backtop


Print 102 comment(s) - last by topkill.. on Apr 14 at 5:03 PM


The numbers of EV options will more than double with the release of the 2013 Ford Focus Electric (pictured), the 2013 Toyota Prius Plug-In, and the 2013 Tesla Model S.  (Source: Treehugger)

Charging stations, like ECOtality's BLINK charger, are being deployed across America as well.  (Source: Tech Fever)

History cautions us that the EV movement may not be out of the woods yet -- the most iconic EV of the 1990s, GM's EV1 quickly ended up crushed in the scrap heap (pictured). This time around things may work out differently, though.  (Source: Treehugger)
EV movement has stalled several times, historically, industry hopes to avoid another letdown

Researchers and market advocates in a recent Detroit News interview argue that the electric vehicle movement is reaching the point where it will become an unstoppable force on the market before.  Describes, Genevieve Cullen, the vice president of the Electric Drive Transportation Association, an advocacy group for electric cars, "We think that increasing electric is inevitable. The speed is variable."

I. The EV Movement has Faded Before -- Will History Repeat Itself?

The question of whether the electrification movement will stick this time around is a compelling one. 

In the early 1900s electric vehicles were extremely popular, outselling gas vehicles in some areas until the advent of mass production.  With the arrival of modern engine designs, electric vehicles quickly faded from the mind of the auto industry and the public.

In the 1960s interest in electric cars once again rose, with concepts like the 1967 Comuta from Ford Motor Company (F).  These efforts failed to gain traction, though.  In the 1990s there was yet another electric revivalist movement with General Motors Company's (GM) EV1.  And yet again EVs were met with apathy and a hasty demise.

Today EVs are once more on the market, with the 2012 Chevy Volt from GM (a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle; PHEV) and 2012 Nissan (NSANF) LEAF EV (a battery-electric vehicle; BEV).  However, the sales aren't looking great, largely due to the manufacturers' inability to put out significant volume to the public.

But many are convinced that this time EVs may hang in there.  Oil is off highs of $147 USD/barrel reached in July 2008.  But it's still relatively high, hovering at around $100 USD/barrel.

II.  Increasing Infrastructure

They key to the survival of the EV movement arguably lays in the significant uptake in EV infrastructure.  Thanks in part to a $2.4B USD government investment program in the battery industry, six major battery plants are open or are near opening.  And Tesla Motors Inc. (TSLA), Ford, and Toyota Motor Company (TM) will look to jump into the mass market next year with new electric vehicles.  Ford is planning to release the 2013 Focus Electric and Toyota plans to release a 2013 Prius Plug-In.  Tesla meanwhile is planning to launch its first mass-market EV, the 2013 Model S.

The real key to increasing promise for the mass market is dropping batter prices and increased battery production.  Analysts estimate that in 2011 50,000 EV batteries will be produced and in only three years -- by 2014 -- that number will rise to 500,000 batteries a year.

Meanwhile costs are dropping.  Eric Isaacs, the director of the Argonne National Laboratory -- a government research institution located outside of Chicago, Illinois -- states, "The question is: Can these guys make a battery that is five times cheaper? I think yes. I think we can do it."

One major obstacle to the fledgling movement is the availability of charging stations.  EVs, like gas vehicles need to be "fueled up".  Standard chargers can take hours to completely charge a vehicle.  A dedicated high-voltage charging station can mostly charge a vehicle within a half or so.

The need for chargers is more critical when you consider that the "tank" on EVs (battery) only holds one or two days worth of "fuel" (charge) for the average commuter.

Here, again, the government is looking to help spur the market by investing $400M USD to deploy chargers to public locations.  

Two of the leading firms include SemaConnect and ECOtality Inc. (ECTY).  SemaConnect was installing chargers in Maryland this week.  Meanwhile ECOtality in recent weeks has installed its BLINK charging stations in California, Washington state, Oregon and Arizona.

III.  The EV Outlook

There are telltale signs that the new EV trend may be a bit different.  Anecdotal examples can be found in the retail and fleet markets.  

Fleet giant Hertz is offering rentable EVs in New York City and will soon be offering them in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco, Calif.

States Company spokeswoman Paula Rivera, "Currently, we have a few dozen vehicles. By the end of the year we anticipate having hundreds of them available. We do view this as the future of transportation, and see adoption coming not only from having the cars available, but the ecosystem to charge them. ... As the ecosystem builds out, our fleet will increase."

Similarly, electronics retail giant Best Buy says it is considering selling recharging stations and is training its "Geek Squad" service team members to ready them for the possibility.  Chad Bell, the senior director of Best Buy's New Business Solutions Group states, "We dedicated a significant amount of resources to help this technology come to market. We think these (home charging-stations) will be purchased and sold in the future similar to how electronics are sold today."

Some analysts are more pessimistic about the movement.  Still it's hard to argue that the industry isn't showing an awful lot of interest in it, this time around.

To borrow a chemistry analogy, it appears that EVs are currently are entering a transition state.  They aren't over the energy barrier (sales hump) yet, but they may soon get there.  If they can keep up their momentum, perhaps the EV movement can finally survive and thrive.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Outstanding
By MeesterNid on 4/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: Outstanding
By callmeroy on 4/12/2011 11:41:48 AM , Rating: 3
Can't we figure out a way to use the tears of the various political lobbyist and environmental groups as a fuel source.....

