EV Not Dead - Just Playing Possum - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 17, 2013, 06:04:03 pm
content: Greetings EEVBees:--Please see below link for latest sales figures for EVs. Final paragraph of article sums it up quite well.http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130117/AUTO04/301170346/--I think Government intervention has probably hurt more than helped the EV."Math is hard."Barbie Doll - 1959Best RegardsClear Ether

author: r90s
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:16:14 am
content: Watch out, your topic will be locked any minute!

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:53:28 am
content: They are poor sellers because they are a luxury item, and are marketed as such.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 06:30:31 am
content: EVs are definitely the way to go for short distances (since engines wear faster and work less efficiently if they don't have enough time to warm up), but it would be a long time before they become practical for longer distances. So plug in hybrids are the way to go, preferably those that use biofuels. As for biofuels, they should use plants that need little care to grow well (what are traditionally called weeds) so that just about anyone can plant some in their yards and make a small profit off otherwise mostly unused land. In particular, plants that grow where food crops do not would help nullify the "food vs. fuel" debate since the fuel crops can grow on land that cannot be used to grow food.

author: Harvs
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 09:09:39 am
content: I'd love one of these babies:http://www.zeromotorcycles.com/au/zero-s-specsBut the reality is, there's no dealerships over the western side of this country, and it would only just make a round trip to work and back and current infrastructure isn't setup for it over here.Then again maybe it's because I'd need to get rid of one of my three other bikes which I've grown too attached to

author: Dagon
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 10:01:31 am
content: QuoteI've read good things about them. A big step forward from the previous generation apparently.I've also been doing a bit off roading lately and I'd love to try out KTM's freeride E. Supposed to be highly entertaining.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 03:16:56 pm
content: Just as well sales have stalled, research shows that EV doing less than 20 can only be heard about a second before they hit you. They need to be made to make more noise by law.http://www.guidedogs.org.uk/supportus/campaigns/safe-and-sound-ev/

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:31:17 pm
content: Were the test subjects wearing earphones? Some users will not hear even a freight train barrelling down on them as they wander, remarkably akin to cattle, across the tracks. Drunks do not care anyway, before impact they are oblivious and afterwards there is just a shoe left there in the road.

author: Lightages
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:38:10 pm
content: Until we have everyone using thorium based reactors to produce power, or some other non-polluting source of energy, electric cars do nothing except cause more "e-waste" and more pollution from the inefficiencies of all the power conversions going on.

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:39:58 pm
content: Ah yea, the old "well people will still die anyway so why bother with common sense easy fixes?" argument. It continues to make as much sense today as when the first ignorant person said it.That said, EV's aren't ready for the mainstream yet. They're still niche and should be treated as such. Maybe SgtRock thinks that somehow car companies will do massive R&D as public charity? I dunno, but EV's are considerably more advanced than they used to be, and government funded R&D is a huge reason for that.

author: Colfaxmingo
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 04:47:11 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on January 18, 2013, 03:16:56 pmLow power RF receiver with a speaker on the dogs collar. Approaching car transmits constantly. Noise uses Doppler effect to indicate if its advancing or receding. Motor company gives away receivers.Next problem please.

author: rollatorwieltje
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 09:12:41 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on January 18, 2013, 03:16:56 pmSo basically noise gives a driver the right not to be careful around other people? Instead of stopping for a blind person you just install a siren and basically tell him to get out of the way?Maybe it's the strange way of thinking that everything should move out of the way for motor vehicles is what's causing the problem. Maybe drivers of motor vehicles should actually be better qualified for controlling a one tonne death trap near other people. Certainly not like it is now, a lame drive around the block and you're qualified for life.Motor vehicles are very interesting. The company I work for makes robot vehicles that move at walking pace and weigh as much as a small car. They need to be equipped with all kinds of safety stuff like collision bumpers, push bars, emergency stops, sonar sensors, beepers, soft panels, you name it. When I go home I walk only several meters away from loads of other people "controlling" the same amount of weight at several times that speed. The only safety feature is a 10cm high curb. For some reason with 60 deaths and 600 badly injured pedestrians (16M population) a 10cm curb is perfectly acceptable when it comes to motor vehicles. When any of our robots causes only one severe injury the company is screwed...

