California may attempt to ban/limit sales of gas powered vehicles by 2035

alfadriver (Forum Supporter) said:

First, the battery has to be durable and cheap enough so that the bottom end of the economy can live with them, too. Especially since they will be the ones dealing with the end of life battery. Current battery tech can't do that, yet. But I know there is a strong effort to find better alternatives.  

Batteries are proving a lot more durable than people thought and predicted, me included.  There are a lot of 15 year old Prii running around with perfectly good battery packs with well over 100K miles on them.  Even when there are issues with a few cells within a battery pack there's cheap apps to tell you exactly how many and which ones are failing.  There's even a health aftermarket, and some more adventurous DIYers who are rebuilding and replacing cells to bring packs to 100% efficiency.  I think battery life is working out much better than anyone expected.  I see battery replacement as probably more affordable than swapping an engine or trans in a 15 year old high mileage car.

In reply to Adrian_Thompson (Forum Supporter) :

Literally the  only tools you need to replace the individual cells in Prius NiMH batteries are 10 & 12 mm sockets, socket wrench, screwdrivers, needle nose pliers, and maybe some silicone sealant. And the ability to lift.

I love watching the Facebook comments over this. 
 

"10001 reasons not to live in California"

"better buy them all now the government willl seize them"

"I hope California falls into the sea"

seems like a lot of hurrr durrr buggy whips. 

Argumentum ad hominem:  a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

In reply to Adrian_Thompson (Forum Supporter) :

A well kept engine won't need a change. The batteries will. And who is going to own the car when that change is forced?

There are thousands and thousands of ICEs limping along with stuff wrong, but they still go. At some point, the battery will need replaced just to go from A to B. And forgive me that I don't see an engine swap more expensive than a battery one right now. Especially with current battery technology- cobalt is just too expensive. 

In reply to GIRTHQUAKE :

And many thousands of dollars for new cells. Right now, the cost is roughly $200/mile you want to go. That's the cost of about 1kw-hr. 
 

Thats the point of needing a significant shift of battery chemistry. 

I've not checked back in on this thread, so I apologize if this has been covered. It seems like maybe "we" are looking at the transition from ICE to electric the wrong way. 

Maybe what we need isn't a better charging infrastructure, but rather a standardization of batteries & return to the "service station" model. If battery packs were standardized designed to be swapped quickly, there's no reason existing gas stations couldn't add the capacity to swap them out on-site. 

I'm envisioning that the batteries wouldn't be "purchased" with the vehicle, but rather they would be part of a subscription service. So every time you stop for a battery swap what you'd be paying for is electricity+labor+a portion of the battery life+profit for the companies involved. 

Yes, it would be more expensive than just charging your car at home - though I see no reason that couldn't still happen too - but you also wouldn't be faced with expensive battery replacement at some point in the future.

Of course this won't really work until battery tech has plateaued, and the chances of getting all auto manufacturers to settle on a standard packaging for batteries, and a way to make them easily swappable in a matter of minutes, which will never happen. 

In reply to alfadriver (Forum Supporter) :

With some Tesla's posting 400,000 miles on single battery packs still having more than 90% their original power, I don't think that's a problem for us at all. The Tesloop vehicles in particular show even with repeated supercharging and constant deep-cycling one can still last hundreds of thousands of miles with little degradation*. As for ICE engines having stuff wrong as still driving... you'd have to physically damage a battery to stop them from functioning and that's just with our posted limited examples of EVs here.

*now. The batteries seem to have had a MASSIVE jump in lifespan around 2016, though it seems like all of Tesla had a big jump in quality then.

At some point, an ICE needs to be replaced just to go from A to B. Battery longevity (and almost all batteries are "well kept" because they are maintained by software instead of relying on a human not to skip a few oil changes) is looking like it's REALLY long. To the point where Tesla warranties their batteries to have at least 70% capacity after 150,000 miles in some models. That's still a long way from needing to be replaced to get from A to B. Checking battery capacity will be part of evaluating a used car and the value of said car will drop with the capacity, so the owner of the car when a battery change is required will have paid an appropriate amount. Or more likely, the  car will be scrapped and recycled before it gets there.

Current cost is about $156/kWh for EV batteries, and both GM and Tesla expect it to be under $100 very soon. That's without a step change in chemistry.

Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) said:

I've not checked back in on this thread, so I apologize if this has been covered. It seems like maybe "we" are looking at the transition from ICE to electric the wrong way. 

