Electric cars, why are some of their ranges so poor?

[daz]

Then cycle the 2 1/2 miles and take a car with you on the weekly shop. Which is exactly what I was alluding to.

A large proportion of car journeys are not needed. Get rid of those and the trip to the shop once a week is much nicer due to less cars...

(personally I hate buses, smelly and big and if I'd actually need a bus to get anywhere I may as well walk or cycle...)

Cycling is great but it's not much fun doing so on narrow NSL/40mph lanes even when the weather is good, let alone when the weather is bad. I've used a motorbike to get to work for two years so I think I deserve to get to work and get around in the warm and dry for now thank you very much.

 

[tbz_ck]

when there is a national infrastructure of quick charge stations (or hydrogen stations) and the costs of these vehicles are approximately the same as standard cars then I'll happily invest in one.

By that time though, the tax free status on EV's will have mysteriously disappeared and we will have GPS tracking on every car and a per mile toll........

 

[Amp34]

Still sounds too expensive, especially as after X years (eg: 5-6) you'll no doubt need to replace the entire battery unit?

Thinking about it, how much would you save on fuel over the 5-6 years? Would that cover the new batter pack? Would that cover the more expensive car to begin with?

Now with that wiki link to the Tesla you are looking at possibly £8k for a whole new 300m range battery pack (looking at the price difference between the 160m car and the 300m car and doubling it). If the batteries last for 6 years at a time (and you can't part ex, which I guess you could do) and the fuel costs were lower that works out at just over £1000 a year, would you save that much on fuel costs?

 

[Glaucus]

For popping to the shops etc (e.g. 100 miles per week) it would mean that even with a 120-150 mile range you only have to charge once a week, which for most people would be fine. Electric cars are at the most efficient for the type of journeys that petrol cars are worst at (stop-start city traffic, short journeys) so I think they will be a good option for a lot of people once the cost comes down.

problem is unless government/insurance companies change, so you can have two cars for the price of one (insurance, mot, tax). Then people aren't going to fork out to have two cars.

 

[daz]

No clutch/gearbox and other random engine parts (e.g. cambelt changes) would generally be required on electric cars. They're a lot simpler mechanically speaking, so the battery replacement cost could be slightly mitigated by that.

 

[Amp34]

Cycling is great but it's not much fun doing so on narrow NSL/40mph lanes even when the weather is good, let alone when the weather is bad. I've used a motorbike to get to work for two years so I think I deserve to get to work and get around in the warm and dry for now thank you very much.

I walked and cycled to work in similar conditions so yeah it's fine.

Anyway, most people live in towns so the its a semi moot point, most inner town journeys don't need a car. People get lazy (and I saw this with friends when they passed), before they had a car they could walk/cycle perfectly fine, then they got a car and there was no chance they would walk/cycle again. Generally their fitness plummeted and their weight increased... (Although it seems to have leveled out over the last few years).

 

[Amp34]

problem is unless government/insurance companies change, so you can have two cars for the price of one (insurance, mot, tax). Then people aren't going to fork out to have two cars.

But most families generally have two cars, one larger one for the family days out and a runaround (normally a polo or something). The electric car would quite easily replace the smaller car.

 

[Amp34]

Just doing some really basic calculations, using 10,000 a year, current fuel prices, and a 6 year lifespan of the batteries (with an £8000 change cost) as well as electricity being a quarter of the price (apparently about right)...

On that basis you're looking at around £2000 petrol costs a year (for a car doing 30mpg), so that's £500 for electricity, saving £1500, which over 6 years is £9k, or £1k over the price of the battery change.

Sound about right? From that there isn't much cost saving (if you keep your car for a while or don't buy new).

 

[Jonnycoupe]

Just doing some really basic calculations, using 10,000 a year, current fuel prices, and a 6 year lifespan of the batteries (with an £8000 change cost) as well as electricity being a quarter of the price (apparently about right)...

On that basis you're looking at around £2000 petrol costs a year (for a car doing 30mpg), so that's £500 for electricity, saving £1500, which over 6 years is £9k, or £1k over the price of the battery change.

Sound about right? From that there isn't much cost saving (if you keep your car for a while or don't buy new).

Dont forget your oil, spark plugs, more coolant, oil filter, air filter, more frequent brake parts. Its not about cost savings is it?

125 year old IC car against a product that only techno early adopters will drop into.

Where do you get £500 electricity?

10,000 miles and lets say 250Wh/mile (industry common figure). So that 2500kWh of juice a year. If you pay 10p per kWh on a 90% charge efficiency thats under only just above half of your figure. £275 or so.

