The Electric Vehicle Disruption - End Of Oil by 2030
 

Tony Seba, Stanford University lecturer, gave this presentation on March 2016.

Snippet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Jg1IJ68_g

Full presentation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kxryv2XrnqM

It's ok Doug, we remember when you posted this the first time. How much time do you have to watch YouTube videos anyway? ;)

Too much time, Paul. I'm between gigs right now.

Tony Seba has different video posts. This one was the most recent. Also, new Fuelly members would likely not dig through the archives to see my first posting of this.

It's like CNN rerunning the same news story all day!

What's the general UK mood about Trump, Paul?

Trump has given comedians years worth of writing material, he has become the laughing stock of the World. Seems like every day he edges closer towards being a dictator. What's the latest, he wants to bring back certain torturing methods? If he's not careful, he's going to isolate the US from other World leaders who wont want anything to do with a violent person in office. Our Prime Minister has stated she won't share intelligence with him if he brings back torturing methods.

I stop listening when I hear "no maintenance".

Gary, are you talkin' 'bout cars or women?

Both. (I needed 5 more characters for the post to be listed)

I saw the video, and I want my 11 minutes 26 seconds of my life back :-(

Claims of a "Tesla Infinite Mile Warranty" and "Zero maintenance" leave me with my eyes rolling. Ignore that 60% of Tesla Model S owners who need an entirely new drivetrain before 60,000 miles. Ask Tesla whatdo they warranty for an infinite number of miles... and how many months do they limit so you'll never get close?

The Tesla is "the best car ever" (say consumer reports). Right. As long as you're okay with body panels and door not aligning in a $100,000 vehicle, and replacing your drive train before 60,000 miles, it's way good. Riiiiiigh (in my best Dr. Evil voice).

"An electric motor is WAY more powerful than in internal combustion engine." Always? Nah. Not always. Your mileage might vary. Just because you have an EV does not mean you'll toast every ICE on the road.

"You'll soon be able to get Porsche performance for Buick prices." I would not recommend holding your breath for "soon" to arrive.

"Minimum range to go mainstream is 320 kilometers" (198 miles). Better check that with your neighbors to see if they agree.

"By 2020, and maybe before, EVs will be cheaper to buy (than ICE) and they will be 10x to 100x cheaper to maintain... This is the tipping point." That's less than 4 years away, assuming the END of 2020. Call me skeptical.

"By 2022 the undustry will be able to build a $20,000 EV." Yeah, I'm still waiting for the $5 PC, based on historic price declines. Also remember "Moore's Law" about computer power doubling every few years? Do you know the "law" no longer applies, and hasn't for a number of years?

"By 2025, all new vehicles will be electric... all new buses, all new cars, all new tractors... anything that moves on four wheels will be electric... globally." Maybe in locales where that's the law. I don't believe because it'll make engineering and purchasing sense to do so.

Do I need to go on? I'm calling "hyperbole" on this.

Remember E-store. Charge it for 5 minutes, drive 250 miles.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor

MELT YOUR HOUSES WIRING.

Outlandish warranty claims are just an insult to any semi intelligent car owner-driver. At least in the old Midas muffler commercials, the company was around to honor their "lifetime" warranty".

Know any "lifetime warranties" that survived a company bankruptcy?

Our collective memories must be pitiful. Maybe I'm plagued with to good a memory.

As a general rule, anytime I hear lifetime warranty uttered by a salesperson, I'm finished with any further communication sine it has just entered the dream world and exited reality.

Lifetime warranty means the products lifetime, not the human buying it. The average car is 7-11 years old isn't it? So the warranty probably isn't that much longer than your average one on the average car. My friend sells tyres with "lifetime" warranty, that doesn't mean he'll replace them when they wear out, but if a fault occurs during the life of the tyre.

Why would you need to charge that fast at home? Do you have a gas pump installed there.

