EV/battery powered transportation trends

[Chuck]

7 hours ago, gstallons said:

The scary thing about developing the perfect/superior EV battery is ; what happens when your new perfect / superior EV battery has now been usurped by a new EV battery that is now 5% lighter , 5% more efficient and 5% less expensive. This goes well until a newer EV battery is developed that is 2.5% better in all of these areas.

This goes along the lines of MX bikes in the 70s-80s.  Today's technology is GREAT until tomorrow's bike hits the showroom .

 

EV batteries *are* recyclable.. there is money in it. I watched a video of a big recycling plant, and they get about all of it. Battery EVs aren't perfect, of course.. but they are a good stop gap until hydrogen (most likely) is perfected. At the very least, they cut fossil fuel usage, and we really need to do that..

[activpop]

Hydrogen seems to be in the news more and more. They just did a report on this vessel on Motor Week. Check this out...

https://sanfranciscobayferry.com/sea-change-hydrogen-powered-ferry-schedule/

[gstallons]

There is/was a facility "being" built in Hopkinsville , Ky. to reclaim Li-Ion batteries . Polyaramid separation ( I think was the process) .  It was supposed to be this black "dirt" end product to be reused in EV battery production. It was about 50% -70% done and halted . This was to be the only facility in North America to do this recycling at present . There are  all kinds of "reasons" this was stopped . I have heard and read so much , I stopped thinking. You will have to decide for yourself.  Microvast had another facility going up in Clarksville and shuttered it around the same time . 

Edited Monday at 10:13 AM by gstallons
spelling error

[gstallons]

I watched it strictly for the play-by-play and color commentary ! even w/her meltdown the Brother kept it in perspective !

[p6x]

On 1/11/2025 at 1:53 PM, docc said:

 

Anyone care to elaborate on this?

I keep an eye on batteries since my company has used Lithium batteries in our proprietary tools from the 80's. A long time before anybody in the public could even say Lithium in a generic conversation.

At that time, we had a partnership with a battery manufacturer, SAFT. My company was funding their research for batteries with a longer autonomy, while being submitted to hydrocarbon wells temperatures. At the time, I was a tester for the batteries, SAFT showed me how dangerous Lithium was, and how difficult a Lithium fire was to put out.

Anyway, the number 1 vehicle battery manufacturer has introduced a battery using new chemistry; LFP for Lithium Iron Phosphate, instead of what you typically find in cars today; Its interesting to me, because when I left my company, we were using Lithium Oxyphosphate batteries in our tools already. That was in 2015!

Here's the article from the horse's mouth: CATL, the Chinese company responsible for powering 80% of the EV market.

https://www.catl.com/en/news/6091.html

About the Solid State batteries, and when they will become standard in cars, there are only assumptions. What is known, is that all the battery manufacturers, including CATL, are actively working to iron out the known issues of Solid State batteries, the most notorious one is their prohibitive cost, another is reliability.

Today's actual target to install Solid State batteries in cars is set to 2027, although a Chinese car manufacturer has it planned for 2026.

Some of the major car manufacturers, all are invested in Solid State batteries, which seems to be the next step to break through the EV adoption plateau the world is seeing today.

I heard that the US is also actively trying to get a foothold in Solid State battery technology.

 

 

 

[GuzziMoto]

Generally I find talking about EVs on the internet to be a waste of time. There is so much mis-information about them out there, and people seem to get very emotional about them. But the tech is interesting. Toyota (and Honda) put their weight behind hydrogen fuel cells, but for cars that does not seem to be a winning formula, at least any time soon. Hydrogen has much more potential in non-consumer applications like shipping, trucking, or trains, maybe even airplanes. But for consumer operated cars it is not that practical. Unless you can use liquid hydrogen, the energy density of it comes up way short. Toyota is now trying hard to get solid state batteries to work, trying to catch up in a market they were left behind in. They have even announced a solid state battery car, but the reality of it is way off in the future. They announced a car that they have not yet been able to make. They seem desperate to be included in the conversation as a player, but they have little going for them in full EV. Funny, because the BEV tech would dovetail nicely with the hybrid tech. If they built up battery tech it would help them in both BEV and hybrids. A push right now is to move towards a more true hybrid tech, an electric vehicle that also burns gasoline to recharge the batteries. But in that group if you can store more electricity in a lighter / smaller battery you can offer a significant advantage. An EV that can burn gasoline on longer trips, but runs entirely off battery for local trips and can recharge the batteries by plugging in at night while you sleep would be very appealing to many people. But without the battery tech your electric range is limited, and the usefulness is reduced.

