TDIClub Forums

TDIClub Forums (http://forums.tdiclub.com/index.php)
-   TDI News/Tech (http://forums.tdiclub.com/forumdisplay.php?f=22)
-   -   Volkswagen exec reaffirms commitment to diesel: ‘Now it is absolutely clean’ (http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=501301)

IndigoBlueWagon January 30th, 2020 16:15

I have an extreme example of making EV ownership work. Friend of mine's daughter has a Model X. She lives in Harlem in a sublet apartment, street parking only. She doesn't use the car a whole lot during the week, probably not enough to require a charge. On weekends she'll take the family to shop in NJ or Westchester at a center that has superchargers. When I heard she was buying a Tesla it seemed illogical at best, but it works really well for her.

Another friend who lives in Brooklyn says some homeowners have strapped chargers to trees on the sidewalk outside their building. Of course having the space in front of the tree available is a gamble, but they seem to make that work as well.

Not sure I'd be happy with the uncertainty, but I wouldn't want to survive with on-street parking regardless. I don't even like leaving my cars outside overnight!

tikal January 31st, 2020 08:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5568433)
The smart money on Wall St. sure seems to think that Tesla has initiated the EV revolution. I wouldn't argue.

Time will tell.

BeetlePD January 31st, 2020 16:08

I had to replace the battery in two of my hybrids.... $2000 times two. I doubt EVs will be any different, requiring a battery replacement which erases any supposed savings

Also I already mentioned I can buy a Fiesta or Mitsubishi for only $12,000. That’s a hell lot cheaper than the Tesla. That’s about $25000 cheaper which will buy over 300,000 miles of gasoline. Of course I never keep cars past 200K so that means the Fiesta/Mitsubishi is cheaper on the longterm. I try to chose what is cheapest

And YES Teslas need maintenance like flushing the coolant, replacing the air filter, flushing brake fluid every two years, et cetera. Tesla owners who say “no maintenance” are lying to you

.

flee January 31st, 2020 17:12

My 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid is at 230,000 mi and the batt's doing just fine.
There are now many thousands of EVs at or beyond that milage.
Your 2 hybrids are the outliers. I guess it just sucks to be you.
I'd have no problems ponying up $100 a year for maintenance on a Tesla...

bhtooefr January 31st, 2020 17:24

Also, does anybody on this forum really want to drive a Mitsubishi Mirage for 200,000 miles?

BeetlePD February 1st, 2020 07:18

The Mirage is not great, but a Ford Fiesta or Focus is no more sucky than the Model 3 compact. Except 25,000 dollars cheaper and their grills/styling look like compact Aston Martins. They are nice cars. (You could also get a Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla for $16,000.). Paying almost $40,000 for a compact car is just dumb.

And battery replacement is not an outlier. Goto any Honda or Prius forum, and you’ll find 1000s of threads about wornout batteries needing replacement. Here in California there are businesses that do nothing but battery replacement, all day long

Teslas are still relatively young, but as they age we will see more failures. I know several drivers that passed 120,000 miles and needed a new battery. That’s equivalent to a gasoline car needing a new engine at just 120-130,000 miles. Very poor lifespan


.

turbobrick240 February 1st, 2020 09:10

Several owners out of a half million isn't much cause for concern. For folks who prefer hard data to anecdotal stories, this graph shows what Tesla owners are experiencing for battery degradation:

tesla battery degradation graph.

bhtooefr February 1st, 2020 10:21

Also, the battery longevity of Honda hybrids (many of which had highly-stressed high-charge/discharge rate aircooled NiMH packs) has nothing to do with the battery longevity of Teslas (comparatively much lower discharge rate liquid cooled/heated Li-ion packs).

BeetlePD February 1st, 2020 13:14

Quote:

highly-stressed high-charge/discharge rate
Say what? My Honda barely uses its battery at all (about 1% of the time). EVs use their batteries 100% of the time and will burn them out faster.

Also ye are lying with statistics. Teslas that are older than 10 years (when battery failure becomes common) is only 500 units. That sample size is too dmall. The supermajority of Teslas are not old enough to drawva conclusion. They are still too young. Not until 2025 will we see how these aging batteries perform (or fail)

BTW Tesla owners remind me of religious zealots. They absolutely BELIEVE that tesla cars are perfect (Praise Elon Musk aaaamen). Put a pope hat on his holy head. Sometimes I expect EV owners to be carrying bibles, they are so zealot. Their FAITH has little basis in logic. They are running on rainbows & fairies not facts/rational thinking

They have eyes that appear brainwashed (like cult followers)

.

flee February 1st, 2020 14:52

My dropnosky detector just went off. :eek:
Maybe it is the odd usage and capitalizations.

Lightflyer1 February 1st, 2020 15:38

Read some of his previous posts.

atc98002 February 1st, 2020 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569004)
Say what? My Honda barely uses its battery at all (about 1% of the time). EVs use their batteries 100% of the time and will burn them out faster.

Also ye are lying with statistics. Teslas that are older than 10 years (when battery failure becomes common) is only 5,000 units. That sample size is too dmall. The supermajority of Teslas are not old enough to drawva conclusion. They are still too young. Not until 2025 will we see how these aging batteries perform (or fail)

BTW Tesla owners remind me of religious zealots. They absolutely BELIEVE that tesla cars are perfect (Praise Elon Musk aaaamen). Put a pope hat on his holy head. Sometimes I expect EV owners to be carrying bibles, they are so zealot. Their FAITH has little basis in logic. They are running on rainbows & fairies not facts/rational thinking

They have eyes that appear brainwashed (like cult followers).

Your hybrid battery is used constantly, not just when it's moving the car without the ICE running. It's providing EV assistance when accelerating, can take over from the ICE when lightly loaded, and constantly receives charging (regeneration) every time you touch the brakes. And from what I've read about the Honda hybrid, they did a pretty poor overall job with the entire system. Pure EVs do use the battery constantly, but it's also designed for it, and as long as the owner doesn't abuse it there's no reason it can't last for many hundreds of thousands of miles.

There many not be many Teslas over 10 years old, but there are quite a number with batteries that are well beyond 100,000 miles. Some have used Superchargers extensively, and still see 350-400,000 miles without replacing. Have they lost some range? Yes, but still have a lot more range than many new EVs today.

I am not a strong fan of Tesla overall. But I think they will be successful in the long run. I'm far more inclined to get the VW ID.4 when it comes out, or maybe just turn my PHEV in for a new Niro EV when my lease is up. And I might even end up with the RAV4 PHEV, if I decide I don't want to go full EV yet, since it will have 40 miles EV range, a heat pump, and the other things that make going EV nice.

I'd even consider a new TDI VW, but my gut feeling is we'll never see them here again. Depending on my needs, I might pick up a used one this year sometime.

nwdiver February 1st, 2020 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569004)

They absolutely BELIEVE that tesla cars are perfect

Teslas are FAR from perfect. I mean... they do use >200wh/mi or ~140mpge... that's A LOT of energy compared to riding a bike.

