Challenging the opinion

[WetEV]

Initial prices are higher for PEVs (unless you qualify for lots of subsidies), batteries won't last the life of the car which eliminates much if not all of the advantage of less money spent on routine maintenance, and as I've shown, fuel/electricity price advantage is highly dependent on both housing/work situation as well as location. Which brings us back to practicality/convenience of public charging, and that's got to improve immensely before PEVs can grow at the rates needed so we can avoid the worst effects of climate change.

Things change.

Initial prices are higher now, but a BEV can be built with less labor and materials cost than an ICE.

Batteries would not last the life of the car in 2012. Probably will today.

Public charging is changing.

 

[GRA]

You're limiting sales to only those own single-family homes or who have reliable workplace charging.

Sure. Which is well over 50%. No where close to that yet.

I've edited my previous post to include public charging info by metro area. And as I mentioned, here in the Bay Area we're at 40% or a bit more PEV new car sales % NOW (Q2), and that's a hell of a lot closer to 50% than 90%. California as a whole was at 25.6% (another source says 25.4%) for Q2, up from 21.1% for Q1. The Bay Area's the canary in the coal mine. Assuming the current growth rate continues we may well hit 50% by year's end. The Saudis say they're going to maintain their 1 million bbl/day production cut at least through the end of the year so gas prices may not drop much (bar the usual drop when changing from summer to winter blend) at least until then, so PEVs should have relatively good 'fuel' costs vs. ICEs at least while that's the case. But if people don't have convenient charging, sales will stagnate. San Francisco's something of an extreme case, as 65% of households are renters owing to sky high prices, but housing prices are very high in most of the Bay Area.

Isn't the canary Norway? What's Norway's BEV sales percentage?

I wasn't aware that Norway was part of the US, or that they use NACS - aren't they using CCS-2? BTW, what's Norway's distribution of household types, and the number of chargers per population, and how are those chargers distributed?

Also you need to consider not the whole population, but the subgroup that buys new cars. Renters are far more likely to buy used cars. Home owners are far more likely to buy new cars. The renter crunch is later, 3 to 8 years delayed or when ever the used BEVs start filling up the used auto sales lots. As used BEVs are likely to be cheaper, there will be a real economic incentive to find/develop/build charging.

Since BEVs will have degraded range 3-8 years down the line, the number of people who will find they meet their needs will be limited for that reason as well. Lower income renters will be far more likely to be single-car households, typically have longer commutes, and each car will have to be capable of doing all kinds of trips, PHEVs, OTOH, only need L1, and will be just as usable for road trips when used as they were when new., and still capable of handling any commute (with some loss of AER, to be sure). Oh, and we're already 12.5 years into this transition.

Landlords will find they can charge higher rent, get better tenants and retain tenants longer; by investing in charging.

Employers will find they can get happier and more stable employees by investing in charging.


San Fransisco has a lot of renters (43.19%) that are car free. I doubt if they are likely to buy a BEV.

https://transpomaps.org/san-francisco/ca/car-ownership

Have you ever tried to park in San Francisco? I had a girlfriend who lived there. When she got off swing shift (she went to to school during the day, worked at night), often the nearest legal parking spot she could find to her apartment was up to six blocks away. Since there was no way she was going to walk that distance by herself at that time of night, she parked in a nearby bus stop and set her alarm in hopes that it'd wake her up in time to move the car into a parking spot opened up by the early commuters, before the buses started running. But because she was often exhausted the alarm didn't wake her. Although she'd since moved from S.F., when I met her she still had something over $4,000 in parking fines, which she was slowly paying off.

Actually, many of the renters in San Francisco now have bought PEVs in the form of e-bikes, or else they rent electric scooters.

San Francisco's high population density and lack of space isn't conducive to car ownership (or driving in general, which is why after NYC it'll likely be the second U.S. city to impose congestion fees), but it is well suited for walking, public transit and alternative forms of transportation. One can only hope that fully autonomous cars (Cruise, Waymo etc.) reach an adequate level of development soon, because owning a car there is a rough experience, especially when you consider housing costs (Average apartment rent $3,336/month. Average apt. size 736 sq. ft.). Absent curbside charging or DCFCs at large grocery stores, PEVs just aren't going to work for most renters there.

Luckily, San Francisco was largely built out pre-car, so much of it still has the kind of mixed-use walkable development with good public transit that makes owning a car not a necessity, unless of course you have to commute somewhere that doesn't have good transit links.

