Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 606

Is it time to pull the plug on EVs?

Electric vehicles (EVs) have been hailed as the future of transportation – promising a cleaner and greener alternative to traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Governments worldwide have pushed EV adoption through subsidies, tax credits, and ambitious targets, while car manufacturers have invested billions to electrify their fleets. However, announcements from major automakers, as well as recent data and surveys in the U.S., Australia, and Europe, suggest EVs may not be the wisest purchase for consumers today.

From production pullbacks and the downstream impacts of consumer hesitancy and infrastructure woes, here’s why the EV revolution is hitting a speed bump.

Major carmakers are hitting the breaks on EV ambitions

One of the most telling signs that EVs may not be the golden ticket they were once thought to be comes from the very companies building them. Large car manufacturers are rethinking their all-in approach to EV production, citing weaker-than-expected demand and staggering financial losses.

In the U.S., Ford and General Motors (GM) have made headlines with their retreats from aggressive EV plans. Ford, which has been transparent about its EV financials, reported losing US$18 billion on EV production over three years, equating to a jaw-dropping US$50,000 loss per EV sold. In response, Ford announced in 2024 that it’s scaling back EV production and shifting focus to hybrids, delaying plans for an all-electric SUV (sport utility vehicle). GM followed suit, cutting its 2024 EV production targets by an estimated 50,000 units, acknowledging that consumers aren’t transitioning to fully electric models as quickly as anticipated.

While Tesla is still an EV market leader, it has faced its own challenges, with price cuts and slower sales growth signalling a cooling market. In Australia, Tesla’s sales slide continued in February, with the brand recording a significant reduction in sales compared to the previous year. The nation’s best-selling electric vehicle brand recorded 1,592 sales in February, more than double the disastrous 739 deliveries notched in January. However, that was down 70% from the 5,665 sales of February 2024.

The picture in Europe is similar. Volkswagen, a key player in the European market, has tempered its EV targets. According to the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA), Volkswagen recorded a 27% year-to-date drop in battery-electric vehicle (BEV) sales in Germany.

Volvo, which once pledged to go fully electric by 2030, has adjusted its timeline, admitting that market infrastructure and consumer acceptance aren’t quite there yet. European manufacturers are increasingly pivoting to hybrids as a bridge technology, reflecting a pragmatic response to sluggish EV uptake.

Meanwhile, back in Australia, EV adoption remains in its infancy, with the pure electric market share declining precipitously. The latest data from the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI) and the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) reveals a total of 5,684 full battery-electric vehicle were sold in Australia in February, compared to 10,111 in the same month last year.

A total of 96,710 new vehicles were sold in Australia during February, including cheap Chinese EVs, meaning EVs make up just 5.8% of sales. A year ago, EVs made up 9.6% of the market even when cheaper Chinese models were unavailable in significant quantities.

Major manufacturers like Toyota, dominant in the Australian market, have doubled down on hybrids rather than pushing EVs aggressively, citing the country’s vast distances and limited charging infrastructure. Even Tesla’s Model 3, which led EV sales in 2019, faces competition from more affordable internal combustion engine and hybrid options, dampening enthusiasm for a full electric switch.

Consumer sentiment: cost and convenience concerns

Surveys across all regions reveal a growing scepticism among consumers. This is driven by high costs, range anxiety, and inadequate infrastructure. In the US, a 2023 Pew Research Centre survey found that only 38% of Americans were likely to consider an EV for their next purchase, down from 42% in 2022. The same survey in 2024 revealed just 29% of Americans say they would consider an EV for their next purchase. And globally, 29% of current EV owners told McKinsey in 2024 that they plan to switch back to gasoline or diesel vehicles, with that figure rising to 38% in the US – highlighting dissatisfaction with the ownership experience.

Key concerns include the high upfront cost (EVs remain 10-50% more expensive than internal combustion engine equivalents) and concern about charging availability.

