# How near are we to solving the problem of recharging electric cars? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 2, 2008, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413 "2008-12-02T22:26:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/141 "2008-12-08T17:42:32Z")
[Update on Project Better Place](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/better-place-un.html#more) for anyone interested. It doesn’t look like they are too worried about kids unplugging them. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/142 "2008-12-08T18:00:45Z")
> [@](#): > > So sight-impaired people are also deaf? Who knew? If they were deaf, then it wouldn’t matter if the cars were quiet or loud, as they wouldn’t hear them anyway. But for a sight-impaired person, the difference between a loud car and a quiet car might be the difference between a car they detect and one they don’t. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/143 "2008-12-08T18:29:54Z")
> [@Merkwurdigliebe](#): > > So we’ve got three pages of FUD from **Tuckerfan** here. Might I ask for your take on what ought to replace electric cars? You’ve found the most negative situations possible for electric vehicles. If you’re so sure they’ll fail, then what should we do? Is it “FUD” to _not_ blindly accept the promises made by people who’ve **not** deployed the technology widely yet? I’ve dealt with enough “Alpha” techonologies being deployed too soon to buy the idea that the people in charge of them have thought of all the significant problems. The automakers have poured billions into fuel cell research, because they were certain they’d be able to develop those _faster_ than they could develop practical battery technology. Now, they’re switching to batteries, because they can’t get the costs of fuel cells down to where they need them to be. This is _not_ as simple as going to the Moon, simply because people won’t tolerate the kinds of things in their daily lives that a test pilot will. Not to mention, _cost_ was a _minor_ consideration in Apollo. What good does a technology do you, if it is beyond the means of 95% of people? As I pointed out upthread, estimates have battery technology being, at best, 10 years away from where it needs to be. Its entirely possible that a breakthrough will happen _before_ that point in time, but, of course, we have no way of predicting it. The history of technology is littered with ideas that took a long time to take off, and studies have shown that the _easiest_ way for a new technology to get adopted is for it to closely match the technology it is replacing in terms of user experience. Until electric cars seem little different than conventionally powered cars, they will remain, at best, a niche item, if not a simple curiousity. > [@](#): > > It’s really bizarre to see such a “can’t-do” attitude from you about this kind of thing. If there’s ever been anything that defined America in the best of times has been it’s can-do attitude about solving our problems through technology. I think people might be a little bit more willing to not be such pansies about the initial problems than you imagine. I have **never** said it _can’t_ be done, only that it is going to take a _long_ time before it happens. Yes, it _can_ be done, but there are a _lot_ of stumbling blocks along the way, and there are aspects of the technology which I don’t think have been properly examined. I am _not_ a “nattering naysayer of negativism” on this, as I’m sure we’ll make a shift away from the ICE completely within my lifetime. I don’t know if it’ll be battery technology, fuel cells, or something else entirely. It is too early to tell. Right now, we’re at about the same point we were when cars were first developed, with a number of technologies all vying to become dominant. We don’t know exactly how, when, or what will cause the shift to what will replace the ICE. At the dawn of the 20th Century, it was a combination of seemingly unrelated factors which helped this. One was the outbreak of hoof and mouth disease in NYC. The city did two things in response to this, they sealed the watering troughs in the city, and banned horses from the city. Because Stanely Steamers hadn’t changed their designs in ages and failed to install a simple condensor on their cars so you could recapture the steam, they became utterly useless in NYC. Henry Ford was marketing his Model T at this time, and the electric starter was starting to show up on some vehicles. This killed steam cars in NYC, as well as electric cars (Why buy an electric car when for less money you could get a car which offered so much more?). Had that simple event not happened, we might have wound up with all three technologies competing against one another for a longer period of time. > [@](#): > > If we decide to go electric in a big way, for all the right reasons, then maybe people will be a little more understanding? Yeah they may bitch when one of the millions of super-cautious problems may arise, but maybe that’s better than having to kowtow to a bunch of dictators in the Middle East? I’d rather have a faulty yet privately owned transportation infrastructure, rather than one we have to borrow from the Chinese to pay the Arabs to function. When oil was at it’s peak we were spending around a trillion dollars a year on it. You _do_ realize that the US car makers (assuming they survive) are planning on having things like the batteries built in China, don’t you? Many of the electronics are made there as well, so don’t expect the adoption of the electric car to mean that we won’t be sending large amounts of US currency overseas, as we most certainly _will_. IMHO, we’re going to find that China’s a bigger concern than terrorists within a decade or two. > [@](#): > > As far as electric cars being too quiet? That’s really neither here nor there. A car going at 40 MPH while idling is just as quiet as any electric car would be. The tire noise is louder. Gasoline engines are made pretty quiet these days too. There’s serious concern amongst the blind and hard of hearing that silent cars are a big danger to people. Fortunately, this is a relatively easy matter to solve. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/144 "2008-12-08T18:34:59Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > [Update on Project Better Place](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/better-place-un.html#more) for anyone interested. It doesn’t look like they are too worried about kids unplugging them. IME, its the things you **don’t** worry about, that bite you. MS wasn’t worried about things like computer security when they released Win95, 98, and XP. It wasn’t until _after_ XP was released that they woke up to the fact that computer security was a _big_ deal, despite a number of highly qualified individuals telling them that they needed to worry about it. 95 and 98, you can understand, since when those OSs were developed, the internet wasn’t on too many people’s radar. XP, OTOH, was an entirely different matter. They should have been _much_ better prepared when they put that out. **Every** company, in **every** industry makes that sort of mistake, sooner or later. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/145 "2008-12-08T21:27:40Z")
Just to be clear, **Tuckerfan** , I passed that on without passing judgment on their judgment. That said I have not been aware of hooligans unplugging cars from the charging stations that have been extant. So I am a bit agnostic about how big of an issue that may be. Israel will go first in a big way and I know that Israeli youth are as obnoxious as any others. We’ll find that much out there. And more to the issue of clarity: when you say “estimates have battery technology being, at best, 10 years away from where it needs to be” you _are_ talking about the “where” being batteries large enough to go 300 miles plus on a single charge at a reasonable price point, yes? Because of course where exactly they need to be is an issue of some debate. One thing is clear: gas prices over the next decade are likely to be moderately high or higher, the current drop notwithstanding, unless demand stays decreased. And if the world’s economy does recover soon then few have any expectation other than a rapid rise in gas prices as demand picks back up and beyond. Battery technology is likely to continue to improve and significant decreases in price are expected with economies of scale in production alone. Minimally plug-in cars with batteries large enough to handle most daily commutes with range extenders that run of off liquid fuel (be it diesel, biodiesel, ethanol, gas, blends, or designer biofuels; be it with an ICE, a Stirling engine, or whatever) are very close to being a cost-effective option at merely moderately high gas prices and do everything that any other car can do. Those cars alone have the potential to decrease gas demand significantly. Especially if they become the vehicle of choice as emerging economies adopt the car culture (yes China, I’m talking to you.) ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/146 "2008-12-08T22:03:40Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Just to be clear, **Tuckerfan** , I passed that on without passing judgment on their judgment. That said I have not been aware of hooligans unplugging cars from the charging stations that have been extant. So I am a bit agnostic about how big of an issue that may be. Israel will go first in a big way and I know that Israeli youth are as obnoxious as any others. We’ll find that much out there. Remember the Tylenol poisonings? For decades nobody thought about sealing packages against tampering, then one idiot got the “bright idea” that he could poison lots of people by putting products on store shelves (copycat criminals soon followed) and now just about everything is sealed up. If locks _aren’t_ installed on charging stations, sooner or later people will start yanking cords just for sport. > [@](#): > > And more to the issue of clarity: when you say “estimates have battery technology being, at best, 10 years away from where it needs to be” you _are_ talking about the “where” being batteries large enough to go 300 miles plus on a single charge at a reasonable price point, yes? Because of course where exactly they need to be is an issue of some debate. This issue can be quibbled with endlessly. I’m going by what one of the ecoblogs stated in regards to Tesla. _Ideally_, the price point for the batteries would be on par with a conventional ICE, could be quickly recharged, and give a vehicle a 300 (or better) range **without** the use of expensive materials in the construction. (Note that I’m allowing for some flexibility here, the cost of things like carbon fibre could drop to that of steel/aluminum, or battery capacity could increase such that its practical to fit them a conventionally engineered car.) > [@](#): > > One thing is clear: gas prices over the next decade are likely to be moderately high or higher, the current drop notwithstanding, unless demand stays decreased. And if the world’s economy does recover soon then few have any expectation other