Poll: Do you have, or plan to get, an electric car?

[betarhoalphadelta]

The problems surrounding BEVs, as I see them, are unrelated to the technology, driveability, usability.

The way I see it, the problems buyers encounter with BEVs now are FUD, infrastructure, and purchase price. I won't dive deep into FUD as this isn't Debate, but I will acknowledge it exists and there have been lots of examples of it here in this thread. Infrastructure, basically fast and publicly available charging, is something that has been improving and can continue to improve. Purchase price is also something that should improve as companies streamline their supply chains. My Bolt, for a new BEV, was pretty affordable. It was an example of a good BEV from a domestic brand that ended up to be under $30k (not getting into specifics on pricing). I would still say it was too expensive for a lot of people, but it (and maybe the Leaf?) are a testament to how companies can make good, affordable BEVs if they want to.

Agree on your first statement. For my next vehicle, the choice of BEV vs ICEV will not be based on technology, drivability, usability... At least not in any sense that disadvantages BEV. I think my next vehicle would preferably be BEV, all things otherwise equal.

Also not going to touch the FUD. It exists.

Infrastructure is a weird one. I'm increasingly coming to the [unintuitive] conclusion that a lot of fast chargers aren't the answer. They're naturally going to be the most expensive charging solution. Which means that they inhibit adoption because they negate some of the cost advantages to BEV. I think the answer might be fast chargers in remote areas [road trip stops], and ubiquitous slow (L1/L2) chargers everywhere else. They're cheaper to produce and require less power input to operate. I use my workplace parking garage as an example. We've got a bank of L2 BEV chargers on site. Well, if you're coming in to an office for 8 hours a day, you don't need L3 charging! Hook up your car for 3-4 hours, go unhook it and park elsewhere when it hits 80%, and you're likely good for the next 3-5 days. So I agree that infrastructure is going to be VERY important, especially for the people who for whatever reason cannot charge at home. But I don't necessarily think the future is a massive buildout of fast chargers.

Where I disagree a little more strongly is the idea that pricing should improve "as companies streamline their supply chains." I find this is an incorrect extrapolation of Wright's Law (aka the experience curve effect) that by definition, increasing production reduces prices through economies of scale and learned production efficiencies. This effect DOES exist, but I think it is believed by too many people to be MUCH stronger than it is. Ultimately price has a natural floor. Battery material cost, and battery energy density, which determines how much material you need. Obviously battery manufacturing / supply chain / etc is in there, but even if all of that was $0 you're still going to have a basic minimum material cost that CANNOT be recovered by any sort of Wright's Law efficiency gains. And it'll never be $0 anyway.

I'm not sure that you're claiming that Wright's Law or economies of scale will get BEV close to [or beyond] parity with ICEV just based on streamlining of supply chain. However it's a common enough misconception about how economics work that I feel it's worth a little bit of pushback. Ulitmately the battery portion of a BEV is expensive because batteries are expensive. Supply chain and manufacturing efficiency can improve that on the margin, but unless we improve the energy density of batteries or find less expensive materials to use to produce them, supply chain efficiency isn't going to get us from ~$115/kWh to $50/kWh. The experience curve effect just isn't that strong.

 

[Kent88]

Infrastructure is a weird one. I'm increasingly coming to the [unintuitive] conclusion that a lot of fast chargers aren't the answer. They're naturally going to be the most expensive charging solution. Which means that they inhibit adoption because they negate some of the cost advantages to BEV. I think the answer might be fast chargers in remote areas [road trip stops], and ubiquitous slow (L1/L2) chargers everywhere else. They're cheaper to produce and require less power input to operate. I use my workplace parking garage as an example. We've got a bank of L2 BEV chargers on site. Well, if you're coming in to an office for 8 hours a day, you don't need L3 charging! Hook up your car for 3-4 hours, go unhook it and park elsewhere when it hits 80%, and you're likely good for the next 3-5 days. So I agree that infrastructure is going to be VERY important, especially for the people who for whatever reason cannot charge at home. But I don't necessarily think the future is a massive buildout of fast chargers.

