How Long Do EV Batteries Last? Longer Than You Might Think, Research Suggests (pcmag.com) 172
PC Magazine cites a study done in March by Recurrent, a Seattle-based company that analyzes used electric car batteries, which analyzed real-world telematics data from 15,000 EVs of various makes and models, taking daily readings of their actual charging activity, battery percentage, and estimated range. Their results?
Electric vehicles typically come with a standard battery warranty, between eight and 12 years, plus a certain number of miles. Recurrent found that most drivers were not replacing their batteries even after those warranties expired. The oldest models in the study have the highest percentage of battery replacements, at about 5% for those that have been on the road for nine to 12 years, according to the graph below. Twelve years is the current average lifespan for gas-powered cars in the US, according to Progressive.
This suggests a battery replacement could come at a natural time to consider buying a new vehicle or replacing the battery on the current one, not as an unfortunate surprise just a few years into ownership... "Almost all of the batteries we've ever made are still in cars, and we've been selling electric cars for 12 years," says Nic Thomas, marketing director for Nissan.
This suggests a battery replacement could come at a natural time to consider buying a new vehicle or replacing the battery on the current one, not as an unfortunate surprise just a few years into ownership... "Almost all of the batteries we've ever made are still in cars, and we've been selling electric cars for 12 years," says Nic Thomas, marketing director for Nissan.
Error in summary (Score:2, Insightful)
Uh, no, progressive identifies the average age of cars on the road at 12 years old. Which means that lifespan needs to be around double that.
That means that EVs really need to last almost 25 years unless they become substantially cheaper.
Re: (Score:2)
Journalists! Creme of the crop.
Re: (Score:2)
Your second sentence does not logically follow from your first.
1) The rate of replacements on old batteries is just several percent. You, by contrast, assume they all just die. There is no evidence for this.
2) 12-year-old cars have little residual value, regardless of how long the vehicle stays on the road in addition to that. You lose most of the value of your purchase early on. The lack of value for old cars is due to expected high maintenance across the board, in addition to lack of convenience and m
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The replacement battery for 2008-2013 Camry would cost about 5K to install at the shop. It would cost maybe about 2K DIY, but relatively few people can do this. Used 2GR-FE engine is under 2K in most cases and would probably cost 5K to replace at the shop. But the engine is not com
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect EV batteries will last a lot longer than phone, cordless tool, or laptop batteries. I think the main reason is the charge and use cycles are more carefully managed on the EV. A lot of laptops spend their days plugged in and topped off, with relatively few cycles, and often shallow ones at that. That's not good for a battery. Phones get cycled more but again they also end up spending a long time at 100% charge on your night stand.
Re: (Score:2)
Car batteries are special (Score:2)
What makes car batteries so special?
It's very simple: Actually good battery management systems (pretty much confirmed for Teslas, we can't be sure about the others yet).
For your examples:
NiMH: How many years did they last? I ended up replacing them for my parent's cordless phones, but the old batteries must have lasted a decade
Sealed lead acid(I figure "led" was a typo): A different chemistry, but I also have to replace the batteries in my UPS units on a regular basis. This is because lead-acid regular
Re: (Score:2)
Remember, there's a reason why cell phone companies make batteries hard to replace and charge to 100% by default - they WANT you to be buying more phones.
I'm old enough to remember cell phones with user replaceable batteries and I don't miss them.
By the time the batteries in my phones were old enough to need replacement then the phone was old enough to need replacement. This could be just fair wear and tear to the phone, it was just so beat up that I wasn't about to invest in another battery for it. It could be because the technology changed in the last four years or so since I bought the phone that by the time the battery was old enough to where the charg
Re: (Score:2)
I'm old enough to remember cell phones with user replaceable batteries and I don't miss them.
I'm also old enough to remember, and I DO miss them. Of course, that's because until recently I lived in low signal areas, so my phones needed charging a lot, and I missed the ability to install a bigger aftermarket battery in them.
