i find his shows pretty cool - a lot less yelling and berk than the colbert report.
What does $500 brl OIL mean??
- Thread starter Bill.L
- Start date
A bit off topic (but related to cars/petrol) - a colleague at work today made a weird comment about me living so close to work as if it's some kind of achievement to have a long commute every day. I'm a bit baffled by this and wonder if others think the same? I think it's great and love the extra time (and money) I have to do things that actually matter to me. Same person made a similar comment a while back about people who travel overseas - apparently there is no way they can afford it and just put it on credit. Maybe if said person poured less money into other things, they could do the same. End of rant 
Makes sense.
There seems to be quite a push from government to support EV manufacturers.
I was fortunate recently to get a ride in the new Mitusbishi electric car being used as part of govt fleets. I was absolutely amazed by how well it went, and how well sorted it seemed to be. It wasn't a sports car, but as a city commuter it was damn near ideal - small to park, accelerated well from standstill, was quite happy to cruise with traffic at higher speeds and simply plug it on while you aren't using it. I understand that it costs about 1/6 to run when compared with the cost of a petrol equivalent. I'd be quite happy to run a commuter that cost less than 5 bucks a week in energy.
Of course, it's more expensive to buy and no-one really knows what the longer term running costs will be like, or the resale value.
But "to run" does not equate to "energy".
Opex "to run" an electric car involves {tyres, rego, insurance, servicing, repairs and plug in electricity}.
Opex "to run" a petrol car involves {tyres, rego, insurance, servicing, repairs and fuel}.
I'd be highly surprised if the former is only 1/6th that of the later.
I reckon the end result would be nigh on the same.
Indeed, the much larger Capex considerations swamp the opex difference - if any at all.
I reckon the electric car fits into the same bucket as solar panels.....if you ignore the large Capex issues, everything is go go go.
If you ignore the Capex issues - you're nuts.
Electric cars will take off when they are cheaper / more reliable and have better ranges than petrol driven cars. Until then.....samey samey.
You may have noticed that I now have a hybrid Camry and it too is an extremely good package.
I still believe we are a long way from acceptance of EVs. A suburban family would still need a reliable conventional car, [does a metro dweller need transport at all?] so the EV must be economical enough to OWN as a commuter/shopping trolly.
I know you should never say never but I don't see that happening in 20 years.
I still believe we are a long way from acceptance of EVs. A suburban family would still need a reliable conventional car, [does a metro dweller need transport at all?] so the EV must be economical enough to OWN as a commuter/shopping trolly.
I know you should never say never but I don't see that happening in 20 years.
EVs are interesting. Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs) have the massive advantage of huge economies of scale. If you tried to build a modern ICE today from scratch without those scale economies the cost would be horrendous. Far more than EVs in fact. EVs are far simpler and easier to build than ICEs after all when you get back to basics.
Slowly but surely scale economies in batteries and other EV specific tech are gaining ground with hybrids as the transition technology to get there. As we get more and more hybrids we get cheaper and cheaper batteries and associated gear - the price trajectory of hybrid Camry is evidence of this when you compare to early Prius models for example. This will flow on to pure EVs. The MiEVs running around now prove the pure EV product is technically good enough to compete in the small car market on basic performance and the market is big enough.
The only real issue left now is cost and it is slowly creeping down. Once we reach that tipping point in scale economies with the virtuous circle back into R&D budgets for tech development then there will be rapid change. But I agree we are still a long way from that. 20 years feels too long for me though - I would peg it to start in earnest in about 10 years, if it's ever going to get there. That's an educated guess based on how I've seen other similar technologies develop in the power industry. Battery development has hugely advanced in the last 10 years to take just one example - but that probably means the "low hanging fruit" has already been picked in the field and there will likely be slower incremental development from now on but you never know your luck in the big city!
I also believe the whole rare earth price boom thing is a storm in a teacup but I know others don't share that view. I firmly believe if they were called by any other name (other than "rare") we wouldn't have this perception problem... they are just minerals like any other after all.
Slowly but surely scale economies in batteries and other EV specific tech are gaining ground with hybrids as the transition technology to get there. As we get more and more hybrids we get cheaper and cheaper batteries and associated gear - the price trajectory of hybrid Camry is evidence of this when you compare to early Prius models for example. This will flow on to pure EVs. The MiEVs running around now prove the pure EV product is technically good enough to compete in the small car market on basic performance and the market is big enough.
The only real issue left now is cost and it is slowly creeping down. Once we reach that tipping point in scale economies with the virtuous circle back into R&D budgets for tech development then there will be rapid change. But I agree we are still a long way from that. 20 years feels too long for me though - I would peg it to start in earnest in about 10 years, if it's ever going to get there. That's an educated guess based on how I've seen other similar technologies develop in the power industry. Battery development has hugely advanced in the last 10 years to take just one example - but that probably means the "low hanging fruit" has already been picked in the field and there will likely be slower incremental development from now on but you never know your luck in the big city!
