Multiple choice - What could GM do to increase EREV sales? Ideas? (2nd try)

randl said:

GM and others are pretty good at marketing. Having them spend more and do a better job explaining these wonderful vehicles isn't likely to lead to big changes in the proportion of EREV or BEV vehicles on the road. ...

Click to expand...

Yes, they are pretty good at marketing. My impression though is they have done relatively little of it recently on the their EREV or BEVS. I do think they probably did a fair amount on the Volt back in the day. If they are good at marketing and have done little of it, then I think increasing it might well lead to (or contribute to) changes in the proportion on the road. So, I guess I disagree with your syllogism on that.

By the way, as far as I know, the Bolt is doing ok in sales (increasing little by slow, every month, and now up to nearly 3k per month). Has GM done a lot to market and advertise the Bolt? Not that I'm aware (I've seen some GM ads prominently on TV recently, but none for the Bolt that I recall). So, there might be room for marketing to help with sales growth there, I don't know.

Even with more aggressive marketing I think there may be some early limits on Bolt sales (kind of a limited addressable market in the US for less-than-great-looking $35k small wagon hatchbacks), but, regardless of whether marketing (or lack of it) is helping or hindering, I am really enjoying seeing the vehicle garner sales - it is the first highway-capable BEV ever sold in this country, and maybe in the world, above a certain range and below a certain MSRP, and I think the demand for that will not soon be saturated, despite any drawbacks.

hellsop said:

The trick is that battery charge rates are kind of limited by chemistry. Lithium Ion batteries should never be charged faster than in 30 minutes, from "empty" to "full" (actual capacity, not including state of charge buffers at the top and bottom end). That's a "2C charge rate" -- twice the capacity of the battery per hour. Going faster is very hard on their eventual useful number of charge cycles, even with good thermal management. Keeping the charge rate below 1C (an hour from "empty" to "full") gains about 30% MORE charge cycles to end-of-life. And limiting to 0.5C charge rates add another 15% to the expected cycle count or so. Plus, you can actually get more electrons in before "full" at slower rates. A battery that takes 100kwh at some small fractional C might reach "full" by voltage after only accepting 85-90kwh at 2C, and there's nothing you can do at that point. There's only 85 in there so you've lost 15% of your range being in a hurry for that charge. Slow charges, slow discharge, avoiding deep charge/discharges and good thermal management is how Volts take batteries that usually only last for 1000 cycles and push them to 5000-6000 cycles and warranty the batteries for eight years. (Twice a day charging for eight years is 4380 cycles.)

Click to expand...

Hi - someone mentioned that they see this as good information, and it does seem like it, but are there any additional sources we could reference on some of this? And, are you saying it is all-encompassing (across all chemistries, thermal management, charge management, etc.) or are there exceptions? Just for one example, would Toshiba's recently announced improvements look like they could be an exception (or perhaps some batteries would not be considered conventional lithium ion and so not fit the rule?.... or perhaps some other consideration such as insufficient testing as yet?)

https://www.greencarreports.com/new...te-recharge-for-new-electric-car-battery-cell
Toshiba claims 6-minute recharge for new electric-car battery cell
Sean Szymkowski
162 CommentsOct 19, 2017

"...Engineers tested a 50-amp (0.6 kilowatt-hour) prototype battery with the same technology and, Toshiba said, the results showed the latest anode structure retained the lithium-ion battery's longevity, safe operation, and low temperatures.

"Specifically, the prototype retained 90 percent of its capacity after 5,000 charge and discharge cycles; Toshiba says the six-minute fast charging operated in colder conditions, too...."

VoltAP1 said:

As for the original question, right now, people are buying CUV's and only CUV's. In lower gas price states, trucks are also a big mix. Take a look at a vehicle that gets 15-20 mpg in mixed driving and think about the battery pack size to even get ~45-50 miles of EV range. You'd need probably 35-40 kW minimum, nevermind that you'd probably be looking at ~7000-7500 lb curb weights for an EREV powertrain combo on existing huge "half ton" trucks.

So just the EV powertrain and battery by itself would be edging up against the starting price for stripper models of the trucks. Add in an ICE range extender, making the interior fit for the probably $60-70k selling price, and all that sweet truck profit that GM/Ford enjoy would suddenly go away.

On the CUV side, most are <$30k base price, with well optioned ones eeking into the mid-high 30's, or low 40's for some. There are premium nameplates that get much pricier, but that's the general price range for the high volume sellers. Add in ~25 kW of batteries for ~45-50 miles of EV range, and the EV drivetrain, and it's going to be hard to hit anywhere near those prices.


I ultimately feel the inefficient vehicle choices most consumers gravitate towards are why EVs haven't started to be offered in those vehicle types. It's just too pricey for the EV range. I'm sure most public think they could get a 50 mile range EREV CUV, if they even know what that is, but the reality is you need a lot more battery capacity to do that due to the aero drag and weight increase over a small to midsized car.

