-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Adm
Active Member
Jaff
Active Member
So let's dissect...we have a report by a firm of bean-counters who have gleaned their data from (conventional) auto industry executives from all over the world...and they conclude that affordable EV's are 5 years away...does this shock or surprise anyone? 
I would give this report far more credence if it contained data from battery engineers and manufacturers "admitting" that their wares are not fit for public consumption for another 5 years, let alone today.
I would give this report far more credence if it contained data from battery engineers and manufacturers "admitting" that their wares are not fit for public consumption for another 5 years, let alone today.
tdelta1000
Active Member
The Tesl Roadster is the "proof of concept" that cannot be longer ignored. Even the cost per kW/h is less then 200$. Thats far less then the 500-1000$ of the big lion-traction batteries used by MiEV or Nissen Leaf. That what is being expected to achieve in 10years by the carmakers. Tesla is just using existing technology (which is already 8 years old) like billion-produced laptop-batteries. Tesla will successfully use this technology for the whole decade and even longer.
Everything is already there. Tesla is doing a good job. Model S will mix up the market. Studies of economists says, the the carmaker will loose 50% of there business, because EV are getting cheaper, easy to manufacture and only little maintenance need.
Most of the petrol-stations and repair-shops will be closed.
Everything is already there. Tesla is doing a good job. Model S will mix up the market. Studies of economists says, the the carmaker will loose 50% of there business, because EV are getting cheaper, easy to manufacture and only little maintenance need.
Most of the petrol-stations and repair-shops will be closed.
"Accessibility of electric cars" depends on one single thing : the cost of batteries. Disregarding batteries, an
electric car is cheaper to build and always more reliable than any ICE could ever be - the number of
mechanical parts in an EV is probably half that of an equivalently equipped ICE version. Many don't realize that Henry Ford
considered electrics superior as a technology and partnered with Edison, who tried to create a practical battery
for several years, only to give up in failure. Ford's wife drove an electric. So much for the BS about automakers
being averse to electrics. I'm sure automakers would love to build a simpler vehicle and get away from the rat race of constantly
redesigning their motors and transmissions. And those people don't like our dependence on foreign oil any more than every other
civilian.
electric car is cheaper to build and always more reliable than any ICE could ever be - the number of
mechanical parts in an EV is probably half that of an equivalently equipped ICE version. Many don't realize that Henry Ford
considered electrics superior as a technology and partnered with Edison, who tried to create a practical battery
for several years, only to give up in failure. Ford's wife drove an electric. So much for the BS about automakers
being averse to electrics. I'm sure automakers would love to build a simpler vehicle and get away from the rat race of constantly
redesigning their motors and transmissions. And those people don't like our dependence on foreign oil any more than every other
civilian.
Talkredius
Member
but isn't it a quite defensive report ?
No complains about range , reliability etc.
just " not accessible in the next five years", sounds like the last line of defense while 1500+ Roadsters are already on the road and the Leafs, iMievs and Model S are knocking at the gates... ;-)
No complains about range , reliability etc.
just " not accessible in the next five years", sounds like the last line of defense while 1500+ Roadsters are already on the road and the Leafs, iMievs and Model S are knocking at the gates... ;-)
Last edited:
It would be interesting to know what percentage of Americans, in a poll taken in 1890, would have believe that their homes would be lit by incandescent light within 10 years.
Sometimes polling for information is useful--sometimes, it isn't.
Sometimes polling for information is useful--sometimes, it isn't.
I love this graphic ( the "Consumption spreads faster today" part of it at the bottom ):
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/10/opinion/10chart.large.gif
Look at any of the items on this chart, start at the point where the line starts at zero. ( We're at less than 0.01% for EVs right now )
Imagine polling people about that piece of technology.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/02/10/opinion/10chart.large.gif
Look at any of the items on this chart, start at the point where the line starts at zero. ( We're at less than 0.01% for EVs right now )
Imagine polling people about that piece of technology.
