
Global shockwaves from electric cars will be here sooner rather than later - epistasis
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/10/journey-to-all-electric-car-future-shorter-than-thought
======
solaris_7
If this shift takes place - what would be the best 10 year investment strategy
be? Long electric utilities, renewable generation, charging networks, smart
grid companies & lithium miners. Short oil companies, petrodollar denominated
govt. bonds & gas station networks.

Is there a "massive shift to electric cars within 10 years" ETF I can buy?

~~~
lettergram
Still buy gas, it's not like we're going to suddenly produce clean energy. All
that's going to happen is we are going to build more power plants to support
charging cars...

With the push for less nuclear, and less coal, all that's left is oil and
natural gas. Renewable energy is no where near where it's necessary. So invest
in companies that build windmills, solar, etc. But also natural gaz power
plants.

Really the best investments are construction companies, and companies that
manage and build the power grid infrastructure.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Push for less nuclear? Where? Germany, Japan?

Anyways, electric cars are made for renewables (sans hydro) and nuclear that
provide energy when it might not be needed but can be used for charging
batteries instead. Gas will fill in the gaps, but it's on demand nature means
it doesn't really become more useful like the other sources do with car
electrification.

~~~
drdrey
France too. Public perception is against it, but so are the economics (nuclear
is expensive to produce and decommission)

~~~
seanmcdirmid
France is way ahead on nuclear, getting most of their energy from it (90%).
What are they going to replace it with?

~~~
epistasis
Only time will tell, but right now I would bet on wind, solar, storage,
imports, exports, etc. Eventually those existing reactors are going to age and
need to be decommissioned, the median age is now more than 30 years old. Every
year, construction of the EPR design is proving to be more and more expensive
than they thought.

Of course, if somebody in the Western world can figure out how to build a
nuclear reactor on time with a competitive budget, nuclear may enter that mix
of new construction. But right now, with the past decades' trends, it is not
looking good for nuclear.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
So is this something you are saying about France or something France has said
itself. Last time I checked, France was still pretty dedicated to nuclear,
unlike Germany....which gets a lot of exported nuclear power from France.

~~~
epistasis
I believe they are very dedicated to nuclear as well. However, the entire
point of my comment was that they are having a difficult time constructing
nuclear reactors, just like everybody else in the Western world. Without new
construction, their existing nuclear fleet (median age >30 years) will
eventually need to be decommissioned just due to time.

------
harwoodleon
As batteries get better and cars charge less frequently, solar improves (and
improved solar is added to the car's energy collection) and wind too - the
demand will even out, in fact the demand per car may well decrease by a large
margin - as market forces come into play (think the MPG figure for marketers).

Local generation can take up the slack too, with fewer volts being sent over
wasteful energy grids - that can waste 6-7% of energy in transit, up to 30% in
undeveloped countries.

I was concerned before I got my first electric car that the electricity bills
would be massive. But I use the car every day, charge it at home 70% of the
time and I have hardly noticed an increase in my bills.

I think the fear that the grid won't be able to cope is overblown. Especially
in hotter countries where solar will have such a massive impact on transport.

In fact reducing oil consumption will only have benefits in remote locations
where oil is very difficult to come by. Think about places where oil is a
reason for war. No one will fight over the sunshine.

~~~
mikestew
_I was concerned before I got my first electric car that the electricity bills
would be massive._

That should have been an easy calculation to at least get a ballpark figure of
what to expect.

 _But I use the car every day, charge it at home 70% of the time and I have
hardly noticed an increase in my bills._

Any decent charger should be able to tell you, once you tell it how much you
pay for electricity, how much you spend each month to charge. For us, it's
about $20/month compared to $60 or $70 for ICE. And that car never needs to
spend time at a gas station, which once we owned an electric, is more of a
hassle than I thought.

~~~
schraitle
I used to drive a Volt to work, where I had access to charging and Booster for
the rarely needed gas fill-up. On days when my wife's Prius was low on gas,
we'd switch cars and I'd fill it up while at work. We didn't visit a gas
station for months with either car.

Unfortunately, we got rid of the Volt and I now ride my bike, so no charging
and no Booster. The Prius tank now has to get below 0 on the gauge before
either of us will find the time to go out of our way to a gas station.

------
tonyedgecombe
It will be interesting to see the impact on oil producing nations, if the
price of oil plummets most of them are going to be in real trouble as few of
them have diverse economies.