I had a tendency to install batteries with ~3X the capacity, they'd come with a new back to accommodate the bulge, so I'd get decent life out of them. I was also apparently nicer to them, as they'd still be in decent shape by the time that battery was going bad, most of the tim
Re: (Score:2)
Another consideration is BEV batteries tend to degrade, rather than fail, so still have a useful life for some owners even whe
Re:Error in summary (Score:5, Informative)
With all the batteries for cars being bespoke to that model, replacing a battery in years to come will either be:
1: Not available, as they won't be manufactured anymore
2: Require complete refurbishment, replacing the individual cells
3: An after market solution, with the market being supported by a large number of batteries needing replacement for specific models.
The problem is a battery takes up a huge amount of space and weight compared the entire car, so the structure of the car and battery as designed together.
Regardless, by the time a battery is worn out, it's going to be cheaper to scrap the car, due to the battery being the most expensive part by a significant margin, plus associated labour costs.
Combustion engines aren't specific to models either, or even generations of cars.
Most engines are found in multiple different models, spanning sometimes decades of sales.
Parts between the engines are also common too.
Its all part of engineering a cost-effective product. Common parts.
A battery is the same, they all use a number of similar cells. The problem is, they use maybe 8,000 of them and all must be replaced at the same time with the same spec. They're all welded together too. Inside a sealed box.
Same goes with transmissions, even more so. There are fewer popular transmission manufacturers than there are car manufactures.
Take the ZF 8HP for example, it's used in not only dozens of models, but by dozens of manufacturers.
Re: (Score:2)
With BEVs being simpler and having low maintenance cost I suspect there will be a trend to want
Re: (Score:3)
With long term trends for battery prices, halving every decade, the price of replacing an BEV battery with a new one is likely to be similar to the cost replace an ICEV motor by the time the need becomes common.
That trend cannot continue indefinitely, at some point the price of the batteries will hit a floor. Given the trend to get away from Li-ion batteries to lower cost and lower energy density options like LFP it is possible we already saw the prices hit that floor, and take a bit of a bounce after hitting the floor since prices came up some.
I suspect we could see budget minded BEV options use battery types that were once considered obsolete, such as NiMH, NiCd, or even lead-acid. Use of these lower cost batt
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Error in summary (Score:2)
Error in logic? (Score:3)
Your second sentence does not logically follow from your first.
It doesn't?
My first sentence is correcting the summary: The summary claims that average lifespan of cars is 12 years, but the actual measurement that average age of cars on the road is 12 years old.
But the important metric isn't really "age on road', it's "lifespan".
Now, let's do an "in head" estimate, not even involving napkins. Let's make it easy as such, as little complex math as possible.
So, assume an even distribution - IE no cars are lost early, the lifespan is identical, that the total number of ca
Re:Error in summary (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Error in summary (Score:2)
How many people who buy a 12 year old car do think keep it until its 22 years old? Newsflash kiddy, cars that age are bought to be run into the ground and arnt expected to last more than a few years and being an EV will make no difference as the suspension, chassis and bodywork will be shot. No sane adult would cough up 3 times the value of the vehicle on a new battery. Get a clue.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Uh, no, progressive identifies the average age of cars on the road at 12 years old. Which means that lifespan needs to be around double that.
That means that EVs really need to last almost 25 years unless they become substantially cheaper.
That data doesn't pass the sniff test. Look at the cars you see the next time you go out. The vast majority of cars you see on the road are very obviously less than 10 years old. There's pretty clear trends in the exterior design of cars over the years, so you can pretty easily guess a car's age within a few years just from glancing at it. If you pay attention as your car ages, you'll notice a lot less people driving the same car as you once you start approaching that 10 year mark. If you see a car approach
Re: (Score:2)
Difficulty for me: I drive a tacoma. I can see brand new tacomas on the lot virtually identical to my 2 decade old one. I also see a lot of older cars.
