SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the EVs-are-making-a-charge-on-ICEs dept.
The BMW i3 has been on sale since 2014, and in that time, BMW has seen fit to expand its battery size and, by proxy, its range. For the 2019 model year, it's getting yet another battery upgrade, and it's a big one.
The 2019 BMW i3 will come with a 42.2-kWh battery (120 amp-hours), which should permit for up to 153 miles of all-electric driving. This is a roughly 30 percent improvement over the previous 94-Ah battery, which allowed for 115 miles of range. The i3's first battery was just 60 Ah, offering a range of just 81 miles. Oh, how far we've come.
BMW will offer the battery in both variants of the i3. The standard i3 uses a 170-horsepower electric motor, powerful enough to get the little EV to 60 mph in just 7.2 seconds. The i3s, on the other hand, is the sportier trim, offering a 181-hp electric motor and a 6.8-second sprint to 60.
Will EVs (electric vehicles) like this succeed in replacing ICEs (internal combustion engines) as commuter cars?
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday September 28 2018, @06:12PM (33 children)
Improved range from 115 to 153 miles, huh? That's good. So, what's the recharge time, life expectancy and replacement cost of the batteries? Maybe 30 minutes to reach 80% capacity? Does a fast charge shorten battery life?
One very aggravating thing about cars is getting the facts. Manufacturer websites are mostly marketspeak garbage. Consumer Reports guards their findings behind paywalls. Don't trust J. D. Powers too much, and they run their website in a very market driven, click forcing way. Government sites focus on one aspect, such as fuel economy or emissions. And then, you always wonder what cheating is going on.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 28 2018, @06:31PM (5 children)
Agreed with most of that. I haven't visited the sites to see how accurate your claims are.
But, practical. I'm not about to buy a new car, for any reason I can think of. I'm happy with older cars. But, that range is getting within shooting distance of my minimum requirements. For me to consider an electric, it will have to be capable of two day's commute, with a little reserve at least. Call it 225 mile range. That would still be something of a stepdown, in the range department. My current vehicle can commute about 3.5 or 3.6 days, and "recharge" is about five minutes.
Of course, the bad thing about electricity is, power outage. If the power went out when I had a full charge, I could only count on getting to work two days, then I'm forced to hitch a ride, or miss work. Walking or bicycling is not an option when you live ~50 miles from work, and there is no mass transit here.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday September 28 2018, @07:21PM
Can we make a simple rule that the outliers with 50-mile-each-way commutes have to specify it in the first sentence of electric car discussions ?
That's not a ding at your comment or yourself, since you did present your use case correctly. But there are so many others who express their opinion without realizing that they are outliers, and generalizing happily without taking into account that usually an 11-figures company has studied their market... (yes, mishaps happen, but a lot less recently that historically)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NewNic on Friday September 28 2018, @07:48PM (3 children)
Charging an electric car take a matter of seconds.
That's how long it takes to plug in the charger (EVSE) connector in the evening and unplug it in the morning. Who cars what happens while it is sitting in a garage or driveway overnight?
Can you park your ICE car at home in the evening and wake to a full tank?
Seriously, if filling an ICE vehicle is so convenient, why do companies like this exist:
https://www.trybooster.com/ [trybooster.com]
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday September 28 2018, @09:34PM (2 children)
I have 2 use cases: a commute that's 38 miles one way, unless I detour to avoid traffic which easily blows that up to 40 miles, and the occasional road trip. A 76 mile round trip is pushing it for the shorter range electric cars. Can't guarantee a place to charge up will be available at work.
A big adjustment would be remembering to plug in when I arrive home. Not good to be scrambling to get out to door and rush off to work only to discover that I forgot to fill up. No big deal when we're talking about a 5 minute delay at one of the many gas stations around. But if we're talking 30 minutes to recharge the batteries to 80%, that's a problem. That would make me late for work. A 160 mile range is the minimum that would give me a 2 day cushion.
The road trip was the deal killer. When electric cars had a range of only 60 miles or so, with at least a 30 minute wait to go another 60 miles, or 50 miles if you can only recharge to 80%, it was unacceptable. 80% of 160 miles is 128 miles, much more reasonable. I could learn to live with that-- it's a lot better than 1/2 your time recharging a car with a range of only 62 miles-- but I'd rather not.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Friday September 28 2018, @09:54PM
The problem is with your memory, not the car.
Even if I forgot to charge, where I live, I could get to a fast charger that is 5 minutes from home, then spend another 5 minutes charging (need just enough to get to work, where I can charge it), so I would only be ~10 minutes late.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 29 2018, @11:49AM
Try to remember the seven P's
Proper Prior Planning Prevents Piss Poor Performance.
