No ICE from 2040?!?

[Mr2Mike]

GT119 said:

I'm guessing that Salamura has ignored that fossil fuels are refined using a whole lot of electricity. Each gallon not refined saves enough electricity to power an EV for something like 20 miles or more. This is one if the most compelling reasons for EV being the right technology for the future, but is generally totally overlooked. I get that there are other useful by-products from refining but I'd be very surprised if petrol/diesel isn't what drives crude oil consumption.

Without oil/gas extraction there would be no tarmac roads on which to drive your EVs, and no plastic components, not to mention no flights or shipping.

[Ares]

jet_noise said:

Evanivitch said:

Really? How long do you think it takes to drive from London to Edinburgh when traffic and roadworks is included?

Also, a number of key points:
1 charge was done using an Ecotricity rapid charger that took 2 hours. The equivalent Tesla Superchargers takes 45 minutes. The supercharger network has grown significantly.

2 The latest Tesla have a greater range than what was tested.

So is a EV as quick as a ICE? No. Is it perfectly capable of doing it on technology already 3 years old and in a reasonable time. Yes.

In fact this website says you can do it in a Tesla P100D in 8 hours, 10 mins, but just 27 mins to stop to charge. Practically a coffee stop.

https://www.evtripplanner.com/planner/2-8/?id=ntm0...

Edited by Evanivitch on Friday 28th July 09:53

Ah, different circumstances. Rather than increasing my journey time by 50% for £80k I can decrease the increase(!) to 1/2hr for £130k.
Still no sale.

So when do you drive for 300+ miles without stopping once? And how often?

In 25yrs of driving I think I can count the times on one hand.

[Ares]

Toltec said:

Ares said:

Range anxiety will be a thing of the past in less than 10yrs, ranges will be easier/better than ICE.

Before long it won't be any worse than taking a car that needs super unleaded to various parts of the country, going on holiday in my Impreza, for example, just needed some forward planning.

At some point it will be less the availability of rechargers and more how having to recharge affects your journey time, what will be the maximum distance you can do in a day, say 12 hours of travel. A closer match to ICE will come in time I suspect, helped by ICE times gradually increasing, twenty years ago I could do Dartford to Glasgow in 6 1/2 to 7 hours in a diesel van easily and repeatably, I doubt that would be possible now.

With dynamic chargers though it won't be a case of stopping every few hours it MAY be a case of slowing down to 60mph every 5th hour to charge you battery.

[Evanivitch]

Ares said:

So when do you drive for 300+ miles without stopping once? And how often?

In 25yrs of driving I think I can count the times on one hand.

It's the corner case of the EV deniers.

"What! I can't drive 600 miles non stop in 12 hours, how absurd. Of course I don't need to use the toilet, avoid DVT or consume caffeine in that time, I'm a very busy person!"

I'm sure in 2050 they'll still be driving their Audi diesel and arguing how the 6 cylinder diesel is more refined than the 4 cylinder, and that the torque available at just 1500rpm makes it an A road beast.

[bodhi]

Evanivitch said:

It's the corner case of the EV deniers.

"What! I can't drive 600 miles non stop in 12 hours, how absurd. Of course I don't need to use the toilet, avoid DVT or consume caffeine in that time, I'm a very busy person!"

I'm sure in 2050 they'll still be driving their Audi diesel and arguing how the 6 cylinder diesel is more refined than the 4 cylinder, and that the torque available at just 1500rpm makes it an A road beast.

Personally as an EV "Denier" (good to see that word getting dragged out again) my corner case is that they bore the living piss out of me - and yes, I include Teslas in that. We have 2 in the family (a Leaf and an i3 REX), and I'm struggling to think of anything memorable about them in the slightest.

[GroundEffect]

Ares said:

jet_noise said:

Evanivitch said:

Really? How long do you think it takes to drive from London to Edinburgh when traffic and roadworks is included?

Also, a number of key points:
1 charge was done using an Ecotricity rapid charger that took 2 hours. The equivalent Tesla Superchargers takes 45 minutes. The supercharger network has grown significantly.

2 The latest Tesla have a greater range than what was tested.

So is a EV as quick as a ICE? No. Is it perfectly capable of doing it on technology already 3 years old and in a reasonable time. Yes.

In fact this website says you can do it in a Tesla P100D in 8 hours, 10 mins, but just 27 mins to stop to charge. Practically a coffee stop.

https://www.evtripplanner.com/planner/2-8/?id=ntm0...

