Eletric cars are they worth it - do you have one

WellKnownSid

zee34 said:

WellKnownSid said:

zee34 said:
the cost of replacing them every 7 years i think is expensive.

Only Daily Mail readers need to change the batteries every 7 years...

I dont read news papers. 10 years then , they wont last forever. While a normal car engine will last much longer. 

Nissan data suggests a 22 year usable lifetime on the Leaf.

LFP batteries are good for 5,000 charge/discharge cycles.  Perhaps 1,000,000 miles if you drive carefully.

After that, the battery modules can be re-used in for less demanding applications.

mgfvvc

zee34 said:

Manufacturers have no clue how to get rid of the used batteries.

Most of the gigafactories under construction include recycling facilities with a claimed 95% recovery rate.

zee34 said:

the cost of replacing them every 7 years i think is expensive.

They generally come with 8 year warranties and the manufacturers wouldn't issue 8 year warranties unless there was a big margin over that in life expectancy. Tesla's figures are that Model S and Model X batteries typically have 90% capacity after 200,000 miles (usual pinch of salt required but, excluding Nissan Leafs, battery degradation is not proving to be a big issue).

zee34 said:

The mining process is ruining the environment.

No more than oil drilling, probably much less overall.

Nessyjr

It really does depend on your usage. We live in Northern Ireland, where the charging infrastructure is virtually non-existent.  We do over 20,000 miles a year, and 95% of it is local. We have a second petrol car for longer journeys and holidays. All of our charging is done at home overnight on a cheaper tariff. We were spending £70 a week on diesel (on a car doing 50mpg) for almost 500 miles a week, but the overnight electric bill is currently about £25 a week. Our electric car is like for like on size and style for the previous diesel.

Another thing to consider is that electric cars don't like the winter, and the range will only be about two thirds of the summer range. We typically get 120 miles on a full charge in the winter, and around 170 in summer

grumiofoundation

zee34 said:

WellKnownSid said:

zee34 said:
the cost of replacing them every 7 years i think is expensive.

Only Daily Mail readers need to change the batteries every 7 years...

I dont read news papers. 10 years then , they wont last forever. While a normal car engine will last much longer. 

We have a ten year old Leaf - battery still >90% of original capacity

ElefantEd

If you want to see just how many charging points there are, have a look at https://www.zap-map.com/live/

Granted there are some areas that are still poorly supported (where I live for example!) but in most locations there are plenty.

Charging at a rapid charger at a motorway service station takes about as long as it does to have a coffee and go to the loo. Obviously you aren't charging from 0 to 100%, which would take a long time, mostly you are adding another 75-100 miles or so to the range, which is about 15- 25kWH, which at 43kW (typical AC power rating) takes roughly half an hour or less.

Martyn1981

zee34 said:

happyman70 said:

I am considering buying an electric car but i am not sure. My concern is most of them only let you travel around 200 miles before they need a charge.

I would like to know of people's experience with them, and if there are still free charging points, and how the cost of fuel compares to a petrol car

I dont have an electric car, maybe if i only used it in cities to get around then maybe. But I do drive long road trips on weekend and I just couldnt trust it. Also, a full charge can take like an hour or more?? Sitting around in a service for that long? Until the charging networks are improved, location, lenght of charge I just wouldnt havr it. And they are not much more environmentally or cost friendly either. Manufacturers have no clue how to get rid of the used batteries, the cost of replacing them every 7 years i think is expensive. The mining process is ruining the environment. Sooo no, maybe a hybrid..best of both...but deffo not electric

Rapid charge won't take an hour. Tesla's at V3 (version 3 (version 4 are now rolling out)) stations can charge at 250kW, till about 30%, and 200kW to 50%, before slowly sliding down towards 100kW. Given they have a range of 200-300 miles depending on choice of standard range or long range, then you're talking about a 20-30min charge after 3+hrs of driving. You may not believe this, but you really don't need the charge rate to be any faster, but it will keep improving.

Charging networks (aside from Tesla) are far from perfect, but improving all the time, and the roll out of chargers is accelerating.

They simply are more environmentally friendly, as study after study has shown, and as the carbon intensity of the grid improves, they will get ever cleaner, including the BEV's already on the road, whilst ICEV's will never.

You are entirely wrong about the batteries. Firstly when their capacity has fallen far enough to make them less viable for automotive use (perhaps 70% or less), then they can be used for stationary batteries. This is already happening, but at a 'disappointing' rate, as the batteries are lasting so long. As already advised, studies of the older Tesla BEV's have shown them having around 88% battery capacity after 200,000 miles. The newer battery technology, LFP, appears to be even tougher and longer lasting.

Multiple battery recycling centres are being built, with the ability to extract 95%+ of the material. In fact, recent studies have found that the recycled material has a slightly better performance than virgin mined material. Is the petrol/diesel consumed by an ICEV recycled?

Your 7yr life clim, is simply false, and I assume unsupportable, outside of simply repeating comments from others, who use/spread such information. Car and Driver, a US based car magazine that has been going since 1955, suggested a few years ago, that ICEV's are good for around 180k miles, and BEV's for around 300k miles.

