EV developments
- Thread starter begreen
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
The big SUVs are not their best sellers globally. The Corolla, Rav4, and Camry are.
Hmm, that is until they did.
GM, Toyota, and FCA pit themselves against humanity in move that will kill more people with pollution — Opinion
It's the latest in a fight against California's clean air rules, with EPA insisting on rules which, by their own analysis, will kill people and cost money.
electrek.co
That is an opinion piece with no intent to make a fair and objective review of the facts.
Car companies sell what the public wants and the US public currently does not want EVs in large quantities even with rebates and subsidies, I wish it was different, but a big part of the population wants full size pickups and SUVs and the US car companies make very large profits on them. The expectation of the public is that the governments job is to keep fuel to run those vehicles cheap by the "drill baby drill approach".
The federal government has been "priming the pump" for EVs and outright strongarming GM to build EVs in order to bail them out and to a lesser extent Ford to build them and to date neither has been successful. Yes, Tesla is making a buck selling to what was a niche market funding it from legacy companies who have made the decision that they would rather buy emission credits than bet on federal requirements that potentially change every four years in the US. If not for the last administration the Obama era CAFE standards would have already have shifted the US auto/truck market, any company that made that bet like Ford and the all aluminum truck body got penalized when the Trump administration shelved the standards. Ultimately its a decision from the US, either let the tragedy of the common approach decide long term US energy and environmental policy or actually put in a long term strategy.
Car companies sell what the public wants and the US public currently does not want EVs in large quantities even with rebates and subsidies, I wish it was different, but a big part of the population wants full size pickups and SUVs and the US car companies make very large profits on them. The expectation of the public is that the governments job is to keep fuel to run those vehicles cheap by the "drill baby drill approach".
The federal government has been "priming the pump" for EVs and outright strongarming GM to build EVs in order to bail them out and to a lesser extent Ford to build them and to date neither has been successful. Yes, Tesla is making a buck selling to what was a niche market funding it from legacy companies who have made the decision that they would rather buy emission credits than bet on federal requirements that potentially change every four years in the US. If not for the last administration the Obama era CAFE standards would have already have shifted the US auto/truck market, any company that made that bet like Ford and the all aluminum truck body got penalized when the Trump administration shelved the standards. Ultimately its a decision from the US, either let the tragedy of the common approach decide long term US energy and environmental policy or actually put in a long term strategy.
EbS-P
Minister of Fire
We don’t have an affordable solution for the the big trucks and SUVs. I don’t even think the tax credit is enough financial incentive. A Suburban starts at $60k. I just don’t think the $100 a month enough to make many choose a smaller vehicle. incentive for mileage requirements is at the corporate level, not individual which I find slightly problematic
Last edited:
I think that Americans want their cake and to eat it too. They want the vehicles they want, they want them as cheap as can be to buy and operate, and they want the climate to be survive for their kids and grands. How they rank order those three things varies from person to person.
And as a card carrying techno-optimist, I say... technology will give the people what they want.
BEV sedans are cost competitive-ish with ICE sedans in 2024 for purchase price. And much cheaper to operate in places with average kWh and gasoline costs. But SUVs and pickups are either not cost competitive (purchase) or have performance issue in (IMO niche) applications like heavy long range towing.
The result of the above reality is the current 'awkward' stage of BEV adoption, and the 'stupid' nature of the existing incentives.
We are in the midst of a global disruption in ICE sedans for BEV sedans. The Model Y has dethroned the Camry. In China and EU this disruption is obvious to everyone. The Chinese automakers are having an epic shakeout. The European auto workers are up in arms. In the US, where sedans are a small part of the market, the disruption is less obvious, and also lagging. But it is well underway.
Will all sedans be BEVs in 2 years? Nope. It will take some time to sweep through different states, and colder regions will be later adopters.
That adoption will be driven by the lower cost of BEV than ICE sedans, and held back by DCFC availability.
But but, the Mach E is not selling well... but its not really a small sedan. GM and Ford aren't really building any BEV sedans, and couldn't do it near cost parity if they tried. And the folks that want BEV sedans in the US have plenty of choices, and the prices are FINE in 2024.
SUVs and Trucks? We'll need some further battery cost reductions, and maybe energy density improvements (or both) to get to purchase price parity. And we will not have mass adoption in the US until we get to cost parity. Projections are (ofc) uncertain, but I'd expect that to happen within 5 years.
So with the EV transition there is a lot of cross-talk. If you think a car is a sedan, you are thinking the BEV transition is here now. If you think a car is an SUV or a Truck, you see it still in the misty distance and wonder what all the hubbub is about.
And the 'stupid' fleet emission average system we are using now accommodates the bifurcated nature of the US light vehicle market, and the resulting awkward nature of the US transition.
