When Anti-EV Arguments Turn Subjective, EVs Have Already Won

By Edward A. Sanchez — March 20, 2025

Recently, in my interactions on LinkedIn, or with friends or family skeptical about EVs, I’ve noticed a recurring pattern. When sharing my ownership experience with an EV, or touting the efficiency benefits, I’ll get comments along the lines of “Well, I don’t want to change my routine,” or “They just seem so strange and different,” or my personal favorite, “I don’t want to be told what to drive.”

None of these responses have a basis in objective facts. By that standard, EVs are measurably superior to ICE in multiple categories. It’s indisputable that EVs are 3-4x as efficient in terms of energy consumption than their ICE equivalents. That’s just counting tank-to-wheels efficiency, not even taking upstream energy consumption factors for fuel such as extraction, refining, and transportation, which would tip the scales even further in favor of EVs.

Although “I don’t want to be told what to drive,” is a subjective statement, it has the basis in political philosophy, and is valid in that context. But it is not a statement of objective, scientific fact. I can also accept philosophical objections to political policies granting billions of dollars to private corporations in order to build out the charging network, as NEVI was originally intended. However, the opponents of NEVI and other programs promoting “green energy” are largely silent on the billions of dollars in government subsidies given to the oil and gas industry.

The argument gets even more convoluted when you get into the definitions and inclusion of “implicit” vs. “explicit” subsidies. This debate is fraught with partisan politics, as the political right dismisses “implicit” subsidies as being a fabrication of the left to justify heavy-handed environmental regulations. Implicit subsidies are essentially the unaccounted secondary costs of pollution such as respiratory illnesses, environmental damage, climate-caused natural disasters, etc.

There is something inherent in the American political and social ethos about “not being told what to do.” This goes to the founding of the country, enshrined in our constitution in the Bill of Rights.

But removing the politics from EVs, it’s fundamentally just a different technology than internal combustion, and an evolution of transportation. You could make the case in that context, it’s no different than the transition from carburetors to fuel injection, the addition of catalytic converters to cars in the 1970s, the government mandate of airbags, anti-lock brakes, and third brake lights.

But for many, the technological chasm between ICE and EVs is too great a leap. Not only is it a fundamentally different technology from an engineering standpoint, it requires a major change in human behavior and routine. Humans are creatures of habit, and change is hard.

For years, many commented and hypothesized about the “iPhone moment” for EVs. Some claimed it happened in 2018 with the introduction of the Model 3. I would argue it hasn’t happened yet, the main factor being charging infrastructure. Depending on region, EV charging infrastructure is plentiful and ubiquitous, or rare and inconvenient. In California, where I live, it’s predominantly the former. Nearly any major metropolitan or populated area has some provision for public EV charging of some sort, whether Level 2 or Level 3 DC fast charging. But in many other regions of the country, public EV chargers are few and far between.

To me, this is a perfectly legitimate reason to not get an EV. While the argument could be made with the average daily commute or driving cycle of 40 miles, and Level 1 120V AC charging, most Americans could statistically live with an EV and make it work, I can speak from experience that 120V AC home charging is far from ideal, and constraining. As opposed to an ICE vehicle, where refilling the fuel tank takes 3-5 minutes (never mind the fact it may cost $50-100 or more).

So sure, if you want to talk about EVs, and you tell me, “I don’t live near any public chargers, and I don’t have access to home or workplace charging,” I completely accept your hesitancy toward buying an EV. But if you parrot hollow right-wing talking points of “They’re expensive and don’t go very far,” show me the objective data. And no, Fox News or a Trump campaign rally is not a valid source.