Electric cars

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

So is LiIon mature tech or not?

You seem to be saying that it is now mature (but wasn't in 2010 when the Leaf was launched), then saying that it still isn't now, because the detail chemistry is still being tickled?

Not mature, never said it was. Both of my comments you quoted say not mature, couldn't really be simpler or more obvious, unless you are a FUD'ing.

aurelieweill

Herzlos wrote: »

An old milk float for a school run seems like a pretty good idea, no need to go very far or above 20/30mph in most situations. They'd be great for runs to the shops, tip and so on but not great for the commute or anything else.

There is a Smiths Cabac Electric Milk float with new batteries on eBay for £10,995.... Electric milk float vehicles don't seem that cheap.

almillar

AdrianC:

Is sellotaping a bunch of mature technologies together somehow anything but mature?

It's only been done a few times, in a few different shapes. Plenty of niches to fill yet, so yes, the collection of technologies is immature.

The concept of an electric-powered vehicle is hardly novel. I'm sure we all had milk delivered by them in our childhoods, and they were around at the very dawn of the motorcar. They have been in mainstream production, available to buy through mainstream car brand showrooms in the UK and around the world, for several decades.

Nissan Leaf, ~2010. That's less than a decade, and the first mainstream manufactured, mainstream Li-Ion powered car. Quadricycles not included! Lithium Ion is the technology that turned EVs from milk floats into proper passenger vehicles.

Or were you? Depends on how they do it, doesn't it? If the basic tech is unchanged, merely an iterative process of evolution (capacity or number of cells used, or their unit price), then doesn't that prove the technology is mature?

Martyn and I seem to have agreed on measuring maturity by rate of development, improvement and cost reduction. If that same technology develops (not gets reinvented) fast enough, then I was wrong, and it was still immature.

Buglawton:

Cheap, cheerful completely fit-for-purpose solution that makes me wonder why we're all fixated on £35k+ hi-tech EV cars

How much was the milk float NEW? What's the Euro NCAP rating to protect her little cherubs, never mind seatbelts etc.

Martyn:
I think you are confusing old with mature. But you shot down your own argument when you said that Renault's batts weren't mature prior to them advancing, unless you are denying the possibility of further large improvements.

OK, stick with the Zoe - 2014, 22kWh. 2017, 40kWh, same price, same battery enclosure. 2014, not mature. 2017 mature. That's all I've got. 80kW, 2022, same price, same enclosure, won't happen, that's my prediction, because it's mature now.

Are you happy to claim that Li-ion batts couldn't double in energy to cost Wh/£?

No, I'm not. You didn't provide a timeline. I'm sure it WILL happen, but more slowly than it did in the last 10 years - more mature. Didn't we already agree that one measure of maturity is the speed at which everything happens?

Which again destroys your argument, since batts (and BEV's with said batts) can't be mature if the technology used is still undecided. Next decade is not mature, that's just short term and part of the medium term, certainly not mature.

Again, you seem confused about what my argument is. The technology in EVs is Li-Ion, that technology is mature. I've agreed with you all along that EVs are not mature. The tech is decided, for the moment. Something new needs to come along and be viable, I'd call that a new chapter in EVs.

Do you not understand that BEV's are not mature because the technologies employed are not yet mature, or do you have some fantastical way of explaining your mature / immature at the same time claims - Schrodingers BEV perhaps?

Do you not understand that EVs are a collection of technologies? Am I wasting my time here saying that 'manufacturer' assemble cars from parts from many other manufacturers?

(PV) And yet the day before you claimed it was mature - arguing for the sake of it weren't you?

I stated my opinion. It's been around a long time, plenty of improvements have happened, it has got cheaper. You informed me that they're still developing, and getting cheaper rapidly, and I accepted that. You didn't like AdrianC drawing parallels, then did so yourself, that was the problem.

You envision no significant changes, yet in your Renault example, especially when compared to where Tesla are, I can envision a doubling of energy per cost, volume and mass.