And as a card carrying techno-optimist, I say... technology will give the people what they want.
BEV sedans are cost competitive-ish with ICE sedans in 2024 for purchase price. And much cheaper to operate in places with average kWh and gasoline costs. But SUVs and pickups are either not cost competitive (purchase) or have performance issue in (IMO niche) applications like heavy long range towing.
The result of the above reality is the current 'awkward' stage of BEV adoption, and the 'stupid' nature of the existing incentives.
We are in the midst of a global disruption in ICE sedans for BEV sedans. The Model Y has dethroned the Camry. In China and EU this disruption is obvious to everyone. The Chinese automakers are having an epic shakeout. The European auto workers are up in arms. In the US, where sedans are a small part of the market, the disruption is less obvious, and also lagging. But it is well underway.
Will all sedans be BEVs in 2 years? Nope. It will take some time to sweep through different states, and colder regions will be later adopters.
That adoption will be driven by the lower cost of BEV than ICE sedans, and held back by DCFC availability.
But but, the Mach E is not selling well... but its not really a small sedan. GM and Ford aren't really building any BEV sedans, and couldn't do it near cost parity if they tried. And the folks that want BEV sedans in the US have plenty of choices, and the prices are FINE in 2024.
SUVs and Trucks? We'll need some further battery cost reductions, and maybe energy density improvements (or both) to get to purchase price parity. And we will not have mass adoption in the US until we get to cost parity. Projections are (ofc) uncertain, but I'd expect that to happen within 5 years.
So with the EV transition there is a lot of cross-talk. If you think a car is a sedan, you are thinking the BEV transition is here now. If you think a car is an SUV or a Truck, you see it still in the misty distance and wonder what all the hubbub is about.
And the 'stupid' fleet emission average system we are using now accommodates the bifurcated nature of the US light vehicle market, and the resulting awkward nature of the US transition.
Last edited:
It's not just the US that is pushing GM/Ford/Stetlantis. They are global companies and the international market is pushing them to switch to EVs soon. America is a niche market. It often defies commonsense. For years the big 3s have been pushing big vehicles for image and "safety" due to size. They dressed up trucks as early SUVs to avoid some EPA requirements and because the profit margin was much higher. This lead to a competitive spiral to bigger and more macho vehicles until housewives got saddled parking the Queen Mary at the grocery store. The market mentality of supersizing and bigger is better is a hard one to shake even as the average family size in the country is on the decline.
We don't need cars that go 0-60 in 3 seconds. In fact, they can be dangerous to the inexperienced driver. Most 2 child families don't need more than a 5 passenger vehicle. A 9 passenger Suburban or minivan is often an outlying case but America is built around the car so they keep getting pimped bigger, heavier, and faster to the point where average safety guardrails and barriers can no longer contain them when they are out of control.
We don't need cars that go 0-60 in 3 seconds. In fact, they can be dangerous to the inexperienced driver. Most 2 child families don't need more than a 5 passenger vehicle. A 9 passenger Suburban or minivan is often an outlying case but America is built around the car so they keep getting pimped bigger, heavier, and faster to the point where average safety guardrails and barriers can no longer contain them when they are out of control.
Last edited:
EbS-P
Minister of Fire
I believe Fiskars end Is near. Do they have any IP that has any value?
It’s not cost parity. Depending on options, half ton trucks are ranging from the 40s to over 100k.
2 things are keeping EVs from the mainstream.
Products that don’t meet the needs of consumers and slow/lack of charging spots.
The charging spots is probably the biggest issue. It’s getting better, but not everybody lives in an urban or suburban environment and it takes longer to charge. When every gas station has a charger and it only takes 5 minutes to recharge an empty battery to full there won’t be a reason not to buy it.
Eliminate the reason for range anxiety.
2 things are keeping EVs from the mainstream.
Products that don’t meet the needs of consumers and slow/lack of charging spots.
The charging spots is probably the biggest issue. It’s getting better, but not everybody lives in an urban or suburban environment and it takes longer to charge. When every gas station has a charger and it only takes 5 minutes to recharge an empty battery to full there won’t be a reason not to buy it.
Eliminate the reason for range anxiety.
I'm saying that we are at BEV/ICE cost parity for small sedans and hatches, but not trucks or SUVs. And if you drive one of those, and live in an area with good DCFC and have an L2 at your house... the EV revolution has arrived.
With all the legacy makers signing onto NACS, the DCFC problem will be significantly better in 6-12 mos (assuming that Tesla builds out their network to avoid congestion, as they have repeatedly in the past).
In a year or two folks shopping for small cars will be asking why they should pay more for an ICE model.
