CARB Compliance Cars, Battery Costs, Etc

[RegGuheert]

"Getting below $30,000 with an EPA range of 150 miles will likely take until the end of this decade."

But have you forgotten the Model X and the Giga-factory? I thought in 2016 that was going to be the
'end-all' BEV vehicle year and put an end to all other OEM BEV products, right?

Bottom line: Too much guessing, speculation, and ignorance as to what technology and market forces
will yield in as few as two to three years out. Lucky most that has been posted recently isn't the same
long term market outlook as most strategic marketing departments of the major automotive OEMs
have with regard to the future BEV marketplace.

:?: :?:

I'm not wildly guessing or speculating or applying ignorance to this topic. I have actually done some research to confirm "what technology and market forces" can and do yield in this space. To repeat, Li-ion battery capacity technology in the marketplace has improved at an average rate of 8%/year over the past couple of decades. Yes, there is a thread here where many of us have posted about promising new battery technologies, but that type of "coming to market in a year" announcement has been commonplace with batteries for as long as I can remember. Still, the market sees 8%/year capacity improvement, which is quite phenomenal, really. Applying that trend going forward is the most logical way to project were we will be in the future. This is truly how most technology progresses.

The simple fact is that today's market leader has a BEV with an 84-mile EPA range with an entry price of $30,000. There are a couple of smaller cars with similar range for less money and several entries with similar or slightly more range for more money, none of which have been nearly as popular. Then you have the Model S at 3X the cost which also has done well. There clearly is an emerging market for these things. But it takes time for immature technologies and markets to mature. Tesla can function as a driving force in this new market, but they simply cannot build the market alone. They need the large manufacturers to be successful to validate their approach. So far, they have shown that they have brilliant design, engineering, and execution, but that has come at very high cost and quite low reliability. And while no one has been killed in a Model S AFAIK, the fires have been quite spectacular. Nissan takes great pride in the fact that there hasn't been a single fire in a Nissan LEAF with over 125,000 on the road. Too conservative? Maybe, but I doubt it. Many people need that type of assurance before moving to a new technology.

I hope there are disruptive battery technologies waiting on the horizon, but I doubt it. As GRA said: increasing the capacity at the same time that you lower the per-kWh cost is no easy feat. Add safety and durability into that mix and the problem is quite a difficult one.

Regarding the new Mercedes BEV offering discussed in this thread, it offers a bit more range for quite a bit more money and has some early reliability issues of its own. It serves to further validate the market. Nothing more.

 

[evnow]

All do on the EPA LA-4 City Cycle. 19.59mph average speed.

is that the criteria used for the credits? who drives at that speed? why have a car? at those speeds a bicycle will do

That is the city cycle - and averaged out of several actual drives they did on a route in LA some years back. If we do a pure city cycle today - the results won't be very different.

 

[lorenfb]

"The simple fact is that today's market leader has a BEV with an 84-mile EPA range with an entry price of $30,000. There are a couple of smaller cars with similar range for less money and several entries with similar or slightly more range for more money, none of which have been nearly as popular. Then you have the Model S at 3X the cost which also has done well. There clearly is an emerging market for these things. But it takes time for immature technologies and markets to mature. Tesla can function as a driving force in this new market, but they simply cannot build the market alone."

That's correct. But to imply, as some have, that the less than $35K market range is the result of ZEV credits
versus technology/costs is naive. Just because data indicate a correlation doesn't imply a casual effect.

 

[hill]

.........snip...........
That's correct. But to imply, as some have, that the less than $35K market range is the result of ZEV credits
versus technology/costs is naive. Just because data indicate a correlation doesn't imply a casual effect.

To think that hard core hydrogen lobby/money sucking off EV carb credits in favor of expensive FC tech doesn't skew results - is even more naive.
.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Regarding the new Mercedes BEV offering discussed in this thread, it offers a bit more range for quite a bit more money and has some early reliability issues of its own. It serves to further validate the market. Nothing more.

Well, first and foremost, this compliance car meets regulatory mandates from both CARB and EPA.

Whatever happens after that is gravy.

 

[GRA]

Even assuming that Nissan get's the full 8%/yr improvement in _both energy densities_ and price over a 5 year period,, that would only gain them 40% of range at the same weight and price, or 117 miles EPA, so I have my doubts that we'll be seeing 150 EPA for $35k in the 2016 model year - they would need almost a 79% improvement to achieve that.

That does not compute. I claimed 105 EPA below $30K.

Okay, I think that's doable for 2016 given higher energy density batteries, if they want to. I don't see that happening with the current battery, because they'd have to put them in the cargo bay and/or spare area and probably have to redo crash testing. Whether it's worth it when they will have the 2nd gen following in a year, IDK. It would give them the opportunity to try a new chemistry pack for that time and get any bugs out of the manufacturing process, but it's too short a time to provide feedback for the 2nd gen design.

