Will the Chevy Bolt EV be a 'game changer'?

[oilerlord]

Charging on the road is somewhat of a bother, can be a time sink and can be more expensive than gasoline, or free.

No doubt.

"Free" is a perceived yet powerful benefit that excites the left side of the brain and releases endorphins. People line up for it regardless of what their right side of the brain is telling them. Please don't take away my free.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Charging on the road is somewhat of a bother, can be a time sink and can be more expensive than gasoline, or free.

No doubt.

"Free" is a perceived yet powerful benefit that excites the left side of the brain and releases endorphins. People line up for it regardless of what their right side of the brain is telling them. Please don't take away my free.

All of your arguments in favor of "free" make sense in terms of the current state of the market. Basically, EV drivers are few and far between. Most people today don't even consider buying an EV for their next car. Many people don't even know they are available still. So in terms of growing the market for the next few years, I agree. "Free" is a powerful concept.

I guess I'm just thinking longer term. In 5-10 years, if EVs are truly successful, "free" DCQC will not be viable. In fact, it will start to hamper further EV growth if people start to realize that DCQC cannot be depended on. In order to make a journey that requires 1 or more charging stops, one should expect to wait in a line and/or plan on an alternative when that wonderful "free" DCQC is either occupied or in disrepair. The excitement of "free", along with its rush of endorphins, will wear off pretty quickly after a few such trips.

 

[WetEV]

I guess I'm just thinking longer term. In 5-10 years, if EVs are truly successful, "free" DCQC will not be viable.

The "free" L2 stations outside the casino are likely to stay free.

 

[oilerlord]

"Free" is a powerful concept.

I guess I'm just thinking longer term. In 5-10 years, if EVs are truly successful, "free" DCQC will not be viable. In fact, it will start to hamper further EV growth if people start to realize that DCQC cannot be depended on. In order to make a journey that requires 1 or more charging stops, one should expect to wait in a line and/or plan on an alternative when that wonderful "free" DCQC is either occupied or in disrepair. The excitement of "free", along with its rush of endorphins, will wear off pretty quickly after a few such trips.

People that buy a Bolt or Model 3, or any current EV on the market are still early adopters. The industry would have little chance of surviving outside of it's government incubator. That "free" $10,000 tax credit, and charging for "free" excites people. Let's get people excited about EV's first. Until EV's reach economies of scale, it's way too early to start talking about charging being on par with the price of gasoline.

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that government someday passes a law that requires Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc, to install at least one DCFC at every gas station, and post a regulated and/or subsidized price per kWh alongside the price of a gallon of gas. That pretty much resolves the problem of enough fast charging stations to go around.

 

[DucRider]

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that government someday passes a law that requires Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc, to install at least one DCFC at every gas station, and post a regulated and/or subsidized price per kWh alongside the price of a gallon of gas. That pretty much resolves the problem of enough fast charging stations to go around.

Passing a law that requires small business owners to install a piece of equipment that will generate little to no revenue had better be out of the realm of possibility.
Remember, gas stations are customers of Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc. - they are not owned by the brand on the sign. Even if you could force Big Oil to pay for the equipment and installation, it's unreasonable to require gas station owners to sell electricity in addition to gas. Should we also pass a law that if you sell soda pop, you must also install a cooler that stocks milk? The government would then of course regulate or subsidize the cost of the milk. Milk is better for you - right?
We have a shortage of laws and regulations in this country that restrain free trade - so lets work on adding more!

 

[SeanNelson]

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that government someday passes a law that requires Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc, to install at least one DCFC at every gas station, and post a regulated and/or subsidized price per kWh alongside the price of a gallon of gas.

I can't see them making a requirement or regulating the price. None of that happened for gas.

But I can see them offering incentives to install charging stations.

 

[SparkE]

Easy guys. I said free L3 (or technically DCFC) charging is one of the Bolt's TCO selling points - not all of them.

I must have missed it - when did GM say that DCFC charging would be free? Today, most (CHAdeMO & CCS) DCFC stations in the US aren't free. Yes, Nissan gives you a card for free charging. Has GM announced that they are going to do the same?

