Gigafactory

Quote: reno

AZ, you and I have sparred on this before, we're repeating ourselves. Lithium ion batteries are absolutely "new" technology, they were introduced commercially in 1991. The 1897 Morrison had a top speed of 14 mph and a 4 horsepower motor. You just can't compare the 1897 Morrison to a Tesla Model S. Moreover, the convenience of charging an EV in your own garage didn't exist in 1900, an era when just 3 percent of U.S. households had electricity. Here's the bottom line: if the 2018 Tesla Model 3 and/or 2018 Chevy Bolt fail spectacularly, (and they might!) that failure will be because EV technology in 2018 sucks, not because EV technology in 1900 sucked.

We have been over it before, but what we have here is a failure to communicate. I am not saying that you can compare a modern EV to the Morrison any more than you can compare a Camry and a Model T. But I am saying there is nothing new about the idea of an EV and the same hurdles that stopped the 1897 model are causing issues now, namely range and charging time.

Quote:

I agree that subsidizing the Nissan Leaf has increased sales significantly. But no one buys a $135,000 BMW i8 to get the $7,500 federal tax credit. And considering the beneficiaries of oil revenue (Iran, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, ISIS) there's a national security argument to be made for the U.S. government to subsidize the Nissan Leaf. Those U.S. Navy aircraft carriers stationed in the Persian Gulf aren't cheap, either. As for California's ZEV mandate, if the air in your hometown looked like this much of the year, maybe you'd be a bit more sympathetic to a ZEV mandate.

National security argument? Not so much. If we were concerned about oil and national security we would be making drilling locally easier. Most of US imports come from Canada and Mexico, within 10 years North America will be our own self-contained oil market, with imports balanced by exports only for need of grades better suited to our refineries.

Quote:

Quote: AZDuffman

The "green" market has probably been filled and every person who thinks EVs are some sort of better environmental choice owns one.

EVs were 1% of sales in 2014. Surely more than 1% of the U.S. population are treehuggers. In 2012, 65 million Americans voted for Obama. Is it fair to assume that perhaps 20 or 30 percent of Obama voters are treehuggers? That's 13 to 19 million Americans. It's one thing to argue that these millions of treehuggers are gullible, misguided, hypocritical, and stupid. It's quite another thing to argue that these millions of treehuggers don't even exist.

1% in 2014, but cars last more than one year. The Leaf has been out for 5 years, the Prius has been out since 1997. Volt for what, 5 also? Bottom line is no matter if they want EV or hybrid they could have chosen one last time they replaced their wheels. Remember too that some unknown portion of the treehugger group chooses not to own any car.

I will maintain my point that the EV market is now mature and more growth will be a slow slog.

Quote: AZDuffman

...the same hurdles that stopped the 1897 model are causing issues now, namely range and charging time.

The range of the Model S P85 is in the neighborhood of 265 miles. That's an entirely different ballgame than what they had in 1897. The whole point of the gigafactory is to whittle down the $100,000 sticker price.

Quote: AZDuffman

National security argument? Not so much. If we were concerned about oil and national security we would be making drilling locally easier. Most of US imports come from Canada and Mexico, within 10 years North America will be our own self-contained oil market, with imports balanced by exports only for need of grades better suited to our refineries.

Domestic drilling has skyrocketed, but it's an international market, and oil is fungible. So when the Saudi government executes a Christian for distributing the Bible, no U.S. President (Republican or Democrat) has any leverage to flip the Saudis the middle finger and tell those guys to go to hell. If Saudi Arabia's main export were, say, pineapple or cashews, we could hold them accountable for their horrors. But in 2014, 13% of the oil consumed in America came from our "ally" Saudi Arabia. Yes, there's an enormous price to be paid for switching to electric batteries. But there's also an enormous price to be paid for Saudi atrocities, and earthquakes in Oklahoma, (14 Oklahoma houses destroyed in November 2011). Either way, it's expensive.

Quote: AZDuffman

I will maintain my point that the EV market is now mature and more growth will be a slow slog.

If the current $30,000 EV only gets 90 miles per charge, why would the market stop growing when the 200 mile range cars hit the dealerships in 2017? That argument doesn't make any sense. You've got it backwards: the technological innovations will cause the EV market to expand, not contract.

True story: my next door neighbor, Ben, just bought a car over the weekend (VW diesel). A couple months ago, Ben had borrowed his friend's Leaf for the day. Ben was seriously considering buying the Leaf, and the only reason he didn't jump on it is because his wife commutes beyond the 45 mile one-way range. A Tesla with 200 miles would certainly be adequate, and they're keeping their old Subaru Forrester, so the annual long road trip isn't the deal breaker.

