Electric vehicles as an example of a market failure

Electric vehicles as an example of a market failure
A Renault Zoe charging. It’s currently one of the top-selling plug-in electric vehicles in Europe, but what would happen if subsidies dried up? Credit: Werner Hillebrand-Hansen/Wikipedia

Electric vehicle revolution is well under way. Norway ambitiously heads toward having all new cars sold as zero-emission by 2025. China continues to be one of the major drivers of EV boom. The US market experiences strong growth, driven by models from Tesla, Chevrolet and Nissan. The United Kingdom and France have announced they would ban new petrol and diesel vehicles sales by 2040.

Electric cars are perceived as a positive externality of consumption on the society. To fight global warming, governments have implemented different policies to stimulate consumer demand.

But just how sustainable is demand for electric vehicles and how long will governments fuel it? There is also the question of hidden costs for stakeholders like the Democratic Republic of Congo, major supplier of cobalt used for EV batteries.

Norway hits new highs with EV market penetration

A stellar example of a country that's fully charged to go electric is Norway. It has the highest number of electric vehicles per person in the world, with close to 300,000 registered units in its EV fleet in 2018. According to the European Alternative Fuel Observatory, almost 50% of the cars purchased in Norway in 2018 are electric.

What lies behind such impressive result that puts Norway ahead of others? Answer seems clear: change of consumer habits through comprehensive incentive package introduced gradually since the 1990s. One of the key policies is Norwegian car-taxation system, based on the principle that the more you pollute, the more you pay. Tax for a new car is calculated by combining weight, CO2 and NOx emissions. It is progressive, making big cars with high emissions very expensive. This results in most electric vehicles becoming cheaper compared to similar petrol models.

In addition, other incentives are in place such as 25% VAT exemption for new EV purchases, road toll exemption, low annual road tax, free access to municipal parking and ferries, access to bus lanes and good network of public charging stations.

How long can it last?

But how long will governments continue incentive schemes and can EV market roll on its own? The main concern with subsidies is they're addictive – once put in place, they're difficult to end. Budgets are also tight and incentives of this magnitude put pressure on public finances.

Electric vehicles as an example of a market failure
Illustration of Norway subsidy scheme, comparison of Volkswagen Golf petrol and electric model. Credit: https://elbil.no/english/norwegian-ev-policy/

In October 2018, the UK announced subsidy cuts on electric and hybrid vehicles, making models such as Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV and the Toyota Prius Plug-in no longer eligible for grants. This adds thousands of pounds to the price of these cars, and many are concerned it could turn customers away from less-polluting vehicles.

China plans to terminate EV subsidies by 2020. The phase-out process is already in place, with 30% cuts planned for this year. The rationale is shift toward competitiveness, pushing car producers to find cost reductions of their own, as sales volume grows.

The Trump administration has also signalled a possible end of renewables subsidies in the near future. Announcements from the White House, followed by a series of angry tweets from the president, followed General Motors' announcement that it would end production in five automotive factories in the United States and Canada.

Although Democrats will certainly fight any such eventuality, it brings uncertainty among US car manufacturers, who continue to lobby for additional incentives.

Who bears the costs?

Another question is, who benefits most from subsidies? A Manhattan Institute report on EVs highlights the fact that more than 50% of EV buyers in the United States lived in households with annual income of at least $100,000, and 20% had yearly incomes over $200,000. The conclusion is that subsides come at the expense of lower-income drivers of gasoline-powered cars who cannot really afford to buy any new , much less an electric one. It is they who end up paying for highway maintenance costs through fuel taxes.

Also, as more electric vehicles hit the streets, electricity replaces fuel consumption. The International Energy Agency estimates that by 2030, electricity could displace about 4,8 million barrels of petrol and diesel used per day. This could result in revenue loss of close to $100 billion in fuel taxes, major source of financing infrastructure development. Thus, governments need to find alternative taxation income and someone needs to bear this cost.

And while some nations embrace "going green", others might get left behind. There is a need for discussion on how the shift from internal-combustion motors to electric vehicles can be inclusive of those who need it most.

Electric vehicles as an example of a market failure
Children working in cobalt mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Credit: Centre of the American Experiment

Darker side of the electric car bonanza

While much of the developed world heads enthusiastically toward vehicles that pollute less, the celebration isn't universal. The Democratic Republic of Congo supplies two-thirds of world's cobalt, essential for EV batteries. This Central African nation chronically suffers from "natural resource curse": while "blessed" with richness in minerals, it remains among the poorest nations in the world.

In the absence of formal employment, hundreds of thousands of Congolese turn to mining. UNICEF estimates there are more than 40,000 children working in mines on jobs such as underground digging, transportation of heavy loads or washing mined cobalt in rivers.

Many adult and children workers have no modern machinery or even basic protective clothing, and the health consequences can be catastrophic. Cobalt even has disease named after it – cobalt lungs, a form of pneumonia caused by overexposure to cobalt dust that leads to permanent incapacity and in many cases, death.

Years of mining have also taken their toll on Congolese environment. Untreated waste and toxic substances pollute areas near the mines, exacerbating health problems of the locals. In addition, worrying radioactivity levels were reported in some of the mines, as southern Congo has vast deposits of not only cobalt and copper, but also uranium. In November 2018, Glencore, one of the world's leading cobalt producers, temporarily suspended sales of from its Kamoto mine due to radioactivity detected in supplies.

The long road ahead

It may seem that are on the verge of replacing internal-combustion vehicles. But while their market share is growing, it still represents only 2% of car sales in 2018. Although there is raising awareness on environmental issues, we must remember that people tend to seek to maximise their personal utility. Because of this, electric vehicles can be considered an example of market failure – their benefits to society as a whole exceed those to individuals, so they're undersupplied by a free market. Another example is vaccinations, which may require a shot (briefly painful to one person), but can help provide collective immunity (beneficial for all). Government regulations, subsidies and other methods can help insure that such failures of the free market are compensated for.

In the case of electric vehicles, however, once government subsidies are phased out, it remains to be seen whether consumers will perceive as economically viable option. A lot will depend on the ability of car manufacturers to cut production costs, and also how much countries have advanced in installing related infrastructure such as charging stations.

In any case, we are in for a long ride and a lot of uncertainties along the way.


Explore further

China's Hainan province to end fossil fuel car sales in 2030

Provided by The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.The Conversation

Citation: Electric vehicles as an example of a market failure (2019, March 20) retrieved 25 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2019-03-electric-vehicles-failure.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
38 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Mar 20, 2019
Electric Vehicles aren't a market failure. For the most part, they are a marketing failure. With the exception of Tesla, auto manufacturers only produce EVs to appease various government requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Manufacturers don't advertise EVs. When they do, it's as a 'Green-mobile' nobody wants. Auto companies hide EVs on their dealers' lots. Dealers don't want to sell them because there is no money to be made on service/maintenance. Sales people aren't trained to sell EVs. EVs, with the exception of Teslas are compliance vehicles. Multiple surveys show the majority of the driving public has no idea EVs exist. So, with an essentially EV ignorant public and the vast amount of misinformation surrounding them confusion abounds. It's no wonder EV's haven't captured a greater market share. People don't buy things they don't know exist and/or don't understand.

rgw
Mar 20, 2019
Major upgrades in all vehicle engines/drive tech, especially electric, occur seemingly on a daily basis. This trend is almost as frightening as PC tech growth. I no longer own a car or even want one (retired), but I would be very circumspect on my SS budget in purchasing a car in which the tech will be obsolete at all levels in a few years.

It is almost like buying a Model T in 1915 if you knew that expressways and Audi Quatros would be available at the same price in time for prohibition.

Mar 20, 2019
You can fool the public, but not the laws of physics/thermodynamics/electrochemistry and economics.
"Tesla Factory Store Uses Diesel Generators to Recharge Slow-moving Model 3 Inventory"- Mar 14, 2019
https://4k4oijnpi...re-2.jpg
https://wattsupwi...ventory/
https://pbs.twimg...ZHhE.jpg
If solar and wind are so good and cheap at displacing DIESEL, why are diesel/gasoline generators still widely used to recharge electric cars?
Tesla in Norway
https://pbs.twimg...FL8v.jpg

"Tesla's Main Product Isn't Cars, It's Subsidies"
"Tesla received $713 million in U.S. subsidies in Q3, compared to its $312 million profit."
https://realmoney...14769263

Mar 20, 2019
It's not the market for electric vehicles that is a flawed, it's the market for fossil fuels, which does not incorporate costs associated with externalities. If you want to correct the market in general, implement a carbon tax.

Mar 20, 2019
Shit article mostly, an opinion piece written by a low intelligence poorly informed fool. Too many fatal flaws in it to even get into.....

Mar 20, 2019
electric vehicles can be considered an example of market failure – their benefits to society as a whole exceed those to individuals, so they're undersupplied by a free market.


It is not a market failure, it is the failure to digest all the available data and come to the correct conclusion. I have seen this pattern many times before over many decades. A better technology is introduced, a few get it and most don't, but companies keep pushing in that direction regardless because they know how to do the math and that the rest of us will eventually see the light. Think computers, the internet, HDTV, etc.


Mar 20, 2019
One Example: Buy a Tesla Model 3 AWD for ~$50K that does 0-60 mph in ~4.2 seconds and lasts 500,000 miles (or more). Save $50K by not buying high octane gasoline for an ICE sports car, at least $30K by only needing one Tesla instead of at least two ICE cars to reach 500,000 miles, and say $20K in maintenance. That is $100K saved over the life of the car.

