I've said this before, but the car I currently have will certainly be the last internal combustion engine vehicle that I own. I truthfully even felt a bit weird buying it 6 years ago, but at the time, there weren't that many options other than a Tesla. And I didn't want a Tesla.
Today, there are lots of EV options, and the numbers are starting to show that. When the final figures come in, it is estimated that the US will have sold 15.5 million new cars last year. And of these, about 1.44 million units are expected to have been electric.
This means that we are just under 1 out of every 10 new cars sold in the US. The trend line is also working in the right direction. 1.44 million new EV units is roughly the total number of EVs sold between 2016 and 2021 in the US.
So things are accelerating. And presumably there are other people like me waiting on the sidelines. I am deliberately roughed in for an EV charging station in my new parking spot and, if/when it comes time to purchase a new car, that's exactly what will get installed.
(I added "if" because, depending on how mobility evolves over the next 5-10 years, there's a chance I may no longer want to own a car.)
This is the current state of global electric vehicle adoption:
Last year was the first year that global electric-vehicle sales reached 10% of all car sales -- the total was around 7.8 million cars (see above chart)
Fully-electric vehicles accounted for about 5.8% of all car sales in the US, 11% of all car sales in Europe, and about 19% of all car sales in China -- China is leading in this department
The US saw 807,180 fully-electric vehicle sales last year -- Tesla remains the biggest EV maker in the world
In Germany, electric vehicles accounted for about 25% of all new vehicles produced last year -- BMW reported a 5% decline in new-car sales, but saw its EV sales more than 2x
Similar story with Volkswagen: 7% decline in new-car sales; 26% increase in EV sales
This year, some are predicting that China will see EV sales increase to every third car, and that it will reach its tipping point sometime between 2025-2030
It is obvious where all of this is heading. It is simply a question of how fast, and who will be the leaders at the end of the day.
All data sourced from the WSJ
Nabr, which I wrote about last year over here, recently announced its first residential project in San Jose's SoFA district. Named SoFA One, the project is expected to have 125 apartments that will be offered up on a hybrid lease, own, and lease-to-own model. In this latter scenario, the company is saying that people will be able to buy with as little as 1% down. Construction isn't scheduled to start until later this year, but if you'd like to get early access, you can add yourself to their waitlist, here.
As a reminder, Nabr is touting itself as a direct-to-consumer real estate company that aims to bring the same manufacturing and supply chain efficiencies that we have seen in virtually all other industries to the production of housing. This, of course, is not a new ambition. The flatlining of construction productivity is well documented, and lots of architects, builders, and entrepreneurs have tried to innovate in this space over the years. But it's clearly a notoriously difficult problem to solve. So the obvious question here is: What is going to make Nabr any different?
Nabr is trying to productize housing. To do this, they're building a vertically integrated process, going deep into supply chains, and trying to standardize their product offering as much possible. In the case of SoFA One, the base building is expected to consist of a CLT loft-style frame that can then be fitted out with various interior offerings. The idea here is that 90% of the build will be a repeatable system but that the remaining 10% is something that their customers will be able to customize -- similar to when you're buying a new car. The car is the same, but would you like black leather or brown leather?
Continuing with the car analogy, the company is also taking a move out of Tesla's playbook for how they plan to roll out their products. The plan is to start at the top of the market (like what Tesla did with its expensive roadster) and then move downmarket as they drive efficiencies and cost savings in their delivery process. What they are trying to do is find the compounding innovation that has been present in most industries but that has been noticeably lacking from construction.
This all sounds great, but we know that buildings have a myriad of unique challenges compared to other products like cars and smartphones. My iPhone is the same as your iPhone, except for maybe the color and the case I put on it. But each development site is unique. Some have a high water table below it and some don't. Some have adjacencies that will impact how you need to build and some don't.
Each jurisdiction also has unique codes and regulations -- everything from urban design guidelines to more or less stringent seismic requirements. Some cities have snow and some cities don't. The list goes on. So what Nabr is going to have to do is create regionalized products with as much repetition as possible. And if they can generally lock the ~90% base building systems and just adjust the balance as needed, maybe that's enough to do it.
At the end of the day, our industry is not completely void of innovation. It's just a bit slow to change. We never used to build skyscrapers, but now we do. So I've decided to cast my developer cynicism aside. Today, we don't have truly productized housing, but maybe we will.
As an aside, Nabr also recently shared their leaderboard of cities where people want to see a future Nabr building. Those cities are New York, London, Los Angeles, Toronto, and San Francisco.
Image: Nabr