Diesel Engines just set the bar really... REALLY low... :(

bhtooefr February 1st, 2020 20:23

Although, interestingly, an EV car - especially a Tesla Model 3 or Hyundai Ioniq EV - can pretty easily beat a human on a fully human-powered bicycle on CO2 equivalent emissions, especially if the human isn't on the lowest emission vegan diet (enjoy your rice and lentils, and not much else).

However, electrifying the bicycle extremely rapidly fixes that problem.

jackbombay February 1st, 2020 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5568931)
And battery replacement is not an outlier. Goto any Honda or Prius forum, and you’ll find 1000s of threads about wornout batteries needing replacement.

Yep, and if you are a human with a tool set and the ability to search youtube you can swap your own battery for minimal cost. If you don't know which way to apply pressure to a wrench to loosen a nut you will have to pay more.

jackbombay February 1st, 2020 21:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhtooefr (Post 5569086)
if the human isn't on the lowest emission vegan diet (enjoy your rice and lentils, and not much else).

Thats what you think vegans eat? Rice and lentils?

I'll gladly line my bike up against anyone, I'm in the %85 of bikers as a whole and I don't actually ride my bike very much, and I'm notaly older than most bikers, and I attribute it to my diet.

To quote Pink Floyd, You pick the place and I'll choose the time.

bhtooefr February 2nd, 2020 03:38

No, that's not what I think vegans eat.

That's, AFAIK, the lowest CO2 equivalent emissions diet that gets you complete protein.

If you eat almost anything else, your emissions are higher, that's all.

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 12:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by atc98002 (Post 5569074)
Your hybrid battery is used constantly, not just when it's moving the car without the ICE running. It's providing EV assistance when accelerating, can take over from the ICE when lightly loaded, and constantly receives charging (regeneration) every time you touch the brakes.

What you described is NOT constant use. If I’m driving my Honda Insight to work at a steady 60mph then the battery is neither assisting or charging (the dash meter shows 0 current flowing). The battery is just sitting idle. That means it is used less than 100 percent. Not all thr time.

Also it doesn’t run on pure electric. It doesn’t have an EV mode. Saying the battery can “move the car without running the ICE” is completely ignorant. It isn’t a Prius.
Quote:

from what I've read about the Honda hybrid, they did a pretty poor overall job with the entire system.
. Yeah I’ve heard that from others, but my 2000 Honda Insight is the only hybrid to be rated 66 MPG highway (official EPA sticker). Honda clearly did something right (namely they used a three cylinder engine).

And besides PRIUSES have failures too. Goto priuschat.com and see tons of threads about failed batteries. Unfortunately a Prius cannot be driven with a dead battery. The Honda can. I think that’s another way Honda engineers did a superior design, since I’ve driven 1000s of miles with dead battery (and manual shift).

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 12:32

Quote:

There many not be many Teslas over 10 years old, but there are quite a number with batteries that are well beyond 100,000 miles.
YES and some of them have needed replacement at just 120-130,000 miles. The drivers complained about it on EV forums or on youtube.

Pretending these failed batteries don’t exist is intellectually dishonest. Like telling people a TDI will never need a new turbo. It is deceptive to car buyers

.

nwdiver February 2nd, 2020 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569197)
YES and some of them have needed replacement at just 120-130,000 miles. The drivers complained about it on EV forums or on youtube.

Pretending these failed batteries don’t exist is intellectually dishonest

.

ok.... and my sister needed a new transmission for her TDI after 15k miles; Pretending outliers are typical is intellectually dishonest.

My sister had her transmission replaced under warranty... just like >95% of battery failures so far.

You also have a fundamental misunderstanding of what causes battery degradation. It’s depth of discharge not continual use. I rented a hybrid once with a battery meter. We fully cycled the battery roughly once every 90 minutes between accelerating and regeneration. An EV battery would be cycled to 80% once in 3 hours of driving. So hybrids are actually much harder on their packs than EVs are.

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 12:55

No you didn’t. Hybrids never drain below 30% and never charge above 60% to limit stress (and extend life). AGAIN you demonstrate your ignorance about how hybrids work.

When nearly 100 Tesla owners had to replace their batteries at 120,000 or 130,000 miles that is not an outlier. It is a significant number.
Quote:

Originally Posted by jackbombay (Post 5569093)
Yep, and if you are a human with a tool set and the ability to search youtube you can swap your own battery for minimal cost.

WHAT?!?!? Your post is the dumbest on this tjread. A high voltage hybrid battery costs $2000 to $3000 to buy from Honda or Toyota or any other carmaker. That is NOT minimal cost.

flee February 2nd, 2020 12:59

Yeah, remember that this guy can't even afford a couple hundred for a used turbo.
No way can he afford a set of tools!

nwdiver February 2nd, 2020 13:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569203)
No you didn’t. Hybrids never drain below 30% and never charge above 60% to limit stress. AGAIN you demonstrate your ignorance about how hybrids work.

When nearly 100 Tesla owners had to replace their batteries at 120,000 or 130,000 miles that is not an outlier. It is a significant number.

WHAT?!?!? Your post is the dumbest on this tjread. A high voltage hybrid battery costs $2000 to $3000 to buy from Honda or Toyota or any other carmaker. That is NOT minimal cost.

LOL! Inform webster’s... 0.01% is ‘significant’

.... And most EV miles only cycle ~20% of the pack. Again on average hybrid batteries live a tougher life.

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 13:19

This from the man who still thinks Honda Insight or Civic Hybrid have EV modes (rolls eyes). And that they use the whole battery (no just 30% of it). You are clearly ignorant of how hybrids actually work. .....dateline 2030: Tesla is facing a class action lawsuit. 10% of their cars had battery failure before 150,000 miles and owners are angry.

Hopefully I am wrong, but I don’t think I will be. Batteries age and wearout (and also the cells go out of balance). Assuming average 12,000/year commute we are asking them to last 13 years. Long time.

nwdiver February 2nd, 2020 13:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569214)
This from the man who still thinks Honda Insight or Civic Hybrid have EV modes (rolls eyes). And that they use the whole battery (no just 30% of it). You are clearly ignorant of how hybrids actually work. .....dateline 2030: Tesla is facing a class action lawsuit. 10% of their cars had battery failure before 150,000 miles and owners are angry.

Hopefully I am wrong, but I don’t think I will be. Batteries age and wearout (and also the cells go out of balance). Assuming average 12,000/year commute we are asking them to last 13 years. Long time.

??? Um... no... 10% of cars >150k miles have not had their packs replaced and batteries are continually improving.

.... you realize EVs balance their cells.... right?

atc98002 February 2nd, 2020 13:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569196)
What you described is NOT constant use. If I’m driving my Honda Insight to work at a steady 60mph then the battery is neither assisting or charging (the dash meter shows 0 current flowing). The battery is just sitting idle. That means it is used less than 100 percent. Not all thr time.

