Lamenting the decline of the car

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

My point here is that your car already includes substantial Chinese content. Just like many other appliances. But until now, you've probably never thought about it as being in things other than cheap dollar store junk and electronics. The legacy automakers have been using China to make parts they rely on for eons. The Chinese OEMs are just starting to understand there's an opportunity to move up the value chain here.



I actually hope the Chinese don't dominate. But I'm calling it as I see it. And the way I see it, while legacy automakers were in denial about EVs in Japan and the US and Europe, the Chinese OEMs have spent the last decade and hundreds of billions learning how to build better EVs, developing the supply chains, etc. And they will be rewarded for it. American protectionism means squat. They couldn't stop the Chinese from taking over electronics manufacturing. What makes this any different? The worst they'll be able to do is keep the cars out of the US. And that kind of protectionism has consequences too, given that the Detroit OEMs sell more cars in China than they do in the US.



When talking about energy consumption it does...

And if you don't want to actually calculate out the thermodynamics, go look at the mileage figures. The MPGe metric converts gasoline into an equivalent energy amount (33.7 kWh) per gallon. Go look at EV mileage. You'll see every one of them has ridiculous sounding numbers in the 80-130 MPGe range. The worst EVs are better than even the best hybrids.



That weight, is a function of what makes them efficient: the battery. Like I said, it will get better over time. And there are a ton of design efforts to lightweight the cars in other ways. But really, this is a bit of a red herring in an era when people are ditching Corollas for F150s.

Quick answers:
China's auto/parts/electronics manufacturing - yes I understand but I think it is way more complex than your allusions indicate. As such I don't share your view that the future is already decided and carved in stone. Not saying that I won't be proven wrong, though.

I was just referring to your comment of 'cheaper', just your choice of words.

Weight - sure, makes sense. IC cars have become bloated pigs as well, a reality that bothers me very much. I was hoping that EVs, being potentially clean-slate designs would be able to reverse that trend, given that the main reason for their existence is the environment - so I see it as untapped potential. I also share your optimism that new technologies will be able to reduce that weight, though there's the potential to get caught up in that ideal of bigger and heavier is better, which seems to be responsible for the large pickup/SUV trend. You can make really efficient, well-performing vehicles, but really the trend is to just tow the line on base-line energy use while using the advancements in technology to make larger and heavier vehicles. Ones that use the same amount of energy as their smaller less-efficient forbears but become bloated and heavy to meet some ridiculous (to me) market demand.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

The market's decisions about climate change haven't been good, to date. Quite the opposite. If EVs weren't, quite literally, essential to the transition to a low carbon/low GHG emission economy, then, yes, let the market decide. Likewise, if seatbelts, airbags, crush cans, ADAS, etc., weren't demonstrably better at saving lives, then let them be optional extras and the market will decide what it wants.

It is genuinely informative for me to read some folks' opinions about EVs and reflect upon how out of date they already are. It's jarring and troubling to still see such dismissal and FUD still being circulated about EVs, and the frequent omission or failure to acknowledge the time-sensitivity of transitioning away from combustion engines, and sense I get that EVs viewed by some as just some sort of scam or still a long way off from being practical replacements of combustion engines, all strikes me as bizarre. It's like we're still in the late 90s hearing people talk about the internet being a fad or ecommerce is a hassle and it will never replace good 'ol department store like Sears or Eaton's.

And as for the market deciding, it's deciding. Despite the bluster of its detractors, Tesla is growing fast, sold out for months, and profitable ($1.6 billion GAAP net earnings in Q3, 14.6% operating margin across the company and 28.8%+ margins on auto sales (excluding regulatory credit income), despite the chip shortage that's hemorrhaging money from the legacy automakers. The Model 3 was the best-selling car across the board in Europe last month (since monthly declines in market share are trumpeted as proof of Tesla's imminent demise, let's include stand-out months, too). Hertz even announced today it is buying 100,000 of them and transitioning to an all-electric fleet. The stock is at an all-time high, too. People are placing their bets on the future and it's paying off.

Good points.

I'm not sure I would include myself in the category that you probably think I'm in, but I also think it's healthy for the conversation to present counterpoints.

As time moves on, the truth will be whatever it turns out to be, despite what people thought it would be previously. We'll see what happens...

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

The weight issue is a bit overblown. EV are maybe 500lbs or 20% heavier than their gas equivalents. It's something, but all cars have been getting bigger and heavier over time.

