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.
Yeah a company called Hertz pushing DC powered cars is absurd
Seriously, watt are they even doing?
Ohm my god, right‽
These puns are re-volt-ing.
A/C what you did there…
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
-
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.
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.
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.
Great news!
Amended title: Rental giant to take a huge step back in climate change fight and generate more GHG to protect their bottom line.
Alternate alternate title: EVs’ cost of ownership too high compared to ICEs.
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.
How do you mean? I’m not following.
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.