Leave a light on in your car? You could wake up to a dead battery no matter what.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 28 2018, @07:40PM (1 child)
One real world data point: I have a leaf with one of the original 83 mile batteries from 2012. It has over 50k miles on it and on a full charge it reads something in the low 70s for range (depends on ambient temperature -- in the heat of last summer I've seen it show 81). The car informs me it gets 4.3 miles/kWh. 6 kWh (60-72 cents) allows me to travel 25.8 miles. My car charges from about 15-20 mi range remaining to a full charge in 2.5 hrs on 220v charger. I haven't used the 110v charger since I installed the 220v charger (I spent about $400 total on the charger and running a 220 line (DIY) to plug it into) but my recollection is that it would take 8 or more hours to charge the car.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 28 2018, @07:48PM
Maybe it was closer to $550 to install the fast charger, either that or the current price has risen -- it's been 2.5 years since I installed it. Anyway, this is my charger and it works great: https://www.amazon.com/Siemens-US2-VersiCharge-Installation-Compatibility/dp/B00MFVI92S/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1538163880&sr=8-3&keywords=siemens+car+charger&dpID=41RoQ8pj8fL&preST=_SY300_QL70_&dpSrc=srch [amazon.com]
(Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday September 28 2018, @08:12PM
I had one of the first gen i3s for 3 years. No noticeable decrease in range over that time. I primarily charged using L2 (240V, though my home charger was only rated for 20A when I think the car would take 30A), which from 0-100 is about 5.5hr (again, my experience), my i3 had either a 6.6 or a 7.2KWhr charger in it I believe, so you can get a rough idea of the likely charging time with the larger battery, it is the last 20% or so that takes most of the time anyhow, so most of the difference would be closer to full bore. I did make use of free fast charging which was offered a few times (probably 50 or so total at the high end). Fast charge is usually quoted as 80% battery in 30 minutes, and I found that accurate, and the claims there have been very universal (that is what you get up to 50KW at some fast chargers of DC right at battery voltage). The primary thing that is unintuitive to most is that battery charging has an exponential curve, so a full charge fast charging isn't an economic likelihood (90 minutes or so were my estimates), and the first couple of hours as worth a lot more than the last couple. Fast charging absolutely WILL generate more heat and degrade lifetime faster. Reports I have seen of people who exclusively fast charge indicate that it is a noticeable difference in lifetime. In my state all EV batteries carry a mandatory 10y/150k warranty, most manufacturers explicitly state that 80% of nominal charge qualifies as a defect. Your call on whether they are just taking a chance that no-one will complete a warranty claim because they will have moved on before they reach a degraded state.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 28 2018, @09:23PM (23 children)
The best pricing I have seen on practical batteries is around $0.50/Watt-hour, and as for weight: about 35 Watt-hours per pound.
If you like to drive at 100kph, that's roughly 18kW engine output in a 1976 VW Golf I diesel [iea.org] If you want to drive 250km at that speed, that will be (very roughly) 45kWh, or about 1300lbs of lithium batteries, costing about $22.5K. It's actually worse than that because the weight of the batteries increases the rolling resistance of the tires, decreasing overall efficiency... Government subsidies, year on year marginal increases in efficiency, etc. are making this picture better, but remember that the diesel engine only weighs ~500lbs [kubotaengine.com] and the diesel fuel required to cover those 250km weighs less than 30lbs and currently costs ~$14.
Straight economics: if that $22,500 battery pack only gets 2000 cycles before it's used up, that's $11.25 cost for the batteries, and at 90% efficiency and $0.11/kWh for the electricity to charge those batteries, those 100MWh will be costing another $11K over the life of the pack, so your TCO for 500,000km traveled is $33,500, or $16.75 per trip for the batteries and the energy to charge them (let's not talk about the $5K+ for a quick charger). The differential cost of maintenance means the EV should win by a small margin in the very long run, if you can manage to actually get 2000 full charge cycles out of the battery pack.
But it is kinda cool not having to deal with the ICE and all of its problems.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Friday September 28 2018, @09:59PM (3 children)
Most car manufacturers appear to be paying $200/kWh. Tesla is pushing towards $100/kWh.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 28 2018, @10:22PM (2 children)
Where can a non-manufacturer buy these sub $0.20/Watt-hour battery packs?
The 18650s we're putting in our commercial device these days cost us ~$10 each for ~10Wh.
Tesla's power wall is spec'ed at 13.5kWh for ~$5900 ~$0.44/Watt-hour.
Not surprising that manufacturers have >100% markup, but that's not usually >50% profit in the end analysis.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Friday September 28 2018, @11:33PM (1 child)
I really don't understand why your price of Lithium batteries has any relevance to the discussion of EVs built by large OEMs.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 29 2018, @01:28PM
Because he wants an expensive investment to last longer than 4 years before it has to be completely replaced?