Also, one of the big theoretical advantages of solid state batteries is fast recharge time. But since no one has really brought it to market it is hard to know if the theoretical advantages are real.

I am happy with the two EVs I drive. They get me around with way less hassle then the ICE vehicles they replaced. I still have a ICE vehicle, but it is more of a weekend toy we drive for fun. For day to day driving the BEVs do the job with less drama. I can see they would not be for everyone. But we typically only drive 200 miles a day, and that is well within the range of a single charge. And if we need to drive 300 or 400 miles in a day it is easy to recharge once or twice on the trip. Beyond that mileage we rarely do in a day. So, for us, a BEV works better than an ICE vehicle.

[p6x]

12 minutes ago, GuzziMoto said:

Toyota (and Honda) put their weight behind hydrogen fuel cells, but for cars that does not seem to be a winning formula, at least any time soon.

I would be one of those early adopters of H2 Fuel Cells here in Houston, I would purchase the Toyota Mirai no problem.

Unfortunately, in Houston, there is not a single N2 filling station. They seem to be only found in California. On top of it, they seem to have the same issues as the non Tesla charging stations. They go offline all the time which results in N2 car owners having to travel long distance just to refill.

The reason why Tesla was so successful, is because they implemented a proper charging network before selling the cars. So those who were early adopters did not have to worry.

The N2 solution is what's closest to refilling your tank with gas. Why is it not pushed by the authorities? my only guess is that the infrastructures to produce large quantities of N2 does not exist, and car manufacturers do not want to diversify in too many technologies.

This is what I don't understand. Each and every existing Gas Station can be overhauled to have an N2 tank and N2 pump. N2 is delivered by tank trucks the same way gas is. No need to build expensive power lines and transformers to remote places. Yes, N2 is very expensive at present. This is why Toyota subsidize your N2 refuelings when you purchase a Mirai.

I personally don't think EV is a permanent solution to replace ICE.

[GuzziMoto]

On 1/11/2025 at 2:33 PM, p6x said:

I am an Hertz Gold member from my working days.

There was a time when I was getting an email from them, each and every day about renting a Tesla for a heavy discount.

I recently came accross an add stating Hertz was unloading a bunch of Teslas at sacrificed prices. Just out of curiosity, I went on their website to check out what "sacrificed prices" meant. It was all a lure. The so-called "discount" pricing was for cars that had around 100k miles, so well amortized already. The lower mileage cars were in the exact same price braket as what you could find on the market.

This is not the first time I see adds for rental companies supposedly heavily discounted cars. When I was looking for a 911, I used to scan their offers, and their ask price was in the same range as other dealerships. Plus, they did not have the right color (here we go again).

 

I would agree. Most of what they are selling off they are selling at normal prices. Also, Hertz, and other car rental companies, sell off ICE cars all the time but no one says they are bailing on the ICE market. That said, I am not sure a car rental company is wise to invest too heavily in any BEVs. Having some, sure. But I would not think at this point in time there is a massive market for renting EVs. On the other hand, the big advantage of EVs is they are way cheaper to keep running. Which seems at odds with the headlines about this where they allude to the high cost of keeping the Teslas running as being a factor in all this. That makes no sense to me. I think maybe they are talking about a high cost to repair. And that would mainly be because they went with Tesla and not a normal car company who understands that repairs are part of the game. Tesla does seem to struggle with repairs. But the cost of maintaining a Tesla should be pretty low.

[GuzziMoto]

34 minutes ago, p6x said:

I would be one of those early adopters of H2 Fuel Cells here in Houston, I would purchase the Toyota Mirai no problem.

