‘Unreliable’ charge points putting people off buying electric vehicles

[LLL]

Luke to the rescue!

This can easily be summarized in three points:

1. Today, and until 2020 Tesla will be the ONLY alternative to replace an ICE from a convenience perspective. Charging network works incredible well and no hazels with payments and such. Just plug in and leave the car and the uptime is close to 100%. Expensive cars and has it downsides - this we can agree on. So this is clearly not for the masses nor for everyone. At least not until Model 3 is out there if they sort the "production hell" ramp up.

2. Existing charge points in all countries are a real mess. Mix of RFID-badges, subscriptions, apps that doesn't work, charge posts that doesn't work, etc etc. They're clearly in the early stages, people working in the support are not educated about how things work, etc etc. Home charging is the only reliable option and that doesn't do it for longer commutes.

3. Ionity and E.ON will deploy 350kW charging networks cross Europe. It will be a stronger network than even Tesla.

E.ON will build 10.000 350kW capable chargers in Europe (CCS Standard):
https://electrek.co/2017/11/06/ultra-fa ... g-network/

Ionity (VW group, BMW, Daimler, Ford) Will deploy 400 charging STATIONS, with on average about 6 stalls each station across Europe before 2020
https://electrek.co/2017/11/03/ultra-fa ... olkswagen/

So it's really simple. Wait until 2020 if you think Tesla is an overpriced shitbox from America, because about year 2020 EU will have a reliable and convenient real Fastchareging network available and at the same time the Germans happen to release their EV programs from vaporware into drivable cars that customers actually can buy (thumbs up icon inserter here )

Its the cost of the Teslas that is the problem Luke.

In the UK we have to pay tax on the value of a Company car hence Tesla will not be considered by manyif any Companies.

Our tax is not just on value its on other factors as well.

Its why many of us choose to opt out of Company cars and finance our own with an enhanced payment with our salary.p from our employers.

I completely understand that Col! I think you missed my point.

This was by no means a post saying that everybody should go out and buy a Tesla - rather the opposite to be frank. The message is more of wait until 2020 when there are alternatives on the market and charging infrastructure supporting those cars.

Today it's just not convenient driving around in e.g. a Nissan Leaf or E-golf because charging is slow and a hazel with reliability when charging en route. Those cars work fine if you drive shorter daily commutes and only charge home over night. For longer trips it just doesn't work very good.

Tesla are too expensive (like I wrote) and therefore those cars are no alternatives today for most people. So wait until the next century and the options will be better both for vehicles on offer and also the fast charging networks that by then will be more widely deployed.

[SAC1]

"So wait until the next century and the options will be better both for vehicles on offer and also the fast charging networks that by then will be more widely deployed."

I think you mean decade.....but I'm not holding my breath that this will be resolved anytime soon. What's needed and not an exhaustive list -
Standardise EV plugs needed; vandal proof public charging points; enough of them to meet the demand; high capacity charging for all cars; recharging in maximum 5 minutes; enough power to service them all; lighter weight batteries etc, etc. All this may be alright for your second cat that does short trips and assuming it can be charged at home or the workplace [providing the yobs don't unplug your lead]. For a lot of people neither will apply though....then what?

Taxation and electricty prices will be ramped up to compensate for the loss of fossil fuels. EVs depreciate rapidly, maybe with the exception of Tesla -but will that change with the model 3? if they can ever can produce that many cars. The model 3 is really bland and mass volume will magnify that if / when thousands are in circulation.

[Col Lamb]

I did understand your post Luke.

My point is that the bulk fleet market is now dominated by Vauxhall with its Integra and Astra and Ford with its Mondeo and Focus, hence to compete other manufacturers need to aim for this price range.

It still is the tax regime that is a problem, we are also heavily penalised with tax for cars with an otr price of £40k and above, so Finance Directors being modern day Scrouges in character want vfm and minimal outlay on non profit orientated assets, unless it happens to be there company car when it may very well be a Tesla S.

[Deleted User 1874]

Obviously Teslas are expensive and not for the masses or company fleet buyers. But when I compared the cost of a Model X (75D) against similar cars like the XC90 T8 or new Cayenne S it actually came out considerably cheaper on a PCP deal due to Tesla offering 1.5% APR and a very generous GFMV. The difference was well over £200 per month and that's not even factoring in lower running costs. I was surprised to be honest as I was initially put off by high Tesla list prices.

[SAC1]

Auto Express article:

9 Nov, 2017 4:40pm Hugo Griffiths

Lifecycle CO2 emissions of Tesla Model S higher than those of Mitsubishi Mirage when run in the US Midwest

The Tesla Model S has been found to emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) over the course of its whole life than a petrol powered supermini in areas where electricity production is particularly reliant on high CO2-emitting sources. A new study has revealed that in such areas, the lifecycle CO2 emissions of the Model S are higher than those of a Mitsubishi Mirage with a petrol engine.

Researchers for Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) analysed whole-life CO2 emissions for the Mirage and the Model S, as well as a BMW 750 xDrive. In doing so they found that in the US Midwest, while the Model S emits 226g/km of CO2 for every kilometre it travels and the 7 Series manages 385g/km, the Mirage put out just 192g/km - though in other areas of America the Model S was found to produce fewer lifetime carbon emissions than the Mirage. 

