Who will buy an electric car when they are available?

[kircher]

When they're cheap enough I would not hesitate for a moment to buy one as a commuter car/grocery getter. Nothing like sitting in traffic or at the lights in total silence using only a watt or two of power (to run the brake lights and stereo, etc), plus they should to a billion km without any servicing beyond replacing the batteries and the tyres. The motor in your hard drive can spin at 7200rpm for years and years non stop. No internal combustion engine will do that. Add up how much it costs to service and fuel a car, air filters, oil, belts, etc and the cost of swapping out batteries will be chicken feed - and they'll only get cheaper as they're mass produced, probably in China. Electric motors and circuitry simply do not break down over a realistic time frame.

And I don't buy into the idea that the batteries are not sustainable, as long as all of the relevant EPA measures are put in place. Battery technology is advancing continuously, and they are all fully recyclable. The lithium/calcium/lead/whatever doesn't go anywhere, it's just converted to another compound over time, and can be reprocessed. And fuel cells? I'll wait and see. Hydrogen is a really difficult thing to store. I don't see Hydrogen fuel cells being a reality for another 20 years, and even then, who says batteries or some other storage medium won't be better anyway?

And what's with the requirement for doing 100s of km? 95% of people drive 20km or less a day. Nothing says you can't have an internal combustion engine for long distance AND an electric car for the daily commute.

We'll see. My prediction is most of you will be driving electric cars by 2030.

[fou_bleu]

I think it's important to define what kind of electric car we are talking about here, because as we know, different cars are designed to do different things.

As we know, hybrids were the first step to cleaner motoring (whilst turning out to being even dirtier in the long run). Plug-in hybrids (PHEV) are the next big thing and ultimately refine the basic hybrid principle - cleaner to produce, further pure electric range and only need small engines to charge them. Full battery electric vehicles (BEV) are not that far off from becoming mainstream (Ford Focus Electric) what we should be focusing on when discussing electric vehicles - these are the cars that will be replacing the fleet of ICE vehicles in the not too distant future.

For this thread, I think pure BEVs, designed from the ground up to be BEVs are the best example to use - and Tesla is the most promising / biggest electric only car company out there.

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I will, given a few provisions...
1. It must not cost any extra over a "normal" car.
2. It must seat five adults with decent room.
3. It has to have a minimum range of 500km.
4. It has to recharge from a normal household power point at home in three or four hours.
5. It has to refill at a "filling station" in ten minutes or less.
6. They have to guarantee that the batteries will last at least ten years.
7. It can sit on 110kph for hours with a full load on board in typical central Queensland summer heat reliably. With air con going.

1. For a while BEVs will cost more than the equiv. ICE car - new technology is always expensive, you'll never escape it.
2., 3., 4. & 5. - http://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/models/specs
6. http://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/models/faq - "Based on testing, Tesla expects the battery to retain approximately 70% of its initial capacity after seven years or 100,000 miles (160,000 km)." Will only get better...
7. http://www.teslamotors.com/en_AU/models/faq - "Accessory use does not have a dramatic impact on driving range. Exact range fluctuates based on vehicle speed, driving style, road conditions, and weather. Holding these factors constant, using higher consumption accessories like climate control will reduce range approximately five to ten percent."

Too many of these things are spruiked as being the latest and greatest solution to everything...but when you start asking a few hard questions, they say something like "Well they're not really targeted at country people".

Any one affiliated with the auto industry would never say their product is the solution for everyone - quotes and sources are needed for that one I'm afraid. Affordable BEVs (Focus BEV etc.) won't suffice for longer trips than around 100km return, so there is work to be done there - cue Tesla and their 480km range on the Model S (of which the technology will trickle down from).

Too bad...you can't make a car for a limited city-based market and expect it to sell in big numbers, not everyone lives in the city, and if it's "really only meant for the city", then it defeats the environmental purpose because you have to then buy a second car when you want to go on trips.

Not sure if you're aware of this, but I'm pretty sure that the majority of our population do live in urban areas that even the most basic BEV's can cater for. Remember, as technology advances, range gets further and recharge time drops. If you frequently make long trips, keep your / buy an ICE car or a BEV that can go further (if funds and desire allow).

A few awkward questions also spring up about "filling them up"...who pays for the chain of stations that will have to be built across the nation every couple of hundred kilometers? Who pays for the upgrades to the power network to cope with the extra demand and also the extra transmission lines to the various stations?

