Advisability of buying electric car at this point in time

Martyn1981

HillStreetBlues said:

I have no issue with EVs  just been thinking how it would affect me in the future.
Currently have an oldish car but when I fill up I still get much the same kind of distance that I would when it was new. Would I be right in thinking that when having an oldish EV the downside to the age will be less distance?

Yes, possibly but hopefully not too bad.

The early Nissan Leaf's didn't do well, but they had no active thermal management for the batteries, so they definitely suffered. Also, the smaller the battery size, the harder the cells will work for any given distance, which may cause more wear.

The older Tesla S and X's seem to be showing about 88% battery capacity after 200k miles, but most BEV's seem to get a battery hit in year one of a few percent, before it slows down. Hopefully, something like 80%+ after 300k miles will be fine for most makes and models, as that probably exceeds most ICEV's full life expectancy.

Newer models like the 3 and Y haven't clocked up as many miles, but a canadian courier hit 300k miles in his model 3 last year (still on original brake pads), and the battery is at ~80% capacity, but he charges mostly at superchargers, and that can wear the battery faster.

Many BEV's (about 50% and growing) are now moving to LFP batteries, and these can be happily charged to 100% all the time, and seem to suffer less 'damage', so things should get even better.

An ICEV will lose efficiency over time as mechanical parts wear and tolerances increase. That will mean a reduction in range for the same amount of fuel. Whilst a BEV will hopefully not lose much efficiency, just battery capacity. For example, let's say charging a 60kWh battery may take 66kWh, due to charging losses. If that battery over time has fallen to 54kWh (90%), it won't still take 66kWh to fill, but more like 59kWh. In effect, it's like having a smaller battery.

Not sure if this is fair, or just my opinion, but as cars get older, we tend to use them for less demanding roles, and shorter trips. Someone with a long daily commute, probably wouldn't go for an older high mileage ICEV, as they will be experiencing more mechanical issues ... or 'may experience'.

So a person buying the BEV new may require 250 miles of range on a single charge (for example). But someone buying it secondhand, say after 10yrs, and 150,000 miles, may be happy with 200 miles, for their needs.


Again, personal opinion, but for a second car, a BEV may only need 100 miles of range, if you have an ICEV for those long journeys. That's how we got started, with an old 70 mile range Leaf. Whilst it was technically called the second car, it actually provided about 80% of our miles, as most journeys were less than 70 miles, and it was a nicer car to drive.

TooManyPoints

Martyn1981 said:

Just to calm concerns/fears, we do need to apply some context here. Firstly, 2030 is seven years away, that's quite a long time. Next, the ban is only on full petrol/diesel vehicles, PHEV's (plug-in EV's) will be allowed till 2035. So it's actually 12yrs before folk won't be able to buy a new ICE if they really want too.

But the majority of people don't buy new cars, only about 20% of car purchases each year are new, the majority being secondhand.

Even if new car sales reach 100% BEV in 2030, the displacement of the older ICE fleet will still take another ~15yrs, so the full ramifications won't be felt till around 2045+.

The grid doesn't really require any expansion in capacity, as mentioned earlier, with the link to the National Grid (posted by Petriix). The estimate for additional demand for a whole BEV car fleet is about 10% (net*). And leccy demand has fallen by more than that this century. To put that +10% in context, the UK has been displacing FF leccy off the grid at roughly 3.5%pa since around 2010. In fact RE deployment has been accelerating, and hopefully will approach 5%+pa in the second half of this decade. So +10% for BEV's, over the next 22+yrs, isn't a problem. Heatpumps are a much bigger issue (but still fit within that growth rate, perhaps +7%, from 2030 onwards).

Obviously, the charging infrastructure needs to be expanded massively, and I'd suggest the Government is currently behind the curve, so that's a biggie. But there are many solutions for slow charging where folk don't have a dedicated space or driveway. Such as councils installing a small gulley across the pavement for a cable to be run, or chargers added to lamposts, or pop up chargers installed on mass. Then we get to the more fun options, like induction charging pads in parking spaces/bays, or, as is being developed and tested, induction charging on the go which would allow for smaller batts, and cheaper lighter BEV's:-

Hybrid Toyota Drove in Electric Mode for 100 Hours Nonstop

The RAV4 Prime covered 1,200 miles using Electreon’s wireless electric road technology that charges your car while you drive.

