have no way of charging it because I only have access to on-street parking. If they really wanted to help they should bring down the cost of their massively overpriced vehicles and also invest in distributing charging points around the country.
Isn’t the ultimate plan supposed to be that they’ll be at least one charging point and every highway at least every 8 mi?
It depends where you are and what market segment you’re looking in. In NZ you can buy a fully electric MG ZS EV (7 year warranty) for almost the same price as a base model Toyota Camry.
A new Renault Zoe is about 23 000€, which has a driving range of about 400km. Second hand they go for about 10 000€.
Yeah, there are many luxury EV brands, but those aren’t the only ones existing.
Yeah, so, how much is one of those Rivian trucks, exactly?
$73,000?
Yeah, fuck off. That’s more than the median annual gross income for American workers. It’s all good and well to tout a slightly more sustainable form of transportation–still not nearly as sustainable as busses or trains!–but when you’re pricing it well outside what most people can rationally afford, you’re not helping the situation.
Average transaction price for a new vehicle in the U.S. is already at $48k. Plenty of electric models are below the average price by now.
The fact is, if you’re considering buying a new car, you’re already on the richer side. So this message is mainly aimed at those richer Americans considering a $73,000 F-150, that they might want to consider a $73,000 Rivian instead.
Even in that instance the Lightning is a better deal.
and it’s only $40,000 to repair a bumper dent! such value!
https://www.thedrive.com/news/rivian-r1t-fender-bender-turns-into-42000-repair-bill
All these products have to come to market in order for prices to eventually come down. People need to see that they have viable options to gasoline cars.
In Norway, more than 80 percent of new cars sold are electric. There are many other options that don’t cost $73,000. Rivian is just one option.
IIRC, Norway also offered substantial tax incentives to people that bought electric cars. IIRC, the fed. gov’t did the same in the US, and car companies responded by raising prices by the amount of the incentive.
Ah, because the only EVs in the market are Rivian ones.
That’s true but you have to consider how much of the car market is made up of used cars. When I was last shopping for cars (4 years ago) there were hardly any EVs in my budget and the ones that were, were 10 year old Priuses. Most people frankly don’t have the income to buy anything more than a gas car. (Market for EVs may have changed since my experience). The way I see it is the CEO is making a good point while also shitting on poor people.
The first response from Google shows me several late model used Nissan Leafs for around $15k. Those didn’t have much range but plenty for most people’s day to day
deleted by creator
I believe that from his comment (“what are you going to do with that in 10 years”), he was implying buying new cars. I see nothing odd in buying used ICE cars, but I wouldn’t dish out for a new one at this point.
Now if you buy a used car for 10k now, you’ll probably have a harder time getting value out of it in 10 years vs. EV.
deleted by creator
Not only the cost, but there’s also the issue of infrastructure. I as well as many others in my city don’t have a garage and park either on the street or on a parking pad in the alley. I wouldn’t imagine a power cord running to a vehicle lasting very long because of the scrap prices of copper. We’ve got a long ways to go.
I buy what my meager wage allows me to afford…
Make an EV that competes on price with a Corolla and I’ll be there.
Removed by mod
Yeah, big words from rivian. Trucks that cost more than a luxury SUV.
Even then. My Corolla cost under $15k brand new off the lot. It’s not the base model either. The base model for the 23 Corolla is almost $22k. Car prices are insane.
The only new car still sold in the US for under $20k is the Mitsubishi Mirage, and even that model will likely be phased out in the next few years. I also wouldn’t recommend buying one, as, speaking from experience, it tends to roll over in a slight breeze.
Removed by mod
still use plenty of fossil fuels from coal plants
This is disingenuous as fuck and you know it. Updates to the grid are by far the most effective means of limiting carbon release. Tying engines to the grid maximizes gains in solar, wind, etc that not doing so does not.
There is no serious plan for climate change mitigation that does not involve EVs.