than a rapid rise in gas prices as demand picks back up and beyond. Battery technology is likely to continue to improve and significant decreases in price are expected with economies of scale in production alone. Minimally plug-in cars with batteries large enough to handle most daily commutes with range extenders that run of off liquid fuel (be it diesel, biodiesel, ethanol, gas, blends, or designer biofuels; be it with an ICE, a Stirling engine, or whatever) are very close to being a cost-effective option at merely moderately high gas prices and do everything that any other car can do. Those cars alone have the potential to decrease gas demand significantly. Especially if they become the vehicle of choice as emerging economies adopt the car culture (yes China, I’m talking to you.) We really _don’t_ know what gas prices are going to be doing in the coming years, though I think we should bet on them being higher. Folks are pushing the development of alternative fuels pretty hard, and if the stories about thermal depolymerization are right about the costs, then we _might_ see a long term stabilization in fuel prices even if demand goes up. I would hope that under such conditions we’d continue to push for more fuel efficient vehicles at the very least. Getting China to adopt hybrid vehicle technology enmasse is going to be difficult, I think. They **don’t** have the necessary support infrastructure to deal with the complexities of hybrid vehicles, and its going to be difficult for them to build that up, while they’re building up the rest of their country. Right now, one of the big problems they’re having is that people are building **unauthorized** electrical plants (these plants have little to no pollution controls on them) and while technically illegal, nobody in China is willing to do much about it because they need the power. In that kind of environment, I can see the Chinese government not paying much attention to a factory pumping out bunches of conventionally powered vehicles for domestic consumption, instead of producing all hybrid vehicles. China was _supposed_ to running all their cars off of CNG after a certain date, but I haven’t heard any more about that, so I don’t know what’s happened with that policy. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/147 "2008-12-08T23:01:01Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > Getting China to adopt hybrid vehicle technology enmasse is going to be difficult, I think. They **don’t** have the necessary support infrastructure to deal with the complexities of hybrid vehicles, and its going to be difficult for them to build that up, while they’re building up the rest of their country If hybrid cars were more advanced, I wonder if this might actually be less of a problem precisely because there is less existing infrastructure - less to replace? ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2008, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/148 "2008-12-08T23:10:25Z")
> [@Quartz](#): > > If hybrid cars were more advanced, I wonder if this might actually be less of a problem precisely because there is less existing infrastructure - less to replace? In the case of not having entrenched things like gas stations, yes. In the case of things like parts distribution channels, trained service personnel, etc. no. ---
**Author:** ![bengangmo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/50afbb/32.png) [@bengangmo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bengangmo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2008, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/149 "2008-12-09T07:20:16Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Exactly why are they only interim solutions? Why is a vehicle that averages 250 mpg over its lifespan, has a multi-hundred mile range, and can drive for weeks on end without a recharge if it must, somehow inferior to all-electric? I’m really not getting it. At the rate of consumption we’re talking about, we could power the auto fleet with biodiesel if necessary. Fully sustainable, cheap, and can be distributed using the existing infrastructure. This sounds like a very good solution to me, and could remain the prime technology for the majority of cars for decades to come. > > Think about how many idiots run out of gas today. You see them on the side of the road all the time. Now imagine how many dead electric cars will be littering the highways when it requires planning hours ahead to make sure you have enough juice for the trip you have to make. > > And if you run your car out, what do you ? Hoof it to a gas station, come back with a can, and fill it up. What are you going to do with your all-electric car? Tow it home, I guess. Why not just “blue sky” it a bit with concurrent technologies being developed? Run out of juice - no problem, key your destination into the computer, a car that is nearby and going to the same neighbourhood stops, pugs in atuomatically and then takes over control using its own batteries and driving system to contro; your car. Unrealistic now? SUre - but in 10 or 15 years, as control systems develop, electricity for cars close to free (instead you pay a charge based on distance travelled) - then who knows? There will be heaps of developments in areas we haven’t even thought of - one thing that will be required, (an yes I am US bashing) is the removal of the current “incentives” in the US for big vehicles - start a punitive tax regime for higher capacity vehicles, CBD vehicle charging and some of the punitive systems that other countries use and see how quickly people start to switch to electric as a REAL option. The US, has a real opportunity to lead - they are both the wealthiest nation and also the most “spread out” making cars the most convenient option - it will take policy initiatives to change this, and as the US changes so will the rest of the world follow. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2008, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/150 "2008-12-09T12:25:35Z")
> [@Tuckerfan](#): > > In the case of not having entrenched things like gas stations, yes. In the case of things like parts distribution channels, trained service personnel, etc. no. Remember that the electric part of the car requires much _less_ maintenance than the ICE part, really virtually none. That’s one of the attractions of pure BEVs. I do not see why you think that building a parts and service infrastructure for EREVs or PHEV is more daunting than building one for other cars. I never heard that bit about China planning to go to all CNG but their [current plan](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/11/report-china-to.html) includes this: > [@](#): > > China will put 60,000 new-energy vehicles—including fuel-cell vehicles, hybrid-electric vehicles, and battery-electric vehicles—into trials in 11 cities over the next few years to support the development of a fuel-efficient, alternative-energy auto industry … The government to date has invested some 800 million yuan (US$117 million) in developing the EV industry. The government will provide automakers with financial assistance and preferential policies, and will also give subsidies and tax breaks to individual and corporate buyers of alternative-energy vehicles. China has large lithium reserves and some of the world’s largest battery makers (CBAK, BYD, ABAT, among others). ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2008, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/151 "2008-12-09T13:42:02Z")
> [@bengangmo](#): > > Why not just “blue sky” it a bit with concurrent technologies being developed? Run out of juice - no problem, key your destination into the computer, a car that is nearby and going to the same neighbourhood stops, pugs in atuomatically and then takes over control using its own batteries and driving system to contro; your car. Of course, you have the problem that the added load will significantly shorten the range. Then, you have to work out how to pay the person for the use of energy. Assuming, of course, that this doesn’t violate warranties, or that an electric vehicle is capable of towing. Of course, there’s always the possibility that someone could use this as a method of robbing people. > [@](#): > > Unrealistic now? SUre - but in 10 or 15 years, as control systems develop, electricity for cars close to free (instead you pay a charge based on distance travelled) - then who knows? Wonder how long it’ll be after these new computer controlled wonders appear on the roads that someone starts writing malware for them? > [@](#): > > There will be heaps of developments in areas we haven’t even thought of - one thing that will be required, (an yes I am US bashing) is the removal of the current “incentives” in the US for big vehicles - start a punitive tax regime for higher capacity vehicles, CBD vehicle charging and some of the punitive systems that other countries use and see how quickly people start to switch to electric as a REAL option. But a large vehicle _doesn’t_ have to be a fuel hog. There are a number of features which can be added for low costs, to a conventionally powered vehicle to improve fuel economy. Additionally, many of the materials used in building an electric car can be used in conventionally powered cars to boost fuel economy. A large car is _comfortable_ when you have to spend long periods of time in one. Not to mention, people like me, who have to haul large things (in my case a big, rolling toolbox) can’t exactly fit that into a small car, and shipping it via UPS or other service is expensive and time consuming. Putting everyone in small cars also transfers costs to corporations like Home Depot and Lowes, because they have to buy more trucks and hire more drivers to deliver goods that people purchase because they don’t have a pickup to haul the stuff they’ve bought back home. This raises the costs of goods for _everyone_ and makes life difficult for people who live _outside_ the delivery area. > [@](#): > > The US, has a real opportunity to lead - they are both the wealthiest nation and also the most “spread out” making cars the most convenient option - it will take policy initiatives to change this, and as the US changes so will the rest of the world follow. We have a very narrow window of opportunity. Projections have China being the largest consumer of cars within a decade or so. > [@DSeid](#): > > Remember that the electric part of the car requires much _less_ maintenance than the ICE part, really virtually none. That’s one of the attractions of pure BEVs. I do not see why you think that building a parts and service infrastructure for EREVs or PHEV is more daunting than building one for other cars. The servicing of a new ICE powered car is not exactly onerous, and much of it, is covered under the warranty. Some dealers even including oil changes in the purchase price of the car. Building infrastructure for a PHEV/BEV is more complicated because so little of it exists. Lets take a not too terribly unrealistic scenerio for a moment. Scientists have recently discovered a fungus which produces small amounts of diesel (there is also a tree which produces almost pure kerosene, BTW) and lets say that there’s a genetic engineering breakthrough which allows them to easily splice the genes for producing the fuel into other plants, say a fast growing grass. The harvesting of the grass and the extraction of the fuel can be done with conventional machinery, with a few minor modifications, if any. The resultant fuel can then be processed and delivered with existing infrastructure. If the total cost of the fuel is relatively cheap (say it compares with current fuel costs where oil is less than $50 a barrel) then there’s not much incentive to push beyond this. You have some environmental issues to put pressure on things to change, and its conceivable that demand could stress supply to the point where prices start to rise, but who knows how long that will take? With an electric car infrastructure, taking _any_ level of technology (be it ultracapacitors, current technology, or what have you), you’ve got to build recharging stations, provide power to those energy stations, train personnel, develop proceedures, sell the public on the technology, and build up the electrical grid at some point. That’s a _lot_ more work than dealing with a relatively simple fuel change for ICEs. Note that you’ll have similar problems with using an uncommon fuel like hydrogen or CNG. In those cases, however, it could be argued that they’d be _slightly_ cheaper since there is an already existing infrastructure for much of what would be needed, it would only have to be expanded. I’d imagine that a gas pump which provides CNG is cheaper than a recharging unit for an electric car. In a place like China, its a bit more daunting of a task. Lots of guys learn about engines tinkering with small engines on lawn motors and the like. This guy can then make a living repairing all kinds of conventional ICEs, since the principles remain the same. With simple tools, he can make replacement parts using whatever he happens to have handy. The vehicle may never run as well as it did when it was new, but at least it can still serve a purpose. Cuba is an excellent model of how this works, with cars from the 1950s still on the road, being powered by a variety of jerry rigged means. With a high tech electric vehicle, there’s not much the self taught mechanic can do to fix the thing. He may not even be able to bypass bad components to keep the vehicle running. This can turn an electric vehicle with a _minor_ problem into a lawn ornament (especially if its going to be operated in an area without good roads, which will put a _lot_ of wear and tear on the vehicle). Nor is this a “hypothetical” problem, as things like this have already occured. Aid agencies have shown up in a distressed area and given the locals a modern tractor built in a developed nation. Their reasons for doing this are well meant. The tractor is better than anything that could be found locally, and enables the locals to grow more food than they otherwise be able to, which allows them to sell the surplus and improve the local economy. All goes well until the tractor breaks. Then, nobody in the villiage can fix the tractor because they either lack the skills or the means to get the necessary parts. Had they been provided with a domestically produced tractor, they’d have been better off, since they could have been able to get parts for the thing when it broke. > [@](#): > > I never heard that bit about China planning to go to all CNG but their [current plan](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/11/report-china-to.html) includes this:China has large lithium reserves and some of the world’s largest battery makers (CBAK, BYD, ABAT, among others). Well, they said that somewhere around 10 years ago, so its entirely possible that they’ve abandoned the idea. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2008, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/152 "2008-12-09T13:51:49Z")
I should also add that in remote places, its often alot easier to truck fuel in, than it is to supply electricity. Sooner or later, solar cells will reach a point where its practical to put them up in remote places to provide lots of power, so that folks in those areas can have electric vehicles. We’re not there yet, and I won’t hazard a guess as to when that will happen. Until then, however, you can expect people to continue to use ICEs in those areas, because they can get the fuel cheaper and easier than they can other methods (be it by truck, or by making alcohol or other fuel). Nor is this strictly a Third World problem. In places like Alaska, large stretches of the state get their fuel delivered _by air!_ Solar cells aren’t exactly practical in place like that. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/153 "2008-12-10T01:18:31Z")
