Lamenting the decline of the car

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Hint to the rest: Battery cost is a function of manufacturing scale, not technology.

That is true when the raw materials of a product are a negligible compared to the cost of the product (i.e. a silicon chip that sells for hundreds of dollars and has a few cents worth of silicon and copper).

An EV battery needs signficant amounts of lithium carbonate (recently as high as $20k/tonne), Graphite ($10k/tonne), Colbalt ($27,000k/tonne), Nickel ($10k/Tonne). Since these materials are relatively difficult to acquire (except graphite which is made from coke or coal tar and the main cost is energy), the price will likely go up if these fantastical production numbers you believe in actually happen. The price of Lithium Carbonate is roughly double what it was in 2015, for example.

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

How about your engine? transmission? radiator/cooling? oil? belts? fuel injectors?

EVs are far simpler to construct and maintain. The battery is literally the only thing that is more expensive, and is rapidly decreasing.

None of these parts require neodymium.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Uggh. More Boomer talking points and math....

Fuel tax equivalent doesn't change the equation much on owning an EV. The total federal and provincial excise taxes on an 8L/100km vehicle driving 20 000 km per year is $400. This is out of the $1600-2000 being spent on gas.

At 20 kwh/100km for the average EV and $0.20/kwh, the total electricity cost would be $800. And I've deliberately overestimated the cost of electricity substantially in anticipation of more incoming nonsense. Charge overnight entirely and you can spend half that. But let's assume some peak charging and some charging at paid chargers.

Now here's the really challenging bit:

800 + 400 < 1600

Perhaps you can use your Gen Z math to inform us how many years $400 in annual savings (plus $100 for an oil change if the dealer does it) equals the difference in price of comparable vehicles.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

VW says that TCO of an EV is now cost competitive without subsidies (and they're not the only ones saying this). They also say they are getting closer to parity on purchase price. If you think the world's largest automaker is filled with retards like me, VWAGY is their stock sticker. Bet against this madness and you can retire early.

The same people that perpetuated a multi-year, multi-billion dollar fraud to try to convince people diesel was environmentally friendly?
Or the people that did emissions testing on humans?

And even if VW are now pure of heart, companies make estimates for future growth all the time. It is no guarantee it will come true. RIM thought it was going to sell lots of the next gen blackberries. Google thought it was going to sell lots of glass.

But if we return to the real world for a second, VW has 33k pre-orders for the ID.3. That's a nice little niche market, but a mass market it is not.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by acottawa

None of these parts require neodymium.

Your argument is meaningless if you keep changing the goal posts.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Your argument is meaningless if you keep changing the goal posts.

My argument all along has been with current technology, and reasonably foreseeable future costs, EVs are not scale-able to the extent they will replace ICEs. No goalposts are moving.

Modern cars just don't need spark plugs, belts, etc. to provide enough savings to justify the significant difference in engine cost, just like average users don't drive nearly enough for a few hundred a year in fuel/oil change savings to justify the cost of the battery.

As I said earlier, that could change if engineers figure out an efficient motor and battery design that uses more conventional materials.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by acottawa

My argument all along has been with current technology, and reasonably foreseeable future costs, EVs are not scale-able to the extent they will replace ICEs. No goalposts are moving.

What time frame are you looking at? As mentioned multiple times, there are dramatic changes coming to.both costs and scale of EV production in the next five years.

[WarrenC12]

Here's a new article talking about the decline of retail gas stations, what some are doing to adapt, etc:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ele...tion-1.5468360

I think this quote sums things up nicely:

For instance, Kodak did not stubbornly refuse to make digital cameras. Instead, as digital imaging took off, the advantages the company had created with massive investments in the world's best film technology suddenly became a liability, and nimble specialists in electronics and software crowded into the digital photography space.

Experts now say something similar has happened in the automotive business, as electric engines wipe out years of competitive advantage by German carmakers in sophisticated internal combustion mechanics.

Props to Suncor and Couche-Tard for seeing the future and taking steps in the right direction. Some of the others will no doubt be left behind.

[Truenorth00]

The arguments are hilarious. We're gonna run out of lithium! Yeah. Right after we run out of oil....

And the assumes that solid state batteries and tech to simply reduces lithium content won't pan out. I don't buy that one either.

