Battery tech progressing at a rapid pace

[dbsb3233]

My sister's almost 20 year old Honda was hit by a truck (at very low speed), economically totaled, but she got over $8000 for it.

Insurance varies depending on whether it's an Actual Value policy or a Replacement Cost policy (which costs more and pays more). My stepmom had that situation last year. Accident that economically totalled her 11yo car (even though it was still drivable, albeit looking over the crunched hood) and paid out $16k. I was surprised since blue book value was closer to $12k. Then I realized why... she'd been paying more for a replacement cost policy for decades (she didn't even know).

https://www.carchex.com/research-ce...ash-value-vs-replacement-cost-auto-insurance/

Early 2023 was better than 2024 though. Values have dropped.

Sponsored

 

[Peugfan]

In an ICE, I don't beed a break until after my 10-12 hours of driving is done. It's fill up every 600 miles for 5-10 minutes and get back on the road. So much of my travel time in an EV is wasted not driving.

Do you have a camel kidney/bladder transplant? They recycle much of the bad stuff.

 

[mkhuffman]

Do you have a camel kidney/bladder transplant? They recycle much of the bad stuff.

My brother carries a bottle, and pees in it while driving. I asked him if he has accidentally taken a swig from it. Regardless, you don't need a bladder of steel to drive long beyond the pee point.

 

[mkhuffman]

7-10 years is a long time - esp in technology.

Yes, but it isn't a long time when it comes to manufacturing at a large scale.

You may have a great idea for a new battery, but producing it isn't easy and takes a lot of investment to be profitable. You have to build a significant infrastructure, including facilities and equipment, and that takes a long time. Years.

Look at Rivian, who is using existing technology and losing billions of dollars a year. How long did it take them to produce the vehicles they are selling now? They designed them years, freaking years, ago. And the R2? How long have they been working on that? Look at Lucid with the Gravity. Will it really be mass produced in a year? Maybe. But they have been working on that for years also.

A great idea does not mean it will make it to the market and be successfully mass produced.

 

[Mach1E]

Yes, but it isn't a long time when it comes to manufacturing at a large scale.

You may have a great idea for a new battery, but producing it isn't easy and takes a lot of investment to be profitable. You have to build a significant infrastructure, including facilities and equipment, and that takes a long time. Years.

Look at Rivian, who is using existing technology and losing billions of dollars a year. How long did it take them to produce the vehicles they are selling now? They designed them years, freaking years, ago. And the R2? How long have they been working on that? Look at Lucid with the Gravity. Will it really be mass produced in a year? Maybe. But they have been working on that for years also.

A great idea does not mean it will make it to the market and be successfully mass produced.

Exactly.

For example, CDs (compact discs) were invented in 1979. But the tech? Patent applied for in 1966. And CD players first really hit the markets in 1983 but cost over $1000!

I purchased my first CD in 1992. That’s also the first year that CD sales surpassed cassette tape sales.

Even if inventors come up with an idea it takes a very long time to reach mass production and adoption.

 

[dbsb3233]

Another point... Stops and charges aren't the same thing. All charges are stops, but all stops aren't charges. Just because someone may stop to pee, or eat somewhere they really like, or have somewhere to shop or sightsee along the way on a road trip doesn't mean that's where the DCFC is.

Sometimes it is, and if it has what we need within walking distance, great! But that's not always the case. And that's where more range matters. Just because we may need to stop for a couple of minutes to pee doesn't automatically mean that's a charging stop.

 

[ChehRob]

Does anyone suppose that 2023 batteries were just incorporating most of the advances from 2016? And likewise 2025 batteries advances from 2018? etc.

 

[Mach1E]

Does anyone suppose that 2023 batteries were just incorporating most of the advances from 2016? And likewise 2025 batteries advances from 2018? etc.

Probably not too far from the truth.

The problem with battery tech is that we are dealing with physics. You can only cram so much energy into a small space, charge and discharge it so fast, deal with so much heat and then somehow make it do it reliably and cheap enough to buy.