Quote: reno

Domestic drilling has skyrocketed, but it's an international market, and oil is fungible. So when the Saudi government executes a Christian for distributing the Bible, no U.S. President (Republican or Democrat) has any leverage to flip the Saudis the middle finger and tell those guys to go to hell. If Saudi Arabia's main export were, say, pineapple or cashews, we could hold them accountable for their horrors. But in 2014, 13% of the oil consumed in America came from our "ally" Saudi Arabia. Yes, there's an enormous price to be paid for switching to electric batteries. But there's also an enormous price to be paid for Saudi atrocities, and earthquakes in Oklahoma, (14 Oklahoma houses destroyed in November 2011). Either way, it's expensive.

The earthquake thing is nonsense, just one more thing from the NO FRACKING crowd who if they were serious would go home and turn off their water heaters, furnaces, and stoves. They are useful idiots for OPEC and the Russians. We have been fracking for decades, yet earthquakes just now? Like there were not earthquakes before?

Quote:

If the current $30,000 EV only gets 90 miles per charge, why would the market stop growing when the 200 mile range cars hit the dealerships in 2017? That argument doesn't make any sense. You've got it backwards: the technological innovations will cause the EV market to expand, not contract.

Many reasons. The 200 mile range is still not enough for a good part of the population. The purchase price will remain high. Lots of people do not have a nice garage to pull in to recharge and must park on the street. Sure, more will be sold, but not the major expansion you are expecting.

Quote:

True story: my next door neighbor, Ben, just bought a car over the weekend (VW diesel). A couple months ago, Ben had borrowed his friend's Leaf for the day. Ben was seriously considering buying the Leaf, and the only reason he didn't jump on it is because his wife commutes beyond the 45 mile one-way range. A Tesla with 200 miles would certainly be adequate, and they're keeping their old Subaru Forrester, so the annual long road trip isn't the deal breaker.

Which more proves the point that an EV will remain mostly the secondary car and for the old lady who goes to church and the grocery store only. It isn't that you usually don't drive 200 miles. It is that when you do you do not want to have to rent a car. And we all know 200 is the best-case, it will probably be closer to 150 when you have the radio and A/C running. No person I know is going to take that kind of chance. The diesel is the smarter choice.

Quote: AZDuffman

Which more proves the point that an EV will remain mostly the secondary car and for the old lady who goes to church and the grocery store only. It isn't that you usually don't drive 200 miles. It is that when you do you do not want to have to rent a car. And we all know 200 is the best-case, it will probably be closer to 150 when you have the radio and A/C running. No person I know is going to take that kind of chance. The diesel is the smarter choice.

Actually, I don't think range limitation is the biggest weakness of an EV. While people may drive more than 150-200 miles in a day, they often go to work or some place where they can get a slow trickle charge

It is the intercity trip of 500 miles where they must stop at least twice and get charge up completely in a reasonable amount of time. As I said before, I think ultimately you will have to rent gasoline cars or take a train or plane to do intercity trips. People who drive all day, cannot get electric cars.

I know these numbers can go up and down dependent on state and future improvement, but
Electricity costs 8.4 cents per kWh to generate and other 3.7 cents per kWh to distribute
Gasoline at $2.80 per gallon and 33.4 kWh/gallon costs 8.4 cents per kWh and is subject to the efficiency of the engine

A $3000 Tesla powerwall battery conservatively may get the equivalent of 1000 cycles at 100% before it needs to be replaced. That is 30 cents per kWh just to fill up and discharge a battery. I still need to generate the power or purchase it from somehwere, or pay for solar cells.

I think that those numbers are so far apart, that they will not be in the same neighborhood in two decades.

Time of Use plans offered by electricity generators are very stingy, and it difficult to get them pay for themselves, let alone give you low cost power to fill up your battery.

Without ROI in the same ballpark as an economy gasoline vehicle even the little old lady won't touch it with a ten foot pole. Also, for houses, unless you live in an ultra expensive urban location, it is still cheaper and more practical to go with a LNG generator. The rural dweller far from power is still going to use lead acid batteries over lithium ion. He has not space problems, and can afford to purchase or build a shed for his batteris.

Quote: Pacomartin

Actually, I don't think range limitation is the biggest weakness of an EV. While people may drive more than 150-200 miles in a day, they often go to work or some place where they can get a slow trickle charge

It is the intercity trip of 500 miles where they must stop at least twice and get charge up completely in a reasonable amount of time. As I said before, I think ultimately you will have to rent gasoline cars or take a train or plane to do intercity trips. People who drive all day, cannot get electric cars.

