Electric car thread

[spenaroo]

for all your electric car posting,

 

have at it

[spacesailor]

Why do EVs seem so expensive , compared to the same specification IC vehicle .

spacesailor

[red750]

The new, clean, green electric trucks. This is the truck that caught fire in Melbourne a few days ago.

 

[facthunter]

Spacey the battery is about $12,000.   Nev

[octave]

Vehicles of all sorts occasionally catch fire. The important question is what is the rate of fires diesel vs petrol vs electric per KM driven.  Another factor is how these common occurrences are dealt with.   I am assuming that the recent electric truck fire has been successfully dealt with by now.

 

People tend to think aviation is dangerous when 1 crash is reported in the news but happily ignore many other crashes. 

 

 

Massive Truck Fire On Princes Highway

 

Driver escapes serious injury after truck catches fire on busy Melbourne freeway

 

Truck fire causes major delays on Melbourne road

 

Truck carrying TVs engulfed in flames on Tullamarine Freeway, Brunswick West

 

Massive truck blaze disrupts traffic on Melbourne’s Western Ring Road

 

Truck fire closes lanes on Melbourne's Eastern Freeway at Doncaster

[spacesailor]

It ' must ' be " Victoria's " fault , as all but one , are in Melbourne. 

spacesailor

[octave]

7 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

It ' must ' be " Victoria's " fault , as all but one , are in Melbourne. 

spacesailor

I only searched for incidents in recent times in Melbourne and this was not all of them. I would suspect that a search for NSW would yield a similar number of incidents.

[facthunter]

Space, we have to find any way possible to keep warm in Melbourne. Nev

[Litespeed]

Here is a report in 2022.

 

Ev fires are remarkably safe from fire.

Unfortunately they are magnets for hack journalism and scare campaigns from vested interests.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.mynrma.com.au/electric-vehicles/basics/understanding-electric-vehicle-fires%23:~:text%3DA%202022%20analysis%20by%20insurance,defines%20plug%2Din%20hybrids.)&ved=2ahUKEwihyMW2ze2CAxVUamwGHXuJCPYQFnoECAkQBQ&usg=AOvVaw1KOlb5q88Nyx1ehjb6kEb-

 

ICE cars are 60 times more likely to have a 🔥 and hybrids are 138times more likely to burn.

 

For a new tech to be so safe is really amazing given the 135 years combustion cars have existed and been continuously developed.

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2023 by Litespeed

[old man emu]

3 hours ago, spenaroo said:

for all your electric car posting, have at it

Which way are we going to go with this? How far are we going to compare the EV -v- ICE? Here are some of my starting points:

 

1. In their operation, EVs do not generate the gases and particulates that an ICE does. This is a good thing in urban areas where we have seen the effects of petrochemical smog.

 

2. If you take two identical vehicle platforms, one EV powered and the other ICE, and compare their useful loads, the ICE will come out ahead because of the weight of the battery in the EV being so much greater than the weight of the fuel of an ICE.

 

3. If the two vehicles are identical, except for the power generation and transmission systems, the environmental cost of the EV's system is much greater than that of the ICE, because of the manufacturing costs of the battery compared to the environmental cost of a tank of fuel. (That's my opinion. I can't back it up with reliable data, but it seems a reasonable conclusion.)

 

4. Until there is developed a safe, but practical means of storing electricity from renewable sources, EVs will remain a hazardous item due to the possibility of thermal runaway fires that are self-perpetuating. 

 

5. Following on from point 4, there must be a safe and reliable means of recovering materials from batteries that have reached the end of their useful life. And the replacement cost of a battery pack should not be so great as to make it more economical to scrap the vehicle than to fir a fresh battery pack. 

 

6.  The most appropriate EV at present is a small vehicle which means it would not need a battery with a very high storage and discharge capacity. Such a vehicle should be designed to have a range of about 200 kms, and be rechargeable in a maximum of 6 hours, so that it can be recharged during the user's rest period, mainly overnight. Such a vehicle would satisfy the needs of the urban driver, and possibly certain residents of the closer rural areas who might travel up to 200 kms per day going to work in town.

 

[old man emu]

4 minutes ago, Litespeed said:

Ev fires are remarkably safe from fire. Unfortunately they are magnets for hack journalism and scare campaigns from vested interests.

