Big oil will die when it becomes cheaper to hail an electric self-driving car(shift.newco.co)
shift.newco.co
Big oil will die when it becomes cheaper to hail an electric self-driving car
https://shift.newco.co/this-is-how-big-oil-will-die-38b843bd4fe0
102 comments
Trucking is one area where the per-mile costs are really important, unlike most passenger cars. The cost of electricity is generally much much less than the cost of fuel, so there's definitely the potential for a compelling offer for hauling, even if its only a subset of all uses of semi trucks.
Electric drive trains are excellent at heavy loads; many huge haul trucks, trains, etc. use diesel electric where the diesel is just a fuel source to generate electricity for the real workhorse, the electric motor.
So it's really just the battery that's the hard part here.
Most EVs get ~3.3 mi/kWh. If the increased air resistance means only a third of that efficiency, a 450 kWh battery would be sufficient for 500 mile range. That's about 3 tons of weight, which is a lot, and take up about 2 feet of space behind the cab, perhaps. But since a diesel engine itself is going to weigh about 1 ton more than the electric motors and inverters, it's not a completely outrageous amount of overage.
Of course, the battery alone for this would be about $100,000k, as much typical tractor cabs these days. So clearly there would be some sort of swap program, and battery usage would be charged.
This all becomes a ton easier if designed for just, say, 250 miles before swapping batteries. But napkin math suggests that 500 miles isn't completely implausible, if you can get over the up front capital costs, and the slightly lower hauling capacity.
Electric drive trains are excellent at heavy loads; many huge haul trucks, trains, etc. use diesel electric where the diesel is just a fuel source to generate electricity for the real workhorse, the electric motor.
So it's really just the battery that's the hard part here.
Most EVs get ~3.3 mi/kWh. If the increased air resistance means only a third of that efficiency, a 450 kWh battery would be sufficient for 500 mile range. That's about 3 tons of weight, which is a lot, and take up about 2 feet of space behind the cab, perhaps. But since a diesel engine itself is going to weigh about 1 ton more than the electric motors and inverters, it's not a completely outrageous amount of overage.
Of course, the battery alone for this would be about $100,000k, as much typical tractor cabs these days. So clearly there would be some sort of swap program, and battery usage would be charged.
This all becomes a ton easier if designed for just, say, 250 miles before swapping batteries. But napkin math suggests that 500 miles isn't completely implausible, if you can get over the up front capital costs, and the slightly lower hauling capacity.
> Most EVs get ~3.3 mi/kWh.
Not even close. BMW runs electric trucks between production facilities and our 169kWh trucks (Terberg YT202-EV) which haul up to 34,000kg get at most 100km out of that, often less. So you're looking at about 0.6km/kWh or 0.37mi/kWh. It will be more with less stopping (although there isn't a lot of stopping on our routes) but nowhere near your estimate.
Not even close. BMW runs electric trucks between production facilities and our 169kWh trucks (Terberg YT202-EV) which haul up to 34,000kg get at most 100km out of that, often less. So you're looking at about 0.6km/kWh or 0.37mi/kWh. It will be more with less stopping (although there isn't a lot of stopping on our routes) but nowhere near your estimate.
I appreciate your data! However I wasn't trying to say that trucks will get 3.3 mi/kWh, this was apparently quite confusingly phrased, as I meant passenger vehicles.
My spitball of 1.1 mi/kWh was clearly way too high still.
My spitball of 1.1 mi/kWh was clearly way too high still.
> Most EVs get ~3.3 mi/kWh
Not if they're hauling around 40,000 - 50,000 lbs of freight.
Not if they're hauling around 40,000 - 50,000 lbs of freight.
And in the next sentence I completely spitball that it may be a third of that.
That's based on the drag, which is most of the energy spent on hauling.
Though another benefit of electric is that the kinetic energy of accelerating 50,000 lbs to 55mph can be regenerated, instead of lost entirely. And it's not an insignificant amount of potential energy, at really close to 2kWh.
That's based on the drag, which is most of the energy spent on hauling.
Though another benefit of electric is that the kinetic energy of accelerating 50,000 lbs to 55mph can be regenerated, instead of lost entirely. And it's not an insignificant amount of potential energy, at really close to 2kWh.
Also don't forget the battery charging time. If your battery takes two days to charge, it will be show stopper to even start with.
Well I did say: "So clearly there would be some sort of swap program"
Though my intent was mostly so that the capital cost could be amortized over many uses by independent truckers, rather than them having to take out an upfront loan for the massive cost of the battery. But it also makes the timeliness of charging a non-issue.
Though my intent was mostly so that the capital cost could be amortized over many uses by independent truckers, rather than them having to take out an upfront loan for the massive cost of the battery. But it also makes the timeliness of charging a non-issue.
Swapping is an option if the batteries aren't owned by the drivers/truck owners. Otherwise its a huge issue.
I don't want to buy a new truck and have my new battery swapped for a 5 years old battery, then have a break down somewhere and pay for it.
I don't want to buy a new truck and have my new battery swapped for a 5 years old battery, then have a break down somewhere and pay for it.
> But since 2000 heavy trucks have accounted for 40% of the TOTAL growth in oil demand
I kept trying to parse this (and then got shocked and was like "no, that can't be true...") before going on and realizing I was reading a garden path sentence.
I kept trying to parse this (and then got shocked and was like "no, that can't be true...") before going on and realizing I was reading a garden path sentence.
Thank you I hadn't read the description of that before.
After looking up the definition of garden path sentence... I'm not sure this fits the bill.
It doesn't look like a misleading statement to me. Unless you mean it's missing a comma after '2000'?
It doesn't look like a misleading statement to me. Unless you mean it's missing a comma after '2000'?
I think it does.
"Since 2000 heavy trucks have" tells me "2000 heavy trucks" did something and I'm going to read what that something caused.
It's only when I get to "and similar gains are projected over the next few decades." that it's clear the author meant "Since the year 2000, heavy trucks have".
It's a garden path sentence because the initial interpretation while you're reading it is incorrect and you only realise this when you get to the end and reprocess the start.
If the author put a comma there, it would be clear on first read: "Since 2000, heavy trucks have".
"Since 2000 heavy trucks have" tells me "2000 heavy trucks" did something and I'm going to read what that something caused.
It's only when I get to "and similar gains are projected over the next few decades." that it's clear the author meant "Since the year 2000, heavy trucks have".
It's a garden path sentence because the initial interpretation while you're reading it is incorrect and you only realise this when you get to the end and reprocess the start.