**Tuckerfan** , once again, no one, not even the most ardent BEV supporter, is trying to claim that pure BEVs are the answer for all situations. This particular location so remote as to be off-grid scenario is really a bit bizarre as an argument against the technology having wide enough usefulness as to be a meaningful part of the solution. Meanwhile Better Place keeps [chugging along.](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/better-place-jo.html#more) > [@](#): > > Better Place is joining Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd., maker of Subaru automobiles, and other Japanese carmakers in the first Ministry of Environment sponsored electric-vehicle (EV) project in Japan. Better Place, the only foreign company participating, was invited by the Japanese Ministry of Environment to build a battery exchange station for EVs and showcase the technology. > > The government’s project supports the move to sustainable transportation and includes various electric-car models and EV infrastructure in multiple cities to demonstrate feasibility. The EV project is scheduled to begin in January 2009 and last three to six months, encompassing municipalities in Kanagawa, Aichi, Osaka, and Hyogo prefectures. > > Yokohama will host the first location to demonstrate the ability to exchange a depleted EV battery for a fully charged one, a means of extending EV range under the Better Place model. The concept will be fully tested any way, my doubtfulness as to its likelihood of broad success notwithstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/154 "2008-12-10T01:27:34Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > **Tuckerfan** , once again, no one, not even the most ardent BEV supporter, is trying to claim that pure BEVs are the answer for all situations. This particular location so remote as to be off-grid scenario is really a bit bizarre as an argument against the technology having wide enough usefulness as to be a meaningful part of the solution. Its not that uncommon in places like China and India, however. _Those_ areas will be the growth areas for automobiles in the coming years, **not** the US and Europe. > [@](#): > > Meanwhile Better Place keeps [chugging along.](http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/12/better-place-jo.html#more)The concept will be fully tested any way, my doubtfulness as to its likelihood of broad success notwithstanding. [Yet even environmental types have their doubts.](http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/12/08/why-is-better-places-shai-agassi-not-being-more-straightforward/) > [@](#): > > While Agassi’s goal is worthy, some of his analysis seems flawed. For example he says that Detroit only made money on financing while losing money on selling vehicles. This is not accurate. When larger cars and trucks were still selling wel, Detroit made huge profits directly on the sales of those vehicles. It was small cars that they didn’t make a profit on. In discussing his plan for exchangeable batteries he mentions hydrogen and says, “This is not the hydrogen freeway where you need to build an entire infrastructure” This implies that electric vehicles need no infrastructure which is patently false. His entire business is predicated on that infrastructure. A network of battery exchange stations is an infrastructure. Those stations will have to be built, the equipment to do exchanges installed and batteries and chargers purchased. If Agassi wants to make the Better Place plan a reality, he needs to be less disingenuous. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/155 "2008-12-10T01:52:31Z")
Off grid entirely? Common in wide areas of China or India? I don’t think so. Oh some individual homes do not have electricity and some infrastructure would need to be created for those individuals just like it would need to be built for apartment dwellers, but there is a grid. Generating capacity needs to be created but from China’s POV any way those are domestic jobs and domestic resources (as opposed to resources from Russia or the ME). China is, for example, doubling its wind power capacity every year. And there are many cutting edge solar power companies in China as well. Distributed power generation may even actually make sense there. And the biggest growth for auto purchases in those countries are not likely in those rural districts with little electricity but in urban centers. BTW your cite doesn’t really seem to be an environmentalist expressing doubts: it is a complaint that Agassi is being bit less than completely accurate in aspects of his sales pitch. Which might be true but is no critique of the concept. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/156 "2008-12-10T02:23:47Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Off grid entirely? Common in wide areas of China or India? I don’t think so. Yes. Common. China and India are both desperately trying to keep up with the demand for electricity. In the case of China this means allowing people to build unregulated plants, because they see the economic opportunities provided by having power generation as being greater than concern for the environment. > [@](#): > > Oh some individual homes do not have electricity and some infrastructure would need to be created for those individuals just like it would need to be built for apartment dwellers, but there is a grid. [One that is _not_ unified, like it is in the US.](http://www.geni.org/globalenergy/library/national_energy_grid/china/index.shtml) > [@](#): > > A major issue for China’s electric power industry is the distribution of generation among power plants. China’s stated intention eventually is to create a unified national power grid, and to have a modern power market in which plants sell power to the grid at market-determined rates. In the short term, though, traditional arrangements still hold sway, and state-owned power plants which have government connections tend to have a higher priority than independent private plants. Additionally, some private plants with “take-or-pay” contracts, which provide for guaranteed minimum sales amounts, have had trouble getting the provincial authorities running the local grids to honor those terms. In many areas that _do_ have power, its either unreliable (available for only a few hours a day) or limited to industry