So it's OK to not hold EVs (which our literal vehicular future) to a higher standard than current vehicles? Granted, they are still in the early stages in terms of their long term development, but god, some of you seem like I just insulted your mother in noting the weight issue. If it's there, why shouldn't we mention it?

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

It's also a bit disingenuous to start worrying about what this will do to the roads when we have no issues letting people swap out economy sedans for much heavier SUVs and pickup trucks.

Disingenuous? Really? Passenger vehicles outnumber heavy trucks by large factors and all vehicles have some effect on the roads, so why would a trending increase in vehicle weight be something to have no concern over? Again, why should we not discuss these things without being accused of being disingenuous?

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I'm no engineer but I'm pretty sure it's the big semi trucks and buses doing 90% of the road damage, not passenger vehicles.

See above.

Geez, sorry if I've offended anyone, I realize that I'm probably best to leave the EV discussion to the 'rah rah' crowd and keep my thoughts to myself on the matter. It will be what it will be. I'll still watch with much interest regardless.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

So it's OK to not hold EVs (which our literal vehicular future) to a higher standard than current vehicles? Granted, they are still in the early stages in terms of their long term development, but god, some of you seem like I just insulted your mother in noting the weight issue. If it's there, why shouldn't we mention it?

Nobody is offended here. Just pointing out flaws in your logic. Seems to me that you think road wear is as important as cutting emissions. The rest of us seem to think climate concerns, being a more pressing issue, allow for a bit more leeway in vehicle weight. Especially with an established trend of improvement.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Disingenuous? Really? Passenger vehicles outnumber heavy trucks by large factors and all vehicles have some effect on the roads, so why would a trending increase in vehicle weight be something to have no concern over? Again, why should we not discuss these things without being accused of being disingenuous?

If this isn't disingenuous that you might just be ignorant on how irrelevant the extra impact is of a few hundred pounds from passenger vehicles. Road wear doesn't scale linearly with weight. It's exponential to the 4th power. So a few hundred pounds isn't the real problem, compared to semis, which are way heavier and drive much more than the average passenger vehicle. I like this chart for a relative idea on just the impact of vehicle weight:

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

So it's OK to not hold EVs (which our literal vehicular future) to a higher standard than current vehicles? Granted, they are still in the early stages in terms of their long term development, but god, some of you seem like I just insulted your mother in noting the weight issue. If it's there, why shouldn't we mention it?

LOL, EVs are already quite simplified compared to ICE vehicles. The batteries are heavy, yes, and hopefully lighter soon. But what does an extra 500 lbs really do?

EVs are well balanced, right around 50/50 front/back weight, and have a very low centre of gravity. That leads to better handling and driving in slippery conditions. How's that for improvement. [/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Geez, sorry if I've offended anyone, I realize that I'm probably best to leave the EV discussion to the 'rah rah' crowd and keep my thoughts to myself on the matter. It will be what it will be. I'll still watch with much interest regardless.

You seem to be the one that is taking this all a bit personally.

EVs have been subjected to a range of FUD for years.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Nobody is offended here. Just pointing out flaws in your logic. Seems to me that you think road wear is as important as cutting emissions. The rest of us seem to think climate concerns, being a more pressing issue, allow for a bit more leeway in vehicle weight. Especially with an established trend of improvement.




If this isn't disingenuous that you might just be ignorant on how irrelevant the extra impact is of a few hundred pounds from passenger vehicles. Road wear doesn't scale linearly with weight. It's exponential to the 4th power. So a few hundred pounds isn't the real problem, compared to semis, which are way heavier and drive much more than the average passenger vehicle. I like this chart for a relative idea on just the impact of vehicle weight:

You keep saying that you know what I'm thinking, when you don't. Please stop.

Yes to your chart, but where is the equivalency to several thousand 5500 lb cars causing cyclic stresses to road materials per one large truck? Over and above, you apparently haven't grasped that I was expressing my disappointment that vehicle weight is continuing to trend in the wrong direction, because I care.

Instead you choose to call me disingenuous or ignorant, which is disrespectful and insulting. Why should I want to continue discussing with you?

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Mostly just a little surprised that cars that are supposed to save the world are such heavy pigs at this point...

The Model 3 weighs about 300 lbs less than a new BMW M3, and the Model S weighs about 400 lbs less than a new Mercedes S Class.

Just sayin'...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Yes to your chart, but where is the equivalency to several thousand 5500 lb cars causing cyclic stresses to road materials per one large truck?