They might just be able to do so on a barebones S.

That's the point. I claimed 150 miles below $35K. That allows $5000 for the additional battery capacity to get from 105 EPA to 150 EPA, which should be more than enough.

Getting below $30,000 with an EPA range of 150 miles will likely take until the end of this decade.

I don't think they can get to 150 EPA miles with the current generation LEAF and the currently available battery tech at any price, unless people are willing to give up their cargo space. I think 150 EPA will need the 2nd gen platform.

 

[RegGuheert]

I don't think they can get to 150 EPA miles with the current generation LEAF and the currently available battery tech at any price, unless people are willing to give up their cargo space.

Nor do I.

I think 150 EPA will need the 2nd gen platform.

Exactly.

 

[lorenfb]

As most all are aware of, it's all a function of battery capacity and how much extra cost a BEV OEM
wants to add to the resale price. Nissan could easily add another 10 kWhrs and have a 150 mile range,

No, they couldn't. Ignoring the weight and volume requirements as well as the cost, it takes them 21 kWh usable to get 84 miles EPA range; to get to 150 EPA would require 150/84 * 21 = 37.5 kWh usable (42.9 kWh total assuming they use the same proportion of the pack), and that's making the unrealistic assumption that the weight (and volume) of the battery pack won't increase likewise, i.e. higher specific energy will provide all the extra capacity for the same weight.

but that would add $3K plus ($300/kWhr) or more to the price. Just like with Tesla, it's all about
where you want to position your product based on costs to the consumer. It really doesn't take
any key competitive technology over another BEV OEM at the present state of technology.
Obvious the additional weight, i.e. 200 - 250 lbs, would have an effect, but it only affects the
rolling resistance losses at less 5-7%, thereby reducing the range accordingly.

Hardly any great technology advance made by these other BEVs! It's just another big 'yawn'.

I'm not aware that anyone was claiming that the B-class was a 'great technology boost', just that it provided a very useful (and much desired) increase in realistic range to over 100 miles, which no other current BEV manufacturer is offering for less than $50k. Alternatively, the B-class can use a much smaller SOC % of its battery pack to achieve a bit more range than the LEAF, which along with its TMS improves the pack's longevity. There's nothing to stop other manufacturers from doing the same, provided their cars can take the weight and volume of a larger pack and retain their utility (currently, none except maybe the i3 can).

Actual Data:

Today my Leaf was driven a little over 100 miles doing my ordinary driving; 1/2 freeway @ < 55mph,
and city streets @ < 40 mph without any trip charging. The following data per LeafDD;

Start Data; 58.8 Ahrs, 395 volts, 10,340 miles, SOC 99%, GOM 91 miles, 12 bars
End Data, 11.4 Ahrs, 359 volts, 10440 miles, SOC 19%, GOM 11 miles, 1 bar, LBW

Calculation #1 - range based on Ahrs for additional 10kWhrs of energy:

Ahrs used = 58.8. - 11.4 = 47.4 Ahrs or .474 Ahrs/mile
Ahrs for additional 10kWhrs added battery capacity = 10 kWhrs / 395 volts (initially) = ~ 25.3 Ahrs
Additional range = 25.3 Ahrs / .474 Ahrs per mile = ~ 53 additional miles

Calculation #2 - range based on just an energy calculation with an additional 10kWhrs of energy:

Initial Energy = 58.8 Ahrs X 395 volts = 23.2 kWhrs
Final Energy = 11.4 Ahrs X 359 = 4.1 kWhrs
Energy Used = 19.1 kWhrs or .191 kWhrs/mile
Expected additional range for an additional 10 kWhrs of battery capacity = 10 kWhrs/.191 kWhrs per mile = 52 additional miles

So it is possible to achieve an approximate 150 range for the Leaf with just an additional 10 kWhrs
of energy. Being very conservative, though, one probably might expect a range at least 135 to 140 miles.
Obviously, the additional battery weight, i.e. approximately 200 - 250 lbs, would add to the rolling
resistance losses but only about 5-7% and thus affecting range somewhat.

Note: My Leaf's efficiency has consistently been at 5.1-5.2 miles/kWhr.

 

[EVDRIVER]

Regarding the new Mercedes BEV offering discussed in this thread, it offers a bit more range for quite a bit more money and has some early reliability issues of its own. It serves to further validate the market. Nothing more.

Well, first and foremost, this compliance car meets regulatory mandates from both CARB and EPA.

Whatever happens after that is gravy.

