EV battery prices to fall by nearly 50 pct and near ICE parity by 2026
thedriven.io
thedriven.io
Also the 50% number is based on a bump in cathode material price in 2022 and 23 as can be clearly seen in the graph.
It's now returned to a long term trend and up front purchase price parity has been predicted for mid 2020s for about a decade now.
Here an article from 2017:
https://about.bnef.com/blog/electric-cars-reach-price-parity...
Anyone working on longer timescales should have been planning for this. China was, the West wasn't and now the cheaper and better cars of the future are Chinese made.
Sorry but this is just not true for any honest meaning of the word "true".
Yes, you have TCO parity in some market segments for some use cases, particularly higher up the market (Tesla M3 vs BMW M3) and in the bottom of the market (subcompacts and compact crossovers) but there are giant gaping holes.
There is no TCO parity (or even an offering) for intentionally built to a price utility vehicles, the little euro city vans and Ford Maverick type stuff.
And this is before you start talking fullsize trucks and vans. The E-transit is a joke from a TCO perspective. It only makes sense if you're trying to run a fairly swanky low milage shuttle service and even then not really. I guess a few senior centers might like them.
The electric half ton trucks are compelling for certain use cases and feature sets but the purchase prices are just so high to start with that the TCO on any useful timeline is way above that of white trucks with vinyl carpets and V6 engines.
TCO parity really isn't there for anyone who gives a crap about TCO and buys accordingly because those people gravitate to the low TCO ICEs and purchase price is such a large contributor to TCO that a reduction in operating costs doesn't wash that out on a timeline that the overwhelming majority of new car buyers care about.
Source: Purchases a new car last quarter. Wanted an EV, wound up with an ICE Honda. :(
I think without half ton trucks that get used as personal commuter vehicles in the mix the comparison gets even less favorable to EVs. Vans face all the same problems but worse because people don't buy $50k half ton vans for mostly commuting with a little bit of heavier work thrown in so the tradeoffs are going to make sense for fewer people. There aren't any midsize electric pickups from big OEMs yet (i.e. I bet someone in China makes one that isn't sold internationally).
I guess insane European fuel costs do potentially make the comparison better in the SUV market segments though...
Which makes sense. Like city busses, EV vans in last mile city traffic are the low hanging fruit for EV adoption.
Planned routes. Being part of mixed fleets (similar to having a two car family and using the EV for most journeys to maximise fuel savings). Stop and go traffic for regen.
Can you cite one? All I'm finding is SEO/AI/low effort listicle type garbage.
>Which makes sense. Like city busses, EV vans in last mile city traffic are the low hanging fruit for EV adoption.
If it makes so much sense for so many users then why aren't we seeing more than the slightest trickle of the?
There's a reason I called the E-transit a joke. That's because it is. Low milage "go somewhere and stay there all day" type van buyers won't pay the initial price. The people moving users who generally buy the higher priced stuff new rack up too many miles in a day and they're gonna suffer some of the worst real world range because they have to heat and cool the cargo.
The only bigger work vehicle EVs are really starting to make sense for is city busses and local delivery (e.g. Amazon and similiar) that need low range, low flexibility (can't turn a van around and send it back out with a new driver at end of shift) and high up front cost. That's a tiny slice of users.
I really want this to work (especially for motor coaches for obvious NVH reasons) because EVs when they work they do an amazing job being pure appliance vehicles. But it just doesn't pencil out without using mental tricks or just writing off downsides that need to be planned around because "other people's money".
That said, there absolutely is the potential for large key players to aquire more control and|or to maximise their profits rather than minimise and end price.
Today’s battery and minerals supply chains revolve around China
China produces three-quarters of all lithium-ion batteries and is home to 70% of production capacity for cathodes and 85% for anodes (both are key components of batteries). Over half of lithium, cobalt and graphite processing and refining capacity is located in China.
Europe is responsible for over one-quarter of global EV assembly, but it is home to very little of the supply chain apart from cobalt processing at 20%.
The United States has an even smaller role in the global EV battery supply chain, with only 10% of EV production and 7% of battery production capacity.
Korea and Japan have considerable shares of the supply chain downstream of raw material processing, particularly in the highly technical production of cathode and anode material. Korea is responsible for 15% of global cathode material production capacity, while Japan accounts for 14% of cathode and 11% of anode material production. Korean and Japanese companies are also involved in the production of other battery components such as separators.
Most key minerals are mined in resource-rich countries such as Australia, Chile and the Democratic Republic of Congo, and handled by a few major companies.
I ran a python script the other day using the French state data on pricing. Minimal wage was about 1000 euros after tax in 2003, and is 1300 in 2023. But 1000 in 2003 is about 2300 euros in 2023 according to the same official data.
I don't know a single vital thing in my life that is not more expensive now than when I was a kid: food, water, energy, shelter, clothes, health... They are all more expensive.
Now sure, internet access is less expensive and better, but you can't eat wifi.
Also, comparing changes in income deciles over time would be more useful than minimum wage changes, as legislatures are not necessarily reacting in real time.
