It's an article about the Volt, and mostly the pessimistic side. Where are the reports about happy owners? The Leaf gets a short mention as "struggling" in the market, but it has sold more in 2011 than the Volt. Most I hear from Leaf owners is they are indeed quite happy with them, except for the absence of promised fast chargers. (Might be changed by those "corrupt" efforts.) Tesla is only enumerated in the category for rich technophiles who also have ICEs, even though Model S is coming around the corner, which may go a long way towards changing the requirement of an ICE, for the kind of sedan in a price class which you actually see quite a lot on the street. Instead the article mentions lots of stupid arguments that were launched against the Volt. OK, realistic recalibrating, now what's the "refreshing" part?
Yes, the article is mainly about the Volt. But the Volt is the most visible plug-in vehicle at the moment and the subject of the most negative press, so that didn't surprise me.
It's true that the happy owners piece is missing for all of the vehicles. But the automakers have also mostly missed that piece in their marketing and public comments. Ironically, GM has been the most vocal on customer satisfaction, but most of what they say is disregarded in general unless it's useful fodder for Rush Limbaugh.
The Leaf sold more than Volt in 2011, yes. (They are about equal now.) But it still fell nearly 2/3 short of the 25,000 unit goal that Nissan expressed. It was never a realistic goal, and Nissan never should have said it- but putting that out there makes Leaf sales look anemic by comparison. I have the same issues with GM (for 2012), Coda, Fisker and Tesla. All have expressed sales goals at some point that aren't going to happen, and it behooves us to be the first ones to say that rather than let the opposition media treat it like a story they "broke" later.
As for rich technofiles...EVs have always been seen that way, and even the $40k Volt takes a ton of heat for it now. Unfortunately, that's not really going to change with Model S. It's true that it's a more accessible price range, but still out of reach for the average buyer. And that's ok- lots of gas cars aren't "affordable" either. I usually have more luck not trying to contest the "more expensive" point; new technology is more expensive, and costs will come down. They haven't yet, in a way that's visible to consumers- and part of what we have to do is balance the tension between consumer enthusiasm that EVs are coming and the frustration that they're not available everywhere or affordable to everyone yet. But the benefit to this plug-in generation is the the variety within it- from an iMiEV that's in the high teens or low twenties after incentives through six-digit vehicles. I also still frequently remind people that it's important to contact automakers and ask for what they want in a plug-in vehicle- to express support for the idea, even if their dream car hasn't been announced yet.
I found the article refreshing because it attempted to talk about some of the challenges without resorting to the usual stable of curmudgeons who tend not to articulate anything more substantive than "EVs suck"... because of coal, or President Obama likes them, or whatever. Whether I agree with it or not, I'd rather see someone who has earned his point of view by doing the work than simply having a contrarian point of view for the sake of it. It's also a novelty to see an article acknowledge that everything won't be rosy, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing this. There was a little bit of "not because is is easy, but because it is hard" in there that I think is very much needed amongst all of the rhetoric about EVs being a national imperative. The industry needs help, and buyers in the market stage we're in (not the mass market automakers tend to think we're in) will rise to that challenge. You all prove it every day.
