DIY Electric Car Forums banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey guys,

I've recently written an article which looks at the current limitations of electric cars, as well as how it affects potential new buyers and whether or not it is sustainable for the entire planet to run Electric Cars at the moment. I'd love to get some thoughts from other electric car owners, and if there any potential solutions to the problems that I'm not aware of ?

This is the article: https://www.inter-citycouriers.co.uk/challenges-electric-vehicle-production-can-we-beat-pumps

It's a relatively quick read, and I would really appreciate any feedback or thoughts on the content.

Thanks
Joey
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
The issues for the U.K. are quite different than the US.

A few points
Battery degradation / life is a non-issue for many EVs, the problems tend to surround the Nissan Leaf and other EVs without thermal management.
In the US Battery warranties are up to 10yr/240,000 km but CAPACITY warranties are sketchy and batteries are non-standard making 3rd party solutions more difficult.


The issue of road tax / duty in your case is more of a red herring than a real issue.
The trouble is that the US government lacks the will to fairly administer the costs of public infrastructure, nobody, especially not the businesses that damage the infrastructure want to pay for it directly.
Instead they try to shove the costs fully off on individuals who do minimal damage to the roads And further can completely avoid the tax if it’s excessive or extreme.
(AKA regressive taxes like registration are poorly thought out)
Hard decisions are needed to eliminate certain forms of taxes and move funding directly to general funds and using fee structures to drive certain “gross offenders “ either off the road to rail or to different vehicles that don’t clog up large cities
In the US a rather large percentage of the cost of electricity is a hidden tax called municipal substation tax So EVs already pay taxes, the issue is not that individuals aren’t paying their fair share (Ex some areas charge a grand more on EV tax than a gasser)
but that we’ve made poor decisions subsidizing semi freight making trains more expensive comparatively to operate.


lastly in my area chargers are rare, a proper PHEV (like a Prime) address this issue with minimal impact.
The issue isn’t chargers as much as it is open outlets, right to charge legislation would clear the way for apartment dwellers to use a BEV for local travel regardless of the charger situation
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,296 Posts
I have just read the article
ITS BOLLOCKS
You really NEED to do your homework BEFORE you write such bilge

Do some homework - and when you get somewhere NEAR enough knowledge to write an article THEN come to us for help BEFORE you publish a concoction of incorrect and misleading information
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
Your article is...

Not great.

It mixes some facts, some misconceptions, with a lot of stretched opinion. I suppose it's okay not to have source in an article, but you need to at least make defensible claims.

You're a courrier company posting about fuel costs are rising and such. I'm not sure what the purpose of you writing this articles is? Trying to influence public opinion away from electric vehicles and whatever your current fleet doesn't do?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Your article is pretty terrible, frankly. I have over 120,000 hard miles on one of those lithium batteries, and I still have over 90% of my original capacity. The batteries are continually improving, but frankly, they are now at a price point, energy density, and expected operating life that exceeds internal combustion components and -- more importantly -- the expectations of the average consumer. And we haven't even broached the topic of second-life batteries that are no longer acceptable for automotive use but are very effective for grid-tied energy storage that relieves peaks and stress on the power grid.

The carbon footprint is a bit of a distraction, too. Though EVs have a lower GHG emissions over their operating life (yes, they have "long tail pipes" but ICE vehicles have "longer tail pipes"), the GHG emissions isn't the key environmental advantage EVs have over ICE vehicles. That's actually criterion pollutants. Whether particulate matter, CO, NOx, or whatever other carcinogen or toxin you can think of, EVs emit less. A LOT less.

The transition time is really just making an excuse for laziness. How is it the most compelling EV brand is outselling everyone using 10+ year old technology (e.g., those laptop batteries you were referring to)? It's because they took what already existed and applied capital and effort. What Tesla is doing isn't magic sauce, and every major automaker could match what Tesla is doing. Why don't they? They have no incentive to do so, and in fact, they're still receiving a lot of incentives to do the opposite. Trillions of dollars is being fed into the fossil fuel industry globally, and as a result billions are being poured into infrastructure and support for fossil fuels. Turning off the free money would speed up your transition time exponentially.

Which leads to your point about not enough choices. I actually agree. There aren't enough vehicle choices right now. I have two 20 year old EV pickups sitting on my driveway right now, and what would they require to be a competent EV by today's standards? A new battery. Maybe some cabling and programming. That's it. We don't have the choices we should have as consumers for the same reason the transition is taking so long: Laziness and a lack of profitability.

And that brings me to what is likely your most interesting point. Who should pay? The obvious answer for the energy itself is: EV owners should pay for the energy they consume. When it comes to the actual public charging infrastructure, that's a different question. I'm actually in the minority in the EV community where I look at public chargers the same way as I look at range extenders in plug-in hybrid electrics. They are a necessary evil that I don't think will be required long term. The reason I am in the minority in the EV community is because a number of people believe that we should all be fine with small batteries, short range, and fast charging. That might work for city folk, but it doesn't work for most other people. As battery technology and self-charging technology (e.g., PV solar panels) improve, EVs will become nearly autonomous from the public charging infrastructure.

So, in my opinion, in the short term, EV owners should help fund the public charging infrastructure by buying more battery capacity than they need to get through their day-to-day routine. This alleviates pressure on the public charging infrastructure, and it reduces the funding required for the public charging needed to spur EV adoption (again, though, those subsidies are still a drop in the bucket compared to the tax dollars spent propping up the fossil fuel industry). Mid and long term, business owners need to be paying for publicly accessible charging. Whether that be the automakers themselves who want to incentivize sales or retail and service businesses that benefit directly from the increased traffic that their publicly accessible chargers will draw (coffee shops, convenience stores, grocery stores, hotels, motels, restaurants, shopping malls, etc.).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
I disagree that EV owners should pay for the energy we use. That also is outdated thinking and supports continued use of fossil fuels. As Germans are painfully aware, without energy storage, going completely wind and solar still doesn't work. In exchange for their huge capital outlay and for use of the batteries in their vehicles as grid storage for the 95% of the time those EVs are parked, energy for mobility of those vehicles should be free. You could even argue that IN ADDITION, payment should be made to the EV owners to incentivize the cars being plugged in as GRID ELEMENTS. This is the elephant in the room of EVs, one that horrifies the fossil fuels industry....they can't compete with free, even when they are given the stuff at the bottom of the hole by governments for free.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,270 Posts
I disagree that EV owners should pay for the energy we use. That also is outdated thinking and supports continued use of fossil fuels.
Well, I don't think people should pay for groceries, either, because that's outdated thinking that supports continued consumption of fast food. ;)

Of course EV owners should pay for their energy, just as everyone pays for the energy they use for anything. Anything free and unlimited to the user is wasted, and everything must be paid for by someone. Pay for what you use as you use it, or pay more buried in taxation or utility charges... but you're going to pay.

As Germans are painfully aware, without energy storage, going completely wind and solar still doesn't work. In exchange for their huge capital outlay and for use of the batteries in their vehicles as grid storage for the 95% of the time those EVs are parked, energy for mobility of those vehicles should be free.
I've always thought that this EV-as-grid-storage idea is strange. A typical EV is plugged in overnight and driven during the day, so when energy would be needed from them for peak needs they're not plugged in, and when demand is at its lowest they're plugged in. EVs can smooth demand by storing it off-peak and using it to drive when needed, and they would make good emergency residential power sources, but beyond that they're just consumers and don't seem to be to be a useful element of a utility system. But certainly battery and electronics suppliers would like to sell products for this purpose, useful or not, so there's lots of promotion of the scheme.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
EVs are driven to/from work, otherwise are parked. They are not driven during the day. Solar is only generated daytime. EVs extend the "day" into residential evening use. The capital expenditure of a grid element is moved into the EV owner's pocket - that gets a "lease" payment to that owner from the utility as a payment. Motive energy use is miniscule compared to grid flows. A green grid requires storage - economically and resources use will make V2G real, but fossils and Brian 😂 will diss the architecture.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
After all the negative posts, I had to read your article. I have to agree your article seems very stilted to suggest EVs are not ready for prime time. That is truly BS. Things will only get better from here and eliminate every half-assed "con" you put up. As an EV driver for over 7 years now, I would never go back. They may not be for everybody yet, but they will be very soon.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,296 Posts
The EV's as storage does NOT make sense - yet - with today's batteries and vehicle ranges any sensible amount of grid storage simply kills your car's total lifespan or resale value

This is where Tesla's million mile batteries come in - with that sort of lifespan we can sensibly sell capacity to the grid
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
The EV's as storage does NOT make sense - yet - with today's batteries and vehicle ranges any sensible amount of grid storage simply kills your car's total lifespan or resale value

This is where Tesla's million mile batteries come in - with that sort of lifespan we can sensibly sell capacity to the grid
The way EVs would be used as grid-tied storage, current batteries are more than up to the task. Even cycling just 1 kWh is of huge benefit to the grid.

Also, the Tesla "million mile battery" is a bit of a scam, in my opinion. We first need to be very clear about their metrics because, technically, LiFePO4 cells that you can currently buy off the shelf achieve that "million mile" mark. A 200-mile LiFePO4 with a 5,000 cycle life to 80% of original capacity could already be classified as a "million mile" battery.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
It's kinda funny that the ones who have been in EV for a long time are the biggest luddites when it comes to having privately-owned batteries as grid elements. Ladogaboy nailed it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
The EV's as storage does NOT make sense - yet - with today's batteries and vehicle ranges any sensible amount of grid storage simply kills your car's total lifespan or resale value

This is where Tesla's million mile batteries come in - with that sort of lifespan we can sensibly sell capacity to the grid
You are confusing off-grid emergency power with grid storage. Two different animals.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,296 Posts
You are confusing off-grid emergency power with grid storage. Two different animals.
Off grid emergency power makes total sense with today's batteries

Grid power storage does not
How much is grid power storage WORTH?? - and how much does it COST to use EV batteries for that
Rough numbers
200,000 miles is about 50,000 kwh - at 2 cents per kwh storage fee that is $1000

Is swapping 200,000 miles of vehicle range for $1000 a "good deal"?

When we have the "million mile battery" then swapping 600,000 miles of range that will NEVER be used for $,3000 in the wallet makes a lot more sense
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
Who said any needed range was ever used? For most vehicles, there's 150 miles' worth of battery unused per day...a grid peaker application would not swing that many kWh as the storage fleet grows and fossil fuels "peaker" plants get proportionally retired.

To me, the asinine view of the future is having my car running Level 5 autonomous and backing out of the garage at midnight to go "generate" revenue by taking someone home from a bar and coming home with puke in it. Yeah, that's worth $8k to me, Elon.

V2G is the future, and fossil fuels are deathly scared of peakers being retired....they are soon to be the only viable deployment of methane for grid generation...V2G kills that off.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,296 Posts
Hi Remy_martian

That is NOT NOT NOT the range I am talking about!
I'm talking about the vehicles overall lifetime range - the range it has before battery degradation becomes critical

Today it looks as if the Teslas have a lifetime over 400,000 miles - which is GREAT and more than is needed
But it's not ENOUGH more than is needed to allow somebody to "sell" that additional mileage to the grid
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
534 Posts
Where did the $0.02/kWh come from?

Seems to me you did the math backwards.

What's a kWh worth to an owner?

The "lost" kWh is only 20% of capacity, not 100%, by the way.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
6,296 Posts
The $0.02/kwh was a guess - if generation is going to cost less than $0.10/kwh then simply time shifting the power should be less than that

The 20% is the loss in range - I suspect that it will start to drop quite fast after that - that is the way failure modes normally work - what will that do to the value of your car??
If you treat it as being depreciated to nothing after 10 years and 100,000 miles then the remaining 400,000 miles battery range will be worth "selling"

Put different numbers in if you like and look at the results - we are going to end up with a lot more renewable energy which is going to be cheaper than today's fossil fuels - but not as "controllable"

So we are going to
Use long distance transmission
Use large corporate batteries
Use Pumped Hydro
Use "Demand management" - I bet this one will do a LOT when you can get to save money by scheduling your loads

Finally use BEV's as storage
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,004 Posts
I doubt my 10 year old 48 volt 250ahr lead silicon battery pack would be any use for v2g.

Im rather impressed it’s lasting as long as it has.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
80 Posts
Off grid emergency power makes total sense with today's batteries

Grid power storage does not
How much is grid power storage WORTH?? - and how much does it COST to use EV batteries for that
Rough numbers
200,000 miles is about 50,000 kwh - at 2 cents per kwh storage fee that is $1000

Is swapping 200,000 miles of vehicle range for $1000 a "good deal"?

When we have the "million mile battery" then swapping 600,000 miles of range that will NEVER be used for $,3000 in the wallet makes a lot more sense
I think you're making a number of assumptions there. First, not every kWh drawn from a battery has an equal impact on battery life. Cycling a few kWh from a battery at 70% is very different than driving 200 miles down to 20% battery and then recharging back to 70%. Second, the rate of discharge also matters. During driving, it's not unusual to exceed a 1 C discharge rate, which puts much more stress and wear on a battery than the .1 C to .2 C discharge rates you're likely to see with V2G. Third, I think you're completely undervaluing grid storage. Tesla seems to think this is a highly profitable business, where they are replacing multi-million dollar gas peaker plants with grid-tied battery storage and reaping all the profits. Even from a personal use perspective, owners can see far more than a 2 cent per kWh difference between peak and off-peak rates, which here in the United States can double or even triple from the national average baseline rate of ~11 cents per kWh.

So even if every kWh drawn was the same (i.e., driving versus V2G), your 50,000 kWh example would need to be valued at a minimum of $10,000, or roughly a quarter of the total cost of a modern, 200+ mile EV.
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top