How Realistic Will It Be to Expect EV's to Conquer ICE Cars Soon

RockyRaccoon on 07/02/2023 - 20:20
Last edited 07/02/2023 - 20:21

Friends keep telling me that EV's will take over in the next few years. The issue is how long is a few.

I got to thinking and checked on some data. Yep you know from Google, which we all know is 100% accurate. 🤣

That said there is some interesting figures out there. And I roughly rounded the numbers to keep it simple.

Last year world wide around 80 Million cars produced (down on years before). Estimated BEV's produced in 2022 10 Million (Hybrids not in these figures)

Sales of EV's have at least doubled in past year up and doubled the year before that.

Estimated, there are world wide, 1.4 Billion Cars on the road

In Australia the average age of the national car fleet is 10.1 years

Aust June 21 20 Million cars registered 23000 were EV’s

Ignoring general logistics of this occuring, if we say Australia can take even 10% of worlds current production thats 20 years to change over without ever replacing an older EV

Let alone all the other places with populations far greater than ours like our near neighbours, which have a much greater fleet lifespan average.

Is "soon" realistic or are we just dreaming.

Automotive Electric Vehicle

Comments

      • ribze1 on 10/02/2023 - 11:51

        Needs a big uplift in infrastructure. I feel hybrids are a better dominant option for Australia.
        For example, my parents live in Inner West Sydney where most properties are small and do not have garages or drive ways, how would they and their neighbours be able to charge an EV? Both are retired too so cannot charge it at work.

        • Euphemistic on 10/02/2023 - 12:48

          It’s not that difficult. There’s power poles everywhere, just whack a charge point on those for the inner city mob.

          When there’s more demand, there will be more chargers.

        • joelmuzz on 10/02/2023 - 23:14

          The majority of cars never do a trip longer than their overnight garage charge so it's not that big an issue.
          The majority are city suburb cars and rentals exist for that once a year roadtrip.

      • gromit on 10/02/2023 - 11:55

        5 years maybe 20-25%. 10 years will pass 50%. Too much infrastructure work and manufacturing output increase to lift from 3% to 50% sales in just 5 years.

        • surg3on on 10/02/2023 - 14:15

          my ball/ass. Aus is relatively well off and small. If we pay, they will divert limited manufacturing here for more profit.

          • gromit on 10/02/2023 - 14:35

            @surg3on: bullshit. Left hand drive will get the majority of manufacturing capacity, we are already seeing that. No way in hell will we get priority, we are too small to care about custom configs when manufacturing capacity is so limited. Add in to get to 50% we would need massive grid upgrades which would never get done in the next 5 years.

            • joelmuzz on 10/02/2023 - 23:16
              -1

              @gromit: RHD will go away with the increase in driver assist features.
              What is the justification for RHD vs LHD steering wheel being a safety issue when modern cars have so much driver assist tech?

  • Cluster on 10/02/2023 - 08:53

    Look at how long it took for lead replacement fuel to no longer be sold in Australia. New leaded fuel vehicle sales were stopped in 1985, yet LRP was commonly available until the late 1990s. Change in the overall car industry moves very slowly. I expect ICE and EV cars to share the marketplace well into the 2030s.

  • SpendLess on 10/02/2023 - 08:59
    +1

    You would think it be around the next 10 years. Alot of the major car companies have already come out saying they will be stopping ICE car production by 2035. Some alot earlier. A few countries have also come out saying they will be banning ICE cars at a certain year alot of it around this time as well.

  • RolandWaites on 10/02/2023 - 09:45

    A long time. Decades. I would guess for a highly developed country like Australia, somewhere in the range of 15 years before EVs reach 50% of the market. For less developed regions, such as India, Pakistan or much of Africa, at least a couple more decades.

  • JTTheMan on 10/02/2023 - 10:03
    -1

    Back in 2007 I remember looking at this new phone and saying “what a stupid gimmick this touch screen is!” Then I tried my cousin’s iPhone and had to get one, the rest is history.

    Tesla is the iPhone of the road!

  • CowFrogHorse on 10/02/2023 - 10:22
    -1

    Considering that roads contribute 10% of the worlds carbon, the real solution is of course less roads, less cars and less travel.

    • 91rs on 10/02/2023 - 10:49

      Less people would be a better solution.
      Especially the preachy ones that keep telling everyone else that everything they do all of the time is wrong.

      • CowFrogHorse on 10/02/2023 - 11:33
        +1

        I know what you mean, i especially hate traffic lights.

        Who does they think they are to tell me i have to stop at red lights ?

        Or how about driving lanes ? Why should i drive on the left if i want to drive on the right, half drunk ?

        • 91rs on 10/02/2023 - 11:43

          Solid argument, I'd encourage you to have a few drinks, then a couple more and drive somewhere but we already know how much you hate driving.
          Best to take an uber home, maybe you can get an EV uber.

  • 91rs on 10/02/2023 - 10:46

    We are almost at the bottom of the list of countries that manufacturers are targeting, RHD prevents a lot of that.
    So you'd expect the bulk of manufacture to be aimed at LHD countries as to where supply of vehicles goes.

