Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
20kWh of Lithium Cobalt Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 100kg to 133.33kg.
20kWh of Lithium Manganese Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 133.33kg to 200kg.
20kWh of Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 90.9kg to 133.33kg.
20kWh of Lithium Iron Phosphate type li-ion battery will weigh from 166.66kg to 222.22kg.
24kWh battery in the original Nissan LEAF had an EPA range of 73 miles
Obviously the acceptable range is very subjective. Nissan sold ~20,000 LEAFS in the United States in 2011/2012 with the EPA range of a mere 73 miles.
I feel like there is a significant percentage of the population that will never willingly convert unless they have the ability to drive all day on a single charge.
Governor Newsom's executive order directs California to require that, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles.
20,000 versus Honda/Toyota moving 500,000+ Civics and Corolass, Chevy 450,000 Cruzes. Leaf was the only game in town other than the Model S and it sold in very small numbers where the ICE analogs each individually sold in 5, 10, 20x the volume.
The problem with Newsom's EO is it's an EO. It can be reversed just as easily so in the event that it's not viable to sell $18,000 EVs and that's still and important segment of the market, that's exactly what will happen. There's a long way to go. Right now Ford, for example, has one EV that starts at $44,000. It's an EV version of the Ford Escape which starts at $26,000. Obiously there's a large difference in price between $44,000 and $26,000 that must close by 2035. I think that basically California could just do away with things below the Escape. The $20,000 EcoSport? It's not a major seller. If Ford can't make a $20,00 EV basically so what. Even if nobody can perhaps it's so what. But they need to be able to make a close to $26,000 EV compact crossover by 2035 or the EO will just be pushed back.
20kWh of Lithium Cobalt Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 100kg to 133.33kg.
20kWh of Lithium Manganese Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 133.33kg to 200kg.
20kWh of Lithium Nickel Manganese Cobalt Oxide type li-ion battery will weigh from 90.9kg to 133.33kg.
20kWh of Lithium Iron Phosphate type li-ion battery will weigh from 166.66kg to 222.22kg.
24kWh battery in the original Nissan LEAF had an EPA range of 73 miles
Obviously the acceptable range is very subjective. Nissan sold ~20,000 LEAFS in the United States in 2011/2012 with the EPA range of a mere 73 miles.
I feel like there is a significant percentage of the population that will never willingly convert unless they have the ability to drive all day on a single charge.
Governor Newsom's executive order directs California to require that, by 2035, all new cars and passenger trucks sold in California be zero-emission vehicles.
Nothing about your feeling seems to be supported by actual data and the word significant can mean anything. It's pretty obvious that ICE vehicles hit a certain point where additional range is no longer a meaningful differentiator for most and that range isn't orders of magnitude greater than what new EVs have done. Yes, that does have something to do with how quick and common gas stations are, but there's also little to indicate that fast chargers cannot (despite the completely unsupported statement you said earlier) be as quick as gas stations are as prevalent in the sense of meeting usage for a saturated market. It would be interesting if you actually had some rationale laid out for why you think the way you do, because I haven't seen anything to support such or a particularly solid argument or evidence to support such.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric
The 72 is reportedly around the same weight as the Kona 64. Since the 72 pack is just 30 modules rather than 32 modules in the 77 pack, at a simplistic level teh 77 kwh pack would be around 1,060 pounds (divide by 30, multiple by 32). That's just taking the about 450 kg (980 pounds) for the 72 pack. In reality it's probably a bit under as there's the weight of the housing and whatnot as well as just the modules, maybe 1,050 versus the Kona is around 998 pounds. It's a better pack but also at least as expensive to manufacture.
With the Mini SE it could go either way. Right now it's not too terribly heavy for an EV, around 3,150 pounds or 200 pounds heavier than a 4 door Cooper S. An EV specific platform could likely save weight in the chassis but I think more likely than not they just offset the weight savings on the chassis with weight gains from a larger battery. Mini SE the ~29 kWh usable pack and not the larger i3 battery. The BMW i3 with the same battery is 2,960 pounds but I really don't see BMW doing a fancy carbon fiber tub on an electric Mini the way they did on the i3. They're not even doing that on the BMW electrics anymore as that was just a dumb decision. Ferraris or whatnot maybe the carbon tubs make sense but it's not worth the cost on a more normal car.
The 77.4 is about the same weight as the 72 which is about the same weight as the Kona's 64. The reality is that the housing, the structure around to hold and protect it, the mounting points, the thermal management system and its accessories, the electronics for managing power and signal, etc. are together a large part of the weight as the modules are a bit over 20 pounds each and the 77.4 is only two modules larger than the 72 and all of them share a pack design that essentially has the space for the full complement of 32 modules though of course some do not. It's also why things like cell to pack or "structural battery" innovations that is being pushed by some automakers and some battery manufacturers are citing such large improvements form doing such--though I think this may come at a cost of serviceability and ease of modding though maybe they'll figure something out.
