Knightshade and future battery availability discussion (out of main)

[Knightshade]

“We believe the transition will happen over time,” Barra said on “Leadership Live With David Rubenstein” on Bloomberg Television. When asked if all cars will be electric in 20 years, she said that may be too soon. “It will happen in a little bit longer period, but it will happen.”

To be fair- there's about 80 million new cars sold each year.

Even the most optimistic projections of battery factory/capacity for the next 20 years don't show anywhere near enough being produced to replace 80 million cars a year. Maybe half that last I saw?

Tesla, which has more capacity than anyone AFAIK, hopes to make 500k EVs this year. Out of 80 million new cars.

And they've got other businesses they need batteries for too that they've been starving just to hit those car numbers.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

To be fair- there's about 80 million new cars sold each year.

Even the most optimistic projections of battery factory/capacity for the next 20 years don't show anywhere near enough being produced to replace 80 million cars a year. Maybe half that last I saw?

Tesla, which has more capacity than anyone AFAIK, hopes to make 500k EVs this year. Out of 80 million new cars.

And they've got other businesses they need batteries for too that they've been starving just to hit those car numbers.

A few thing at play here. As battery density goes up, battery capacity requirements go down (per vehicle). Also, the article was refrenceing US sales, which is considerably less than 80M/yr.

 

[Knightshade]

A few thing at play here. As battery density goes up, battery capacity requirements go down (per vehicle).

Sure long as you can repeatedly retool all your existing plants to build the new batteries with each advance in a timely and cost effective manner

Even then it's not just battery factories.

Currently lithium supply worldwide for this is roughly 390,000 tonnes- just the factories announced for THIS decade are gonna require nearer a couple million.

Ditto the various other materials-teslas supposedly trying to get rid of cobalt, which'll help some at least... but that means a bunch of OTHER industries all have to scale up along with the battery factories too....and unlike the announced factories there's not a lot of people dumping billions into scaling those things up proportionately so there'll continue to be serious bottlenecks.

Also, the article was refrenceing US sales, which is considerably less than 80M/yr.

That wasn't mentioned in the quote- but doesn't really help the math that much... if anything it makes the math worse since EV adoption rates in the US are well below the other largest markets like the EU and China.

Even Ford is sending the majority of the Mach E production (which is only gonna be 1/10th Teslas 2020 production due to battery constraints) to Europe.

 

[TheTalkingMule]

Even then it's not just battery factories.

Currently lithium supply worldwide for this is roughly 390,000 tonnes- just the factories announced for THIS decade are gonna require nearer a couple million.

Ditto the various other materials-teslas supposedly trying to get rid of cobalt, which'll help some at least... but that means a bunch of OTHER industries all have to scale up along with the battery factories too....and unlike the announced factories there's not a lot of people dumping billions into scaling those things up proportionately so there'll continue to be serious bottlenecks

Nonsense. These inputs will scale immediately now that the market knows there's demand. That's how markets work.

They said the same thing about silicon for solar panels in 2010. "We'll NEVER have enough silicon for double this level of production."

 

[Knightshade]

Nonsense. These inputs will scale immediately now that the market knows there's demand. That's how markets work.

This is pretty obviously wrong- given every car maker trying to do EVs is heavily battery constrained.

Even Tesla who has put a ton more effort into this than anybody else.

If battery production and inputs could "scale immediate" because "that's how markets work" you wouldn't have Hyundai saying they've got MASSIVELY more demand for their EVs than they have batteries would you?

You wouldn't have Ford saying the Mach E is limited to 50k production because there's just no more batteries to be had.


You wouldn't have a number of EV makers having announced cuts to even the previous small #s due to battery constraints.

You wouldn't have Tesla choking their own energy storage business because they already don't have enough cells just to meet vehicle demand.


Mining companies aren't exactly silicon valley tech companies used to turning on a dime and massively scaling production (and everything that goes into it like labor, storage, equipment, etc).

Transition from the horse to the car in cities took roughly 10 years, transition form ICE to EV should take about the same time...

"in cities"

The discussion was either worldwide- or countrywide.

Ain't happening anywhere near that fast- and didn't with cars either.


