Electric cars

NigeWick

ChrisK..... wrote: »

I have hybrid which is what I will be buying for the next 20 years

If Tony Seba is correct, you're wrong. He believes all new vehicles will be autonomous electric ones by 2030.

Martyn1981

ChrisK..... wrote: »

Im not convinced that allllllll elctric cars will be main stream in the next 20 years so I have hybrid which is what I will be buying for the next 20 years

Sorry, but I'm struggling to understand that statement, did you mean " I'm not convinced that allllllll main stream cars will be electric in the next ...."?

The problem here is that you can't really say what you'll be buying in 20yrs time, nor what 'they' will be selling. This might sound odd, but I'd hazard a guess that hybrids might disappear before ICE's, since their TCO is higher than an ICE, whereas BEV's are cheaper.

So as BEV's get cheaper and cheaper, the best of both worlds, but worst of both worlds offering might get the chop.

Perhaps we will still see REx hybrids, but from the comments posted on here by an I3 REx and I3 owner (quite an I opener might I add), even they may not be worth the extra hassle and cost.

What ever happens, who knows, but I'll guess it happens faster than we expect which is (delete as appropriate) 'great fun' 'terrifying'.

Herzlos

Yeah, I think hybrids only really make sense whilst the EV range is insufficient for the perceived need, and EVs are getting to the point that they don't need extending for most. Another 20 years of development and hybrids won't make any sense for most buyers.

Martyn1981

Herzlos wrote: »

Yeah, I think hybrids only really make sense whilst the EV range is insufficient for the perceived need, and EVs are getting to the point that they don't need extending for most. Another 20 years of development and hybrids won't make any sense for most buyers.

Yes, but been thinking, and legislation might mandate that all cars are at least 'electrified', or the companies might find that hybridization is the only way for their fleet to meet rules/regs as fuel standards are pushed up, especially as the leccy part of the drive-train gets cheaper over time, so the complete opposite of what I said yesterday. Basically, I haven't got a clue what will happen, having thought about it more (fun times)!

AdrianC

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Herzlos wrote: »

Yeah, I think hybrids only really make sense whilst the EV range is insufficient for the perceived need, and EVs are getting to the point that they don't need extending for most. Another 20 years of development and hybrids won't make any sense for most buyers.

Yes, but been thinking, and legislation might mandate that all cars are at least 'electrified', or the companies might find that hybridization is the only way for their fleet to meet rules/regs as fuel standards are pushed up, especially as the leccy part of the drive-train gets cheaper over time

This is certainly the most likely path in the short-to-medium timeline (<2030).


I strongly suspect the boundaries between the four basic categories (IC/"SC"H*/PHEV/BEV) are going to blur to the point of irrelevance.

Hybrids are going to get more and more common, to the point of ubiquity. They'll get more and more plugin capability, and plugin range - and form a larger and larger part of the mix. The IC will shrink from "prime mover" to "REx", then start to quietly get dropped.

* - where in the name of all that's holy did "self-charging hybrid" come from? What a disingenuous piece of marketing guff...

AnotherJoe

zeupater wrote: »

Hi

Good here isn't it .... You write a post effectively saying that you've done the maths & at the current price the option isn't viable but will be when it becomes mainstream ... just to get a reply as irrelevant as the one above!

Anyway, why use never and 10years in the same sentence? ... it's eminently possible to build the PV element into existing moon roof apertures and deliver around 300-500W in full sunshine using current technology which at over 4miles/kWh would suggest that 10 miles of range extension is possible from utilising the roof space on a car (in good conditions) then why wouldn't it be done?. As for cost, if the option became mainstream then the likely on-cost over a moon roof would almost be negligible - £50 to £100 on a £20k to £30k vehicle price tag ..... time to get real ladies & gents, when EVs become mainstream the option for a solar roofline to increase efficiency will also - the marketing departments will almost certainly ensure it!


