Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[Big Tea]

I think the rush towards full electric will be larger in Europe for many years, and in the US it will lag considerably. Though it's reaching a point where EV's range will cover most of my use, until it covers all of my use it's just not going to be a consideration at all. I could easily think about a PHEV, even if the ICE power was only good for 100 HP or so. As long as I could keep driving at the speed limit it wouldn't bother me at all to have less power.

But if I've got to go 300+ miles in a day, even with the proper charging infrastructure, I'm not doing to wait around to charge.

For the old disposable commuter, I'd consider BEV, but only once they come down to a reasonable price point on the used market. I just don't spend much on a commuter regardless of what powers it.

I'm not so sure of this. The push to reduction in oil use is not only ecological, there is a big chunk of politics involved.
There is a move away from buying from countries who were seen as 'friends' (maybe because they had all the toys, maybe not) and it is politically difficult to be hard on a country who supplies most of your oil needs. As they are no longer needed it is easier to move away from them. (I know USA has huge reserves of oil, but they are still thinking long term and not using it)

Highlighted to aid people notice what are USA interests in the CC debate. Some say scientists have hidden interests to support CC, even when none of them were able to say what are those interests , when it´s USA and the rest who deny CC who have obvious interests to deny CC and keep using oil

It´s amazing to be forced to point this obvious reasons in 2020 after decades of these countries manipulations sincerely, but

I agree, partly, mainly because I believe there are many smart people involved who realise there are far better things to do with oil than burn it. So much of our modern world depends on things produced from oil it is seen as a strategic resource, and if things do go to hell, well they still have something to burn when no one else does.

[Ferry]

Military drones are unlikely to go EV as batteries take up too much payload capacity.

Probably right in most cases, but there are at least one battery operated drone for military use. https://www.flir.com/products/black-hornet-prs/
https://www.armyrecognition.com/april_2 ... -uavs.html

[djos]

True, but we can't evaluate militar viability using common tech, they're always two or three steps ahead.

I wonder what are they testing/developing. Aluminium batteries, those wich can't be recharged but provide 4x the energy density of current Lithium batteries, could make viable some interesting flying machines, drones, etc

Yes, aluminium is looking interesting. But it's still at least an order of magnitude lower energy density than oil-derived fuels.

Hydrogen fuel cells probably make more sense for this type of use. Indeed, they probably will be the answer for road vehicles that require range of greater than a couple of hundred miles. The issue then is making hydrogen in a sustainable and clean way.

The hydrogen eco system is grossly inefficient tho and consumers imo have already declared the BEV the winner. There’s no way hydrogen cars will catch and pass BEV’s now.

[Greg Locock]

I think you are probably right, but CSIRO are working on a PV to hydrogen process. If it scales up then hydrogen could become remarkably cheap. Now we've heard all that before, so a pinch of salt is required.

The thing that puzzles me is that Toyota and Honda, who aren't usually insane, are still backing FCEV, which necessarily implies a hydrogen source. I'm sure they know a lot of things I don't, but I've never heard a whisper of a near term source of hydrogen that doesn't have very significant downsides.

[Tommy Cookers]

..... For a diesel car to meet the 95 limit it would need to do around 95mpg, 76 USmpg, 3 l/100km.

well I seem to get (UK) 78mpg for the diesel car and 71 mpg for petrol

RETRO_EDIT
current figures are 76.3mpg for diesel and 70.6mpg for petrol (due to the changes in bio content ?)

[djos]

The thing that puzzles me is that Toyota and Honda, who aren't usually insane, are still backing FCEV, which necessarily implies a hydrogen source. I'm sure they know a lot of things I don't, but I've never heard a whisper of a near term source of hydrogen that doesn't have very significant downsides.

I think they've been "encouraged" to research these areas by the Petroleum companies who know ICE is on the way out over the next 20-30 years and need to find a new revenue stream.

[Zynerji]

I think you are probably right, but CSIRO are working on a PV to hydrogen process. If it scales up then hydrogen could become remarkably cheap. Now we've heard all that before, so a pinch of salt is required.

The thing that puzzles me is that Toyota and Honda, who aren't usually insane, are still backing FCEV, which necessarily implies a hydrogen source. I'm sure they know a lot of things I don't, but I've never heard a whisper of a near term source of hydrogen that doesn't have very significant downsides.

https://www.element14.com/community/gro ... e-molecule

[J.A.W.]

With all the 'ra-ra' hype & overt 'boosting' of the EC practicability/inevitability 'pending' by some here,
together with the seemingly dismissive attitude shown toward pragmatic US/Au members who live in a
needs-must long-distance/continental usage vehicle profile - I must ah, 'pipe-up' here, & remind those
Euro members that even '2035' for total ICE phase-out (as 'ambit claimed' by certain politicians) - is in
fact beyond their forseeable longevity/viability as 'leaders'...

When we see the likes of actual longterm leaders of other continental territories, such as Russia/China
deeming such as imperatives (other than for specific zones such as 'clean' inner-city use by the affluent),
then I'll buy it.

& I'll here take the opportunity to remind some recent posters here, that even in Europe, the US Forces
of NATO still operate the emissions-filthy, but longstandingly performance-positive, 2T Detroit Diesel...

[henry]

..... For a diesel car to meet the 95 limit it would need to do around 95mpg, 76 USmpg, 3 l/100km.

well I seem to get (UK) 78mpg for the diesel car and 71 mpg for petrol

btw
the 2020 test for CO2 emission aka consumption to be replaced in 2021 with EU 2017/1151
presumably despite these both being 'real world' tests they still imply better results than owners actually get
so the 95gm car won't be much different to the 100gm cars that being tax-incentivised hitherto in the UK are common

Correct. I forgot it was km.