I absolutely believe that home charging and public level 2 charging at places where vehicles frequently park for at least 2 hours are a part of the charging solution. Heck, I frequently lobby my spouse, who works in management at her job, to push her employer to install level 2 charging at her place of employment.

This is where infrastructure bleeds into FUD. The people pushing the FUD will keep telling whoever will listen that EVs are terrible on road trips until the public DC charging networks expand significantly.

Where I disagree a little more strongly is the idea that pricing should improve "as companies streamline their supply chains." I find this is an incorrect extrapolation of Wright's Law (aka the experience curve effect) that by definition, increasing production reduces prices through economies of scale and learned production efficiencies. This effect DOES exist, but I think it is believed by too many people to be MUCH stronger than it is. Ultimately price has a natural floor. Battery material cost, and battery energy density, which determines how much material you need. Obviously battery manufacturing / supply chain / etc is in there, but even if all of that was $0 you're still going to have a basic minimum material cost that CANNOT be recovered by any sort of Wright's Law efficiency gains. And it'll never be $0 anyway.

I'm not sure that you're claiming that Wright's Law or economies of scale will get BEV close to [or beyond] parity with ICEV just based on streamlining of supply chain. However it's a common enough misconception about how economics work that I feel it's worth a little bit of pushback. Ulitmately the battery portion of a BEV is expensive because batteries are expensive. Supply chain and manufacturing efficiency can improve that on the margin, but unless we improve the energy density of batteries or find less expensive materials to use to produce them, supply chain efficiency isn't going to get us from ~$115/kWh to $50/kWh. The experience curve effect just isn't that strong.

From what I understand supply chains for BEV manufacturing are still new and forming. I gave the example of my Bolt as what we can have available someday. Is it a perfect vehicle for everybody? Heck no! But it's something that a company was able to put together with still fairly new EV technology and supply chains that are still in flux (well, moreso than those of ICE vehicle manufacturing).

I'm not suggesting that improved supply chains will lead to dirt cheap, new, usable BEVs. I'm saying that they should be competitive with where ICE vehicles are now.

As far as battery tech, I don't disagree with what you said. While I was writing that I did have at least one or two battery posts you've made in mind, but I wasn't sure how to frame it, and improvements in supply chains should be enough to help bring down costs while we explore new, cheaper battery makeups. Current batteries are fine in that they work, are fairly durable, can be recharged pretty quickly at a DC charging station, and have a capacity that allows them to power the electric motors to take the vehicles they're in many miles on a single charge, so I don't want to criticize the batteries. They absolutely can and need to be improved, but that doesn't mean that they're garbage now, and they also don't need to be as expensive as they are now.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

I'm not suggesting that improved supply chains will lead to dirt cheap, new, usable BEVs. I'm saying that they should be competitive with where ICE vehicles are now.

And IMHO that is just not true. Improved supply chains will help, but IMHO the battery technology that will allow a BEV with 250+ mile range to be competitive where ICEV is now just simply doesn't exist.

As far as battery tech, I don't disagree with what you said. While I was writing that I did have at least one or two battery posts you've made in mind, but I wasn't sure how to frame it, and improvements in supply chains should be enough to help bring down costs while we explore new, cheaper battery makeups. Current batteries are fine in that they work, are fairly durable, can be recharged pretty quickly at a DC charging station, and have a capacity that allows them to power the electric motors to take the vehicles they're in many miles on a single charge, so I don't want to criticize the batteries. They absolutely can and need to be improved, but that doesn't mean that they're garbage now, and they also don't need to be as expensive as they are now.

I don't believe they're garbage now. They're expensive. That doesn't mean they're garbage.