If the author put a comma there, it would be clear on first read: "Since 2000, heavy trucks have".
I get what you mean now. I think I mentally auto-corrected the sentence on the first pass and never really considered the literal meaning.
It's hard for me to tell what the most likely interpretation is, but yes, a comma could certainly disambiguate it. As it was written, I was expecting it to go "But since 2000 heavy trucks have accounted for 40% of the TOTAL growth in oil demand, and since [foo] is also true, we expect that [blah]..." but then my mental model just crashed.
Charging I think is generally misunderstood. More room to work with (like in a truck) means you can either add more cells or have more space between cells, meaning you can pump more energy in (and out) within the thermal constraints. I suspect the Tesla semi will charge very fast for this kind of reason - much faster than Tesla's cars (not more slowly as people seem to expect).
If the semi is also made with "commodity" components like seems to be the idea (for instance using Model 3 motors[1]), then the cost of ownership equation becomes very appealing. This kind of modularity is yet another inherent advantage over ICE technology.
Also in this case I imagine multiple motors are more efficient than a single large motor for long-distance travel because of better thermal control for the motors themselves.
[1] https://electrek.co/2017/05/03/tesla-semi-model-3-electric-m...
If the semi is also made with "commodity" components like seems to be the idea (for instance using Model 3 motors[1]), then the cost of ownership equation becomes very appealing. This kind of modularity is yet another inherent advantage over ICE technology.
Also in this case I imagine multiple motors are more efficient than a single large motor for long-distance travel because of better thermal control for the motors themselves.
[1] https://electrek.co/2017/05/03/tesla-semi-model-3-electric-m...
I am imagining a battery pack that can be moved into place on pallet jack. Also, bigger more voluminous batteries can suck down more power, limited by thermal load, not current.
Exactly. If you can throw 2 battery packs into the semi, it can be charged twice as fast as a Tesla car without doing anything else. The actual equation (miles/minute) has a few variables (mileage of semi, weight, charge curves), but the conclusion seems to be that it would charge really fast. I don't think they're going to bother with swapping.
There's Nikola One and Toyota's Project Portal though both use hydrogen rather than batteries. And as you say, Tesla is working on one.
Electric motors should be fine for torque, and great for efficiency (with regenerative braking). Range is obviously the main issue.
But is range really such a problem? Imagine you can just swap the battery pack at recharge stations. That would be a pain for cars (different batteries, batteries built into the chassis, consumers being worried about the new battery being OK, consumers not knowing how to swap them, consumers not planning routes properly), but for trucks you can standardize.
100 battery swap stations across the US could cover a lot of high volume truck routes. Tesla cars are low volume, and the battery can't be swapped (because they're built into the bottom of the chassis), and Tesla can still afford those power charging stations. Trucks seem a little more "blocky" than cars though, so perhaps a swappable battery is possible?
It doesn't need to cover every edge case, in the first rollout, just enough to steal business away on high volume routes.
Electric motors should be fine for torque, and great for efficiency (with regenerative braking). Range is obviously the main issue.
But is range really such a problem? Imagine you can just swap the battery pack at recharge stations. That would be a pain for cars (different batteries, batteries built into the chassis, consumers being worried about the new battery being OK, consumers not knowing how to swap them, consumers not planning routes properly), but for trucks you can standardize.
100 battery swap stations across the US could cover a lot of high volume truck routes. Tesla cars are low volume, and the battery can't be swapped (because they're built into the bottom of the chassis), and Tesla can still afford those power charging stations. Trucks seem a little more "blocky" than cars though, so perhaps a swappable battery is possible?
It doesn't need to cover every edge case, in the first rollout, just enough to steal business away on high volume routes.
Tesla batteries can be swaped. They have a video showing it, and a single station doing it, but there is no need for it atm. Ive been driving my Model S for 2+ years now, and the charging options are plenty. Link to video of battery swap https://youtu.be/HlaQuKk9bFg
Wow, I didn't know that. And that's a lot faster than I would have guessed.
From Tesla: "a Supercharger provides up to 170 miles of range in as little as 30 minutes".
Yes, there is certainly a need for swapping batteries if you drive 500 miles a day, and are being paid to deliver on a tight schedule - you don't want to spend an extra hour and a half charging. But if you're spending 6 minutes swapping those batteries out (2 minutes per change), it's a lot more viable (especially if an EV can go up hills faster).
People don't drive a Tesla 500 miles a day, and even if they do they don't mind a few 30 minute breaks. Trucks are a bit different.
From Tesla: "a Supercharger provides up to 170 miles of range in as little as 30 minutes".
Yes, there is certainly a need for swapping batteries if you drive 500 miles a day, and are being paid to deliver on a tight schedule - you don't want to spend an extra hour and a half charging. But if you're spending 6 minutes swapping those batteries out (2 minutes per change), it's a lot more viable (especially if an EV can go up hills faster).
People don't drive a Tesla 500 miles a day, and even if they do they don't mind a few 30 minute breaks. Trucks are a bit different.
I think we will see some smart solutions in the future, and next generation charging hinted by Tesla and promised by the likes of Porsche for the Porsche Mission E, would reduce charging times by half. https://newsroom.porsche.com/en/technology/porsche-engineeri...
There's a flaw in the argument that individual vehicles will go away: families with kids.
Before I had a baby, ride sharing was fantastic. Now it's basically useless. To transport my baby, I need a car seat of the appropriate size. It's really handy if I can leave a stash of diapers and wipes in the car. A portable high chair is nice, too. Sure, ride sharing is more convenient, but the car seat issue is a show stopper, at least until the ride sharing services catch up or autonomous car safety improves significantly and legislation catches up.
All that being said, the car seat and diaper cache in question live in an EV, and I'm quite happy that I am basically done with the gas station phase of my life.
Before I had a baby, ride sharing was fantastic. Now it's basically useless. To transport my baby, I need a car seat of the appropriate size. It's really handy if I can leave a stash of diapers and wipes in the car. A portable high chair is nice, too. Sure, ride sharing is more convenient, but the car seat issue is a show stopper, at least until the ride sharing services catch up or autonomous car safety improves significantly and legislation catches up.
All that being said, the car seat and diaper cache in question live in an EV, and I'm quite happy that I am basically done with the gas station phase of my life.
That goes away fast though. By the time you are a more seasoned parent you just need less stuff & the car seat issue is only for very early age kids. Booster seats are drop in.
> Now it's basically useless.
