Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

Martyn1981

It's not easy being green? - I just can't stop laughing at the vid. What happens when a town of Aussie coalminers, and true petrolheads, who love their V8's, get behind the wheel of a BEV.

‘It’s like a rocket ship’: videos show coalminers behind the wheel of an electric car

What happens when you take an electric car into a town full of petrolheads and coalminers, and film them planting their steel-capped boots on the accelerator?
“**** me … it’s like a rocket ship,” says one miner, who usually spends his time driving V8s or manoeuvring a giant coal scoop.

YouTube and Twitter channel Coal Miners Driving Teslas is the project of 39-year-old mechanical engineer-turned climate change activist Daniel Bleakley.

Other reactions – heavily spiced with unbridled swearing – range from “it’s like taking off in an aeroplane”, to three cowboy-style “yee haws” from the veteran independent Australian federal MP Bob Katter.

QrizB

From the BBC:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57253947

Why electric cars will take over sooner than you think

I know, you probably haven't even driven one yet, let alone seriously contemplated buying one, so the prediction may sound a bit bold, but bear with me.
We are in the middle of the biggest revolution in motoring since Henry Ford's first production line started turning back in 1913. And it is likely to happen much more quickly than you imagine.
Many industry observers believe we have already passed the tipping point where sales of electric vehicles (EVs) will very rapidly overwhelm petrol and diesel cars.
It is certainly what the world's big car makers think.
General Motors says it will make only electric vehicles by 2035, Ford says all vehicles sold in Europe will be electric by 2030 and VW says 70% of its sales will be electric by 2030.
This isn't a fad, this isn't greenwashing.

There's a long article at the link, but those %ages above explain why there was so much facepalming in this thread a week or two ago in response to Toyota's declaration that they are aiming for 20% plug-in by 2030.

Martyn1981

Norway still crushing it, with 60% BEV sales in May, and BEV's slowly creeping up the total road fleet to ~12%.
Vehicles with no plug at all,  and not even hybrid, are down to single digits with 8.9% of sales.

Norway’s Plugin EV Transition Continues: 83.3% Share In May With Ford Mustang Mach-E Overall Bestseller

Norway, the leading country in the electric transport revolution, saw plugin electric vehicles take 83.3% share in May 2021, up from 65.6% in May 2020. Non-plugin powertrains, including old-school combustion and plugless hybrids, are all fading away. Overall auto volumes were back to pre-Covid seasonal norms, at 14,063 units in May. The Ford Mustang Mach-E saw a big push and was Norway’s overall bestselling vehicle in May.

Grumpy_chap

How has Norway achieved the 12% EV figure?
Obviously, there must be a big part of it related to charging infra-structure. 
What I want to know is how do the finances work?  An EV is expensive - ignore the Tesla and premium-pitched products - even a "run-of-the-mill" EV is pricey.  Vauxhall Corsa starts at £16k.  EV Corsa at £27k.  For which an Insignia is also an option, or the ICE Corsa is pretty-much BOGOF deal.

JKenH

Grumpy_chap said:

How has Norway achieved the 12% EV figure?
Obviously, there must be a big part of it related to charging infra-structure. 
What I want to know is how do the finances work?  An EV is expensive - ignore the Tesla and premium-pitched products - even a "run-of-the-mill" EV is pricey.  Vauxhall Corsa starts at £16k.  EV Corsa at £27k.  For which an Insignia is also an option, or the ICE Corsa is pretty-much BOGOF deal.

Here are the incentives for EVs in Norway.

Norwegian EV policy

The progressive tax system makes most EV models cheaper to buy compared to a similar petrol model, even if the import price for EVs are much higher. This is the main reason why the Norwegian EV market is so successful compared to any other country.

https://elbil.no/english/norwegian-ev-policy/

The ability to fund this policy comes from the revenues earned from North Sea Oil. The cynical might say Norway pollutes the rest of the world to pay for clean air at home. 

Edit: article attached showing Norway’s dependence on oil and the reluctance to see any cuts in production. 

Paradox or hypocrisy? Norway's renewables vs oil and gas debate

I could have penned the following myself. 

"Natural gas is needed to cut CO2 in the short to the medium term, and to secure stable energy in a time of increasingly-volatile energy production from renewables. Oil demand will not reduce as a consequence of a potential Norwegian oil cut."

https://euobserver.com/climate/151637

I have heard Norway being compared to a drug dealer, exporting misery to the rest of the world while making out it is a model of clean living and munificence.

Martyn1981

Grumpy_chap said:

How has Norway achieved the 12% EV figure?
Obviously, there must be a big part of it related to charging infra-structure. 
What I want to know is how do the finances work?  An EV is expensive - ignore the Tesla and premium-pitched products - even a "run-of-the-mill" EV is pricey.  Vauxhall Corsa starts at £16k.  EV Corsa at £27k.  For which an Insignia is also an option, or the ICE Corsa is pretty-much BOGOF deal.

Norway put their FF money into a Sovereign Fund (I think it's now worth around $200k per person), instead of wasting it on vote winning cheap energy like the UK, and most other countries. So they can support green issues with more spondoolies. 

I still don't really agree with your position on costs, I don't think you should simply compare headline range prices, but need to look at the actual prices after any incentives, and the cost of ownership.

Quick look at Vauxhall's own site and I see the cheapest petrol car is available on a 48m lease at £185.35 with a £2,342 deposit, whilst the BEV starts at £217.22pm and £3,354 deposit.