    Based on current tech that's ever evolving, we don't have enough lithium or other the materials to convert countries like the USA to 100% EV*, we need another battery technology to come along, we also then need a super abundance of whatever goes in to those to make enough for more vehicles, or the output and capacity need to increase and size and materials required to drop significantly then meet a reasonable safety level for every home to have this bomb waiting to go off parked in a driveway or garage.

    A Tesla model 3 long range battery is 489kgs. That's a whole lot to dig up, mine etc. This process is probably far worse on the environment you all claim to care about to make new vehicles than it would be to keep older vehicles running and well maintained, but some of you cry over maintenance and think EV removes that need.

    When tax credits or rebates are thrown out there and people are replacing EVs at high rates just for the tax credits, look at Prius's (Priusi?) in CA, they litter car yards as so many were bought and then dumped when the tax credits wore off and nobody wanted them.
    The continual replacement of EV cars is a bigger problem (by owners upgrading when credits expire, leased vehicles), yes it does create a second hand market which can be more affordable but that's more of a gamble than new in many cases. Same argument could be made for ICE, but easier to onsell.
    I'd hate to buy second hand high tech vehicles like Tesla's etc where sensor costs are high, software is often locked, modules for things aren't easily replaceable and its OEM only.

    We also need to seriously address right to repair in EV's (and all modern cars), you don't really own anything, you can't easily modify anything, 3rd party options for repairs and parts are still a struggle. Even wait times for parts for insurance claims in Australia are high, few places are touching them.
    People will start to see them like laptops and just dump them when something too expensive pops up to deal with, creating more waste.

    This is before the what some people will see as crazy rants & conspiracies about vehicles being remotely disabled, conditions or time periods of when it can and can't be charged set, days of week driven to avoid congestion etc. Let's not pretend our nanny governments wouldn't love the ability to do that to us, if it was an option during covid I'm sure Andrews would have loved that for extra control to limit people going out.

    The real price of supercharging\fast charging is still very high when you're not on a free deal, people don't understand that.
    Again look at CA where people were told over summer not to charge their EVs due to aging infrastructure of the power grids so they all went out to diesel generator powered charging stations and waited hours to charge up.

    We saw complaints over Christmas of Tesla owners who'd gone out and then had wait times of a couple hours to charge and that even though EVs only made up 3% of all cars sold last year (1,081,429 cars sold, 33,410 EV's (all brands) for 2022. ).
    Their issue was there were insufficient charging stations compared to the 11 petrol stations nearby, meaning in peak holiday times when people go out they had to wait, oh the horror who could have seen that happening?

    I'd not expect to see it overtake for at least 25 years unless there is some huge breakthrough in the batteries, but even then new tech always costs $$$$$, so to get to a saturation point where it becomes affordable for the average family is quite a while down the road so to speak.

    *Excluding trucks, buses delivery vans etc just targeting private vehicles

    • CowFrogHorse on 10/02/2023 - 11:46
      -1

      Why complicate things ?

      Why dont you think the problem is too much driving ?

      Its the simplest and most environmentally friendly option.

    • gromit on 10/02/2023 - 12:33

      We have more than enough lithium. Why some people classify lithium as a "rare metal" it is not actually rare. The extraction processes though in many countries are extremely environmentally destructive for it. Lithium for instance is more abundant than Lead.

    • us3rnam3tak3n on 10/02/2023 - 23:00

      LHD vs RHD is less of an issue with EV than ICE for obvious reasons.

      Lithium is abundant and Australia has all the other resources required for batteries.

      Right to repair would be great (generally speaking, not just cars) and tax incentives would be helpful as well, particularly when the fossil fuel industry is so subsidised.

  • Devastator0 on 10/02/2023 - 10:49
    +2

    For me personally, not until there is such a time that you can fully charge an EV in the same amount of time it takes to fill up an ICE car. If I'm on a long trip (frequently for myself), I'm not really enthused with stopping somewhere for any length of time delaying my trip so my vehicle can charge. Right now, if I need to stop, it's only for 5 mins to refil the car, quickly stretch legs, and then head off again.

    Also a lot of the EV proponents have full solar arrays, with batteries and keep spouting the words of "just charge when you're at home, overnight"…they never seem to want to acknowledge the fact that not everyone has off street parking, solar setups at home, EV charging at work and just because their use case works for them, or they've had to significantly adjust how they live to use their EV, it doesn't and can't apply for everyone else.

    • JTTheMan on 10/02/2023 - 11:16
      +1

      That's fine if you drive more than a 300km return trip multiple times/week but I think that would be a very niche requirement, we're talking about the vast majority of the population where plugging in at home while they sleep a couple of times/week is more than enough.

      • Devastator0 on 10/02/2023 - 11:28
        +1

        What if you do not have off street parking and cannot charge at home?

        • JTTheMan on 10/02/2023 - 13:11
          +1

          Yes that is a problem at the moment, one of the hurdles stopping widespread adoption of EVs but that will likely change in future with street charging infrastructure.
          Technology is changing very fast. The old Nokia owners would say why would I need a phone that I have to charge everyday?
          The benefits far outweigh the downsides

  • OhmyRyzen on 10/02/2023 - 16:50
    +1

    Developing out of car dependency is the correct way and then having ebikes be the EVs that take over.

