Why get an EV?

Open for any sort of non-technical discussion regarding EVs
Squiggles
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed, 22 Apr 2009, 03:19
Real Name: Neil
Location: Newcastle NSW

Why get an EV?

Post by Squiggles »

Just to help the biofuels industry along, in 2003 the Australian government decided to introduce a 38 cent per litre duty on bio diesel production. What a surprise that was.....
User avatar
Thalass
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun, 12 Aug 2007, 07:29
Real Name: Ben Rypstra
Location: Perth, WA, AU

Why get an EV?

Post by Thalass »

I think running a car (or, rather, an on-board genset) on WVO or WVO-derived biodiesel is good. At least you're getting some use out of something that'd only get turfed anyway.
I'll drive an electric vehicle one day.
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Ok, lets get a few facts straight here! Conspiracy theories are not really helpful.

1) The Australian Government will permit the importation of EV vehicles. EV buses trucks and vans have been imported, ADR'd and registered for road usage in Australia. Vectrix import an EV. The only restrictions are these vehicles, just like ICE's must be ADR compliant. If the EV is to be offered for sale it must also comply with the state safety registration requirements. No problem for Smith, Tesla etc.. but Reva would need an entire safety rebuild.

2) Who killed the EV1? The consumers, very few people wanted to own one certainly not enough to justify a production run. Car makers exist to make a profit, if not like every business they will fail. No conspiracy in that! Vectrix failed because of poor management, but also because no enough people wanted to buy the product. Vectrix never sold more than 1500 bike per year, and need a production run of 30,000 to survive. No conspiracy, just the product was not good enough to attract enough buyers!

3) Hybrids are an excellent stepping stone to get the public used to a safe, reliable, affordable, EV experience. The EV purist who condemns hy-brids is not advancing the EV cause in the eyes of the only people who can bring about change; the consumer!

4) Biodiesel is an interesting hobbyist pursuit! Nothing more! Except for a possible use as a maritime bunker oil replacement, it has no real mass transport fuel future as the production feedstock supply is economically and logistically impractical.

Forget con piracies, the only thing slowing the adoption of EV's on a mass scale is battery/storage development, not oil companies, evil governments, cartels etc.
Goombi
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun, 10 Aug 2008, 17:59
Real Name: Eugen
Location: Gympie

Why get an EV?

Post by Goombi »

Hybrids yes but the makers are getting smarter less electricity more motor power same subsidy--- Do you believe that the insulations scams are unique-- ha ha
The australan hybrid actually don't need batteries-- all it need is a Hybrid sticker it will cost 20K less and with 1800cc motor will be just another Corolla and to think that our master spender Rudd has given them 40 Million dollars to try to bring in a revolutionery vehicle-- Japanese are known to have a very subtle smile--- can you see it?
Squiggles
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed, 22 Apr 2009, 03:19
Real Name: Neil
Location: Newcastle NSW

Why get an EV?

Post by Squiggles »

Apparently Marco considers Caltex to be a hobbyist Image
User avatar
acmotor
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu, 26 Apr 2007, 03:30
Real Name: Tuarn
Location: Perth,Australia

Why get an EV?

Post by acmotor »

Hey marco ... agreed, 1 and 4 state the obvious.

But 2 and 3 ???? well all I can say is that you are entitled to be a victim of the media and vehicle manufaturers manipulation of the market.
IMHO and just as entitled to it !!
P.S. I don't think that one of the EV1 leasees wanted to give the vehicles back ! The rest of the population never even had a chance.
Read : don't show anyone else or they will want one and we'll be in trouble !

History shows market research fails if you don't actually offer the product you are researching.... i.e. EVs !!!!!
iMiEV MY12     110,230km in pure Electric and loving it !
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Squiggles wrote: Apparently Marco considers Caltex to be a hobbyist Image


Ok, tell me how many Caltex service stations can you buy biodiesel from in 2010 (not the 2008 website)? Even Caltex fleet service delivery service is only 2% biodiesel mix, not the 20% originally promised.