...surely we'd then have unlimited fuel supply until our Sun burns out and destroys our solar system in the next few billion years... :)


RE: Outstanding
By semo on 4/12/2011 11:44:55 AM , Rating: 2
Wave power has a lot of potential (no pun intended) but I think kills whales or something... Also, people are very skeptical about off shore wave/wind power stations. It's usually the same people who find off-shore oil drilling acceptable (hey, it's done already so it must have been easy right?)


RE: Outstanding
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 1:42:51 PM , Rating: 2
People are skeptical but not for the reasons you think. They are skeptical because offshore generation is not yet proven reliable or economically robust. The initial costs are high, and maintenance cost is extremely high. You also lose a lot of efficiency in delivery to the grid.


RE: Outstanding
By semo on 4/13/2011 8:09:01 AM , Rating: 2
How is that different than offshore oil drilling? I'm sure everyone had the same doubts when it was first suggested. Is it efficient to clean up FULLY (not the half-assed efforts oil companies get away with) after an oil spill?


RE: Outstanding
By Harinezumi on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 1:22:47 PM , Rating: 2
We've got plenty of oil too. We just don't use it.


RE: Outstanding
By MeesterNid on 4/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: Outstanding
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 2:10:01 PM , Rating: 2
Canada is a hostile foreign government? I must have had a different geography teacher than you.


RE: Outstanding
By torpor on 4/12/2011 2:26:09 PM , Rating: 2
Ultimately, it doesn't matter where you import it from. All purchasing affects the market price.

This whole bit about, "but we gets it from Canuckistan!!!lol" just shows how truly dire the need is to get Economics 101 in public schools.


RE: Outstanding
By MeesterNid on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By EricMartello on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By Pirks on 4/12/2011 3:00:58 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I don't care if we have to live in a box
Got divorce lawyer standing by? You better do! Sooner the better


RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 3:12:53 PM , Rating: 5
My parents did just fine. And they didn't make a lot of money either. Sure they were always behind on bills. But they managed. They put our education before vacations and fancy cars.


RE: Outstanding
By Pirks on 4/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 3:28:34 PM , Rating: 2
/facepalm


RE: Outstanding
By JediJeb on 4/12/2011 5:16:41 PM , Rating: 1
Plenty of Russian women ready to come over and fill the gaps left by the greedy American women ;)


RE: Outstanding
By EricMartello on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By Pirks on 4/12/2011 6:28:00 PM , Rating: 1
HAHAHAAA ROFLMAO!!! :))) So the sad fate of Hans Reiser and his Russian wife did not teach you kids anything? HAHAHAHAHAAAA *crying here* jeez you guys just made my day! wonderful, now post some more shit like that puhleeeaassee!!! THIS IS DA BEST


RE: Outstanding
By torpor on 4/12/2011 3:41:32 PM , Rating: 3
Wife had private (lutheran) school from about 3rd grade on, and her siblings from earlier.

I went to public school.

In the end, I've had to teach her most of what she knows about economics. You see, private schools are no guarantee.

School boards are local entities, and even if you don't want to get involved there, you can (and must, if you want them to be successful) still take an active role in your child's education.

But it would be nice if all the kids on forums had, at least, the ability to sketch out a supply vs. demand graph and label what supply and demand shifts do to price.

Our national debate would be very different, and we could use the Econ to replace the "labor history" materials as supplied by the AFL-CIO. (true story from my high school)


RE: Outstanding
By Reclaimer77 on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: Outstanding
By Lerianis on 4/12/2011 10:02:08 PM , Rating: 2
If you call Canada 'hostile' since that is where almost 2/3rds of our imported oil comes from


RE: Outstanding
By sorry dog on 4/13/2011 9:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
Actually in my area (southeast US.) we have a lots of coal, however it is mostly not used in power generation around here. It is a lower grade coal that produces too much NOx in plant emissions. So most of the coal used in plants here is actually imported from places like Bolivia and the local coal is exported for use to places like Bolovia where they don't have to worry about trading NOx emissions, etc.

That's the thing about our enviro regs...we don't actually make things cleaner...we just move it somewhere else where they are too poor to care about clean.


RE: Outstanding
By sviola on 4/12/2011 1:22:03 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the first Fusion Power plant is under construction in Italy, if it works as expected, it will produce much more power than any Nuclear Power Plant and doesn't have the issues the latter has.

Also, there are other alternative power sources under study (like Microwave).


RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 1:25:33 PM , Rating: 2
Microwave power will never happen. If hippies aren't happy with a controlled nuclear reaction and waste that only they themselves cause through their protesting of reprocessing, how do you think they'll feel about electromagnetic waves powerful enough to incinerate homes if aimed improperly.


RE: Outstanding
By sviola on 4/12/2011 1:31:55 PM , Rating: 2
Well, I think that is a concern as well, but I was just giving an example of other alternative energy being studied/developed. But I think in the near future, Fusion will be the way to go, as long as they find out a way to start the process without using so much energy (after it is started, it is auto-sufficient).


RE: Outstanding
By Reclaimer77 on 4/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: Outstanding
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 5:07:40 PM , Rating: 2
We do have some of our own. But I agree that its still not nearly enough for every home in America, much less the world, to have an electric car.


RE: Outstanding
By Azethoth on 4/12/2011 6:43:45 PM , Rating: 1
"China holds 95% of the rare earth elements in the world"

This is total bunk. If you instead say that China currently mines 95% then you are correct. The reason is they do it cheaply and without caring about environmental consequences so nobody else is bothering to mine them right now.

If they embargo exports like against Japan last year then the picture changes rapidly.