That said, I'll fully accept that newer cars are more likely to be daily drivers, while the older cars are more for once in a while trips, thus seen less.
Re: (Score:2)
That said, I'll fully accept that newer cars are more likely to be daily drivers, while the older cars are more for once in a while trips, thus seen less.
I would totally believe something like that. That's would really skew the data.
I'd also believe you if you said areas where things like Tacomas are common tend to have a lot older cars than areas where most people drive a sedan or SUV.
I suspect the answer is there's certain types of people that skew the data a lot, and the data isn't even close to a bell curve.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd also believe you if you said areas where things like Tacomas are common tend to have a lot older cars than areas where most people drive a sedan or SUV.
There's a lot of sedans and SUVs in my area. There's also a lot of trucks. Most of them bigger than mine. I bought mine during a period of life where I was heavily renovating my house and needed the ability to tow a trailer and haul building materials.
But consider the possibility that used cars, as they age, trend from upper-class areas down to lower class. And not just within cities. You'll see a migration of older cars towards the Appalachians, for example. From states like NY down to Florida. Etc.
Re: Error in summary (Score:3)
Highly dependent on where you are. Around my extended family, the dude with a 2013 is considered to have the "new" car. One relative was happy to upgrade to a 2005 model a couple years back.
Also, not so sure about the styling as a good clue. Certain decades you can guess at a glance even without specific knowledge of the car model. However I'd say broadly the design language has been very similar over the last twenty years. A balance of the blob shape from the 90s but with stronger lines to make it act
Re: (Score:2)
Both of my Toyotas have over a quarter million miles on them and both are over 20 years old.
use some common sense fool (Score:5, Informative)
Obviously you need to make some kind of assumption about a distribution in order to make meaningful statements about statistics. Most items that "wear out" have something like an exponential distribution. In the case of cars, a certain fraction of them get into collisions every year, and they are made of parts which themselves have exponential distributions. Of course this is a gross over-simplification (a "bathtub curve" is more applicable to products with bad QC) but the point is, it's at least a crude analogy that helps with questions like "If the average age of a car on the road is 12 years, is it reasonable for a car battery to only last 12 years?"
For a exponential distribution with mean 12, the lambda parameter is .083 and that means that 13% of cars will last even longer than 24 years. So no, it is not reasonable for a car battery to only last 12 years.
In fact, common fucking sense would tell you that for the hypothetical to make sense, you'd have to have cars which were kept in pristine condition where nothing else wore out for the 12 year period. Like, you didn't run them at all and you kept them under armed guard in the vault at Fort Knox. It's a completely idiotic hypothetical and if you were in a meeting with your VP and you made that argument you did above, you would not be getting a big raise in the next review cycle.
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming all on the road already average is 12 years right now.
with 1.474 billion on the road-
adding a billion would make the average 7.15 years
adding a trillion would make the average .02 years.
Numbers do matter.
Not magic, it's math [Re:Error in summary] (Score:2)
So you get it. The expected lifespan has no relation to the average age. Let alone some magical 2x relationship.
If cars have a lifespan of X plus or minus a gaussian distribution, and if people are buying cars at the same rate, then the expected lifetime is twice the average age. That's not magic, it's math.
(the plus or minus doesn't have to be gaussian distribution for this to be true, as long as the distribution isn't skew.)
Degradation is More Relevant (Score:4, Informative)
Recurrent found that most drivers were not replacing their batteries even after those warranties expired.
What a strange way to phrase that. Wow, so owners tend to not do something even after it costs thousands and thousands, as opposed to when it was free? Did you mean to say "especially after those warranties expired"?
Yeah, no shit; owners are more likely to just put up with the reduced range, unless they're going to resell the car (knowing full well that prospective buyers don't have to put up with the lowered range).