The mining process for BEV's, is miniscule compared to the mining/extraction for fossil fuels. But if you are also hinting at the Cobalt issue, a large proportion of which comes from the DRC, sometimes from highly dubious practices, then you can be assured on many levels. Firstly, the recent focus on this matter (and I stress recent focus*) means that supply chains are being more carefully checked, and hopefully procedures can be improved. Secondly, roughly half of BEVs now come with LFP batteries, which don't contain any Cobalt, and the choice of LFP (and other non-Cobalt technologies) is expanding.

*But most importantly, consumer electronics such as laptops and mobile phones use a Cobalt based battery, but nobody mentioned it before, and the refining process for petrol/diesel, has been using Cobalt for many decades, and that material is lost over time, whereas the Cobalt in BEV batteries can be recycled.

Lastly you suggest a hybrid is the best of both worlds. But it also has the worst of both. Whilst a PHEV is probably a great 'gateway drug' to those looking to change, they typically have a slightly higher TCO (total cost of ownership) than an ICEV, whilst a BEV has a lower one. But a PHEV, driven mostly using leccy (charged most of the time), can be cheaper than an ICEV.

Congratulations - As far as BEV bashing Bingo goes, you pretty much got a full house.

mgfvvc

Every time there is a discussion of electric vehicles someone brings up the old chestnut of needing to replace the batteries every 3 years or 7 years. There is little evidence for this, but there are genuine concerns around batteries, so let's unpack the issue a little.
Let's start with how long batteries really last. As with any automotive component, battery life may vary. Tesla's Model S and Model X batteries have a design life of 500,000 miles. This is much longer than the life expectancy of most vehicles. Other manufacturers' batteries should have similar design lives, but I don't know that for sure. All new EVs are sold with 8 year battery warranties, which suggests considerable confidence in the durability of automotive batteries.
This also raises the question of whether they actually achieve that mileage. Tesla's figures indicate that at 200,000 miles they typically have 90% of their original capacity. Obviously Tesla is the source of these figures and they need to be viewed with a degree of scepticism.
As well as ongoing degradation there are other failures possible, such as damage to cooling systems and electronic failures. I have no idea how common these are, but a significant concern is that they may not be easy to repair. Typically rather than replacing a cheap failed component Tesla, and probably other manufacturers, will often change the whole battery pack, which is very expensive.
Fire risk is a disputed question with claims ranging from electric vehicles being 20 times less likely than ICE vehicles to catch fire, to 4 times more likely.

Goudy

I think it's worth noting there are some caveats when it comes to any form of vehicle warranty and that includes EV batteries.

For instance the MG battery warranty states they may replace with a new or remanufactured battery if their authorised repairer deemed it to have suffered capacity drop below 70% of it's original value at delivery.

Same for VW, Tesla, Toyota and so on.

Nissan state this differently but the upshot is the same (below 9 bars out of 12).

So you could effectively lose a third of you battery capacity overnight, over weeks, months or 8 years for whatever reason, degradation or other fault and you'd struggle to get it replaced under warranty.

I wouldn't interpret that as considerable confidence.
The manufacturers have only really warrantied 2 thirds of it. 
Partial confidence perhaps?

I'm not bashing, just stating facts.

mgfvvc

Goudy said:

I wouldn't interpret that as considerable confidence.
The manufacturers have only really warrantied 2 thirds of it. 
Partial confidence perhaps?

Batteries degrade, the question is where your acceptable limit is.

There are 2 sides to the confidence question.

For the manufacturer, it's a question of how may they will have to replace. If the average remaining capacity at 8 years is 90% they will likely have  to replace less than 1%. If the average is 80% I would guess 5 to 10% would need replacing (would any statisticians like to do a less hand waving estimate?). An average of 70% would mean that around 50% would be replaced.

From the consumer side, it depends. If 80% is too much degradation, then a warranty that's triggered at 70% doesn't inspire confidence, although it may mean that the manufacturer expects well over 90% of their cars to have better than 80% capacity at 100,000 miles.

Goudy

I think it's a manufacturer marketing gimmick.
An attempt to easy peoples minds that the technology is sound.

It's apparent to me that the use of "8 years warranty" is the headline people take from the warranty.
Most don't bother reading the rest or don't decide to divulge that part of the warranty as it doesn't suit their point of view.

If say a car's anti perforation warranty was 8 years but only the top 2/3rds was covered in the small print, I'm sure some would be fooled and others use the 8 years to qualify a point of view or decision. It's still partially worthless.

Personally I don't think degradation would be a problem for your average driver.
Those that mainly slow charge at home, do average mileage, keep a car the average length of time.

Like a lot of EV ownership concerns, you're just unlucky in the other half of the average that can't and don't.

More worrying perhaps than battery degradation should be technology obsolescence.
It seems these threads are full of what is coming in the EV world.

If these better batteries and super fast chargers are coming, why would you worry about your current battery possibly losing up to 30% when your expensive car is suddenly old news with high depreciation because it's not able to take advantage of the advancements.

Volvo have cracked a 40Kw wireless EV charging system, why buy a car with a cable and plug?