 

[sam]

Game changer I think so- it set the bar high for other automakers n set a media hype that made the electric vehicle stand out. I think the majority of society didn't think it would be so expensive....

 

[Robaroni]

Interesting article: 'Increased mileage on a charge for electric cars is all well and good, but the real “game changer” won’t come until a way is found to recharge the battery that renders the process equivalent in time to filling up a tank with gasoline.'

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/readersreact/la-ol-le-bolt-20160916-snap-story.html

I disagree with this statement, here's why.
You can't equate an EV with an ICE car. First, a car that goes over 200 miles on a charge only needs a charge station on trips. How many of you go more than the 238+ mile range of the Bolt on a daily basis? I certainly don't. An electric car can be charged anywhere there is an outlet, work, home, etc. How many people with gas cars have pumps at their homes? How many businesses have pumps for their employees? That's rhetorical! It's apples and oranges, there's just no range anxiety with a car that goes this far on a charge. That's the petroleum industry's angle, let's not chase that straw man! EVs are so much better in so many ways than an ICE car that there is just no comparison.
The world is changing, thank you Mr. Musk, and I hope it keeps changing, I can't wait for the Bolt and the Model 3, both are a great start to a technology that can only go up, unlike fossil fuel that has no way to go. Now we have massive new technologies, MOSFETS (metal oxide silicon transistors), IGBT (insulated gate bipolar transistors(, PWM (pulse width modulation), etc. etc. The transistor change the world, it was the greatest discovery of the 20th Century and it will continue to change this one.

My good friend came over yesterday, her truck gas tank is leaking and her "check engine" light is on - again! No spark plugs, no gas tank, no oil change, no complex tranny with slipping disks.

I make more electricity at my home than I use, the electric company owes me every month, now I'll drive for free, what's not to like!

Rob

HI Rob, welcome to the forum!

You made some valid points, but, being able to fully recharge (any EV's) battery in the time it takes to fill up an ICE car - would begin to change the game. Imagine if there was a universal EV charging station at all existing gas stations - able to charge our batteries to 80% in five minutes - provided free to the end user. Game changer.

To your point about your friend's old truck, there are old EV's on the road that are end-of-life too. Without a costly replacement battery, the manageable range of a Nissan Leaf with 50K miles on it is pretty much done - regardless of the fact you can charge it at home. I'm guessing your friend's truck has 100K or more miles on it, but it can probably make the trip from LA to Vegas without a problem. The Bolt will have nowhere near the large battery buffer that the V1.0 Volt had, and after 200K miles, I doubt that the Bolt will be able to manage more than 150 miles on a charge. This isn't the petroleum industry's "angle", it's reality. Batteries degrade over time and number of cycles.

We all don't live in California where there are an abundance of DCFC stations. There are countless city X to city Y destinations that don't have DCFC between them. So you drive 150 miles in one direction...what about getting back? What if you didn't fully charge the battery before you left, and don't have the extra half day to sit around at the destination charging at 120V because L2 and L3 aren't available?. How much of a hit does your range take if you live in a northern state with cold winters? The Bolt will be a great EV, and perfect commuter, but you can't honestly say there is "just no range anxiety" associated with it because there still is. I never give a thought about running out of fuel with my TDI, and neither does your friend with that old truck.

Please understand that I'm a big fan of EV's, and drive one too. Having enough range to make it to your destination and back 98% of the time - isn't ALL of the time. As someone that also generates their own electricity from solar, the kWh's that you generate aren't "free" either...they are a commodity with a value, and there was a big up-front cost to generate that "free" electricity. As much as the petroleum industry has an angle, the renewable energy industry has it's own angle too...complete with it's own spin and half truths.

Thank you! I'm happy to be hear and in the market for a Bolt.