What I'm saying is that yes, they DO need to be as expensive as they are now. There might be some room in the margins to improve battery pricing based upon supply chains and economies of scale, but the real nut to crack price-wise is changes in the battery chemistry to improve raw material cost, energy storage density, or [hopefully] both.

 

[Bilsch]

It's not fair to factor solar for hte general population, because solar is a very niche subject. I have 11kw of panels, 18kw of inverter, and 90kwh of battery. I'm adding 11kw of panels by EOY. I am not the normal person, neither are you. So you can't really consider these circumstances for the average person.

It’s only niche because people mostly don’t understand it. But the fact is solar isn’t difficult, especially expensive nor does it require any maintenance. It just quietly does its job in the background for 30 years and saves money. I mean try putting gasoline collectors on your roof.

My point is it’s an option for those that can think outside of the box. It saves loads of money and it just works.

 

[Bilsch]

And IMHO that is just not true. Improved supply chains will help, but IMHO the battery technology that will allow a BEV with 250+ mile range to be competitive where ICEV is now just simply doesn't exist.

But it does exist in China. They are way ahead of us in that regard.

 

[mac_1103]

I'm not suggesting that improved supply chains will lead to dirt cheap, new, usable BEVs. I'm saying that they should be competitive with where ICE vehicles are now.

And IMHO that is just not true. Improved supply chains will help, but IMHO the battery technology that will allow a BEV with 250+ mile range to be competitive where ICEV is now just simply doesn't exist.

Kinda depends on what one means by "competitive." I'm thinking may you two have different definitions.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

But it does exist in China. They are way ahead of us in that regard.

Are they? Have they solved the "cost" problem via advanced technology, or have they solved the "price" problem via subsidies? They're two very different things. To an extent we were solving the "price" problem with the $7500 subsidies, but that didn't make the cars less expensive to produce.

Do they have materially different battery chemistries available to them than we do? If so, why are we not copying them?

BTW I'm asking honestly and sincerely--I know China is dominating BEVs, but I'm asking how much of that is actually a technology gap rather than an artificial market propped up by subsidy?

Kinda depends on what one means by "competitive." I'm thinking may you two have different definitions.

That may be true. To me, it's not a BEV exactly at price parity with an "equivalent" class ICEV. But with all the examples I've used in this thread, the cost of entry appears to be >$10K difference. I.e. $12K for Honda Fit vs Nissan Leaf. $14K for Hyundai Tucson vs Ioniq 5. $19 for Ford F150 SuperCrew vs F150 Lightning.

Get that number closer a to cost adder around $4-5K for basic badge sedans and crossovers, and no more than $10K for high-end luxury trim and very large SUVs/trucks that need very large batteries, and we're in the range that I'd call competitive. It's a lot easier to stomach $4-5K than $12-14K, to get the BEV advantages.

My rationale is that smaller / more efficient cars will also be more efficient in gas consumption, so the relative advantage of BEV in fueling cost over time will be smaller--hence the cost adder needs to be smaller. Larger vehicles and more luxury trims are going to need bigger batteries for range, but they're bigger and less fuel efficient, so the cost adder can be bigger if the gas savings are realized more quickly. Those are also sold to more affluent customers who may be less price-sensitive so they might be more inclined to shell out for them.

 

[Bilsch]

Are they? Have they solved the "cost" problem via advanced technology, or have they solved the "price" problem via subsidies? They're two very different things. To an extent we were solving the "price" problem with the $7500 subsidies, but that didn't make the cars less expensive to produce.

Do they have materially different battery chemistries available to them than we do? If so, why are we not copying them?

Yes, yes and yes. Currently US companies are bringing in equipment in an attempt to set up similar battery lines here.

 

[mac_1103]

$12K for Honda Fit vs Nissan Leaf

Just out of curiosity... how/why are you comparing the Leaf to a car that is no longer sold in North America? Wouldn't the Nissan Versa be a more apt comparison for the Leaf? MSRP difference is <$9K (but you can get either one for well below MSRP, 'cuz markets and stuff).

