Sign In or Create an Account.

By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy

Electric Vehicles

The Stripped-Down Tesla Is Exactly What We Need

No bells. No whistles. Just EV.

The Stripped-Down Tesla Is Exactly What We Need
Illustration by Simon Abranowicz

South of the border, Tesla quietly made its electric vehicles a little simpler.

The independent Tesla-tracking website Not A Tesla App recently shared news of a subtle change to the Tesla Model 3 that’s offered in Mexico compared to those for sale in the U.S. In place of the vegan faux leather that had been the sole option for its seats, Tesla offered ordinary cloth fabric as a choice. Luxury touches such as the heated or cooled seats aren’t available in this version of the Model 3. Nor is the rear touchscreen for backseat passengers to control their own temperature settings, a key addition to the redesigned Model 3 that recently debuted.

These changes don’t knock a lot off the cost of the EV: This rear-wheel drive 3 still costs 749,000 pesos, or about $40,000. But the introduction of a more stripped-down Tesla could be a signal that, just maybe, a more affordable Tesla is around the corner.

There’s no getting around it: Money may be the biggest stumbling block for EVs in the United States — at least as range anxiety dissipates thanks to better battery technology, growing charger networks, and people simply having more exposure to electric vehicles. The gap may be closing, but, in general, new EVs remain pricier than entry-level gas cars. Meanwhile, high interest rates are depressing auto sales of every kind and making comparably expensive EVs seem out of reach.

Electrics are expensive because of the costs to make their enormous batteries, the need to retool assembly lines to build a whole new kind of car, and other reasons mostly related to manufacturing. But on top of all that, they’re expensive because of how they’re positioned as a product. To get people excited about electric cars and see them not just as wimpy golf carts, carmakers led by Tesla sold the EV as the tech-forward ride of tomorrow. The look of EVs became all touchscreens and LEDs, smartphone features that meant to have us equate “electric” with “future.”

That design approach, combined with an emphasis on the zoominess an electric powertrain can deliver, gave EVs a sheen of luxury, even though the spartan conditions inside a Tesla bear little resemblance to the cushy environs of a Mercedes-Benz. It allowed Tesla — and Rivian and Lucid — to keep their startup companies afloat by selling expensive cars at the outset to maximize revenue. (It didn’t hurt that the high sticker price provided some room to hide the cost of the battery.)

That worked for the first phase of the EV revolution, when early tech adopters and climate-focused drivers jumped in. But that era is over. As the next era begins, success or failure will rest with the millions of people who make their car decisions on dollars and cents. The declining cost of batteries as companies get better at building them will help the electric vehicle get cheaper. But the other side of the coin is for companies to start selling the EV as just a car — a better one than your dinosaur gasoline-burner, yes, but not some smartphone on wheels sent back from the future.

This isn’t an entirely foreign notion. Cars have long been sold with various “trim levels” that include different packages of features at different price tiers. They’re usually designated by the alphabet soup you see at the end of a vehicle name, like Toyota Corolla XSE or Ford F-150 STX. In the case of the F-150, the extra technology and performance packages can double the starting price of $37,000.

You might think this is an annoying way to buy a car. The system hooks buyers with the promise of a low starting price, only for many to realize the car they actually want is $15,000 more. At the very least, though, it gives you the option to buy the cheap car if you can live without the fancier wheels, heated seats, and advanced suspension.

Gasoline cars could stand to do better in this regard, but it’s especially important for electric vehicles. Today’s market abounds with crossover EVs that pass themselves off as luxurious to get away with a price that bloats into the low $40,000s. Even with a few vehicles coming in the $30,000s, like the basic trim level of the Chevy Equinox EV and the promised revival of the Chevy Bolt, the useful-but-simple EV is a rare thing.

An EV is still an EV if it’s unremarkable. It’s just as good for reducing greenhouse emissions if it looks like my old Ford Escort on the inside: plain cloth seats, chunky physical buttons, and an analog speedometer on the dash. In many ways, it’d be better.

