So with shipping, $869.96 for 2.4 kwh, or about $362/kwh. A $3 gallon of gasoline has 33 kwh, but only 8 kwh of usable energy due to the inefficiency of internal combustion engines, so $0.375/kwh.
So batteries are somewhere around 1000 times more expensive than gasoline, but, if they can be recharged more than 1000 times they may actually be cheaper. 1 kwh of electricity costs about 10-20 cents usually (call it $200 per 1000 charges). That's a total of $1069.96 for 1000 cycles, maybe $1269.96 for 2000 cycles, etc, something on that order anyway.
So $1 per cycle per kwh is pretty close to a breakeven against gasoline, and batteries are only going to get less expensive.
The original prototypes involved connecting hundreds of small batteries in parallel.
How did that happened in the age of the internet ? and are there still a lot of such technological "secrets" ?
Then, on the other hand, $3/gal is a US-only phenomenon among countries that can really afford electric cars, everywhere else it is ~2x that? Europe, japan/korea/australia? I could be wrong here too but I think that's how it is. So there electric may already be quite a bit cheaper, depending on generation cost.
I wonder if some kind of weight + mileage tax would work better?
Ultimately I don't see how one could institute a fair system without converting all roads to toll roads (perhaps with variable pricing to manage demand).
Gasoline taxes are a reasonable proxy for "usage", so heavy users contribute more.
Registration fees treat everyone of the same make and model the same, be it a livery vehicle with six-digit annual mileage or a proverbial old-lady whose car is being driven around town twice a week. And one can't exactly levy a tax on kWh.
(This is bad because it makes driving more very cheap for people who already have cars, the exact opposite what's good for extracting maximal utility out of minimal fuel use)
The high taxes on cars and gasoline usually goes to improve public transport.
So at least for transportation, the breakeven is probably somewhat further than your calculation suggests.
Low on gas? Get to a station, take 10mn to refill and you're gone for 500 more miles. Low on battery? Get to a station, wait hours to get it charged back up and you can go for 300 more miles. The fact charging takes time means a long queue before you can get to a charger.
besides time to charge the real big drawback of battery EVs is the weight of the packs
EG: The vast majority of travel is for errands and work commuting. Probably a lot of that social travel in the linked survey is short distance as well.
Average miles a day is 30, which can easily be covered by an overnight charge.
Agree that the time to charge EVs is definitely a drawback for long distance travel (whether for social reasons or for transport etc.).
 Source: http://www.mtfca.com/discus/messages/118802/146015.html?1276...
For now. Battery tech is increasing at a fast pace.
And if we play this game, to get it even, maybe we should compare the whole car since gasoline requires a big engine too.
My impression is that analysis which takes everything into account puts EVs far ahead in environmental impact, and I think they're slightly ahead in terms of total ownership costs.
The current battery are way too heavy.
Not true with modern EV batteries. Tesla's packs typically show less than 8% degradation after 100,000 miles, which would be approximately 500 cycles.
Thats only for certain specific model and delivery time combinations.
i.e just before they introduced the 90kWh option in production, some 85kWh cars were shipping with the 90kWh pack.
If you ordered a particular pack before the next step size started shipping, then that's all you got.
>Tesla batteries only show very little degradation because their capacity is limited by software
Not true. It's mostly to do with active management of the battery, and keeping it within the optimal conditions for much of it's life. These are things your phone and laptop can't (or rather: don't) do.
Everyone tends to plug in their laptop/phone and charge to 100%, then leave it there for long periods of time. Plus, laptops and phones tend to get very hot, and there's no active cooling of the battery.
This combination of conditions tends to reduce the life of batteries significantly.
Why is this a problem for Lithium batteries?
Tesla recommends that their customers to charge to only about 80% for normal daily driving, and that if they need the full 100% range that they should start driving very soon after it reaches 100% charge. They also recommend not leaving it at empty for very long too as empty cells are more likely to drop below their minimum voltage, and die.
It's now four years old, has driven over 45,000 miles (well over 500 cycles) and the total degradation is less than 10%.
I'd say it looks like they behave rather well in general.
Guy #2: No it won't.
Guy #3: Do you have any sources that disprove that claim?
The onus is on the person making the ridiculous claim.
I can tell you from personal experience I have had a Nissan LEAF for about 2.5 years and ~24k miles, driven daily and it has lost no range whatsoever. But if you want a study or something, you're gonna have to Google for yourself man.