Sigh, ACmotor, have you ever seen a EV1, in the flesh? If you had you wouldn't think that it was either desirable or practical. GM spent more than a billion dollars on building the EV1, do you imagine that if this vehicle was going to be a success,they would kill it? Oh, I forgot! Of course, thats right! It was a conspiracy, not the simple fact that this impractical, unpleasant little vehicle could not compete in large enough sales volume with more desirable ICE products once the fuel crisis ebbed, price of petrol dropped and the State of California changed it's draconian environmental policies in line with the rest of the US?

The EV1 is like Vectrix, a really good idea, until you are asked to buy one. I didn't say no one wanted an EV1, but nowhere near enough buyers to justify the cost of production.

I am not even talking about the nightmare of servicing these vehicles etc..

Vectrix raised over $800 million dollars to sell 2400 units world-wide! Do the maths,over $330000 per unit! Would you by a $300k Cicatrix?

In todays terms and EV1 would have to sell more than 12 million units at $60,000 each to just break even. This is simply not possible. No one would permit such a ridiculous investment for such a ridiculous vehicle!

Even GM isn't that stupid. (nearly, but not quite)

Goombi
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun, 10 Aug 2008, 17:59
Real Name: Eugen
Location: Gympie

Why get an EV?

Post by Goombi »

Conclusion: Build your own EV and no one will catch you in price and with reasonabler expectation of performance you have reasonable EV life expectancy of 10 years. Use and Build your EV for what it was designed for
Runabout- shopping basket and taking kids to school.
Think -- and make your own EV Don't wait for Automakers They are talking about EV's but in the mean time they want you to buy ICE car..
Squiggles
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed, 22 Apr 2009, 03:19
Real Name: Neil
Location: Newcastle NSW

Why get an EV?

Post by Squiggles »

marcopolo wrote: Ok, tell me how many Caltex service stations can you buy biodiesel from in 2010 (not the 2008 website)? Even Caltex fleet service delivery service is only 2% biodiesel mix, not the 20% originally promised.
Sorry, but are you saying Caltex are or are not supplying biodiesel?
Even at a miserly 2% mix it is hardly a hobby!!
The Caltex 2010 website claims they supply B5 and B20 but I suppose that could be a typo error or something put there by the CIA without Caltex knowing to cause confusion and mass hysteria among the environmentalist populous.
User avatar
acmotor
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu, 26 Apr 2007, 03:30
Real Name: Tuarn
Location: Perth,Australia

Why get an EV?

Post by acmotor »

marcopolo wrote: I didn't say no one wanted an EV1, but nowhere near enough buyers to justify the cost of production.


Well my point stands soooooo solidly and the simple fact is your reasoning is out the door ! IMHO

Why ? THERE WERE NO BUYERS FOR THE EV1   it was never sold, just leased !!!!!
Please don't kid me that that was a "market survey" Image
GM and others were scared of implications of what they had created.

Back then or right here, now, today, I'd love and EV1.

While on that point, IF I had spent 1bn$ on a development I wouldn't crush it despite the public plea to spare the creation unless I had something to hide or a glimpse of the future I needed to stamp out.
iMiEV MY12     110,230km in pure Electric and loving it !
Squiggles
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed, 22 Apr 2009, 03:19
Real Name: Neil
Location: Newcastle NSW

Why get an EV?

