Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

ABrass

The current range of EVs isn't an issue for 75% of Norwegians. There the price is around equal or better for EVs through deep tax incentives.

The single biggest blockers to increased sales are price and availability. As the price drops the sales will increase, as long as there are cars to sell.

Thankfully Tesla are bringing on another million cars per year of production just on their own. That's increasing global production by a third, from just one brand. Who knows, perhaps the price might even drop too.

JKenH

CKhalvashi said:

JKenH said:

EricMears said:

Martyn1981 said:

The Model T Ford (and its competitors) effectively displaced horses, and it was launched at ~$900, and fell to $360 over the following ~20yrs. Including inflation, its price fell approx 75%.

For those of us who don't remember events from 1908,  a more useful example might be colour TVs.  When first available in the 1960s, buying one would cost the average person several month's pay;  nowadays it's just a couple of days earnings.  

So why does Tesla keep putting its prices up?

They charge what people are willing to pay.

As I pointed out earlier and as others have said, Tesla are not into profiteering so maybe they are putting prices up as the cars are costing more to make. 

In principle, though, I agree that is how the market works. 

If EVs are more in demand than ICEVs then which will go up in price and which will fall?

ABrass

shinytop said:

ABrass said:

shinytop said:

ABrass said:

shinytop said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0010ntb

Interesting article on batteries.  They also discuss EVs and the estimates for how much emissions we (the UK) will be saving by 2050 are a bit underwhelming at about 1% of the total.  The assumption is that 25% of miles will be EV by then.  Obviously that will go up afterwards.

 I know it has to happen but it seems like a lot of effort and cost for not a lot of gain. 

That doesn't sound right.

If we are banning new Petrol cars by 2035 (diesel will be dead well before that anyway) then we're supposed to believe that 75% of miles will be done in cars at least 15 years old?

But don't worry, the EV pain will be over by 2025. Then they will be cheaper to buy than petrol cars as well as cheaper to own. Everyone is happy.

The numbers included commercial vehicles, not just cars.

I'm not worrying, but EVs won't be cheaper to run in the long term than ICE cars.  There might be a short time when it is made such to encourage the switch. They are cheaper to run now because their 'fuel' is hugely subsidised compared to petrol and diesel.  That won't last.  And the biggest downward pressure on EV purchase prices is the fact that ICE cars are much cheaper.  Once ICE cars are gone then so is that competition.   

So electricity prices are going to quadruple? Cool, I guess I'll order those solar panels sooner rather than later.

I suppose they might but I don't think I said that. There are other ways to make running an EV more expensive.  I just can't see the widespread use EVs reducing the cost of personal motorised transport.  Nor do I think it should btw.    

I don't doubt that the cost of running an EV will increase in the future, once they become dominant because of their general superiority. But the bit you're missing is that the ICE cost to run will also increase in parallel so it always remains more expensive than running an EV.

Anything else would be stupid and as the public is becoming more green, electorally stupid, as well as allowing precious pounds to slip from the Exchequers fingers.

JKenH

Surge in electric vehicle sales power lithium prices as shortages loom

Lithium prices have jumped to their highest in more than three years thanks to an upsurge in electric vehicle sales, depleting stocks of the battery material in top consumer China.

https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/surge-electric-vehicle-sales-power-lithium-prices-shortages-loom-2021-09-13/

Supply and demand at work. Might be a while before electric car prices reach parity with ICEVs.

QrizB

Grumpy_chap said:

But £800 now is much cheaper than £500 then.

Per the Bank of England, £500 in 2007 is worth £709.45 today.

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator

Spies

Would it be feasible to trade in a Clio for a Zoe? As I have a vehicle to trade in, used prices won't affect me? 

Solarchaser

I'd think the Zoe is pretty much aimed at taking business from its sister (clio) in terms of size anyway @EVandPV has a zoe so would perhaps be best placed to comment.

I do keep seeing the range anxiety come up again and again from EV sceptics. And I understand it too, it can be inconvenient at times having to pull over and charge when you just want to crack on.
I've had to do it a couple of times in the model 3 when I've done long journeys back to back over a couple of days when plans have suddenly changed.
Not too dissimilar you could argue, to having to pay through the nose for petrol/diesel at motorway services when plans suddenly change, the only difference being the wait being longer to charge the car.

