A $5,600 Electric Makeover for Old Diesel Cars
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
They lost most of their businesses around 2012 when Italy passed a bill making all these converted cars not roadworthy without an explicit permit from the original manufacturer, permits that very rarely where granted. (That law got partially overturned in 2017, but the FUD and the chilling effect remain today.)
Source: a friend of mine being laid off by that firm in 2012 + http://mondoelettrico.blogspot.com/search?q=retrofit
Depending on interpretation that would open for liability of a modified vehicle by a third party for the manufacturer.
Maybe. But your source is an anonymous poster on the forum. I'm not saying they made it up, but that there's likely more to the story. It isn't exactly far fetched to think there is strict regulation about how you can modify your car for the roads. The "explicit permit" might be to signify that everything is done to the highest standards.
By whom?
>This is clearly a power move to protect their industry.
You're arguing against a conspiracy for which not a shred of evidence has been provided.
Obviously a power move? Do you, in fact, know that paperwork from the manufacturer is required for any modifications, and what the source and/or requirements of it are? Or have you dreamed up some conspiracy where permission from the manufacturer is required to modify your car because you read a random comment on HackerNews (despite the fact that there's a massive aftermarket modding community in the real world)?
I also find it quaint that some posters here think we need to regulate mortgage loans because people aren't capable of calculating interest and what they owe, but the same people should be able to replace the fuel tank in their vehicle with 1000lbs of combustibles, in their garage, and then take it out onto the road. With no oversight.
Furthermore, in the case of an EV conversion you can basically just make sure the EV power-train does not occupy physical space that the ICE power-train did not and your crumple zones and airbags will work fine.
Edit:
Making batteries that don't catch on fire is a solved problem. Getting those electrons to the motor without starting a fire is a solved problem. You really only get fires when you're trying to push the performance envelope which is generally a low priority for commercial conversions.
Cars are not hyper-complicated non-deterministic black boxes. It is possible to modify them without causing unforeseen consequences. Just because you may personally lack the expertise to understand how the systems interact does not mean that nobody can understand it. A qualified engineer with an automotive background should have no problem creating an EV conversion that is every bit as safe as the base vehicle though it will probably be slightly less efficient in terms of materials and labor usage than a conversion for the same vehicle designed by an OEM team for manufacture at scale. The OEMs don't have people that are magically smarter, or different laws of physics if anything they will have a harder time engineering an equivalently performing system because they have many more constraints to optimize for than a conversion company.
Agreed that they're not black-boxes and there's a lot of assumptions you can carry over, though. The NCAP rating of the donor vehicle won't be valid any more, but all that tells you is how well its siblings survived destructive testing - it's likely to perform similarly.
TLDR: it's not quite that simple, but assuming you're not driving like an idiot it'll probably be fine.
Cars are designed to operate in a certain range of weights, as they get loaded with drivers, passengers, cargo, etc.... so long as the distribution is roughly the same, then the careful tuning of the suspension and handling, etc... should all still mostly work the same.
Sure, it might be a bit more sluggish if it is significantly heavier, but that should be about it. You might b able to largely solve that problem by just putting some stronger springs in the suspension, which might already exist in the third party market for other people who are doing other kinds of work on the same type of vehicle.
Of course, you’ve got to actually do the work to make it right, but keeping the same basic weight distribution will probably solve at least 80% of the problem.
With regards to components being really heavy, consider that the engine and the transmission are two of the heaviest components in most any car. If you can eliminate those in your BEV conversion, that gives you quite a bit of weight to work with for the new heavy components.
A lot of this has parallels in the world of aviation. For example there are provisions for owner supplied parts on certified airframes. Experimental / homebuilt aircraft have to meet a standard of the amount of work completed by the original builder (usually 50%).
Personally, I do think that this poses some risk- I might be hesitant to put my kids on a converted EV school bus, for instance- I think it's probably a better idea for a specialized contractor to outfit a fleet than it is for the fleet's mechanic to do so, especially if it's something that they've never done before.
