No, I don't think it'll happen that quickly. Even if you could convince everyone that it was time for a BEV immediately, the battery industry can't handle building Tesla sized packs for 3 million cars this year. Even after Tesla builds the Gigafactory in a couple years, they are thinking they will have capacity to build ~500,000 cars worth of batteries.

Will we move to a pure EV being the norm? I think we will.

But will it happen overnight this year? I don't think it can.

Battery technology and cost is reaching the critical levels, but the industry isn't there yet. However, the growth in solar power is crying out for more batteries, too. I have no doubt the industry will grow to that kind of production eventually.

In the mean time, hybrids and PHEVs reduce fuel consumption while requiring fewer batteries and are arguably a more effective way to use limited battery production (though that's not really a relevant perspective at the moment given the limited demand for them from the as yet unconvinced public.)

I'm hoping to buy a Tesla in a couple years - they've mostly reached the levels of technology for me to be comfortable - but I think the PHEV and/or EREV will be around for at least a decade to come.

 

Stale gas? As you may know, the Volt prevents that.

I think it's a bit premature to declare either the ICE or a PHEV like the Volt dead. Give it another 10 years (or 20).

 

I have been a staunch supporter of the Volt and plug in hybrids for a long time, but in just one short year it appears that battery energy density will go from 240 whr per kg to 400.

The most efficient ICE is still the Prius hybrid. Such technology also makes it possible to have a Volt2 with a 50mile AER with less weight/volume overhead as compared to a conventional hybrid. So it would also be good for electric hybrids. imho, not sure that batteries are really getting that good that fast though.

 

You know, it is funny. I was thinking about this just the other day. I was doing some calculations and was thinking of writing a story for Inside EVs. I haven't finished all of my research yet. But here's the question posed: Does cheaper and lighter batteries help BEV or PHEV more?

Obviously, cheaper, smaller, and lighter batteries will very much help both types of cars. I think from a cost and technical standpoint it will help BEVs even more.

However - where I ran into difficulty is figuring out the psychological issues. Keep in mind, there are plenty of people who still think that 200 miles of range is not enough for a BEV. Even when you jump to 400 miles, it is still not enough. I swear I even had one person tell me 1,000 miles was not enough. And with charging stations the way the are in most of the country (non-existent mostly) then the PHEV is still a strong contender for most people.

This is something I've been saying for a while. For around town the existing 85 mile Leaf is adequate for most anyone. I know because we have one. It is surprising how far you can go in one, and if there is a skeleton of fast chargers around then range is almost unlimited, in town. The next generation of BEVs are believed to have between 120 and 200 miles of range. But even then, the moment you try to leave town it is suddenly not enough range. And without having fast chargers every few miles down every rural highway, it never will be enough.

So for at least the next 10 to 20 years, the PHEV will still be the only game in town that will let you drive anywhere you want. Even Teslas are limited to certain routes where they have superchargers.

And with the battery prices dropping, that should really narrow the gap between the price of a standard hybrid (that doesn't plug in) and a PHEV. In fact, I would think in time we'll see the end of hybrids that don't plug in.

 

And with the battery prices dropping, that should really narrow the gap between the price of a standard hybrid (that doesn't plug in) and a PHEV. In fact, I would think in time we'll see the end of hybrids that don't plug in.

This makes sense. It wouldn't surprise me at all if most or all hybrids became PHEVs over the next few years.

 

Well this doesn't happen too often, I agree with all of the above posts. I just hope I live long enough to see us leave the oil age for the Sun age. With V2G (vehicle to grid) we can finally have a smart grid that doesn't have the wasteful peak demand infrastructure. With the widespread adoption of BEVs, when driving its a car, when parked it is peak shaving the grid.

 

Just that one parameter isn't enough to kill off PHEVs even if it happens tomorrow.

 

Nobody "needs" 80+ kWh on-board. I would be glad to have 30-35 kWh and the occasional DC FC.