In Europe, despite a 62% surge in EV sales from mid-2022 to mid-2023 (Bloomberg), mass adoption is stalling. The Ernst & Young (EY) report notes that while subsidies have boosted sales, the average EV still costs over 25% more than an internal combustion engine vehicle, and consumers are often unaware of the long-term ownership costs. A 2024 S&P Global forecast slashed its 2025 EU battery-electric vehicle market share prediction from 27% to 21%, reflecting economic pressures and a lack of affordable models. Posts on X (Twitter) echo this sentiment, with users pointing to the steep losses manufacturers and owners face as evidence that EVs aren’t yet viable for the masses.

In Australia, range anxiety is a major hurdle, especially outside urban centres. With EVs like the Tesla Model 3 commanding a premium price – around A$60,000 compared to A$40,000 for a comparable hybrid – the cost-benefit equation doesn’t add up for many.

Infrastructure and market realities

The EV charging infrastructure – or lack thereof – remains a critical bottleneck. In the U.S., despite US$5 billion allocated in 2022 to build EV charging stations, only 17% of Americans in the Pew Research Centre survey were confident this would materialise effectively. In Europe, the ACEA warns that the EU’s charging network isn’t keeping pace with demand, with gaps in rural areas undermining EV practicality. Australia fares worse, with just 3,000 public chargers nationwide as of 2023, compared to over 12,000 in Norway, a country with a similar population.

The hybrid hedge and the bigger picture

Meanwhile, as we have reported previously, hybrids are emerging as a compromise, offering fuel efficiency without the full commitment to electric. Toyota’s success with the Prius and Ford’s pivot to hybrid F-150s suggest that consumers will accept greener options without the risks and inconveniences of EVs. Meanwhile, manufacturers face regulatory pressure – like the EU’s 2035 zero-emission target or California’s 2035 internal combustion engine ban – but recent data shows these goals may be out of sync with market realities. The International Energy Agency’s (IEA) 2024 Global EV Outlook predicts EVs could hit 45% of global sales by 2030, yet this falls short of net-zero targets, and regional disparities mean progress is uneven.

Why EVs might not be the smartest buy today

For the average consumer in the U.S., Australia, or Europe, EVs come with too many caveats in 2025. They’re expensive, lose resale value quickly, and depend on an insufficient and unreliable charging grid. Manufacturers are losing billions, signalling an unsustainable model without massive subsidies – subsidies that are shrinking, as seen with the U.S.’s tightened Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) credits and Europe’s shifting policies. Hybrids, by contrast, offer a practical middle ground, while internal combustion engine vehicles remain cheaper and more versatile for now.

The EV dream isn’t dead, but it’s clear the hype has outpaced reality. Until prices drop, infrastructure catches up, and manufacturers stop bleeding cash, putting your money into an EV might be more of a gamble than a smart investment. And by then, alternative technologies may supersede lithium battery-electric vehicles. For now, the road ahead looks bumpier than the glossy electric vehicle advertisements suggest.

Roger Montgomery is the Chairman of Montgomery Investment Management and an author at www.RogerMontgomery.com. This article is for general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any individual.

 

29 Comments
Rod
April 12, 2025

Correction: Norways population is approx 1/6 of Australia’s, not equal to Australia.

Disgruntled
April 11, 2025

EV car sales have for the most part been boosted by subsidies and legislation.

This has brought forward demand to those that could afford and wanted an EV.

It is natural to have a pull back in numbers.

There is no single issue affecting EV sales but a combination, as mentioned.

Cost (early movers)
Range anxiety
Distrust
Media Posts about every EV car fire (ICE vehicles catch fire more but EV gets the headline)
Just Australia alone, new car sales are around 1 Million a year and the car fleet nation wide is circa 20 million cars so it is a minimum 20 years* to replace the current car fleet. Only a small % are EV sales. ICE cars will be n the road for decades yet. Average age of cars on our roads is nudging 12 years now up from around 10 years.

*Likely longer as ICE vehicle isn't slated to cease production until 2035 to 2040 (possibly t be extended with Hybrids)

We have a bit of carrot and stick approach here, subsidised batteries, solar etc Emissions tax applied to new cars

Usage charge will have to come into play at some point to over some of the lost revenues from reduced fuel excise raised.