You're missing that critical timeframe again. I agree it'll happen, I don't particularly want to put a timeframe on it, I just think it'll happen slower than it already has.

You say you are talking about Li-ion, that's just more backpeddling

Stating the same thing over and over again is not backpeddling. EVs are an immature technology, made up of mature technologies. That's what I said from the start. Li-Ion is one of those mature technologies.

Panasonic suggest economic viability in about 10yrs, so the medium term, and therefore batts are clearly anything but mature at the moment.

I look forward to it.

I think this is a case of projection, where you apply to someone else your own issues. I don't see the future as written as I can envision many changes and improvements and developments, whereas you are writing off large improvements already, in an as yet immature technology.

Which large improvements am I writing off? Li-Ion getting better, really fast? It will get better, but it will happen slower. That is NOT writing off. New technologies (different batts) are outside the scope of today's EVs. My comments have always been about the cars that are on the road now(ish).

But your earlier comments, as addressed, have denied the possibility of significant improvements, so you are backpeddling again. And silly definitions such as "80kW (sic) into a £20,000 Zoe within 5 years," clearly demonstrates your inability to understand maturity which stretches much, much further than 5yrs.

In the short to medium term I suspect Renault will see big improvements in price, volume and mass of their batts, they will probably change the Li-ion chemistry, and may well choose a different batt type in the medium to long term.

So I have to use numbers, whereas you can get away with vagaries like 'short to medium term' and 'big improvements' OK. Did you find 'backpeddling on one of those 'word of the day' calendars or something?

We're in the Li-Ion era, or chapter. We don't know what the next one is.

AdrianC

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Not mature, never said it was. Both of my comments you quoted say not mature, couldn't really be simpler or more obvious

Furry muff.

Martyn1981 wrote:

When Leaf's arrived Li-ion was certainly not mature

I did take an implicit "unlike now" from that.


So lithium ion batteries - despite their utter ubiquity across a wide range of consumer tech - are an immature technology still, iyho.


Let's follow that through, if we can. Because a LiIon battery is not mature tech, nothing containing a LiIon battery can possibly be mature tech, iyho. Correct?


So an electric toothbrush is not mature tech?

silverwhistle

Boys, boys. Can we all just accept that the situation is still changing fast, regardless of definitions? Semantics are fun in the right place but not here.

Now obviously newspapers like the Express (I'm being flexible with the term here, please don't argue..) have articles which say "SHOCK, many people can't afford EVs". Paraphrased apart from the word in capitals.

But it's undoubtedly the case that as more manufacturers announce their plans and/or ramp up production and diversify the market segments they are going to become more mainstream quite quickly. All those people such as myself who always buy second hand are going to have to wait a couple of years if the current S/H models don't really meet their needs, depending as ever on usage patterns. All those ex-PCP three year old cars will sell, and hopefully, as volumes increase, at more realistic prices.

Browsing in the newsagent the other day I noticed that the main article on the cover of What Car (I think) dealt with EVs.

Times are definitely changing.

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

I did take an implicit "unlike now" from that.

Of course you did, and of course you are wrong.

almillar

Boys, boys. Can we all just accept that the situation is still changing fast, regardless of definitions?

Yes, good idea.

And now you flip and say the opposite, not mature. BTW we did have a timeline 'maturity', that's not 5yrs as you seem to think but medium to long term with no significant changes/improvements. Once again I suspect you have launched one of your month long crusades against me based on you not having a clue what you are talking about.

No flipping here. You're sticking with vagaries like 'medium to long term' whilst scolding me for using actual numbers like 5 years. That's an argument I can't possibly win. I'm not crusading against anyone either, I'm making points I feel are important, for and against you and Adrian, and you jump down my throat every time.

Your argument was to claim I was wrong. I was discussing maturity of BEV's. If the technology changes, or is likely to change then it's not mature. Please stop introducing your own definitions in order to maintain your new crusade of month long arguing.

