Electric Car Economics

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Your going after it logically, and if logic is applied I think your right.
But currently vast majority of US auto sales are in SUV’s and Pickup trucks, which are completely illogical vehicles for 90% of the people buying them, so why would these people become logical if the power plant is electrical as opposed to ICE?
Think one of Fords first EV’s will be an F-150? Probably have half the range and four times the battery, let’s see.

However if we applied logic, then we would be driving ICE cars getting 70+ MPG right now, third gen Prius came out in 2010. Toyota could easily have pushed the then current Prius to 70 MPG, but instead built a larger, heavier Prius with a larger and more powerful ICE and kept the 50 MPG.
Prius was set to become its own vehicle line similar to the way Lexus was with small work vans etc. All returning phenomenal mileage, that was to be there hallmark, great mileage and environmentally low impact. But people wanted SUV’s so they went with what made money, and built V8 powered SUV’s.

Interestingly Toyota hasn’t jumped on the EV bandwagon, I don’t know why, but it’s curious.

I think you're underestimating the power of the automakers and their ad agencies to drive demand towards the more profitable SUVs and trucks, and the perverse incentives provided by their exemption from CAFE standards, and inexpensive gas. (I was once part of an auto advertising company. Don't hate me )

Businesses are ahead of consumers in adopting alternatives like hybrids, natural gas or propane, or electric fleets. They do so mainly for economic reasons, though some are also draping themselves in the mantle of eco-virtue for marketing reasons.

As always, reality will eventually overcome both emotion and logic. It's almost a certainty that the economics of sustainable energy will continue to improve, and that there will finally be agreement that we can't continue to rely on fossil fuels to the same extent, and the necessary transitions will happen. The oil and auto industries are already starting to plan for it. This is the last decade of the dominance of the internal combustion engine in vehicles. Get your convertible Mustang NOW.

Re Toyota and EVs - they have an interesting explanation. Basically, it's their way of best using a limited battery supply at this time.

[a64pilot]

As far as automakers being the driving force that influences what people want to drive, I don’t think they are. They wish they were, cause then they could manufacturer the same vehicle year after year with no changes and we would still buy them. They of course have an effect, but the US public has always wanted big, powerful vehicles that make them feel important, it’s always been that way, even back in the 20’s. If you had money , you wanted a Packard or similar, not a model A.
The reason SUV’s and Pickups are so profitable is because they are in demand and therefore they can be proved higher than sedans that aren’t in demand. There is nothing inherently different to an SUV that makes it cheaper to manufacture, it’s not, but it’s demand means that the price can be jacked up and that makes it more profitable.

The US driver won’t ever become more efficient until economics drive them there, in the 70’s small Japanese cars sold well. Not because people. Wanted them, they still wanted their full size Vista Cruisers or whatever, they just couldn’t afford them due to the price of fuel.

Well fuel is relatively cheap now, and people want big and powerful so that the look important again.

[a64pilot]

Japan as a Nation has embraced Hydrogen, something that all the “experts” decry as foolish and wasteful, but something in the back of my head keep telling me that the Japanese aren’t stupid, perhaps they know something that the “experts” don’t.

[Go Wildcats]

Quick and familiar form of filling up utilizing an existing network of stations helps fuel cell appeal. Additionally, the ability to power your house from your car is appealing to many.

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Japan as a Nation has embraced Hydrogen, something that all the “experts” decry as foolish and wasteful, but something in the back of my head keep telling me that the Japanese aren’t stupid, perhaps they know something that the “experts” don’t.

[a64pilot]

You can power your house from your electric car too.
Many have postulated it as a good use of electric cars, their battery banks being available as a storage medium for when excess generation is available and of course to feed the grid when it’s not, or to relive the pressure on the grid by powering the house.

One assume that of course you would buy at it a lower rate and its excess and sell it back at a higher rate when there is a shortage as you would have to incentive people to make it happen, but as more and more renewables come on line, the need for some sort of storage capacity becomes more important.
Of course if power becomes variable price wise becomes more common, the car could power the house when power was expensive and charge when it wasn’t and not backfeed the grid but accomplish nearly the same thing.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

As far as automakers being the driving force that influences what people want to drive, I don’t think they are. They wish they were, cause then they could manufacturer the same vehicle year after year with no changes and we would still buy them.
(cough - F 150. Jeep Wrangler - cough. with yearly tweaks, but still...)

They of course have an effect, but the US public has always wanted big, powerful vehicles that make them feel important, it’s always been that way, even back in the 20’s. If you had money , you wanted a Packard or similar, not a model A.
The reason SUV’s and Pickups are so profitable is because they are in demand and therefore they can be proved higher than sedans that aren’t in demand. There is nothing inherently different to an SUV that makes it cheaper to manufacture, it’s not, but it’s demand means that the price can be jacked up and that makes it more profitable.