As a prospective EV buyer, for me the much more useful metric gathered for those 15000 EVs is the degradation of the battery (and they have a graph for the Model S):
https://www.pcmag.com/news/how... [pcmag.com]
For the Tesla Model S, the expensive, 100-kWh battery degrades faster than the lower cost 85- and 70-kWh options. The battery in the BMW i3 has held up fairly well. "The smallest, a 22 kWh pack, was released in the US in 2014. The 33 kWh packs were introduced in 2017," the study says. "Both have, on average, hit 100,000 miles with around 80% of original capacity remaining."
It's worth a click to see the Model S graph. Higher ranges (i.e. higher capacity in batteries) seem to be be much harder to maintain over the life of an EV. Of course, TIWAGOS since it's based on the "dashboard range estimate" instead of actual road tests, but this (and resale value) is the kind of data I'm more interested in regarding years-old EVs.
Re: (Score:2)
What a strange way to phrase that. Wow, so owners tend to not do something even after it costs thousands and thousands, as opposed to when it was free?
I'm not sure how these battery warranties work (someone with an EV and contract in hand enlighten me). Is there some hard capacity limit below which the mfg. is obliged to pick up the whole tab? Or do they just say "It still runs. Suck it up, snowflake." Or is it like tread life on a tire? "Here's your $500 toward your new $20,000 battery."
Re: (Score:3)
For Tesla a quick search turns up "8 years or 100,000 miles, whichever comes first, with minimum 70% retention of Battery capacity over the warranty period"
Now the question would be how is that degradation determined, do they only accept their own diagnosis either from the vehicle itself or their own test equipment? That leads to some conflicts of interest.
Re:Degradation is More Relevant (Score:4, Insightful)
The trick is, they don't let you use all the physical capacity when you buy the car new.
As the battery degrades, the car allows more charge into the battery and allows it to discharge more.
Your range won't degrade as quickly as the battery does, for a while.
Then it'll plummet, as the increased charging and discharging increases how quickly the battery wears out.
Get the algorithms right, and it'll only lose 30% of the original range in the 8 years of warranty, but it's not going to last another 8 years, since it started out only using 80% of the physical capacity and now its using 100% of what's left. It's really lost 50%.
Re: (Score:2)
Couple things about what you said...
First, the "buffer capacity" is SMALL. Typically less than 10% of total pack capacity, not 20% as you're suggesting. For example, the Tesla Model 3 Long Range, with its 80.5 kWh pack, has a buffer of only 2.2 kWh. (80.5 kWh rated, 78.3 usable)
Second, that buffer is split between "top" and "bottom" of the pack. In other words, 100% charge is not truly 100% of the battery's technical max charge, and 0% is not truly empty. This is because virtually all of the degredation hap
Re: (Score:2)
It's routinely "we'll replace the EV battery if it's state of health (ie range) is 80% or lower after 7 years or 100k miles" or similar. Entirely theoretical for most folks, as it's routinely much higher than that.
Re: (Score:3)
Hyundai is as follows:
Hybrid/Electric Battery & Hybrid System Components Warranty
We are committed to giving you the confidence and peace of mind that comes with knowing your Hyundai is built with the highest quality and care. That's why we cover our batteries and system components for our hybrid, plug-in hybrid, and all-electric vehicles with a 10- year/100,000-mile warranty. While all electric-car batteries will experience degradation over time, ours will not degrade more than 70 percent of the original capacity during the warranty period.
https://www.hyundaiusa.com/us/en/assurance/america-best-warranty [hyundaiusa.com]
Re: (Score:2)
The actual capacity tends to be a bit higher than the advertised capacity. I wonder if what's happening with the 100 vs 85 kwh Tesla batteries is the 100 kwh batteries have less buffer and are operating closer to their true capacity.
The difference in buffer would have two consequences. First, the battery is probably software limited to stop charging when it reaches official capacity (vs actual capacity). So even when the battery starts degrading it doesn't changing things for the user because they're still
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with a lot of the data is that it's early EVs and the batteries have improved a lot since then.