Also 10 years doesn't seem correct even then- because Barras comment was "all cars" not "a simple majority"

There were a handfull of cars in NYC for example at the turn of the century.

The last horse-drawn trolley didn't retire in NYC till 1917.

The last horse drawn fire engine not till 1922.

In 1928 there were still 90 carriage makers in business in the northeastern US.

Even into the 1930s there remained thousands of horses in NYC though obviously cars vastly outnumbered them.

(and again- most of the country isn't NYC)

 

[MC3OZ]

This is pretty obviously wrong- given every car maker trying to do EVs is heavily battery constrained.

That is right, but it doesn't mean they will be happy to remain battery constrained.

Our ability to ramp up automated mining, refining, transport and manufacturing has never been higher, rapid communication and supply chain optimisation has never been better. I would argue the stakes have never been higher..

My target is 95% of new cars sales worldwide being EVs, once we get there a handful of ICE sales or a few old cars running makes no difference.... it becomes very hard to sustain the oil industry....

My guess at the 95% target 2028-2033 possibly earlier.... but once we get to about 10% of new cars sales being EVs that is a tipping point... everyone knows market share is a land grab .. it is a land grab now, just not every company is aware that... or wants to admit it.

 

[Knightshade]

That is right, but it doesn't mean they will be happy to remain battery constrained.

Our ability to ramp up automated mining, refining, transport and manufacturing has never been higher, rapid communication and supply chain optimisation has never been better. I would argue the stakes have never been higher..

My target is 95% of new cars sales worldwide being EVs, once we get there a handful of ICE sales or a few old cars running makes no difference.... it becomes very hard to sustain the oil industry....

My guess at the 95% target 2028-2033 possibly earlier.... but once we get to about 10% of new cars sales being EVs that is a tipping point... everyone knows market share is a land grab .. it is a land grab now, just not every company is aware that... or wants to admit it.

I find your optimism.... err.... optimistic.

There's not even a sizeable percentage of the battery factory capacity needed to hit half that target on drawing boards anywhere... let alone scaling everything else up in that time frame.

You're also going to need to massively improve charging and power infrastructure everywhere.

At 2% of the market...or even 20% of the market... you don't need to do that...

But only about 2/3rds of americans live someplace they can charge at home (and most of them at just 110v right now).

That percentage is going to be even lower in most other countries.

95% penetration means you need massive improvements in public charging worldwide- another thing that's not really taking off at a scale that'd support your 2028-2033 targets.


Bloomberg financial projections are that EV sales in 2040 will be about 54 million a year- a solid majority, but nowhere near all (or even 95%).

In terms of "all" cars on the road, not just new ones they put it at roughly 31% of the worldwide fleet being EVs by 2040.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

I find your optimism.... err.... optimistic.

There's not even a sizeable percentage of the battery factory capacity needed to hit half that target on drawing boards anywhere... let alone scaling everything else up in that time frame.

You're also going to need to massively improve charging and power infrastructure everywhere.

At 2% of the market...or even 20% of the market... you don't need to do that...

But only about 2/3rds of americans live someplace they can charge at home (and most of them at just 110v right now).

That percentage is going to be even lower in most other countries.

95% penetration means you need massive improvements in public charging worldwide- another thing that's not really taking off at a scale that'd support your 2028-2033 targets.


Bloomberg financial projections are that EV sales in 2040 will be about 54 million a year- a solid majority, but nowhere near all (or even 95%).

In terms of "all" cars on the road, not just new ones they put it at roughly 31% of the worldwide fleet being EVs by 2040.

Nope, that's mostly anti-EV talking points.

Electricity infrastructure is everywhere, even those remote podunk gas stations have electricity. With Audi introducing their mobile charging packs, you can even have EV charging where there's no grid!

And the UK has already demonstrated how EV charging can be done for those 1/3 of americans who can't charge at home - EVSE's in the streetlights. Electricity is ubiquitous, and access to a fast charger isn't needed for daily use.

BYD, CATL, Samsung, and LG all have construction plans for 35GWh+ cell factories within the next 5 years (that's a cumulative total of 140GWh non-Tesla battery capacity). Scaling that up to 1TWh over the next 10 (plus whatever Tesla comes up with) is only impossible to the anti-EV crowd.

