WetEV
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am

GRA wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:41 pm
Uh huh, so only some fraction of the market even then in one particular scenario, but then they cover more than one and a mix of possible actions that might occur, because (to quote the great Yogi), "it's tough to make predictions, especially about the future".
Some predictions are hard to make, some are easier. Regardless of how drilling technology advances, regardless of future climate change, the gasoline powered ICE is doomed. There is only so much oil and other fossil fuels to be extracted. Once gone, is gone. Easy prediction that this will happen. Much harder to say exactly when. Price of oil declined until almost all the cheap oil was drilled. Minimum price will rise with time as more expensive drilling technology chases harder to extract oil... And wide price swings are likely to continue.

https://www.businessinsider.com/timelin ... es-2016-12
Image
GRA wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:41 pm
Do you see any implication in the above that one EV tech is a guaranteed winner regardless of any of the other changes in other areas which may take place, and we should put all of our eggs in that basket? I sure don't. Uncertainty rules.
All?? Take that strawman out of my mouth, please.

Some baskets need more eggs than others. For example: Unicorn farts need none, at least until you show me a real uncorn. Biofuels are at best a tiny fraction. Hydrogen needs a few eggs, as hydrogen might be a minor part of the transportation future. Perhaps more for aircraft than ground. Batteries need a lot of eggs, as for decades will be a rising part of personal ground transportation.

Sales of new electric vehicles in California shot up 63.7% in the first half of the year, to 51,750 units, largely on the strength of the Tesla Model 3.

But that doesn’t mean a golden age of electric vehicles has dawned. Pure electric cars still total only 5.5% of California car sales. Consumers, for the most part, are shrugging at EV offerings from car companies not named Tesla. And Tesla sales could be topping out.

“California is the largest green market in the country,” said Jessica Caldwell, market analyst at Edmunds. The state accounts for nearly half of the 105,472 pure EVs sold nationwide. “But EVs are still a tough market, even in California.”

Dealers sold nearly 950,000 new automobiles statewide in the first six months of 2019, according to the California New Car Dealers Assn. About 13% of them were “electrified” in some form — pure EV, hybrid or plug-in hybrid.

Practically all the rest run on internal combustion engines, the vast majority on gasoline. Gasoline car sales have fallen 7.3% in California thus far this year, partly because of electrified competition and partly because auto sales nationally (and internationally) have entered a cyclical downturn of yet-unknown severity.

Statewide sales of new hybrid cars, which run mainly on gasoline with an electric battery boost and don’t need to be plugged in, rose 22.1% in the first half, to 48,861 vehicles. Plug-in hybrids, which can run on battery power for a few dozen miles before having to switch to internal combustion, plummeted 28.5%, to 35,500 vehicles — in part, analysts have said, because consumers recoiled from the latest design of the plug-in hybrid leader, the Toyota Prius Prime.

Without Tesla, pure EV sales would be limp. About 33,000 Model 3s were sold in California in the first half. The next-highest seller was Chevrolet’s Bolt EV, at 4,482 cars, followed by the Tesla Model X (3,690) and the Tesla Model S (3,390.) The Nissan Leaf sold 2,034 units.

Electric car buyers “don’t seem to be EV fans, they seem to be Tesla fans,” Caldwell said. “It’s been really hard for any other company to crack the code of what people want in an EV. . . .”

One reason for the slow transition is cost. Batteries remain expensive, and EVs generally cost more. The base price of a gasoline-powered Hyundai Kona compact SUV, for instance, is $18,740; the all-electric version is $36,950, before government incentives. Other barriers: range anxiety and a shortage of public charging options. . . .
Notice that the market leader "internal combustion engines, the vast majority on gasoline" is doomed. When and what replaces gasoline is the question. Gasoline powered PHEVs and HEVs are not a replacement.

