Question for Car Guys.

[Rick76]

It seems to me that all the big car companies are pretty much betting the farm on electric vehicles for 2030 and beyond. I just don't know that the infrastructure required to support 100% EV in the future will be there.

Plus I don't think most foreign countries are going to go 100% EV, so there's still going to be a huge market for internal combustion engine powered cars.

What do you guys think?

 

[oldpsubear]

I think EV's are going to have to go a heck of alot farther than 300-350 miles a charge or a lot of road trips will become a week longer just because of the need to recharge. Short urban settings are the best case for use but mass transit is the biggest and best solution in those settings

 

[Nitt1300]

i think that with as much investment as there is going into it that battery technology is going to take a big leap forward sooner than we might suspect.

 

[Nohow]

Most foreign countries are indeed going electric. The EU will be all electric by 2035, India and China may be sooner. The US is even a laggard in this regard.

 

[Nitt1300]

and ask yourself- how often do you actually drive more than 400 miles at one sitting?

 

[republion]

and ask yourself- how often do you actually drive more than 400 miles at one sitting?

Not very often. I’ll usually take a 15 minute break to grab some food and fill up the tank and then get back on the road. If EV technology allows for similar convenience/ timeframe, then I think it will be seamless. I don’t see ultra rapid charging happening anytime soon though.

 

[Bwifan]

It seems to me that all the big car companies are pretty much betting the farm on electric vehicles for 2030 and beyond. I just don't know that the infrastructure required to support 100% EV in the future will be there.

Plus I don't think most foreign countries are going to go 100% EV, so there's still going to be a huge market for internal combustion engine powered cars.

What do you guys think?

They are not all in on electric yet... big car companies are still looking at other options. They know it will be probably a combination but many still think hydrogen is the holy grail. Just need to make it more efficient and refueling stations. Here is a good article on what Porsche just did with hydrogen and some of the things they learned for everyday cars...

Link:

Porsche Tests 590 HP Hydrogen Engine at Nurburgring

 

[psuro]

It will be a gradual, but accelerated shift towards EV (and perahaps other alternative fuel) based vehicles. Infrastructure will catch up. AS an old saying goes - "Necessity is the mother of invention". Some state legislation requires new construction to include EV parking/charging spaces (although each business can decide how it manages this issue).

You may not like it, nor may you appreciate it, but you cannot ignore it's going to be part of the future.

 

[91Joe95]

EV will never be more than a niche market, even with massive government subsidies. They're great for government graft though, so they've got that going for them.

 

[91Joe95]

It seems to me that all the big car companies are pretty much betting the farm on electric vehicles for 2030 and beyond. I just don't know that the infrastructure required to support 100% EV in the future will be there.

Plus I don't think most foreign countries are going to go 100% EV, so there's still going to be a huge market for internal combustion engine powered cars.

What do you guys think?

They're not really betting on EV's. They're taking advantage of massive government funded subsidies and/or tax penalties to make a perpetually small number of vehicles.

 

[Ghost of OM]

To me the elephant in the EV room is that electricity still has to be generated somehow. It doesn’t fall free from the sky. So many of the big proponents of EV use seem to ignore that fact. Related, can our grid support the necessary millions of chargers if EVs really gain mass market share. Add to that the environmental issues associated with production of current batteries and the whole “miracle” of EVs starts to look much less appealing. Not to say there won’t be advances in the whole process, I just don’t buy into the current fantasy yet.

 

[91Joe95]

They are not all in on electric yet... big car companies are still looking at other options. They know it will be probably a combination but many still think hydrogen is the holy grail. Just need to make it more efficient and refueling stations. Here is a good article on what Porsche just did with hydrogen and some of the things they learned for everyday cars...

Link:

Porsche Tests 590 HP Hydrogen Engine at Nurburgring

Hydrogen comes from breaking down fossil fuels, which uses a lot of energy and produces a lot of CO2 emissions. It is also highly flammable and explosive even at extremely low concentrations, which provides real recharging problems.

 

[Rick76]

They're not really betting on EV's. They're taking advantage of massive government funded subsidies and/or tax penalties to make a perpetually small number of vehicles.