This has all been debunked ages ago, why are we reviewing this again? And in the investor thread no less?!

 

[Knightshade]

Nope, that's mostly anti-EV talking points.

It's really not- it's actual facts... try them sometime!

No
Electricity infrastructure is everywhere

I mean- now you're outright lying.

Access to Energy

Close to 1 billion people don't have access to electricty.

At all.

Let alone affordable electricity at their home to charge an EV with.

Only roughly 2/3rds of people in the US, the richest nation in the world, have easy access to home charging.

, even those remote podunk gas stations have electricity

They have working lights.

They don't have massive power lines to handle things like superchargers.

Nobody is gonna pull into a Shell station to charge on 110v for hours at a time dude.

Again you are using magical thinking- not facts.

And the UK has already demonstrated how EV charging can be done for those 1/3 of americans who can't charge at home - EVSE's in the streetlights.

Again- no.

They've installed 1300 such chargers. Total. In London specifically where there's already tons of streetlamps AND they ALREADY RUN 220 FOR EVERYTHING.

So 1300 chargers in a city with a population of about 9 million- in a country with over 66 million people

Meanwhile in the US 110v is typical so....3 miles per hour of charging even if you somehow had the $ to do this everywhere.

And it's no real help to most folks in suburb apartments because unlike London streets there's not a streetlamp every 20 feet.

Magical thinking man.

Electricity is ubiquitous

Except, it's really not.

It's plenty ubiquitous for EVs to have a 2% market share.

It's plenty ubiqutous for even a 50 or 60 percent market share?

95%? Not remotely so no.

Again that's not anti-EV- that's reality.


Can that change? Sure. Not tomorrow though. Not 5-10 years from now either, worldwide.

BYD, CATL, Samsung, and LG all have construction plans for 35GWh+ cell factories within the next 5 years (that's a cumulative total of 140GWh non-Tesla battery capacity).

Scaling that up to 1TWh over the next 10 (plus whatever Tesla comes up with) is only impossible to the anti-EV crowd.
[/QUOTE]


35gwh is ~500k cars (per Tesla)

So 1TWH would be about 14.3 million cars.

You need 80 million to replace all new car sales today.

Even if you magically invent batteries that have 4x Teslas density in that time, you only get to 56 million cars out of 80 million needed.

Interestingly- that's VERY close to Bloombergs predicted # of new EVs a year by 2040.

And nowhere near 95-100% of the market.


OH! LOOK! YOUR NONSENSE MATH DOES NOT EVEN SLIGHTLY ADD UP! SHOCKING.


Magical. Thinking.

Come back to reality maybe.

This has all been debunked ages ago, why are we reviewing this again?

Because it hasn't and you're speaking nonsense?

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

Sorry to the rest of this thread, as this is OT.

@Knightshade, your anti-EV concerns were debunked at least 3 years ago: How To Debunk Every Anti-EV Argument

But if you want a play-by-play, here ya go:

It's really not- it's actual facts... try them sometime!
I mean- now you're outright lying.

Access to Energy

Close to 1 billion people don't have access to electricty.

At all.

This is an example of finding data without any comprehension. The graph that accompanied your data also showed that the electricity access trend is falling. Your same source also stated that 40% of the people don't have access to clean fuel (like natural gas) to COOK with. Most importantly, these people are NOT consumers buying a new ICE vehicle that's going to be replaced by EV's, so over 1/3 of the global population is completely irrelevant to the new car sales issue!

Let alone affordable electricity at their home to charge an EV with.

Only roughly 2/3rds of people in the US, the richest nation in the world, have easy access to home charging.

"easy access" - nice weasel qualifier there. Not going to address it.

They have working lights.

They don't have massive power lines to handle things like superchargers.

Nobody is gonna pull into a Shell station to charge on 110v for hours at a time dude.

Again you are using magical thinking- not facts.

110v is sufficient for commuters who drive the average american commuter miles. ~40 miles per day (assuming model 3 level efficiency) would take 10 hrs on 110v @ 12A (accounts for charging losses and vampire drain). People don't drive while they sleep!

Again- no.

They've installed 1300 such chargers. Total. In London specifically where there's already tons of streetlamps AND they ALREADY RUN 220 FOR EVERYTHING.

