https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... nce-iphone says:

It’s been 10 years since Apple Inc. unleashed a surge of innovation that upended the mobile phone industry. Electric cars, with a little help from ride-hailing and self-driving technology, could be about to pull the same trick on Big Oil.

The rise of Tesla Inc. and its rivals could be turbo charged by complementary services from Uber Technologies Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Waymo unit, just as the iPhone rode the app economy and fast mobile internet to decimate mobile phone giants like Nokia Oyj.

The culmination of these technologies — autonomous electric cars available on demand — could transform how people travel and confound predictions that battery-powered vehicles will have a limited impact on oil demand in the coming decades.

The article is hype-filled but does have a cool graph showing how disruptive Apple and Samsung were to Nokia and Blackberry:



It argues that the synergy of the electric car (in particular its low maintenance and low emissions), ride sharing, and autonomous driving will create an eco-system just as disruptive as the iPhone/appStore/etc eco-system. In particular it'll foster new models of car ownership (or lack thereof).

I did find the talk about the low maintenance advantage of e-cars to be interesting:

One key advantage of electric cars is the lack of mechanical complexity, which makes them more suitable for the heavy use allowed by driverless technology, Francesco Starace, chief executive officer of Enel SpA, Italy’s largest utility, said in an interview. “I don’t see driverless being pushed into internal combustion engine” vehicles, he said.

After disassembling General Motors’s Chevrolet Bolt, UBS Group AG concluded it required almost no maintenance, with the electric motor having just three moving parts compared with 133 in a four-cylinder internal combustion engine.

That's a bit misleading, no? How often do we end up changing parts within our internal combustion engines? To me the big thing is that the e-car doesn't have a lot of the auxiliary systems (water pump, alternator, fuel pump) that do get replaced a lot, but the cost for that is having a heavy battery to haul around everywhere you go.

Why does the industry think the battery situation is going to improve? Is there some big breakthrough coming down the pike? Or is it just incremental improvements, along with volume manufacturing causing prices to drop?

Yes - in the future, just ordering a car at a specified time will be normal. But in 2030 or 2040, when most EU country finally ban the internal combustion engine, energy storage technology will have tremendously progressed. Believe me!

In Germany, on an average day the average car is stationary for 22 hours and 48 minutes.


David

[quote="Revelation" How often do we end up changing parts within our internal combustion engines? [/quote]

Once but Peugeot paid 75% for new engine

Ive recently looked at electric cars. After the purchase price, the monthly battery rental costs my monthly fuel bill for 100km per day. Electricity is extra. you pay a premium for being "eco".
However the Nissan Leaf is a nice drive but I want to try the Hyundai which gets the same mileage with half the charging.

EVs may make headway, though I am sure it will create its own set of problems once mass produced. But this autonomous talk is just fanciful. The technology exists but the liablity doesn't. In an accident, and there will be accidents, who accepts the liabilty? Remember the hysteria the media whipped up eight years ago about Toyota's unintended acceleration? What happens when a couple of families die in autonomous cars? Expect the politicians to swoop in and "save" the masses with new legislation.

william wrote:

EVs may make headway, though I am sure it will create its own set of problems once mass produced. But this autonomous talk is just fanciful. The technology exists but the liablity doesn't. In an accident, and there will be accidents, who accepts the liabilty? Remember the hysteria the media whipped up eight years ago about Toyota's unintended acceleration? What happens when a couple of families die in autonomous cars? Expect the politicians to swoop in and "save" the masses with new legislation.

The actual rate of accidents and insurance will solve that. If the accident rate is vastly lower than human driven vehicles then "families being killed" won't be an issue as lots of families are killed right now due to the stupid things we do. And if insurance costs the same as for a "manned car" (I am sure in the beginning it will be at least the same if the accident rate is much lower simply for the emotional reasons you note) then people will be able to afford the costs.

Any legislation will ultimately back fire as human caused accidents rates will be much higher.

Tugg

Where I live I see autonomous vehicles all day long. They are in regular service with multiple operators around the city. They still carry a person aboard as backup/witness but they run themselves the majority of the time. I still can't get my head around the desirability of the concept though. Why would anyone want an autonomous vehicle? Who wants just one more way for big brother to track your every move? Who wants to give up the tremendous independence and autononomy of going wherever you want whenever you want? Not me thats for sure.

flyingturtle wrote:

Yes - in the future, just ordering a car at a specified time will be normal. But in 2030 or 2040, when most EU country finally ban the internal combustion engine, energy storage technology will have tremendously progressed. Believe me!