Coal was the fuel of choice that allowed the industrial revolution and Pax Brittanica.

Then coal became bad and oil was the savior.

Then oil became bad and nuclear was the savior.

Then nuclear became bad and nat gas was the savior.

Now nat gas is bad and windmills, solar and EVs are the savior.


As a 30 year nuclear engineer and employee of major nuclear utlities and engineering companies, nuclear isn't the overall answer. I started working on the two new nuclear units in Georgia in 2008. They might come on line next year - 15 friggin' years. And the company that was building two similar units in South Carolina went bankrupt.

And wait until all the greenies see their electric bills for charging their EV's in the future.

 

[psuro]

Coal was the fuel of choice that allowed the industrial revolution and Pax Brittanica.

Then coal became bad and oil was the savior.

Then oil became bad and nuclear was the savior.

Then nuclear became bad and nat gas was the savior.

Now nat gas is bad and windmills, solar and EVs are the savior.


As a 30 year nuclear engineer and employee of major nuclear utlities and engineering companies, nuclear isn't the overall answer. I started working on the two new nuclear units in Georgia in 2008. They might come on line next year - 15 friggin' years. And the company that was building two similar units in South Carolina went bankrupt.

And wait until all the greenies see their electric bills for charging their EV's in the future.

Reative to your examples EVs wil not require significant capital investment. EV is the end use of the power source-you are providing examples of creating the power source.

Regarding your final comment - two colleagues have EV. They both report a $45-60 increase in theif electric bills per month. Both drive in excess of 1000 miles per month. They would pay a lot more per month for gasoline for the same number of miles driven.

I would not characterize either as “greenies.“

 

[Rick76]

Reative to your examples EVs wil not require significant capital investment. EV is the end use of the power source-you are providing examples of creating the power source.

Regarding your final comment - two colleagues have EV. They both report a $45-60 increase in theif electric bills per month. Both drive in excess of 1000 miles per month. They would pay a lot more per month for gasoline for the same number of miles driven.

I would not characterize either as “greenies.“

Electricity rates are going to go way up next year as new taxes and fuel costs kick in. We already go a preliminary notice in NE PA. Plus state legislatures are going to tax EV's on miles driven to make up for losses in gas tax revenue. The rationale will be that they are owned by rich people and rich people should pay their fair share.

And then the environmentalists will demand that EV owners pay a "battery disposal fee" similar to fees for nuclear waste disposal paid by nuclear power plants.

I expect the costs will reach parity with owning a gasoline powered vehicle.

 

[Nohow]

Electricity rates are going to go way up next year as new taxes and fuel costs kick in. We already go a preliminary notice in NE PA. Plus state legislatures are going to tax EV's on miles driven to make up for losses in gas tax revenue. The rationale will be that they are owned by rich people and rich people should pay their fair share.

And then the environmentalists will demand that EV owners pay a "battery disposal fee" similar to fees for nuclear waste disposal paid by nuclear power plants.

I expect the costs will reach parity with owning a gasoline powered vehicle.

EV will never be more than a niche market, even with massive government subsidies. They're great for government graft though, so they've got that going for them.

Nonsense.

 

[1000 OaksLion]

Electricity rates are going to go way up next year as new taxes and fuel costs kick in. We already go a preliminary notice in NE PA. Plus state legislatures are going to tax EV's on miles driven to make up for losses in gas tax revenue. The rationale will be that they are owned by rich people and rich people should pay their fair share.

And then the environmentalists will demand that EV owners pay a "battery disposal fee" similar to fees for nuclear waste disposal paid by nuclear power plants.

I expect the costs will reach parity with owning a gasoline powered vehicle.

All great points. Here in CA the legislature is already working on taxing the EV owners based on miles driven. About 25% of the electricity comes from wind and solar in CA. And we've been leading the way when it comes to renewables and brownouts for the last 20 plus years. Fossil fuels aren't going away anytime soon.

 

[psuro]

Electricity rates are going to go way up next year as new taxes and fuel costs kick in. We already go a preliminary notice in NE PA. Plus state legislatures are going to tax EV's on miles driven to make up for losses in gas tax revenue. The rationale will be that they are owned by rich people and rich people should pay their fair share.