The problem with 80+ kWh on board (whether high 400Wh/kg or less) is that it puts more batteries than most people need into one car and then people complain about shortages of batteries or total cost. What would it be like if everyone had 35 or 40 kWh onboard and the number of less-expensive BEVs were on the road? Seems like a better way to spread the battery market out better. We need to see higher capacity cells being offered in a few years to help cut down on the costs. But will battery companies charge less per kWh or will they just say "you get more capacity per-cell, pay-up!" Customers want more range - but more range costs more due to more cells which lowers desire for people to buy BEVs. If battery cell prices do drop, a usable 20 kWh Volt would be quite nice. 80 mile AER or more for many of us.

I have gotten up to 50 miles out of my 2011 Volt battery pack on one charge (effectively 10.4 kWh usable). But there are times I need 80 miles on a charge and cannot go without the range extender. 35-40 kWh on board solves 99% of my driving needs. I am pretty sure most Volt owners might agree - however, once in a while I need to drive 700 total miles without an ability to charge due to the lack of available charging sites out there. We need a whole lot more CHAdeMO or SAE Combo charging and access to them before we can rely on BEVs to become mainstream. Whether 40 or 80+ kWh on board.

BEVs will become a real good choice when we have enough infrastructure to support driving in any direction. BEVs make limited sense now and require families to rent cars or buy secondary ICE vehicles to compensate. DCFC accessible by all (not Nissan's select CHAdeMO or similar) is necessary every 30-40 miles in all directions and that means thousands more installations are needed. As CYAOPEC says above - many people expect the ability to run a few hundred miles on a whim. As resources wind down in our world (when oil finally runs out in some decade in the future) then we will have to have found the answer to energy storage by then so that a car can charge off the grid with enough energy for a simiar trip. Or we have to stop having hobbies which require such long driving distances. I'm sure hikes can be found nearer to home, etc. When oil does eventually run down, then you will see home prices in cities and near water skyrocket as they will become the desired properties and land and homes in the mid-west and other locations requiring long drives for activities declining. I just wonder how we will "pull off" large scale farming without oil out in 2100. Large battery-based tractors?

More importantly, we have to understand how cold weather affects EVs/PiHV and BEVs. The impact of this loss of range for plug-ins is somewhat dramatic and the common consumer does not want to have this problem to deal with.

 

Unless we have battery tech that can rival gasoline in energy density, hauling around a heavy long range battery so that you can use it a few times a year does not make much sense to me. Such energy densities could be achieved by fuel cells or some type of flow-cell tech that can also be quickly refueled. So, a 30 to 40 kWh traditional traction battery paired with a range extending high-density energy source is what would be the most ideal. Today, that range extender is an ICE. Tomorrow, it could be anything.

 

This ^^

A hybrid doesn't necessarily mean gas/electric. It could be electric/electric with aluminum-air replaceable rather than re-fillable. Or H2 fuel cell/electric. Or NG fuel cell/electric. Or even lithium/lithium but with a slide-in pack.

Or maybe a hoop-da-loop thinger eliminating the need for long-distance driving all together.

So many future possibilities.

 

This is a really difficult question to answer. According to the U.S. DOT the average person drives 13,500 miles each year. That averages to just under 37 miles a day, but we all know people drive the same distance each day. GM says their data shows that 80% of the miles driven by Volt owners are electric miles. The new Volt pushes the electric rAnge from 38 to 50 miles, so it would probably be safe to assume that new Volt owners will drive something around 90% of their driving using only electric power.

So the way I look at it is the penalty for having the capability to go anywhere is the additional weight of the range extender system. That is, the ICE including intake and exhaust equipment, and fuel system. I don't know how much all this stuff weighs, but if it weighs more than a 400 mile battery then I think a Battery only EV would make more sense. Assuming 3 miles per KWH and using the power density in the title, this would add about 565 pounds to the battery used in the 2016 Volt. So if the range extension equipment weighs more than this perhaps a pure battery vehicle makes more sense.

