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

The guide to real-world EV battery health

geotab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 106 posts

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#31

Post by cogman10 »

hdgvhicv wrote: post #21
cogman10 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bike > walk == public transit > used EV > new EV > used ICE > new ICE That's pretty much the order of "greenness" in personal transport. New EVs will pay off their added carbon footprint in roughly 1 or 2 years in most locations. The ultimate determining factor of how fast that is the energy mix of your local power generation. The only time it'd probably be better to continue using an ICE is if that ICE is a moped or…

My small car does 3,000 miles a year, or 300 litres of petrol a year, or about 1 ton of co2 a year. How many co2 tons are generated in making a new Nissan leaf?

From an old forum post in 2013, the best I can find is about 15 tons.

I suspect it's much lower than that number now-a-days. Primarily because the energy going into batteries production will both use less power and likely comes from greener power sources.

If nissan is to be believed, since then they've cut the CO2 emissions from production by 40%. So maybe in the range of 9T?

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#32

Post by conception »

dangus wrote: post #15
nritchie wrote: post #9

Hopefully, in coming years, we will see more practically designed EVs that are more affordable. A practical car doesn't need neck-snapping acceleration, every bell-and-whistle and room for a family of six with a dog. I'd like to believe that as batteries cost drop, the incentive to justify the extra cost will drop. Then we can get back to "just basic transportation" rather than a luxury product for the rich. While $3…

At this point most EVs are exactly the way you describe and Tesla is an outlier. Look at Hyundai/Kia’s lineup. The Niro, EV6, and EV9 are essentially the three major segments of American car preferences. They aren’t particularly fast or exotic. They don’t really cost a whole lot more to buy/own than alternatives in the same segment especially on a monthly payment or buying one used, they just aren’t chosen at a high…

I always drive my EV6 in eco mode because normal and sport feel dangerously fast. I think my 0-60 in sport mode is 4 seconds?

The Niro however is spot on.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#33

Post by zdragnar »

closewith wrote: post #11
cogman10 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bike > walk == public transit > used EV > new EV > used ICE > new ICE That's pretty much the order of "greenness" in personal transport. New EVs will pay off their added carbon footprint in roughly 1 or 2 years in most locations. The ultimate determining factor of how fast that is the energy mix of your local power generation. The only time it'd probably be better to continue using an ICE is if that ICE is a moped or…

Those must be US estimates involving huge mileage, because - taking your existing ICE car's production emissions as an already sunk cost - replacing an existing ICE with a new EV would over a decade of driving the average EU mileage (~10k km) before reaching emissions parity. It takes 2-4 years of that mileage alone for a new EV to reach lifetime emissions parity with a new ICE in the EU (which I know is longer than…

I've now heard three different carbon payback estimates for an EV in the last week, and one year is by far the most optimistic of the lot.

My wife might be able to do it with the amount she commutes, but for me, working from home, it's utterly laughable.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#34

Post by Eisenstein »

criley2 wrote: post #10
anonu wrote: post #5

> How long do electric car batteries last? The article never answers the question. But if you assume 70% end-of-life threshold with 2.3% loss per year - then we're looking at 13 years.

Why is 70% a end of life threshold? Considering that most major models are sold with configurations where the entry level begins under 70% compared to the "Long Range" model, clearly 70% is a perfectly fine level of battery for some users. I myself have a 11 year old Nissan Leaf with pretty significant battery degradation (the guessometer says 70 mi range but I wouldn't count on more than 35-40) and it's fine for pro…

Battery degradation is non-linear, and when it reaches a certain point of degradation it can be become unstable. This has lead to 80% being the traditionally considered point for EOL of a Li-Ion pack. However, this is a rule of thumb and the data is evolving with the technology.

"When the battery degrades to a certain point, for instance, if a battery can only retain 80% of its initial capacity,9, 10, 11 the battery should be retired to ensure the safety and reliability of the battery-powered systems."

Xiaosong Hu, Le Xu, Xianke Lin, Michael Pecht, Battery Lifetime Prognostics, Joule, Volume 4, Issue 2, 2020, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S254243511...

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#35

Post by graemep »

cogman10 wrote: post #7
Etheryte wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While buying an EV is a greener choice than buying an ICE, a better option still is to use the vehicle you already have for as long as reasonable. This also overlooks the fact that EVs are prohibitively expensive for the vast majority of the population. It isn't the case that people aren't buying them because of preference. Nearly everyone would buy a car that's cheaper to run and maintain if they could afford it.