AKA. Why you can't repair most cell phones now.
And once they establish business units to compete against the new company in the secondary market, suddenly the established companies aren’t so pressed about needing to enforce regulations anymore.
Could this be the reason?
As a Fiat owner, I feel disgusted, but while they do make decent ICE cars, they have been worringly absent from the electric-car stage.
Probably is seeing how VW/BMW/Mercedes, PSA/Renault and Fiat are important to their respective host countries (Germany, France and Italy). Those companies are always lobbying hard regulators at national and since the 90's at European level to gain advantages and protect their market.
There is a very telling anecdote from the 80s/90s in Europe, where supermarket grew in size and were ready to take on all retail business including car resale. This was made an exception so European car manufacturer could keep their high profit margin (relatively) allowed by their approved resale points.
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motor-shows-geneva-motor-...
You mean, due to it being a compliance car only? Fiat actively discourages people from buying them - or at least the CEO does/did.
https://insideevs.com/news/353886/kbb-secures-amazing-deal-f...
The problem was that I priced it up, and it would cost about £20k for a conversion, which obviously isn't going to happen. If you could get it do say £5-7k, then anyone with one of these who's faced with a new gearbox being needed, or needs the injectors replaced and they're seized in place because the scuttle under the windscreen leaks water onto the engine (which can be a £2k + bill) might think it was worth doing.
However, I'm also sure that the insurance situation would need looking at - it's effectively a different vehicle and you've definitely had it modified.
Another one of my pie-in-the-sky ideas, but I'm sure it'll be financially doable at some point, and given that the Vivaro had a 12-year model lifespan and didn't suffer from rust, there are plenty of them about.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renault_Trafic_III_-_Fiat_Tale...
EDIT: esp since you can just use an angle grinder on the old pack
The same powertrain is also used in their larger models - Master/Movano (can't think of the Nissan one), so that would also be another market. The labour would be minimal compared to the cost of the batteries.
Some sort of direct gearbox with multiple speeds would probably be useful in a work vehicle application. However, one from an automotive application would be totally overkill because an electric motor's power band is too wide to need more than two or maybe three widely spaced gears. A purpose built high/low gearbox (like on a drill) would be better. Sure, you can always spec a bigger motor but that has trade-offs.
Most early EV conversions had fairly low horsepower motors and retained the manual transmission and used it to avoid overheating the motor when leaving a stop wide open (which you did most of the time when you only had ~50hp). Obviously that's a non-issue with the higher power motors that are commonly used today.
And wouldn't not replacing the transmission result in lower costs for the retrofit? If the upfront cost of a retrofit is the major hurdle preventing adoption, then reducing complexity of the retrofit would seem more important than reducing overall complexity of the drivetrain... particularly since you'll still be better-than-parity complexity following an electric retrofit.
I understand the non-trivial power-loss of connecting a motor to a transmission, but to me this seems like an acceptable trade... particularly as someone who enjoys rowing through my gears.
Not really. An electric motor does not lose much efficiency with increased speed.
>And wouldn't not replacing the transmission result in lower costs for the retrofit?
In a longitudinal application it would be cost neutral to retain a manual transmission.
In any application it would be dumb to keep an automatic transmission. In a longitudinal application replacing any transmission is as easy as a couple carrier bearings and a different drive shaft.
If I was really trying to cut cost but perform a large volume of conversions on FWD cars with transverse mounted engines (i.e. basically all FWD cars) and automatic transmissions I'd keep the transmission housings but replace all the clutches, planetaries, etc with a single solid shaft. While machined parts are expensive they're still cheaper than coming up with another solution for the differential.
I think there are a couple of super high end EV models with transmissions, but almost all EVs just have a fixed ratio.