Talking heads underestimate how often people need to drive more and how often they have less time to charge. Not just those intercity trips. Then add in sitting in traffic. Then ask, will charge time take longer as the battery ages? Americans want the ability to go NOW! Without that most will not consider.

Quote: AZDuffman

Tesla is taking different sales approach, their unique market proposition is speed and handling. Anyone who knows even a little knows an electric motor will outperform a gas engine on power and how fast that power comes on. It is part of why golf carts are so fun to drive. Instant torque, in fact max torque is at 0 RPM.

I know zero about Musk except that he is the Tesla CEO. I just know I have seen what he is doing back in the 1990s on so many dotcom disasters. He has to keep the hype going so the money flows. The thing is I see is that in a few years his sales will flatten. His natural market will have been reached. The early-adopters will move to something else, so if he is not getting early majority he is really sunk. Even if they do adopt, I don't know that I see profits as he keeps piling on fixed costs.

Yeah, this is how we build economies. I just see the house battery as a more viable product.

Musk made a tonne of money with Paypal, and also owns SpaceX. While I don't believe someone should be feted as a business genius or guru after one success, he's the sort of smart, risk taking entrepreneur that has big ideas, and seems to have the control to see them through. I don't think, from what I've seen, he is close to being sunk if Tesla falls away.

Quote: AZDuffman

The earthquake thing is nonsense, just one more thing from the NO FRACKING crowd who if they were serious would go home and turn off their water heaters, furnaces, and stoves.

Just a coincidence...

Quote: International Business Times

Oklahoma’s government confirmed this week that hundreds of earthquakes rocking the state are largely caused by oil and gas operations. The position marks a sharp turnaround for state officials, who for years expressed skepticism that Oklahoma’s earthquake swarm could be linked to the rampant underground disposal of wastewater from oil and gas wells.

The state’s energy and environment office on Tuesday launched a website, called Earthquakes in Oklahoma, which embraces the scientific consensus that injecting billions of gallons of wastewater near fault zones is triggering temblors in areas with little history of seismic activity. Until this week, officials had maintained that the spike in earthquakes was probably a natural phenomenon.

“While we understand that Oklahoma has historically experienced some level of seismicity, we know that the recent rise in earthquakes cannot be entirely attributed to natural causes,” the new state website says. “The Oklahoma Geological Survey has determined that the majority of recent earthquakes in central and north-central Oklahoma are very likely triggered by the injection of produced water [i.e., wastewater] in disposal wells.”

The State of Oklahoma's new official website blaming earthquakes on fracking was announced and endorsed by Republican Governor Mary Fallin.

I knew it! Fallin (a Republican) is in on the conspiracy with those lying, deceitful scientists! Why are the Republicans lying to the people of Oklahoma about earthquakes?

Ditto for Kansas.

Quote: reno

Just a coincidence...

I knew it! Fallin (a Republican) is in on the conspiracy with those lying, deceitful scientists! Why are the Republicans lying to the people of Oklahoma about earthquakes?

Ditto for Kansas.

Drilling for over 100 years, fracking for decades, yet just now they are claiming quakes? Sorry if I am not impressed.

BTW: The fracking is needed to support all those electric cars, so the enviros might want to consider that electricity comes from more than an outlet.

Quote: AZDuffman

Talking heads underestimate how often people need to drive more and how often they have less time to charge. Not just those intercity trips. Then add in sitting in traffic. Then ask, will charge time take longer as the battery ages? Americans want the ability to go NOW! Without that most will not consider.

I am in general agreement with you. I am just saying that if the infrastructure appeared overnight to eliminate range anxiety , I think the cost of the battery would still leave the EV out of the mainstream.

As I said, earlier the cost of using a battery (even without considering the power source) far exceeds the cost of gasoline or power from an electric company directly used. The margin is so significant that they won't get close unless there is a massive shift in the economics of the world.

Quote: Pacomartin

I am in general agreement with you. I am just saying that if the infrastructure appeared overnight to eliminate range anxiety , I think the cost of the battery would still leave the EV out of the mainstream.

As I said, earlier the cost of using a battery (even without considering the power source) far exceeds the cost of gasoline or power from an electric company directly used. The margin is so significant that they won't get close unless there is a massive shift in the economics of the world.

I agree totally, was just adding to the point about how even if they get it to said 200 miles that it is still not enough. Many people think it will be, but in the end it would not.