WINTER IS COMING....and so are electric TESLA's

[Redracn]

Eg. Smart Four2 EV being charged on the street in Paris today.

 

I can see a new pass-time for the bored youth. Just walk by and pull the charge plug back a bit. Owner returns and not enough power to get home. 

Ever seen how a pretty tough air hose and inflator ends up at a servo? How long do you expect the charger leads and plug to last with every noddy just poping it out and flinging it away or driving over it. I assume they are at least bright enough to have a drive away interlock on the car itself while it is actually charging. Will also be interesting to see what happens when a charge station gets backed into. Will it take the city block out. How often will you find a park only to find the charge station is faulty or its lead cut off. There is just so much wrong with street charging that it really is a joke.

But many new skilled green jobs as these leads will need a daily safety inspection and a guard/attendant for every 20 units. 

[Niko]

A better investment may be the contribution towards designing a new range of car fragrances to support our electric buddies:

"Heater Core Leaking"  "Workshop" and "Burnt Oil"  are my favourites...

Plus the old favourite......  "peeeeuu....."is that my clutch" fragrance".....

[Niko]

0

[Stew F]

Unless the auto makers can sell a ubiquitous version for sub $20k (at the moment) EV won't become the mainstream car that everyone has. Plus, even if IC cars are no longer made, there would have to be a transition period of at least 10 years. Ultimately a good thing, but it won't be in my lifetime I don't think.

[DJM]

I can see a new pass-time for the bored youth. Just walk by and pull the charge plug back a bit. Owner returns and not enough power to get home. 

Ever seen how a pretty tough air hose and inflator ends up at a servo? How long do you expect the charger leads and plug to last with every noddy just poping it out and flinging it away or driving over it. I assume they are at least bright enough to have a drive away interlock on the car itself while it is actually charging. Will also be interesting to see what happens when a charge station gets backed into. Will it take the city block out. How often will you find a park only to find the charge station is faulty or its lead cut off. There is just so much wrong with street charging that it really is a joke.

But many new skilled green jobs as these leads will need a daily safety inspection and a guard/attendant for every 20 units. 

you'd reckon inductive charging will come - park over a loop in the bitumen and charge away then the infrastructure doesn't need cables and can be in a locked cabinet away from the kerb.  I still don't want one.....

[Redracn]

you'd reckon inductive charging will come - park over a loop in the bitumen and charge away then the infrastructure doesn't need cables and can be in a locked cabinet away from the kerb.  I still don't want one.....

No chance on inductive charging on that scale. Concentrating a magnetic a field is not simple and an airgap is a very very bad thing. So at a minimum you need a pad that raises or part of the car must go to ground level neither should have any dirt on it and alignment needs to be pretty accurate essentially you need to dock to it. And the cost of this infrastructure $$$$$$$$$$$. And do not mention charging efficiency as it will be so low you need to double up on the coal burnt (CO2 emitted) compared to a direct conection. Not to mention people with pacemakers dying in the street from stray magnetic fields as well as numerous other issues. 

[Harvs11]

I can see a new pass-time for the bored youth. Just walk by and pull the charge plug back a bit. Owner returns and not enough power to get home. 

Ever seen how a pretty tough air hose and inflator ends up at a servo? How long do you expect the charger leads and plug to last with every noddy just poping it out and flinging it away or driving over it. I assume they are at least bright enough to have a drive away interlock on the car itself while it is actually charging. Will also be interesting to see what happens when a charge station gets backed into. Will it take the city block out. How often will you find a park only to find the charge station is faulty or its lead cut off. There is just so much wrong with street charging that it really is a joke.

But many new skilled green jobs as these leads will need a daily safety inspection and a guard/attendant for every 20 units. 

From my brief observations, the fitted cable is secured under the top of the pylon covered by a heavy steel lid. Access is granted after logging in with your own charge card.  Once unlocked you can use the fitted standard cable or plug in your own cable if your car requires it. The lid locks down over the plug so it cannot be tampered with. Only the owner can unlock the charge station to remove the cable. When the charge station is not in use it is all locked up and very robust.  That said, the plug into the car socket is totally exposed.  That aspect needs some work. 