It’s a tall order. Size, weight, cost, heat, speed and reliability. If any one of those things goes badly it is a failure.

 

[spgordon57]

While I agree we can simply say "Lithuim-Ion in everything", I think that's too simplistic. Battery Tech for cars, taken as a whole (cell chemistry, energy density (both volumetric and weight), cell design, packaging, etc.) has been "improving" at roughly 8-10% per year for over a decade. Most of the improvements are small, but taken together, batteries are quite a bit better now than they were in the mid-teens. Solid State, though it seems to be quantum leap, is really part of this overall picture. IMHO, the 2 thresholds that we need to cross to make this viable for "everyone" are 350 true EPA range (obv. lower in winter) and 20 minute avg charging. When we cross those 2 thresholds, we'll see the uptake accelerate. I figure that's about 2 years away, and hopefully our charging infrastructure will have caught up by then. I don't think its all about solid state, or any other specific technology - vast majority of people don't care. Whatever tech or combination of tech that gets us there (that doesn't result $75K+ vehicle prices) is what we need.

Agree but I think the mental threshold for most consumers is 400+ miles on a full charge, plus much more convenient, reliable and fast public charging than today. I also agree with many posts that most of the claims of a quantum leap being just around the corner is mostly happy talk - even from Toyota, saying they’ll offer 700-900 miles of range with 4-5 years. Believe it when I see it.

 

[jeffMachE]

Agree but I think the mental threshold for most consumers is 400+ miles on a full charge, plus much more convenient, reliable and fast public charging than today.

This is an interesting debate point. I agree and disagree at the same time. Agree because people have a mental model of ICE that they try to apply to EV's, and that makes Joe/Jane Average nervous. Disagree because (with the huge caveat of having garage to charge in) when people actually use an EV, they don't need anything near 400 miles. 2 big exceptions are road trips and towing. Road trip EV charging is rocky now, but it's improving pretty rapidly (and will accelerate due to both Tesla opening up and Nevi stations coming on-line). I'm hopeful (not predicting, but hopeful) that road trip EV charging will become fairly mundane in the next 2-3 years.

I have no idea how the towing question will be answered.

But the biggest issue I have no clue about is how to accommodate people who don't have a dedicated garage to charge in. That could be the real tipping point vs. anything else we are debating. Does a 400 mile range EV eliminate this problem? Maybe. But if 400 eliminates the problem, I'd profer that 350 does as well.

(BTW, I'm curious - I really don't know - what percentage of people actually drive long distances. I'm not interested in anecdotes; I'd like to see real data. Literally if you take a random sample of 1000 drivers, what percentage of them have driven more than 200 miles in a day in the previous 12 months.)

 

[Mach1E]

This is an interesting debate point. I agree and disagree at the same time. Agree because people have a mental model of ICE that they try to apply to EV's, and that makes Joe/Jane Average nervous. Disagree because (with the huge caveat of having garage to charge in) when people actually use an EV, they don't need anything near 400 miles. 2 big exceptions are road trips and towing. Road trip EV charging is rocky now, but it's improving pretty rapidly (and will accelerate due to both Tesla opening up and Nevi stations coming on-line). I'm hopeful (not predicting, but hopeful) that road trip EV charging will become fairly mundane in the next 2-3 years.

I have no idea how the towing question will be answered.

But the biggest issue I have no clue about is how to accommodate people who don't have a dedicated garage to charge in. That could be the real tipping point vs. anything else we are debating. Does a 400 mile range EV eliminate this problem? Maybe. But if 400 eliminates the problem, I'd profer that 350 does as well.

(BTW, I'm curious - I really don't know - what percentage of people actually drive long distances. I'm not interested in anecdotes; I'd like to see real data. Literally if you take a random sample of 1000 drivers, what percentage of them have driven more than 200 miles in a day in the previous 12 months.)

400 miles sounds great! If you actually got 400 usable miles…….

400 EPA rated miles gets……
lowered 20% if you drive on the highway
Lowered 30-50% if it’s cold
Lowered 40% if you recharge 20-80% like you’re supposed to on a road trip.