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Yes, yes and yes. Currently US companies are bringing in equipment in an attempt to set up similar battery lines here.

Thanks. I'll do some research on that.

If you've got any links/info that would get me started, it'd be much appreciated.

Just out of curiosity... how/why are you comparing the Leaf to a car that is no longer sold in North America? Wouldn't the Nissan Versa be a more apt comparison for the Leaf? MSRP difference is <$9K (but you can get either one for well below MSRP, 'cuz markets and stuff).

Not intentional. @fatjay brought up the idea of creating a BEV equivalent to the Honda Fit with a cheaper motor that doesn't have neck-snapping acceleration, limited "tech", and a 250+ mile battery, and thus I ran with his example (the Fit) for comparison. The only widely available commuter car BEV I could think of is the LEAF so that's what I chose for comparison. Looking at the Nissan USA web site it says the Versa starts at $17,190 and the LEAF at $28,140, so that's still about an $11K difference.

I was using it as an example that the unicorn he's looking for doesn't seem to exist. Note that it still doesn't meet his conjecture--the base LEAF is only 149 mile range, and he was asking for something with a chunky battery that would have 250+ mile range. The LEAF SV+ gets you to 212 mile range (still not meeting his 250+ criteria) but starts at $36,190, so now we're at $19K adder relative to a Versa.

Nissan sold 42K Versa in the US in 2024, and 11K units of the LEAF. And the LEAF is basically the only car IMHO in its class. Seems to me that the "BEV econobox" market just doesn't exist, and I'd say it's due to battery cost.

 

[sibelman]

i can only go by what i hear on the news

...or cast a broader net for more complete and reliable information. Anecdotes and personal experience are powerful. The news is too powerful. Better data abound.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

@Bilsch I found this... Really illuminating. Interested in your thoughts...

https://www.latitudemedia.com/news/catalyst-unpacking-chinas-cheap-battery-costs/

Looks like it's a combination of a lot of things. Definitely not just subsidies. A good portion might be learning and efficiency that came from prior era subsidies, but it's not like they're just subsidizing the price at the cell level. Also interesting the number of times they referred to the market there as a "bloodbath", because prices have cratered, probably to unsustainable levels, and there is likely to be a shakeout in the market. I don't know the extent to which that's a supply-side or demand-side problem; possibly too much capacity came online too quickly and there isn't enough of a market to digest it yet? Towards the end they talk more about the area where the US and Europe might end up going to remain competitive, as well as some of the reasons we've struggled so far.

Anyway, I found it highly interesting.

 

[mac_1103]

I ran with his example (the Fit) for comparison

Fair enough.

Looking at the Nissan USA web site it says the Versa starts at $17,190 and the LEAF at $28,140, so that's still about an $11K difference.

In practice however, the lowest MSRP for a Versa that's actually on a dealer's lot within 100 miles of me is over $20K. Now as I said (or at least implied) nobody is paying MSRP for a Versa. OTOH, I also found a new Leaf SV Plus listed for $11K below MSRP. So I'd say the real world price difference, in my area anyway, is closer to $9K than $11K. Still buys a lot of gas.

the unicorn he's looking for doesn't seem to exist

It used to (pretty sure someone who frequents this thread owns one). And it's supposed to be coming back later this year at <$30K. Still a bit pricey, especially if tax incentives go away. But I can get a used one with 22K miles for $18K.

 

[sibelman]

I can get a used one with 22K miles for $18K.

A local used-car dealer that specializes in EVs has 9 used Chevy BoltEVs ranging from $13K to $22K. Seems there's still quite a premium, but there are some "affordable" options out there. The BoltEV seemed kind of like the aforementioned unicorn when I bought mine in 2018. Half the price of a Tesla Model S and twice the price of a Versa, so I'm not sure that's the unicorn you're looking for.