[rego]

Unless the auto makers can sell a ubiquitous version for sub $20k (at the moment) EV won't become the mainstream car that everyone has. Plus, even if IC cars are no longer made, there would have to be a transition period of at least 10 years. Ultimately a good thing, but it won't be in my lifetime I don't think.

It's hard to comprehend how quickly the world is going to change sitting here now but the way I see it 2040 is 23 years away, in 1994 I don't think anyone would of been able to predict that the world would of changed as much as it has from technology (this time in 1994 netscape navigator hadn't even been released and we were on Windows 3.1).

Electric vehicles, battery technology and solar have come a long way in the last 10 years and 23 years from now non-electric cars will be like film cameras are today in a digital camera world.

[Redracn]

From my brief observations, the fitted cable is secured under the top of the pylon covered by a heavy steel lid. Access is granted after logging in with your own charge card.  Once unlocked you can use the fitted standard cable or plug in your own cable if your car requires it. The lid locks down over the plug so it cannot be tampered with. Only the owner can unlock the charge station to remove the cable. When the charge station is not in use it is all locked up and very robust.  That said, the plug into the car socket is totally exposed.  That aspect needs some work. 

No matter how much they try people will damage them. Nothing is secure, people will have forged cards/keys, some will take delight at injecting acid into any cracks and others put two part expoxy whee it was never meant to go. By their very nature the stations will always be very exposed to vandalism when in use. No device is safe or secure unless actively monitored and even then it can be gotten at. I would expect the theft of electricity to be an issue in the future as it becomes more expensive and rationing starts along with a black market. Vandals may be active because they resent not having any electricity while the rich ruling class do. People will probably steel electric cars just so they can drain the battery. 

Might sound a bit doomdayish but the simple mattr of fact is the renewables will never ever provide the power for everyone to which we have become accustom at any price.

[firstone]

A fully auto Robo-cop will be the std law enforcement by then anyway. ?

[Cars And Coffee Byron Bay]

I drove more distance yesterday in the 911 than any electric car could. I made a lot of noise. The boys laughed. 

Try that in a toaster 

[Redracn]

A fully auto Robo-cop will be the std law enforcement by then anyway. ?

A renewables powered robo cop will spend more time on charge than patrol. 

[JWM]

Electric vehicles, battery technology and solar have come a long way in the last 10 years and 23 years from now non-electric cars will be like film cameras are today in a digital camera world.

As Bill Gates said: "We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten." This thread (and the 50 exact copies of it) are good examples.

I'll always have something with three pedals that burns petrol on the garage but EVs are very clearly the mainstream future. Today's limitations on them (in the broadest sense, from power generation to range), won't last long. 

[Redracn]

As Bill Gates said: "We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten." This thread (and the 50 exact copies of it) are good examples. 

I am wondering without Nuclear where the power will come from for this so called electric revolution? Currently worldwide Wind/Solar make up less than 0.5% of energy required for today. With wind/solar being so unreliable their effective contribution is not even that much. With population growth and the 3rd world getting richer there is a steady growth in energy demand. 

The hype drives the short term with people thinking they are on a surefire winner but in the longer term it could be something quite different that actually delivers. It would only take a breakthrough in algae to convert sun directly to a liquid fuel to shut down EV. Despite the hype around batteries there has been no recent breakthroughs in technology. All we have seen is small steps but mainly manufacturing advances and volume reducing cost.  

[JWM]

I am wondering without Nuclear where the power will come from for this so called electric revolution? Currently worldwide Wind/Solar make up less than 0.5% of energy required for today. With wind/solar being so unreliable their effective contribution is not even that much. With population growth and the 3rd world getting richer there is a steady growth in energy demand. 

The hype drives the short term with people thinking they are on a surefire winner but in the longer term it could be something quite different that actually delivers. It would only take a breakthrough in algae to convert sun directly to a liquid fuel to shut down EV. Despite the hype around batteries there has been no recent breakthroughs in technology. All we have seen is small steps but mainly manufacturing advances and volume reducing cost.  