This conclusion is based only on weight, it does not include cost factors such as the comparative cost of ICE vs battery or life cycle operations and maintenance cost which are too complex for my poor brain to figure out.

 

I guess my perspective of an early EV adopter and hobbyist is different. What I dealt with 15 years ago with no lithium cells was a very heavy lead acid pack for a short range and nasty voltage sag under load. My latest creation is that of not so energy dense Winston prismatic LiFePO4 large format cells. Still heavy, but not nearly as heavy as lead and no voltage sag. The Panasonic 18650 cells that Tesla use have a bit over twice the energy density of my cells, and they have proven a 85 kWhr bank is manageable weight wise in their sedan. At the same weight with the 400 whr per kg cells due out next year you would have a 155 kWhr pack. This is a real game changer, and not just added range. The honest true prototype of the Tesla Roadster was designed and on the road in 1997, designed by Alan Cocconi who founded AC Propulsion in San Dimas, CA. His controller that he sold the rights to Tesla, was a all in one package, controller/inverter, and charger. This allowed V2G but Tesla didn't incorporate this aspect. Having 155 kWhr storage parked in your garage has more benefits than just long range. You now have the ability to sell back to the power company some of your power during the grid's peak usage. It is much cheaper for the power company to pay you a premium for peak shaving than to build infrastructure that is 4 times larger than average loads. This is where the BEV with a large bank and power companies get to work together and share the wealth. Off peak your a power purchaser at $0.10 per kWhr, during peak your a energy producer at $0.30 per kWhr.

 

For me, the Volt with it's go anywhere gas backup, plus a 200 mile Bolt metro-area commuter will likely be the winning combination. If I was limited to one car, then it would be a Volt as it's a great balance of mostly electric driving with the flexibility to go anywhere there regardless of charging opportunities.

 

Better batteries will expand PHEVs into the ICE market as much as BEVs expand into the PHEV market.

There will be, for decades, people whose driving patterns require the assistance of an ICE.

More importantly for the next ten years, there will be people who believe they need gas backup, even if they really don't.

The product can be available overnight, people's psychology takes much longer.

I'm just glad I get to enjoy the conveniences offered now, it is a wonderful time to be alive

 

For me in retirement, BEV coupled to no power bills thanks to V2G is my insurance of fixed income vs rising energy costs not effecting my lifestyle. Long trips cost nothing thanks to the free Supercharger network, home charging also free by selling stored energy during peak rates and charging during off peak.

 

Deckofficer, please help us know where to find information on the "next year" claim for the 400 Wh/kg. i just have not heard of that.

Power firms are working their local state PUCs to try to limit or eradicate Net metering. Selling back at .30/kWh will not be around forever. If they do end up with 400Wh/kg batteries, power firms will build large "pumped Lithium" plants instead of pumped hydro and store their own excess power at night and use it for daytime demand response. As will wind and solar farms.

 

I just google search "400Wh/kg" and read whats in the labs. I agree that the power companies will invest in their own lithium buffer storage, but for economic reasons wouldn't it be cheaper to tap stored energy from the garages of BEVs for the peak of the peak, than to invest in spinning reserves to cover that?

 

Might take a bit longer in cold climates. Today I saw a local leaf still buried in snow from our last snow storm. I almost stopped and took a picture. Wish I had as would have been perfect example for this thread. We really have not seen temps above 20 here in NH for many weeks. This morning it was -4. Volt fired up perfect. The Leaf I saw not so much. I guess the owner figures it's not even worth driving in near zero temps. That said my next car will most likely be a BEV, but we also have an ICE pickup also.

 

Sure it could turn plans for hybrids into PHEVs and plans for longer range PHEVs into BEVs. Anything could happen! But how likely is it and how long will it take? OEM's have been watching battery trends for years. They not only have seen changes coming, but have long established the ability to evaluate them. And how long would that take? About a year for validation at the lowest levels. And once validated they can be placed in cars that have been previously planned. But what about dropping the now planned models and moving each model released to a more advanced type? That of course would take a few more years of development and engineering, using all new models.