There's also this thing that even if you don't have kids (I personally don't) you don't want to sit on a car chair which has had other people's bodily fluids on it. Public transport like buses or trams is for the moment safe-ish when it comes to that, at least where I live, because not a lot of people masturbate in public or have sex on the chairs of a bus because people will call them out, but I don't see what would stop 2 people having sex in a car which they don't own (they only share it) and where nobody can see them.
There's also the non-politically correct question of what we should do with homeless people riding these vehicles? This is a real problem when it comes to public transport in my city, as the trams and buses are used as a de-facto day shelter against cold when winter comes. You really do not want to sit close to many of these homeless people in those cases, as the smell is very hard on the senses (I mean, real hard), often times you can tell a homeless people has been riding that tram half an hour ago only by the smell alone (even though he's not still on the tram). If said homeless people were to use this car-sharing thingie I can guarantee you that nobody else will use said cars after them.
There's also the thing of how do you protect these vehicles against destruction and negligence by its users, a problem encountered by many who have shared their car in the existing car-sharing projects.
There's also this thing that even if you don't have kids (I personally don't) you don't want to sit on a car chair which has had other people's bodily fluids on it. Public transport like buses or trams is for the moment safe-ish when it comes to that, at least where I live, because not a lot of people masturbate in public or have sex on the chairs of a bus because people will call them out, but I don't see what would stop 2 people having sex in a car which they don't own (they only share it) and where nobody can see them.
There's also the non-politically correct question of what we should do with homeless people riding these vehicles? This is a real problem when it comes to public transport in my city, as the trams and buses are used as a de-facto day shelter against cold when winter comes. You really do not want to sit close to many of these homeless people in those cases, as the smell is very hard on the senses (I mean, real hard), often times you can tell a homeless people has been riding that tram half an hour ago only by the smell alone (even though he's not still on the tram). If said homeless people were to use this car-sharing thingie I can guarantee you that nobody else will use said cars after them.
There's also the thing of how do you protect these vehicles against destruction and negligence by its users, a problem encountered by many who have shared their car in the existing car-sharing projects.
There could still be a massive in the total number of individual cars, though. If you switched from the US average of 2 cars per household to one car for each child under the age of eleven, that would be a drop from 250 million individually owned cars to 50 million individually owned cars.
With the standardized latch system you can fit a car seat in about 2 minutes. The main issue is when you transition out of the clip-in car seat to the larger seat at around a year as you certainly wouldn't want to have to lug one of those around at the other end.
That said it's a solvable problem with some thought, engineering, and standardization, but you are correct in saying it won't be solved until ride sharing EV's are out of the early adopter stage/commuter stage.
That said it's a solvable problem with some thought, engineering, and standardization, but you are correct in saying it won't be solved until ride sharing EV's are out of the early adopter stage/commuter stage.
This is a really big point I've never considered!
I don't have kids, so I'm definitely coming from a place of ignorance. On planes and trains I never see car seats used, which I assume is because crashes are so unlikely on those modes of transit.
If self driving cars are as safe as, or safer than, a trip on a train, would it still be a concern?
I don't have kids, so I'm definitely coming from a place of ignorance. On planes and trains I never see car seats used, which I assume is because crashes are so unlikely on those modes of transit.
If self driving cars are as safe as, or safer than, a trip on a train, would it still be a concern?
^ Parent w/ a <1 yr old. Car seats aren't used on planes because a car seat would take up a seat, which costs money. Kids under 2 yrs are free if they sit on your lap at most/all US airlines, so parents would just swap lap-sitting for their kid(s).
Not sure about trains.
I assume that if/when cars are as safe as a plane/train, adults wouldn't even need seat belts but you'd still need a carseat for an infant/toddler because it also stabilizes the child's position. Kids <6mo have no neck control. Kids <10mo can't reliably sit up for long durations. An autodriving car might be safe, but it'd probably still need to make emergency stops / turns. That'd be real bad if there were no carseats.
Not sure about trains.
I assume that if/when cars are as safe as a plane/train, adults wouldn't even need seat belts but you'd still need a carseat for an infant/toddler because it also stabilizes the child's position. Kids <6mo have no neck control. Kids <10mo can't reliably sit up for long durations. An autodriving car might be safe, but it'd probably still need to make emergency stops / turns. That'd be real bad if there were no carseats.
Car seats are now encouraged for planes for < 18 months. The worry isn't crashes per say but jerks and sudden stops on take off and landing, and turbulence.
https://www.faa.gov/passengers/fly_children/
It's a PITA to use due to the huge variety of seat dimensions and car seat sizes and no standardized latching system for plane seats.
https://www.faa.gov/passengers/fly_children/
It's a PITA to use due to the huge variety of seat dimensions and car seat sizes and no standardized latching system for plane seats.
Good point - I'd imagine that quickly becomes something you can request that the vehicle have. Maybe it'll take an extra 5 minutes to get to you as there are fewer but that might just be a bonus if you have a kid to get ready :D
Exactly. It will be a checkbox in the app and work much like cabs with disability access do now - just a subset of the larger fleet.
Just another checkbox on some sort of auto-deploying fleet management's app, maybe.
Actually a percentage of cars could have child seats and you have to inform while booking. In Singapore Grab already had the option of booking car with child seat.
Similar issues if you have a dog. The probability that you can take a dog in a taxi/uber/lyft is very low and you have to call ahead to ask and it makes it very inconvenient. Many families have dogs. At least in Canada/Europe public transit allows dogs much more than in the US so thats an improvement.
> internal combustion engine has too many moving parts.
It does. But then the simple EVs aren't a that much cheaper than those complicated ICE cars. Where is the $9k efficiency basic model that someone in a lower income bracket could afford? Mention the government incentives and credits and talk about the cheap recharge cost compared to a tank of gas, less maintenance costs, and all of the sudden a lot of people will start listening. Most EV cars start at $20k and up from what I remember. That's more than the MSRP of a new Honda Civic. Few American consumers will choose a more expensive model, with less range, and long recharge cycle. There'd have to be some serious tax incentives/penalties or a huge jump in gas prices for people to start seriously considering EVs as their next car.
I get the point of electric taxis about maintenance, but there are only so many taxis around. Some are even regulated based on a medallion system. So I am afraid just taxis might not be enough to revolutionize the car industry.
It does. But then the simple EVs aren't a that much cheaper than those complicated ICE cars. Where is the $9k efficiency basic model that someone in a lower income bracket could afford? Mention the government incentives and credits and talk about the cheap recharge cost compared to a tank of gas, less maintenance costs, and all of the sudden a lot of people will start listening. Most EV cars start at $20k and up from what I remember. That's more than the MSRP of a new Honda Civic. Few American consumers will choose a more expensive model, with less range, and long recharge cycle. There'd have to be some serious tax incentives/penalties or a huge jump in gas prices for people to start seriously considering EVs as their next car.