[Most of this difference can be found/explained in the higher residual value of the BEV, which I think is something we can all agree on. I'd even go further and suggest that as 'fears' of owning an ICEV grow, we will see ICEV lease costs go up, as the companies need to consider ever lower residuals on the vehicle when it comes back.]

I'd suggest that the lower fuel cost would give the BEV a lower cost of ownership per month, and rapidly 'repay' the extra grand deposit. From there you also have to consider other lower ownership costs, ULEZ issues, and dare I say, on a G&E board, the externality costs of the FF vehicle and the local pollution issues.

Martyn1981

Here's a vid, which I was going to post on the Energy thread, but perhaps it's better here. It answers the question, that nobody on here has asked (I think) about synthetic / green fuels for ICEV's v's BEV's.
Engineering Explained is a great site, and the work is often referenced on green sites, and the car tech explanations also appear as articles in car magazines.

So ...... if we have to store energy in the future as the amount of RE penetration grows, then we may want to consider an energy dense form of storage such as bio-fuels/synthetic fuels.
This vid explains why it simply won't be economical for ICEV cars and light vehicles, though for long haul flights and long distance shipping, it may/will have value.

No, Synthetic Fuels Won't Replace Electric Cars

shinytop

Martyn1981 said:

Grumpy_chap said:

How has Norway achieved the 12% EV figure?
Obviously, there must be a big part of it related to charging infra-structure. 
What I want to know is how do the finances work?  An EV is expensive - ignore the Tesla and premium-pitched products - even a "run-of-the-mill" EV is pricey.  Vauxhall Corsa starts at £16k.  EV Corsa at £27k.  For which an Insignia is also an option, or the ICE Corsa is pretty-much BOGOF deal.

Norway put their FF money into a Sovereign Fund (I think it's now worth around $200k per person), instead of wasting it on vote winning cheap energy like the UK, and most other countries. So they can support green issues with more spondoolies. 

I still don't really agree with your position on costs, I don't think you should simply compare headline range prices, but need to look at the actual prices after any incentives, and the cost of ownership.

Quick look at Vauxhall's own site and I see the cheapest petrol car is available on a 48m lease at £185.35 with a £2,342 deposit, whilst the BEV starts at £217.22pm and £3,354 deposit.

[Most of this difference can be found/explained in the higher residual value of the BEV, which I think is something we can all agree on. I'd even go further and suggest that as 'fears' of owning an ICEV grow, we will see ICEV lease costs go up, as the companies need to consider ever lower residuals on the vehicle when it comes back.]

I'd suggest that the lower fuel cost would give the BEV a lower cost of ownership per month, and rapidly 'repay' the extra grand deposit. From there you also have to consider other lower ownership costs, ULEZ issues, and dare I say, on a G&E board, the externality costs of the FF vehicle and the local pollution issues.

Vauxhall's TCO/cost per mile illustration has the EV almost the same over the term.  Of course, as you say, it's the almost double residual value that makes the difference.  And the default electricity price is 4.7p/kWh, which is disappointing.

Martyn1981

Timely article, as we're discussing TCO. This analysis of costs gets right down into the weeds, and shows that a BEV police car saves its entire purchase cost (v's an ICEV) over 4yrs.
This article is about a Tesla, and of course cheaper vehicles are available, but perhaps on this occasion, its power/speed and the cost savings on the license plate reading kit, is important to the overall picture.
The study also seems to show the ICEV only being good for 4yrs, whilst the BEV should be 6yrs.

Tesla Police Vehicle Brings Huge Monetary Savings To Westport, Connecticut

Barry noted his analysis of all of the data regarding the purchase, customization, and operating expense all came from the Westport Police, and that at his request, the Town of Westport audited his analysis and confirmed the accuracy of the data.

The analysis is a sharp reality-based response to critics who scoffed at the Model 3 purchase (saying things like, “$52,000 — what a joke“). This shows that although the Tesla is a premium vehicle, it comes at an affordable cost. The Town of Westport made an investment, and in the first year, that investment paid off. By the 4th year, there should be enough savings for the city to buy a new Tesla police vehicle just using the savings from not buying a Ford Explorer.

JKenH

Martyn1981 said:

Here's a vid, which I was going to post on the Energy thread, but perhaps it's better here. It answers the question, that nobody on here has asked (I think) about synthetic / green fuels for ICEV's v's BEV's.
Engineering Explained is a great site, and the work is often referenced on green sites, and the car tech explanations also appear as articles in car magazines.

So ...... if we have to store energy in the future as the amount of RE penetration grows, then we may want to consider an energy dense form of storage such as bio-fuels/synthetic fuels.
This vid explains why it simply won't be economical for ICEV cars and light vehicles, though for long haul flights and long distance shipping, it may/will have value.

No, Synthetic Fuels Won't Replace Electric Cars

If I have understood the video correctly the assumption was that the electricity used to make the synthetic fuel would cost $0.15/kWh. Yet did I not see that in Portugal utility scale solar was now capable of being produced at around $ 0.013/kWh? Once the technology is proven synthetic fuels are not going to be made by Joe Bloggs in his domestic garage paying retail prices, they will be produced on an industrial scale taking advantage of PPAs. 

If, as has been suggested the best way to cut CO2 is to overbuild RE then there may be energy available at negative prices for industries that can consume the excess and switch off when demand is high. 

It is too simplistic to dismiss synthetic fuels using current metrics just as it was 20 years ago to argue solar was not commercially viable. 

Never say never!