I own a gasoline car. I was being too flippant. I would point out that our car centric culture is inefficient no matter how you swing it. I agree it’s a part of solving climate change, but cars of any type are still a problem, we need to massively overhaul our urban transit and get away from cars in urban areas.
In the end all transit only accounts for 15% of the overall problem. Our spread out infrastructure caused by car convenience has many other negative externalities though, like the increased need to maintain more roads, electric loss over longer distribution, heating and cooling in large single family homes made possible by cars bringing you to your job while living way out in the suburbs (arguably way more serious than the cars themselves), etc. The suburban experiment was an environmental disaster, and I say this as someone that lives in a large house in the suburbs currently pumping out AC, so I’m not judging.
But plugging in your personal tank isn’t really solving the problem. It’s just ignoring it. Cars are the problem no matter the fuel source, because of the impact they have had on how we spread out and grow our consumption… We need multi use zoning, dozens of train lines in every city, bike infrastructure, work at home, massive reduction in fossil fuel based power plants… A reordering of society around alternatives to spreading out, a massive worldwide effort of urban densification. As well as a massive effort to hold corporations accountable for their energy use as well. That and we need to stop having so many fucking kids, the world can’t support this level of consumption forever.
Not disingenuous. True. Grid power is still dirty so electric cars are still dirty. Probably about a 50% improvement in carbon emissions based on the most common fuel mix in the US for an e car.
Clean transportation by car is a luxury that we do not yet have.
You don’t engineer for what you currently have. You engineer for where you want to be.
Renewable energy is the fastest growing segment of the energy market by a mile, growing exponentially.
I don’t have my numbers at hand, but renewables account for something like 80+% of new energy growth in the US.
Yes. The OP is about how TODAY it is silly to use ICE. Today it is silly to pretend that electric cars are clean. They will be at some point. At that point, I will agree with the obnoxious CEO from the article. Today, he is wrong, very heavy (7-8k lbs) coal powered trucks are not clean.
Make them smaller!
Purchasing EVs sends price signals. Big trucks are in demand, and it’s easier to cater to demand than shape demand when you’re an emerging market.
Seriously the epa doesn’t even bother to rate mpg in vehicles that approach rivian weight. An f250 probably gets a combined 15mpg. It weights 6k lbs vs the rivians 7k. if your only seeing a 50% cut in emissions with the switch to electric. A rivian truck is pretty much the same as an ICE car that gets around 30 combined.
There are a million reasons that drive them to make these monsters. But the climate isn’t one. I don’t care about the market forces. I care about cutting CO2 emissions. These vehicles do not help that mission today. The CEO is wrong. His vehicles don’t make sense TODAY except as a luxury product for rich people to signal their virtue. That’s it.
I don’t care about market forces
Then you are not serious about impacting climate change.
The rivian truck (I call it “froggy”) is actually a pretty small pickup truck, by american standard … have you seen a F150? (including the electric “lightning” version)?
in before, “but I need my enormous vehicle because once every 13 years I haul 3 2x4’s and am too dumb to use a roof rack or rent a truck for the day!”
I win!!!
My enormous eletric vehicle (plug-in Rav4) is powered from my home solar panel system, and I use it to transport my dogs to the park a couple of times a week.
I’m completely guilt free!!!😃
Rivian truck
It’s like buying a small house!
A small house for 74,000? Lol, you’d need at least double that in the Northeast part of America.
I was being facetious
Even a subcompact automobile takes up an entire traffic lane and an entire parking space, and providing such spaces is what ruins cities.
The future is designing our cities for walking, biking and transit, not replacing our disastrous car sewers of gasoline cars with disastrous car sewers of electric cars.
Removed by mod
Man I can haul 3 2x4s in my Camry
In 1910 the Model T had already been in production for 2 years. Remember that the Model T was designed to be cheap, so that every American could afford one.