RE: Outstanding
By Reclaimer77 on 4/12/2011 7:00:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
This is total bunk. If you instead say that China currently mines 95% then you are correct. The reason is they do it cheaply and without caring about environmental consequences so nobody else is bothering to mine them right now.


You're implying a distinction where there is none. If China is the only ones willing to mine something, then THEY control the supply. Who cares how much might be in the ground if it's going to stay there forever?

If anyone was planning on being pro-active about rare Earth mining, 10 years ago would have been the time to do it.


RE: Outstanding
By topkill on 4/13/11, Rating: 0
RE: Outstanding
By Reclaimer77 on 4/13/2011 5:47:27 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Outstanding
By Reclaimer77 on 4/13/2011 5:49:18 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2010/September24/...

More recent. OOPS looks like I was wrong. China produces 97% of rare Earths, not the 95% I previously stated. Please forgive me.


RE: Outstanding
By topkill on 4/14/2011 5:03:04 PM , Rating: 2
Produces! PRODUCES!!! Not has, but PRODUCES!!!!

They don't own anywhere near a majority of the world's supplies, they are simply the only ones PRODUCING them right now because they were not worth producing while the price and demand was low.

There is a huge difference between not having any and not producing any. We have all we need in the US, it just wasn't economically viable when prices were low so we didn't produce them.


Battery is the key
By quiksilvr on 4/12/2011 11:11:30 AM , Rating: 1
Batteries have been making strong leads in the industry. And with the vat of Lithium found in Afghanistan, we can very well be on our way to an EV world within the next two decades.




RE: Battery is the key
By SirKronan on 4/12/2011 11:17:39 AM , Rating: 3
NiMH ftw. 95% recyclable. Look at its track record on the Prius. I owned a Prius for almost 100k miles, and we never in the life of the vehicle, despite living in cold, snowy climates saw a drop in performance. Even without conservative driving we consistently got 47 MPG average. We sold it and got something larger (growing family) but I know people with many more miles than that on their Prii that continue to get very close to brand new performance.

New tech and better methods as well as higher capacities, smaller sizes and quicker recharge rates are definitely on the horizon though. Electric has more potential now than ever.


RE: Battery is the key
By quiksilvr on 4/12/2011 12:52:09 PM , Rating: 1
NiMH ftl, unfortunately. It doesn't last as long, loses charge faster, has less energy per pound and takes longer to charge.

Lithium is the future.


RE: Battery is the key
By semo on 4/12/2011 11:39:58 AM , Rating: 2
I think infrastructure is the key.

Who cares that it takes 10 hours to recharge when most cars are parked for long periods at a time. Imagine if all the money invested in gas stations and associated infrastructure was instead invested in charging stations. We have electricity supply everywhere. The problem is how do we generate enough with so many brain-dead green terrorists opposing everything that makes sense.


RE: Battery is the key
By anony on 4/12/2011 12:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
I think instead of creating charging stations, all manufacturers should decide on a standard modular battery form factor (and battery bay access), and have battery stations instead of charging stations. This way, some kind of heavy lift machine can swap out batteries for charged ones quickly.

Thoughts why this may not be a good idea?


RE: Battery is the key
By Ushio01 on 4/12/2011 1:00:18 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Battery is the key
By anony on 4/12/2011 1:06:26 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly, but discussions are usually centered around charging stations. Of course, it will take a lot of co-operation from different car manufacturers to get this to work. And the swap station itself can be powered by a small local power plant, maybe a fuel cell based one. This will be an alternative to making fuel cell vehicles.


RE: Battery is the key
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 1:01:32 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah lets build 1.5x the number of batteries we need. That's going to happen. Who's going to pay for all those extra batteries? The materials for said batteries are already in high demand and short supply. And you want to build even more?

Why its not a good idea? They don't end.


RE: Battery is the key
By anony on 4/12/2011 1:26:12 PM , Rating: 2
Well, someone built all the complex cellphone stations for us to use and we are paying for them, so it is not completely unfeasible, but point taken.

The battery tech/material problem has to be tackled regardless. But unlike oil, it is not really consumed, it can be recycled.


RE: Battery is the key
By Gurthang on 4/12/2011 2:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Yeah lets build 1.5x the number of batteries we need. That's going to happen. Who's going to pay for all those extra batteries? The materials for said batteries are already in high demand and short supply. And you want to build even more?


It is called investing.. there are these groups of people with money who look for ways to make more money on new ventures. If the auto industry gave even a hint they would standardize on swappable packs there will be tons of investors ready to jump on the concept and manufacturers to build the cells. Who pays for the strategic oil reserves we maintain here in the US or all that gasoline sitting in tanks waiting to be sold..

And no there is plenty of lithium, carbon, silicon, etc. for making those newer lithium batteries like A123 cells. The cells used in laptops tend to use colbalt and be a tad to touchy for vehicles.

In the end the market will decide if allowed, I expect there will be many failures and suprises along the way hopefully leading to something more practical than most of the silly concept cars I see out of "Detroit".


RE: Battery is the key
By FITCamaro on 4/13/2011 9:10:20 AM , Rating: 2
It's called reality. When people buy a car, it comes with a battery. People wouldn't like the idea of giving that battery away to someone else in exchange for a battery that they know nothing about. They bought a car with a new battery, after their first "fill-up", they don't know what they have.