HTH
Z

I used never and ten years in the same sentence because there are two different considerations.
Is it economically worth it. No, but now, maybe in ten years time the electric savinsg might work in some climates.
And never because the range will always be limited by physics. There's only so much solar falling on a car and there's only so much of that can be captured and that can oniy manage a certain distance because electric motor efficiency is so close to maximum anyway,
So maybe one day when the cost of adding ten miles a day - at best in the most optimum circumstances - is trivial, let's say spray on solar, or paste on flexible panels, or some such, then it might happen.
And even then for most people in most circumstances it won't remove the need to charge elsewhere, or just not have a car. After all if you need less than ten miles a day use taxis, if you can't always charge in the most optimum circumstances or you don't live in Arizona , you'll need to charge anyway.
So anyone selling PV on cars right now is using it as a trick to make you think you are getting something for nothing. And as my evidence I produce the Lightyear One at one hundred and twenty thousand dollars US. Or the Sonos at more than a Zoe with worse specifications and who's only benefit is you dont need to plug in if you do so little mileage a tenners worth of taxi fares or a £15 charge once a month would cover your driving needs anyway.

Arklight

Herzlos wrote: »

Yeah, I think hybrids only really make sense whilst the EV range is insufficient for the perceived need, and EVs are getting to the point that they don't need extending for most. Another 20 years of development and hybrids won't make any sense for most buyers.

It seems a bit inefficient to have a motor lugging around another motor. I had a hybrid Rav 4 as a rental once for a few days. It averaged about 36mpg which was some town and mostly motorway driving. I suppose this is probably a bit better than the petrol version. Not sure if it's enough to justify the environmental footprint of making the electric part, lithium batteries etc...

AdrianC

Arklight wrote: »

It seems a bit inefficient to have a motor lugging around another motor.

Think of the electrickery as a transmission, instead.

Like all those diesel-electric trains.

And, as far as "better than petrol alone" goes, remember that hybrids are almost all from manufacturers whose primary markets are Japan and the US - neither of which do diesel.

zeupater

AnotherJoe wrote: »

I used never and ten years in the same sentence because there are two different considerations.
Is it economically worth it. No, but now, maybe in ten years time the electric savinsg might work in some climates.
And never because the range will always be limited by physics. There's only so much solar falling on a car and there's only so much of that can be captured and that can oniy manage a certain distance because electric motor efficiency is so close to maximum anyway,
So maybe one day when the cost of adding ten miles a day - at best in the most optimum circumstances - is trivial, let's say spray on solar, or paste on flexible panels, or some such, then it might happen.
And even then for most people in most circumstances it won't remove the need to charge elsewhere, or just not have a car. After all if you need less than ten miles a day use taxis, if you can't always charge in the most optimum circumstances or you don't live in Arizona , you'll need to charge anyway.
So anyone selling PV on cars right now is using it as a trick to make you think you are getting something for nothing. And as my evidence I produce the Lightyear One at one hundred and twenty thousand dollars US. Or the Sonos at more than a Zoe with worse specifications and who's only benefit is you dont need to plug in if you do so little mileage a tenners worth of taxi fares or a £15 charge once a month would cover your driving needs anyway.

Hi

But you're arguing a point that wasn't even raised - no-one said that the panel would power the vehicle, just that it would assist in increasing range in good conditions. As for cost/viability ... please read the post again & note the mention/example of building the PV into the moon roof as an option .... the glass cost already exists and would therefore carry over - as for the photovoltaic element, well with current glass panels costing around 30p/Wp (including glass, frame, connectors etc) the basic on cost of integrating PV into a moon roof/panoramic roof should be in the same ballpark or less, which would add a likely maximum £100 for a 300Wp setup to £150 for 500Wp, so already trivial on a £20k-£30k vehicle so I don't really follow your argument ....

If you know it's not going to happen, you'd best have a quiet word with Panasonic so that they don't waste any more money on investing in plant & equipment!

HTH
Z

AdrianC

zeupater wrote: »

As for cost/viability ... please read the post again & note the mention/example of building the PV into the moon roof as an option .... the glass cost already exists and would therefore carry over

The whole point of glass sunroofs is that they're transparent, isn't it?

And, yes, transparent PV is out there - but it's very much in its infancy.