Both you and 'jjawssd are making claims, and you're very confident that 'jjawssd is wrong.
This is a bullshit statistic that has somehow become a meme on the internet. It just flat out isn't true.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone who expresses that level of confidence to have something to back it up. And if the false claim is so widespread, I'd also expect someone to have busted it and publicized it. From my outside, ignorant point of view, both sides are unproven, with an edge to you because of your own experience.
I'm sure you have devices in your own life that disprove his claim. Look at your phone. Does it really go to 50% capacity after 500 days? None of mine have. Sure batteries degrade over time and you'll experience better performance one day or worse another, but he's claiming after 500 days of using your phone you should be at 50% capacity. That's obviously baloney.
When I first read your comment, I thought you were a little over the top, but it sounded like you likely had something solid to back it up, so I was interested in learning something new. Personally, I don't make strong statements like that unless I can pretty quickly defend them. I honestly wasn't trying to catch you out. And seeing a myth busted is generally a good time!
As for phone batteries, I just had to replace mine, so that's not a particularly useful example. As I understand it, there's a lot of circuitry in phone batteries these days anyway, so I'm not sure what failed. I'm not going to use my anecdotal evidence for or against your case, for what it's worth.
I don't save a folder full of links to answer skeptical people on the internet and I'm not going to Google for you. If you're interested in reading articles, go look for yourself.
Anyway whatever. This has been a colossal waste of time.
Next time just say "sorry I don't have hard evidence for this opinion on hand". Nobody expects you to know everything but they do expect you to treat people decently.
Are you relying only on the 12 bar indicator or on the more detailed data download from the car's telemetry? My car still shows 12 bars, but has obviously lost some capacity (max range at 100% charge is down to about 95 from 102/103), just like my phone that still charges to "100%" but obviously has way less capacity after 3 years.
From my perspective, losing "no range whatsoever" after 2.5 years is the extraordinary claim.
If his claims about losing 50% capacity after 500 cycles were remotely true that would be the main cause of lost range ina 2.5 year old LEAF.
I imagine that if gas stations start to shut down due to low profitability, people will start worrying about whether their local gas stations is still operating in 5 years. So even if gas becomes dirt cheap, it might not become a setback.
We'll see. Interesting times ahead.
Things weren't exactly groovy for them the last few years with sub-$40 oil.
I had the misfortune of having my Honda hybrid's battery die, and if it weren't for CARB's extended emissions warranty for all HV car batteries, I would have been SOL paying 3-4K (or 2-3K for a refurb) for a tiny ~1kWh battery.
The new battery in my hybrid didn't go down in price significantly despite ~9 years of battery advancement, nor is it more powerful than the one it replaced.
I understand I'm comparing NiMH to Li-ion, but perhaps 5-10 years from now Li-ion will be superseded by a another chemistry, leaving today's electric car buyers with a similar experience.
When does it ever work like this in the real world though? Planned obsolesce and all that. Even in this industry, replacement car parts cost far above the component price when the car was new.
As the original battery owner I don't intend to get much for selling a used car battery, but it still seems quite cool to have it be repurposed for some other use.
Older phones, e.g. Nokias would commonly had standardised, replaceable batteries. Sadly, this trend has gone by the wayside. I can imagine EV makers going the non replaceable battery route. Maybe in the future we'll have some popular open source EV+standard spec battery pack, the "build your own computer" version of an EV.
You can be confident that lithium ion won't be replaced on that short of a time scale. Nothing's ready to do so.
Third party pack upgrades already exist for some of the most popular EVs, like the Nissan Leaf.
The new Nissan Leaf has a larger battery pack, but it's not backward compatible.
But they do have a batter replacement option which has better thermal management.
I wasn't able to find out anything about the Renault Zoe, or Kia Soul (new model isn't out yet though).
But our dealership did tell us that he expects there to be battery upgrades available for the Kia Soul, and this also seems to reflect what others on the forums have heard. But he did say it might be 3rd party options. Supposedly you can upgrade individual cells.
So the picture isn't clear yet. But I think once the market reaches a certain size, there will at least be 3rd party options.
I would be surprised if a well-maintained, crash-free electric vehicle in a climate without road salt wouldn't be worth battery replacement.
It's also not the correct economic consideration; you have to compare the value of a used EV vs. that same vehicle with a battery upgrade. If that value is greater than the cost of the battery, that's all you need. High depreciation of new cars makes the upgrade more attractive, actually, if you're considering resale value; upgrading an old car would allow you to avoid the 'off the lot' hit.