WRT the infamous MIDAS lifetime muffler warranty: When I was a youngster, I did that. Here's what I learned:

• Lifetime warranty is void if you use non-Midas parts and/or work is performed by a non-Midas technician.
• If the pipe leading to the muffler needs replacing, that has to be done by MIDAS.
• In reality, you'll need to get exhaust system repairs done sooner than if you had OEM part because MIDAS used substandard materials. But if you get anything replaced with non-MIDAS parts or done by non-MIDAS people, it voids your muffler warranty.
• Only the muffler (part) is warranties. Labor and other parts, like clamps and fasteners, are not. You only discover that AFTER you've used your "free" warranty.
• When you need to get exhaust system work done again, and you will (more often than if you had used OEM parts), and you pay MIDAS to do the work, it'll cost you more in the long run.

In short, it was a scam.

Nope. Can't have BOTH. Pick one and stick with it.

For the folks that cite short EV recharge times for "80% charge", I can't recall the last time I went to a dino-juice station and thought, "I'm in a hurry, so I'll only put in 80% of my tank's capacity." Virtually nobody does that with liquid fuel. They simply fill it up. And they make their range comparisons based on a full tank of fuel. Similarly, EV manufacturers quote (best-case EPA estimated) range based on fully charged batteries.

So this "quick recharge for 80%" talk is a red herring. It is introduced solely to get people to believe that "you can quickly recharge your EV today", while shifting the focus away from the fact that if you opt for a quick recharge to only 80%, you sacrifice an already relatively short rage in your haste.

Also note that plug-in hybrids and EVs quote recharge times based on how you recharge. In North America, where standard electrical outlets are 120 volts, recharge times are a LOT longer than if you opt for the home quick-charge station or if you go to one of Tesla's Super Charger (quick recharge) stations. A home fast-charge station has it's own costs for the device itself, and it requires a separate electrical line, assuming that your home's electrical service (AKA circuit-breaker box or "electrical panel") can readily supply the additional current to a 220 or 240 volt high-amperage quick-charge station in your garage. Factor in a few grand for the station, line, and electrician. More if you need to upgrade your home's electrical service to accommodate the mich higher current draw.

Also note that some manufacturers don't make it that simple for you. You want to do the quick recharge? Oh, you have to buy the next higher (and more expensive) trim level that supports quick recharging. In the case of the Audi e-Tron plug-in Hybrid, that trim level jump is several thousand dollars more for the ability to recharge quickly, assuming you have the facilities to do so.

Most liquid-fuel consumers who are enthusiastically eying a PHEV or EV don't know all these niggly little gotchas. When they learn about them, a great deal doesn't sound so good anymore.

Yeah. But what about the children?!

This Tony Seba guy reminds me of the sc-fi books I read that were written 40 years ago trying to predict the future. The books said that by the year 2020 we will work 20 hour weeks so that we can spend a lot more time on things that our heart desires.

The reality for 2020 is that most people work more than 40 hours per week. And that's only if you are lucky to have a job to begin with. Most young people have a nice degree with a $60,000 loan with not many jobs out there.

The thing is guys, multi billion dollar car makers are investing tens of billions in electric vehicles, energy companies are too, as are governments. Do you honestly think if they had 1% of the scepticism you guys had, they would be doing this? Do you not think they had the huge conference meetings with well renowned respected experts in every field and investors to maybe give a clue where the market is heading? Do you not realise the years of compiled projected data from everything from lithium reserves, mining costs and emissions regulations they have to hand to make these huge decisions? Do you not think they might know a thing or two that the general public don't? Car manufacturing is one of the biggest most profitable businesses on the entries planet, and yet you think they would risk everything just like that?

C'mon people, this is happening now, electric cars work for millions of people already, and one day you'll consider one too.

Two things:

1. This is America. If it isn't true you can't say it. We have laws against fibbing.

2. He backs up his guess with a substantial amount of speculation, rumors, and hope. And, by CNN journalism standards, THAT is good enough for me and, hopefully, 2 or 3 law abiding American patriots.