Mentioned in comments about charging costs about 1/2 the equivalent petrol cost via mains charging.
Add future road usage charge cost, how much closer to ICE then?

The best idea is to not buy a new car and run the old ones into the ground. Mining of all the battery materials, oil to make the plastics, shipping materials around the world for assembly.

The old car has been made, use it until it is no longer serviceable. Oh, but I have t have a new car.. No, no you don't, you just think you do.




CC
April 11, 2025

I have never seen or heard of an ICE car spontaneously catching on fire and burning all the adjacent cars parked next to it. Neither have the long haul cargo ships that transport cars across oceans, whereas they have had a few catastrophic events with EV cargoes. Not common, but disastrous when they happen. I've heard some shipping companies now refuse to carry them due to prohibitive insurance costs.

John
April 10, 2025

It's all over for EVs, because even Tesla, which has the highest gross profit margin (18%) of any major car manufacturer, can no longer make money thanks to Trump's tariffs on China. e.g. The traction battery from China for a USD 35,000 Model Y costs Tesla about USD 6,300. That's now more than doubled to about USD 13,000 after Trump's tariff. Goodbye all the margin and a dead loss after tariff on all the other imported components. If this keeps up, Tesla shares go to near zero and it's equally bad news for any other EV manufacturer.

Rob
April 11, 2025

John there's more to EVs than the US and the tarrifs are only relevant to the US. No issues for sales from one country to another country so your proposition is not relevant to the rest of the world

Trevor Gordon
April 10, 2025

Another reason that sales are slowing is that consumers are starting to see through the Elon Musk and green hype. I'll own an EV one day, but it will be powered by hydrogen, not a lithium battery.

China is in control of most of the rare earths required for batteries. It has no concern for the damage it does in Indonesia with nickel mining, crashing the price to responsible nickel miners.

All these EVs have to come on dirty ships, so if you are trading to an EV to only save the world, it will take years to offset the transport carbon footprint alone.

We should immediately take away every rebate and incentive for EV sales, including adding a fee to pay for road infrastructure that all petrol/diesel owners pay in fuel taxes. Then put all that money into hydrogen or similar alternatives. Tax payers won't have to fund infrastructure if the current service station owners incorporate hydrogen like they did with LPG. Airbus has just released its first hydrogen fuel cell powered plane. Toyota has started hydrogen research and trials, but the solutions to full retail outcomes need funding.

I would never consider buying a second hand EV and I am yet to meet anyone that would.

Douglas
April 11, 2025

Hydrogen is dead in the water ..look how many projects have either terminated contracts or gone into Receivership.
Another expensive dream by a multi millionaire plus blackout Bowen's government incentives.

Disgruntled
April 11, 2025

Hydrogen powered vehicles themselves are good, the issue is the Hydrogen part.

Expensive to make, compress, store and distribute.

Still makes sense for heavy transport like trucks and trains that run depot to depot.

For everyday motoring, not so much.

Shell closed their Hydrogen fueling stations in California last year.

Honda and Toyota have had Hydrogen powered cars on the roads in LA for decades. They never really took off in any great numbers.

Craig
April 11, 2025

All cars are transported on 'dirty' ships, what difference does it make if it's an EV or ICE vehicle. Therefore that point is irrelevant, the carbon offset comes from the long term ownership.
I seriously doubt Hydrogen will ever be be able to compete with electricity, and why would anyone bother. Just like fuel, someone still has to make the hydrogen, ship it to an import terminal, then transport it to a service station (that has to retrofitted to install hydrogen tanks and pumps), then you need to drive to the station to fill up. Compare that to an EV vehicle that you can just charge at home without all the other hassle. I just can't see Hydrogen being able to compete.
EV's aren't responsible for bad work practices in Indonesia, people are. I'm sure the same poor working conditions apply with gold and diamond mining in Africa, do you think people should stop buying gold and diamonds?