This is probably in part due to the UK annual inspection which checks all these things and forces you to fix them.
I agree though that pretty much all the catastrophic scrap-the-car failures are power train related. A lot of modern engines are really, really reliable though, so will happily go for hundreds of thousands of miles without issue.
It is technological improvement leading to falling prices that is beneficial to society and to an economy.
> Around half of consumers in the US and Germany say they comprehend how electrified
vehicles and related technology work versus almost 100% of consumers for ICE vehicles
I wonder if the almost 100% who say they comprehend how ICE vehicles work actually do understand it–even in a limited regard. It's easy to feel you understand something if you are familiar with it for the majority of your life.
And if that's the bar, then customers sure as hell know how an electric motor works.
The best we can do right now are "Neighborhood Electric Vehicles", limited in the US to a top speed of only 25mph. Scoot rents one, a Twizy: http://blog.caranddriver.com/in-a-twizy-nissan-renting-elect.... They're fun to drive, but VERY rough and crude.
Perhaps we need a class of lightweight vehicles with a top speed just barely insufficient for freeway use? For pedestrian and bike safety, I'd think we need to keep vehicle mass and velocity as low as practical.
Interesting half-way-house for city drivers.
DC Fast Charging mostly solves this problem -- roughly 80 miles in 30 minutes. Grab lunch while charging your car, and your battery is filled for the week. There aren't a ton of stations that support that speed yet, but more are being built every year.
> suburbia has luxury of charging EVs overnight
This is one of the few luxuries suburbia offers. Urban apartment/condo dwellers get dozens of benefits that suburban households don't, it seems only fair that suburban folks get a few things to enjoy.
So the real business is 7 to 13 years away.
1. Zero degradation
2. Recycling (and producing) batteries has less e impact than petrol
Zero degradation is simply not true (all batteries degrade) but the degradation issue is largely overblown. I own a 4-year old EV, with over 45,000 miles and well over 500 battery cycles. It has degraded, but only a small amount (less than 10%).
Anecdotally, liquid-cooled batteries (Tesla, Chevy) seem to resist degradation better than air-cooled batteries (Nissan Leaf, Renault Zoe. But that assumes high temp swings -- if your careful with air-cooled ones, they can last a long time as well.
One thing some manufacturers do is 'lie' about battery capacity, which really helps sell the "zero degradation" claim. If a EV has a "16.5kwH" battery pack, the car might only actually let you use 10.5kwH of it. This way, use is gentler on the pack (you never really go from "full" to "empty", but from "80% full" to "20% full", and the car hides that fact from you), and the pack can swap out degraded cells for unused ones as needed, to maintain the illusion of no degradation.
As of today, I think degradation has become a non-issue now that range capacity is decent. Even if a 2017 Chevy Bolt degrades a full 30% after 10 years, it would still be a car that gets ~160 miles on a single charge, which is still useful to many people. (That's 50% more range than a brand new 2017 LEAF gets today, and LEAF is the #1 selling BEV in the US).
Clean air, enables 100% solar, 2.4 sec zero to sixty, and so on.
Grid scale lithium ion storage costs about $0.30/kWh right now. Residential is probably about $.40-.50/kWh.
Dropping by a factor of two and some time shifting is most electrical use, and the electricity is similar to rates in many parts of the country, just with peak rates at a different time.
I think you meant .30c/Wh, right? Or perhaps you are referring to the cost to purchase off-peak energy stored in grid-scale Li-ion battery storage systems (If so, I'm curious where you got that number).
Otherwise, .30c/Wh for storage implies that a 100kWh battery pack would cost $30, when it clearly costs much more.
And the residential I get from Tesla's estimated numbers for their residential system. The residential ones may therefore be a tad bit optimistic. But if you happen to know an electrician.... maybe then it's realistic, as a huge amount of the cost is not the battery itself.
Better grid technology will help too. If we can transmit energy efficiently over long distances, there's less storage required. Build a global grid and the whole planet can run on renewables: it's always sunny (or windy) somewhere.
I'm not talking about powering one's home, I'm talking about powering cities and infrastructure - we are far away from having this kind of storage capability, and it's cheaper to produce electricity 24/7 than to build that kind of storage capacity anyway. It's all a matter of ROI.
Not to mention it allows us to make policy decisions about where our energy comes from at the source without changing anything at the consumer side. If we find out that <energy source> is unhealthy, unsustainable, running out etc... We can change one power plant rather than millions of autos. If OPEC turns the taps off, we aren't all suddenly paying twice as much to drive to work.