Do the math here. Increasing average passenger vehicle weight is pretty irrelevant compared to any increase in truck traffic which does two orders of magnitude more damage per axle, and three orders of magnitude when we account for multiple axles. From the article I posted earlier:

Consider a standard sedan with two axles and a total weight of 2 tons. Assuming an even distribution, each of its axles would bear the weight of 1 ton. Now consider a semitruck with eight axles and a weight of 40 tons -- each of its axles would weigh 5 tons. The relative damage done by each axle of the truck can be calculated with the following equation, and comes out to 625 times the damage done by each axel of the sedan.

Considering that the truck has eight axles and the sedan has two, the relative damage caused by the entire semitruck would be 625 x (8/2) -- 2,500 times that of the sedan.

“The damage due to cars, for practical purposes, when we are designing pavements, is basically zero. It’s not actually zero, but it’s so much smaller -- orders of magnitude smaller -- that we don’t even bother with them,” said Karim Chatti, a civil engineer from Michigan State University in East Lansing.

This is before accounting for the fact that the average semi drives at least 4x more than the average passenger vehicle. With numbers that big, most road wear outside of residential streets is substantially attributable to heavy commercial vehicles. The numbers of passenger cars is not really that relevant, when the difference is that huge.

And that's assuming the increases due to electrification are substantial. They really aren't. In most cases, about 500 lbs compared to an equivalent category vehicle.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Over and above, you apparently haven't grasped that I was expressing my disappointment that vehicle weight is continuing to trend in the wrong direction, because I care.

We get you care. I think the rest of us just see it as far less important than saving the planet. I really don't care if the switch to BEVs drives up road maintenance by 2-3%.

I have, however, said on here before that the upsizing of vehicles and its impact on pedestrians and cyclists does bother me and I would like to see larger and heavier vehicles taxes. But really, even on this front, an F150 is far more problematic than a Tesla Model 3.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Instead you choose to call me disingenuous or ignorant, which is disrespectful and insulting. Why should I want to continue discussing with you?

No disrespect was intended. I thought you might genuinely not know how the impact of vehicle weight works, and the math involved. Or that your were overweighting these concerns with BEVs in the broader trend towards larger vehicles.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by homebucket

The Model 3 weighs about 300 lbs less than a new BMW M3, and the Model S weighs about 400 lbs less than a new Mercedes S Class.

Just sayin'...

Thanks for the info. A comprehensive chart would be interesting to see.

It's been interesting to see how an offhand comment regarding EV weight has generated such a passionate response. Truly, I was just expressing my surprise to find that all-new EVs such as the Polestar having a curb weight of 4714 lb, or the Rivian R1T having a curb weight of 5886 lb, for example to be much higher than I was expecting. I should have considered that batteries are as heavy as they are, but it still seems like a lot of weight to be hauling around.

We all know that IC vehicles carry around the inefficiencies that they do, including thermal losses and curb weight, but I had higher expectations for EVs. I guess I shouldn't have.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

No disrespect was intended. I thought you might genuinely not know how the impact of vehicle weight works, and the math involved. Or that your were overweighting these concerns with BEVs in the broader trend towards larger vehicles.

Thanks. No, I thought I was just introducing it as a topic of conversation, not a grand argument that disproves the validity of EVs as a form of convenient transportation, but it seemed to turn into much more than that. Frankly I don't have the energy to put any more into the discussion about it. So they are heavy, but more efficient and better for the environment than ICs. A win that I'm happy about.

It could be much worse, such that the climate emergency dictates that we must all give up the luxury of personal transportation that uses any amount of energy, electrical or fossil, but we're not going there yet. We are simply transforming our vehicle use to another mode, and some of us are watching in amazement at all the complexities involved in that transformation.

I personally am looking forward to watching how EVs evolve to become much better than they are as time moves on... I don't think we have yet imagined all of the possibilities, nor can any of us accurately predict where it will go. Just my two cents.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

It's been interesting to see how an offhand comment regarding EV weight has generated such a passionate response. Truly, I was just expressing my surprise to find that all-new EVs such as the Polestar having a curb weight of 4714 lb, or the Rivian R1T having a curb weight of 5886 lb, for example to be much higher than I was expecting. I should have considered that batteries are as heavy as they are, but it still seems like a lot of weight to be hauling around.

The Ram TRX weighs 6400 lbs.

It seems like you're just surprised that cars in general weigh a lot. The Corolla today weighs about the same as a Camry from two decades ago. Cars are just heavier now. It's not EV specific.

