Simple question: What is the expected impact in electricity Demand when EV deployment exceeds 10%

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

20 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

As I pointed out "NOT for sale in U.S." or North America....there is a reason why that "NOT FOR SALE" sign is posted above the cobalt-free EV, a very good reason. Low end is the reason. Concerns about fires. That would make bad headlines in North America. 

No, that's not the reason. The reason is that Tesla does not ship cars from the Shanghai factory to the US. They are production limited and can sell every Shanghai car they can make in the Chinese market with a few left over to ship for Europe. They serve the US from the Fremont factory. They can sell every Fremont car they can make in the US and European markets. To make cheaper cars they would need to cut production of their more expensive, higher profit cars. All of  this will change when Giga Berlin and Giga Texas begin production later this year, but we do not know yet what the changes will be. We can predict that Giga Berlin will quickly ramp up to handle all European sales of Model 3 and Model Y, ending imports to Europe from Shanghai and Fremont. We can predict that Giga Texas will ramp up for Model Y, but we cannot know when Fremont+Texas will saturate the US "long range" market and cause Tesla to start building "standard range" models.

Tesla has no special concerns that I know of about fires in LFP batteries that are different than their concerns about fires in their NCM batteries. A Tesla fire in any market creates a "fire storm" of scare posts on blogs everywhere by the Tesla haters, so there is no gain in having a fire in China instead of in the US. The percentage of EVs that catch fire is small by comparison to the percentage of ICE that catch fire.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

2 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

No, that's not the reason. The reason is that Tesla does not ship cars from the Shanghai factory to the US. They are production limited and can sell every Shanghai car they can make in the Chinese market with a few left over to ship for Europe. They serve the US from the Fremont factory. They can sell every Fremont car they can make in the US and European markets. To make cheaper cars they would need to cut production of their more expensive, higher profit cars. All of  this will change when Giga Berlin and Giga Texas begin production later this year, but we do not know yet what the changes will be. We can predict that Giga Berlin will quickly ramp up to handle all European sales of Model 3 and Model Y, ending imports to Europe from Shanghai and Fremont. We can predict that Giga Texas will ramp up for Model Y, but we cannot know when Fremont+Texas will saturate the US "long range" market and cause Tesla to start building "standard range" models.

Tesla has no special concerns that I know of about fires in LFP batteries that are different than their concerns about fires in their NCM batteries. A Tesla fire in any market creates a "fire storm" of scare posts on blogs everywhere by the Tesla haters, so there is no gain in having a fire in China instead of in the US. The percentage of EVs that catch fire is small by comparison to the percentage of ICE that catch fire.

These are early days for the cobalt-free batteries, we will see what the numbers are for overheating and fires as time marches on. If the laws of physics continue to work, there should be issues with those parameters.

I don't buy the marketing scenario you outlined above as the reason for the slow march into North America for the cobalt-free batteries. There are fundamental scientific reasons to be concerned about them, and low end (or your own spun "standard range" designation) EV vehicles have less market potential in North America, and more concerns about media response to overheating and fires.

I am not a Tesla critic by nature, but a "CO2" defender. There is a difference.

Edited April 17, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

These are early days for the cobalt-free batteries, we will see what the numbers are for overheating and fires as time marches on. If the laws of physics continue to work, there should be issues with those parameters.

I don't buy the marketing scenario you outlined above as the reason for the slow march into North America for the cobalt-free batteries. There are fundamental scientific reasons to be concerned about them, and low end (or your own spun "standard range" designation) EV vehicles have less market potential in North America, and more concerns about media response to overheating and fires.

I am not a Tesla critic by nature, but a "CO2" defender. There is a difference.

"standard range" is what Tesla designates their models which have at least 200 miles range. 

[turbguy + 1,553]

Dilithium Crystals?

Where's "Mr. Fusion" when we need him the most?

 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

17 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

These are early days for the cobalt-free batteries, we will see what the numbers are for overheating and fires as time marches on. If the laws of physics continue to work, there should be issues with those parameters.

I don't buy the marketing scenario you outlined above as the reason for the slow march into North America for the cobalt-free batteries. There are fundamental scientific reasons to be concerned about them, and low end (or your own spun "standard range" designation) EV vehicles have less market potential in North America, and more concerns about media response to overheating and fires.

I am not a Tesla critic by nature, but a "CO2" defender. There is a difference.

You continue to opine that cobalt is needed to reduce the risk of fire. This is incorrect. Cobalt-free LFP batteries are less fire-prone than cobalt-containing NCM batteries, and the lack of cobalt is one of the reasons. From the Wikipedia LFP battery article:

Quote

 

One important advantage over other lithium-ion chemistries is thermal and chemical stability, which improves battery safety.^[22]LiFePO₄ is an intrinsically safer cathode material than LiCoO₂ and manganese spinel, through omission of the cobalt, with its negative temperature coefficient of resistance that can encourage thermal runaway. The P–O bond in the (PO₄)³⁻ion is stronger than the Co–O bond in the (CoO₂)⁻ ion, so that when abused (short-circuited, overheated, etc.), the oxygen atoms are released more slowly. This stabilization of the redox energies also promotes faster ion migration.^[23]As lithium migrates out of the cathode in a LiCoO₂ cell, the CoO₂ undergoes non-linear expansion that affects the structural integrity of the cell. The fully lithiated and unlithiated states of LiFePO₄ are structurally similar which means that LiFePO₄ cells are more structurally stable than LiCoO₂ cells.