If it becomes possible to charge cars at 7kW+ whilst they are moving, then that translates to roughly 30mph. Allowing cars to drive without consuming onboard energy. If the charge rate is greater than the vehicles consumption, then it may become possible to actually charge the car 'up' whilst travelling, on certain main routes. Don't hold me to this, but I think induction charging is about 80% efficient, v's about 90%+ for normal charging. Don't know if the vehicle being lighter makes up for this loss, but possibly.

*The +10% net figure for a full BEV car fleet, is after savings from the reduction in fuel refining, and also the reduction in fuel consumed in transporting fuels. I believe cars account for about 2/3rds of UK road fuel consumption, so the figure for all transport may be around +15%.

That's all fine and dandy. But many of the "solutions" to this self-imposed problem involve undeveloped and untested technology. Certainly in the short term (by which I mean when EV's become the only new cars on the market - if the government does not change its mind) the current technology of fixed charging points is likely to be the only viable option for the vast majority of people. And quite simply it's currently inadequate and, at the present rate of installation, will become even more so. The government is not "behind the curve" - it hasn't even identified where the curve begins.

Martyn1981

TooManyPoints said:

Martyn1981 said:

Just to calm concerns/fears, we do need to apply some context here. Firstly, 2030 is seven years away, that's quite a long time. Next, the ban is only on full petrol/diesel vehicles, PHEV's (plug-in EV's) will be allowed till 2035. So it's actually 12yrs before folk won't be able to buy a new ICE if they really want too.

But the majority of people don't buy new cars, only about 20% of car purchases each year are new, the majority being secondhand.

Even if new car sales reach 100% BEV in 2030, the displacement of the older ICE fleet will still take another ~15yrs, so the full ramifications won't be felt till around 2045+.

The grid doesn't really require any expansion in capacity, as mentioned earlier, with the link to the National Grid (posted by Petriix). The estimate for additional demand for a whole BEV car fleet is about 10% (net*). And leccy demand has fallen by more than that this century. To put that +10% in context, the UK has been displacing FF leccy off the grid at roughly 3.5%pa since around 2010. In fact RE deployment has been accelerating, and hopefully will approach 5%+pa in the second half of this decade. So +10% for BEV's, over the next 22+yrs, isn't a problem. Heatpumps are a much bigger issue (but still fit within that growth rate, perhaps +7%, from 2030 onwards).

Obviously, the charging infrastructure needs to be expanded massively, and I'd suggest the Government is currently behind the curve, so that's a biggie. But there are many solutions for slow charging where folk don't have a dedicated space or driveway. Such as councils installing a small gulley across the pavement for a cable to be run, or chargers added to lamposts, or pop up chargers installed on mass. Then we get to the more fun options, like induction charging pads in parking spaces/bays, or, as is being developed and tested, induction charging on the go which would allow for smaller batts, and cheaper lighter BEV's:-

Hybrid Toyota Drove in Electric Mode for 100 Hours Nonstop

The RAV4 Prime covered 1,200 miles using Electreon’s wireless electric road technology that charges your car while you drive.

If it becomes possible to charge cars at 7kW+ whilst they are moving, then that translates to roughly 30mph. Allowing cars to drive without consuming onboard energy. If the charge rate is greater than the vehicles consumption, then it may become possible to actually charge the car 'up' whilst travelling, on certain main routes. Don't hold me to this, but I think induction charging is about 80% efficient, v's about 90%+ for normal charging. Don't know if the vehicle being lighter makes up for this loss, but possibly.

*The +10% net figure for a full BEV car fleet, is after savings from the reduction in fuel refining, and also the reduction in fuel consumed in transporting fuels. I believe cars account for about 2/3rds of UK road fuel consumption, so the figure for all transport may be around +15%.

That's all fine and dandy. But many of the "solutions" to this self-imposed problem involve undeveloped and untested technology. Certainly in the short term (by which I mean when EV's become the only new cars on the market - if the government does not change its mind) the current technology of fixed charging points is likely to be the only viable option for the vast majority of people. And quite simply it's currently inadequate and, at the present rate of installation, will become even more so. The government is not "behind the curve" - it hasn't even identified where the curve begins.

