REGISTER | LOGIN
Breaking News
Blog

Mercedes Dumps DTM for Formula E

Motosport momentum shifts to electric cars
Alix Paultre
7/31/2017 00:01 AM EDT

 17 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
realjjj
User Rank
CEO
Re: ....
realjjj   9/8/2017 1:02:15 AM
NO RATINGS
I was pointing out that at this stage charging rates are more important. This stage means 200+ miles as the default in the near future. A 15 mins break to charge after every 3h of highway driving is ok, a 1h break is too much for mass adoption.

Cost depends on segment and pack size. If you take an ICE based powertrain that costs 9k$, some might be able to reach cost parity this decade(with a 50-60kWh pack). If you compare with a 5k$ ICE powertrain, it takes a few more years or a smaller pack. And ofc beyond that point, EVs take the lead in costs.

However, the claim that EVs are lesser vehicles is outrageous. EVs are much much better cars and that's why one should not look at cost or TCO crossover but value.

Already listed this in another comment here but will do it again

Negatives for EVs:

- not everybody has access to a parking spot with a charger
- longer trips slightly less convenient

That can be fixed with much faster charging and slightly larger batteries.

Negatives for ICE
- value going forward
- air pollution that causes a few million premature deaths every year
- global warming
- noisy and smelly
- lazy, not as smooth and less fun since it lacks instant torque and you got gears
- can't refuel at home, can't generate your own fuel
- less efficient so higher fuel costs
- much more complex powertrain thus less reliable and with higher maintenance costs
- less freedom for aerodynamics
- less freedom in managing the mechanical volume
- will slowly become socially unacceptable in the long run



Once the consumer learns what EVs can provide, ICE doesn't have a chance at all. You just can't design a competitive product with outdated technology, the steam engine had its time too but nothing lasts forever.

Tim R Johnson
User Rank
Author
Re: ....
Tim R Johnson   9/8/2017 12:12:48 AM
NO RATINGS
Range is important.  For example, I drive 55 miles round-trip to and from work.  Add 10 miles for an occassional side trip, and the range should be 65 miles per charge.  Charge the battery overnight.  Also, it must do this year round, including in winter when the temperture can be below freezing for days.  Lets say, 10 deg F (-12.2 deg C) in the middle of the night to a high during the day of 26 deg F (-3.3 deg C), and have enough extra power available to heat the passenger compartment to 68 deg F (20 deg C).  And cost no more than a gasoline car, since after all, as a car, it is still less functional than a gasoline car, so it should not cost more.  Indeed, it really should cost less since it is less functional.  Until that is available, I'm not interested.

catherine
User Rank
Rookie
mercedes
catherine   9/6/2017 3:09:42 PM
NO RATINGS
I am glad for this great change,It is very interesting, great work!

handypixel
User Rank
Rookie
re: ...
handypixel   8/28/2017 3:36:56 PM
 I live in a suburban area of OH, while a EV would suit a lot of my driving along with my co-workers we all ahve to make at least 1 trip a week that is round trip is over the range of the current EVs using "MAss Transit" would triple the trip time.. Also I make 2-3 trips a year that are about 800 miles one way, and there are very few recharging stations along the way. Renting a vehicle to cover those trips for me would at least double the trip cost so that's not very likely to happen.

Smartalix
User Rank
Blogger
Re: ....
Smartalix   8/11/2017 2:28:52 PM
NO RATINGS
IMO there will always be fueled vehicles for exatly the applications you desribe. However, that doesn't mean those vehicles must be fueled with gasoline or diesel. There are technologies ranging from refillable electrolyte reflow batteries to hydrogen fuel cells. The key is that each core technology will eventually be pushed by market economies into the application spaces best suited for it.

realjjj
User Rank
CEO
Re: ....
realjjj   8/10/2017 12:25:40 AM
NO RATINGS
Think i've already addressed most of that.

They don't offer commercially viable products so ofc they can't sell. That's a product design issue. they need to fix it. That does include the charging infrastructure. Play on the strengths of the technology, hide the battery costs by reducing the percentage of the BOM it represents- so go higher end. It's not the same product with a different powertrain, it's a lot more and marketing offers ample opportunities. I get it, the ROI is lower for now but they will lose share if they can't make good cars that are EVs. 

They don't understand the value offered by the product and they don't understand that the % of people that want an EV will expand greatly with awareness. Green has value to some but it's not just about that, EVs are better vehicles.

And there is car as a service that has to be electric and will generate a lot of electric miles.

Let's focus on the negatives for EVs:

-value

- not everybody has access to a parking spot with a charger

- longer trips slightly less convenient

Value crossover is being reached now with smart product design in the upper segments of the market and the other 2 issues can be addressed with faster charging and slightly larger batteries.