+1

 

[mkjayakumar]

And while no one has been killed in a Model S AFAIK, the fires have been quite spectacular.

Thats a cheap shot. I didn't expect that from you, with adjectives like 'spectacular'. You very well know the circumstances of those two fires, and how the owners simply walked away without even a scratch. Agreed the chemistry used in Model S might be more volatile than used in a Leaf, but Tesla has proved time and again it is the safest vehicle compared to any ICE in its class.

My guess is Model S owners have driven more miles than Leaf, even though we have had more Leafs on the road for much longer time.

 

[TomT]

+1

Thats a cheap shot. I didn't expect that from you, with adjectives like 'spectacular'. You very well know the circumstances of those two fires, and how the owners simply walked away without even a scratch. Agreed the chemistry used in Model S might be more volatile than used in a Leaf, but Tesla has proved time and again it is the safest vehicle compared to any ICE in its class.

 

[evnow]

My guess is Model S owners have driven more miles than Leaf, even though we have had more Leafs on the road for much longer time.

Thats a cheap shot. I didn't expect that from you

 

[GRA]

As most all are aware of, it's all a function of battery capacity and how much extra cost a BEV OEM
wants to add to the resale price. Nissan could easily add another 10 kWhrs and have a 150 mile range,

No, they couldn't. Ignoring the weight and volume requirements as well as the cost, it takes them 21 kWh usable to get 84 miles EPA range; to get to 150 EPA would require 150/84 * 21 = 37.5 kWh usable (42.9 kWh total assuming they use the same proportion of the pack), and that's making the unrealistic assumption that the weight (and volume) of the battery pack won't increase likewise, i.e. higher specific energy will provide all the extra capacity for the same weight.

but that would add $3K plus ($300/kWhr) or more to the price. Just like with Tesla, it's all about
where you want to position your product based on costs to the consumer. It really doesn't take
any key competitive technology over another BEV OEM at the present state of technology.
Obvious the additional weight, i.e. 200 - 250 lbs, would have an effect, but it only affects the
rolling resistance losses at less 5-7%, thereby reducing the range accordingly.

Hardly any great technology advance made by these other BEVs! It's just another big 'yawn'.

I'm not aware that anyone was claiming that the B-class was a 'great technology boost', just that it provided a very useful (and much desired) increase in realistic range to over 100 miles, which no other current BEV manufacturer is offering for less than $50k. Alternatively, the B-class can use a much smaller SOC % of its battery pack to achieve a bit more range than the LEAF, which along with its TMS improves the pack's longevity. There's nothing to stop other manufacturers from doing the same, provided their cars can take the weight and volume of a larger pack and retain their utility (currently, none except maybe the i3 can).

Actual Data:

Today my Leaf was driven a little over 100 miles doing my ordinary driving; 1/2 freeway @ < 55mph,
and city streets @ < 40 mph without any trip charging. The following data per LeafDD;

Start Data; 58.8 Ahrs, 395 volts, 10,340 miles, SOC 99%, GOM 91 miles, 12 bars
End Data, 11.4 Ahrs, 359 volts, 10440 miles, SOC 19%, GOM 11 miles, 1 bar, LBW

Calculation #1 - range based on Ahrs for additional 10kWhrs of energy:

Ahrs used = 58.8. - 11.4 = 47.4 Ahrs or .474 Ahrs/mile
Ahrs for additional 10kWhrs added battery capacity = 10 kWhrs / 395 volts (initially) = ~ 25.3 Ahrs
Additional range = 25.3 Ahrs / .474 Ahrs per mile = ~ 53 additional miles

Calculation #2 - range based on just an energy calculation with an additional 10kWhrs of energy:

Initial Energy = 58.8 Ahrs X 395 volts = 23.2 kWhrs
Final Energy = 11.4 Ahrs X 359 = 4.1 kWhrs
Energy Used = 19.1 kWhrs or .191 kWhrs/mile
Expected additional range for an additional 10 kWhrs of battery capacity = 10 kWhrs/.191 kWhrs per mile = 52 additional miles

So it is possible to achieve an approximate 150 range for the Leaf with just an additional 10 kWhrs
of energy. Being very conservative, though, one probably might expect a range at least 135 to 140 miles.
Obviously, the additional battery weight, i.e. approximately 200 - 250 lbs, would add to the rolling
resistance losses but only about 5-7% and thus affecting range somewhat.

Note: My Leaf's efficiency has consistently been at 5.1-5.2 miles/kWhr.