My position on EVs is as follows:

• I don't believe that every automaker who invests in EVs believes EVs will soon displace ICE, so we better get on it or we'll be out of business. I don't believe this anymore than I believe that Toyota and GM are throwing big money at hydrogen fuel cells in a Beta vs VHS war for the next dominant propulsion system. Part of an automaker's "thing" is optics: the practice of appearing to be leading-edge (or at least relevant) to prospective consumers. It's one way they can present the face of being progressive and green, while less than 3% of what they make is EVs, and while they continue to sell pretty ordinary, gassy vehicles.
  .
• Less than 3% of vehicles on the road are EVs. But that share is climbing.
  .
• I believe EVs and battery technology are just beyond the "early adopter" stage, and nowhere close to being a no-brainer for replacing ICE for the masses. That's today.
  .
• I believe ICE will likely go away entirely, or almost entirely, like the steam engine did, not because we ran out of coal, but because ICE proved to be so much better than coal-fired steam engines. Switching became a no-brainer. I speculate this day will come within my lifetime. I'm 56. I'm skeptical about it arriving in just 3 or 4 years where the masses abandon ICE in favor of EVs.
  .
• People are terrible at predicting the future! Me included, BTW. Our history is littered with predictions that look silly in hindsight. In early 2016, a prominent tech publication said that SSDs (solid state drives) won't dominate because they're just too expensive and unreliable. About 3.5 years ago, I built a work-horse PC with a premium SSD boot drive (CAD$150 for 128GB). Massive use, great speed, flawless reliability. 3+ years ago, (premium) SSD reliability surpassed HDD! I knew that, but a tech expert doesn't. SSD cost has dropped sufficiently to use them at least as a boot drive, or as exclusive storage in smaller systems (<= ~256GB total storage). So much for expert predictions.

Just my two cents... and worth every penny!

The take up will depend a lot on government policy, subsidies, grants etc. Take Norway for example, their energy is 100% clean from wind and hydro, an electric Golf is a staggering $9000 cheaper than a diesel Golf. The government there is doing all they can to encourage EV sales, it's estimated 20% of new cars registered there are electric. Norway is a good model for the future of EV's.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/b...cars.html?_r=0

For Norway, where clean electricity is abundant and cheap, yes, EVs make a lot of sense! In the US, where 2/3 of electricity is generated by burning stuff, not so much. In Canada, it's even worse due to high electricity prices, and in Ontario, a province with the highest population (about 1/3 higher than the next guy) and which also has the highest electricity prices in all of Canada, an EV is a harder sell.

My understanding is that Iceland has free home heating and hot water due to their geothermal advantage. Few places have that advantage. Few places are like Norway.

Note that my statements merely highlight what is, and why there isn't universal rapid adoption of EVs. It's coming; just not as quickly as some folks think for us in North America, and more specifically, the US, the land of rivers of cheap oil (and wars to secure those rivers).

Just the facts M'aam. Take your imaginary scale and put the benefits of each choice on their appropriate sides.

Maybe I look at it differently.

Oil IS a solar fuel. The raw materials would not exist without the sun.

Climate Change. Explain to me how the change in atmospheric oxygen content from the 35% of the dinousaurs to the 20% of today, IS NOT CLIMATE CHANGE IMPOSSIBLE TO ATTRIBUTE TO HUMAN ACTIVITY.

Breathing causes Cancer, Quit breathing and cancer will not kill you. Keep breathing and you COULD die of Cancer.

IF you can predict the future WITH any reliability then you should be rich enough to do something about it.

Humans are fascinating animals! They don't believe they'll die from smoking, but they do believe they'll win the lottery. Similarly, many Americans cannot see a connection between humans and mass climate change, but they can see a suitable leader and wonderful human being in a Donald J. Trump.

Absolutely fascinating.