  • space cadet on 10/02/2023 - 17:22

    Plenty of comments rightly calling out that charging-time is a significant impediment to universal uptake.

    Wouldn't it be great if the EV industry were able to agree to standardise on a modular battery system that (a) had a universal charging solution for those willing to recharge slowly but cheaply at home, yet (b) was able to be easily exchanged like a "swap-n-go" gas cylinder at a service station?

    For example, your smaller "compact EV" could have a battery system comprising of say 6 of these batteries, whereas your "SUV EV" could have a battery system comprising 12. Let's say two are used in tandem to provide adequate voltage. So once the first two are drained, the car starts using the next pair. You could rock-up to a service station, and swap out the two that are drained for a fully-charged pair, and be on your way. Or, when you got home you could plug your car into the mains and have the batteries recharged there. It would allow you to access the best of both worlds.

    Edit: another thought that just came to me, is that having battery packs that can be swapped out at a service station would also solve the Government's issue of not being able to levy a "consumption" tax on EVs (which they do to ICE users in the form of taxes on petrol). There would simply be a tax included in the price of the exchanged battery. If you've got the time to recharge at home, chances are you're not driving much/far.

    There's lot of considerations to iron out here of course, but I feel like this would be the most logical "revolutionary" step forward in getting mass EV adoption. Unless we are able to crack the nut of super-super-fast charging.

  • CuteWittleCorgi on 10/02/2023 - 19:13

    We’ve had 2 Teslas for almost a year now. And we’re never ever ever going back to inferior ICE cars. So yeah EVs have already “taken over” our household.

    • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 22:18

      Not everyone can afford a Tesla, or similar.

  • us3rnam3tak3n on 10/02/2023 - 23:12

    I find it weird that the question posed was about how soon EV would conquer ICE cars and the discussion quickly devolved into "how do you feel about EVs taking over?"

    I think they will eclipse sales in 5-10 years and take up to another decade to become the majority. Just a guess really. I don't think most of the problems raised will have much impact other than lowering the initial cost.

  • R4 on 11/02/2023 - 01:01

    Not anytime soon.

    2040 onwards will be when it happens.

  • inertia8 on 11/02/2023 - 10:09

    For us, when the time comes to get a 2nd vehicle then we will consider an EV.

    I feel that whilst we still see personal vehicle ownership as the norm, then those who are wealthy enough will be just fine with having EVs as they can afford to just keep buying/leasing brand new vehicles, removing their risk of having a battery going bad outside of warranty… It's the 2nd or 3rd owner of the vehicle that I feel for, those who basically buy it because they can't afford new.. So they end up buying something that in all probability during their ownership will experience decreased range or other failing battery related issues.. it's only a matter of time before that battery needs replacing and I'm hoping there is laws/guarantees in place that ensure that it can actually be replaced for a good life of the product.. otherwise what? We end up sending a useful vehicle to be recycled, cutting it's life short and negating some of its benefit to the environment…

    • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 13:06

      So they end up buying something that in all probability during their ownership will experience decreased range or other failing battery related issues

      That’s not dissimilar to buying used cars now. Engines blow up, gearboxes pack it in. Yes, batteries degrade, but if you only need 100km range and the starting point was 3-400km that a lot of degradation before the car is no good.

      There are battery upgrade options for early Nisan Leaf and Mitsubishi imiev but it’s still a niche market. There’s a good argument for replacing batteries as the rest of the vehicle and drivetrain are robust enough. Battery upgrade/replacement might take off.

      Time will really tell how long batteries last and their rate of failure. We’ll have to wait and see somewhat. One thing is for sure, batteries will last plenty more than 10years before they are useless.

  • 11112007 on 11/02/2023 - 11:30

    There are now 83,000 EVs in Australia according to the latest report from the Electric Vehicle Council. Last year 3% of new car sales were electric.

    Year to date 2023 is 6% of new car sales……. electric new car sales will most likely double year on year from here on as prices drop, more supply and government incentives like no FBT on novated leases.

    • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 22:23
      -2

      The price of ALL cars, not only EV's, are going to drop as the Covid 19 car supply crisis eases.
      Subsidy of EV's is theft.
      Why are not ALL cars receiving a subsidy?
      In NSW there is now a $3,000 rebate for EV's.
      Equity suggests that ALL cars get it, or none.

      • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 22:29
        +1

        EVs get the subsidy because the government want to virtue signal. They’re trying to buy votes from greenies. /s

        Or perhaps they are actually trying to improve air quality and reduce health issues in cities while reducing the carbon output of our economy.

  • pulpfiction on 11/02/2023 - 12:42

    As others have said, we tend to hold onto our cars for a long time here (this is the best thing for the environment, regardless of ICE or EV in the near term). The transition therefore will be slower than other countries. I suspect a lot of people are just waiting.

