Summary
Highlights
Louis Rossman discusses BMW's strategy for encouraging plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) owners to charge their cars. He contrasts two approaches: explaining benefits vs. limiting car functionality, noting that automakers often choose the latter. This introduces the larger issue of BMW's past actions, such as subscription-based heated seats and proprietary screw designs.
Rossman explains what a PHEV is and its intended benefits. PHEVs combine a small electric battery for short, efficient commutes (15-30 miles) with a gas engine for longer trips, offering the best of both worlds: cheaper electric power for daily use and the convenience of quick refueling for long distances, without the high cost of a large EV battery.
BMW's chairman of the supervisory board, Nicholas Peters, suggested monitoring how frequently PHEV owners charge their cars. If a driver consistently fails to plug in, BMW proposes reducing the engine's power as a technical measure to 'persuade' them, viewing the non-charging as a 'behavioral problem' that discredits climate-friendly technology.
Rossman strongly disagrees with BMW's punitive approach. He suggests informing users about the financial and time-saving benefits of charging. He proposes the car could display how much money a user would have saved by charging, or how much time they wasted at gas stations, rather than punishing them.
Rossman points out that some users may face legitimate obstacles to charging, such as expensive parking garages without charging options. He criticizes BMW's approach as ineffective and counterproductive, comparing it to 'bad activism' that scolds people instead of demonstrating how an action can improve their lives. He advocates for 'good activism' that educates and excites users about possibilities, making them enthusiastic about adopting beneficial behaviors.