55mph is hardly representative of how most people drive on the freeway. Most people drive at (more often above) the speed limit whenever the traffic allows. Sure, it's possible to drive the current LEAF 100 miles or more without recharging driving the 'right' way, not using any HVAC etc. LEAFfan was able to drive his 188 miles on a charge on a track, but that was hardly representative of normal use. The number of people who drive the 'wrong' way far outnumbers the ones who drive the 'right' way, as represented by the scarcity of members of the "100 mile club" more than 3.5 years after the LEAF was introduced.

 

[nosuchthing]

My average is 4.0 and that's where it stands.

That, I believe, is representative of an average Leaf owner, driving CA freeways, where you cannot be hypermiling at <55 without being rammed or climbed over by an ICE.

The above gives Leaf a bad name, creates an annoying road hazard for all drivers, and should not reap any rewards. The ball is in Nissan's court to make a vehicle with decent range, now that we all are much smarter than we were in the spring of 2011.

 

[TomT]

Yep, my lifetime average is 4.3...

My average is 4.0 and that's where it stands.

 

[ELROY]

Yep, my lifetime average is 4.3...

My average is 4.0 and that's where it stands.

4.0 is what I see to be about average on mine also.

 

[lorenfb]

55mph is hardly representative of how most people drive on the freeway. Most people drive at (more often above) the speed limit whenever the traffic allows. Sure, it's possible to drive the current LEAF 100 miles or more without recharging driving the 'right' way, not using any HVAC etc. LEAFfan was able to drive his 188 miles on a charge on a track, but that was hardly representative of normal use. The number of people who drive the 'wrong' way far outnumbers the ones who drive the 'right' way, as represented by the scarcity of members of the "100 mile club" more than 3.5 years after the LEAF was introduced.

Obviously you haven't driven much in SoCal, as it's rare to drive over 55 mph other than during
'window' times. And by-the-way, who are you to discuss Leaf driving techniques when you don't
even own a BEV? And it's just not the 100+ mile Leaf owners that achieve efficiencies about 5 miles/kWhr,
i.e. many have posted that in other Leaf threads. Achieving a 90-95 range for most Leaf owners
doesn't take much effort even when driving at 65 mph.

Whether a Leaf owner can achieve 130 or 150 mile range, an additional 10kWhr of battery capacity
would be very beneficial to any type of Leaf driver. And when is enough capacity really enough?
I don't consider the 85 kWhr battery of the Tesla desirable as I don't find it acceptable to have
to arrange a trip based on charging locations and don't desire to have to wait for a charge time,
which is the case for most ICE owners considering a BEV as a trip vehicle. Furthermore, I don't
consider it desirable to modify my electrical service for a dedicated special 100 amp service
just for a long range BEV such as a Tesla.

For most considering a BEV as a commuter vehicle or typical ICE replacement, the battery capacity
must be re-charged using 110VAC during a 10-12 hour non-demand time, i.e. the battery charging
time must not impinge upon one's normal routine when compared to an ICE. Additionally, telling
a potential BEV buyer that he needs to modify his electrical service could be a 'deal-breaker'.
So most likely the ideal range will be 150 to 175 miles for a BEV given battery recharging requirements
now and in the near future when replacing an ICE commuter vehicle for most potential buyers.

 

[apvbguy]

Achieving a 90-95 range for most Leaf owners
doesn't take much effort even when driving at 65 mph.

I have to call BS on this comment, in my experience there is no way a LEAF will go any more than 75 miles or so at speeds around 65 MPH. no way no how it just is not possible.

Furthermore, I don't
consider it desirable to modify my electrical service for a dedicated special 100 amp service
just for a long range BEV such as a Tesla.

what makes you believe that 'dedicated special 100 amp service' is necessary? I use 50 amp service, I charge the Tesla at around 40 amps gaining about 29 miles per hour charging, in less than 8 hours I am able to charge to over 80% of capacity.

I don't know where you get your data from but your data is woefully poor

 

[lorenfb]

"what makes you believe that 'dedicated special 100 amp service' is necessary? I use 50 amp service, I charge the Tesla at around 40 amps gaining about 29 miles per hour charging, in less than 8 hours I am able to charge to over 80% of capacity."

Whether it's 40/50/100 amp service mod (80% current max of breaker), it's problematic for most
potential BEV buyers!

 

[apvbguy]

"what makes you believe that 'dedicated special 100 amp service' is necessary? I use 50 amp service, I charge the Tesla at around 40 amps gaining about 29 miles per hour charging, in less than 8 hours I am able to charge to over 80% of capacity."

Whether it's 40/50/100 amp service mod (80% current max of breaker), it's problematic for most
potential BEV buyers!

it may be problematic for you but is surely isn't for most people, the majority of tesla owners have installed 240 50+amp service. there are a few people who live in cond/apartments who are having troubles getting this level of service installed but those people are few.

do you not have a response regarding your comment about the LEAF's range at 65MPH??