Edited by Evanivitch on Friday 28th July 09:53

Ah, different circumstances. Rather than increasing my journey time by 50% for £80k I can decrease the increase(!) to 1/2hr for £130k.
Still no sale.

So when do you drive for 300+ miles without stopping once? And how often?

In 25yrs of driving I think I can count the times on one hand.

I do the London-Edinburgh (okay, Essex to West Lothian but it's actually slightly further!) run once a year at Christmas time. Each year I do not stop for more than 5 mins in the journey of 460 miles...

But then again, I do have a 20s bladder.

[Salamura]

jet_noise said:

Salamura:
Can you point me to one of these studies, please?
The only stuff I could find from green-oriented sources suggested the opposite.

I've come across tens of these studies over the years, but they don't get much coverage from the mass press or from politicians. One that comes to mind was published in MTZ magazine a few years ago, and those of you working in the automotive industry will know that they only publish serious research. Below is an excerpt demonstrating why, as things stand, the electric powertrain is not as efficient as an ICE.

In summary:

- Electric motors possess a thermal efficiency of around 90%, which at first glance seems significantly superior to an ICE powertrain.
- Electric energy produced with approximately 50% efficiency in fossil fuel power plants (50-70% of energy production in the UK) with additional losses for transport and charging.
- In the case of EVs, further 16% of the energy is lost in battery mass transportation, as you're lugging that heavy battery pack regardless whether you have power in it or not.
- Overall, only 15% of the primary fuel energy is used for driving the vehicle, compared to 45% for the ICE powertrain

Efficiencies and losses in an ICE powertrain (well to wheel):



Efficiencies and losses in an EV powertrain (well to wheel):




Unless energy starts coming mostly from renewables or nuclear, EVs don't make sense in terms of efficiency. In fact, although the ban to ICE might reduce pollution in town centres, but increase it overall, as petrol and oil consumption on a national level might indeed raise to make all that extra power.

[98elise]

ash73 said:

98elise said:

lowdrag said:

We have some very technically minded people on this thread and it is interesting to follow. Now another question, on car manufacture and servicing. How long, since there are far fewer moving parts, will a fully electric car last with these wonderful new batteries? Will the car just be recycled when the batteries die, thereby creating pollution to manufacture a new one, or will we be changing them on a five or ten year basis? Will they need regular servicing, and will the annual MOT be still needed? I am on my third car in 25 years and expect the current one to do at least another ten years, or 125,000 miles if I keep to my usual schedule.

Batteries can be changed relatively simply. That need less servicing (the service items are minimal), and an electric motor should easily outlast an ICE. Modern cars can come to the end of their life when something as simple as a clutch goes. Ford wanted nearly 1k to change the clutch on an 02 mondeo I owned.

An MOT is of course needed. An EV has tyre brakes etc just like an ICE.

Reality check, Tesla service costs here:
https://www.tesla.com/en_GB/support/maintenance-pl...

You are not required to have it serviced by Telsa, or indeed at all. Look at the items included in a service!

I intend to set up an EV service business as soon as there are enough on the roads to make it viable. It's money for old rope!

[anonymous-user]

Mr2Mike said:

98elise said:

Batteries can be changed relatively simply. That need less servicing (the service items are minimal), and an electric motor should easily outlast an ICE. Modern cars can come to the end of their life when something as simple as a clutch goes. Ford wanted nearly 1k to change the clutch on an 02 mondeo I owned.

The clutch failing didn't bring the Mondeo to the end of it's life, that was entirely your decision. What happens when a battery fails on a Tesla outside of the warranty period, which will be far more expensive than a clutch?

What matters is the ratio of repair cost to vehicle worth.

Above about 150kmiles, an ICE car becomes, effectively worthless (a sub £1000 banger, or "shed" as us PHer like to call em). Why is this? Well, it's because at that age, any significant failure will cost more than (or at least a significant proportion of) the vehicle is worth. But, you are playing the risk game. As any good Shedder will know, get lucky and you can buy a £500 car that lasts for years and costs nothing to run. However, there is no foolproof, simply way of telling what the condition of your ICE actually is. You check it doesn't rattle, smoke, or knock too much, drive it round the block, seems ok, take a look at the almost certainly iffy and un-complete service history and take your chance.

Compare that to say my i3, which with a button press on the dash tells you the exact state of the battery! Go an buy a high miles EV, and chances are you can relatively accurately assess it's condition. Tesla have recently announced they are now targeting a 1 million mile lifetime for the powertrain (not inc battery)

The knock on effect of that ^^^, i suspect, will be to see the value of EV's leveling off at high miles and retaining more of their value compared to ICEs. And if that happens, the ratio of repair costs to worth could be more favourable, meaning later life replacements of the battery or other components could be significantly more viable.