~~~
jbattle
It has already been happening to Russia the last few decades - as the price of
oil rose then fell it played havoc with their economy and government budgets

------
jimjimjim
just a thought, when thinking about the pros and cons of this, try not to just
think about it from a US lifestyle point of view.

a lot of countries are more densely packed or have governments that can just
arbitrarily enact new laws.

------
Freestyler_3
When it reaches 100 million electric cars, Peaks are going to be really big on
the power grids. The electrical grid needs improvement, a few battery hubs
won't do. The energy to move 1 billion cars around needs to come from
somewhere and it needs transportation for that energy from source to user.
This requires big changes in power infrastructure. Wonder what the future
holds.

~~~
philipkglass
It's not necessarily going to lead to much higher peaks. Most EVs do _not_
need to charge continuously from the moment the owner gets home until the
owner leaves home the next morning. Simply time-shifting the bulk of charging
to, say, between 9 pm and 6 AM would enable vehicle charging without boosting
peaks on the California grid:

[http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDeman...](http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDemand)

It's even better for places where renewable generation is more weighted toward
wind than solar, like Texas, because wind output tends to peak while people
are sleeping and demand is otherwise low:

[http://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/html/CURRENT_DAYCOP_HSL.htm...](http://www.ercot.com/content/cdr/html/CURRENT_DAYCOP_HSL.html)

~~~
bit_logic
What if something unusual happens? Imagine there is a long blackout during
those 9pm to 6am hours. It doesn't have to be the entire city, just a
significant number of homes. The next morning, thousands of drivers find they
don't have enough power to get to work. Thousands of cars are suddenly
charging beyond the expected 9pm to 6am window. Will the grid be able to
handle full daytime load in addition to this huge unexpected load? How much
would it cost to upgrade the grid to worst case scenario? (entire city
blackout during 9pm to 6am)?

~~~
philipkglass
If charging shifts to early-mid morning after an overnight outage, I would
expect that there's enough distribution/generation capacity to handle it. Take
a look at this curve again:

[http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDeman...](http://www.caiso.com/Pages/TodaysOutlook.aspx#SupplyandDemand)

Although demand at 7:00 AM is 5 gigawatts above the 4:00 AM nadir, it's still
15 gigawatts below the 5:00 PM peak. Since electrical generating and
distribution systems are sized to handle those early-evening peaks, shifting
charging some hours away from the traditional peaks ( _either_ direction,
later or earlier) should allow vehicles to recharge daily without increasing
daily peak demand.

What about places that aren't California? Even places that have more seasonal
electricity demand in the winter than in the summer, like the UK, see their
daily peaks in the early evening. Peak demand hours are more about human
behavior than geography. People come home after work, cook dinner, turn on
lights, do chores... Traditional peak demand hours coincide with this burst of
domestic activity. Scheduling charging away from the traditional peak
electricity times makes more efficient use of existing infrastructure and
allows peak distribution/generation capacity upgrades to be delayed and
minimized even with rising adoption of home-charged EVs.

------
all_usernames
A good read on the topic of electricity production and distribution in the age
of renewable, distributed sources: [https://www.amazon.com/Grid-Fraying-
Between-Americans-Energy...](https://www.amazon.com/Grid-Fraying-Between-
Americans-Energy/dp/1608196100)

------
throw2016
A lot of countries are getting pretty aggressive about electric vehicles. The
grids will probably scale but the geopolitical ramifications are more
unpredictable.

The demand for the US dollar worldwide is linked to oil and the 70s deal with
the Saudis. This is a core component of US foreign policy that people like
Gaddafi and Saddam found the hard way. US foreign policy is deeply linked to
oil.

The middle east itself is a hotbed of political intrigue and geopolitical
action since oil, and will lose this central role in the global sphere. Both
of these will have far reaching consequences for global politics.

------
graycat
I'm still concerned about the time needed for recharging, especially if that
recharging is to be a home with the now common 100 A and 230 V connection to
the grid.

Even with charging stations, there is the question about how fast can recharge
a battery without overheating it.

~~~
cynix
> I'm still concerned about the time needed for recharging, especially if that
> recharging is to be a home

Charging at home is the least worrisome of all charging situations, because
you can charge while you sleep and not care about how long it takes. Same with
charging at shopping centres, restaurants, parks, hotels, etc., because you're
going to spend the time doing the thing you went there to do anyway,
regardless of whether you're charging or not.

