Electricars

Perhaps you've seen the recent movie (or at least seen ads for) Who Killed The Electric Car?, which from what I understand suggests a conspiracy to deny US drivers of a clean, efficient car.  A few weeks ago, Ralph Bennett offered what appeared to be a pretty compelling rebuttal of the film's premise, and discussed some major reasons why the car was basically a non starter:

(Electric cars) have succeeded as purpose-built vehicles -- fork lifts, golf carts, "city cars," airport shuttles and the like. But they have never become the car for the open road, the let's-drive-over-to-the-shore-for-the-weekend car.

Why?

Let's go over this one more time, class: Range. Range is the problem. Electric cars do not have sufficient range to be the practical, versatile, every day car most people want.

They don't have range because they operate on batteries -- those mysterious sealed devices that convert chemicals into stored electrical energy. And batteries can't store enough energy to keep an EV going more than 50 or 60 miles, or in rare cases (with experienced drivers and the latest and very expensive nickel-metal-hydride battery packs) 150 miles, before they have to be recharged.

Put it this way. I can drive my wife's big Lexus 55 miles on two gallons (about 16 pounds) of gasoline that cost me six bucks. An electric car like the one featured here could travel the same distance by exhausting its 1000-pound battery pack (lead-acid, costing $2000) which would then have to be recharged. The recharging would take about four hours. I could replace the two gallons of gasoline in about 30 seconds, but I wouldn't have to because my wife's car can easily go another 450 highway cruising miles on a tank of gas.

I have always been fascinated by electric cars. And I appreciate the enthusiasm of EV partisans. But, frankly, I'm a little tired of hearing people brag about heroic 120 or 200 mile trips in their EVs. And how they only had to wait three or four hours before their batteries were charged up enough to go another 100 miles, provided they kept a feather foot.

Sounds compelling, but again, not having seen the movie (it may have addressed this), I'll remain on the sidelines.  Now a new Bay Area startup, Tesla Motors, is getting attention for selling an electric car.  It's even been mentioned in tech blogs like SiliconBeat for having raised VC money from the Google guys.  Certainly looks pretty sexy.  So will the conspiracy to deny you a clean car be busted by idealist techies?  Not likely.  Here's some numbers on it:

The relevant facts:

1. Range: 250 miles per charge.
2. Recharge time: 3 1/2 hours with a 240 volt/70 ampere source, longer with ordinary house current.
3. Configuration: Sports car.
4. Price: $85,000-$100,000.
5. Operating cost: 2.6 cents/mile if electricity is 13 cents/kwh.

If gas costs $3/gallon, the per mile cost for a vehicle averaging 25 mpg is 12 cents, so the electric vehicle saves less than ten cents per mile. If we assume a 100,000 mile lifetime, that's less than ten thousand dollars, which doesn't make up for much of the cost difference between the electric car and a conventional vehicle.

The range is sufficient for many people's needs, although not all. But a sports car does not have to carry many passengers or much luggage, leaving more space for batteries. That suggests that a sedan would either be much heavier and more expensive or have a substantially shorter range.

So if this is the best a niche house like Tesla Motors can do, it certainly doesn't seem like a sinister cabal is standing in the way of electric car -- instead it looks like the biggest challenge remains the laws of physics.

Comments

[Reinhard]

I agree, that the physics are tough at the moment, but I am sure it will come one way or the other. There are just so many possibilities, and once a market gets going, it could develop fast:
-Li based batteries, much lighter than Ni
-Renting/swapping of batteries for longer ranges.
-Charging overnight which helps the grid and is cheaper.
-Charging at work with solar panels, which are almost available with good EROEI (energy return on energy invested) and ROI (return on investment)
-Motors mounted at wheels, and no transmission, drive-train, catalytic converter, etc.
-Like hybrid, no usage when stopping, or even recycle breaking work (in high traffic areas)
-Much less air-pollution incl. greenhouse gases.
-No ground pollution through spills.
-Electricity on board for other applications
-Combination with any generator(e.g. natural gas) or fuel-cell possible.
-Cost of batteries could go from $40,000 to $4,000 approaching material costs.

[Frank]

Regarding the first rebuttal- to say going from a cost of 12 cents to 2.5 cents per mile is less than a 10 cent saying is very misleading. the fact is that it represents nearly an 80% reduction. 200 million drivers (which is what we have) x 12,000 miles per year x $0.095 savings per mile is a $228 billion dollar savings. Since much of that money ends up in angry hands, that conversion along would have a huge impact on the war on terror.

My second point is that the real question to ask is does a two worker family need two cars that can travel indefinitely on gas fillups. Or would they be reasonably well served with one commuter car and one commuter/distance car, planes and trains? Most people do not travel more than 200 per day. And almost all two driver families don't ever have a need for both of them to drive 200 miles each to different places on the same day.

Finanlly, you have to accept the fact that most of our major concerns revolve around oil, gas, and nuclear energy. I am not an environmentalist, though I appreciate clean air and water. But we will be a bankrupt nation staying with those energy sources. And bankruptancy affects your freedom, so you should care. At least stop pointing out that only a $10 cent difference won't make a difference because that difference matters a lot.

[Jay Walker]

While I support EV in theory, but as the article points out, they have a long way to go before becoming as versatile as gas vehicles.

And while many may think they're doing the environment a big favour, the sad fact is that more and more marginal electicity is being generated by burning fossil fuels: coal, natural gas, etc.

So, while the net effect currently isn't exactly zero, without generating electricity from friendly means, eg wind and solar, then these vehicles aren't likely to do a big favour to the environment.

Jay Walker
The Confused Capitalist

[Reinhard]

I agree that it would be nice to have electricity generation from friendly means, but even without, it would be a big plus. Take natural gas, one of the cleanest fuels (and abundant too, just hard to transport). Burn in the power-plant: ~55% efficient (combined cycle), low pollution. Burn in a car engine: 20% efficient (average load). That difference gives you something to work with. Sure batteries also cause pollution and there is some charge/discharge loss, but near term it would still come out ahead.

[Norman]

I have a continuing argument with a liberal friend of mine how the current spate of 'documentaries' are really just propaganda unlike in intent from the master, Josef Goebels, but not unlike in terms of subtrefuge as we don't see the other side. Well, he's planning a trip to Europe and looking at website renderings of accomodations. I said, "that's good you get to see just what you will be staying in". With this he's not so naive and he says, "they only show you what they want you to see". I proudly retorted, " just like "An Inconvient Truth" don't you think?" QED.

[Matt]

I've heard more & more republicans bring up people like the Nazis and Goebels, etc. Why is this? Is your argument so weak that you need the fire of the Nazis on your side to make it more compelling?

What on earth do the Nazis have to do with an electric car movie?

What one earth do the Nazis have to do with our war in Iraq? (Rumsfield yesterday had to say that our enemies are like the Nazis over there.)

Give it a break!

Matt

[attic insulation]

Visible light is the sun, in the form of a photon before it hits the solar panel. Silicon solar panel, the photon has been asked of semiconductor material. Corresponds to the photon energy is then used to excite the molecule electron semiconductors. The total freedom of movement of electrons in the form of current in a closed circuit.

[chanel outlet]

What one earth do the Nazis have to do with our war in Iraq? (Rumsfield yesterday had to say that our enemies are like the Nazis over there.)

[UGG Shoes]

i love you post

[UGG Shoes]

i love you post

[Best way to invest Money]

Cars these days are becoming more sophisticated with every new launch. The latest I read about was about the new Chevy volt and some hybrid cars and now we have a car that runs on RAM and water! Google too have a surprise on the way.