And we're having this discussion as Germany hits a 23-year low in auto production on collapsing exports.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/german-c...orts-1.1369675

They say it's electrification hitting them hard. That happens when something like this happens in your export markets:



But hey, some internet random from Ottawa definitely knows more than the CEOs of the Big 3 German automakers about the headwinds facing their companies and industry.

[accord1999]

BMW, MB, Audi and Porsche all reported higher unit sales in 2019. The real headwind facing German auto production is high local costs in general, so they're moving to cheaper locations; a trend that follows other rich countries like Japan, the US, Canada, other Western European countries, etc who manufacture fewer cars today than they did 10 or 20 years ago.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Here's a new article talking about the decline of retail gas stations, what some are doing to adapt, etc:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/ele...tion-1.5468360

I think this quote sums things up nicely:



Props to Suncor and Couche-Tard for seeing the future and taking steps in the right direction. Some of the others will no doubt be left behind.

There's no saving retail gas stations. It's moronic. The best places to charge in order of preference will always be:

1) Home
2) Work
3) Place of regular concurrent activity (gym, grocery store, mall, etc)
4) Highway rest stops

Nobody wants to charge at a freaking Esso or Petro-Canada. Who are the morons who lead these companies? Europe's oil giants have at least understood they need to either get into the charging network business or build these chargers where it makes sense (Highway rest stops). Or fully converting gas stations to EV charging parks:

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/07...station-in-uk/

Though I'd argue that even this is pointless. In the long run, gas stations have at least 15-20 years of solid business. After that, the real estate will be valuable in many cases. Think of how many gas stations are at intersections where they could be converted to neighbourhood retail.

[OldDartmouthMark]

So, are we saying that there are no worries regarding price/supply/environmental impacts for the elements required to build current-tech lithium batteries if faced with massively increasing demands?

There are some that consider it an issue. I don't have any inside info into the battery/mining industry, so all I have to go by is info found on the internet (for better or for worse), but it does sound like a legitimate concern point.

This article is about a year and a half old, but has some good info:
The spiralling environmental cost of our lithium battery addiction

Demand for lithium is increasing exponentially, and it doubled in price between 2016 and 2018. According to consultancy Cairn Energy Research Advisors, the lithium ion industry is expected to grow from 100 gigawatt hours (GWh) of annual production in 2017, to almost 800 GWhs in 2027.

William Adams, head of research at Metal Bulletin, says the current spike in demand can be traced back to 2015, when the Chinese government announced a huge push towards electric vehicles in its 13th Five Year Plan. That has led to a massive rise in the number of projects to extract lithium, and there are “hundreds more in the pipeline,” says Adams.

But there’s a problem. As the world scrambles to replace fossil fuels with clean energy, the environmental impact of finding all the lithium required to enable that transformation could become a serious issue in its own right. “One of the biggest environmental problems caused by our endless hunger for the latest and smartest devices is a growing mineral crisis, particularly those needed to make our batteries,” says Christina Valimaki an analyst at Elsevier.

In South America, the biggest problem is water. The continent’s Lithium Triangle, which covers parts of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, holds more than half the world’s supply of the metal beneath its otherworldly salt flats. It’s also one of the driest places on earth. That’s a real issue, because to extract lithium, miners start by drilling a hole in the salt flats and pumping salty, mineral-rich brine to the surface.

Then they leave it to evaporate for months at a time, first creating a mixture of manganese, potassium, borax and lithium salts which is then filtered and placed into another evaporation pool, and so on. After between 12 and 18 months, the mixture has been filtered enough that lithium carbonate – white gold – can be extracted.

It’s a relatively cheap and effective process, but it uses a lot of water – approximately 500,000 gallons per tonne of lithium. In Chile’s Salar de Atacama, mining activities consumed 65 per cent of the region’s water. That is having a big impact on local farmers – who grow quinoa and herd llamas – in an area where some communities already have to get water driven in from elsewhere.

But lithium may not be the most problematic ingredient of modern rechargeable batteries. It is relatively abundant, and could in theory be generated from seawater in future, albeit through a very energy-intensive process.