Steve
April 10, 2025

Glad to see some satisfied EV owners here. Well done, but you are still way in the minority. This article was mainly factual which is probably what annoys zealots. Even 30% of current owners plan to switch back - that's BAD. These are probably the easier people to sell this technology to and 1/3 say not again. Clearly the experience was not good enough. In a place like Australia the distances are too big, sure if you plan a trip and want to wait around each time you charge, go for it. Just hope you don't do too good a job converting people or you may have a queue of cars and the waits could be less than ideal. One thing missing in the article is how many of the sales are private and how many are to vested interests like councils, government departments etc where the cost is always a secondary consideration to being more pure than the rest of us.

CC
April 10, 2025

Norway has a population of less than 6 million ( 5.5 million ) which is less than a quarter of Australia.

Disgruntled
April 11, 2025

Norway also gains its wealth from selling Oil.

Stephen
April 10, 2025

George B,
1. Too big???
2. Efficiency not compromised! 0-100kph faster than Porches and even battery distribution throughout chassis ensures better road holding than Porche which has engine at one end of the car. Tyre wear is greater simply because of weight that is not detrimental to performance. I have had no problem with suspension.
3. Takes longer to charge publicly (but still surprisingly fast), but, great efficiency to charge at home like you use your phone. Plenty of Tesla charging points to drive interstate and to all provincial cities. Hybrids do avoid the charging anxiety.
4. I was in a Prius taxi recently that had done 400,000 kms and was still providing similar fuel efficiency as originally. EV battery warranties are typically 8 years but the jury is out on how long an EV battery will last. Batteries can be replaced. Your suggestion that 60,000 km will see out an EV is frankly naive.
5. So battery production for computers, solar & wind farms and every portable appliance we use daily don't come from the same dirty nickel producers: a little naive again! Think of the ICE pollution in cities we are inhaling each day like passive smoking. Surely massive health savings would come from eliminating that pollution in cities.
6 & 7. Insurance is based on replacement cost. I have had my 3 Teslas insured and repaired on various occasions at similar rates to my previous Lexus and my wife's Lexus hybrid. Panel works are expensive because EV bodies are often aluminium.
8. Depreciation is an issue with most luxury cars. There is definitely battery life anxiety associated with the 8 year warranty period.
I owned each of my 3 Teslas for 4 years: never serviced them once! Changed tyres on one at 22,000 kms which was a bit disappointing, but, not during either of the other 2 cars that lasted 30,000.
Fuel is domestic supplied electricity from mains at home as solar doesn't produce sufficient for a 100 kw battery. Estimated to be half the cost of petrol for an ICE.
9. Public charging is well developed but not as prolific as petrol (p for pollution) stations. Next time you walk down the street, consider the CBE exhaust pollution you are inhaling.
10. It is not practical to rely on solar to charge an EV that is using a 100 kw battery. Mains power is the only solution other than to top up with solar. So, connect to domestic power supply and marvel at the savings versus petrol going into a polluting ICE.

James
April 11, 2025

"Fuel is domestic supplied electricity from mains at home as solar doesn't produce sufficient for a 100 kw battery."

Right, so most of the time it's a coal powered car then!?

Steve
April 11, 2025

The rationale for EVs - which took 426 words - destroyed in one sentence.

GeorgeB
April 11, 2025

Hi Stephen (see my comments below)