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 09:29:03 pm
content: That is an average week here.................. Of course most are accident victims who were passengers in the HiAce ( High intensity Accident causing equipment) while the others are mostly moderately to severely inebriated pedestrians.The blind are very aware about what is happening around them, there is a blind man who goes to Mosque every day who walks past my work. Extremely aware of what is going on around him, and just a stick and no Haraam dog.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 18, 2013, 10:47:36 pm
content: I think that perhaps the guide dogs are also experiencing trouble hearing the electric cars among the other traffic noise.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2013, 03:20:45 am
content: EV is not dead but is indeed a niche technology, and it will remain that way until battery technology improves, and more charging stations are available.I did recently see a two-space charging area at a motorway services, but I am thinking at 50 miles between some services, it is not good enough with current tech.Nonetheless I am working on plans for a prototype personal EV for my own use, and I will size it to have a 30 mile maximum range, because that is all I need.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 19, 2013, 03:53:36 pm
content: It is a bit trite to say that pedestrians should look more carefully, most will also be using their ears as for dogs having collars with receivers, It is not for nothing that fork lifts and most other plant have beepers for reversing no one can be looking in all directions at once and that includes the driver, everyone must take responsibility for safety and that includes legislators and manufacturers and if a piece of moving machinery is too quite and or is operating in an otherwise noisy environment it to must make an audible alarm signal on moving. Lotus have demonstrated an audible alarm for electric vehicles.http://www.cnet.com.au/lotus-safe-and-sound-system-makes-hybrid-electric-vehicles-audible-339291235.htm

author: jerry507
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 01:41:47 am
content: G7PSK, what you makes genuine sense. But there is a prevailing feeling that anything under the banner of "safety" is bad these days, no matter how simple, obvious or commonsense it might be. It's a bandwagon, not any real logical thought-driven process.

author: justanothercanuck
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 06:26:40 am
content: I think EV's could have easily been done in the 90s. Yet we're still fighting the same crap today...One concern that always keeps coming up is the range. If you need to drive more than 140 miles in a day, you need to move closer to work. Most of the time, the whole "I can go to a gas station and fill up in 30 seconds" debate is moot, because if you charge your battery every night when you're sleeping, then who cares how long it takes to charge? And that ties into the range concerns as well. If you're one of those people who forget to charge, then there's always hybrids.While we're talking about battery capacity, the story would be a lot different right now if Texaco and Chevron didn't hold the monopoly on NiMH batteries. If you want to buy NiMH, you have to buy it from them, and you have to buy them in large quantities. They're holding the market back from using better batteries, which we already have available today.One thing manufacturers will need to start thinking about is setting a common standard for charging. Without it, nobody will want to build a charging station based on the fact that the charging station only supports one make of cars. Unless they build the chargers into the cars and use standard extension cords to plug the cars in, but that seems expensive.Another thing that always comes up with talking about EV's is the concern of where the power comes from. While it is true that most countries still use coal as their main source of fuel, I would rather shift the carbon to the power generation facility, than have it hang over our cities in that dense unbreatheable mass called smog. Luckily for me, 56% of my power comes from nuclear (followed by 22% hydroelectric, coal only accounts for 2%). Also, regardless of what power companies would tell you, there is no energy shortage. In fact, for my area alone, we export 15% of what we're currently generating, and we still have tons of power to go around.Going back to another item I touched on, is the price. EV's are too expensive right now. While I won't get into conspiracies that manufacturers are artificially inflating EV prices to keep ownership low, between R+D, and battery costs (again, patents and licensing), among other things, something needs to be done to bring the prices down. Or perhaps governments could stop subsidizing manufacturers for making and selling gas-powered vehicles. It was suggested in a documentary that one could essentially buy a Hummer for nothing due to subsidies, but those same subsidies didn't apply to EV's.I won't even get into the whole "ethanol kills the corn market" thing, because it's just more protectionist garbage meant to maintain the status-quo. Not to mention, it's not the only source of ethanol. One thing I will touch on though, which I find interesting, is that people still haven't taken up SVO/WVO as a fuel. It's free (aside from the costs of the refining equipment), and all you have to do is acquire it and filter it. It really wouldn't work here in Canada, but it could easily work in the US, moreso in the southern states.Long story short, we could have fixed all this 20 years ago, but we didn't because doing nothing is easy... and the rich get richer.edit: I guess I should note that I am an electric scooter owner.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 09:09:07 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--I do not want to waste everyone's time with a line by line refutation of a post so let's just pick one statement and see how it stacks up. Justanothercanuck has stated:"While we're talking about battery capacity, the story would be a lot different right now if Texaco and Chevron didn't hold the monopoly on NiMH batteries. If you want to buy NiMH, you have to buy it from them, and you have to buy them in large quantities. They're holding the market back from using better batteries, which we already have available today."--1) Last I heard Texaco and Chevron were competitors. But in any case can anyone provide any links to proof that they hold a monopoly on NiMH batteries.--2) Assuming, arguendo, that they do hold a monopoly on NiMH batteries, how does this help them in "holding the market back from using better batteries, which we already have available today." Seems like I heard something about various iterations of the Lithium battery being used in nearly every EV. How can this be? If anyone can sort this conundrum, by all means have a go. Otherwise I will file this one with this story "Oil Companies Murder Inventor of 700 MPG Carburetor And Destroy Research""The only relevant test of the validity of a hypothesis is comparison of prediction with experience. "Milton Friedman 1912 - 2006Best RegardsClear Ether