Two other key ingredients, cobalt and nickel, are more in danger of creating a bottleneck in the move towards electric vehicles, and at a potentially huge environmental cost. Cobalt is found in huge quantities right across the Democratic Republic of Congo and central Africa, and hardly anywhere else. The price has quadrupled in the last two years.

Another article from last summer:

Battery supply shortages may be linked to rising demand for nickel

From 6 days ago:
As electric car sales soar, the industry faces a cobalt crisis

Looks like lithium demand has subsided since the first article was published:

Look at lithium. At the moment, we have enough – too much, in fact. While soaring prices of the core material in lithium-ion batteries sparked a mining rush in Australia, Argentina and Chile and – which between them provided 91 per cent of supply in 2017, says Harper – a slump in demand caused by a weak automotive market and a reduction in grants for buying such cars in China has slowed the pace of mining and processing plant construction.

...but still with concerns:

China is globally the biggest player in lithium, no surprise as it's also making and buying the most EVs. "This is starting to worry a lot of OEMs," says Leyland, pointing to the trade war spurred on by a tweet from US President Donald Trump. "People don't want a single point of failure in their supply chain – you can't really invest billions of dollars and then overnight, one tweet means an export tariff makes your business unsustainable."

Cobalt still an issue, but with possibilities for alternatives:

Unlike lithium, much of cobalt is found in one place, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or DRC – 59 per cent of the world's supply is sourced from that country. Among many concerns, there's evidence of widespread use of child labour, and last year tech companies were sued for their alleged role in the death and injury of children. Then there’s the harsh economics: cobalt is also one of the most expensive metals in EV batteries, costing between $33,000 and $35,000 per tonne. And we simply may not have enough supply. Research from MIT suggests there's not enough ability to mine and process the material to meet demand. The research suggests that demand could reach 430,000 tonnes in the next decade, which is 1.6 times today's capacity.

One solution could be finding an alternative to cobalt in EV batteries. One major Chinese manufacturer, Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL), already produces batteries that use phosphate instead of nickel-cobalt-aluminum or nickel-manganese-cobalt combinations. That's attracted the attention of Tesla, with reports suggesting the company is seeking to add lithium iron phosphate batteries to its options.

Back in 2018, Tesla CEO Elon Musk pledged that his company would stop using cobalt in the next generation of batteries, but the deal in China is likely for shorter-range cars, as phosphate batteries don't have the same capacity as cobalt ones. We're going to need better batteries, or fix cobalt, if EV sales are going to continue to soar.

Like anything that is new-ish, it has to go through a development cycle, whereby new methods and materials are researched and brought into production if they prove to be a practical alternative. Then price, performance, durability, etc. improvements will serve to make the products more attractive to consumers. It's always the way it goes, and has long been driven almost purely by price and availability. I think that where we are headed is a case where environmental concerns and politics may play increasing roles, and these are not set targets - they can change in a very short time.

So... I am a little skeptical of some of the extremely optimistic claims that we are going to be hit by an onslaught of EVs in a very short time. I think it is coming - nobody is really questioning that - but for high volume, sustainable production to occur, there are still a number of obstacles that have to be overcome. Of course this is mostly IMHO, and you know what they say about opinions...

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

So, are we saying that there are no worries regarding price/supply/environmental impacts for the elements required to build current-tech lithium batteries if faced with massively increasing demands?

Plenty of worries. Just not enough for anybody to do anything about it. Did concerns about toxic waste or pollution or ancillary resource demand stop the development of any other resource or growth of sector? Moreover, pollution from mining is local/regional. The impact of fossil fuels is global. So nobody really gives a shit about these crocodile tears and the concern trolling over lithium extraction impacts because it doesn't impact most of the population.


People didn't stop buying cars and putting distilled fermented dino juice in them when they found out about global warming. They won't care about the impact of lithium/nickel/cobalt/(other element you want to concern troll about) extraction either.

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

I think it is coming - nobody is really questioning that ...

Have you missed the last few pages? Plenty of folks questioning whether it is truly coming.

