User avatar
evnow
Moderator
Posts: 11480
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 am
Delivery Date: 25 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 303
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:32 pm

indyflick wrote:Second, I figure I will be able to get the new battery technology later anyway. Third, often the first generation of a product is actually more rugged than later versions. This is because over time they tend to cost down and sacrifice some of the durability.
As for as you are fine with a newer battery down the road it should be fine. You will definitely get a more robust V1 product - but usually with smaller number of features.

This will be the only decade where we will have range issues and such. By 2020 I think things would have worked out ...
1st Leaf : 2/28/2011 to 5/6/2013
2nd Leaf : 5/4/2013 to 3/21/2017
Volt : 3/25/2017 to 5/25/2018
Model 3 : 5/10/2018 to ?

indyflick
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:18 am

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 5:43 pm

evnow wrote:This will be the only decade where we will have range issues and such. By 2020 I think things would have worked out ...
I agree. I read once that when America was being electrified, in the early 20th century, a lot of folks would put caps over their outlets. The FUD was that the electricity could leap out and kill you. Nothing kills FUD faster than empirical experience.

User avatar
planet4ever
Posts: 4674
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 9:53 pm
Delivery Date: 02 May 2011
Leaf Number: 1537
Location: Morgan Hill, CA, south of San Jose

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 6:16 pm

indyflick wrote:If I purchase, they can't remove it from the road and crush it.
The only reason it made "sense" (to GM) to crush the EV-1 was because they could get all of them back and never have to worry about servicing or battery replacement. There's no way Nissan could ever get all the LEAFs back, so leasing doesn't bother me a bit.
End of April 2013: Traded my 2011 SL for a 2013 S with charge pkg.

indyflick
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:18 am

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 6:37 pm

planet4ever wrote:
indyflick wrote:If I purchase, they can't remove it from the road and crush it.
The only reason it made "sense" (to GM) to crush the EV-1 was because they could get all of them back and never have to worry about servicing or battery replacement. There's no way Nissan could ever get all the LEAFs back, so leasing doesn't bother me a bit.
Leasing really doesn't bother me either, but it gives me a chance to remind folks GM crushed the EV1 :D

TLeaf
Forum Supporter
Posts: 247
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:08 am
Delivery Date: 15 Jan 2011
Leaf Number: 000225
Location: Renton, WA

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:19 pm

Peterson does well to point out some legitimate weaknesses of current battery tech, but then he goes off the deep end by citing the most extreme examples using a battery degradation chart that may not even be comparable to the Leaf's batteries (I couldn't find anywhere in the report what type of "li-ion" batteries were being benchmarked). I'm all for postulating realistic expectations for battery tech, after all I think the EV transition will be much helped if the tech isn't over-promised, but the key word here is "realistic". Total FUD.

While I'm ranting, I suppose another thing that annoys me about most skeptics is the cost-of-ownership deal. I'm getting rather sick of all the pundits who make the case that since EVs (or hybrids, as was their first target) can't generate enough savings to pay for themselves that they are a worthless technology. When was the last time that a $50,000 Dodge Challenger generated enough savings to pay for itself?? By this argument, we should all be driving manual-shift Honda Civics as they are relatively cheap, reliable, fuel efficient, safe, etc. Better yet, let's not drive at all!

TLeaf
Forum Supporter
Posts: 247
Joined: Sat Aug 07, 2010 12:08 am
Delivery Date: 15 Jan 2011
Leaf Number: 000225
Location: Renton, WA

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 8:48 pm

And another thing...
Assuming 100% coal-fired electricity generation: 25 kg CO(2) equivalent to cover 100 miles based on 0.963kg/kWh produced (wikipedia) and ~26kWh full system recharge
Assuming 33mpg ICE-based car: 26.4 kg CO(2) equivalent to cover 100 miles based on 8.8kg/gallon consumed (EPA)