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 09:26:13 am
content: What subsidy? Here a convention vehicle has taxes amounting to around half the price on it, the same for imported vehicles new or used. Add the carbon tax on new vehicles based on fuel consumption and that is the only saving of EV's. they still are a premium product, the hybrid being typically 30% more than the conventional one. Peter next door to me at work has the Hybrid Lexus, his father has the regular one, and the hybrid has a price premium. Quiet yes, but not so that you would not hear it coming in a regular city environment, even my car is quiet when at low speed. imagine a parkade with 30 hybrids with noise makers going, it would be a noisy place and even more dangerous as people will ignore the noise.Funny, research shows people with ABS and TC tend to drive faster and more aggressively than non ABS drivers, they rely on it and when it is past limits and lets go they die in the crash, as the airbags only work in conjunction with the unused seatbelts ( same reasoning applies) in keeping them from injury.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 10:48:40 am
content: QuoteIf you researched it you'd find out:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteriesChevron owns the patents, however Texaco originally acquired them. Texaco was purchased by Chevron mid-2001. They are not competitors.QuoteLithium batteries are fantastic -- but damn expensive, difficult to charge safely, and don't have the same cycle life times. NiMH are rugged, reliable, cheaper and, although not having the same density, often an acceptable solution for an EV, especially a hybrid or small EV which only needs to run ~30mi on a charge.The Prius uses NiMH, but I understand Toyota had to bypass the patents by using a lower-voltage design with a boost converter. I'm not sure how that works, or if there's some kind of threshold. Regardless, it adds to the cost.If we had cheap NiMH automotive batteries, we'd see EVs at the same price point as a small petrol/diesel car.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 11:09:03 am
content: The original Rav4 electric has these batteries. No longer produced, but those that were not totalled are still running around.NimH in large format are perfect standby cells, better than flooded lead acid in high reliability applications. There are old Edison nickel iron batteries made 50 years ago that are still in use as standby batteries, and the cells are still being made and sold. Nice flooded cells with no real failure mechanisms other than periodic electrolyte changes and keeping them from absorbing CO2 from the air.

author: justanothercanuck
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 08:06:30 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on January 20, 2013, 09:26:13 amhttp://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500159_162-537649.htmlI can't find a better link right now, but basically, you can buy a hummer for almost free, but those same subsidies (er, rebates) don't apply to electric vehicles.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 08:21:25 pm
content: Only in America...........

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 20, 2013, 10:06:22 pm
content: Dear Tom66:--Indeed you are correct, Sir, there is no Texaco, and indeed, the has not been a Texaco for now 12 years. I stand corrected. I assumed that when Justanothercanuck mentioned Texaco that such a company existed, my mistake.--While, as a general matter Wikipedia articles must be checked for political bias, this one appears to be accurate in all regards and, accusations by interested parties are reported as just that, and not as facts. I heartily recommend the article whose link I reproduce at the end of this post.--With regard to the charge that and Oil Company is holding a key technology off of the market to prevent the EV from devastating the gasoline market. It is made even more risible by the fact that Chevron sold its interests more that four years ago, probably because they saw no likelihood of a market big enough to justify building a huge Fab. If Oil Companies invest in alternative technology the are accused of trying to hold it off of the market. If they to do not invest in it they are accused of not supporting it because it is "just about the money". Go figure.--The article also mentions the random paranoid assertions of rogue genius Stanford Ovshinsky (inventor of Amorphous Silicon Semiconduction), who cannot make up his mind just which corporate giants (Car Companies or Oil Companies or who ever) are trying to squash NiMH. Next he will accuse Panasonic, Samsung and BASF."At the time of the 2009 Cobasys sale, control of NiMH battery technology transferred back to ECD Ovonics. In October 2009, ECD Ovonics announced that their next-generation NiMH batteries will provide specific energy and power that are comparable to those of lithium-ion batteries at a cost that is significantly lower than the cost of lithium-ion batteries. On February 14, 2012 BASF announced that it had acquired Ovonic Battery Company from Energy Conversion Devices Inc."And, what has happened since Chevron sold out? Uh, nothing. Clearly the EV is dependent on battery technology, which is not quite there yet, and no amount of Big Brother's thumb on the scales is going to get it there any sooner.--It is appropriate for the Government to spend public funds for R&D, but not for production. At least Toyota is loosing its own money on EVs. In any case be sure to read the article Tom66 was kind enough to find for us (reproduced below).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patent_encumbrance_of_large_automotive_NiMH_batteries"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it."Milton Friedman 1912 - 2006Best RegardsClear Ether