If anything, this is more like buying a horse (not building a barn) in the “Horseless Carriage” era of the late 1800s. It was an era when cars basically looked like horse-drawn carriages but without the horses. Everything was custom-manufactured, and it was expensive. You could maybe see that these “horseless carriages” were the future, but they were still pretty impractical for the present. The world still had infrastructure only for horses, and not horseless carriages.
And yeah, if you were rich enough you might want to do your part to get rid of the major pollution problem of the day – streets absolutely filled with horse shit. But, that didn’t mean it was necessarily a practical idea to be one of the first to jump on the bandwagon.
Who cares what a CEO has to say?
We can give them a little credit when they speak out against fossil fuels, as a treat.
Sure, let me just fork over 80k for a truck from a company that’s been building cars for only a couple of years.
My next vehicle will likely be electric, but right now my wife and I have decent cars that still run, and are paid for, and I’m reluctant to waste money replacing something that still works.
I’m on a diesel and the emission zones in the UK are making it more challenging to own one. That said it has 750 miles range, 4 wheel drive, a station wagon, can actually tow stuff without halfing that range and can fill it up anywhere in minutes. It suits my lifestyle perfectly.
That and it cost me £2600… I wonder what electric car I could get for that.
I think you’re looking at electric bikes rather than cars for that money.
Haha exactly it’s crazy
Considering any new electric cars you buy would have to be made from materials mined and processed, manufactured into a vehicle and then shipped long distances before it even gets to you, keeping your existing car and maintaining it well is possibly better for the environment when the entire life cycle is considered.
While true for most devices.
With cars there is a big secondhand market.
Any new car added at the top trickles down and removes a polluting heap of junk at the bottom.
80k and it cuts my carbon emissions by less than half. Which might be washed out completely when you consider that a Rivian weighs over 2x what my car weighs.
Electric is the future. But it is a boutique luxury right now. A compact ICE is probably just about as good a choice for the climate as a electric mega truck. Call me back in five years.
Buying any car, electric or otherwise, is 'Sort of like building a horse barn in 1910’.
Real sustainability comes from changing the zoning code to cease outlawing walkability.
I don’t own a car anymore and haven’t for two years now. I walk everywhere. Around 10 miles most days through the countryside and coast from town to town.
Healthiest I’ve ever been, I can eat what I want a lot of the time too. I’ve got basically no body fat and I have a ridiculous amount of energy. I feel constantly refreshed too, before I was lethargic and overweight.
I live in the UK however in a very pedestrian orientated location where I can do this without issue. Or get a bus or train if needed. I have absolutely no idea how it would be possible in a rural area or a car centric city. I guess it wouldn’t be, and the people in charge are not willing to change.
I have absolutely no idea how it would be possible in a rural area or a car centric city. I guess it wouldn’t be, and the people in charge are not willing to change.
I live in a car-centric city, and am relatively civically engaged. Speaking from personal experience, for most of the people in charge, it’s not that they’re unwilling to change; it’s that they’re so indoctrinated from having grown up in American car-centricity that they don’t understand the problem or the alternatives enough to realize that there’s anything to change to. They’re like the people in this thread, who think “infrastructure” means things like adding EV chargers to suburban-sprawl parking lots or trying to get public transit to serve neighborhoods of single-family houses. They have no comprehension of the scope of the problem, which is that the Suburban Experiment is a failure and that the geometry of low-density, car-centric development makes it unsustainable, unaffordable, and unhealthy, regardless of how you power the cars.
Even when they support things like transit-oriented development or abolishing minimum parking requirements, they tend to think it’s the exception to be implemented in certain areas instead of realizing that it needs to be the default way we do things now.
Buying any car, electric or otherwise, is 'Sort of like building a horse barn in 1910’.
Let’s say that it depend on where you live. In a big city maybe a car can be useless (or less usefull), but in a small town like mine a car is basically the only way to move around since public transportation is really limited.
Real sustainability comes from changing the zoning code to cease outlawing walkability.