Bike > walk == public transit > used EV > new EV > used ICE > new ICE That's pretty much the order of "greenness" in personal transport. New EVs will pay off their added carbon footprint in roughly 1 or 2 years in most locations. The ultimate determining factor of how fast that is the energy mix of your local power generation. The only time it'd probably be better to continue using an ICE is if that ICE is a moped or…

How is biking better than walking?

New EV vs used ICE will depend on how much you drive and in what conditions. I would guess what I do (in the UK) is uncommon in the US but it must be possible but working from home plus living in a town rather than a city means I only do low single digit thousands of miles a year and that almost entirely on clear roads.

People in much of the UK commute by public transport and use their cars lightly (e.g. for shopping on the weekend, trips, etc).

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#36

Post by tbrownaw »

nritchie wrote: post #9

Hopefully, in coming years, we will see more practically designed EVs that are more affordable. A practical car doesn't need neck-snapping acceleration, every bell-and-whistle and room for a family of six with a dog. I'd like to believe that as batteries cost drop, the incentive to justify the extra cost will drop. Then we can get back to "just basic transportation" rather than a luxury product for the rich. While $3…

> doesn't need neck-snapping acceleration

I thought this was mostly* a side-effect of electric motors inherently behaving differently than combustion motors.

* Not that it can't be deliberately turned off since everything goes through a computer.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#37

Post by fortran77 »

cogman10 wrote: post #7
Etheryte wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While buying an EV is a greener choice than buying an ICE, a better option still is to use the vehicle you already have for as long as reasonable. This also overlooks the fact that EVs are prohibitively expensive for the vast majority of the population. It isn't the case that people aren't buying them because of preference. Nearly everyone would buy a car that's cheaper to run and maintain if they could afford it.

Bike > walk == public transit > used EV > new EV > used ICE > new ICE That's pretty much the order of "greenness" in personal transport. New EVs will pay off their added carbon footprint in roughly 1 or 2 years in most locations. The ultimate determining factor of how fast that is the energy mix of your local power generation. The only time it'd probably be better to continue using an ICE is if that ICE is a moped or…

How on earth is Bike > Walk? Walk is > Bike.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#38

Post by sgt »

boplicity wrote: post #18
nritchie wrote: post #9

Hopefully, in coming years, we will see more practically designed EVs that are more affordable. A practical car doesn't need neck-snapping acceleration, every bell-and-whistle and room for a family of six with a dog. I'd like to believe that as batteries cost drop, the incentive to justify the extra cost will drop. Then we can get back to "just basic transportation" rather than a luxury product for the rich. While $3…

Affordable EVs exist and are widely available in some countries. They're effectively banned in North America, though.

Have you seen the BYD Dolphins? Pretty nifty.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#39

Post by closewith »

cogman10 wrote: post #22
closewith wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those must be US estimates involving huge mileage, because - taking your existing ICE car's production emissions as an already sunk cost - replacing an existing ICE with a new EV would over a decade of driving the average EU mileage (~10k km) before reaching emissions parity. It takes 2-4 years of that mileage alone for a new EV to reach lifetime emissions parity with a new ICE in the EU (which I know is longer than…

People keep their cars for longer than 2 to 4 years and an EV sold in 2 to 4 years will likely be driven by someone else. Which is why I put a used EV as being better for the environment vs a new one. But both will be better for the environment in their lifetime than keeping a used ICE on the road. It's more economical to keep your current car until it starts seeing major mechanical issues. However, environmentally a…

> However, environmentally an EV will (almost) always beat an ICE, the sooner you get one the better. Especially in a place like the EU where you can get even more environmentally friendly EVs due to the lower amounts of driving.

This is simply not true. A new EV will not reach emissions parity with a used ICE car in its average useful lifetime (12.5 years).

This isn't close or controversial, so I wonder what the basis for your mistaken belief otherwise is? Not even EV companies make this claim.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#40

Post by closewith »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #26
closewith wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those must be US estimates involving huge mileage, because - taking your existing ICE car's production emissions as an already sunk cost - replacing an existing ICE with a new EV would over a decade of driving the average EU mileage (~10k km) before reaching emissions parity. It takes 2-4 years of that mileage alone for a new EV to reach lifetime emissions parity with a new ICE in the EU (which I know is longer than…

Surely the composition of one’s local power grid factors in? There are areas where the share of renewables is much higher than the average.

It does, but single digit percentages.
Post reply on HN