Notice that even if the price was lowered to take the majority of sales, there isn't the battery production capacity in the world to supply more than a few percent of sales. Don't expect sales of BEVs rise faster than to double every couple of years... Which is exactly what they are doing.
Last edited by WetEV on Thu Nov 28, 2019 11:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:57 pm

WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
GRA wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:41 pm
Uh huh, so only some fraction of the market even then in one particular scenario, but then they cover more than one and a mix of possible actions that might occur, because (to quote the great Yogi), "it's tough to make predictions, especially about the future".
Some predictions are hard to make, some are easier. Regardless of how drilling technology advances, regardless of future climate change, the gasoline powered ICE is doomed. There is only so much oil and other fossil fuels to be extracted. Once gone, is gone. Easy prediction that this when happen. Much harder to say exactly when. Price of oil declined until almost all the cheap oil was drilled. Minimum price will rise with time as more expensive drilling technology chases harder to extract oil... And wide price swings are likely to continue.

https://www.businessinsider.com/timelin ... es-2016-12
Image

Which is not in dispute. But we've already seen Hubbert's curve fail to predict the development of fracking, giving the U.S. at least two oil peaks. He certainly never predicted that after losing our spot as the world's largest oil and gas producer in the '70s that we would regain that title in the 20-teens due to technical improvement. While I believe that fracking is a short term band-aid, I have no idea what other technological breakthroughs might be developed. The one thing that you can say about energy transitions is that making predictions more than a few years down the road is fraught with uncertainty. I say that in a U.S which was supposed to have mostly nuclear-powered electricity a decade or two back, according to forecasts made when nuclear was at its peak. See Vaclav Smil's "Energy Transitions" for more examples of failed predictions, past and recent.


WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
GRA wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:41 pm
Do you see any implication in the above that one EV tech is a guaranteed winner regardless of any of the other changes in other areas which may take place, and we should put all of our eggs in that basket? I sure don't. Uncertainty rules.
All?? Take that strawman out of my mouth, please.

Did I say that you were claiming that? No, I asked you a question. But you have claimed that I "have as a fact that hydrogen fuel cells are the future", and I challenged you to provide a quote where I said any such thing. You have not. Do you now agree that I haven't made any such conclusive statement regarding H2, or any other alternative energy source FTM? AFAIA I've always provided qualified statements of what might be possible given certain things happening, precisely because I know how wrong long-term energy and tech predictions tend to be.

WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
Some baskets need more eggs than others. For example: Unicorn farts need none, at least until you show me a real uncorn. Biofuels are at best a tiny fraction. Hydrogen needs a few eggs, as hydrogen might be a minor part of the transportation future. Perhaps more for aircraft than ground. Batteries need a lot of eggs, as for decades will be a rising part of personal ground transportation.

That's one possible outcome, but you are presupposing that you know how things will develop, i.e. that personal ground transport in American-type car-dependent suburbia will remain the norm. Many other possibilities exist, with the interlocking factors described in the MIT report all playing a role. We just don't know.

FWIW, here's my take. BEV/FCEVs/PHFCEVs/off-board EVs (trains/buses) of one type or another will take over most ground and at least some sea transport, with BEVs handling the shorter ranges and FCEVs or PHFCEVs the longer, the size of each niche depending on battery/H2 production and resource limits as well as technical developments in each area, with biofuels probably restricted to aviation owing to limitations on growing areas (power density of energy crops) , barring development of some GM super-algae that would allow the necessary quantities to be produced. Any excess biofuels will likely be needed for long-distance sea transport before it's used on land.

WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
Sales of new electric vehicles in California shot up 63.7% in the first half of the year, to 51,750 units, largely on the strength of the Tesla Model 3.

But that doesn’t mean a golden age of electric vehicles has dawned. Pure electric cars still total only 5.5% of California car sales. Consumers, for the most part, are shrugging at EV offerings from car companies not named Tesla. And Tesla sales could be topping out.

“California is the largest green market in the country,” said Jessica Caldwell, market analyst at Edmunds. The state accounts for nearly half of the 105,472 pure EVs sold nationwide. “But EVs are still a tough market, even in California.”

Dealers sold nearly 950,000 new automobiles statewide in the first six months of 2019, according to the California New Car Dealers Assn. About 13% of them were “electrified” in some form — pure EV, hybrid or plug-in hybrid.

Practically all the rest run on internal combustion engines, the vast majority on gasoline. Gasoline car sales have fallen 7.3% in California thus far this year, partly because of electrified competition and partly because auto sales nationally (and internationally) have entered a cyclical downturn of yet-unknown severity.

Statewide sales of new hybrid cars, which run mainly on gasoline with an electric battery boost and don’t need to be plugged in, rose 22.1% in the first half, to 48,861 vehicles. Plug-in hybrids, which can run on battery power for a few dozen miles before having to switch to internal combustion, plummeted 28.5%, to 35,500 vehicles — in part, analysts have said, because consumers recoiled from the latest design of the plug-in hybrid leader, the Toyota Prius Prime.