And then the environmentalists will demand that EV owners pay a "battery disposal fee" similar to fees for nuclear waste disposal paid by nuclear power plants.

I expect the costs will reach parity with owning a gasoline powered vehicle.

Electric rates are goverend by the PUC, which would cap a rate increase. Gasoline prices are based on supply and demand and have no cap. But, if your electric prices go up, so will your gasoline prices, because your local gas station sets a price based on the purchase price of the fuel, plus their overhead - which includes the electriicty to power the pumps, canopy to keep you dry during the rain while you pump your gas, and the convenience store where you get your coffee.

Legisltature could and probably should tax EVs. They use the infrastructure just like every other vehicle. However, like most technology related to the auto industry, higher end vehicles tend to be the first place that new technology is tried and used Everything as simple as auto transmissions, power windoes, NAV systems, etc. But, after a while it becomes commonplace. That said, Ford's F150 EV starts at around $42K. Chevy Bolt is around $40K. NIssan Leaf - $32K. The median price of a new car is around $37,000. There are EV that are available between $40-$50K. (I am looking at MSRP, not the price the dealer will actualy sell the car for - who knows that will be). So, I am not in agremeent that rich people will be ones owning EVs.

I don't understand why you would equate a battery disposal fee to nuclear waste. As someone who says they have been in nuclear energy for 30 years, you are surely aware that nuclear waste is goverened by the NRC and that waste is still radioactive. Hence the need for special disposl sites, which are paid for by ....the nuclear plants. EV batteries are simply not the same thing. They are not radioactive, and they would be considered solid waste, whcih is regulated by state laws.

I get the sense you have an issue with "environmentalists" or "greenies", which is a bit suprising, since you are probably aware Nuclear power is probably the greenest man made power available.

But that said, and as someone else has said, you are probably not getting away from ICE vehicles anytime soon. However, electric cars (and hybrids) are certainly going to be part of the future.

 

[psuro]

EV will never be more than a niche market, even with massive government subsidies. They're great for government graft though, so they've got that going for them.

That was just dumb.

 

[NoSoup4U]

To me the elephant in the EV room is that electricity still has to be generated somehow. It doesn’t fall free from the sky. So many of the big proponents of EV use seem to ignore that fact. Related, can our grid support the necessary millions of chargers if EVs really gain mass market share. Add to that the environmental issues associated with production of current batteries and the whole “miracle” of EVs starts to look much less appealing. Not to say there won’t be advances in the whole process, I just don’t buy into the current fantasy yet.

https://electrek.co/2021/04/27/tesla-power-all-superchargers-with-renewable-energy-this-year/

 

[JakkL]

I'm really surprised that no one (especially California) is pushing for solar on all new construction of homes, warehouses, etc. It seems like the only way to meet the ever increasing demand for electricity as fossil fuel is decreased. There are only so many feasible places to build solar farms.

 

[cac@PSU]

I do not own an electric car, perhaps in a few years may purchase such. What is the cost to install a charging station in you home garage?

 

[1000 OaksLion]

I'm really surprised that no one (especially California) is pushing for solar on all new construction of homes, warehouses, etc. It seems like the only way to meet the ever increasing demand for electricity as fossil fuel is decreased. There are only so many feasible places to build solar farms.

Well CA will be requiring new home construction to be all "electric ready". An added cost for builders which is passed on to the consumer. It's one of the many regulations, laws, and policies discouraging builders to build affordable housing. And one of the many reasons for CA's housing shortage. I believe in 2024 no more fossil fuel generators or lawnmowers will be sold in CA. And you need gas generators out here because of the regular brown outs. The RV lobby is sweating. CA sells the most RVs in the country. How do you sell an RV without fossil fuel generators?

 

[Rick76]

I'm really surprised that no one (especially California) is pushing for solar on all new construction of homes, warehouses, etc. It seems like the only way to meet the ever increasing demand for electricity as fossil fuel is decreased. There are only so many feasible places to build solar farms.

I used to live in Hawaii where it is always windy and the sun shines 99% of the time. The electricity prices are the highest in the nation because all fuel (oil and coal) for power plants has to be imported from thousands of miles away. Even so, wind and solar are not competitive with respect to fossil fuel generated electricity without large government subsidies or tax breaks. There have been dozens of wind turbines installed since the 1980's. Many are already out of service. Open land is at a premium on Oahu and many wind farms are right next to small communities.