Yes, batteries are rated in cycles but let's not mix apples and oranges. Batteries are 'fuel' not defects! Leaky gas tanks, exhaust problems, ignition, etc. are defects and those defects don't plague EV's, that was my point. The future, just like the past, will be determined by technology, as batteries get better EV's will get better. ICE vehicles have basically no where to go, they're a hundred year old anachronism. Technology hasn't increased their efficiency appreciably in the last 50 years. I was getting 35 mpg on my 1970 VW bug. ICE efficiency is still at 30 to 35%. EV's, are technology rich. That's the difference.
Your TDI will continue to pollute the planet, an EV charged from a PV system like mine will never be beaten by an ICE vehicle. PV modules recover the energy required to make them in the first year with 29+ years of clean energy to follow. The sun shines on this planet for one hour and produces all the energy everyone on the planet needs for one year. It will last a couple more billion years. What do you think we should be concentrating our technology on?

It's no contest, no oil changes, no broken fan belts, cracked radiator hoses, tranny problems. The simplicity of an EV means those 50K miles will spend much less time in a repair shop. It's the difference between a VCR and an MP3 player. The VCR is full of mechanical parts that wear out. Electronics has no moving parts, no connecting rods, valves slapping back and forth or blown head gaskets. EV motor bearings that Musk says will last a million miles - put in a new and cheaper set of batteries and you're good to go. That's the difference between an EV and an ICE.
Look at the cost of PV. My first system, 10 years ago, cost 5 to 10 times more than a comparable system today, just like that LED TV. It's technology and, again, EVs have a rich future.
Rob

 

[oilerlord]

Passing a law that requires small business owners to install a piece of equipment that will generate little to no revenue had better be out of the realm of possibility.
Remember, gas stations are customers of Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc. - they are not owned by the brand on the sign. Even if you could force Big Oil to pay for the equipment and installation, it's unreasonable to require gas station owners to sell electricity in addition to gas. Should we also pass a law that if you sell soda pop, you must also install a cooler that stocks milk? The government would then of course regulate or subsidize the cost of the milk. Milk is better for you - right?
We have a shortage of laws and regulations in this country that restrain free trade - so lets work on adding more!

Umm...not that it really matters, but government already subsidizes the dairy industry, and has mandated that schools with soda vending machines, also provide healthy choices (including milk) to their students. Apparently, milk is better for you...but I digress.

Let's not ignore the fact that ZEV's are already regulated and subsidized by the EPA and government via environmental initiatives and tax incentives. Tesla notwithstanding, car manufacturers don't want to build ZEV's because they are money losing propositions, but CAFE and the requirement for zero emission credits forces them to.

I'm not going to debate if government subsidies are good, bad, or ugly - only suggesting one possible solution to the shortage of charging infrastructure as the ratio of EV's to public charging stations becomes a bigger problem then it already is. Adding fast charging to the existing and widespread network of gas stations makes sense (to me), but no doubt that presents it's own set of challenges as to who pays for it. EV's require regulation and subsidies to survive. It really isn't too much of a stretch that government also institutes regulations and subsidies to provide places to charge them.

If you have a better solution to the problem, please share it with the group.

 

[oilerlord]

Your TDI will continue to pollute the planet, an EV charged from a PV system like mine will never be beaten by an ICE vehicle. PV modules recover the energy required to make them in the first year with 29+ years of clean energy to follow. The sun shines on this planet for one hour and produces all the energy everyone on the planet needs for one year. It will last a couple more billion years. What do you think we should be concentrating our technology on?

It's no contest, no oil changes, no broken fan belts, cracked radiator hoses, tranny problems. The simplicity of an EV means those 50K miles will spend much less time in a repair shop. It's the difference between a VCR and an MP3 player. The VCR is full of mechanical parts that wear out. Electronics has no moving parts, no connecting rods, valves slapping back and forth or blown head gaskets. EV motor bearings that Musk says will last a million miles - put in a new and cheaper set of batteries and you're good to go. That's the difference between an EV and an ICE.
Look at the cost of PV. My first system, 10 years ago, cost 5 to 10 times more than a comparable system today, just like that LED TV. It's technology and, again, EVs have a rich future.
Rob

Rob, I drive an EV for all the reasons you've listed, and it perfect for at least 95% of my needs. Really...I get it. I'll stipulate that EV's are more advanced, more efficient, and better than ICE in almost every way. The sun shines on my 41 solar modules, powers my house, and charges my car. It's a beautiful thing.