I get the point of electric taxis about maintenance, but there are only so many taxis around. Some are even regulated based on a medallion system. So I am afraid just taxis might not be enough to revolutionize the car industry.
EV price will mainly depend on how well Li-Ion batteries scale up in a mass market. I'd imagine at some point more and more of the price will go towards the part that cannot be made cheaper (and will actually increase in price with higher demand): Lithium. On the other hand, having efficient refurb/recycle processes for older batteries may solve that, assuming that there's enough Lithium to serve the global market once over in the first place. If not I guess it's either time for a new battery technology or time to mine asteroids or the moon.
I love my combustion engine car and don't plan to go electric next time... but this article made me think. And while perhaps a little too optimistic on timeline, I have to concede that his premise regarding moving parts has merit.
If it's any comfort, I don't think combustion engines will go anywhere. They will likely be relegated to a romantic niche, however.
It happened with vinyl and film already, most famously. They were announced to have met their end and were doomed to be but a mark in history books, yet they've found their place. A fine-tuned masterpiece of mid-20th century automotive engineering is a thing of beauty, but it's not sustainable on a vast scale anymore -- and that's what we need for transportation now. We need transport on a vast scale -- a worldwide, ubiquitous, affordable scale. Everyone needs access without harming the planet that we so happily live upon.
If it combustion engine vehicles become about beauty, they will last in some form. I hope they do.
It happened with vinyl and film already, most famously. They were announced to have met their end and were doomed to be but a mark in history books, yet they've found their place. A fine-tuned masterpiece of mid-20th century automotive engineering is a thing of beauty, but it's not sustainable on a vast scale anymore -- and that's what we need for transportation now. We need transport on a vast scale -- a worldwide, ubiquitous, affordable scale. Everyone needs access without harming the planet that we so happily live upon.
If it combustion engine vehicles become about beauty, they will last in some form. I hope they do.
I've been pondering this. I think gasoline could become hard to get very rapidly. There are already fewer gas stations along the interstates as car ranges have increased. As electrification takes hold, less demand drives the price of gas lower. At what point is it too cheap to stock at a convenience store? Right now those stores are built around it, gas brings in visitors. If less people want gas, their whole model has to change. No c-stores around sort of means not many places to get gas. will battery prices ever go up?
That's an interesting path to go down. It's pretty hard to predict for certain.
People thought that vinyl manufacturing would never exist again, but new "boutique" pressing plants have emerged over time with people dedicated and passionate about the design of the machines and the quality control process.
I imagine you could see something similar with gas, though of course the scale is very different.
My father was a pipe fitter in an oil refinery for ~30 years, and he started doing it because he loved the craft. Over the years the large companies' treatment of their employees made him a bit jaded, but if it's a smaller operation I imagine you could see passions emerge again.
In spite of the obvious benefits of automated vehicles, especially for long trips, I can see some people still enjoying the feeling of driving on the open road. And even if automated vehicles are the prominent mode for long trips, there will still exist a need for rest stops, truck stops, etc. They just might be a little different.
There could probably be boutique gas/fuel stores. Maybe someplace that offered charging stations, new fully-charged batteries, and various brands of artisan gasoline. And of course, they'd have a fridge full of Coca Cola and a shelf of chips and Oh Henry bars.
Dammit, I'm seeing the makings of a fun fictional world here...
People thought that vinyl manufacturing would never exist again, but new "boutique" pressing plants have emerged over time with people dedicated and passionate about the design of the machines and the quality control process.
I imagine you could see something similar with gas, though of course the scale is very different.
My father was a pipe fitter in an oil refinery for ~30 years, and he started doing it because he loved the craft. Over the years the large companies' treatment of their employees made him a bit jaded, but if it's a smaller operation I imagine you could see passions emerge again.
In spite of the obvious benefits of automated vehicles, especially for long trips, I can see some people still enjoying the feeling of driving on the open road. And even if automated vehicles are the prominent mode for long trips, there will still exist a need for rest stops, truck stops, etc. They just might be a little different.
There could probably be boutique gas/fuel stores. Maybe someplace that offered charging stations, new fully-charged batteries, and various brands of artisan gasoline. And of course, they'd have a fridge full of Coca Cola and a shelf of chips and Oh Henry bars.
Dammit, I'm seeing the makings of a fun fictional world here...
I love my combustion cars too but the Tesla puts them all to shame. It's just better in every way but two: Initial price and range. Economies of scale and competition will fix the first and recharging stations have already mostly fixed the second. I encourage skeptics to drive one. It's an astonishing vehicle.
Puts them to shame how? The Tesla standard of luxury is light years behind that of cars like the S Class. The standard of performance is strictly limited going from 0 to 60, and not sustaining it.
I've driven it, and I've driven other high end cars of it offers very little that you can't find in other high end cars.
The novelty of instant acceleration is fine, but the insulation from wind noise and road noise are still not on par with high end brands even though there's no ICE (and it's not because there's no ICE noise to cover up, in a modern S Class the cabin is almost whisper quiet), and if performance is you goal.
You don't (knowledgeably) get a Tesla because you want the best car, you get one because you want a Tesla. To me cars like the S Class shame the Model S for trying to call itself a "luxury car", and cars like C63 AMGs shame it for calling itself a "performance sedan"
I've driven it, and I've driven other high end cars of it offers very little that you can't find in other high end cars.
The novelty of instant acceleration is fine, but the insulation from wind noise and road noise are still not on par with high end brands even though there's no ICE (and it's not because there's no ICE noise to cover up, in a modern S Class the cabin is almost whisper quiet), and if performance is you goal.
You don't (knowledgeably) get a Tesla because you want the best car, you get one because you want a Tesla. To me cars like the S Class shame the Model S for trying to call itself a "luxury car", and cars like C63 AMGs shame it for calling itself a "performance sedan"
You're probably right about the luxury aspect; I'm not that into luxury. The things that excite me are performance and utility. The P100D is extremely quick [0] and that matters not just on the drag strip but when passing on the highway. The lack of a transmission means the acceleration curve is absolutely monotonic without gaps for gear changes. Regen braking means the car slows down quickly when you back off the throttle. I've never driven a car that had such a direct connection between your foot's position and the car's velocity.
The Model S also has two trunks and can carry six passengers (okay two have to be kids). This thing is as practical as a minivan and has the performance of a 911 turbo. I find that pretty amazing.