But I bet you already knew that.
Fuel cells seem like they'd be good for vehicles that can't have charging downtime. But then again hydrogen seems obnoxiously difficult to store what with all the escaping and the catching fire, so maybe we can stick to ICE and synfuels?
Anyway, we already know this. I'm hoping for third party battery packs by the time I need a fresh set for my 2011 Leaf. (Still years away)
This might be the first time I consider a lease. I have seen what happens to current and previous generation EVs and unless you just plan to keep it you will get soaked. I also would like to see more movement on availability of charging outside of home.
Total cost of ownership per month of the lease is $136. This is not counting KWHs or insurance, but includes all dealer costs, maintenance, and taxes. That's really hard to beat, other than buying some used vehicles. Lots of people spend more than that on fuel. These things are becoming affordable fast.
In my case, it's a 2nd car as my wife has a longer-range vehicle, so I'm fine that I can only use it for commutes and short trips.
Wow, that is striking. In the UK you could easily spend £200 a month on petrol costs for commuting, and I think the electricity costs would be small in comparison. There are lease deals for £150-200 a month, you could be paying off a new car and still pay less than just the fuel costs for your old car. I wonder whether this could be crafted into a successful advertising campaign.
Personally I think software upgradability is the most important criteria, which means either Tesla or lease and let someone else deal with rapid obsolescence.
Of course the price of leases may factor that in.
Except they've managed to hold their value pretty well... Still, and attractive option, especially with the 3.0 battery upgrade available!
50+ miles of pure electric-only driving for the majority of your normal driving needs. But can also be filled up with gas for 200+ mile driving days.
If your considering buying an traditional car anyway, it gives you the best of both worlds.
Before getting the Leaf I monitored my driving habits. The only days I ever drive more than ~20 miles are because I am going somewhere outside my daily routine. If you have access to a second vehicle, I would really recommend taking a second look at current EVs. Where else will you get heated seats, rear view camera, gps, alloy rims... all on a 3 year old car with 20k miles for less than 12k USD? It can be an amazing deal. Additionally if you have access to free charging at work it is a huge incentive.
These people generally wouldn't be bothered by a car with an 80 mile range.
The selection of PHEV options are really great now. They include the Chevy Volt, Ford Fusion Energi, Ford CMax Energi, Chrysler Pacifica Minivan PHEV. If you are looking for a performance or luxury PHEV, even those are available: Volvo XC90 PHEV, Audi E-tron, and a couple BMW models.
How many days of the year do you actually drive more than 100 miles?
If it's many, then electric is not yet for you yet, unless your destinations are near the Supercharger network.
Primarily galvanic battery chemistry gains?
These have not been on the rise and would need to be for batteries to ever take any meaningful marketshare from Coal.
This is happening in CA  and elsewhere. The trend will enable renewable energy sources like wind and solar to meet larger portions of total electrical demand.
That will cut into coal's power generation market share. Probably pretty rapidly.
The materials being used presently won't scale to such big numbers as you purpose, so it will all depend on the alternative materials being used by then.
From 2010 to 2016, battery pack prices fell roughly 80% from ~$1,000/kWh to ~$227/kWh
Current projections put EV battery pack prices below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, and suggest the potential for pack prices to fall below $100/kWh by 2030
I think your's wins!
IMHO, the thread's already self-policing (with a downvote mechanism).
Personally, I found your comment confusing. Currently, cr0sh's other comment has already been pushed down by sibling comments. Suggestion: add links to specific comments.
I don't think you have to direct other people to downvote on HN. Again, the community's good at self-policing.
> According to the research result, we can see that the same batteries can be produced at $227 per kWh in 2010... and that by 2020 it will fall to $190 per kWh and...
...and that's where it lost me - but something about it falling to $100 per kWh (maybe by 2030?)...
'From 2010 to 2016, battery pack prices fell roughly 80% from ~$1,000/kWh to ~$227/kWh (Exhibit 4).4 Despite that drop, battery costs continue to make EVs more costly than comparable ICE-powered variants. Current projections put EV battery pack prices below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, and suggest the potential for pack prices to fall
below $100/kWh by 2030'
So in 6 years the cost of battery packs has dropped 4 to 5 fold. And by 2030 may drop a total of 10 fold vs 2010 prices.
flagging this as spam.
Bull. It's a joke to talk about customer "demand" when a single damn car hasn't been sold without government subsidies.