EV's and Transportation as a Service to kill Alberta economy by 2030?

[Fozzie_DeBear]

France considering banning sale of gas and diesel cars by 2040

[Fuzz]

You left out one important word.

[Fozzie_DeBear]

Was the word 'sale'? If so...you're missing the forest for the trees

[Robotic]

With the rise of self driving vehicles, eventually there will be a country song about how your truck left you too.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Fozzie_DeBear

Was the word 'sale'? If so...you're missing the forest for the trees

Yes, there is a massive difference between banning petrol vehicles, and stopping the sale of petrol vehicles. And I understand the point. Gas is on the way out. But no one is making any drastic moves like disallowing petrol vehicles from operating in a country.

[getbak]

2040 is 23 years away.

It's not worth listening to what a politician says they'll do in the next 4 years, let alone two decades from now.

[Enoch Root]

unless it supports your personal narrative, at which point it becomes NEWS

[Bill Bumface]

Maybe the targets aren't realistic, but the sentiment shouldn't be ignored, especially in Alberta. These eventualities should be planned for. I don't think only planning for a scenario of near status quo will lead to long term success.

[Ozy_Flame]

It's probably worth mentioning that Alberta's rate of change regarding adoption of these vehicles will be no different versus other provinces and Western countries. Just because we extract oil doesn't mean a whole lot; we will do what the critical mass does. We always have with very technological breakthrough (e.g. internal combustion engine, semiconductors, television, internet, etc.) We'll just have to manage the fact that it will happen sooner or later. And every passing year that reality comes sooner.

[Erick Estrada]

For those that don't know the Chevy Bolt was supposed to be a game changer.

Chevy Bolt EV inventories are piling up, GM temporarily shuts down factory

https://electrek.co/2017/07/18/gm-ch...tory-shutdown/

Again I'm not disputing the inevitable and simply the absurdness of the original article to which this thread is based. We aren't remotely close to seeing the end of ICE powered cars as long as nobody is buying EV's.

[Ozy_Flame]

That hipster commercial guy talking to "real people" ruined Chevy for me. Bolt or otherwise.

Not that I had much faith in Chevy to begin with.

[Fuzz]

The big problem right now is no one is going to pay $45 000 for a $20 000 American hatchback. Tesla does OK because it's a bit of a niche manufacturer, but that pool of customers is shallow. They are still to expensive. And if we have to throw government rebates to make them affordable then I just don't see that working in mass market quantities.

In the end, batteries are still a massive limit. Tesla can't make enough of them, and they are expensive. Yes, costs are decreasing, but it just isn't enough. I believe only a break through is going to solve this problem, and you here about them all the time, but until they can fix this issue at a commercial scale, EV's are going to be a niche player in the market.

Plug-in hybrids, one the other hand, I think are going to fill the gap in a massive way.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

The big problem right now is no one is going to pay $45 000 for a $20 000 American hatchback. Tesla does OK because it's a bit of a niche manufacturer, but that pool of customers is shallow. They are still to expensive. And if we have to throw government rebates to make them affordable then I just don't see that working in mass market quantities.

In the end, batteries are still a massive limit. Tesla can't make enough of them, and they are expensive. Yes, costs are decreasing, but it just isn't enough. I believe only a break through is going to solve this problem, and you here about them all the time, but until they can fix this issue at a commercial scale, EV's are going to be a niche player in the market.

Plug-in hybrids, one the other hand, I think are going to fill the gap in a massive way.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ithin-a-decade

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ithin-a-decade

I give it 40 years

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I give it 40 years

Based on?

[Igniter]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ithin-a-decade

I read bloomberg a lot - I find their pieces to be more positively biased towards EV's, Solar, Wind, Clean etc. So it's important to remain disciplined when reading their opinions.

With respect to the article, I agree that costs will decrease, but the extrapolation is very similar to what the IEA or whatever other organization does with respect to global oil demand. It's based on a certain set of assumptions that may or may not be achievable/factual.

For example, I wonder in this future EV world, is their enough latent capacity for Li and other base elements that go into battery manufacturing. Or will their have to be expansions and greenfield development? In other words - will their be a scarcity - like recently in oil - that raises the cost of batteries until supply increases. (I honestly have no idea - so if someone knows, let me know)

We're going through the same thing in the oil & gas industry, there was deflation as a result of the oil glut recession but are those prices completely sustainable? Already service companies in the US are saying that at current activity levels, they are going to have to start raising costs. A lot of what the Shale Players tout as "sub 40$ cost of supply" is predicated on their capital costs remaining low/tied to inflation. If service company costs increase faster than inflation - we'll need to see oil stay above $40 for those wells to be profitable.

Again, I fully agree that battery technology will be cheaper in the future, but cheaper than an ICE car? without a subsidy or rebate? bold steps.