So how many OEM's have completed models sitting, ready for production and waiting in the wings for a new battery type? Tesla Model 3 and Bolt have been announced. So, no radical change there. Well the Bolt could be considered a radical change for GM, so maybe you should have made this prediction a few months ago LOL, to get the most impact from the Bolt announcement!

 

I am sure it is inevitable that the PHEV with ultimately be replaced with the BEV. How long, no one can forecast. It's all a matter of: A. cost of battery versus cost of the ice in the phev.
b. people's perception of what range is sufficient to eliminate range anxiety

The Bolt makes a good example of A- If Bolt and Volt were to be identically priced, then it would be necessary that the production cost of the 200 mile battery and transmission of the Bolt is lower than the combined cost of the ice, battery and transmission of the volt.
If the buyer's family is a one car family, there is almost no choice - it's the volt
If a 2 car family, either one can be the 1st car, and if the bolt were significantly less expensive, there would be little question that they bolt would be purchased. along with some other car, either extended range or pure gas
BUT THE GOOD THING IS: either or both concepts could eliminate 80% of the gas used, based on the statistic that 80 % of the cars are driven less than 40 miles a day and offer a smoother and quieter (ne better) car with less operating costs . Hopefully widespread adoption will occur if the prices are below the average new car price (about $32,500 from what i have read)

There are to many variables to guess how long and what exactly it will take to get beyond the 200 mile milestone which GM is promising at 35 K or less for most of us, the and Tesla has achieved for the buyers of $90K and up vehicles. Leaf and Volt and i3, the Fords and others are also necessary to offer several different brands and choices for the buyer and to expand the base.

Take your choice for BEV's only, 300 miles, 400 miles 600 miles, 5 years, 10 years, 20 years? I wish I could be around to see that milestone

 

Not unless you can get those batteries down to a price comparable to a gas engine and year of gasoline, even then they would have to come down to significantly less or gasoline would have to skyrocket for people to make the switch. Even then people switching over won't be fast because trade in values would plummet putting many upside down. Face it, a paid off gasoline car is only so expensive so electrics would have to be vastly cheaper.

 

We won't be seeing batteries at 400 wh/kg in the next year. Maybe in five years. Still not high enough density to make a huge difference. For that we need something more in the range of 1000 wh/kg.

Also note that cost and energy density are not the same. You need to bring the cost down, and for that you need to make batteries out of less expensive materials. Mr. Dave referenced solid electrolytes and that would seem to be the best bet for both cheaper and more energy dense batteries (liquid electrolytes are heavy and pose safety risks).

I don't see even this immediately causing people to abandon either ICE cars (much less trucks) for the reason below:

In truth batteries are already cheaper, much much cheaper, than gasoline. You just have to wait until you drive a lot of miles. If you drive 150,000 miles then gas at any conceivable price will cost at least 3X or 4X what batteries would cost. This was brought home when the finance guys ran the numbers on the Volt and found that over five years it was cheaper to own than the Cruze, which had an MSRP of thousands less.

The problem is that you have to pay for the batteries all at once up front while with gas you pay as you go. The vast majority of consumers would prefer to pay much more in total if they can pay per month rather than once up front. Stated differently, they apply a very high discount rate to the savings. Same reason why they don't like to pay more for energy efficient refrigerators or LED light bulbs. It's actually irrational but that's the way they are.

If what you're saying is that batteries need to be cheaper than a gas tank, not the gas, then this will never happen. A gas tank costs a hundred bucks.

