Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: The EV thread (Read 38690 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The EV thread

Reply #30 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
The debate reminds me of VHS vs Beta.....the latter was the superior technical product but VHS had the better marketing and won the day...

I referenced that the other day.

This is why the government needs to get involved and start their marketing campaign for Hydrogen cars now.....before its too late.

The government just needs to come in with heavy discounts on these, and heavier taxes on alternatives just to get it off the ground.....and then it will take off from there.

Re: The EV thread

Reply #31 –
Yep, within a few short years, people who had bought BETA, had essentially paid $800 for a clock.

Re: The EV thread

Reply #32 –
It won't be the same thing though.  EV's will be around and infrastructure for them will persist even if hydrogen is the future of motor vehicles.  A bit like gas and regular petrol alongside diesel.  It won't obsolete any one platform to the point where it's a brick. 
"everything you know is wrong"

Paul Hewson

Re: The EV thread

Reply #33 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
I referenced that the other day.

This is why the government needs to get involved and start their marketing campaign for Hydrogen cars now.....before its too late.

The government just needs to come in with heavy discounts on these, and heavier taxes on alternatives just to get it off the ground.....and then it will take off from there.
The Government have thrown their efforts into passenger EV's with generous subsidies as you would know with leasing and I cant see them backing two horses in the same race in terms of supporting infrastructure especially with the lack/dwindling interest in Hydrogen in other parts of the world for passenger cars. Maybe they might get onboard for heavy transport, replacing Diesel vehicles where EV's are still unsuitable at this stage and then if proven in that area might be seen as an alternative in passenger vehicles as well but I doubt it.

Re: The EV thread

Reply #34 –
If they don't find a clean abundant alternative to lithium ion it won't be long before hydrogen fuel is cheaper.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

Re: The EV thread

Reply #35 –
Quote from: LP – on
If they don't find a clean abundant alternative to lithium ion it won't be long before hydrogen fuel is cheaper.
https://dialogochino.net/en/extractive-industries/38662-explainer-the-opportunities-and-challenges-of-the-lithium-industry
China screwing Chile royally who would have thought that?
500,000 gallons of water to produce 1 tonne of Lithium?...how is that sustainable in some of those arid lithium rich countries?...

Re: The EV thread

Reply #36 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
The Government have thrown their efforts into passenger EV's with generous subsidies as you would know with leasing and I cant see them backing two horses in the same race in terms of supporting infrastructure especially with the lack/dwindling interest in Hydrogen in other parts of the world for passenger cars. Maybe they might get onboard for heavy transport, replacing Diesel vehicles where EV's are still unsuitable at this stage and then if proven in that area might be seen as an alternative in passenger vehicles as well but I doubt it.

You can back a horse, but you don't have to continue to back it if you can see it is no good.
As has been mentioned, lithium is somewhat of a temporary solution with the cost and rarity set to cause a while range of problems down the line.

Especially in this country, the wide open spaces and nothingness that envelopes most of it means the range of bevs simply doesn't work as well as it does oversees.  "Last fuel for 500km" is not an uncommon sign to see out bush. What hope to bevs have with that?

Using the most abundant element in the universe should be a no brainer.... but it seems you need a little bit of brains to see that, which excludes the majority of the decision makers in parliament

Re: The EV thread

Reply #37 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
You can back a horse, but you don't have to continue to back it if you can see it is no good.
As has been mentioned, lithium is somewhat of a temporary solution with the cost and rarity set to cause a while range of problems down the line.

Especially in this country, the wide open spaces and nothingness that envelopes most of it means the range of bevs simply doesn't work as well as it does oversees.  "Last fuel for 500km" is not an uncommon sign to see out bush. What hope to bevs have with that?

Using the most abundant element in the universe should be a no brainer.... but it seems you need a little bit of brains to see that, which excludes the majority of the decision makers in parliament

You are massively overstating the charging “issues”, a Tesla driver prior to xmas circumnavigated Australia in 10 days, he’s done it a couple of times, I think his previous record was 14 days or such.
The charging infrastructure is massively expanding and there certainly are not many 500km stretches of road without fuel left in Australia and quite a few ev are now more than capable of 500km.
Let’s go BIG !

Re: The EV thread

Reply #38 –
Quote from: northernblue – on
You are massively overstating the charging “issues”, a Tesla driver prior to xmas circumnavigated Australia in 10 days, he’s done it a couple of times, I think his previous record was 14 days or such.
The charging infrastructure is massively expanding and there certainly are not many 500km stretches of road without fuel left in Australia and quite a few ev are now more than capable of 500km.

OK, let me put it this way.

Go on a road trip. Go stop at one of those petrol stations on the highway that has a maccas and what not. Go look at how long those lines are for getting fuel. Work out how long it currently takes people to pull up, fuel up, and get moving. Say 5mins?