1. when you are working with multiple cars+models it is much harder to scale, every car is its own challenge, as such the operation is likely to remain small
2. customers might expect the rest of the car to also improve which would be problematic when you have to source parts or fix 10 to 15 year old car models
3. every new model you work with is a bit of an experiment, you don't really know whether your configuration is going to cause problems until it does; what worked with another model might not work with this one, in the worst case scenario, people get hurt and you're to blame; if you read any of the 100s of EV conversion blogs, they never get it right the first time round, there's always something that needs rethinking
As a side note, you don't have to buy anything from Tesla to do this. You can furnish yourself a whole package relatively easily from various suppliers. People were doing it before Tesla was even a thing.
association-aire.org
IIRC they were targeting small city cars like 107 (and the other models sharing the frame).
- https://www.challenges.fr/automobile/dossiers/il-sera-biento... [in french obv.]
- https://www.caradisiac.com/se-convertir-a-l-electrique-mais-...
Here are some more articles where they explain their desires
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=association%2Daire%20k...
So you can't remove the gearbox, or you'll have to place a new stand-alone differential, which will add significant costs.
I'm glossing over the details but you'd need about half a dozen precision machined features and like three or four parts that are specific to a particular ICE engine/transmission application. Dimensions are such that you could probably buy cheap axles for a common application and then have them machined down to make your part. Parts cost should wind up under $200ea unless you need something expensive to machine (like blind female splines).
My most vivid memory is climbing into the “frunk” of a Porsche that was owned by a famous cardiologist, and measuring the heater core slot so that we could make our own heater core enclosure to fit for an electric unit we bought. And I took very careful and accurate measurements and very carefully applied them to sheet metal on the hand brake press. Only to discover that I had not accounted for the thickness of the metal or the enforced bend radius, and so the finished unit was off by about a millimeter and wouldn’t fit.
I tried to convince them that they should partner with certain kit car companies, buying only the non-BEV components from them, much the way Tesla started out with Lotus. But that never went anywhere, and I haven’t heard from them since. I need to get back in touch with them....
When there is a crash and the emergency rescue team has to use the “jaws of life” to cut the car open, you want to make damn sure they won’t be cutting through any of your high-amperage cabling. And if you are converting an ICE car to BEV, you don’t want to surprise them by routing your power cables through unexpected places. When they see a certain model of car, they are going to expect to be able to cut through in certain manufacturer-approved locations.
You don’t want to risk killing the guys who are trying to save your life.
Ah, the good old days of "if you want an electric car, you have to suffer."
This isn't really a company yet, it's a pitch for funding.
It's perfectly possible to convert existing cars to electric drive. Conversion kits exist.[2] Those guys have conversion kits for most early VWs powered by the little four-cylinder opposed engine. Cost is about $17,000 with battery. Which is a used Tesla pack. Unclear why this new conversion is so much cheaper, unless it doesn't include the battery. Other sellers have conversion kits for other vehicles.
The usual result is a rather heavy car with limited range. Also, conversions tend to leave the transmission in the power train and use a DC motor, which is obsolete electric car technology.
In any case, the target demographic is likely not wealthy, so for them, less range for less money would be ideal. Plus, the smaller the battery the easier it is to fit, meaning less potential problems later on. Particularly important because these cars won't be crash tested.
More like 95% of commuting needs of 95% of the people.
As local transport is quite good, vacation is the more important and harder to substitute part of the car need.
Also lots of families have two cars to manage commute, and one of those doesn't really need more range than necessary for the commute.
Renting a car seems to be the obvious solution, but there might be two reasons why it doesn't appear to be so for most people. The first one is that in general car drivers don't know how much they pay per day or per kilometer driven. Then renting a car seems to be expensive. The second reason is that cars have an almost religious status in our society.
It reminds me of Ath, a city in Belgium that has a yearly event where the people go through the streets wearing huge statues. This tradition can be found in other countries as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantes_y_cabezudos. Car culture looks like a big daily procession to honour the values of power, speed, and freedom from physical limitations. No wonder some people can't leave their symbolic attire, and instead want to own it, the way they own their daily clothes.