In Germany, on an average day the average car is stationary for 22 hours and 48 minutes.
David

My average car is stationary for 23 hours and 50 minutes probably : I have 3 cars and don't drive that much !

Ordering a self driving car is appealing, however I wonder how well it will work for rides that for example you'd have trouble doing in a taxi or Uber today. I live in the suburbs of Paris, and taxis will come here, but for a hefty price. I plan to move even further away in the boonies, there I doubt any taxi or Uber would come.

I think I'll end up owning my self driving car, that will get me where I need to go, then go park somewhere waiting for me to need my next trip.

flyingturtle wrote:

Yes - in the future, just ordering a car at a specified time will be normal. But in 2030 or 2040, when most EU country finally ban the internal combustion engine, energy storage technology will have tremendously progressed. Believe me!

In Germany, on an average day the average car is stationary for 22 hours and 48 minutes.


David

Perhaps in Germany, but in North America, having a vehicle is pretty much a necessity. And maybe to a lesser extent in the United Kingdom. Germans have the luxury of a superb public transport system, but try using Amtrak for anything beyond New York - D.C. or the 'Missouri River Runner' (maybe). Via Rail Canada is a lot better, but probably would rate as poor by European standards. That's one reason the rental car business is so big.

Talking specifically about electric vehicles; they need to have much, much more range and be able to be charged much, much quicker if they're to be viable in the North American market. I recently stayed in Missouri for a few days. One of those days I made a 300 mile round trip. An electric car might have gotten me there (just), but not back.

Well the goal is to be able to charge "there".

KLDC10 wrote:

Via Rail Canada is a lot better

Bawhahahahahahahaha! Seriously?

Hard to believe, but Canada does extend outside of the GTA.

ACDC8 wrote:

KLDC10 wrote:

Via Rail Canada is a lot better

Bawhahahahahahahaha! Seriously?

Hard to believe, but Canada does extend outside of the GTA.

Seriously. Try Amtrak if you don't believe me Although I take your point that the Canadian system is pretty much Toronto/Ottawa/Montreal and then a line to Vancouver. Room for improvement, for sure, but I spent a week in Montreal without a vehicle and used the train to commute to Ottawa and Quebec City.

But as I said - neither can compare to the European systems. I mean, the British system isn't great, but I was on a train in Germany once that pulled into every station virtually on the second. I was incredibly impressed.

Now that I think about it the premise got things backwards I feel. People will own an electric car. Maybe less cars will be owned than today, but still, many/most people who own one today will own one in the future, and it will be electric.

Then when people need a very long ranged car to go somewhere they can't get a charge, they would hire a self-driving liquid fuel (or maybe hydrogen fuelled) vehicle.

We are already starting to see disruption though, the Tesla Model 3 has hit BMW 3 series and Merc C series sales, off the top of my head it's something like a 25% decline in sales for both. When the bread and butter "high end" small cars are getting sales taken from them, it's only a matter of time before costs come down far enough to start hitting the real mass markets, of course before then the manufacturers will have to figure out a way to increase range, if they can hit 350 miles on one charge then the main stream cars will be n trouble.

Revelation wrote:

One key advantage of electric cars is the lack of mechanical complexity, which makes them more suitable for the heavy use allowed by driverless technology, Francesco Starace, chief executive officer of Enel SpA, Italy’s largest utility, said in an interview. “I don’t see driverless being pushed into internal combustion engine” vehicles, he said.

After disassembling General Motors’s Chevrolet Bolt, UBS Group AG concluded it required almost no maintenance, with the electric motor having just three moving parts compared with 133 in a four-cylinder internal combustion engine.

That's a bit misleading, no? How often do we end up changing parts within our internal combustion engines? To me the big thing is that the e-car doesn't have a lot of the auxiliary systems (water pump, alternator, fuel pump) that do get replaced a lot, but the cost for that is having a heavy battery to haul around everywhere you go.

Why does the industry think the battery situation is going to improve? Is there some big breakthrough coming down the pike? Or is it just incremental improvements, along with volume manufacturing causing prices to drop?