I didn't say continuous, I said constant. Ok, we're word nit-picking here. But other than steady state flat ground driving, there's current going into and out of the battery on a regular basis.
Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569196)
Also it doesn’t run on pure electric. It doesn’t have an EV mode. Saying the battery can “move the car without running the ICE” is completely ignorant. It isn’t a Prius. . Yeah I’ve heard that from others, but my 2000 Honda Insight is the only hybrid to be rated 66 MPG highway (official EPA sticker). Honda clearly did something right (namely they used a three cylinder engine).

I've never driven a Honda hybrid, but have driven many others. They certainly are capable of moving the car without the ICE running. Not, it's not an EV mode, and they can't accelerate very much before the ICE fires. But my son-in-law's Ioniq can maintain freeway speeds with the EV motor only, just has to be level ground. Even most PHEVs can't stay 100% battery power if you press the go pedal too far. I get to about 70% pedal before my ICE starts. The Volt could remain 100% EV, and I've heard the Prius Prime can as well. That's the only two I know of.

bhtooefr February 2nd, 2020 15:24

The older Honda hybrids actually can't propel themselves without the ICE running - the electric motor takes the place of the flywheel, so electric motor RPM = engine RPM. That's also part of why they work when the hybrid system fails - when it does fail, there's a backup 12 volt starter motor, and there's a conventional transmission (either a CVT or a manual).

However, the SoC range was very, very wide on Honda hybrids initially, causing a lot of early battery failures, that Honda had to cover under warranty. IIRC, software updates were released to narrow the SoC range to preserve the batteries (at the expense of efficiency and performance).

The current EPA MPG of the 2000 Insight is 49 city, 61 highway, 53 combined, out of a sub-2000 pound 2-seater. Meanwhile, an over-3000 pound 5-seat Prius Eco is at 58 city, 53 highway, 56 combined, or a similarly sized Ioniq Blue is at 57 city, 59 highway, 58 combined. (The Ioniq IIRC is a bit worse relative to its EPA ratings than the Prius is, but still.)

Prius battery failures are... they definitely happen, but it's surprisingly uncommon. It's just that there's so many of the things that the uncommon is common enough.

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 16:30

Prius rated just 53 MPG on highway is pathetic. When I bought my insight, the original EPA sticker said 70 MPG highway and my insight does that easily. I don’t condider it a failed design when it gives me amazing economy
Quote:

Originally Posted by nwdiver (Post 5569217)
Quote:

dateline 2030: Tesla is facing a class action lawsuit
Um... no... 10% of cars >150k miles have not had their packs replaced.?

Not only do you have no clue how Honda hybrids work, you also cannot read. My post clearly said 2030 (the future). I’m saying I expect a lot of battery failures in the year 2030, because the oldest Teslas will be very old. Batteries fail when they are elderly.
Quote:

EVs balance batteries
. You cannot balance a battery if some of the cells are weak. For example some cells might fully-charge to 1.5 volts while weaker cells peak at 1.2 which means thr battery is unbalanced. That is the main reason batteries need replaced

.

BeetlePD February 2nd, 2020 16:54

Greenercars.org says EVs are not really any cleaner than gasoline cars. In their well-to-car analysis, they rate the Model S as no cleaner than a Cruze Diesel, and a Hyundai Ioniq EV as only 1% cleaner thsn the gasoline Ioniq

.

turbobrick240 February 2nd, 2020 16:59

Thanks to many of the best minds in the battery development industry, Tesla is soon to introduce million mile battery packs. That should put to rest most of the ill-informed, antiquated views about battery longevity.

wired- million mile batteries

jackbombay February 2nd, 2020 23:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569203)
WHAT?!?!? Your post is the dumbest on this tjread.

Your posts are obviously not included in this "calculation" you performed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569278)
I’m saying I expect a lot of battery failures in the year 2030, because the oldest Teslas will be very old. Batteries fail when they are elderly.

And cars that burn gasoline or diesel never fail when the get elderly so we're all obviously supposed to agree that EV's are inferior to ICE powered vehicles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569286)
Tesla is soon to introduce million mile battery packs. That should put to rest most of the ill-informed, antiquated views about battery longevity.

Ah HA! So you admit that electric car will fail if they are driven over one million miles! We will conveniently ignore the fact that ICE powered cars on average end up in the junk yard with less than 200,000 miles on them while we do a happy dance celebrating that fact that Teslas will only do one million miles before the battery *may* need replacing!

nwdiver February 3rd, 2020 02:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569283)
Greenercars.org says EVs are not really any cleaner than gasoline cars. In their well-to-car analysis, they rate the Model S as no cleaner than a Cruze Diesel, and a Hyundai Ioniq EV as only 1% cleaner thsn the gasoline Ioniq
.

What 'grid mix' are they assuming? A common error is neglecting the fact that EVs don't use 'grid mix'. At a minimum EVs can be easily charged off-peak most of the time when renewables are more abundant. Soon they can be used as a buffer to reduce curtailment of wind and solar. EVs can be used to increase the amount of clean energy the grid can support. Cleaner cars can help make the grid cleaner which makes cleaner cars. Don't get any better than that :)

Electric Vehicle Batteries Will ‘Dwarf’ The Grid’s Energy-Storage Needs

oilhammer February 3rd, 2020 04:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5568823)
I had to replace the battery in two of my hybrids.... $2000 times two. I doubt EVs will be any different, requiring a battery replacement which erases any supposed savings

Also I already mentioned I can buy a Fiesta or Mitsubishi for only $12,000. That’s a hell lot cheaper than the Tesla. That’s about $25000 cheaper which will buy over 300,000 miles of gasoline. Of course I never keep cars past 200K so that means the Fiesta/Mitsubishi is cheaper on the longterm. I try to chose what is cheapest

And YES Teslas need maintenance like flushing the coolant, replacing the air filter, flushing brake fluid every two years, et cetera. Tesla owners who say “no maintenance” are lying to you

.


Well according to one of your [many] other threads, you cannot even afford a turbocharger for your Beetle. So... :rolleyes:

redbarron55 February 3rd, 2020 06:59

I drove a first generation Prius for close to 200,000 miles and it did need a battery. I figured that it was like a transmission repair or so.
The car was basically trouble free for that time.
I also drove a 2009 JSW 2.0 TDI for close to 300,000 miles and during that time I spent a lot more on maintenance a DPF cracked and clogged (down pipe) a DSG clutch and two timing belt replacements.
The operating cost was much higher for the JSW, but it was also a nicer car and a great touring car.
VW bought it back for around $9000 as they also bought the 2013 for $23000.
Currently I have gone basically crazy and bought a 2012 Touareg Exec TDI.
The new EVs are probably a lot better than the old Prius I, but I don't drive enough anymore for that to be a concern and when I drive more it is on long trips where recharging would be a problem.
This last year we towed our little Scamp travel trailer 95000 miles with our 2016 T&C and 7500 miles with our 2012 Touareg and and EV would not have done that.
There is a place for EVs and ICE. EVs are getting better and if we stayed around town all of the time I would seriously consider one (and have seriously considered one already).

tikal February 3rd, 2020 08:16

Perhaps the following graph would put this thread more in track of the relative 'cleanliness' of passenger vehicles. From the graph I observe that the overall environmental foot print per mile driven of the 2018 models are as follows from best to worst (leaving out H2 powered passenger vehicles, R100 diesel (since it is so scarce) and Compressed Natural Gas vehicles):

1) Battery Electrical Vehicle (BEV) solar charging
2) BMW X5 diesel with compliant emissions system (actual on the road emissions tested by University of West Virginia)
3) Battery Electrical Vehicle (BEV) with electricity coming from Natural Gas
4) Battery Electrical Vehicle (BEV) with electricity coming from California electrical grid system
5) Diesel passenger vehicles such as fixed CR TDIs
6) SIDI (Spark Ignited Direct Injection) vehicles using E10 (gasoline w/ up to 10% ethanol)
7) Hybrid vehicles (for simplicity I lumped together SI HEV and PHEV running on U.S. Mix)
8) Battery Electrical Vehicle (BEV) running on average U.S. Mix electrical grid (which I supposed includes coal which makes it this bad)

If wxman reads this thread maybe he has a more updated chart.