Most new cars are sold to businesses.
I think this does not apply to the US.
France (and Europe) have a great railway system. You don't necessarily need a car to travel.
And if you do, as you mentioned, just rent one.
The main leg was a 350km drive we've done several times before, and due to the charging it took us an extra hour or so compared to previous years with our previous ICE car. Interestingly my girlfriend said she actually felt it was shorter, because the trip was broken up by the longish charging stops. We also felt much less exhausted when we arrived.
I'm sure charging will get better with time though. Increasing range will help a lot, and more charging stations will be built.
I also think you effectively need to half the quoted range figure, as there is little guarantee of a charging point at your destination - so it's max 50km/31miles each way. Of course, even if there is a charger at your destination, it's going to take a long time time charge, so may not be convenient in any case.
A 60 mile round trip is probably about the longest daily commute you could manage in many parts of Europe
I think you're quite underestimating distances in Europe. Here in Belgium, it's common enough to commute from West Flanders to Antwerp, a 100km (60 miles) commute one-way. My case is a bit special as I commute from Antwerp to Lille in France (130km or 80 miles) although only one day of week thankfully.
30 miles one-way is the average commuting distance for people who live in Wallonia and work in Brussels, for example[0]. Looking at the stats in France[1], I see that the median commuting distance for the 1.7 million people that commute between two different urban areas is 30 miles, meaning half of those have a commute longer than 60 miles round trip.
Such commuting distances are not nearly as uncommon as you seem to think.
[0]https://mobilit.belgium.be/sites/default/files/final_report_... (Dutch) or https://mobilit.belgium.be/sites/default/files/final_report_... (French)
I don't understand this? I'm in Scotland, and know multiple people that commute 120 miles (round-trip) in a day; not sure why you think the location in Europe matters.
There's a bunch of problems with this though:
* Finding charging spots can be difficult, most workplaces don't provide them, many residential buildings don't either, if you live in the city and park outside just forget about it entirely, finding a spot is already hell; having to waste an hour charging every two days makes the "fit" way worse, even more so when the few charging spots are completely out of your way.
* The range figures are usually without A/C or heating, both of which eat significantly into EV range.
* It's nice that 100km range fits into people's commuting needs, but there's no provision for non-commuting, how do you go see your parents, or on holidays, or drop by friends a few cities over, or go to your cousin's wedding?
My own commute is like 15km, but if I were to get a car (rather than use public transport) I'd get a plug-in hybrid: sure a 100km EV is more than enough for my commute (I even have an electrified parking spot), but a trip to go back to the family is 600km, and that's if I don't go and see cousins or whatever.
Even if there were enough charging stations on the way (there aren't) transforming a ~6h trip into 8~10 would not be fine.
Hell, with a 100km range I couldn't even round-trip to the nearest ikea on a full charge.
So sure, if you've got the money and room (aka a house at least) to own two cars and keep one charging overnight you can get a short-range EV for your commuting.
Not sure that's the majority though…
Rent a car or go by train/plane.
The model 3 apparently isnt using an AC motor.
https://electrek.co/2018/02/27/tesla-model-3-motor-designer-...
I associate AC motors with washing machines though, so was surprised EVs used AC at all.
Almost all EVs use AC motors. Only old fashioned vehicles like the old British milk floats used DC motors.
Beware that the maximum range drops significantly if you drive at 100km/h for some of that range (at least I was told that about the Leaf EV).
and here lies the problem. Tesla doesnt (afaik, please correct me) sell their car batteries, those are second hand post crash written off car packs(1). You cant build a scalable (planned 4000 cars a year) business around digging rare parts out of the trash.