I edited this bit out of your post to discuss this bit.

You change parts regularly in an ICE engine. Spark plugs, filters, belts, oil. All those (expensive!!) service items. Then on top of that, the killer item which is a clutch every now and then that can run into thousands of dollars for some brands. tens of thousands even for premium brands. Electrics have none of those.

Battery tech is also due to take a pretty hefty leap forward with new dry cell technologies. Henrik Fisker is also up and running again and putting effort into supercapacitors as there's due to be some new ways of stabilising them for use in automotives.

It's an exciting time for those people in the industry. Guys like RIMAC are at the cutting edge, and licencing their technologies out to the big manufacturers. Even Tesla is in on that. There are indeed big new tech stories that will drop over the next few years, including Tesla bringing in their "Hyperchargers" (not a real name for them BTW) with doubled or trebled charging rates for compatible vehicles. Now that will enable real long range usage with quick refuelling stops.

william wrote:

EVs may make headway, though I am sure it will create its own set of problems once mass produced. But this autonomous talk is just fanciful. The technology exists but the liablity doesn't. In an accident, and there will be accidents, who accepts the liabilty?.

Audi is willing to take the liability on the new A8 and they are just waiting for being legally allowed to do so.

best regards
Thomas

Channex757 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

One key advantage of electric cars is the lack of mechanical complexity, which makes them more suitable for the heavy use allowed by driverless technology, Francesco Starace, chief executive officer of Enel SpA, Italy’s largest utility, said in an interview. “I don’t see driverless being pushed into internal combustion engine” vehicles, he said.

After disassembling General Motors’s Chevrolet Bolt, UBS Group AG concluded it required almost no maintenance, with the electric motor having just three moving parts compared with 133 in a four-cylinder internal combustion engine.

That's a bit misleading, no? How often do we end up changing parts within our internal combustion engines? To me the big thing is that the e-car doesn't have a lot of the auxiliary systems (water pump, alternator, fuel pump) that do get replaced a lot, but the cost for that is having a heavy battery to haul around everywhere you go.

Why does the industry think the battery situation is going to improve? Is there some big breakthrough coming down the pike? Or is it just incremental improvements, along with volume manufacturing causing prices to drop?

I edited this bit out of your post to discuss this bit.

You change parts regularly in an ICE engine. Spark plugs, filters, belts, oil. All those (expensive!!) service items. Then on top of that, the killer item which is a clutch every now and then that can run into thousands of dollars for some brands. tens of thousands even for premium brands. Electrics have none of those.

Battery tech is also due to take a pretty hefty leap forward with new dry cell technologies. Henrik Fisker is also up and running again and putting effort into supercapacitors as there's due to be some new ways of stabilising them for use in automotives.

It's an exciting time for those people in the industry. Guys like RIMAC are at the cutting edge, and licencing their technologies out to the big manufacturers. Even Tesla is in on that. There are indeed big new tech stories that will drop over the next few years, including Tesla bringing in their "Hyperchargers" (not a real name for them BTW) with doubled or trebled charging rates for compatible vehicles. Now that will enable real long range usage with quick refuelling stops.

Perhaps on an older engine.

I drive a Nissan VQ40DE. The plugs are good for 100K, I change the air filter every 60K, the oil filter every 6K, my timing chain is good for the projected lifespan of the engine, and the S-belt should be good for 100K+. Oil is done every 6K. As for the clutch, if you're changing a clutch in ANYTHING less than a ~150K mile auto, then you need to seriously alter the way you drive your vehicle.

6qts of oil and a new filter cost me ~$60.00.

I'm not saying IC engines are less maintenance hungry than EV's, just that a lot of the maintenance items you mentioned are not as much of a hurdle as they seem to be in your post.

Calder wrote:

I'm not saying IC engines are less maintenance hungry than EV's, just that a lot of the maintenance items you mentioned are not as much of a hurdle as they seem to be in your post.

I hear you but it's not just the parts, is it?

Put a car in for service at a main dealer to ensure your warranty stays valid. Then the price goes right up. That set of plugs becomes up to two hours work at a huge rate.

Some dealers will sting you for £80 or more an hour. Premium cars will cost silly amounts for the annual service. Ideally an electric car's annual service will be no more than a quick inspection and maybe a read of some diagnostics. Nothing oily, dirty and expensive.