No lithium remains in the cathode of a fully charged LiFePO₄ cell. (In a LiCoO₂ cell, approximately 50% remains.) LiFePO₄ is highly resilient during oxygen loss, which typically results in an exothermic reaction in other lithium cells.^[14] As a result, LiFePO₄ cells are harder to ignite in the event of mishandling (especially during charge). The LiFePO₄ battery does not decompose at high temperatures.^[22]

 

Please provide references for your assertion that batteries need cobalt for safety reasons. You or I can update the Wikipedia article if we have references.

Edited April 18, 2021 by Dan Clemmensen
suggest we update the WP article if there are refs

[turbguy + 1,553]

There are still some fools in this world...

I though the Tesla could detect the lack of hands-on-the-wheel.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/18/no-one-was-driving-in-tesla-crash-that-killed-two-men-in-spring-texas-report.html

Edited April 18, 2021 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

23 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

"standard range" is what Tesla designates their models which have at least 200 miles range. 

The new cobalt-free are lower range, marketing terms are just that, marketing terms.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

9 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

You continue to opine that cobalt is needed to reduce the risk of fire. This is incorrect. Cobalt-free LFP batteries are less fire-prone than cobalt-containing NCM batteries, and the lack of cobalt is one of the reasons. From the Wikipedia LFP battery article:

Please provide references for your assertion that batteries need cobalt for safety reasons. You or I can update the Wikipedia article if we have references.

I gave you the reference above, you should read it.

The cobalt-free batteries are only being attempted on the low end models, low performance models, shorter range models.

If there is less problem with overheating, why would that follow? Does not add up.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

There are still some fools in this world...

I though the Tesla could detect the lack of hands-on-the-wheel.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/18/no-one-was-driving-in-tesla-crash-that-killed-two-men-in-spring-texas-report.html

Are you aware this entire self driving craze is due to cell phone usage in a auto? Toyota was one of the first to deploy such tech with there crash avoidance systems...that is a fact. actually more deaths and accidents are caused by cell phone usage in a car than DUII...another fact...A world gone insane. Yet at the same time if the fine was a 1000 big ones and a mandatory 90 day therapy class things would calm down a smidge...and as always there would be those who rebel...lol

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The new cobalt-free are lower range, marketing terms are just that, marketing terms.

Sorry no, the LFP Teslas have over 200 mile range.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

32 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

I gave you the reference above, you should read it.

The cobalt-free batteries are only being attempted on the low end models, low performance models, shorter range models.

If there is less problem with overheating, why would that follow? Does not add up.

The only reference you gave that I could find which discussed cobalt and battery safety is this one:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488626/elon-musk-cobalt-electric-vehicle-battery-science

The reference states correctly that cobalt stabilizes NCA batteries and that you cannot safely reduce the percentage of cobalt any further in those batteries. This is true. Its also true for NCM batteries. But we are not talking about NCA or NCM, we are talking about LFP. LFP has no cobalt, and it is safer (i.e., less prone to thermal runaway) than either NCA or NCM. Am I looking at the correct reference? If not, please provide the correct one. It's hard to wade through a thread when it gets this long.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

The cobalt-free batteries are only being attempted on the low end models, low performance models, shorter range models.

If there is less problem with overheating, why would that follow? Does not add up.

LFP batteries are heavier and run at a lower voltage which means lower acceleration. That is why they are used in the lower performance shorter range models. But that doesn't mean that they aren't completely appropriate for mass market vehicles. A lot more people drive Corollas than Lexus.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

@Ward Smith, I meant to post this earlier. Sorry. LLNL mashes energy usage data into very pretty charts. Here is the one for California is 2018, the latest for which they have complete California data:

https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/content/assets/images/charts/Energy/Energy_2018_United-States_CA.png

The big problem with these charts is that everything is normalized to BTU, and it's a bit awkward to figure out exactly which BTU-to-KWh and BTU-to-BOE factors to use.  Petroleum provides the largest percentage of energy by far, but its also the by far the least efficient way (in terms of "rejected energy") to turn the wheels of a vehicle. This is not a dig against gasoline and diesel, it's just a fact. We have used them for over 100 years because they are incredibly effective energy sources by just about every other measure ($/mile, energy density, etc.)

You can get their charts for other states or the whole country and for other years here:

https://flowcharts.llnl.gov/commodities/energy

I have not attempted to use these charts directly to answer your original question because of the conversion factors, but they do provide some insight as you dredge through the data.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Sorry no, the LFP Teslas have over 200 mile range.