So how many actual highway miles do you even get between charges on a road trip with a 400 mile EPA rating? 200 if you’re lucky.

 

[mkhuffman]

This is an interesting debate point. I agree and disagree at the same time. Agree because people have a mental model of ICE that they try to apply to EV's, and that makes Joe/Jane Average nervous. Disagree because (with the huge caveat of having garage to charge in) when people actually use an EV, they don't need anything near 400 miles. 2 big exceptions are road trips and towing. Road trip EV charging is rocky now, but it's improving pretty rapidly (and will accelerate due to both Tesla opening up and Nevi stations coming on-line). I'm hopeful (not predicting, but hopeful) that road trip EV charging will become fairly mundane in the next 2-3 years.

I have no idea how the towing question will be answered.

But the biggest issue I have no clue about is how to accommodate people who don't have a dedicated garage to charge in. That could be the real tipping point vs. anything else we are debating. Does a 400 mile range EV eliminate this problem? Maybe. But if 400 eliminates the problem, I'd profer that 350 does as well.

(BTW, I'm curious - I really don't know - what percentage of people actually drive long distances. I'm not interested in anecdotes; I'd like to see real data. Literally if you take a random sample of 1000 drivers, what percentage of them have driven more than 200 miles in a day in the previous 12 months.)

I think a 400 mile range BEV really helps those who cannot charge at home because it reduces the number of times they need to find a public charger. The longer they can drive without charging, the better.

I really doubt the public charging situation will improve in 2-3 years, but it is definitely going to be better for us when we all get our NACS adapters.

 

[dbsb3233]

This is an interesting debate point. I agree and disagree at the same time. Agree because people have a mental model of ICE that they try to apply to EV's, and that makes Joe/Jane Average nervous. Disagree because (with the huge caveat of having garage to charge in) when people actually use an EV, they don't need anything near 400 miles. 2 big exceptions are road trips and towing. Road trip EV charging is rocky now, but it's improving pretty rapidly (and will accelerate due to both Tesla opening up and Nevi stations coming on-line). I'm hopeful (not predicting, but hopeful) that road trip EV charging will become fairly mundane in the next 2-3 years.

I have no idea how the towing question will be answered.

But the biggest issue I have no clue about is how to accommodate people who don't have a dedicated garage to charge in. That could be the real tipping point vs. anything else we are debating. Does a 400 mile range EV eliminate this problem? Maybe. But if 400 eliminates the problem, I'd profer that 350 does as well.

(BTW, I'm curious - I really don't know - what percentage of people actually drive long distances. I'm not interested in anecdotes; I'd like to see real data. Literally if you take a random sample of 1000 drivers, what percentage of them have driven more than 200 miles in a day in the previous 12 months.)

400 miles for the "no home charging" people only makes the problem is little less worse. Most of the negatives still exist. Full-time DCFC with no home charging is:

(a) 3x-4x more expensive than residential rates, negating the fuel savings that help offset the higher purchase price.
(b) a pain in the ass vs gas refueling (30 minutes versus 3, and relatively scarce and thus father away on average).
(c) not good for other EV drivers as it ties up precious and limited DCFC spots (that cost a fortune to install).

I would still not recommend a BEV to anyone that doesn't have L2 charging where they sleep.

 

[johnmark]

400 miles sounds great! If you actually got 400 usable miles…….

400 EPA rated miles gets……
lowered 20% if you drive on the highway
Lowered 30-50% if it’s cold
Lowered 40% if you recharge 20-80% like you’re supposed to on a road trip.

So how many actual highway miles do you even get between charges on a road trip with a 400 mile EPA rating? 200 if you’re lucky.

300+ usable miles is about the magic number for me, so total range probably needs to be at least 450-500. It will probably be 4-5 years before that's commonplace.

 

[jeffMachE]

Not trying to pick a fight, but *my* threshold is 3-4 hours driving before I want to stop and at least stretch my back and legs. @~70 mph, that means 240-280 miles. I'm never driving 400 miles without a stop. And if I'm going to stop, then I'm going to charge the car.

Sponsored