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxman (Post 5412452)
Here is an update of the non-GHG damages of various technologies and fuels using the most recent version of GREET (GREET_2017), and using urban/non-urban damage factors as suggested by bhtooefr:


http://lmarzccm.com/images/GREET_201...mp_Damages.png


wxman February 3rd, 2020 08:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5569426)
...If wxman reads this thread maybe he has a more updated chart.

Actually, I do have an update based on the latest release of the GREET model (GREET_2019):


http://lmarzccm.com/images/GREET_201...mp_Damages.png

turbobrick240 February 3rd, 2020 09:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5569426)
Perhaps the following graph would put this thread more in track of the relative 'cleanliness' of passenger vehicles. From the graph I observe that the overall environmental foot print per mile driven of the 2018 models are as follows from best to worst (leaving out H2 powered passenger vehicles, R100 diesel (since it is so scarce) and Compressed Natural Gas vehicles):
.

That chart does not represent "overall environmental footprint". It is supposed to represent human health impacts. It's a fairly crude estimation based upon LCA's that do a fairly poor job of accounting for human exposure. E.g.- 10 kg of lead in a car battery generally poses much less of a health hazard than 10 kg of lead in the paint inside a home.

wxman February 3rd, 2020 09:32

Why do you think these LCAs (GREET in this case) do a "poor job" of accounting for human exposure?

turbobrick240 February 3rd, 2020 09:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxman (Post 5569445)
Why do you think these LCAs (GREET in this case) do a "poor job" of accounting for human exposure?

They are working on it, and the LCA's are getting better at accounting for exposure. Many of today's and yesterday's assessments will look not so great in the near future.

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP3871

nwdiver February 3rd, 2020 10:13

Fun Fact; In 2013 I sold my 2003 Jetta TDI for $3k. I bought 100 shares of TSLA around the same time for roughly the same price. If I sold that stock today I could buy a new Tesla Model 3. CRAZY.

'Course.... If it'd bought TSLA instead of a Tesla in 2013 today I could buy a really... REALLY nice house... hindsight :(

turbobrick240 February 3rd, 2020 10:17

Every penny of my VW buyback went into tsla stock. Not regretting it a bit. :)

BeetlePD February 3rd, 2020 10:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackbombay (Post 5569344)
And cars that burn gasoline or diesel never fail when the get elderly so we're all obviously supposed to agree that EV's are inferior to ICE powered vehicles.

Gas/diesel engines don’t wearout at just 13 years incurring an expensive $10,000 bill like an EV battery does. EV (and hybrid) longevity is poor in my professional engineering opinion

Oh well. Like I said when 2030 eventually arrives we will see just how many of the model year 2010-15 EVs are no longer operational. People would not tolerate a gas/diesel car that needed engine replacement at just 13 years (about 150,000 miles) and won’t tolerate it with EVs either

BeetlePD February 3rd, 2020 10:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by nwdiver (Post 5569349)
EVs can be easily charged off-peak most of the time when renewables are more abundant. ]

That makes zero sense. There’s no solar power at night, so the cars have to charge off coal, natural gas, fossil fuels.

Greenercars.org calculates with US mix and California mix. They say the difference is negligible because most pollution comes from manufacture & disposal. That’s why Ioniq EV or Ioniq gasoline car, the difference is only 1%

.

nwdiver February 3rd, 2020 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeetlePD (Post 5569463)
That makes zero sense. There’s no solar power at night, so the cars have to charge off coal, natural gas, fossil fuels.
Greenercars.org calculates with US mix and California mix. They say the difference is negligible because most pollution comes from manufacture & disposal. That’s why Ioniq EV or Ioniq gasoline car, the difference is only 1%
.

..... wind.... there's GIGA-WATT-HOURS and GIGA-WATT-HOURS of wind at night. SPP was >60% wind last night while I was charging. Looks like there was A LOT of curtailment since the thermal plants like coal were cut back to minimum.

And again.... EVs don't typically use grid mix. SPP is ~25% wind annually but >50% at night when EVs would usually be charging. Aggregating them would push that to ~90% since grid operators could use them as a buffer to reduce curtailment.

wxman February 3rd, 2020 10:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569453)
They are working on it, and the LCA's are getting better at accounting for exposure. Many of today's and yesterday's assessments will look not so great in the near future.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/EHP3871

There certainly is room for improvement.

I conducted dispersion modeling for NESHAPs compliance many years ago. Granted, that was for specific emission sources and specific receptor sites. Nevertheless, empirical monitoring data were generally in good agreement with the modeling results.

For the GREET modeling, BEV emissions are mostly non-urban, which I assumed as being "rural" for the purposes of assigning damage costs. Those are about one-tenth the damages of "urban" emissions, which are much higher for ICEVs than BEVs.

Here are the damages I used for the previous graphic I posted ("Urban Large" for urban emissions in GREET, and "Ireland Rural" for all non-urban emissions in GREET):


http://lmarzccm.com/images/Europe_Damage_factors.png


If you are aware of better methodology, I'm all ears, er, eyes in this case, I guess.

turbobrick240 February 3rd, 2020 11:06

I wish I could offer a better methodology. I'm just a lowly organic farmer, and most of this is well out of my wheelhouse. But I've done enough research to see the strengths and weaknesses inherent in these assessments of very complex systems. One glaring deficit, imo, is the complete lack of factoring in the health impacts that climate change will/is incurring on populations.

wxman February 3rd, 2020 11:10

Just to be clear, I welcome your input, or anyone else's for that matter.

There are actually best-guess estimates for climate change impacts, currently about $45/ton of GHG emissions.

tikal February 3rd, 2020 11:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569477)
I wish I could offer a better methodology. I'm just a lowly organic farmer, and most of this is well out of my wheelhouse. But I've done enough research to see the strengths and weaknesses inherent in these assessments of very complex systems. One glaring deficit, imo, is the complete lack of factoring in the health impacts that climate change will/is incurring on populations.

