Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons

reddroverr

Keep in mind that currently most of the cost of a gallon of gas or a barrel of oil goes to foreign state owned oil producers.

The 18 cent federal tax per gallon and whatever a state might extract will indeed have to be made up. But remember, most of those taxes are fixed and not percentage...now consider a few short years ago when you were paying a buck a gallon. It is not the taxes that have burdened Joe Sixpack. There is a cheaper lunch.

tpe

I don't think that the government will start taxing electricity at a higher rate. Certainly not "green" electricity. Possibly some kind of carbon tax on coal and natural gas powerplants. What's already happening in some local areas and, IMO, will probably spread is a tax per mile. I'm not entirely sure how this is implemented. Maybe some kind of installed GPS device or simply going off the odometer reading. This policy shift is being driven by a belief that high mpg vehicles like hybrids are not paying their fair share for road maintenance. I don't think the per gallon gas tax will ever go away but it will now be classified as a carbon tax and no longer earmarked for road maintenance.

apeweek

...And if the sun don't shine or the wind don't blow, you don't drive???

There's a couple of ways a home power scheme like this works.

The first way is that you sell electricity to your utility when you don't need it. Utilities do allow this. This makes your power meter run backwards when the wind blows or the sun shines. Then when you need electricity, you just plug in as usual. If you make more power than you use, you can even turn a profit this way.

The second way is to implement your own power leveling system, using storage batteries. When the wind blows, and the sun shines, your storage batteries take the electricity. You then recharge your car from your power reserves. The batteries used for power leveling can be less capable than the ones used for driving, so as an EV driver, I would move my used EV batteries into power leveling service every time I get new ones for the car.

If there are long periods with little sun or wind, you just use the power grid as usual.

daysailer

Added mass is a problem that distribution can only partially mitigate. Mass IS the enemy.

regardless how frequently I exceed an EV's range, the fact that I exceed it at all would relegate an EV to limited duty, not worthy of the price (and garage space) that I allocate to a gasoline vehicle (and unlike an ICE, an EV would REQUIRE garage space to allow charging). A trip to the nearest large cities is more than 200mi round trip in any direction.

daysailer

Whatever is done with gasoline taxes, roads must be paid for, and properly that burden should be born by the users, regardless their source of fuel.

apeweek

...relegate an EV to limited duty, not worthy of the price...

This is an opinion you are entitled to, and nobody should have to buy a vehicle they don't want. However, there is a difference between this, and trying to decide what everyone else wants to drive.

If I had never driven a motorcycle, and they were not widely available for sale, I might have a very negative opinion about them, since motorcycles have many disadvantages compared to cars (dangerous, noisy, no cargo capacity, etc.)

However, there is a meaningful market for motorcycles, because the people that do like them are quite passionate about them. Because for every flaw the motorcycle has, there is also an advantage (good gas mileage, fun to ride, etc.) that attracts buyers.

This is exactly the sort of market that will develop around electric cars when they begin easing into the mainstream. For every disadvantage (short range, heavy batteries) there are advantages (cheap to drive, no fumes, high reliability, quiet, no gas stations to visit.)

tpe

I'm amazed that someone would point out mass as being such a big negative. Just take a look around at the vehicles on the road today. The conclusion that I would draw is that American drivers love mass.

tpe

relegate an EV to limited duty,

I'm one of those uber-rich people that can actually afford two cars. You've probably read or heard about people like me. When I get an EV I will keep my ICE as a second car. I'd guess that there are less than 20 times in a year that I drive over 100 miles in a day. Oh, I also possess keen insight, which allows me to know in advance whether or not this will be one of those days. That being the case I will be driving my EV over 90% of the time. Now which car has been relegated to limited duty?

daysailer

The motorcycle is an interesting comparison which, unlike any EV we are likely to see in my lifetime, is (usually) a less expensive alternative to the automobile. Also unlike the EV, most motorcycles can travel as far as there are roads and many regardless of roads. A motorcycle (or "motor-scooter") may even be an entry level motor vehicle, as it was in my case, whereas cost (if nothing else) will prohibit such use of an EV.

The vehicles that EV technology can currently provide would make great sense for short range urban runabouts if they could be had for the price of a motor-scooter or small motorcycle.

daysailer

The public may be largely ignorant of the physics of their activities, but that does not alter the effect of mass.