 

I think if we had a 100 mile EPA rated range, we could almost do 99% of our driving without an ICE. Trips it wouldn't work out until the charging network is better. In the cold we lose a lot of range = 50% of what we had in Miami (48 vs. 24). Sorry, I won't freeze in the car and don't expect anyone else to. Sub zero temps during the winter are very common, sometimes for weeks on end. And even if I wanted to, my body heat fogs up the windows if I turn the defroster off as I tried just to see if I could push some more miles out when the temps are in the 20s.

Now a 200 mile PHEV would be awesome. Even a PHEV designed like the i3, but if you knew you were going on a long trip you could turn on the range extender - kinda like a mountain mode, when cruising it would could slowly charge the battery. (BTW, I read that there is a hack so that you can run the range extender on the i3 when SOC gets below 75% - instead of 6% = the 2 gallon tank is still my main issue).

Interesting thought that BEVs will totally replace PHEVs. I would have a long range BEV today, but not as our only vehicle.

 

I don't think it will. The number of plug ins looks to be exploding in the next year or two. I think they make more sense than BEV for most people. Like Volt, can treat it as BEV most of the time, but convenient to drive anywhere.

Batteries are expensive, so it minimizes BEV battery cost and adds affordable unlimited range.

As for weight, gas has a range of like 15 miles per kg, 400 whr is like 1.5 or 2 miles. And you still have issue of recharge speed. I think people would tolerate 120kw charging once or at most twice a day for cross country travel. If you could drive 400 miles without charging, then an hour charge might not be too bad. However, if there was a line at the station it would be brutal.

 

I don't think it will. The number of plug ins looks to be exploding in the next year or two. I think they make more sense than BEV for most people. Like Volt, can treat it as BEV most of the time, but convenient to drive anywhere.

Batteries are expensive, so it minimizes BEV battery cost and adds affordable unlimited range.

As for weight, gas has a range of like 15 miles per kg, 400 whr is like 1.5 or 2 miles. And you still have issue of recharge speed. I think people would tolerate 120kw charging once or at most twice a day for cross country travel. If you could drive 400 miles without charging, then an hour charge might not be too bad. However, if there was a line at the station it would be brutal.

Props for that...

And like what was already said, since it doesn't take 5 minutes to fill up, you need to have more charging stations than gas pumps. After 400 miles, I wouldn't mind sitting down for a meal watching the car charge up.

 

Remember that when GM or any OEM makes a statement of 200mi range in 2017, it's because they're planning for the battery specs that will be available to them in 2017. Suppliers like LG share their confidential roadmaps for batteries in the coming years. The newer, higher WHr/kg cells are already planned. Same thing in the computer (laptop) business.

The more interesting thing to me is the secure distribution of power. How long can Tesla keep free superchargers? With 50-100KWhr batteries more common, how long before BEV users "fill up their tanks" at free stations and take it home to power their house? Or sell the power they got for free, back to their utility. Might be happening already. We joke about that at work now, as my employer provides free EVSEs.

 

Remember that when GM or any OEM makes a statement of 200mi range in 2017, it's because they're planning for the battery specs that will be available to them in 2017. Suppliers like LG share their confidential roadmaps for batteries in the coming years. The newer, higher WHr/kg cells are already planned. Same thing in the computer (laptop) business.

The more interesting thing to me is the secure distribution of power. How long can Tesla keep free superchargers? With 50-100KWhr batteries more common, how long before BEV users "fill up their tanks" at free stations and take it home to power their house? Or sell the power they got for free, back to their utility. Might be happening already. We joke about that at work now, as my employer provides free EVSEs.

I don't think Elon is too worried about that with his Tesla clientele base spending an hour at a Supercharger to sell $8.00 worth of power.