Maybe what we need isn't a better charging infrastructure, but rather a standardization of batteries & return to the "service station" model. If battery packs were standardized designed to be swapped quickly, there's no reason existing gas stations couldn't add the capacity to swap them out on-site. 

I'm envisioning that the batteries wouldn't be "purchased" with the vehicle, but rather they would be part of a subscription service. So every time you stop for a battery swap what you'd be paying for is electricity+labor+a portion of the battery life+profit for the companies involved. 

Yes, it would be more expensive than just charging your car at home - though I see no reason that couldn't still happen too - but you also wouldn't be faced with expensive battery replacement at some point in the future.

Of course this won't really work until battery tech has plateaued, and the chances of getting all auto manufacturers to settle on a standard packaging for batteries, and a way to make them easily swappable in a matter of minutes, which will never happen. 

Every time someone seriously investigates the battery swap concept, it comes back that recharging the battery in the car is a better choice. 

alfadriver (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Adrian_Thompson (Forum Supporter) :

A well kept engine won't need a change. The batteries will. And who is going to own the car when that change is forced?

 

There are thousands and thousands of ICEs limping along with stuff wrong, but they still go. At some point, the battery will need replaced just to go from A to B. And forgive me that I don't see an engine swap more expensive than a battery one right now. Especially with current battery technology- cobalt is just too expensive. 

Even a well kept engine will have smaller failures and maintenance along the way though that can cause unexpected cash flow issues. What's a fuel injector replacement cost in a direct injected engine, or O2 sensor, etc? An issue with one of those things can cause increased fuel/oil consumption too, so putting them off only causes more economic and physical damage. Oil changes are $40+ a pop these days. Fuel prices fluctuate a lot more than electricity prices too, which makes it harder to budget that aspect of ownership. All of those end up being a "death by a thousand paper cuts" thing for an owner of a high mileage ICE. Most of the vehicles that I see being scrapped or junked still have some functionality of the engine remaining. It's the ancillary things that fail and cost a few hundred bucks to fix that eventually kill them or cause them to fail inspection and be thrown out.

I think the bigger issue at the bottom of the market is access to charging where these people live. Most people that are driving cheap cars are renters. Availability of a dedicated parking space and a landlord willing to install charging access will limit EV adoption at the low end of the economic spectrum.

Keith Tanner said:

 

Every time someone seriously investigates the battery swap concept, it comes back that recharging the battery in the car is a better choice. 

It reminds me a bit of the orginal Corvair drivetrain concept.   You would just swap out the entire drivetrain for most service (the engine and transaxle is pretty easy to pull in and out).  The concept became quickly impracticle as one engine option and automatic transmission went to multiple engine options, auto, 3 speed and 4 speed.

I suspect the idea of the exact same battery pack in a large group of cars is unlikely.

aircooled said:

My opinion is: Why?

They tried this before... didn't work.

The CA electrical generation cannot even handle a HOT DAY.  Seriously, they where doing rolling blackouts when it was 120 in the San Fernando Valley a few weeks ago!!!  One of the prime reason was an over dependence on solar and wind, which, shockingly don't produce as much in the evening (the blackouts where in the evening).  I mean, who could have possibly predicted that!  Hey, just buy dirty power from out of state...

Setting up the infrastructure to support all the charging (charging point and generation) is going to be stupid expensive.  Did I mention CA is letting the license on the only remaining nuke plant (Diablo Canyon, which represents a surprising large percentage of the states power) in CA expire in a few years.  Oh, and there is a mandate to go carbon free also, so.... all the natural gas plants need to go also!  Yeah....

There are nearly 200 utility-scale natural gas–fired power plants in California; together, they provide approximately 39 gigawatts of generation capacity to the grid

You might ask: what about night time?  You know, that thing that happens about half the time (and it's generally not very windy)?  How do they deal with that?  HUGE batteries.  Can you imagine how expensive a battery plant big enough to supply power to the entire state would cost? 

Did I mention, as with many other states, CA is currently racking up HUGE debt because of COVID?

Besides the grid issue, what's the point?  If you can make electric cars that people want to buy, do it.  Forcing them to buy them....  

Hey, I think electric is cool. Love to see the advancements, but I don't see any point in REQUIRING it... well... other than making things even more expensive in CA....