I also believe the whole rare earth price boom thing is a storm in a teacup but I know others don't share that view. I firmly believe if they were called by any other name (other than "rare") we wouldn't have this perception problem... they are just minerals like any other after all.
Electric cars will not be a viable alternative for most people, especially since people are already all "ZOMG electricity prices are going up !1!!" Can you imagine people also paying to power their cars with electricity (which is a lot more expensive than petrol)? I can't.
I believe only the reasonably wealthy will be able to afford them if they take off. Most other people will resort to more sensible measures such as living close to where they work, etc which is what most civilised cities have been doing for decades or more. No new "magic" technology will change that.
This commuting at all costs culture will end soon IMO, as people will need to choose between eating and using their car.
I believe only the reasonably wealthy will be able to afford them if they take off. Most other people will resort to more sensible measures such as living close to where they work, etc which is what most civilised cities have been doing for decades or more. No new "magic" technology will change that.
This commuting at all costs culture will end soon IMO, as people will need to choose between eating and using their car.
Don't know where you get this from? The reality is that electricity is a lot cheaper than petrol for this purpose... regardless of where you live in Australia.
I don't mean just in terms of cost but also efficiency in relation to that cost. Australia has massive suburban sprawl and that is not conducive to electric vehicles at all. I don't know why we have to be so obsessed with this kind of living. Do people in New York or Paris care about electric cars or petrol prices? I doubt it. Yet they have a much better quality of life than 99% of people in Australia (and we all try to visit these kinds of places when we go on holidays, interestingly). Compact well-designed cities are the answer, not some ugly suburban lifestyle with 1 car per person and needing to get into a car to buy some bread. It is not sustainable or even healthy in any way.
If 85% of the Australian public live on the coast,then it will be the way it will go,the only problem with electric vehicles is price,but when you look at the numbers on one aussie car company per car out the door each week compared too what China makes per hour,then you can see why the Aussie car industry is "Kaput",no matter how many millions of tax payers money
is splashed around like water..
Same bucket as solar power though - huge capex, never get it back on opex. Even wind is cheaper.
If ya think EVs will be viable with current or reasonably advanced technology ya dreamin.
Economy of scale is a cop out. Every conventional vehicle has a battery and sometimes four or five during it's life. Submarines have used big battery banks for 70 years as do phone exchanges and fork lifts. New battery technology is being driven by electronics so if the advances haven't been made yet it would be reasonable to assume that they are hidden deep below our current knowledge. If and when they are developed they will most likely need millions of tons of some strange metal or rare earth.
I love technology, but I'm a pragmatist.
Economy of scale is a cop out. Every conventional vehicle has a battery and sometimes four or five during it's life. Submarines have used big battery banks for 70 years as do phone exchanges and fork lifts. New battery technology is being driven by electronics so if the advances haven't been made yet it would be reasonable to assume that they are hidden deep below our current knowledge. If and when they are developed they will most likely need millions of tons of some strange metal or rare earth.
I love technology, but I'm a pragmatist.
Economies of scale for lead acid batteries are already huge. Of course they are never going to get us there.
It remains to be seen what battery technology will win on the EV front but it's clear that they won't use lead acid. The economies of scale for the others are only just starting. The battery in even a Camry hybrid bears very little resemblance to a typical car battery or a submarine battery. Let alone the battery in a pure EV like the MiEV, which is completely different again and offers plenty of promise in scale economy for this application.
It remains to be seen what battery technology will win on the EV front but it's clear that they won't use lead acid. The economies of scale for the others are only just starting. The battery in even a Camry hybrid bears very little resemblance to a typical car battery or a submarine battery. Let alone the battery in a pure EV like the MiEV, which is completely different again and offers plenty of promise in scale economy for this application.
Please do us the courtesy of having your sig tell us your industry. Others do.
If technologies other than lead/acid were "easy" we would have them in our Falcadore already. The US survives on innovation and would have offered them if they could.
Technology may occasionally make a big leap forward, but the uptake is always more measured. The women who have to balance the budget need to be convinced first. They are not about to buy an expensive shopping trolly which will NOT allow them to visit the grand kids on the other side of town.
Think PEOPLE!
Yes, quite obviously EVs are not economic right now. This is why I said it's good that govts are getting behind it to help push the technology further.
At some point we will need to deal with the concept of having cars powered by something other than fossil fuels. Ethanol in itself is probably not the whole answer.
Governments have no right to PUSH unproven technology. They control tax policy and if they want innovation, do it via the tax structure. Same opportunities for all.
Its ironic to hold up the US as a model of energy efficiency when they consume more than us per capita.