Not sure I'd call 12yrs short term, more like medium to long term.

If you have a read of what I posted, you'll see that all of those solutions are being developed and tested, and the ones in para 5 are being deployed. But of course, it's not at all exhaustive, and I'm sure many, many more will arrive too.

Yes, Gov is behind the curve. They never expected the market to shift to BEV's at this rate. If they'd looked at Norway now at ~85% BEV sales, and ~25% BEV fleet, they may have thought twice. Or had they been listening to disruptive technology experts like Tony Seba, they may have realised that when a superior technology reaches the market, you get the start of the "S curve", and at around 5-10% penetration, things really start to accelerate. A major part of that is the learning curve (or Wright's Law), which predicts a %age reduction in production costs for every subsequent doubling of production. This then leads to feedbacks and the virtuous circle.

The opposite of course applies, with the vicious circle, as falling sales of ICEV's, leads to rising production costs.

WellKnownSid

Not exactly short term.  People in the UK keep their cars on average for four years. The mean age is 8.4 years, mean life span is 16 years.

People, on average, will be forced to buy an EV in “four cars time” if they want to buy new.

Some people will be forced to buy an EV in “seven cars time” if they hold off a bit.

In 28 years, someone will come onto this forum and complain that nobody told them how much better EVs were to drive 🙄

C’est la vie!

Ectophile

I wonder how many people compare the fuel economy of their older petrol or diesel car with the economy when it was new.  Old and worn engines are usually down on power, and will require a heavier right foot to achieve the same speed.

CKhalvashi

HillStreetBlues said:

I have no issue with EVs  just been thinking how it would affect me in the future.
Currently have an oldish car but when I fill up I still get much the same kind of distance that I would when it was new. Would I be right in thinking that when having an oldish EV the downside to the age will be less distance?

It depends on the status of the battery.

For comparison purposes, I drive a Hyundai Ioniq (38kWh) and at about 75000 miles it's lost maybe 5% of the original range in the battery in comparable conditions. I can count on one hand the number of times it's been rapid charged though and generally prefer to keep it between 10-90% range.

In reality that'll probably be a car suitable for most people most of the time at 250k+ miles. I'll probably keep it for 5-6 years and would be quite happy to believe the capacity will be at 75% of original at that point, probably a bit higher. The same car driven in the same way that's constantly rapid charged and not properly maintained will be one to avoid. One benefit to EVs should theoretically be that in most circumstances the battery drain comes over time instead of with cars where something tends to go expensively wrong at once.

Ibrahim5

There's some bonkers stuff made up on this thread. Petrol and diesel engines don't become less efficient or powerful with age.

shinytop

Martyn1981 said:

TooManyPoints said:

Martyn1981 said:

Just to calm concerns/fears, we do need to apply some context here. Firstly, 2030 is seven years away, that's quite a long time. Next, the ban is only on full petrol/diesel vehicles, PHEV's (plug-in EV's) will be allowed till 2035. So it's actually 12yrs before folk won't be able to buy a new ICE if they really want too.

But the majority of people don't buy new cars, only about 20% of car purchases each year are new, the majority being secondhand.

Even if new car sales reach 100% BEV in 2030, the displacement of the older ICE fleet will still take another ~15yrs, so the full ramifications won't be felt till around 2045+.

The grid doesn't really require any expansion in capacity, as mentioned earlier, with the link to the National Grid (posted by Petriix). The estimate for additional demand for a whole BEV car fleet is about 10% (net*). And leccy demand has fallen by more than that this century. To put that +10% in context, the UK has been displacing FF leccy off the grid at roughly 3.5%pa since around 2010. In fact RE deployment has been accelerating, and hopefully will approach 5%+pa in the second half of this decade. So +10% for BEV's, over the next 22+yrs, isn't a problem. Heatpumps are a much bigger issue (but still fit within that growth rate, perhaps +7%, from 2030 onwards).