So 1300 chargers in a city with a population of about 9 million- in a country with over 66 million people

Meanwhile in the US 110v is typical so....3 miles per hour of charging even if you somehow had the $ to do this everywhere.

And it's no real help to most folks in suburb apartments because unlike London streets there's not a streetlamp every 20 feet.

Magical thinking man.

220v for 8 hrs, means each model 3 only needs 1 overnight charge per week, assuming they drive 300 miles per week (which they don't). So those 1300 chargers would supply 14,000 BEV's regularly (assuming only 50% utilization).

London has 2.8 million street lamps, and a car population of 2.5m. People don't need charging (aka they have rectums not recepticles).

Except, it's really not.

It's plenty ubiquitous for EVs to have a 2% market share.

It's plenty ubiqutous for even a 50 or 60 percent market share?

95%? Not remotely so no.

Again that's not anti-EV- that's reality.

Can that change? Sure. Not tomorrow though. Not 5-10 years from now either, worldwide.

35gwh is ~500k cars (per Tesla)

So 1TWH would be about 14.3 million cars.

You need 80 million to replace all new car sales today.

Even if you magically invent batteries that have 4x Teslas density in that time, you only get to 56 million cars out of 80 million needed.

Interestingly- that's VERY close to Bloombergs predicted # of new EVs a year by 2040.

And nowhere near 95-100% of the market.

Welcome to the Osbourne effect (from over a year ago The Osborne Effect On The Auto Industry | CleanTechnica).

OH! LOOK! YOUR NONSENSE MATH DOES NOT EVEN SLIGHTLY ADD UP! SHOCKING.


Magical. Thinking.

Come back to reality maybe.

Because it hasn't and you're speaking nonsense?

Pull your snark and condescension out of your rear. Your arguing from a position of ignorance, not reality.

Also, to answer your reply to others, Lithium prices have fallen lately, because supply has caught up to demand. Because there isn't a minerals shortage, just a mining capacity shortage. The only mineral with any kind of "real" limit was cobalt, and plenty of companies are working to make cobalt-free batteries.

 

[Knightshade]

Sorry to the rest of this thread, as this is OT.

@Knightshade, your anti-EV concerns

I'm not sure how much crack you need to smoke to find "I think the majority of cars being EVs in 10-20 years is reasonable" to be anti-EV....but you do you I guess....

"easy access" - nice weasel qualifier there. Not going to address it.

Of course you're not- because it proves you're wrong.

If you don't have easy access to charge an EV, you're not likely to own an EV.

110v is sufficient for commuters who drive the average american commuter miles. ~40 miles per day (assuming model 3 level efficiency) would take 10 hrs on 110v @ 12A (accounts for charging losses and vampire drain). People don't drive while they sleep!

Sure.

But most EVs are less efficient than the Model 3.

And nowhere near 95% of americans (let alone the rest of the world) has access to a 110v plug for their car overnight

About 1/3rd of the country does not live in detached single family homes

(and that % is generally even higher in other countries)


Which is again why I say 50-60% market share for EVs is easy and totally reasonable in 10-20 years...but 95% is not.


You somehow read facts and basic logic as "anti-EV" though.

London has 2.8 million street lamps

Yes- and 2.799 million of them don't have EV plugs right now.

Plus there's the whole rest of the world that doesn't either....including tons of places without even millions of street lamps.

Again- 50-60% is probably pretty easy. 95% is hard.

Pull your snark and condescension out of your rear.

Are you talking to yourself now?

You just handwave away every reality-based remark by citing tiny sample size exceptions and assuming they apply easily to the entire rest of the world.

That's not facts, that's magical thinking.

Because there isn't a minerals shortage, just a mining capacity shortage.

That's literally what I said dude.

I pointed out you can GET the minerals- but will need to MASSIVELY upscale all the operations around that by very large multipliers....workers, equipment, storage, transport, etc...

Which again doesn't happen overnight.


Hell it took Tesla/Panasonic years to get enough qualified workers just at their ONE gigafactory in Nevada to MAKE the batteries.