Now, if everyone driving a petrol/diesel car switches to BEVs, assuming they get the same distances as petrol/diesel by then. How long will it take them to get to 50%, 80% 100%? How long will all those backed up cars behind them have to wait now? If each station has a 30min charge time and even if that charge station has double the capacity of existing stations, peoples charge/wait time would balloon out while they are waiting for their spot....and obviously more time charging.
Stops would take say 6 times longer.....IF you could get a spot to begin with. If you are at capacity, you could be waiting hours to get a charging spot. This is what will happen with increasing takeup of BEVs. Not too mention the population and general traffic users will also continue to increase compounding the problem.

Currently there are not that many charging stations and not that many cars. However, if everybody who uses an ICE car now changed to BEV, the infastructure will need to increase to greater what it is now in these areas to get the same result. (wait times).

OR....
You go Hyrdrogen and none of the above is a problem. ;)

Re: The EV thread

Reply #39 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
OK, let me put it this way.

Go on a road trip. Go stop at one of those petrol stations on the highway that has a maccas and what not. Go look at how long those lines are for getting fuel. Work out how long it currently takes people to pull up, fuel up, and get moving. Say 5mins?

Now, if everyone driving a petrol/diesel car switches to BEVs, assuming they get the same distances as petrol/diesel by then. How long will it take them to get to 50%, 80% 100%? How long will all those backed up cars behind them have to wait now? If each station has a 30min charge time and even if that charge station has double the capacity of existing stations, peoples charge/wait time would balloon out while they are waiting for their spot....and obviously more time charging.
Stops would take say 6 times longer.....IF you could get a spot to begin with. If you are at capacity, you could be waiting hours to get a charging spot. This is what will happen with increasing takeup of BEVs. Not too mention the population and general traffic users will also continue to increase compounding the problem.

Currently there are not that many charging stations and not that many cars. However, if everybody who uses an ICE car now changed to BEV, the infastructure will need to increase to greater what it is now in these areas to get the same result. (wait times).

OR....
You go Hyrdrogen and none of the above is a problem. ;)

There's not going to be an instantaneous swap over from ICE to EV and the infrastructure could very well keep pace with demand.  It's likely that motels and other accommodation will offer overnight charging (which is better for battery life) if the demand is there.

Meanwhile, there are only about a dozen hydrogen refuelling stations across the nation.  That includes the one owned by Toyota in Melbourne, and that can only produce enough hydrogen about a dozen cars each day.  Swinburne and CSIRO have just built a $2.5M plant but our Governments are only spending $160M on hydrogen refuelling as opposed to $500M for EV charging infrastructure.  I guess that reflects current demand rather than future needs.

Toyota's Andrew Willis says a lack of refuelling infrastructure is holding up wider adoption of HICE vehicles (I just made that acronym up); "It's growing, but it's still limited. We can't introduce a car to market that you can't refuel. Refuelling is one of the key barriers to the growth in the [sales/leasing] volumes."

Toyota's refuelling station separates hydrogen from oxygen in water by electrolysis using its own solar generated electricity and electricity from the grid.  The hydrogen is stored as a gas at sub-zero temperatures and cars are refuelled with a nozzle similar to that used for LPG vehicles.  I'm not across the technology or the costs but I assume that it would be feasible to have similar but larger scale refuelling stations if not at every servo, then at all of those with the capacity to generate renewable electricity. Cheaper electricity is required to reduce the cost of hydrogen to an affordable amount.

Of the fleet of 52 zero-emission buses Victoria is trialling, two are powered by hydrogen fuel cells.  However, the hydrogen is "grey" as it is produced by burning natural gas rather than electricity from renewable sources.  Of course, brown coal and natural gas is still used to provide some of the electricity that's charging the EV buses.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: The EV thread

Reply #40 –
Quote from: DJC – on
There's not going to be an instantaneous swap over from ICE to EV and the infrastructure could very well keep pace with demand.  It's likely that motels and other accommodation will offer overnight charging (which is better for battery life) if the demand is there.

Meanwhile, there are only about a dozen hydrogen refuelling stations across the nation.  That includes the one owned by Toyota in Melbourne, and that can only produce enough hydrogen about a dozen cars each day.  Swinburne and CSIRO have just built a $2.5M plant but our Governments are only spending $160M on hydrogen refuelling as opposed to $500M for EV charging infrastructure.  I guess that reflects current demand rather than future needs.

Toyota's Andrew Willis says a lack of refuelling infrastructure is holding up wider adoption of HICE vehicles (I just made that acronym up); "It's growing, but it's still limited. We can't introduce a car to market that you can't refuel. Refuelling is one of the key barriers to the growth in the [sales/leasing] volumes."