By "limited duty", I refer to the limited range of uses of the EV, not the frequency of use. Regardless how frequently my needs exceed the capability of an EV, if I exceed them at all, I need another car as well. Even if I have multiple cars (I have 3), the fact that an EV cannot be a full service vehicle means that the EV would be in addition to the number of full service vehicles that I actually need. I might justify that if the EV was a cheap alternative.

Although when I set out for the day I may think that I know how far I will travel, unexpected requirements of work, or even spontaneous personal decisions, may cause that distance to increase dramatically before I return home.

tpe

One of my current vehicles is a Honda Accord. I can't take this car off road or tow more than 1,000 pounds. Does this make it less than a full service vehicle? Most people that have more than one vehicle don't buy the same type. They buy vehicles with different strengths that complement each other. Some people might own a truck and a sedan. When they need to haul or tow something the truck is superior. When they are taking the family out to dinner then maximum comfort and passenger seating might be preferred. In my case an EV would be the superior vehicle 90% of the time and unacceptable the other 10%. I guess I could fixate on this 10% and drive one full service vehicle that was inferior for the application 90% of the time but I'd rather not. From my perspective I'm not sure why this vehicle should have to cost less. For instance why should it be any cheaper than a Accord when it is superior at performing its intended duty?

apeweek

...The motorcycle is an interesting comparison which, unlike any EV...

I fear the point of my motorcycle comparison has been entirely missed. Of course I did not mean to directly compare motorcycles and EVs, as these are very different vehicles.

Again, the point of the comparison is that both motorcycles and EVs have flaws compared to conventional cars. No they do not have the same flaws and strengths. They each have different flaws and strengths. Yes, motorcycles can travel farther than most EVs, and yes, they are usually cheaper than EVs. Those are motorcycle strengths. EVs can fuel up inexpensively at home, travel noiselessly, and without fumes. Those are some EV strengths.

If the motorcycle - with its own unique strengths - can be a viable and marketable vehicle despite its flaws, then the EV, with its own unique strengths and flaws, can be, too.

This is the point I was addressing.

...The vehicles that EV technology can currently provide would make great sense for short range urban runabouts if they could be had for the price of a motor-scooter or small motorcycle.

You want a cheap EV? I got mine used from eBay for $2500. See this page: http://squidoo.com/cheap-electric-car

tpe

I fear the point of my motorcycle comparison has been entirely missed

Maybe a better comparison would have been to use 2-seat roadsters like the Miata, S2000, Solstice, etc.. Clearly buyers of these cars are sacrifing utility. In addition there is no price break that goes along with this reduced utility. I'd guess that most people need the use of the back seat of their vehicles more often than they need to exceed an EVs range. Meaning a car like the Miata would be unsuitable more often than an EV. Yet, like the motorcycles you referred to, there is a market for them.

daysailer

Another interesting comparison, since one of my cars is a Miata. Yet the Miata, regardless of its limited cargo capacity, can carry me to work year round. I needn't worry whether I might need to travel to a client site during the workday or perform errands that might exceed an EV's range. If my Wife and I choose to go out to dinner (onr anywhere else) upon my return from work, we can do so in the Miata. Should I need to refuel, I can do so in under 5 minutes most anywhere that I might travel. It can travel any distance, anywhere that there are roads and do so with greater handling prowess (and certainly greater driving pleasure) than the vast majority of vehicles. And when its battery fails (the first one lasted 9.5 years), I can replace it for less than $100.

An EV cannot fulfill that mission, even if one could be had for the price of a Miata.

apeweek

...Yet the Miata, regardless of its limited cargo capacity, can carry me to work year round...

Again, missing the point - yes, the flaws are different, but the Miata still features reduced utility at a premium price, this is the point.

No not exactly the same flaws as an EV, but it still shows that there is a market for cars - even expensive ones - that have reduced utility.

I think what you really are trying to say is that limited range is such a serious flaw that nothing, no other advantages the vehicle might have, can compensate for it.

But of course bicycles have this same flaw. Very few people can (or would want to try) to match the 50-mile range of my EV on a bicycle. (The few who could would need a refueling stop on the way.)