Post by Squiggles »

acmotor wrote:   

While on that point, IF I had spent 1bn$ on a development I wouldn't crush it


Yes, that thought had occurred to me, what is the best way to recoup a 1bn$ investment....let me see....destroy all the production. Now that makes a hell of a lot of sense, not even the wackiest economist could come up with that one! At the very least you would sell off the 1500 testers and get some money back. What possible logical reason would there be for destroying them? Bloody hell a huge amount of the expense is in tooling and they didn't even use that.
The mere fact that they were lease only makes me suspicious. Then top that off by allowing a university to preserve one only after rendering it undrivable??? Even ford didn't destroy all the Edsels!!
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Squiggles wrote:
acmotor wrote:   

While on that point, IF I had spent 1bn$ on a development I wouldn't crush it


Yes, that thought had occurred to me, what is the best way to recoup a 1bn$ investment....let me see....destroy all the production. Now that makes a hell of a lot of sense, not even the wackiest economist could come up with that one! At the very least you would sell off the 1500 testers and get some money back. What possible logical reason would there be for destroying them? Bloody hell a huge amount of the expense is in tooling and they didn't even use that.
The mere fact that they were lease only makes me suspicious. Then top that off by allowing a university to preserve one only after rendering it undrivable??? Even ford didn't destroy all the Edsels!!


Boy, it's hard to dispose of a popular conspiracy theory with just commonsense and logic!! The EV1 was exactly that an experiment. The Vehicle was leased so that GM retained ownership.

Now here's the bit you have to consider. If GM sold the vehicle, in US law, GM would be obliged to warranty the vehicle both in a contractual period and inherent warranty. This would include providing parts and service anywhere in the US. (not just the test Zone of Central California.) GM would have to provide insurance, (no company would cover EV1 at a reasonable rate). A special battery was produced, GM would be obliged to keep up a totally unprofitable battery supply. EV1 performed very poorly in hot conditions, just one of numerous defects. These defects would potentially be the subject of years of litigation. etc..etc..

Most of these liabilities continue, no matter how many times the vehicle changes hands.

Gm couldn't simply sell the vehicle without warranty, since in the US no contract can be drawn contrary to Statue. The State of California granted these vehicle registration, dependant upon GM proprietorship, it made no provision for private registration.

As these vehicles aged, any charging problems could be GM's problem. etc.. etc.. The decision to scrap the EV1 was made by the corporations lawyers. Far from recouping a piddling amount of money from any sales, GM could have incurred vast potential liabilities .

The dies and tooling of any model rapidly become obsolete and valueless once the model is discontinued. GM would also have to consider the Tax write-off provisions. In hindsight, GM should probably have formed a separate EV1 corporation and simply Chapter Seven'd the whole thing!

This is the problem with films like "who killed the electric Car", the producers are not interested in rational explanations, no one would buy a ticket! Instead, they rely upon sensationalism and preaching to the converted. This tabloid method of journalism ignores the complications and relies on the prejudice of the audience to gain creditability

The EV1 died because it was a poor vehicle. It could not find a market if it was produced today.      
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Squiggles wrote:
marcopolo wrote: Ok, tell me how many Caltex service stations can you buy biodiesel from in 2010 (not the 2008 website)? Even Caltex fleet service delivery service is only 2% biodiesel mix, not the 20% originally promised.
Sorry, but are you saying Caltex are or are not supplying biodiesel?
Even at a miserly 2% mix it is hardly a hobby!!
The Caltex 2010 website claims they supply B5 and B20 but I suppose that could be a typo error or something put there by the CIA without Caltex knowing to cause confusion and mass hysteria among the environmentalist populous.


No, not a typo, just the website is not updated. The only really serious biodiesel retailer was SAFF, who have largely disappeared. Australian biodiesel production is still commercially used by the the SA railways, etc.., but in reality Caltex just advertise 2% biodiesel as a PR gimmick.
User avatar
acmotor
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu, 26 Apr 2007, 03:30
Real Name: Tuarn
Location: Perth,Australia

Why get an EV?

Post by acmotor »

But there you go... the EV1 was not crushed because of common sense and logic. That's exactly how I read your excuses !

It is so easy to "justify" a poor action by sighting fear and legal action as to why you made a non common sense choice.

The USA, the land of he free ! until you have to make a real choice. Then the vested interests move in to tell you what you can do.

Marco, IMHO you have been sold the "rational explanation for everything" line. But it is fun to talk over the fence !

You say the EV1 died because it was a poor vehicle. What experience of the EV1 have you to make that call ?
I for one believe it was killed.

