Posted on 11/25/2015 5:07:47 AM PST by thackney
In the next 60 months the automotive industry will see more change than in the last 60 years. European car manufacturers should commit to electric cars now or Europe will be in economic trouble
Once in a while a new technology comes along that profoundly changes the way humans relate to energy and transport. Wheels, steam engines and airplanes are all step changes that put humanity on a new trajectory. When I first drove the full electric Nissan Leaf back in 2011, I realized I was sitting in such a technological breakthrough.
An internal combustion engine peaks at ~30% efficiency. This is the result of a century of continuous improvement and trillions of dollars in research and development. The room for improvement that's left in combustion engines is minimal. Yet there I was, driving the first generation of a car that comfortably hit 85-90% efficiency! Immediately I understood the tremendous potential of the electric car: fast acceleration, no noxious emissions, three times as energy efficient -- and it could be driven on pure sunlight.
Since the introduction of the Nissan Leaf, more electric cars have hit the market. But this is just the beginning of a massive shift from fossil fuels and combustion engines to electric cars powered by renewable energy. At Fastned we call this the Autowende.
Here's why I think the European automotive industry has to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine and put all their effort and funds behind the electric revolution.
Combustion engines cannot compete with electric motors
As battery prices continue to fall and more people start to appreciate electric cars, the internal combustion engine and the traditional European car manufacturers are facing the perfect storm. They have to comply with ever stricter emission regulations and deal with a changing public attitude towards exhaust emissions.
There are three reasons why I believe electric motors are the future.
1. 100% Electric is the new normal for "Freude am fahren"
"We're a V-12 engine company. Project that into the future. Do I go the way of the rest of the industry and downsize the engine? Do I see Aston Martin with a three-cylinder engine? God forbid. You've got to do something radical. Electric power gives you that power. It gives you that torque."
-Andy Palmer, CEO of Aston Martin
The joy of driving -- "Freude am fahren" as BMW calls it -- is no longer possible with internal combustion engines. The internal combustion engine has reached the limits of physics. It may be able to meet stricter emission regulations for the time being, but this results in a dull driving experience.
In the coming decade emission regulation forces cars to become even cleaner, which will in turn make fossil fuel cars more expensive. In the EU for example, car companies will have to comply with an average CO2-emission throughout their fleet of 95 grams per km in 2021. This means that within six years the entire fleet sold by Daimler should have exhaust emissions similar to a Fiat Panda. So car companies can still build a growling flat six cylinder Porsche, but they have to offset this with a zero emission car. In other words, to comply with emission regulations car makers don't have many options left but to sell serious numbers of fully electric cars.
Electric cars have massive torque from the moment you hit the pedal, which makes them better than gasoline equivalents. And they can deliver hundreds of horsepowers without any emission scheme to worry about.
Soon you'll face the choice between a fun, quickly accelerating electric car, which can be charged on pure sunlight and which might earn some tax breaks -- and a dull, heavily taxed fossil car which is banned from city center and packed with expensive emission controls.
This may well be the reason Volkswagen resorted to cheating the emission tests. Building cars with an internal combustion engine that combines great performance and low emissions simply wasn't possible at low costs.
2. Electric cars are more affordable
"I would be disappointed if the price per kWh was not in the $100 dollar range by 2020."
-J.B. Straubel, CTO Tesla Motors
Digital cameras and solar panels were once expensive. Not anymore. These technologies followed a steep 'learning curve' and declining costs. A similar fate awaits the electric car.
In 2010 -- when the very first Nissan LEAF came to market -- lithium-ion battery prices were around $1000 per kWh. In 2013, at the time of Tesla introducing its Model S, analysts concluded that battery prices had dropped to around $400 per kWh. GM announced a price of $145 per kWh for its all electric Bolt which will be introduced in 2016. Tesla Motors expects to produce batteries in the range of $100 in 2020.
he trend is clear: the price of batteries is declining at an annual rate of around 20%, while the internal combustion engine is getting more expensive in order to comply with emission regulations.
It may be hard to imagine today, but we'll soon see the day that electric cars are cheaper to purchase than comparable gasoline cars. In markets with high taxes on polluting vehicles, electric cars will be competitive even sooner.
3. The 'cigarette moment' for the internal combustion engine
"Twenty years from now, the smell of exhaust will be as rare (in cities) as the smell of cigarette smoke is in a restaurant today."
-Sir Richard Branson
The vast majority of EV-drivers will tell you that they will never go back to petrol. Internal combustion engine technology feels old and obsolete once you've driven an electric car. These people realise that cars do not necessarily have to be polluting.
It is only a matter of time before society sees gasoline cars as an irresponsible technology, simply because they are hazardous to the health of others and imperil our climate.