author: justanothercanuck
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2013, 12:30:00 am
content: Quote from: SgtRock on January 20, 2013, 10:06:22 pmOvshinsky died in 2012.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2013, 01:36:53 am
content: The reason Chevron was accused of trying to kill the technology is simple: they refused to sell the batteries, even though there was significant demand from major automakers such as Toyota and Mercedes. What was very clever of Chevron was that they simply licensed the new patents to ECD Ovonics: Chevron still maintains control of them to this day, and can decide who to license them to and what the licensee can do with the technology. Perhaps when the Li-Ion market picks up they'll consider introducing their reduced price NiMH packs, because there will be significant demand for them.ECD Ovonics went bankrupt in Feb 2012, with the technology licenses passing to BASF.Fromhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECD_Ovonics:QuoteIf that isn't at least evidence of attempting to suppress the technology, I don't know what is.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 21, 2013, 02:27:11 am
content: Dear Tom66:--The link you posted to the ESD_Ovonics article does not work. In any case I was relying on information in the first Wikipedia Article which apparently had it wrong. I apologize, I should have known better. Please clarify a point for me. Is Chevron refusing to sell these batteries, or are they waiting for a large enough order base to justify investment in a major fabrication facility. If the first, such a facility, capable of production of 100s of thousands of these batteries must already exit. Please, someone tell us where it is. And, just how much money was Chevron offered to produce how many batteries. What you provided was evidence alright but is far, far from proving what the motivations of the various actors were, it is really quite a corporate tangle. My guess is that Chevron pulled funding from Cobasys, not because it was wildly successful, but because it was an abject failure (like the battery companies which received stimulus funds), which contracted to deliver NiMH units at a loss. But as I said that is a guess, which is at least based on business principles, and not on assumed Oil Company Skulduggery. Are we really supposed to believe that the entire future of the EV depends on a single series of patents, without which the EV is not practical. The most important of these patents should expire in 2014, and then we can expect millions of cheap, long range EVs, I guess.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobasys"According to SEC filings, ECD Ovonics and Cobasys hold 125 US patents related to NiMH battery technology. 13 of the patents, considered particularly important, are due to expire by 2014.""In an interview with the Economist, Stan Ovshinsky stated, "I think we at ECD we made a mistake of having a joint venture with an oil company, frankly speaking. And I think it’s not a good idea to go into business with somebody whose strategies would put you out of business, rather than building the business." In a later interview, however, when asked, "So it’s your opinion that Cobasys is preventing other people from making it for that reason?", he responded "Cobasys is not preventing anybody. Cobasys just needs an infusion of cash."--So given the the Wiki article is accurate (an always necessary caveat) Stanford Ovshinsky said "Cobasys is not preventing anybody. Cobasys just needs an infusion of cash." Hmm.--So the first Wiki article contains at least one glaring mistake. And the second one provided is non functional. Wiki is doing really well, so far. I will check the third one (mine), after I post to make sure it is working. Reader please check and verify and Wiki facts that you doubt. And they report back please."Measure twice. Cut once"Norm Abram 1950 -Best RegardsClear Ether

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 21, 2013, 08:44:10 am
content: Remote the colon:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECD_OvonicsMany smaller battery companies have shipped prototypes. Toyota asked if they could order less than 10,000 units.ECD Ovonics has not been able to supply this.Any reasonable technology company has the capability to supply small prototype orders as demonstration products. Such products would be made by hand by skilled engineers; this of course would cost a lot of money (but less than 10,000 units.)