BTW, on hybrids. Consider the prius. It has made some remarkable developments but hold there. If the hybrid was such a fanastic path to tread then why has each model increased the power and capacity of the ICE and not the battery pack or addresed the plug in requirement ? Look at the servicing nightmare (a point you raised yourself) and still you can buy non hybrids that use less fuel. If the prius was becomming more EV I'd have more time for it.
I don't plan to revisit all the issues raised on the forum re hybrids... thats a reading job for you.


Image
iMiEV MY12     110,230km in pure Electric and loving it !
Squiggles
Senior Member
Posts: 742
Joined: Wed, 22 Apr 2009, 03:19
Real Name: Neil
Location: Newcastle NSW

Why get an EV?

Post by Squiggles »

acmotor wrote: IMHO you have been sold the "rational explanation for everything" line.


The same rational that says there is no evil in the world, that everyone is good and pure and large corporations would never try to exert their influence to their own advantage. And of course Sol Trujillo was a good honest man.
Goombi
Senior Member
Posts: 532
Joined: Sun, 10 Aug 2008, 17:59
Real Name: Eugen
Location: Gympie

Why get an EV?

Post by Goombi »

Perhaps everyone like to read what our gov does with the money they say will spend as ellection promise


Image
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

acmotor wrote: It is so easy to "justify" a poor action by sighting fear and legal action as to why you made a non common sense choice.

Marco, IMHO you have been sold the "rational explanation for everything" line. But it is fun to talk over the fence !

You say the EV1 died because it was a poor vehicle. What experience of the EV1 have you to make that call ?I for one believe it was killed.


And fortunately you live in Australia, where you are fully entitled to hold and express your views, no matter how accurate or inaccurate. How fortunate that you don't reside in the PRC and express views that the PRC government finds incompatible with 'correct thinking'? Hmmm..Free Tibet,anyone..?

My belief that the EV1 was a poor vehicle with no chance of market acceptance, is based on three reasons

1) All similar vehicles have failed. 2)The EV1 was designed to maximise the technical aspects of the product not passenger useage or requirements. As a result the vehicles inbuilt technical restrictions ensured that only a very small number of enthusiasts could contemplate buying such a vehicle. Far too small a market to justify an economic production run. 3) The example of Vectrix.

Now, if you can put aside your bias for a moment, and imagine yourself as an investor of other peoples money. I come to you with a plan to invest over a billion dollars in a project very people will accept and can never make money, what would you do? You see, if the EV1 had real potential, other car makers would have pursued the market segment. But no one, not even the PRC, bothered, until the technology became far more advanced. No conspiracy theory, just logic.

Not all great ideas succeed. In 1956 Ford was advised that the increasing US road toll was causing a huge demand for safety features. This praiseworthy and moral policy resulted in a huge drop in sales and almost no sales of the padded dash, seat belts, 'lifeguard' safety featured model. Road Safety it was discovered, was actually a turn-off for buyers. Ford had to wait another 20 years for safety to become an issue with motorists.

Was this a conspiracy? Or just a good idea, ahead of its time?       
BTW, on hybrids. Consider the prius. It has made some remarkable developments but hold there. If the hybrid was such a fanastic path to tread then why has each model increased the power and capacity of the ICE and not the battery pack or addresed the plug in requirement ? Look at the servicing nightmare (a point you raised yourself) and still you can buy non hybrids that use less fuel. If the prius was becomming more EV I'd have more time for it.


Here we agree, although Toyota has pursued the Hybrid concept with dedication and shrewd marketing, other makers have cynically adopted the technology as a 'green gimmick'. The concept of a V12 Ferrari hybrid or a 375 bhp Porsche 'hybrid' is obviously not an attempt to build an EV. Still, despite the obvious hypocrisy, you would have to admit that in the eyes of Joe Public these manufacturers, (albeit inadvertently) help make Ev technology more familiar?