No, I was not arguing you were wrong. I think you're taking it personally. (very short version) You said EVs were immature, Adrian said they weren't, I tried to bring in a bit of nuance saying they're an immature collection of mature technologies. I was actually trying to keep the peace (again) and let you both be right, but here we are still arguing.

Do you not realise how silly and contradictory your claims are that BEV batts are mature ..... for the moment ..... a moment is not maturity!

What is in BEV batts? Lithium Ion, a mature technology. That's all. Not arguing about future tech, what will replace Lithium Ion, I'm just saying Litium Ion is mature, and you disagree. We've both argued our cases exhaustively.

Nobody has suggested BEV's aren't a collection of technologies - it's you claiming that the technologies are mature, but BEV's aren't. As usual your claims are absurd and contradictory.

Disagree, explanations ad nauseum above in the thread.

Then it's not mature, and your position is based on maturity being the short term / 5yrs. Again I'll point out that your crusade here is based on you not understanding the discussion nor what maturity means.

I think the changes have to happen fast to be immature. We've both referred to them happening fast. Do you not agree? Has the rate not slowed?

Backpeddling - you started by saying that batts are mature, but have since introduced short term deadlines and limited the choice of technology. Everything is mature if you don't look past today and alternatives. Desperate backpeddling so as to maintain your latest crusade.

Absolutely not. I was always referring to EVs - the things that are driving around on the road right now. You are referring to EVs, the notion. The EVs on the road right now, have Lithium Ion batteries in them, those are the batteries I was always referring to. I've explained this explicity, which you call backpeddling.

As explained earlier, in order to maintain your latest nonsense crusade you are redefining 'mature' as cars on the road now(ish). That's not maturity (in more ways than one).

Not redefining. See above, and above, and above...

Li-ion era ..... says it all, one of your best backpeddling statements so far, both acknowledging the possibility of technology change, whilst simultaneously not realising that batts can not therefore be mature.

Again, From the start, I was talking about current cars, as I think Adrian was too. Your calendar's word of the day - crusade.

AdrianC

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Please don't backpeddle by reclassifying maturity as advances slowing

<scratches head>
Martyn, dear, you appear to be talking to yourself there.

BEV and batt advances are still fast

No, not particularly.


LiIon cells are utterly generic. Sure, they're still developing in small, evolutionary ways - a minor internal chemistry tickle here, a minor packaging tickle there, a capacity increase there, a bit cheaper. But if you redefine technological maturity to exclude any of that kind of evolutionary creep, then you render the very concept irrelevant, since there is pretty much no such thing as any mature technology.

Martyn1981

AdrianC wrote: »

<scratches head>
Martyn, dear, you appear to be talking to yourself there.




No, not particularly.


LiIon cells are utterly generic. Sure, they're still developing in small, evolutionary ways - a minor internal chemistry tickle here, a minor packaging tickle there, a capacity increase there, a bit cheaper. But if you redefine technological maturity to exclude any of that kind of evolutionary creep, then you render the very concept irrelevant, since there is pretty much no such thing as any mature technology.

Check the context. Al felt that if advances slowed, then they were mature. HTH.

You may think that Li-ion chemistry is mature, and the chosen future batts of BEV's is already decided, and maturity excludes price reductions ...... but let's be honest, you're just an anti-EV'er posting FUD.

DoaM

AdrianC wrote: »

LiIon cells are utterly generic. Sure, they're still developing in small, evolutionary ways - a minor internal chemistry tickle here, a minor packaging tickle there, a capacity increase there, a bit cheaper. But if you redefine technological maturity to exclude any of that kind of evolutionary creep, then you render the very concept irrelevant, since there is pretty much no such thing as any mature technology.

Hammer? Nail? Please meet at the Head.

The ICE is a case in point ... there are still advances being made (with power to weight/size, efficiencies, etc.) but I doubt anyone would class the ICE as an immature technology.