    My car over 20yo. Japanese SUV and going strong. When this dies, I’ll be exceptionally likely to grab an EV. It’ll be one of the following, in order of likelihood: Sub-75k EV for the fringe benefits tax exemption, high end EV or large 4x4 ICE for camping.

  • Chong on 11/02/2023 - 13:16

    It will all be down to economics, eventually petrol stations will start becoming non economical as no enough petrol/diesel ICE vehicles left, then petrol will slowly get more expensive

    then growth will become exponential (not simply doubling every year), also waiting for the cheaper commuter type EVs to come up to minimum spec (safe and suitable for daily work commute for most of the general population)

    I suspect in 10 years we will say wow EV adoption was slower than expected, then in 15 years (5 years after that) it will suddenly feel like majority of the vehicles are suddenly EV.

    I also suspect there will be this weird window where theres not enough affordable 2nd hand/cheaper vehicles for commuting, and the people who cant afford to get an EV will also be stuck with pay for expensive petrol.

    Thats my guess

  • Yoo05 on 11/02/2023 - 13:20
    -1

    Will be interesting to see around the 10 year mark when the battery needs a replacement, lot of people will be in shock.

    • pulpfiction on 11/02/2023 - 13:50

      Time will tell. Most batteries are warranted for 8-10, but have expected lifetimes of 15-20 so it will be further out for most. Just like a ICE, it’ll keep going after warranty… unless it’s a Jeep.

      In either case, the real question is will battery prices drop materially when it comes time to upgrade. I doubt it…

    • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 14:43

      Batteries do not magically need a replacement at 10 years. Sure, they degrade over time and some will fail but the majority have warranty of 10years at something like 90% capacity. So maybe a 20yo battery will need replacing, but chances are it’ll still have 50% range at that point.

  • Jackson on 11/02/2023 - 15:58

    You can't post a question about EVs and expect to get straight answers. Every a-hole is an expert and it's just and arguement fest. Funnily enough it's just progress, when the iPhone came out there were droves of people saying they will hold on to their Nokia, they all jumped ship in a couple of years and the company went broke. Now people have a similar attitude to ICE vehicles.

    You can think of a million reasons why an ICE vehicle might be better than a petrol one and vice versa. At the end of the day, when cost parity comes in, everyone will be jumping ship to EVs, simply because 99% of us live in a society where we would rather save our money for luxuries like holidays and making ends meet. ICE will become a niche vehicle for special purposes. If you are a forward thinker, willing to import a car from Japan, and compromise on the type of vehicle you have, you will already come out ahead on costs compared to ICE vehicles.

    • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 21:04
      -1

      Unless there is not enough electricity generating/charging capacity to go around.
      Don't forget, the sun only shines when the sun is above the horizon, and the wind does not blow 24/7.
      It is reported that Germany, for example, is needing to reinstate coal generating capacity, giving Saint Greta conniptions.
      The UK is in a similar condition because it let the coal fired generating capacity run down.
      What is the point of having electric cars "to save the planet" if the source for expanding their market share is fossil fuel fed?
      As Homer Simpson would say "D'oh"!

      • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 22:32

        Even if the EVs end up being powered by coal (it’ll phase out) the carbon emissions of an EV powered by coal is less than the carbon emissions of an equivalent ICE vehicle.

        • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 22:37
          -4

          But carbon emissions don't do anything.
          Since the mid 70's the "global warming" mantra has been the cause celebre(italics needed).
          Just a few weeks ago an ALL TIME coldest temperature record was set in Mt. Washington USA.
          When is it going to start getting warmer?

          • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 22:39

            @Leadfoot6: The vast majority of climate scientists agree that “climate change” is real and that carbon emissions are a big part of it. It’s not “global warming”. Record cold, bigger storms, worse droughts = climate changing.

            • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 23:11

              @Euphemistic: No.
              The mantra was changed from "global warming" to "climate change" because Blind Freddy could not/still cannot make the "warming" mantra stick.

              From the mid 70's till now, significant warmth should have occurred.

              It hasn't.

              Hence, no need to worry about/spend trillions of dollars on trying to reduce CO2.

              & "worse droughts"?

              (Climate Scientist - roll eyes)Tim Flannery's epic fail - "Sydney's dams will never fill again" uttered in about 2007.

              What a FW he is.

              • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 23:21

                @Leadfoot6: Yes, it’s not warmer, but weather rvents are getting more extreme - per your lowest recorded temp. It’s real, get your head out of the sand.

                Besides that, fossil fuels are a finite resource. If we don’t do something, they’ll run out. As it is, it’s getting more difficult and therefore more expensive to extract fossil fuels. we’ve tapped most of the easy stuff.

                If we are wrong about climate change we spend trillions of $ to cut emissions and it doesn’t affect climate, we end up with a lower cost energy sector BEFORE we run out of fossil fuels. if we are right about climate change and spend trillions to cut emissions, we prevent catastrophe. Win win situation IMO.