[anonymous-user]

Salamura said:

jet_noise said:

Salamura:
Can you point me to one of these studies, please?
The only stuff I could find from green-oriented sources suggested the opposite.

I've come across tens of these studies over the years, but they don't get much coverage from the mass press or from politicians. One that comes to mind was published in MTZ magazine a few years ago, and those of you working in the automotive industry will know that they only publish serious research. Below is an excerpt demonstrating why, as things stand, the electric powertrain is not as efficient as an ICE.

In summary:

- Electric motors possess a thermal efficiency of around 90%, which at first glance seems significantly superior to an ICE powertrain.
- Electric energy produced with approximately 50% efficiency in fossil fuel power plants (50-70% of energy production in the UK) with additional losses for transport and charging.
- In the case of EVs, further 16% of the energy is lost in battery mass transportation, as you're lugging that heavy battery pack regardless whether you have power in it or not.
- Overall, only 15% of the primary fuel energy is used for driving the vehicle, compared to 45% for the ICE powertrain

Efficiencies and losses in an ICE powertrain (well to wheel):



Efficiencies and losses in an EV powertrain (well to wheel):




Unless energy starts coming mostly from renewables or nuclear, EVs don't make sense in terms of efficiency. In fact, although the ban to ICE might reduce pollution in town centres, but increase it overall, as petrol and oil consumption on a national level might indeed raise to make all that extra power.

Like all science, it's only as good as the people doing it.

There are some pretty glaring flaws in that analysis, that in the real world affect the outcome.

1) ICE's can reach the efficiency claimed under peak conditions. In the real world, with colds starts, getting stuck in traffic, flooring it off the lights etc the over all efficiency is much lower. Hint, work out how much energy is being consumed by a car doing say 40mpg. (gasoline = 34MJ/l !!!)

2) ICE are fundamentally mono-directional powertrains. They cannot recapture KE stored in their mass at speed. For ever change of speed, which in the real world is very often, you are wasting a large amount of energy. (EVs current recapture around 65 to 70% of that energy

3) Once you have a bi-directional powertrain, absolute vehicle mass is NOT the greatest impact on fuel economy, so a "heavy" battery is not a handicap. (and most modern EVs aren't that much heavier than their ICE cousins)

4) Modern PM motors are way better than 90% efficient. Include the inverter (which should really be considered as the "gearbox" in the powertrain, and the figure is more like 95% on average, and up to 98% at peak!

5) It assumes we all use old coal fired power stations to charge our cars, that are miles away from our houses. Increasingly, small scale local solar or wind generation is used (sometimes domestic systems on the roof of the house / business the EV is parked next too!) so bundling in a load of in-efficiency an grid losses makes no sense.




I personally authored a report for the UK Dept of Environment a couple of years back, that took typical UK car usage, our grid infrastructure, and concluded that for "real world" use, an EV in the UK used 2.6 times less total energy than it's ICE cousin. That report did not include the energy required to refine or transport oil, (because it really is totally impossible to come up with a verifiable figure), so in reality, i'm pretty confident that in fact, the 2.6x reduction is a lower bound.

(You also should note that in that erroneous study the "electricity" has losses from transmission ("transport") included, but the fuel magically appears in your tank without any loss!)

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 28th July 13:39

[suffolk009]

Wacky Racer said:

kambites said:

Wacky Racer said:

Is it the SALE of petrol & diesel cars to be banned by 2040 or the USE of them?

Sale.

I personally doubt we'll ever see a blanket ban on their use. Once new ones are no longer sold, the number on the roads will become insignificant within a few years.

So then by say 2060 when only (maybe 5% of cars on the road are petrol or diesel).....the rest have gone to the great scrapyard in the sky...petrol stations will be virtually redundant and will be closing down wholesale as their customer base as gone, there might be one every twenty miles or so.

Not good.

I'm currently 7 miles from the nearest petrol station, and 28 miles from the nearest Tesla supercharger.

There is an upside to rural life here in Suffolk - it's 18 miles to the nearest Starbucks.

[mfmman]

Wacky Racer said:

So then by say 2060 when only (maybe 5% of cars on the road are petrol or diesel).....the rest have gone to the great scrapyard in the sky...petrol stations will be virtually redundant and will be closing down wholesale as their customer base as gone, there might be one every twenty miles or so.

Not good.