[canucklehead2]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's no saving retail gas stations. It's moronic. The best places to charge in order of preference will always be:

1) Home
2) Work
3) Place of regular concurrent activity (gym, grocery store, mall, etc)
4) Highway rest stops

Nobody wants to charge at a freaking Esso or Petro-Canada. Who are the morons who lead these companies? Europe's oil giants have at least understood they need to either get into the charging network business or build these chargers where it makes sense (Highway rest stops). Or fully converting gas stations to EV charging parks:

https://cleantechnica.com/2020/02/07...station-in-uk/

Though I'd argue that even this is pointless. In the long run, gas stations have at least 15-20 years of solid business. After that, the real estate will be valuable in many cases. Think of how many gas stations are at intersections where they could be converted to neighbourhood retail.

Gas stations will be like those country stations you see along undivided highways. More Post Office, 7-11, ATM services with gas on offer. Or if you're in the trashy sticks like me, it's usually a gas station* (priced 15c over market value) but REALLY a liquor store...

[canucklehead2]

And yes L1 charging is still the cheapest and easiest solution since cars still sit "idle" 95% of the time. Even if it takes 12 hours to recharge who cares? Very few people are going to max out their battery every day. If I take my own driving patterns into consideration, I do about 3 km a day 6 days a week. On the weekend I do a round trip into Edmonton that takes about 300 KM which would require on the go charging. I pass about 20 potential L2/L3 charge stations on the way if gas stations/road side turnouts offered just 1 outlet. So how plausible are BEV's even here out in the sticks of Western Alberta? Very...

[urbandreamer]

Charging stations could become the new stage coach stops: brothels, shops and gambling dens spring up beside them.

[canucklehead2]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Charging stations could become the new stage coach stops: brothels, shops and gambling dens spring up beside them.

More likely fast food joints but yeah. If you think how cheap the juice is and how long people tend to stay at a spot (apx 30 min). I could easily see McJuice being a thing or Timmy's BEVerage charge network...

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

What time frame are you looking at? As mentioned multiple times, there are dramatic changes coming to.both costs and scale of EV production in the next five years.

No, there is dramatic speculation and prediction about changes coming to both costs and production over the next 5 years. If you look at actual models arriving at actual dealerships it is a totally different story.

There was all kinds of hype for the ID.3, for example, at the concept stage. But they aren't event launching the lower cost version this year, the higher cost version they did start to produce in November has all kinds of technical problems and the deliveries will probably be delayed, and the version with the larger battery only seats four, despite allegedly competing in a market segment that is used by families (outside of North America). The pre-orders are decent, but in line with current demand for EVs (2-3% market share in most jurisdictions) and yet somehow VW is supposed to ramp up production to the millions in two years?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The pre-orders are decent, but in line with current demand for EVs (2-3% market share in most jurisdictions) and yet somehow VW is supposed to ramp up production to the millions in two years?

Where did you get millions in 2 years? They said a million in 5 years. You're strawmanning now.

[OldDartmouthMark]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Plenty of worries. Just not enough for anybody to do anything about it. Did concerns about toxic waste or pollution or ancillary resource demand stop the development of any other resource or growth of sector?

That's in the past, though. I am thinking (perhaps erroneously) that in today's more environmentally aware (i.e. Greta, millennial outrage about the problems created by previous generations, lip service to climate change by some governments, etc.) society that it would be harder to put into mass production things that might create new/more environmental issues.

Perhaps, though, they will be able to justify it as a net improvement over burning defunct dinosaurs...

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Moreover, pollution from mining is local/regional. The impact of fossil fuels is global. So nobody really gives a shit about these crocodile tears and the concern trolling over lithium extraction impacts because it doesn't impact most of the population.

I was thinking more from a supply point of view, such as Cobalt being sourced mainly from the DRC, and the ensuing child labour issues, etc. But maybe you're right in that nobody gives a shit (and that perhaps much of the outrage crowd are really hypocrites in accepting such situations as long as it achieves goals that they want to happen), in which case it's a non-issue except for those who suffer the immediate impacts of it.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

People didn't stop buying cars and putting distilled fermented dino juice in them when they found out about global warming. They won't care about the impact of lithium/nickel/cobalt/(other element you want to concern troll about) extraction either.