For me that forced half hour or hour mid journey can be frustrating, however on the other hand it can be a stress relief, time to catch up on paperwork,  or a forced stretch of the leg's, making me eat lunch etc.
In some ways I'd liken it to average speed cameras, cos I kinda hate them, but at the same time, knowing they are there means, switch on cruise control and chill out

I've noticed that the more I drive the 3, the better theoretical range I get, I say theoretical because really I'm talking about indicated wh/m consumption rather than tested range.
When I got her 275wh/m was pretty standard, but I've noticed 235 and even 225wh/m on alot of journeys the last month or so.... perhaps I'm mellowing.

I'd be pretty confident to say I could get 300miles out of one charge now, I didn't think so when I first got her, but due to the nature of my work I tend not to fill and completely drain, I tend to top up at the various places where I'm visiting, so I haven't tested the theory.
Perhaps I will soon.

Anyway range anxiety is a thing, it's a thing when you first get the car, I suppose it could be a thing if you are in an area sparsely populated by chargers, but really with modern EVs and modern charging infrastructure it shouldn't be, and thats only gonna get better in time.

Having petrol cars that can do over 300 miles is a pretty new thing, most cars from the 1990's and before would struggle to do that.
And that was with what? A hundred years plus of internal combustion engines in mainstream production.
Common rail revolutionised diesel, perhaps there's a battery equivalent around the corner, or perhaps we will be powered with fusion reactors.
Battery cars have been what? 10, maybe 20 years, I wonder what range they will get in the 2090's...

I've tried many angles, but I'm afraid I can't make any sense out of the horses to ice to donkey comment. 

Solarchaser

The Tesla to apple comparison is interesting. 
I used to make the same Comparisons, but as Ken points out, Tesla doesn't actually appear to try and get masses of profit.

Having driven a leaf for 3 years and a Tesla for 5 month, and also having used both android and apple phones for the last 10+ years, including now where I have a personal and work phone, 1 is apple and 1 is android, id have to say its not a bad comparison, but not really a fair one.

Both have toys that they do, which the other brand doesn't.
Tesla has games, Spotify, internet, fart noises if that's your thing... and the leaf doesnt.
Apple has access to more apps, and arguably plays games better than android, it has facetime and apple to apple text.

Where I think it falls down is the core use.
As an actual car, the Tesla is alot better than the Nissan, smoother, better power delivery, better road tech, just a better road car (I do still love the leaf though, 3 years, 20k miles, no issues at all. None!)

As an actual phone, the apple is pretty darn poor, side by side with same network, apple signal strength and call quality is much poorer than android, it also has a terrible habit of not blanking the screen when you lift the phone to your face when you are on a call, so you end up hitting buttons with your cheek, requesting facetime etc while talking to the person, not to mention the amount of dropped calls for no good reason.

Before the apple fans jump on me, I'm talking over last 10 years + apple phones 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 11 is current.
Compared to Samsung s3, 5, 7, 9 and s20 is current.

I'd definitely agree that apple and Tesla suffer the same weirdo fan boys/girls though

CKhalvashi

JKenH said:

CKhalvashi said:

JKenH said:

EricMears said:

Martyn1981 said:

The Model T Ford (and its competitors) effectively displaced horses, and it was launched at ~$900, and fell to $360 over the following ~20yrs. Including inflation, its price fell approx 75%.

For those of us who don't remember events from 1908,  a more useful example might be colour TVs.  When first available in the 1960s, buying one would cost the average person several month's pay;  nowadays it's just a couple of days earnings.  

So why does Tesla keep putting its prices up?

They charge what people are willing to pay.

As I pointed out earlier and as others have said, Tesla are not into profiteering so maybe they are putting prices up as the cars are costing more to make. 

In principle, though, I agree that is how the market works. 

If EVs are more in demand than ICEVs then which will go up in price and which will fall?

Tesla's Chief Executive is a full Jack Ma ahead of Jeff Bezos in wealth rankings.

Being worth $250bn (that's 1,1% of the entire US economy), apart from just being greed, doesn't go with not making serious profit long term. I invest for returns, not for fun, as I'm sure do many others.

As EV technology grows, we will of course find more demand. The ID4 is arguably a better value car than the TM3, the EQS is almost certainly more competitive than the TMS, both are aimed at similar markets, although the ID4 is significantly cheaper, the EQS outranges the TMS at a slightly higher price point. There therefore must be a profit for Tesla here somewhere, likely a gross one much higher than other manufacturers. If there isn't, Tesla has absolutely ridiculous costs somewhere in its supply/capital chain which need to be addressed.

shinytop

Martyn1981 said:

shinytop said:

Martyn1981 said:

shinytop said:

ABrass said:

shinytop said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m0010ntb

Interesting article on batteries.  They also discuss EVs and the estimates for how much emissions we (the UK) will be saving by 2050 are a bit underwhelming at about 1% of the total.  The assumption is that 25% of miles will be EV by then.  Obviously that will go up afterwards.