Without Tesla, pure EV sales would be limp. About 33,000 Model 3s were sold in California in the first half. The next-highest seller was Chevrolet’s Bolt EV, at 4,482 cars, followed by the Tesla Model X (3,690) and the Tesla Model S (3,390.) The Nissan Leaf sold 2,034 units.

Electric car buyers “don’t seem to be EV fans, they seem to be Tesla fans,” Caldwell said. “It’s been really hard for any other company to crack the code of what people want in an EV. . . .”

One reason for the slow transition is cost. Batteries remain expensive, and EVs generally cost more. The base price of a gasoline-powered Hyundai Kona compact SUV, for instance, is $18,740; the all-electric version is $36,950, before government incentives. Other barriers: range anxiety and a shortage of public charging options. . . .
Notice that the market leader "internal combustion engines, the vast majority on gasoline" is doomed. When and what replaces gasoline is the question. Gasoline powered PHEVs and HEVs are not a replacement.

Notice that even if the price was lowered to take the majority of sales, there isn't the battery production capacity in the world to supply more than a few percent of sales. Don't expect sales of BEVs rise faster than to double every couple of years... Which is exactly what they are doing.

Except when they aren't doubling, and as has been pointed out they've dropped for the past several months in the U.S., by a much greater percent than total auto sales. As you note, battery production will be limited by production for some time, but it may also be limited by resource constraints later. We don't know. Similarly, FCEVs are limited by production capability and the cost of H2 now, may be limited by (somewhat different) resource constraints than batteries, and may also be limited by energy used in (current) conversion processes. And any large-scale electrification of transport may be limited by resource constraints on say copper, meaning most of us may have to get around by walking or on bicycles (see urban design,economic, political and social interactions). We don't know, so we'd better proceed on multiple fronts until the picture's a lot clearer than it is now, because none of the past long-term predictions of future energy usage have proven accurate.
Last edited by GRA on Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Nov 26, 2019 6:59 pm

cwerdna wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 6:59 pm
johnlocke wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 6:22 pm
With BEV's and home charging, that changes. If you can fill up every night while you sleep, absolute range is a non-issue unless you exceed the battery's capability on a regular basis. The biggest reason for a larger battery is to limit the number of charge cycles and lower the stress during discharge.
Yet, judging by how the Model 3 is decimating everyone else in US EV sales at https://insideevs.com/news/373812/ev-sa ... mber-2019/, I doubt it's because of what you list as the "biggest reason".

FWIW, someone I know at my work used to lease a 24 kWh Leaf. IIRC, her commute is ~30 to 35 miles each way, almost all highway. To make it comfortably, she had charge on both ends (at home and my work). Charging is free at my work. Leaf went back at end of lease and she got a Bolt pretty early on. She doesn't need to charge quite as often now and she can limit her charging to just free charging at work.

Then there's Tony Williams, who went from a 73 mile (or 84 without the 80% option) LEAF, which he drove from BC to BC, to a ca. 140 mile RAV4, which he started a company to develop and sell a CHAdeMO adapter for, to a 234 mile S70D, to a now 325 mile 3LR. He's also posted about how he's driven 300k miles on electricity. I wonder why he didn't just take the more environmentally responsible route and stick to a BEV with the smallest possible battery and slowest charging rate for trips. After all, he proved it could be done. Could it be that range and energy replenishment speed are more important to him than purely environmental considerations, just as they are to many if not most people when considering which car to buy?
Last edited by GRA on Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Tue Nov 26, 2019 7:06 pm

LeftieBiker wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 10:28 pm
goldbrick wrote:
Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:54 pm
Don't forget that buying decisions are seldom rational. For example, LED lightbulbs are much cheaper in the long run than standard incandescent lightbulbs but try selling that to the average American consumer. There are countless other examples.

Having has several LED bulbs fail after less than one year (and the same thing happening with numerous fluorescents before them) I'm not sure that that's a good example...

Yes, cheap CFLs or LEDs can seriously affect the economic argument for them. They're inexpensive enough now that I don't worry about it when they don't come near their projected lifetimes, as I'm still using a lot less energy. I recently bought a 4-pack of either 60 or 75W-equivalent LEDs, made in China IIRR, but it was $8.99 for the pack, which compares quite well with the high-quality 60 or 75W-equivalent CFLs I was buying in the late '80s for $20-$29/each. Not that you can even buy incandescents in that wattage in California any more.