This whole discussion is going to deteriorate into a tit-for-tat between those of us who have set up their tent in the camp of either of the Pro or Anti camps, which is not going to be productive for us.

 

In my opinion, vested interests on the Pro side are rushing into this desire to "save the planet" by melting the ICEs. The Antis are not necessarily Luddites, but many are following the Romans' advice, festina lente - hurry slowly, or as my dairy farmer grandad was want to say, "Don't go rushing at it like a bull at a gate". EVs will eventually form probably 75% of all people movers, but there will still be situations which require an ICE powered vehicle. We will never really be able to stop burning liquified dinosaurs in order to move stuff.

[octave]

9 minutes ago, old man emu said:

the environmental cost of the EV's system is much greater than that of the ICE

 

EVs require more energy to manufacture and therefore have a greater environmental footprint than IC however this is compensated after a certain period.  This explanation seems reasonable.   Are Electric Cars Worse For The Environment?

15 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Until there is developed a safe, but practical means of storing electricity from renewable sources, EVs will remain a hazardous item due to the possibility of thermal runaway fires that are self-perpetuating. 

 

I guess we need to define safe.    I would assert that if we take a harsh attitude petrol cars are not safe.   Deaths and injuries in petrol or diesel car fires are reasonably rare but none the less, it still happens.   I believe in Australia there were about 13000 EVs whilst in Norway at this time there were about 600000 EVs.  It would seem that looking at the experiences of countries that are way ahead of us would yield interesting information about the safety of EVs.

 

 

25 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Following on from point 4, there must be a safe and reliable means of recovering materials from batteries that have reached the end of their useful life.

 

Whilst battery recycling has been slow to start it is being done now.  Partly it is hard for a recycling system to develop when there are so few end-of-life batteries around.  Recycling does occur as well re-use in second-life stationary power systems.   Batteries are generally lasting longer than originally expected.  Many EVs are using LiFePO4 which has advantages in safety and environmental friendliness although not quite as energy-dense.  

 

I don't particularly with we are rushing like a bull at a gate toward total EV.   I would suspect that the overturning of horses by petrol vehicles was done at a much more rapid pace.  Certainly, early aviation could not be considered safe.

 

I am not suggesting everyone must rush out and buy one however I do think there is some hysteria amongst some folks.   When there is a fire involving a car online comments are usually along the lines of, I bet it was an EV or I heard it was an EV 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[kgwilson]

These are the statistics from the US in 2021.

 

From US insurer AutoinsuranceEZ

Per 100,000 sales

 

Petrol car fires         1529.9

Hybrid car fires       3475.4

Pure EV fires                25.1

 

The right wing press in the UK, much of it owned by Murdoch has been spreading a huge amount of false information about Electric Vehicles for several years now. This has finally led to the "Fully Charged Show" setting up an offshoot to get the actual facts out in the public eye. They have set up an on line site for debunking myths and there are many, even some as off the wall as "EVs are too heavy & they will destroy all the roads" and "tyres won't last" etc. It is called "Stop Burning Stuff" Stop BS for short. They don't advocate getting rid of ICE vehicles although that is inevitable when known oil reserves run out but stick to myth busting with verifiable facts.

 

OME the issues you raise are all covered here. Look it up if you are interested.

Edited December 1, 2023 by kgwilson

[kgwilson]

Just so you know, I own a 2023 MG4 Essence 64. I made the EV switch in September after looking for more than a year. It suits my lifestyle. It won't suit everyone. I've done 5000 km so far and one 1100km round trip. I cannot imagine returning to internal combustion but that's me, no-one else.

[spacesailor]

I Am, addicted to the ' motor car , & I can' t imagine what  I'll do when they. ( bureaucrats ) take my licence away . because I'm OLD .

THOSE SAME ( AS-OLS  have made even using a ' mobility scooter ' illegal .

So what are our chances of " running after the bus " as we have a long ( slow ) walk to the bus stop. Only to be 10 seconds late . Then there's those ' coded numbers ' on the bus to tell you it's going to 6 unknown places . 

spacesailor

[Litespeed]

I think people have seen my views as too left wing or green but I love internal combustion engines for the sound and feel. 