I think your view on this a little narrow. IC engines have been in common use in automobiles for well over a century, and all the infrastructure, supply chains, vehicle manufacturing, etc. has been in place and in use by almost 100% of the users during this time. It would be unreasonable to expect our entire society to suddenly stop using what amounts to the only method available to 99% of us all of a sudden - this includes methods of transporting goods and transit, which we all depend on to live, and not just pleasure driving. In fact, the concept of efficient, usable electric vehicles would not have even been possible 20-ish years ago, as the advent of electronics/computing technology that has come to the mainstream in the last couple of decades is what has made EVs a viable option.

So, now most of us believe there is a climate issue that has to be dealt with, and the technology is being developed, so the next step will be to deal with the practicalities that will be necessary to implement this technology on a mass scale. It doesn't happen overnight.

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Have you missed the last few pages? Plenty of folks questioning whether it is truly coming.

I skimmed them over, but there was too much speculation and inflammatory comments to be bothered to take it all too seriously. Plus... it's only the opinions of a few skyscraper forum members that you're talking about. I'm talking about the mass of people in the 'real world'...

[canucklehead2]

Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark

That's in the past, though. I am thinking (perhaps erroneously) that in today's more environmentally aware (i.e. Greta, millennial outrage about the problems created by previous generations, lip service to climate change by some governments, etc.) society that it would be harder to put into mass production things that might create new/more environmental issues.

Perhaps, though, they will be able to justify it as a net improvement over burning defunct dinosaurs...



I was thinking more from a supply point of view, such as Cobalt being sourced mainly from the DRC, and the ensuing child labour issues, etc. But maybe you're right in that nobody gives a shit (and that perhaps much of the outrage crowd are really hypocrites in accepting such situations as long as it achieves goals that they want to happen), in which case it's a non-issue except for those who suffer the immediate impacts of it.



I think your view on this a little narrow. IC engines have been in common use in automobiles for well over a century, and all the infrastructure, supply chains, vehicle manufacturing, etc. has been in place and in use by almost 100% of the users during this time. It would be unreasonable to expect our entire society to suddenly stop using what amounts to the only method available to 99% of us all of a sudden - this includes methods of transporting goods and transit, which we all depend on to live, and not just pleasure driving. In fact, the concept of efficient, usable electric vehicles would not have even been possible 20-ish years ago, as the advent of electronics/computing technology that has come to the mainstream in the last couple of decades is what has made EVs a viable option.

So, now most of us believe there is a climate issue that has to be dealt with, and the technology is being developed, so the next step will be to deal with the practicalities that will be necessary to implement this technology on a mass scale. It doesn't happen overnight.



I skimmed them over, but there was too much speculation and inflammatory comments to be bothered to take it all too seriously. Plus... it's only the opinions of a few skyscraper forum members that you're talking about. I'm talking about the mass of people in the 'real world'...

THIS LAST PARAGRAPH SUMS UP 95% OF THE PEOPLE ON HERE...

[ssiguy]

It's obvious that we are quickly heading towards the end of the internal combustion engine which is nothing but good news. The real question is what will happen to the BIG 3 and will they still be around in 40 years?

Most of you are far too young to remember the days when imports were nearly non-existent. You always had BMW, MB, Volkswagan, Volvo, and Saab but their impact was marginal and up until the 1970 the BIG 3 enjoyed 92% of the car and truck market. The "Asian Invasion" didn't start til the mid-1970s with the energy crisis and now just 40 years later, they nearly completely dominate the car market. Plymouth, Mercury, AMC, Saab, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, and Saturn are now just distant memories. Chyrsler no longer produces cars and neither does Buick and Ford is now down to just the Mustang as it's Lincolns are also being phased out. Next year Dodge will phase out it's last car the Charger and Chrysler will be officially dead as it's last remaining vehicle, the Pacifica Minivan is in it's last year of production. Chevy has seen it's offerings cut in half and there is talk that it may soon get out of the car business altogether possibly including Cadillac.

This leaves our BIG 3 that once owned the car market completely vacant from it leaving only trucks and SUVs. Of course people will say that the BIG 3 will always be able to sell their trucks and SUVs but that is exactly what they said in the 1970s when Toyota, Datsun {Nissan}, and Honda first came on the market and they were laughed at and proclaimed as being nothing more than a fad due to the energy crisis and they would soon fade away.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Where did you get millions in 2 years? They said a million in 5 years. You're strawmanning now.

https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/v...roduction-id3/