It feels like the battery, and renewable revolution is coming.
Like the 1kWh battery for 64€ in the article, when 1kWh is 0.25€ gives 256 charges to pay for it, if the electricity would otherwise be wasted, and batteries nowadays have at least 600-900 cycles.
This paves the way for so many things, not just EVs.
Can’t wait for electric vans to become a thing. After my Sprinter dies I want to get an electric one.
Where do you live as the sprinter launched this year and the electric transit a little while ago
How does that square with the other article posted here?
https://lemmy.ca/post/33771493
Porsche will keep gas-powered and hybrid vehicles alive as EV sales slow
Personally, I’ve seen a huge increase in EVs around me, which makes me think that the issue isn’t that EVs as a whole are slowing, some companies just suck at making EVs.
Articles claiming slow or declining EV sales are flat out lies to support some agenda. If they have numbers, they’ve been cherry picked from some temporary high and/or low points. Over all, adoption has been going up and will be going up if there’s supply and selection.
It’s pretty easy to guess that Porsche in particular would have issues selling EVs. There are two reasons people buy Porsches, for a sports car or for a status symbol. EVs don’t really fit either category right now…
I thought thr Cyberdump was supposed to be that
Policy factors aside, the cost of EVs will continue to drop, led by a decline in battery costs. Technology improvements, falling commodities prices, and a potential oversupply of EV batteries are some of the factors cited by Liz Najman, a researcher with the EV sales analysis firm Recurrent, leading to the conclusion that the upfront cost of buying an EV will be on par with the cost of a comparable gasmobile by 2026.
In a piece posted by Recurrent on November 19, Najman notes that Goldman Sachs anticipates a cost of $64 per kilowatt-hour for EV battery packs by 2030. Other leading research groups see a steeper declines. RMI, for example, anticipates that battery packs will dip to $45–$65/kWh.
Najman cites an RMI analysis showing that by 2030, the cost of replacing an EV battery will be cheaper than replacing the engine on a gasmobile. An RMI analysis puts the replacement cost at $3,375 for a 75 kilowatt-hour battery pack. In addition, EV owners can defray the cost by selling their battery into the growing second-life market.
The $3,375 price point sounds about right for a parity argument. AutoZone puts the cost of an engine replacement at $2,000–$10,000, or even more, depending on the circumstances.
For that matter, all of this talk about battery replacement may be moot. Battery replacements are rare, and they are about to get rarer. The EV battery of today is expected to last for 200,000 miles, possibly more. Most electric cars won’t need their batteries replaced at all.
Such fantastic news! One day the stink of cars will be a memory.
Worry not: they’ll still pollute because the tires running on the road release micro-particle, a problem which EVs didn’t solve and which the tendency for bigger cars, which is unrelated to EV adoption but has been happening in parallel, makes worse.
Mind you, EVs are much better, but cars are still a problem on the pollution front (and the danger for people front, and the stealing of natural public spaces to put roads on front, and on the making most of the public space dangerous for children to play in front and so on).
I have seen this comment made about tires only in the last few years. I am curious why people are concerned about it now? Also I have only seen it when EVs are reducing CO2 emissions. It has nothing at all to do with reduced gas and CO2 emissions.
More BS being pushed by the far right and entrenched i.c.e. interests. They never seem to admit that the low rolling resistance ties that are standard on most, if not all EVs, produce less particulate pollution than normal tires on an ice vehicle.
Eta: also I rarely see anyone talking about EVs and tire particulate pollution bring up brake particulate pollution. Almost like they know EVs with Regen braking would stomp any ice competitor.
RE: low rolling resistance tires: not so sure about that. My little BEV has those tires and they wear faster. Part of it is the high torque of my car combined with the stiffer tire material means way more tire spin outs even when just driving casually.
The extra weight of the battery even in my tiny car means more tire wear as well. So even if I get 100,000km from the brake pads I am using a lot more tire than previous ICE cars. I’m pretty conscious about that being the primary active pollutant from my travel.
I’ve been warning people about cadmium poisoning caused by tire pollution for 20 years, and learned about it because of tire usage in children’s playgrounds and alternative building projects.
Microplastic accumulation is largely due to tires.
It’s not some political shit. It’s chemistry and biology.
Public transit and other ways to reduce tire usage are required to reduce the risks.
More BS being pushed by the far right and entrenched i.c.e. interests.
It’s perfectly possible to be wary of this on a general anti-car basis, which is neither a far right nor a pro-ICE position.
They never seem to admit that the low rolling resistance ties that are standard on most, if not all EVs, produce less particulate pollution than normal tires on an ice vehicle.
Do you have any numbers I can see on this claim? I’m interested to see.
Eta: also I rarely see anyone talking about EVs and tire particulate pollution bring up brake particulate pollution.
I’d also be interested in the numbers on this factor.
To be clear - I think all ICE vehicles should be taken off the road, I just think that the general number of vehicles on the road should decline by a massive factor, to be replaced by superior alternatives in bicycles and trains.
I’m not entirely sure the consideration of tires as a pollutant is necessarily a right wing argument. It may be coming from the angle of public transit and distaste for cars.
Because nothing is ever good enough
About musk being in favor of dropping the EV incentive
The argument that “it will hurt competitors’ EVs more than it hurts our EVs” doesn’t cut it.
Why not? As the first/most profitable EV maker in the US, the only one able to drop prices significantly and remain profitable, the only one that isn’t still trying to repay huge development costs, a manufacturer with half its models too high priced for the incentive, Tesla would do well out of the deal.
Sure, business would drop temporarily but Tesla is in a good position to make it work. Other US manufacturers couldn’t afford it. They’d drop entirely out of the business, leaving it all to Tesla
Now wait, can you really just have an EV post without someone showing up to get free Internet points by shitting on Tesla? I’m not sure you can do that.