and _not_ available for residential dwellings. > [@](#): > > Generating capacity needs to be created but from China’s POV any way those are domestic jobs and domestic resources (as opposed to resources from Russia or the ME). China is, for example, doubling its wind power capacity every year. And there are many cutting edge solar power companies in China as well. Distributed power generation may even actually make sense there. Right now, China’s _industrial_ demands for energy are taking priority over residential needs. Its the factory owners putting up many of the powerplants, _not_ the government, and they generally _don’t_ have to make concessions to things like supplying power for the locals to use, since folks in China are so desperate for work, they’re willing to put up with almost anything to get a job. > [@](#): > > And the biggest growth for auto purchases in those countries are not likely in those rural districts with little electricity but in urban centers. Not necessarily. China’s cities are already so crammed with cars that its difficult to drive, and simply having a vehicle in a remote part of the country can be a _powerful_ economic boost for an individual, much the same way cellphones are in some parts of the world. > [@](#): > > BTW your cite doesn’t really seem to be an environmentalist expressing doubts: it is a complaint that Agassi is being bit less than completely accurate in aspects of his sales pitch. Which might be true but is no critique of the concept. Its a critique of the concept as expressed by Agassi. If he flames out, its going to be that much harder for someone else to come along and make it work, simply because people will be so mistrustful of the idea. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/157 "2008-12-10T02:59:13Z")
[Actually](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/22/china-planning-electric-v_n_128217.html) China is investing mightily in building a charging infrastructure. > [@](#): > > China is rushing in to build its own network of electric charging stations. Xinhua, the government’s official newspaper, announced last week that the State Grid Corporation, the world’s largest electric power transmission and distribution company, is speeding up its plans to build electric car charging stations. [Many experts](http://www.reuters.com/article/GlobalEnvironment08/idUSTRE4968KL20081008) believe that EVs are very likely to predominate in China. (And India too.) > [@](#): > > The head of Johnson Controls Inc’s battery unit believes China could adopt electric cars faster than elsewhere because of its size and comparative lack of reliance on gasoline for transport. > > Alex Molinaroli, president of the Power Solutions unit, said China’s government would likely lead the way through policy to provide vehicles to the many among the country’s 1.3 billion people who now rely on bicycles and scooters. > > “The next step up from that is going to be some sort of vehicle, (but) it may not be a vehicle that would be acceptable in both Western Europe and the U.S.,” Molinaroli told the Reuters Global Environment Summit on Tuesday. > > “They can’t go everywhere on a bicycle, and they all can’t afford a $20,000 to $30,000 vehicle, but they have to move people around.” > > Molinaroli expects to see golf cart-like vehicles, which would not be allowed on U.S. roads, driven in China, where his unit has a Shanghai technical center and development deals with carmakers SAIC Motor Corp and Chery Automobile Co. > > “They’ll look a lot different, the vehicles there, but it’s going to put scale around a business much quicker there than it would in other parts of the world,” Molinaroli said, adding that India should also lead the way given its population and recent developments in its auto industry. You are correct that China does not currently have a unified grid, and that they indeed desire to have one, yet a unified grid is not a prerequisite nor even desirable. [Distributed power generation](http://www.eere.energy.gov/de/international_markets.html) may be a better fit for China after all. > [@](#): > > power generation is steadily moving into the hands of privately owned enterprises and away from organizations that are directly owned or controlled by governments. > > With traditional power generation industries in developed countries experiencing steady but unspectacular growth, attention is turning to distributed generation as a way of reducing the load on the electricity grid, increasing system efficiencies, and preparing for blackouts. In some developing countries, particularly India and China, distributed generation shows potential for double-digit expansion. This is partly because transmission losses in developing countries can be as high as 30% of the power produced, compared with roughly 10% in developed countries, making distributed power seem particularly attractive. And as to your claim that being totally off-grid is common in China, it just [isn’t so.](http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:PXeYwO8rxwwJ:www.electricitypolicy.org.uk/pubs/wp/eprg0517.pdf+china+electric+infrastructure+residential&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a) > [@](#): > > In 1979, the year when the economic reform started, there were > about 37.4% rural households still without access to electricity … In 2001, when the project was completed, the percentage of rural > households without electricity access was reduced to about 1.5% (CED, 2004). These > households normally live in remote, isolated places where it is very uneconomical to > build a transmission line. In this case, the government provides financial support to > encourage them to use renewable energy, such as micro hydropower, solar energy, wind > energy and biomass energy. They have problems keeping up with increasing demand and in quality control and regulation but you exaggerate greatly. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/158 "2008-12-10T03:28:34Z")
