CARB Compliance Cars, Battery Costs, Etc

[DaveEV]

MOD NOTE:

This thread split from here: Official Mercedes B-class EV thread
Some posts moved to Snippiness.

A couple of you are looking way over the edge. Let's keep it polite, and on-topic, eh?

 

[kubel]

You'll just have to work a bit to come up with a more accurate label to use for EVs you want to dismiss as insignificant, such as the Spark EV made by your unfavorite car company, the one you still harbor ill will over the EV1 fiasco.

I harbor no ill will towards GM, and it's my understanding that general consensus is any car that would likely not be sold absent some government regulation is a compliance car. It can get merky, since we can't truly know the motivation of all car manufacturers, especially when they open up sales to non-CARB states.

I don't think it's unreasonable to call the Chevy Spark EV a compliance car.

 

[GRA]

55 mph 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.

Notice how I wrote 'whenever the traffic allows?' Why do you think HOV stickers are so popular; if people are willing to maximize their range so that they can go routinely go 100+ miles on a charge, they should be happy to crawl along in stop and go rush hour traffic that will maximize their regen.

And by-the-way, who are you to discuss Leaf driving techniques when you don't
even own a BEV?

Me? I'm someone who has been reading this and other BEV forums for 3 years or so, have driven many of them and 'enjoyed' living with one for a week, and who has analyzed how most people choose to drive when unconstrained. For every ultra-green who's happy to poke along in the slow lane at 55 even when they aren't forced to because of limited capacity, there's two or three Tesla owners zooming by at 80+ on the way to Vegas or Florida.

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.

Tony's range chart, which shows 75 miles range (which is slightly conservative) at a constant 65 mph, and hundreds if not thousands of reports from owners disagree. We have several LEAF owners just above your post who say they never see anything of the kind, driving their cars 'normally'. Again, there are something over 12,000 members of this forum (like me, not all of them drive LEAFs or any other BEV), and still under 100 who've said they've driven 100 miles or more on a charge. OTOH, 100 miles on a charge isn't even worth mentioning over on the RAV4EV forum, unless that's all they get. LEAF EPA range is about 4.0 miles kWh, and that's what most people who aren't willing to practice hypermile techniques or freeze/sweat actually average - the leadfeet do a bit less, the feather feet a bit more.

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.

That's an entirely different matter from the technical ability of how far an additional 10 kWh can take a LEAF, or whether it could be fit into the current model, which is what was being discussed. No one has said that offering more range/capacity on a LEAF or any other current BEV is undesirable.

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.

I have no argument with any of this. Personally I consider anything at or over 330 miles range @ 75 mph (80 preferred) with four people plus gear (call it 1,000 lb. useful load) at any OAT between 25-110 deg. F. with free use of HVAC and all other accessories, for at least 10 years, and with multi-point quick charging infrastructure spaced no more than 50 miles (30 preferred) apart, to be close to comparable with an ICE and its infrastructure. Everything beyond that is gravy.

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.

I agree that the need to install 240V to achieve adequate range on an overnight charge is a bar to entry for many people, although your range numbers on 120V imply a huge decrease in commuter BEV weight. You're only talking about 10-12 kWh into the battery, so even at your 5 miles/kWh [edited to restore bolded section section unintentionally chopped off] (which owners of the Chevy Spark are actually achieving) you're only talking 50 or 60 miles range. For the above entry hassle reasons, I believe that 20 mile AER PHEVs will be the mainstream consumer's choice for some time, as they can be fully recharged in an 8 hour off-peak window on 120V without paying for extra battery capacity (and hauling around its weight) that can rarely be used.

 

[GRA]

You'll just have to work a bit to come up with a more accurate label to use for EVs you want to dismiss as insignificant, such as the Spark EV made by your unfavorite car company, the one you still harbor ill will over the EV1 fiasco.

I harbor no ill will towards GM, and it's my understanding that general consensus is any car that would likely not be sold absent some government regulation is a compliance car. It can get merky, since we can't truly know the motivation of all car manufacturers, especially when they open up sales to non-CARB states.

I don't think it's unreasonable to call the Chevy Spark EV a compliance car.

By the standard you define, every BEV, with the possible exception of the Tesla Model S, is a compliance car.

 

[TonyWilliams]

You'll just have to work a bit to come up with a more accurate label to use for EVs you want to dismiss as insignificant, such as the Spark EV made by your unfavorite car company, the one you still harbor ill will over the EV1 fiasco.

I harbor no ill will towards GM, and it's my understanding that general consensus is any car that would likely not be sold absent some government regulation is a compliance car. It can get merky, since we can't truly know the motivation of all car manufacturers, especially when they open up sales to non-CARB states.

I don't think it's unreasonable to call the Chevy Spark EV a compliance car.

By the standard you define, every BEV, with the possible exception of the Tesla Model S, is a compliance car.

I'm not sure what standard you're referring to, but Mitsubishi is exempt from CARB-ZEV, yet they produce them (over 30,000 worldwide).

 

[evnow]

The simple fact is that Spark is available in only 2 out of 50 states. So in US it's a compliance car.

Hyundai FCEV is worse - available in just a small area. It's definitely a compliance car.

 

[kubel]

By the standard you define, every BEV, with the possible exception of the Tesla Model S, is a compliance car.

Do you really think if CARB dropped its mandate that every manufacturer would figuratively crush their BEV programs?

Ford Focus Electric? Possibly, but they are selling them outside of CARB states, but only in select markets- so that implies Ford might see some value in this vehicle beyond maintaining compliance.

Nissan LEAF? I don't think so. It's available nation-wide and internationally. This is not a car solely produced for compliance.

Chevy Spark? Seeing as this car is available only in CARB states, it seems very clear to me that this car would be axed if the CARB mandate was dropped.

Toyota RAV4-EV? Same as the Spark- obvious compliance car.

Mitsubishi iMiEV? Not sure.

 

[GRA]

By the standard you define, every BEV, with the possible exception of the Tesla Model S, is a compliance car.

Do you really think if CARB dropped its mandate that every manufacturer would figuratively crush their BEV programs?<snip>

No, I think none of them, possibly excepting Tesla, would have gotten started in the first place. As to the rest? Without mandates and incentives, they'd all (again, Tesla possibly excepted) disappear in short order. Until PEVs/FCEVs can thrive without mandates and govt. subsidies and perks they're all compliance cars, which is exactly the standard you defined:

"it's my understanding that general consensus is any car that would likely not be sold absent some government regulation is a compliance car."