Prototype EV Battery gives 750 mile Range

[First_Lexus]

I found this to be quite a balanced video. Interesting. Spoiler alert, the conclusions aren’t exactly what you might expect from the title!

 

[Las Palmas]

11 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

And most modern devices have smart control to do just that. I have numerous devices sitting on their chargers permanently with no detriment to their operational durance. The consumer need not concern themselves about it. It would be very strange if current BEVs don't control this to provide the optimum battery life

Hopefully, but maybe long range is more important than those batteries lose power over time.

[Linas.P]

3 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

I found this to be quite a balanced video. Interesting. Spoiler alert, the conclusions aren’t exactly what you might expect from the title!

 

I knew from the title that conclusion will be opposite from the title, so didn't expect anything else when watching as I knew there will be no new information provided and it will be just shallow review of headline figures which are convenient for BEV makers. 

It is already known that in long term "lifetime" pollution study average BEV was found to be ~30% less polluting than average ICEV. The word average is very important - Tesla Model X is not average, Tesla Model 3 long rage is not average, Model S plaid - you guessed it not average, Lucid Air... not average, Audi etron GT/Porsche Taycan Turbo S (what a stupid name) are not average... and so on. These BEVs are equivalent to Bugattis of ICEVs world.

When we going to do another study considering all these long range electricity guzzles - I really doubt 30% less pollution estimate is going to stand. The study was done for years 2012 ~2020, that is when most of BEV on the roads were like Renault Zoes, Nissan Leafs and rare early production Teslas.

In this video in particular they looking at Volvo XC40, which is poor example - to begin with it is exactly that sort of "average" BEV with average range and not comparable to silly 500 miles+ Teslas. So although nothing is wrong in this video factually, it is still made in such a way that it misleads average person who doesn't do their own research - it is not lying, just not saying all the truth. Simple reason - ICEV pollution comes mostly from tailpipe emissions, BEV pollution comes mostly from 2 sources - power grid and Battery itself. As such smaller Battery BEV is automatically greener than one with large capacity BEV. Simplest way to look at BEVs - Battery capacity on BEV is the same as engine capacity on ICEV, the bigger is the Battery the worse it is for environment... and that is before it even drives a single mile. That is why super cars are fine - they only drive few miles so it does not matter that their 7L V12s produce loads of pollution, but that is why long range BEVs are not fine, that pollution is right there no matter if you drive it or not.

[Boxbrownie]

14 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

And most modern devices have smart control to do just that. I have numerous devices sitting on their chargers permanently with no detriment to their operational durance. The consumer need not concern themselves about it. It would be very strange if current BEVs don't control this to provide the optimum battery life

Correct and they do which is why this is all pretty irrelevant.

[Las Palmas]

21 hours ago, Boxbrownie said:

Correct and they do which is why this is all pretty irrelevant.

I doubt it. Car makers are competing about having longest possible range and how do you get longest possible range? By charging to only 80% of capacity?

[Boxbrownie]

1 hour ago, Las Palmas said:

I doubt it. Car makers are competing about having longest possible range and how do you get longest possible range? By charging to only 80% of capacity?

Yes, basically……they actually usually only have a 10% headroom for safety so in actuality your charging to 90%…..it’s means the Battery health is protected and lasts for more than the length of the 8 year warranty, the very last thin manufacturers want is a reputation for their EV batteries to have failing batteries/range after only a few years.

 

[ColinBarber]

1 hour ago, Boxbrownie said:

Yes, basically……they actually usually only have a 10% headroom for safety so in actuality your charging to 90%…..it’s means the battery health is protected and lasts for more than the length of the 8 year warranty, the very last thin manufacturers want is a reputation for their EV batteries to have failing batteries/range after only a few years.

 

The buffer is all built into the bottom end, as going below 0% is much worse. If you charge to 100%, your Battery is at 100% in most EVs, but when you are at an indicated 0% you aren't really.

Batteries should easily last past any warranty period but their capacity will lower with age. The warranties typically only apply if capacity drops below 70% of the original usage capacity (another reason why a buffer is built-in).