There definitely is a place for wind and solar in Hawaii. The DOD put solar panels on many of its new construction military housing over the past 20 years. I have no idea what the payback is.

 

[91Joe95]

That was just dumb.

I wish it were, but EV's don't make money. Tesla makes almost all of its profits off of selling government created carbon credits. There's no magic improvement that will significantly increase the energy density of lithium batteries, so forget decreasing the amount required in any appreciable quantity. Even something as important as fast charging was achieved by incurring the penalties of smaller, less efficient battery cells and a second cooling system for the batteries. It's not like heat transfer is suddenly going to change. Then there's the supplies of raw materials. Good luck keeping those prices down as the US government starts buying its massive fleet of new EV postal vehicles, especially since environmentalists oppose new mining operations in the US.

That's not even getting into the energy grid, where years of absolutely horrible decisions to close plants and invest in green energy that doesn't work adequately are just beginning to severely stress the grid.

Let hybrids act as a reality check on EVs. They have completely disappeared from the market. The Prius and Volt aren't even made or sold anymore, and with today's gas prices they should be thriving. They were a perfectly sound technology, used significantly fewer raw materials than the EV, and still couldn't get their prices down enough to compete with a gas powered car that costs half as much. The steel drive train for a gas powered car costs a few grand, a lithium powered EV costs several times that with no realistic way to close the gap.

 

[Tom McAndrew]

I used to live in Hawaii where it is always windy and the sun shines 99% of the time. The electricity prices are the highest in the nation because all fuel (oil and coal) for power plants has to be imported from thousands of miles away. Even so, wind and solar are not competitive with respect to fossil fuel generated electricity without large government subsidies or tax breaks. There have been dozens of wind turbines installed since the 1980's. Many are already out of service. Open land is at a premium on Oahu and many wind farms are right next to small communities.

There definitely is a place for wind and solar in Hawaii. The DOD put solar panels on many of its new construction military housing over the past 20 years. I have no idea what the payback is.

"By 2021 Hawaiian Electric (which supplies 95% of electricity through the state) announced that it had reached 34.5% renewable."

From:

Energy in Hawaii - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[91Joe95]

Electric rates are goverend by the PUC, which would cap a rate increase. Gasoline prices are based on supply and demand and have no cap. But, if your electric prices go up, so will your gasoline prices, because your local gas station sets a price based on the purchase price of the fuel, plus their overhead - which includes the electriicty to power the pumps, canopy to keep you dry during the rain while you pump your gas, and the convenience store where you get your coffee.

Legisltature could and probably should tax EVs. They use the infrastructure just like every other vehicle. However, like most technology related to the auto industry, higher end vehicles tend to be the first place that new technology is tried and used Everything as simple as auto transmissions, power windoes, NAV systems, etc. But, after a while it becomes commonplace. That said, Ford's F150 EV starts at around $42K. Chevy Bolt is around $40K. NIssan Leaf - $32K. The median price of a new car is around $37,000. There are EV that are available between $40-$50K. (I am looking at MSRP, not the price the dealer will actualy sell the car for - who knows that will be). So, I am not in agremeent that rich people will be ones owning EVs.

I don't understand why you would equate a battery disposal fee to nuclear waste. As someone who says they have been in nuclear energy for 30 years, you are surely aware that nuclear waste is goverened by the NRC and that waste is still radioactive. Hence the need for special disposl sites, which are paid for by ....the nuclear plants. EV batteries are simply not the same thing. They are not radioactive, and they would be considered solid waste, whcih is regulated by state laws.

I get the sense you have an issue with "environmentalists" or "greenies", which is a bit suprising, since you are probably aware Nuclear power is probably the greenest man made power available.

But that said, and as someone else has said, you are probably not getting away from ICE vehicles anytime soon. However, electric cars (and hybrids) are certainly going to be part of the future.