Thanks for your honest answer (my opinion). That's why I believe that as long as each of has work more on the three Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle (RRR) then we can impact in a positive way the environment around us and in the world. Having said that a used BEV (three or four years old) such as a Kia Soul EV (or similar) might be a pretty good value (even today) for households with two or more cars looking at a 'newer' vehicle in which one is to be used around town and the other for road trips.

turbobrick240 February 3rd, 2020 14:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5569484)
Thanks for your honest answer (my opinion). That's why I believe that as long as each of has work more on the three Rs: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle (RRR) then we can impact in a positive way the environment around us and in the world. Having said that a used BEV (three or four years old) such as a Kia Soul EV (or similar) might be a pretty good value (even today) for households with two or more cars looking at a 'newer' vehicle in which one is to be used around town and the other for road trips.


Absolutely. Well said. I agree that a used EV is probably the most environmentally friendly auto option.

nwdiver February 3rd, 2020 17:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569529)
Absolutely. Well said. I agree that a used EV is probably the most environmentally friendly auto option.

True... but we need more new EVs to get more used EVs.

But we should stop building new ICE. Seems like that would be an easy 1st step.

IndigoBlueWagon February 3rd, 2020 18:15

Crude dropped to $52/barrel today. If gasoline is in the $2/gallon range it's going to be tough to get people to give up ICE. Just count the number of pickups you see next time you're driving. Sales have held steady for the past two years at around 350,000/month. That's about what Tesla sold in all of 2019.

Rrusse11 February 3rd, 2020 20:18

"Crude dropped to $52/barrel today. If gasoline is in the $2/gallon range it's going to be tough to get people to give up ICE." IBW


And therein lies the rub. The fossil fuel industries have enormous political
clout, and extraordinary subsidies from governments. If they actually
charged a fair cost for their products, which included the costs of pollution,
enviromental degredation, et al, we'd be in a very different world.
Climate change and species extinction will catch up with us all, but not
before the damage has been done.

nwdiver February 3rd, 2020 20:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndigoBlueWagon (Post 5569579)
Crude dropped to $52/barrel today. If gasoline is in the $2/gallon range it's going to be tough to get people to give up ICE. Just count the number of pickups you see next time you're driving. Sales have held steady for the past two years at around 350,000/month. That's about what Tesla sold in all of 2019.

For most people energy for an EV is the equivalent of paying $1/gallon. For someone with solar PV it's closer to $0.50/gallon. I agree we need EVs with a ~200 mile range for ~$25k to really hit an inflection point. That should happen in ~5 years. Right now the biggest problem is ramping up cell production... not demand. Tesla is selling cars as fast as they can make them.

IndigoBlueWagon February 4th, 2020 02:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by nwdiver (Post 5569617)
For most people energy for an EV is the equivalent of paying $1/gallon.

This doesn't matter. When fuel prices are in their current range it appears (to my surprise) that fuel costs aren't a concern for vehicle buyers. They care about other things: Sitting high, "safety" of a larger vehicle (even though it's a fallacy), image, and so on. I've maintained that if you approached 10 people at a filling station and asked them what fuel economy they're getting in their vehicle, 8 of them wouldn't know.

tikal February 4th, 2020 05:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndigoBlueWagon (Post 5569636)
This doesn't matter. When fuel prices are in their current range it appears (to my surprise) that fuel costs aren't a concern for vehicle buyers. They care about other things: Sitting high, "safety" of a larger vehicle (even though it's a fallacy), image, and so on. I've maintained that if you approached 10 people at a filling station and asked them what fuel economy they're getting in their vehicle, 8 of them wouldn't know.

Very good points. I am pretty sure if you go out online and search for large used passenger vehicles that would average not more than 15 MPG you find so many in good shape, relatively low miles and below $5000. Why bother buying a Toyota Corolla/Honda Civic/etc. or a Kia Soul EV/Nissan Leaf/etc. for let's $10,000 or more when you can buy a GM Suburban type vehicle for $5000 or less?

turbobrick240 February 4th, 2020 05:46

Yeah, the average consumer isn't particularly savvy. My experience with dealers(and others) indicates that most buyers are more interested in the monthly payment amount than the total cost of the vehicle. This is why govt. needs to step in occasionally to steer people in the right direction.

oilhammer February 4th, 2020 05:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569663)
Yeah, the average consumer isn't particularly savvy. My experience with dealers(and others) indicates that most buyers are more interested in the monthly payment amount than the total cost of the vehicle. This is why govt. needs to step in occasionally to steer people in the right direction.

Yeah, like banning the sale of a bunch of 50 mpg cars that are actually nice to drive. :rolleyes:

I do not necessarily place any blind trust in the gov't to make choices for me, thanks. They've proven time and time again (and if you happen to unfortunately see any of the news lately) they continue this almost daily.

turbobrick240 February 4th, 2020 06:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilhammer (Post 5569668)
Yeah, like banning the sale of a bunch of 50 mpg cars that are actually nice to drive. :rolleyes:
I do not necessarily place any blind trust in the gov't to make choices for me, thanks. They've proven time and time again (and if you happen to unfortunately see any of the news lately) they continue this almost daily.

Is our govt. perfect? Absolutely not. I'm disgusted by the imperfections on a daily basis. But we should be extremely grateful to live in one of the great democracies of the world. I'll take it over thunderdome any day. ;)

kjclow February 4th, 2020 06:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569440)
That chart does not represent "overall environmental footprint". It is supposed to represent human health impacts. It's a fairly crude estimation based upon LCA's that do a fairly poor job of accounting for human exposure. E.g.- 10 kg of lead in a car battery generally poses much less of a health hazard than 10 kg of lead in the paint inside a home.

The falicy in your arguement is that there is no lead based house paint on market anywhere in the world today. Lead based consumer paints have not been on market in the US and Canada since 67/68. They were outlawed in 73. The risk of lead exposure from a lead acid battery is therefore much higher than lead exposure inside any building painted and properly maintaned since the mid 70s.

turbobrick240 February 4th, 2020 06:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by kjclow (Post 5569673)
The falicy in your arguement is that there is no lead based house paint on market anywhere in the world today. Lead based consumer paints have not been on market in the US and Canada since 67/68. They were outlawed in 73. The risk of lead exposure from a lead acid battery is therefore much higher than lead exposure inside any building painted and properly maintaned since the mid 70s.

That was merely a very simplified example I was using to make a point about the shortcomings in many life cycle assessments that look at health impacts. Exposure to pollutants is a very important element that isn't adequately (or at all) modeled in many LCA's. The Europeans are way ahead of us with their modeling. The ReCiPe database is a good example of that.

Btw- lead paint is still an issue in many areas. I know it's still common in the older homes here in New England. It's often the most vulnerable groups that have the most exposure.

kjclow February 4th, 2020 06:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569676)
That was merely a very simplified example I was using to make a point about the shortcomings in many life cycle assessments that look at health impacts. Exposure to pollutants is a very important element that isn't adequately (or at all) modeled in many LCA's. The Europeans are way ahead of us with their modeling. The ReCiPe database is a good example of that.

Btw- lead paint is still an issue in many areas. I know it's still common in the older homes here in New England. It's often the most vulnerable groups that have the most exposure.