[Boxbrownie]

25 minutes ago, ColinBarber said:

The buffer is all built into the bottom end, as going below 0% is much worse. If you charge to 100%, your battery is at 100% in most EVs, but when you are at an indicated 0% you aren't really.

Batteries should easily last past any warranty period but their capacity will lower with age. The warranties typically only apply if capacity drops below 70% of the original usage capacity (another reason why a buffer is built-in).

Yes there is also a buffer at the bottom end, no idea what Tesla do but BMW have a buffer top and bottom to preserve Battery lifespan.

And yes again most Battery warranties are specific to 70% after eight years.

 

How did Tesla do the OTA update on the Model S which gave slightly more range (as did Jaguar with the iPace)….they reduced the upper range buffer.

[ColinBarber]

8 minutes ago, Boxbrownie said:

How did Tesla do the OTA update on the Model S which gave slightly more range (as did Jaguar with the iPace)….they reduced the upper range buffer.

Some of the Tesla increases were because they used the same pack in different capacity vehicles so there was a huge buffer on the lower capacity vehicles, so some was placed at the top. Buffers were also larger on earlier Model Ss because degradation was somewhat unknown. But the modern small increases they have provided on the 3 have come from unlocking some of the lower buffer, not top because there isn't one anymore.

[Linas.P]

11 minutes ago, Boxbrownie said:

Yes there is also a buffer at the bottom end, no idea what Tesla do but BMW have a buffer top and bottom to preserve battery lifespan.

And yes again most battery warranties are specific to 70% after eight years.

 

How did Tesla do the OTA update on the Model S which gave slightly more range (as did Jaguar with the iPace)….they reduced the upper range buffer.

So basically... you just disproved your point and confirmed what Kieran originally said - ideally you should not charge BEV to 100%. This is not because you overcharge (there is protection for that), but because charging it always to 100% will degrade Battery quicker.

Secondly, don't forget fast charging of any type degrades batteries faster as well. 

And finally, what you need to understand that from warranty stand point - 70% is total Battery capacity, not 70% of capacity available for the consumer. They can still have arbitrary limit to prevent you using last 10% or top 10%, leaving you with 50% of usable capacity. So if you range drops from 250Miles to say 150Miles after 8 years, this still may not be valid warranty claim. I am sure they have it in small print that "range may vary based on circumstances" so what counts is only the test they perform in the way they like want and can prove anything they like. 

[Barry14UK]

I don't know how or if this is factored in but by 10-12 years it seems likely that a new Battery will be required as performance of original will have reduced considerably by then in BEV vehicles.  This is going to be a major cost (even if Battery technology improves) and with further ungreen implications.  On the other hand, setting aside parts common to BEV and ICE, many of the latter will still be in use beyond 12 years with maybe a few minor parts for the engine and transmission and replacement of much less expensive 12v Battery.  So what I am saying is that one shouldn't just consider the life of a BEV Battery but the whole cost in financial and green terms over the life of the car which could be much longer, (as in my 21 year old E39 BMW) for example.

[Linas.P]

4 minutes ago, Barry14UK said:

I don't know how or if this is factored in but by 10-12 years it seems likely that a new battery will be required as performance of original will have reduced considerably by then in BEV vehicles.  This is going to be a major cost (even if battery technology improves) and with further ungreen implications.  On the other hand, setting aside parts common to BEV and ICE, many of the latter will still be in use beyond 12 years with maybe a few minor parts for the engine and transmission and replacement of much less expensive 12v battery.  So what I am saying is that one shouldn't just consider the life of a BEV battery but the whole cost in financial and green terms over the life of the car which could be much longer, (as in my 21 year old E39 BMW) for example.

I think key point still applies here - as long as you drive 90k miles in you BEV over those 10-12 years, it will have same impact as ICEV. So even if new Battery is required it doesn't suddenly become less green - it just means that after Battery replacement it would be best to cover at least another 90k miles (or slightly less, because rest of the car doesn't need to be made again). 

I think the key problem here will be Battery design and "right to repair" question. For example what Tesla is proposing with "structural" Battery is outright criminal from this point of view, meaning that once Battery dies the rest of car will be scrap as well. Secondly "right to repair" - if owner will be forced to use authorised dealer, then for 10-12 years old car this will never be economical to change, in other hand if they won't require authorised dealer - then we potentially have high voltage safety risk at hands.

