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

 13 comments   post a comment
NO RATINGS
View Comments: Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Smartalix
User Rank
Rookie
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.

Bill_Higdon
User Rank
Author
Re: ....
Bill_Higdon   8/5/2017 4:02:04 PM
NO RATINGS
My point is what happens when you have to travel away from the freeways like most of the US? As an minor note here my car a 1980 VW Diesel rabbit takes 3 fuel stops to reach Salt lake City from Salem. And I can drive similar distance on roads other than the freeways with the same ease. Something the EV's are a long way from reaching. When the infrasructure is there ok but I don't see that happening in the near future.

realjjj
User Rank
CEO
Re: ....
realjjj   8/5/2017 12:14:03 PM
NO RATINGS
My comment was a bit more forward looking as it's mostly addressing this bit of the article "The biggest hurdles electric vehicles need to clear are energy-storage and driving-range limitations.". Wasn't thinking US only either and i look at range and charging rates taken together. Faster charging does require infrastructure but i assumed an abundance in that area in a not too distant future.

For your example, the US seems to be settling towards a 200+ range. If you have that, do you need more and is the extra range more important than faster charging?

Most chargers are Level 1 or 2 with very few DC Fast Chargers. So in practice you are stuck with adding 20-30 miles per hour when charging as both the vehicle and the infrastructure are lacking. No matter the range, the charging rate is a big problem for long trips.  A Tesla Model 3 is advertised as being able to add 130 miles in 30 minutes for the base model and 170 miles for the Long Range model. Look a few yers into the future and at least 350 kW chargers should be available. If today adding 100 miles takes 5 hours for almost all EVs (and some 15 minutes with a Model 3 Long Range), tomorrow it will take 5 minutes, whenever that tomorrow comes, not gonna risk a prediction. A lot of room for progress and in terms of total trip duration , it makes a big difference. I suppose we might be thinking of range a bit differently. I'm thinking that 200-300 miles is enough ,maybe less for some segments and no need for 600 miles in 10 years from now as some think it is needed. You are likely thinking 80 miles vs 200+? New EVs seem to be moving towards 40kWh packs or better- 40kWh tends to be enough for 140-200 miles EPA rating - and i assume that by the time EVs reach cost crossover with ICE, EVs in most segments will offer over 200 miles of range.

Edit: Out of curiosity checked how many Superchargers (Tesla's charging network) there are between Portland and Boise (Idaho). Including the ones soon to open, there will be 5 along the way, not including the ones in Portland and Boise. According to Google, the trip is 6h 19 mins for 429 miles. Pretty good charger density at 61 miles average. Two stops of 20-30 mins each would be required with a 200+ miles range Tesla - less for models with larger battery packs. Without fast charging, an overnight stop would be required.

Bill_Higdon
User Rank
Author
Re: ....
Bill_Higdon   8/5/2017 11:07:30 AM
NO RATINGS
realjjj your comment "Range is not nearly as important as the oil industry has made it. The average miles driven per day in the US should be bellow 40 and about half that in Europe." Leaves out a lot of "Real Life" in the US, at this time unless you live in a Major Metro area of the US, the current range, recharge time & lack of facilties is a MAJOR ISSUE. I live in a suburban area of Oregon, 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.

Bill

 

 

nick_rb
User Rank
Author
Re: The electric engine?
nick_rb   8/3/2017 5:20:33 AM
NO RATINGS
Indeed, the first land vehicle to reach 100 km/h was "La Jamais Contente" (The Never Satisfied), a Belgian electric car (1899).

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