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Friday September 28 2018, @11:45PM (1 child)
I've been keeping an eye out for more news on this recent advancement [umd.edu]. I suspect even just doubling the range of current EVs, along with a reasonable increase in battery longevity could be sufficient factors for a wholesale migration to EVs as the entry point for basic transportation.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 29 2018, @03:00AM
The numbers I'm running indicate to me that we're within a factor of 2 between EV and ICE, much better than the factor 5+ when they tried to sell tarted up golf carts as EVs back in the 1970s.
It won't be a perfect flip from one to the other, batteries are still quite heavy for the energy they carry, and tanks fill much faster than batteries recharge, but electricity "pipelines" leak less bad stuff into the environment than liquid or gaseous fuel handling does.
With another factor 2 improvement in the EV system (mostly battery energy capacity per unit cost and/or weight), the "well to wheel" efficiency figure will swing to EVs as a favorite, but... ICE performance has more or less peaked out around 30mpg for decades, and instead of continuing to improve to 50+mpg, development has favored bigger vehicles with more aggressive performance - because: which would you rather pay a premium for? Something that pays you back an ROI slowly or something that makes you feel powerful immediately?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Saturday September 29 2018, @05:37AM (2 children)
2,000 cycles is probably about 20 years of use (charging every 3.5 days), after which time an ICE would have been scrapped. The battery of an EV should be fully depreciated after 20 years, so any residual value in the car at that time is a bonus.
Your "$11.25 for the battery" cost of a hypothetical trip is double-counting the depreciation.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 29 2018, @01:36PM (1 child)
Suburban drivers with commutes aren't gonna be charging every 3.5 days. They are the people that EV's need to market to. People in cities don't need to drive in the first place, rural areas are too far from anything for them to be practical without massive range increases. Suburbanites with a 30-60 mile daily round-trip + kids-to-school + grocery + etc are your target. They will charge at minimum every other day, most likely every day because you can't just get a jump or walk to the gas station when your EV runs dies. These batteries will see a lot more wear than your use-case of people who don't practically need a car anyway.
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Saturday September 29 2018, @02:18PM
It doesn't really matter how many times you charge the battery.
With Lithium Ion batteries, as long as you are not charging past 80% state of charge, you can charge more frequently without affecting the lifetime. 2 or 3 short charge cycles are equivalent to one longer charge cycle in terms of how they affect the life of the battery.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Saturday September 29 2018, @05:52AM (13 children)
Another way to look at it. If you assume that each charge adds 150 miles of range, 2000 charges is 300,000 miles. If all the vehicle needs after 300,000 miles is a new battery, that's been a good purchase.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 29 2018, @06:26PM (11 children)
With these relatively short range capabilities, it's all well and good to say: don't drain below 20% capacity, don't charge above 80%, so now that "increased" range of 153 miles comes down to 90 miles of "being nice to your batteries" driving. The road warriors I knew in Houston were in fact driving more than 45 miles each way on their commutes - I think they're insane, but that is indeed what many of them do.
As for "ICE will be scrapped in 20 years" speak for yourself. We have 4 vehicles ranging in model year from 1991 through 2002, and only the 1991 is starting to make me think that a major overhaul is potentially coming up in the next 5 years or so.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Saturday September 29 2018, @08:24PM (10 children)
It's not "don't drain below 20% capacity, don't charge above 80%,", instead, it's don't do that every day.
Outliers, the average commute is 15 miles each way.
I also think the age of your cars are outliers.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday September 29 2018, @11:24PM (9 children)
I also think the claims of 2000 cycles are going to prove to be outliers in the real world. As for my outlier ICE vehicles, that's mostly attributable to living close to work - when your daily commute is under 4 miles each way, the daily driver doesn't spin the odometer too quickly through the years.
I have been dealing with all forms of rechargeable battery tech for my entire life. In certain well controlled use cases batteries can out-perform the manufacturer's "typical" recharge cycle lifetime claims. In the real world, where batteries might be stored in a hot place, where discharge to flat might happen once in a while, where rechargers aren't as smart as they could be, where any one of a thousand other things can happen to throw off the ideal circumstances, rechargeable batteries very often do fail to live up to their "typical" recharge cycles as claimed by the manufacturer.
This has been true of all forms of lead-acid (liquid, AGM, gel, etc.), NiMh were some of the worst, and puffy LiPo happens way faster than it should. I just ordered a replacement for a pack that's barely 4 years and 50 recharge cycles old - puffed up to the point it looks like it's going to split. I read on the one hand how LiFePO4 is "different, bulletproof" and then in the moment you read about how they're catching motorcycles on fire, even with specialized charging regulation in place.
