LeftieBiker
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2017
- Messages
- 793
boltage said:
No, my concern was the constant traffic noise.
Hyundai will annonce Ioniq EV for U.S. market
- Thread starter SparkE
- Start date
Help Support Chevy Bolt EV Forum:
No, my concern was the constant traffic noise.
oilerlord said:
That time frame was referring to 200 mile EVs being cost competitive with ICEs. With the current pace of battery improvements, I think that is probably a reasonable estimate. As long as EVs cost more than a gas car, it's going to be hard for them to catch on, even considering tax credits, etc. At this point cost is the biggest issue, so all other considerations are academic.
In the long run I think electric vehicles are better technology and that is what will win the day. This is still early days though.
oilerlord
Well-known member
boltage said:
Not as different as you may think. Our "sexy" Prime Minister went off script with a Freudian slip a month ago saying "We can't shut down the Oil sands tomorrow, we need to phase them out", and the leader of our Province is busy collecting carbon taxes from individuals and businesses that do nothing to help the environment. Our oil-based economy is dying on the vine, but both levels of government have turned their backs on it.
Oil is the golden goose that provides Albertans a living either directly or indirectly. We have the supply and the US provides the demand. You're buying oil from a friend in a relationship that serves both countries. Personally, I'm not necessarily for or against oil - I just accept it for what it is. Regardless of your political stripe, the fact remains that petroleum products provide the necessities of life on so many levels. It isn't only the stuff that goes in your gas tank.
WetEV
Well-known member
oilerlord said:
Don't believe the reports of a $9,000 loss. Source wasn't stated, numbers don't add up, quote doesn't make sense as doesn't mention a sales volume.
oilerlord said:
Best answer for this is to point out I really don't know. I plug in the car when I get home from work and it is fully changed in the morning when I leave. Will be true for everyone with a Bolt and a 240V charging station.
I've sold several people on buying an EV. I've also talked several people out of buying an EV. If the buyer fits the profile, they will love the car and do well. If they don't fit the profile, talking them out of it is a kindness to them and is the best thing for EVs in the long run.
Profile is for a second commuting car. Not the primary car that you take on longer trips. Cheaper locally, battery life is better in cool climate and electric rates are below national average, even with current gasoline price. EVs are more convenient if you fit the profile, just a better daily drive.
9 hour change time is bogus, unless your commute is 230 miles round trip. Your nightly charging time is a function of how far you drive, not the size of the battery.
oilerlord said:
You mileage will vary. True for a gasoline car as well. Best advice is to have EPA rated range at least twice your normal routines. Allow for batteries to degrade, not work as well at lower temperatures, allow for heat, and so on..
oilerlord said:
Warranty limits and times. Point out that GM doesn't want to pay out anything on warranties, so should be at least somewhat better than that.
oilerlord said:
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_use indicates that oil consumption in the US goes to:
47% Finished motor gasoline
20% Distillate fuel oil (diesel fuel and heating oil)
13% Hydrocarbon gas liquids (HGL) (propane, butane, ethane, etc.)
8% Kerosene-type jet fuel
Obviously, gasoline is not the only use of oil in the US, but it is nearly half of the use.
http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_imports describes US oil imports, which make up 24% of oil used in the US. Of the imports, Canada supplies 40%, but 31% comes from OPEC countries and 16% comes from Persian Gulf countries (note that OPEC and Persian Gulf countries partially overlap -- Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE are in both groups).
oilerlord
Well-known member
boltage said:
Like I said, it isn't only the stuff that goes in your gas tank. Pretty sure we're on the same page. Not sure what point you're trying to make.
oilerlord
Well-known member
WetEV said:
Nobody knows what the loss really is, but in light of Fiat losing $14,000 per 500e they sell, $9K is probably about right given the Bolt's battery is 2.5X larger than the Fiat's. Fiat chairman Sergio Marchionne has repeatedly stated that they lose $14,000 per 500e sold. He may be telling the truth, or lying to us all. It is what it is.
http://www.reuters.com/article/chrsyelr-ceo-evs-idUSL1N0O71MS20140521
oilerlord said:
WetEV said:
So, it depends...right?
oilerlord said:
WetEV said:
So just a guess...it depends?
oilerlord said:
WetEV said:
Should be?