So is there no market for bicycles?

tankman52

I work for a DoD contracting company in Huntsville, Alabama and we have electric Hummers and I am here to tell you that it is a great concept, but impossible to rely on. The reason is that you cannot replenish the energy used at the rate that a vehicle uses it. A few of us drove one of our hummers across the US starting from the Pentagon and finished at San Fransisco, Ca. We broke down 3 or 4 times and was able to sustain about 53 miles an hour, but constantly had to monitor the battery cells so they wouldn't drop out at 10.5 volts. If it did, then the limp home mode would kick in which was 35 mph. Now keep in mind, this was a total 288 volt electric vehicle and no mechanical linkage like the insight that Honda makes.

apeweek

...A few of us drove one of our hummers across the US starting from the Pentagon and finished at San Fransisco, Ca...

That's actually a pretty impressive performance for an electrified Hummer. Or are these the serial hybrid Hummers?

If so, yes, I believe you would have to schedule your trip around some off-board charging. The engine would be designed to extend the range, and not to entirely replace the charging.

What battery technology is on board? And what caused the breakdowns?

tpe

That's interesting that you happen to have a Miata. I guarantee there are times that you choose one of your other vehicles because the Miata just isn't up to the task. To me this seems to contradict some of your previous posts where you state that you aren't interested in a vehicle with limited utility. What does it matter whether that limit is range or something else?

daysailer

Yes, range is for me a most serious flaw. Any other motor vehicle intended for highway use has UNLIMITED range (barring natural barriers, e.g. oceans) while an EV would confine me to one city, and rather limited travel even in that locale. That is considerably more of a disadvantage than whether I can carry large cargo. It is a limitation that sets the EV apart, relegating it to novelty or even toy status. Every vehicle is limited in WHAT it can carry but only the EV is limited in WHERE it can travel or for how long. To me, its utility IS more akin to a bicycle than to a motor vehicle. That sort of limitation could have a place if it was a cheap alternative, but it is not and is not likely to be.

daysailer

Every vehicle has "limited utility" if your only measure is cargo capacity, and by that rationale we should all drive tractor-trailers.

michael2003

Sounds very much as if you would be a good candidate for a PHEV. They'll be here very soon now!

daysailer

Perhaps, but I suspect that it will be quite some time before an adequately developed product is available at a competitive price. After all, I am a fan of hybrid vehicle technology yet, after a decade on the market, there is not one that I consider to be both adequate and cost competitive. The additional challenges of a series PHEV design do not bode well for a sufficiently small/light/nimble/affordable vehicle to serve commuter duty in the near future. Since none are available to consider, I'll reserve judgment, but I won't hold my breath. We'll see.

reddroverr

We should also consider external costs associated with gasoline. Consider the health benefits and quality of life benefits if in the valleys of SoCal there were no fossil burners adding to pollution.

Maybe we should tax larger vehicles more per mile because they take up more road space, reduce visibility for other drivers, and wear down the roads faster.

Call me when my property taxes are less than the guy down the street with four kids in the public school system.

Well that is a bit of a rant, we are a long way off from major alt vehicle impact. I guess an OD reading would be ok as long as it isn't excessive. That even complicates a vehicle sale though.

on edit:

However, what are people going to do who get hit with the bill all at once? Americans are notoriously bad financial planners. Going to have collection agencies involved? Monthly mileage bills? much mare efficient to just raise the tax on electricity than bother with this new deal.

reddroverr

The trend is your friend.

http://www.electricdrive.org/images/common/ProdInfo/TotalHybridSalesGraph0006sma- ll.jpg

tpe

The additional challenges of a series PHEV design do not bode well for a sufficiently small/light/nimble/affordable vehicle to serve commuter duty in the near future.

Well I agree that everyone wants affordability but it's beyond me where you came up with this view that commuters want small/light/nimble vehicles. If given the choice between a 2,500 lb car that got 30 mpg and a 3,300 lb car that got the equivalent of 100+ mpg the vast majority of the public would go with the higher mpg. I'm not sure what the value of "nimble" is. Every car on the road can safely negotiate turns at the flow of traffic. Now maybe a Miata can take turns at speeds much higher than this. I'm sure that's fun but it's a behavior that seems like somewhat of a departure from this strict common sense in buying philosophy.