 

[GRA]

Initial prices are higher for PEVs (unless you qualify for lots of subsidies), batteries won't last the life of the car which eliminates much if not all of the advantage of less money spent on routine maintenance, and as I've shown, fuel/electricity price advantage is highly dependent on both housing/work situation as well as location. Which brings us back to practicality/convenience of public charging, and that's got to improve immensely before PEVs can grow at the rates needed so we can avoid the worst effects of climate change.

Things change.

Initial prices are higher now, but a BEV can be built with less labor and materials cost than an ICE.

Batteries would not last the life of the car in 2012. Probably will today.

Public charging is changing.

Of course things change, the issue is whether they change fast enough to meet the demand. Batteries will last the life of the car? The average age of the U.S. LDV fleet is up to 12.5 years now, thanks both to cars lasting longer as well as high new car prices, and the average car that doesn't get totaled is probably lasting at least half again as long. AFAIA, not a single manufacturer is willing to warranty pack capacity for more than 8 years (and increasingly they don't even offer capacity warranties), and at best those are only to 70% of new capacity, which, given that BEVs have far less practical range than ICEs even when they're new, is hardly likely to be adequate as an all-around car when used. In order for used BEVs to have adequate remaining value, California thought it necessary to mandate that manufacturers provide improved capacity and range warranties, and that doesn't even take effect until 2026:

For model year 2026 through 2029, a battery has to maintain 70% rated range for 10 years or 150k miles. This is raised to 80% range in the 2030 model year. For 2026 to 2030, individual battery packs have to keep 70% of energy capacity for eight years or 100k miles. This is raised to 75% in model year 2031.

Two friends of mine who've recently bought PEVs replaced a 1998 RAV4 (Bolt) and a 2001 CR-V (RAV4Prime), another is on a waiting list to replace his 20014Runner. I don't know the mileage of the first one, but the second was well over 200k and the last was over 290k the last time I talked to him. Is there any current BEV battery that will be able to meet the same range requirements at that age as it could when new? Of course not.

And that's not counting the fact that the practical range, given limitations of usable SoC% for longevity reasons, is far less than EPA Highway. The longest range Lucid Air (520 miles EPA Combined) is the only current BEV that could probably drive for 4 hours at 80 mph plus at least a 30 mile reserve, DCFC in 1/2 hour or so and then do it again, and that's only when new. OTOH, my 20 yr. old ICE, which cost something like 1/7th of the Lucid has the same range as new and can still do that, and its range is hardly a rarity, let alone at the top end of current ICEs.

 

[knightmb]

And that's not counting the fact that the practical range, given limitations of usable SoC% for longevity reasons, is far less than EPA Highway. The longest range Lucid Air (520 miles EPA Combined) is the only current BEV that could probably drive for 4 hours at 80 mph plus at least a 30 mile reserve, DCFC in 1/2 hour or so and then do it again, and that's only when new. OTOH, my 20 yr. old ICE, which cost something like 1/7th of the Lucid has the same range as new and can still do that, and its range is hardly a rarity, let alone at the top end of current ICEs.

I'm only nit-picking this part because this topic is a lively debate and I don't want to side-track it on too much technical stuff. An ICE vehicle that can drive 80 mph for 4 hours would mean about a -42% drop in file mileage so the ideal passenger car that gets 30 mpg with a standard 12 gallon tank would only be able to drive about 208 miles @ 80 mph in ideal, no hills, no wind conditions. It would never make a 4 hour trip at that speed without needing to refill somewhere along the way. Even increasing for better efficiency with a smaller engine, it still would probably not make that 4 hour trip without having a bigger fuel tank to begin with. The Lucid Air is subject to the same air resistance, but it's better coefficient of drag might be able to drive that 320 miles @ 80 mph if no hills or wind was involved ideal conditions again, but it would be really cutting it close.

Now, I have read this many times about the legend of the old car that gets identical fuel mileage to when it was new, but there is a large resource of testing data out there that the more an ICE engine is used, the more it's mileage will decreases with use; unless you are doing very thorough maintenance to keep the fuel system clean, replacing worth parts in the engine, mechanical part cleaning, etc. So while a good auto mechanic can do this on their own vehicle to keep the engine running like new, how many other people actually do this type of deep maintenance on their own vehicles beyond just the oil change? I would guess the ratio is highly skewed toward the layman maintenance types, especially in the ICE used car market.