You think worldwide everybody's gonna find 100x trained miners overnight? (on top of 100x the storage, transport, mining equipment, etc)

 

[CorneliusXX]

Hell it took Tesla/Panasonic years to get enough qualified workers just at their ONE gigafactory in Nevada to MAKE the batteries

I don't think you're taking exponential growth into the equation enough.

Battery prices have dropped 87% in the last decade and solar panels even more. They are likely to do the same in the next 10 years. The experience curves for these products are well established and investment in growth is continuing apace.

You are making similar arguments that have been said to predict the end of Moores Law for decades, but innovation and substitution always gets around the supposed limits.

Do you know how cheap an ICE vehicle would need to be to be to compete with batteries at 1/10th the price? Or effectively free energy from solar panels?

How about the hassle of buying fuel as all the service stations close? It is happening slowly already.

Buckle up

 

[TheTalkingMule]

That's literally what I said dude.

I pointed out you can GET the minerals- but will need to MASSIVELY upscale all the operations around that by very large multipliers....workers, equipment, storage, transport, etc...

Which again doesn't happen overnight.

So, with millions and millions of dollars to be made in extracting a fairly common element.......you think it's gonna take years for the market to respond with adequate supply? Nonsense. Trolling.

 

[Knightshade]

I don't think you're taking exponential growth into the equation enough.

Battery prices have dropped 87% in the last decade and solar panels even more. They are likely to do the same in the next 10 years.

That's great.

But it's not a cost issue, it's a supply and production issue.

Make batteries much cheaper- you still need to produce orders of magnitude more of them to get 80 million electric cars a year on the road.

(plus all the other things that need to happen up and down the supply, and fueling, chain to get 95-100% market penetration for EVs).


Again- 50-60%? Easy. 95% a lot harder. More and more edge cases and weird corners you can't easily fill.

It's a bit like FSD if you think about it. Highway lanekeeping is easy. Handling unprotected left turns in cities? Turns out it's pretty hard.

You are making similar arguments that have been said to predict the end of Moores Law for decades, but innovation and substitution always gets around the supposed limits.

Moores law says transistor count on ICs will double every 2 years.

It doesn't say "number of devices using these will grow 160x in 10 years"

So you can make a moores-law type argument for battery costs (though it'd be hard, as decreases have not been anywhere NEAR as linear as transistor counts)

You can make a moores-law type argument for battery density (though it'd be hard, as increases have not been anywhere NEAR as linear as transistor counts)



You can't really make one for "Building EVs" because apart from Tesla everybody's all over the damn place and years behind schedule.

Ditto most charging infrastructure rollouts.

Even supercharger rollout misses their targets by LARGE numbers EVERY year....and Teslas way ahead of everyone else on this.


So citing exponential growth doesn't really stand up industry wide for EV production- because outside Tesla that doesn't exist.... and not even Tesla is gonna be able to make 80 million EVs a year in 10-20 years.

Do you know how cheap an ICE vehicle would need to be to be to compete with batteries at 1/10th the price?

Again- this isn't a cost problem. It's a capacity and logistics problem.

Tesla hopes to sell 500,000 EVs this year.

We need 80 million a year to replace all ICE vehicles.

(and everyone not Tesla is HOPING to maybe make 50k EVs next year? For those even bothering to make them at all?)

How about the hassle of buying fuel as all the service stations close? It is happening slowly already.

Buckle up

Cars already on the road run north of a billion ICE cars

Gas stations aren't going away all that soon.

That is a very small barrier. It's silly to claim that you need to live in a detached home to have access to charging.

Residential parking garages - no problem

Except that they don't have L2 plugs at every spot. Or any at all for most existing such garages.

T
Work parking garages - no problem

Same issue.

I work at a Fortune 100 company. We have 8 EV chargers in our parking garage. Total.

Public parking lots - no problem

Yeah- even less so there- the city parking garage for the county seat has three EV chargers for the whole place. And 1 is usually out of order.

Street parking with access to a charger on every street lamp + stand alone chargers + chargers grocery stores etc.

Which again largely don't exist in 99% of places right now.

 

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

OT. again.

@Knightshade. Read the links I provided earlier. Digest them.

Once you understand the info presented, you'll see that 95% of new cars sold by 2040, won't be with 90M cars, but with significantly less than that (maybe only 50M). Used cars will simply be kept longer until they can be replaced by new BEV's as production continues to ramp up.