You claim that there is no market for a vehicle that cannot compete in terms of price and utility yet you own a Miata. You cannot justify the purchase of a Miata in terms of practicality. You could have bought a Toyota Corolla for a lot less and it would have gotten better mileage and had a back seat. The only justification for paying a premium for a car like the Miata requires bringing in the "fun factor", which again has nothing to do with practicality. Once you acknowledge that buying decisions can involve subjective criteria then it doesn't make sense to say that EVs won't be marketable due to a price premium.

gagrice

a 3,300 lb car that got the equivalent of 100+ mpg

If you are referring to the Plug-in Prius, it is a Pie in the Sky vehicle. The one they put together was only capable of 30 miles on electric only and only if you stay under 30 MPH. That is no better than the golf cart neighborhood vehicles. Last I read Toyota had put the PHEV on the back burner, due to lack of good battery technology.

When the first conversions were being talked about it was going to be a $12,000 add-on to your Prius. Now that they are available it is more like double or triple that price. I am not interested at all in a $57,000 Prius that has a voided warranty. You can get 30 miles of EV operation for a mere $32k.

http://www.hybrids-plus.com/ht/products.html

daysailer

Affordability in not a "want", it is essential if alternative fuel/propulsion is to significantly affect our oil dependence and the enviro-economic-political problems it perpetuates. With the average person spending ~40% of their annual income to buy a car, there's no room for an EV "premium" beyond what may be recovered in fuel cost, and even that is dependent on financing.

Practicality depends on an individual's requirements. For me, as a daily drive, the Miata is imminently practical, reasonably economical, extremely reliable, provides a margin of dynamic safety that few vehicles can match, and is enjoyable to drive in the bargain. I only wish that it were a bit lighter. When an EV can fulfill my requirements as well as the Miata and cost no more, there'll be one in my garage.

apeweek

...Practicality depends on an individual's requirements.

Of course it does, and this is an acknowledgment that people's needs can differ. For me, the EV I own is my most practical car for everyday driving.

Affordability is a complicated concept as well. Something like a bicycle, motorcycle or used car would be the ultimate in affordability, after all. The more relevant concept is value. People want to believe they are getting the maximum value for what they spend, and perceptions of value can be greatly affected by advertising and other psychological factors.

For example, why do so many people buy iPods, when there are many more affordable mp3 players on the market that perform all the same functions? Superb marketing is the reason, of course.

daysailer

Value IS the crux of my argument. I realize that different people may assign value very differently and that some are influenced by advertising hype, peer pressure, the phase of the moon, or whatever. But in simple terms, a product that has less capability than another at the same price/cost has less value. In order to conclude otherwise, one must either assign zero (or negative) value to the capabilities that are lacking, or realize sufficient O&M cost savings to offset whatever value he does assign. Since EVs produced to date cost substantially more than their closest ICE counterparts, I see no opportunity for parity.

apeweek

...But in simple terms, a product that has less capability than another at the same price/cost has less value.

But this must cut both ways. Now that I have been driving an EV for a few years, cars that require trips to the gas station have less value in my eyes. Cars that cost much more to fuel have less value. Cars that require more repairs have less value. Cars that are noisy and smelly have less value. Value is not universal - everybody has their own formula.

...EVs produced to date cost substantially more than their closest ICE counterparts, I see no opportunity for parity.

This is your best argument, but EV cost would fall once they became mass market vehicles, just like any other technological product. In the present market, I always recommend EV conversions, since they can be found cheaply. My EV only cost me a few thousand, for example.

The fact that conversions can be had cheaply illustrates that it will be possible to market EVs at reasonable prices once R&D costs are out of the way.

tpe

But in simple terms, a product that has less capability than another at the same price/cost has less value.

Yet you were willing to pay more for your Miata than you would have paid for a Toyota Corolla, Ford Focus, Honda Civic, and I'm sure many others. You must place an extremely high value on nimbleness. Whether or not you want to accept it the Miata appeals to a niche market and many people would consider it somewhat of a toy.

daysailer

To me, lithe, nimble, responsive, describe the highest values in automotive design. Mass has negative value. based on that alone, my choice should be obvious.