1. Too big meaning that it extends over the entire floor and is typically integrated with the chassis of the vehicle making replacement and/or or repairs a complex and expensive venture – a relatively minor accident that dents the battery casing can mean that the entire battery needs to be replaced or the vehicle has to be written off.
2. You appear to be confusing efficiency with performance - faster than Porsche acceleration in a car weighing two tons or more comes at a significant cost to efficiency because more energy is needed to accelerate a bigger mass and more energy is needed to slow it back down (basic physics). Regen braking alleviates this to some extent because some of the energy is recycled back to the battery. Nevertheless Regen braking is not 100% efficient and the gain is largely offset because battery powered cars are significantly heavier than their ICE counterparts, so more energy is needed to start with-even battery or weight distribution mainly benefits driving in a straight line but try turning a fast corner when two tons plus want to travel in a straight line (basic physics again) and you will appreciate the benefit of reducing overall weight of the vehicle.
3. Charging at home only makes sense if you have installed renewable power otherwise you are just swapping emissions at the tail pipe for emissions at the power station.
4. “Your suggestion that 60,000 km will see out an EV is frankly naïve”.
My comment about an older ICE vehicle underscores the contrast that ICE do not degrade significantly over time including when not being driven in contrast to an EV battery that would likely degrade to near zero over a similar time frame even with minimal or no use- while some batteries may survive 400,000 kms this would need to be done in a relatively short time frame (about 50,000 or more kms per year).
5. It’s bad enough that we have to produce and dispose/recycle the (relatively small) batteries produced for computers, and other portable appliances we use daily without making the problem much worse by adding another ton or so for every vehicle traversing our roads.
6. “Surely massive health savings would come from eliminating that pollution in cities”-see comment above about swapping emissions at the tail pipe for emissions at the power station (we live in Australia not Norway).
7. “Depreciation is an issue with most luxury cars”– have a look at how fast an EV Porsche Taycan depreciates compared to an ICE Porsche Macan.





OJ
April 10, 2025

To George B... Well summarised. atm it's erroneous to suggest EVs are more environmentally friendly than ICE vehicles when all factors are considered. One day, this may change, but don't hold your breath waiting.
And if EVs are so wonderful, why so many taxpayer subsidies to the EV/weather dependent energy boondoggle- Robin Hood in reverse.

Fergus
April 11, 2025

OJ...moving to a form of transportation which does not require digging and drilling and polluting makes a lot of sense...yes EVs or Hydro- Fuel Cells are not perfect ....but neither is the fossil fuel solution...it is dirty...creates significant waste and is not great for our health: "Fossil fuel pollution kills more people globally than smoking, according to a new report from Doctors for the Environment." Source -https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/am/fossil-fuels-kill-more-people-than-smoking-report/104222264

Unsure what you mean by Robin Hood in reverse....but if you want to talk subsidies look at what the fossil fuel industry receives from us tax payers:

"In 2024–25, Australian governments provided $14.9 billion worth of spending and tax breaks to assist fossil fuel producers and major users, a 3% increase on 2023–24.

Subsidies in the forward estimates have increased from $65 billion to a record $67 billion, a sum 14.2 times larger than the nation’s $4.75 billion disaster response fund". Source: https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/fossil-fuel-subsidies-in-australia-2025/

James
April 11, 2025

"OJ...moving to a form of transportation which does not require digging and drilling and polluting makes a lot of sense..."

And how do you think they mine nickel, copper, lithium, cobalt.........?

OJ
April 12, 2025

To Fergus.
1. Unfortunately politicised medical doctors, " doctors for the environment " (dfte)or not , cannot be trusted to give impartial advice. Witness the front page story in The Australian of 10.4.2025, whereby a Family Court Judge "calls into question the integrity of one of the nation's peak (medical) gender clinics" . So I wouldn't be quoting anything from partisan doctor groups.
2. At best, dfte are likely extrapolating from 3rd world countries where outdated coal fired power stations and outdated cars are in use; think about it- if fossil fuel pollution were so bad, there would have been a mass exodus from western cities years ago.
3. Re "fossil fuel subsidies", it's a favourite ploy of the greens to lump in normal tax deduct-ability as a "subsidy" . Whether a company is producing fossil fuel or mining lithium or building windfarms, they all get depreciation allowances for capital employed, exploration costs, rebate of diesel excise when the diesel is not being used to power vehicles driven on public roads, etc.
3. Robin Hood "in reverse" is where the benefits of green subsidies flow to wealthier people at the expense of the less wealthy. Re subsidies for rooftop solar and household battery installation costs; poorer people on average are more likely to be renting, and so would not be installing solar panels/ batteries, but they pay for these subsidies through general taxation and paying full price for electricity . For Salary Sacrifice schemes there is a bigger after tax benefit if the salary sacrifice is an EV. Again, people on higher salaries on average benefit from this at the expense of the not so wealthy.
Currently, to the best of my knowledge, EV owners in Australia don't pay for road maintenance, however poorer people that can only afford older ICE cars pay "road tax excise" on every litre of fossil fuel they buy.