I also occasionally drive my Jetta TDI for longer trips, including between Alberta and Arizona - something that isn't (yet) viable with an EV for reasons I mentioned earlier. Though technically, EV's have zero emissions - the electricity generated to charge them may not be depending on where you live. Yes, my TDI pollutes - but it also gets a combined city/highway 40MPG, so it burns less fuel, and thus releases less CO2. Once EV's evolve to the point I can just as easily drive long distances like I do in my TDI, we'll consider going 100% electric.

 

[DucRider]

...Yes, my TDI pollutes - but it also gets a combined city/highway 40MPG, so it burns less fuel, and thus releases less CO2. Once EV's evolve to the point I can just as easily drive long distances like I do in my TDI, we'll consider going 100% electric.

There are a lot more pollution issues with ICE cars than CO2, and diesel has more than gas. "Dieselgate" and "clean diesel" had little to do with CO2, but was primarily focused on NOx. NOx is nasty in many ways. Electricity generation can certainly contribute to NOx as well (particularly coal and to some extent natural gas), so where you get your juice does matter. It is easier/less expensive to control those emissions at a few sources where electricity is generated than trying to do it on thousands of vehicles driving around. And owners have been known to defeat emissions systems themselves (Google "rolling coal" for extreme examples).

I personally hope that all offending TDI owners are forced to either get their cars fixed under the recall or take the VW buyout. In areas with emissions testing, they need to be automatically failed unless proof of a recall fix can be provided.

And I completely agree that long distance travel is not practical in most EV's. Tesla and the Supercharging network are getting close, and most would find little inconvenience on most trips. It's that last 5% that is kind of a "gotcha", but there is always the option to rent a vehicle suitable for long trips.

 

[oilerlord]

I completely agree that long distance travel is not practical in most EV's. Tesla and the Supercharging network are getting close, and most would find little inconvenience on most trips. It's that last 5% that is kind of a "gotcha", but there is always the option to rent a vehicle suitable for long trips.

I read that a lot...just rent a vehicle for long trips. That might work for a weekend, but not when we leave our vehicle in Arizona for months at a time...which also reminds me that our garage can easily hit 120F too. Not exactly the best environment for EV batteries.

Anyway, the Bolt does address more of an EV's compromises but not all of them. For most, the advantages still don't overcome the drawbacks as people typically want to buy one car that does it all, not just 95% of the time.

 

[WetEV]

Anyway, the Bolt does address more of an EV's compromises but not all of them. For most, the advantages still don't overcome the drawbacks as people typically want to buy one car that does it all, not just 95% of the time.

The Bolt does expand the number of people that could make it an only car, as well as a second car. That's enough for good.

Don't expect BEVs to be market leaders for a few years, at minimum.

 

[DucRider]

I read that a lot...just rent a vehicle for long trips. That might work for a weekend, but not when we leave our vehicle in Arizona for months at a time...which also reminds me that our garage can easily hit 120F too. Not exactly the best environment for EV batteries.

Anyway, the Bolt does address more of an EV's compromises but not all of them. For most, the advantages still don't overcome the drawbacks as people typically want to buy one car that does it all, not just 95% of the time.

Yeah, sounds like an EV may not be right for you. Are you selling the B-Class?

No one vehicle is going to suit 100% of the people 100% of the time. Or even one person 100% of the time. I want something that is small, , quick, efficient, easy to maneuver and park in the city and can occasionally carry 4x8 sheets of plywood, drywall, 10' 4x4's, etc. Makes sense to rent/borrow a truck on occasion instead of expecting one vehicle to cover everything. For most people, it would make sense to rent on the rare occasion they want to take an extended road trip if an EV was their only personal vehicle. While "snowbirds" are not uncommon, they certainly don't represent most of the population.