[0] http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/news/a30536/tesla-model...
The Model S also has two trunks and can carry six passengers (okay two have to be kids). This thing is as practical as a minivan and has the performance of a 911 turbo. I find that pretty amazing.
[0] http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/news/a30536/tesla-model...
Why is accelerating from 0 - 60 in a few seconds so important for people when their journey would largely be for minutes/hours?
Its not like going to office/supermarket/school/college/home is a race.
Its not like going to office/supermarket/school/college/home is a race.
That's kind of my point, it doesn't really matter in everyday driving, and if you're interested in some "spirited driving", you want a car with more wholistic performance.
Instantaneous acceleration is nice for stop and go traffic and city driving, but that's inherent to all EVs (A base model Volt as fast from 0 to 30 as a Model S 85)
Instantaneous acceleration is nice for stop and go traffic and city driving, but that's inherent to all EVs (A base model Volt as fast from 0 to 30 as a Model S 85)
> Tesla puts them all to shame.
Too bad they can't get their seat belts to work..
http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN19R08Y-OCA...
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6ljmed/tesla_m...
Too bad they can't get their seat belts to work..
http://ca.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idCAKBN19R08Y-OCA...
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6ljmed/tesla_m...
Range is key to me... I live in the southwest us, a drive to see family is 450-700 miles.
I live in the southwest US too, and the Tesla seemed impractical until about a year ago. Now, however, they have pretty good supercharger coverage.
http://www.teslarati.com/map/
http://www.teslarati.com/map/
Even a fully electric car uses a substantial amount of petroleum based products
Likewise aircraft, which will not run practically on batteries for at least another decade. But the elimination of cars will decrease a volume of petroleum consumption large enough to pose an existential challenge to many oil companies.
It would be interesting to see if lithium mining and production could be scaled up fast enough to produce 15+ million cars per year (US only).
Something tells me that this could be an ecological disaster even greater than coal.
The article may be correct on the rationale, but the timing seems fast given everyone's concern about the planet.
Also consider that oil comes from a small hole in the ground, and already has refineries in place to turn it into gasoline, while last year the whole world only produced about 650,000 tons of lithium. Each Tesla uses about 65Kg of it.
Something tells me that this could be an ecological disaster even greater than coal.
The article may be correct on the rationale, but the timing seems fast given everyone's concern about the planet.
Also consider that oil comes from a small hole in the ground, and already has refineries in place to turn it into gasoline, while last year the whole world only produced about 650,000 tons of lithium. Each Tesla uses about 65Kg of it.
One car is going to be able to service 4-10 people, old cars will still exist. Think of the transition from incandescent to fluorescent to LED, no one expected that LED would take over so soon, that the efficiencies and bulb life would surpass CFL as quickly. How many LED bulb assembly lines do we need? Probably 1. For the whole world.
I think recycling will be a significant source of these metals by the time the world is producing 30+M EVs a year.
That's a hell of a bubble the author is in. Good thing he's not talking politics.
ICEs aren't going anywhere for a very long time. Their market share will certainly be reduced for ground transportation but electric power isn't making nearly as much progress in marine or aviation applications. Liquid field are simply too convenient, especially in remote areas. I know city folk sometimes like to forget that everyone else exists but gas/diesel off highway vehicles aren't getting replaced very soon. The service life of a big piece of equipment (e.g. a front end loader) is measured in decades. Even if a silver bullet comes along it will take a long time for everything else to age out. Secondly, standby generators are everywhere. Those aren't being replaced with batteries anytime soon for obvious reasons. Oil is refined for use in plastics, lubricants and a laundry list of other things that are indefensible to modern civilization. Sure, transportation is a big slice of the market for oil and it's going to get smaller but it's not the only slice. Finally, while the first world may adopt electric power soon, other nations will be slower. If the Keystone pipeline isn't carrying crude that will be refined and sold in the US it will be carrying crude that will be refined and sold elsewhere.
This is wishful thinking, nothing more.
I don't have stock in an oil company or anything, the author's claims are just a little too ridiculous for me to ignore.
ICEs aren't going anywhere for a very long time. Their market share will certainly be reduced for ground transportation but electric power isn't making nearly as much progress in marine or aviation applications. Liquid field are simply too convenient, especially in remote areas. I know city folk sometimes like to forget that everyone else exists but gas/diesel off highway vehicles aren't getting replaced very soon. The service life of a big piece of equipment (e.g. a front end loader) is measured in decades. Even if a silver bullet comes along it will take a long time for everything else to age out. Secondly, standby generators are everywhere. Those aren't being replaced with batteries anytime soon for obvious reasons. Oil is refined for use in plastics, lubricants and a laundry list of other things that are indefensible to modern civilization. Sure, transportation is a big slice of the market for oil and it's going to get smaller but it's not the only slice. Finally, while the first world may adopt electric power soon, other nations will be slower. If the Keystone pipeline isn't carrying crude that will be refined and sold in the US it will be carrying crude that will be refined and sold elsewhere.
This is wishful thinking, nothing more.
I don't have stock in an oil company or anything, the author's claims are just a little too ridiculous for me to ignore.
> Their market share will certainly be reduced for ground transportation
And that alone will be enough.
You're right that gas/diesel will never be completely replaced, but it seems that it doesn't need to be in order to suffer a serious decline in usage that radically transforms the energy landscape.
Looking at this graphic [1], ground transportation is the biggest single use case of oil in the United States.
67% of oil consumption in the U.S. goes to the transportation sector, and ~80% of the transportation industry's oil use is for ground travel. A serious decline in that could really hurt the industry and cause the kind of disruption the author was talking about. (Granted, the graphic's from 2004 but I don't have a reason to believe the proportions have fundamentally changed).
[1] http://afstrinity.com/images/data/oil-transportation.jpg
And that alone will be enough.
You're right that gas/diesel will never be completely replaced, but it seems that it doesn't need to be in order to suffer a serious decline in usage that radically transforms the energy landscape.
Looking at this graphic [1], ground transportation is the biggest single use case of oil in the United States.
67% of oil consumption in the U.S. goes to the transportation sector, and ~80% of the transportation industry's oil use is for ground travel. A serious decline in that could really hurt the industry and cause the kind of disruption the author was talking about. (Granted, the graphic's from 2004 but I don't have a reason to believe the proportions have fundamentally changed).
[1] http://afstrinity.com/images/data/oil-transportation.jpg
Unless something comes along that halves domestic ground travel demand overnight it's not going to hurt the industry too bad. They'll just sell crude to China or whoever. Furthermore, if gas/diesel usage falls then other oil products become cheaper so while lost demand from transportation would not be close to fully compensated for elsewhere it will still be partially compensated for.