The only reason lead paint is still an issue is due to poor maintenance. The best, easiest, and proper way to remedy exposure to lead paint is to paint over it. But now I am sidetracking the thread.

wxman February 4th, 2020 07:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569676)
That was merely a very simplified example I was using to make a point about the shortcomings in many life cycle assessments that look at health impacts. Exposure to pollutants is a very important element that isn't adequately (or at all) modeled in many LCA's. The Europeans are way ahead of us with their modeling. The ReCiPe database is a good example of that.

Btw- lead paint is still an issue in many areas. I know it's still common in the older homes here in New England. It's often the most vulnerable groups that have the most exposure.

Do you have a reference for that database? First I've heard of it.

The European LCA studies I've seen aren't remarkably different from my results (I used the 2009 report from the National Academy of Sciences, "Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use" as a basis for my methodology).

For example, the European Environmental Agency issued a report in 2018 highlighting the lifecycle impacts of EV and ICEV car technologies ("Electric vehicles from life cycle and circular economy perspectives, TERM 2018: Transport and Environment Reporting Mechanism (TERM) report." EEA Report No 13/2018, November 2018, https://www.eea.europa.eu/publicatio..._download/file). The LCA analysis there looked at not only air emissions but also contamination of surface water, groundwater, and soil.

Another is a study by Beltran et al. ("When the Background Matters: Using Scenarios from Integrated Assessment Models in Prospective Life Cycle Assessment." Journal of Industrial Ecology, November 2018, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...111/jiec.12825). This also look at contamination of all environmental media.

Generally speaking, BEVs have lower AGW and fossil depletion impacts, but higher human and ecological toxicity impacts according to those resources based on current technology.

turbobrick240 February 4th, 2020 08:04

There are so many variables in a good assesment, it's mind boggling. Like what is the projected vehicle useful life- 100k km, 150k km, etc. The more miles a BEV accumulates the more it offsets the relatively high production/manufacturing impacts. Is a second life for BEV batteries as grid storage factored in? Is battery recycling factored in? What grid mix is used to not only charge but manufacture the vehicles? Is the changing nature of our grid mix fully accounted for? What battery chemistry is being used, and what is the quantity of elements like cobalt in that chemistry? Modern BEV's are just in their infancy and the environmental impacts related to production and use are improving at a very rapid pace. Some things are also very difficult to quantify- especially with purely monetary metrics. Like the synergies between BEV's and renewable energy. Or the value of human health, clean air etc.. I'll see if I can find a good link to the ReCiPe modeling.

https://www.dovepress.com/advances-a...t-article-EECT

my d sel February 4th, 2020 08:53

Well said oilhammer

flee February 4th, 2020 09:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilhammer (Post 5569668)
Yeah, like banning the sale of a bunch of 50 mpg cars that are actually nice to drive. :rolleyes: (snip)

In the interest of accuracy, few if any of the recent 'banned' TDI's were getting 50 mpg.
My A3, one of the worst examples of fuel usage, never even got near 40 mpg.:(

wxman February 4th, 2020 09:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569710)
There are so many variables in a good assesment, it's mind boggling. Like what is the projected vehicle useful life- 100k km, 150k km, etc. The more miles a BEV accumulates the more it offsets the relatively high production/manufacturing impacts. Is a second life for BEV batteries as grid storage factored in? Is battery recycling factored in? What grid mix is used to not only charge but manufacture the vehicles? Is the changing nature of our grid mix fully accounted for? What battery chemistry is being used, and what is the quantity of elements like cobalt in that chemistry? Modern BEV's are just in their infancy and the environmental impacts related to production and use are improving at a very rapid pace. Some things are also very difficult to quantify- especially with purely monetary metrics. Like the synergies between BEV's and renewable energy. Or the value of human health, clean air etc..

Yes to virtually all of those questions with regard to GREET. The changing electricity grid mix is why I continue to update the NAS results:


http://lmarzccm.com/images/NAS_2030_EDX.png


I'm aware of the rapid changes with respect to battery chemistry. GREET is current as of 2019. GREET assumes 20% recycling of battery materials. I've seen that could be as high as 75% or more in the future, but it's speculation at this point.

GREET_2019 assumes 183,383 miles useful life.

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5569710)
I'll see if I can find a good link to the ReCiPe modeling.

That would be great. Thanks!

oilhammer February 4th, 2020 09:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by flee (Post 5569723)
In the interest of accuracy, few if any of the recent 'banned' TDI's were getting 50 mpg.
My A3, one of the worst examples of fuel usage, never even got near 40 mpg.:(


I was not limiting this to Dieselgate cars. There are loads of other cars that are available in other markets that we cannot get. Name just about anything that isn't some high performance sports coupe, and there is a diesel engine offering for it that WAY bests any gasoline version we get here.

Also, your A3 was an automatic. However, even my 2010 Jetta that was also so-cursed, was able to tag 52-56 with reasonably careful highway driving. Post delete, it got 60, and is still on the road today 1/4 million miles and climbing.

However, I do not feel deleted cars should be included. But there are still plenty that are able.

But to get to the broader point of "banned", it is more to do with what regulations they required, despite it not being as bad as they would have led people to believe (regarding NOx).

Did you know there are Bluemotion VAG products capable of getting 70+ mpg? Do you know there was a VAG product capable of getting over 80 mpg? And that was well over a decade ago.

wxman February 4th, 2020 09:44

@turbobrick - if you are really interested what's included in GREET, I invite you to download the model from https://greet.es.anl.gov/ . It's free; just requires registration. Both the "Fuel-Cycle model" and "Vehicle-Cycle model" need to be downloaded. Many of your questions are addressed in the tabs in the respective models (Excel based).

A list of documentation associated with the GREET model is available at https://greet.es.anl.gov/list.php .

atc98002 February 4th, 2020 09:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by flee (Post 5569723)
In the interest of accuracy, few if any of the recent 'banned' TDI's were getting 50 mpg.
My A3, one of the worst examples of fuel usage, never even got near 40 mpg.:(

My '14 Passat was averaging overall 38 MPG, with little freeway driving. I did take it on a nice trip down to the Oregon coast for a couple of days. That trip was 52 MPG. And I was doing 70+ when traffic (and the speed limit) allowed.

Lightflyer1 February 4th, 2020 11:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5569661)
Very good points. I am pretty sure if you go out online and search for large used passenger vehicles that would average not more than 15 MPG you find so many in good shape, relatively low miles and below $5000. Why bother buying a Toyota Corolla/Honda Civic/etc. or a Kia Soul EV/Nissan Leaf/etc. for let's $10,000 or more when you can buy a GM Suburban type vehicle for $5000 or less?

Yep just bought a 2002 suburban for $1,200. One owner vehicle and excellent shape no issues with it at all. I don't know why anyone spends $50 or $60,000 for a big vehicle like this when there are decent older ones around that are perfectly usable. I don't use mine as an everyday driver just as a every now and then go-getter. Dealer said they would only give them $750 for it trade in.

turbobrick240 February 4th, 2020 13:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxman (Post 5569741)
@turbobrick - if you are really interested what's included in GREET, I invite you to download the model from https://greet.es.anl.gov/ . It's free; just requires registration. Both the "Fuel-Cycle model" and "Vehicle-Cycle model" need to be downloaded. Many of your questions are addressed in the tabs in the respective models (Excel based).