But my automotive choices are not the subject of this thread and the fact remains that EV technology has not produced a vehicle with the capabilities of an ICE car with any prospect of price parity.

reddroverr

The scenario car I gave you is about the best it can be expected to get in the next 5-10 years. If that isn't going to work for you, fine. The vast majority of people do not leave the house without knowing if they will be driving 30 or 300 miles. So, your case is somewhat atypical. The 15 minute fill up I offered may indeed mean a total reduction in on road service station time. After all, the avereage person would rarely use it if they can plug in and go 250 miles.

Battery/power storage costs are the obstacle. No one knows for sure if they will come down sufficiently. Again, applied cost should be considered..that is the $1000 or so saved on fuel costs annually. Oil is currently $80 a barrel. It certainly makes sense to me anyway, to diversify your vehicle fuel options in case of major price shocks or shortages.

If the 300k mile battery expected battery life is for real, then the residual value of a car with this simplified drive system should be much higher. If the car I desscribed comes anywhere close to a comperable ICE in price, it will find many buyers. The biggest competion would be the serial hybrid, if they develop as planned.

Re the Tesla handling:

"Like its platform cousin, the Lotus Elise, the Tesla feels at home on twisty roads. The chassis is very taut and communicates exactly what those tire patches are doing right up through the steering wheel. On our test drive around Pebble Beach, California it was like driving a big electric go-kart. Who knew saving the planet could be this much fun?"

http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/automotive_news/3700136.html

apeweek

...Oil is currently $80 a barrel...

Indeed, with the dollar in freefall this week, and news stories about how oil may not be priced in dollars much longer, gas prices could get beyond outrageous in the next few years.

More than anything else, gas passing $5/gallon will get people to take a hard look at electric cars, and maybe even start demanding them. An extra few thousand on the purchase price tag is nothing compared to the prospect of spending thousands on gasoline year after year.

PF_Flyer

Be sure to check out Senior Editor John O'Dell's newest addition to our lineup, the Green Car Advisor for news and commentary on environmental automotive trends and technologies.

Looking forward to all your comments!

PF_Flyer

GM has a solution of sorts to the problem of battery overheating in electric and hybrid vehicles, and I've made it the subject of today's Alternate Route.

Chill Out

gagrice

I applaud GM trying to be first with a viable plug in hybrid. I think they could get more bad press if it does not live up to expectations. Trying to force a technology that is still not there is what got MS into so many problems early in the Windows era.

PF_Flyer

You have to try things, and sometimes fail, to learn and progress. The story on Green Car Advisor ends with this:

With the Volt, a car Lutz has said will be sold for under $30,000, GM has laid its reputation on the line. Asked if the project could wind up on the cutting room floor, Posawatz shook his head.

“We’d never live it down,” he said.

I'm not sure that this quailfies as a gamble, but it ceratinly doesn't sound like a sure thing.

larsb

Gary says, "Trying to force a technology that is still not there.........."

Um, not to mention the EV1 fiasco.

GM is "among" the companies testing PHEVs. Toyota has a pilot program on the road already in the USA:

Toyota PHEVs on the road in SoCal and NoCal

reddroverr

add to that the real possibility of supply interuptions. currently..the rumblings about Iran.

Odd-even day fillups and long lines, or worse, would quickly revalue EV/PHEV technology in the minds of consumers.

gagrice

You noticed that the PHEV from Toyota still uses NiMH batteries. The range is 7 miles on battery. Does not say at what speeds. They do not mention how much weight it added with the additional batteries.

larsb

Sure it uses "tried and true" NiMH for now....

But everyone is testing Li-Ion and are trying to get it functional for production cars.

Whoever does it best in the best overall package will sell the most cars. Honda beat Toyota to market in several hybrid technological arenas but does not own the market.

It's all in flux right now. Good luck to all of them.

tpe

Given that the RAV4 EV's battery pack weighed 900 lbs and provided 100+ mile range I can't imagine that a 7 mile battery pack would be all that heavy. I suspect that it is still speed limited since it is still using the same electric motors, which just aren't powerful enough for high speeds or rapid acceleration. Regardless, I don't think that Toyota sees this as a marketable vehicle but rather a test bed. The limited range isn't all that important. It will still allow them to identify the potential problems and benefits associated with this technology.

