Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[Just_a_fan]

Of course, not all of these clever new trucks are what they seem to be:

Hindenburg said the truck was “towed to the top of a hill on a remote stretch of road and simply filmed it rolling down the hill.” It was then used in a video, which Nikola said was created by a third party, in which the truck appeared to be driving on its own propulsion on flat roads.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/14/nikola- ... laims.html

Ooops! Best not to get caught doing that sort of thing.

[nzjrs]

Some new? Real world data on phev efficiency https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-54170207

[Brake Horse Power]

Actually they say real world reduction of emission is a third.. Which is pretty good I think.

People who actually believe or allow them to put 75% on paper are just ignorant.

[Greg Locock]

I'd have thought PHEV efficiency was fairly easy to measure. Camry hybrid vs proper engine Camry (incidentally if that was the car I'd wanted I'd get the PHEV). Sure you can argue about the CO2 intensity of the electricity, but those numbers are known. In Germany a PHEV makes little sense, in Norway it makes some sense but not as low as BEV, if CO2 emissions bother you. Which they don't, in my case.

[Brake Horse Power]

Even on grid mix batteries make sense. Germany has 46% percent renewables. Their carbon intensity however is still relatively high at 400gr/kWh because the other 50% is mainly coal powered power stations. Thought these do around 800 gr/ kWh. Brown coal is even worse.

Besides the grid mix, my BEV recovers 5kWh every 100km. I presume a Phev is able to do much of that as well. So only that reduces fuel consumption already a lot.

[Andres125sx]

Of course, not all of these clever new trucks are what they seem to be:

Hindenburg said the truck was “towed to the top of a hill on a remote stretch of road and simply filmed it rolling down the hill.” It was then used in a video, which Nikola said was created by a third party, in which the truck appeared to be driving on its own propulsion on flat roads.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/14/nikola- ... laims.html

Ooops! Best not to get caught doing that sort of thing.

This is bad news, not because of the truck, but because of their announcement about their new battery with double energy density and half the price. I was eager to see if their claims are true or not, but now I guess my expectations have dropped significantly...

They will show it in their motor show in 3rd-4th december

[Phil]

Then he goes on. The part where I finally unsubscribed was the environement part.... when he does not even touch the environement part but analyse a simple marketing point of view . His argument is, since manufacturers sell a 10% of EV and a 90% of ICE, it´s more efficient to improve ICE. Yeah but, who said that percentage will remain in next years? If he´s really analysing the environmental point of view.... shouldn´t he at least mention the toxic substances and emissions?

He addressed the elephant in the room: economic viability. It's about the manufacturers and finding the right incentives. That EVs make out a small fraction of total sold cars is a reality and will continue to be a reality for the next decades. Therefore, from the POV of a car manufacturer, it's more efficient to invest in optimizing ICEs (because they've been inherently inefficient for years, thus still have room for improvement) and this investment also has a more positive effect on the overall environment because the smaller improvements there carry more weight in sheer numbers than the few EVs that are being sold.

Investing into future technologies (EVs) is expensive, not all car manufacturers can afford. He also mentions that price point is very important and crucial and in some markets, it's just not viable to invest into EV technology (yet).

Of course for EV manufacturers, it's great to improve the technology, get batteries smaller, increase energy density etc. They are selling their cars on this premise. For most car manufacturers that either don't have EVs yet or don't sell a lot of them, it becomes a question of where to invest into. ICE cars will continue to be sold and governments will continue to enforce lower emission thresholds, forcing ICE manufacturers to increase efficiency.

[Greg Locock]

You get a much bigger CO2 benefit if you move somebody from driving a truck or SUV to driving a Prius, than you do from getting the Prius driver into an EV, in many regions.

[Jolle]

Then he goes on. The part where I finally unsubscribed was the environement part.... when he does not even touch the environement part but analyse a simple marketing point of view . His argument is, since manufacturers sell a 10% of EV and a 90% of ICE, it´s more efficient to improve ICE. Yeah but, who said that percentage will remain in next years? If he´s really analysing the environmental point of view.... shouldn´t he at least mention the toxic substances and emissions?

He addressed the elephant in the room: economic viability. It's about the manufacturers and finding the right incentives. That EVs make out a small fraction of total sold cars is a reality and will continue to be a reality for the next decades. Therefore, from the POV of a car manufacturer, it's more efficient to invest in optimizing ICEs (because they've been inherently inefficient for years, thus still have room for improvement) and this investment also has a more positive effect on the overall environment because the smaller improvements there carry more weight in sheer numbers than the few EVs that are being sold.