Obviously, the charging infrastructure needs to be expanded massively, and I'd suggest the Government is currently behind the curve, so that's a biggie. But there are many solutions for slow charging where folk don't have a dedicated space or driveway. Such as councils installing a small gulley across the pavement for a cable to be run, or chargers added to lamposts, or pop up chargers installed on mass. Then we get to the more fun options, like induction charging pads in parking spaces/bays, or, as is being developed and tested, induction charging on the go which would allow for smaller batts, and cheaper lighter BEV's:-

Hybrid Toyota Drove in Electric Mode for 100 Hours Nonstop

The RAV4 Prime covered 1,200 miles using Electreon’s wireless electric road technology that charges your car while you drive.

If it becomes possible to charge cars at 7kW+ whilst they are moving, then that translates to roughly 30mph. Allowing cars to drive without consuming onboard energy. If the charge rate is greater than the vehicles consumption, then it may become possible to actually charge the car 'up' whilst travelling, on certain main routes. Don't hold me to this, but I think induction charging is about 80% efficient, v's about 90%+ for normal charging. Don't know if the vehicle being lighter makes up for this loss, but possibly.

*The +10% net figure for a full BEV car fleet, is after savings from the reduction in fuel refining, and also the reduction in fuel consumed in transporting fuels. I believe cars account for about 2/3rds of UK road fuel consumption, so the figure for all transport may be around +15%.

That's all fine and dandy. But many of the "solutions" to this self-imposed problem involve undeveloped and untested technology. Certainly in the short term (by which I mean when EV's become the only new cars on the market - if the government does not change its mind) the current technology of fixed charging points is likely to be the only viable option for the vast majority of people. And quite simply it's currently inadequate and, at the present rate of installation, will become even more so. The government is not "behind the curve" - it hasn't even identified where the curve begins.

Not sure I'd call 12yrs short term, more like medium to long term.

If you have a read of what I posted, you'll see that all of those solutions are being developed and tested, and the ones in para 5 are being deployed. But of course, it's not at all exhaustive, and I'm sure many, many more will arrive too.

Yes, Gov is behind the curve. They never expected the market to shift to BEV's at this rate. If they'd looked at Norway now at ~85% BEV sales, and ~25% BEV fleet, they may have thought twice. Or had they been listening to disruptive technology experts like Tony Seba, they may have realised that when a superior technology reaches the market, you get the start of the "S curve", and at around 5-10% penetration, things really start to accelerate. A major part of that is the learning curve (or Wright's Law), which predicts a %age reduction in production costs for every subsequent doubling of production. This then leads to feedbacks and the virtuous circle.

The opposite of course applies, with the vicious circle, as falling sales of ICEV's, leads to rising production costs.

I'm not sure the shift to EVs is a true market with a new, superior technology. Apart from lower tailpipe emissions, a quieter engine and the ability (for some) to refuel at home, I really can't think how EVs are superior to ICEVs.  The only reason EVs exist at all is that the world has collectively (and rightly) decided to ban/phase out ICEVs in order to reduce C02 emissions.

In the UK and many other countries, most EV purchase and running costs are currently heavily subsidised. The majority is paying for a small number of relatively wealthy early adopters.  I'm not saying this is wrong; just pointing out that this is not the same as, for example, the transition from film to digital photography.  The EV transition may have some significant hills/rocky roads to traverse on the way to proper mass adoption.    

WellKnownSid

Ibrahim5 said:

There's some bonkers stuff made up on this thread. Petrol and diesel engines don't become less efficient or powerful with age.

10% of petrol engined cars and 4% of diesel cars fail their MoT on emissions every year.  I would wager that many of those are significantly down on power and the driver claims they haven't noticed

Once cars get to 10+ years old and on their third, fourth, fifth owner, servicing generally goes out the window and there are lots of reasons why they are down on power.  This is the real-world market that many people are playing in so I believe it's a reasonable comparison to make.

sevenhills

WellKnownSid said:

10% of petrol engined cars and 4% of diesel cars fail their MoT on emissions every year.  I would wager that many of those are significantly down on power and the driver claims they haven't noticed

Having covered 115,000 miles mine is a little smokey, but never failed.
On the point of the OP, I don't think any garage that deals in combustion engine cars would recommend a change to electric, they would lose business that way.