Think about what happened to smoking. Just thirty years ago people used to accept smoking virtually everywhere -- smoking in airplanes, smoking in schools, smoking in hospitals. People smoked in the presence of babies and the elderly. Pregnant women smoked, doctors smoked, sick people smoked. With hindsight, it is crazy!
ahmmm..... you are correct.
There are however specifics that seem to be overlooked. For urban travel with short commutes of say 25 miles, the electric Fiat or Yugo might have a place.
For intercity or interstate driving, Gas or turbo diesel engines will not likely be replaced.
The USA markets will sort it out if the green wackos can be kept out of the political majority
Yes, nat gas is gaining, but it still produces CO2, which causes Islamic terrorism (as per 0bama).
End use of electricity is horribly inefficient, and the ability to store large amounts of energy are all but non-existent. We have been “just a few years away form a major battery breakthrough” for at least 50 years. They just need more funding for research to bring it to market, translated : Give us your money.
I expect to see a market for small trailer mounted generators for electric cars on longer occasional trips.
Electric car "recharge" time = 6 hours.
'nuff said.
So does the hydrogen fuel cell. The difference is it is produced at the hydrogen processing plant rather than the vehicle. And due to the inefficiencies in creating H2 from some other fuel, more CO2 is produced than just using the methane directly.
End use of electricity is horribly inefficient
I don't agree there. We get ~100% efficiency for heat generation and often 90% (and better) efficiency for motors. The efficiency problem with electrical devices is the creation of the electricity and the storage.
It seems that hybrids are the way to go.
They have their place. Overnight recharge at home for a commuter car works. But they are not going to pull our horse trailer for a rodeo +100 miles away.
Electric cars would in temperate climates where heating and A/C issues do not dominate the “driving experience”.
Hybrids make more sense to me for most applications than pure electric.
But most still fail to be total economy of the same size vehicle in gasoline. Not just mpg but purchase to resale total cost.
Agreed, those greatly impact the cost of range.
“I don’t agree there. We get ~100% efficiency for heat generation and often 90% (and better) efficiency for motors. The efficiency problem with electrical devices is the creation of the electricity and the storage. “
When I say “end use” that includes everything from power generation to the ultimate magnetic field generated to provide the motive torque.
No such thing of anything approaching 100% in anything having to do with energy, There are losses everywhere, especially in electric cars. Proponents think if they just ignore these losses and don’t report them (like the global warming hucksters) they don’t exist.
This report is an fantasy opinion piece, not a scientific presentation. It is pure speculation, and just the kind of tripe used by politicians to justify idiotic legislation designed to “save the world”.
Remember the old Pollock joke: the Poles have announced a manned mission to the sun. When it was suggested the space capsule would burn up as it approached the sun, the spokesman said - simple, we’ll go at night.
This guy probably thought that was a good plan.
Somebody is going to have to make a bunch more wall outlets for this electric car prediction to work (that is where electricity comes from, right?)
Yes that's true but there are other factors.
It's like spending a ton of money on a vegetable garden when buying vegies is cheaper. I have a acquaintance who spend some $30,000 for a 20 year old Vestas 65KW wind turbine. It never paid for itself but he just liked the thing. My Harley will never be as practical or economical as Hybrid car but when I even hint at getting rid of it my wife says "That's enough of that p*ssy talk!". I love that woman.
Sorry to pick at the nits, but that isn't end use, that is the whole system.
No such thing of anything approaching 100% in anything having to do with energy,
Electric heat comes close, since the losses are nearly 100% of the desired product, heat. But that is only for the end device, not the whole system.
“An electric car is no different than a spring or rubberband powered car, the power must be produced somewhere else, then stored in the car for later use.”
This level of scientific thought is far beyond the liberal mind to comprehend.
...if I only had a long enough extension cord.
The only reason the electric vehicle industry is somewhat viable is because of government subsidies. If electric cars had to compete in the marketplace, the industry would cease to exist.
This graphic looks like a dog’s head.
I wonder how he came up with and what 85-90% efficiency he is speaking of.
If you look at the entire process to power the electric car, this is impossible. You have 3 major energy transformations in this system and multiple systems.
In order to get the total efficiency, you have to multiply the efficiencies together.
I don’t know what they numbers stand out today, but lets just say for an example (made up numbers off the top of my head):
1. NatGas Electric Generators: 60%
2. Transmission Lines: 89%
3. Transformers to step down to the charging stations: 94%
4. Efficiency of charging the batteries: 75%
5. Battery Discharge and Power Supply: 94%
6. Conversion of Energy to Motive force and Braking Recovery (Motor): 93%
So: .60*.89*.94*.75*.94*.93 = 33%
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.