I think the fact there's a $5k grant off the purchase price means an extra $5k depreciation (up to $9k in BC and $10k in Quebec).
The luxury ones though for sure don't seem to be holding value, but I suspect it's because the people buying them aren't the brand's normal customers and are the first mover types who want what's newest all the time.
The luxury vehicles don’t hold their value because the people who can’t afford them new definitely can’t afford to have their car turn into a brick with $50K owing.
Oh, and they still don’t own a house to charge them.
And without an in-house charging point, a EV is functionally useless for many consumers.
The luxury vehicles don’t hold their value because the people who can’t afford them new definitely can’t afford to have their car turn into a brick with $50K owing.
No that's not the case. Like, at all. None of the luxury EVs are even old enough to have used ones be close to being outside the 8+ year/128000+km battery warranty. This idea that the all these batteries just brick is nonsense. It's a smaller risk than you transmission blowing right after the warranty or anything else.
Quote:
Oh, and they still don’t own a house to charge them.
And without an in-house charging point, a EV is functionally useless for many consumers.
Are we still talking about luxury EVs? because I don't see a lot of Mercedes or Porches parked at apartments in general, nevermind EVs.
As for off street parking, it's definitely a challenge that needs addressing, but there's lots of solutions and even now their not "functionally useless". Having to charge up once every 7-14 days is not that onerous, and that's assuming that no workplace charging or apartment blocks don't or won't get chargers in the future.
Remember that Calagry in 2024 is not representative of most of the world and certainly not representative of even Calgary in 5 years. Norway and China have very high rates of EV ownership for people without off street parking and they are not "functionally useless" there. I know two people with houses that don't have a driveway so they charge their Teslas (both in Red Deer) with public chargers and have for years. It's a slight inconvenience, but it's not that difficult and a very far cry from "functionally useless".
No that's not the case. Like, at all. None of the luxury EVs are even old enough to have used ones be close to being outside the 8+ year/128000+km battery warranty. This idea that the all these batteries just brick is nonsense. It's a smaller risk than you transmission blowing right after the warranty or anything else.
Are we still talking about luxury EVs? because I don't see a lot of Mercedes or Porches parked at apartments in general, nevermind EVs.
As for off street parking, it's definitely a challenge that needs addressing, but there's lots of solutions and even now their not "functionally useless". Having to charge up once every 7-14 days is not that onerous, and that's assuming that no workplace charging or apartment blocks don't or won't get chargers in the future.
Remember that Calagry in 2024 is not representative of most of the world and certainly not representative of even Calgary in 5 years. Norway and China have very high rates of EV ownership for people without off street parking and they are not "functionally useless" there. I know two people with houses that don't have a driveway so they charge their Teslas (both in Red Deer) with public chargers and have for years. It's a slight inconvenience, but it's not that difficult and a very far cry from "functionally useless".
I don't think that is true at all. The link I posted earlier shows it is probably averaging around 1%. The 3 lowest rates are newer vehicles, for Tesla I don't think it is unfair to look at the Model S for longer term failure rates. And comparing a $5k job to a $20k one is also a bit disingenuous, as is having 1 in 100 vehicles fail, outside of maybe Ford.
I'm sure it is getting better, but some of those are risky.
"Sudden battery death syndrome" is a lead acid 12V battery thing and has nothing to do with lithium EV batteries. Not sure what that's about
As for replacement, it extrapolates 225 of an unknown sample of 15000 vehicles, then mentions that it's old Nissan Leaf and Model S batteries.
The older Nissan Leafs uses a different chemistry and had no thermal management. Leaf batteries lost capacity at crazy high rates that aren't even close to what current EVs see. Add to that the Nissan Leaf range was only 75 miles. If you lose 35% after 8 years you're down to 49 miles. That's terrible, but not comparable with any other EV sold in the last 5 years. Teslas lose about 10% of range after 150,000 mileS (240,000km). It's just not reason for concern with current EVs. My Pacifica Hybrid (Plugin Hybrid), still has 100% of the capacity it did in 2019 when I bought it.
I don't think that is true at all. The link I posted earlier shows it is probably averaging around 1%. The 3 lowest rates are newer vehicles, for Tesla I don't think it is unfair to look at the Model S for longer term failure rates. And comparing a $5k job to a $20k one is also a bit disingenuous, as is having 1 in 100 vehicles fail, outside of maybe Ford.
