News   Nov 15, 2024
 2.3K     7 
News   Nov 15, 2024
 1.9K     1 
News   Nov 15, 2024
 2.3K     0 

The Coming Disruption of Transport

Would you buy an EV from a Chinese OEM?

  • Yes

    Votes: 17 17.2%
  • No

    Votes: 66 66.7%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 16 16.2%

  • Total voters
    99
Yeah, I think EVs more or less have the range and charging performance needed to gain mass adoption. We just need to work on price. Tesla seems to be making good progress not just on batteries but also on the end to end manufacturing (simplifying body shop by using large castings, or avoiding paint shop by using stainless steel body panels). As charging infrastructure becomes more robust, I can see most people settling in more at the 400km range vehicle, which makes it viable to use cheap (low nickel/cobalt) battery chemistries.
 
You're seeing this through the paradigm of filling gas regularly. But that's not how BEVs will be used. We'll basically have two usage patterns:

1) Residential charger. Charge at home or work. The driver has a place where their car is parked regularly and where it can charge for hours. They will never charge away from this, except for roadtrips.

2) Concurrent charger. With no charging at work or home, they'll have to charge concurrently at regular activities like getting groceries.

Knowing those patterns determines the kind of charger put in place. Home and work chargers are mostly under 10 kW. 15 kW is generally the max for Level 2. For the average commuter that means 1-2 hrs daily or 1-2 nights a week is enough. For those charging at the grocery store, they'll need to get 25-50 kWh once a week, within about 20-40 mins per session. That means a 50-100 kW charger at the grocery stores.

And then there's road trips. Depending on vehicle, travel speed and weather consumption is 250-400W/km. If 2 hrs worth of driving needs to be charged in a 20 min break, that's 150 kW-240 kW chargers. This is what would be needed at service centres. And it's the speed that Tesla and Electrify Canada are building. All of Tesla's V2.0 Superchargers and Electrify Canada are 150 kW. Tesla V3.0 are 250 kW. And Electrify Canada installs one stall at each location that does 350 kW. So we're basically at the point where most stops won't be longer than 20 mins. There's a YouTuber (Bjorn Nyland) who tests out different EV on a 1000 km drive in Norway, with charging along the way. Most are in the 10-12 hr range for such a trip. Only the older EVs whose battery packs have no thermal management take longer (14-16 hrs). I really don't think 12 hrs for a 1000 km trip is unmanageable. And that's getting better with every new generation that comes out.
I think it's also a mistake to look at EVs through today's technology. We've already seen that in a few years there will be high end EVs with 1000km+ range. What about in 2035? Potentially, a high end car could have a 2K+ range or more. That's looking 14 years in the future; 14 years ago the first iPhone was released, that's how fast technology can change.

The same goes with charging, it's not great today but the technology keeps moving forward and the time of charge will get better.
 
^There was an article in the paper this week about Hyundai's latest offering, which will come with a choice of battery capacity. I'm not sure that 1K or greater range is a universal prerequisite. Many buyers might be content with a smaller, cheaper battery option. Especially if quick top-up, even adding a further 100 kms, is widely available.

It's price that needs to come down just a little further.

- Paul
 
^There was an article in the paper this week about Hyundai's latest offering, which will come with a choice of battery capacity. I'm not sure that 1K or greater range is a universal prerequisite. Many buyers might be content with a smaller, cheaper battery option. Especially if quick top-up, even adding a further 100 kms, is widely available.

It's price that needs to come down just a little further.

- Paul
Agreed (That's why I said high end). I would expect most cars would get 400-600km range.

EV could potentially make car ownership more affordable if batteries make up a a large part of the purchase price. You could buy the 200km range and later upgrade the batteries to 400km when the situation allowed.
 
I think it's also a mistake to look at EVs through today's technology. We've already seen that in a few years there will be high end EVs with 1000km+ range. What about in 2035? Potentially, a high end car could have a 2K+ range or more. That's looking 14 years in the future; 14 years ago the first iPhone was released, that's how fast technology can change.

The same goes with charging, it's not great today but the technology keeps moving forward and the time of charge will get better.
Hmmm, I think 1k km is about the most we'll see. 2k km range is utterly pointless. Apple figured this out, and instead of making phones with 2 day battery life they made them lighter and thinner. Range is just about satisficing. 600-700km range is lots and anything beyond that has next to zero utility.
 
