Gigafactory

Quote: AZDuffman

There always seems to be some person thinking people will just fall in love with EVs all of the sudden. Renault half bet the companies on the idea. Yet they remain a niche.

Perhaps I'm blinded by my own ideological bias, but hear me out.

I've been leasing a 100% electric Kia since February 2016. In early May 2017, I spent a week in Los Angeles driving a rented 2017 BMW (gasoline engine.)

The Kia vastly outperforms the BMW, it was no contest. Smoother, quieter, quicker response, no vibrations. To be fair, the BMW offered a luxury experience, I'm not disparaging it.

I'm not talking about exhaust pollution or liberals' global warming hysteria-- I'm talking about sitting in the driver's seat and hitting the pedal. Once you spend some time driving an EV, there's no going back to gasoline.

Quote: reno

Why would the French oil company Total be predicting 15 to 30% market share for EVs in 2030? From Total's perspective, it's bad news for demand for their product.

Depends, are the there any oil-fired or natural gas electric plants in France, or other countries where Total does business? France isn't' exactly an oil/gas producer, so I'm guessing Total buys crude and distributes refined products, maybe refines it as well. If they also invest in other energy types, well...

Electric car use will spread far and wide when three things happen: 1) they drop in price to a point comparable to today's cars, including energy costs (that is, filling up the tank and charging the battery cost roughly the same), 2) you can drive on as you do a gas car, meaning you need not worry about running out of juice far from a charging station, and 3) charging the battery takes about as long as filling up the tank.

Roughly 42% of US homes built in the last 50 years are heated by electricity, and not natural gas, heating oil, or other options despite electricity being one of the most expensive options to operate. I think if people were solely concerned about cost savings, then over 80% of new homes would be heated with natural gas which is almost always the least expensive way to heat a home.

Quote: reno

The Kia vastly outperforms the BMW, it was no contest. Smoother, quieter, quicker response, no vibrations. To be fair, the BMW offered a luxury experience, I'm not disparaging it.

See, I don't think electric cars have to really be more cost efficient than gasoline cars to operate for their numbers to go above 10%. I think consumers make decisions based on many options other than rigid cost comparison.

Quote: Pacomartin

Roughly 42% of US homes built in the last 50 years are heated by electricity, and not natural gas, heating oil, or other options despite electricity being one of the most expensive options to operate.

How many do so because the heating component is part of an overall AC system? How many because an electric heater or three are cheaper than central heating?

Quote:

See, I don't think electric cars have to really be more cost efficient than gasoline cars to operate for their numbers to go above 10%. I think consumers make decisions based on many options other than rigid cost comparison.

I'd like to think so, too.

But then we'd still have free bags and meals and polite service in most airlines.

Quote: Pacomartin

Roughly 42% of US homes built in the last 50 years are heated by electricity, and not natural gas, heating oil, or other options despite electricity being one of the most expensive options to operate. I think if people were solely concerned about cost savings, then over 80% of new homes would be heated with natural gas which is almost always the least expensive way to heat a home.

It's about distribution. Electrical infrastructure already goes to each house. Natural gas infrastructure does not - it has to be built out, and then hooked up. The more rural the property, the more expensive the buildout is, especially compared to electrical.

Quote: Dalex64

It's about distribution. Electrical infrastructure already goes to each house. Natural gas infrastructure does not - it has to be built out, and then hooked up. The more rural the property, the more expensive the buildout is, especially compared to electrical.

Well 80% of America lives in urban areas already. Most new homes are built in urban areas, whereas rural America is dominated by homes built before 1970.

I tried to take infrastructure into account with my WAG.

I think the main point is that new homes heated with electric are about the same as those heated with natural gas. Even excluding infrastructure issues, you would expect natural gas systems to greatly outnumber electric based on cost alone. I think that people still prefer the simplicity of electrical systems despite the cost of operation.

Quote: Dalex64

It's about distribution. Electrical infrastructure already goes to each house. Natural gas infrastructure does not - it has to be built out, and then hooked up. The more rural the property, the more expensive the buildout is, especially compared to electrical.

Well put. And it's absurd that Toyota has been adamant about pushing hydrogen fuel (the Toyota Mirai) and reluctant to mass produce an EV.

How many homes have a hydrogen tank in the backyard?

Quote: reno

How many homes have a hydrogen tank in the backyard?

Probably none, but if a market does develop, Toyota will be market leader.

Quote: reno

Well put. And it's absurd that Toyota has been adamant about pushing hydrogen fuel (the Toyota Mirai) and reluctant to mass produce an EV.

They may be betting that the oil companies can produce hydrogen 8esily done from crude or natural gas), and adapt their existing gasoline distribution networks and stations for use with hydrogen.

Some people bet the double zero, too.

But fuel cells merely produce electricity. Past that, the car is also all electric. Adapting it to batteries should be simple.

Quote:

How many homes have a hydrogen tank in the backyard?

Since we're talking about batteries to store energy from solar panels... Well, you don't need batteries to store energy. There are other storage means. For instance, you might use the electricity from solar panels to split O2 and H2 from H2O. Release the O into the atmosphere, and keep the H2 in a tank to refuel your hydrogen vehicle.

The efficiency would be lower than straight transfer to a battery, and there would also be startup costs involved (everything costs something), and maintenance costs. Not to mention you'd be keeping a fire and explosion hazard in your property (though perhaps no more dangerous than a propane tank?). And of course it won't be stored cryogenically, as that would drive the costs way, way, way up!

But it might be worth it for some people.

There are actually already 35 hydrogen fueling stations in the US. Almost all of them in southern California.