I agree, this is the biggest issue AT THE MOMENT with BEV (especially in Australia, the U.S. and Europe are going gang busters on making viable networks) - but to think the industries haven't thought of this and aren't working on solutions?! As for grid demand? There's already solar charging kits available from Ford (of all companies) for the Focus BEV - a must buy IMO to make the most out of the prospect of an electric car.

You also have to ignore a few uncomfortable things going on in the background...the filthy process of mining rare earth minerals and shipping them around the world to process into raw materials for the vehicles, the "tailpipe exhaust shifting", where you are simply shifting the exhaust from your tailpipe to a coal fired power station somewhere else...

I agree that something has to be done, but as with everything else, with time and money comes improvements. If you're buying a BEV for its environmental benefits, you'd buy things like said solar panels to potentially create true emission free driving.

I'm not saying electric-only cars won't become more common...but there's quite a few large and expensive hurdles to overcome before they become truly useful for everyone except a few trendy people in the big cities...

Yes, there are hurdles, like all new technology, but those "trendy people in the big cities" are the ones that will make future BEVs more accessible and more viable to replace the ICE family car.

[nstg8a]

all the ones saying its just shifting emissions from the car to the coal powered stations are ignoring one thing, the coal powered stations are already running, theres no need to build new ones just because a few ev's are getting plugged into the grid...
in somewhere like nz, where a lot of the power is produced by hydro dams they would be ideal. win win. or as someone earlier said, if you already have existing solar power, win win again.

[bullfrog]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Too many of these things are spruiked as being the latest and greatest solution to everything...but when you start asking a few hard questions, they say something like "Well they're not really targeted at country people".
Too bad...you can't make a car for a limited city-based market and expect it to sell in big numbers, not everyone lives in the city, and if it's "really only meant for the city", then it defeats the environmental purpose because you have to then buy a second car when you want to go on trips.

Unfortunately "most" people live in cities. Of the 5 million or so people in Victoria 3.5 million live in Melbourne, Ballarat or Bendigo. All of these eco-friendly cars are designed around a "commuting" lifestyle.
I live in the country, I know where your coming from, these cars won't work for us.

[kircher]

^^Also regarding transferring emissions to the Power plants... This is a good thing in a City. Smog and Haze cause asthma and problems for people. It's just plain unhealthy.

Another thing for those claiming that coal fired electricity is less efficient to power a vehicle than fuel, here's some simple Maths to clear that issue up. Coal Power plants are roughly around 40-45% efficient. Electric motors are typically between 80-90% efficient, so assuming those figures and multiplying both extremes by the other corresponding extreme we get 80%x40% = 32% and 90%x45% = 40.5%, the efficiency of an electric car based on the thermal energy output of the burning coal should be roughly between 30-40%. Now lets assume the circuitry to drive the motors in the car is around 80% efficient (it will probably be higher than 80%, probably more than 95% efficient), we get an efficiency somewhere in the region of 24-32%. The most efficient internal combustion engines are diesels, due to the very high compression ratio and the lack of a throttle which may get efficiency as high as 30%. Maybe. That's a stretch. That doesn't count energy use to pump crude oil, to transport it across the ocean, to refine it and transport it to the bowser and to your car. Petrol engines will be possibly as much as 20% efficient, but that would only be at full throttle situations, and would be substantially lower at cruise due to pumping losses from the closed throttle plate.

Consider that per Joule electricity is substantially cheaper than fuel to purchase, I think you'll find that electric cars will be both cheaper to run and cleaner, and that doesn't even count the vastly increased running costs of an internal combustion engine.

Also consider that my calculations are based on energy derived from coal power. As we move away from fossil fuels (and we will) those efficiency numbers can only increase.

Keep in mind that those calculations are very simplistic, I hope it can give those doubters a better understanding of where we're headed.

I love my V8s, turbos and grunt as much as anyone on here, but I don't need that on my daily commute, nor do I need the expense.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/el...ncy-d_655.html
http://courses.washington.edu/me341/oct22v2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal...ion#Efficiency

[SSD-85]

To answer the question, no. And never will.

Ill die hard with ICE.

[Nic85]

Like others have said; for me, the range needs to be increased a lot. I drive 220kms round trip to work every day, so it'd need sort of 250km range at least to be a viable work vehicle for me. Also, I've mentioned the whole coal burning for electricity thing on here before.

[fou_bleu]

Originally Posted by kircher

^^Also regarding transferring emissions to the Power plants... This is a good thing in a City. Smog and Haze cause asthma and problems for people. It's just plain unhealthy.