See my discussion of your link above, but it doesn't discuss "battery failure" at all. Just battery replacement which is usually done either under warranty due to some other risk, or when the degradation isn't acceptable to the owner. The degradation issue isn't really an issue with modern evs anymore until well past an ICE vehicles usual lifespan. If some people with a 10 year old model S with 300,000 miles want to replace a battery with 70% capacity left, go at it. I wouldn't call that a "failure" or a risk to purchasing an EV vs an ICE
There are companies that exist to refurbish and replace dead Tesla battery packs. So I don't really understand how you say it isn't a thing.
I didn't say batteries don't get replaced, I said "sudden battery death" wasn't a thing. the 12v batteries can suddenly die, but that happens in every type of vehicle. Foe EVs, the 12v battery is what powers all the software and non traction electronics and is recharged by the high voltage battery. Telsa has removed most manual controls and if the 12v battery dies you can't do almost anything. But that's a unique issue to them and has nothing to do with the EV battery.
And yes, batteries get replaced in old EVs if the range has dropped too much or in the case of the leaf where a new battery doubles therange from even what you originally purchased. If you buy a 7 year old Model S from Arizona that the owner charged at the supercharger all the time and charged to 100% all the time, you might need to replace the battery. But you check that fairly easily before buying
I didn't say batteries don't get replaced, I said "sudden battery death" wasn't a thing. the 12v batteries can suddenly die, but that happens in every type of vehicle. Foe EVs, the 12v battery is what powers all the software and non traction electronics and is recharged by the high voltage battery. Telsa has removed most manual controls and if the 12v battery dies you can't do almost anything. But that's a unique issue to them and has nothing to do with the EV battery.
And yes, batteries get replaced in old EVs if the range has dropped too much or in the case of the leaf where a new battery doubles therange from even what you originally purchased. If you buy a 7 year old Model S from Arizona that the owner charged at the supercharger all the time and charged to 100% all the time, you might need to replace the battery. But you check that fairly easily before buying
I'm not sure where you are stuck on this. EV batteries do suddenly fail for any number of reasons, and you can peruse the forums to see what those are if you don't believe me. And it isn't that every cell in the pack died, but the items failing in the pack are major enough to warrant a replacement.
So I saw Polestar had to delay their financial reporting citing accounting errors that will change their numbers in the previous two fiscal years. But they're struggling with some sluggish sales and hoping the eventual release of the Polestar 4 might spark new sales. Scuttlebutt that Volvo won't be helping them anymore.
Than you have Fisker being all but dead, and Tesla and Rivian having a rough go. Tesla might be like Apple where charging and storage becomes their core business.
Mainstreams like Ford and GM are having struggles with their EV's. Hyundai/Kia seem to be the one who are able to produce and sell without loss although they too reported sales declines last quarter.
Will be interesting to see how they weather the current high interest environment if it sticks around for a couple more years. Seems like cheap cars are what the market is needing, but most EV companies need the profits from expensive models to get going on making their version of the Corolla.
__________________ "Some guys like old balls"
Patriots QB Tom Brady
The Following User Says Thank You to Sylvanfan For This Useful Post:
I remember talking about how it would be better for the environment overall if makers had decided to go hard on plugin hybrid rather than big ticket EVs (maybe here?), seems like that might have been better for the companies overall too.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
I remember talking about how it would be better for the environment overall if makers had decided to go hard on plugin hybrid rather than big ticket EVs (maybe here?), seems like that might have been better for the companies overall too.
I've argued that point before!
It sure doesn't look like Tesla is pivoting to charging, they just fired the entire supercharger team. Cynical Fuzz sees that as they knew if a different charging standard dominated, they'd have big(perhaps devastating?) costs switching. So they offered everything they could to get everyone to switch to their standard. Now that they have avoided the issue of incompatibility for their vehicles, they don't need to be in the charging game and all 3rd party chargers will be Tesla compatible.
I also don't see storage as something you'd really dominate in, because their is no big technology advantage and it's going to be a priced like a commodity in the future. From what I have read, they are already one of the most expensive, and name brand only goes so far.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Isn't electric tech a placeholder between fossil fuels and hydrogen. Meaning surely the Iong term answer is hydrogen - understanding we are probably decades from commercial solutions. Or is it really just theoretical at this point?