I think it's also a mistake to look at EVs through today's technology. We've already seen that in a few years there will be high end EVs with 1000km+ range. What about in 2035? Potentially, a high end car could have a 2K+ range or more. That's looking 14 years in the future; 14 years ago the first iPhone was released, that's how fast technology can change.

Cost matters though. A 1000 km battery will always be more expensive and less efficient than a 500 km pack. Right now, as batteries are expensive we're seeing range used as a marker of luxury and capability. In reality, most automakers have a threshold in mind. A decade ago Elon Musk said he didn't want to sell anything with less than 200 miles range. Recently he said that he thinks 300 miles is the minimum for an EV. And that is where the market is going. The differentiation will come from load. So the pickup truck makers will target 500 km with a load. The car and CUV builders will target 500 km without any load. Once they hit their range thresholds any benefits in battery tech will go to reducing weight and cost.

The same goes with charging, it's not great today but the technology keeps moving forward and the time of charge will get better.

The technology can improve but the physics of moving electricity doesn't. If there's a limited supply coming into the premises, network design has to decide how to allocate that.
 
The reason Tesla is talking about 200 kWh/1000 km range Roadster is that they need a big battery for very high power output for silly acceleration claims (<2s 0-60 time). The range is just a side benefit.
 
I'm not sure it is a hatred for Musk.
I'd like to think if I had Musk's brainpower, wealth and access to capital that I'd do something useful to mankind. Sure making cars that run on batteries instead of gas is good, and self driving cars or fractional ownership vehicles is neat, and everyone likes rocketships and space. But think what he could do for the environment. Imagine Musk partners with Dyson and makes a giant vacuum to collect the plastic floating in the oceans.
 
I'm not sure it is a hatred for Musk.

There's plenty of articles about his disdain for public transport.

He says stuff like this:

It’s a pain in the ass. That’s why everyone doesn’t like it. And there’s like a bunch of random strangers, one of who might be a serial killer, OK, great. And so that’s why people like individualized transport, that goes where you want, when you want.”


Think of his response to traffic. It wasn't public transit. It was building expensive tunnels that require cars with automation to drive in.

Too poor to buy a Tesla? In the world of Elon, you don't deserve motorized mobility.
 
I'd like to think if I had Musk's brainpower, wealth and access to capital that I'd do something useful to mankind. Sure making cars that run on batteries instead of gas is good, and self driving cars or fractional ownership vehicles is neat, and everyone likes rocketships and space. But think what he could do for the environment. Imagine Musk partners with Dyson and makes a giant vacuum to collect the plastic floating in the oceans.
He's not doing anything for the environment?

He can't solve every problem! Maybe he will turn his mind to some of these things once he can rest of his laurels somewhat and his massive accumulated wealth. He makes a much bigger difference to the world becoming very wealthy doing things that add a lot of value and help humanity than he would if he took his Paypal fortune and started an ocean plastic cleanup charity.
 
Too poor to buy a Tesla? In the world of Elon, you don't deserve motorized mobility.
I think this is contradicted by his comments on who Boring Company should serve.




He just thinks that currently conceived public transit is not a good experience (largely true) and could be made better by using smaller, more flexible, autonomous vehicles (also true).
 
I think this is contradicted by his comments on who Boring Company should serve.




He just thinks that currently conceived public transit is not a good experience (largely true) and could be made better by using smaller, more flexible, autonomous vehicles (also true).
Everything Elon Musk proposes is to make Elon Musk more money.

If Elon Musk created something like the Loop system, where mass transit could go point to point underground. (Ignoring all the safety issues and logistics and cost), why would you even consider transporting cars??????

The fact that cars are still on Elon Musk's mind here is because everything Elon Musk proposes is to promote Tesla or SpaceX. Everything he does is in the frame of an auto-centric city, a model that we know has massive failings and should be quashed for the sake of our health, society's health and the health of the ecosystem that enables human civilization.

Ignore what Elon Musk says and look at what he does.
 
Everything Elon Musk proposes is to make Elon Musk more money.