I still have one incandescent in my closet, but as it gets used maybe 1 minute a day I'm just not worried enough about the amount of energy it uses to replace it before it burns out. I recently replaced its twin when that burned out with one of the LEDs, but as I think both bulbs had been in the closet since I moved in back in 2000, those lights have certainly lasted a long time, with lots of very short cycles that are hard on filaments. OTOH, as soon as I moved in I replaced all the lights I used frequently and for long periods of time with CFLs, and they in their turn are gradually being replaced by LEDs.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:32 pm

Just one more on the pile, via GCR:
Thank you for not buying: GM president points to EVs that aren't here yet
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/11 ... t-here-yet

General Motors CEO Mark Reuss says consumers won't gravitate toward EVs until they deliver more range and faster charging, but even his own company, which is one of the highest-volume EV sellers in the country, doesn't offer either.

His remarks were part of an op-ed penned for CNN, the contents of which won't come as much surprise to most who follow the EV industry. He said range, infrastructure and cost are currently the highest barriers to entry—citing market data to back each up.

"Like any revolution, this one will be created by market demand," Reuss said. "Beyond the environmental benefit, electric vehicle owners enjoy the performance, quiet operation, robust acceleration, style and interior space. And EV owners like not having to buy gasoline. We believe the majority of these customers will stay loyal to electric cars. . . .

Reuss says that demand is starting to come around. In the 1990s, when GM experimented with the EV1, customers were put off by the fact that even the best EVs on the market had a range of no more than 70 miles. That alone was a deal breaker for the vast majority of potential buyers. Now?

"We recently held consumer clinics in Los Angeles and Chicago and presented people with six SUV choices: three gasoline and three electric," Reuss said. "When we asked for their first choice to purchase, 40% of the Chicago respondents chose an electric SUV, and 45% in LA did the same. This is despite a several thousand-dollar premium on the price of the electric models (but also before crucial government tax credits that we believe will continue to drive people toward electric vehicles and help fuel market demand)."

But Reuss admits that EVs—including GM's own Bolt—still have a long way to go when it comes to delivering the range people expect from a daily driver. By his own data, almost 90% of the current EV sales volume is made up of vehicles with more than 200 miles of range, with 300 being the point where most consumers start to favor electrics. . . ."
Last edited by GRA on Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:50 am

GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:32 pm
But Reuss admits that EVs—including GM's own Bolt—still have a long way to go when it comes to delivering the range people expect from a daily driver. By his own data, almost 90% of the current EV sales volume is made up of vehicles with more than 200 miles of range, with 300 being the point where most consumers start to favor electrics. . . ."
Realistically, 300 miles of range can not be offered for a reasonable price today.

Why? There isn't that much battery manufacturing capability to supply most consumers. Not anywhere, not at any price, not for a decade or more.

The reason why time exists is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

WetEV
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:08 am

GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:57 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
Some predictions are hard to make, some are easier. Regardless of how drilling technology advances, regardless of future climate change, the gasoline powered ICE is doomed. There is only so much oil and other fossil fuels to be extracted. Once gone, is gone. Easy prediction that this when happen. Much harder to say exactly when. Price of oil declined until almost all the cheap oil was drilled. Minimum price will rise with time as more expensive drilling technology chases harder to extract oil... And wide price swings are likely to continue.

Which is not in dispute. But we've already seen Hubbert's curve fail to predict the development of fracking, giving the U.S. at least two oil peaks.
Yes, and we should add synfuels such as coal -> liquids. That was much of the fuel used to power Nazi Germany during WW2, and keep Apartheid South Africa alive for a decade longer. Cost is only $6 to $12 per gallon, plus lots of CO2.

At least in theory, synfuel could be used with coal too deep, too thin of seams, or too low of quality to mine. Drill and fracture wells into carbon bearing rocks. Generate superheated steam at the bottom of a well in a "coal" seam and add some oxygen. Out nearby wells extract a mixture of CO2, CO, assorted hydrocarbons and methane. Vent the CO2, burn the CO and some of the methane for heat and power to keep the process running. Convert the rest of the methane to gasoline or hydrogen. See, no future hydrogen shortage!
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:57 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
GRA wrote:
Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:41 pm
Do you see any implication in the above that one EV tech is a guaranteed winner regardless of any of the other changes in other areas which may take place, and we should put all of our eggs in that basket?
All?? Take that strawman out of my mouth, please.
Did I say that you were claiming that? No, I asked you a question.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Questions can and do make and attribute assumptions of fact.