 

[mac_1103]

Yeah, affordable compared to other EVs is different than affordable compared to all cars.

more affluent customers who may be less price-sensitive

This should be me, but for some reason I just can't help myself. Based on what I paid for a nicely equipped minivan in 1999, I should be perfectly fine paying MSRP for something like an Ioniq5. But it still sticks in my craw.

 

[fatjay]

"Won't get there"? EV technology itself is already there! I feel just as safe driving my Bolt as I did any of the ICE vehicles I used to drive in it's role. It can go just as fast. It handles snow and ice pretty much as well as they did.

It's not though. If eveyrone in an apartment complex went out and bought an EV, it takes to long to charge, they couldn't use it.

If 20 cars are lined up at a gas station with 4 pumps, and each person takes 3 minutes to fill up, that line is cleared in 15 minutes for all 20 people.

If 20 cars are lined up with ev's, and there are 4 chargers, 30 minutes to charge, that's almost 3 hours to clear that line.

There are gas stations everywhere, it takes 3 minutes to fill, and there are still lines sometimes. So while you or I may be fine with an ev because we can charge overnight in the privacy of our own homes, a lot of people do not have that luxury.

 

[Kent88]

It's not though. If eveyrone in an apartment complex went out and bought an EV, it takes to long to charge, they couldn't use it.

If 20 cars are lined up at a gas station with 4 pumps, and each person takes 3 minutes to fill up, that line is cleared in 15 minutes for all 20 people.

If 20 cars are lined up with ev's, and there are 4 chargers, 30 minutes to charge, that's almost 3 hours to clear that line.

There are gas stations everywhere, it takes 3 minutes to fill, and there are still lines sometimes. So while you or I may be fine with an ev because we can charge overnight in the privacy of our own homes, a lot of people do not have that luxury.

See: the rest of my post...

The problems surrounding BEVs, as I see them, are unrelated to the technology, driveability, usability.

The way I see it, the problems buyers encounter with BEVs now are FUD, infrastructure, and purchase price... Infrastructure, basically fast and publicly available charging, is something that has been improving and can continue to improve...

I specifically stated that infrastructure is an issue. But that isn't an issue with the vehicles themselves, it's the chicken & egg issue of businesses not wanting to install chargers because there isn't enough demand, and there isn't enough demand because people are nervous that they won't have good charging options and are hesitant to buy them because of that. Those with BEVs and at home, level 2 charging demonstrate that the vehicles are capable, we just need the world to catch up to them.

Charging infrastructure will continue to grow.

 

[mac_1103]

each person takes 3 minutes to fill up

I wish.

 

[fatjay]

See: the rest of my post...



I specifically stated that infrastructure is an issue. But that isn't an issue with the vehicles themselves, it's the chicken & egg issue of businesses not wanting to install chargers because there isn't enough demand, and there isn't enough demand because people are nervous that they won't have good charging options and are hesitant to buy them because of that. Those with BEVs and at home, level 2 charging demonstrate that the vehicles are capable, we just need the world to catch up to them.

Charging infrastructure will continue to grow.

It's not just an infrastructure issue though. Even if you had as many charging stations as there are gas stations, the time it takes, there will still be extreme bottle necks and it's going to take to long. 30 minutes is just not acceptable. An what's worse is actually doing that type of charging on a regular basis is extremely harmful to the battery if you do it every time you need to charge, you're basically asking for a worn out battery after 5 years.

So yes, while it's getting there, i don't think the technology is there yet.

What we really need is EV lightning rods, where you pull in and **POW** lightning strikes the car and boom, you're good to go.

 

[Kent88]

There will be gas-station type charging stations, but there will also be a lot of home charging, charging available at work, grocery stores, parks, trail heads, long term parking lots, restaurants, malls, town halls, tourist traps, theaters, hotels, libraries, etc, etc.

Gas station / convenience store type charging is what people are familiar with now, and that's what they're going to want to see to get comfortable with it, but unless we discover a new fuel source, like a rechargeable slurry that people decide is more acceptable than petrol, I don't think many who have given this a lot of thought believe that will be what we settle on.