An interesting Hybrid will be the Peugeot diesel/electric plug in hybrid. this is getting closer to an reduced emission vehicle. Especially if it ran on pure Biodiesel, and you used renewable electricity.

User avatar
Thalass
Senior Member
Posts: 741
Joined: Sun, 12 Aug 2007, 07:29
Real Name: Ben Rypstra
Location: Perth, WA, AU

Why get an EV?

Post by Thalass »

There is a blog linked in this forum written in the early 00's by a guy who had an EV1 for a weekend (or a week, or so), in which he details the hassles he had to put up with in driving the EV1. Namely: Planning his route sensibly for opportunity charging and ensuring the hotels he stayed at had power points in the car park. That's about it.

Even if the EV1 wasn't a sale-able product (I personally don't think they looked very good, and lead-acid batteries are a poor choice - though they did move to nimh later on), GM didn't just kill that model and putter along working on the problem. They killed the entire tech base. Deleted their files, dispersed the employees, banned anyone from reviving the few cars that remained. That is what pisses people off. If you would set aside your bias, you would see this.
I'll drive an electric vehicle one day.
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Thalass wrote: They killed the entire tech base. Deleted their files, dispersed the employees, banned anyone from reviving the few cars that remained. That is what pisses people off. If you would set aside your bias, you would see this.


GM is a business. In it's judgement the EV1 was a failed product. A product that for many years had no real chance of success. Why would GM continue the expense of retaining staff to "putter around"?

In view of the direction that the automobile industry has taken, the action to abandon EV research may have been less than visionary, but hardly sinister.

The problem has always been that battery systems were inadequate. This is not really something for which GM can be held responsible. The most you could accuse GM management of, is a lack of vision, but not some kind of weird conspiracy!

GM is not responsible for producing morally suitable products to fit in with your ethical standards! GM's only obligation is to produce products that sell, make money and fulfil the needs of their customers at a profit to shareholders. If they fail to do so, (which they eventually did)the market will punish them by purchasing a competitors products. This is the nature of a free enterprise system.

When governments interfere with this system, the result is never a superior product but a Trabant!

The history of the automotive industry is littered with wonderful ideas that just didn't make it. The Tucker car inspired years of conspiracy theorists and dedicated passionate supporters, but the truth is that Tucker simply lacked the logistical ability to mass produce and market his vehicle. Mass manufacture and merchandising is far more complicated than armchair theorists can comprehend. Advanced Engineering is only about 15% of the logistics of a successful enterprise.

Look at it from GM's point of view at the time of cancelling the EV1. What sort of people were 'pissed off" ? A few oddball EV enthusiasts and environmental freaks. These people do not buy expensive GM products. They drive old VW's or small foreign cars. Not a market worth bothering about. So having taken the decision to close down the division, the resources were allocated elsewhere within GM. For accounting and legal purposes, the product was eliminated. There was probably those among the GM executive who were delighted to see the end of the EV1, which used resources better utilised on their own pet engineering projects, racing engines,expanded marketing, advertising budget, etc..

As I say, history will reveal that EV technology was worth pursuing. But who was to know back then? What about all the money wasted producing a hydrogen fuel cell? Or gas turbine cars. Do you think that Rover kept the the gas turbine staff 'puttering around'?

There is just no evidence to support the existence of a more sinister conspiracy theory. I am not naive as to some of the appallingly unethical decisions made by major corporations, but in this instance the facts simply don't support a conspiracy. Especially in the absence of any evidence of a creditable conspiracy.

     




Nevilleh
Senior Member
Posts: 773
Joined: Thu, 15 Jan 2009, 18:09
Real Name: Neville Harlick
Location: Tauranga NZ

Why get an EV?

Post by Nevilleh »

EVs are bloody hard work!

The general public is not interested in them as such. All they want is cheap, reliable transport that goes when and where they want, preferably without costing too much. Its only the enthusiasts (such as the people on here!) who are fans of EVs. Probably the few people who thought the EV1 was "good" fall into this category too.