"People" may wish for whatever they like, but this person (me) would prefer a lighter/smaller battery, for the same (or even lower) range.
To be fair, luxury cars have all become bloated. The 3-series BMW used to be around 2700 lbs. They've gained 1000 lbs over the past 40 years. The fatter that ICE cars get, the more competitive EVs become.
Still, there's no EV answer to the Miata. And the original EV answer to the Lotus Elise was.... well, you know that story.
Just don't forget that ICE engineering, metallurgy, and so on, have improved quite a lot through the years. An example of this is the Formula 1 automobile design. Aluminum alloys are used instead or iron blocks and heads, carbon fiber used for the brakes, etc. In 90's these automobiles were made very light, but naw they are heavier as indicated in the article below, but the heaviest one weighing 1,753 pounds is quite light: https://racingnews365.com/how-much-d...la-1-car-weigh
Even if EV batteries and bodies are made lighter, an ICE vehicle can still be made even lighter and stay ahead of the EV on the road. The battery's weight is one of reasons for the heaviness of an EV because of the metals, electrolyte, and plastics, used nowadays. Aluminum alloy drive housings and motors have been used for a long time on automobiles, as well as drive-by-wire, keyless start, fuel injection, ECU's, TPM computers, ABS, traction/stability controls, collision warnings, lane change and proximity warnings, and so on.
I firmly believe that range anxiety will prevent 50% EV sales until they develop batteries small enough to be easily exchanged at a gas/electric station in 5 minutes, or to get one from AAA. It could have a lower range as long as they are readily available to exchange on the road. Too many people are used to
driving all day stopping only for 5 minutes to gas up and another 5 to get drive-up food. Even those with an EV now that I know all have at least one ICE vehicle as well for trips.
Battery exchange is really not the answer especially now that charging is getting so much faster. I take trips at least once a month yet never take ICE. Even trips with today's tech only result in about 10 minute longer stop every 3-4 hours when charge. You connect and then are charging while getting food, using the facilities etc. Also the delay for charging makes trip much more pleasant.
Yup, that's why it's time to stop wastign money on the tax incentives as use it more effectively on the $5 billion Biden wants to spend to pay for chargers. That may sound like a lot but there's around 16 million car sales in a typical year or even at the current subsidy which they want to expand that's $120 billion per year if all cars sold are EVs. Time to cut that lunatic policy in the bud. Puts some chargers up and let EVs either stand on their own merits or not.
Yup, that's why it's time to stop wastign money on the tax incentives as use it more effectively on the $5 billion Biden wants to spend to pay for chargers. That may sound like a lot but there's around 16 million car sales in a typical year or even at the current subsidy which they want to expand that's $120 billion per year if all cars sold are EVs. Time to cut that lunatic policy in the bud. Puts some chargers up and let EVs either stand on their own merits or not.
Yea! I think if someone wants to argue about fairness or some such, then let the current federal incentives just phase out as they already have for some automakers but convert them into point of purchase. Aside from that, I don't see any potential fairness or good argument for incentivizing EV purchases.
Instead, put it into infrastructure, like electrical infrastructure for a more stable and more capable electric grid, and pony up money upfront to finance purchases for EVs and charging infrastructure for federal, state, and municipal vehicles if the calculation is that the lifetime levelized cost of operations is lower for the electric variant which it usually is for a lot of use cases. That and continued research and development money is about as far as it should go.
The problem with Newsom's EO is it's an EO. It can be reversed just as easily so in the event that it's not viable to sell $18,000 EVs and that's still and important segment of the market, that's exactly what will happen.
My dad's friend was mayor from 1974 to 1978. Under the previous may most of the downtown was torn down and an 80,000 square foot mall was built to compete with suburban malls. The mall was beyond disaster with no major stores moving in. My dad's friend is now credited with saving the rest of the historic downtown. In reality it was clear to everyone that tearing down more buildings was just going to make matters worse.
Politicians make calls the way they see the economy changing. If they were right they get lauded in their retirement. Newsome will be in his late 60's in 2035 and no doubt be making a good living as a consultant.
Toyota was California's most popular brand in 2020 by a larger percentage than Toyota nationwide.
Toyota is now planning for Lexus to be all BEV by 2035 (Lexus was 13% of Toyota US sales in 2021). They look like they will make good on their promise of having a hybrid for every model by 2025. The last firm percentage goals they have released were 15% battery EV and 55% propulsion hybrids for the United States by 2030. For 2021 the Toyota Division had 26% electrified sales and Lexus division had 18% electrified sales with no BEVs.