(1) going rate for used Model 3 pack is ~$12K with maybe 10-20 available at any time in whole world
No, but it should bootstrap you enough capital to be able to do your own R&D and develop your own battery pack, or at the very least enter into talks with manufacturers to lease existing battery packs for your business.
Also, Tesla is making ~5,000 cars a week. Of those 5,000, 77 have to crash and be written off (1.5%) for there to be enough battery packs for 4,000 cars a year. Not considering the 100,000+ Teslas on the road already.
This is revenue, so rent, parts and labor will significantly reduce that. I'm not sure how this would result in a good R&D budget.
As for getting supplies from written off Teslas, it doesn't take into account location. What percentage is in Europe within a economically viable shipping distance?
They have sold not just batteries but complete powertrains to Toyota for the RAV4 EV and to Daimler for the Mercedes-Benz A-Class E-Cell, the Smart ForTwo and the Mercedes B-Class Electric.
If you're just starting out you use off the shelf parts, if you scale up enough it starts being worth it to use custom parts.
I view it as a short term oddity of an immature market, that the best current option is 2nd hand batteries from crashed Teslas.
And that doesnt even touch the realities of retooling for many many used car models they would have to support in order to meet that 4000/year projection.
Another company I have heard from is doing this specifically for supercars, so special Porsches etc.
I feel like both the margin and the clientele would be much more fun to deal with, as with this approach (as many have mentioned) the scaling will be the difficult part.
EV West - in general: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOx5uCufB2Q
EV West - BMW M3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHaqiWcWSIc
EV West - VW Bus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLRAQu0b8-o
To convert and ICE car to electric you'll need a battery pack, BCM, inverter, motor, charger, heater core and mounting hardware at minimum. Even if they source all parts from the used market, I doubt they can do it for €5k.
Then there is the practical part. Converting an ICE car to an electric drivetrain messes with weight distribution and crash safety. In most EU countries you'll need to do a full technical inspection to get the car road legal again (even if you used a certified kit). Air conditioning and most gauges in the dashboard will no longer work. And on most modern cars they'll need to do some serious software hacking to get the body control modules to accept the fact that there is no ECU anymore to talk to.
Once you have designed a set of compatible, tested parts, doing the conversion on a lot of similar vehicles becomes faster and cheaper compared to developing a bespoke solution each time.
Not sure if they actually replace the ECU or just fake the missing inputs to keep the existing one happy. Either way, I'm sure they retain existing wiring and keep all the dashboard gauges working.
I wasn't talking about type approval.
In most EU countries (at least Germany and the Netherlands that I'm sure of) you need to pass through technical inspection if you modify a car. Especially if you change the fuel type or change the power output of the vehicle.
> I'm sure they retain existing wiring and keep all the dashboard gauges working.
Most gauges are no longer applicable (coolant temp, oil pressure, fuel level) or display the wrong range (the tachometer for instance).
In modern cars these gauges are all controlled electronically, so it's not so difficult to make them display whatever you like by sending them different signals.
They don't. They do it for 8300€, of which 3300€ are (re)funded by the French tax office/Ecology Ministry. So it's 5000€ from the driver's pocket (in the end).
See https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F32487 (in French)
And as someone else said, it's still an old(er) vehicle - any incident may lead to the vehicle being totaled from an insurance point of view.
This may be OK for some consumers, but it could a big financial surprise to most.
Many families have two vehicles, one of which is primarily used for local tasks. These are ideal to convert if the rest of the car will last for another 5ish years.
Meanwhile, public transport, biking lanes, and other options should continue to be developed. There is never just one solution.
So, a conversion like this starts earning itself back well within the lifespan of the batteries either way based just on fuel cost savings. Of course if you drive an older Diesel, it would be unlikely to actually last another 150K or have anywhere near the fuel economy of a newer model. Additionally, older cars tend to need expensive maintenance on their engines to keep on going before they finally become to expensive to repair.