Comparing the lowest prices of an EV to the median price of a gas powered vehicle does not make sense. The median price of an EV is around $66K. Comparing the lowest price of an EV to the lowest price of a gas powered car is appropriate since you are actually looking at similar classes of vehicles, and since gas powered can be purchased for about half the price of an EV the economics favor the gas by a significant margin. It's a significantly lower upfront cost and is actually affordable, and the yearly savings just can't close that big of a gap.

 

[91Joe95]

As a general rule, when trying to figure out the price of a mass produced product, add up the costs of all the raw materials. The price of raw materials is significantly higher for an EV with no way to close the gap. The differences between labor costs simply are not enough to overcome that gap, and neither are the yearly cost of ownership savings.

 

[barry j fenchak]

I'm curious where all of this additional electrical energy is going to come from.

Average power requirement for ICE vehicle would be around 100 KW (@1.34 hp/KW). Substitute a million EV for ICE and you add 100 GW demand on the grid. Not many rivers left to dam so hydro is out, solar and wind is noise level. That leaves only fossil and nuke for significant increases in capacity. Gonna build a lot more of those? They are already behind the curve for catching up.

More than a few people live in areas that are already beyond generated power capacity.

How well did EVs do in Texas winters the last couple of years?

 

[NoSoup4U]

I'm curious where all of this additional electrical energy is going to come from.

Average power requirement for ICE vehicle would be around 100 KW (@1.34 hp/KW). Substitute a million EV for ICE and you add 100 GW demand on the grid. Not many rivers left to dam so hydro is out, solar and wind is noise level. That leaves only fossil and nuke for significant increases in capacity. Gonna build a lot more of those? They are already behind the curve for catching up.

More than a few people live in areas that are already beyond generated power capacity.

How well did EVs do in Texas winters the last couple of years?

Tesla secures big 200 MWh Megapack order for a new energy storage project in Australia

The state of Queensland and publicly owned generator CS Energy announced a giant new 100 MW/200 MWh energy storage project,...

electrek.co

 

[barry j fenchak]

Tesla secures big 200 MWh Megapack order for a new energy storage project in Australia

The state of Queensland and publicly owned generator CS Energy announced a giant new 100 MW/200 MWh energy storage project,...

electrek.co

And that addresses nothing in terms of power generation. Where is all that energy going to come from? You can't store what you don't have. Right now, you've got two choices for the GW/TW increases that will be necessary to address current demand, fossil and nuke. Energy demands are already outstripping capacity.

 

[Nohow]

As a general rule, when trying to figure out the price of a mass produced product, add up the costs of all the raw materials. The price of raw materials is significantly higher for an EV with no way to close the gap. The differences between labor costs simply are not enough to overcome that gap, and neither are the yearly cost of ownership savings.

<https://mjbradley.com/sites/default/files/CT_PEV_CB_Analysis_FINAL.pdf>
And if you acknowledge society’s obligation to mitigate climate change, there is no alternative.

 

[FTLPSU]

By the estimates;
2.5M Electric cars in the U.S.
Almost 300M gas powered cars registered in U.S.

Long way to go.....and not sure where all that lithium and cobalt will come from and who will make the batteries? Hmm...

And lithium is So healthy for the environment and our water tables.... Hmm...

 

[barry j fenchak]

By the estimates;
2.5M Electric cars in the U.S.
Almost 300M gas powered cars registered in U.S.

Long way to go.....and not sure where all that lithium and cobalt will come from and who will make the batteries? Hmm...

And lithium is So healthy for the environment and our water tables.... Hmm...

Lets say that 10% of that 300 M gas powered transitions to EV, that would be 30 M, each placing a 100 KW new demand on generated power. That translates to 3000 Gigawatts or 3 Terawatts. That amount of energy isn't going to just fall out of Elon Musk's butt, it is going to require significant infrastructure to generate and transport. You cannot produce that amount of energy without burning or radiating something, so pick your poison.

Transition to EV simply moves the pollution source from one location to another.

 

[Nittany.Lion]

I'm curious where all of this additional electrical energy is going to come from.

Average power requirement for ICE vehicle would be around 100 KW (@1.34 hp/KW). Substitute a million EV for ICE and you add 100 GW demand on the grid. Not many rivers left to dam so hydro is out, solar and wind is noise level. That leaves only fossil and nuke for significant increases in capacity. Gonna build a lot more of those? They are already behind the curve for catching up.

