anyway, i see better place idea as an death end. i except a quick improvement in battery chemistry within the next coming year like lithium-sulphur etc. And I don't think, that better place is able to handle this and the investment needed. with cars like Models S with 300miles there is no need for swapping services. If you don't have your own charging socket at home, you to it once a week while shopping within 45min - 2h and 80%-100% SOC. You own your battery and how better you care for it, you get more out of it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Project Better Place
- Thread starter tonybelding
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Electric Vehicles
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
EVNow
Well-Known Member
There is definitely a business case for swapping in some countries. Today they can deliver an EV with a leased battery for a total ownership cost that is same as an ICE car. We can't say that about an EV with 300 mile range battery.
Ofcourse the BP model has no chance of success in the US - that is why Leaf isn't even swap compatible.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Depends, the LEAF is already being delivered at less than the total ownership costs of most ICE vehicles. Since the average purchase price of a car in the US for 2009 was $28K even the unsubsidized cost of a LEAF is lower after only a few years. Over time a BP car will cost more than a similar non BP EV. In smaller countries where it's easier to build enough swap stations to cover it it's also easier to travel normal distances on a single charge. That's the big problem with BP, larger countries could take better advantage of swapping yet it's impossible to cover them with enough swap stations to actually make it work. I'm still predicting total failure for BP.
Better Place is about more than just battery swaps; it's essentially a middle-man battery lease program with charging services. Problem is I just don't see how they can offer a better deal to consumers than the automakers can directly when coupled with the use of home and public charging. I suppose it's the battery swap stations that get most of the attention since it's the one area that others don't have covered.
To me, Better Place offers:
- Lower initial cost of entry.
- Promise to build out the infrastructure first, so when you get a car you can add range at many convenient locations.
- Government funded (USA) EVproject intending to rollout lots of public infrastructure to increase adoption / acceptance of non BP vehicles being offered for sale.
- More subsidies that reduce the lease price of a non BP vehicle.
If the carmaker cannot make profit on the battery, they have to make profit from the car. this will increase the cost even more. improvement with the batterie will go on. how is going to pay for the old batteries?
With 3-phase charging at 400V/64A the charging power is 44kW. with DC charging at 100kW and more, it can be done within 45min or even less. Despite this, 99% of charging will be done at home or office.
With 3-phase charging at 400V/64A the charging power is 44kW. with DC charging at 100kW and more, it can be done within 45min or even less. Despite this, 99% of charging will be done at home or office.
Last edited:
Again, I don't see how they could do this for cheaper than a lease direct from the automaker.
Possible, but I'm skeptical that they can do it cost effectively. For how many consumers would the cost difference be worth while?
I think their main advantage would be getting to the market before public infrastructure catches up.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I realize that BP is more than swapping, it's also over priced charging as well, but the swapping part increases the costs of the entire program. Even if it is rarely used it still has to be paid for, by the consumer.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I'm not sure building charging stations that are unneeded, and therefore will mostly sit unused, makes sense. If a limited number of charge stations fits the bill spending money on extraneous units just to play into public misconceptions seems misguided. Remember how small Israel is, and it seems to have most of the population concentrated in the northern two thirds.
It's a tough argument. Potential EV purchasers have range anxiety and need the comfort of a network of charge stations before purchase. Once they get used to the cars, the charge points go unused as they learn charging at home is all they need.
Then, the "unused" chargers are then seen as wasteful spending. A dilemma for sure. Thing is, the stations will be used by all the continuing waves of new EV owners and those who are making trips.
Just because a charge point does not got a car plugging in 24/7 does not mean it's a waste hardly unused because when you need a place to plug in you really need one.
Maybe charge point need plug counters on them. After X amount of uses then it can be considered "paid for" by the government body that installed it. I can go to the most obscure charger I can think of on EVCharge maps and there will be a user comment about someone using it within the last 6 months (usually less). That's probably only a small percentage of actual users and with the 4000 delivered LEAFs compared to the 2000 RAVs on the road I bet the next wave will not be nearly as unused as the last batch.
Maybe they've backed away from the charging stations to make sure people actually use those expensive swap stations.
Similar threads
- Article