SUVs and Trucks, yeah... that's not here yet. If you're an optimist, expect it in a few years. If you're a pessimist, expect it to take nearly forever.
Surveys suggest that most folks are fine with overnight charging at home and 20 minute charge time on road trips. And that 20 minute level is close to where we are at these days.
That is the case in our town. There are a smattering of Rivian's, but a lot of Teslas, ID4s, Priuses, Rav4 Primes and recently what seems like a notable increase in Leafs. I think this is because most people charge at home, for local stuff the short range is not a problem, and they are cheap on the used market. I suspect that many of these folks have a 2nd car or use public transport to get into the city, though the Leaf round trip range can cover that for some.
While I agree not everyone needs a large SUV, in some cases the fuel economy differences aren't as great as is often portrayed.
2 common vehicles here are the RAV4 hybrid (non-prime) and a Chevy Suburban with the 3.0 liter diesel. The fuel economy difference is 20%, 6.3l/100km vs 8.0l/100km.
We're kind of looking at mid sized 3 row SUVs and almost none of them get better than that diesel Suburban/Tahoe. But a Honda Pilot vs a Chevy Suburban Diesel would likely garner a very different reaction from this crowd based on "machoness" while actually achieving almost identical CO2 emissions per mile driven.
The absolute fastest and simplest way to lower emissions would be to lower speed limits, take all the 70, 75, 80, and 85 mph speed limits and move them down to 60 or 65. By doing that you'd almost achieve the same result as converting all those vehicles traveling at those speeds to hybrids.
sloeffle
Minister of Fire
NIO's first 900V EV drive system rolls out with 150 mile fast charge in 5 min(U)
NIO’s 900V drive system rolled off the production line Wednesday, according to the Chinese EV maker. NIO’s (NIO) “Thunder” 900V...
electrek.co
Pretty impressive charge time. I'm assuming it would have to be from a level three charger ?
Weird. I wonder what the architecture is? Existing DCFC units are 400V or 800V nominal, running at 150 kW or 350 kW respectively. In both systems are current limited at about 400 amps.NIO's first 900V EV drive system rolls out with 150 mile fast charge in 5 min(U)
NIO’s 900V drive system rolled off the production line Wednesday, according to the Chinese EV maker. NIO’s (NIO) “Thunder” 900V...
Pretty impressive charge time. I'm assuming it would have to be from a level three charger ?
Most EVs use a 400V DC onboard drive architecture, and the 800V models break the bank into two parts which run in parallel for driving the car (at 400V) or in series for charge (at 800V). Moreover, 400V (or 800V) is a maximum rating, EV batteries run more like 350V when fully charged, to allow for some swing with SOC and ohmic losses in the cabling.
Keep in mind that the 350 kW nominal 800V standard, say 300 kW actual, for 20 minutes would deliver 100 kWh or 250 miles of highway range. So a 20 minute stop every 3+ hours of drive time is NBD. 800V EVs today, however, can't quite keep up with this DCFC standard, but that can be improved with newer battery chemistry.
The issue is cables to deliver 400A need to be liquid cooled and going higher makes them really fat and unwieldy. So if you want the power to go much higher than 350 kW, you will need to up the voltage. But the current 350 kW and 800V standard seems pretty adequate for light vehicles.
My Bolt DCFCs at 400V nominal, and 55 kW peak, and 40 kW or so on average. Or 1/8th as fast as spec'd by the current 350 kW units.
Last edited:
And here comes the next 900v drive system car. This one has solid-state batteries and a claimed 1000 km range. China is leading the way to high voltage drive systems.
electrek.co
IM Motors' L6 EV promises huge range and AWD performance thanks to solid-state batteries
Chinese EV automaker IM Motors is on the cusp of launching its fourth EV model and is touting some impressive...
electrek.co
Weird. I wonder what the architecture is? Existing DCFC units are 400V or 800V nominal, running at 150 kW or 350 kW respectively. In both systems are current limited at about 400 amps.
Most EVs use a 400V DC onboard drive architecture, and the 800V models break the bank into two parts which run in parallel for driving the car (at 400V) or in series for charge (at 800V). Moreover, 400V (or 800V) is a maximum rating, EV batteries run more like 350V when fully charged, to allow for some swing with SOC and ohmic losses in the cabling.
Keep in mind that the 350 kW nominal 800V standard, say 300 kW actual, for 20 minutes would deliver 100 kWh or 250 miles of highway range. So a 20 minute stop every 3+ hours of drive time is NBD. 800V EVs today, however, can't quite keep up with this DCFC standard, but that can be improved with newer battery chemistry.
The issue is cables to deliver 400A need to be liquid cooled and going higher makes them really fat and unwieldy. So if you want the power to go much higher than 350 kW, you will need to up the voltage. But the current 350 kW and 800V standard seems pretty adequate for light vehicles.