 I know it has to happen but it seems like a lot of effort and cost for not a lot of gain. 

That doesn't sound right.

If we are banning new Petrol cars by 2035 (diesel will be dead well before that anyway) then we're supposed to believe that 75% of miles will be done in cars at least 15 years old?

But don't worry, the EV pain will be over by 2025. Then they will be cheaper to buy than petrol cars as well as cheaper to own. Everyone is happy.

The numbers included commercial vehicles, not just cars.

I'm not worrying, but EVs won't be cheaper to run in the long term than ICE cars.  There might be a short time when it is made such to encourage the switch. They are cheaper to run now because their 'fuel' is hugely subsidised compared to petrol and diesel.  That won't last.  And the biggest downward pressure on EV purchase prices is the fact that ICE cars are much cheaper.  Once ICE cars are gone then so is that competition.   

I can't follow any of that. Shirley the biggest downward pressure on EV's is the falling cost of batteries, and the economies of scale from ramping up production.

I can't see all the car companies in the World suddenly raising their prices when ICEV's go, you'd only need one to be cheaper and it would take the market. I don't think ICEV's are the competition for each manufacturer, I think the other manufacturers are the competition.

The Model T Ford (and its competitors) effectively displaced horses, and it was launched at ~$900, and fell to $360 over the following ~20yrs. Including inflation, its price fell approx 75%.

No of course they won't and I didn't say that but ICE cars are a benchmark for price and range that BEVs need to aim for currently.  Or rather, ICE price + whatever grant is available.   People who want to buy EVs compare them with ICE cars and if the difference is too much they won't buy them.    

If you want to continue the Model T analogy, some people might say that what we are doing now is replacing horses with donkeys    
 

Sorry I still don't understand that, you said:

And the biggest downward pressure on EV purchase prices is the fact that ICE cars are much cheaper.  Once ICE cars are gone then so is that competition.   

Which at the very least suggests that BEV prices won't keep reducing when ICEV sales fall (but they are already falling). As I mentioned, the biggest drivers of BEV cost reductions are falling battery prices and the ramping up towards mass production on a scale similar to ICEV production. I don't understand why you think BEV prices will be tied to ICEV prices, when BEV's will have to compete with BEV's. The Chinese in particular seem able to produce quality BEV's at reasonable prices.

That's why I mentioned the Ford Model T, which was the 'new' and disruptive vehicle of its time due to mass production, and costs kept falling. As Eric points out, colour tellies kept getting cheaper, I don't believe their price reductions stalled when B&W sales dropped. History will provide you with no end of examples where a better product comes along and disrupts the established technology, then costs fall as production ramps. [Typically a technology related percentage cost reduction with each doubling of production, known as Wright's Law. In the case of Wright Aeronautical the cost reduction was ~15%, so the 2,000th aircraft cost 15% less to build than the 1,000th, and then the 4,000th would cost 15% less than the 2,000th. Wright's law can be applied both to BEV's and batteries.]

Regarding your 'donkey' comment, I'm at a bit of a loss concerning that one. Are you suggesting that BEV's are an inferior product, or that 'some people' think they are an inferior product? I hadn't heard that. Could it be that those people haven't tried a BEV yet, and are simply assuming it's inferior, in which case they are in for a pleasant shock?


TBH, whilst I still can't really follow your logic, I would say it's actually pretty positive - if the main fears are that the product is inferior, or that costs won't fall (as ICEV sales drop), or perhaps are just a mix of unknowns due to fear of change - then things will be fine, we just need folk to try out a BEV, and then enjoy ownership once costs and availability (new or SH) improve.

I am quite positive about BEVs and I think they have a significant place in personal transport in the future.

Donkeys?  Maybe the wrong animal but the new horse can't go as far as the old one, it eats special food that is sometimes hard to find (although you can get it delivered to your house quite cheaply for now), takes ages to eat its dinner, can't pull a cart and is much more expensive to buy.  Also, it's bigger, heavier, has a reputation for getting injured and nobody is sure how long it's going to live. It does look very like the old horse though, it can sprint quite fast and some people think they can be taught to ride themselves. It also doesn't cr4p in the street like the old horse, which seems to be its main advantage.