It's not the change that hurts, it's how fast the change happens. Think about the kinds of things that have hurt the industry in the past. They've all been very quick.
It's not the change that hurts, it's how fast the change happens. Think about the kinds of things that have hurt the industry in the past. They've all been very quick.
>They'll just sell crude to China or whoever.
So China will stick with gasoline even though it will be more expensive, has to be imported, and the country has terrible air pollution problems?
So China will stick with gasoline even though it will be more expensive, has to be imported, and the country has terrible air pollution problems?
This link says transportation uses about 3/4 of petroleum usage in the US [0] (2015), so that graphic isnt too far off. About 50% of the total is just in motor vehicle gasoline.
[0]https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_use
[0]https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_use
> That's a hell of a bubble the author is in.
Agreed. The fact that countries need to establish laws to prohibit ICE vehicles suggests that "the market" isn't going to kill ICEs for economical reasons.
Agreed. The fact that countries need to establish laws to prohibit ICE vehicles suggests that "the market" isn't going to kill ICEs for economical reasons.
There are some, how to call, secondary effects which can avalanche real quick. For example, if gas stations begin to close (or just give up regular gasoline still selling diesel to trucks) that can become a self strengthening death spiral incredibly fast.
> The costs of electric self-driving cars will be so low, it will be cheaper to hail a ride than to drive the car you already own.
Actually it's nearly to that point for me already. I moved to LA from Hawai'i. In most places in Hawai'i having a car is essential if you want to go anywhere (not so much in Honolulu) - on my island the bus only ran every 2 hours until 4pm on the weekends, and some of the stops were over 5 miles apart.
But now that I live in LA, so any of my needs to go out can be met with Sprouts Amazon Prime Now, Uber and when I really need something coordinated I'll rent a Turo car. And all this costs me less than a monthly car payment would.
Actually it's nearly to that point for me already. I moved to LA from Hawai'i. In most places in Hawai'i having a car is essential if you want to go anywhere (not so much in Honolulu) - on my island the bus only ran every 2 hours until 4pm on the weekends, and some of the stops were over 5 miles apart.
But now that I live in LA, so any of my needs to go out can be met with Sprouts Amazon Prime Now, Uber and when I really need something coordinated I'll rent a Turo car. And all this costs me less than a monthly car payment would.
Same for me. I happen to live in a place with decent enough bus routes. A monthly bus pass is $90. Insurance for the single car my family owns is...$90.
So already a bus pass is on point with owning a car and that's just for insurance. Add to the cost of operating a vehicle: gasoline, oil changes, repairs, annual inspections/registration, etc.
Busing for my commute and then using Uber/Lyft/Zipcar for abnormal trips is cheaper than owning and operating a personal vehicle, today. Forget about 2025.
So already a bus pass is on point with owning a car and that's just for insurance. Add to the cost of operating a vehicle: gasoline, oil changes, repairs, annual inspections/registration, etc.
Busing for my commute and then using Uber/Lyft/Zipcar for abnormal trips is cheaper than owning and operating a personal vehicle, today. Forget about 2025.
Don't forget the part where Uber is selling the service below cost...
Subsidized Uber rides are proof that venture capitalists love us and want us to be happy.
There's a fantastic report from UK that studies what would happen to oil companies if demand decreases at the rate needed to hit 2 and 3 degrees warming.
In general, it see oil prices falling and sovereign oil selling the most since they can undercut competition for a diminishing pie (basically a fire sale). The private oil companies get super screwed, with something like 80%+ stranded assets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_bubble
In general, it see oil prices falling and sovereign oil selling the most since they can undercut competition for a diminishing pie (basically a fire sale). The private oil companies get super screwed, with something like 80%+ stranded assets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_bubble
However there are other uses for oil other than gasoline like jet fuel, asphalt for roads, making plastics.
Your comment reminded me of the idea that "...crude oil is much too valuable to be burned as a fuel."
http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s7121.html
http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/s7121.html
Sure, but something like 40% of all oil in America is used for transportation, and 55% of that is gasoline for cars.
Source: http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/fuels.aspx https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_energy_transpor...
I can't find a good source for what percentage of global oil consumption is burned up in cars, but supposing that was ~20% as well--that would be really something, to take away ~20% of Big Oil's revenues.
Source: http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/fuels.aspx https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/?page=us_energy_transpor...
I can't find a good source for what percentage of global oil consumption is burned up in cars, but supposing that was ~20% as well--that would be really something, to take away ~20% of Big Oil's revenues.
While the author makes a lot of interesting points that even I hadn't considered before as an enthusiastic reader of EV news, there are a few glaring holes I need to point out:
- Pretty much every point the author makes about the rapid takeover of EVs, from being cheaper to hail one instead of owning a gasoline powered car, to the ones relating to owning cars at all, could (and should) be prefixed by "In a city..." because speaking as someone who lives far from an urban sprawl, a lot of this stuff just would not work. Sure EV's work ok out here, though the self driving tech might need more help than most often, but who is buying all of these self driving EV cabs and operating them, and why? The volume just isn't here, you'd get tons of passengers clamoring for a ride between 7am and 9am, then again at 3pm to 5pm, and then it would be near dead the rest of the time.
- There are no EV technologies (to my knowledge) ready to replace anything beyond a city runabout vehicle. The act of, for example, plowing snow would be insanely taxing on an EV truck (running an electric motor under strain is the best way to wear down the battery), and sure, the mechanical element is definitely true but you'd need some sort of fast-charge system to make it viable, otherwise your trucks are spending hours charging for every hour plowing. And then that's a fairly easy one, electric combines, construction equipment, cranes, tow trucks, I haven't heard of any of these and I look for this sort of thing.
- Societal inertia is going to be a big factor here, around here we have people driving vehicles from the 70's, not as collector's items or anything like that but as their daily driver. Come on out here and propose to our average Joe the idea of buying a Tesla Model 3 for $37,000, a guy who barely makes $30,000 a year, who buys and drives the cheapest thing on the lot until the wheels fall off and goes and gets something else.
I could go on but it's bed time. Maybe ICE vehicles will be dearth from cities within 10 years, maybe. But even then I kind of doubt it.