Even if you remove all the private cars in a city, you will discover that you will substitute almost all of them with small/medium trucks to deliver all the groceries/products you (end everyone else) need in your life. And I say it living in a small town where I can almost do the day by day chores without using a car.
A single delivery truck carries 100-200 packages, if everyone drives to the store instead, you’d have 100+ cars on the road. There is a huge difference.
I am not sure that there would be a so huge difference, especially outside some big cities and especially if you add also the public transportation to the game.
But maybe I am wrong.
It would be quite large. The vehicles per household would decrease to about 1 instead of over 2.
That would barely scratch the surface, I’m afraid. For quite a lot of America, not owning a car is simply not feasible. I don’t have a large friend/family group, but in 4 cases now, we’ve had to relocate our families a town over because wages aren’t keeping up with cost of living. So we all have long commutes now. There are no buses, trains, etc. We were priced out of housing market. When my landlord sold the property and forced my move 5-6 years ago, I could rent and pay 30% more for a smaller place, I could buy for what I was paying if I wanted to move my family of 5 into a two bed with no yard, etc, or I could move a town or two over pay a bit more, and get a decent size house for my family. Today if I had to buy a house, I couldn’t even come close to affording the place I live in now, especially not at 7-9% interest compared to the 3.5% I got.
Now I guess you could still say fuck me I should have given up my dogs, moved my family into a shoe box and just walked to save the planet, but even then that’s not really feasible. In a town of 60k I moved from, there is only bussing, and even then they don’t run often enough to a wide enough range of places that you’re not building in additional hours of the day to get where you’re going. And they often don’t run past 7pm or before 7am. And that’s most of America. Even in large cities, public transportation is severely lacking compared to the rest of the civilized world.
Biking in the US should also help be a stopgap, but our whole society is so fucking car centric even that’s even not really feasible. Aside from the fact that most of infrastructure rarely has bike lanes or even places to store bikes, its still lacking severely from “I’m just going a few blocks over to the bodega” every few days and is more like “just 5-10 miles to the grocery store.” And this is just looking at my tiny little town where I live that is nowhere near as bad as somewhere like Houston, which is far more populous and also even less dense and less traversable by anything that’s not a car.
In 2023, saying people shouldn’t own cars is either ignorant of the issues around it or just classist. The Rivian CEO saying shit like this, with a starting price of $73k, is just more classist CEO bullshit. We don’t even have the charging infrastructure at the moment to support everyone buying electric, not to mention I’d be willing to bet that 50% or more of this country can’t even afford the starting price on whatever the cheapest electric is.
Real sustainability comes from changing the zoning code to cease outlawing walkability.
Reply:
For quite a lot of America, not owning a car is simply not feasible
WHY IS IT NOT FEASIBLE WHOFEARSTHENIGHT? IS IT BECAUSE OF ZONING? ITS BECAUSE OF ZONING ISNT IT
deleted by creator
I hate armchair urbanists so much it’s unreal
Maybe if the alternative to building a horse barn in 1910 was building a garage that was so expensive only like 5% of the population could afford it.
barns are still useful and valuable today. this guy is a moron! he might have said something that made sense, like buying a new horse-drawn carriage. still, didn’t it take a couple/few decades for everything to switch over to cars?
deleted by creator
In 1910, in the United States, there were about 5 automobiles per 1,000 people. His analogy is stupid.
Source: Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 33, ORNL-6990, Oak Ridge, TN, July 2014, Tables 3.5 and 3.6.
I think his analogy is accidentally spot on. ICE cars are going to be around for a while
For a very long while, which makes it so important we switch away from fossils fuels to co2 neutral, synthetic fuels as fast as possible. And in Europe, nobody wants EVs anyway, sales dropped like batshit crazy and everyone is getting ICE cars…
Synthetic fuels would be great for all the existing stuff, but not sure where you’re getting EV sales are down in Europe.