Different manufacturers use different metrics too. For example, Kia and Hyundai sell "64kWh" batteries that are actually about 69kWh gross capacity. You are guaranteed to get at least 64kWh from them when new, and actually the large extra capacity that acts as a buffer also means that 4 year old cars often have 0% degradation, i.e. they can still get the full 64kWh they are rated for out of the pack.
Mo
Re: (Score:2)
The warranties are usually something like "70% capacity after 7 years", whereas they can easily hold 75% after that period (or more). These are carefully calculated so that most regular users won't be eligible for the warranty, but only those with real manufacturing issues (like every other device).
The issue is not longevity, but obsolesce. There were basically three generations. First [~2010] 70-100 mile range cars (100 being very premium), than [~2015] 90-140 mile range cars (again usually 110-120), and t
Re: (Score:2)
From your Tesla S qoute, it mentions that the 100-KWH battery degrades faster, compared to the lesser capacity option.
If I recall correctly, the battery packs are all the same, difference being how much is "enabled" for your use. So I guess the "lower capacity" versions have better "wear leveling" capabilities compared to the 100KWH versions, cos of the extra buffer of 15-30KWH.
Wasn't there some emergency in the US during which time Tesla just sent an OTA update to enable max capacities for all cars in that
How many Olympic sized pools,... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
EV detractors chime in (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Nuh-UH!
2) (after crowing about battery replacement costs after just a few years of ownership) yes, but they still can’t X
In other words: flat denial or moving the goal posts.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Counterpoint, and I say this as an EV owner:
If an internal combustion engine fails you have options. Most likely the failure will not necessitate the replacement of the entire engine. There are also a wide variety of vendors that can handle that particle failure.
The opposite is true of an EV. In the year 2023 your only option is most likely the manufacturer. On top of that it's unlikely that the battery can be fixed down to the component level since most of the components are cells. And a single cell w
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is easily fixable. The solution is govt fiat. You MUST buy an EV. Problem solved. Love, Gavin.
Re: EV detractors chime in (Score:5, Informative)
1. Short distance is apparently 300+ miles to you. Equivalent to most gasoline cars.
2. Sit for long periods waiting to charge: A supercharger can put on 200 miles in 15 minutes. Given that 200 miles is almost 3 hours of driving, if you charge while taking the DOT recommended breaks, you'll never run out of charge.
3. Competing with others: I've never seen the Tesla supercharger complex at the local Wawa completely full.
4. Charging stations going down: Tesla superchargers don't seem to have this problem. I've had to dodge way more broken gasoline pumps.
Still, 3-4 are solved the same way: Continued build-out of charging stations. It helps that if you're not actually on a trip, you can refill at home without having to fill and store gasoline cans.
5. Price of EVs: Teslas are very competitive once you factor in incentives and reduced maintenance costs, which this article touches on. Replacing the batteries seems about as common as replacing the engine in a ICE.
Re: EV detractors chime in (Score:5, Interesting)
Extrapolating (Score:4, Funny)
A supercharger can put on 200 miles in 15 minutes.
I ran the math on this yesterday in response to people claiming 18 minutes to gain 200 miles.
https://xkcd.com/605/ [xkcd.com]
By Thursday (Nov 2nd), gaining 200 miles will be instantaneous. In the days following, you will be able drive away from the charger an (increasingly large) amount of time before you arrive.
Checkmate, detractors.
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile people I know, who owns a Tesla, always post how they spend time in this or that restaurant while charging their Tesla. One has to make lemonades from lemons, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
More to the point I could o
Re: (Score:2)
You have not seen a line at Tesla superchargers in CA (Gilroy for example), or chargers at my place of work. And it costs more than filling up car with gas.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to read the article further. The problem was that Hertz was renting their EVs to Uber rideshare drivers, who were apparently beating them to death (like they do to any car they get, taxi service is nasty on cars.
