Battery Electric Vehicle News / Enjoying the Transportation Revolution

JKenH

orrery said:

JKenH said:

Indeed, some manufacturers are concentrating on more expensive (profitable) bigger battery models which of course have a greater CO2 manufacturing footprint but offer no environmental benefit over the same model with a smaller battery....

I don't agree. I've had various models of Leaf, with 24/30/40kWh batteries, but now I have an 80kWh Enyaq.

In parallel, as the new car has significantly better range, I've got rid of my petrol estate* and gone down to one car. A move which has been enabled by the much bigger battery, in a much bigger car, which now provides the facilities that the large petrol estate once did.

* a win win, as I gave it to my daughter, who was then able to terminate the lease on her even bigger diesel car.

I’m not sure what you don’t agree with. Is it that I am suggesting bigger battery cars have a larger environmental footprint than small battery cars? If so where is the flaw in that? Over any given mileage the efficiency will be lower so CO2 emissions will be higher and the the extra CO2 debt of manufacturing the bigger battery won’t ever be clawed back.

JKenH

CKhalvashi said:

JKenH said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I agree that everything is all rather nuanced. 
Any discussion that is based upon current car sales as part of the metric also needs to have consideration as to what cars are actually available given current supply constraints.  That impacts sales probably more than any other factor right now.

Indeed, some manufacturers are concentrating on more expensive (profitable) bigger battery models which of course have a greater CO2 manufacturing footprint but offer no environmental benefit over the same model with a smaller battery. As the article said more weight/mass is the enemy of efficiency.

Once we were happy driving round in 24 kWh Leafs or 22 kWh Zoes but no one wants much less than a 60 kWh battery now. 

I have been thinking about the big battery MGZS EV as a replacement for my Leaf but environmentally that would be a retrograde step. I dare say it will turn out to be the most popular model in the range just like the bigger battery Kona and E-Niros. Perhaps a tax based on battery size would help redress the problem.

But would the larger batteries not be a bit of a counterbalance in removing more emissions from the environment later on?

Taxi drivers etc require large-ish batteries with decent ranges, as do sales rep-types. If you can remove petrol/diesel from this type of driver the longer term environmental benefits (subject to fuel mix etc) should be much larger. This to me would make the bigger battery models less of a double edged sword.

I'm finding the Ioniq will do about 3 days to a charge at the moment instead of 2 and a bit, so summer weather is better for it too. We aren't at air conditioning stage in the year yet though.

I understand your point that bigger battery cars may incentivise certain groups to make the switch to EVs, that otherwise might not, but that is a slightly different argument. At the moment virtually all EVs are supply constrained and we could make a bigger impact on CO2 emissions if whatever batteries are available were spread over 4 million cars with 40kWh than 2 million cars with 80kWh batteries.

Trying to go back to the point in the article, in a direct comparison of a large and small battery EV the the larger battery car will always emit more CO2 over its lifetime and potentially therefore fare less well (relatively)  than a small battery car when compared against an ICE car. 

Thrugelmir

JKenH said:

Grumpy_chap said:

I agree that everything is all rather nuanced. 
Any discussion that is based upon current car sales as part of the metric also needs to have consideration as to what cars are actually available given current supply constraints.  That impacts sales probably more than any other factor right now.

Indeed, some manufacturers are concentrating on more expensive (profitable) bigger battery models which of course have a greater CO2 manufacturing footprint but offer no environmental benefit over the same model with a smaller battery. 

Better margins on luxury vehicles as manufacturers can add lots of bells and whistles tech to justify the price tag. Different cost construction between an ICE and an EV.  Far cheaper to build a no frills ICE. EV manufacturers are suffering rapid increases in cost due to supply chain issues and metal commodity prices spiking. 

JKenH

Just one further thought on this issue. The larger the battery then the less the driver will be concerned about fuel efficiency. 

With smaller battery EVs it was often a challenge to reach one’s destination on a single charge. Topping up at a rapid would be relatively very expensive compared to home charging so you would see EV drivers using hypermiling techniques to get them home. I managed to drive my 30kWh Leaf over 100 miles on a frosty day in January but, my, was it a slow journey. 

Now with larger batteries there is no problem and we can belt down the motorway at or even above the speed limit with little or no thought for the extra consumption/reduced efficiency knowing it will at worst only be costing us a fraction of a penny more per mile to fill up at home.  

The bigger the battery, the higher the average speed on long runs and the higher the CO2 emissions. 

As an aside when I was at Donington Park on Monday there was a Porsche Taycan on track. I asked the driver how many miles per kWh he was getting. He said “about half” but to be fair he was giving it some beans. 

shinytop

Good discussion. I've always thought that current EVs demonstrate a lack of innovation and out of the box thinking.  All we are trying to do is create something that looks and feels exactly like an ICE vehicle.  The problem is, we end up with a huge, heavy, expensive contraption that closely resembles but doesn't (and never will) have the range and convenience of an ICE car and isn't really very good for the environment either.  A bit like this; nice try but not quite there yet...