As for clutches, that depends totally on the car. The new dual clutch gearboxes can be a bit expensive too and don't last anything like as long as 100k. Some time back the Ford Escort was notorious for the thrust bearing going as it was just a nylon thing and replacing it was almost as expensive as a full clutch.

It's all these things that add up. The new electric drives are so much simpler to maintain and many will go to half a million miles or more. There's a Tesla in the Netherlands being used as a taxi that has just hit that figure and most of that was totally worry free motoring apparently. No major faults.

I think EV industry should look into standardizing batteries to few types and have battery exchange stations.

JJJ wrote:

Tesla tried and quietly dropped that...

Tesla may not have the infrastructure but battery manufacturers do. Every automotive battery on 1000s of store shelves is kept sufficiently charged by Interstate and others.

Channex757 wrote:

Calder wrote:

I'm not saying IC engines are less maintenance hungry than EV's, just that a lot of the maintenance items you mentioned are not as much of a hurdle as they seem to be in your post.

I hear you but it's not just the parts, is it?

Put a car in for service at a main dealer to ensure your warranty stays valid. Then the price goes right up. That set of plugs becomes up to two hours work at a huge rate.

Some dealers will sting you for £80 or more an hour. Premium cars will cost silly amounts for the annual service. Ideally an electric car's annual service will be no more than a quick inspection and maybe a read of some diagnostics. Nothing oily, dirty and expensive.

As for clutches, that depends totally on the car. The new dual clutch gearboxes can be a bit expensive too and don't last anything like as long as 100k. Some time back the Ford Escort was notorious for the thrust bearing going as it was just a nylon thing and replacing it was almost as expensive as a full clutch.

It's all these things that add up. The new electric drives are so much simpler to maintain and many will go to half a million miles or more. There's a Tesla in the Netherlands being used as a taxi that has just hit that figure and most of that was totally worry free motoring apparently. No major faults.

Actually, most manufacturers have provisions to allow the warranty to remain intact if the vehicle owner is the one doing the maintenance. Nissan does anyway. Unless it was for a very make/model specific issue, I would never bring a vehicle to a dealership. Surely each make/model will have its own specific needs during any scheduled service. Some you look at, and run diagnostics, and some you change lots of fluids.

Shop rates are typically high. A quick search and I see that Tesla has shop rates varying between $75 and $150 per hour. Which really isn't that bad considering the initial cost of entry.

As for clutches, they are (obviously) a wear item by design. Of the half dozen or so manual vehicles I've had in my lifetime I've never had one die before putting at least ~90K on it. Granted, I've also never had a DCT, but if what you're saying is true I'll avoid them like the plague.

Electric motors are very happy to run and run and run if kept balanced, and in a clean, dry environment. It's the ancillaries that have the limited lifespan. I'd be curious to see the stats on the electric taxi (charge cycles, depth of charge, battery pack chemistry, etc).

Like everything in our lives (e.g. Smart TVs etc) the newer cars (including several already, especially Tesla with its dash-mounted wide screen) will be places to run web connected apps. So far what I've seen in (rented) modern cars from the mainstream vendors is pretty lame, and I end up preferring to run the apps on my smartphone. I also prefer to not pay for a separate data connection for my car. However if I had a setup like I've seen on the Tesla I would probably change my mind, or even Android Auto / Apple CarPlay. But so far the cradle to hold and charge my smartphone is still the winning solution.

I do not understand the expectation that the ride sharing program would fundementally change the way people treat their cars. In my opinion, these ride sharing programs are ust more intellegent, convenient and more sophiscated version of cabs, and anyone who would want to do ride-sharing can already hire a cab instead.

And then as for electric cars themselves, as far as I understand the biggest advantage is to cut the reliance on oil, reduce air pollution and noise pollution of internal combustion engines, as well as reduce energy price. But how would this cause changes to the way people use their cars except maybe they can afford driving their car more?

As for AI driving, it would indeed do drastic change by cutting accident rate and also freeing drivers from driving seat. And it would also allow individuals without the ability to drive to use their own vehicle and reach wherever they want. But then this is not actually dependent on the use of elctric car nor really related to ride sharing programmes.