Click to expand...

I think you may be exaggerating or over-simplifying a bit..... in my opinion there's a middle ground here where there can be a good EREV modest-sized crossover or similar, or full-sized sedan giving more interior volume, with the present usable 11 or 12 kWh (or whatever it is). Not all calls for larger interior volume vehicles have to be followed by assumptions of towing capacity or that we are only talking about very large vehicles, or even that we have to be talking about EV-range similar to the Volt.

I think this vehicle (which has been selling well in Europe and is about to go on sale in the US... not sure if it's a CUV or SUV, but whatever....) is a decent example of the affordability of a middle-ground vehicle in this area.

https://www.mitsubishicars.com/outlander-phev/2018#phev-upcoming-slideshow
STARTING AT $34,595
MPGE 74
SEATS 5
POWERTRAIN LIMITED WARRANTY
10YRS/100KMILES
THE 2018 MITSUBISHI
OUTLANDER PHEV
Eco-friendly. Adventure focused.
Coming December 2017.

hellsop said:

Best single source for all this is http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/

You're correct with the implication that not all lithium ion batteries are the same. When most people, me included, say "lithium ion", they're talking about normal lithium cobalt oxide cathodes with carbon anodes, and the characteristics I talked about are appropriate for those. Technically, lithium iron phosphate, lithium manganese oxide, etc are all "lithium ion" as well, but LiCo had a half-decade head start and does a lot of stuff really well that the others just don't get a lot of time.

The Toshiba battery is a lithium–titanate battery, and the big difference is that the anode (positive pole of the cell) is a titanium crystal lattice instead of a carbonate crystal, which is strong enough to make an anode with about 25 times as much surface area, and THAT is what makes the faster recharge rates possible. The downside (not mentioned in the greencar article) is that these batteries are rather more expensive than LiCo and are only about 60% as energy dense, due to the cells having a lower voltage. So you need more battery to make a kwh of storage, which is heavier and bigger than the same power's worth of LiCo. A Bolt with the same battery form-factor would probably have only about 40kwh, have a practical range of about 150 miles, but if you got access to a 350kw charger, it'll charge up in 10 minutes.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the prompt response. I try not to post during my work hours, so that's why I didn't get back on this sooner. The points about lithium cobalt oxide make a bit more sense - your initial claim seemed too sweeping.

I don't know enough about batteries to really say too much specific, but

- at this point I'm not sure what % of good PEVs use a battery chemistry that would really fit within this definition of lithium cobalt oxide. Maybe a higher % than I realize, but I doubt 100%.

- I am not sure that the Volt uses a lithium cobalt oxide battery, at least not one "strictly defined"... perhaps one that is "somewhat" that. For example:

http://batteryuniversity.com/index.php/learn/article/types_of_lithium_ion

"...Most Li-manganese batteries blend with lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide (NMC) to improve the specific energy and prolong the life span. This combination brings out the best in each system, and the LMO (NMC) is chosen for most electric vehicles, such as the Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt and BMW i3. The LMO part of the battery, which can be about 30 percent, provides high current boost on acceleration; the NMC part gives the long driving range...."

llninja said:

If Elon can make a semi truck have a lower Cd than a Ferrari, anything is possible with a little CUV

Click to expand...

Indeed. In the end, a large EREV with strong towing capability might well have an EV-range issue depending on various choices, but there is I think a middle ground where one can have a more modest-sized vehicle such as an Impala-sized sedan, old-style wagon, crossover or small or medium-sized SUV where I think some smart compromises can be made to keep costs down and performance up. We are probably already there with some competing PHEVs, depending on the EV range one considers acceptable. I think this probably applies to pickups as well. For the large towing capability vehicles, can cost be kept down? I guess it also depends on desired EV-only range and other factors. So far, there does seem an issue (looking for examples at the reported costs of future Workhorse trucks (I can't recall, are they EREV or BEV or both?) or modified aftermarket PHEV pickups from 3rd parties) but we are seeing lower costs and higher pack sizes here and there, and that should help. One can also increase engine size.

On the BEV side, Tesla is planning a crossover and a pickup. Sure, one can make cynical comments, but they have so far delivered four light-duty vehicles, it is not a stretch to suppose they may get in those other two. So, a question becomes whether a cost- and performance- competitive EREV crossover (or the like) and pickup could be built to compete with the BEVs. Even if it could be built, if GM may build its own competing BEVS, there could be a question of whether it is worth it. So far, 6.67% of poll respondents have checked off the option "(don't try to prolong EREV sales. It's no big deal... the technology has served its purpose as a bridge to full BEV once the batteries were good enough, which they now are)".