The US driver won’t ever become more efficient until economics drive them there, in the 70’s small Japanese cars sold well. Not because people. Wanted them, they still wanted their full size Vista Cruisers or whatever, they just couldn’t afford them due to the price of fuel.

Well fuel is relatively cheap now, and people want big and powerful so that the look important again.

The Japanese and Koreans own the economy car market. The upmarket sedan markets are mostly owned by the Europeans and Japanese. The one area where the American makers dominate the category is trucks and SUVs. so that's where they concentrate their efforts. There's a reason the consumer trucks and SUVs are all injected with testoserone and chromed and painted like your favourite HotWheels. About the only thing they haven't tried is smearing the hoods with Nutella.

[FlyingScot]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

The Japanese and Koreans own the economy car market. The upmarket sedan markets are mostly owned by the Europeans and Japanese. The one area where the American makers dominate the category is trucks and SUVs. so that's where they concentrate their efforts. There's a reason the consumer trucks and SUVs are all injected with testoserone and chromed and painted like your favourite HotWheels. About the only thing they haven't tried is smearing the hoods with Nutella.

The only reason the North American auto makers own the truck and SUV market is 'chicken tax' import duties.

25% tariff will put a damper on the competition.

Sprinter vans are an excellent example. They build them in Germany, test them, disassemble them, ship to SC, USA, reassemble, test and then send to the dealers to sell to the public. Cheaper than paying the 25% tax. The passenger versions are exempt, I had a 2002, and much preferred that it wasn't taken apart after it was built.

[Go Wildcats]

That 25% isn't just for passenger trucks. Medium duty and up trucks as well get the treatment. It's partly why our commercial vehicles are so far behind in tech and safety.

[a64pilot]

The tax thing has been dodged forever.
The original Toyota trucks back I guess in the 70’s arrived in California with the bed removed. Four bolts and plug in one wiring harness and it was “assembled in America” and no tax.
My Brother was Mayor of our small town for a couple of years, he went to visit the Kawasaki Jet Ski “factory” in Dothan Alabama as part of that.
He said in the “factory” they take the engine out of one box and the hull from another, install the engine and call it built in America and got all kinds of tax breaks and incentives for building a plant in the US.

There is a big KIA plant in Alabama now, at least they are more honest and call it an assembly plant, although I believe the assembly is rather extensive and includes a lot of fabrication, painting etc. it’s not like the Jet Ski plant was. But it is an assembly plant with the engines and transmissions etc arriving from Korea.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by FlyingScot

The only reason the North American auto makers own the truck and SUV market is 'chicken tax' import duties.

25% tariff will put a damper on the competition.

... you're right. I can't believe I forgot about that.

[stevensuf]

Is no one thinking, well the oil wont last forever.....


I like the hydrogen idea, much easier than batteries for storage, solar is cheaper
than grid nowadays and all we need for hydrogen is water, yes difficult to store etc etc, but i think it will be much cheaper than batteries, now where are those megafarad supercapacitors to eliminate batteries....


Perhaps zero point energy will be used one day, only if hell breaks lose... Not great for the guys at the top if we all had infinite free energy. I do wonder just
how much is suppressed.


The patents for high efficiency solar panels were suppressed from the 60s to the 80s under the national security banner.

[Go Wildcats]

They are also taxed, 15%, for "Gliders" - think rolling chassis'. Made in America is determined by the sum of USA parts, not necessarily point of assembly. Lastly, no automotive manufacturer is in the true sense of the word. Nearly all parts are sourced through suppliers. In fact, most manufacturers utilize a third party to inventory and deliver to the plant "just in time" for each foot print. Hell, Jeep is an Italian brand.

Originally Posted by a64pilot

The tax thing has been dodged forever.
The original Toyota trucks back I guess in the 70’s arrived in California with the bed removed. Four bolts and plug in one wiring harness and it was “assembled in America” and no tax.
My Brother was Mayor of our small town for a couple of years, he went to visit the Kawasaki Jet Ski “factory” in Dothan Alabama as part of that.
He said in the “factory” they take the engine out of one box and the hull from another, install the engine and call it built in America and got all kinds of tax breaks and incentives for building a plant in the US.

There is a big KIA plant in Alabama now, at least they are more honest and call it an assembly plant, although I believe the assembly is rather extensive and includes a lot of fabrication, painting etc. it’s not like the Jet Ski plant was. But it is an assembly plant with the engines and transmissions etc arriving from Korea.