Sure, there's *steady* growth in energy consumption but although it's small now, as you say, solar is growing *exponentially*... It's doubled every two years for twenty years. That makes for 100% of global energy usage covered in 16 years. 

'Manufacturing advances and volume reducing cost' is all it takes, and the fact that's all that it's taken for the exponential growth of the last twenty years to occur should make it even more obvious what's going to happen, no magic breakthroughs required and marginal energy costs go to "zero". Why would you run your car on anything else?

[Stew F]

When I was at primary school, in the early to mid 70's, all the talk was that by the year 2000, everyone will be driving levitating cars. It's nearly 2018. Guess what.

[rego]

Sure, there's *steady* growth in energy consumption but although it's small now, as you say, solar is growing *exponentially*... It's doubled every two years for twenty years. That makes for 100% of global energy usage covered in 16 years. 

'Manufacturing advances and volume reducing cost' is all it takes, and the fact that's all that it's taken for the exponential growth of the last twenty years to occur should make it even more obvious what's going to happen, no magic breakthroughs required and marginal energy costs go to "zero". Why would you run your car on anything else?

I agree for sure, here's a report on on the EV market by McKinsey if you are interested, shows the economics for automakers pretty clearly and they talk about the technology improvements that JWM denies http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/automotive-and-assembly/our-insights/electrifying-insights-how-automakers-can-drive-electrified-vehicle-sales-and-profitability

This graph of battery prices since 2010 from the report (Telsla now claim to be ~$190/kWh) shows how quickly prices are falling which is the main thing improving the economics of Automakers building and consumers buying.

 

When I was at primary school, in the early to mid 70's, all the talk was that by the year 2000, everyone will be driving levitating cars. It's nearly 2018. Guess what.

The problem with that comparison is that levitating cars wasn't built on top of something that already existed and requires a leap for it to happen. Solar and Electric Cars are already here and the technology is just being improved upon.

[Redracn]

Sure, there's *steady* growth in energy consumption but although it's small now, as you say, solar is growing *exponentially*... It's doubled every two years for twenty years. That makes for 100% of global energy usage covered in 16 years. 

'Manufacturing advances and volume reducing cost' is all it takes, and the fact that's all that it's taken for the exponential growth of the last twenty years to occur should make it even more obvious what's going to happen, no magic breakthroughs required and marginal energy costs go to "zero". Why would you run your car on anything else?

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but 100% wind/solar is a fantasy and will never ever happen. The exponential groth is also a fantasy. It is easy when you have one windmill to put in another and double capacity but once it takes hundreds of thousands that is another matter and then you have end of life replacement.  As far as wind which is far bigger then solar the best sites are taken so any new windmill will have a lower return on invested manufacturing and resources. Fact is current renewable energy expansion is not even keeping up with growth. You have been sold a bridge by some slick con artists?

[Coastr]

The comparisons to computing power usually come up with any new technology.

It's usually a bad comparison because the thing that drove the advances in computing power are the transistor density available in chip manufacture.  Most of the advances in the last 50 years are due to that - truly new capabilities are few and far in between.  A lot of discovery and systems advances have been made possible by falling cost of processors which is driven by the ability to get higher transistor densities - so called 'Moores Law'.  But Moores law is hitting a wall because it is exponential and not really holding up anymore.

The falling cost of solar and battery power are true and well documented but they leave out a big part of the picture which is energy density.  There is not the same exponential growth in energy density that there was in transistor density.  Which is why it's easy to say that wholesale replacement of IC engines by battery vehicles is not going to happen any time soon.   It's easy too make electrcic sports cars and commuter cars and even luxury cars.  Because all of these have a low load carrying capability and short range is acceptable.  The falling battery cost enables the production of these products more possible, which is what will drive increasing adoption of electric vehicles over time.

However the failure of a step-change in energy density in battery capacity and nothing like an exponential growth will limit the deployment of battery vehicles to those which can handle limited load capacity and limited range.  This excludes all commercial vehicles - which is 25% of the market (not sure if this includes 'tradie utes' or not).   As I put in another thread on this topic - the energy density of diesel vs the best batterys is still off by 500x.  The fastest growing vehicle categories in Australia are large 4wds and campervans as the baby boomers decide to set off around the country.  