Thanks for the EV 101 lesson. While you're trying to be helpful listing points right out of the EV handbook, the best answers are: We don't really know, It depends, and you're guess is as good as mine. Thank you for making my point. We both own and drive EV's. We get it. We want more people to buy EV's but there continues to be a shroud of uncertainty around them - because in all candor, we really can't give straight, definitive answers to the basic, newbie questions about EV's.
As helpful as these forums are, buying an EV still requires a leap of faith. It did for me. I think it's a leap that the 99% have trouble taking.
GetOffYourGas
Well-known member
oilerlord said:
No, we can't give simple one-line answers to those questions, especially as you phrased them.
Answering "it depends" is very different from answering "I don't know" or "your guess is as good as mine".
Most people I talk to about EVs understands that charging time depends on how discharged the battery is when you start. They also "get" that most charging is done overnight. As for "road trip" charging, I normally give them the line from GM: "90 miles in 30 minutes". If they ask, I can easily elaborate on all the variables. The key is getting to the point where you identify whether EVs work for them, and then you work through the details. You don't have to know every last detail about EV ownership before you try one out. I certainly didn't.
And for everyone else, there are PHEVs. Everybody understands "Electric for your commute, Hybrid for long drives".
The EPA range estimates for EVs actually seem pretty accurate, maybe even slightly conservative. There are reports of people getting 220 miles on the freeway in the Bolt, so the 238 mile range is pretty much in the right ballpark. At least in Southern California, 200 miles seems like a pretty safe range. If the person drives 90 mph everywhere then they won't get that, but that's not my problem. Up north in cold weather the answer might be harder, but I leave that to those who live there.
You can't tell someone what range they'll get in a gas car either. The thing is it doesn't matter because we know 1) the range is far enough that we're not going to have to worry about running out at very short distances, and 2) if we run low, gas stations are easy to find and we can refill in a short period of time. When buying an ICE I never thought to concern myself with whether I could go 200 miles, or 300 miles or 500 miles on a tank of gas.
The reason range is an issue for EVs is because the range in most first gen vehicles was woefully short. They effectively were driving around with only a 2-3 gallon gas tank. It was pretty easy to run into situations where your range was insufficient. With the Bolt we're getting to the point where basic range is no longer a significant issue. The only problem still remaining is recharging time/recharging locations.
I don't see these as major problems in describing EVs to others, it's just that we're on the cutting edge of adoption, the tech is still developing and all of the services aren't fully rolled out yet. In a few years battery density will probably be good enough, and batteries cheap enough that there won't even be any EVs for sale with less than 200 mile range. Teslas can also recharge relatively quickly, so it seems like getting a fast charge down to a reasonable time is technically feasible.
You can't tell someone what range they'll get in a gas car either. The thing is it doesn't matter because we know 1) the range is far enough that we're not going to have to worry about running out at very short distances, and 2) if we run low, gas stations are easy to find and we can refill in a short period of time. When buying an ICE I never thought to concern myself with whether I could go 200 miles, or 300 miles or 500 miles on a tank of gas.
The reason range is an issue for EVs is because the range in most first gen vehicles was woefully short. They effectively were driving around with only a 2-3 gallon gas tank. It was pretty easy to run into situations where your range was insufficient. With the Bolt we're getting to the point where basic range is no longer a significant issue. The only problem still remaining is recharging time/recharging locations.
I don't see these as major problems in describing EVs to others, it's just that we're on the cutting edge of adoption, the tech is still developing and all of the services aren't fully rolled out yet. In a few years battery density will probably be good enough, and batteries cheap enough that there won't even be any EVs for sale with less than 200 mile range. Teslas can also recharge relatively quickly, so it seems like getting a fast charge down to a reasonable time is technically feasible.
oilerlord
Well-known member
Nagorak said:
Yes you can. In terms of EPA ratings, my VW is EPA rated at 36.9 MPG combined. I drive it city/highway/+30C/-30C and everything in between. My lifetime average with the Jetta is 40.0 MPG:
http://www.fuelly.com/car/volkswagen/jetta/2012/oilerlord/200092
This winter, and with the same driving habits, my EV's range dropped by as much as 50% - regardless of what the EPA's test cycle suggests it "should" get. EPA numbers are far more accurate with ICEV's than they are with EV's.
oilerlord said:
Exactly, you can look at the EPA figures, but then their actual range is subject to how fast they drive, whether going up hill or not. You can't give them an exact figure without knowing what their situation is. Just like an EV. But on one cares because they know the range will be sufficient and refueling is not a problem.