Another thing for those claiming that coal fired electricity is less efficient to power a vehicle than fuel, here's some simple Maths to clear that issue up. Coal Power plants are roughly around 40-45% efficient. Electric motors are typically between 80-90% efficient, so assuming those figures and multiplying both extremes by the other corresponding extreme we get 80%x40% = 32% and 90%x45% = 40.5%, the efficiency of an electric car based on the thermal energy output of the burning coal should be roughly between 30-40%. Now lets assume the circuitry to drive the motors in the car is around 80% efficient (it will probably be higher than 80%, probably more than 95% efficient), we get an efficiency somewhere in the region of 24-32%. The most efficient internal combustion engines are diesels, due to the very high compression ratio and the lack of a throttle which may get efficiency as high as 30%. Maybe. That's a stretch. That doesn't count energy use to pump crude oil, to transport it across the ocean, to refine it and transport it to the bowser and to your car. Petrol engines will be possibly as much as 20% efficient, but that would only be at full throttle situations, and would be substantially lower at cruise due to pumping losses from the closed throttle plate.

Consider that per Joule electricity is substantially cheaper than fuel to purchase, I think you'll find that electric cars will be both cheaper to run and cleaner, and that doesn't even count the vastly increased running costs of an internal combustion engine.

Also consider that my calculations are based on energy derived from coal power. As we move away from fossil fuels (and we will) those efficiency numbers can only increase.

Keep in mind that those calculations are very simplistic, I hope it can give those doubters a better understanding of where we're headed.

I love my V8s, turbos and grunt as much as anyone on here, but I don't need that on my daily commute, nor do I need the expense.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/el...ncy-d_655.html
http://courses.washington.edu/me341/oct22v2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal...ion#Efficiency

Wow, thanks for the read, it was an eye opener!

Originally Posted by Nic85

Like others have said; for me, the range needs to be increased a lot. I drive 220kms round trip to work every day, so it'd need sort of 250km range at least to be a viable work vehicle for me. Also, I've mentioned the whole coal burning for electricity thing on here before.

I think kircher has debunked that, si I don't think people can even use that as an opinion, let alone fact...

[MITCHAY]

I won't buy one while the petrol is still a feasible option.

[graham_h]

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

I won't buy one while the petrol is still a feasible option.

+1..... no question

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by 4RD4TW

Wow, thanks for the read, it was an eye opener!


I think kircher has debunked that, si I don't think people can even use that as an opinion, let alone fact...

Sorry mate, you can't debunk the fact that producing power from coal power stations is the dirtiest way to make power known to man, and the most archaic. Regardless of car efficiencies etc, the power still needs to be generated, and the more power needed, the more coal that needs to be burned to keep up with demand.

I take his point, and I get where he's coming from to a degree, and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it all, and that EV's may well be extremely efficient, but in Australia at least (excluding Tasmania), with the way we produce our power, EV's make little sense. When we switch to nuclear power, solar, wind or whatever it might be in the future, then they make heaps of sense, and I'll be happy to make the switch.

[babyf6]

only get one if its oz made (not that that will ever happen)

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Sorry mate, you can't debunk the fact that producing power from coal power stations is the dirtiest way to make power known to man, and the most archaic. Regardless of car efficiencies etc, the power still needs to be generated, and the more power needed, the more coal that needs to be burned to keep up with demand.

I take his point, and I get where he's coming from to a degree, and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it all, and that EV's may well be extremely efficient, but in Australia at least (excluding Tasmania), with the way we produce our power, EV's make little sense. When we switch to nuclear power, solar, wind or whatever it might be in the future, then they make heaps of sense, and I'll be happy to make the switch.

i disagree, you are telling me that $2.00/$2.50 per week is a lot of load on the grid??

you boil the kettle for your coffee how many times per week? youll find that will cost you $4.00 at least..

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by burnz

i disagree, you are telling me that $2.00/$2.50 per week is a lot of load on the grid??

you boil the kettle for your coffee how many times per week? youll find that will cost you $4.00 at least..

As a niche market filler, an EV makes sense. For densly populated cities (more pollution) etc. As an alternative to the conventional internal combustion engine, yes, that would be a lot of load on the grid. If you're talking about an extra 10 million or so cars plugged in all day every day, that's a lot of boiling kettles.

[Majestic]

in a city and want to be environment friendly - just ride a push bike lol Get some good exercise while you're saving the world so to speak. Donate the 50k that you would pay for the electric car to some environmentally friendly cause

[Nic85]

I've just done a little bit of research quickly. Now, I'm no expert by any means on the subject, but from what I can find, if you had a 20 minute each way travel to work, an electric car would use the equivalent of 5kWhr. A 2000W kettle uses 2kW an hour if boiled constantly for that entire hour. So to recharge 5kW is like boiling a 5000W kettle for the duration of recharge (usually 8 hours or more?)