The only time charging speed actually matters is when you're on a long road
trip and need to keep moving. That's when you need a fast charging solution,
like CHAdeMO or Tesla's Superchargers.

~~~
graycat
Charging time:

In the US, houses commonly have from the grid 100 A at 230 V. So, that is

100 x 230 = 23,000 W (Watts)

or 23 KW (kilowatts).

For an electric car with a 75 KWh battery, the charging time using all the
house power would be

75 / 23 = 3.26

hours. Maybe the house needs also to use an electric stove, electric clothes
dryer, air conditioning, a water pump, a microwave oven, some lights, etc. so
wants to use only half the house power for the car charging in which case the
charging time would be

75 / (23 / 2) = 6.52

hours.

From a Google search, supposedly at

[https://www.tesla.com/models](https://www.tesla.com/models)

is

"With unparalleled performance delivered through Tesla's unique, all-electric
.... will achieve the maximum charge rate of 11.5 kW for 75 kWh configured
vehicles."

Then the minimum charging time would be

75 / 11.5 = 6.52

hours.

So, net, for an electric car, I'd be concerned about charging time.

With a gasoline powered car, can fill up in a few minutes.

------
cr0sh
I don't see an extremely widespread adoption of electric vehicles until the
battery issue is fixed.

Half of the issue is almost solved: Range. But it has a couple of problems.

First, while the range of miles being able to be driven on a battery is now
fairly large - upwards of 200+ miles - that still isn't quite comparable to
the range an internal combustion engine can get. That value needs to double,
if the car is to be used for more than general commuting (at least here in the
United States, where the only way to go between cities cheaply and without
hassle is to drive).

Some of this issue may be mitigated in the future - and other advances could
help it with current technology for batteries; for instance, more power
efficient motors would greatly assist in extending the range of current
battery technology capabilities.

The second issue is Charging. For general commuting, this likely isn't an
issue at all, even today. Just find a place to charge it, plug in, go into the
office (or wherever). At home, plug it in, and it will be ready to leave again
in the morning. But for long distance driving, assuming you have a place to
recharge (let's suppose this is common in the future), you still have to wait
a while to get a decent charge on the battery.

With an ICE, you can simply pull up, put some fuel in, and be gone in less
than 5 minutes, depending on what you need. You can't do that currently with
an electric vehicle. Instead, you need to wait around until it is recharged;
if you have no reason to wait (like stopping for food or something), you are
basically forced. For long distance driving, this has good and bad points, but
sometimes you just want to fill the car up, get some snacks, and go.

Maybe the segment of the market that does longer drives is shrinking, or is
already small enough not to matter? Maybe advances will help out here? Maybe
car owners can add a "hybrid module" for long distance drives that incorporate
an ICE/generator combo to keep the battery topped up as it is driven? Right
now, the answers are unclear.

For those who are only going to and from work, maybe doing a bit of shopping,
electric cars can make sense. For others, at best they'll be a secondary
vehicle, or only used for going to work and back, with something else in the
driveway for longer distances.

Lastly - there's the issue with the supply of lithium on the planet. I have
read (I don't know the truth of this) that there isn't enough lithium
available to support a large population all using electric vehicles. Perhaps
we'll find other sources, or perhaps my information is out of date. Recycling
will help too, most likely. Future battery technology may do away with the
need for lithium. Lots of "ifs" here, but we may have an issue if we are
sticking to lithium chemistry for power (given the reactivity of lithium vs
other elements, this may not be possible - IIRC, elements that are more
reactive than lithium have problems to them for the use of them in batteries).

~~~
com2kid
> For those who are only going to and from work, maybe doing a bit of
> shopping, electric cars can make sense. For others, at best they'll be a
> secondary vehicle, or only used for going to work and back, with something
> else in the driveway for longer distances.

I'm trying to think of how often in the last year I've needed more than 200
miles round trip in a single day where I didn't spend a significant % of the
time that day in a metro.

Zero times.

Last 5 years, maybe once.

I live in Seattle, a rather remote city when it comes to Getting To Things To
Do, but a 200 mile range brings me safely into another country with over 50
miles to spare. With less than 200 miles I can get to the next major
metropolitan city (Portland), in the other direction. ~80 east or west get me
to two of the most popular camping spots in the state.

Heading to Spokane is a problem however. For that I'd need almost 280 miles.

For reference, my compact 1.6L ICE gets ~250 miles out of a tank of gas. (Fill
up is a lot faster though!)

For road tripping width-wise across the US, ICE is superior. But for the
majority of commutes (30 miles round trip), an electric car can be plugged in
a couple times per week and leave plenty left over for other activities.