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by homebucket

The Ram TRX weighs 6400 lbs.

It seems like you're just surprised that cars in general weigh a lot. The Corolla today weighs about the same as a Camry from two decades ago. Cars are just heavier now. It's not EV specific.

A Corolla is about the same size as a Camry of 20 years ago, so that makes sense.

As battery densities increase the weight of electric cars will decline, but there is no doubt that they weigh significantly more than existing vehicles. This is a concern for all kinds of things like pedestrian safety, stopping distances, additional road wear, etc.

All issues that can be mitigated of course, but still issues.

I imagine once batteries become affordable enough on the mass market, which is coming soon, the next big push will be for battery density to reduce mass.

We also always have to remember that society has spent a century perfecting the ICE, battery electric vehicles are still in their infancy. Automotive manufacturers are still trying to figure out how to produce them in truly mass quantities. We have a long way to go in terms of innovation to address issues like vehicle weight, range, charging speed, etc.

The difference in electric vehicle battery technology in 2021 compared to 2011 is nothing short of astonishing. Back then GM was pushing to get a money-losing Volt on the market with a 40km range, and Tesla was only producing small electric sports sedans with a similarly small range. Imagine another decade of innovation and research into the technology and where we will be in 2031.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

A Corolla is about the same size as a Camry of 20 years ago, so that makes sense.

As battery densities increase the weight of electric cars will decline, but there is no doubt that they weigh significantly more than existing vehicles. This is a concern for all kinds of things like pedestrian safety, stopping distances, additional road wear, etc.

All issues that can be mitigated of course, but still issues.

I imagine once batteries become affordable enough on the mass market, which is coming soon, the next big push will be for battery density to reduce mass.

Yeah there's a lot of reasons for cars being heavier now. They're bigger like you mentioned and have a lot more safety and technology features, all of which adds weight and complexity. Despite ICE cars having smaller, more efficient engines (less displacement and cylinders) than ever before, they're still weighing much more and increasing.

[thewave46]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

EVs have been subjected to a range of FUD for years.

Sure. It's a natural thing for new technology. I just don't like being a beta tester.

They're a relatively new product and have minimal in-service data compared to the fleet of ICE powered vehicles on roads today.

They are expensive and the dealer network is sparse at best. Canadian operating conditions are hard on conventionally-powered vehicles, much less a completely new type of vehicle.

Will they overcome? Probably. Do I want to drop $40-50k right now to be the first to find out how they do at -30C? I'd like to hedge my bet, hence why plug-in hybrids look to be 90% of what I need for running on electric power at this juncture and I know gasoline engines work reliably at low temperatures.

I live in a colder region of the country. The Tesla dealer network's closest dealer is 400km away. Transiting between cities is often 4+ hours of driving on sparsely populated roads. I am a cautious person when $40k is involved.

Maybe if I was in a different place and set of needs I'd consider it, but there are plenty of us who aren't ready to go all-in yet.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

We all know that IC vehicles carry around the inefficiencies that they do, including thermal losses and curb weight, but I had higher expectations for EVs. I guess I shouldn't have.

They're still in their infancy. Think cell phones when they were the size of bricks. Now cell phones are basically handheld computers. It'll get better.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

Thanks. No, I thought I was just introducing it as a topic of conversation, not a grand argument that disproves the validity of EVs as a form of convenient transportation, but it seemed to turn into much more than that. Frankly I don't have the energy to put any more into the discussion about it. So they are heavy, but more efficient and better for the environment than ICs. A win that I'm happy about.

It could be much worse, such that the climate emergency dictates that we must all give up the luxury of personal transportation that uses any amount of energy, electrical or fossil, but we're not going there yet. We are simply transforming our vehicle use to another mode, and some of us are watching in amazement at all the complexities involved in that transformation.

See the Bill Gates interview I put up in the Economy thread. He makes the point that this transition will be unprecedented in human history (he was citing Vaclav Smil) and it has to be. Billions of lives depend on it. If the worst that comes of it is a few dollars a month more in property taxes for road maintenance, we will be stunningly lucky.

Maybe if climate change wasn't bearing down this might be more drawn out. That said, as JB Straubel (Tesla's former CTO) said, as soon as batteries hit the density where BEVs were possible, somebody was going to build them. Even if it wasn't Tesla.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I personally am looking forward to watching how EVs evolve to become much better than they are as time moves on... I don't think we have yet imagined all of the possibilities, nor can any of us accurately predict where it will go. Just my two cents.