Furthermore, the battery packs weigh over a hundred pounds. Where are you going to put it so its easy to get in and out of every car quickly and safely? Also what about size? A bigger vehicle will have a bigger battery. Now you're talking about having tons (both literally and figuratively) of batteries on hand to be available to replace in cars and different sizes depending on the class of vehicle. Fill up stations would turn into warehouses.

It isn't feasible no matter who would interested in investing. The costs are in the trillions. Tell me where that capital exists. It doesn't. Not even in the make believe money land of the common liberal.


RE: Battery is the key
By JediJeb on 4/12/2011 6:21:27 PM , Rating: 2
One problem would be that most cars would need to be very similar in shape and size, though that could be overcome I guess. Another is what happens if you get your nice new battery swapped out and the one you get turns out to be a dud that leaves you stranded on the side of the road? Also unless they can increase the range on these cars then these swap stations need to be placed fairly close together to cover everyone, unless you want EVs to be restricted to certain locations.

We haven't been able to get cell phone companies to standardize batteries, it will probably be even harder to get car companies to do so.


RE: Battery is the key
By semo on 4/13/2011 8:23:04 AM , Rating: 2
How close to one another are gas stations? Also, I think that if the industry went this way, then the battery packs would be much smaller and different vehicles would carry different quantities.

I still think that this sort of concept is best suited for things like city buses. I see commuting to a filling station as one of the many negatives of ICE cars but in the short term it could be the only viable solution for EVs.


RE: Battery is the key
By semo on 4/13/2011 8:14:10 AM , Rating: 2
This is a great idea for a bus service I think. Just change the battery at the depot.

For commuter cars, I think it has its advantages but it takes away the convenience of not having to go a particular spot just to recharge. If implemented though, long distance journeys would be feasible.

With a good infrastructure, a lot of the current EV's deficiencies could be improved until the technology matures and takes care of itself.


RE: Battery is the key
By kattanna on 4/12/2011 2:05:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And with the vat of Lithium found in Afghanistan


there are actually vast amounts of many resources to be found there. we have known that since the soviets invaded.

but with little to no infrastructure and a hostile terrain and locals, its doesnt lend itself to investment and resource extraction. nor will it for some time.


By Chudilo on 4/12/2011 11:55:01 AM , Rating: 2
Jason. when will you start proofreading your articles. Seriously.




By theBike45 on 4/12/2011 2:59:09 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone knows that it's battery PRICES, not capabilities that decide when EVs become ubiquitous. Batteries already are fully capable of competing with ICE powered vehicles, including trip capabilities. The Tesla Model S, in addition to showing the "experienced automakers" how one goes about building an electric car, also demonstrates where EVs can compete : at the upper price levels, where battery costs
can be offset by avoiding very expensive high-end drivetrains from BMW and MB. The Model S can travel 300 miles on a single charge and recharge in less than one hour. That's plenty good enough for trips. Examine the Model S and compare to similarly priced offerings from MB and BMW and you'll see that the electric is actually a far superior vehicle, and long term, beats the pants off those competitors in terms of operating and maintenance costs.
GM and Nissan have misunderstood the current state of
battery costs and tried to produce (unsuccessfully) low cost electrics (GM, unbelievably, made a cost estimate of "under $30K" for their Volt, later to learn the true cost of the battery pack, leading to a revision of cost to $42K). That ends up, predictably, with vehicles that cannot travel even 100 miles (the Nissan Leaf is EPA rated at 75 miles). Even with battery swapping (an impossibility, for many reasons) that would require stopping for a swap every 60 miles or so. And battery swapping increases battery costs. Therefore, economics dictates that electrics will enter the market from the top down, and move into lower priced levels as battery costs are reduced. How soon that will occur (battery prices have been dropping roughly 6-8 percent per year) is anybody's guess, but there is no
critical need for additional improvement in battery technology.




OK smart people!!
By muIIet on 4/12/2011 7:53:40 PM , Rating: 2
This may be a dumb question but how much does it cost to charge a EV from totally dead to fully charged?




Wait until they discover reality
By Beenthere on 4/12/2011 11:00:46 PM , Rating: 2
The tree huggers may all be enthralled with EVs but for most folks they are simply not practical. Hybrids have a more realistic application. I doubt you will see the sales of EVs that those rushing to the rescue (sic) expect. Once the reality of how impractical these EVs are is experienced, sales will plateau and tapper off. EVs are being hyped so car makers can meet mandated emissions standards.

As far as energy goes there is plenty of oil and there always will be. EVs may reduce air pollution in operation but they raise the level of toxic waste both to produce the batteries and to dispose of them.

Germany has used clean coal power generation for quite some time. Windmills will continue to be built. Ocean wave technology is evolving. Nuclear is fine when the proper safeguards are employed. The infrastructure for EVs doesn't really exist and there is no money to pay for it.

My tax dollars are already subsidizing EV production and purchase yet we are elimination teachers, police, fireman and busting unions. The U.S. has become a cesspool of political cronyism and the working class pays for the greed of the rich and the needs of the poor.




EV != Electric
By gamerk2 on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: EV != Electric
By Methal on 4/12/2011 11:46:20 AM , Rating: 2
A few reasons EV isn't going anywhere.

No market.

EV is worse on the environment than gas. Electricity has to come from somewhere.

Time to charge is decades behind fill up time.

Performance.

Cost to repair/replace batteries.

size.