Unfortunately, in Houston, there is not a single N2 filling station. They seem to be only found in California. On top of it, they seem to have the same issues as the non Tesla charging stations. They go offline all the time which results in N2 car owners having to travel long distance just to refill.

The reason why Tesla was so successful, is because they implemented a proper charging network before selling the cars. So those who were early adopters did not have to worry.

The N2 solution is what's closest to refilling your tank with gas. Why is it not pushed by the authorities? my only guess is that the infrastructures to produce large quantities of N2 does not exist, and car manufacturers do not want to diversify in too many technologies.

This is what I don't understand. Each and every existing Gas Station can be overhauled to have an N2 tank and N2 pump. N2 is delivered by tank trucks the same way gas is. No need to build expensive power lines and transformers to remote places. Yes, N2 is very expensive at present. This is why Toyota subsidize your N2 refuelings when you purchase a Mirai.

I personally don't think EV is a permanent solution to replace ICE.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg52543v6rmo

Norway on track to be first to go all-electric

For sure, improving the charging infrastructure is key, as is improving recharge speeds. Gas stations can just as easily add chargers as it can add hydrogen. But that misses the advantages of EVs. They can recharge at the grocery store while you are shopping, at the restaurant while you are eating, or at your house while you are sleeping. Surely some gas station style infrastructure is required for people who are traveling longer distances. But for most people charging while they are doing what the do is an easy option. So we have chargers at the local shopping centers, and around places to eat.

If hydrogen is going to pan out, it will. But so far, they have yet to figure out how to make it commercially viable and something most consumers want. There is no hydrogen infrastructure in place, where as electric infrastructure is already there. They only need to add the chargers to deliver that electricity into the cars. The required infrastructure for hydrogen would have to be built from scratch. And if you think about it, hydrogen is simply adding a middleman and additional complications to the process. Take electricity, use it to make hydrogen, pressurize it to dangerous levels, then ship that and disperse it out to fill cars. Easier to just put the electricity into the car directly.

Edited Monday at 06:12 PM by GuzziMoto

[audiomick]

18 hours ago, activpop said:

Hydrogen ...

An anecdote: I used to work at the Linde annual stockholders meeting. I don't remember when this was exactly, but it is at least 15 years ago, maybe closer to 20. Anyway, at one of the stockholders meetings they talked a lot about big investments they had made in Hydrogen. A couple of years later, one of the stockholders asked why, after the big investments, there hadn't been much movement in that direction. The CEO's answer was very honest and very short: "it seems there is more resistance to hydrogen from certain directions than we reckoned with."

Linde hasn't given up. Their site today:

https://www.linde.com/clean-energy

I am convinced that hydrogen will come to play an important role, both in transport and in "stationary engines" like, for instance, high-power mobile generators. The oil industry is doing its best, I reckon, to slow that down as much as possible.

Edited Monday at 11:36 PM by audiomick

[Lucky Phil]

6 hours ago, GuzziMoto said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cg52543v6rmo

Norway on track to be first to go all-electric

For sure, improving the charging infrastructure is key, as is improving recharge speeds. Gas stations can just as easily add chargers as it can add hydrogen. But that misses the advantages of EVs. They can recharge at the grocery store while you are shopping, at the restaurant while you are eating, or at your house while you are sleeping. Surely some gas station style infrastructure is required for people who are traveling longer distances. But for most people charging while they are doing what the do is an easy option. So we have chargers at the local shopping centers, and around places to eat.

If hydrogen is going to pan out, it will. But so far, they have yet to figure out how to make it commercially viable and something most consumers want. There is no hydrogen infrastructure in place, where as electric infrastructure is already there. They only need to add the chargers to deliver that electricity into the cars. The required infrastructure for hydrogen would have to be built from scratch. And if you think about it, hydrogen is simply adding a middleman and additional complications to the process. Take electricity, use it to make hydrogen, pressurize it to dangerous levels, then ship that and disperse it out to fill cars. Easier to just put the electricity into the car directly.