I think current Tesla, VWG and other mainstream EV manufacturers are just making horseless carriages.   I don't know what the answer is but definitely something smaller, lighter and cheaper, maybe with replaceable batteries.  We don't all need to own one either.  We really need another Henry Ford but unfortunately we've got Elon Musk instead.  

As a slight aside, next month I'll be travelling from the UK to Athens and back using an ICE powered vehicle with a maximum range of 150 miles.  I'm not in the least worried about not having a 500 mile range because I know I can 'recharge' at any number of convenient places in a few minutes.  However, I wouldn't even consider doing this trip in even the longest range currently available EV.        
    

orrery

JKenH said:

I’m not sure what you don’t agree with. Is it that I am suggesting bigger battery cars have a larger environmental footprint than small battery cars? If so where is the flaw in that? Over any given mileage the efficiency will be lower so CO2 emissions will be higher and the the extra CO2 debt of manufacturing the bigger battery won’t ever be clawed back.

I disagree with your conclusion that there is a bigger environmental impact - I got rid of a petrol car, down from 2 cars to 1. My daughter won't get an EV, she would only get a PHEV - because she doesn't want the range restriction with a small child in the car. My son is only just looking at EVs and regards the current 300 mile range models as marginal for him, so he sticks to driving two very large diesel cars (a Sharan and a Merc V series).

Give my daughter a bigger battery and more range, and the PHEV idea is out of the window and she stops using petrol completely. Give my son a 350 mile VW Buzz and at least one diesel wagon will get dumped.

It isn't a comparison between a small battery and a large one (yes, of course a larger battery has a greater environmental impact than a small battery but that is a trivial statement) - in the real world it is still a comparison between an EV and an ICE.

Martyn1981

orrery said:

JKenH said:

I’m not sure what you don’t agree with. Is it that I am suggesting bigger battery cars have a larger environmental footprint than small battery cars? If so where is the flaw in that? Over any given mileage the efficiency will be lower so CO2 emissions will be higher and the the extra CO2 debt of manufacturing the bigger battery won’t ever be clawed back.

I disagree with your conclusion that there is a bigger environmental impact - I got rid of a petrol car, down from 2 cars to 1. My daughter won't get an EV, she would only get a PHEV - because she doesn't want the range restriction with a small child in the car. My son is only just looking at EVs and regards the current 300 mile range models as marginal for him, so he sticks to driving two very large diesel cars (a Sharan and a Merc V series).

Give my daughter a bigger battery and more range, and the PHEV idea is out of the window and she stops using petrol completely. Give my son a 350 mile VW Buzz and at least one diesel wagon will get dumped.

It isn't a comparison between a small battery and a large one (yes, of course a larger battery has a greater environmental impact than a small battery but that is a trivial statement) - in the real world it is still a comparison between an EV and an ICE.

Thanks, very thought provoking, and perhaps reflects the fact that we are in the very early years of BEV adoption (at significant levels), so there are many concerns and fears. Plus of course much of the media attention currently is not from the motor press comparing BEV's, but from mainstream media fascinated by the transition. I assume the press was full of cars v's horses stories 100+ yrs ago, but not so much these days.

Much of the concerns will work their way out in the wash* as BEV's become ever more normal. Plus the whole ICE v's BEV's media interest will simply wane. Until then it's a 'hot topic' so comparisons, positives and negatives will make the news. Cobalt for instance has been a popular concern the last few years, and it's great to see it being reduced in some batts, and not needed in other battery chemistries, but I have to wonder why the topic wasn't being raised decades back with its use in refining petrol and diesel. I think change stimulates interest, sometimes for good, sometimes for bad.

*Reminds me of the stories around PV and wind turbines a decade ago, and claims that they never make back the energy that goes into manufacturing them, when it's actually just a few years, or that we can't make enough, not enough space to place them etc.. Valid concerns, but easily addressed with facts, and of course the normalising effect of time and use.

Martyn1981

There's still hope that the extremely 'dodgy' contract issued to Oshkosh to replace the ageing USPS (United States Postal Service) vehicles with mostly ICEV's, can be stopped.

Been following this for a long time, and DeJoys's questionable business links to Oshkosh, and the fact he's been prosecuted previously for ripping off a Gov contract. Last time this made the news it related to the claim that BEV's would be cheaper than ICEV's, but DeJoy's team pushed back claiming exorbitant costs for the chargers, and that USPS specific usage favoured ICEV's ............. what, relatively low daily mileage, and lots of stopping and starting, accelerating and braking .... hhmm!

Back at the start of all this, Oshkosh's bid explained that they didn't have expertise in BEV's, and presented a modified Ford Transit (diesel) to show what they were thinking of building.

So the irony is that whilst all other delivery firms will be moving to BEV's, probably off the shelf versions* for the many roles from tiny to huge, the USPS will be paying considerably more per vehicle for custom built ICEV's.

*Internally customised for delivery usage.

Sixteen states sue US Postal Service over gas-powered truck purchase

California and 15 other states that want the US Postal Service to buy more electric delivery vehicles are suing to halt purchases of thousands of gas-powered trucks as the agency modernizes its mail delivery fleet.