 

Tesla already has it "figured out". They are going to sell battery pack systems to homeowners to install for their own "TOU" battery storage solution. Sized in 10kWh increments, someone can store their nightly 10kWh, dump it during the daytime hours when TOU prices are higher and then recharge nightly. Not sure how many years that lasts doing full charge/discharge cycles - but let's say it lasts 10 years. If the 10 kWh is dumped 3560 times, that is a savings of $3650 if you are shaving .10/kWh off your prices (that is simplified and meaning you must have a larger differential than .10 to make it work since batteries have a 10-20% charging loss. If differential TOU kWh pricing is .30 and nightime is .05 - that would work great. If it is .20 and .10, it wouldn't pay off at all. I wonder if they also will factor in the decrease in storage capacity over time and the charging losses in their brochure?

CA is the nutty market with wild TOU pricing in different regions. Other states - TOU pricing differentials are less than .10. So, the Tesla home-storage unit is mainly geared toward the enthusiastic Tesla owner buying more stuff from Tesla and for peak demand shaving for large firms like Walmart (who are already wildly profitable and looking for more ways to cut their expenses by using government funds to give incentives for such installations - like they have for their solar PV roofs).

 

>>Off peak your a power purchaser at $0.10 per kWhr, during peak your a energy producer at $0.30 per kWhr.

Honest question: If you take the cost of your battery and divide it by the number of lifetime charge/discharge cycles it can support, how much does it cost you for each of these "buy low / sell high" transactions?

I say "honest question" because I did the math some years ago and the numbers were dismal, but maybe with the battery advances you are expecting, the economics are attractive today.

 

I guess the math has changed since the last time you crunched the numbers. Some of the Tesla Supercharger stations has a 400 kWhr battery for peak shaving. Also Tesla sells batteries from 10 kWhr to 10MWhr for the same purpose of peak shaving. Using the car's battery if programmed to only use the middle 50% (far from both voltage knees) for peak shaving does use up partial cycle count but shelf life probably enters the equation before cycle life so might as well use the cycles for a positive return.

The large format LiFePO4 prismatic cells that I'm using in one of my projects has a storage life of 7 years before it reaches 80% of stated capacity but that rating turns out conservative since it started life giving 117% of rated capacity. It is rated for 2000 cycles at 80% DOD for that same rated 80% of original capacity. But if you limit DOD to just 50% DOD in the center of the voltage curve, the cycles jump to 6000.

I have over 500 cycles on one of my banks that is also 4 years old and during a recent capacity test still returned 3% more than rated. These are Winston cells but from what I have learned from others, their packs from different suppliers were also conservatively rated.

 

True Commodity pricing for batteries is not a bad thing for either.

And I would think it would fare far better for the PHEV and here is why.

Think of all the start/stop vehicles, greenwashed hybrids and obviously all the normal gassers.

If a significant battery capacity would drop down to the price of the lead acid battery every car has up front,
what would happen?

It would become FOOLISH not to have some level of PHEV support in every car, the cost of electronics to add low performing EV specs into any old car on the road, along with Hybrid functionality is minimal.

This would mean that this development can only foster more PHEVs even down toward the low end of the spectrum, because why not?

If 4kw is under $200 (example) there is no reason to not offer mild hybridization on all cars along with MILD NEV like EV performance for said vehicles. The car would still have its 300hp gas waster but could be operated ICE free at low speeds without a cost increase and be plug in, again with minimal cost increase.

Sort of like the EV button on the prius, except now it could actually work.

And I doubt lower cost, higher density batteries will make everyone receive 80kw cars, more than likely it will just benefit everyone by making the up front cost lower to start with and improve weight and efficiency of the platform.

We shall see, just because it exists does not mean it will make its way into anything, afterall it takes about 20 years of something being proven out before auto makers gobble it up.

Cheers
Ryan

 

This is the best thread in a while !
Selling or using at home your "Free Electric Fill up" ! Amazing !!! It won't stand for long once this gets out.

Still, there can only be DC fast chargers where they will be used. If you're off the beaten path,,, too bad.

When I'm on a Rockies vacation, or wherever, I need a 5 minute/400 mile fill up with Gasoline.
Face it. Gas is here for a long, long time to come.
And the Volt is the only car that lets you take advantage of both fuel sources now!