 

I am not anti ICE but a realist.

I love the sound, get off on the feel of the best ICE, give me an Italian bike or Alfa Romeo and I am in heaven.

Its like a drug and very addictive.

Sadly it's also poisonous, do not use a exhaust as a breathing apparatus.☠️

Unfortunately we expect the environment to breath it and that needs to change.

 

The idea of rural communities been unable to survive using non petrochemical energy is a common talking point but not a no sum game, it's actually short- medium term very realistic and makes sense.

 

 

 

Sure we need to keep burning dinosaur fuel short term in select applications.

People complain farmers can't survive but remember good years means you invest for the lean years and lower costs etc.

 

We tend to forget the rural communities gain wealth by harvesting produce or meat or fibre. All these are sun powered and that energy is free, you only need to convert the sun power to electrical , it's still energy farming just a different way. Why should rural Australia have to import it's energy at great cost at a price, political and environmental cost that we can't afford to ignore. We can generate the energy here locally at lower overall cost and the money stays in the local community.

Sure it costs but bar renewal it's a highly efficient low maintenance way of drastically reducing costs.

If you have fast charging available in every town then the range anxiety is a non issue bar extreme remote destinations. 

My local Bowling club has fast chargers as does the local marina but we don't have a petrol station.

Chargers open 24 hrs, unlike most rural petrol stations.

 

Sure a petrol powered device can be fuelled quick but breaks are needed anyway and waiting for the servo to open in the morning ain't pleasant either. 

 

Motorcycle touring means small range and off the major highways, that's range anxiety. I survived and didn't have the option of getting fuel anywhere with even a normal power point to help, slow but still works. Or a small solar setup, recently a solar charged car toured Australia with a thin film roll of printed solar cells kept in the boot to charge it, roll it out and charge. Can't do that with a ICE vehicle bar someone bringing energy to you ie diesel etc, your fu**ed.

If someone does something on the other side of the planet or says something,  your oil price can rocket. The sun is free and independent, it does not give a damn and still shines.

 

You can't fight a war over the Sun, it's free to everyone and beyond our control. Compare that to oil and the millions of lost lives in the pursuit to control it and profit from it. 

Even forgetting about the real costs of fossil fuels it's a no brainer sun power is cheaper short,medium and long term.

 

 

 

[spacesailor]

Solar " is free " touted everywhere. 

BUT

Without subsidies , that free power will cost Me $ 15,000 to put a 4.5 mW array on my house .

There will be No return of my investment from the grid after this year.

My current power-bill is less than $ 250 per quarter/ $1,000 PA, at 81 , it's 15 years to spend that initial cost.

Minus Any interest, it Could have earned .

Question: should I waste my money on solar or blow it on fuel ." AT any. " cost per litre .

spacesailor

[red750]

I'm with you, Spacey. Two years younger, but also don't know how much longer they'll let me drive. Had to renew my disabled parking permit recently. That requires a doctors certificate that I require it. The doctor asked, "Are you still driving?" 

 

I have been in debt most of my life, but have nearly worked my way out of it. When my Falcon died last year, I didn't have the money to replace it for 9 months, then only because I found a low kilometre 4 cyl Festiva for $4,000. I don't travel much, 430km for the whole of November, but I cherish my independence. I reckon I'll be gone before even used EV's get down to $4,000. So it's ICE for me.

[Litespeed]

$15,000 seems extremely expensive and should be 1/3 of that cost for the size.

 

But I am amazed you have such incredibly low power bills.

I have lived in a Sydney Mcmansion that gulped  $5000 a year to keep cool and warm as needed. And we tried to be economical.

 

The big savings come from having a home or communal storage system. An ideal use for used car batteries from wrecks or swapping for newer and cheaper packs.

Why send energy into the grid and get a tiny fraction of its value and then buy it back at 10 times the price or more? 

 

It's the economic model that's failing not the technology .

 

We all tend to live in homes that cost a millions dollars, drive car and consume lots of energy which can cost a family a easy  $200 a week just in energy and fuel for the commute of two cars and the average energy inefficient home. Some spend far more than that.

We happily go into ridiculous debt to invest in a house but won't invest a tiny percentage in removing our fuel and other energy costs.