The only reason I bring this up is that debate about the range of ICE vs. EV over the long term should try to avoid using too many "ideal and perfect" circumstances for comparison. EVs have a shirking battery with age and use, ICE have a shrinking engine with age and use. My own opinion is that the "shrinking" battery is problem that is easier to tackle for the industry than a shrinking engine since it's had a +100 year head start on that engine problem. Everybody old enough to remember here knows the times when the family car could barely reach 50K miles without some major engine failure that was expensive to fix, sold at a deep discount used and then it moved up 100K miles because people wanted cars that could be driven longer and then 200K miles, etc. EV batteries will go the same route as people expect it to do more and the technology follows it. We are all at the very beginning of that because battery technology has just been slow for the previous hundred years. If Lithium batteries had gotten the same development and industry attention in the 1980s instead of the 2010s who knows if we would even still be using them right now today.

 

[WetEV]

Isn't the canary Norway? What's Norway's BEV sales percentage?

I wasn't aware that Norway was part of the US, or that they use NACS - aren't they using CCS-2? BTW, what's Norway's distribution of household types, and the number of chargers per population, and how are those chargers distributed?

All marginal effects. So what's Norway's BEV sales percentage?

Also you need to consider not the whole population, but the subgroup that buys new cars. Renters are far more likely to buy used cars. Home owners are far more likely to buy new cars. The renter crunch is later, 3 to 8 years delayed or when ever the used BEVs start filling up the used auto sales lots. As used BEVs are likely to be cheaper, there will be a real economic incentive to find/develop/build charging.

Since BEVs will have degraded range 3-8 years down the line, the number of people who will find they meet their needs will be limited for that reason as well. Lower income renters will be far more likely to be single-car households, typically have longer commutes, and each car will have to be capable of doing all kinds of trips, PHEVs, OTOH, only need L1, and will be just as usable for road trips when used as they were when new., and still capable of handling any commute (with some loss of AER, to be sure). Oh, and we're already 12.5 years into this transition.

This was more persuasive with the 2011 LEAF, 12.5 years ago. Ranges have gotten longer, battery life has improved. Did you notice?

BEVs (and PHEVs) only need L1 as long as your driving doesn't exceed about 200 miles per week. That's 10,000 miles per year, less than average to be sure, but still lots of people.

People making less than median income (half of the population) or slightly more than $50k per year take very few road trips. Sure doesn't line up with renters in SF, but does many places.

Landlords will find they can charge higher rent, get better tenants and retain tenants longer; by investing in charging.

Employers will find they can get happier and more stable employees by investing in charging.


San Fransisco has a lot of renters (43.19%) that are car free. I doubt if they are likely to buy a BEV.

https://transpomaps.org/san-francisco/ca/car-ownership

Have you ever tried to park in San Francisco?

As a matter of fact, yes.

SF is a small fraction, and an extreme example.



The gas station effect.

Half of the cars become BEVs, charged at home, half of the gas stations close their doors for good.

The distribution is not going to be even. Some places are going to become gas station deserts, as only a few people passing through and a few hold outs will actually want to buy gas. Maybe the hardware store will sell gallon cans. Driving

 

[WetEV]

Things change.

Initial prices are higher now, but a BEV can be built with less labor and materials cost than an ICE. Perhaps a lot less, with sodium

Batteries would not last the life of the car in 2012. Probably will today.

Public charging is changing.

Of course things change, the issue is whether they change fast enough to meet the demand.

They will and they will not. Depends. As it usually does.

Batteries will last the life of the car? The average age of the U.S. LDV fleet is up to 12.5 years now, thanks both to cars lasting longer as well as high new car prices, and the average car that doesn't get totaled is probably lasting at least half again as long. AFAIA, not a single manufacturer is willing to warranty pack capacity for more than 8 years (and increasingly they don't even offer capacity warranties), and at best those are only to 70% of new capacity, which, given that BEVs have far less practical range than ICEs even when they're new, is hardly likely to be adequate as an all-around car when used. In order for used BEVs to have adequate remaining value, California thought it necessary to mandate that manufacturers provide improved capacity and range warranties, and that doesn't even take effect until 2026:

For model year 2026 through 2029, a battery has to maintain 70% rated range for 10 years or 150k miles. This is raised to 80% range in the 2030 model year. For 2026 to 2030, individual battery packs have to keep 70% of energy capacity for eight years or 100k miles. This is raised to 75% in model year 2031.

I've recently replaced a laptop that had a one year warranty. The old laptop was about 20 years old. Battery was still good enough, but probably was down capacity. Yet for the uses I gave it, it was more than adequate. Something related to USB died, making the touch screen unusable among other things.

Battery lifetimes have been getting longer. Laptop warranties have not.

Warranties do give information on lifetime, but only in a limited sense. If the life of the item is less than the warranty period, it will be a very expensive warranty to provide. So the manufacturer will take strong efforts to improve lifetime.

