Since you said we could be off fossil fuels in a month via carbon capture based methanol production, please elaborate how that would happen, since it requires hydrogen production and we (America) have no nationwide hydrogen production scale, but if we did, then we could just use hydrogen fuel...
Ethanol, commonly used as a biofuel, has several disadvantages:
1. Environmental Concerns:
Greenhouse Gas Emissions: While ethanol combustion produces fewer greenhouse gases than gasoline, its production can result in higher emissions due to soil carbon release, fertilizer usage, and...
FWIW, I had a similar mindset although I was a diehard truck and/or 6k+ lbs SUV person preferably V8 or super charged and/or twin turbo V6; however, my daily r/t commute is 100+ miles and my Audi Q7 premium unleaded only monthly gas bill was ~$650-$750.
Then, I read about Rivan's plans to build...
Well, unless you had a field of solar panels or a bank of batteries those solar panels kept fully charged, it would take you a helluva lot of days (weeks?) to *fill up* your BEV from the usual number of home solar panels considering the output of solar panels vs the size of the Scout BEV battery...
I get your logic, but I guess if that really concerned me, I'd just invest in a whole house propane or diesel generator that could run my home charger too. ;-)
Why are you not a fan of BEV? Is your daily drive more than 300 miles/day? Do you tow long distances often? Do you go off-road long distances? Is home charging not an option?
Just trying to understand the logic.
Did you read the letter?
It's America. Anyone can sue anyone despite how frivolous the lawsuit.
There is a reason why LEGAL BUSINESS ENTITIES exist. Why Rivian is NOT Amazon it's largest investor nor VW Group for which they formed a Joint Venture.
Scout Motors is LITERALLY A DIFFERENT LEGAL BUSINESS ENTITY from VW Group which means VW Group cannot be sued. They're only have their investment in Scout Motors to lose if Scout Motors loses.
ICYMI...
As the Scout CEO made perfectly clear, Scout is NOT VW but a separate American startup company and not legally bound to VW contracts.
Much like Rivian is NOT Amazon although Amazon is their majority investor.
50/50 in the JV not Rivian. The JV is a separate business entity than Rivian and VW Group.
Obviously, Rivian isn't the first EV manufacturer with direct to consumer sales model. Tesla pioneered it.
It's a 50/50 joint venture. VW Group has no ownership in Rivian. Amazon is still the #1 investor in Rivian by far.
As far as lawsuits,Rivian has had plenty of them to deal with.
The fatal flaw in your*just choose a different product* logic is that the trend is when ALL the major manufacturers adopt the same practices and there becomes little if any other choices. It's already happening with EVs even with legacy automakers.
We definitely will have to agree to disagree...
Apparently, you misunderstood my post. EVERY manufacturer should ABSOLUTELY be required to make *OEM* parts available to be purchased by owners as well as repair manuals which is NOT the case for more and more manufacturers including the legacy automakers as they have started producing EVs...
The *RIGHT* to repair is just that. The FREEDOM for consumers to choose DIY or not. Supportability and right to repair are not in conflict. See 100 years of DIY shade tree mechanics that didn't void any warranties for details.
Right to repair is also about making OEM parts and repair...
The evil empire (Apple) pwns your data and despite the myth that somehow a closed proprietary eco system is more secure than an open source system has been proven wrong time and again; e.g. see Pegasus for details.
Ideally, a transparent open source system that's been independently verified by...
I'm not just talking about stealing the vehicle. I'm talking about hacking the vehicle for whatever nefarious purpose by bad actors. e.g. https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15342464/cias-alleged-foray-into-car-hacking-should-come-as-no-surprise/