The only means available for providing a good estimate of EV penetration in the years ahead would be knowledge of
what batteries will be like and , most importantly, cost (initial plus lifespan costs). Without that knowledge, which no one now possesses,
there is no valid means of predicting EV penetration. That goes for both sides of this issue. Someone mentioned that the Tesla has
"proven" the concept, but that's nonsense. Tesla has "proven" what everyone already knew - electric cars work (and have worked for
over 100 years). What Tesla hasn't proven (with its $40,000 battery pack) is that EVs are cheap enough to mass market. hasn't happened
and won't happen until battery prices decline by more than half the reported $535/kWhr Tesla's batteries cost. And Tesla can't do anything about that.
what batteries will be like and , most importantly, cost (initial plus lifespan costs). Without that knowledge, which no one now possesses,
there is no valid means of predicting EV penetration. That goes for both sides of this issue. Someone mentioned that the Tesla has
"proven" the concept, but that's nonsense. Tesla has "proven" what everyone already knew - electric cars work (and have worked for
over 100 years). What Tesla hasn't proven (with its $40,000 battery pack) is that EVs are cheap enough to mass market. hasn't happened
and won't happen until battery prices decline by more than half the reported $535/kWhr Tesla's batteries cost. And Tesla can't do anything about that.
Great way to introduce yourself. First of all, are you referring to the Model S battery pack at $40,000? Secondly, Tesla isn't going after the mass market with the Roadster or the Model S. The Nissan Leaf is attempting a more mass market car.
No one also can predict battery costs as you said but no one can predict oil costs either. One thing that is almost certain is that battery costs will continue to go down and oil will continue to rise over time. An as to your first post, 40 million EVs would make a dent in our oil consumption. While it may not be drastic, it would be a start and would have other benefits besides simply oil use.
At the risk of siding with the troll, Tom's probably right. If battery technology and prices were to stay approximately where they are today, then BEVs will never achieve a really substantial market share. Consider that hybrids collectively have never broken 4% of sales.
At the other extreme, if battery $/kWh were to drop by 80%, as Dr. Chu suggests, the BEVs suddenly become a dominant technology for a broad swath of car buyers. If the 40kWh battery in the Model S, which probably adds ~$17,000 (@$425/kWh) to the price, suddenly only added $3,400, that delta of $13,600 would put the list price at $36,300 (after the US tax credit, or $43,800 before credit). Wow! The 85kWh pack would have an after-credit price of $48,500. At those price points, the Model S would own its segment, and other OEMs would be rushing in with very attractive, competing products. ICE would be relegated to specialized applications, like towing and ultra-long distance touring vehicles, and in 20 years they'd all have range anxiety because nearly all gas stations would have closed.
And then there are a range of scenarios in between, which are probably the most likely scenarios. Battery tech evolves and prices drop; BEVs gradually become more and more affordable, and gain more and more market share. So, the driver of future BEV market share is largely going to hinge on the success of the innovators in the labs, with important supporting roles from auto OEMs, infrastructure developers, and early-adopters.
At the other extreme, if battery $/kWh were to drop by 80%, as Dr. Chu suggests, the BEVs suddenly become a dominant technology for a broad swath of car buyers. If the 40kWh battery in the Model S, which probably adds ~$17,000 (@$425/kWh) to the price, suddenly only added $3,400, that delta of $13,600 would put the list price at $36,300 (after the US tax credit, or $43,800 before credit). Wow! The 85kWh pack would have an after-credit price of $48,500. At those price points, the Model S would own its segment, and other OEMs would be rushing in with very attractive, competing products. ICE would be relegated to specialized applications, like towing and ultra-long distance touring vehicles, and in 20 years they'd all have range anxiety because nearly all gas stations would have closed.
And then there are a range of scenarios in between, which are probably the most likely scenarios. Battery tech evolves and prices drop; BEVs gradually become more and more affordable, and gain more and more market share. So, the driver of future BEV market share is largely going to hinge on the success of the innovators in the labs, with important supporting roles from auto OEMs, infrastructure developers, and early-adopters.
Yes, batteries are currently expensive, but the prices are dropping steadily and the quality and performance is improving. This is much like any new technology; for example, LCD screens were initially expensive, small, had narrow viewing angles, slow response, etc., etc. It took a while, but by now CRTs have pretty much disappeared.
All that happened without us facing a "peak CRT" situation. We're facing an era where fuel prices are going to be unstable; limited supplies will result in not just increases over time but instability - dramatic peaks and valleys. The valleys will cause people to revert to denial (Denali?), only to get caught with their pants down again. It won't take many of those to drive demand to EVs.
All that happened without us facing a "peak CRT" situation. We're facing an era where fuel prices are going to be unstable; limited supplies will result in not just increases over time but instability - dramatic peaks and valleys. The valleys will cause people to revert to denial (Denali?), only to get caught with their pants down again. It won't take many of those to drive demand to EVs.
Similar threads