I agree, most would have trouble with an EV as an only vehicle. About half the urban population is in multifamily housing or rentals where home charging is not a practical option, and that alone supports your statement. I don't know of anyone that thinks EV's are ready to replace all ICE vehicles.

And back to the original subject:
The Bolt will be a game changer by the simple fact that it is the first to offer more than "usually enough range around town" at a price that many of the 80 mile EV's can't match. That kind of price and range pressure is already changing the EV market. I doubt if the i3, e-golf, Soul EV, stopgap LEAF 1.5, etc would be coming to market at this time without the Bolt being delivered. Tesla's 373K reservations for a future product sent a message, but the Bolt actually being produced and delivered significantly advances the timetable and instantly puts incredible price pressure on existing EV's. I doubt that Tesla would be offering a software limited S 75 (the S 60)for an $8500 discount if the Bolt wasn't hitting the market when it is. Game changer? When your product forces other manufacturers to redesign, accelerate timetables, drop prices,etc., the game has changed and the consumer benefits.
Is the Bolt the only game changer? No. When the Model 3 starts to ship, it's likely the game will change again (more likely when the $35K version ships, but it's all speculation at this point). Same when the LEAF 2.0 comes out (if they can do 200+ miles and active thermal management).

 

[oilerlord]

[

Yeah, sounds like an EV may not be right for you. Are you selling the B-Class?

No one vehicle is going to suit 100% of the people 100% of the time. Or even one person 100% of the time. I want something that is small, , quick, efficient, easy to maneuver and park in the city and can occasionally carry 4x8 sheets of plywood, drywall, 10' 4x4's, etc. Makes sense to rent/borrow a truck on occasion instead of expecting one vehicle to cover everything. For most people, it would make sense to rent on the rare occasion they want to take an extended road trip if an EV was their only personal vehicle. While "snowbirds" are not uncommon, they certainly don't represent most of the population.


I agree, most would have trouble with an EV as an only vehicle. About half the urban population is in multifamily housing or rentals where home charging is not a practical option, and that alone supports your statement. I don't know of anyone that thinks EV's are ready to replace all ICE vehicles.

And back to the original subject:
The Bolt will be a game changer by the simple fact that it is the first to offer more than "usually enough range around town" at a price that many of the 80 mile EV's can't match.

We have our Jetta TDI wagon for long trips to and from Arizona, and when the car is parked down south, my wife's gasoline BMW works just fine for other medium-range trips.

To me 95% of the time IS "most" of the time. For that reason, the B250e is the perfect vehicle for me "most" of the time, so no; I'm not selling it. To the contrary, I'm thrilled with it - but I'm also a realist to what an EV can, and can't do. From experience, I enjoy all the benefits of driving an EV but I'm also comfortable discussing it's compromises - such as limited public charging infrastructure, and the long time it takes (compared with ICE) to charge the battery. I still LOVE my EV, it's just that I can take off the rose colored glasses once in a while to discuss it's shortcomings. Not sure why people have a problem with candor.

You and I interpret the words "game changer" differently (and that's ok). For some, it only takes an EV with more range at a lower price to change the game. If that's the sole criteria, than anyone can pick up a cheap used $8,000 Leaf, and it will have "usually enough range for around town" since "most" of us drive less than 46 miles per day.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/onh00/bar8.htm

If the Bolt's "low" price causes EV sales double, this year...would that change the game? If the answer is "Yes" - then EV sales go from a pathetic 0.6% to nearly-as-pathetic 1.2%. If the needle barely moved, has the game changed? Think iPod, iPhone, iPad. Think about, the excitement, and imaginations those products captured on a global scale. In essence, think bigger and aim higher.

The VW Beetle changed the game. By 1973, 16 million were produced. Kids helped the car become part of Pop Culture with "Punch Bug" when spotted. Movies were made about the "Love Bug". They were everywhere and a household name. Unfortunately, we now led to believe the next smartphone is a game changer because it's screen has more pixels, and the battery lasts longer. I put the Bolt in that category...more evolution than revolution.