As I've posted several times before. Toyota is pursuing cobalt based Li-ion batteries. These are fundamentally different than the iron phosphate based Li-ion chemistry that GM's battery provider, A123 Systems, is using. When Toyota makes a statement regarding the readiness of their batteries it should not be interpreted as a blanket comment that applies to all Li-ion batteries.

gagrice

Toyota had made statements regarding Li-Ion batteries for both a PHEV Prius and the LS600h. I did read one news brief that said they were putting Li-Ion on the back shelf until more progress was made. The LS600h was to be released with Li-Ion and of course that did not happen. I assume the LS600h is being sold. Though none were listed in their August sales results.

It will be interesting to see if either type becomes usable for EVs.

jeffyscott

Long lines, etc. only occur if the government meddles with the market. Otherwise the price rises until supply equals demand. Followed by whining about "price gouging".

PF_Flyer

Can't argue with that jeffy. I dealt with this very issue and a government report on gouging in Got a Gasoline Jones

larsb

Hard work being done

Electric cars hoping for lithium ion revolution

19 September 2007

Try to imagine the frustration of having a cutting-edge technology at your disposal which promises to reduce greenhouse gas emissions - but no batteries to power it.

Vehicle manufacturers don't have to imagine it. They all have the know-how to build plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs), which run primarily on electricity but also have combustion engines for driving longer distances. But that one final - and essential - piece of the PHEV puzzle is missing: the batteries just aren't good enough.

But US auto giant General Motors is betting that chemists are close to solving the puzzle, by developing rechargeable batteries that are safe, robust, long-lasting, and inexpensive.

GM is investing heavily in two battery companies with rival technologies in the hope at least one of them can power its planned Opel Flextreme hybrid car, unveiled at the Frankfurt IAA auto show last week. The Flextreme is slated for a 2010 launch, along with its counterpart hybrid in the US, the Chevrolet Volt. Joe Lograsso, manager of hybrid energy storage systems for GM, hints that meeting the goal will be challenging, with battery cell development now entering a key phase. 'I think the next 12 months will be critical,' he told Chemistry World.

Many car manufacturers already offer hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) without plug-in charging capability. HEVs rely on their combustion engines, and energy diverted from braking, to charge nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries, which are generally safe but only hold enough charge for very short stretches of travel time.

Conversely, PHEVs are likely to use lithium ion batteries, already widely used in laptop computers and mobile telephones. These are charged by using an electrical potential to push lithium ions through an electrolyte from cathode to anode, where they intercalate with a crystalline material (such as graphite). Electricity is discharged through an external circuit when the ions return to the cathode.

Yet Li ion batteries are less durable and less safe than NiMH batteries, and can be prone to overheating and fire, a risk that can increase in the larger, higher density cells needed to power cars. The batteries must also have a life of at least 10 years, added Lograsso.

That's where the competing battery developments come in. They aim to refine the lithium ion battery within the next couple of years so that it fits the needs of the 21st century motorist.

michael2003

So, what is it about the current A123 batteries that make them not acceptable? I'm concerned about the constant use of the statement that perhaps in a couple of years, but I still haven't read anything that specifically addresses why a couple of years are needed?

gagrice

There are two very serious problems with Li-Ion batteries. One, they have a very short shelf life. Two they get very hot when charged too fast. Remember the recent recall of over a million Sony laptop batteries. Several had caught fire during the charge cycle. What I am concerned about with GMs idea to add liquid cooling to prevent fires. Will that add as much weight as they save over NiMH batteries.

The last problem that may keep them from ever being used in a mainstream car is they are very expensive. Batteries unlike any other electronics, has not come down with mass use and production. Laptop batteries are more expensive today than they were 10 years ago.

tpe

Laptop batteries are more expensive today than they were 10 years ago.

The comparative cost of batteries should be measured in terms of energy storage. Today's laptop batteries store more than twice as much energy as 10 years ago. In terms of cost per watt-hour these batteries have definitely gotten cheaper in the last 10 years, especially if you factor for inflation.

Regardless, potential car buyers won't fixate on one particular cost. They will be more concerned with the overall operating costs. Higher battery costs won't be a show-stopper if they are offset by lower costs in other areas.

I personally don't think we'll see liquid cooling in EVs like ICE's have. Now these fast charging stations might very well require some elaborate cooling system.