But that's life. Despite ebay claiming 'they have all the parts for my classic car', they don't and I have to work just that little bit harder to obtain them. It's the price I pay for owning something that is less than common. If petrol stations are only 20 miles apart in 43 years time, I'll think that is ok really (aside from the fact I will be 90 ). Posters from the north of Scotland will possibly join in and say that they experience that now, they may have a real problem one day.

[Evanivitch]

bodhi said:

Personally as an EV "Denier" (good to see that word getting dragged out again) my corner case is that they bore the living piss out of me - and yes, I include Teslas in that. We have 2 in the family (a Leaf and an i3 REX), and I'm struggling to think of anything memorable about them in the slightest.

I don't disagree with that. I think my Ampera is a wonderful tool for the miles I do, but it's not a fun car. The acceleration is a novelty.

But because I do big milestone also have a mk1 MX5 in my garage. Because I do enjoy driving fun roads in a fun car.

But people who think they can't replace their 2ltr diesel German barge because an EV doesn't do 600 miles are constantly providing corner cases to prove a point they've already lost.

[PotatoSalad]

suffolk009 said:

Wacky Racer said:

kambites said:

Wacky Racer said:

Is it the SALE of petrol & diesel cars to be banned by 2040 or the USE of them?

Sale.

I personally doubt we'll ever see a blanket ban on their use. Once new ones are no longer sold, the number on the roads will become insignificant within a few years.

So then by say 2060 when only (maybe 5% of cars on the road are petrol or diesel).....the rest have gone to the great scrapyard in the sky...petrol stations will be virtually redundant and will be closing down wholesale as their customer base as gone, there might be one every twenty miles or so.

Not good.

I'm currently 7 miles from the nearest petrol station, and 28 miles from the nearest Tesla supercharger.

There is an upside to rural life here in Suffolk - it's 18 miles to the nearest Starbucks.

And 10 feet from the nearest socket in your house...

[Toltec]

Evanivitch said:

But people who think they can't replace their 2ltr diesel German barge because an EV doesn't do 600 miles are constantly providing corner cases to prove a point they've already lost.

Just add a sound synth to make it sound like a tractor and they'll feel right at home

[AH33]

ash73 said:

The cheapest Tesla is currently £65K, the Chevrolet Bolt isn't available in the UK, are there any other electric cars you can actually buy with a range of more than 125 miles?

125 would be wishful thinking on a lot of them. In winter, and without resorting to doing 42mph on the fking motorway - how much could you really expect from a Zoe/Leaf? 50-60 miles? That's a hair shirt I refuse to wear.

[jet_noise]

Evanivitch said:

I don't disagree with that. I think my Ampera is a wonderful tool for the miles I do, but it's not a fun car. The acceleration is a novelty.

But because I do big milestone also have a mk1 MX5 in my garage. Because I do enjoy driving fun roads in a fun car.

But people who think they can't replace their 2ltr diesel German barge because an EV doesn't do 600 miles are constantly providing corner cases to prove a point they've already lost.

Eh?
You have already posted that the best available (and for £130k) buys inferior journey times. How is this "point lost"?

[Farmboy UK]

AH33 said:

ash73 said:

The cheapest Tesla is currently £65K, the Chevrolet Bolt isn't available in the UK, are there any other electric cars you can actually buy with a range of more than 125 miles?

125 would be wishful thinking on a lot of them. In winter, and without resorting to doing 42mph on the fking motorway - how much could you really expect from a Zoe/Leaf? 50-60 miles? That's a hair shirt I refuse to wear.

A 24kWh leaf will do a real world 80miles on a charge. I know this because I drove to Bath from Nottingham in one the other day with breaks for coffee and a McDonalds. By the way, this unattainable expensive car is a 2015 Acenta and I bought it for £9000. Not quite the £40k people keep talking about.
In winter, you are correct, this can drop to 60-70miles on a charge, which would have allowed me to do the same journey with the same number of stops.

A 30kWh Leaf will obviously go further.

A new Zoe with the 40kWh battery pack will go 180 miles in summer and 120 miles in winter. NEDC range is 250 miles but that is a pointless measure.

[Farmboy UK]

Just to add as well.

If you are a one car family, I will accept the arguments against EVs for some people.

If you have 2 or more cars in your household I'm not sure how you can argue against an EVs range.

Does your family regularly travel hundreds of miles separately?

[AH33]

I know this has been said a million times, but my golf will do 400 miles after a 2 minute "charge" whether cold or hot, and a Zoe or Leaf wouldn't see which way it went, its going to be a very, very long time before I see the need to go EV.