A list of documentation associated with the GREET model is available at https://greet.es.anl.gov/list.php .


Thanks wxman, I'll give that a shot tonight. I think I tried registering a while back but had some issues. My phone is pretty much my sole internet access, and sometimes the bandwidth is pretty poor out here. I apologize if some of my comments came across the wrong way. I probably know just enough to be dangerous on the subject of LCA's. That would be fantastic if the newest GREET model can/does answer many of my questions.

wxman February 4th, 2020 13:27

No offense taken on my part. As I mentioned, I welcome any input from other members here.

I should also mention that I couldn't be more pleased that many members are very happy with their EVs. My son has an EV (i-Pace) and loves it. Works very well for him. I've driven it on several occasions and it's very impressive. However, I'm more convinced than ever that it wouldn't work well for me, at least not at this time.

nwdiver February 4th, 2020 13:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxman (Post 5569813)
However, I'm more convinced than ever that it wouldn't work well for me, at least not at this time.

What needs to change for it to work for you?

wxman February 4th, 2020 13:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by nwdiver (Post 5569822)
What needs to change for it to work for you?

Range, charging times, ability to tow, to name a few.

I have several family members in diverse places each about 600 miles. There have been times when family emergencies have occurred, and having a range of even 300 miles is inadequate in those situations, and charging times of even 30 minutes is not acceptable. I can reach each of these destinations on one tank of fuel, with plenty to spare in my diesel vehicle.

nwdiver February 4th, 2020 14:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by wxman (Post 5569826)
Range, charging times, ability to tow, to name a few.

Maybe an EV 99.3% of the time and a diesel truck for towing and 600 mile emergencies?

flee February 4th, 2020 14:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by oilhammer (Post 5569738)
I was not limiting this to Dieselgate cars. There are loads of other cars that are available in other markets that we cannot get. Name just about anything that isn't some high performance sports coupe, and there is a diesel engine offering for it that WAY bests any gasoline version we get here.
Also, your A3 was an automatic. However, even my 2010 Jetta that was also so-cursed, was able to tag 52-56 with reasonably careful highway driving. Post delete, it got 60, and is still on the road today 1/4 million miles and climbing.
However, I do not feel deleted cars should be included. But there are still plenty that are able.
But to get to the broader point of "banned", it is more to do with what regulations they required, despite it not being as bad as they would have led people to believe (regarding NOx).
Did you know there are Bluemotion VAG products capable of getting 70+ mpg? Do you know there was a VAG product capable of getting over 80 mpg? And that was well over a decade ago.

OH, it is always easier to blame the 'regulators' for what is in many cases the product
of subsidized low oil prices and the marketplace.
You have often said that there are many fine cars that the manufacturers won't bring
into the US because they wouldn't sell enough to justify the effort it would take.
Even with Europe's strict pollution standards the diesels sell there in part due to high
fuel costs and also because there is a greener 'smaller is better' public perception, IMO.

IndigoBlueWagon February 4th, 2020 14:38

Smaller cars are more desirable to Europeans for several reasons. First, almost everything is smaller: Roads, driveways, parking lots, etc. Second, distances are shorter. Third, fuel is way more expensive. Fourth, taxes on many aspects of driving are higher, making smaller, less expensive cars more appealing.

In the Northeast we share some of these factors, size of city streets and distances, for example. Despite that, small cars are in the minority. My MKIV car looks comically small when parked among current pickups and SUVs.

We could encourage people to drive more fuel efficient, cleaner, and less resource taxing vehicles, but politicians don't want to be responsible for raising taxes. I've got a shamefully large lifetime carbon footprint. but I would welcome a carbon tax. And states like Oregon who offer lower taxes to less energy efficient vehicles is a great example of how sometimes government doesn't do the right thing. But $5/gallon gasoline would be a good start.

tikal February 5th, 2020 15:58

It will take more time in the US to switch from gasoline SUVs to electric SUVs
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by IndigoBlueWagon (Post 5569834)
Smaller cars are more desirable to Europeans for several reasons. First, almost everything is smaller: Roads, driveways, parking lots, etc. Second, distances are shorter. Third, fuel is way more expensive. Fourth, taxes on many aspects of driving are higher, making smaller, less expensive cars more appealing.

In the Northeast we share some of these factors, size of city streets and distances, for example. Despite that, small cars are in the minority. My MKIV car looks comically small when parked among current pickups and SUVs.

We could encourage people to drive more fuel efficient, cleaner, and less resource taxing vehicles, but politicians don't want to be responsible for raising taxes. I've got a shamefully large lifetime carbon footprint. but I would welcome a carbon tax. And states like Oregon who offer lower taxes to less energy efficient vehicles is a great example of how sometimes government doesn't do the right thing. But $5/gallon gasoline would be a good start.

Indeed. Even before Dieselgate is not like a fuel efficient light duty diesel vehicle was "taking over" the passenger vehicle market in the US. Why? Because most Americans do not want to pay a premium of xx% to go from 20 something MPG to 30 something MPG (or perhaps more) when gasoline is around $2.70/gallon (approx.). Now the price of RUG hasn't changed that much from the 'TDI period' of 2009-2015 and you are asking Americans to buy an smaller sedan EV for a premium of ++ xx% to help alleviate climate change and reduce air pollution!

Ok some people are going to give up their Prisues, BMWs, Audis, Mercedes Benz for another sedan such as the Model 3. But why would you give up your RAV4, Honda Civic, GM Equinox etc. SUVs that you bough or you can buy for around $30K for something comparable size and cargo that will be probably 30, 40 or 50 percent more expensive running on electricity when RUG is so inexpensive in the US?

turbobrick240 February 5th, 2020 16:11

It's not just about protecting the environment or saving money for most EV buyers. People want the cool new tech, self driving capabilities, crazy acceleration etc. That's why Tesla making performance and cutting edge tech. key elements of their cars was a brilliant move.

tikal February 6th, 2020 06:57

Let's see in this decade how EVs growth would do besides the 'cool tech' that Tesla and other luxury car makers are going to bring.

Right now in many states you have to do your research very well if you want to buy a Kia Soul EV, a Nissan Leaf and other less pricey EVs because many dealers will not provide warranty work since they are not certified to do so on an electrical vehicle.

So ok let's say you find a nice three year old Kia Soul EV for $12,000 with some really cool tech stuff and you will not be going to a gas station forever! Then one day there is an 'issue' and the EV won't start. Then you realize that you have to tow the car at your expense around 250 miles to the closest authorized/certified Kia dealer that is willing to work on it.

Not so 'cool situation' to be in :(

I bet you most Americans prefer convenience (plain vanilla gasoline vehicles) over 'high tech cool stuff' (EVs) that cannot be serviced locally.

turbobrick240 February 6th, 2020 07:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5570232)
Let's see in this decade how EVs growth would do besides the 'cool tech' that Tesla and other luxury car makers are going to bring.