If you would care to untangle your riddle I’ll respond to your other point.

[Tommy Cookers]

properly current UK mpg '95g/mile carbon' equivalents are 76.3 (diesel) and 70.6 (petrol) - via changes in bio content rules ?

regarding the official fuel consumption/carbon emission figures ... they are a mess ....

the old (infamously optimistic) NEDC test was gradually replaced in 2017-18 by a 'WLTP-type' test
pre-2017/18 models at present use their NEDC test figures arithmetically translated into a notional equivalent of the above
so official economy figures for such vehicles have fallen - and will fall further when this concession ends in April
figures for newer models are often worse than with their NEDC-tested predecessors

on January 2021 a modified 'WLTP-type' test as per EU 2017/1151 will replace the current 2020 version
presumably even this will be optimistic (relative to ownership experience)

buyacar also says the Tesla Performance S figures put it in the 'might as well have a fuel burner' category
https://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/1524/ele ... -explained

[henry]

properly current UK mpg '95g/mile carbon' equivalents are 76.3 (diesel) and 70.6 (petrol) - via changes in bio content rules ?

regarding the official fuel consumption/carbon emission figures ... they are a mess ....

the old (infamously optimistic) NEDC test was gradually replaced in 2017-18 by a 'WLTP-type' test
pre-2017/18 models at present use their NEDC test figures arithmetically translated into a notional equivalent of the above
so official economy figures for such vehicles have fallen - and will fall further when this concession ends in April
figures for newer models are often worse than with their NEDC-tested predecessors

on January 2021 a modified 'WLTP-type' test as per EU 2017/1151 will replace the current 2020 version
presumably even this will be optimistic (relative to ownership experience)

buyacar also says the Tesla Performance S figures put it in the 'might as well have a fuel burner' category
https://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/1524/ele ... -explained

You are, of course, correct about the relevance of test results versus real world. Interestingly the Golf figures I used in earlier posts are very close to the NEDC numbers. It depends so much on journey mix and driving style.

As for buyacar. Based on my earlier analysis, 296 Whr/mile gives 66gCO2/mile, 40g/km using electricity from the average U.K. generation mix. I don’t know what fuel burner they are comparing with, I can’t think of one. A comparable car to the Tesla would be something like an M5 at 241g/km. Equivalence would require the Tesla to consume 1.kW/mile giving it a range of less than 60 miles.

[Airshifter]

properly current UK mpg '95g/mile carbon' equivalents are 76.3 (diesel) and 70.6 (petrol) - via changes in bio content rules ?

regarding the official fuel consumption/carbon emission figures ... they are a mess ....

the old (infamously optimistic) NEDC test was gradually replaced in 2017-18 by a 'WLTP-type' test
pre-2017/18 models at present use their NEDC test figures arithmetically translated into a notional equivalent of the above
so official economy figures for such vehicles have fallen - and will fall further when this concession ends in April
figures for newer models are often worse than with their NEDC-tested predecessors

on January 2021 a modified 'WLTP-type' test as per EU 2017/1151 will replace the current 2020 version
presumably even this will be optimistic (relative to ownership experience)

buyacar also says the Tesla Performance S figures put it in the 'might as well have a fuel burner' category
https://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/1524/ele ... -explained

The US regulatory agencies have been through similar changes over the years, adopting more strict standards in testing as far as drive cycles and such. The idea was to move testing towards the real world (or in this case the real country) overall averages vs testing that allowed more leeway and loopholes.

There was a study not long back from the European Parliament, as well as many others I'm sure, that came to the conclusion that though the EU standards were overall more stringent than the US, the testing and policy procedures to enforce the standards were lacking. Over time they will all likely gradually merge to be more in line with each other, though I'm sure standards will continue to vary by specifics. The US takes more of an approach of "combined greenhouse gas impact" where the EU seems to focus on specific output levels of CO more, and less concern with other greenhouse gasses.





Since several have mentioned military use of EVs, just my opinion on the matter.

Not any time in the near future. Probably not even in the distant future.

The military will continue to be driven by speed and flexibility. With mountains of heavy vehicles designed for rapid deployment into forward operations, diesel will remain the fuel of choice for many more decades most likely. Even as it currently stands, most forward fighting armor (both heavy and light) can easily outrun the fuel supply chain that it depends on. As such, the speed of operations is often limited by the supply chain capabilities, which would be further diminished by the move to EVs.

Tactical movement of charging capabilities would be an absolute nightmare.

On the flip side, if we could somehow convince all the worlds powers to convert military equipment to EV only use, it would greatly limit the scope of conflicts in the world. The concern over tanks rolling into another country would be gone.

[Big Tea]

This is interesting re electric and self driving
It is from 'the other end' rather than selling cars to us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMxeQzFoZb4

[izzy]

This is interesting re electric and self driving
It is from 'the other end' rather than selling cars to us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMxeQzFoZb4

it all looks like walking distance, and walking speed! just sayin

[Big Tea]

This is interesting re electric and self driving
It is from 'the other end' rather than selling cars to us

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMxeQzFoZb4

it all looks like walking distance, and walking speed! just sayin

Yes, but what I considered walking distance and walking speed 20 years ago I now have a taxi for
The taxi is always there even if I use it for 10 min, it travels half a mile to collect me and a mile back.
Multiply this my how many million do something similar each day than X 7 x 365 etc
Take a mom with 3 kids on a wet day too

Safety and not being intrusive is the whole point of this.