The notion that electric vehicles have “moral” superiority over gas-powered vehicles needs to end, because in many ways it’s a lie. The argument surrounding EVs needs to focus on the real issues at play regarding motorized vehicles of any type — the cost-benefit ratio.

For too long, the ecofascists have played the religious game of calling EVs “good” and gas-powered vehicles “bad” simply out of an opposition to fossil fuels and their direct pollution factor. However, when all things are considered — from the manufacturing process to energy sources to battery toxicity and so on — the environmental impact of EVs compared to gasoline-powered vehicles ends up being a wash. EVs may not contribute directly to air pollution in the way gas-powered vehicles do, but EVs most certainly contribute to environmental pollution, namely through coal power. You know, fossil fuel.

So, eschewing the environmentalists’ sleight of hand, the real issue boils down to technology factors that include, among other things, vehicle reliability and operational range. The technology behind EVs is exciting and making significant developmental steps forward. Yet it remains true that EVs simply don’t have the operational range of gas-powered vehicles.

There’s also the maintenance factor. According to J.D. Power, EV owners report a higher rate of maintenance problems than do gas-vehicle owners. And it’s not really even close. EV owners noted 240 problems per 100 vehicles, whereas gas-car owners cited 175 problems per 100 vehicles.

Then there’s the price tag. The average price of an EV is nearly $60,000, which is roughly $20,000 more than that of a gas-powered vehicle. No matter what Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg may claim, buying an EV is certainly not a realistic way for most consumers to save money, even with gas prices hitting $5 per gallon.

Of course, the government pushes the sale of EVs via tax credits. This boondoggle benefits car dealers. Electric cars are grossly overpriced, and most of the tax credit is being absorbed as profit by the dealer/retailer. In other words, you pay $65K for an EV worth $45K — that’s a $10K up-charge, and the $10K tax credit means your effective cost is $50K but the dealer is absorbing all the benefit of the tax credit.

This scenario happens every time the government introduces “tax credits” that are ostensibly designed to benefit the end user, but in practice end up most benefiting the retailer. The exact same scenario has been the case for expensive solar panels. The customer pays an inflated price while getting a tax credit, but that credit has already been absorbed as profit by the retailer. The so-called “tax credits” are designed to entice buyers, but almost entirely go to benefiting the seller.

What needs to happen is the removal of all the “moralistic” language surrounding EVs. Furthermore, the government needs to stop picking winners and losers and let the free market determine whether EVs ultimately defeat gas-powered vehicles. In our estimation, a healthy economy would benefit from both rather than the government deciding fossil fuel is bad.