ICEs don't drop as much in the winter because they are naturally generating waste heat (maybe this needs to be singled out as a specific issue for EVs, rather than lumping it all together with range). Other than that it's the exact same situation. How you drive definitely affects your overall gas mileage, and I can tell you from personal experience that terrain makes a big difference. The point is if your gas tank gets you 200 miles vs 300 miles, it's pointless. There is already plenty of excess range.
If you only had a 2 gallon tank in your Jetta you'd be well aware of every little thing that impacts your gas mileage too. Just getting 20% less from running the AC would reduce your range from 80 miles to 64 miles-- a pretty big difference-- just like in an EV.
oilerlord
Well-known member
Nagorak said:
Huh?
Last January (winter where I live), my VW's average FE was 36.4 MPG. That missed the EPA number by 0.5 MPG. That is NOT "Just like an EV". This January, I had trouble getting 40-50 miles out of my "EPA: 87 mile range" B250e. Huge difference.
Believe me, people DO care about MPG ratings on cars - regardless if gas stations are just around the corner.
WetEV
Well-known member
oilerlord said:
I suspect that Sergio was telling the truth, or something close to it. This was over two years ago, the battery world has changed. The 500e was a tiny volume car. Notice the differences between this statement on the Fiat 500e and the report from unnamed sources on the GM Bolt.:
Named source vs unnamed source. Not only a named source, but a creditable named source.
A stated production volume vs an unstated production volume.
Numbers make sense vs numbers that don't make sense.
So lets look at numbers, for a bit. Start with batteries numbers. The Bolt's battery is about 2.5X times the capacity of the Fiat 500e's battery.
At the start of 2014, when Marchionne was ranting, battery prices were around $500 per kWh in modest volumes. Yes, the two high volume electric car makers (Tesla and Nissan) were getting batteries rather cheaper than this. But Fiat isn't a high volume electric car company. So the 24 kWh battery cells in the Fiat cost in 2014 was perhaps $12,000. This is a fairly rough estimate, it might well have been much more. Unlikely to be much less.
GM has stated that the current cost of battery cells for the Bolt is $145 per kWh, falling to $100 by 2020. So the 60 kWh battery for the Bolt costs about $8700 now, and about $6000 by 2020.
The battery of the Fiat 500e in 2014 was likely $3k more expensive than the battery of the Bolt is today. That's what the falling battery price curve does. Oh, and put the GM Bolt battery cost on that chart. Battery prices have been falling faster than predicted.
oilerlord
Well-known member
WetEV said:
Ok. Let's accept assumptions we both agree on:
- Fiat is/was losing $14,000 per car
- The battery in the Fiat 500e was $3K more expensive in 2014 than the battery of the Bolt is today
- $14,000 - $3,000 = $11,000.
You may be right. If we're looking at the numbers, the loss on the Bolt may be closer to $11,000 per car - but as neither of us are privy to actual GM accounting numbers (notwithstanding summarized public 10Q's), we're both guessing. I have no idea what inverters, charging systems, heating/cooling/BMS, and other electrical bits cost either. Further discussion should probably be directed here:
http://www.mychevybolt.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4946
I noticed you called the Fiat 500e a "tiny volume" car. While Bolts outsold 500e's by an approximate 3:1 ratio last month, do the 1162 Bolts sold in January qualify it as a "large volume" car? Just curious.
I'm interested to see to see how the US market accepts the Ioniq EV/PHEV.