If Elon Musk created something like the Loop system, where mass transit could go point to point underground. (Ignoring all the safety issues and logistics and cost), why would you even consider transporting cars??????

The fact that cars are still on Elon Musk's mind here is because everything Elon Musk proposes is to promote Tesla or SpaceX. Everything he does is in the frame of an auto-centric city, a model that we know has massive failings and should be quashed for the sake of our health, society's health and the health of the ecosystem that enables human civilization.

Ignore what Elon Musk says and look at what he does.
I really don't understand why you are so annoyed when someone running multiple businesses is trying to expand/promote those businesses. That's literally what capitalism is and how capitalism works. If you don't like that then you can move to North Korea, or maybe Antarctica.

And really, doing things in the frame in an auto-centric city is basically just doing things in the frame of what exists in North America. It's not the job of private corporations to fix urban sprawl. That's the government's job. A couple of zoning changes and we'd already be halfway there. If anything, maybe you should be screaming at Walmart and Home Depot, whose impacts to cities have been far worse. But even then, they just took advantage of the opportunities created by the government in the form of zoning laws and highway infrastructure etc. When there is an opportunity in a market economy, someone will take advantage of it. That's the government's problem, not Walmart and Home Depot's problem.

And if you say we should "ignore what Elon Musk says and look at what he does", then let's take a look, what has he done?
- Started electronic banking via (the precursor of) PayPal
- Made electric vehicles a thing. Nobody cared or talked about EVs before Tesla existed and the entire auto industry was staunchly against electrification. There is no question that Tesla has dramatically accelerated the transition to EVs. If you do not recognize that EVs are far better for the environment, society, and cities compared to ICE vehicles then we have really lost hope.
- Making 100% renewable energy grids feasible via grid scale energy storage systems
- Dramatically lowered the cost of accessing space. Allows economically feasible fast satellite internet for the 50% of people on Earth not currently connected to the Internet, allows more science to be done in space, etc.
- And, the funniest thing about this statement that you've made, The Boring Company is still super early stage and basically hasn't done anything yet. If we "ignore what Elon Musk says" and just "look at what he does" with regards to the Boring Company, the only thing that has happened is the construction of a test tunnel in LA and a people mover-type system, so basically no material impact on cities. OK pedantry aside, this is literally a private company attempting to lower the cost of building tunnels. That in of itself will benefit public transportation putting pressure on the industry to also lower costs, and I think we can all agree that cheaper tunnels = better.

And to answer this: "If Elon Musk created something like the Loop system, where mass transit could go point to point underground. (Ignoring all the safety issues and logistics and cost), why would you even consider transporting cars??????"
Well, if you have excess capacity after fulfilling public transit needs on the Loop system, and you're a private company looking to maximize usage and revenue of your infrastructure, why wouldn't you allow cars? There will almost certainly be excess capacity, since Loop is basically just a one-lane underground highway with self-driving EVs only, and on the highway, headways are like 2 seconds. If you think safety, logistics, and cost are issues, so what? This is a private company. If the cost balloons, that's their problem. If the logistics make it super difficult to build or operate, that's also their problem. If the cars keep crashing, they'll be liable (which is why they'll use self driving only, which will make it much safer than the highway).
 
I really don't understand why you are so annoyed when someone running multiple businesses is trying to expand/promote those businesses. That's literally what capitalism is and how capitalism works. If you don't like that then you can move to North Korea, or maybe Antarctica.
The problem with all of this is fanboys like you. Elon Musk is a billionaire who sells cars for a living. Relying on him to improve public transit or the public realm is relying on the fox to guard the hen house.

And really, doing things in the frame in an auto-centric city is basically just doing things in the frame of what exists in North America. It's not the job of private corporations to fix urban sprawl. That's the government's job. A couple of zoning changes and we'd already be halfway there. If anything, maybe you should be screaming at Walmart and Home Depot, whose impacts to cities have been far worse. But even then, they just took advantage of the opportunities created by the government in the form of zoning laws and highway infrastructure etc. When there is an opportunity in a market economy, someone will take advantage of it. That's the government's problem, not Walmart and Home Depot's problem.
And if you say we should "ignore what Elon Musk says and look at what he does", then let's take a look, what has he done?
- Started electronic banking via (the precursor of) PayPal
- Made electric vehicles a thing. Nobody cared or talked about EVs before Tesla existed and the entire auto industry was staunchly against electrification. There is no question that Tesla has dramatically accelerated the transition to EVs. If you do not recognize that EVs are far better for the environment, society, and cities compared to ICE vehicles then we have really lost hope.
Better for the environment, sure. Better for society and cities? Probably not. A car is a car is a car and all the ills of urban sprawl (except air pollution) continue to apply regardless if the car has a combustion engine or an electric motor.

