golfcart said:
DarthPuppy said:
Where's the emoticon for "Argh, this thread has been hijacked!" :lol:
Me thinks we need a thread for the debate between the economic realities of long range BEVs vs short range BEVs. No offense, the discussion is thought provoking.
My bad, I took it in this direction regarding the practicality of matching the bolts 200 mile range vs having a cheaper leaf with 100 - 150 mile range but that discussion took on a life of its own and now were talking about Teslas and road trips and QC networks. haha.
No, golfcart, I'd say the discussion is right on target. Otherwise, what is the possible reason for having a 200 mile BEV vs. a 100 mile BEV, as 100 miles is probably the maximum commute 90% of the people would do in a day, then recharge at night?
I wouldn't say that QC's are necessarily a niche market though, except for the fact that Tesla has gone their way, apparently because others, including the federal government that is happy to help other industries and groups, didn't lead quickly enough. It would be as if back in the 1800s one railroad used 3' wide tracks, another used 3.5' wide tracks, and so on.
In my opinion one of the two real argument in favor of 60kwh+ battery packs would be that you'd only need one QC every 200 miles, then you've cut the infrastructure in half or even a third. But it seems that having thousands of cars with 30kwh additional battery capacity for those three road trips per year just doesn't balance the equation. Also, if QCs were more prevalent, It is also possible a large number of ICE vehicles, which can make those long trips but don't operate with great efficiency the other 90% of the time, could be replaced. And if you really think about the big picture, two vehicles with a 30kwh pack will use much less gasoline than one with a 60kwh pack and the other an ICE vehicle. And to truly focus on gasoline reduction, if all cars were similar to the Ford Energi 20 mile electric, with 7kwh pack, and is the commute range that I'm guessing a vast majority fall into, you would be close to maximum efficiency.
I'm thinking, don't bother matching the Bolt, surpass it by implementing the Vehicle-to-Grid interface so people can use the 30kwh pack they're getting in the Nissan to offset peak electric usage, and get maximum usage of a commodity that is necessarily diminishing based on time. Because the V2G is really the only other reason to be sitting on a 60kwh pack that is getting older by the day, but I still think that 30kwh ought to be plenty in this situation too.