Live data from Hacker News

Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

ark-invest.com

11–20 of 54 posts

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#11

This argument avoids the issue of battery depreciation as well as the fact that if you took the battery out of the car it's value goes to the scrap value.

For the cost of a new battery, you essentially get a car that performs just as good as the day it rolled off the assembly line. And since most tend to come with collision avoidance ability, more EV's might outlive their first battery without any accidents.

Quality ICE cars are pretty trivial to run a long time. I drive a 2003 Honda SUV, which just hit 230,000 miles. I've probably put an average of $500 annual repairs for the last 6-7 years. Mostly drivetrain stuff that wears out like CV joints, sway bars, etc.

If you buy a electric car, you're not doing it to save money. The optimal ROI remains a 12-24 month old car with a certificatation program that you keep for 8-10 years. I'd rather do that and have $30k in the bank than futz with electric cars and unknown service lives.

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#12

This argument avoids the issue of battery depreciation as well as the fact that if you took the battery out of the car it's value goes to the scrap value.

Come again? Its value goes to (value of 10 yr old Tesla - value of used battery). This is much higher than scrap value.

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#13

This is a terrible analysis. First of all, it assumes that the cost of a kWh of battery remains at today's high value. If battery costs are falling rapidly (and they are), then the value of a used battery pack will be driven down as inexpensive new packs come on the market. Second, it ignores the fact that 10-year-old packs will have a substantially higher rate of catastrophic failure than new packs, and if reliabili…

I agree it's terrible; even from TFA's opening paragraph:

> if electric utilities were to pay $15,000 per battery, the battery alone in a 10-year-old Tesla would retain more value than an entire vehicle powered by an internal combustion engine (ICE).

a) why would a utility pay that much ($2.2/cell) for a bunch of heavily-used 18650s when you can buy lightly-used 18650s on eBay today cheaper?

b) if you look up used 2007 Mercedes S550 for sale in the US, you'll see plenty that sell for $15k+.

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#14

This is a terrible analysis. First of all, it assumes that the cost of a kWh of battery remains at today's high value. If battery costs are falling rapidly (and they are), then the value of a used battery pack will be driven down as inexpensive new packs come on the market. Second, it ignores the fact that 10-year-old packs will have a substantially higher rate of catastrophic failure than new packs, and if reliabili…

$4k sounds like a market failure, and probably Chrysler Fiat mismanaging the project. They treat the 500e with utter contempt.

If there's 18 kWh of the 24 kWh left, that's just $222/kWh. That would be a fantastic battery system for an off the grid home.

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#15
I am of the opinion that the EV market is going to be held back until we have standard battery packs of known price, quality, and warranty. There's no good reason that this can't be taken on by some standards body. ANSI? Milspec? Please, somebody!

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#16

I am of the opinion that the EV market is going to be held back until we have standard battery packs of known price, quality, and warranty. There's no good reason that this can't be taken on by some standards body. ANSI? Milspec? Please, somebody!

I think that there's still a need for significant exploration of the design space. What type of standard are you suggesting? Size? Connection? And how is that holding back anything at the moment?

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the cost of a new battery, you essentially get a car that performs just as good as the day it rolled off the assembly line. And since most tend to come with collision avoidance ability, more EV's might outlive their first battery without any accidents.

That's a specious argument. Most gasoline powered cars today will be performing as good as new at 100k miles with minimal attention beyond regular oil changes and a new set of spark plugs -- certainly, you don't need a complete motor replacement that early in. Likewise, any car with 100k miles, EV or not, will have a pretty worn interior, need a new suspension, be showing wear on its paint, have very out of date elec…

> Pontiac Aztek

Mother of god. That looks like US version of Fiat Multipla. Which somehow got a cult following for its utility value.

Re: Residual Value: Electric Batteries vs. Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles

#20

Do the batteries retain so much of their value because energy density (J/kg) of batteries hasn't improved for a long time? If a battery new tech comes out that is sufficiently energy dense (and is mass produced), these old batteries won't have much value except as scrap. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/602245/why-we-still-dont-...

You don't need particularly high density for storing your roof solar. Price is a lot more important, many people still use lead-acid for this purpose.
Post reply on HN