Right now in many states you have to do your research very well if you want to buy a Kia Soul EV, a Nissan Leaf and other less pricey EVs because many dealers will not provide warranty work since they are not certified to do so on an electrical vehicle.

So ok let's say you find a nice three year old Kia Soul EV for $12,000 with some really cool tech stuff and you will not be going to a gas station forever! Then one day there is an 'issue' and the EV won't start. Then you realize that you have to tow the car at your expense around 250 miles to the closest authorized/certified Kia dealer that is willing to work on it.

Not so 'cool situation' to be in :(

I bet you most Americans prefer convenience (plain vanilla gasoline vehicles) over 'high tech cool stuff' (EVs) that cannot be serviced locally.

It depends largely upon which age brackets you're looking at. Tech disruptions can happen very quickly- look at how rapidly smartphones became ubiquitous. Or how quickly EV's have come to dominate markets like Norway. I think we'll see some paradigm shifting changes in this decade. Just look at how quickly fossil fuel industries are falling out of favor with investors. I think it will be more of an avalanche than a glacial retreat. ;)

casioqv February 6th, 2020 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by tikal (Post 5570232)
So ok let's say you find a nice three year old Kia Soul EV for $12,000 with some really cool tech stuff and you will not be going to a gas station forever! Then one day there is an 'issue' and the EV won't start. Then you realize that you have to tow the car at your expense around 250 miles to the closest authorized/certified Kia dealer that is willing to work on it.

Not so 'cool situation' to be in :(

I bet you most Americans prefer convenience (plain vanilla gasoline vehicles) over 'high tech cool stuff' (EVs) that cannot be serviced locally.


That would be a really frustrating situation. I would think the chances of an unexpected failure are much much lower than an ICE car, so the "expected inconvenience" would be lower, even if actually fixing it would be more hassle.


I only have N=1 experience, but I owned an e-Golf for 2.5 years and only needed to put air in the tires, whereas all of the ICE VWs I've owned had at least minor issues every few months.

IndigoBlueWagon February 6th, 2020 12:19

I heard a pundit on a financial channel say something yesterday that rung true: People are buying Teslas because Elon has made the brand attractive. That it's an EV is tangential to some buyers. They just want to be driving a Tesla.

bhtooefr February 6th, 2020 13:17

Yeah, and that was absolutely a goal, make a desirable car that happens to be an EV, don't just make an EV.

tikal February 6th, 2020 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndigoBlueWagon (Post 5570318)
I heard a pundit on a financial channel say something yesterday that rung true: People are buying Teslas because Elon has made the brand attractive. That it's an EV is tangential to some buyers. They just want to be driving a Tesla.

It would be interesting to have a side by side graph of growth rate for Tesla vs non-Tesla EVs. I have a suspicion that the combined growth of vehicles such as Nissan Leafs, GM Bolts, Kia Soul EVs, etc. is not that impressive but I could be wrong.

bhtooefr February 6th, 2020 15:42

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpsd0yRYk8c

(I'd have combined the Prius Prime with the PHV, seeing as it's the second generation of the PHV, but hey.)

turbobrick240 February 6th, 2020 16:28

Wow, that's impressive watching how quickly the Model 3 jumped to the top of the heap. I think the Model Y might even be more dramatic.

kjclow February 7th, 2020 06:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by turbobrick240 (Post 5570124)
It's not just about protecting the environment or saving money for most EV buyers. People want the cool new tech, self driving capabilities, crazy acceleration etc. That's why Tesla making performance and cutting edge tech. key elements of their cars was a brilliant move.

Quote:

Originally Posted by IndigoBlueWagon (Post 5570318)
I heard a pundit on a financial channel say something yesterday that rung true: People are buying Teslas because Elon has made the brand attractive. That it's an EV is tangential to some buyers. They just want to be driving a Tesla.

The few people I know that own a tesla bought them because of the bells and whistles. They did not go out looking for an elceltric car and came back deciding that a tesla was the best option out there. Much like my truck. My wife was attracted to the bells and whisltes while I insisted that it was a diesel.

tikal February 7th, 2020 09:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by bhtooefr (Post 5570354)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpsd0yRYk8c

(I'd have combined the Prius Prime with the PHV, seeing as it's the second generation of the PHV, but hey.)

Very neat evolution of US Electric Vehicles sales since 2012. Thanks for the link!

Apparently the Kia Soul EV did not even make it in the charts at the bottom :confused:

JSH1 February 15th, 2020 12:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by atc98002 (Post 5529731)
I happen to like and support both. I guess my "green" credentials have a shade of blue to them. :p

It's really not an either/or proposition.

No it isn't. Until recently we had a 2016 Spark EV paired with a 2014 Jetta Sportwagen. The Spark handled my 50 mile commute and trips around down. My wife used the TDI for her 14 mile commute and our trips out of town. We used each car were it worked best.

The Spark went back to GM last September after the lease was up. It is by far the least expensive car I have ever owned. At 400 lb-ft of torque at 0 RPM was fun too.

Now we have the TDI and my wife rides her bicycle to work.

turbobrick240 February 15th, 2020 16:36

Five years out and dieselgate is still costing VW billions. It looks as though German owners will be getting $.9 billion in compensation:

https://www-autoblog-com.cdn.ampproj...-settlement%2F

ericy February 16th, 2020 06:11

I found an interesting documentary about the future of the German auto industry:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcXjVxaKzv4


The short version is that they are dragging their feet on electrification. Partly because they are really good at making ICE engines, but there is also a lot of political pressure to the save the jobs of all of the people in the supply chain who make engines, transmissions and other such things. In doing so, they risk being completely left behind in the transition.



But as things stand now, sales of ICE vehicles are down - especially on some of the more expensive (and hence more profitable cars). Only sales of EVs were up for the year.

tikal February 17th, 2020 09:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by ericy (Post 5572385)
I found an interesting documentary about the future of the German auto industry:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcXjVxaKzv4

The short version is that they are dragging their feet on electrification. Partly because they are really good at making ICE engines, but there is also a lot of political pressure to the save the jobs of all of the people in the supply chain who make engines, transmissions and other such things. In doing so, they risk being completely left behind in the transition.

But as things stand now, sales of ICE vehicles are down - especially on some of the more expensive (and hence more profitable cars). Only sales of EVs were up for the year.

Ok so overall US sales of ICE passenger vehicles are down and sales of large gasoline trucks and large gasoline SUVs are up. And that leaves you with an overall US passenger vehicle average MPG stuck in the low to mid 20s MPG. Am I missing something?

turbobrick240 February 17th, 2020 09:34

The Japanese are also dragging their feet largely out of fears of disrupting their supply chains. These next few years should be very interesting.

https://www-teslarati-com.cdn.amppro...-3-teardown%2F


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:47.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright - TDIClub Online LTD - 2017

Page generated in 0.17312 seconds with 8 queries
[Output: 130.77 Kb. compressed to 124.55 Kb. by saving 6.22 Kb. (4.76%)]