"All-round car" is an interesting phrase. People below median income are far less likely to road trip, so of course Government Should Require That They Must Buy A Road Trip Capable Car.

Right.


There are battery chemistries that provide enough cycles for multiple million miles. Calendar life over 50 years @25C to 70%. Maybe someone can wear out the battery before the wheels fall off. Or more likely, keep sticking the wheels back on until the battery wears out. Good luck.

Is there any current BEV battery that will be able to meet the same range requirements at that age as it could when new? Of course not.

"Same range requirements"? Oh, will the BEV be like new when the ICE will not? That's fair. Right.

And that's not counting the fact that the practical range, given limitations of usable SoC% for longevity reasons, is far less than EPA Highway.

"Practical range?" What conditions? Commute? Road trip?

Limitations of usable SOC% are twofold. Should not keep the car with near 100% for long periods of time. And should not go below about 10% on a regular basis. Both SOCs are indicated, true would be more like 95% and 20%. See car manual for exact margins and for any suggested limitations. Charging to 100% right before departure is proven not to cause measurable increase in capacity loss.

Going below 10% once in a while is unlikely to have an impact on battery life as well. However, I've not seen reliable test results on this.

Last weekend I could have driven more than the original EPA Highway range in my 2019. Didn't, as I stopped and added 18%. Got home with 26%


A practical limitation is that DCQC slows above 80%. Fastest travel is usually with charging stopping at 80%.


Commuting would need to deal with extreme weather, assuming you can't just WFH the bad days, should probably not charge to above 80%. And arriving at home with reserve to deal with likely local trips might be worthwhile. The "no worries" range.

 

[MikeinPA]

(Apologies if this information has already been linked to previously)

Fast charger count in North America on track to double https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/0...uild-ev-charging-network-with-30000-chargers/.

BMW, General Motors, Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Mercedes-Benz, and Stellantis are creating a joint venture to significantly expand the number of fast-charging sites in the US and Canada. The sites will use the new National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure guidelines, which means, among other things, 97 percent uptime for each charging port. The sites will support both CCS1 and NACS plugs, and the chargers will also support the plug-and-charge protocol.

 

[WetEV]

Fast charger count in North America on track to double

And not just double, and improved charging but improve on other things as well.

https://www.businessinsider.com/ev-electric-car-charging-station-need-better-amenities-bathrooms-food-2023-8

"That means some plugs are steps from everything you need, while others are just a high-voltage connection in a random parking lot."

With the nearest business far enough away you can finish the charge and drive there faster than you could walk there. Last trip I rented an EV, and two of the best charging spots turned out to be in utility companies parking lots. Miles away from anything.

 

[Snakebitten]

At this point in the history of electric vehicles, there are reasons other than the obvious stereotype to purchase an EV.

I'm certainly not the stereotype.

I purchased a Leaf pretty much on impulse. And mostly just for fun. I'm old. I've reached that point in my life where I can just do things out of curiosity.

As for the price of entry, the low mileage 2018 SL costs less than the suspension/wheels/tires/brakes upgrades I did on my F150.
And although I'm enjoying not visiting the gas station for weeks at a time, the real cost savings I am enjoying is the mileage that I'm NOT putting on my "bucket list truck". (or my beloved Miata & Porsche toys)

And I don't know about the data points used in the article, but I L2 charge exclusively at home, 13¢, for about $2.00 daily. I don't qualify for any tax incentives and STILL I feel like the Leaf is insanely inexpensive per mile. Motorcycle territory from my vantage. Except safer and with far less fuss.

Win win win for my use case.

 

[johnlocke]

At this point in the history of electric vehicles, there are reasons other than the obvious stereotype to purchase an EV.

I'm certainly not the stereotype.

I purchased a Leaf pretty much on impulse. And mostly just for fun. I'm old. I've reached that point in my life where I can just do things out of curiosity.

As for the price of entry, the low mileage 2018 SL costs less than the suspension/wheels/tires/brakes upgrades I did on my F150.
And although I'm enjoying not visiting the gas station for weeks at a time, the real cost savings I am enjoying is the mileage that I'm NOT putting on my "bucket list truck". (or my beloved Miata & Porsche toys)

And I don't know about the data points used in the article, but I L2 charge exclusively at home, 13¢, for about $2.00 daily. I don't qualify for any tax incentives and STILL I feel like the Leaf is insanely inexpensive per mile. Motorcycle territory from my vantage. Except safer and with far less fuss.

Win win win for my use case.

And if you have solar like I do the cost per KWH is about $.05. Charge 20-100% for $2.50 on my SV+. The tires cost as much as charging the car.