BEVs are winning now. While that might not continue, best bet is that it will continue. Not to say we shouldn't make other bets, at much smaller stakes.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:50 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:32 pm
But Reuss admits that EVs—including GM's own Bolt—still have a long way to go when it comes to delivering the range people expect from a daily driver. By his own data, almost 90% of the current EV sales volume is made up of vehicles with more than 200 miles of range, with 300 being the point where most consumers start to favor electrics. . . ."
Realistically, 300 miles of range can not be offered for a reasonable price today.
Which is what I've been saying right along is the reason (along with charging speed and infrastructure) why BEVs aren't yet acceptable or desirable by mainstream buyers. BEVs have to be better than what they've got, and they aren't yet in any way that mainstream consumers place a high value on.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:50 am
Why? There isn't that much battery manufacturing capability to supply most consumers. Not anywhere, not at any price, not for a decade or more.

The reason why time exists is so that everything doesn't happen at once.

Yet. Nissan was predicting 500k LEAFs would be sold worldwide by what year was it, 2013? And Pres. Obama was saying we'd have a million PEVs in the US by 2015, so obviously battery production capacity wasn't considered .to be a limiting factor in either of those claims. More failed predictions of an inevitable future. How about one more failed prediction, plus analysis of that failure and yet another prediction of how things might develop?
In 2010, I was standing in the parking lot of Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles to hear Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn proclaim that by 2020, 10% of the auto market worldwide would be electric. The occasion was the introduction of Nissan's Leaf EV, a car that's still on sale today, even though Ghosn's career is in ruins as he awaits trial in Japan on charges of financial malfeasance.

The global market for plug-in electric vehicles — and that's plug-in gas-electric hybrids as well as all-electric battery vehicles, aka BEVs — stands at about 2% on the eve of Ghosn's benchmark year.

A decade is more than enough time for a market to develop for a new type of vehicle. It's happened again and again, with everything from muscle cars to front-wheel-drive sedans to minivans. That EV sales growth has been so weak relative to expectations means people fundamentally don't want the cars.

It gives me no joy to report this. In the US — the most competitive market — people don't want hybrids either. They do want SUVs and pickups. While this trend has been great for automakers' bottom lines (SUVs and pickups are highly profitable), it's not going to rescue the planet from climate change. I have three children, and I don't want them to inherit blistering winds in summer and savage hurricanes in winter.

But I also can't ignore what's happening in the car business. It's true many more EVs are on sale today than in 2010, and most of the big-name automakers are either planning to introduce or have already rolled out a variety of all-electric vehicles. If the market doubles in the next few years, however, we'll still be 6 percentage points shy of Ghosn's prediction.

Consumer reluctance to make the switch from fossil fuels to electrons for automotive transport could be blamed on everything from patchy recharging infrastructure to relatively elevated EV prices to cheap oil. Still, the extremely sluggish growth of the EV market remains vexing.
. . .

That brings us back to EVs and the USA.

For EVs to make up Ghosn's 10% of that market, we'd need to see yearly sales of 1.7 million. In 2018, fewer than 400,000 were sold. But the overall market has supported a 17-million-plus level for about five years now, almost all of it gas-powered. EVs would have to displace those gas sales, as the US market doesn't have much room for new sales growth at its record or near-record levels.

So let's just cut to the bad news, or at least a sad prediction: The US could be gas-powered, mostly, forever. Sure, you'll be able to buy an EV from Tesla, or from Porsche, or from Nissan or a General Motors or Ford brand — assuming those companies can figure out how to make money on the products.

Europe, by contrast, could witness a gradual replacement of diesels by EVs. But like today's small-engine diesels, those EVs could be modest city cars, with small batteries and limited range.

Where does that leave the electric car?

The globe's other major markets are Latin America, which is, like Europe, a diesel realm, but an economically troubled one. And then there's China. Of these, China is the EV wild card.

It's already the world's biggest car market, with sales that inched toward 30 million in 2018. Some analysts think that China's yearly sales could hit 40 million or more, based on what they see in terms of vehicle ownership in fully developed economies. China's market has been retreating of late, after years of growth, but nobody expects the decline to be a permanent trend.