 

[Broothru]

You did peak my interest though… lol

A 50’ run from panel to outlet using 10ga wire at 30 amps (safe amperage for 10ga) would see a loss of 1.43%

My typical run of 50’ of 6ga at 48 amps loses less than 1%.

I used an online calculator:
https://www.southwire.com/calculator-vdrop

For residential installations, voltage loss is so low that it’s not much of a consideration.

At work, we have to consider loss for the longer runs but again, 99% of the time we are handed completed prints before we start the job. We only make changes when a change to another part of the job causes an impact on our installation.

Good to know info. 1.43% isn't that bad, but <1% @ 48A is even better. I'll likely go with 50A for Level 2 charging, so I need to be thinking 6ga as a minimum? No wonder the estimate my electrical guy gave me for materials was so high <g>.

 

[doug293cz]

Good to know info. 1.43% isn't that bad, but <1% @ 48A is even better. I'll likely go with 50A for Level 2 charging, so I need to be thinking 6ga as a minimum? No wonder the estimate my electrical guy gave me for materials was so high <g>.

A 50A circuit (40A charging capacity) will charge faster than a 30A circuit (24A charging capacity), but we have been managing quite nicely with a 30A circuit that is used for both my wife's Ionic5 BEV, and my daughters Honda Clarity PHEV. Cars don't even get plugged in every day. Might be a different story if we had two BEVs.

Brew on

 

[Airborneguy]

6ga is the code for 50A.

I'm happy to have the 50A capability but agree that 30A is likely enough for the typical working person who mostly just commutes to and from work during the week before parking the car all afternoon and night.

My wife's Mach E charges on 120v 99% of the time. Very, very rarely she will "top off" using my charger when necessary.

 

[Broothru]

A 50A circuit (40A charging capacity) will charge faster than a 30A circuit (24A charging capacity), but we have been managing quite nicely with a 30A circuit that is used for both my wife's Ionic5 BEV, and my daughters Honda Clarity PHEV. Cars don't even get plugged in every day. Might be a different story if we had two BEVs.

Brew on

Our current Level 1 charger (for Prius) is on a 120V/20A circuit along with two overhead 75W light bulbs and two garage door openers. Occasionally I plug in our RV 120V/30A draw into the same outlet with a dog bone adapter, but not simultaneously with the Level 1 charger or the RV air conditioner running. The A/C uses ~12A to run, but double that when the A/C compressor starts. I'm looking to invest in a 'soft start' to mitigate the 25A surge when we're hooked up to less than 30A service. The coach battery charger also carries a high load, but as long as the sun is shining, the solar array keeps the 200Ah of LiFePO4 fully charged. Gotta' be careful at night or on cloudy days, however.

 

[fatjay]

Had a burger and fries while charging the ocean and my wife shopped at the outlet. I think every car should come with tray tables.

 

[Airborneguy]

You made me look…

I found a few Oceans for sale locally for $18k. I can see how tempting that is, especially for one who is a technically savvy tinkerer.

 

[fatjay]

You made me look…

I found a few Oceans for sale locally for $18k. I can see how tempting that is, especially for one who is a technically savvy tinkerer.

Last I checked the used price was about 18k, but you can get them new for 22k. Which is absolutely stunning for what it is.

I know they're a bit rocky right now, but I've had the car for a year, and never had an issue. Sure there are a few dozen people out of 10k cars sold that have some issues, but for hte most part, everyone that I know with an ocean just loves their car.

 

[Pkrd]

while charging the ocean and my wife shopped at the outlet.

Charging is more expensive than anyone ever imagined.

 

[Airborneguy]

Charging is more expensive than anyone ever imagined.

When your experience with the medium is only imagination, I can see why you’d say that.

 

[day_trippr]

I thought it was a joke (charging => shopping)