As with most thing coming out of politicians mouths though, this is more about what make the person saying it look good than what is good for the state.  Our last governor liked trains.... we now have a multi billion dollar high speed train being build that is not high speed, and with travel between two small towns... that may be shut down (hopefully) by the massive miss management and corruption involved.  Projected to cost 60 billion to span the state (LA to SF), is now pushing 80 billion to go from Fresno to San Jose (which almost certainly is never going to happen).

In summary:  electric cars?  Yes.   Renewable energy?  Yes.   Mandate 100% of either?  That's just stupid!

You've done an excellent job of summarizing the problems without looking at potential benefits. 
In the 50's and 60's I was in California and for a time I lived through the smog.  We'd be out doing exercise on some days and half the class would fall out because of breathing issues.  Clear day when the wind blew the smog out they'd do the same program without any trouble.     The mountains trap the foul air and it makes life miserable. 
Population continues to grow but the mountains are still there. Yes it's better but fly into the area sometime and look.  
Aside from that  there are endless rooftops without any solar panels. So there is great potential for improvement. One of the nice thing about solar is lack of transmission losses.  Generate it at home, use it at home.  
Look at swimming pools.  They used to be blue. Now they are black. Why?  less energy usage.  
    Finally with California's car culture. Cheaper better EV's will happen.  Recharging can be put on a timer to start after dinner when energy usage winds down. 

Fueled by Caffeine said:

In reply to 1988RedT2 :

I don't get the hating on another state thing..  We all got problems, but we're all americans.  If we can't see beyond our differences.. then there's a bigger problem here..    Unless it's Wisconsin.. 1st DUI is free..  (it's a joke, but not really)..

 

I guess.. if you get an endorphin rush from it..  I don't get it.. 

Well said, Some of the reason might be jealousy. California by itself is the worlds 5th largest economy. 
rich in population and resources. They recognize that just because one part of the state has a surplus of water while another part is near desert the smart move is to move the water to where the need is.  
Yes Taxes are high. They always are high where incomes are high. But they have some great schools, great diversity of economy. And a vast supply of Vacational areas. 
    

In reply to STM317 :

It's easier to deal with $5000 spread out over many years than all at once for a $2000 car. 

alfadriver (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to STM317 :

It's easier to deal with $5000 spread out over many years than all at once for a $2000 car. 

Maybe? It may be easier to get a loan for a replacement used car with little/no money down than to try and gather up a few hundred to pour into a repair of the current vehicle. If that $5k is spread out on small repairs to keep the vehicle going, and the vehicle runs until the ICE actually needs replacement, you're in much deeper. You've basically paid $5k in installments to kick the can down the road and get the vehicle to the point that the ICE needs replacement (which is likely to cost thousands more).

That $5k battery swap (If indeed a full replacement is needed, and it can't be done for less) should mean the car likely goes another 150-200k without any significant powertrain repairs. In reality, most battery failures are a small number of bad cells, which can often be replaced for pennies on the dollar compared to a full battery swap at dealer prices.

The point in my previous post was that there are often failures in ICE vehicles that do not require engine replacement, but are still expensive enough to scrap the vehicle. Those are less likely with an EV. I'd be willing to bet that an EV is more likely to get to the point where the battery needs repair than an ICE is to get to the point where the ICE needs replacement (mostly due to things related to the ICE failing, but not the ICE itself).

In reply to Pete Gossett (Forum Supporter) :

My dude we can't even get tool companies to stop changing how their batteries plug into their tools every few years, so unless Ryobi starts making EVs I don't see automakers agreeing on a standard design ever.

Interesting point about the ability of lower incomes folks to have access to the same types of infrastructure as wealthier individuals. 

I think rather than banning ICE cars outright, I could see California banning the ability to sell ICE cars NEW within the state.  The thought being, if you're wealthy enough to buy a new car, you're probably wealthy enough to have a charger installed (or convince your landlord to do so.) 

It's got a powerful economy, and like other scenarios, is able to bend manufacturers to it's will. 

alfadriver (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to STM317 :

It's easier to deal with $5000 spread out over many years than all at once for a $2000 car. 

A major justification of outright ban on new ICE powered cars would be the elimination of the $2000 junkers perhaps through a requirement that all vehicle transfers receive a safety and emissions inspection.  Very few ICE's at that price point would pass such an examine. 

I don't think battery cost is that big of an issue in the long run. The current cost of a replacement battery is less that the cost of fuel saved, even accounting for higher electricity bills. Trouble is, who sets that money aside? Nobody. I don't have to fill up this week? Awesome, I'm going to the movies instead. Or buying a video game. Or an assload of tacos.