People need to forget the outliers like Norway who produce 88% of their electricity by Hydro and has a population of 5.5 million people and the land area of Montana. It also has extreme daylight hour fluctuation depending on the seasons. It's a unique country with unique conditions and location in regards to topics such as this. Like making arguments about power source generation with a location on top of thermal springs and using them as aspirational or solar generation in Saudi Arabia. Just distorts the real argument.  

Edited Tuesday at 01:02 AM by Lucky Phil

[audiomick]

24 minutes ago, Lucky Phil said:

People need to forget the outliers like Norway who produce 88% of their electricity by Hydro ...

Yes, but...

Norway is apparently one of the world leaders in electric transport, despite this:

Quote

The state income derived from natural resources includes a significant contribution from petroleum production

The state has large ownership positions in key industrial sectors, such as the strategic petroleum sector

The country is richly endowed with natural resources including petroleum

Large reserves of petroleum and natural gas were discovered in the 1960s, which led to an economic boom.

Oil industry
Oil production has been central to the Norwegian economy since the 1970s, with a dominating state ownership (Heidrun oil field).

Export revenues from oil and gas have risen to over 40% of total exports and constitute almost 20% of the GDP.[168] Norway is the fifth-largest oil exporter and third-largest gas exporter in the world,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Economy

 

I expect they have thought well about placing so much value in electric cars.

 

I rather suspect that they have seen the light at the other end of the tunnel, and realised that it is, indeed, an oncoming train.

Edited Tuesday at 01:24 AM by audiomick

[p6x]

7 hours ago, GuzziMoto said:

Gas stations can just as easily add chargers as it can add hydrogen.

They may be able to install AC chargers, but not all can install the DC chargers that require massive power input.

Buc-ee's has now Testla charging stations, and they have installed massive AC to DC transformers, and they have also installed dedicated medium voltage lines.

I am skeptical that those rural gas stations can afford the upgrade to run DC chargers. It would have to be subsidised by either the State or Federal.

As I make my own bread, I wanted to purchase one of the special humidity oven. They work on 380 or 440 Volts. I contacted Center Point to ask them how I could get this kind of voltage, and they told me I would have to purchase the transformer, and finance the entire cost myself.

 

[Lucky Phil]

5 hours ago, audiomick said:

Yes, but...

Norway is apparently one of the world leaders in electric transport, despite this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Economy

 

I expect they have thought well about placing so much value in electric cars.

 

I rather suspect that they have seen the light at the other end of the tunnel, and realised that it is, indeed, an oncoming train.

Surprise surprise the electricity to charge them is almost free and I'm guessing motoring in Norway isn't a popular pastime. 

Phil

Edited Tuesday at 06:23 AM by Lucky Phil

[LowRyter]

1 hour ago, p6x said:

They may be able to install AC chargers, but not all can install the DC chargers that require massive power input.

Buc-ee's has now Testla charging stations, and they have installed massive AC to DC transformers, and they have also installed dedicated medium voltage lines.

I am skeptical that those rural gas stations can afford the upgrade to run DC chargers. It would have to be subsidised by either the State or Federal.

As I make my own bread, I wanted to purchase one of the special humidity oven. They work on 380 or 440 Volts. I contacted Center Point to ask them how I could get this kind of voltage, and they told me I would have to purchase the transformer, and finance the entire cost myself.

 

I would guess if there is a sufficient customers base, that the profit motive would get someone to back charging stations in rural areas.  Why not the electric utility? 

And considering that rural people could charge at home and be 40 miles to the nearest gas station, perhaps those rural folks might even want an EV?

So far as subsidies, there's $7b in the infrastructure budget for the next three years for charging stations- provided the new admin doesn't sequester it. 

So far as charging stations.  Tesla has started them and promised to open them up with adapters for other cars, then promptly fired the entire charging team.  Perhaps trying to ration what was originally going full on?  Perhaps Tesla Charging Systems should be spun off from Tesla Car Maker?   Elon can own one or the other.  

Edited Tuesday at 02:37 AM by LowRyter