Perhaps this is the pathway to what Tesla, Ford, and others envision when they promise us the $25,000 EV. You’ll probably give up a little in terms of battery size and range, and lose some of the amenities and creature comforts. But what you get, finally, is a truly affordable EV. As someone who grew up on dead-simple transportation, I’d welcome it.

You’re out of free articles.

Subscribe today to experience Heatmap’s expert analysis 
of climate change, clean energy, and sustainability.
To continue reading
Create a free account or sign in to unlock more free articles.
or
Please enter an email address
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Sparks

New York’s Largest Battery Project Has Been Canceled

Fullmark Energy quietly shuttered Swiftsure, a planned 650-megawatt energy storage system on Staten Island.

Curtis Sliwa.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

The biggest battery project in New York has been canceled in a major victory for the nascent nationwide grassroots movement against energy storage development.

It’s still a mystery why exactly the developer of Staten Island’s Swiftsure project, Fullmark Energy (formerly known as Hecate), pulled the plug. We do know a few key details: First, Fullmark did not announce publicly that it was killing the project, instead quietly submitting a short, one-page withdrawal letter to the New York State Department of Public Service. That letter, which is publicly available, is dated August 18 of this year, meaning that the move formally occurred two months ago. Still, nobody in Staten Island seems to have known until late Friday afternoon when local publication SI Advance first reported the withdrawal.

Keep reading...Show less
Blue
AM Briefing

Exxon Counterattacks

On China’s rare earths, Bill Gates’ nuclear dream, and Texas renewables

An Exxon sign.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

Current conditions: Hurricane Melissa exploded in intensity over the warm Caribbean waters and has now strengthened into a major storm, potentially slamming into Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, and Jamaica as a Category 5 in the coming days • The Northeast is bracing for a potential nor’easter, which will be followed by a plunge in temperatures of as much as 15 degrees Fahrenheit lower than average • The northern Australian town of Julia Creek saw temperatures soar as high as 106 degrees.

THE TOP FIVE

1. Exxon sued California

Exxon Mobil filed a lawsuit against California late Friday on the grounds that two landmark new climate laws violate the oil giant’s free speech rights, The New York Times reported. The two laws would require thousands of large companies doing business in the state to calculate and report the greenhouse gas pollution created by the use of their products, so-called Scope 3 emissions. “The statutes compel Exxon Mobil to trumpet California’s preferred message even though Exxon Mobil believes the speech is misleading and misguided,” Exxon complained through its lawyers. California Governor Gavin Newsom’s office said the statutes “have already been upheld in court and we continue to have confidence in them.” He condemned the lawsuit, calling it “truly shocking that one of the biggest polluters on the planet would be opposed to transparency.”

Keep reading...Show less
Red
The Aftermath

How to Live in a Fire-Scarred World

The question isn’t whether the flames will come — it’s when, and what it will take to recover.

Wildfire aftermath.
Heatmap Illustration/Getty Images

In the two decades following the turn of the millennium, wildfires came within three miles of an estimated 21.8 million Americans’ homes. That number — which has no doubt grown substantially in the five years since — represents about 6% of the nation’s population, including the survivors of some of the deadliest and most destructive fires in the country’s history. But it also includes millions of stories that never made headlines.

For every Paradise, California, and Lahaina, Hawaii, there were also dozens of uneventful evacuations, in which regular people attempted to navigate the confusing jargon of government notices and warnings. Others lost their homes in fires that were too insignificant to meet the thresholds for federal aid. And there are countless others who have decided, after too many close calls, to move somewhere else.

By any metric, costly, catastrophic, and increasingly urban wildfires are on the rise. Nearly a third of the U.S. population, however, lives in a county with a high or very high risk of wildfire, including over 60% of the counties in the West. But the shape of the recovery from those disasters in the weeks and months that follow is often that of a maze, featuring heart-rending decisions and forced hands. Understanding wildfire recovery is critical, though, for when the next disaster follows — which is why we’ve set out to explore the topic in depth.

Keep reading...Show less