 

[michael]

According to the cited information , the average for male drivers is about 46 miles a day. But this is grossly inadequate for an EV to gain wide acceptance


In my opinion, in order to gain wide acceptance an EV should be adequate for a driver 99% of the time. Three days a year it doesn't do the job. Knowing the average doesn't tell the story. In my case I believe a 200 mile car will do the job almost all the time.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

According to the cited information , the average for male drivers is about 46 miles a day. But this is grossly inadequate for an EV to gain wide acceptance


In my opinion, in order to gain wide acceptance an EV should be adequate for a driver 99% of the time. Three days a year it doesn't do the job. Knowing the average doesn't tell the story. In my case I believe a 200 mile car will do the job almost all the time.

Agreed. Averages are terrible at telling stories.

I drive about 15,000 miles/year. That's an average of 41 miles per day. Great. Most days (more than 300/year), I drive less than 25 miles. The remaining days, I often drive 300+ miles in a day. Those are the days that I am traveling, usually to visit family.

My current fleet is 1 BEV (2012 Leaf) and 1 PHEV (2015 CMax Energi). For 300 days/year I burn no gasoline. For the rest, I have an efficient hybrid. The best part of the PHEV solution (versus renting a gasser) is that local driving at the other end of the trip is also electric. I drive a hybrid to my mother's house, but then drive electric around her town. Renting a gasser would mean I'm driving on gas around her town too.

If I replace my CMax with a Bolt, I could make those 300-mile trips work. But it would require sacrifice and a lot more planning compared to taking the PHEV. I am willing to live with that, but most people aren't. Including my wife. So if I do get a Bolt, it replaces the Leaf and not the CMax. It's still a good step forward.

 

[Robaroni]

OK, so "game changer" is just a relative term and just about everything is evolution, smart phones are the evolution of Bell's first phone if you think about it, or as Newton said, he could only accomplish what he did because he "stood on the shoulders of giants".

So why are we even concerned if it's a game changer or not? Does it make the car, the evolution, etc. any more significant? I don't think so, they were making electric cars at the turn of the last century, we're just better at it now!

Real 'game changers' are much bigger than the Bolt, Volt, Tesla, etc. Sure they changed how we view and maybe even accept the immediate future but the last big automotive game changer was Ford's assembly line with interchangeable parts. That changed industry forever. The transistor was a 'game changer' because it changed history and The Industrial Revolution was a 'game changer', it changed our world completely. Those are game changers. The new EVs are just historical transitions. Fossil fuel is at its end cycle, just like whale oil reached its end of cycle. Was the first hybrid a game changer? I don't think so, it was just part of the present transition.

The fossil fuel industry is hanging on for dear life, now they can't raise prices to $4 or $5 a gallon and they know it, the sun has won out and it's only time until the present transition becomes the norm just like kerosene in lamps and smart phones in our pockets.

 

[oilerlord]

According to the cited information , the average for male drivers is about 46 miles a day. But this is grossly inadequate for an EV to gain wide acceptance

In my opinion, in order to gain wide acceptance an EV should be adequate for a driver 99% of the time. Three days a year it doesn't do the job. Knowing the average doesn't tell the story. In my case I believe a 200 mile car will do the job almost all the time.

I'd equate "wide acceptance" in relation to how the market accepted diesel vehicles since 2009. It took time, a lot of marketing, and a great product to convince people to give smelly, coal rolling, and noisy vehicles - a chance.

In 2014, 20% of all VW vehicles sold in the US were diesel, so clearly, they gained wide acceptance. At 0.6%, of all vehicles sold in the US, EV's aren't even on the radar. EV's can't just be "adequate 99% of the time", they need to excel 100% of the time. That was the promise of diesel TDI, (green, high MPG, more reliable) and why people paid a premium for them.

It's going to take a lot of marketing, and an amazing car to convince 20% of car buyers to buy an EV. Someday, perhaps but right now, an "adequate 200 mile car" that does the job 99% of the time - isn't enough.