Re: (Score:2)
2. Sit for long periods waiting to charge: A supercharger can put on 200 miles in 15 minutes. Given that 200 miles is almost 3 hours of driving, if you charge while taking the DOT recommended breaks, you'll never run out of charge.
I'd like to see a source on that claim of 15 minutes of charging to get 200 miles of range. I did some looking myself and it's more like 30 to 40 minutes so if there is a case of getting an actual range of 200 miles with 15 minutes of charging then that is likely with a Tesla that has the largest battery option (therefore quite expensive) and finding a rare "mega-charger" that can supply far more wattage than is typical. Perhaps not a big deal in the end but exaggerated claims aren't helping your case, wh
Re: (Score:3)
So, the 15 minute charge time to get 200 miles of range would be with the most powerful 250kW chargers available, and those chargers are only available to people buying a BEV from a single automaker. The 15 minute charge time is based off a Tesla advertisement, not any real world testing, so not exactly an unbiased source.
Faster non-Tesla chargers are available over in Europe. Most of the automakers are making their cars able to access the Tesla network here in the USA over the next couple years.
Like I said though, it's not actually that big of an issue if you're taking DOT recommended rest breaks. No, you aren't mandated to take them. I'll state though that taking them is a good idea, because it spikes the accident rate if you don't. And part of them is getting up and moving, so trading off isn't an ideal solution eithe
Re: (Score:3)
Like with so many other things, your "research" is once again faulty.
Really? I checked the CCS2 standard used in Europe and it looks like it tops out at about 150 kW while NACS allows 250 kW
300kW chargers are common in Europe. Tesla is "only" 250kW for now, both on the charger and the vehicle side. All chargers are CCS2, except for a few CHAdeMO.
Re: (Score:3)
You made a statement about CCS2 in Europe. Now you are blathering on about the Chevrolet Bolt which AFAIK never made it to Europe at all. Its capabilities or lack thereof are entirely irrelevant. Just stop your trolling.
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly most people who can charge at home and have 230V, the norm outside the USA and Japan, things are a painless experience.
Here in New Zealand road trips are faster and easier with a Tesla, but there are a lot of 50kW chargers and all of which that I kno
Re: (Score:2)
Firstly most people who can charge at home and have 230V, the norm outside the USA and Japan, things are a painless experience.
240V is the norm even in the USA. My water heater, dryer, oven, stove, and even microwave (I have a very fancy one) are all 240V. Only the little utility wall outlets are 120V.
If you're paying to have an EV charger installed, the cost difference between a 120V and a 240V one is normally negligble. Basically, you need a 2 pole breaker vs a 1 pole one. $16 vs $7. [lowes.com]
The wire otherwise would be identical.
Re: (Score:3)
The only charging stations I have found that don't work are the free ones.
I wonder why free chargers even exist. I mean I know why people would want to offer EV charging at no fee but why have the EVSE when just offering a standard electrical outlet to charge from could perform the same function?
If the person operating the charger have no intention to make money off the electricity then why not just provide a 240VAC outlet rated for 20, 30, or maybe 50 amps, and have the EV driver use their own charger cord? As I recall every BEV will come with a portable charger cord and two o
Re: (Score:2)
The remaining free chargers are at supermarket and a
Re: (Score:2)
That's not really what he's saying. He's saying that things are a lot less than ideal today, and the problems are not of the sort that will be magically fixed by next week. That makes the rather large expense of buying a new car problematic and something you should postpone for as long as possible in the hopes that yes, things improve - eventually.
Re: (Score:2)
Am I at home or at a gas station?
Probably take me 15 minutes at home. Gas cans, especially modern ones, pour fairly slowly. And I'd need to empty two of them.
Probably closer to 5 at the gas station, but then, I can't run in and piss and then grab a soda while I'm fueling, unlike with an EV.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably closer to 5 at the gas station, but then, I can't run in and piss and then grab a soda while I'm fueling, unlike with an EV.