Toyota's refuelling station separates hydrogen from oxygen in water by electrolysis using its own solar generated electricity and electricity from the grid.  The hydrogen is stored as a gas at sub-zero temperatures and cars are refuelled with a nozzle similar to that used for LPG vehicles.  I'm not across the technology or the costs but I assume that it would be feasible to have similar but larger scale refuelling stations if not at every servo, then at all of those with the capacity to generate renewable electricity. Cheaper electricity is required to reduce the cost of hydrogen to an affordable amount.

Of the fleet of 52 zero-emission buses Victoria is trialling, two are powered by hydrogen fuel cells.  However, the hydrogen is "grey" as it is produced by burning natural gas rather than electricity from renewable sources.  Of course, brown coal and natural gas is still used to provide some of the electricity that's charging the EV buses.

I dont disagree with anything you are saying.

My point is, that do we 'stick with BEVs' simply because they started first?
Sure the money is being spent there and the technology is largely proven all over the world.
But in a pure environmental / long term option, IMO the hydrogen is the horse to bet on....or at least the horse we should be putting our efforts into training up.

The only problem is the powers that be.

Re: The EV thread

Reply #41 –
Things will get bad first, economically and environmentally, then the two forms of nuclear will become the only solution, at which time desalination and hydrogen go on to save the planet.

Airlines are already looking long term for bulk energy sources to generate green hydrogen, transport for both road and rail will head the same route.

Capillary pipelines will branch out transporting hydrogen at low cost in a carrier medium which gets split at the end user local using zero carbon energy sources. At which time HEV becomes king.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

Re: The EV thread

Reply #42 –
Quote from: kruddler – on
OK, let me put it this way.

Go on a road trip. Go stop at one of those petrol stations on the highway that has a maccas and what not. Go look at how long those lines are for getting fuel. Work out how long it currently takes people to pull up, fuel up, and get moving. Say 5mins?

Now, if everyone driving a petrol/diesel car switches to BEVs, assuming they get the same distances as petrol/diesel by then. How long will it take them to get to 50%, 80% 100%? How long will all those backed up cars behind them have to wait now? If each station has a 30min charge time and even if that charge station has double the capacity of existing stations, peoples charge/wait time would balloon out while they are waiting for their spot....and obviously more time charging.
Stops would take say 6 times longer.....IF you could get a spot to begin with. If you are at capacity, you could be waiting hours to get a charging spot. This is what will happen with increasing takeup of BEVs. Not too mention the population and general traffic users will also continue to increase compounding the problem.

Currently there are not that many charging stations and not that many cars. However, if everybody who uses an ICE car now changed to BEV, the infastructure will need to increase to greater what it is now in these areas to get the same result. (wait times).

OR....
You go Hyrdrogen and none of the above is a problem. ;)

I guess if you consider that we’ve had “real” evs for about 10 years now.
If you go back to the start of the ice revolution, did we have vehicles with the range of today’s cars ?
Did we have the network of service stations that we have today ?
No, they grew with the market (demand).
I totally get your point about charging times but my understanding is that 30mins gets most cars back up over 80% and on the road.
I believe battery tech will reduce that charge time over the next 5-10 years.
I suspect that if you were to talk to actual ev owners you would feel a lot more assured about the vehicles, though the decent owners will still say that ev are not for everyone (yet ?)
I recall you saying in the past that in your work you’re a very high km driver each day ? If that’s still the case you’d probably be preferring the swap and go batteries, are they happening in Australia yet ? 🤔

Let’s go BIG !

Re: The EV thread

Reply #44 –
Quote from: ElwoodBlues1 – on
https://www.drive.com.au/caradvice/used-electric-car-prices-fall-after-two-years-data-finds/
As the article said, its hard to make sense of those figures without more data, but there is a couple things seem to be at play.

People selling used EVs are taking longer to sell, and they are averaging a lot less value compared to the others. This to me suggests that these ones for sale are put up at an overinflated price, which is why they are not selling. They eventually have to drop the price to below what they'd expect, just to cut their losses. Which makes sense with the data as a possible reason.

However, it also states there is very limited data (thus supply) of used EVs on the market. That SHOULD mean that a lack of supply yields an increased in demand and thus drives prices up....not down.

Ultimately, the only scenario that makes sense is that people simply do not want used EVs. You which would think that it would have to be at least in part due to their 'scrap value' after 10 years when the battery life is suggested to be next to useless.
The people who can afford new cars don't keep cars until they die, they just churn them over and upgrade to the newer models every 2-3-4 years.
The people who can't afford new cars, want something that they can rely on for the long term. It appears EVs are not that and people are voted with their wallet.