Electric Vehicles

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by mariojas

Well... but you could argue that charging stations will be mostly for far commutes, while regular daily charging will be at home. So you don't need the same amount.

Nailed it.

When we had our Volt (RIP) that used gas and electricity, we would go to the gas station once every 4 or 5 months to top off the 8 gallon tank. And we used public charging stations maybe a couple dozen times in the 7 years we owned it. And most of those was me plugging into the chargers in front of the GM Renaissance Center and walking to Ford Field for football games. Free parking, as opposed to $40 and up. I’m a cheapskate.

With a full EV, we will obviously never go to a gas station. And with a 300 mile range (instead of 53 with Volt) we’ll only stop at public charging on trips longer than 250 miles (2-3 times a year).

[FenwickHockey65]

EVs come with a fundamental shift in refueling.



Right now with ICE cars we refuel at gas stations and drive until we need to refuel again. Could be a few days, or in my case where I rarely drive my personal vehicle, once a month.



With EVs you stop at charge stations to get enough charge to make it to your home charger to plug in overnight or until it's convenient to stop and let the vehicle charge at a public charger somewhere you're already planning to go like a grocery store or mall. But theoretically every time you leave your garage, you have a full "tank." The EV "gas station" is your house.

[KMPrenger]

Some current kinks with EV public charging that not many think about:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...-in-california

Yes, there are significantly more public charging stations than when I first got behind the wheel of my Kia Niro EV in January 2020. But there are also significantly more electric vehicles vying to use them — and still vast areas of the state without a single fast charger. Chargers are more reliable now, but still not quite good enough. In 2020, it felt like half the public chargers I tried to use weren’t working. These days, l find only about a quarter are out. This jibes with the experience of researchers who checked public fast chargers at 181 charging stations in the Bay Area last year and found that about 23% weren’t functional.

When I chose an electrical vehicle, I knew that meant an extra 30 minutes in travel time for each charging stop during a road trip. But I did not count on the time wasted by having to, for example, backtrack to another station or one out of my way because the charging station on my route was not working.

I did not count on having to wait 60 minutes to charge because the fast charger is not charging very fast today. Or having to spend the wait time baking in the sun because the charging station on the side of a hot freeway has no shade. Honestly, who thought that was a good idea? I didn’t count on having to download a half-dozen apps because each charger company has its own.

[KMPrenger]

BEVs are not THE answer. THE answer (to the quickest cut on our carbon footprint) is a vast acceptance of BEVs, hybrids, and e-fuels and I believe this is the answer until there is some huge killer breakthrough in battery technology.

I've never been a big Toyota fan, but their approach in letting the buyers have all the options, and each one of them has somewhere between a potential 50 - 100% cut in tailpipe emissions is what just makes sense.

[90503]

...or just have your wife or daughter charge-up at any convenient un-manned EV station like this one, for example...

[90503]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

Some current kinks with EV public charging that not many think about:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...-in-california

That was a good article and a true picture of driving in California.

[snizzle]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

BEVs are not THE answer. THE answer (to the quickest cut on our carbon footprint) is a vast acceptance of BEVs, hybrids, and e-fuels and I believe this is the answer until there is some huge killer breakthrough in battery technology.

I've never been a big Toyota fan, but their approach in letting the buyers have all the options, and each one of them has somewhere between a potential 50 - 100% cut in tailpipe emissions is what just makes sense.

I agree, propulsion diversity. Everyone in the media is killing Toyota/Honda but it was probably the more sensible approach. Now if BEV's take over the world, GM will be well positioned, maybe more than most.

[FenwickHockey65]

I highly doubt this was some carefully calculated move on Toyota's part. I'd say it's more the fact they put all their eggs in the hybrid basket decades ago and are now way behind the curve on full EVs. It's typical modern Toyota product planning.

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

I highly doubt this was some carefully calculated move on Toyota's part. I'd say it's more the fact they put all their eggs in the hybrid basket decades ago and are now way behind the curve on full EVs. It's typical modern Toyota product planning.

And now people buy their marketing and PR hook line and sinker…..

Brilliant!

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by KMPrenger

BEVs are not THE answer. THE answer (to the quickest cut on our carbon footprint) is a vast acceptance of BEVs, hybrids, and e-fuels and I believe this is the answer until there is some huge killer breakthrough in battery technology.

I've never been a big Toyota fan, but their approach in letting the buyers have all the options, and each one of them has somewhere between a potential 50 - 100% cut in tailpipe emissions is what just makes sense.

Originally Posted by snizzle

I agree, propulsion diversity. Everyone in the media is killing Toyota/Honda but it was probably the more sensible approach. Now if BEV's take over the world, GM will be well positioned, maybe more than most.

Propulsion diversity is definitely the issue. Keep in mind this swing to EV is projected to roll out over the next couple of decades. Even the most aggressive states are talking 2035. EVs are not for everybody and for the most part, ICE will still be available for most uses where an EV doesn’t work well.

The sad part is, to make room for the growing volume of EVs, some ICE vehicle models have to die. And even sadder, performance vehicles are among the first to go.

[Martinjlm]

Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65

I highly doubt this was some carefully calculated move on Toyota's part. I'd say it's more the fact they put all their eggs in the hybrid basket decades ago and are now way behind the curve on full EVs. It's typical modern Toyota product planning.

Exactly. Toyota is way ahead of everybody in hybrid vehicle technology from efficieny, performance, and cost aspects. Why would they want to sprint away from that into a technology that they are way behind in and does not fit well in their home market? In Japan, most of the population lives in accommodations that doesn’t support overnight charging. Plus, their grid is supported by imported energy sources, so increasing draw on the grid is not what Japan wants to do.

[Martinjlm]

GM is investing in a battery plant to build cells for Corvette EV. And likely Camaro EV.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news...ST_EMAIL_ID%5D

[lbls1]

Originally Posted by Martinjlm

GM is investing in a battery plant to build cells for Corvette EV. And likely Camaro EV.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news...ST_EMAIL_ID%5D

^So you are saying Camaro will be back as an EV?

[snizzle]

A pivot from Ultium pouch cells already or is this just a diversification of formats?