The  solar and battery can also give free charge for your car and your car can act as a battery for the house. It's a circular economy with low losses, not the 100% economic loss of the current system.

 

Everyone can be a micro energy baron.

And master of his/her destiny and not rely on market forces and political whims. 

 

Just like any gold boom or new tech industry, beware of wooden nickels and tooth fairies. Keep in mind for equivalent specs ,it's a fraction of the cost per Kw/h for storage if you put wheels on it. And you get a free car at the same time, that shows how when applied the economics can work, fundamentally a complete home energy/transport system can be very cheap compared to the norm.

 

Think outside the box, nature and physics does not make strait lines.

 

[Litespeed]

21 minutes ago, red750 said:

I'm with you, Spacey. Two years younger, but also don't know how much longer they'll let me drive. Had to renew my disabled parking permit recently. That requires a doctors certificate that I require it. The doctor asked, "Are you still driving?" 

 

I have been in debt most of my life, but have nearly worked my way out of it. When my Falcon died last year, I didn't have the money to replace it for 9 months, then only because I found a low kilometre 4 cyl Festiva for $4,000. I don't travel much, 430km for the whole of November, but I cherish my independence. I reckon I'll be gone before even used EV's get down to $4,000. So it's ICE for me.

And fair enough, I can't afford a new car and don't even have one, but independence is key. Cheap old ev's will happen but we are ten years behind the rest of the world. Just like anything in life, it's not intially accessible to all nor relevant.

 

I am optimistic and look forward to a electric future.

[kgwilson]

Resistance to change no matter what that change is is normal so no-one should feel bad about it.

 

From my perspective I have been involved in change management for 50 years so new technologies excite and challenge me. Electric vehicles have been around since the early 1900s. They died because of the inability to get any range from the battery technology of the day. This has all changed now & it has been the vision of Elon Musk that has championed that change. In the 1970s interest was again sparked by the early oil crisis  but disappeared quietly till the late 90s. This was largely due to the realisation that cars were reducing air quality in large cities.

 

Toyota produced the first Prius hybrid in 2000 but then in 2006 Tesla was born & the EV revolution has been on an exponential path ever since. From only a few thousand sold world wide in 2012, 10 years later in 2022 more than 22 million were sold world wide and there are now hundreds of brands and models to chose from and this does not include hybrids.

 

There is plenty of resistance to this change and this is understandable. When cars first took over from horses the resistance was just the same. Most people will have heard of the requirement to have a man walking ahead of the motor car waving a red flag.  Sounds nuts but it happened.

 

The transition will take time but it is inevitable. We will run out of fossil fuel. Latest estimates are in 45 years. I'll be well dead but will die happy that I was part of the process to try to keep us going in to the future.

[red750]

[nomadpete]

8 hours ago, red750 said:

So what?

 

A couple of years ago my mechanic told me

"Your IC motor is dead, that'll be $19,000".

 

And the car was only a year out of warranty.

[nomadpete]

I really hate these new EV's.

 

I'll never buy one.

 

They are simply all too ugly.

[old man emu]

Regarding domestic solar generation of electricity, it is quite true that for those of us past retirement age, the odds of paying off a domestic system before we are paid off are pretty short. However, for our children, and for some, grandchildren who are buying their own homes (chuckles ate the irony of that comment) the outlay for a system would be paid off before the mortgage. 

 

There is something rotten in Denmark when governments provide benefits to vehicle owners in the way of various financial benefits while at the same time failing to forgo the money they make from generating electricity using the very fuels EVs are supposed to eliminate from use. Governments go all out to make rules relating to the construction methods of dwellings. In some areas they specify the installation of rainwater tanks to help overall domestic water supplies in times of drought, yet they will not specify the installation of solar generators to make use of the square metres of collection area on the rooves of dwellings. 

 

Currently, the average cost of a solar generation system is around $6,500. You can add some other components that overcome some practical problems, so if you went the whole hog, that sort of system would cost under $10,000. The problem is finding that money from the budget for a new house. The new-build home buyer really has to consider what is better, paying for "fully landscaped gardens and outdoor entertainment areas" or a solar electricity generation system that will be paid for well before the expected lifespan of the building is reached AND which will contribute an iota to reducing the environmental effects of burning fossil fuels.