I have been importing and selling electric scooters (EVT from Taiwan) for a few years now and they are not easy to sell! People never cease telling me "but I can buy a Nifty Fifty for $2000, why should I pay $2500 for an electric one?"

You can't win with those people. And unfortunately, the "Greenies" who think they are marvelous haven't got any money anyway. Or else they are so mean they won't buy one, they think they can make their own cheaper.

The pure electric car will never achieve great acceptance until it can do what a petrol/oil driven one can and that means I don't have to think ahead when I want to use it. I just jump in, turn the key and off I go, secure in the thought that when my "gas" gauge reads low, I can pull into a "Service Station" (what a misnomer THAT is) and fill 'er up.
The only way I can see that happening with EVs is for a "standard" battery pack to be invented that is interchangeable. Something like a tray in the bottom of the car. You just pull in, put your credit card in the slot and a device slides your old tray out and slides a new one in. The old one is then charged, ready for the next customer. Might need a stack of trays in the charging station so that there is always a "full" one ready.

Might take a while for such a scheme to come together, but how long did it take for gas stations to be invented and then start to appear everywhere? I believe that in the early days of cars, most people carried around a few 4 or 5 gallon drums which they would fill up so they could refuel when they needed to.

Until then, electric cars remain in the "fringe" area, supported by a relatively small number of enthusiasts and with manufacturers paying lip service to the whole thing, but with not very much real commitment. I daresay that if Mitsubishi were to hang the company's future on the imev or whatever its called, they wouldn't be in business very long!
User avatar
coulomb
Site Admin
Posts: 4522
Joined: Thu, 22 Jan 2009, 20:32
Real Name: Mike Van Emmerik
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Why get an EV?

Post by coulomb »

Nevilleh wrote: I have been importing and selling electric scooters (EVT from Taiwan) for a few years now and they are not easy to sell! People never cease telling me "but I can buy a Nifty Fifty for $2000, why should I pay $2500 for an electric one?"

Yes, sadly it seems that the almighty dollar is the most important signal for people to change their habits. They'll do it if there is a dollar in it for them.

Well, as the global economy recovers slowly, that price signal may return (maybe not for scooters, though, sorry Neville!):

Image

From http://www.oilprices.com.au/oil-price/oil-price-chart/.

Edit: forgot to make my point: the oil price, at just over US$80 per barrel, is close to the point where it took off towards the recent peak. I'd say it won't climb as fast this time, since the economy is hardly booming, but it looks like petrol prices will start to get uncomfortable again soon.
Last edited by coulomb on Mon, 08 Mar 2010, 04:15, edited 1 time in total.
Nissan Leaf 2012 with new battery May 2019.
5650 W solar, 2xPIP-4048MS inverters, 16 kWh battery.
1.4 kW solar with 1.2 kW Latronics inverter and FIT.
160 W solar, 2.5 kWh 24 V battery for lights.
Patching PIP-4048/5048 inverter-chargers.
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

Nevilleh wrote: EVs are bloody hard work!

The general public is not interested in them as such. All they want is cheap, reliable transport that goes when and where they want, preferably without costing too much. Its only the enthusiasts (such as the people on here!) who are fans of EVs. Probably the few people who thought the EV1 was "good" fall into this category too.

I have been importing and selling electric scooters (EVT from Taiwan) for a few years now and they are not easy to sell! People never cease telling me "but I can buy a Nifty Fifty for $2000, why should I pay $2500 for an electric one?"

You can't win with those people. And unfortunately, the "Greenies" who think they are marvelous haven't got any money anyway. Or else they are so mean they won't buy one, they think they can make their own cheaper.

The pure electric car will never achieve great acceptance until it can do what a petrol/oil driven one can and that means I don't have to think ahead when I want to use it. I just jump in, turn the key and off I go, secure in the thought that when my "gas" gauge reads low, I can pull into a "Service Station" (what a misnomer THAT is) and fill 'er up.
The only way I can see that happening with EVs is for a "standard" battery pack to be invented that is interchangeable. Something like a tray in the bottom of the car. You just pull in, put your credit card in the slot and a device slides your old tray out and slides a new one in. The old one is then charged, ready for the next customer. Might need a stack of trays in the charging station so that there is always a "full" one ready.