Investing into future technologies (EVs) is expensive, not all car manufacturers can afford. He also mentions that price point is very important and crucial and in some markets, it's just not viable to invest into EV technology (yet).

Of course for EV manufacturers, it's great to improve the technology, get batteries smaller, increase energy density etc. They are selling their cars on this premise. For most car manufacturers that either don't have EVs yet or don't sell a lot of them, it becomes a question of where to invest into. ICE cars will continue to be sold and governments will continue to enforce lower emission thresholds, forcing ICE manufacturers to increase efficiency.

A large amount of EV carmakers are probably not going to make their own batteries, motor and control electronics. Same as a lot of parts now in petrol cars are outsourced.
Because these packages are more modular and much less part of the cars character, car engineering probably gets cheaper and easier.

You can already see this at Porsche, who are using a lot of rimac parts like the motor and gear.

[Andres125sx]

Then he goes on. The part where I finally unsubscribed was the environement part.... when he does not even touch the environement part but analyse a simple marketing point of view . His argument is, since manufacturers sell a 10% of EV and a 90% of ICE, it´s more efficient to improve ICE. Yeah but, who said that percentage will remain in next years? If he´s really analysing the environmental point of view.... shouldn´t he at least mention the toxic substances and emissions?

He addressed the elephant in the room: economic viability. It's about the manufacturers and finding the right incentives. That EVs make out a small fraction of total sold cars is a reality and will continue to be a reality for the next decades. Therefore, from the POV of a car manufacturer, it's more efficient to invest in optimizing ICEs (because they've been inherently inefficient for years, thus still have room for improvement) and this investment also has a more positive effect on the overall environment because the smaller improvements there carry more weight in sheer numbers than the few EVs that are being sold.

Investing into future technologies (EVs) is expensive, not all car manufacturers can afford. He also mentions that price point is very important and crucial and in some markets, it's just not viable to invest into EV technology (yet).

Of course for EV manufacturers, it's great to improve the technology, get batteries smaller, increase energy density etc. They are selling their cars on this premise. For most car manufacturers that either don't have EVs yet or don't sell a lot of them, it becomes a question of where to invest into. ICE cars will continue to be sold and governments will continue to enforce lower emission thresholds, forcing ICE manufacturers to increase efficiency.

I see your point, and agree at some extent. But economic viability is very different to environment. I agree for a car manufacturer like Renault, BMW, etc. it´s more efficient to improve ICE than EV, but that has no relationship with environement at all, that is, as you say, economic viability/efficiency

Investing into future technologies (EVs) is expensive, not all car manufacturers can afford

I´m afraid I have to strongly disagree with this single sentence. We see EV all around because it´s exactly the opposite, any small company can develop an EV today, so big petrol companies no longer can purchase patents to avoid the invention seeing the light. Today any small company can produce an EV, that´s the reason there are a lot of new companies with no previous experience in car/motorcycle world manufaturing electric vehicles.

Since nowadays any small company can produce an EV, now big companies can´t stop it anymore. If you can´t beat them, join them

[Andres125sx]

[rscsr]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqywRziE7pk

can you translate? I only get some incoherent rambling without any substance.

[Greg Locock]

battery day highlights if it was me: they've made the cells at least 4 times bigger in volume and can store 5 times as much energy in them. They've reduce path length so losses are reduced so they can run 15% more instantaneous power. However, the ratio of surface area to volume has dropped so cooling becomes more difficult. They've eliminated tabs on the cells to improve the packing density. They've got some newer chemistry and processes.

Most of the above is positive.

Now we get silly. Plaid will have a top speed of 200 mph. Y rating tires will not be sufficent. They'll need tires with high grip for the 0-60 time, and a high speed rating. other attributes will suffer. Every Plaid buyer will pay for these unless Plaids are crippled at the factory (it is quite common to speed limit cars so that they don't need more expensive tires).

[djos]

battery day highlights if it was me: they've made the cells at least 4 times bigger in volume and can store 5 times as much energy in them. They've reduce path length so losses are reduced so they can run 15% more instantaneous power. However, the ratio of surface area to volume has dropped so cooling becomes more difficult. They've eliminated tabs on the cells to improve the packing density. They've got some newer chemistry and processes.

The Tabless battery is probably the biggest deal here - being able to flow energy into and out of the battery with far greater thermal and electrical efficiency is quite impressive. This in itself reduces the cooling requirements.

[Andres125sx]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqywRziE7pk

can you translate? I only get some incoherent rambling without any substance.

Not a clear video, sure. You can read it here, basically a new tabless battery with much better thermal efficiency and 16% increase in range.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new- ... ordable-ev