This is where the EV growth is likely to happen. And it might not be recognizable to anyone in the US because the vehicles could mostly be small, cheap, urban platforms. Bear in mind that I'm not even taking ride-hailing services or autonomous vehicles into account; all I'm doing is surveying the major global markets and trying to determine where EVs could make up a substantial percentage of sales.

So there you have it. The US runs on gas, Europe runs on a mix of diesel and electricity, and China takes all the EV growth. This, in my view, is the extreme realist prediction. Dozens of factors could change or spoil it. But unlike diesel in the US, which didn't benefit from government subsidies, EVs have been supported by assorted federal and state incentives. And still ... 2% of sales. . . .
https://www.businessinsider.com/electri ... pe-2019-11
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 11957
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Sat Nov 30, 2019 2:19 pm

WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:08 am
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:57 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am
Some predictions are hard to make, some are easier. Regardless of how drilling technology advances, regardless of future climate change, the gasoline powered ICE is doomed. There is only so much oil and other fossil fuels to be extracted. Once gone, is gone. Easy prediction that this when happen. Much harder to say exactly when. Price of oil declined until almost all the cheap oil was drilled. Minimum price will rise with time as more expensive drilling technology chases harder to extract oil... And wide price swings are likely to continue.

Which is not in dispute. But we've already seen Hubbert's curve fail to predict the development of fracking, giving the U.S. at least two oil peaks.
Yes, and we should add synfuels such as coal -> liquids. That was much of the fuel used to power Nazi Germany during WW2, and keep Apartheid South Africa alive for a decade longer. Cost is only $6 to $12 per gallon, plus lots of CO2.

At least in theory, synfuel could be used with coal too deep, too thin of seams, or too low of quality to mine. Drill and fracture wells into carbon bearing rocks. Generate superheated steam at the bottom of a well in a "coal" seam and add some oxygen. Out nearby wells extract a mixture of CO2, CO, assorted hydrocarbons and methane. Vent the CO2, burn the CO and some of the methane for heat and power to keep the process running. Convert the rest of the methane to gasoline or hydrogen. See, no future hydrogen shortage!
GRA wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 3:57 pm
WetEV wrote:
Tue Nov 26, 2019 10:23 am

All?? Take that strawman out of my mouth, please.
Did I say that you were claiming that? No, I asked you a question.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Questions can and do make and attribute assumptions of fact.

Ye they can, but they can also be simple questions, unlike unambiguous statements claiming to be 'fact', such as yours that I "have as a fact that hydrogen fuel cells are the future". I challenged you to provide a quote where I said any such thing. You have not.

I'll repeat my question and will do so as long as you keep ducking an answer - Do you now agree that I haven't made any such conclusive statement regarding H2, or any other alternative energy source FTM? Time to man up.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 10:08 am
BEVs are winning now. While that might not continue, best bet is that it will continue. Not to say we shouldn't make other bets, at much smaller stakes.

BEVS are winning in a very small segment of the market now, as they are at a later stage of development than the competing techs. Only further R&D of all the techs will determine whether they retain that lead. [Edit]: Might as well ad this, via IEVS:
Global EV Sales In October 2019 Shrunk 28%: Tesla Extends its Lead
https://insideevs.com/news/385302/globa ... ober-2019/

Global car sales as a whole are only down about 4% this year.[End Edit]

At the moment only FCEVs can provide essentially the same operational capabilities as fossil- or bio-fueled ICEs, but they have their own issues, as they and their fuel are too expensive. I believe economies of scale and fairly limited tech development can bring the price of FCEVs down to ICE-comparable levels, leaving fuel cost as the major impediment to mainstream acceptance. BEVs with big enough packs and rapid enough charge rates at a low enough price to be mainstream may or may not be developable, but we certainly need to try. And bio-fuels would be the simplest, easiest answer, but it's highly unlikely to be able to make enough for anything other than limited, niche replacement of fossil fuels.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

WetEV
Posts: 3759
Joined: Fri May 04, 2012 8:25 am
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2014
Location: Near Seattle, WA

Re: Mink hole, like a rat hole but much much nicer

Mon Dec 02, 2019 9:43 am

GRA wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm
WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:50 am
GRA wrote:
Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:32 pm
Realistically, 300 miles of range can not be offered for a reasonable price today.
Which is what I've been saying right along is the reason (along with charging speed and infrastructure) why BEVs aren't yet acceptable or desirable by mainstream buyers. BEVs have to be better than what they've got, and they aren't yet in any way that mainstream consumers place a high value on.