SeanNelson
Well-known member
These numbers are completely useless because neither the Fiat $14,000 number nor the Bolt $9,000 number have any indication of whether they are per-unit or are an amount which includes development costs. And if they include development costs, then there is a huge question of how many units those costs are amortized over. In the case of the Fiat they would be amortized over far fewer units, which would dramatically increase the quoted cost.oilerlord said:
Without knowing the story behind these numbers it's pointless to use them in an argument.
oilerlord
Well-known member
SeanNelson said:
Sean, I doubt anyone around here is privy to the internal cost accounting of Fiat and/or GM. We can guess at the numbers, and external financial reasons why both cars exist, but both sides of the argument aren't doing much more than blowing smoke, and getting twisted up about it. I really don't want to do that anymore because your're right, it's pointless.
GetOffYourGas
Well-known member
oilerlord said:
This much is undeniably true. In a large part, it's due to the fact that the tests have been fine-tuned for decades to better align with real world conditions for ICEV's. The same is not true for EV's. It will take a while for the EPA to come up with tests that more accurately describe EVs' performance. And maybe that doesn't result in a single number. Maybe two or three scenarios, similar to Nissan gave me when I first got my Leaf. It was something like:
* 60MPH steady highway cruising at 75F
* Mixed driving with A/C on, outside temps 95F
* City stop-and-go driving with heat, outside temps 20F
No doubt, conditions affect EVs more then ICEVs. That's in a large part due to the much higher efficiency of EVs, in particular not having all that "free" waste heat in the winter is a big one.
oilerlord
Well-known member
Brian, the discussion about the Ioniq, and if 124 miles is "enough" went off the rails. It never surprises me how threads go on tangents, and I certainly do my part to feed into that. In general, I don't think we can point to one particular factor about EV's - price, range, battery size, or the overall ignorance of dealers that sell them as the singular reason as to why 99% of the car buying public aren't buying them.
There needs to be some desire on behalf of the buyer required to find out what the EV experience is like, and to my previous point, take a leap of faith that it just might be awesome. It isn't that the subject matter is difficult to comprehend, it's just that Joe Public doesn't seem to want to make the effort. Perhaps $4.00 gasoline would help that along.
We now have an "affordable" 238 mile EV on the market. Last month, less than 1200 were sold, and carsdotcom shows 1362 units available for immediate purchase. Like a lot of others on this board, I used to think range was the be-all-end-all, of what was holding back a deluge of would-be buyers. Not anymore. Range alone isn't holding back the demand.
There needs to be some desire on behalf of the buyer required to find out what the EV experience is like, and to my previous point, take a leap of faith that it just might be awesome. It isn't that the subject matter is difficult to comprehend, it's just that Joe Public doesn't seem to want to make the effort. Perhaps $4.00 gasoline would help that along.
We now have an "affordable" 238 mile EV on the market. Last month, less than 1200 were sold, and carsdotcom shows 1362 units available for immediate purchase. Like a lot of others on this board, I used to think range was the be-all-end-all, of what was holding back a deluge of would-be buyers. Not anymore. Range alone isn't holding back the demand.
Just as a point of reference, cars.com lists cars that are In transit as well as those that are in dealer inventory but spoken for/sold.oilerlord said:
I haven't figured out exactly where they get their numbers, but it appears they harvest the manufacturer and/or dealer inventory info from the web. The results are variable. As we have seen from previous threads, a car showing in inventory at a a particular dealer may not have arrived at the dealer or may already be sold.
And as to "Is 124 miles enough"? For most the answer will be yes - with conditions.
The biggest market for (and best use of) an EV is as a commuter car (with another vehicle available). 89% of US commutes are <=30 miles each way (60 miles round trip). 77% are <=20 miles (40 RT). The Bolts range of 238 miles would probably cover 99% of all commutes. Ironically, the longer your commute (both time and distance), the more sense an EV makes. The added cost of an EV is recovered quicker with lots of miles due to it's lower operational costs.
Commute data source (as of March 2016) http://www.statisticbrain.com/commute-statistics/
In all but extremely frigid climates, 124 miles of range should provide plenty of range for the majority of commuters with allowance for some battery degradation, side trips, and a decent "range anxiety" buffer (size of the buffer needed decreases with experience and will likely be a wash with battery degradation)
The biggest barrier is lack of awareness, with rampant disinformation a strong runner up.