RE: EV != Electric
By hughlle on 4/12/2011 12:42:56 PM , Rating: 4
exactly, the industry opinion may be it's all going super, but well, the comsumer opinion from where i live is quite the opposit, noone drives EV vehicles because they are crap. There is the od prius here and there but well, they're rather crap for the environment so i'm confused as to their use.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 1:03:11 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Tell your stupid BS to Tesla or Prius or Leaf manufacturers who ALREADY made wagons of money, basically selling to like 0.0001% of the global auto market.


WTF are you talking about? Tesla has yet to make any money. And Nissan has hardly made any money off the Leaf.

Has Toyota made money off the Prius? Sure. Because they hardly paid anything to develop it due to government subsidies from both Japan and the US.


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 1:06:01 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Tell your stupid BS to the nuclear power station designers who'll laugh hard at your stupidity. Everyone knows coal and oil and gas are way more polluting and way less efficient than nuclear. You will look even more moronic with further advances in nuclear fusion.


There are more factors than how the power is generated. The batteries are not exactly clean to produce. Requiring large amounts of shipping (using lots of fuel), lots of toxic chemicals, etc.

quote:
Noone cares about your stupidity since people can recharge overnight when electricity rates are the lowest.


Because no one ever drives more than 100-120 miles in a day right?

quote:
Stupid people like you don't own high performance Bugattis, so you're not the one to talk about it. Besides with your stupid 50-70 mph speed limits everywhere what you need your Bugatti for? To look even more stupid than you do now?


Yes because tons of performance enthusiasts drive Bugattis...

quote:
This goes down with time and economies of scale. Your stupidity does not.


Much like your trolling.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/11, Rating: -1
RE: EV != Electric
By amagriva on 4/12/2011 2:15:11 PM , Rating: 2
If you really want to hurt him replace Bugattis with Camaros...
Did you really write prolly? Brrr! I feel goosebumps and I'm not even english mothertongue...


RE: EV != Electric
By amagriva on 4/12/2011 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
Is it enough to reply to Pirks to be rated down? Is it contagious?


RE: EV != Electric
By MrTeal on 4/12/2011 2:22:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A few guys with such ridiculously long everyday commutes can use older gas cars or hybrids until battery tech catches up. Majority is still fine with EVs since their commute is not that crazy long.


Some of us don't spend all our time in our parent's basement and do occasionally travel. While I agree that EVs will be part of the auto mix in the future, they won't take it over any time in the near future.


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 2:38:03 PM , Rating: 5
Why do I bother arguing with a child? But here goes.

quote:
Wait for some time until the gas prices raise to their normal levels again and you will see people run in droves to buy cars that are like $300 cheaper EVERY MONTH just because of the price of gas.


The only people who will do this are those already with a car payment. The millions of people who don't have them will stay with their current car because even paying more for gas will be cheaper than gas and a car payment.

quote:
Fairy tale.


Hmmm...who to believe....the former exec that worked there and had nothing to gain by stating it? Or the company that looks bad if the report was indeed true?

quote:
That's still much less fuel wasted and pollution released compared to your typical gas car.


In the long term(10 years) yes. Short term no. And what kind of pollution is also important. Todays cars are extremely clean compared to those of 30 years ago. Most rare metals are mined in areas of the world with no environmental regulations. So the mining destroys the landscape. We can also produce fuels from algae and potentially plants other than food crops. Oil in the distant future will run out. Well so will rare metals needed to build batteries. I'd wager completely switching to EVs would result in those being depleted long before oil would be. Because again we have ways not to use it. Not so with batteries.

quote:
A few guys with such ridiculously long everyday commutes can use older gas cars or hybrids until battery tech catches up. Majority is still fine with EVs since their commute is not that crazy long.


So I guess you never take day trips anywhere longer than 100-120 miles away. I have a friend who lives farther away than that. So now I'm supposed to own two cars to make you happy? Sorry three since I already have two. Maybe in your 1 bedroom apartment you don't care about certain things, but others have different needs.

quote:
Replace Bugatti with any other Mustang like "performance" gas guzzler that idiots buy, the make/model doesn't matter in this case.


30 mpg out of a 6.2L V8 is hardly a gas guzzler in my opinion.

quote:
Truth hurts


No it really doesn't.

Don't you have a Mac you should be trying to dry hump? I need to get back to raping mother earth. She's got DDs.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/2011 3:16:44 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The only people who will do this are those already with a car payment
Or those with old cars worth replacing, as well as the new car owners buying their first one - and that's quite a few globally.
quote:
the former exec that worked there and had nothing to gain by stating it
Former exec? What former exec? Where did you get this BS from?
quote:
Well so will rare metals needed to build batteries
Recycle old batteries and the problem is solved.
quote:
I already have two
For those people like you who own two cars: one is EV commuter and the other is a rarely used gas one that can go very long distance. Problem solved. I'd get myself a hybrid for the long distance ones, will save a ton of gas this way, just one 200 mph trip will save quite a lot in terms of gas consumed. Besides with hybrid you have to refuel very very rarely, you can go like 500 miles on one tank, sweet!
quote:
30 mpg out of a 6.2L V8
Switch to city drive and your gas guzzler will consume double of what my Echo consumes, with no benefit whatsoever (your V8 roaring loudly at the red traffic light is extra moronic and childish :). Your ideal highway mileage under ideal conditions never happens, are you really so naive to believe this? Why do I bother arguing with a naive child indeed? :)
quote:
Don't you have a Mac
No I don't, not into toys these days


RE: EV != Electric
By Gurthang on 4/12/2011 1:43:51 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
There are more factors than how the power is generated. The batteries are not exactly clean to produce. Requiring large amounts of shipping (using lots of fuel), lots of toxic chemicals, etc.