- Pretty much every point the author makes about the rapid takeover of EVs, from being cheaper to hail one instead of owning a gasoline powered car, to the ones relating to owning cars at all, could (and should) be prefixed by "In a city..." because speaking as someone who lives far from an urban sprawl, a lot of this stuff just would not work. Sure EV's work ok out here, though the self driving tech might need more help than most often, but who is buying all of these self driving EV cabs and operating them, and why? The volume just isn't here, you'd get tons of passengers clamoring for a ride between 7am and 9am, then again at 3pm to 5pm, and then it would be near dead the rest of the time.
- There are no EV technologies (to my knowledge) ready to replace anything beyond a city runabout vehicle. The act of, for example, plowing snow would be insanely taxing on an EV truck (running an electric motor under strain is the best way to wear down the battery), and sure, the mechanical element is definitely true but you'd need some sort of fast-charge system to make it viable, otherwise your trucks are spending hours charging for every hour plowing. And then that's a fairly easy one, electric combines, construction equipment, cranes, tow trucks, I haven't heard of any of these and I look for this sort of thing.
- Societal inertia is going to be a big factor here, around here we have people driving vehicles from the 70's, not as collector's items or anything like that but as their daily driver. Come on out here and propose to our average Joe the idea of buying a Tesla Model 3 for $37,000, a guy who barely makes $30,000 a year, who buys and drives the cheapest thing on the lot until the wheels fall off and goes and gets something else.
I could go on but it's bed time. Maybe ICE vehicles will be dearth from cities within 10 years, maybe. But even then I kind of doubt it.
The US and most developed countries are highly urbanized. The US is 82% urban, most of Europe about 80%, China was 57% in 2016 and increasing every year. [1]
Together, these countries account for over half of the world's oil demand and the urban parts account for most of it. [2]
The impact on urban areas alone would be sufficient to disrupt the whole industry. The disruption will unlikely to be as drastic as what happened to Kodak and Nokia since most people cannot afford to change cars as quickly and changing modes of transportation especially conditioned on self-driving vehicles reaching broad acceptance might take some time. Your point regarding rural areas may be applicable to several developing countries. The author's key points remain valid, although the timeline looks too optimistic.
[1] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS?year_h...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_consu...
Together, these countries account for over half of the world's oil demand and the urban parts account for most of it. [2]
The impact on urban areas alone would be sufficient to disrupt the whole industry. The disruption will unlikely to be as drastic as what happened to Kodak and Nokia since most people cannot afford to change cars as quickly and changing modes of transportation especially conditioned on self-driving vehicles reaching broad acceptance might take some time. Your point regarding rural areas may be applicable to several developing countries. The author's key points remain valid, although the timeline looks too optimistic.
[1] http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.URB.TOTL.IN.ZS?year_h...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_consu...
This data lumps together suburban and true dense urban as 'urban'. Probably over 50% of the U.S. population is suburban, and that population is not going to be served economically by on-demand ride services.[1]
[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-suburban-are-big-am...
[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-suburban-are-big-am...
I think you're spot on.
I think the hype about pure electric and self driving are largely just that, hype. I do think electric will rule the day, I just don't think we're going to see it by 2030 - maybe by 2050 - but thats still a big maybe - we need one more generation of battery technology to make it to the mass market.
I think the hype about pure electric and self driving are largely just that, hype. I do think electric will rule the day, I just don't think we're going to see it by 2030 - maybe by 2050 - but thats still a big maybe - we need one more generation of battery technology to make it to the mass market.
> I think the hype about pure electric and self driving are largely just that, hype
I also fear misinvestments from the car companies that could cause major unforeseen health and ecological risks 20 to 30 years from now. The same has happened with diesel here in Europe, which 20 to 30 years ago was seen as superior to gasoline for the average daily commuter and which now, when more than 50% of the cars in in major European countries run on diesel, has proven itself really bad for the health of people living in big cities.
I also fear misinvestments from the car companies that could cause major unforeseen health and ecological risks 20 to 30 years from now. The same has happened with diesel here in Europe, which 20 to 30 years ago was seen as superior to gasoline for the average daily commuter and which now, when more than 50% of the cars in in major European countries run on diesel, has proven itself really bad for the health of people living in big cities.
Yes, charging time is something the author overlooked. A taxi company using its cars all day and night still needs to put them out of service to charge. Maybe battery swapping will become a thing again. There are rental electric cars in China which have swappable batteries. Basically the prediction of the story already existing. But they're obviously not nearly as popular as private cars.
Regarding trucks and cranes. What reason is there for them not to be electric? A snow plow wouldn't overload the motor - it would be designed with a suitable motor and gear reduction just like every other vehicle. For now, there probably aren't subsidies or "look at me saving the planet!" factors to make them economical. There have been lead acid electric forklifts since forever and they charge them overnight.
Regarding trucks and cranes. What reason is there for them not to be electric? A snow plow wouldn't overload the motor - it would be designed with a suitable motor and gear reduction just like every other vehicle. For now, there probably aren't subsidies or "look at me saving the planet!" factors to make them economical. There have been lead acid electric forklifts since forever and they charge them overnight.
[deleted]
> our average Joe the idea of buying a Tesla Model 3
The idea is that Joe will rent the Tesla (i.e. use a taxi), not buy the Tesla because it will be cheaper to use a taxi than to own the car himself (in the city).
So Joe doesn't care about how much the Tesla cost just like nobody cares about how much a taxi car cost.
This effect is visible in Denmark: most taxis are expensive Mercedes-Benz E-Class which nobody owns privately because of the price. They are used for taxis as they are very reliable for driving a huge distance everyday.
> Societal inertia is going to be a big factor
It can change very fast when people can save money.
The idea is that Joe will rent the Tesla (i.e. use a taxi), not buy the Tesla because it will be cheaper to use a taxi than to own the car himself (in the city).
So Joe doesn't care about how much the Tesla cost just like nobody cares about how much a taxi car cost.
This effect is visible in Denmark: most taxis are expensive Mercedes-Benz E-Class which nobody owns privately because of the price. They are used for taxis as they are very reliable for driving a huge distance everyday.
> Societal inertia is going to be a big factor
It can change very fast when people can save money.
> This effect is visible in Denmark: most taxis are expensive Mercedes-Benz E-Class which nobody owns privately because of the price. They are used for taxis as they are very reliable for driving a huge distance everyday.
Same here, but I don't they are that much more reliable compared to other cars. I think it has more to do with labor and fuel being a much bigger part of the total cost vs. the upfront purchase price. So it doesn't cost much extra for taxi companies to market themselves by providing "luxurious" transportation.
Same here, but I don't they are that much more reliable compared to other cars. I think it has more to do with labor and fuel being a much bigger part of the total cost vs. the upfront purchase price. So it doesn't cost much extra for taxi companies to market themselves by providing "luxurious" transportation.