[lordgeoff]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

So, you don't still don't get the concept of 'baseload', or realize how ridiculous the non-term "baseload grid" is. Don't feel bad, not everyone's an EE or has bothered to read up on it.

The current capacity of the Australian electrical system is 50,000 megawatts (MW). The Tesla battery recently installed there can supply 100 MW. So.... how much power could 1000 such stations provide? (Hint 1000 x 100 MW). Of course provided there's enough primary generation (of any type, including renewables) to keep those batteries charged.

Not sure where to start with you Lake.
Suggest first up "read up" on the difference between MWh and MW.
I can do the calculations for you Lake but the 100MWh Horndale battery would run the South Australian Grid for about 4 minutes.
But of course it will never be used to run the Baseload Grid.
Its primary purpose is to bring the rubbish Hornsdale Windfarm output up to Grid quality.
Your comment about 1,000 Elon/Horndale batteries.....?
Again I can do the numbers but you would be talking about $100Billion for backup which would be about 1,000 X 4 minutes in SA. (Doubt if it could be technically done anyway)
Making the ROI work on that little project would be a challenge.
Hint SA annual electricity input to the Baseload Grid is about 15,000 GBh.Not sure if that includes imported electricity of rooftop stuff.
National 50,00GB you quote probably relates to the theoretical capacity of the bits and pieces that make up the Baseload Grid nationally. The baseload Grid gets about 180,000 GBh annually.
Maybe also "read up" on Nameplate Capacity while you are researching.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by lordgeoff

Not sure where to start with you Lake.

Best idea - don't.

There's no such thing as a "baseload grid". There's a power distribution grid, and there's base load generation capacity, and there's peak load generation capacity.


That's all I'm giving you; the rest you need to puzzle out on your own.

[lordgeoff]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Best idea - don't.

There's no such thing as a "baseload grid". There's a power distribution grid, and there's base load generation capacity, and there's peak load generation capacity.


That's all I'm giving you; the rest you need to puzzle out on your own.

Pleased to see you have stopped digging the hole. How did the "read up on" go?
Anyhow. Did some quick calculations to assist you.
Should be reasonably correct but no promises.
First up Lake “read up” on the difference between “MWh” and “MW” and then come back to the thread?
HINT.
The Hornsdale Battery Reserve has storage capacity of 100MWh (actually 129MWh but let’s use 100MWh for simplicity).
This means the battery does not generate any electricity it merely stores in this case enough electricity to provide 100MW for 1 hour or variations thereof.
Now Lake you said our "electrical system" is 50,000 MW which I presume you mean name plate capacity of the various generating components of the Grid.
Just as an fyi the actual electricity generation in Australia is about 180,000 GWh or 180Million MWh.
Generators rarely operate to their nameplate particularly Windmills and Solar. (Daylight/night time/ No wind) so lets compare apples with apples and accept the electricity generated into the South Australian Grid is about 13,000GWh over a year. Not sure if that includes imported electricity or rooftop solar generation. Anyhow 13,000GWh is good enough for this exercise.
So 13,000GWh is 13,000,000MWh or 35,000MWh per day or 1,500MWh each hour.
So during a SA Blackout the Hornsdale Power Reserve battery can provide the Baseload Grid with enough electricity to keep it running for about 4 minutes. (1,500/100 is 1/15th of an hour or 4 minutes)
So say we want enough Hornsdale batterys scattered around South Australia to run the Grid for say a 4 Hr Blackout we would need to have 60 Hornsdales.
So Lake. Lets look at the cost of 60 Hornsdales? Assuming Elon does the same deal and infrastructure for each of the Horndales and s is the same it would cost 60 X $AUD100Million or $AUD6Billion. Now for those $'s you could have a Snowy Pumped Hydro twice. Or a large HELE that can produce Baseload 24/7/365 for 50 years.
..........all to supply standby power for 4 hours only in South Australia.
Now Lake you have suggested 1,000 Hornsby Battery Reserves. So your solution is going to cost 1,000 X $AUD100Million = $AUD100 Billion. All to supply 4,000 minutes of Baseload Grid. $100Billion for about 2 weeks of standby electricity and only for South Australia.
Good luck developing an ROI on that investment.
Oh and Lake. These batteries would need to be replaced around every 10-20 years or so.
And yes theoretically any electricity supply can recharge a battery.
If they are connected to the Baseload Grid.
Except of course during a Blackout.....
Or Solar generation at night......
Or Wind generation when it’s not windy......
The irony is the Baseload Grid, mostly Coal and other Fossil Fuels, already produce enough Grid quality electricity to meet day to day needs in Australia (plus a buffer supply) including Peak Loads.
Anyway Lake. Come back to the discussion when you have “read up” on that curly one, the difference between MWh and MW.