My Bolt DCFCs at 400V nominal, and 55 kW peak, and 40 kW or so on average. Or 1/8th as fast as spec'd by the current 350 kW units.
That's actually an interesting thought I never considered, but should have dealing with welding cables, that's big amperage to put through a hand manipulated cable. 400 amps is outside of standard AWG sizes if it's not cooled by artificial means.
I wonder where the voltage limit is by code for chargers? 1000volts?
That's why utility solar systems max voltage was increased to 1500 volts from 1000volts. 50% more power can now travel down the same conductor, which saves a lot of copper on a large solar array.
I suspect that the highest speed DCFCs in China these days are simply 900V (versus the N America standard of 800V), so they are building them to that level whenever they want a maximum speed charging vehicle. 900 is not that much more than 800.
Yeah, all the existing DCFCs in N America have liquid cooled cables (at least the ones 150 kW and above, I don't know about older 50 kW units). This is a maintenance issue, because you need a pump, fluid, a heat exchanger and sensors to confirm that the flow is occurring.
If anything goes wrong with that fluid system, the DCFC will derate to a much lower current, rather than shut down completely. Typically just 25 kW at EA stations. This is waaaay better than 0 kW if you are low on electrons in a snowstorm, but damned frustrating if you were expecting 125 or 250 kW.
These derated units will not post an error code on the display or in the app, so you will encounter them. Happened to me a couple times. And then if you know what's going on, you just move to a different unit and you're fine. If you don't, you sit there and rant and rave about how terrible DCFCs are and how you should never have bought an EV and post it on social media.
The normal voltage limit is 600 volts for conventional insulation. Anything bigger than that is considered high voltage and requires special design and larger clearances. The electrical code was modified about 10 years ago to allow 1000 volts in solar farms with limited access. Those plants need to buy specially rated gear and wiring . When voltages get over 600 the potential for arc flashes is much higher and harder to extinguish with conventional insulation.
When I used to install large variable speed motors in a paper mill, it was less expensive to install a 2300 volt to 460 volt transformer in front of a 460 volt variable speed drive and run very large conductors or even multiple conductors to a 460 volt motor than to buy a 2300 volt Variable Speed Drive. The 2300 volt drives were huge and took up a lot of space and cooling capacity in a motor control room where pace was always tight. The internal clearances for the higher voltages are much higher and the components are much more expensive.
Most industrial plants use 460/480 volt gear. I have run into eastern Canadian and even some US mills that run a higher voltage, 575 volts) that stays under the 600 volt limit. That means the amount of copper or aluminum in the cables and gear can be little bit less due to lower amperage than in a 460 volt system.
Last edited:
EbS-P
Minister of Fire
Is there any difference between AC and DC for these definitions of high voltage?
That's interesting Canadian Electrical Code allows for solar installs up to 1500 volts at utility facilities. 600 volt is the limit for residential applications, really 480 volt because our code requires a 125% multiplier be added to the max OC voltage of the panels.
480 volt and 600 volt are pretty much equal around here in use. I've seen motors up to 4160 volt at compressor stations, usually driving 6 throw natural gas compressors. These were somewhere in the 4000hp range. But they used soft starts and not VFD's. There was no reason to make the motors variable speed, when volume and pressure were just as easily controlled by valves on the piping. Although these are become very uncommon, due to electrical grid restrictions (and power costs) most of the motors are now reciprocating natural gas engines.
Yeah, all the existing DCFCs in N America have liquid cooled cables (at least the ones 150 kW and above, I don't know about older 50 kW units). This is a maintenance issue, because you need a pump, fluid, a heat exchanger and sensors to confirm that the flow is occurring.
If anything goes wrong with that fluid system, the DCFC will derate to a much lower current, rather than shut down completely. Typically just 25 kW at EA stations. This is waaaay better than 0 kW if you are low on electrons in a snowstorm, but damned frustrating if you were expecting 125 or 250 kW.
These derated units will not post an error code on the display or in the app, so you will encounter them. Happened to me a couple times. And then if you know what's going on, you just move to a different unit and you're fine. If you don't, you sit there and rant and rave about how terrible DCFCs are and how you should never have bought an EV and post it on social media.
I wonder if there would be a way to make a passive cooling system for these cables? Thinking of CPU heat pipes or the like, and have a radiator on the charger.
I do not think so. Then again when selecting cables there are all sorts of special armoring and insulation classes. Exposed PV wire had to be USE2.
It could have been bumped up in the US as most of my big PV background is 10 years old.
Arcing (when insulation is penetrated) is easier with DC. Not sure if the efficacy of insulation differs as a result of this (i.e. whether different insulation standards apply to DC than AC).