Most of the US population (and that of most other countries around the world) is concentrated in cities. So even if EV's were limited to just city driving, that would suit most people for most of the driving they do.
Electric trains exist, and they haul around way more mass than a simple truck.
As for battery charging times, why couldn't users just swap out empty batteries for fully-charged ones, and charge the empty ones while they're offline?
Electric trains exist, and they haul around way more mass than a simple truck.
As for battery charging times, why couldn't users just swap out empty batteries for fully-charged ones, and charge the empty ones while they're offline?
Come on out here and propose to our average Joe the idea of buying a Tesla Model 3 for $37,000
But that's not what the article is suggesting. It is saying with electric self driving cars, you won't own your own car, it will be cheaper to simply use one exactly when you need it.
But that's not what the article is suggesting. It is saying with electric self driving cars, you won't own your own car, it will be cheaper to simply use one exactly when you need it.
It's the non-existence of affordable electric self-driving cars that's the problem. Not everyone can indulge in this type of irreality. Some people live in the suburbs and have to get to work tomorrow with cars that exist rather than cars that are "nearly" here, or "just around the corner", or "inevitable" or whatnot.
To misquote a famous Rabbi, if you have a sapling in your hand and someone rushes to tell you that the inexpensive fully self-driving electric car has arrived, first plant the sapling and then go and see about the car.
To misquote a famous Rabbi, if you have a sapling in your hand and someone rushes to tell you that the inexpensive fully self-driving electric car has arrived, first plant the sapling and then go and see about the car.
It's important to understand that oil companies all over the world will be going bankrupt if consumption falls 30%.
To start, they all have huge investments that they borrowed money for on the calculation of making a certain level of revenue for 40 or so years.
A big drop in demand will mean less sales, but also that prices per barrel, which are already low, will go down even further. The result would be maybe half the total revenue, so they won't be able to pay off their loans and will have to declare bankruptcy.
To start, they all have huge investments that they borrowed money for on the calculation of making a certain level of revenue for 40 or so years.
A big drop in demand will mean less sales, but also that prices per barrel, which are already low, will go down even further. The result would be maybe half the total revenue, so they won't be able to pay off their loans and will have to declare bankruptcy.
Gasoline is 100 times more energy dense than a battery. The Tesla roadster adds 800 lbs to the lotus elise upon which it is built. Batteries have a long way to go.
AFAIK the factor is more like 50x now (Tesla's panasonic packs vs. gasoline) [1]. The thing is, in order to have a fair comparison in energy density, you should compare with the weight of the whole drivetrain, which lowers the advantage of gasoline quite a bit (due to a heavy motor and transmission) [2]. You also have to consider the significantly lower energy conversion efficiency of ICEs (3-4x). All in all I'd expect the difference is more like 2x, otherwise it would be impossible to have EV cars with a more than two thirds of the range than ICE cars of similar size, weight and power (Tesla S vs. BMW M5).
Edit: IMO the main disadvantage of EVs today is not the energy density, with that they're almost on par with ICE. Instead it is the rate at which energy can be refueled. Driving a Tesla for long distances is still a hassle. That's why I see EVs mainly as daily commuters in the near future, while for weekend trips people may just rent an ICU car.
[1] http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-7709...
[2] http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1104121_electric-car-ene...
Edit: IMO the main disadvantage of EVs today is not the energy density, with that they're almost on par with ICE. Instead it is the rate at which energy can be refueled. Driving a Tesla for long distances is still a hassle. That's why I see EVs mainly as daily commuters in the near future, while for weekend trips people may just rent an ICU car.
[1] http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-7709...
[2] http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1104121_electric-car-ene...
And yet combustion vehicles don't have 2000 miles range. Energy density is very important, but you can make up for it with better efficiency.
Only because they don't need it. Most people are comfortable with a ~300 mile range, knowing they can refill in 5 minutes. So most cars are built with 10-to-15 gallon tanks.
Build a car with a 30 gallon tank and you could easily be in the neighborhood of 1000 miles range.
Build a car with a 30 gallon tank and you could easily be in the neighborhood of 1000 miles range.
But the beauty of adopting electric cars now is that when a better battery technology is developed it can be replaced in cars on an individual basis, whereas a reason we don't drive hydrogen cars today is because fuelling stations would need to stock that in addition to traditional fuels. Supposing nanowire batteries come out for cars: they can still use the same EV chargers.
Electric vehicles have not yet turned out to be more reliable or cheaper to repair. Tesla vehicles are lower than average on both of those measures.
I used to be very optimistic because of how simple electric cars are in theory, but in practice, a century of refinement of internal combustion engines has not yet been beaten.
I used to be very optimistic because of how simple electric cars are in theory, but in practice, a century of refinement of internal combustion engines has not yet been beaten.
The two Tesla models that are available right now are not 'average' cost vehicles, though. How do the fair against similarly positioned vehicles?
I would expect Teslas to be a bit more expensive to maintain at this point, as parts availability and third party after market parts manufacturers are about non-existent for them. As electric vehicles get more popular and mainstream, this problems (as far as EVs in general) will likely be resolved.
I would expect Teslas to be a bit more expensive to maintain at this point, as parts availability and third party after market parts manufacturers are about non-existent for them. As electric vehicles get more popular and mainstream, this problems (as far as EVs in general) will likely be resolved.
[deleted]
Cite? I know quite a few people that have Nissan Leafs and have had literally zero maintenance.
He's wildly optimistic on the timeline to the point of delusion, but it's probably true we'll transition to automated electric cars within a few decades.
This essay carries little weight if he hasn't put his own money on the Line by betting against oil companies.
[deleted]
Musk tweeted earlier this year "Tesla Semi truck unveil set for September. Team has done an amazing job. Seriously next level."
I am involved in a logistics startup that leverages Class 8 trucks and the specs are brutal.
Our trucks need a 500+ mile range and have to haul 40,000 - 50,000 pounds, and do it 5 - 6 days a week reliably.
It's hard to conceive how an electric drive train & battery array could manage to deliver on those basic specs.
But since 2000 heavy trucks have accounted for 40% of the TOTAL growth in oil demand, and similar gains are projected over the next few decades.(2)
And capital on the fleet side is very organized and effecient.
EG if lifetime operating costs of electric are significantly lower w/a longer useful equipment lifetime adoption will be rapid.
(1) https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/852580027178696704
(2) http://www.iea.org/newsroom/news/2017/july/iea-study-unveils...