I talk a lot about the disruption here because I am always stunned at how quickly it's moving and most people seem completely unaware to what is happening. Meanwhile companies are pouring in tens of billions in capital and we're about to hit tipping points on various technologies that will change our society and economy.

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I imagine once batteries become affordable enough on the mass market, which is coming soon, the next big push will be for battery density to reduce mass.

BEVs were getting heavier because the last decade of density gains had to go towards improving range. We're only now starting to see automakers trade density for improved safety and lower cost with LFP batteries. Once we reach a nominal range that yields the real world range most buyers are comfortable with, battery gains beyond that point will be leveraged towards other goals than than higher range. I figure once nominal ranges hit 500-600 km, buyers will start feeling comfortable with battery degradation and winter range losses that they won't need more range, or will be more willing to pay for it.

If solid state pans out in the next 5 years, it's game over for ICEV. 10-15 min charge times. 800-1000 km ranges for most cars using current battery pack dimensions. And cheaper than today.

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The difference in electric vehicle battery technology in 2021 compared to 2011 is nothing short of astonishing. Back then GM was pushing to get a money-losing Volt on the market with a 40km range, and Tesla was only producing small electric sports sedans with a similarly small range. Imagine another decade of innovation and research into the technology and where we will be in 2031.

People really forget what EVs were like a decade ago. Set aside the Tesla Roadster and look at what the average person might buy. The 2011 Nissan Leaf had an EPA range of 73 mi/ 117 km. The 2022 Leaf has a range of 363 km.

Originally Posted by thewave46

Maybe if I was in a different place and set of needs I'd consider it, but there are plenty of us who aren't ready to go all-in yet.

Nobody is asking you to go all-in yet. The government phase out target is 13 years from now. You're going to be able to drive your dino juice burner for a long time, if you so wish. Though, I'd argue that given the pace of improvements, your concerns are probably on track to get addressed over the next half decade.

[urbandreamer]

Many renters won't be able to get EVs. My building management is always a decade behind the latest trends so I'm not expecting on site chargers until the mid 2030s.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Many renters won't be able to get EVs. My building management is always a decade behind the latest trends so I'm not expecting on site chargers until the mid 2030s.

Not just renters. My condo is full of old and retired people. Trying to convince them that is in their interest has been challenging.

The average person truly believes that this is some very distant future thing. And in a certain sense the 2035 target reinforces that attitude. They don't see steady adoption. They imagine nobody is going to be buying BEVs till 2035, except for some gadget freaks with money to burn. It'll be interesting to see how quickly this narrative changes as adoption ramps in the coming years.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by thewave46

Sure. It's a natural thing for new technology. I just don't like being a beta tester.

True. But I think the beta testers were those driving Nissan Leafs and Tesla S 6 years ago when they were the only options.

Originally Posted by thewave46

They're a relatively new product and have minimal in-service data compared to the fleet of ICE powered vehicles on roads today.

That's true, but changing all the time. Is there specific in-service data you want to know? Nothing stops century-old manufacturers like Ford and GM from building lemons on a semi-regular basis either.

Originally Posted by thewave46

They are expensive and the dealer network is sparse at best. Canadian operating conditions are hard on conventionally-powered vehicles, much less a completely new type of vehicle.

That's true, but mostly because the dealer network is broken. As for EVs themselves, they have far fewer moving parts, and don't undergo the massive temperature changes that combustion engines do, and all of the requisite wear and tear.

Originally Posted by thewave46

Maybe if I was in a different place and set of needs I'd consider it, but there are plenty of us who aren't ready to go all-in yet.

That's fine. I wouldn't invest ~$50k in a new ICE right now either, unless you're planning to drive it into the ground.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

The average person truly believes that this is some very distant future thing. And in a certain sense the 2035 target reinforces that attitude. They don't see steady adoption. They imagine nobody is going to be buying BEVs till 2035, except for some gadget freaks with money to burn. It'll be interesting to see how quickly this narrative changes as adoption ramps in the coming years.

BC was able to move up their ZEV goal thanks to the general public adopting it faster than expected. New goals as follows:

"Our new light-duty ZEV sales targets are 26% by 2026, 90% by 2030 and 100% by 2035."

We were at 10% in 2020. Higher so far in 2021 but that data wasn't published. 26% in 2026 sounds like they picked it for marketing, I think it will be easily exceeded.