If you were alive in the late 1990s, you either wanted, or knew a kid who wanted, a Furby. For those unfamiliar, the Furby was a robotic owl-like toy introduced during the 1998 holiday season.
Originally retailing for around $35, prices soon skyrocketed to triple digits as children around the world begged their parents for one of these creepy little creatures. The Furby ultimately went on to sell more than 40 million units in its initial three-year run. But then, just as quickly as it began, the fad ended.
Merriam-Webster defines fad as “a practice or interest followed for a time with exaggerated zeal.” There have been many fads over the years: pet rocks, waterbeds, the macarena, to name a few. They all shared the same surge of excitement and popularity. And they all shared the same inherent lack of any real substance.
Back in 2007, many people probably thought the first iPhone was a fad. Seventeen years later, that device has gone on to revolutionize our lives. The key difference between the iPhone and any of the aforementioned fads is that the iPhone possessed inherent innovation. It completely changed the way humans procured and disseminated data, and it just so happened to do so in an aesthetically pleasing package.
A skeptical thinker has to question whether the current electric vehicle (EV) craze is just the latest in a long line of fads. As simply a tool for transportation, the EV does not provide any advantages over existing internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. EV and ICE vehicles will both get a passenger from point A to point B in the same manner.
EV fans are quick to point out that EVs are better for the environment because they don’t burn fossil fuels. But they’re powered by electricity, which is generated from fossil-fuel powered electrical plants. And given the intense power needs of EVs, they require a lot more of that electricity than is currently being produced, requiring the burning of even more fossil fuels. So that argument is speculative at best.
EV proponents will also point out that EVs will save you money at the pump, since you don’t need to buy gasoline. According to many studies, the cost of electricity to “fuel” an EV is likely less expensive than the cost of gas to fuel an ICE vehicle. But according to a recent article from Edmunds, the average price of an EV is approximately $17,000 more than a comparable ICE vehicle. So, the money you save in power will easily be erased by the higher purchase/finance costs.
Then there’s the ethical issue. EVs are powered by batteries made from materials like lithium and cobalt. These materials are mined from places like the Democratic Republic of Congo, long known for its inhumane treatment of workers. I encourage readers to reference the February 2023 NPR article How ‘modern-day slavery’ in the Congo powers the rechargeable battery economy.
At best, EV fans can point to the myriad of advanced technologies appearing on many new EVs as incentive enough to purchase. Self-driving via Tesla’s Autopilot is a perfect example, but it’s not a technology distinct to EVs. A number of automotive manufacturers are already offering this technology on ICE vehicles, and the number is rapidly growing.
There are also a number of areas in which EVs are clearly inferior to ICE vehicles. These include, but are not limited, to:
- Lack of availability of charging stations
- Charging times
- Higher initial costs (as previously mentioned)
- Limited driving range
- Expensive battery replacement costs
- Questionable environmental effect of disposed EVs, due to the omnipresent battery materials
One would be remiss to not consider the “alternative” alternative fuel technologies that are either available in the market or currently being developed. At the time of this writing, biodiesel, hydrogen and hybrid electric all seem like much more viable long-term solutions to fossil fuels.
Recent news from the automotive industry would suggest that the proverbial writing is already on the wall. EV sales dropped significantly in Q1 2024 to just 268,909 units. GM announced June 11 that it was scaling back its target EV production from 300,000 vehicles to 250,000. Ford recently asked its dealers to pause EV investments due to impending changes to its EV certification program. This comes after the automaker posted a $1.3 billion (approximately $100,000 per vehicle) loss in Q1 2024 in its Model E (EV) business. Mercedes Benz, meanwhile, which once touted that they would sell only electric cars by 2030, is now backtracking to say they will continue to manufacture cars with electrified internal combustion engines well into the next decade. Many other auto manufacturers are following suit.
Only time will tell whether EVs stand the test of time. Perhaps they possess more innovation than this author gives them credit. Perhaps the federal government will continue to mandate an inferior technology for political reasons that this author does not understand. Or, maybe in five years, EVs will be the butt of dad jokes. On the bright side, original mint condition Furbies now sell for over $1,000 on eBay.
About Schneider Downs Automotive Industry Group
The Schneider Downs Automotive industry group serves dealers of all sizes, from single-point locations to mega-dealerships. Our members cross departments and meet regularly to ensure efficiencies in the services provided to our clients and discuss issues, regulations and trends affecting the automotive industry.
To learn more, visit our Automotive Industry Group page.