I'm happy to be proven wrong here.

[fou_bleu]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Sorry mate, you can't debunk the fact that producing power from coal power stations is the dirtiest way to make power known to man, and the most archaic. Regardless of car efficiencies etc, the power still needs to be generated, and the more power needed, the more coal that needs to be burned to keep up with demand.
I take his point, and I get where he's coming from to a degree, and I'll admit that I don't fully understand it all, and that EV's may well be extremely efficient, but in Australia at least (excluding Tasmania), with the way we produce our power, EV's make little sense. When we switch to nuclear power, solar, wind or whatever it might be in the future, then they make heaps of sense, and I'll be happy to make the switch.

Yes, coal-powered power stations are the dirtiest way to make power, no one is disagreeing with that! What kircher's post points out is that by powering a EV off the grid, you are still perhaps lowering your carbon footprint than by using an ICE car for the same distances. Naturally, the smartest thing to do if you really want to do that is go solar for the car at least.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Nic85

I've just done a little bit of research quickly. Now, I'm no expert by any means on the subject, but from what I can find, if you had a 20 minute each way travel to work, an electric car would use the equivalent of 5kWhr. A 2000W kettle uses 2kW an hour if boiled constantly for that entire hour. So to recharge 5kW is like boiling a 5000W kettle for the duration of recharge (usually 8 hours or more?)

I'm happy to be proven wrong here.

the volt takes 3 hrs charge @0.720 kwh

about the same as an lcd television

[fordv8!]

Originally Posted by babyf6

only get one if its oz made (not that that will ever happen)

Oh but the new commodore electric is ........ Honest the add will say so!!!!!


Back on topic....... Never

[Redrum]

Give me internal combustion...come up with alternative fuel, but electric cars, yawn, only if I have no choice...

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by burnz

the volt takes 3 hrs charge @0.720 kwh

about the same as an lcd television

Okay, but the Volt is not a BEV (battery electric vehicle) is it? It's a range extending EV I thought? Small petrol motor to charge the battery pack.

[burnz]

the tesler in my opinion would be a niche product,
the volt, fusion, leaf, prius,,would be more main stream..yes a hybrid.

allso suplemental charging overnight would be "off peak" so extra load on the grid is a mute point

[kircher]

I'll add one more thing. Australia has huge reserves of natural gas. Natural gas power plants have similar (slightly higher) efficiencies than coal power plants when generating electricity, or around 35-40%. Here's the cool part. When they're used on the smaller scale for Distributed Generation, for example each city has many small power plants they can be as high as 80% efficient if used for Cogeneration. This means you get electricity, and basically get your heating, hot water and cooling for free. This is not science-fiction. It's reality. There are already many cities around the world that use this technology. New York has used it for decades. Now you'd think that this only applies to large cities, but on the contrary... If anything it better suits small towns and remote communities than the centralised grid system we have. It reduces their reliance on State owned and controlled power. There are already many companies producing these gas turbines for this purpose.

Natural gas is still a fossil fuel, yes, and it won't last forever, but for every Joule of energy derived from it as opposed to coal, you create half as much CO2. So for a coal power plant to be equal, it would have to be over 100% efficient. Impossible. I see natural gas to be a stop gap measure and backup as we make the transition to more alternative forms of energy. I'm not opposed to nuclear, either. I just don't see it happening.

So the point is: Run your car on electricity derived from natural gas or some other alternative energy and its efficiency and carbon footprint will leave internal combustion for dead.

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by burnz

the tesler in my opinion would be a niche product,
the volt, fusion, leaf, prius,,would be more main stream..yes a hybrid.

allso suplemental charging overnight would be "off peak" so extra load on the grid is a mute point

The Nissan Leaf is a pure electric vehicle with batteries only. The Prius is a Hybrid that uses a small battery pack to assist the petrol engine and cannot be plugged in. The Volt is a range extending electric car using a small petrol engine to charge the battery pack. Not sure on Fusion, but all these cars are different in their own ways.

Charging overnight is only off peak because it's a low load time on the grid. Just as example, but if electric, battery only vehicles really took off, and in the next say 5 years there were a few hundred thousand sold, and everyone was charging them at night during the off peak time, don't you think it would quickly become peak time?