                • Leadfoot6 on 11/02/2023 - 23:34

                  @Euphemistic: Not if the money spent was not necessary.
                  Economic growth has been hindered.
                  It won't hurt us as much as the poor nations.
                  Aren't socialists supposed to be more concerned for the poor?
                  Seems not.
                  Besides, Australia has 200 + years of coal.
                  Or we could fall back on nuclear.
                  Raw materials for the supply of Australia has the luck to have most of the worlds largest reserves of.
                  Yet, the "hand wringers" and "bed wetters" don't want to use it to any great extent.

                  A change to increased nuclear energy use in Australia, and worldwide, is a change I would happily embrace and encourage.

                  • Euphemistic on 12/02/2023 - 06:38

                    @Leadfoot6: Nuclear is a spore risk solution, but it’s significantly more expensive that renewable options.

                    • Euphemistic on 12/02/2023 - 08:36

                      @Euphemistic: Nuclear is a potential part of the solution, but it comes with a massive financial cost.

                      No idea what autocorrect changed it from. I really need to proof read better.

      • us3rnam3tak3n on 12/02/2023 - 00:30
        +1

        With bidirectional charging more EVs will be more storage for those intermittent sources.

  • Eeples on 11/02/2023 - 16:31
    +1

    I'm in the 4th group. Just want to charge at home and not visit service stations and minimise my contact with mechanics.

  • quanticism on 11/02/2023 - 18:10

    Every year, about 70 mil vehicles sold. Assuming exponential growth in EV sales, EVs will overtake ICE sales in around 2025.

    It'll still take around 20 years (1.4 billion cars / 70 million cars per year) to replace the existing ICE fleet though. Still anything can change. Who knows what FSD would do the the world. And EVs should become cheaper than ICE in every way so it's quite possible for it to go significantly over 70 million cars per year.

  • johnfuller on 11/02/2023 - 20:07
    +2

    lithium production cannot keep up with current demand .. charging times take too long .. impact on environment .. people aren't sold

    • Euphemistic on 11/02/2023 - 22:33
      +1

      No. People aren’t sold which is why they have hundreds of EVs in stock and can’t sell them /s

      • johnfuller on 13/02/2023 - 08:55

        go check how many people are selling their ev, some selling with only ~100km on the clock, some haven't even got delivery lol, you tell me … they aren't selling privately .. maybe there is demand due to the petrol prices, but petrol prices will come down with more evs on the road .. i dont want to spend that long charging my car its too long

        • Euphemistic on 13/02/2023 - 09:23
          +1

          Many people with EVs are leasing them. They turn them over every few years. Others selling before delivery are speculating and hoping that someone out there will pay over the going rate because they don’t want to wait 12 months for a new delivery. There’s been plenty of models where people are lying over the RRP to get one now.

          As for charging, you don’t need to ‘wait’. You plug in and go do something else. If you’ve got a garage at home, you charge while you are home, usually sleeping, and start every day with a full tank. Unless you regularly drive further than your EVs range you’ll likely not need to charge away from home either.

          And before “I only have street parking without a charger”, how often to you get petrol now? You might need to charge twice as often, but likely you can do this while grocery shopping or going to the movies/pub/restaurant. This will actually be quicker than filling, because it takes 30s to plug in/unplug instead of standing there holding the hose trigger.

          Petrol prices are not coming down. They might settle down a bit, but the oil companies will want to maintain their profit margins and it’s likely that governments will increase taxes on fuel to keep it prices high and ‘pay for carbon offsets’.

          • johnfuller on 13/02/2023 - 11:51

            @Euphemistic: i disagree ..

            people are leasing all kind of cars .. not just ev .. thats a general statement ..

            petrol prices WILL come down with more people going on EV.. you know how supply and demand works?

            you are still waiting .. watching a movie cannot guarantee there will be a charger available for your car ..

            dont get me started on long road trips lol

            • Euphemistic on 13/02/2023 - 11:57

              @johnfuller:

              people are leasing all kind of cars .. not just ev .. thats a general statement ..

              Of course it’s a general statement, but I think you’ll find that very few people go back to ICE once they’ve tasted EVs.

              We get it, not everyone wants an EV amd that’s your choice. It’s just that many who don’t want one, can’t see the forest for the trees. Charging seems to be a big issue for non owners, but fine for owners. Range anxiety isn’t real for most owners, especially now real world range is 300+ km not 160 like it used to be.

              • johnfuller on 13/02/2023 - 12:03

                @Euphemistic: range is an issue for aussies .. maybe not for other parts of the world.. agree to disagree :)

                • Euphemistic on 13/02/2023 - 12:32

                  @johnfuller: Range is an issue for some Aussies. Yes, we can disagree. I believe we’ve also been sold the line that you won’t be able to travel if you have an EV. Most of us would only travel more than 300km in a day maybe 2x per year, travelling 700km in a day is pretty rare. If you do want to do that it makes a trip much more pleasant if you can break it up and stop a couple of times for 20-40min. Planning charging around that is not difficult. Just a change in thinking. Last time I travelled 700km in a day, we pretty much stopped long enough to recharge just to stretch legs/have lunch anyway.

                  Of course, if you travel more than that, EV is not for you … yet.