They can be powered by a horde of hamsters for all I care, as long as they're not driverless or flying I'm up for it.

I was watching some video earlier about US car giant GM expanding its battery and hydrogen lineup. About time too, seeing as the big Euro makers like JLR and Mercedes are also going electric.

There are some laggards though such as Fiat and PSA. Ford also seem to be a little slow off the mark. Volkswagen's new electric Golf is also way better than the model it replaces.

Just a shame that I can't buy a GM product in Europe any more.....

electric batteries still come from the polluting and environmentally unfriendly mining of Nickel. It just shifts the dependency from oil to something different and shifts the immediate pollution to somewhere else in the world far away from anywhere the consumer sees and so they also feel less directly responsible for causing. Given the biggest Nickel operations are in Russia, Brazil, Australia, Philippines, Madagascar and New Caledonia they still have to be flown/shipped from the other side of the world by fossil fuel.

dtw2hyd wrote:

I think EV industry should look into standardizing batteries to few types and have battery exchange stations.

There was a company doing that, called Better Place, it spent 850 millions $ with the support of governments, a manufacturer (Renault), etc. And the ideal location : Israel. It didn't work out.

c933103 wrote:

And then as for electric cars themselves, as far as I understand the biggest advantage is to cut the reliance on oil, reduce air pollution and noise pollution of internal combustion engines, as well as reduce energy price. But how would this cause changes to the way people use their cars except maybe they can afford driving their car more?

On of the biggest paradigm shifts with electric cars is the ability to "fuel" your car at your home. In addition to other places that you visit during the day (you place of work, shopping centers, etc). While there may be a network of "supercharging stations", there will be less need for anything like the network of gas stations that currently exist. There will be no more need for the regular pilgrimage to a gas station. Most of the time you will just recharge over night and go on with your day.

Also as to pollution, fewer gas stations will improve the pollution that gas powered cars create as ground leaks, exhaust from cars, and vapors from fueling etc. will be reduced.

Tugg

What happens to peak electricity usage patterns if everyone plugs in their EV at home in the night?

I still think hot-swap battery packs are a better solution, which can be charged during the day with solar.energy, unless you have rooftop windmill.

If everyone washes their automobiles at home, a lot of fresh water will be wasted, go to local carwash which recycles most of the water used.

To me the ideal situation would be to have solar panels on the roof to handle the home and cars. Sadly Oklahoma has a Dumb Broad for a Governor who signed a bill to add a "fee" for the electric. Just like a tax on wind and solar. Normal states can probably move forward with new technologies.

Tugger wrote:

Also as to pollution, fewer gas stations will improve the pollution that gas powered cars create as ground leaks, exhaust from cars, and vapors from fueling etc. will be reduced.

I am all in favor of the electric car, but we have to keep in mind most electricity comes from hydro-fuels (coal, NG, petroleum) and it's my understanding that approximately 10% of the power generated gets wasted in the transmission lines (I2R losses).

I must say I also have some 'range anxiety'. 99% of my driving would allow me to charge overnight or at my destination. The problem is still that 1%. I guess I could rent a 'gasser' for that 1% but over time that will probably become prohibitive.

dtw2hyd wrote:

What happens to peak electricity usage patterns if everyone plugs in their EV at home in the night?

I still think hot-swap battery packs are a better solution, which can be charged during the day with solar.energy, unless you have rooftop windmill.

Or think of Tesla's Powerwall (or competing products): charge solar to home battery during the day, then transfer to car at night.

Revelation wrote:

Why does the industry think the battery situation is going to improve? Is there some big breakthrough coming down the pike?

Battery chemistry is progressing every day. There are prototypes now of Li-Asphalt batteries that can charge in 5 mins with higher than ever power density. They are apparently extremely stable even after high charge-discharge cycles and inhibit Li dendrite formation which cause the short circuits in the batteries resulting in thermal runaways. Electric is the future.

http://news.rice.edu/2017/10/02/asphalt-helps-lithium-batteries-charge-faster/

Revelation wrote:

Or think of Tesla's Powerwall (or competing products): charge solar to home battery during the day, then transfer to car at night.

I noticed every EV maker already aware of this night charging issue and upselling $20K home battery packs. Except it reminds me of



Also if Musk thinks every human needs 2x240lb battery packs, humans can never colonize Mars.