Electric vehicle war, is gas soon to be toast?

[Azure]

Until they are in full production that remains nothing more than hearsay. Easy to build one prototype, but now do it at scale, and build out the infrastructure to support it.

Great to see more development in the tech though.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I feel with almost certainty that an ICE vehicle purchased today will be worth more than an equivalent EV in five years.

Petrol car purchased now in 5 years will be almost worthless unless it is a specialty model.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Azure

It almost certainly will, but are you planning on keeping your car that long?

This is what I don't get...people scoff at keeping a vehicle for years

how is that environmentally friendly at all?

[Azure]

I'm not scoffing at it. I'm simply saying that most people don't keep a car that long, and that battery technology is going to exponentially improve the next 5 years.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not scoffing at it. I'm simply saying that most people don't keep a car that long, and that battery technology is going to exponentially improve the next 5 years.

Citation needed.


It's been incremental gains for the past 2.5 decades in density and price. Pretty linear. What is coming that makes that exponential in the next 5 years?





https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...ig13_315747192

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

I feel with almost certainty that an ICE vehicle purchased today will be worth more than an equivalent EV in five years.

Originally Posted by zamler

Petrol car purchased now in 5 years will be almost worthless unless it is a specialty model.

Ha ha ha. Both ends of the extreme and both likely wrong.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by dino7c

This is what I don't get...people scoff at keeping a vehicle for years

how is that environmentally friendly at all?

It’s not. Even buying an EV to replace a perfectly good ICE isn’t environmentally friendly. It’s just a form of conspicuous consumption. If people are replacing their EV because batteries improved, that’s not much better.

[Azure]

Exponential is the wrong word, but there is an expected 1000% increase in battery deployment each year, and with that is coming record investment in R&D, and once the bigger players get on board there is no reason we shouldn't expect batteries to get exponentially better.

What happened over 2.5 decades and what happened the last 5 years is not comparable. Even 10 years ago nobody would have thought that we'd see 400km + range on a EV.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

Exponential is the wrong word, but there is an expected 1000% increase in battery deployment each year, and with that is coming record investment in R&D, and once the bigger players get on board there is no reason we shouldn't expect batteries to get exponentially better.

What happened over 2.5 decades and what happened the last 5 years is not comparable. Even 10 years ago nobody would have thought that we'd see 400km + range on a EV.

This Deloitte report from 2011 proves otherwise...In fact this graph is not to far off at all.




https://www2.deloitte.com/content/da...les_100411.pdf


I just haven't read anything that would indicate battery performance drastically improving. It's still on a nice linear trend, which means by 2025 it will be better than now.


Most of the big battery players have been working on it for decades, this isn't a technology that is ripe for discoveries. A random breakthrough can change the game, but what we've seen over the past 25 years is incremental improvement to the original Li based battery, and I don't see any reason why that won't be carrying on at that pace in the future.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Azure

I'm not scoffing at it. I'm simply saying that most people don't keep a car that long, and that battery technology is going to exponentially improve the next 5 years.

I meant in general not directed at you but it seems to be the norm these days to finance a new vehicle every few years. This can't go on forever.

Pretty hard to sit on an environmental high horse if that is the case IMO


again not towards you just in general

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I meant in general not directed at you but it seems to be the case these days that to finance a new new vehicle every few years. This can't go on forever.

Pretty hard to sit on an environmental high horse if that is the case IMO


again not towards you just in general

In a well balanced market it doesn't really matter if someone sells a vehicle and moves to a new one. Their old vehicle becomes someone else's new one, as they retire an even older busted vehicle that may be worse for the environment, and EOL. If the market isn't balanced, and too many young vehicles drive prices down and second handers retire perfectly good vehicles early that get sent to the crusher because there is no demand, then yes, it's worse for the environment.

[Azure]

The Tesla 4680 cell is claiming to have 5x more energy, 16% more range, 6x more power.

There are a ton of other improvements, and while it has taken longer to get rolling on making these and incorporating them into vehicles, the benefits are massive compared to the 2170 cell.

And then you have this.