Also, no, it wasn’t “a critique of the concept as expressed by Agassi”; it was a critique of how Agassi expressed the concept. Quite a different thing. Which is not to say that there is not a lot to critique about his concept. As we have covered I am also a bit skeptical of its being appropriate for all but a few of the American market segments and do not see pure BEV becoming the dominant car form here any time soon. And yes, if Project Better Place flames out, then it would be very hard to get anyone else to invest that kind of money in a similar project again. It is a big bet. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/159 "2008-12-10T03:33:52Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > [Actually](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/22/china-planning-electric-v_n_128217.html) China is investing mightily in building a charging infrastructure. But as the [full article shows](http://www.ecogeek.org/content/view/2146/), they won’t have many electric cars. > [@](#): > > China hopes to bring in 10,000 fuel cell, electric and hybrid cars as well as infrastructure to power the vehicles in 10 chosen cities around the country within two years, according to the ministry of science and technology. That’s a drop in the bucket compared to the number of cars they have now, and we’ve yet to see if such a thing can work on a wide scale. > [@](#): > > [Many experts](http://www.reuters.com/article/GlobalEnvironment08/idUSTRE4968KL20081008) believe that EVs are very likely to predominate in China. (And India too.) If by “many” you mean the head of Johnson Controls, who is not exactly what one would call unbiased on the matter of electric vehicles. > [@](#): > > You are correct that China does not currently have a unified grid, and that they indeed desire to have one, yet a unified grid is not a prerequisite nor even desirable. [Distributed power generation](http://www.eere.energy.gov/de/international_markets.html) may be a better fit for China after all.And as to your claim that being totally off-grid is common in China, it just [isn’t so.](http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:PXeYwO8rxwwJ:www.electricitypolicy.org.uk/pubs/wp/eprg0517.pdf+china+electric+infrastructure+residential&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us&client=firefox-a)They have problems keeping up with increasing demand and in quality control and regulation but you exaggerate greatly. From your own cite, we get this tidbit: > [@](#): > > In 2004, 26 out of 31 provinces experienced electricity shortages. Eventually, by aggressively rationing electricity and controlling demand to prevent spikes, > [@](#): > > Experts predict that the current demand-supply imbalance will last far into 2006 (SGCC, 2004). Shortage of generating capacity is the main cause of the ongoing electricity crisis in China. According to the International Energy Agency, to meet rapidly-growing electricity demand, China needs to invest a total of nearly 2 trillion U.S. dollars in electricity infrastructure between 2001 and 2030, about one fifth of the estimated world total investment in the electricity industry during this period (Toh, 2003) I note that your cite fails to define what it means by “access to electricity.” Technically, if I have five minutes of electricity, I have “access” to it. Some would even say that if there was a power line running by your house, you have “access,” if your house _isn’t_ wired up, yet, simply because there’s a line which you can, at some point, connect up to. China’s not exactly known for their honesty when it comes to many things. ---
**Author:** ![Tuckerfan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/eada6e/32.png) [@Tuckerfan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tuckerfan)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2008, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413/160 "2008-12-10T03:37:56Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Also, no, it wasn’t “a critique of the concept as expressed by Agassi”; it was a critique of how Agassi expressed the concept. Quite a different thing. Not really. > [@](#): > > Which is not to say that there is not a lot to critique about his concept. As we have covered I am also a bit skeptical of its being appropriate for all but a few of the American market segments and do not see pure BEV becoming the dominant car form here any time soon. And yes, if Project Better Place flames out, then it would be very hard to get anyone else to invest that kind of money in a similar project again. It is a big bet. Very big. Here’s a question for you, one that I don’t know the answer to: In the case of hybrid vehicles does one _have_ operate them periodically in order to keep the batteries in order? I’ve heard an account of a guy who bought a Prius, and had to have someone start the car periodically, while he was away on a business trip. Kind of inconvenient if you have figure out who’s going to take care of your car if you’re going to be out of town for a couple of days. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-near-are-we-to-solving-the-problem-of-recharging-electric-cars/475413.md?page=9)