                  If you have a second car, it is more often than not a car that stays within EV range of home all the time. Unfortunately they don’t really sell us Aussies city EVs yet. Yet again, we’ve been let down as there are many available overseas that would be perfect as a city based car for commuting and taking kids to sports. But we’re at “early adopter” phase where they are expensive and “have to have” all the bells and whistles. The new MG ev is probably a good starter for cheap(er) city EV motoring.

  • Mrgreenz on 11/02/2023 - 23:00

    Define "soon"

  • Lancerx on 12/02/2023 - 00:38
    -1

    With the price of electricity at 28c/kw,is it really saving that much? My biggest beef with EV is you have to buy another one in 10 years, as the battery would be bad by then.

    • Jonesy555 on 12/02/2023 - 13:44

      Many electricity retails are offering discounts for EVs.
      From 17c overnight to free power daily between 10am -2pm.

      Majority charge from solar, so only loosing 6c feed in tariff.

      • Lancerx on 12/02/2023 - 16:45

        But most drive their car during the day.. So it doesn't make sense, at least for me

    • Euphemistic on 12/02/2023 - 17:46

      Yes. Sparks are cheaper than petrol.

      No, you won’t need to buy another in 10 years because “the batteries are bad”.

  • TightAssDude on 12/02/2023 - 08:28
    +1

    Does anyone remember how poorly built holdens and ford's were in the 80s, with most cars suffering serious faults after 10-15 years? Yet we lapped them up… Evs are the same… Soon their quality and the battery issue will be solved and we'll never look back.

  • conza on 12/02/2023 - 13:29

    I would say, think of ICE cars continuing like Diesel cars used to be, they'll fill that gap for those edge cases where you can't access fast charging, need to go mega distances in short periods of time (1500km in a day).

    Aside from access to charging and mega distances, electric cars are objectively superior to ICE cars. You would need a reason to be buying a new car that isn't an ICE car now, such as a specific feature or style of car. Not many ICE sports cars - and don't say Model S, a sports car isn't a performance car.

    • Leadfoot6 on 12/02/2023 - 19:11

      There are other earlier posts saying electric vehicles are so superior to petrol powered in so many ways, but I don't have time to find the exact posts so this one will do:

      "The head of the National Transportation Safety Board expressed concern Wednesday about the safety risks that heavy electric vehicles pose if they collide with lighter vehicles.

      The official, Jennifer Homendy, raised the issue in a speech in Washington to the Transportation Research Board. She noted, by way of example, that an electric GMC Hummer weighs about 9,000 pounds (4,000 kilograms), with a battery pack that alone is 2,900 pounds (1,300 kilograms) — roughly the entire weight of a typical Honda Civic."
      […..]

      “We have to be careful that we aren’t also creating unintended consequences: More death on our roads,” she said. “Safety, especially when it comes to new transportation policies and new technologies, cannot be overlooked.”

      Homendy noted that Ford’s F-150 Lightning EV pickup is 2,000 to 3,000 pounds (900 to 1,350 kilograms) heavier than the same model’s combustion version. The Mustang Mach E electric SUV and the Volvo XC40 EV, she said, are roughly 33% heavier than their gasoline counterparts.

      “That has a significant impact on safety for all road users,” Homendy added.
      […..]

      https://fortune.com/2023/01/11/electric-vehicles-heavy-batte…

      The extra weight, as noted by an authorative automotive organisation, is a significant drawback.

      An important factor in automotive vehicle performance is keeping the total weight as low as practicable.

      It would seem that electric vehicles are handicapped in this respect.

      • conza on 13/02/2023 - 06:16

        You're quite right, weight is the largest flaw in electric cars and it does hamper them today, all of them.

        Battery technology is developing though, and I believe we'll see lighter batteries with longer ranges, it may never get to the level energy density of petrol per litre/kilogram, but it will be more than enough.

        • Euphemistic on 13/02/2023 - 08:32

          BEVs are heavier, but not by a massive amount. The additional weight in a BEV is generally low in the structure - under the floor so it doesn’t affect handling as much as expected. Plus while they are heavier to accelerate, there is also more energy regained during regenerative braking.

          It’s not ideal, but it’s not as bad as it sounds.

          • conza on 13/02/2023 - 18:26

            @Euphemistic: The BEV acronym has always confused me. I don't see a need for the B personally, any 'non-BEV' EV is not default, it's kinda like full cream milk right? Milk is milk, everything else is special milk. Anyway. BEV is default EV when speaking about EVs.

            Yes the skateboard layout aids weight distribution and swaying in corners, basic physics, and that's wonderful, it means cars might not 'feel' as heavy as they are.

            But they still are heavier and it still matters as it's the biggest contributor to range reduction, EVs that are 2 tonne today are closer to 1.5 tonnes for the equivalent petrol car.

            Anyway, hope it is improved either through higher density batteries, newer battery technologies etc. I take your point it isn't a 'deal breaker' for me, if my car blew up, EVs would be on the cards, despite the added weight.

            • Euphemistic on 13/02/2023 - 20:09

              @conza: Toyotas Mirai is an EV. It runs on electricity but from hydrogen. It’s a HEV. There are also hydrogen combustion engines so it makes sense to use HEV, there are also PHEV, plug in hybrids. Not really applicable to cars, but train locomotives and mining dump trucks etc are often diesel electric, and electric drivetrain with a diesel generator.