 

[Amp34]

I was just doing a really basic costing, worst case senario etc, not maintenence (how much to repair/maintain electric motors etc?).

Electricity wise I was using an article from scientific america which suggested costs of fuel being around 1/4.

Either way you would definately get savings, which you could also offset on the cost of the original car.

No it's not about cost, it's about the environment/future. Unfortunately money and laziness comes into it for most people.

 

[Kitchster_uk]

There is another cost here that people do not count - the rare earth alloys required and the ecological damage caused in their extraction and the fact they are, as the name suggests, rare. Digging this stuff out of the ground generally occurs in 3rd world countries. Much of it is done by the Chinese who basically missed the 'care factory' out of their suite of mass polllution. But the environmentalist mafia are happily ignorant of this, or worse do not want you to know that so they can ponce about in their Prius on the moral high-ground.

 

[markweatherill]

Sound about right? From that there isn't much cost saving (if you keep your car for a while or don't buy new).

Don't forget the air of smugness is priceless!

 

[Mr_Sukebe]

As already suggested, we're simply waiting from someone to discover some seriously clever new battery technology that's cheap (doesn't use scarce raw materials), can be charged quickly, doesn't overheat and hopefully fits in an easy to replace battery pack that could be dealt with on the eletric equivalent of a petrol station.

I have to say that I'm surprised that more manufacturers haven't investigated kinetic storage devices more closely. They rely on spinning up a centrifuge whilst under braking, then using it for acceleration. As some of the newer hybrids can only achieve 2 miles under electric power alone, a centrifuge would seem a potentially viable option. I believe that at least 1 of the F1 KERS systems used that, as did a prototype racing car a few years ago.

 

[Amp34]

There is another cost here that people do not count - the rare earth alloys required and the ecological damage caused in their extraction and the fact they are, as the name suggests, rare. Digging this stuff out of the ground generally occurs in 3rd world countries. Much of it is done by the Chinese who basically missed the 'care factory' out of their suite of mass polllution. But the environmentalist mafia are happily ignorant of this, or worse do not want you to know that so they can ponce about in their Prius on the moral high-ground.

And this is why I still think hydrogen is the better bet, alongside less laziness. Less use of cars/less cars and the cars that are actually needed used with hydrogen.

 

[NeilF]

Do you realise how much battery tech has changed in 20 years, remember those 80s and early 90s mobile phones and laptops.

It probably will be atleast 10 years but still I think electric is the best option compared to hybrid cars, fuel cells and hydrogen. It's just so much more simple (once you get over the battery issue)

Suppose so... But it's like we need a major break through TBH. I suspect we're starting to push the limits surely by now of the existing technology? (Me not being an expert in anyway of course )

 

[NeilF]

What ever happened to those 'air cars' being developed in France than worked on nothing but compressed air?

 

[Glaucus]

And this is why I still think hydrogen is the better bet, alongside less laziness. Less use of cars/less cars and the cars that are actually needed used with hydrogen.

I think electric is still the way forward.
Just with powered main roads or a mono rail.
So you only use battery power on minor roads. Once you hit main roads you are using national grid and charging the much smaller batterys.

 

[Amp34]

So essentially railways on all roads. Considering most car drivers insist railways are so expensive I can't see it happening. Also think of the safety issues you'd have, you can't just stick high voltage cables/rails in/over most roads without some major issues. The only other option is using the same tech as the power pads that are just coming out, however they are massively inneficient.

 

[Glaucus]

So essentially railways on all roads. Considering most car drivers insist railways are so expensive I can't see it happening. Also think of the safety issues you'd have, you can't just stick high voltage cables/rails in/over most roads without some major issues. The only other option is using the same tech as the power pads that are just coming out, however they are massively inneficient.

Not on all roads, major roads. dual carriageways/motorways. Where pedestrians/cyclists would not be allowed.
Not really like a railway as you can go anywhere you want. Railways are expensive due to inflexibility and far less users than road.

Or a monorail, with self driving cars would be the best solution.
several companies are developing it and with much nicer cars than that picture
http://www.markstechnologynews.com/2008/07/liberator-car-monorail-and-automobile.html

 

[NeilF]

But most families generally have two cars, one larger one for the family days out and a runaround (normally a polo or something). The electric car would quite easily replace the smaller car.

True, but if you look at our case.

We have a Ford SMax for the family. I suspect this will do 10,000-12,000 miles a year.

Meanwhile my 15yr old car, only does about 3,000 miles a year.

Now, logically, we want the family car to be the efficient one, for £££ and green reasons. Changing my 3,000 miles a year to instead be electric miles will not have the biggest/most impact. And probably will not save a real money... So there's no incentive.