You can argue with my numbers, but Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for the Tesla Model 3 is already superior than any comparable ICE vehicle. While many of you are having trouble with this example, I am laughing all the way to the bank, baby. Plus I can probably get to the bank a lot faster than most of you. :-)

BTW, Tesla just announced they are going to crank up the power by about 5% with a software update so I can get the bank even faster. You will never catch me now. :-)

Mar 20, 2019
It is almost like buying a Model T in 1915 if you knew that expressways and Audi Quatros would be available at the same price in time for prohibition.


You are talking about a level of improvement that took roughly 100 years, not 5 years. Yes, there will be improvements in EVs over the next 5 years, but nobody is expecting EVs to get 2,000 miles on a charge and reach 1,000 mph by 2024. If you don't need a vehicle, save your money. If you do need a vehicle, make the best choice for yourself considering Total Cost of Ownership. Think of it this way, I never go to a gas station and most of the parts you need serviced on an ICE vehicle don't even exist on my Tesla. I don't even have a transmission, I have a gear box. There is only one gear, but the electric motors have so much power and torque the computer limits my top speed to 145 mph. Tesla gear boxes are designed to last more than 1 MILLION miles.

https://electrek....es-test/

Mar 21, 2019
Once battery tech matures EVs will be substantially cheaper to build than ICE, have lower running costs, lower service costs, far better performance and last much longer. In 5 years time it will be a no-brainer

Mar 21, 2019
EV are a failure, market and marketing. EV are NIMBY-itis, sickness.

I am old, hopefully driving my last auto purchase, a 6000# luxury diesel.

Mar 21, 2019
The article suffers from a "it will all stay the same" fallacy
There is also the question of hidden costs for stakeholders like the Democratic Republic of Congo, major supplier of cobalt

Current generation of batteries have already reduced cobalt content substantially and the next ones will have no cobalt at all.

What lies behind such impressive result that puts Norway ahead of others? Answer seems clear: change of consumer habits through comprehensive incentive package introduced gradually since the 1990s.

Sorta omits the fact that all other countries have massive subsidies on the fossil fuel sector. As long as no one is willing to eliminate those there's no other except giving EVs also subisdies way to level the playing field.

As for cost: the cost of EVs is already competitive (looking at TOC) and prices are dropping fast (foremost in the battery sector). Soon EVs will be way cheaper than ICE cars - even with *only* ICE getting their subsidies.


Mar 21, 2019
The nationwide electric bill is about 0.25 per KWH.This places the effective cost per gallon of an electrified world at about $7.12. EV advocates often use pricing which does not reflect real rates. Few states have electric costs anywhere near the 0.10 per KWH that is often used to promote cost effectiveness of a EV purchase. At current gasoline prices of $2.60, why would any sane person want an EV?

Along with all that other electricity you use besides the EV when Supply/Demand curves ticks upwards in the future, the 0.25 per KWH rates are not going lower when many of the current generating plants are decommissioned.

The only incentive that currently exists for buying an EV are subsidies that are piurchase cost incentives that are expiring worldwide, & lower cost of maintenance, but at what tradeoff when you suddenly find yourself saddled with increased electric bills at an equivalent gasoline cost that will be pushing $8/gallon in the near future.

Mar 21, 2019
The nationwide electric bill is about 0.25 per KWH.This places the effective cost per gallon of an electrified world at about $7.12.


Hey Benni, who pays you to post your lies? Seriously, does Putin or the Koch Bros. pay you well, or did you sell your soul for chump change?

In the U.S. the average rate for electricity is about $0.11 per KWH. For a sports car that gets 18 mpg, and still does not perform as well as a Tesla, the Tesla highway equivalent is gasoline at $0.50 per gallon (0.25 KWH/mile) to $0.70 per gallon (0.35 KWH/mile)! Tesla does even better in the city. Tesla owners save a ton of money this way, on the order of $10,000 per 100,000 miles. I am laughing all the way to the bank.

https://www.stati...ce-1990/

Mar 21, 2019
only needing one Tesla instead of at least two ICE cars to reach 500,000 miles


How much are you going to drive in a year?

To reach the 500k miles within the calendar lifespan of the Model 3 battery, you'd have to drive about 50k miles a year, or almost 140 miles every single day. Most people do 16-17k miles a year, which means they will only drive around 160k miles on the battery.

There are no EVs with lithium batteries on the market that would last long enough to actually drive half a million miles under normal driving patterns. Even Tesla itself estimates their batteries to last no longer than 12 years under best conditions. That's half the lifespan of the average car.

The issue is that the replacement battery costs a third the value of the new car, so if you want to make the comparison even, you have to add that in.

Mar 21, 2019
For a sports car that gets 18 mpg, and still does not perform as well as a Tesla


A sports car can perform all day. A Tesla only performs (ludicurous mode) at the top 5% of the battery. False comparison.

Besides, comparing straight line acceleration is not a really good metric for "sports cars". If you're running on skinny low-resistance wheels and stock brakes, trying to drive like you were in a Porsche 911 will only end you up in a ditch - the Model 3 is not a sports car, it's a compact car with a gimmick - like putting a bottle of nitrous into a Ford Fiesta.

Mar 21, 2019
In the U.S. the average rate for electricity is about $0.11 per KWH.


That's an illusion of statistics.

Most electricity is consumed (by industry) in states/counties where electricity is abundant and cheap. Eg. putting an aluminum smelter right next to a hydroelectric dam. This pushes the average down for the rest of the US, where actual rates for residential consumers are much higher.

https://www.elect...y-state/

The 2019 average is 13.19 cents. If you live in New York, you pay an average of 19.30¢ / kWh, California 19.90¢ / kWh, Conneticut 21.62¢ / kWh... etc.

Mar 21, 2019
Even Tesla itself estimates their batteries to last no longer than 12 years under best conditions.


Stop lying and prove it.

https://forums.te...pectancy

https://batteryun...atteries

Mar 21, 2019
Once battery tech matures EVs will be substantially cheaper to build than ICE, have lower running costs, lower service costs, far better performance and last much longer. In 5 years time it will be a no-brainer


Unless you can replace lithium and cobalt etc. with something else, make that 25 years.

The issue is production capacity, and the ability of the mining and refining industry to scale up by 1000x from today's figures to meet the demand for all the things that would require batteries. Increasing supply means increasing prices, because the cheapest deposits are already being exploited, while recycling lithium batteries is still non-existent because it's more expensive to recycle rather than make new ones.

Mar 21, 2019
Me: In the U.S. the average rate for electricity is about $0.11 per KWH.

Eikka: That's an illusion of statistics. The 2019 average is 13.19 cents.

Me: Maybe, but that still means gasoline at $0.60 to $0.83 per gallon.

Mar 21, 2019

Stop lying and prove it.

https://forums.te...pectancy

a battery pack could still retain about 95% of its original energy capacity after ~300,000 miles – or 25 years at the average 12,000 miles per year."

Irrelevant comparison.

Lithium batteries have a cycle AND shelf life. Mileage comparisons are invariably over high-mileage cars that have been driven long distances over few years.

There are no EV grade batteries on the market that have a practical shelf-life beyond a decade or so. The cheapest (laptop/cellphone) grade batteries degrade in 3-4 years, the EV grades in 8-12 years, and only the stationary storage battery types with lower energy densities (unsuitable for EVs) may last up to 20 years.

They simply will not last for the 25 years it would take to drive the miles to make the comparison.

Mar 21, 2019
They simply will not last for the 25 years it would take to drive the miles to make the comparison.


Prove it.

Mar 21, 2019
For example:

https://batteryun...atteries
. Exposing the battery to high temperature and dwelling in a full state-of-charge for an extended time can be more stressful than cycling. Table 3 demonstrates capacity loss as a function of temperature and SoC.


Table 3. lists a common condition with a battery sitting at 25 C with 40% SoC losing 4% capacity per year. Extrapolating over 10 years (0.96^10) leaves you with 66% of the original. The end-of-life point for li-ion is considered to be 63% due to exponential decay after that point.

Me: Maybe, but that still means gasoline at $0.60 to $0.83 per gallon.


The cheapest electricity prices also correlate with states/counties with the cheapest fuel prices. Where energy is cheap, energy is cheap, and the higher price of the EV in the first place, plus the cost of replacing the battery at some point, negates the difference.

Mar 21, 2019
Tesla batteries will live longer than expected, survey finds. The packs are on track to last over 500,000 miles.


"Tesla batteries retain over 90 percent of their charging power after 160,000 miles, according to data gathered by a Dutch-Belgium Tesla owners group. According to its survey of over 350 owners, the EVs dropped about 5 percent of their capacity after 50,000 miles, but lose it at a much slower rate after that. If the trend holds, most Tesla vehicles will still have 90 percent capacity after around 300,000 km (185,000 miles), and 80 percent capacity after a whopping 800,000 km (500,000 miles)."

https://www.engad...-longer/

Mar 21, 2019

Prove it.


See above.

Find me a lithium battery with a listed shelf-life of more than 10 years. I can guarantee you won't find one with an energy density high enough to put in an EV. You have to trade energy density with shelf/cycle life because the higher the voltage you charge the cells, the faster/more it degrades the battery over time and cycles. This is basic battery chemistry, and this is the state of art in the year 2019.

You can make the battery last for 20 years - the life of a typical ICE car - only if you toss away half the range capacity.

"Tesla batteries retain over 90 percent of their charging power after 160,000 miles,


Irrelevant. They still won't last the years. Tesla uses the same batteries in the Supercharger stations for power buffering, and they expect no more than 12 years life out of them - and that's in air-conditioned and cooled protected containers at low charge/discharge rates (per unit).

Mar 21, 2019
If the trend holds


It won't.

Lithium battery wear-out mechanism is exponential. The miles and days on the battery add up through side reactions that lock away some of the active lithium in the cells as the battery is used and also when it just sits around. This causes the internal resistance of the battery to rise gradually, which causes the wear mechanism to accelerate.

The battery wears out rapidly at the beginning because the chemical mixture hasn't stabilized yet after manufacture. After the initial drop, the aging process makes a plateau and appears to go slower, but then picks up again nearing the end of life and makes a quick nosedive for the last 10-20% of the cycles.

For example:
http://batteryblo...les2.jpg

The extrapolation for exceedingly long mileages comes from cars that are no older than 4-5 years (2014 and up), where the wear curve has made a plateau, but these are actually middle-aged batteries.

Mar 21, 2019
Find me a lithium battery with a listed shelf-life of more than 10 years.


Irrelevant. You have demonstrated zero knowledge of the Tesla 2170 battery and Tesla battery management system, currently the best in the world. When all the Teslas sold in 2012 don't die by 2022 you will probably ignore that too.

Tesla uses the same batteries in the Supercharger stations for power buffering, and they expect no more than 12 years life out of them.


Supercharging is stressful on a battery so 12 years running a supercharger probably equates to 40 years of charging on a NEMA 14-50 in my garage. Heck I might get more like 600,000 miles out of my Model 3, thanks!

Mar 21, 2019
You have demonstrated zero knowledge of the Tesla 2170 battery and Tesla battery management system, currently the best in the world. When all the Teslas sold in 2012 don't die by 2022 you will probably ignore that.


Special pleading. It's your burden to prove that Tesla has special batteries. They're ordinary Panasonic NCA cells, which trade chemical stability (and fire safety) for higher energy density (more range and more "ludicurous" power). Tesla can't really improve the shelf-life.

Supercharging is stressful on a battery


Yes, on the car's battery.

The batteries in the supercharger itself are lightly loaded because there are more of them (lower load per unit), and they're used just to smooth out the power-on/off ramp because you can't just switch on hundreds of kilowatts of load suddenly - without annoying your power utility.

Mar 21, 2019
Heck I might get more like 600,000 miles out of my Model 3, thanks!


Lying to yourself is probably the dumbest thing anyone can do.

Mar 21, 2019
knowledge of the Tesla 2170 battery


https://www.tesla...battery/

the Model 3's battery cell features a lithium-nickel-cobalt-aluminum oxide


Like I said, it's a Panasonic NCA cell. In a slightly bigger cylinder. The properties of this cell type are not magic: it has high energy density at the cost of chemical instability. Tesla/Panasonic have chosen to up the energy density to make the battery cheaper/lighter rather than improving on the shelf-life or cycle stability (because nobody's talking about what happens to the batteries in 10 years anyhow), so there's no reason to expect these batteries to last beyond the industry standard 8-12 years.

If they did, they'd be making headlines and sales pitches out of that. Rather, the concern right now is getting more energy packed into the battery because Tesla is committed to whatever arbitrary mileage goal they promised, that they can only barely pull off.

Mar 21, 2019
Even Tesla itself estimates their batteries to last no longer than 12 years under best conditions.


As opposed to lying to everyone else? Tesla never said this, you just made it up, right?

Mar 21, 2019
the concern right now is getting more energy packed into the battery because Tesla is committed to whatever arbitrary mileage goal they promised, that they can only barely pull off.


So you admit that Tesla did pull it off. Look, I charge to 80% at home. The battery is going to last a very long time. Studies show the initial degradation is a little faster but the curve goes virtually flat after that. I think there is an excellent chance of my Tesla lasting twice as long as an ICE vehicle. Consider that most ICE car warranties are between 3 years/36,000 miles and 5 years/60,000 miles. My Tesla is warrantied for 8 years, 120,000 miles.

https://www.warra...ies.aspx

Mar 21, 2019
You see, it's quite simple: why can't Tesla make the car go further? Because it would either make the batteries heavier, or make them break sooner. Why can't Tesla make the batteries last longer? Because it would make the cars go less. It's a compromise.

We know they're at the bleeding edge of battery performance in terms of range and power, so we also know they're compromising on the safety/longevity aspect on the batteries. That's why you can't expect the battery to last much longer (in years) than the warranty term which covers a period of 8 years only.

The warranty is slightly short to account for early failures from the expected lifespan (see: "bathtub curve") so we can very well guess that Tesla designs the batteries for a lifespan somewhere around 8-12 years - which is pretty much what anyone can do with lithium batteries anyhow.

Mar 21, 2019
As opposed to lying to everyone else? Tesla never said this, you just made it up, right?


It was on the Tesla forums. Impossible to source now.

So you admit that Tesla did pull it off.


Depends on what you mean by "pull off". Practically speaking, they cheat as always, using cherrypicked metrics and tests - but that's more or less industry standard as well.

Studies show the initial degradation is a little faster but the curve goes virtually flat after that.


Yep, and I already showed you with references that this is just the mid-life behavior of a lithium battery before it starts to degrade exponentially. The Tesla owners forum which is the source of the study hasn't got cars/batteries older than 2014 in their data - they're extrapolating out of wishful thinking.

Mar 21, 2019
. Consider that most ICE car warranties are between 3 years/36,000 miles and 5 years/60,000 miles. My Tesla is warrantied for 8 years, 120,000 miles.


Yeah, because you paid a whole lot more for it than most people pay for most ICE cars. You'd expect that.

Meanwhile, the average age of a car on the road is between 11-12 years. Regardless of the 3 year warranty, they last, and why wouldn't they? ICEs are mature technology and most cars rust to bits before their engines fail.

Besides, it's a bit of a false comparison anyhow, because in a regular car the warranty covers the whole car, whereas in the Tesla the 8 years applies only for the battery. The actual warranty for the whole car in a Tesla is 4 years and 50,000 miles.

Mar 21, 2019
https://www.tesla...warranty
Your car is protected by a New Vehicle Limited Warranty for 4 years or 50,000 miles, whichever comes first. The Battery and Drive Unit in your car are covered for a period of:

Model 3 with Standard or Mid-Range Battery - 8 years or 100,000 miles, whichever comes first, with minimum 70% retention of Battery capacity over the warranty period.


Oh, so you can actually lose almost a third of your range within warranty. But that's very close to the standard EoL capacity of lithium batteries (63%). If you estimate 20% more after this exponential curve knee point (80/20 rule), you get the design lifespan out at 10 years. Correct that up for the difference, let's say 30% more, and it's 11 years. Perfectly comparable with other batteries on the market.

Of course, the last 30% isn't going to be very fun to drive, because the range of the car will diminish week by week.

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, you just keep making stuff up with no basis in fact. You never "already showed you with references that this is just the mid-life behavior of a lithium battery before it starts to degrade exponentially." There is no exponential decay, you made that up.

"because you paid a whole lot more for it than most people pay for most ICE cars." Not really, I know plenty of folks that spent just as much on their ICE vehicles which don't perform as well.

No false comparison either. I am comparing the battery versus the internal combustion engine. What are you comparing exactly?

Mar 21, 2019
You never


I did. Scroll up.

There is no exponential decay, you made that up.


See the link I posted above. Here, I'll post it again. This is the typical wear-out behaviour of a lithium-ion battery:

http://batteryblo...les2.jpg

This isn't some esoteric knowledge. Look it up, there's good articles on Wikipedia, and I already gave you links to the Battery University website where this is explained.

Consider the Tesla goes let's say 300 miles per full cycle of the battery. You can drive it for the 160,000 miles and it's only done about 500-600 cycles - even bad lithium batteries do that. Cheap cellphone batteries can do that. It's not about the number of miles you drive at all - the dominant wear mechanism is age, but the effect is the same: the internal efficiency of the battery goes down and the rate of wear per mile (per cycle) accelerates.

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, that chart is for charging to 4.2 volts! You can double the life by charging to 4.1 volts. Carefully review the batteryuniversity link I posted above and here again, especially Table 4:

https://batteryun...atteries

So how much are getting paid anyway? Are all trolls like you taught to never respond to these questions? Come on, you can tell me. Are you in Russia or Finland?

Mar 21, 2019
No false comparison either. I am comparing the battery versus the internal combustion engine. What are you comparing exactly?


Car manufacturers don't give special engine warranties. The 3-5 years you quote are for the entire car. The 8 years Tesla gives is for the battery and drivetrain, and the comparable new car warranty is only 4 years.

Geez, it's like you don't even read the replies I give. I'm having to repeat myself here.

Eikka, that chart is for charging to 4.2 volts! You can double the life by charging to 4.1 volts.


That does not change the shape of the curve - only makes it last for more cycles. The wear-out mechanism is still the same: internal efficiency of the battery goes down, which causes damage when the battery is used, which leads to lower capacity and efficiency, which is a self-accelerating process.

So how much are getting paid anyway?


Care to try an actual argument?

Mar 21, 2019
from the article;
The United Kingdom and France have announced they would ban new petrol and diesel vehicles sales by 2040.
...
But how sustainable is demand for electric vehicles ... ?

Well, that's a stupid question because if none electric vehicles are to be banned then people will then only ever buy the electric vehicles thus the demand for electric vehicles will be permanent i.e. HIGHLY sustainable.

There is also the question of hidden costs for stakeholders like the Democratic Republic of Congo, major supplier of cobalt used for EV batteries.
what if the electric vehicles do NOT have cobalt in their batteries? This, after all, IS what will eventually happen.

This article asks some stupid questions! VERY BADLY WRITTEN.

I see the usual morons posting here making out the falsehood of electric vehicles impossible to ever be cost effective. They are ALREADY proving cost effective in some parts of the world and they are becoming cheaper.

Mar 21, 2019
The 8 years Tesla gives is for the battery and drivetrain, and the comparable new car warranty is only 4 years.


You just made my point. The Tesla drive train is warrantied for TWICE as long as the ICE car drive train, so it is not unreasonable to think it might actually last TWICE as long or it would take TWO ICE vehicles to reach the same distance as one Tesla. I realize this is not definitive, but it is highly suggestive that the Tesla is going to greatly outlast a similarly priced ICE vehicle.

Eikka, my wild guess is that are a university graduate in Russia, maybe St. Petersburg, working in some kind of Russian Troll factory we often read about. Maybe you helped Trump in 2016?

Mar 21, 2019
Carefully review the batteryuniversity link I posted above


Umm... I also posted that link, and referenced it.

I repeat myself: With 40% state of charge at 25 C, the loss of capacity of a typical lithium battery is 4% per year, extrapolating to 10 years the capacity will be 66.5% which is close to the generally agreed end-of-life condition of 63% because this is the typical knee-point in the exponentially accelerating wear-out curve. After that point, the capacity of the battery will take a nosedive.


Mar 21, 2019
Not 4% per year, 4% the FIRST year. Real world data shows the curve levels off to almost flat. That is how Tesla vehicles with 300,000 miles still have ~90% of their original battery capacity left.

Я слишком умен для тебя, Эйкка, ты не можешь обмануть меня.

Mar 21, 2019
You just made my point. The Tesla drive train is warrantied for TWICE as long as the ICE car drive train


No I didn't. You just shifted the goalposts.

, so it is not unreasonable to think it might actually last TWICE as long


Yes it is. If the rest of the car breaks down after year 4, Tesla doesn't have to give you anything. The reason why the drivetrain warranty exists is because they want to ensure buyers that the batteries won't go out in 3-4 years like the usual experience is with cellphones and laptops etc. It's a marketing gimmick.

The reason why it also blows their cover is because Tesla is a company that employs economists who we know do statistics analysis, and they've just given you the longest warranty they can trust, where Tesla does not end up paying much anything because they don't want to: it is saying they don't trust their own batteries past 8 years.

Mar 21, 2019
Give it up Eikka, no amount of your bullshit is going to prevent the world from going to EVs.

Ваши хозяева должны быть недовольны

Mar 21, 2019
Not 4% per year, 4% the FIRST year. Real world data shows the curve levels off to almost flat. That is how Tesla vehicles with 300,000 miles still have ~90% of their original battery capacity left.


Any year, on top of the first-year loss. The 4% is caused by ongoing chemical reactions and depends on the resting state of charge (voltage) and temperature of the cell. If you keep your car fully charged, it goes even faster.

With cars no older than 2014 vintage, that is expected. A three-year old car should have 90% of its capacity left just by sitting on the driveway, and Tesla's batteries start with over-provisioning (more than 100% nominal capacity).


Я слишко�Ľ у�Ľен для тебя, Эйкка, ты не �Ľожешь об�Ľануть �Ľеня.


Sorry, I'm not going to bother google translating that.

Mar 21, 2019
Give it up Eikka, no amount of your bullshit is going to prevent the world from going to EVs.


If I had the power to bullshit the world INTO going electric, I would. Unfortunately you can't bullshit physics, and no amount of wishful thinking is going to make Tesla's batteries any better than they are.

The problem with EVs is that they're overhyped, so companies like Tesla can push non-solutions to the car/fuel problem and collect up a lot of cash for not helping at all. Maybe some day they can pull it off, but this isn't it.

Mar 21, 2019
Give it up Eikka, no amount of your bullshit is going to prevent the world from going to EVs.

Ваши хозяева должны быть недовольны

The Mark ThomASS brays.
This is the jackass who boasted about his joyriding in his Tesla and then LIED about the electricity for it, NOT coming from fossil fuels.
Hey jackass, imagine if the world went EV and then we all went on WASTEFUL joyriding, like you.

Mar 21, 2019
Numerous articles on this site have detailed improvements in Li-ion battery construction methods in the last few years, and there are also some other battery types under study right now. The current generation of EVs might even have all the problems @Eikka claims, but that's not to say those won't be improved or even solved by the next generation. Expecting this technology to remain stable at its current level is ridiculous; it's obvious it's going to improve. So any argument against EVs that is based upon this is, as @antialias says above, fallacious.
The article suffers from a "it will all stay the same" fallacy
and so does @Eikka.

And hey, big surprise, here's @Eikka dissing electric cars and batteries again. Who'da thunk it?

Mar 21, 2019
Ford says it is spending over $11 billion on EVs in coming years. What's more, BMW is planning 25 electric models by 2025. Volkswagen is planning more than that. It wants to launch 70 battery-powered and hybrid cars by 2025. Toyota and Suzuki Motor also announced an EV partnership this week and General Motors (GM) is launching all-electric Cadillacs by 2021 or 2022. The EVs are coming. Of course, it is too early to say what that means for Tesla (TSLA). More competition, to be sure, but driving down battery costs—which is a function of the number of EVs being built—is important for all electric car makers.


https://www.barro...53170029

There will probably always be liars and scumbags like Eikka and assholecle that pretend them know something they don't. They try to create Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD), but the Tesla Model 3 is a great car and a great bargain RIGHT NOW, not maybe 10 years from now, RIGHT NOW.

Mar 21, 2019
There will probably always be liars and scumbags like Eikka and assholecle that pretend them know something they don't. They try to create Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD), but the Tesla Model 3 is a great car and a great bargain RIGHT NOW, not maybe 10 years from now, RIGHT NOW.

The Mark ThomASS, brays again.
Tell us jackass. Did YOU NOT LIE about the fact that the electricity for your WASTEFUL joyriding coming from fossil fuels.
Keep braying you LYING JACKASS.

Mar 21, 2019
The current generation of EVs might even have all the problems @Eikka claims, but that's not to say those won't be improved or even solved


I expect so. NMC cells are around the corner - they're pretty robust, it's just that they're not light enough for EV use yet, and they're a bit more expensive.

But the calendar life issue really is a tough nut to crack, because it's a tug of war between two things: energy density and chemical stability. You get one, you lose the other, and EVs desperately need more energy density because the batteries are still ridiculously big (and expensive).

Here's an example of LMN chemistry cells, as used in the Nissan Leaf and Tesla Roadster:

http://www.myniss...Life.jpg

The chart shows, if you keep the battery at 45 F it will hold for 14-15 years - but if it's kept at 75 F then the expected lifespan is just 7-8 years.

Mar 21, 2019
The thing is that early adopters don't care about the calendar life, except in the case of the Nissan Leaf which has a really small battery and it suffers from rapid range loss in hot climates.

For the kind of people who can buy EVs now and for the foreseeable future, they're toys. Very expensive toys. People buy them and THEN rationalize by dodgy math how they're "saving money" because they didn't buy a sports car that gets 18 MPG (instead of buying a Honda Civic to save even more)

The moment you have to sell an electric vehicle to the blue collar working class guy next door, who mainly buys cars at the used vehicles lot, it's really not a viable option. That's why people don't buy them. The real life math, where you have to choose between driving a fancier car and paying your rent, doesn't work out.

Mar 21, 2019
I worked the "dodgy math" BEFORE I traded in my 18 mpg sports car, so you are wrong on that front. Only you have doubt that I am saving money by using electricity instead of gasoline. Only you ignore reduced maintenance costs. Only you ignore a warranty twice as long as comparable ICE cars. Musk told you years ago he would start with the luxury EVs and work his way down to less expensive vehicles. That is exactly what he has done and is doing. You can buy a $35K Tesla Model 3 right now.

Maybe you should let the following countries know that you know everything and banning gasoline/diesel vehicles won't work:

India, China (the largest auto market globally), Japan (the third largest auto market globally) South Korea, Taiwan, U.K., Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Germany, France, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Israel and Costa Rica. In the U.S. look to Los Angeles and Seattle.

https://en.wikipe...vehicles

Mar 21, 2019
Only you have doubt that I am saving money by using electricity instead of gasoline.


For the Model 3 money, I can buy a 2019 Honda Civic and about 4500 gallons of gas, enough to drive it 160,000 miles, then after 10 years the re-sale value of the car will be between $7-8k so that more or less pays for the usual maintenance.

Meanwhile, your Model 3, which I know you didn't buy at the cheapest price point because Tesla didn't sell them for that price for the longest time, will be worth a round zero because it's not built to last. The battery will be dead, the weird dash-gadget thingy will be obsolete (and dead), and you're lucky if anyone other than scrap dealers will buy it off of you.

And that hasn't paid for the electricity yet, or the maintenance (Teslas need it too), or the Level 2 charger you probably also have/need, or the quick charger uses which aren't free for the 3.

And I don't even need to buy a Civic. I could go for much cheaper cars.

Mar 21, 2019
Meanwhile, your Model 3, which I know you didn't buy at the cheapest price point because Tesla sell them for that price for the longest time, will be worth a round zero because it's not built to last.


That is where you are dead wrong.

Tesla batteries retain over 90 percent of their charging power after 160,000 miles, according to data gathered by a Dutch-Belgium Tesla owners group.


Why do you think Tesla has such a great resale value? Because it lasts!

https://www.engad...-longer/

I will still be driving my Model 3 when your 2019 Honda Civic is recycled into electric scooters.

Mar 21, 2019
Besides, if you're talking economics, money now is more expensive than money later. The EV's cost structure is heavy on the front because of the battery, while an ICE costs over time, so if you have any investments etc. it becomes cheaper in the long run to pay less now because you collect interest for the money you didn't spend. It's also easier to fund the smaller up-front expense by credit and you end up paying less interest because you can clear your loans quicker.

That is where you are dead wrong.


I'll take your word for it. Doesn't change the end result though.

Why do you think Tesla has such a great resale value? Because it lasts!


You keep repeating the same false argument. Tesla's batteries can take a lot of miles because they're large - they're barely putting on any cycles. Time is what kills them, like all other lithium batteries. We went through this already.

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, you need to contact India, China (the largest auto market globally), Japan (the third largest auto market globally) South Korea, Taiwan, U.K., Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Germany, France, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Israel, Costa Rica, Los Angeles and Seattle and let them know what a big mistake they are all making.

You keep telling yourself the Tesla Model 3 isn't good enough and I will keep loving the one I am driving. Heck, I got to get back to work and make some more money so I can buy a Model Y next. Bye. :-)

Mar 21, 2019
I will still be driving my Model 3 when your 2019 Honda Civic is recycled into electric scooters.


If it lasts as long as my 1995 Nissan, I'll definitely eat my shorts. I'll eat your shorts as well if you want it, because I know it won't happen.

I know from personal experience from the devices that I have owned that lithium batteries die around year 9 even when you baby them, and I have tried to find ones on the market that would hold on for longer (for work related purposes, remote sensors stuff) and cannot find any that would offer both high capacity and long shelf life. The best candidate is Lithium Thionyl batteries, but those aren't rechargeable and they explode on you if you poke them with something sharp.

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.

The other 'hidden costs' of ICE vehicles is air pollution in major cities/regions which adds enormous costs/stress on both national/state budgets and health systems and also infrastructure attacked by the nasty acids/solvents etc which ICE car industry/travel creates/distributes over everything.

Moreover, your pessimistic complaints about CURRENT state of battery development is like your great grandfathers complaining about the state of ICE car development until the new generations of ICE cars came along with better, lighter, more powerful and more efficient engines/systems.

Don't you ever get depressed by your own pessimism, mate?

Anyhow, the following link should give you an idea of what is happening re exciting new developments in battery systems:

https://techxplor...nds.html

Cheer up! :)

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, you need to contact India, China (the largest auto market globally), Japan (the third largest auto market globally) South Korea, Taiwan, U.K., Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Ireland, Germany, France, Netherlands, Spain, Portugal, Israel, Costa Rica, Los Angeles and Seattle and let them know what a big mistake they are all making.


They only sell what people pay them to make. When Norwegian oil barons pay +$100k for EVs to dodge their local taxes and collect state subsidies, by all means, make them.

The main driver for EV manufacturing is playing lip service to regulators who mandate them, and the luxury market that Tesla caters to. In Denmark where the subsidies were cut, the PHEV/EV market went down 90% in a year.

Mar 21, 2019
Moreover, your pessimistic complaints about CURRENT state of battery development is like your great grandfathers complaining about the state of ICE car development until the new generations of ICE cars came along with better, lighter, more powerful and more efficient engines.


That was a time when a "better, lighter, more powerful..." ICE engine could be made in a shed by a guy with a drill press and a file. We have the power to simulate chemistry from the quantum level up and we are struggling to improve battery energy density by 4% per year (+50% a decade) while ignoring some pretty fundamental issues like the woefully inadequate global supply chain for the crucial chemicals/materials. I'm not holding my breath.

Don't you ever get depressed by your own pessimism, mate?


I'm never depressed by the state of reality, just by watching people who ignore it and continue to do stupid things because of it.

Mar 21, 2019
The other 'hidden costs' of ICE vehicles is air pollution in major cities/regions which adds enormous costs/stress on both national/state budgets and health systems and also infrastructure attacked by the nasty acids/solvents etc which ICE car industry/travel creates/distributes over everything.


True, but also a red herring. ICE engines, or fuel combusting engines in general don't necessarily pollute.

For example, one major source of air pollution, and one of the leading causes of lung cancer, is the ethanol we keep adding to fuels, because in a cold engine it produces ethanal (Acetaldehyde). The original intent was to save CO2 emissions, but that didn't work because corn ethanol is made by/with fossil fuels and causes other emissions that are equally harmful, and the main reason turned out to be political: inventing a market and a reason to subsidize agricultural surplus.

But this gets blamed on the ICE as a technology, rather than on the people who (ab)use it.

Mar 21, 2019
I'll definitely eat my shorts. I'll eat your shorts as well if you want it.


If your comments are sincere, then I have zero desire to rub your nose in it, even if I am ultimately proven correct. I can only encourage you to go beyond extrapolating from other lithium ion batteries without the Tesla battery management system and read about the real world stories of folks who drive Teslas. Yes, it is possible to abuse them and shorten their life like anything else, but I keep mine in the garage at 80% SoC when I am not driving in a relatively moderate climate. I have absorbed the data that is available and I am confident my Model 3 will last a long time. Tesla is trying to change the world, not sucker me into buying a clunker. It is a very different way of thinking.

Mar 21, 2019
And for the solutions side of it, if anyone thinks a thing like carbon tax on fuels would put an end to fuel use, they need to wake up and smell the coffee.

If a government that is trillions of dollars in debt, and continues to take on new debt faster than they can pay it off, institutes a new tax, can they afford to lose that source of tax revenue?

If you answer "No", you'll immediately see the reason why carbon taxes cannot work: the government that sets them will immediately make sure that carbon will be burned to the distant future, because they need the money and the state would collapse without the tax revenue. That's why the government keeps subsidizing fossil fuels as well - it would be terrible for the bottom line if people didn't use so much gasoline.

Mar 21, 2019
I can only encourage you to go beyond extrapolating from other lithium ion batteries without the Tesla battery management system


The battery management system hasn't got anything to it. This is a pure chemistry problem - the only way you can stop the battery from breaking down over time is by freezing it solid (but then it obviously doesn't work).

That's why they're looking into solid electrolyte batteries, because they don't have this issue. They have other issues, like not enough ionic conductivity to put out any appreciable power.

Tesla is trying to change the world, not sucker me into buying a clunker.


They already did. Tesla is a horrible company run by a P.T. Barnum type huckster who has consistently sold twice as much and delivered half on the money. They're not changing the world, they're mainly buying what others already make and claiming it their own.

The Model 3 is kinda like the first iPhone. Remember? Expensive, no appstore, no 3G...

Mar 21, 2019
A BIT OF A BIND

Electric charged by oil versus petrol charged by oil
where subsidies are withdrawn from electric charged by by oil
bit of a bind as to what to do
seeing as which ever vehicle we buy it runs on oil
its a bit of a bind
as the government gets road tax directly from petrol charged by oil
its in a bind
if it withdraws the subsidies for electric charged by oil
the sales for electric charged by oil will drop like a stone
then the manufactures in electric charged by oil will go bankrupt
and
the sales of petrol charged by oil will continue unabated
as the carbon footprint is lower on petrol charged by oil
the government
by leaving the status quo
removing subsidies for electric charged by oil
and let them sink or swim
because
the government will keep carbon emissions low and keep its road tax
so
A bit of a Bind
or
It is in a Win, win position
it
All depends, does it want to keep carbon footprints low and keep our ROAD TAX

Mar 21, 2019
read about the real world stories of folks who drive Teslas.


Hardly reliable. Nobody's had a Tesla for a very long time. The Model S has been on the market since 2012 but very few were even made until deliveries picked up in 2014 and 2015. Most of the Teslas on the road are less than 4 years old - they're practically brand new, and new cars generally don't fail very much.

The oldest one I found was one guy in an obscure forum, a post from 2015, where he complained that his 2009 Tesla Roadster battery had gone down 26% but still "This is fine; completely acceptable". Good for him, I guess.

The Roadster being an obsolete design now, doesn't count of course, but that's just the point. It's a game that corporations like PC laptop manufacturers play as well - by changing the models often enough that the bad reviews can't catch up. Musk has used this tactic to hide his failures to deliver on his promises.

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka wrote, "Tesla is a horrible company run by a P.T. Barnum type huckster."

Yet somehow folks like me love their Tesla vehicles more than any other car brand. The same person, Elon Musk, also runs SpaceX. How do you reconcile the world-beating rockets at SpaceX with Musk being a "huckster"? You can't. Elon Musk is the greatest innovator of our time. I am grateful the successes of the Apollo Project helped to attract Mr. Musk to the U.S. from South Africa. We are very fortunate to have him here. There are lessons to be learned from this experience.

"Hardly reliable."

You are very wrong about this.

Mar 21, 2019
Yes, it is possible to abuse them and shorten their life like anything else, but I keep mine in the garage at 80% SoC when I am not driving in a relatively moderate climate.


Tesla is already "abusing" them.

Initially the Model 3 was supposed to have an NMC chemistry cell, but because Panasonic couldn't make them to the required performance they put in the same NCA cells as in the Model S. The NCA cell has a known compromise of lifespan vs. capacity, and the Model S got away with it because they put in a very large and heavy battery.

The Model 3 has a smaller battery compartment and it has to be lighter, so they've had to wring more charge out of the cells. They did some of that by putting them in larger canisters to have less support material per active material, but they also increased the chemical energy density to push the battery power up even more. This has most likely made the Model 3 battery more chemically unstable than the Model S battery

Mar 21, 2019
Tesla in Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, United Kingdom
said
Tesla does not know how long its batteries last in the wild, as this car has only come out recently
Tesla also said, in The Lion Yard
Tesla does not know how much the battery costs
Tesla said
Nevertheless, do not dwell on it, as is more than the car costs!

Mar 21, 2019
How do you reconcile the world-beating rockets at SpaceX with Musk being a "huckster"? You can't. Elon Musk is the greatest innovator of our time.


The most successful cheats are those who cheat just enough so they'll have more people defending them than wanting to throw them in a river. It also helps to promise people cool stuff they really want, because then they're afraid to boo you - in case you're serious. You can continue cheating as long as you keep people wanting and hoping.

Again. Think about Steve Jobs, and how he managed to sell the world a phone that wasn't any good, cost $2,000+ to own, and was really invented by other people and merely copied by Apple.

(That is btw. the semantic difference between "innovator" and "inventor". You say innovator when you don't want to admit it wasn't their idea in the first place, and you still want to suck up to the person because of social reasons)

Mar 21, 2019
"Hardly reliable."

You are very wrong about this.


Anecdotal customer reviews are rarely reliable because those who realize they got a pig in a poke usually don't want to admit they were fooled - especially if they paid a ton of money - so they either shut up, or start to proselytize - to preach how wonderful the product is even when it's duff.

Then there's also the wannabes who don't actually own the product, but pretend that they do, and the shills who think that by "doing good for the company", they're somehow helping themselves to have the product in the future.

Tesla has played on the last point by inventing the "three step mission" where they excuse their ridiculous prices by claiming they help fund the cheaper models, which in the end they didn't because they made no profit whatsoever (intentionally: Musk got his by lending money to his own company at 10% interest).

It's basic human psychology. Buyer's remorse makes people act irrationally.

Mar 21, 2019
When a high profile sales man
in The Lion Yard
in one of the richest towns in the world
the most famous town in the world
Cambridge
tells you
he does not know how long this batteries life span is
he does not know how much this battery costs in pounds sterling
be
very, very suspicious
as
He might be about to fleece your wallet of every last farthing

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, you seem unable to consider any other perspective and that is why you fail to understand what is going on here. This is a common and lamentable problem that is a source of a great many of our problems.

We could have had this conversation 100 years ago and you would be telling me how that huckster Henry Ford will never replace the horse with his motor-car. :-)

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
complaints about CURRENT state of battery development is like your great grandfathers complaining about the state of ICE car development until the new generations of ICE cars came along with better, lighter, more powerful and more efficient engines.
That was a time when a "better, lighter, more powerful..." ICE engine could be made in a shed by a guy with a drill press and a file.....
Yet it was almost a century later that aluminium/carbon alloys/composite for stronger/lighter higher-compression engines, more compact/powerful drive-trains and computer controls systems for fuel injection, have become 'the norm'.
I'm not holding my breath.
No need to hold your breath, mate; just give new battery/electric technology equal time (as for ICE) to 'mature'. Fair?
Don't you ever get depressed by your own pessimism, mate?
I'm never depressed by the state of reality, just by watching people who ignore it and....
Twas ever thus, mate. Cheer up! :)

Mar 21, 2019
Yet it was almost a century later that aluminium/carbon alloys/composite for stronger/lighter higher-compression engines, more compact/powerful drive-trains and computer controls systems for fuel injection, have become 'the norm'.


But that's a different argument.

ICE cars were pretty much duff at the turn of the 20th century - they were difficult, dirty, and very expensive. They barely existed - then in 20 years all that changed.

We've had electric cars for more than 100 years now - longer than ICE cars for that matter - and they've had plenty of time to improve. Yet we're still at the "difficult, dirty and very expensive" stage of development, and people seem to think Elon Musk is the next Henry Ford - if he just paints them black and we all pretend really hard.

If history is anything to come by, the Battery Electric Vehicle is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car, and the world is waiting for a better portable generator to come along.

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
'hidden costs' of ICE vehicles is air pollution in major cities/regions which adds enormous costs/stress on both national/state budgets and health systems and also infrastructure attacked by the nasty acids/solvents etc..
True, but also a red herring. ICE engines, or fuel combusting engines in general don't necessarily pollute.
Re-check your 'reality', @Eikka. :)
For example, one major source of air pollution, and one of the leading causes of lung cancer, is the ethanol we keep adding to fuels, because in a cold engine it produces ethanal (Acetaldehyde). The original intent was to save CO2 emissions, but that didn't work because corn ethanol is made by/with fossil fuels and causes other emissions that are equally harmful, and the main reason turned out to be political: inventing a market and a reason to subsidize agricultural surplus.
Talk about "red herrings", mate! You're 'selective'; ignoring overall unavoidable pollution from ICE/Oil industry. :)

Mar 21, 2019
Talk about "red herrings", mate! You are 'selective' and ignoring overall unavoidable pollution from ICE. Bad.


There is no such thing. For example, running an ICE on methane produces no NOx, no particulate matter, and if you allow for bio/synthetic methane no net CO2.

ICE can be made to produce practically no harmful emissions, which is why forklifts in warehouses run on liquid propane.

from ICE/Oil industry.


That's shifting the goalposts. You were originally talking about the vehicles, not the infrastructure used to support them, which is also begging the question by demanding that they be fueled by oil.

Mar 21, 2019
Eikka, is putting a more realistic
real world
down to earth
when you wake up in the morning
and
you think you have a full battery
for
that weekend with the kidds
the children, RealityCheck
and
you step in your car
and
it battery only has half the charge
to take the kids on that weekend retreat at the beach
how are you going to tell the children, RealityCheck
their electric car
Just will not fill up in seconds like that old rust bucket used to get them to the beach on time!

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
a century later ... aluminium/carbon alloys/composite for stronger/lighter higher-compression engines, more compact/powerful drive-trains and computer controls systems for fuel injection, have become 'the norm'.
But that's a different argument.
No, mate; this point was re development period for ANY tech. :)
ICE cars were pretty much duff at the turn of the 20th century - they were difficult, dirty, and very expensive....
Yes, evolution/development is specific according to the tech involved. So?
We've had electric cars for more than 100 years now - longer than ICE cars for that matter - ... If history is anything to come by, the Battery Electric Vehicle is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car, and the world is waiting for a better portable generator to come along.
Not so, mate; there was a HUGE jump from Lead-acid to Lithium tech (latter much more compact/lighter/more capacity)...and my link earlier indicated another 'jump'. Cheer up, mate! :)

Mar 21, 2019
here was a HUGE jump from Lead-acid to Lithium tech


If you ignore NiCD and NiMH in between, plus a host of other battery chemistries like Nickel-Iron batteries, and the fact that lithium batteries started out pretty bad, and most of them still are quite bad in at least one respect, but they have special applications.

And lithium batteries are also a very old invention, with first experiments made around 1912, but it was such a difficult chemistry it took until 1970's for the first real applications to come about, and 1980's when the first rechargeable lithium-ion batteries came about, and until 1996 when it was good enough to put into an electric car (A prototype Nissan EV) - though it was still so heavy they had to take out the rear seats to not break the curb weight limits.

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
ignoring overall unavoidable pollution from ICE/Oil industry.
For example, running an ICE on methane produces no NOx, no particulate matter, and if you allow for bio/synthetic methane no net CO2.
Yes, I already realised that option for ICEs [please note: I edited my relevant comment, now included in your above quote of same to reflect my edit while you were composing your response.).
ICE can be made to produce practically no harmful emissions, which is why forklifts in warehouses run on liquid propane.
Yes, I realised that too. The point is that ICEs use fossil and/or biofuels/gas as you say; but the overall industry for production/distribution/burning fuels is 'dirty' (also, electric engines do not need lubrication etc like ICEs do.
from ICE/Oil industry.
You were originally talking about the vehicles, not the infrastructure used to support them,.. Yes, my bad. But overall disadvantages/costs of ICE industry is relevant, yes? :)

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
here was a HUGE jump from Lead-acid to Lithium tech
If you ignore NiCD and NiMH in between, plus a host of other battery chemistries like Nickel-Iron batteries, and the fact that lithium batteries started out pretty bad, and most of them still are quite bad in at least one respect, but they have special applications.
That was understood. The point was that the DEVELOPMENT ended in vastly superior battery for cars than lead-acid etc; including the development of whatever the 'enabling' tech was that allowed that improvement in battery techs of all sorts from their earlier stages in their evolution.

The point remains, you must allow for ongoing developments and not just complain about current state of the art re batteries.

Cheer up! :)

Mar 21, 2019
As Oxygen is paramagnetic
and
Nitrogen is diamagnetic
using
Superconducting magnetic fields
with sufficient strength
it is possible
in the carburettor to separate Oxygen from Nitrogen
there by
only combusting Oxygen with fuel
only
Producing harmless plant food, CO2

Mar 21, 2019
If history is anything to come by, the Battery Electric Vehicle is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car, and the world is waiting for a better portable generator to come along.


Eikka, you have never been in a Tesla, just admit it. Test drive a Tesla Model 3 AWD with 19 inch wheels just like the one I have and then try to come back and try to tell me how it, "is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car." I promise you, it is not, it is amazing.

Mar 21, 2019
Using diesel engine piston stroke proportions
using longer stroke petrol engines
with air compressors
it is possible
to over fill the cylinder
and with a smaller amount of fuel
expand that combustion
greater than a small stroke engine
there by
reducing fuel consumption
increasing power output
and
with its longer stroke
slowing its tick over
enabling
this petrol engine pull heavy weights like a diesel
With a lower fuel consumption

Mar 21, 2019
Yes, evolution/development is specific according to the tech involved. So?


Electric cars as a technology is not a question of engineering the better mousetrap - the car itself is already made, the basic mechanism is already as good as it can reasonably get for the particular use. There's nothing to do except wait for the better battery to come along, and there's nothing revolutionary going on - simply physicists and chemists grinding their nose on the wheel to try and gain better understanding about the fundamental workings of the universe so they could make stuff work, and that unfortunately has become highly esoteric stuff. There are no more easy discoveries - we've hit diminishing returns.

No Tesla or Elon Musk is making that process any faster, because they're just making money for themselves by pretending to help.

And, it's more than likely that batteries are a dead end, because of how they work - stuffing in more energy just makes them more unstable.

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
their electric car
Just will not fill up in seconds like that old rust bucket used to get them to the beach on time!
At least the lead in the fuel that poisoned whole generations of children, and affected their nervous system development/functioning, will no longer be part of the picture when (cheap to buy, but expensive to run) ICE 'rust buckets' are replaced by cheap electric 'rust buckets', hey!

Anyhow, the battery/charging tech is still developing/improving (pls see my link earlier to @Eikka for example of relevant research and developments).

And not having to suffer breakdowns in ICE 'rust buckets' (on a stinking hot day on the way to/back from beach) because of radiator overheating and/or engine oil leaks and/or transmission oil leaks and/or broken pistons/rods/block and/or rusted out exhaust/muffler and/or clogged up fuel filters etc, is reasons enough for preferring electric 'rust buckets' to ICE 'rust buckets', hey!

Surf's up! :)

Mar 21, 2019
If history is anything to come by, the Battery Electric Vehicle is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car, and the world is waiting for a better portable generator to come along.


Eikka, you have never been in a Tesla, just admit it. Test drive a Tesla Model 3 AWD with 19 inch wheels just like the one I have and then try to come back and try to tell me how it, "is the equivalent to the Stanley steam car." I promise you, it is not, it is amazing.


The Stanley Steamer was a brilliant car - it outperformed all the internal combustion engine cars back in the day, beating them in hill-climbing competitions, speed, fuel economy, and being able to accelerate at full torque from zero speed without a clutch or gears. It was able to start from dead cold in under five minutes and required no complicated starting procedures - just press a button and the boiler goes on.

It was in every respect well ahead of the curve - until it wasn't.

Mar 21, 2019
The innovation and development
of this petrol and diesel engine
is only just beginning
until
a power source
to charge this electric motors battery is found
it
is more environmentally friendly
to burn oil
internally in pistons directly
rather
than indirectly
to
finally charge batteries
where there are even further loss's
converting
this batteries energy back to electricity
to
Drive this electric motor

Mar 21, 2019
Quantum of acceleration, RealityCheck
@granville583762.
their electric car
Just will not fill up in seconds like that old rust bucket used to get them to the beach on time!
At least the lead in the fuel that poisoned whole generations of children, and affected their nervous system development/functioning, will no longer be part of the picture when (cheap to buy, but expensive to run) ICE 'rust buckets' are replaced by cheap electric 'rust buckets', hey!

There is an alternative electric car in the offing, RealityCheck
that does not require
oil to charge its batteries, RealityCheck
because
RealityCheck, this is a science forum
This is phys.org

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
Yes, evolution/development is specific according to the tech involved. So?
There's nothing to do except wait for the better battery to come along, and there's nothing revolutionary going on - ...
Aren't you aware of all the various factors being researched/developed to do with how the electrodes can be 'protected/enhanced' etc by smart-coatings/alloying/doping etc etc? And also the integral electrolyte types which can do their job without much degrading etc like previous ones? Mate, it's all up for grabs now. The surrounding/enabling chemistry/physics/tech developments have breached down to molecular/atomic levels which have b=never been attained before. Knowledge/Production methods for all sorts of META-materials is now reaching 'critical mass' stage. As is the management/control systems for internal activity/efficiency at various load, charge/discharge conditions etc. Cheer up. mate! :)

Mar 21, 2019
Point being that fuel cell technology is coming along quite nicely, and it has two major advantages over batteries:

1) The fuel tank can be arbitrarily sized without a weight and cost penalty, and it doesn't get smaller over time
2) The fuel by itself is inert - as opposed to batteries which can discharge within themselves and catch fire or explode

You're still running an electric car, but it won't have half a ton of very expensive and very heavy batteries to haul, and you won't need to plug it in for hours and hours.

Aren't you aware of all the various...


It's a long road from the lab to the market, and one out of a thousand good ideas make it. I'll see when they get there, a decade later.

I've been reading about these things since the 90's, and while the theory may be sound the practical applications are long coming.

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
The innovation and development
of this petrol and diesel engine
is only just beginning
until
a power source
to charge this electric motors battery is found
it
is more environmentally friendly
to burn oil
internally in pistons directly
rather
than indirectly
to
finally charge batteries
where there are even further loss's
converting
this batteries energy back to electricity
to
Drive this electric motor
Solar/Wind power generation will replace fossil plants, mate. No pollution involved. And 'ICE-Electric Hybrids' which currently use on-board fossil burning energy will also be replaced by All-Electric cars that charged up their even=better batteries with solar/wind from their owners' own rooftop solar panels and home battery system to augment solar/wind electricity from community/private industry run renewable power plants.

Yep, Granville, you're right when you also said:
this is a science forum
This is phys.org


Cheers. :)

Mar 21, 2019
Quantum of acceleration, RealityCheck
You have oft heard
of this alternative propulsive automotive power source
as, RealityCheck
even though
you think
you have not heard of this
even though you think you do not know of its mechanics
it is just your false perception, RealityCheck
because
retract your self
from your nightly crusade, RealityCheck
and
apply your self
on this kind of innovation and invention, RealityCheck
is more beneficial to your sanity
That was sourly tested the other night

Mar 21, 2019
When you know of alternative power source
which is infinitely greater than windmills
produces 100BHP
250BHP
or
1000s of Giga watts
in a small industrial unit
That produces no pollution, RealityCheck
you
have a different outlook
to
Windmills and solar panels

Mar 21, 2019
@Eikka.
1) The fuel tank can be arbitrarily sized without a weight and cost penalty, and it doesn't get smaller over time
2) The fuel by itself is inert - as opposed to batteries which can discharge within themselves and catch fire or explode
Its a question of comparative benefits/utility etc. Also many accidents with ICE cars on freeways also create firestorms engulfing many vehicles; especially a problem in tunnels. And power/cost/weight/safety is also being improved; and weight/cost are more than offset by all the savings/benefits to owners/community/sustainability etc, as already seen.
very expensive and very heavy batteries to haul, and you won't need to plug it in for hours and hours.
All very well, mate; but the noise produced by ICEs are still a problem in densely populated city/urban areas. And the charging time is reducing all the time.
I've been reading about these things since the 90's,...
But CRITICAL MASS of tech/support is only recent. :)

Mar 21, 2019
When all vehicles convert to electric
there
is insufficient power stations to supply the energy supply, RealityCheck
We have barely sufficient power stations to supply are current demand

Mar 21, 2019
This electric revolution

And that
one and all
is the finality
for this electric revolution
because
with out 1000s of extra giga watt power stations
this electric revolution
is
Just a dream

Mar 21, 2019
The fuel by itself is inert
@Eikka gets caught outright lying. Anything that punctures the gas tank releases gasoline to the air, after which it's not inert at all, as the many deaths from vehicle gasoline fires after collisions attest.

Personally, since I don't have an EV, I keep a fire extinguisher behind the driver's seat ready and easy to grab. And the biggest ignition source is the lead-acid battery, which is only used to start the engine.

One gallon of gasoline mixed with air is the equivalent of a stick of dynamite.

Now, you were spewing what lies exactly?

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
When all vehicles convert to electric
there
is insufficient power stations to supply the energy supply, RealityCheck
We have barely sufficient power stations to supply are current demand
That would be true IF solar/wind power industry did NOT develop concurrently to cater for electric car requirements. Also, the distributed nature of solar/wind on home/factory/public building ROOFTOPS is accelerating apace; and act as local/domestic power source/charge-points for electric cars. That is also enhanced by the larger centralised community/state/private enterprise solar/wind parks generating massive amounts of electricity and replacing coal/other fossil fuels power plants as they get older and decommissioned. It's a question of govts having the foresight/will to plan ahead (instead of delay/sabotage like some have to date) proper transition from dirty unsustainable power/cars paradigm to clean and renewable power/cars paradigm. Good luck to us all. :)

Mar 21, 2019
RealityCheck

Have you calculated the extra demand
on the national grid
that supplies the electric to garages
industrial estates
house holds
offices
apartments
RealityCheck, have you thought of the turmoil
to updating
the existing infrastructure
to cope
with
this enormous
increased demand
the mind boggles
of the disruption
to fit this in
there will be holes in the road by workmen
the like you cannot imagine, RealityCheck
this will be the most effective
Traffic calming the world has ever seen

Mar 21, 2019
This United Kingdom is not California

I defy you to put a solar panel on an average British roof
as
how well does it work on a wind swept soggy Welsh roof
On an average day in Wales, RealityCheck

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
Have you calculated the extra demand
on the national grid
that supplies the electric to garages
industrial estates
house holds
offices
apartments
I just pointed out that rooftop solar on commercial/domestic buildings is increasing apace; and some enterprises/homes are already providing much of their own power needs for apace heating/air conditioning, lighting etc. So no "calculation" needed when industries/people are "doing it for themselves" already. The additional requirements for overall grid stability/supply is also being gradually supplied by major solar/wind 'park' projects to replace some decommissioned fossil power plants.
have you thought of the turmoil
to updating
the existing infrastructure
Progress is always disruptive/costly to some degree; but the costs-benefit case is already there for this particular progress.
there will be holes in the road by workmen
the like you cannot imagine,
What/Why "holes in the road", Granville? :)

Mar 21, 2019
For instance RealityCheck
this Spring Solstice
even though
it was
it was cloudy all day
so
its capacity was greatly diminished
and today, RealityCheck
was a very good day
as
17°
on the first day of Spring is not to be sneezed at
In these Shires

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
This United Kingdom is not California

I defy you to put a solar panel on an average British roof
as
how well does it work on a wind swept soggy Welsh roof
On an average day in Wales,
You'd be surprised how much solar power can be had even at those latitudes, mate. Especially with even better solar panel tech on the way/in development. Moreover, you will note that Britain is 'big on wind power' projects. Hence the balance of sources will be determined by the local/regional circumstances (that was always allowed for in discussing alternative energy sources). Even the fossil power sources will play a role into the future for some very disadvantaged countries/regions far north/south. That was also long allowed for when discussing 'mix' of sources which would be required for each country/region on a case-by-case basis. If you/some others here revisit the discussions over past years here, you'll see that all your 'concerns' have already been addressed. :)

Mar 21, 2019
What/Why "holes in the road", Granville?

You obviously, RealityCheck
do not live in Britain
as
any thing
water
electric
gas
telecommunications
all
require
in this Britain
holes in the road
with the obligatory single lane traffic
and 4 way traffic lights
for weeks on end
RealityCheck, you need to cross the pond
as
You're in for a reality check, RealityCheck

Mar 21, 2019

Our windmills are most effective of shore where the wind is always blowing
the ones in farmers fields
wind farms
always only have insufficient actually turning
as the 20 at Dungeness
Dungeness nuclear power station
strangely
Is transforming into gas fired turbines
Which is certainly not renewables

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
What/Why "holes in the road", Granville?
You obviously
do not live in Britain
as
any thing
water
electric
gas
telecommunications
all
require
in this Britain
holes in the road
with the obligatory single lane traffic
and 4 way traffic lights
for weeks on end... It's not about re-doing the distribution system, but rather about sourcing the electricity to be distributed over existing grid. Ie, large solar/wind power plants will feed into the nearest inteconnector to them, not be separately fed to existing homes/customers on existing grid over new distribution networks UNLESS these are new homes and existing distribution networks do not exist already. And rooftop solar on business/factories/homes/warehouses etc will feed into their own power board, not via any roads unless they are new developments requiring new distribution add-on to nearest existing/expanded network.

Cheers.

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
Our windmills are most effective of shore where the wind is always blowing
the ones in farmers fields
wind farms
always only have insufficient actually turning
as the 20 at Dungeness
Yes, that was factored into the overall supply from many sources, including those windmills and solar elsewhere and fossil fuel power plants as necessitated to cover the country/regional needs with a suitable 'mix' of sources'. The solar/wind will be increasing as further improvements in both production/tech get better 'economies/efficiencies of scale' in both sources and customers.
Dungeness nuclear power station
is strangely
Is transforming into gas fired turbines
Yes, as I already mentioned, the local/regional 'mix' of sources will be determined by necessity/variations in local/regional circumstances. Also at this relatively early stage in the energy re-evaluation/reforming will be cases where the TRANSITION period may depend on fossil until full wind/solar is done.

Mar 21, 2019
REFORMATING an earlier post. Thanks.

@granville583762.
What/Why "holes in the road", Granville?
You obviously
do not live in Britain
as
any thing
water
electric
gas
telecommunications
all
require
in this Britain
holes in the road
with the obligatory single lane traffic
and 4 way traffic lights
for weeks on end...
It's not about re-doing the distribution system, but rather about sourcing the electricity to be distributed over existing grid. Ie, large solar/wind power plants will feed into the nearest inteconnector to them, not be separately fed to existing homes/customers on existing grid over new distribution networks UNLESS these are new homes and existing distribution networks do not exist already. And rooftop solar on business/factories/homes/warehouses etc will feed into their own power board, not via any roads unless they are new developments requiring new distribution add-on to nearest existing/expanded network.

Cheers.

Mar 21, 2019
This United Kingdom has existed for 1000s of years
every square inch is accounted for
there is no more free land
land is at premium prices
the builders get more houses than can fit on the land
the farmers cannot spare arable land for windmills
or solar power
we need this land for building and food
our electricity
has to be nuclear power
gas turbines
as we buy nuclear from France
and in Scotland and the north
hydro electric
as this is where our reservoirs are
Windmills and solar hardly get a look in

As this is before electric cars

Mar 21, 2019
The fuel by itself is inert
@Eikka gets caught outright lying. Anything that punctures the gas tank releases gasoline to the air, after which it's not inert at all, as the many deaths from....
HAWW..HEE..
Now, you were spewing what lies exactly?

Da Schitts, the "meat" gobbler, brays.
Yes, Schitts, gasoline needs air to combust, unlike a lithium-ion cell which, when they fail, can heat up on their own and explode.
Now, go talk to your sock puppets and stop soiling the forum with the shite from between your ears.

Mar 21, 2019
1000s of Fusion reactors

There are huge areas
but
they are managed by the forestry commission
tightly packed pine forests for wood
then area of outstanding beauty are off limits
in Britain windmills and solar does not cut it
no matter how tempting it looks
as this government
is realising the need for a 1000 nuclear power stations to avoid power cuts
which in the future
will be
1000s of Fusion reactors

Mar 21, 2019
@granville583762.
the farmers cannot spare arable land for windmills
or solar power
we need this land for building and food
Actually, the ample land between the towers remains perfectly useable for haymaking, grazing, greenhouses, wildlife, recreational activity etc (with the further bonus that the electricity is right there, 'on tap' and cheaper for whatever activity may require it). Unlike the situation with nuclear/fossil plants; which poison the surrounding land/air and water (surface streams/underground aquifers); and make vast acreages unsuitable for agriculture/domestic housing etc (especially when the open-air coal storage/handling/access etc 'footprint' AND the mining/transport of said coal is included).

It's a matter of embracing the future: cheaper, safer. cleaner, more sustainable, more/better/healthier/safer jobs, distribution of wealth/amenities better than previous centralised polluting nuclear/fossil plants/fuels; and proper planning/implementation. :)

Mar 22, 2019

@Eikka gets caught outright lying. Anything that punctures the gas tank releases gasoline to the air, after which it's not inert at all, as the many deaths from vehicle gasoline fires after collisions attest.


That's besides the point: the fuel by itself IS inert. It can't do anything outside the "fire triangle" of fuel, oxygen and heat. Meanwhile, a lithium battery has the fuel, the oxidizer, and the ability to self-heat to the point of combustion.

Lithium batteries become more reactive the more energy you pack into them, so as they improve in weight, size, capacity and power, they necessarily become worse and worse for safety to the point that you might as well be carrying gunpowder. This isn't dependent on the battery type either - it doesn't need to be a lithium-ion battery - it applies to all batteries which rely on storing energy in highly reactive electrodes sandwiched together with a micron thin separator in between. Break the separator and it goes.

Mar 22, 2019
There are of course "safe" batteries that can withstand stabbing with a knife of being cut with scissors, but they all rely on a simple trick: low energy density.

When the energy per volume/mass is low enough, they can't heat themselves enough to sustain a runaway chemical reaction. There's some localized heating, a wisp of smoke and that's it. The battery burns/melts the short circuit away and may even continue operating.

That also makes them unsuitable for actual use in electric cars, because for the "safe" chemistries you'd typically need 2 - 2.5 times more batteries to go the same distance.

Mar 22, 2019
The argument against lithium batteries is kinda like the argument against nuclear reactors.

They started with 20 Megawatt naval reactors and observed that they were safe, because in a meltdown the core would simply pool up inside the reactor and fizzle out. So they took the same design and made it 50 times bigger - but whoops, now it's too big to contain itself and you get the China Syndrome, and you have to design in core catchers and backup systems and backup backup systems and the whole thing just gets out of hand and turns into an unwieldy monster. It was cute when it was small, now it's just a problem that people want to get rid of.

Same thing happened with electric cars. The Henney Kilowatt, or the EV1 etc. were cute proofs of concept, but then they scaled it up and you got a Model S that will spontaneously combust when you run it over a piece of metal lying on the road. That's no good.

Mar 22, 2019
"Actually, the ample land between the towers remains perfectly useable for haymaking, grazing, greenhouses, wildlife,....."

Actually there is ample evidence that the subsonic pulses generated by the towers are harmful at close distances.

Mar 22, 2019
First of all I would be willing to bet that 99% of electric car sales are 3rd cars sold to people in private homes. In other words virtue signaling devices that are not relied upon for 24/7 critical transportation needs. Secondly, How can people in most multifamily housing developments recharge their vehicles? Who will pay for the needed recharging stations?

Mar 22, 2019
RealityCheck, the reality

The E-Golf, despite all the protestations
as
you have probably heard
the good news
that
if all the windmills and solar panels are in place
well RealityCheck
you've heard the good news
from the horse's mouth
so to speak
As Volkswagen is far bigger than Tesla
https://www.volks...e/e-golf

Mar 25, 2019
For a sports car that gets 18 mpg, and still does not perform as well as a Tesla


A sports car can perform all day. A Tesla only performs (ludicurous mode) at the top 5% of the battery. False comparison.

Besides, comparing straight line acceleration is not a really good metric for "sports cars". If you're running on skinny low-resistance wheels and stock brakes, trying to drive like you were in a Porsche 911 will only end you up in a ditch - the Model 3 is not a sports car, it's a compact car with a gimmick - like putting a bottle of nitrous into a Ford Fiesta.

Must be why I was able to smoke that Porsche 911 Carrera S last sunday......in my Tesla Model 3 AWD NON performance, with about a half charged battery....that Porsche sure made a lot of noise though.

Mar 25, 2019
And, yes, Eikka lies.....Eikka also drives a sluggish, noisy, stinky crap car......

Mar 27, 2019
Must be why I was able to smoke that Porsche 911 Carrera S last sunday......in my Tesla Model 3 AWD NON performance, with about a half charged battery....that Porsche sure made a lot of noise though.


That's nice, but you're still making a specious argument. If you really cared about saving energy, you wouldn't drive like you had a hole in your head, and you wouldn't care about having sports-car performance, so that puts the comparison to some 18 MPG car entirely irrelevant.

..Eikka also drives a sluggish, noisy, stinky crap car......


With the price of your car, I can genuinely buy ten like mine. From my perspective, being able to "smoke a Porsche" has about as much value or merit as owning a bathtub full of margarine. Why?

It seems you're just protesting too much.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more