What I am saying here is neither pro, nor against BEVs - I am just saying that many things of how to use and maintain these cars, and environmental impact of it is not fully understood or well appreciated yet. 

[flotsam]

And after about 7 years you'll need a new one. I'm waiting for hydrogen

[ganzoom]

36 minutes ago, flotsam said:

And after about 7 years you'll need a new one. I'm waiting for hydrogen

A new what? Our EV is coming up to 5 years old, apart from new tyres every 30k its not needing a new of anything. Combustion of hydrogen is already here, and has been for billions of years, I still struggle to understand why us humans think we can do better than the universe at using hydrogen as fuel? 

[ColinBarber]

1 hour ago, Linas.P said:

For example what Tesla is proposing with "structural" battery is outright criminal from this point of view, meaning that once battery dies the rest of car will be scrap as well.

I'm not sure you fully understand the design if you state this. 'Structural' means load bearing not non-removable - although admittedly I'm sure it will take longer than the 90 mins it currently takes to swap a Model 3 Battery.

[Phil xxkr]

2 hours ago, Linas.P said:

I think key point still applies here - as long as you drive 90k miles in you BEV over those 10-12 years, it will have same impact as ICEV. So even if new battery is required it doesn't suddenly become less green - it just means that after battery replacement it would be best to cover at least another 90k miles (or slightly less, because rest of the car doesn't need to be made again). 

I think the key problem here will be battery design and "right to repair" question. For example what Tesla is proposing with "structural" battery is outright criminal from this point of view, meaning that once battery dies the rest of car will be scrap as well. Secondly "right to repair" - if owner will be forced to use authorised dealer, then for 10-12 years old car this will never be economical to change, in other hand if they won't require authorised dealer - then we potentially have high voltage safety risk at hands.

What I am saying here is neither pro, nor against BEVs - I am just saying that many things of how to use and maintain these cars, and environmental impact of it is not fully understood or well appreciated yet. 

If so Linas that's following the smartphone model where batteries (biggest point of sub-optimal performance) are no longer a swop in/out easy option for the owner 

[Las Palmas]

47 minutes ago, Phil xxkr said:

If so Linas that's following the smartphone model where batteries (biggest point of sub-optimal performance) are no longer a swop in/out easy option for the owner 

Mostly you need a tiny screwdriver to change Battery in most Android smartphones and minimal technical ability. iPhones are made more difficult because apple think that their fans will want the latest anyway and new models come long before batteries need to be changed.

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, ColinBarber said:

I'm not sure you fully understand the design if you state this. 'Structural' means load bearing not non-removable - although admittedly I'm sure it will take longer than the 90 mins it currently takes to swap a Model 3 battery.

No - "structural" means they fit the batteries in all the crevices in the chassis rails and other structural components making them impossible to remove. The only way to remove batteries will require cutting structural cassis components apart, which is basically not viable.

You are partially right that some part of batteries will be just simply part of sub-assembly which is load bearing, still much more difficult and expensive to replace, but not impossible. However again if you look to the proposed design some batteries will literally form part of the shell or will be filling some cavities and will be impossible to remove without destroying the body shell itself.

1 hour ago, Phil xxkr said:

If so Linas that's following the smartphone model where batteries (biggest point of sub-optimal performance) are no longer a swop in/out easy option for the owner 

In principle - yes, smartphone Battery replacement is not worth it because it is made as such that buying new one is simply cheaper than fixing old. That is already the case with most BEVs. In practice it is even worse than that. When it comes to smartphones - it is possible to replace the Battery if one is willing to use heat gun, remove the glue and then glue everything together again. In future Teslas it will be literally impossible - Battery will be part of body shell and removing them will require destroying it, rendering it impossible to do. In smartphone world it be equivalent to fitting Battery in between the layers of PCB. 