Three separate lawsuits, filed by 16 states and environmental groups Thursday in New York and California, ask judges to order a more thorough environmental review before the Postal Service moves forward with the next-generation delivery vehicle program.

Plaintiffs contend that buying fossil fuel-powered delivery vehicles will cause environmental harm for decades to come.

“Louis DeJoy’s gas-guzzling fleet guarantees decades of pollution with every postcard and package,” said Scott Hochberg, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, referring to the postmaster general.

JKenH

orrery said:

JKenH said:

I’m not sure what you don’t agree with. Is it that I am suggesting bigger battery cars have a larger environmental footprint than small battery cars? If so where is the flaw in that? Over any given mileage the efficiency will be lower so CO2 emissions will be higher and the the extra CO2 debt of manufacturing the bigger battery won’t ever be clawed back.

I disagree with your conclusion that there is a bigger environmental impact - I got rid of a petrol car, down from 2 cars to 1. My daughter won't get an EV, she would only get a PHEV - because she doesn't want the range restriction with a small child in the car. My son is only just looking at EVs and regards the current 300 mile range models as marginal for him, so he sticks to driving two very large diesel cars (a Sharan and a Merc V series).

Give my daughter a bigger battery and more range, and the PHEV idea is out of the window and she stops using petrol completely. Give my son a 350 mile VW Buzz and at least one diesel wagon will get dumped.

It isn't a comparison between a small battery and a large one (yes, of course a larger battery has a greater environmental impact than a small battery but that is a trivial statement) - in the real world it is still a comparison between an EV and an ICE.

orrery said:

JKenH said:

I’m not sure what you don’t agree with. Is it that I am suggesting bigger battery cars have a larger environmental footprint than small battery cars? If so where is the flaw in that? Over any given mileage the efficiency will be lower so CO2 emissions will be higher and the the extra CO2 debt of manufacturing the bigger battery won’t ever be clawed back.

I disagree with your conclusion that there is a bigger environmental impact - I got rid of a petrol car, down from 2 cars to 1. My daughter won't get an EV, she would only get a PHEV - because she doesn't want the range restriction with a small child in the car. My son is only just looking at EVs and regards the current 300 mile range models as marginal for him, so he sticks to driving two very large diesel cars (a Sharan and a Merc V series).

Give my daughter a bigger battery and more range, and the PHEV idea is out of the window and she stops using petrol completely. Give my son a 350 mile VW Buzz and at least one diesel wagon will get dumped.

It isn't a comparison between a small battery and a large one (yes, of course a larger battery has a greater environmental impact than a small battery but that is a trivial statement) - in the real world it is still a comparison between an EV and an ICE.

I am pleased we agree that a larger battery has a greater environmental impact than a smaller one but I don’t agree with your comment that the point is trivial. If we could all manage with 40kWh batteries instead of 80kWh it would cut world demand for batteries by half and with it CO2 emissions from battery manufacture would halve. That is not trivial when a large part off the argument against BEVs is their upfront CO2 impact. By using bigger batteries we are dumping substantially more CO2 into the atmosphere now and lengthening the time before the manufacturing debt is repaid. Is the CO2 problem not urgent? Do we not need to cut our emissions now, not double  them?

If I have understood your situation correctly you replaced your 40kWh Leaf with an 80KWh Enyaq and got rid of your petrol car in which you said you did 1500 miles pa. So how long will the heavier Enyaq with an extra 40kWh of battery and therefore higher CO2 emissions take to show a CO2 saving when you are only displacing 1500 miles pa of petrol usage? Not only is there the extra CO2 cost of manufacturing the extra 40kWh of battery but for all your local trips which the Leaf could have covered you are now lugging around an extra 40kWh of battery.

While I completely understand your choice of the Enyaq it is difficult to make the case that in relation to CO2 emissions it has helped the planet. This is what we see all the time. People make a choice for lifestyle reasons and then use man maths to try and justify it on environmental grounds. 

In your particular case you have damaged the planet by incurring a big upfront CO2 cost in the hope that over the next 30 years (say 45,000 miles to offset the extra CO2 cost of the battery) it will be repaid in tailpipe CO2 savings. Presumably you could have bought a smaller battery Enyaq and just had the inconvenience of topping the battery up at a public charger half a dozen times a year. You don’t want to do that. Fine, I understand, but the CO2 argument you are trying to mistake just doesn’t stack up. 

The examples you quote of your son and daughter also confirm how difficult it is to get the public to replace their long range diesel and petrol cars with EVs because the batteries aren’t big enough so we might expect even bigger batteries with more upfront CO2 costs before the public as a whole buy into EVs. I am also amazed that even after your many years of EV ownership you obviously aren’t confident about the charging experience to risk taking a 40kWh car on a long run so is it not surprising that a lot of ICE drivers still are not ready to accept EVs as their sole car. 

QrizB

Martyn1981 said:

Back at the start of all this, Oshkosh's bid explained that they didn't have expertise in BEV's, and presented a modified Ford Transit (diesel) to show what they were thinking of building.

And of course Ford now offer a Transit BEV, so I guess a quick platform switch is all that's required?