Neither is the drilling and transportation for oil nor is the production, transport, and storage of gasoline. Your point? At least EV tech tends to centralize the polution where in theory it is easier to manage and control.

quote:
Because no one ever drives more than 100-120 miles in a day right?

While I agree the state of battery tech is not there yet for long distance driving. This does not mean they solutions do not exist. Flow cells can be "recharged" by changing out the "battery fluid". If the industry standardized on battery modules and their connection/interconnection your fill-up would be just an exchange of modules with you paying for energy used and wear. It also creates a means to manage cell recycling.

Of course the real answer to long haul electrics is in road power on the highways heck that might be a better answer now for moving freight that those high-speed rail boondogles that keep popping up every few years.


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 3:14:07 PM , Rating: 3
And where will the trillions come from to completely replace roads?


RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 3:50:29 PM , Rating: 4
When you are a liberal nut job neither the costs nor the outcomes are important. They are something that someone else can just "deal with later" after your brilliant amazing show stopping miracle plan goes into effect.

Kyoto Protocol: Lets spend trillions on a few years of sketchy lobbyist driven scientific evidence to reduce emissions of a compound that's been on the earth sustaining life for 4 billion years.

Welfare: Lets spend trillions on people who have a negative net impact on the prosperity of a society to assure that their descendants can follow in their footsteps.


RE: EV != Electric
By Spuke on 4/12/2011 5:02:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
When you are a liberal nut job neither the costs nor the outcomes are important.
I find that people that support all these trendy talking points really don't seem to be interested in implementation or costs. Or even pros and cons for that matter. It's like the other thread where you just simply plug in your EV and go. Hell it's taken the better part of two years just to get people here to acknowledge that you have to install/upgrade something to charge their EV in a reasonable timeframe. They still won't accept how much it costs or that some things simply won't happen. I don't know how many people I've personally talked to wanting to install solar or wind that are turned off by it when they hear what's involved or how much it costs. All people hear are the good things (and not even all of the good things at that).


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 5:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
I think welfare should be called the James Clyburn Principle.

If you've ever driven through his districts, you'd know why I say that. Nothing but welfare generation after welfare generation. And he's perfectly content keeping it that way.


RE: EV != Electric
By MeesterNid on 4/12/2011 2:10:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Noone cares about your stupidity since people can recharge overnight when electricity rates are the lowest .


That may be true now, but if this new era of electric everything comes upon us what do you think will happen to the electricity rates? It's basic supply and demand as it relates to price. When the market is saturated with electric vehicles all drawing power from the grid the prices for electricity will be climbing nice and high.


RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 1:30:30 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Tell your stupid BS to Tesla or Prius or Leaf manufacturers who ALREADY made wagons of money, basically selling to like 0.0001% of the global auto market.


Wrong. Tesla is still in the red (all they have is investor equity). Furthermore the Model S won't go on sale until next summer.
The leaf was predicted (by Renault/Nissan CEO) to sell 20,000 units in the US this year. So far they are up to a couple hundred... They might want to take a zero off their silly estimate.
The Hybrids are the only one's making money, and it is more than your pulled out of your ass 1 millionth of global auto sales. Try again with some facts next time.

quote:
Tell your stupid BS to the nuclear power station designers who'll laugh hard at your stupidity.


Right now EV is worse than gas for the environment, especially in the US, because we don't have and will not have new fission plants in the US for decades. It is still cost effective to use gas as opposed to running coal and gas plants for electricity. And Fusion, Pirks, really? Even if ITER and DEMO work out perfectly and don't get delayed to death, fusion plants are at least a century off and will have ludicrous startup costs.

quote:
Noone cares about your stupidity since people can recharge overnight when electricity rates are the lowest


Except people who occasionally drive at night, or for people who occasionally drive more than 2 hours in a day, or the entire US shipping industry.

quote:
Stupid people like you don't own high performance Bugattis, so you're not the one to talk about it. Besides with your stupid 50-70 mph speed limits everywhere what you need your Bugatti for?


Since you don't even present an argument, let alone an iota of logic with this gibberish, I'll leave it alone.

quote:
This goes down with time and economies of scale.


Well please call me up in 30 years when it goes down enough to make electric vehicles worth a god-damn. 'Till then I'll wait before I buy your expensive over-hyped subsidized EV sh!t-box.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/11, Rating: 0
RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 3:33:50 PM , Rating: 2
The US consumes about a quarter of the world's electricity, even with 1/20th of the worlds population, and yet suddenly you "don't give a damn". Sounds about right for your fact ignoring self righteous socialist drivel.

Some people get excited about having nice things. You with your cheap shitty car and warped world view are not among them. I don't care if it is a "stupid waste of money" Apple Mac or a "stupid waste of money" Mustang Cobra, a "stupid waste of money" H&K SL-8, a "stupid waste of money" catamaran, or a stupid waste of money trip to Disney World. Everyone likes spending the money they work for on things they like.

The difference is, most people defend and support everyone else's freedom to waste their time and money as they see fit to.

But go ahead and live in your own little private world where everyone that doesn't agree with your obvious moral superiority and miraculous social ideology is just "a stupid idiot who needs to get out of their basement".