Of course the problem is going to be finding batteries. I'd expect this kind of stuff to quickly go from a novelty to being a very common thing. This may drive up prices and limit availability. However, with second hand batteries the value proposition might be quite good still.
So about half the price. That would be on the expensive side and things get more interesting if you have access to cheaper sources of energy. E.g. bids for solar power plants are below 2 cents now so that cuts it down to about 500$.
Here is a picture: https://imgur.com/40ZymUP
He then took the electric parts out to convert a small chevy car but then died before starting that project.
There's some great videos out there explaining the process and EVWest sells kits for older VWs and Porches (the ones with the simplest motors and drive trains). https://evwest.com/catalog/
I'd love to swap the engine out of my 2007 Mini Cooper soft-top for an electric motor and zip around town silently with it, but unless I was willing to both spend the equivalent of a new car and do all the work myself, it'll never happen.
There really aren't any electric convertibles out there though, so it's tempting.
It will make even more sense once the battery market gets going. Battery factories bigger than Tesla's are under construction in China and Germany. We'll probably have a battery glut in a few years. It's not really that hard to build a battery factory.
https://www.topgear.com/car-news/concept/morgans-cyclops-ele...
You'll have to do the conversion if you want to keep driving the car as cities and eventually whole countries ban ICE vehicles. Aston Martin has an EV conversion program for that reason:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PREftlfZuXA
https://media.astonmartin.com/aston-martin-works-create-firs...
It'd be best to leave it for as long as possible in order to get the best batteries available at the time. A EV conversion with a solid-state battery pack might offer some practical range.
old diesel cars are literally the worst. I wholly endorse anything that will turn a 1986 Mercedes E class from a smog belching iron yacht into a functioning member of polite society. the price quoted here is a steal. take it.
If i were hired to make an old diesel car come up to modern emissions specifications, it would easily be three to five times the cost. Im looking at ripping the engine apart, machining new entry points for sensors, buying a new ECU, finding a place for urea tanks and pumps, and retrofitting a nox scrubber somewhere not to mention the labor charge. the engine will run hotter, so ill need a new radiator or intercooler too. it also has to be retrofitted with a limp or purge mode for when the vehicle runs out of urea or is due for regular service to prevent violating emissions regulations.
This is not an option for older Merc engines, no practical options exists.
Or I would be gladly stand corrected in this matter as I own quite a few old collectible Mercs all in desperate need of modern technology update (invisible of course, like ECU + EFI).
I really wanted to buy the kit but to get any kind of actual range you basically had to fill the bed of the truck up with lead acid batteries. I figured the inefficiency of having to carry around a truck bed full of lead would never catch on and hence electric vehicles would never be a thing so I gave up on the idea...
From what I understand those kits would need to tank adblue as trucks do. But whatever, I prefer that to breathing NOx.
Despite being less efficient in terms of pure energy usage, I think hydrogen-based fuel cell-powered vehicules solve 2 problems for most users: autonomy and time of replenishment (refueling). We just need to invest in solar-based hydrogen generation plants. Hydrogen can be generated on site for replenishment.
Edit: the Riversimple Rasa uses a hybrid lithium based battery/supercapacitor pack for this purpose.
You forgot the 5 minutes spent trying to download and install their own proprietary app, creating an account, just for the app to fail to start the charging...
The rest is history....
However, this is probably the tip of an iceberg to come. There is a huge amount of value worldwide in collectible/exotic/classic cars - values have soared since the '08 financial troubles, to the point of some cars becoming pure investments, rather than something to drive.
As we move towards a world where the ICE will become extinct, what will happen to all of this automotive history? A few options:
* huge devaluation
* exemptions (to the ICE ban) for such cars... but at an increasing cost, as presumably petrol would become increasingly expensive and difficult to source
* widespread drive-train conversions, allowing such cars to be enjoyed in perpetuity
Not sure about that.
