"You Don't Need That Giant Battery"

[Mirak]

Dear Electric Vehicle Owners: You Don’t Need That Giant Battery | WIRED

This article reeks of pinheaded smug elitism. It's also a good example of the new "you should be happy to make do with less" ethos that's always existed among the "intellectual" sphere but has really bloomed in this post-pandemic world.

I think we should strive for abundance, not condemn it. But more practically speaking, I need every damned bit of range I can get my hands on. I live in the midwest. Even with my extended battery, getting from Wichita to Kansas City is a risky proposition in wintertime when my range is reduced by 40%. Sure, I don't need the bigger battery 90% of the time, but I need a car that can also serve me the other 10% of the time. That's like saying "you don't need air conditioning because it's only hot 3 months out of the year." Or "you don't need a roof because it only rains three times a month." Just stupid.

Sponsored

 

[SnBGC]

"Need" is a subjective term.
I get where this is coming from though. We don't need high speed internet either but let's see the author go back to dial-up.

To be fair though....I did just fine with the Focus Electric and it's 33.5 kWh battery and 120 miles of range. I put 25k miles per year on that thing before I traded it for the Mach-E with its giant battery. But guess what? That giant battery liberated me a little bit more and I was enabled to be more productive. I have driven this car 32k miles per year on average so the car apparently is 50% more useful to me.

In light of my real world use case....I would say I need the giant battery.

 

[Mach-Lee]

You Don’t Need That Giant Battery if you live in...[guess where author lives]

I was right.

 

[DYohn]

Largely accurate. Except when you do need it.

 

[Mirak]

You Don’t Need That Giant Battery if you live in...[guess where author lives]

I was right.

Yup. Best part of the article is when the author acknowledges the coastal elitism of his viewpoint…

When a recent New York Times op-ed asked how often people actually used 300-mile battery range, readers responded with indignation. Each person, it seemed, had a routine long-range commitment that mooted the article’s point: an extensive work commute, season football tickets at their alma mater halfway across the state. A 20-minute recharge along the way simply was not within reason. “This is the kind of silly coastal stuff Republicans like to ridicule,” one wrote.

…and then just goes ahead and does it anyway.

 

[phil]

You don't need more than $5,000 in the bank, either. Please remit any excess funds to us at the Internal Revenue Service. We'll make sure it gets to some people who need it more than you do. In our judgment.

 

[AKgrampy]

I do believe that mass adoption will take low cost vehicles which will need smaller batteries unless something changes in battery costs. That being said we, and by that I at least mean I, need a bit more range as there is a lot of nothing between places here in Alaska. Same with a lot of the west. In the future, if I live long enough, I could see myself with a smaller more efficient commuter vehicle with a smaller battery and a second general purpose vehicle with a larger capacity.

 

[Mirak]

If there is demand for 100mi range econoboxes, someone will meet that demand.

 

[satchel prefect]

I'm of the opinion that the state of the art has not yet found the point of diminishing returns for battery size. Capacity vs. efficiency as a function of weight.

We have 2 dual motor EVs in our household: MME Rt1 and EV6 Wind. They are essentially interchangeable in terms of performance and carrying capacity, with each edging out the other here and there (though if we're honest the EV6 is substantially quicker down low, and both trap right around 102).

The EV6 has ~76kwh usable, saving about 200 pounds and reporting 17% better efficiency (4.2 vs 3.6 mi/kwh). Our experience thus far seems to bear out the math, as they seem to have very similar real world range. This might be different in conditions different from our slow-and-go traffic here in the balmy South Florida, disregarding the Kia's heat pump for the sake of comparison.

At the end of the day, a larger, heavier battery will intuitively require more energy to move, so the question remains as to when increasing the battery size no longer contributes to longer range given packaging constraints. And unlike a larger gas tank, that larger battery burdens the motors all the time regardless of state of charge.

Having said that, I'm not against larger batteries. I suspect at some point less can be more, though for different reasons than stated in the article.

 

[Fins160]

I agree with the author that the idea one “needs” huge battery range is one of the excuses for individuals not choosing an EV, mostly due to lack of information, leading many times to grossly over-estimate range needs. I have heard countless times from friends and family that they are “waiting” for 300 mile range. When I start counting the large number of EVs that have that, they raise the bar to 400 miles, even though they haven’t traveled more than 200 miles in one shot in the last decade. They don’t have any idea that there are DCFC chargers all over our state (AZ) and growing fast. They don’t realize you can charge from a 120v outlet at home for most use cases. They don’t realize many hotels have L2 chargers that can charge you up overnight. Then I hear the misnomer that batteries need to be replaced every few years for $20k a pop, and I show them the examples from Tesloop and others of Model S batteries going 300k miles with only 7% degradation.

The reality is that there will be a large number of EVs coming to market with 40-50kwh battery packs, especially with some of the advances in fast charging. And they will meet the needs of a very large percentage of the American population.

 

[phil]

...the idea one “needs” huge battery range is one of the excuses for individuals not choosing an EV...

Why would these individuals need or want any such "excuse"? Do they suffer under the jackboot of an oppressive totalitarian regime that would deny them the right to buy the car they prefer?

 

[Mirak]

I agree with the author that the idea one “needs” huge battery range is one of the excuses for individuals not choosing an EV, mostly due to lack of information, leading many times to grossly over-estimate range needs.

Respectfully, this post is a good example of the “EV Sugar Coating” I sometimes hear among EV enthusiasts. It discounts real world needs (and preferences) and glosses over the inconveniences. Let’s take this piece by piece…

I have heard countless times from friends and family that they are “waiting” for 300 mile range. When I start counting the large number of EVs that have that, they raise the bar to 400 miles, even though they haven’t traveled more than 200 miles in one shot in the last decade.

First, we all know that 300 miles of range might be more like 180 in the winter. Maybe even 150 with a bad head wind. And you really think there are a lot of people who never need to take a 200 mile road trip?

They don’t have any idea that there are DCFC chargers all over our state (AZ) and growing fast. They don’t realize you can charge from a 120v outlet at home for most use cases.

DCFC is still somewhat sparse, and there is still a relatively outsized risk the charger you arrive at will be inoperable or slow. Sugar coating. L1 for most use cases? Sugar coating.

They don’t realize many hotels have L2 chargers that can charge you up overnight.

The vast majority of hotels don’t. And the ones that do often have just one or two that might be occupied. Sugar coating.

EVs are great. I love mine. But I’m willing to put up with a lot of crap that most people aren’t. Every EV owner has a story, often many stories, of having to do something weird/inconvenient to charge. We need to be frank about the pros and cons.

 

[JCHLi]

99% I don't need a 1 ton pickup, but one day I may want to haul something, so I'll just use a F-350 for my daily commute...

Kind of the same thinking...

 

[Mirak]

99% I don't need a 1 ton pickup, but one day I may want to haul something, so I'll just use a F-350 for my daily commute...

Kind of the same thinking...

A closer analogy would be “I need to haul something 5-10x a year, and I don’t want two vehicles.” And that would be pretty reasonable IMHO.

 

[JCHLi]

A closer analogy would be “I need to haul something 5-10x a year, and I don’t want two vehicles.” And that would be pretty reasonable IMHO.

Perhaps, still not a "need" but rather a want.

Of course with either analogy you cannot just make extra stops to turn your small pickup into a full sized pickup. but you could use a smaller battery and slightly inconvenience yourself a few times a year.

Sponsored