Just saying... Food for thought.

Originally Posted by kircher

I'll add one more thing. Australia has huge reserves of natural gas. Natural gas power plants have similar (slightly higher) efficiencies than coal power plants when generating electricity, or around 35-40%. Here's the cool part. When they're used on the smaller scale for Distributed Generation, for example each city has many small power plants they can be as high as 80% efficient if used for Cogeneration. This means you get electricity, and basically get your heating, hot water and cooling for free. This is not science-fiction. It's reality. There are already many cities around the world that use this technology. New York has used it for decades. Now you'd think that this only applies to large cities, but on the contrary... If anything it better suits small towns and remote communities than the centralised grid system we have. It reduces their reliance on State owned and controlled power. There are already many companies producing these gas turbines for this purpose.

Natural gas is still a fossil fuel, yes, and it won't last forever, but for every Joule of energy derived from it as opposed to coal, you create half as much CO2. So for a coal power plant to be equal, it would have to be over 100% efficient. Impossible. I see natural gas to be a stop gap measure and backup as we make the transition to more alternative forms of energy. I'm not opposed to nuclear, either. I just don't see it happening.

So the point is: Run your car on electricity derived from natural gas or some other alternative energy and its efficiency and carbon footprint will leave internal combustion for dead.

Good points mate. I remember listening to something along these lines on the ABC a few weeks back. I believe there were certain European cities using the Distributed Generation power sharing method in the early 1900's.

It makes a lot of sense, and using natural gas is such a logical step for us in Australia as we have such an enormous amount of it. We sell it to the rest of the world for pennies, and barely use it ourselves.

Like I said before, I'm all for battery only electric cars, IF, the way we produce the power that powers the batteries is cleaner and preferably renewable, and the batteries are being fully recycled.

[pottery beige]

bongo beatin doo goodin hairy armpitted electric car loonys need to grow some....

electric car..

its not a car..

[burnz]

Originally Posted by Nic85

The Nissan Leaf is a pure electric vehicle with batteries only. The Prius is a Hybrid that uses a small battery pack to assist the petrol engine and cannot be plugged in. The Volt is a range extending electric car using a small petrol engine to charge the battery pack. Not sure on Fusion, but all these cars are different in their own ways.

Charging overnight is only off peak because it's a low load time on the grid. Just as example, but if electric, battery only vehicles really took off, and in the next say 5 years there were a few hundred thousand sold, and everyone was charging them at night during the off peak time, don't you think it would quickly become peak time?

Just saying... Food for thought.

oh i agree the companys will find a way of releiving you of your hard earned..

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by burnz

oh i agree the companys will find a way of releiving you of your hard earned..

Now we're thinking...

The government invest money into the local manufacturers to make battery only electric vehicles with a 500km range and reasonable performance for the average Mazda 3 / Toyota Corolla buying type at around $25k. They then offer extremely cheap solar installs into households for people to charge their new electric vehicles with completely free and renewable power. The government then buy shares in the local companies and patent any original technologies. The car buying public are happy to buy the electric cars and charge them for free, we keep jobs in Australia and a sustainable future for our car manufacturing, and also lower our carbon footprint and reliance on fossil fuels.

I'll wake up any minute now... .

[MercuryT]

Originally Posted by Nic85

I'll admit that I don't fully understand it all, and that EV's may well be extremely efficient, but in Australia at least (excluding Tasmania), with the way we produce our power, EV's make little sense. .

Why is Tasmania excluded? Not being that up to speed on the topic (and not reading pages of threads), just wondering?

On topic, I would definately buy an electric car as my daily. Think its ther future no doubt. Anything to save a few $$ but would never buy one as long as V8s/Ts etc exist as my "weekend" car.

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by MercuryT

Why is Tasmania excluded? Not being that up to speed on the topic (and not reading pages of threads), just wondering?

On topic, I would definately buy an electric car as my daily. Think its ther future no doubt. Anything to save a few $$ but would never buy one as long as V8s/Ts etc exist as my "weekend" car.

The majority of Tasmania's electricity production is from Hydro generated electricity.

http://www.iris.tas.gov.au/infrastru...ly/electricity

[MercuryT]

Originally Posted by Nic85

The majority of Tasmania's electricity production is from Hydro generated electricity.

http://www.iris.tas.gov.au/infrastru...ly/electricity

Yeah OK mate, no worries

I live in Tassie and we get absolutely shafted on power. Both in price and service )

If Electric cars ever happen, guarantee Tas will be light years behind in getting it all together though! (awesome place to live though)