Let's consider a generic classic car that delivers 25 miles per (UK Imperial) gallon, which is 5.5 miles per liter of petrol. At the moment, petrol is ~1.3-1.5 EUR/liter in central Europe.
Taking a mean of 1.4 EUR/L, that's ~25 cents/mile, or 4 miles/EUR. A 200 mile trip (say, a weekend away) would cost ~51 EUR - not too bad. 3000 miles in a year would cost ~764 EUR.
---
Now, consider 10x the cost. 510 EUR in fuel, just for a weekend away? 7640 EUR for a year's occasional cruising around? Accepted that's no problem for the super-rich, but it starts to be punitive for a hobbyist owner. What about if you're into American classics that deliver 10 MPG?
Further, with that cost for fuel, the economics of a conversion make a lot more sense, before you even consider other possible incentives.
Aston Martin offers a service to replace the ICE with a electric power unit with equivalent power. The ICE gets packed into a flight case in case you want to swap back in the future.
Here's an account of £1.3 million DB6 Volante conversion: https://www.topgear.com/car-news/electric/why-heck-would-you...
Autonomy is about 500 Km (very small tank) but you never use this for long journeys, so the 100 Km after electrification would not be an issue.
The issue on my car is that there are points of rust in some places and there is a new law that may disqualify my working car from being road worthy the next time I go to the mandatory check. (gotta encourage car turn over for the economy).
If this modification could fix my rust issue (I think it's on the underside of the exhaust pipe so not needed anymore) I could be interested.
Random manufacturer: https://www.holtsauto.com/holts/products/gun-gum-silencer-re...
Outside of hobbyist tinkerers / enthusiasts, it’s going to be very difficult for a retrofit to compete with any electric-first design. Just weight distribution alone will be tough, and range is very low, to name a couple of issues.
Yes there is the perceived cost savings here, but I would argue that is a mirage, because over time the consumer will realize that they have made a mistake, and they will have to consider the price they paid as just an expense of learning a lesson. But hey it will surely provide some cool fun and conversation value in the meantime.
Ironically, there's lots of people that like to restore those older 70's and 80's model diesels because they're light and fuel efficient.
So for those who know, is engine standardization still a thing and has it been over the past 10 years?
Don’t expect traditional manufacturers to enter the retrofitting market though : not interesting at all for them.
They will just prefer to sell new units, still against the « reuse, recycle » more ecological principle, to ensure shareholders’ happiness.
I don't know, you might see it happen down the track. Currently the large manufacturers like Chevrolet, Ford, etc offer 'crate engine' products for retrofitting into older/other vehicles. No reason you may not see them offer an electric crate package in the same way you can get a LSA crate package.
Granted, it's not like a 'plug and play' proposition - some DIY is required - but still, I don't think it's too big of a stretch to imagine it.
Tesla is a speculative stock. Tesla almost all quarters generates losses while the other makers are "regular business" with varying profits.
> Don’t expect traditional manufacturers to enter the retrofitting market though : not interesting at all for them.
No car brand is selling kits for retrofitting. Regarding car parts Tesla is worse than most car makers. Most Tesla parts are salvaged instead of sold.
> They will just prefer to sell new units, still against the « reuse, recycle » more ecological principle, to ensure shareholders’ happiness.
All USA public traded business are mandate as such. Companies which seek to prioritize ecology over profits need to stay of the public traded stock market.
Or perhaps "not the business they're in"?
>all mentioned manufacturers are in the +/- 1%, while Tesla is up +6.5%.
Not sure what you mean here.
Used non-Tesla EVs depreciate like crazy at extremely low miles. The Chevy Volt is another excellent used value (is this available in Europe?) and you still have a gasoline engine to bail you out on long trips.
You're also going to get way better serviceability with a stock OEM solution.
Lower middle class and low emission zones. People don't have the budget to upgrade their cars and risk losing car mobility. Ask my hippie uncle in his old van. Meanwhile, there's air travel without externalities priced-in, electric vehicle subsidies, home battery subsidies, and more disproportionally benefiting us upper middle class and rich people.