More than a few people live in areas that are already beyond generated power capacity.

How well did EVs do in Texas winters the last couple of years?

It's like you think we need a boatload of extra power NOW and one huge flaw in your numbers is the assumption that all EV's are going to be charging at the same time on one day of the week. First, 90% of all EV charging occurs at home at night, we NOW have a LOT of available power at night. Second, a complete transition to EV's is going to take decades. Don't you think that during those decades battery technology will improve dramatically? Additionally, in the decades to come, can you visualize all those millions of EV batteries available to supplement the grid when not in use?

It's not going to take a boatload of extra generation to accommodate EV growth & acceleration over the coming decades, there seem to be a lot of short-sighted people think this isn't doable.

There’s Enough Electricity in the World for Electric Vehicles. Here’s Who Will Charge Them. | Barron's (barrons.com)

"That means an American car, if it were an EV, would need 3,857kWh per year, assuming the average efficiency figures above. If all US cars were EVs, they would need a total of 1,106.6TWh, which is 27.6% of what the American grid produced in 2020."

Electricity Grids Can Handle Electric Vehicles Easily – They Just Need Proper Management (forbes.com)

 

[Jason1743]

A major advantage of EV that has been over looked in this thread is their performance. Tesla's can go from 0-60 in around 3 seconds! EV's are fast with no lag time when you put your foot on the accelerator.
IMO there is no doubt EV's are the future, but not yet the present (at least for me). The infrastructure is not yet built. Range is not enough (at least for me). Charging times are glacial compared to filling up a tank with gas. As battery technology improves, so will EV sales.

 

[Georgia Peach]

I do not own an electric car, perhaps in a few years may purchase such. What is the cost to install a charging station in you home garage?

About the same cost as running a 220 line to your utility room for your dryer.

 

[Nittany.Lion]

I do not own an electric car, perhaps in a few years may purchase such. What is the cost to install a charging station in you home garage?

It's highly dependent on where you live and the details/difficulty of the installation, but it's likely to be somewhere between $800 and 2k.

 

[91Joe95]

It's like you think we need a boatload of extra power NOW and one huge flaw in your numbers is the assumption that all EV's are going to be charging at the same time on one day of the week. First, 90% of all EV charging occurs at home at night, we NOW have a LOT of available power at night. Second, a complete transition to EV's is going to take decades. Don't you think that during those decades battery technology will improve dramatically? Additionally, in the decades to come, can you visualize all those millions of EV batteries available to supplement the grid when not in use?

It's not going to take a boatload of extra generation to accommodate EV growth & acceleration over the coming decades, there seem to be a lot of short-sighted people think this isn't doable.

There’s Enough Electricity in the World for Electric Vehicles. Here’s Who Will Charge Them. | Barron's (barrons.com)

"That means an American car, if it were an EV, would need 3,857kWh per year, assuming the average efficiency figures above. If all US cars were EVs, they would need a total of 1,106.6TWh, which is 27.6% of what the American grid produced in 2020."

Electricity Grids Can Handle Electric Vehicles Easily – They Just Need Proper Management (forbes.com)

Grid. Proper management. They can't even do that right now, and if people really think smoothing electrical demand is that simplistic then they would be doing it already. As far as battery tech there's no significant improvement coming. Batteries have been around longer than the combustion engine, lithium batteries for the last 30 years. Quality control and durability have improved, but the amount of energy they can store - it's simply limited by physics with no way to change it. Maybe the electric motors have a big improvement still available, but they've been around longer than the combustion engine too. There's simply no magic way to decrease the amount of materials needed to make the drive train for an EV.

 

[91Joe95]

It's highly dependent on where you live and the details/difficulty of the installation, but it's likely to be somewhere between $800 and 2k.

Home charging is an area for improvement. Instead of using household 110 and doubling it, coming off the grid with true 220 would be helpful, but also requires a brand new line to the house. I also wonder how long charging will be allowed to continue indoors. Propane is not allowed to be stored in a garage, and lithium is essentially one big hydrogen fire if the battery compartment is either compromised or the batteries degrade and ignite.