My dad's friend was mayor from 1974 to 1978. Under the previous may most of the downtown was torn down and an 80,000 square foot mall was built to compete with suburban malls. The mall was beyond disaster with no major stores moving in. My dad's friend is now credited with saving the rest of the historic downtown. In reality it was clear to everyone that tearing down more buildings was just going to make matters worse.
Politicians make calls the way they see the economy changing. If they were right they get lauded in their retirement. Newsome will be in his late 60's in 2035 and no doubt be making a good living as a consultant.
Toyota was California's most popular brand in 2020 by a larger percentage than Toyota nationwide.
Toyota is now planning for Lexus to be all BEV by 2035 (Lexus was 13% of Toyota US sales in 2021). They look like they will make good on their promise of having a hybrid for every model by 2025. The last firm percentage goals they have released were 15% battery EV and 55% propulsion hybrids for the United States by 2030. For 2021 the Toyota Division had 26% electrified sales and Lexus division had 18% electrified sales with no BEVs.
Although ironically the previous mayor should probably get most of the credit. Time and time again we've seen that exact scenario play out in old downtowns. They struggle along for decades until someone comes along with a bull dozer and removes a bunch of the old, unwanted and half abandoned downtown. It's not that there's no demand for having one, it's just there's a gross mismatch in supply and demand. Once the glut is cleared off rather than two or three or four times as much dreary, half abandoned, struggling areas the economic activity can be concentrated in a smaller downtown that can succeed.
It'll be interesting with COVID and potentially permanent WFH or more dispersed regional office scenarios. Most of the larger downtowns are reeling with high vacancy rates. Retail vacancy rate in downtown Oakland are over 30% while class A office vacancy is at 37%. Oakland is in a bit of dilemma. The obvious answer would of course to just be stop trying to charge way over market rent. Unfortunately a lot of it is new construction with large loan balances. If you're the landlord and adjusting your rent downward to market rate guarantees you go bankrupt, might as well just hope for a miraculous recovery and a white knight tenant to rush in to save you. Probably won't happen and the buildings will just stay vacant, get sold off in bankruptcy to a holding company. But that will take years to happen.
It'll be interesting. Same with the mall boom/bust, it's not that there's no demand for surburban style malls. It's just they built too many of them and now the least attractive or useless. Why drive in from the suburbs where you have malls to the suburban mall downtown. The newer style of outdoor lifestyle type shopping malls out in Dublin or in Marin County are pretty popular but you're left with Hilltop Mall in Richmond which is a veritable ghostown. There's been various plans on what to do with it. The current one is to built some warehouses as well as housing. That seems like a good use as it's what most of the area is used for. Amazon has three giant warehouses, UPS, Whole Foods just down the street. It's easy access to 80 and 580 but because of that proximity it's not suitable for more market rate housing. People who can choose where to buy housing as opposed to just where the welfare housing is located won't generally choose to be in that close proximity to a major freeway nowadays as the health implications are common knowledge.
Sacramento where I used to live same problem with their downtown mall. They build a basketball court on half of it which I wouldn't say I'm a big fan of. On the other hand it's not like it's much more dead as a basketball court than it was as a mall. Sometimes they have games or other events although not so often with COVID and people scuttle in and race off home. Mostly it's dead like the mall was. Oddly the one thing that at least in Sacrmento is doing very well is $200-300 night hotels. They've built a number of them, including a brand-new one where part of the mall used to be. I've been there once for an event, not shabby. Then there's not one but two new Hyatt hotels and Sheraton and then my personal favorite which was an adaptive reuse which is the the Citizen Hotel. Bars got a full law library in it, probably an old law firm was in the space before it became the hotel's bar.
That reminds me of the wedding we went to in Menlo Park (Silicone Valley) CA a few years ago, and after flying into Oakland borrowed a relative's blue Prius. After the wedding we went back to the parking lot at the venue and found that every other car was a blue Prius. We had to hit the "panic" button on the remote to find the right one. At our Whole Foods in Redmond, WA there are always several Teslas, but different colors, so no need for such a silly thing as a Trump sticker, which would attract vandalism.
Back in 2000, a Prius driver actually put a Bush bumper sticker on her Prius to distinguish it in the Whole Foods parking lot from all the Priuses that had Gore bumper stickers. She took a picture of about 8 Priuses in the parking lot, 7 of which had Gore bumper stickers, and hers had the Bush bumper sticker. She wrote in to the San Jose Mercury News (Silicon Valley). The Mercury New had a daily column called "Mr. Roadshow", written by Gary Richards; Gary's article was usually Q&A about road construction bottlenecks, carpool lanes, etc - and Gary published her letter & photo.
She wrote, in jest, "So here's my question. Will a Bush bumper sticker void my Prius warranty???"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