WetEV wrote:
Thu Nov 28, 2019 8:50 am
Why? There isn't that much battery manufacturing capability to supply most consumers. Not anywhere, not at any price, not for a decade or more.

The reason why time exists is so that everything doesn't happen at once.
Yet. Nissan was predicting 500k LEAFs would be sold worldwide by what year was it, 2013? And Pres. Obama was saying we'd have a million PEVs in the US by 2015, so obviously battery production capacity wasn't considered .to be a limiting factor in either of those claims. More failed predictions of an inevitable future. How about one more failed prediction, plus analysis of that failure and yet another prediction of how things might develop?
It is amusing to burn over the same ground over and over and over and over again. Only hydrogen can replace fossil fuels, again and again and again.

Nissan's production claimed plans were much more overblown as the LEAF's 100 mile range. I have actually driven a LEAF 100 miles between charges.

Nissan couldn't have produced 500k LEAFs by 2013. AESC might have ramped up to 200k vehicles (including fork lifts!) by 2014, maybe, if absolutely everything went right. And it didn't. Retooling to fix the capacity loss problem stopped expansion for several years.

President Obama might have been correct, if the PEVs built and were mostly short electric range hybrids. Which might have been better from an environmental standpoint. Yet most of the non-environmental gains from an electric car are not found in a PHEV, so was unrealistic. Mixed grill is rarely a good choice in a restaurant. Still, there are a million EVs on the road today.

Consider the silicon solar cell. Discovered and patented in the 1930's, reproducible manufacturing techniques in the 1950's, and claimed to be the future of energy, which it wasn't in the 1960's (but costs fell and production rose), 1970's (same), 1980's, 1990's, 2000's, and finally in about 2018 it broke through 2% of global electric production. Still less than 1% of total energy today, but might exceed that soon. And 2%, and 4% and so on. A complete failure, eh?
GRA wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm
The global market for plug-in electric vehicles — and that's plug-in gas-electric hybrids as well as all-electric battery vehicles, aka BEVs — stands at about 2% on the eve of Ghosn's benchmark year.
It was amusing how much effort I needed to get you to stop saying PEV share was less than 1% just a couple of years ago. Oh, and not just me and you. At what percentage do you admit that EVs have won? 50%? 90%? 99%? 99.9999%?

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/07/01/pl ... in-the-us/
GRA wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm
A decade is more than enough time for a market to develop for a new type of vehicle. It's happened again and again, with everything from muscle cars to front-wheel-drive sedans to minivans. That EV sales growth has been so weak relative to expectations means people fundamentally don't want the cars.
Which is why the market share keeps growing. Oh, not day to day, or month to month. Even not always year to year.

Electric cars are a much larger change than front wheel drive. Larger changes will take longer just because it is a larger change. Front wheel drive is a much smaller change.
GRA wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm
It gives me no joy to report this. In the US — the most competitive market — people don't want hybrids either. They do want SUVs and pickups. While this trend has been great for automakers' bottom lines (SUVs and pickups are highly profitable), it's not going to rescue the planet from climate change. I have three children, and I don't want them to inherit blistering winds in summer and savage hurricanes in winter.
GRA wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 1:48 pm
Yes, the USA is in the "gas is cheap, so why worry" phase again. Yet this too will change.
https://www.businessinsider.com/electri ... pe-2019-11
It is funny in how you stopped quoting before the end.
Is this a bad thing?

It's bad if you're an American and you crave leadership on electrified mobility. It's not bad if you look at another 10 million or more annual vehicle sales in China and want those cars to emit nothing from their tailpipes (because they don't have tailpipes).

Given a choice, I'd rather have an electrified China but a US where gas technologies continue to improve, lowering emissions to near zero and extracting reliably ascending fuel economy. In the same way I go to Europe now and exchange the roar of American gas motors for the rattle of diesel engines, I could visit China and hear the whisper of electrics.

That could be a bummer. But I might just have to live with it.
It is a global market, and a global climate. In any change, someone has to be first, and someone has to be last.
WetEV
#49
Most everything around here is wet during the rainy season. And the rainy season is long.
2012 Leaf SL Red (Totaled)
2014 Leaf SL Red
2019 eTron Blue

Return to “Off-Topic”