Should Leafs have an optional larger battery pack

[DaveinOlyWA]

i think some bright guys like Phil will provide some limited extended range options but i dont expect Nissan to change the pack until 2015 or 2016 unless there is a major unforeseen development. they need to make back some of the 1.5 Billion they put into designing this one.

another thing to think about. once upon a time, a new revolutionary method of transportation was developed. it was expensive, fuel was smelly, hard to get, etc. it was a niche product for the rich man. it was the gasoline car. keep in mind originally gas was delivered by horse drawn wagon and could take a few weeks. so not mainstream.

now, what made the car mainstream??? putting 75 gal tank on it so you only had to refill it once every 2 weeks? not quite.

they became popular because Henry Ford was able to make them cheap enough for the average man to buy.

so, after all this discussion, i dont see why it would not be plainly obvious that EVs will be the same. sure a 100 mile range sucks, but i know a LOT of people who would put up with it over paying $200 a month for gas, especially when i tell them i average $25 a month.

so we might have extended range Leaf of say 200 miles in 2015 for a few thousand more than the current model but if Nissan wants to sell cars, they need to put out a 100 mile range car at $25,000 before incentives.

 

[Yodrak]

I agree that lowering the cost is more important than significantly extending the range, especially if extending the range will add to the cost, in order to make EVs more mainstream.

As an aside, it's curious to me to be talking about a 100 mile range car when we've come to realize that, except under ideal circumstances, the Leaf is not a 100 mile range car. Witness the posts by the fellow who bought his Leaf with expectations that a 100-mile Leaf would be adequate for his 84-mile commute but found that in fact the actual range was too close to be reliable.

I think that 100 miles is something of a 'magic number' - there's something about 3 digits rather than 2. So getting to a 'real' 100 miles (which would be about a 33% increase for the Leaf?) under all but the worst conditions is important if it can be accomplished without raising the cost of the car.

so we might have extended range Leaf of say 200 miles in 2015 for a few thousand more than the current model but if Nissan wants to sell cars, they need to put out a 100 mile range car at $25,000 before incentives.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Too close for comfort means not having to push your Leaf.
Dont know anything about the commute or anuthing else but ifnot using heat it can be done. It all boils down to what you are willing todo tomake it work

I do drive 55 if I think I need to to make it. The speed limit around here is 60 and ya we have our share of 70+ drivers but that its them and I am boot influenced by them

 

[nosuchthing]

The denser batteries are coming. Remember Moore's Law for computers. I'm not saying the product available now (rather than in the lab) will be doubling every year, but it will be happening to at least some degree as soon as BEV battery development and manufacturing reaches critical mass. It's welling up already. There are almost daily announcements of various labs' breakthroughs. The future of BEVs looks mighty good. By 2020 we'll have the proverbial 1000-mile battery. That will be the true game-changer.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

having a 1000 mile battery means getting one with a 1500 mile capacity. too much weight. i dont think we will ever see greater than 300 miles in a standard consumer passenger vehicle ( i would have said 250 but since Tesla is out there, i edited that)


its too much weight and what if you did have a 500 mile pack. when its empty, i can only hope you have a sleeping bag. battery capacity and the weight associated with that extra capacity is only the tip of the iceberg.

battery swapping makes way more sense

 

[Yodrak]

If we do have the capability to produce a 1000-mile battery, I think it will stay "proverbial". I agree with Dave that EV range won't go beyond ICE range. Why pay for something that won't be used, except perhaps in extremely rare situations, even if the cost of batteries is brought down to the point where EVs are cost-competitive with comparable ICE vehicles? Manufacturers will use the cost savings between 300-mile batteries and 1000-mile batteries to make their product even more cost-competitive.

Even going just 300 miles between charges will make charging time unacceptable at any reasonable charging voltage. Having 300 miles of range will eliminate 'range anxiety', but most daily driving will still be in the 100 mile or less range. EV owners will plug in every night or every other night, in effect keeping their EV 'topped off' and rarely using more than, say, 50% of the 300-mile capacity.

i dont think we will ever see greater than 300 miles in a standard consumer passenger vehicle

By 2020 we'll have the proverbial 1000-mile battery.

 

[TimeHorse]

If we do have the capability to produce a 1000-mile battery, I think it will stay "proverbial".

I agree with your argument Yodrak but just to throw some number out there as the devil's advocate we do have 2 independent issues here when we talk about range: Battery Size and mileage. I think it's fair to say mileage can increase slightly but drag is drag is drag so I doubt I would ever see better than 5.0 if I'm currently between 4.2-4.4 in my LEAF. They're can still be some inefficiencies removed in most designs over time. Maybe better regenerative breaking or lower rolling resistance tires, but just as I don't expect revolutionary changes in battery Specific Energy or Energy Density anytime soon, any more than I seem them in Photovoltaic though there are some amazing developments in that arena if we can only get them to market. 42% efficient panels? The mind boggles!