If it takes only 5 minutes to refill my vehicle then why would I feel compelled to run in to the store to buy a soda while refilling? I'd refuel then buy the soda and still be gone within 15 minutes, assuming there's no line at the cashier. If I know that charging an EV would take me 20 minutes then I would certainly want to be able to take that time to buy a soda. If the time to refill a gasoline vehicle took 20 minutes then we could find ways to make it safe to walk away for that time to buy a soda. S
Re: EV detractors chime in (Score:5, Insightful)
Sez you, who doesn't have an EV. I, however, do have an EV, and I enjoy hassle-free charging at home about once a fortnight, consisting of plugging in the car in the evening (20 seconds) and unplugging in the morning (20 seconds). I can drive for 3 hours at motorway speeds before needing to recharge, which is more than I ever want to do. So for me, one of the manufacturer's purported targets, it works brilliantly on all those counts, thank you very much. Additionally, it's quiet, has loads of oomph off the line which is perfect for town driving, the acceleration is exactly proportional to how much I put my foot down, there's no vibration from the engine, and there's no tailpipe smells / gases / particulates floating round me from my car (and increasingly this is true of the other vehicles on the roads of London too, as EVs take over).
EVs are ace, and it's way past time for you to accept you're clinging to ICE vehicles like an old man clinging to vinyl records or CRT TVs. Not that I expect you'll accept that.
Re: (Score:2)
And don't get me started on those "I drive 1000miles every day and don't need stop for anything" types. Each time the average range of BEVs goes up so does the claimed minimum range need for a BEV to be viable. My Tesla already has more range than my Su
Re: (Score:2)
And then there is all those stupid EV killers. Hydrogen or ammonia, neither of those are in my garage...
I have natural gas run to my garage, and I suspect many homeowners do also since natural gas service is quite common. Well, maybe their natural gas pipes don't run to the garage but getting them that far would be trivial and of minimal cost if done at time of construction, and likely not too expensive or difficult for many existing homes. Having a natural gas heater in garages is relatively common around here because the winters can be brutal and keeping the garage above freezing makes the morning commute
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah they did. CRTs were cheaper for a long while, there were claims they were more reliable, better accuracy, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Risk = frequency *severity. And EV fires are much much less frequent than ICE fires.
it's about range (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is upside down. While it may be crucial for some, for many people, a 200 vs a 250 mile range difference is unimportant. It just means charging every 10 days instead of every 12. Not you, of course, on your mighty Texan roads. But there are millions like me on little urban roads near our suburban houses with offstreet parking and chargers, who go on a 100+ mile trip about three times a year.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I live in London. We have motorways around London, but most people don't use them to travel 200 miles, they're going to St Albans or Milton Keynes or round the M25. As I say, millions of people who only make 100+mile trips three times a year.
Re: (Score:3)
Compliance cars and repairs (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
He made a classic blunder though that is at the root of all those problems: buying a Fiat
Re:Compliance cars and repairs (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
. Here if they could not repair it due to no available battery they would have to replace it with a new car of similar spec, or refund the full purchase value.
That’s what happened, they got about 2 thousand more than the sale value of the vehicle if the battery was working put toward a new car. It did take over three months though and it’s still crazy they couldn’t even fix it and it was likely not major or difficult.
Future battery technology (Score:3)
Tesla battery research group unveils paper on new high-energy-density battery that could last 100 years
- https://electrek.co/2022/05/24... [electrek.co]
So future batteries could last longer than the car.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah there's a lot of incentive to make batteries last longer, doubly so for Tesla as their design paradigms for their future vehicles revolve around having the batteries be part of the structure of the car without their own packaging and so for all intents they would be non-replaceable (I remember Musk announcing this awhile back, not sure if they are utilizing it yet).