              • conza on 13/02/2023 - 20:11

                @Euphemistic: Indeed, and neither are the default EV option.

      • saltypete on 13/02/2023 - 09:56

        I’m calling BS on that for Aussie roads at least. Biggest seller here is a Ute that eights 2 tonnes tare, then has at least another 500 kg on it while drifting around town. We share roads with B doubles, buses etc. The ever popular Glandbruiser starts at 3t and many are overloaded from their GVM of 3.5t.
        An EV is heavier than a similar sized ICE, but not spectacularly so. And none are approaching the weight of anything but a bare bones dual cab. Light vehicles on our roads are already vastly outweighed, don’t see EV uptake is going to make any real difference to this.

        EVs have almost all of their weight below the floor level too, lower than any ICE vehicle. Talk of a handicap in this regard is just crazy talk….
        Who is the ‘authority’? Toyota?

  • Clickbait on 12/02/2023 - 15:28

    As all us suckers move over to electric cars, the government s will all start to augment falling excise from conventional fuel with a kilometre based Excise on battery operated cars, like that are already starting to do in New Zealand.
    And like every government, they will bullshit all the way, and we will cop it all the way.
    It's all about taking money from mugs.

    • Euphemistic on 12/02/2023 - 17:49

      But don’t they already take a crap load of tax in petrol sales? Roads don’t repair themselves, a km excise will shift some of the burden of paying for roads back to road users.

      • Clickbait on 12/02/2023 - 18:18

        They take about $14 Billion a year in fuel excise. and they are never going to take less.
        Just moved to 47.7 cents per litre.
        Change that to a cost per Kilowatt or kilometre, EV cars are starting to cost more to run in UK already.
        EV cars will be for rich people only, just like actually buying one now, for the rich only..
        Just like solar panels. If you have to live in a rental or high density, the poor people can eat cake.

  • drfuzzy on 12/02/2023 - 16:18

    Roughly 30 years, give or take 10.

  • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 01:13

    I have not attempted to do a cost comparison, but the following comment from a motoring writer was quite a surprise:

    ‘Clown world’: Man driving electric Kia EV6 exposes glaring flaw in long-distance road trips
    As sales continue to soar, a car reviewer has pointed out the biggest glaring flaw in the electric vehicle revolution.

    "Ross expressed his frustration with the lack of available charging stations and the fact that the cost of recharging is equivalent to petrol.

    (comments about long waiting times to access a charger)

    “We’re still going to have to pay, you know, the same as petrol. Clown world.”

    Any comments about the comparative costs of petrol v electricity would be welcome.

    https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/on-the-road/clow…

    • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 06:50

      Anybody using language like that can be ignored. It’s click bait. Yes, charging at a public charger costs more than from a cord in your garage. Most of them cost less than half the cost of petrol.

  • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 07:19

    So, prima facie(italics needed), he is correct.

    Thank you.

    • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 08:21

      Nope. He’s just wanting clicks and will say whatever is necessary. Plenty of EV owners out there completely happy with their product, and yes, they use them up and down the highways.

      All vehicles are a compromise. EVs need to plan more carefully around charging out on the highways. ICE you have to go out of your way and fill with fuel plus wasting that expensive fuel every time you are sitting there idling.

      • Danstar on 15/02/2023 - 11:12

        fuel plus wasting that expensive fuel every time you are sitting there idling.

        So in EV's with the air con going, music/radio playing, huge display screens don't use power when idle ?

        • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 12:23

          Of course they use energy. But, it’s probably less than the energy generated while slowimg to a stop. Audio/screen etc don’t use much energy, measured in watts, while the battery pack and drive motor use thousands of watts (kW). ICE cars have these too and can run for at least an hour on a relatively tiny 12v battery.

          As for AC, sure, it uses energy but it’ll be a lot low energy efficient than in an ICE because it’s electrically driven and doesn’t require a 100kW motor to be idling wasting half of its energy in heat and noise.

  • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 07:29
    -1

    Here is a similar assertion, but from a different source:

    Electric car owners misled about cost of ‘free’ power

    Business columnist Terry McCrann says electric car owners have been misled into believing that power is “free”.

    “This reality that the underlying cost of power, it’s not simply the fact that you have to power it somehow,” McCrann told Sky News host Rita Panahi.

    “The cost of power that they use electricity has gone up dramatically and will continue to increase precisely because of the whole mix of green policies.”

    https://www.skynews.com.au/business/tech-and-innovation/elec…

    I'm wondering what sort of comment "Blackout Bowen" would make?

    Or Matt Kean?

    Especially when NSW taxpayers are going to be forced to supply "30,000" new electric chargers.

    Furious backpedaling could be a new renewable energy source.

    • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 08:16

      Of course it’s not free. That was a marketing ploy by Tesla early on to help promote their network. Sparks are only feee in some circumstances, mostly when you get them from the sun from your own roof.

