4 ms·

I agree it's a hedge.. but for a slightly different reason. The legacy automakers have been fighting BEVs and though they have made many announcements, they rea

I agree it's a hedge.. but for a slightly different reason. The legacy automakers have been fighting BEVs and though they have made many announcements, they really don't offer (and don't want to offer) much in the US that isn't a compliance car. They have been teasing upcoming concepts and electrification (code word for hybrid) because they are trying to prevent disruption of their (automakers, fuel suppliers, trucking, dealerships, gas stations, unions, etc) status quo. With every milestone that is being made by Tesla, Waymo, etc, they are more at risk. This is them hedging against change. "If things truly change, we'll work together and be able to catch up."

organsnyder 7y ago
I think they're reacting to what they perceive as market demand. What they often don't seem to realize is that they have the ability to alter market demand—and if they don't, their competitors will do it for them. It's the same story as Apple in its heydays (the two Jobs eras): they radically altered the markets for PCs, MP3 players, and smartphones, largely by realizing that they had the ability to do so.
- derekp7 7y ago
  The problem is that batteries are too expensive, too heavy, and they wear down eventually. Not only is there the market demand, but there is also the fears of consumer backlash if they don't (or can't) get it 150% correct. Remember the beating that GM took with diesel cars back in the 80's? Here's the items that need to be overcome: 1) For consumers that don't have a garage, they have to use public charging infrastructure. 2) For those who charge at home, if they do any extended driving they need to use public charging infrastructure 3) The current public charging infrastructure doesn't charge fast enough. For case 2, you can get by (sometimes) with charging at 150 miles in half an hour. Not acceptable for case 1. 4) Most importantly, battery wear and cost. Let's say a battery that costs 30K, for 300 miles range, lasts 10 years. Cost of a "fill up" (300 miles) is about $12.00 of electricity, and $60.00 of wear on the battery. Yes, the battery isn't totally worn down, but they are less useful for automotive use if the capacity is significantly lessened. Now the larger the battery size, you can get by with charging to 80% capacity, and discharging to about 15%. This still significantly increase the longevity, but the cost structure is such that 200 mile batteries (or lower) is all you find in "affordable" electric vehicles. So for this to really take off, I believe you need a battery capacity of 500 miles, at a cost of 15k, with charging time of 300 miles range in 15 minutes. (Tesla is there on the charging time with their one example of a "1000 mph" charger, so hopefully this will be rolled out to the wider public across more manufacturers).
  - woodandsteel 7y ago
    >The problem is that batteries are too expensive Battery costs have been dropping rapidly, %35 in the last year alone. Starting around 2023 they will be low enough that the sticker price for an EV will be about equal to a comparable ICE car. Given that EV operating costs are considerably lower, and that governments around the world are pushing EV's, sales of them are going to skyrocket. The big manufacturers have recently realized this, which is why they are switching their EV programs into high gear.

organsnyder 7y ago

I think they're reacting to what they perceive as market demand. What they often don't seem to realize is that they have the ability to alter market demand—and if they don't, their competitors will do it for them. It's the same story as Apple in its heydays (the two Jobs eras): they radically altered the markets for PCs, MP3 players, and smartphones, largely by realizing that they had the ability to do so.

derekp7 7y ago
The problem is that batteries are too expensive, too heavy, and they wear down eventually. Not only is there the market demand, but there is also the fears of consumer backlash if they don't (or can't) get it 150% correct. Remember the beating that GM took with diesel cars back in the 80's? Here's the items that need to be overcome: 1) For consumers that don't have a garage, they have to use public charging infrastructure. 2) For those who charge at home, if they do any extended driving they need to use public charging infrastructure 3) The current public charging infrastructure doesn't charge fast enough. For case 2, you can get by (sometimes) with charging at 150 miles in half an hour. Not acceptable for case 1. 4) Most importantly, battery wear and cost. Let's say a battery that costs 30K, for 300 miles range, lasts 10 years. Cost of a "fill up" (300 miles) is about $12.00 of electricity, and $60.00 of wear on the battery. Yes, the battery isn't totally worn down, but they are less useful for automotive use if the capacity is significantly lessened. Now the larger the battery size, you can get by with charging to 80% capacity, and discharging to about 15%. This still significantly increase the longevity, but the cost structure is such that 200 mile batteries (or lower) is all you find in "affordable" electric vehicles. So for this to really take off, I believe you need a battery capacity of 500 miles, at a cost of 15k, with charging time of 300 miles range in 15 minutes. (Tesla is there on the charging time with their one example of a "1000 mph" charger, so hopefully this will be rolled out to the wider public across more manufacturers).
- woodandsteel 7y ago
  >The problem is that batteries are too expensive Battery costs have been dropping rapidly, %35 in the last year alone. Starting around 2023 they will be low enough that the sticker price for an EV will be about equal to a comparable ICE car. Given that EV operating costs are considerably lower, and that governments around the world are pushing EV's, sales of them are going to skyrocket. The big manufacturers have recently realized this, which is why they are switching their EV programs into high gear.