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

51–60 of 106 posts

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#51

Post by cogman10 »

graemep wrote: post #35
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…

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 th…

> How is biking better than walking?

Glad you asked.

Biking has an energy efficiency of around 99%. Very little of the effort you put into biking ends up as waste heat. Walking, on the other hand, has a much lower energy efficiency. You are putting much more effort overcoming and generating friction as you move your legs. You are also doing it for a longer period of time since you are going slower.

It's one of my favorite counterintuitive facts.

> I would guess what I do (in the UK) is uncommon in the US

And that's for sure. In almost every US city if you want to do anything, you are driving. Where I'm at, everything is at least 10mi from my home. That racks up the miles pretty quickly.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#52

Post by happyopossum »

closewith wrote: post #13
dangus wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To add to this, almost nobody statistically keeps their vehicle very long. People keeping a car for 20-30 years is extremely rare. The median length of car ownership is something like 7 years. Even if you are switching between used cars, most people are switching vehicles at some point. From what I understand even considering battery mining and using dirty electrical generation, you’re still at breakeven within a cou…

The EU average passenger car fleet age is 12.5 years. > From what I understand even considering battery mining and using dirty electrical generation, you’re still at breakeven within a couple years of driving with an EV. Only when compared to buying a new ICE, as it takes 1-2 years average mileage in the US and 2-4 years in the EU for a new EV to reach emissions parity with a new ICE. It takes well over a decade in t…

Average car age is not related to how long an individual keeps said car…

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#53

Post by happyopossum »

neogodless wrote: post #17
singinishi wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the oil and gas is killing the planet. Even the gas fumes are killing you when you fill up. The sooner the better. There are lots of low cost EVs out there, especially when you factor in there’s no maintenance.

Mostly agree but own an EV. "No" maintenance is an exaggeration and it's not necessary to make your point. My car's first set of tires were very bald at 25,000 miles. That's not unusual on new cars in general as they seem to come from the factory with low longevity tires, but it's still quite a short tire life. Yes anything in a gasoline engine is gone, and brakes get less use. But there are still maintenance items.

When discussing vehicles it’s common to separate “wear” items and “maintenance” items. Brake pads and tires are “wear” items. Replacing your engine oil every 5-7000 miles is “maintenance”.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#54

Post by cogman10 »

graemep wrote: post #50
303uru wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bike is the most efficient form of transportation, period.

Shoes have a lower environmental impact and cost than than steel, plastic, rubber tyres (which AFAIK use at least some synthetic rubber made from oil), etc. Walking does not use fuel so efficiency is not really relevant. It requires less physical extortion so is more efficient that way, but another way to phrase that is that it is less exercise.

Bikes require very little steel and the rubber tires end up lasting longer (typically) than the shoes you do.

> Walking does not use fuel so efficiency is not really relevant.

Ah, it is. You eat food, that's fuel. It's the major source of CO2 for both activities. Now, it can be insignificant. If the only food you eat is like oatmeal and beans that you grow yourself, then yeah it's going to have a non-existent impact.

However, if you have any sort of meat or imported foods, that CO2 budget can go up pretty quickly.

The actual energy for making the steel for a bike, which will outlast your children, isn't significant.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#55

Post by verelo »

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.

It’s great seeing the numbers continue to hold after a decent period of time.

We’ve noticed after 6 years out Tesla, the battery seems to charge slower than it used to, but otherwise all is well. I just love the convenience of charging at home, gas stations seem so odd and antiquated now.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#56

Post by SR2Z »

snakeboy wrote: post #28
zdragnar wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has always been true of gas vehicles as well. They're banned for not having some safety feature or otherwise complying with FMVSS or some other regularity body, not because they are "affordable".

I think it's more likely that Chinese EVs are banned in the US because they would absolutely obliterate the domestic car manufacturing industry.

To be fair, a big part of why is the magnitude of subsidies China has given its domestic EV suppliers.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#57

Post by cogman10 »

closewith wrote: post #39
cogman10 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 bas…

The payoff period for an EV is anywhere from 15,000 to 25,000mi. The moment any EV crosses that threshold, it becomes better for the environment than the ICE vehicle that you'd otherwise buy.

If your used ICE vehicle has 15 to 25,000mi in it, then yeah, replacing it with an EV today is the better choice. It's more a matter of when it will be the better choice.

This is only not true if you have very low yearly milages or a particularly efficient ICE. Which, maybe you do.

[1] https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/dec/06/carbon-dioxid...

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#58

Post by jeffbee »

happyopossum wrote: post #52
closewith wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU average passenger car fleet age is 12.5 years. > From what I understand even considering battery mining and using dirty electrical generation, you’re still at breakeven within a couple years of driving with an EV. Only when compared to buying a new ICE, as it takes 1-2 years average mileage in the US and 2-4 years in the EU for a new EV to reach emissions parity with a new ICE. It takes well over a decade in t…

Average car age is not related to how long an individual keeps said car…

The average length of ownership is a pretty warped statistic, though. It is dependent on when in the car's life cycle someone buys it. At one end of the market are new car buyers who keep them longer than average, at the other end are people who constantly buy end-of-life junkers for $500.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#59

Post by margalabargala »

tbrownaw wrote: post #36
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.

There are two different factors here.

One, as you noted, is that electric motors can apply full torque from a stop, increasing perceived acceleration.

The other, and more impactful, is that electric motor power scales with cost much more cheaply than gas motors, so vehicles will oversize their electric motors.

Re: The guide to real-world EV battery health

#60

Post by dham »

oklahomasports wrote: post #20

81% of original capacity for many cars means when driving at highway speeds you will get like 250 miles or less range per charge. Still dramatically less than gas cars.

People are so worried about the 1% of driving. 99% of the driving is in town, and in that case, it's super convenient. Yeah, you might have to stop an extra time on a road trip, so what? The car is also driving itself 99% of the trip. Plus, the kids have to pee.

If you have to drive 250 miles every day for work, or you don't have kids and can do 3 hour legs on trips without stopping, then get a gas car.

Post reply on HN