      I’ve heard along the lines of 60c/kWh. So an 80kwh battery would cost $48. The likelihood of actually needing a zero-full charge is fairly rare, and it’s still cheaper than $2/l.

      If you are smart about where you charge, you can get sparks a lot cheaper than the ultra fast chargers on the main highways. Businesses just off the highway will offer cheaper charging to get you to spend time at their business for example.

      Why am I not surprised you’ve linked a sky news article and that article is decidedly against EVs?

      The cost of power that they use electricity has gone up dramatically and will continue to increase precisely because of the whole mix of green policies.

      No. Electricity prices have gone up because the price of coal has skyrocketed, previous governments have spent decades cutting costs on the grid and not invested properly in renewables early enough.

      • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 09:43
        -1

        There is no need to "invest" in renewables, duplicating power supply infrastructure.

        The sky "is not falling".

        Only Saint Greta, John Kerry, Al Gore, Adam Bandt and their multitude Greenie FW adherents throughout the world still think it is.

        It's not.

        P.S. My last petrol purchase a few weeks ago was $1.61/L for 91 - less my 4c/L at the supermarket.

        I believe I could get it for less in metro Sydney, during a downward part of the cycle, rather than in the Illawarra where I live.

        P.P.S. I also do not have a lazy $45,000 just sitting waiting to slap down on a Chinese made SBox, especially since I do not want to further the aggressive military ambitions of Chairman Xi.

        • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 10:23

          Why wouldn’t you invest in renewable power? we should stay beholden to the coal and gas companies?

          Aside from the whole climate change argument you obviously don’t believe (it is real) doesn’t it make sense to make electricity from free stuff that has no emissions, not even dust? Surely the power companies are getting excited about electricity they can sell for coal filed prices without the coal fuel. You’d run your car on water if you could and it meant you don’t have to buy petrol wouldn’t you?

          I’ve got solar panels on my roof. Had them there a few years and for the next 20 or so I’m getting some free electricity. They’ve already paid for themselves. Why wouldn’t you want to do that for everyone?

          • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 11:06
            -1

            @Euphemistic: Because I don't feel the need to "save the planet".

            My tax money is subsidising your solar panels.

            I was not asked if I wanted to contribute.

            That is theft.

            This renewable energy scam should have been an "opt in" situation.

            If you believe that "the sky is falling" then put your money where your mouth is.

            Don't expect others to subsidise your fantasy.

            • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 12:38

              @Leadfoot6: Think it might be you who is living in a fantasy land. Perhaps even head in the sand land.

              You don’t feel the need to save the planet? Good for you. There’s plenty of others that think that we need to change our ways, plenty of them the most respected scientists in the world. At this point in time, it’s the majority.

              I wasn’t asked to contribute to a bunch of stuff that benefits you either. I didn’t agree to building hospitals in the Illawarra. See how silly that sounds?

              It’s not just you out there, there’s millions of us and we all pay taxes to support a whole bunch of stuff that predominantly benefits us as a whole. That’s what the government is supposed to do. The majority gets to decide what we get with our taxes every time we vote.

              • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 12:48
                -1

                @Euphemistic: Um, the Illawarra is well behind metro Sydney, for example, in the amount of funding received for hospitals on a per capita of residents basis.

                I have to drive a fair distance to get to a (smaller) hospital.

                Weren't electricity assets privatised some years ago?

                Isn't usage of electricity determined on a user pays basis?

                Apparently not.

                Renewables are subsidised by those not wanting or believing in renewables, but have to pay for the eye sore monstrosities of wind farms already in existence, and proposed off the Illawarra coastline.

                I am not personally benefiting from renewables, but am getting shafted anyway by my power bill being increased.

                Put YOUR money where your mouth is and leave mine alone.

                • Euphemistic on 15/02/2023 - 12:56

                  @Leadfoot6:

                  Renewables are subsidised by those not wanting or believing in renewables, but have to pay for the eye sore monstrosities of wind farms already in existence, and proposed off the Illawarra coastline.

                  Eyesore? Never been for a drive up the Hunter valley? Monstrosity coal power plants spewing stuff into the sky. Coal mine raping the landscape? Coal mining dust settling on houses and getting into lungs. Then there’s the huge black piles of coal next to our beautiful harbour lined with oversized coal shops belching smoke. I’d rather see some windmills. Beauty in the eye of the beholder eh?

                  I am not personally benefiting from renewables, but am getting shafted anyway.

                  Bulls%#^. renewables cost less to install and less to run that fossil fuel sources. It’s keeping prices lower.

  • Leadfoot6 on 15/02/2023 - 13:17
    -3

    We have natural gas now, in huge quantities.

    Except that form of power is being held back.

    It's keeping prices lower???

    HA HA if accurate, why are the electricity bills getting higher the greater the proportion supplied by renewables?

    Why?

    Because renewables are NOT cheaper.

    Besides, Australia EARNS foreign exchange with coal exports.

    We SPEND foreign exchange, mainly to militarily aggressive China, buying solar panels and wind turbines.

    I would much prefer to make my country richer and fund jobs here, rather than sending them offshore

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join