Bottom line: when my $100 AGM cell goes bad after 3 years, I shrug it off and buy another. When a $20K battery system does the same, three days after the manufacturer's warranty expires... I'm just not going to put myself in that position.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Sunday September 30 2018, @03:03PM (8 children)
In the real world, batteries on Teslas are holding up very well. Perhaps it is due to the thermal and electrical management preventing damage to the batteries.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Sunday September 30 2018, @04:07PM (7 children)
I think the thermal management is a big part of the key, and I question whether or not the systems are engineered to be able to deal with the sub-tropics (Florida, Texas...) or if they're just taking a hit on the increased warranty claims and paying them out.
As for how well the Teslas are doing - how many have caught fire so far? (Extreme examples of thermal management failure :) Not many, but per-mile-driven I think much higher than the gasoline powered competition, and certainly way higher than diesel.
The tech has to get to the point that it stops blaming user error on early battery failure and starts "just working" for people who don't do much more than drain the system then plug it in to charge it. Maybe Tesla and the others have made it there, at least for most climates. But, when the ambient temp is 50C (122F) as it can easily be nearly every day for months on end in an enclosed garage or on a sun-baked tarmac, how well does that thermal management system cope?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Sunday September 30 2018, @04:43PM (6 children)
I will confess that I cannot be sure about this, but I think that the number of fires in which there was not some kind of mechanical issue (accident, hit object on the road, etc.) is zero or close to it.
The batteries are required (at least in CA) to have a long warranty. There are a few outliers that Tesla has replaced, but for the most part (including in hot states), the batteries are holding up very well.
Temperature is more of an issue when combined with 100% state of charge. So as long as you are not charging to 100% routinely, it should not normally be an issue. With a 250 mile (or more range), there are very few days that most drivers will need to charge to 100%, and on those days, the car will be driven, so it won't stay at 100% very long.
Everyone can describe outliers for whom electric cars are not suitable, but for people who live in a single-family home, with access to charging at home, they are very convenient. My boss lives on a boat and he drives a Model S.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday October 01 2018, @12:11PM (5 children)
This just in: a friend with a 7 year old Lexus hybrid (10 year nominal battery life, $5K replacement cost), had an early failure of her battery pack at 5 years of age. Dealer replaced, not sure the cost, anyway, on the drive home last night she got a "stop vehicle immediately" light on the dash, apparently the 2 year old $5K battery pack also has a problem.
Now, if ever there was a "blame the user" scenario, she's probably it - anecdote: kids left an unwrapped candy bar in the car overnight, while parked in the dirt under a big oak tree - major ant infestation in the morning... parks outside in the sun both at home and work, etc. On the other hand, she also isn't intentionally abusing the battery beyond driving the last 10 miles home rather than stopping and calling for a tow... for example: they took bikes to the grocery store after getting the car home.
N of 1, but probably less than a 1SD outlier on the "lacking mechanical empathy" curve.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday October 01 2018, @04:50PM (3 children)
This just in, it might not have been a battery failure:
https://jalopnik.com/the-dealer-wanted-4-400-to-fix-his-hybrid-he-did-it-h-1685721487 [jalopnik.com]
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday October 01 2018, @09:34PM (2 children)
Early reports from unreliable sources are notoriously: unreliable.
She did have to replace the battery at 5 years, and at this point I believe the battery is out of warranty for her - didn't get details of cost to her at the time.
This "stop driving immediately" warning last night was diagnosed this morning by the mechanics as a master cylinder failure: $3400.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday October 01 2018, @11:44PM (1 child)
So, she got one new battery problem solved under warranty and since then, no battery problems?
$3400 for a master cylinder? That sounds insane.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday October 02 2018, @02:44AM
Remember: Lexus (aka license to rape customers in the service department.)
I don't know how the first battery failure at 50% of projected lifetime was handled, I do know that she was afraid that this was a repeat (same message as the battery failure), and that it doesn't really matter if it's a $5K battery or a $3400 master cylinder, it's starting to smell citrus-y in that car.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by NewNic on Monday October 01 2018, @04:55PM
In CA, her replacement battery would probably have been covered under the warranty (10 years, 150,000 miles)
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/california-vehicle-and-emissions-warranty-periods [ca.gov]
Batteries are a good example of something for which insurance makes sense: failure is an unlikely event that has huge cost implications. Insurance spreads the risk so that no individual gets a huge, unplanned bill.
lib·er·tar·i·an·ism ˌlibərˈterēənizəm/ noun: Magical thinking that useful idiots mistake for serious political theory
(Score: 2) by toddestan on Saturday September 29 2018, @06:32PM
The other thing I worry about is old age. My car is 20 years old and has about 120,000 miles on it (half of this was put on in the first 5 years too). I'm interested in electrics, but will I face a battery that needs replacing after 10 years and only 30,000-40,000 miles? My experience with older laptops is after 7-10 years the battery is more or less done no matter how well you treat it.
Luckily my conventionally powered car is in good shape and shouldn't need replacing for some time yet if I choose to just keep driving it.