Chuck Squatriglia of Wired takes a look at Zero Motorcycles electric motorcycle model Zero S.
The 4-kilowatt-hour lithium-manganese battery is good for an average range of 40 to 45 miles and a maximum of 60, depending upon how hard you twist the throttle. Once it's dead, you're looking at four hours to charge it from a 110-volt outlet. You can plug it into a 220-volt line but it won't charge any faster because the charger is limited to 1,000 watts, and at 110 volts, a 15-amp U.S. wall outlet already exceeds that by 650 watts.
It goes for $9,950 and accelerates from 0 to 60 mph in less than 4 seconds. The price is in the realm of the affordable for most people in industrialized countries.
The threat of Peak Oil (also see here) has me looking for affordable technologies that can help us transition away from oil for transportation uses. While electric cars seem an obvious alternative the problem is that electric cars cost too much while having limited range.
General Motors is frantically trying to bring the Volt in for less than $40,000 when it goes into production late next year, and even then expects to lose its shirt. The Mitsubishi iMiEV city car is as small as its $50,000 price tag is large. And even the Coda, a four-door, five-passenger family car with all the pizzazz of a Hyundai Sonata, will set you back $45,000 when it goes on sale in California next year.
One can hope that will change. But if it doesn't we might find ourselves riding electric motorcycles in 5 to 10 years.
The Zero S's 4 kilowatt-hours for 40 miles works out to 100 watt-hours per mile. That's less than half the 217 watt-hours per per mile of the Tesla Roadster. The Roadster's 244 mile range gives it 4 to 6 times the range of the Zero S. But for commuters the Zero S would work. At $109,000 the Roadster costs 11 times as much as the Zero S.
But if $10k for an electric motorcycle is above your price range cheaper approaches for electric bicycles will hit the market once world oil production goes into global decline.
By Randall Parker at 2009 July 11 11:58 AM Energy Electric CarsPlace a small nuclear power plant in a tar pit in Alberta and it will refine the oil in situ. There is plenty of oil, but not enough electricity to meet exploding demand. The good news is that China will build 72 giga watts of nuclear power in the next 12 years. More low priced goods will come from China. One day the group think in the USA will turn to realize that we are killing ourselves by pushing up our cost of energy.
"But if $10k for an electric motorcycle is above your price range cheaper approaches for electric bicycles will hit the market once world oil production goes into global decline."
Or you can be like me, quit being lazy, and, you know, *pedal*.
Tesla Roadster is very expensive, but the Tesla Model S which is a large electric sedan is half the price already: $50,000.
http://www.teslamotors.com/models/index.php
It is only a matter of a few years until cheaper batteries are manufactured. If only Obama really starts a major Manhattan Project just for lithium battery research, with 10 % of the money wasted in this war, we could have energy independence within less than a decade.
That Wired article is correct: Tesla tells us that their 52 KWH battery cost $20,000 wholesale a year ago (for about $400/KWH), so the article's estimate of a $20-$30K price is roughly ok. At that price, batteries are still too expensive for EVs to provide a driving range that is comparable to an ICE vehicle, at a comparable market price.
It's worth noting that this is probably not true if one includes non-market external costs - costs which are real, but not included in the market price), so for those buyers who are willing to pay for non-market costs even though they don't have to, the car pays for itself. That's a relatively small niche market, but it's real. It's also worth noting that the Tesla provides serious sportscar performance at a price that is lower than that of comparable ICE vehicles, so it's actually competitive in that niche.
But, all that that doesn't matter, because we don't need pure EVs - PHEVs like the Chevy Volt will eliminate 90% of liquid fuel consumption at a life-cycle costs which is comparable to, or less than, that of an ICE.
Take the Tesla battery and reduce it from 52KWH to 16 KWH, and we get a price of about $6,000. Apply the 8% annual price reduction that Tesla reports seeing in the markets (and which both NIMH and li-ion batteries have been experiencing consistently for the last 10 years) over the period 2008 to 2012 (when the Volt will get to serious volumes) and we get a price of about $4,000. That's about $300/KWH, as predicted here. "I do expect the price will come down to perhaps as low as $200 per kilowatt-hour when mass production begins in 2010 and 2011," she says." They'll use less expensive materials than 1st Gen li-ionbatteries; the larger format is much less expensive (Tesla uses about 7,000 batteries!); and they'll have very, very large production volumes relative to most 1st-gen li-ion. Large production volumes reduce costs very quickly.