So all in all it's misleading to look at advances in computing technnology of the sort that Bill Gates describes and then unilaterally transfer it across to other industries where the underlying assumptions may not hold up.  Look at commercial aircraft - I read today that united is retiring all the 747 fleet today after 40 years.  Yet the replacement is incremental rather than revolutionary.  This is because the fundamental limitations of commercial aircraft design - which is about the limits of efficiency to be gained in subsonic flight - have been reached and gains are only piecemeal.   Not saying battery technology is there yet but the current designs are improving incrementally in performance.  Dropping the cost only helps make the product more affordable - it doesn't make the product more capable.   Which might be great for small city runabouts - I've said before I look forward to cities with a lot of small electrics in them - but it's fantasy to think that 100% replacement is possible in twenty years.

[JWM]

I'm coming at it from a different angle to be honest. Economics is always the most important thing. What you guys dismiss as "just the price coming down" or "just a ramp up in production" is staggeringly important. Few things are built on amazing breakthroughs (whether batteries as energy dense as fuel appearing overnight, or algae that makes liquid fuel) compared to the slow grind that makes technologies price competitive and the market driving it's adoption. 

Even if we "just" get more affordable "small city runabouts" - that is a large number of cars - and will not only drive the investment in better and cheaper tech but probably more importantly upend the economics of the ICE industry (broadly - from manufacturing to fuel delivery etc) and make it less competitive, as we're seeing in other markets.

Anything being the 100% solution to a problem never happens. That's not a particularly useful thing to talk about but even (as I assume is being suggested) battery and solar technology never gets any better than it is today, which is a rather heroic assumption, the economics are already in place to see big big changes in what the world looks like today. I'm sure we can all agree on that.

[Niko]

Wow, I really kicked off a thread here.....Interesting and constructive comments. 

[Redracn]

An EV is simply putting the horse before the cart. No rational person would advocate for a rollout of 100% or even a fraction of that without first determing where the energy to power an EV fleet would come from.  The current unreliables of wind and solar have absolutely no chance. To say it is about economics is to ignore the engineering and scientific realities that exist in the real world.

 The only practical use of EV is in the inner city as they have no prospect of being of any use for freight or rual areas. Those that push the EV as personal transport in the inner city should instead be pusihing for better public transport or better still actualy use the existing public transport system. Oh wait forgot that there is no virtue signaling value in doing that. Perhaps an "My EV ran out of charge" T-shirt would help. 

If EV are so wonderful then they would prosper by themselves. But the consumer has determined they are rubbish so they need assistance from the government. This is nothing more than a steel from the poor to pay the rich scheme.

The poor pay at the factory via manufacturing subsidies. They pay again at retail via more subsidies. They continue to pay for FREE electricity for others at the charge stations they have also paid for. They pay even more towards the cost of registration, parking fees and tolls while watching the smug owners drive past in priority access lanes. But worst of all they compete for the available electricity with the poor who can least afford the resulting higher prices and need that electricity to cook meals and keep food cold. 

Taking money off my neighbour who can least afford it and making their life more miserable just so I can virtue signal. NO THANKS.

 

 

[KGB]

I have been watching a bit of Formula E of late, they go quick and it's good racing.... BUT BUGGER ALL NOISE....sorta like scalextric.

You  W H A T ?

 

[Coastr]

There are several different things being discussed here so it's hard to keep a tab on the different directions.

The main thing I would say (and this is very important to me) is that economics is never the underlying reason.  Economics is the study of human choice in an environment of scarcity.  People often get baffled by BS but the fundamentals of prosperity are just how well a society uses the basic inputs of land, human energy and non-human energy and inputs form natural resources.  A visit to a crappy country will show that they either lack the natural resources or organisation of human energy or have ba do and management.   The economy will prosper when human energy  and ingenuity is allowed to use land and natural resources, and suffers and stagnates when the use of land, labour and materials is banned, stopped or regulated to a halt.  