The lifespans are already improving over what we had 10 years ago so it should still get better in the next 10 years with new chemistries,
Re: (Score:2)
There is more.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure but lifespans are what this topic is about and are a big primary concern for potential EV buyters. I think if you asked most people today if they would prefer a battery with 400mi range guaranteed to last 10 years or one that last's 5 years with 800mi range most would choose the former.
Also much like the mentioned supercapacitors (would those be considered solid state?) there's plenty of potential future tech on the horizon but Toyota can start gloating about those numbers when we can all buy a car wi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This operates under the assumption the battery is the only thing that causes vehicle replacements when for ICE vehicles this isn't even true. Millions of cars are taken off the road with perfectly working engines. Rust, collisions, interior damage and just the desire to upgrade takes plenty of cars with lifespans off the roads.
Are we really saying auto manufacturers are requires to implement planned obsolescence to maintain their businesses because that's not a battery problem that's a market and capitali
Re: (Score:2)
because that's not a battery problem that's a market and capitalism problem
I thought that was evident in my comment, but sadly I think it’s too soon.
Re: (Score:2)
my bad then if i misread
Planned obsolescense (Score:2)
That might be true with the traditional automakers, but that runs a risk.
Last time the big 3 tried that stuff, literally designing their cars to only last 3 years or so, they got their lunch eaten by the Japanese.
While we've lost a lot of car companies since then, Tesla shows that disruption is still possible, and there's still a lot of car companies out there.
It'd only take one producing good cars with good batteries to kill the competition that are intentionally limiting the lifespan of their products.
Re: (Score:2)
Gee, you don't suppose ,,, (Score:2)
So EVs are warranteed for 8-12 years, but cell phones die after two? Hmmm ...
Re: (Score:2)
EV's take much, much better care of their batteries than Phones do (well, at least Teslas do; early Leaf owners might disagree...).
If Phone manufacturers wanted batteries to last 10 years, they'd give you an option to limit the charge to 80 or 90%, because charging to 100% regularly has significant impacts on battery degradation. Phone manufacturers also push the batteries to the limit - 100% charge on a phone battery might be considered 110% or so for an EV battery.
My Tesla Model 3 is five and a half yea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
An elephant isn't just a bigger mouse, ya know. An EV battery has a sophisticated management system that keeps it within thermal limits, active cooling, etc. It's totally different from a phone battery. It also doesn't get used anywhere near as aggressively.
Gas supply fails (Score:4, Interesting)
So I just arrived in Argentina and I'm going to Zapala with some Argeninean friends.
Guess what, there is a gas shortage in various provinces.
* Cars are queueing up for 10 blocks to get a refill.
* Some stations ration gas to max. 13000 pesos (ca. USD 13).
* Some of my friends have to drive dozens of miles to get a refill or can't get any.
Meanwhile, the electricity network is totally fine.
Gas cars are dead. Good riddance and RIP.
Re: (Score:2)
Outside of the USA, and a few other countries with abnormally low gas prices, it has become too expensive t
Re: (Score:2)
Gas cars are dead. Good riddance and RIP.
Tell that to people in California, Hawaii, and other places around the world that see power outages with some regularity from wildfires, earthquakes, hurricanes/cyclones/whatever, and other causes. Also consider that not every cause would be a force of nature. With no electricity it would be common to see people using their gasoline powered vehicles as a means to shelter in place or get far enough away that they'd find basic services were at least close to normal.
California may have incentives to put sola
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile Hertz is scaling back its ev business because they are expensive to maintain - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news... [msn.com]
While the article (incorrectly) makes that claim, Hertz’s original comments [hertz.com] say the exact opposite: at the bottom of page 4 Hertz specifically says that EV maintenance costs are lower.
Instead, Hertz cited two other problems with their EV fleet:
1) 2x higher cost to repair damage (damage = collisions, scratches, dents, etc., not maintenance)
2) Higher incidence rate of damage
It’s worth taking a moment to note that Hertz says Teslas account for 80% of their EV fleet.
For the higher costs, Hertz cites
Re: (Score:3)