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/2011 4:56:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The US consumes about a quarter of the world's electricity
Well since the US was so "wise" to support all this huge consumption with coal and sh1t instead of building clean nuclear plants - well good for ya guys, keep breathing your nice coaly pollution sh1t, again I don't care how much gigawatts you consume and how much of your dirty coal sh1t you burn instead of producing those gigawatts in clean nuclear plants. Stupid people like you deserve what you got, so good luck inhaling you coal sh1t. Smarter countries will build dozens of powerful nuclear reactors while you'll keep inhaling your econut sh1t.
quote:
Some people get excited about having nice things
Electrics are nice things, they are marvel of tech. The gas cars are old, boring and polluting. Wasting money on an expensive gas car is like wasting money on an expensive vacuum tube computer, while you can invest money in the no less expensive silicon chip computer. I understand those vacuum tubes look nice and glow nice and you may consider this museum tech "nice" with all your Luddite buddies for all ya want but still people who invest in vacuum tubes these days are dumb, excuse me for being honest. But after all most people are dumb anyway so...
quote:
The difference is, most people defend and support everyone else's freedom to waste their time and money as they see fit to.
There's no difference, because I said "I don't care" multiple times above. You guys can burn oil, coal and gas for all you want, you are free to do that and I never claimed otherwise. Indeed, I'm free to buy electric and pollute less, you are free to burn stuff and pollute more, here I agree with ya.


RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 6:56:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well since the US was so "wise" to support all this huge consumption with coal and sh1t instead of building clean nuclear plants - well good for ya guys, keep breathing your nice coaly pollution sh1t, again I don't care how much gigawatts you consume and how much of your dirty coal sh1t you burn instead of producing those gigawatts in clean nuclear plants. Stupid people like you deserve what you got, so good luck inhaling you coal sh1t. Smarter countries will build dozens of powerful nuclear reactors while you'll keep inhaling your econut sh1t.


How dense are you? You think Greece and Portugal going bankrupt is a waste of funds? Lets see how long you can drive your echo if the US goes bankrupt, considering we have financial interest supporting every modern country's infrastructure in the world.

You have a seriously warped view of things. I live in the Highest coal producing state in the USA and I have fresher air than you. Look up WYOMING some time when you aren't jerking off to your emo-lib propaganda and Al Gore porn.

That's right butt-munch we produce almost as much coal per year in my state with half a million people as the entire European Union does

Guess what else, its dirt cheap to make, produces thousands of great paying jobs, and our air is crystal clear and environment virtually pristine here.

Keep reading and believing your pseudo scare stories in the tabloid though, if it makes you feel happy.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/13/2011 10:17:59 AM , Rating: 2
Whatever, burn all your coal gas and oil buddy, I don't give a fk about your econut lunacy


RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 6:34:16 PM , Rating: 1
You point out China as an example of a "healthy, modern, science friendly, progressive" country.

Okay....mmmmmaybe if you compare it to Laos, PRK, or Zimbabwe.

Get a clue, Pirks, you don't know dick about environmental, political, socio-cultural, or economic geography. You should definitely run for political office.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/13/2011 9:35:21 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
You point out China as an example of a "healthy, modern, science friendly, progressive" country
Say this is not so given that the US burns dirty coal and is afraid of nuclear because econuts rule the country while China is building nuclear reactors in droves


RE: EV != Electric
By sorry dog on 4/13/2011 9:34:54 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Who cares about US that's driven by econuts and religious right these days? I was talking about more progressive, modern, healthy and nuclear/science friendly countries like China or France. Americans can keep drowning in filthy gas/coal/oil emissions for all I care. Like I give a damn.


Dude, have you been to China?

I'm guessing not since you don't have to be there very long to realize that their air quality sucks and most of the place is a mess. The majority of cars on their roads are several generations behind ours in terms of pollution.

BTW - do you live in the U.S.? If so, why do you talk so poorly of your home? I mean if France is so great I'm sure an intelligent person such as yourself can figure out a way to relocate there??


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/13/11, Rating: 0
RE: EV != Electric
By Skywalker123 on 4/14/2011 3:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
"Because I am an idiot? ;) But what if I'm not? "

Trust me, you are an idiot.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/14/2011 4:38:23 PM , Rating: 2
Why would I trust a moron like you?


RE: EV != Electric
By Reclaimer77 on 4/12/2011 5:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Tell your stupid BS to Tesla or Prius or Leaf manufacturers who ALREADY made wagons of money, basically selling to like 0.0001% of the global auto market.


LOL Tesla has sold like nothing, and the Leaf's global sales were two thousand something units. Globally! Wagons of money I think not.


RE: EV != Electric
By Pirks on 4/12/2011 6:40:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Tesla has sold like nothing
On 2 December 2010, Tesla had delivered more than 1400 Roadsters. That's like 140 million dollars in sales. You wish you could sell this kind of "nothing", boy.


RE: EV != Electric
By AssBall on 4/12/2011 7:02:49 PM , Rating: 2
140m + the 10-20m every month they spend minus the 1000m they got in incentives and subsidy and investment still equals ...

Welcome to the amazing world of arithmetic. We teach that in elementary school here if you're interested.

I wish I could feel good about selling one tenth of what I jewed everyone out of!


RE: EV != Electric
By Hulk on 4/12/2011 11:50:53 AM , Rating: 2
Fuel Cells still need electricity to produce the hydrogen. Reformers are too expensive. And Fuel cells are actually too expensive too. It seems like the market has decided it's time for batteries to have another go round.

As for electricity, if there is a greater demand we'll produce it. It will be some combination of hydro, wind, solar, coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear. Again, the market will deem the percentages of each based on cost per kWHr.

The real determinate for electric vehicles, besides battery capacity will be gas cost.