Let's focus on the negatives for ICE

- value going forward

- air pollution  that causes between 3.5 and 7 million premature deaths every year

- global warming

- noisy and smelly

- lazy and less fun since they lack instant torque

- can't refuel at home

- less efficient so higher fuel costs

- more complex powertrain thus less reliable and with higher maintenance costs

- less freedom for aerodynamics

- will slowly become socially unacceptable but this is a long term thing

Would hate to be the one that has to market that calamity of a product.

Tesla Model 3 is far from perfect and far from affordable, Base price is 35k$ but ASPs will be likely north of 45k$ and that's in the US market where ASPs are insanely high at about 34k$. It does however offer enough for lots of potential customers today when product awareness is minimal.

They could have and should have done much better though. They needed to invest a bit more in the interior, in high value areas and they should have democratized Autopilot by adopting a reasonable price. Sadly they had no reason to try a bit harder as demand is too high and they can't catch up with it before 2020.

realjjj
User Rank
CEO
Re: ....
realjjj   8/9/2017 11:38:24 PM
NO RATINGS
Remarkable that LA Times can write that kind of article.

None of those are Tesla exclusive.

Govs around the world invest in electric vehicles and solar because the adoption must be accelerated. The author of the article even wonders about their chances of success but we don't actually have alternatives. Fossil fuel is running out no matter what. Their are in a forward looking field, that should not be a sin.

Money for building factories is something i don't agree with at all and sadly is a common practice. However much bigger corporations get much better deals but that's no excuse and this practice has to stop.

The way they count the tax credit given to the customer towards Tesla is highly misleading. That tax credit has a positive impact on their sales but of  a much lesser value. As for ZEV credits, Tesla has to sell them 50 cents per dollar . That's not true for other car makers that exploit the system and make EVs just for ZEV.

At a global level, the fossil fuel industry still gets over 5 trillion per year in subsidies. And pretty much everybody gets Govt money, from landlords like Trump to R&D tax credits for tech giants.

In any case, the subs for Tesla will run out soon as they get phased out after they reach 200k units  shipped in the US.

Will check out the other link next.

Bill_Higdon
User Rank
Author
Re: ....
Bill_Higdon   8/9/2017 10:45:00 PM
NO RATINGS
Also a interesting article from the LA Times

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html

 

Bill_Higdon
User Rank
Author
Re: ....
Bill_Higdon   8/9/2017 10:35:06 PM
NO RATINGS
Here's an intersting counter point, https://www.designnews.com/automotive-0/are-we-electrification-tipping-point-yet/51982814257257 Also it's intersting Musk is going the "jumk bond" route rather than get more money fom his backers.

realjjj
User Rank
CEO
Re: ....
realjjj   8/5/2017 6:14:01 PM
NO RATINGS
The existing gas infrastructure can easily transition while existing retail locations can add chargers. If there is a need for more, someone will build them and earn a buck.

That's the car ownership part of it, with car as a service with autonomous electric vehicles, there might be vehicles with extended range, battery swapping locations and w/e else works.

The other day there was a report that BP is considering adding chargers to their gas stations and Shell has already committed to that. Retail locations gain customers if they add EV chargers so it's good business.

There is one more way i look at it. Even if longer trips are less convenient, that's more than offset by the ability to charge at home/work/school - not everybody has that option today but the US does have a very high proportion of the population living in houses and that's a big plus. In urban, car as a service takes over anyway. And that's if we only look at how refueling differs but EVs have many other advantages like instant torque, no engine noise, low center of gravity, more aero freedom, cheaper fuel, greener (has economic value for some customers),more reliable and more.

US EV sales (including hybrids) are crossing 1% of total car sales now and should cross 3% next year, maybe 5% in 2020 with further growth depending on a few key factors.

1. TCO crossover and then retail price crossover timing.

2. The number of people that want an EV. Today most EV buyers pay a premium because they want an EV and that number can be expanded. The social norm shifting, awareness and marketing. This is important and often ignored when projecting EV sales, my assumption is that this is why so many car makers are underestimating EV sales growth. This could be looked at as perceived value and a better metric than TCO or price since those lack context.

Car as a service will grow very fast in terms of miles traveled and it must be electric, it's the only way to go from a marketing and operating costs point of view.

With car as a service or not, growth will be exponential and 2018 is a key milestone. Tesla Model 3 will reach the top 3 best selling sedans in the US, maybe even the #1 spot if they can ramp production fast enough as the demand is there. The media exposure it will generate will be enormous and other car makers will be hard pressed to try and compete as they can't afford the share losses. More EVs on the road creates awareness about their advantages and dispels some myths. It will be very difficult to sell ICE in the US or Western Europe by 2030.

The infrastructure will be ahead of EV sales. Tesla with its own network is forcing others to invest in charging infrastructure while retail locations and gas stations do not need to invest that much and the ROI is not bad.

Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Like Us on Facebook
EE Times on Twitter
EE Times Twitter Feed