New plug-in car registrations:
BEVs: *212,000 (up 57% year-over-year) and 17% share PHEVs: *100,000 (up 17% year-over-year) and 8% share Total: 311,897 (up 42% year-over-year) and 25% shareFrom https://insideevs.com/news/680428/europe-plugin-car-sales-june2023/
Rivian CEO should keep his mouth shut until a few grand gets you a used compact electric hatchback (VW Polo or similar) with a decent battery.
To be fair the headline is a bit clickbaity. The quote is referring to someone buying a new Chevy Suburban in 2030. It would be kind of dumb to do that in my opinion, but I also would never buy a new car anyway.
Selling $80k electric cars and making comments like this is sort of like saying ‘let them eat cake’ in 1780
Those trucks/SUVs weigh 8500lbs. Since there is no fuel tax being collected, these monsters are destroying the roads and not contributing to their upkeep. My city is passing laws to significantly increase the registration on these vehicles, according to their annual mileage. I’m all for going electric, but an 8500lb truck is not helping the environment.
2023 F150 weighs between 4,021 to 5,740 lbs, just as a reference point. All electric vehicles weigh significantly more than their ICE counterparts
This is true, but fuel taxes are very low. Most states that are charging an EV “road maintenance fee” (with whatever phrasing they select) are charging way more than an ICE vehicle would contribute in fuel taxes. And while it is true that BEVs are heavier than ICE vehicles, all else held equal, and that road wear and tear is strongly dependent on weight… as I recall reading, the overwhelming majority of road wear and tear is the result of freight trucks and similar vehicles.
I’m all for going electric, but an 8500lb truck is not helping the environment.
The issue here isn’t that it’s an EV in this case. It’s that it’s a truck. I’d wager than >95% of people buying trucks in the US would be perfectly served by a four door sedan or comparable sized vehicle. Trucks have largely become expensive vanity items to act as an external signal of a person’s cultural identity. Contractors and similar that actually use a truck for truck purposes still exist, but they’re comically outnumbered by people buying trucks for no good reason.
My conservative neighbor drives an F-150 (~5,500 lbs) and his wife drives a Tahoe (~5,800 lbs). But he had the gall to complain to me last week about the weight of my Model Y (4,400 lbs). It’s amazing what a little bit of oil and gas propaganda has been able to accomplish.
I don’t think it’s propaganda that EVs are heavy as shit for their size. Automakers are really upfront on that fact. You trying to call it propaganda illustrates your bad faith argument. You’re misusing that word and diluting the meaning.
4400 vs 5800 isn’t much of a difference, considering the sizes of the vehicles you listed. You are essentially driving a midsize truck but without the utility of a truck. Your neighbor has two trucks to your one. The top trim Tacoma weighs the same as your lower tier Tesla. Tesla Model X Standard Range comes in at 5,185 pounds.
I think we can both agree your vehicle is extremely heavy for being a small, low/mid tier passenger vehicle. Some Teslas are not eligible for the $7500 tax credit because they weigh so much.
I like how you can’t respond to this. It really hammers home my argument and calling you on your bullshit. Thank you for the votes, because that means I know you read the comment but have no idea how to respond!
My city doesn’t allow big trucks on our roads. The wear and tear of roads is heavily dependent on weight, as you and I both stated. Weighing 3500lbs more (the weight of a Toyota Camry) than even the largest personal vehicle is a problem which I hope they solve soon.
I’m not sure why people think it’s propaganda that EVs weigh 1.5x or more than a standard sedan. It’s a fact, and it’s easy to find information. The tech crowd wants to call anything that hurts their opinion bullshit, but they refuse to look it up. It’s right there on the manufacturers’ websites. I sincerely doubt the owners of Rivian or Tesla are in on some government “propaganda” to lower their own sales.
I appreciate the votes. That proves you read the comment but have no idea how to respond, because you can’t.
Mans just mad people arent buying his cars.