Low-end low performance, small.....not up to ICE standards.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

1 hour ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

The only reference you gave that I could find which discussed cobalt and battery safety is this one:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/6/21/17488626/elon-musk-cobalt-electric-vehicle-battery-science

The reference states correctly that cobalt stabilizes NCA batteries and that you cannot safely reduce the percentage of cobalt any further in those batteries. This is true. Its also true for NCM batteries. But we are not talking about NCA or NCM, we are talking about LFP. LFP has no cobalt, and it is safer (i.e., less prone to thermal runaway) than either NCA or NCM. Am I looking at the correct reference? If not, please provide the correct one. It's hard to wade through a thread when it gets this long.

No, he discusses the limits of lithium-ion batteries. That is what we are talking about, isn't it?

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

1 hour ago, Jay McKinsey said:

LFP batteries are heavier and run at a lower voltage which means lower acceleration. That is why they are used in the lower performance shorter range models. But that doesn't mean that they aren't completely appropriate for mass market vehicles. A lot more people drive Corollas than Lexus.

Low end is low end...not up to snuff.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Low-end low performance, small.....not up to ICE standards.

Does any Tesla have sufficient range for you to consider it not low end?

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

No, he discusses the limits of lithium-ion batteries. That is what we are talking about, isn't it?

The article discusses NCA batteries. It was written before Tesla announced the LFP batteries.

"And there’s a safety issue as well. As you decrease the amount of cobalt, you increase the amount of nickel. The cells can overheat and it can no longer effectively cool itself, which can lead to combustion."

LFP batteries have neither cobalt or nickel. LFP is a completely different lithium battery technology from NCA.

The article starts off with Elon's claim that the next gen battery would use no cobalt. That is the LFP which went into production 2 years later.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Jay McKinsey

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

@Ward Smith, We have been neglecting Plug-in Hybrid EVs (PHEVs). Do you want to count them? Purists such as myself (Kalifornia libtard greenie 😀) disdain them, but they make sense for many people. I think to answer your original question, we should generalize your question: What happens the grid when 10% of the energy currently provided by gasoline and diesel is replaced with electricity? For typical California daily usage (avg 37 mi/day), a PHEV with 32 miles battery range will realistically cover the whole day if charged twice (e.g., at home and at work) or half the day if charged once. So let's just call it 50% of the total energy for non-commercial, and say 25% for commercial, where commercial is a mix of EV and PHEV. With a 32 mile EPA battery range, we need 10% of the total battery material we needed for EVs. This allows us to displace 10% of the petroleum using the same 1.04 kWh/day per capita. It needs maybe 30% market penetration, but it uses only 30% of the battery needed by the "10% EV" scenario. PHEVs are also an ideal use case for LFP instead of NCM batteries.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Low end is low end...not up to snuff.

Tesla uses LFP in China because they are available in massive quantities in China from the big CATL factory, and because the Chinese driving public has a short average daily use. China uses LFP batteries for its EV buses. Buses can carry larger batteries and they have no need for the insane power ratios of the High-end Teslas. These are not "low end" buses. They are the best and most widely deployed EV buses in the world. China has 400,000 electric buses.:

https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-10-08/china-dominates-electric-bus-market-us-getting-board

Your characterization of the LFP Teslas as "low end" is only valid by one measure: the range is lower. The Tesla Model 3 standard range in China is still a high-performance car by every other measure, including 0-60, quarter mile time, and handling.

Edited April 19, 2021 by Dan Clemmensen
add number of chinese electric buses

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

4 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Does any Tesla have sufficient range for you to consider it not low end?

I am not into electrified vehicles.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

2 hours ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Tesla uses LFP in China because they are available in massive quantities in China from the big CATL factory, and because the Chinese driving public has a short average daily use. China uses LFP batteries for its EV buses. Buses can carry larger batteries and they have no need for the insane power ratios of the High-end Teslas. These are not "low end" buses. They are the best and most widely deployed EV buses in the world. China has 400,000 electric buses.:

https://www.pri.org/stories/2019-10-08/china-dominates-electric-bus-market-us-getting-board

Your characterization of the LFP Teslas as "low end" is only valid by one measure: the range is lower. The Tesla Model 3 standard range in China is still a high-performance car by every other measure, including 0-60, quarter mile time, and handling.

Interesting, but in China how much CO2 is actually being displaced? I suspect that the carbon footprint for these vehicles is probably above the equivalent ICE.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

6 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

I am not into electrified vehicles.

Thanks for admitting that you are clueless about the subject upon which you have been pontificating.

[Ecocharger + 1,485]

7 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Thanks for admitting that you are clueless about the subject upon which you have been pontificating.

Hardly...here is some solace for you, those coal-cars you admire are not really necessary.

Let me know when the LFP models get up to a 1% of the EV stock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fRBdy-6nZ0

Edited April 19, 2021 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,491]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Hardly...here is some solace for you, those coal-cars you admire are not really necessary.

https:www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fRBdy-6nZ0

The subject was electric vehicles not climate change and you are clueless about EV's. 

btw- coal is now the number 3 source of electricity in the USA

but of course if you are just a proponent of more CO2 then you should be a huge EV fan if you think they are coal cars. something just doesn't add up....hmmm.....

Edited April 19, 2021 by Jay McKinsey