[Las Palmas]

3 hours ago, Barry14UK said:

I don't know how or if this is factored in but by 10-12 years it seems likely that a new battery will be required as performance of original will have reduced considerably by then in BEV vehicles.  This is going to be a major cost (even if battery technology improves) and with further ungreen implications.  On the other hand, setting aside parts common to BEV and ICE, many of the latter will still be in use beyond 12 years with maybe a few minor parts for the engine and transmission and replacement of much less expensive 12v battery.  So what I am saying is that one shouldn't just consider the life of a BEV battery but the whole cost in financial and green terms over the life of the car which could be much longer, (as in my 21 year old E39 BMW) for example.

So, why are we re-electing the same politicians that are doing nothing than lying and cheating and telling us to follow their way with the stupid advice they give us: Buy electric cars? Can we blame the lobbyists? NO! can we blame the politicians that want only to be re-elected? NO! 

We can blame nobody but ourselves.

[Linas.P]

7 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

So, why are we re-electing the same politicians that are doing nothing than lying and cheating and telling us to follow their way with the stupid advice they give us: Buy electric cars? Can we blame the lobbyists? NO! can we blame the politicians that want only to be re-elected? NO! 

We can blame nobody but ourselves.

That is only the case if you believe in free and fair elections, or assume that we live in representative democracy. I am not saying that we definitely don't, but I would not take that for granted. Many recent developments shows otherwise, especially in UK with two party system and first past the post system, the elected politicians are not representative of the voters at all. And even if they would be, then their promises are non-biding which fundamentally undermines the system of elections and democracy. 

So in theory you right, but practice is more complicated than that. 

[Phil xxkr]

13 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

Mostly you need a tiny screwdriver to change battery in most Android smartphones and minimal technical ability. iPhones are made more difficult because Apple think that their fans will want the latest anyway and new models come long before batteries need to be changed.

What you describe as minimum tech ability isn't the case for most people in the same way as I think making a baked Alaska requires minimum cooking skills. As to apple I might remind you of Battery gate and the 113 million fine for precipitating customer needs. But I do agree in that PCP contracts have encouraged no concept of true ownership therefore to treat cars the same way as any new technology ie short term swap out fashion items isn't that far off the mark 

[Boxbrownie]

4 hours ago, ColinBarber said:

Some of the Tesla increases were because they used the same pack in different capacity vehicles so there was a huge buffer on the lower capacity vehicles, so some was placed at the top. Buffers were also larger on earlier Model Ss because degradation was somewhat unknown. But the modern small increases they have provided on the 3 have come from unlocking some of the lower buffer, not top because there isn't one anymore.

More fool them then I guess. Not heard anything about the M3 as have not been interested since our third attempt at a test drive, but the MS I knew had some stolen from its upper buffer.

[Linas.P]

1 minute ago, Phil xxkr said:

What you describe as minimum tech ability isn't the case for most people in the same way as I think making a baked Alaska requires minimum cooking skills. As to Apple I might remind you of battery gate and the 113 million fine for precipitating customer needs. But I do agree in that PCP contracts have encouraged no concept of true ownership therefore to treat cars the same way as any new technology ie short term swap out fashion items isn't that far off the mark 

113 million is literally drop in the ocean for crapple, fines for planned obsolescence in my opinion should exceed annual company revenue to really make it clear - don't do it or we make you go bankrupt for such rotten behaviour. Now it is just cost of doing business, not even a realistic threat - their revenue last year was $365 billion (nicely averages to billion every day), so such fine is a joke. Give them fine of 100 billion and then they will think twice.

[Boxbrownie]

1 hour ago, ColinBarber said:

I'm not sure you fully understand the design if you state this. 'Structural' means load bearing not non-removable - although admittedly I'm sure it will take longer than the 90 mins it currently takes to swap a Model 3 battery.

Not sure about the M3 but we saw the demo Elon put on with an automated Battery change facility for the MS, the Battery was changed (twice) in the time it took an equivalent US vehicle to be fuelled.

[Boxbrownie]

2 hours ago, flotsam said:

And after about 7 years you'll need a new one. I'm waiting for hydrogen

If you mean Battery that’s another misconception put around by the anti EV brigade, even when a new Battery will be needed the old Battery still has plenty enough life in it to be used as a power storage pack in power bank use.

 

BTW our EV is now just over six years old and the Battery shows no sign of degradation at all compared to when we drove it off the forecourt, and it’s also never been in the dealers for anything but a service, almost like a Lexus 😆