In association with its manufacturing partner EVE Energy in China and Warwick University in the UK, StoreDot has created these prototype cells with silicon-dominant chemistry in the 4680 format that can be charged to 100% in just 10 minutes. This would make “refueling” a battery-electric vehicle take around the same time as an internal combustion one and solve one of the issues that currently makes some people think hydrogen might be a better solution (despite its many other drawbacks). Imagine arriving at a recharging spot in your Tesla Model S Plaid and driving away 10 minutes later with 390 miles of range available again. There would be no impediment at all to driving extremely long distances.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmo...to-beat-tesla/

Not sure how you look at this, but to me that is exponential improvement. Going from 30 min supercharger fill to 80%, to 100% full charge in 10 min is an insane improvement.

[Fuzz]

Tesla's claims on those cells need to be decoded:

If you look at the numbers, you see that the 4680 has 5.5 times the volume of the 2170. Now Tesla claim that the new cell has 6 times the current output of the old 2170, which gives it the ability to release 36A with a capacity of 24 Ah, or 86.5 Wh.
So what is the ultimate outlook for a cell that takes up 5.5 times the space that its predecessor did, yet only gives 5 time the energy storage? At first glance it looks like a backward move, but this is forgetting the clincher for the new cell, and that’s the fact that it can flow 6 times the current that the old one could. This means faster energy supply to the motor, as well as faster recharge times possible.

https://www.quora.com/What-did-Elon-...-vehicle-range


So the cells don't have 5x more energy density, which is really what you want to look at. Improving that is really the key. Larger cells improve charge and discharge rates. So they are a nice step, but that's not really a "new" development. GM's using pouch cells, I think, which are bigger still. I never really understood why Tesla went with such small cells, other than that was what they could get when they got started, and stuck with it.

[photon]

Let us know when cars that can charge 100% in 10 minutes come out.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by photon

Let us know when cars that can charge 100% in 10 minutes come out.

I think standardized cells and quick swaps will be the answer for charging woes. I don’t see travellers having the patience on a long weekend road trip out of the city to wait around for cara ahead of them to charge. Also mitigates some of the risk in the event of a power outage.

[Fuzz]

Cell swaps are not a great solution. You have the issue of then not owning your battery, which comes with the downside of getting one that was abused. Swapping a battery is tricky, because a lot of them are structural to the car(which has great weight saving and strength benefits) and also have cooling lines, and other connections, along with being kinda dangerous to work around. Might be handy for things like scooters(which Honda is now doing in India), I just don't see it making a lot of sense for cars.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

GM's using pouch cells, I think, which are bigger still.

Pouch cells are a different animal and cannot be directly compared to chemistry in a can batteries. Also pouch cells are highly prone to fires.

I never really understood why Tesla went with such small cells, other than that was what they could get when they got started, and stuck with it.

Tesla went with them because they are basically perfected, can be made in high volumes and are reasonably cost effective. And at the time (and even now) they are among the best designs available. So it should be very easy to understand why Tesla went with 1865 cells.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Cell swaps are not a great solution. You have the issue of then not owning your battery, which comes with the downside of getting one that was abused. Swapping a battery is tricky, because a lot of them are structural to the car(which has great weight saving and strength benefits) and also have cooling lines, and other connections, along with being kinda dangerous to work around. Might be handy for things like scooters(which Honda is now doing in India), I just don't see it making a lot of sense for cars.

Is not owning the battery really a downside though? I mean, you do own a battery, just not the same one every time.

For this to work, a quality check would have to be done so nobody is ending up with a dud.

This could maybe be set up as a tiered system where people who don’t mind waiting in line can do that, and those in a rush can get a certified battery swap out.

It would be kind of like sodastream canisters.

With respect to the other points, that’s why they should standardize.

[Wormius]

I should clarify, I don’t mean every car having the same size battery, but at least more like 2 AAs or 3 AAs vs. D and C cells and CR2032, to use that analogy.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Azure

The Tesla 4680 cell is claiming to have 5x more energy, 16% more range, 6x more power.

There are a ton of other improvements, and while it has taken longer to get rolling on making these and incorporating them into vehicles, the benefits are massive compared to the 2170 cell.

And then you have this.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmo...to-beat-tesla/

Not sure how you look at this, but to me that is exponential improvement. Going from 30 min supercharger fill to 80%, to 100% full charge in 10 min is an insane improvement.

5x more energy but only 16% more range? If they weren’t focused on performance could they significantly increase range? Nm, I guess the improvements are energy transfer rates not total capacity