Let's take the Volt. Travels about 35 miles on 10 kWHr, which actually requires 12kWHr for recharge due to efficiency losses. At 0.18 cents per kWHr including delivery, which is what I pay in NJ, that means about $2.16 for 35 miles.

If you consider the competing car will travel that far on a gallon then I'd estimate things start to get very interesting when gas hits 2.16x2=4.32/gallon.

At that rate, 12,000 miles a year for gas would cost $1481, while electric would be half that or $741 per year. Over 5 years that's a savings of $3700. Assuming equal vehicle cost that's a pretty decent savings.

Of course gas ISN'T $4.32 a gallon. And vehicle cost ISN'T equal. And range IS still a problem.

You know what? I've just convinced myself that electric vehicles still have some huge obstacles in front of them.


RE: EV != Electric
By Ushio01 on 4/12/2011 12:53:58 PM , Rating: 2
At 37.5 cents per kWHr including delivery and $7.20 a US gallon approximately here in the UK you make me want to cry.


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 12:58:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As for electricity, if there is a greater demand we'll produce it.


Yeah because power plants worth a damn are just popping up left and right. About the only new plants being built anymore are solar and wind and they aren't reliable.

"Sorry boss I can't come to work today because it wasn't windy enough yesterday so there wasn't enough power to charge my car and run my AC".


RE: EV != Electric
By Jedi2155 on 4/12/2011 1:01:48 PM , Rating: 2
Once prices start reaching around $5/gallon which may happen this summer (Diesel is already $4.60/gallon here), they will start to make a lot more economical sense. Add in any extra utilities savings by going with an EV rate plan from your utility your savings might actually be closer to $5-10,000 depending on your exact location and other various factors.


RE: EV != Electric
By FITCamaro on 4/12/2011 2:40:47 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe where you live. Diesel here is $3.85.


RE: EV != Electric
By Spuke on 4/12/2011 5:14:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Add in any extra utilities savings by going with an EV rate plan from your utility your savings might actually be closer to $5-10,000 depending on your exact location and other various factors.
I think talked in the other thread about this. Appreciated your links but where are you getting $5k-$10k savings from? Especially when you must factor in setup costs like meter and service upgrade/install or the possibility of second meter install denial by your city.


RE: EV != Electric
By Hulk on 4/12/2011 5:18:56 PM , Rating: 2
I don't think gas will reach $5/gallon in the US. $4 has proven to be a huge point of resistance. At that price people begin to change their driving habits, trade in for more fuel efficient cars, car pool, and use alternate transportation. The reduction in demand causes a supply surplus and a drop in prices. We yo-yo back and forth on this cycle and I don't see any reason things will change.

The Saudi's know how to play the market like drug dealers. If we start getting off the drug they lower prices to get us hooked again.


RE: EV != Electric
By Skywalker123 on 4/14/2011 3:41:00 PM , Rating: 2
The Saudi's can't "lower" prices, they can only increase production hoping that will drive prices down. Part of the reason for the increase is that the U.S. dollar value is going down.


RE: EV != Electric
By callmeroy on 4/12/2011 11:51:32 AM , Rating: 2
My last reply in the thread was of course a joke...but

Honestly, while I'm most not one for being a huge conspiracy theorist, I think when it comes to alternative energy in this country we are "artifically" farther from oil independence than we should be.

Artifically because -- "big oil" is ENORMOUS money....we are talking hundreds of billions (if not trillions) in the industry. Big oil also employs a very powerful lobby with D.C. ....

We easily could be much farther along with alternative fuels, cars could easily have had much better fuel economy 10 years ago than even what they offer now....but its all about the money....as it usually is.

Big Oil wants their gravy train to last as long as it can....


RE: EV != Electric
By Spuke on 4/12/2011 5:16:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Big Oil wants their gravy train to last as long as it can....
Oil companies have nothing to do at all with fuel economy in cars. Automakers are also multi-billion dollar corporations with lobbyists, etc.


RE: EV != Electric
By gibb3h on 4/12/2011 11:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
I've been wondering why the hell hydrogen fuel cells are used myself actually, seems sensible to me :?


RE: EV != Electric
By gibb3h on 4/12/2011 11:56:44 AM , Rating: 2
*are = aren't -.-


RE: EV != Electric
By Schrag4 on 4/12/2011 1:18:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The only problem? Oilco's won't put in fill-in stations.


Are you going to complain that you can't get a Pepsi out of a Coke machine? That you can't buy a PC at an Apple store? Why can't I buy a Chevy at my local Ford dealership? It's a conspiracy!


RE: EV != Electric
By monomer on 4/12/2011 1:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
Hydrogen Fuel Cells do not run on water, they produce water as the exhaust.

The hydrogen that is used to power a fuel cell can be obtained from water through electrolysis, but you still need a pile of electricity to make it, and that electricity still mostly comes from coal plants. The plants are more efficient than say a gas engine, but the main point of the fuel cell is that it moves the generation of pollution away from the middle of the city to more remote locations.


RE: EV != Electric
By Gurthang on 4/12/2011 1:26:43 PM , Rating: 2
Current hydrogen fuel cells are a pipe dream. They use too much precious metal in their catalysts to be economicaly viable beyond the demonstration level. (It would take more than all of the known reserves of platnium to just get the US fleet converted to Hydorgen fuel cell cars.)

And hydrogen storage is nearly as hopeless.

Could there be a breakthrough.. sure.. but don't hold your breath.


"Folks that want porn can buy an Android phone." -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki