Electric Vehicle tipping point soon?

[K1052]

Also, everyone has a different definition of freedom. Some people never leave their 20 mile comfort zone, living in the big city, and considering the television to be the best portal to what the world has to offer. Others expect a vehicle to take them there. You'll never convince the other they are wrong. When anyone tells me "why don't you just fly across the country" it makes me wonder what they actually enjoy about any traveling vacation if they are simply missing it all. The trip is half the fun.

I've driven cross country before and it's something I that I can easily leave behind if it's going to eat a few days of my schedule. I cannot, for instance, take a long weekend in NYC or New Orleans like I plan to later this year and actually enjoy myself. I can be at my favorite Miami hotel in 6 hours sipping a drink by the pool instead of the 20 hour straight through drive (that I have done) which lives me spent. Realistically I'm unlikely to drive more than a couple hundred miles in radius from home anymore because a) after a lifetime in the midwest I know what it looks like and b) airports.

 

[Yuriman]

Would just like to throw out there that small SUVs will necessarily cost a lot more than sedan and fastback electrics, because of aerodynamics. With a gasoline car, most people don't think too much about getting 25 vs 40mpg, but in an EV, that's the difference between 100 and 160 miles (on the highway) with the same battery. Vehicles with sloped rear ends and lower roof lines have much lower aerodynamic drag.

 

[PricklyPete]

I've driven cross country before and it's something I that I can easily leave behind if it's going to eat a few days of my schedule. I cannot, for instance, take a long weekend in NYC or New Orleans like I plan to later this year and actually enjoy myself. I can be at my favorite Miami hotel in 6 hours sipping a drink by the pool instead of the 20 hour straight through drive (that I have done) which lives me spent. Realistically I'm unlikely to drive more than a couple hundred miles in radius from home anymore because a) after a lifetime in the midwest I know what it looks like and b) airports.

I would have said the same thing...but kids. My wife heads to her parent's beach house in SC with our kids every summer for 3 weeks (an activity I fully support). We tried flying a few times...but it was a disaster trying to pack, let alone go through the airport process with 3 weeks of kids stuff. I'm happy to spend a couple days driving them there and back. That also gives my wife access to a vehicle that can haul the 3 kids (all in car seats) the whole time she is there (they often head inland to her families' farm several times during the visit for various activities). We stay at relatives in St. Louis on the way there and back and my flight to get back to Denver and return to SC 3 weeks later generally costs less than $300.

I spent less than $130 each way on diesel fuel for my wife's Q7. So the round trip (including my airfare and food along the drive) costs us something like $700 max. The cost of airfare for 5 people plus large vehicle rental for 3 weeks, let alone the stress involved, makes driving preferable from my standpoint.

My point is that some people have valid (from their perspective at least) reasons to want to be able to easily drive across the country. In reality though, we are pretty close to this being doable (obviously already is for some routes/cars). So i think in the next decade, this argument will slowly diminish to nothing.

 

[K1052]

I would have said the same thing...but kids. My wife heads to her parent's beach house in SC with our kids every summer for 3 weeks (an activity I fully support). We tried flying a few times...but it was a disaster trying to pack, let alone go through the airport process with 3 weeks of kids stuff. I'm happy to spend a couple days driving them there and back. That also gives my wife access to a vehicle that can haul the 3 kids (all in car seats) the whole time she is there (they often head inland to her families' farm several times during the visit for various activities). We stay at relatives in St. Louis on the way there and back and my flight to get back to Denver and return to SC 3 weeks later generally costs less than $300.

I spent less than $130 each way on diesel fuel for my wife's Q7. So the round trip (including my airfare and food along the drive) costs us something like $700 max. The cost of airfare for 5 people plus large vehicle rental for 3 weeks, let alone the stress involved, makes driving preferable from my standpoint.

My point is that some people have valid (from their perspective at least) reasons to want to be able to easily drive across the country. In reality though, we are pretty close to this being doable (obviously already is for some routes/cars). So i think in the next decade, this argument will slowly diminish to nothing.

Your use case is definitely different than mine, something which I understand. My response was more tailored to the post I quoted that inferred us city dwellers are all couch potatoes who never really get see the world just because we don't all have an ICV in our parking spaces.

I think increases in energy density, falling costs, and improvements in fast charging will in large part make many remaining concerns with range and charge time moot. Tesla has a reasonable start on the problem and others will eventually start catching up.

 

[PricklyPete]

Your use case is definitely different than mine, something which I understand. My response was more tailored to the post I quoted that inferred us city dwellers are all couch potatoes who never really get see the world just because we don't all have an ICV in our parking spaces.

I think increases in energy density, falling costs, and improvements in fast charging will in large part make many remaining concerns with range and charge time moot. Tesla has a reasonable start on the problem and others will eventually start catching up.

Agreed. If my wife's TDI is not bought back by Audi, I really hope to hold off buying another vehicle until we can replace it with an electric vehicle that will serve this purpose.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Don't get me started about SoCal NutJobs.

They are toys. For adults. There's nothing wrong with toys for adults but that they can do one thing well doesn't make them a replacement for all the things they can't do, so you either need another vehicle or added burden finding alternate means of Getting Things Done, unless you just like to live a handicapped life and if you choose that, it is your right to do so.

If 99% of your driving is less than 100 miles at a time why wouldn't an EV work for you? You could always rent a car for the other 1% of your needs. Your logic is why people buy a 3/4 ton pickup truck because they occasionally go to Home Depot for a bag of dirt.

Honestly, an EV would work for me just fine. Even if I drive it to work, let it sit all day and drive it home, I could plug it in overnight and repeat the next morning with no trouble at all. My commute is about 70 miles round trip.

In the past 12 months our longest trip away from home by car was less than 120 miles. This is something an EV like the Tesla could accomplish easily. Definitely not a toy.

 

[Rifter]

Electric isnt even going to take over, at least not in the long run. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are the next big thing. The waiting to charge or even having a place to charge is just to big of a hassle IMO. People will move to hydrogen that they can fill up in 3 min just like gas. Convenience is going to win out here.

 

[Rifter]

The true tipping point will be when total cost of ownership will fall below cost of traditional gas vehicles. That's when it'll begin tipping. At that point I would also expect infrastructure to start catching up. I know a lot of people are optimistic, but I still think we're quite a few years away from that point. Electric cars are still more expensive than gas ones, and while cost of driving electric car is less than gasser, charging infrastructure is still not there, charging is still slow, and you still need gasser for road trips.

I agree, we are at least 20-30 years from the tipping point.

 

[MuchTooSexy]

Electric isnt even going to take over, at least not in the long run. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are the next big thing. The waiting to charge or even having a place to charge is just to big of a hassle IMO. People will move to hydrogen that they can fill up in 3 min just like gas. Convenience is going to win out here.

one could argue that ICE forces you to go to a gas station where you have to touch that nasty pump handle and worry about why the attendant is in a box behind bulletproof glass. if you can charge your EV at home, you avoid the hassle of having to go to that gas/hydrogen station. this is a different kind of convenience. i'm not sure which will win out.

my feeling is that we won't reach that tipping point for a different reason. and that would be because not all people can charge from the convenience of home. mostly people who live in condos and apartments that don't currently have charging facilities.

 

[Yuriman]

I'm hoping private ownership of cars goes out of fashion and makes it a moot point. Why buy a car to sit idle in your driveway 95% of its time if you can summon one at any time, which best suits your needs, for less total cost? Getting rid of a dedicated driver will go a long way to reducing that cost.

 

[PeterScott]

Electric isnt even going to take over, at least not in the long run. Hydrogen fuel cell cars are the next big thing. The waiting to charge or even having a place to charge is just to big of a hassle IMO. People will move to hydrogen that they can fill up in 3 min just like gas. Convenience is going to win out here.

Hydrogen will never get off the ground for personal transportation. The Physics of Electrolysis, compression, transportation, Fuel Cell energy production means you go 3X the distance using electricity in an EV, than using it to create Hydrogen to use in an FCV.

So it will at minimum cost 3X the fueling expense, just on the input electricity costs (ignoring many others).
You will need 3X the electric production infrastructure to support Hydrogen production.
You will get 3X the CO2 production from that electricity production.

Clinging to the fuel station model will not support the broken economics of hydrogen. That will just be extra markup on top of the 3X input costs.

Hydrogen is dead in the water for personal transportation. It might find some niche case uses, but that is it.

 

[Scarpozzi]

They can't even make batteries for cellphones that aren't guaranteed to explode...imagine sitting on a 400lb battery that catches fire...

As for the electric car industry, I'm sure they'll keep working the development on them. I can see a major player swooping in and buying a smaller company if any of them come up with anything ground-breaking. Until someone can develop a vehicle that charges quickly, easily and has enough range for cross-country travel....it's gonna be tough.

Reading the woes about finding Tesla parts would make me totally avoid buying from a smaller company:
https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/03/07/repairing-my-tesla-model-s-has-been-an-utter-night.aspx

It doesn't make a lot of sense to buy a vehicle with such a steep sticker price if you're not saving substantial money on fuel or maintenance. My understanding is that even if fuel were free (electricity), parts and maintenance on most of the current electric vehicles are so expensive, it's still not economically wise to purchase one...unless you just want to drive around silently.

 

[K1052]

They can't even make batteries for cellphones that aren't guaranteed to explode...imagine sitting on a 400lb battery that catches fire...

Gasoline cars catch fire with remarkable frequency. A number of years back watched a friend's Camaro immolate itself in the parking lot of a busy restaurant...which was interesting.

 

[Yuriman]

Regarding cost, these 6 grand Nissan Leafs I see on Craigslist are pretty enticing. And, lightly used replacement batteries can be found for under 3 grand. I've seen people connect two in parallel for 200 miles of range.

 

[Viper GTS]

Gasoline cars catch fire with remarkable frequency. A number of years back watched a friend's Camaro immolate itself in the parking lot of a busy restaurant...which was interesting.

I tend to share the sentiment that LiIon chemistry batteries tendency to try to release all their energy at once is a little disconcerting. But:

Gasoline is not going to improve, you'll still be lugging around 10+ gallons of flammable (by necessity) liquid that gets pressurized, pumped through rubber hoses, and then lit on fire.

And battery technology is still improving:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170906170152.htm

No matter what happens cars are still going to kill people. They will probably kill far fewer people than they do today (particularly when emissions are accounted for) but the nature of moving meat bags at acceptable speed means death is inevitable.

Viper GTS

 

[PeterScott]

They can't even make batteries for cellphones that aren't guaranteed to explode...imagine sitting on a 400lb battery that catches fire...

As for the electric car industry, I'm sure they'll keep working the development on them. I can see a major player swooping in and buying a smaller company if any of them come up with anything ground-breaking. Until someone can develop a vehicle that charges quickly, easily and has enough range for cross-country travel....it's gonna be tough.

Reading the woes about finding Tesla parts would make me totally avoid buying from a smaller company:
https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/03/07/repairing-my-tesla-model-s-has-been-an-utter-night.aspx

It doesn't make a lot of sense to buy a vehicle with such a steep sticker price if you're not saving substantial money on fuel or maintenance. My understanding is that even if fuel were free (electricity), parts and maintenance on most of the current electric vehicles are so expensive, it's still not economically wise to purchase one...unless you just want to drive around silently.

Nice try at a good old fashioned FUD post.

There is no history of EV batteries bursting into flames. There have been a couple of accidents where the battery was damaged and caught fire but they don't explode, there is lots of time to exit the vehicle. All in all it looks better than gas cars which catch fire with regularity and many people have been caught in them.

Maintenance is negligible on EVs, much less than regular gas cars. Aluminum car crash damage is not maintenance.
A Tesla Model S hits 300,000 miles in just 2 years – saving an estimated $60,000 on fuel and maintenance

One bad Tesla collision repair experience is NOT a reason to Avoid EVs. It seems like a lot of the problem was aluminum construction related. Model 3 is steel, and there are big companies selling EVs (See Chevy Bolt and soon, Everyone).

 

[Ajay]

Really, much more infrastructure and the need for faster charging (on the road) will likely delay the EV tipping point for some time in the US. Smaller Euro countries will turn over b/4 the US. 30 years + in the US assuming no help from the federal gov't for expanding infrastructure.

We also need cleaner/cheaper power - but that's another topic.

 

[Thebobo]

Hydrogen will never get off the ground for personal transportation. The Physics of Electrolysis, compression, transportation, Fuel Cell energy production means you go 3X the distance using electricity in an EV, than using it to create Hydrogen to use in an FCV.

So it will at minimum cost 3X the fueling expense, just on the input electricity costs (ignoring many others).
You will need 3X the electric production infrastructure to support Hydrogen production.
You will get 3X the CO2 production from that electricity production.

Clinging to the fuel station model will not support the broken economics of hydrogen. That will just be extra markup on top of the 3X input costs.

Hydrogen is dead in the water for personal transportation. It might find some niche case uses, but that is it.

Not saying you're not right about the cost but would love to see a link from a reasonable source with that information.

Electricity has its issues to, until they get the charge rate down to minutes It's inconvenient to many. I understand Tesla has 30/40 mins chargers but the grid and infrastructure to wire these chargers requires 480v @ 250 amps for each charger. So if you have a station of 4 chargers that would require a lot of power infrastructure. It would probably be have to run from a substation in some places?

As I said earlier either one would work for me. I would drive an all electric to work if the priced dropped and the provided a 220 hook up for charging at my house. But then I would probably have to have the wires from the pole to my house checked, they are old with the original cloth covering. Just happy for the progress either way.

 

[PeterScott]

Not saying you're not right about the cost but would love to see a link from a reasonable source with that information.

You can google for the individual steps if you don't believe. Hydrogen uses multiple lossy conversions. At best you are looking at about 3X the electricity usage for transportation with HFCVs. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Rifter]

Hydrogen will never get off the ground for personal transportation. The Physics of Electrolysis, compression, transportation, Fuel Cell energy production means you go 3X the distance using electricity in an EV, than using it to create Hydrogen to use in an FCV.

So it will at minimum cost 3X the fueling expense, just on the input electricity costs (ignoring many others).
You will need 3X the electric production infrastructure to support Hydrogen production.
You will get 3X the CO2 production from that electricity production.

Clinging to the fuel station model will not support the broken economics of hydrogen. That will just be extra markup on top of the 3X input costs.

Hydrogen is dead in the water for personal transportation. It might find some niche case uses, but that is it.

Perhaps things are jus

You can google for the individual steps if you don't believe. Hydrogen uses multiple lossy conversions. At best you are looking at about 3X the electricity usage for transportation with HFCVs. It just doesn't make sense.

It makes perfect sense, if humans have proven anything throughout history its that we prefer convenience over almost anything else. Unless they get EV recharge times down to under 5 min i dont see it winning over hydrogen.

 

[MuchTooSexy]

It makes perfect sense, if humans have proven anything throughout history its that we prefer convenience over almost anything else. Unless they get EV recharge times down to under 5 min i dont see it winning over hydrogen.

filling up with gasoline once a week is like 50 trips to the gas station a year. that's 250 minutes! that seems more inconvenient to me than topping off my EV in my own garage.

 

[tweakmonkey]

parts and maintenance on most of the current electric vehicles are so expensive

Wut

 

[Thebobo]

Another thing to consider is the grid. It would probably require a massive overhaul across the nation for whatever technology is used EV or HV. Some older houses don't have much overhead to add 240v charging stations. Power lines in rural areas might not be sufficient to provide for the power necessary. Right now in the DC area we have "Gold warning" days in the summer where we are asked to limit our electricity consumption at the peak of the day. Just another thing to consider with any new technology.

 

[PeterScott]

Perhaps things are jus


It makes perfect sense, if humans have proven anything throughout history its that we prefer convenience over almost anything else. Unless they get EV recharge times down to under 5 min i dont see it winning over hydrogen.

Haven't you been paying attention. EVs ARE Winning over hydrogen. You can also Drive a Tesla from LA to NY. Try that in a Hydrogen vehicle.

It's also a lot more convenient to NOT go to a gas station when you can just fuel up at home, where you have to go anyway.

 

[K1052]

Electricity has its issues to, until they get the charge rate down to minutes It's inconvenient to many. I understand Tesla has 30/40 mins chargers but the grid and infrastructure to wire these chargers requires 480v @ 250 amps for each charger. So if you have a station of 4 chargers that would require a lot of power infrastructure. It would probably be have to run from a substation in some places?

This summer Musk said Tesla was going to disconnect "almost all" of the superchargers from the grid and use solar/battery. I imagine this would mean everywhere outside a super urban area. The next generation of their fast charging will probably require the on site deployment of storage anyway to accommodate faster rates.