Graham W
April 10, 2025

Even with a so called 600km range, that is using a standard that assumes a flat freeway no aircon or heater and definitely not extremes in temperature. It also assumes a 100% charge. To protect the battery it's recommended to not charge more than 80% or let it go below 30%. So there goes your range. If you do charge too often.say on a long trip the battery system reverts to trickle rate meaning maybe several hours just to get the last 100 KMs to your destination. And if anything goes wrong who is going to fix it. The support network for all these new EV.s is pathetic and impossible in the country. That's why they are for city folks with solar panels.off road parking and extremely good fire insurance.

Our other car is a diesel
April 11, 2025

My car (Xpeng G6 long range) is more efficient around town than advertised (although when including freeway driving which I rarely do, it gets closer to the mark). Around the city, including up to 90km/hr, I get ~13 kW/100Km compared to the advertised 17.5. I only charge to the recommended 90%, and I can still get >600km if I bothered to run to flat but I never do as I take advantage of home solar. All with air con and traffic. Servicing is done by Ultratune when the time comes and their road side assistance is includeded if you service with them (free for first year). Mine came with free extended warranty for 10 years (incl the battery).

Arthur Hunt
April 10, 2025

It is disappointing to read articles and comments about EVs by people who have obviously never owned or driven one. I have owned an EV for five years
recently ticked over 100,000 km with minimal battery degradation,
completed 52,000 km before first tyre change,
driven from Central Queensland to Tasmania and back without difficulty,
used discounted home charging that costs about $45 per month,
charged at home while the car is idle which requires none of my time,
friends that charge from rooftop solar power for almost zero cost,
very low maintenance costs.
appreciated that over-the-air software updates improve the car at no further cost

I question the survey that suggests EV owners would revert to a fossil-fuel car. This does not agree with other surveys.

Please try to provide balanced articles about EVs.

Pedro
April 10, 2025

Norway , a similar population to Australia? And also no mention about china

Why is MSM against EV?
April 10, 2025

I think there's a bunch of things missing here. The reason I think historically major motor companies are pulling back from EV's is that they can't compete with Chinese technology. The new Chinese EV's are too good and better value than what they can put together (which still requires Chinese batteries since they are the global leaders).

Not having charging stations really aren't a big deal unless you regularly do long trips. Modern EV's can do 600kms on a single charge and even on a home trickle charger can keep you topped up if you charge overnight on off peak (let alone during the day if you have solar).

Newer cars will be able to charge just as quickly as you fill up a fuel tank of petrol.

Steve
April 12, 2025

Faster charging means more current. I doubt the infrastructure in place could not cope with a ten-fold increase in the current needed to achieve this rate of charging. Saying something may be done is not the same as making it practical. EV's have hit their ceiling in a market system, and that's with all the govt incentives. The only thing that will push them will be govt mandates, but that would be a very brave govt. Now as you say, if you don't need long trips and can charge at home, by all means go the EV route. That's entirely your choice. But just because the latte sippers live this way doesn't mean they get to impose their choices on everyone else, particularly those who may regularly drive longer distances or don't have easy access to home charging. But of course Bowen wants to do exactly that - force people to buy EV's via whatever means he thinks he can get away with.

Cam
April 10, 2025

I agree with all GeorgeB says. I expect I'll own an EV one day, maybe next decade.
At some stage EV owners will have to pay for road use aswell. Us petrol car owners are paying lots in tax each time we fill up. At some stage that has to change, if we're all EV owners then where does funding for roadworks come from?
Its an equity issue aswell, reverse Robin Hood.

john
April 11, 2025

Just levy a high tax at the Charging stations. People will still use them even if there is a high tax because of convenience and when they get caught with a low battery out and about. Other methods require a department of bureaucrats and pencil pushers to police and bill the motorist.

