Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 328 posts

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#51

Post by londons_explore »

konschubert wrote: post #49

The only thing that tops range anxiety for me is battery degradation anxiety. I would probably be totally fine with a lower range if I know that my battery can do 100 000 cycles.

At the battery control system design stage, these two factors are mostly trade-off-able.

For example, you'll get far far more cycles out of a battery if you only charge up to 80% and discharge down to 20%. Early hybrid cars used this to an extreme - and always kept the battery between 45% and 60%. By doing that you can get 50,000 cycles necessary to recharge and discharge every time you go up and down a hill.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#52

Post by TheLoafOfBread »

curiousgal wrote: post #41

> Ctrl - F recycle > 0 matches It feels like we are trading one poison for another from a climate change perspective. Just passing down the buck.

You are correct. Nobody is recycling LFP, because there is nothing valuable to recycle.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#53

Post by iasay »

rightbyte wrote: post #47
iasay wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You miss the point. Most people don’t buy new cars. Most people buy second hand vehicles. They now risk degraded batteries and a huge incidental cost. My car cost me £5000 second hand. The cheapest EV battery replacement here is £12,500. I could write that car off twice for the price of a battery and still have enough money to go on holiday. When you buy the bottom end of the second hand EV market which is realistica…

> 128 miles of range. Which is near useless for the average user Maybe if that is your only car. As a commuter or grocery car it would be fine.

Why would you want a car that can be used only for those tasks leaving you to seek other forms of transport for leisure and family?

The main positive factor of vehicle ownership is destination and route flexibility and if you trade that away then the advantage is gone.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#54

Post by smaudet »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

This is huge. To date, Tesla has been the only non-Chinese manufacturer talking iron. LFP is often touted for being cheaper than NMC, but given growing insecurity around battery-grade nickel supplies, using the far-more-prevalent iron and phosphate isn’t just about cheaper cars. It’s about having cars to sell in the first place. With respect to range anxiety, pretty much every EV in the 200 to 300-mile range is sold…

Meanwhile, Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars are putting gasoline vehicles and electric to shame:

https://www.timesnownews.com/auto/car-news/article/toyota-mi...

Of course, you can't readily buy or charge one yet, but you don't have the battery problem (at all).

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#55

Post by influxmoment »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

This is huge. To date, Tesla has been the only non-Chinese manufacturer talking iron. LFP is often touted for being cheaper than NMC, but given growing insecurity around battery-grade nickel supplies, using the far-more-prevalent iron and phosphate isn’t just about cheaper cars. It’s about having cars to sell in the first place. With respect to range anxiety, pretty much every EV in the 200 to 300-mile range is sold…

This is a very forward thinking move for 2018. I look forward to us all driving Chinese BYD cars at this rate of innovation

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#56

Post by NickNameNick »

iasay wrote: post #39
adrianN wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Laptop batteries and EV batteries have a completely different performance profile. The data we have suggests that the battery will retain 80% of its maximum capacity for about as long as the rest of the car is expected to survive.

You miss the point. Most people don’t buy new cars. Most people buy second hand vehicles. They now risk degraded batteries and a huge incidental cost. My car cost me £5000 second hand. The cheapest EV battery replacement here is £12,500. I could write that car off twice for the price of a battery and still have enough money to go on holiday. When you buy the bottom end of the second hand EV market which is realistica…

Replacing major components of an internal combustion vehicle will frequently cost more than the car is worth.

That's usually the cause of scrapping a vehicle in places where structural rust didn't get it first.

What would it cost to replace the engine or gearbox of your car?

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#57

Post by NickNameNick »

cjdell wrote: post #40
klondike_ wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern EV design has the batteries integrated into the structural frame of the car. This is because the batteries are the heaviest part of the car, so you want them to be close to the ground and secure from impact. This also makes it very inconvenient to replace. Lots of companies (even Tesla) have attempted the replaceable battery concept but none have been able to make it work efficiently.

Would it not be significantly easier if we're using 4 or 5 independent modules instead of a giant monolith? Aren't cars routinely lifted into the air when being serviced? I understand that the structure of the car's body may be suboptimal and require extra reinforcement but if we're really serious about EV adoption and reducing battery cost then perhaps a trade-off worth making?

If you want the batteries to be removable, I suspect the extra couplings in the water coolant loop would make that problematic.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#58

Post by iasay »

NickNameNick wrote: post #56
iasay wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You miss the point. Most people don’t buy new cars. Most people buy second hand vehicles. They now risk degraded batteries and a huge incidental cost. My car cost me £5000 second hand. The cheapest EV battery replacement here is £12,500. I could write that car off twice for the price of a battery and still have enough money to go on holiday. When you buy the bottom end of the second hand EV market which is realistica…

Replacing major components of an internal combustion vehicle will frequently cost more than the car is worth. That's usually the cause of scrapping a vehicle in places where structural rust didn't get it first. What would it cost to replace the engine or gearbox of your car?

They do below a certain point yes. But at that point you just buy another one and drive it until the engine falls out. This is how most people operate.

On my vehicle an engine costs about £1275 to put a refurb in it. Gearbox about £550.

There is no rust anywhere on my 8 year old vehicle.

People run like this out of financial necessity. They don’t have enough income to run an EV.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#59

Post by snotrockets »

klondike_ wrote: post #30
cjdell wrote: post #13

I'm not sure why we aren't making EVs with small but upgradeable batteries. Like for example a $20k car with a 10kWh "good enough for now" starter battery that can be bought today. Still good enough for 90% of trips and upgradable to 50kWh with additional after market battery modules should the user decide. As simple as upgrading the RAM on an (old) laptop.

Modern EV design has the batteries integrated into the structural frame of the car. This is because the batteries are the heaviest part of the car, so you want them to be close to the ground and secure from impact. This also makes it very inconvenient to replace. Lots of companies (even Tesla) have attempted the replaceable battery concept but none have been able to make it work efficiently.

Tesla was never serious about replaceable batteries. They could get more tradeable credits for replaceable batteries, so they told everyone they’ll do that, got the credits for the cars that were supposed to have replaceable batteries, and never followed up with the actual tech.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#60

Post by snotrockets »

smaudet wrote: post #54
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

This is huge. To date, Tesla has been the only non-Chinese manufacturer talking iron. LFP is often touted for being cheaper than NMC, but given growing insecurity around battery-grade nickel supplies, using the far-more-prevalent iron and phosphate isn’t just about cheaper cars. It’s about having cars to sell in the first place. With respect to range anxiety, pretty much every EV in the 200 to 300-mile range is sold…

Meanwhile, Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars are putting gasoline vehicles and electric to shame: https://www.timesnownews.com/auto/car-news/article/toyota-mi... Of course, you can't readily buy or charge one yet, but you don't have the battery problem (at all).

There were plans in Japan for wide use of hydrogen as the fuel of the future.

Japanese car manufacturers aligned on that, but weren’t keen on building the necessary infrastructure.

You could lease a hydrogen fuel cell car in CA. There was even a lot of state incentives if you did. But very few fueling stations (iirc, only two in the whole Bay Area)

Post reply on HN