Battery packs for EVs are expensive and heavy. And more complicated than people realise. They're not just big batteries. Making an electric car with decent range at an affordable price* is not easy at all. Tesla is closer than anyone else.
* edit: an affordable price that isn't loss-making, I should say
I posted this for two reasons, first an affordable good range EV is coming to market but more for the costs they claim for their battery packs. the prices sure have come down and faster than expected
Great but more important is how battery prices keep falling. Power density is already high enough that long range versions of the Model 3 can go 400 miles, which, with fast charging available when needed, is enough for the vast majority of auto owners.
The problem is that the battery pack that takes makes the cars too expensive to purchase for most people. But in a few more years falling prices will make ev's similar in sticker prices to comparable ice's. That plus much lower operating costs will cause ev sales to skyrocket.
The battery pack in a long-range electric car still costs more than an entire traditional car sells for.
Assembled battery pack cost to the auto manufacturer is around $190/kWh right now, so the 60 kWh battery in a 2017 Chevy Bolt for example costs GM $11,400 at least. The 100 kWh battery in a 2017 Tesla Model S is a roughly $19,000 part.
Electric motors, inverters, DC-DC converters, AC-DC chargers, etc are also costly parts, but contribute less to the cost than the huge battery packs.
There's no way to take cars that retail for $15,000 -- swap a $3,000 traditional powertrain for a $15,000 electric one -- and not double the selling price. If you double the selling price, you're either in a new vehicle segment or you're not going to sell many units.
Until or unless the cost of batteries comes down significantly, electric cars can't move into the vehicle segments with the most new car buyers. It's not going to happen in 2018; even if there's a revolutionary discovery that allows cheaper and higher density batteries, it would take years to commercialize that discovery, then start manufacturing it at scale.
My prediction: EVs don't become a large portion of non-luxury car sales until the mid-2020s at earliest. Luxury car makers are going to start converting first.
I agree that HN's perspective, and mine, skew too far in one direction, but I think you are skewing too far in the other direction - the "vast majority" of people in the United States are not so broke that they cannot afford reasonably priced new vehicles, or we'd be selling a lot less of them and at lower prices.
Consider that the average new car in the United States cost $48,000 in 2022[0].
I own a new 2023 Chevy Bolt. It cost $36,000; the base price is more like $27,000.[1]. The Tesla Model 3 starts right around that average number at $48,000[2]. The Ioniq 5 starts at $42,000[3]. The Mach E likewise, around $46,000[4].
Electric cars are priced right around what people are paying, on average, for new cars.
You're right that battery packs are very expensive - right now, for new vehicles. But the very first Tesla Roadster was only made in 2008, and the model S, in 2012. We've only had a market with multiple decent choices for reasonably priced EVs in the last three to four years. Give it time.
Also, just to add: a "bad battery" isn't necessarily one that's worthless. My Bolt's battery gets ~250 miles of range now. I don't drive a quarter of that on an average day, nor do most people. Batteries degrade over time - they don't necessarily give out or totally stop working.
When they perfect the fuel cells stack technologies then electric cars will get cheaper. The issue with batteries is their power to weight ratio is not good. Who wants 400kg of batteries added to the mass of every car?
BMW did show the direction the market will go to overcome that weight, composites for the rest of the car. Aluminum was good when it came about but composites are the only future.
I do think the 100 mile range city car is a good opportunity to exploit provided they get it to city car sizes (read: Smart) and make it cheap that its such a viable alternative you cannot say no. In the US this would be 10k to 12k new pricing but specifically they would always be leased which would further increase affordability. The key to acceptance is getting people to accept a smaller package single purpose vehicle
Better Place built quite a few battery swap locations, but due to their limited market (~1000 cars, compared more than 23,000 cars for Tesla already) they obviously failed.
The Tesla battery swaps are listed at between $60 and $80 which for a similar sedan (size, engine power, etc) is about the same as a full tank of gas.
The cost and serviceability of electric motors vs internal combustion engines reeks of BS and until you provide actual sources most of your arguments will have lost all credibility in my eyes.
The big problem the big auto manufacturers are having is the battery and cost. A mass-market electric car cannot cost as much as Tesla's offerings, and a huge part of that cost is the battery. Even with the most optimistic cost projections of battery costs in the near future, it's hard to see how to offer an electric car which is competitive on both cost and range with an ICE car.
The whole premise of the article is that BEV are dead in the water as they are too expensive, the range is too low, there is not enough electricity to charge them and it would take at least 50 years to solve these problems.
Clearly the author has completely missed the developments in battery technology of the past 10 years and the lowering prices of EVs in that same timeframe. Just an example, a 2012 Nissan Leaf started $36k (MRSP) and could barely get you through 100 miles. The 2024 model starts at $28k and gets you 200 miles. Take inflation into account and you pay 40% less for twice the range. I don’t see any reason why these developments would not continue into the future.
At least in my country, two years ago (presumably when avs733 was buying his car) if you wanted an all-electric vehicle with >150 mile range, you had to spend £90,000 on a Tesla Model S.
All the other manufacturers' cars (Renault Zoe, BMW i3, Nissan Leaf, VW e-Golf) were 145 mile range or less.
It's only recently that EVs like the Hyundai Kona (£30k for 245 miles) and the Jaguar I-Pace (£61k for 235 miles) have come on the market.
First, batteries are the critical path for EVs. That is, cost, adoption, range, power, etc all a function of the quality of the battery.
Second but Tesla seems to have the best battery by far. Unfortunately we can't know this for sure, because businesses like Munro & Associates charge millions of dollars for this info, but what they and others do reveal points to that. There's no reason to believe that any other manufacturer can make a better EV. Nissan, for example, can charge you less, but also give you less battery.
Unfortunately for everyone involved, batteries as a whole are still expensive, so it'll take time for the industry to spin up and for used models to become available. My personal guess is that in ~5years, Tesla will be able sell you a $25k car with 400km range.
In the meantime, you could look into used Leafs, Volts or i3s, or just wait. For ~4km you also don't need a charging station for those, just a cable.
I don't see that as misleading. The most successful EV has been an extremely expensive one. There hasn't been a market for truly cheap EVs.
This is probably because EVs are amazing if you're a well-off suburban home owner who can charge at home, and still OK if you're a well-off urbanite with charging stations at work and in your building, and practically useless if you're a less-well-off renter in an older apartment building. So you have range anxiety hurting the cheap ones for the well-off set, and feasibility blocking all of them for the not-as-well-off set.
One problem emerging with EV, at least in the US, is that they don't seem to be economically sustainable at a price affordable by the middle-class. Useful vehicles cost >$50K, and a reliable fast-charging network seems to be feasible only as a loss-leader for a high-margin luxury manufacturer (Tesla).
No fuel savings in the world can justify paying extra $20K for a car.
The cost is a big issue for me still. I get it, but I paid $15k for a car 10 years ago - small hatchback that's been more than enough for my needs. The only options I have for EVs are either 2-3x the size (Rivian, F150, Model X) or 4-5x the cost (Tesla, Lucid, Polestar), or both. I barely drive a hundred miles in a week, and often less, but having range to do a 2-3 hour road trip is a big bonus.
You can't even get a quality EV with a shorter range though for less than 50-70k. I'm not even sure I've spent that much on my car over the last decade, including gas, insurance, repairs, and initial cost. Makes it hard to justify the upgrade.
* edit: an affordable price that isn't loss-making, I should say
reply