- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
Rental firm Hertz Global Holdings (HTZ.O) said on Thursday it would sell about 20,000 electric vehicles, including Teslas, from its U.S. fleet due to higher expenses related to collision and damage, and will opt for gas-powered vehicles.
Shares of the company, which also operates vehicles from Swedish EV maker Polestar among others, fell about 4%. Tesla’s (TSLA.O) stock was down about 3%.
Hertz also expects to book an about $245 million charge related to depreciation expenses from the proposed EV sale in the fourth quarter of 2023.
Hertz’s decision underscores the bumpy road EVs have hit as the growth rate on sales of those vehicles has slowed, causing carmakers like General Motors (GM.N) and Ford (F.N) to scale back production plans of those vehicles.
Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas in a note said the car rental firm’s move was a warning across the EV space and it was another sign that EV expectations need to be “reset downward across the market.”
“While consumers enjoy the driving experience and fuel savings (per mile) of an EV, there are other ‘hidden’ costs to EV ownership,” Jonas added.
Very noble of you but most environmental issues with cars are not related to what kind of fuel they are propelled forward by. Rental cars are arguably a better option for the environment, because it is one vehicle used by many, regardless of fuel type.
I doubt OP is intending to forgo renting entirely.
Yes you are right.
Absolutely, and that’s why I don’t own a car. But there’s no way I’ll rent an ICE car from Hertz for a weekend trip if there are better rental services /carshares that have EV cars.
The main issue with EV cars vs ICE cars is that they require a lot more materials and resources, meaning you have to drive more to make them worth manufacturing. If you only use the car on weekends, then it will take years to offset the cost. Which is exactly why it’s perfect to have ICE rental cars, since they’re shared, they put on a lot more miles, and they are used more frequently than private cars.
Of course the best option for the environment is to not drive at all, which I aim for. I wish there was better public transportation and bicycle infrastructure in Sweden. I do fine with my bike and the trains here in the big city where I live, but once you’re 50 km outside of Stockholm, it’s just not practical to go on trips without a car with the current state of swedish infrastructure.
Thanks for your answer, interesting read 👍
That does seem wasteful of course. But I also wonder what will happen to the EV batteries in the end, and what will happen with cars that are too dependent on software, will the cars be unusable when the manufacturer does not want to support them anymore. All products get old and “worse” over time, but with EVs that seem to happen alot quicker just because of battery and software. Will there be brand new cars, 10 years from now being bricked because because the app is not supported anymore or the battery is not holding a practical amount of charge.
I find EVs outside of metropolitan areas in Sweden being very unpractical too. Not because there are no charging infrastructure, but I find it very unreliable. I never know what I am going to get when I stop at a station, are there any unused chargers, how much power delivery, is it working at all, what kind of app etc etc. Keep in mind i drove around the holidays where, of course, alot of other people also drove, so my experience is not the most positive in that sense. It works better for everyday commuting, because of the simple fact that you can mostly charge where at home.