But it's the things that drive the relative levels of scarcity are the things that upend the economics.   There is plenty of cool tech that is neat-o but don't fundamentally change the underlying levels of scarcity.  This goes back to ancient times.  The reasons the Romans dominated was in part to their ability to solve the scarcity problem of clean water and energy.  This was done with the development of the aqueduct.  Much of what was roman economics after that arose from the basic tech of moving clean water from far away places into cities, and harnessing the gravitational energy in the form of grain mills, solving the problems of feeding lots of people. 

The industrial revolution was kicked off by the development of steam power which transformed the application of energy by using coal instead of timber, wind and animal power.  This was a step-change in the scarcity of energy which then underwrote all the other economic changes.

The computing revolution happened because of the discovery of first the transistor, and then more importantly the ability to etch transistors into silicon wafers.  That is still playing out because it is very short in history timeframe.  But it solved the scarcity problem of computing power and memory, which fundamentally changed the economics of information storage and retrieval.  This has had a very large effect because the application of information and computing power has very wide side effects - which are still ongoing.

Private vehicle use is widespread but actually only about 1/3of liquid fuels consumption, so even a 25% incursion by pure electric vehicles would have limited effect on the effects of scale for liquid fuel production.  This is because passenger vehicles spend the majority of time idle.  Even so, widespread fall of 2x or 3x in the cost of batteries will still only provide a niche market (nothing wrong with that) because they don't represent a step-change in energy density.   It's easy to forget that the cost of liquid fuelled cars is only high because of the extremely high taxation rate applied to the sale of liquid fuels.  There is nothing on the horizon that will replace diesel and jet a1 without a breakthrough.  The idea of battery powered mining trucks or b-doubles is just a pipe dream at the current levels of energy density available.

it comes back to scarcity.  Unless a development comes along that changes the levels of transportable energy scarcity the change will only be developmental and incremental.    The same applies for wind/solar energy, which is the other side of the coin.  The energy density of solar energy or wind energy is so low that even a 100% efficient solar panel or windmill has no hope against a dragline in a coal mine - or a couple of rods of plutonium.  That's even leaving out the variability of generation.  The energy returned on energy invested has to exceed the currently available nuclear or fossil fuel sources for the economics of it to change.

 

[JWM]

 

There are several different things being discussed here so it's hard to keep a tab on the different directions.

Ha, not wrong, seems like at least 3 topics worth of discussion going on, plus one on Formula E... . A forum is hardly the best place for any but here we are I suppose.

But it's the things that drive the relative levels of scarcity are the things that upend the economics.  

Agreed! Good examples. Sorry to combine two threads/topics again but I think this is why EV cars will succeed in big numbers, despite the limitations on the technology today, because the cost of electricity globally is going to go towards zero through one of these step changes in scarcity.

When I see news that Solar power, for the first time, is becoming the cheapest form of new electricity through, as noted, nothing more than better economies of scale, it's reasonable that this will become a self perpetuating flywheel... Now that it's cheaper, more will be built, so it will get cheaper again... We're not seeing it here yet because as the article notes new investment is competing with sunk costs of old power plants etc, so it's happening in developing countries first but will eventually come here.

It's going to create problems for the solar industry itself on the way but I don't see this ending in any way other than the marginal cost of energy *generation* going to almost zero. As you say, at that point, it's no longer scarce, which will totally upend the economics of a lot of things.

To circle back to EVs - if electricity is practically free, why would you run a car (or whatever) on anything else? Sure range sucks etc, but why not just shove more batteries in a car? Doesn't sound particularly appealing or elegant but most things in the world aren't, especially when free!

An EV is simply putting the horse before the cart. No rational person would advocate for a rollout of 100% or even a fraction of that without first determing were the energy to power an EV fleet would com from.  The current unreliables of wind and solar have absolutely no chance. To say it is about economics is to ignore the engineering and scientific realities that exist in the real world.

Demand drives supply. 

What makes wind or solar unreliable apart from the obvious, which batteries resolve? Apparently we just have to cover Spain in solar panels and we're set!