The Volt's non-battery components won't cost any more than those of a Prius when manufactured in volume. Toyota is selling it a profit, at about $24K on average. It has an electrical drivetrain, and an ICE drive train. The only real difference in cost between it and a Volt is the battery. If the battery adds $4,000, that's $28K, or the average new ICE vehicle.
Here's what GM's CEO says about the Volt's costs: “My job is to get it out there and get it right the first time but then get it cost-effective so that we can do a huge number,” he said. “If I had to go with my first generation, we couldn’t really pencil a business case. Any new technology is expensive, but if you get to the second or third generation you find that the cost goes way down”.
The Volt was originally planned to sell at about $30K. Then, the federal government passed a $7,500 tax credit aimed at the Volt, and the expected price of the Volt rose to...the high 30's. Similarly, Mitsubishi plans to sell the iMiev for the high 40's in Japan (that's where the $50K price comes from - it's an estimate based on the price in yen, and is before Japanese subsidies - the price in the US is likely to be very different), where tax credits will bring the price back down to...about $30K. I see a pattern.
Nick G,
GM raised their expected cost long before a $7500 tax credit was passed. Their earlier $30k price was just hopeful dreaming at an early stage of the design. Then as the design got fleshed out their estimated break-even cost rose above $40k and went as high as $48k.
GM raised their expected cost long before a $7500 tax credit was passed.
I'd have to look back, but I believe that the tax credit was in the planning stages well before that. The credit is clearly customized for the Volt (some people in Washington call it the "Volt-credit", or something like that) - GM was certainly involved in the planning.
Their earlier $30k price was just hopeful dreaming at an early stage of the design.
Are you thinking that GM isn't good at costing things out? Or that a PHEV is harder to cost out than an ICE? Keep in mind that EVs have been around for 100 years (GM sold electric trucks in large quantities from 1912-1918); that there are probably 100 million electric vehicles in use, albeit not highway legal; that electric motors are ubiquitous and extremely well understood; that GM designed and built the EV-1, which supplied much of the technology of the Volt; that GM has enormous experience in large electric drivetrains in electro-diesel trains; and that electric drivetrains are much simpler than ICEs. Heck, whenever a new generation of Prius came out, GM would tear it down and cost it out, down to every component. They know how to cost these things out.
Then as the design got fleshed out their estimated break-even cost rose above $40k...
Yes, and they said the reasons were: unexpected costs to get high energy efficiency components ready for the 1st gen; and inclusion of the cost of two batteries, just to be safe. Even if you believe that GM really thinks they need to plan for 2 batteries, these aren't costs that will exist for later models.
...and went as high as $48.
Well, Lutz once said in an interview that they might have to charge $48K to make a conventional profit. But again, that's for the 1st gen Volt. They've spent $1B on R&D for the Volt: if you allocate that to the first 50K of vehicles, that's $20K per vehicle. If you allocate it to the first 1M vehicles, it's only $1k.
Are you thinking that an EV, without a battery, would cost as much or more than an ICE vehicle when produced in volume? Keep in mind that an EV is much simpler. It will cost substantially less. Look at the Prius: it costs about $24K, and it has two drivetrains.
Chris,
Some immediate advantages of the electric bicycle are that one can get the exercise and parking convenience of a bicycle, while traveling faster than a car through our urban landscape. The pedals remain functional and most e-bike riders do not simply stop pedaling when twisting the throttle. The Electric Cyclemotor encourages bicycle use by extending the utility of the conventional bicycle. This can mean less burning of old, naturally sequestered carbon to push a 160 pound primate and a ton of steel across a savannah of asphalt and concrete.
I have not driven my car since last November. Sometimes when the weather is bad, I get may wet or cold, borrow a car, carpool, take the bus or just stay home. Most days I just pedal, run the motor wide-open and grin. Before having a Cyclemotor, I biked mainly for exercise. Now I pedal more than ever because it is my primary mode of transport. I am more fit, aware of my environment, and even know just how many Watt-hours it takes to climb nearby hills at 25 miles an hour.