Scientists from MIT’s Tranick Lab looked at the energy consumed and CO2 emitted during the cars’ production and end-of life recycling. They also calculated CO2 ‘use emissions’ for each model, taking into account either the petrol they would burn, or the CO2 produced by the power stations necessary to generate the Model S’ electricity.

The researchers stress they are not attempting to denigrate the positive impact electric vehicles bring: "Both hybrids and electric vehicles are better than conventional cars of similar size and horsepower, even in emissions-intensive locations”, said MIT’s Jessika Trancik.

It should also be noted the Model S’ emissions are based on it being located in the US Midwest, meaning its use emissions are tied to the CO2-intensive ways in which electricity is produced there. Professor Trancik cautioned that “if we consider the US average electricity mix, the CO2 emissions intensity of the Tesla Model S is significantly lower than that of the Mirage.”

The size of electric vehicles – together with the size of their battery packs – is seen as another important factor where environmental friendliness is concerned. Mining and processing the lithium required for lithium-ion batteries are considered high-impact undertakings from an environmental point of view.

The extra weight of larger electric vehicles – together with the increased range demanded by consumers – necessitates the fitment of larger batteries, which in turn require more lithium and cobalt.

[Deleted User 1874]

That article has been discussed to death in other forums. What it actually demonstrates is that the US Midwest grid is very dirty. So it's only a valid comparison in that specific location. Also it's obviously a pretty unfair comparison of very different vehicles. How about comparing a Leaf or Zoe against the Mirage or comparing the Model S with some other sub 3 sec 0-60 ICE? If you put in average UK grid emissions or even US average then you get a completely different result.

[LLL]

Auto Express article:

9 Nov, 2017 4:40pm Hugo Griffiths

Lifecycle CO2 emissions of Tesla Model S higher than those of Mitsubishi Mirage when run in the US Midwest

The Tesla Model S has been found to emit more carbon dioxide (CO2) over the course of its whole life than a petrol powered supermini in areas where electricity production is particularly reliant on high CO2-emitting sources. A new study has revealed that in such areas, the lifecycle CO2 emissions of the Model S are higher than those of a Mitsubishi Mirage with a petrol engine.

Researchers for Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) analysed whole-life CO2 emissions for the Mirage and the Model S, as well as a BMW 750 xDrive. In doing so they found that in the US Midwest, while the Model S emits 226g/km of CO2 for every kilometre it travels and the 7 Series manages 385g/km, the Mirage put out just 192g/km - though in other areas of America the Model S was found to produce fewer lifetime carbon emissions than the Mirage. 

Scientists from MIT’s Tranick Lab looked at the energy consumed and CO2 emitted during the cars’ production and end-of life recycling. They also calculated CO2 ‘use emissions’ for each model, taking into account either the petrol they would burn, or the CO2 produced by the power stations necessary to generate the Model S’ electricity.

The researchers stress they are not attempting to denigrate the positive impact electric vehicles bring: "Both hybrids and electric vehicles are better than conventional cars of similar size and horsepower, even in emissions-intensive locations”, said MIT’s Jessika Trancik.

It should also be noted the Model S’ emissions are based on it being located in the US Midwest, meaning its use emissions are tied to the CO2-intensive ways in which electricity is produced there. Professor Trancik cautioned that “if we consider the US average electricity mix, the CO2 emissions intensity of the Tesla Model S is significantly lower than that of the Mirage.”

The size of electric vehicles – together with the size of their battery packs – is seen as another important factor where environmental friendliness is concerned. Mining and processing the lithium required for lithium-ion batteries are considered high-impact undertakings from an environmental point of view.

The extra weight of larger electric vehicles – together with the increased range demanded by consumers – necessitates the fitment of larger batteries, which in turn require more lithium and cobalt.

The whole article just is so forced and trying to make a case. Comparing a tiny car with a big family saloon to begin with? And for being able to put that article title they had to go to the US Midwest where it is the dirtiest electricity in the country far below average. Since when has this type of comparisons started to get relevant?

Not sure what point you wanted to make here SAC1? And what does this have to do with "unreliable charge points"?

and here is the Mitsubishi Mirage btw.

[Deleted User 1874]

I haven't read the source article, but it's a very odd comparison and conclusion. I can understand comparing the BMW 750 against the Tesla S, but why not include an EV supermini against the Mirage? Makes a more interesting headline I suppose.

[Dandock]

Other relevant bits of news...

1. An increasing number of charging cars are victims of theft as thieves target the valuable copper in the cables!

2. A wireless afterfit charging mod is being developed thus eliminating the need for 1. - if an infrastructure is available?

But therein lies the problem (an old chestnut) inasmuch as much of the old world is incompatible with charging - limited parking outside houses, it being illegal to trail cables across pavements and so on... and also 1.

Neither are local governments or any other governments going to invest in a meaningful charging infrastructure when the technologies are so embryonic. This year EV, next year hydrogen et cetera!

[Col Lamb]

The MIT study is very interesting

Irrespective of the detail its the principle of using whole life emissions that are of interest to me.

Its the very question I repeatedly asked of a variety of energy equipment Companies for the last 20 years of my working life ever since I wrote a thesis on energy and environmental management and during my research I found that there were so many false and manipulated data within the engergy industry not to mention zero answers to my questions on life cycles