But I digress. Let's just assume a 5.0mi/kWh average driver and work from there. 1000-mile is therefore 200kWh and 300 is 60kWh. Now, moving to charger, the max L2 can do is 19kW, which is what my ClipperCreek CS-100 is capable of. In the DC area we have at least one LEAF and one Volt owner with their dinking 3.3kW chargers drawing power from these behemoths. But the Tesla Model S is capable of 19kW with the $10,000 optional upgrade (base is 10kW), so it's possible this hypothetical car will be the same. So, 1000-mi comes in at 10.5 hours and the 300mi at less than a Focus Electric or Volt (never mind the snail's pace LEAF) at just over 3 hours. Now again assuming say 20% charging inefficiency that's about 12 hours for the 1Kmile and 4 for the 300. Would 12 hours to recharge be that unreasonable?

Now it gets even crazier with DC fast charging. That's about 192kW charging up to 80% so your 200kWh battery takes about an hour to get to 80% and so drive for 1000 mi (nearly a 17 hour drive at 60 MPH!) and then stop off at a nice restaurant or movie and hang out for an hour because you've been driving for 16+ hours! Not that I expect to see all that many CHAdeMO capable of doing that and 5.0kW of mostly highway (60 MPH) is really asking for a lot especially when weather is involved but yes, you could conceivable have that.

Personally though I think the sweet spot may be 800mi, or basically 1Mm per charge.

 

[Yodrak]

Depends on the circumstances. In a circumstance where one really needed to use the full capacity of a 1000-mile battery, a 12-hour interruption might very well be a problem. On the other hand, if one were planning on making a trip that long, one might want to break it into a 2-day trip anyway and recharging could easily be accomplished while sleeping. And in that scenario, a 500-mile battery would be sufficient. I can think of few scenarios other than a group of college students in the northeast heading to spring break in Florida, effectively driving non-stop by rotating drivers, where a 1000-mile range would be used.

I don't think that people will maintain their periodic ICE fueling habits - maybe once a week when the fuel gauage gets to 1/2, or 1/4 - with an EV. It's too convenient to just plug in at home every day or other day. It will be rare that more than 100 miles of range is used, so the value of a 300-mile range is basically just to eliminate the range anxiety for rare occassion or for those people who really need the range. But who really needs 1000 miles?

Manufacturers will stop at the point where EV range equals ICE range so as not add unnecessary cost and be as cost-competitive as possible.

Would 12 hours to recharge be that unreasonable?

 

[adric22]

I'd just like to pop in something people might not of thought about. There is another advantage to additional range. What about all of those people that live in apartments or other places where they cannot charge at home? If they had a longer range and QC stations available, then they could essentially drive their EV much the way they drive their ICE now. They can periodically take it to a QC and charge up. Then use that charge to commute for an entire week. While I really hate that paradigm, it certainly would be advantageous to some. Obviously, the better paradigm would be for apartments to install L2 charging facilities.

 

[TimeHorse]

And of course I strongly feel that if offered an upgrade of 6kWh vs. one of 60kWh at the same basic price and weight penalty we have with today's technology I'd go with 6kWh easily because I'd like to not have to go to 100% daily and not have to rely on the questionable SemaConnect chargers at the Blairs/Giant in Silver Spring MD in order to get home from an EVA/DC meeting since I can't charge at work and I'm hamstrung by a 3.3kW charger.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

i think everyone here with range concerns brings up a valid scenario. but unless enough people have that need, business is not going to address it on their own unless they are putting out $100,000 products.

what we need to focus our energies on is the "atmosphere" we live in which is very very negative towards EVs.

for one lucky enough to live in the EV Highway Project, we are talking about covering what?? 50-75 million people? whats the project budget, what is the per capita cost of the project?

well, it aint very much. add in the $7500 vehicle credit and it is still a Level 3 budget item.

what we need is more support from the government on this. they do know that every American converting to electric vehicles is a win for them. they know that every American converting to electric is another barrel of oil that can be stored, saved or not paid for.

another thing about increasing demand for a 100% American Product is that Americans must be hired to build the infrastructure that is not there, reinforce the infrastructure that is there and so on. so money invested will come back in taxes and be recycled thru the community over and over and over.

but we have to fight the Tsunami of negativity powered by Big Money who, quite frankly, controls the laws, legislation and the engine of change in this country and they will not easily give up a 400 billion dollar cash cow.

so, maybe we need to look in that direction instead.

what we need is L2's on EVERY corner, L1's for EVERY employee, L3's every 10-20 miles in urban areas and (since i am talking) toss in about a half dozen swap stations between Seattle and Spokane.

anyway, back to the governmental EV support. if we get $7500 tax credit and if the EV Highway Project covers 50 million people then our total benefit from the government? (this does not count people who got free chargers which is pretty limited anyway) about $7505 per capita

we will never get off oil anytime soon even if every vehicle went to electric tomorrow because there are too many products that need it.

 

[evnow]

Let us rephrase the question.

Will Leaf have optional larger battery packs ?

Answer is yes. I don't know when it will, though. But it will have optional packs (more like S with 3 options), when the economics & technology make that possible.

Another thing to think about is Infiniti EV. I think larger packs will go into Infiniti in a next couple of years.