This social problem is all over Western Europe. To those who don't care about social exclusion or global warming, it's free votes, free political capital. So no political consensus forthcoming on how to deal with it...
Imho EV's are a much overstated solution to a much deeper problem. EV's make little difference, if we are still running coal, gas and oil power plants to generate the electricity. It's just that our cars are a more visible problem in every day life.
If we had an abundance of carbon neutral energy and make fossil oil more expensive (e.g. through taxes) than renewable burnables, ICU engines would be our smallest problem.
Please run numbers and you may be surprised.
If we go from 46.4 MJ/kg energy in 1 liter of gasoline and apply the usual density of about 0.75kg/l, that's 34.8MJ/kg. At 3.6 MJ per kwH that's ~9.7kwH/l. A modern car uses about 6l gasoline per 100km, so 60kwH per 100km.
A Tesla Model S uses about 20kwH per 100km. So a modern ICE car is about 1/3 as efficient as a Tesla Model S.
But if we go from my argument, that we currently still burn oil to provide more electricity and adding more energy consumers to the network only delays the reduction of burning fossil fuels for electricity, we need to take into account the efficiency of fossil power plants. An oil power plant runs at about 45% efficiency. Lets ignore transport and charging losses, as transporting gasoline isn't exactly free either.
That takes the Tesla up to 45 kwH/100km. So that's actually still a 25% efficiency gain towards the ICE car, which I didn't expect. To get the full picture however, we would have to add the 65.000kwH of energy used to build a 100kwH battery pack (upscaled based on [1]). A (estimated) 10kg steel gasoline tank takes maybe 200kwH of energy to manufacture (based on 50GJ/1000kg of steel and some adds for other stuff that needs to be done). Even if I'm off by an order of magnitude on the steel tank, that's still an energy difference worth north of 100.000km (i.e. more than most cars travel in their lifetime or another at least 50% effiency loss for the EV).
I still wonder if the 25% efficiency gain outweights the cost of the battery production and the cost of adding a large scale charging network to support the broad adoption of electricle vehicles. Or, to rephrase my original argument, if we are better off taking the additional ~50% efficiency loss in converting energy to fuels and focus on expanding our carbon neutral energy production, shutting of fossil power plants and investing more in fusion energy so that might become a reality and we can create an abundance of energy to work with.
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316884465_Manufactu...
See this [1] for discussion of gasoline production - even more unexpected and complicated to tally.
We are already getting EV emitting less CO2 each year, see here [2]. With wind/solar (+batteries) getting even more wins over coal due to price drops, this process will only accelerate — no need to wait for fusion.
[1] https://greentransportation.info/energy-transportation/gasol...
[2] https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-data-show-electri...
So, when we are adding additional energy consumption to the network in the form of (many) EV, it will not charge with nuclear power, but more likely that we need to burn fossil fuel to keep the network up.
[1] https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publi...
In the US, it looks like the average passenger car is 11.6 years old. Since that's the average, even optimistically, there are probably a LOT of 15+ year old cars on the road.
So you probably need to have all new cars sold in the US be electric within 5 years to have a more-or-less complete turnover within 20 years.
(The figures for non-pickup trucks are even worse, with 17 years being the AVERAGE.)
Another potentially massive market will be in making "legacy" cars become autonomous, but that's still unknown as to when that market will really hit off as the technology still isn't there (or approved of by law makers). Still, moving first on that could really be big.
In general I think there is a massive market in old vehicles that isn't been capitalized on. Of course you have scrap, part selling, fixing, etc - but some of these working vehicles (with little wrong) get scrapped for no reason. From a green carbon footprint stand point, a lot of the car's carbon footprint is in making the vehicle itself. When you buy a 10+ year old car I think you're doing more to save the planet, regardless of whether the emissions are higher.