You'll also get that you don't need a garage (just an outlet) to charge your car (so boohoo with your red herring about 1/3rd not living in detached SFR's). Your 5% of americans (~15M) not having access to 110v outlets is dubious at best. Those same people would also NOT be in the market for new cars either. Again, bringing in data without comprehension.

You citing 100x more trained miners needed overnight is FUD by conflating timelines. Are we talking now, 3 years, or 10 years down the line? Currently takes 5-7 years to start a new mine and bring it up to production. Even if companies are late and don't start until 2030, they'll still have the mineral production ready by 2037, well within the forecasts. But that's not reality, this is reality (5TWh's planned for 2028): World Battery Production | Energy Central.

Everything you've brought up are anti-EV talking points. Citing "potential issues" a decade later as "reality" is simply following the anti-EV script. Many people are actively working on solving these bottlenecks, so that your "reality" doesn't stand a chance of happening.

There are no insurmountable problems, just a lack of knowledge that solutions exist.

I'll leave your post quoted below for context.

I'm not sure how much crack you need to smoke to find "I think the majority of cars being EVs in 10-20 years is reasonable" to be anti-EV....but you do you I guess....

Of course you're not- because it proves you're wrong.

If you don't have easy access to charge an EV, you're not likely to own an EV.



Sure.

But most EVs are less efficient than the Model 3.

And nowhere near 95% of americans (let alone the rest of the world) has access to a 110v plug for their car overnight

About 1/3rd of the country does not live in detached single family homes

(and that % is generally even higher in other countries)


Which is again why I say 50-60% market share for EVs is easy and totally reasonable in 10-20 years...but 95% is not.


You somehow read facts and basic logic as "anti-EV" though.




Yes- and 2.799 million of them don't have EV plugs right now.

Plus there's the whole rest of the world that doesn't either....including tons of places without even millions of street lamps.

Again- 50-60% is probably pretty easy. 95% is hard.





Are you talking to yourself now?

You just handwave away every reality-based remark by citing tiny sample size exceptions and assuming they apply easily to the entire rest of the world.

That's not facts, that's magical thinking.




That's literally what I said dude.

I pointed out you can GET the minerals- but will need to MASSIVELY upscale all the operations around that by very large multipliers....workers, equipment, storage, transport, etc...

Which again doesn't happen overnight.


Hell it took Tesla/Panasonic years to get enough qualified workers just at their ONE gigafactory in Nevada to MAKE the batteries.

You think worldwide everybody's gonna find 100x trained miners overnight? (on top of 100x the storage, transport, mining equipment, etc)

 

[Knightshade]

So, with millions and millions of dollars to be made in extracting a fairly common element.......you think it's gonna take years for the market to respond with adequate supply? Nonsense. Trolling.

No. Facts.


There's "millions to be made" in EVs as well. (many many billions in fact)

And yet everyone but Tesla has been dragging their ass through the mud over it for years.

There were-obviously- millions to be made in switching from horses to cars too- that ALSO too a LOT of years. Many decades in most places.

The idea the market fixes everything overnight is magical thinking.

 

[Knightshade]

You'll also get that you don't need a garage (just an outlet) to charge your car (so boohoo with your red herring about 1/3rd not living in detached SFR's).

That's not a red herriing- it's again facts.

Which you seem allergic to.

Most apartment dwellers don't have a 110v they can plug their car into.

Many duplex owners don't either since they have only on-street parking across a public sidewalk.

There's threads on these forums RIGHT NOW from such people- and that's with Tesla having a new car market share less than 0.5% worldwide.

So the idea 95% of the market can go to this is complete fantasy right now.

Your 5% of americans (~15M) not having access to 110v outlets is dubious at best.

Good thing I never said that huh?

The number is of course vastly more than 5% not having access to a 110 they can plug their car into.

They have them for a coffee maker inside their 3rd floor apartment. But they can't drop an extension cord down tot he street and run it across the sidewalk to their car.

Those same people would also NOT be in the market for new cars either.

Except, they would. They'd just buy a $15,000 gas car instead of a $35,000 EV because they lack easy access to charging.