What's the thinking on computing and software? I'm not a big techie. Seems like there are just as many computer repair shops as mechanics, or close to. And what happens to a manufacturers proprietary software in a right-to-repair scenario? Either way, the jobs will change, but not that much. 

The powertrain is unlikely to wear out, but is a dead engine the biggest car killer? I really don't know. I'd also be willing to bet that most dead engines these days are not actually dead, more likely a dead computer or fuel system or complicated transmission. Or a NLA catalyst to allow a car to pass smog.

Has anyone calculated the environmental impact of making a battery vs. drilling and refining 200k miles worth of fuel?

*the questions are genuine, I really don't know the answer. 

And wishing for something unlikely to happen, I want an ev with as little computing as possible. Big smart computer to handle charging and regen braking, but almost no computing anywhere else. Crank windows, manual locks, unpowered r&p steering, regular stereo, regular suspension. No wireless anything. No internet. Simplify as much as possible. Like a mashup of a geo and a golf cart. Mandate that, now please

In reply to barefootskater :

As the former owner of a geo, i grock

barefootskater said:

I don't think battery cost is that big of an issue in the long run. The current cost of a replacement battery is less that the cost of fuel saved, even accounting for higher electricity bills. Trouble is, who sets that money aside? Nobody. I don't have to fill up this week? Awesome, I'm going to the movies instead. Or buying a video game. Or an assload of tacos.

What's the thinking on computing and software? I'm not a big techie. Seems like there are just as many computer repair shops as mechanics, or close to. And what happens to a manufacturers proprietary software in a right-to-repair scenario? Either way, the jobs will change, but not that much. 

The powertrain is unlikely to wear out, but is a dead engine the biggest car killer? I really don't know. I'd also be willing to bet that most dead engines these days are not actually dead, more likely a dead computer or fuel system or complicated transmission. Or a NLA catalyst to allow a car to pass smog.

Has anyone calculated the environmental impact of making a battery vs. drilling and refining 200k miles worth of fuel?

*the questions are genuine, I really don't know the answer. 

And wishing for something unlikely to happen, I want an ev with as little computing as possible. Big smart computer to handle charging and regen braking, but almost no computing anywhere else. Crank windows, manual locks, unpowered r&p steering, regular stereo, regular suspension. No wireless anything. No internet. Simplify as much as possible. Like a mashup of a geo and a golf cart. Mandate that, now please

First, there is almost no such thing as a dead car. Instead, there are cars that it would cost more money or time/effort than it is worth to fix. I would guess most dead cars are due to to the transmission. When the transmission goes, it is usually too much money to repair. Just a guess based on when we have gotten rid of cars before, and what I see for sale and going to the junkyard.

But that is part of the benefit of an electric car. What is there to go wrong? Electric motors are very long lasting, assuming it’s not a fan from the dollar store - and even there the fix is probably just a loose wire. A single speed transmission, I believe. It’s basically just suspension and the computer, like you alluded too. 

In reply to JoeyM :

I mean, not exactly like a geo. A little more refined, a little more quiet, but similarly simple (and hopefully similarly cheap)

In reply to mtn (Forum Supporter) :

I'd define a dead car as one that can't be repaired. I consider an engine rebuild a repair. Most newer engines cannot be rebuilt in the traditional sense (can't mill heads flat, for instance)

To the point, we bought a "core" engine from a local yard to use the heads on the challenge car. I was told it did not run, but after tearing the thing apart, I cannot see anything wrong. Bearings look great, bores look great, no cracks or debris, oil was black but not shiny... maybe it was that terrible Chevy spider injection setup? Maybe the 4l60 had extra neutrals? Maybe the fuel filter was clogged. But the engine is good.

I see a lack of transmission, manual or otherwise, as a huge plus. Just for fun though I'd like a manual ev, but with two gears. Regular gear, and 0-60 gear. Gearing and acceleration being related as they are. No need for a clutch either. 

Growing up hobbing with electronics, I've always thought the electric cars, as a novelty are cool. I have NO problems with electric cars. I DO have a problem hearing sheeppeople repeating that "electric cars have zero environmental footprint and will save the world"  Uh, no. Not unless the laws of physics change.

Is solar power a bad thing, no. Is it becoming a viable energy source? Only looks like it because the government uses your money to subsidize it, and does not include those monies in the statictics that say its becoming a viable source.

And just think "as soon a we get Nuclear power plants running, electricity will be so inexpensive we will not even need meters on the houses." Ligit quote from the early days.