Hydrogen works fine, it's just got fundamental challenges due to storage pressures, and it being a tiny molecule that can escape. Due to a lack of natural free hydrogen, it's more of a battery itself than an energy source. You need to separate hydrogen from something else, which takes energy, and then you get that energy back later when you use it.
There are two ways to use hydrogen, either as a fuel source burned, or through a fuel cell which combines hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity and water.
Is it the long term answer? It takes a lot of energy to extract hydrogen, so if we had free energy it would be a decent enough "battery" to charge up. But without free surplus energy it's better to charge a traditional battery for efficiency.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Hydrogen might have a niche where weight vs energy density of batteries doesn't work and hydrogen just makes more sense but yeah the fact that there's a couple of more steps along the chain makes hydrogen less efficient than batteries.
If we had fusion reactors and could generate nearly unlimited free electricity like Fuzz says then it might make sense but the physics challenges are tough.
Park your hydrogen car and a week later all the hydrogen has boiled away.
__________________ Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position.
But certainty is an absurd one.
The Following User Says Thank You to photon For This Useful Post:
Isn't electric tech a placeholder between fossil fuels and hydrogen. Meaning surely the Iong term answer is hydrogen - understanding we are probably decades from commercial solutions. Or is it really just theoretical at this point?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz
Hydrogen works fine, it's just got fundamental challenges due to storage pressures, and it being a tiny molecule that can escape. Due to a lack of natural free hydrogen, it's more of a battery itself than an energy source. You need to separate hydrogen from something else, which takes energy, and then you get that energy back later when you use it.
There are two ways to use hydrogen, either as a fuel source burned, or through a fuel cell which combines hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity and water.
Is it the long term answer? It takes a lot of energy to extract hydrogen, so if we had free energy it would be a decent enough "battery" to charge up. But without free surplus energy it's better to charge a traditional battery for efficiency.
Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
Hydrogen might have a niche where weight vs energy density of batteries doesn't work and hydrogen just makes more sense but yeah the fact that there's a couple of more steps along the chain makes hydrogen less efficient than batteries.
If we had fusion reactors and could generate nearly unlimited free electricity like Fuzz says then it might make sense but the physics challenges are tough.
Park your hydrogen car and a week later all the hydrogen has boiled away.
Hydrogen will have some niche uses, but where battery storage works, Hydrogen really cannot have an impact.
The only abundant source of hydrogen we have is from natural gas extraction, so it's not very green. If the intention is to be green, we really can't count hydrogen from that.
We can make green hydrogen from Electrolysis, but the amount of electricity that uses is really high. Energy is always lost in conversions, and using hydrogen as fuel in an ELectric type vehicle means that you are converting electricity to Hydrogen, then back to electricity before being used. Fundamental laws of physics means that this will always be FAR less efficient than simply using the electricity to put into batterieis in the first place.
As an example, lets compare a BEV to a Hydrogen Fuel cell EV. At current electricity rates, operation costs for the BEV are roughly 1/4 to 1/3 as much as driving a similar ICE vehicle. Now for a HFCEV, the operational costs are about double what a similar ICE vehicle would use in fuel. Altogether, it's 6-8x more in "fuel" costs for a HFCEV, vs a BEV.
Hydrogen could have worked as a placeholder had battery technology not improved and rapidly gotten cheaper as it has. But long term, there is no future for Hydrogen passenger vehicles.
The very limited places in North America where Hydrogen infasructure WAS in place, are now mostly pulling that infrastructure out. Manufacturers are stopping Hydrogen Development, and Toyota basicall can't GIVE away their Mirai stock.
Any place where you do see "We are going to have a hydrogen fleet, its very green!" (Ahem, Alberta Government and YEG Airport, etc), its not because they want to be green - its because they want to support the Oil and Gas industry while sounding green (see where Hydrogen comes from above).
BEV infrastructure is rapidly expanding, technology is rapidly improving. Hydrogen infrastructure was always limited, and is going away.
The window for any Hydrogen era for vehicles is passed, and their won't be another one until such point where we can make nearly unlimited amounts of power for extremely cheap - so that the 6-8x cost factor is negligible anyway.
