EVs are coming, but for how long?

I have a different perspective on this and it's probably somewhat radical, but I saw an interview with Sam Altman (from OpenAI) that basically said we're on a trend where the marginal cost of knowledge and energy are approaching zero. If anyone's spent time with ChatGPT v4 recently, we're already there on knowledge. Fusion reactors are not very far away. So between renewables, fusion, mini nuclear reactors, etc. we're reaching a point of energy *abundance*, not scarcity. So I think the transition away from combustion will initially be driven by the pace of innovation in industry but ultimately won't return because electric will be cheap and it will be everywhere.

In terms of EV's, what can be done today is pretty awesome. If you took away energy storage, electric makes the most sense in all applications due to it's simplicity and the fact there's no competitor in raw power output. There's a reason freight trains use traction motors with diesel generators. Battery technology is evolving pretty fast, and I think problems with mining, recyclability, weight, and energy density will be solved. It's still early days. Tesla has only been around just over a decade and look what they've accomplished in that time. They don't get mocked as much anymore.

And with that, I think there's going to be winners and losers. Building cars is tough, building electric cars is tougher. Not only that, it requires a lot of vertical integration. So I think we'll see some pretty large automakers fail and other entrants scale massively. And I think there'll continue to be tension between combustion/electric until battery technology gets to a point there's no looking back.
 
So between renewables, fusion, mini nuclear reactors, etc. we're reaching a point of energy *abundance*, not scarcity. So I think the transition away from combustion will initially be driven by the pace of innovation in industry but ultimately won't return because electric will be cheap and it will be everywhere.

You think the powers-at-be would actually allow energy to become that abundant?

I'd like to believe that but there's a LOT of money in "energy" with massive amounts spent on DC lobbying and questionable practices in history that "allegedly" prevented other energy sources from becoming too abundant. If they can't regulate it and make money from it, I highly doubt we will ever see it if they can help it.

You are right though, battery technology is in its infancy and will only improve - albeit slowly. However, from what I gather and have read across different technology/energy news outlets, we are 30 years out from anything overly innovative or set to become a new standard for energy.

*I'm surprised more manufactures didn't expand upon the hybrid approach. I sometimes wonder if they are "too efficient" and were sabotaged before they really had the opportunity to become a standard. I was never sold on the hybrid approach until my wife got one and we had to opportunity to own and drive one on the daily.

**Unless of course something lands on earth from another planet and shares with is something we are fully unaware of.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris Cachor
You think the powers-at-be would actually allow energy to become that abundant?

Yea, that's true. There's already been some of that with home solar installations and utility companies. The potential will be there at least.

I'm surprised more manufactures didn't expand upon the hybrid approach. I sometimes wonder if they are "too efficient" and were sabotaged before they really had the opportunity to become a standard. I was never sold on the hybrid approach until my wife got one and we had to opportunity to own and drive one on the daily.

Yea me too. Nothing better than getting 50MPG and no range anxiety. Honda Accord Hybrid is a solid pick and I read the Volvo hybrids are nice. Ram has the e-torque but I'm shocked they didn't take that concept further in pickup trucks.

You are right though, battery technology is in its infancy and will only improve - albeit slowly. However, from what I gather and have read across different technology/energy news outlets, we are 30 years out from anything overly innovative or set to become a new standard for energy.

I think the next few years we'll see a move away from lithium-ion to solid-state batteries with the main benefit being safety and operating range. The liquid electrolyte is what causes the battery fires and operating temperature requirements. From there, though, I think it'll be a while for new chemistries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Kershner
I like your points, Chris, and I hope things become true! Energy abundance, mixed with a handful of decent world leaders, could bring world peace and resolve many other issues.

@Jeff Kershner your hybrid question is a good one. That's the way. It is a fantastic compromise. My wife is in the market right now, and I have the rules set for diesel or hybrid. 500 miles on a tank of gas is something I appreciate a lot. Time is money, and the pump is boring.

As for solar, I have 81 panels on my roof powering an 18.3kw system. Where I live, an 18.4kw system requires classifying the address as a power station :rofl:

We installed this system nine years ago. I barely pay any utilities for a family of 5 in a 4,000 sqft house in cold MFing Vermont. Unfortunately, my original bet to get off net metering within ten years of installing this system looks like a loser. 10 years ago, we thought the battery technology would be strong enough to handle my use case in 2024. It is not there yet. I think it is for someone who lives in Arizona, but... snow.

Over 70% of Vermont's power is generated from dams, with another large chunk being renewable during the non-winter months. The rest is from coal. As someone with a personal stake and willingness to invest more, I don't see the current renewable path as the end-all yet. We are way too far away. I've also heard fission is still 30 to 50 years away. The recent news about fission seems to have come during a slow news cycle (AKA a distraction).
 
Yea me too. Nothing better than getting 50MPG and no range anxiety.

I know for a fact my wife would second your comment. She loves to mention how so few trips to the gas station she makes, while I laugh at her when she needs to use my truck for a larger grocery run - so little trunk room in the hybrid ford fusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris Cachor
GM's CEO Mary Barra's 'EV Only' growth strategy is either stupid, or, she's crafting a master plan to kill her dealer network.

Barra's team looks at production
  1. Chevrolet - 64.4%
  2. GMC - 22.0%
  3. Buick - 7.9%
  4. Cadillac - 5.7%
-Buick US is on death's door. :rip:
-GMC is a truck brand. (not a good EV fit... yet)
-Chevrolet is a lunch pail brand that has no brand affinity (i.e. high vol, low margin).
-Speaking of no brand affinity, Cadillac. 'nuf said.

Next, Barra must know:
  • selling EV's OUTSIDE of major metropolitan areas* is a tough sell.
  • The top 20 major metropolitan areas* = 45% of the US's total population.
  • Chevrolet's 3000+ dealers, only ~600 are in major metropolitan areas*
  • 2,400 Chevy stores will be getting a fresh product mix that is EV only (i.e. a tough sell)
So, 2,400-ish Chevy stores in non-metro settings will have to dedicate time and money into a totally new product category with no 'hybrid' powered middle ground. EV is still in it's pioneering days and affinity drives EV buying. GM's affinity game plan is beyond weak.

If I owned a 3rd generation GM point in BumbleFuck PA, I'd take my 1st buyout offer and open a used car store.

*ChatGPT3.5
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Alex Snyder
I'm surprised more manufactures didn't expand upon the hybrid approach.
Lambo Hybrid that does 217 MPH :eek3:

 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeff Kershner