GeorgeB
April 10, 2025

I have no issue with electric cars but I have many issues with EV batteries (or why I won’t be buying an electric car anytime soon):
1. Too big
2. Too heavy-leading to compromised efficiency and handling plus accelerated tyre wear (due to the extra weight of the battery and the flatter and higher torque available from electric motors). The extra weight also puts greater strain on suspension elements unless they are reinforced which just adds more weight.
3. Take too long to charge-particularly inconvenient on longer trips.
4. Energy density deteriorates too fast, even when not being used-for example consider my 1996 Porsche 911 which has travelled about 60K kms and is just run in. In contrast a battery of similar vintage would be ready for the scrap heap even with little or no usage.
5. Carbon footprint too big to build and not very transparent (eg.many Chinese batteries are made with dirty nickel from Indonesia)-big batteries are also environmentally unfriendly to dispose of at their end of life which is typically shorter than the life of an equivalent ICE car.
6. Many brands not easily repairable even after minor damage to casings or peripherals.
7. Expensive to insure because too easily written off even with minor damage.
8. Not surprising that cars fitted with such batteries depreciate much faster than their ICE counterparts totally offsetting any savings on fuel or maintenance.
9. Public charging infrastructure not well developed particularly out of town and often relies on burning fossil fuels for its generation.
10. High cost of public charging and threat of road user charges exacerbate running costs while home charging may require significant investment in infrastructure such as solar and batteries and which may not be viable due to cost and/or other factors (including incompatible roof materials such as slate).

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Tesla surges, VW doesn’t. Here’s why

Electrification: Paving the road to emissions reduction

The tipping point for investing in decarbonisation

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

16 ASX stocks to buy and hold forever, updated

This time last year, I highlighted 16 ASX stocks that investors could own indefinitely. One year on, I look at whether there should be any changes to the list of stocks as well as which companies are worth buying now. 

2025-26 super thresholds – key changes and implications

The ABS recently released figures which are used to determine key superannuation rates and thresholds that will apply from 1 July 2025. This outlines the rates and thresholds that are changing and those that aren’t.  

Why the $5.4 trillion wealth transfer is a generational tragedy

The intergenerational wealth transfer, largely driven by a housing boom, exacerbates economic inequality, stifles productivity, and impedes social mobility. Solutions lie in addressing the housing problem, not taxing wealth.

The 2025 Australian Federal election – implications for investors

With an election due by 17 May, we are effectively in campaign mode with the Government announcing numerous spending promises since January and the Coalition often matching them. Here's what the election means for investors.

Finding the best income-yielding assets

With fixed term deposit rates declining and bank hybrids being phased out, what are the best options for investors seeking income? This goes through the choices, and the opportunities and risks involved.

What history reveals about market corrections and crashes

The S&P 500's recent correction raises concerns about a bear market. History shows corrections are driven by high rates, unemployment, or global shocks, and that there's reason for optimism for nervous investors today. 

Latest Updates

Howard Marks: the investing game has changed

The famed investor says the rapid switch from globalisation to trade wars is the biggest upheaval in the investing environment since World War Two. And a new world requires a different investment approach.

Shares

Buy the dips?

The Australian stock market has had almost 40 dips of 10% or more since 1920, with many of these triggered by weakness in the US. What would have happened in each case had you 'bought the dip'?

Shaky markets, steady mind

The uncertainty sowed by falling share markets can make investors panic and commit costly errors. Following the advice of an ex Navy SEAL commander can help you stay composed and focus on what matters.

Is it time to pull the plug on EVs?

Electric vehicles have long been championed as the future of transportation. With production slowdowns, cautious consumers, and infrastructure challenges, EVs appear to be hitting a speed bump.

The future of travel

Travel is about to be transformed by a new technological force: AI-powered travel agents. They will independently navigate websites, make decisions, and adjust your travel itinerary – just like a personal assistant.

SMSF strategies

Navigating SMSF property compliance

Property investment in SMSFs is a popular strategy for retirement wealth. Compliance is essential to avoid risks like the sole purpose test, non-arm’s length income, and property development issues.

History tells us that markets are at a high-risk juncture

Every bubble is unique in its form and duration, yet they all share common qualities and stages. As for the current bubble in AI and quality stocks, we’ve had the displacement and the euphoria. Now for the distress.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.