EVs will be down to cheap ICE car range in the relatively near future- but until all those folks have a simple way to plug in every night that won't matter much.

Again, bringing in data without comprehension.

You seem to be lacking both

You citing 100x more trained miners needed overnight is FUD by conflating timelines

No- it's citing the guy who insisted the market fixes everything quickly.

Which it clearly doesn't.

. Are we talking now, 3 years, or 10 years down the line? Currently takes 5-7 years to start a new mine and bring it up to production.

The original discussion was if "all" cars would be replaced by EVs in 20 years.

Some folks insisted doubting that it'd happen in just 10 made you an anti-EV trolls, actual facts be damned.

I've yet to find any realistic projections supporting those claims (and have supplied a number of them countering them- all while agreeing a MAJORITY of cars can easily be EVs by then)

Even if companies are late and don't start until 2030, they'll still have the mineral production ready by 2037, well within the forecasts. But that's not reality, this is reality (5TWh's planned for 2028): World Battery Production | Energy Central.

Again you fail at math.

According to Tesla, 35gwh gets you 500k EVs.

So 1 twh gets you 15 million of them.

So 5twh gets you.... 30 million of them.

We need 80 million.

(or even in your fantasy where for some reason 1/4 of the world suddenly stops buying the # of new cars they have for decades- we need 50 million of them)


So again- even YOUR OWN MATH agrees with me.

50-60% totally doable.

95-100%? Not so much.

And even THAT is only if -all- that production ONLY goes to EVs. We're gonna need a lot of it for grid storage as solar gets bigger.

Everything you've brought up are anti-EV talking points.

Again suggesting "The majority of new cars are likely to be EVs in 10-20 years" is "anti-EV" is batshit insane

There are no insurmountable problems,

Again, I LITERALLY SAID THAT EXACT THING.

Pointing out all the issues preventing adoption rates getting to 95-100% are SOLVABLE.

But not in the timeframes some people seem to fantasize about.

Even your own math on battery production proved that.

 

[Knightshade]

Tony Seba - April 22:

this missed getting moved over...


Anyway- this one was already debunked pages ago.

The video suggests NYC went entirely from horses to cars in 13 years and it just ain't so.

It went from MAJORITY horses to MAJORITY cars that fast (slightly faster in fact).


You know- just like I'm agreeing EVs will go to a MAJORITY of new cars in a similar amount of time.


But Horses remained in common use for decades in NYC- they remained in used for public transit till 1917... for fire trucks until 1922.... and even in the 1930s there remained thousands of horses in use in NYC....and there were still 90 horse carriage makers in the northeast US alone 30+ years after the car showed up in that 1900 parade. (and of course it's not like the car was invented in 1900 either- Mercedez Benz was founded in 1883).


And that's the densest maybe most easily converted city in the country. Many other places the transition took even longer.



Again- EVs transitioning to majority? Yup that's 100% for sure the relatively-near future... COULD be as little as 10 years (though even Oil4asphalts optimistic battery projections suggest there wont' QUITE be enough batteries for that, but it's possible). I'd certainly expect it in less than 20.

But ALL cars replaced with EVs in 20 as Mary Barra was talking about? Not so much.

 

[SmartElectric]

You're also going to need to massively improve charging and power infrastructure everywhere.

Canadian cross country "trans Canada route" supercharging network was completed, vast land mass, low population density, route contains many "out of the way" locations, and yet you can drive a Tesla coast to coast.

Check out some of the northern Ontario locations, a gas station, 4 houses and a family of moose...
Result: power infrastructure for fast charging is a non issue.

 

[Knightshade]

Canadian cross country "trans Canada route" supercharging network was completed, vast land mass, low population density, route contains many "out of the way" locations, and yet you can drive a Tesla coast to coast.

Check out some of the northern Ontario locations, a gas station, 4 houses and a family of moose...
Result: power infrastructure for fast charging is a non issue.

not sure how this is relevant?

That supercharger network is fantastic... for the what roughly one percent of new canadian cars sold that are from Tesla?

It'd be massively inadequate if there were 100x as many on the road needing to use it. (and another 100x as many added every year)

Plus, of course, superchargers aren't intended to be how people daily charge anyway- they're exactly to support long trips BEYOND the range of home charging.