Might take a while for such a scheme to come together, but how long did it take for gas stations to be invented and then start to appear everywhere? I believe that in the early days of cars, most people carried around a few 4 or 5 gallon drums which they would fill up so they could refuel when they needed to.

Until then, electric cars remain in the "fringe" area, supported by a relatively small number of enthusiasts and with manufacturers paying lip service to the whole thing, but with not very much real commitment. I daresay that if Mitsubishi were to hang the company's future on the imev or whatever its called, they wouldn't be in business very long!


Well done, a very accurate and articulate assessment!

The battery swap concept is the idea behind 'Better Place'. However, careful examination of the logistic and rapidly improving battery, (energy storage, ultra capacitor etc) technology assisted by zero emission range extender systems, is more feasible in the long run. Widespread usage of EV transport is starting to appear in the commercial vehicle sector.

Companies such as Smith/Ford are enjoying success in with a range of commercial EV's in the UK. The acceptance level commercially, is economically based and the driver is not involved in the purchasing decision.
User avatar
acmotor
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu, 26 Apr 2007, 03:30
Real Name: Tuarn
Location: Perth,Australia

Why get an EV?

Post by acmotor »

Yep GM is a business, a failed business. They went the wrong direction with the hummer and history has proved that (you cited history !) (they even needed a few wars to keep the sales up and secure the fuel for them)

I see your point of view marco, but your blind faith in the commercial world is what gives us the very coal fired power stations you complained about. I hope you realise that.

The power companies say coal is the cheapest fuel and so they will use it (thinking only of commercial bottom lines and shareholders ... that was your justification for the decisions others call poor)

Governments have a far more important role than you credit them with.
Even the little things like seatbelts, crash helmets, fire extinguishers, emission control, ADRs etc are but a few items that the commercial world would possibly never get around to if left to their own devices. As you say, some things just don't sell vehicles, but the public benefit from them none the less.

Reducing CO2 emissions is another big area that the commercial world would probably never think it economic or trendy (well they haven't so far !) without government direction. (and an ETS was not the right stick)

Hey, I do applaud your wish for EVs to be better all round, no question there. But would you have bought a model T or stuck with your horse ! We need the early experiments to be on the road so the natural development of the technology can take place. Crushing the evidence simple does nothing but cover up, no matter what the excuses.

Keep in mind the the EV1's main competitor, the Toyota RAV4 EV was 'sold' and many still drive around ! The Gen I prius probably attracted your scorn, but at least it went on through millions to the Gen III.
I can't see the shareholder driven crushing from Toyota.

As has been said before, 'only in the USA' !

Image
iMiEV MY12     110,230km in pure Electric and loving it !
marcopolo
Groupie
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat, 27 Feb 2010, 20:57

Why get an EV?

Post by marcopolo »

acmotor wrote: I see your point of view marco, but your blind faith in the commercial world is what gives us the very coal fired power stations you complained about. I hope you realise that.

The power companies say coal is the cheapest fuel and so they will use it (thinking only of commercial bottom lines and shareholders ... that was your justification for the decisions others call poor)

Governments have a far more important role than you credit them with.
Even the little things like seatbelts, crash helmets, fire extinguishers, emission control, ADRs etc are but a few items that the commercial world would possibly never get around to if left to their own devices. As you say, some things just don't sell vehicles, but the public benefit from them none the less.

Reducing CO2 emissions is another big area that the commercial world would probably never think it economic or trendy (well they haven't so far !) without government direction. (and an ETS was not the right stick)

Hey, I do applaud your wish for EVs to be better all round, no question there. But would you have bought a model T or stuck with your horse ! We need the early experiments to be on the road so the natural development of the technology can take place. Crushing the evidence simple does nothing but cover up, no matter what the excuses.