- Making 100% renewable energy grids feasible via grid scale energy storage systems
- Dramatically lowered the cost of accessing space. Allows economically feasible fast satellite internet for the 50% of people on Earth not currently connected to the Internet, allows more science to be done in space, etc.
Ok I grant you some of this. IDK about Starlink and it's pricing and it's effect on astronomy though. Thats a negative externality that he won't be paying.
- And, the funniest thing about this statement that you've made, The Boring Company is still super early stage and basically hasn't done anything yet. If we "ignore what Elon Musk says" and just "look at what he does" with regards to the Boring Company, the only thing that has happened is the construction of a test tunnel in LA and a people mover-type system, so basically no material impact on cities. OK pedantry aside, this is literally a private company attempting to lower the cost of building tunnels. That in of itself will benefit public transportation putting pressure on the industry to also lower costs, and I think we can all agree that cheaper tunnels = better.
If you look at the tunnel he made, it has none of the safety features that are required to keep people safe. The ventilation is minimal, there are no emergency exits or walkways, there are no stairs, just an elevator. And the primary reason that tunnel was cheaper, is because it had a smaller diameter. What new innovations did Elon Musk come up with to reduce tunneling cost other than declaring it so?

Did he automate the TBM? Because TBM's are already very streamlined.

Did he make it easier to get property easements? Did he make the construction of stations cheaper?

The answer is all NO.


And when I say ignore what he says, I mean ignoring his hype. Ignore what he says about supporting public transit when he proposes that he'll allow pedestrians and cyclists to board Loop vehicles.
Focus on the fact that he sells cars. This is all a marketing gimmick. He'll never seriously try to implement the Loop at scale.

Look at the Vegas people mover. Musk dug those tunnels, and tried to create a people mover with only Teslas. However, because of his insistence that people be transported in Teslas and not a bus, the system doesn't meet the spec of 4000 people per direction per hour.

The Boring Company has admitted to the LV Fire Department that it can only move 1200 people ppdh

Why? Because the Boring Company exists as a marketing gimmick to sell Tesla cars.
And to answer this: "If Elon Musk created something like the Loop system, where mass transit could go point to point underground. (Ignoring all the safety issues and logistics and cost), why would you even consider transporting cars??????"
Well, if you have excess capacity after fulfilling public transit needs on the Loop system, and you're a private company looking to maximize usage and revenue of your infrastructure, why wouldn't you allow cars? There will almost certainly be excess capacity, since Loop is basically just a one-lane underground highway with self-driving EVs only, and on the highway, headways are like 2 seconds. If you think safety, logistics, and cost are issues, so what? This is a private company. If the cost balloons, that's their problem. If the logistics make it super difficult to build or operate, that's also their problem. If the cars keep crashing, they'll be liable (which is why they'll use self driving only, which will make it much safer than the highway).

I think safety, logistics and costs are issues because these things make any Loop system uneconomical.

And even though the Boring Company is a private corporation, it affects the general public. It will affect the general public if this system (somehow) comes to life and then a malfunction 20m down causes a tunnel fire, killing 1000 people in the Loop system.
 
Last edited:
I'm in complete agreement with t54zhao here. This Musk worship is exhausting.

He didn't do anything for PayPal (he bought the title of "founder"), he is not the first guy to come up with an electric car (I remember hearing about the Nissan Leaf long before even knowing about Tesla), and the entire Hyperloop debacle is a distraction that further damages the reputation of existing passenger rail - and when rail loses out, cars pick up the slack.

We have the right to dislike the richest man on the planet trying to enrich himself further through exploiting thousands of people in rich and poor countries alike, just like he has the right to try.
 

Back
Top