Sometimes, I say to those humans, "Regardless if humans have caused massive climate change, or contributed to it to some degree, doesn't it make sense for us to breath clean air, drink uncontaminated water, and live off land that is not poisoned?" They reply that we must balance those things with "economic practicalities."

Fascinating species. Just fascinating.

kind of out of context

From the end of the last age of the dinosaurs to today the oxygen content of the atmosphere has dropped from 35% to 20%. This change can not be attributed to human activity, since it occurred before human beings existed.

But no one is claiming the decrease in oxygen is the cause for global warming.

Yes, climate changes for reasons besides humans, but the carbon in the petroleum, coal, and other fossil fuels that is currently being burned has been locked up, and out of circulation from a time before the dinosaurs. We are putting it back into circulation as CO2, a known infrared absorber, at rate faster than most natural processes. The last time the planet saw such a fast rate of CO2 addition involved a lava field the size of Poland, and was a precursor to the Great Dying.

Thanks, everyone! I appreciate your efforts to keep this interesting discussion civil.

Today I used enough fuel to go 3.8 miles at 52.8 mpg. Yesterday it was 11.6 miles at 62 mpg.

At that rate today it would take one gallon of fuel to make 14 of those trips.

At yesterdays rate it would take a gallon of fuel to make 5.3 of those trips.

2.2 ounces of fuel per mile @ 128 ounces per gallon (US).

Two days a little more than one quart of gas (34 ounces).

That's my contribution.

Hmmm. I was wonderin' why the air smelled like an Irish spring, Gary.

Hey, Paul! Do you guys have a hand / bath soap called Irish Spring?

Your personnel contribution, but don't forget the US as a whole burns through the same amount of gasoline as every continent on the planet combined, almost 7,000,000,000 people, and some 20,000,000 barrels of oil a day. And that's before we consider fracking gas, coal etc....

I don't know Doug sorry, don't really buy soap, I thought it was just for grannies? ;)

For me the biggest elephant in the room is the number of people on the planet, which is increasing all the time.

If the number of people was halved we could all pollute twice as much and be in the same place. I'm not advocating pollution, but you see what I'm getting at, less people = less pollution.

The other thing is the vested interest of governments in promoting greener cars for example. Here in Ireland, about 40% of the retail price of the car goes to the Government in Vehicle Registration Tax(VRT) and VAT, which is also applied to the VRT tax! There is also the business of keeping the car factories going and all the tax revenue that they generate. For example, it must be better for the environment if I continue to drive my 13 year old car, it does use a little more fuel than a new car, but what is the environmental cost of building that new car.

So, are governments really interested in looking after the environment, or their Tax revenue?

Oliver.

The US pioneered personal transportation and the stupidity of many drivers here is astounding, but it gives the rest of the planet a great example to NOT follow. It took Britain some dying to learn many lessons as far as being a global partner versus empire builder.
It's truly sad to see the neighbors F350 diesel remote started every day, massive pollution during that cold (no loads to expedite warm up).
That versus my car cranked and moving within a second of that start. That same neighbor probably burned through enough fuel to cover my two days driving.
I once told one neighbor, my car will go 40 mph on the same fuel your uses to just sit there and idle and it was the truth.
Plant some trees over there buddy to replace those that were used to embark on a global colonization effort some time ago, another example of how to NOT be a world member of the global community.

It's complicated.
In most capitalist countries the government tends to be the one on the hook to clean up when a company closes shop. Even with direct clean up costs, there are public health and quality of life cost increases from pollution. Not only does the government not get tax revenue when you keep an old car on the road, but it might be costing them or society by the extra pollution it emits.

On the the old car, there is an environmental cost to making a new one, but over an ICE one's lifetime, the fuel use is the major contributor to environmental damage.

Attributing a countries irresponsibility to any individual is guilt by association, a form of propaganda under the classification of "killing the messenger".