Yes, a hybrid or similarly efficient ICE will produce less CO(2) emissions if the alternative is purely coal-fired electricity, but consider that the national average is 50% coal (USA Today) and that there are areas where the number is much lower (90+% hydro here in Seattle; go Seattle City Light!!) and it doesn't take a stretch to realize that even a 50+mpg car would be hard-pressed to match up to an EV on emissions.

smkettner
Posts: 7501
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:13 pm
Delivery Date: 26 Feb 2014
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:11 pm

TLeaf wrote:While I'm ranting, I suppose another thing that annoys me about most skeptics is the cost-of-ownership deal. I'm getting rather sick of all the pundits who make the case that since EVs (or hybrids, as was their first target) can't generate enough savings to pay for themselves that they are a worthless technology. When was the last time that a $50,000 Dodge Challenger generated enough savings to pay for itself?? By this argument, we should all be driving manual-shift Honda Civics as they are relatively cheap, reliable, fuel efficient, safe, etc. Better yet, let's not drive at all!
x2 on that. No car pays for itself. And a person can spend plenty more to just drive the costs up.
1 bar lost at 21,451 miles, 16 months.
2 bar lost at 35,339 miles, 25 months.
LEAF traded at 45,400 miles for a RAV4-EV
RAV4 traded in for I-Pace Dec 2018

User avatar
EVDRIVER
Moderator
Posts: 6753
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:51 am

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 9:47 pm

smkettner wrote:
TLeaf wrote:While I'm ranting, I suppose another thing that annoys me about most skeptics is the cost-of-ownership deal. I'm getting rather sick of all the pundits who make the case that since EVs (or hybrids, as was their first target) can't generate enough savings to pay for themselves that they are a worthless technology. When was the last time that a $50,000 Dodge Challenger generated enough savings to pay for itself?? By this argument, we should all be driving manual-shift Honda Civics as they are relatively cheap, reliable, fuel efficient, safe, etc. Better yet, let's not drive at all!
x2 on that. No car pays for itself. And a person can spend plenty more to just drive the costs up.

It's going to get worse before it gets better. Did you know EVs cause cancer from EMF as well? Give it some time and someone will say this, just watch.

AndyH
Posts: 6388
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:43 pm
Location: San Antonio

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 10:10 pm

LTLFTcomposite wrote:Probably a lot of truth to that article.
The problem is that there really isn't. I'm nearing the end of my 2nd year on the road with a lithium iron phosphate pack. I import LiFePo4 cells from Taiwan and have test reports that show both 'in use' cycling and 'storage' capacity loss - and none of my experiences or data from the battery manufacturers show the amount of degradation this gent suggests is certain.

It's FUD, plain and simple, from someone that's so far on the 'inside' of a paradigm that he can't see the outside world. We might as well be trying to get someone with no depth perception to tell us which object is farther away - they just can't and there's nothing we can do to change that.

LEAFfan
Posts: 4828
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:08 pm
Delivery Date: 08 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 1855
Location: Phoenix Area

Re: The Cruel Realities of EV Range on Seeking Alpha

Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:35 pm

EVDRIVER wrote:
smkettner wrote:
TLeaf wrote:While I'm ranting, I suppose another thing that annoys me about most skeptics is the cost-of-ownership deal. I'm getting rather sick of all the pundits who make the case that since EVs (or hybrids, as was their first target) can't generate enough savings to pay for themselves that they are a worthless technology. When was the last time that a $50,000 Dodge Challenger generated enough savings to pay for itself?? By this argument, we should all be driving manual-shift Honda Civics as they are relatively cheap, reliable, fuel efficient, safe, etc. Better yet, let's not drive at all!
x2 on that. No car pays for itself. And a person can spend plenty more to just drive the costs up.

It's going to get worse before it gets better. Did you know EVs cause cancer from EMF as well? Give it some time and someone will say this, just watch.
No problem, just tell them that Nissan has a built-in shield for the occupants. ;)

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”