Plug-in hybrids? These make sense, so much sense it's unreal that they don't get more love. Especially here in Canada with winter driving, long distances, etc. I do not want to drive to Edmonton in the middle of winter with a theoretical 400 km range (in the best conditions).

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Igniter

I read bloomberg a lot - I find their pieces to be more positively biased towards EV's, Solar, Wind, Clean etc. So it's important to remain disciplined when reading their opinions.

With respect to the article, I agree that costs will decrease, but the extrapolation is very similar to what the IEA or whatever other organization does with respect to global oil demand. It's based on a certain set of assumptions that may or may not be achievable/factual.

For example, I wonder in this future EV world, is their enough latent capacity for Li and other base elements that go into battery manufacturing. Or will their have to be expansions and greenfield development? In other words - will their be a scarcity - like recently in oil - that raises the cost of batteries until supply increases. (I honestly have no idea - so if someone knows, let me know)

We're going through the same thing in the oil & gas industry, there was deflation as a result of the oil glut recession but are those prices completely sustainable? Already service companies in the US are saying that at current activity levels, they are going to have to start raising costs. A lot of what the Shale Players tout as "sub 40$ cost of supply" is predicated on their capital costs remaining low/tied to inflation. If service company costs increase faster than inflation - we'll need to see oil stay above $40 for those wells to be profitable.

Again, I fully agree that battery technology will be cheaper in the future, but cheaper than an ICE car? without a subsidy or rebate? bold steps.

Plug-in hybrids? These make sense, so much sense it's unreal that they don't get more love. Especially here in Canada with winter driving, long distances, etc. I do not want to drive to Edmonton in the middle of winter with a theoretical 400 km range (in the best conditions).

Two things.

1) it's fine to disagree, but it's hard to take a contrasting prediction seriously when it's a guy feeling vs a work based on calculations of known quantities

2) your concern about range of legitimate, but that doesn't represent the majority of car buyers in the world

[Igniter]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Two things.

1) it's fine to disagree, but it's hard to take a contrasting prediction seriously when it's a guy feeling vs a work based on calculations of known quantities

Fair. I think a better way to word how I feel is:

I do not believe that they will be cheaper than an ICE in 10 years for the exact same reason as I do not believe oil demand will increase to 103 Million BPD in 2040. This extrapolation is based on a certain set of assumptions made today that will surely be wrong tomorrow.

I do believe that EV's will be cheaper and that oil demand will continue to rise for the near future. But not to the extent that either entity is forecasting - a lot has to go right for either scenario to come to fruition.

Again, these are my feelings and I may be wrong. Just trying to maintain a disciplined posture of grey in a world of black/white opinions.

[Ozy_Flame]

I drive the Calgary/Edmonton corridor almost weekly. You don't need 400 km to get from Point A to Point B unless you plan on doing a lot of intermediary driving at either end or in between. Even then, the infrastructure - at some point - will be sufficient enough where you don't need to drive that long without a recharge. But it will be based on balance and time, and how fast/efficient EV's can actually become.

The point of adoption for an EV for me, at this point, would be:

• Range of 500-600 KM - basically the same "range" as an ICE compact sedan;
• Electric charging station every 100 KM or less (Calgary, Airdrie, Bowden, Red Deer, Ponoka, Leduc, Edmonton);
• Cost of the charge is less than a tank of gas currently (around $35);
• Time to charge is 20 minutes or less (I think this has already been achieved?);
• Cost of the car is less than a similar ICE compact sedan;
• Maintenance on an EV is equal to or less than an ICE compact sedan (on warranty);

Once all of these conditions are met, then I would be convinced to switch. However, there are other factors at play that would inhibit as well. I am a condo dweller, and as such I don't have an internal charging station at the building, therefore the infrastructure is not up to par. Additionally, I would be interested in having driverless automation, and that is only 5-10 years away on a mass scale - not that far if you think about things. Said EV driverless car also has to be able to handle snow/icy conditions, something I don't have enough confidence in yet. I wouldn't know how a driverless car could handle whiteout conditions with blindsiding traffic on the next lane over.

All this said, I think it's a matter of WHEN - not IF. This is coming and I am excited for it.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Two things.

1) it's fine to disagree, but it's hard to take a contrasting prediction seriously when it's a guy feeling vs a work based on calculations of known quantities

2) your concern about range of legitimate, but that doesn't represent the majority of car buyers in the world

In the end though, the Bloomberg article is based off assumptions as well. You can find articles counter to there opinion, outlining the difficulties with batteries, and mass market expansion:

http://jalopnik.com/the-problem-that...uti-1796728488

I stand by my opinion that without a revolution in tech, evolving the current battery technology is not going to be feasible at a scale necessary to replace significant portions of the gas market.