Keep in mind the the EV1's main competitor, the Toyota RAV4 EV was 'sold' and many still drive around ! The Gen I prius probably attracted your scorn, but at least it went on through millions to the Gen III.
I can't see the shareholder driven crushing from Toyota.

As has been said before, 'only in the USA' !


Governments have a very important 'Regulatory' duty. This is different from ownership, control or censorship of free enterprise.

There is no comparison between the RAV4 and the EV1. The RAV4 was a standard production glider with some EV power components largely available from either the Prius, or existing component suppliers. The much earlier designed EV1 (Impact)was a unique orphan. Incompatible with any other vehicle and liable to generate disastrous litigation. Toyota intended to continue with Hybrid production and could support the RAV4.

GM did not believe that the EV1 could ever be adapted to a hybrid (trials were failures)or achieve commercial success. During its brief history the EV1 displayed a series of disastrous technical faults including fires (one completely consuming the Vehicle). Rightly or wrongly, GM's lawyers insisted that, apart from the deactivated EV1's sent to universities and museums, the only safe way was to crush the vehicle. This decision was endorsed by the Clinton administration. (yes' Al Gore!) and that sealed the EV1 fate.

The EV1 was also unlucky to be born at a time when several different automotive power system were in competing development. Toyota's very conservative approach to produce luxury hybrids from popular models paid off and GM's radical two-seater ZEV EV1 did not.

A fairer and more accurate description of the decisions made by GM's Management would be that of a corporation riven with internal power struggles, and paranoid at being the subject of the sort of class litigation which had proved so disastrous to GM in the 1970's and '80's. The Model 'T' was not created in days of consumer litigation or it would never have sold one unit!

No conspiracy, just uninspired GM management.

Part of the reason that EV's are being produced in increasing numbers in India and the PRC is they don't have to comply with our strict ADR's or consumer legislation. I was listening to a prominent green politician extolling the virtues of the Indian built ZEV Reva. When questioned as to the safety aspects of the REVA, he dismissed these concerns as part of the price for progress!

Well, yes, I can understand that thinking! Given time and practical experience, these makers will improve to be able to market vehicles equal to our ADR's. But could you imagine Western automaker attempting that sort of pioneer development?

Our system of advanced safety and consumer litigation has killed the spirit of adventurous experimental development, or at least made it incredibly expensive. In the PRC however, no problems! No one complains! If they do, no one listens! (or is permitted to publish in the state controlled media).

User avatar
acmotor
Senior Member
Posts: 3607
Joined: Thu, 26 Apr 2007, 03:30
Real Name: Tuarn
Location: Perth,Australia

Why get an EV?

Post by acmotor »

Good back pedal re governments ! Image
It was the Californian government that called for EVs and lead to the likes of the EV1 and RAV4.

BTW, I dread a world run by exxon. There is a compromise !

Also noted that your line has drifted from the "good commercial practice excuse" first offered to the truth of poor GM management and the EV1 being a victim as much as anything else.

Good point re the conversion vs ground up. So the imiev will fail as well ? History will tell.

That raises a point that many have called for. Just produce a common model in basic EV form with today's EV parts and put it to the market. i.e. a conversion similar to the better ones that are done in back yards. (for the die hard enthusiasts and rock stars !)
No excuses now... so why is it not done (well other than tesla) ? Because the vehicle industry is dead scared of the market interest. (that is a statement , not a question) OK, I'm getting the idea you will make an excuse for that !

We are in agreement about ADRs and the REVA. My very point about government's role in the public's interest. I'm glad you picked up on my point !

Also agreed, China is not perfect on a number of fronts. But then neither is the US or Australia. They all need to wear the truth without making excuses ! (unless it is for scientific research in the southern ocean Image )

Good observation that our system may now be stifling the innovation we really need. So we leave that to China and continue selling them our coal ! Image
iMiEV MY12     110,230km in pure Electric and loving it !
Post Reply