In 1967 my 170 cubic inch Valiant got 28.5 mpg US, 50 YEARS AGO. Bump that by the 20% increase in volume of the British gallon and I was getting the same mpg as Draigflag is currently.

Who does that make irresponsible? Certainly not the whole country in which that individual resides.

The country cleans up the mess when the closed business owner has no assets to seize to cover the cleanup costs.

Of the attorneys, by the attorneys, for the attorneys = wealthy attorneys, a scenario that should scare all of us to death as it did Jefferson.

Not sure if you are trying to make things personnel, but as I said before, my car is exceptionally good on fuel for a performance car that has a 0-60 time of just over 5 seconds. If you can find a quicker more efficient one currently on sale, other than a big German diesel, please let me know. Plenty of small diesels that do 100 MPG when hypermiled, if I wanted one, I'd drive one.

Diesels barely use any fuel when idling and warm up faster than petrol engines too. Just one of the many benefits of diesels. Not sure why you'd compare a cheap city car to a commercial truck anyway?

Getting back to EV cars, I think they will eventually take over, but it will not be as fast as people think. I thought I provide an example that I have been observing. I’m happy to tell you that in the past five years all the commercial buildings that I worked on have electric car chargers, and most of them can be used for free. The idea is that the building owner provides an environmentally built building, and the tenants using it have an access to free charging. If you have an electric car, you can park it inside and have a spot next to the free charger. Here are some pictures of the building that was completed April 2012.

https://www.fuelly.com/attachments/fo...afa16a5fde.jpg

https://www.fuelly.com/attachments/fo...5f4385643c.jpg

https://www.fuelly.com/attachments/fo...6fccdf81c0.jpg

Having said the above, I tend to go back to the buildings that I worked on and talk to the building managers to see how everything is performing. When I asked the building manger with regards to the use of these chargers, he said that they were never used in the past five years. When I looked around the parking lot, there were cars there that were twice and three times the price of an electric car, so it probably wasn’t about money either why people working there don’t drive electric cars. If I worked there, I would probably have an electric car by now; this also doubles your EVs range if you have a charger at work and home. Anyways, it’s nice to see that changes are coming for EVs, but it’s still a bit further away in Canada.

I took this picture as a joke (blue AMG pretending to be green)
https://www.fuelly.com/attachments/fo...cb9deb257f.jpg

The thing I like about EV'S is the sheer simplicity, 18 moving parts V's 2000+ on a conventional ice car. That alone makes them extremely reliable, easy to diagnose if there's an issue, and cheap to fix too. Assume a 30 year old EV needs a rebuild. New battery, usually comes in one piece, easy to swap, new motor, can be lifted by one guy, and probably rebuilt in a day. How long does it take to source a new engine, transport it, unwired it, remove it etc etc. So labour intensive, labour = cost. An EV, most amateur mechanics would be able to swap the two key components, battery and motor in a day if that.

I'm not quite ready for one yet, not cost effective just yet and I don't do the miles, plus I am enjoying performance now. The Tesla Model 3 would be on par with my GTi, but it's too expensive for me.

Tax mostly. If it were anything to do with pollution, they wouldn't be building a new runway at London's already heavily polluted Heathrow. There are around 1400 flights a day from there as is, each plane will be burning through almost 4000 gallons of Nitrogen rich highly toxic jet fuel and dumping the chemicals all over the people below (that's almost 6,000,000 gallons just to take off every day) Then factor in the extra traffic, buses taxis taxing passengers there. Will any of that help London's air quality?

If it were about pollution, why have they changed road tax so that people driving smaller cars will be paying more? Revenue.

I finished watching the last episode of The Grand Tour last night, and I really liked the VW GTI vs BMW i3 bit. It just shows how the infrastructure is still not there for electric cars. If car makers want to eliminate ICE cars by 2020, the governments better get their sh** together and start building more electric car chargers. So out of the four car chargers that James used, two didn't work.

Sidenote: Paul, how do you make your signature show up centered instead of being to the left indent like mine?