Of course, such extreme change isn't for everybody even in our current economic climate. Few will stop driving their car today. However, from recent automobile sales trends, some must be giving up that second or third car. Under many circumstances, the electric bicycle can effectively supplement the car to reduce miles driven. As the high external costs of our current transportation paradigm become painfully obvious, the electric bicycle may be widely recognized as a more sustainable and practical form of personal motorized transport.
"Peak Oil", at least for the users of hydrocarbon fuels, is entirely specious. This is because as conventional sources are drained, they become more costly to extract. The is exactly where the handwringers who tout peak oil stop. They are ignorant, and maybe even hostile, to how the free market operates to insure there cannot be a shortage of hydrocarbon fuels. This is because as the price rises, there will be alternative sources that come to market, the end user will invest capital and alter his behavior, indeed the entire market will adapt as it always has and always will. (assuming it is allowed to by government)
Peak Oil is worse than specious because it leads us to policy decisions that destroy liberty and reduce our prosperity. We are awash in hydrocarbons that can be converted to liquid fuels. A study produced for the Office of the Secretary of Defense shows the US has over twice the hydrocarbon resources as all of Arab OPEC. We have coal, oil, natural gas, shales and various organic sources that can be converted. We also have vast supplies of methane in undersea hydrates.
The only issue is not one of supply, but one of the total cost to the end user.
My town's a little hilly, and the relative humidity's usually not pretty in high summer. This means a lot of accumulated sweat when biking two miles plus, and adopting a leisurely pace doesn't seem to make a huge difference. I'm sure this is one potential application for electric drives that can be added to a normal bike and perhaps used mainly in summer. Even if you enjoy taking 120-mile rides every sunday, you still might appreciate arriving at work dry, despite the fact that a two-mile commute is not exactly a major strain on your physiology and you have no other desire for an electric drive.
How much of the wear on my car (a Honda Civic with 80k miles) comes from mileage and how much comes from time? If I drive it 3x less will it last 2x as long (in years)? This is a huge incentive since I'm poor.
Here's a PHEV cycle which gets 141 MPG:
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/07/mp3-20090708.html
Commenters suggest that it costs about $8K.
theBuckWheat,
What study?
Of course we will never run out of oil. There will always be some left in the ground. It just won't be energetically advantageous to recover it. More energy will be consumed to find, refine and bring it to the surface than the energy content of the product. We are squandering the cheap stuff, as encouraged by market economics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EROEI
Our country is well endowed with coal, which is relatively expensive and/or dirty to convert to convenient liquid or gaseous transportation fuels. Same goes for the other fuels you mention. There does not appear to be any fuel which is economically competitive with the precious little cheap oil we have left.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_gasification
http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/05/however-you-spin-it-coal-gasif.html
We live in interesting times. Exponential population growth and resource use seem to be coming up against fundamental limits. Sure, market economics will slow consumption, but it may not be pretty. Human history includes examples of resource wars and civilizations which collapsed after depletion of a crucial commodity. Whether exponential growth in technological capabilities and will avert such collapse is anyone's guess. It is discouraging to note that a large segment of our population steadfastly clings to the belief that divine intervention will save them from our big, collective mistakes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/index.html?curid=1378709
There does not appear to be any fuel which is economically competitive with the precious little cheap oil we have left.
How about PHEV/EVs??
Nick G,
Over the lifetime of a battery pack, cell production cost dwarfs the cost of electric vehicle charging electricity. When battery cost is factored in, EVs are not competitive on the basis of immediate, current fuel costs for existing car designs.
http://repositories.cdlib.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=itsdavis
Current battery technology can provide cost-competitive personal transportation only on bicycles and other very light vehicles, not cars as we know them today.
http://knol.google.com/k/jl-radtke/energy-global-warming-and-electric/9h3f3kub8bcr/6#
CyclemotorEngineer,
Have you read the comments above??
Let me repeat some of mine:
Batteries are still too expensive for EVs to provide a driving range that is comparable to an ICE vehicle, at a comparable market price. But, that that doesn't matter, because we don't need pure EVs - PHEVs like the Chevy Volt will eliminate 90% of liquid fuel consumption at a life-cycle costs which is comparable to, or less than, that of an ICE.
CyclemotorEngineer,
I like the article on bicycles. Clearly, electric bikes are the most efficient thing out there. Still, PHEVs will be needed by the majority of people.
The CARB study of EVs is interesting. I would note that it's 10 years old, so the data is out of date.
