Electric cars

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I doubt any ICEV's will still be selling/sellable in 2040 anyway, but nice to see Shell on board.

Shell would support UK bringing forward petrol ban from 2040

Hmmm not sure that article is saying Shell are on board with the switch. Read to me that they're looking to minimise their investmeny in the UK before moving production to more prosperous (for them) countries.

welfayre wrote: »

Hmmm not sure that article is saying Shell are on board with the switch. Read to me that they're looking to minimise their investmeny in the UK before moving production to more prosperous (for them) countries.

Hi

Odd ... I read it that Shell have accepted that the changeover to EVs will happen in the more prosperous countries first, with less developed economies, such as those in Africa, being the last to change over to EVs (for obvious economic & infrastructure reasons) ...

It doesn't really make much sense to read 'UK' into the decision as the rate of changeover to EVs will be broadly similar across Europe and other 'developed' regions ... it's also notable that petrol prices in less developed countries are normally considerably lower than the UK or Europe, by the looks of it it's mainly between 1/3 & 1/2 of UK litre pricing in African nations ... granted, much of the difference could be related to national tax policies, however, wherever fuel tax is low price volatility at the pump becomes an issue as it drives demand, particularly so in poorer economic regions.

Chances are that they're simply looking whether to have a final round of major plant investment, or extend the service life of what's already in place ... current EV timetables probably provide a date which falls into an inconvenient slot between the optimal position for the two options, leaving them in an investment quandary ... however, what suits Shell's timetable may not suit their competitors!

HTH
Z

Arklight wrote: »

Reading this thread kind of reinforces my prejudices about electric vehicles. Namely that battery tech just isn't there yet. Li-On batteries begin degrading the moment they pop out of the production line.

300 charge cycles or so and the internal corrosion has knocked off 8% of their capacity, and realistically what is the range of a brand new fully charged Nissan Leaf with the stereo on loud, the heather blowing heat, and headlights on - 100 miles?

Talk me round because I really want this technology to work, but as it stands the human race can't find a way to make a laptop battery that will hold a charge after two years, how are we meant to abandon petrol vehicles?

I don't think that 8% after 300 charging cycles can be right. We've had a Leaf for nearly 4 years (done over 100,000 miles in it), charging nearly every day - often more than once -, and the battery is still at about 96% of the theoretical maximum.


Obviously this is only one data point, it would be interesting to get an overall picture of battery degradation from a good sized sample. I'm sure that Nissan (at least) have this as the car sends info about its performance for every journey.

Arklight wrote: »

Reading this thread kind of reinforces my prejudices about electric vehicles. Namely that battery tech just isn't there yet. Li-On batteries begin degrading the moment they pop out of the production line.

I think I've read answers to all these points already on the thread. Not sure how your prejudices can have been reinforced as I've found the comments of EV'ers on here really inspiring, with confirmation that the vehicles (and batts) do exactly 'what it says on the tin'.

Arklight wrote: »

300 charge cycles or so and the internal corrosion has knocked off 8% of their capacity, and realistically what is the range of a brand new fully charged Nissan Leaf with the stereo on loud, the heather blowing heat, and headlights on - 100 miles?

Does it knock off 8%? I thought the Tesla & Teslanomics studies showed that they could do 200,000+ miles with less loss than that.

OK, a smaller batt would incur more charges for any given distance, but let's go a bit negative and use your 300 cycles for 8% loss scenario. That would be around 45,000 miles for a 40kWh Leaf (I think), or around 1,000 gallons of petrol and £5k.

With a replacement batt swop heading for less than £5k (I assume in the next decade), then that sounds OK, but of course at 92% capacity you wouldn't want to swop out the batt. If those 8% range miles were so critical you'd most likely buy a car with a larger range and sell the 92% EV on, or to another family member for whom 80%+ of original range is more than adequate.

BTW, the heater issue has been covered very recently and seems unimportant. I'm not sure what stereo you have in mind but I suspect permanent hearing loss would be more important than range loss if it was 'booming' enough to have any real impact.

Arklight wrote: »

Talk me round because I really want this technology to work, but as it stands the human race can't find a way to make a laptop battery that will hold a charge after two years, how are we meant to abandon petrol vehicles?

The laptop battery is not a fair comparison. It's not designed to last long term, but for fast charge, and deep cycling. The EV batts don't truly allow 0-100% use as this impacts life expectancy, and simply avoiding a full charge if not necessary, can lengthen battery life.

Regarding the abandonment of petrol vehicles, well that's already begun. We may be in the early stages, but EV's now have the performance, range and infrastructure to cope with the requirements of a significant number of drivers, and these factors will only improve going forward.

Cost is an issue, but (again) referring to the advice/information posted on here by EV'ers, it seems acceptable when all costs of ownership are considered, and for many it appears to be cheaper. As the cost of EV's will only come down (more production, learning curves, and battery cost reductions), then it looks like the fight is over and EV's have won ........ we are just waiting whilst the referee counts very slowly to 10.