> food, water, energy, shelter, clothes, health
Many of these are things where technological advances resulting in greater and greater economies of scale plateaued, or where technological advances mean that your expectation of the quality of goods or service greatly increased.
The former would be water/energy/shelter/food/clothes. The world has a lot more people competing for these resources, but there was no commensurate increase in supply.
The latter would be health, where the healthcare from your childhood is a greatly different product (at the advanced levels, not necessarily the routine checkup or flu visit).
But I'm sure you will find a reason while health is an exception.
As the other poster pointed out: Your logic is flawed because your premise is wrong. If the US had state controlled medical, I have no doubt our politicians would figure out some way to ruin that too.
Pretty easy to find an exception when you start with a false premise.
> Given that prices for health in the US are exorbitant because they are based on the free market
For the same reason that Americans can't buy a BYD Seagull.
https://www.recurrentauto.com/research/how-long-do-ev-batter...
Replacements do happen, but a lot of them are under warranty. Batteries are lasting longer than people expected, mainly due to really good management systems. These days the industry expects them to usually last the life of the car, though that allows for a range reduction down to 70% of the original.
Further tweaks to battery chemistry will probably improve things further. I might not buy an EV with 100K miles on it just yet, but I'd do 30K; a lot of the warranties go to 100K.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2022/08/01/electric...
The only problems have been the predictable ones - bad designs like the early Nissan Leafs which had no thermal management.
That said, the amount of datapoints here should increase by orders of magnitude over the next 2-3 years as the first million Model 3s roll out of their 8 year battery warranty period.
I'm sure that once there is regular demand for battery replacements, the cost won't be much different than an engine rebuild.
So even the pessimist case for EVs today is "well the TCO is lower for the first decade but then..." and I think we will be solving the "but then.." soon.
which means when buying a car, you expect the range listed on the label to only be 70% effective.
I'm sure you could generate a maintenance figure for EV that was lower than ICE if you wanted to. But I doubt that figure would be significant, maybe 10-15% if you're lucky.
Why ? Well, let's face it, an EV is still a car. So you still have 99% of the same old things ... tyres, brakes, shock-absorbers, windscreen, windscreen wiper blades, washer fluid, AC gas etc. etc. etc.
And then, of course, if there are problems with your EV battery, or its time for an EV battery replacement, then that 10-15% saving goes out the window. :)
Aren't brakes one shared system where electric vehicles have an advantage? With the widespread use of regenerative braking, most of the energy of motion is bled off without friction on wear parts. EVs still need brake discs and calipers to maintain a full stop (particularly on an incline), for emergency braking, and as a failsafe, but the parts should experience much less routine wear.
Additionally, your list omits the entire exhaust system, which is full of components that can foul up or corrode. Combustion exhaust gasses can be pretty corrosive stuff, particularly when combined with water condensation on short trips/cold days.
There are also gazillion things to fail and to be repaired. Sensors, hoses, cables, alternator, fuel lines, clutch, exhaust system. All these parts were replaced in family’s petrol cars during last years.
I doubt, that today’s Teslas will have battery problems. They have enough knowledge for volume production. Expect 2% early battery capacity degradation though.
No, an ICE has a very complex drivetrain with thousands of moving parts. Belts, transmissions, gears, fuel filter, oil seals and gaskets, batteries (ICE's need them too), spark plugs, fuel pump, fuel injector, alternator, radiator and water pump, catalytic converter, etc etc .
Brakes also wear slower on EVs since regnerative braking captures some energy.
Electric motors themselves are far more reliable and simpler than ICE motors.
The complexity as defined by parts count doesn't have much practical impact on TCO.
I've replaced a few ICE batteries in my time. You can replace them at home in 5 minutes and they are a gazillion times cheaper than an EV battery. :)
> ICE has a very complex drivetrain with thousands of moving parts. Belts, transmissions, gears, fuel filter, oil seals and gaskets
This whole thing about ICE is FUD IMHO. Yes, complex, but on modern ICE vehicles is highly-reliable.
Also I would argue with EVs you are replacing ICE "complexity" with other complexity. For example, in EVs you now have individual motors on four wheels (i.e. potentially four points of failure), you have all the software in EVs etc. etc. etc.
I would also argue that the ICE "complexity" of what you speak is NOT where the bulk of ICE maintenance costs come from. Afterall, topping up the oil and replacing gaskets is kids work.
The bulk of ICE maintenance will ultimately be the same as EV maintenance, i.e. all the wear-and-tear parts I listed already, such as tyres.
A quick change once the parts arrived they said. The car is still under warranty so won't cost me a dime, but if the bill they presented me with is real and not some "medical bill" shenanigans, the charger alone would be 1/8th the price of the car as new, total repair cost 1/5th...
So yeah, still some expensive parts that can break. Was quite happy with very little maintenance costs so far, but if that price was real and charger breaks after warranty is out, the whole value proposition is quite different.
There's many studies comparing the cost, I've never see any that put the saving as low as 10 to 15%, 50% is a more common figure.
Most manufacturers grantee their batteries , mine has a 10 year warranty.Batteries developing problems and needing to be replaces is not really a thing.
No, I have not cherry picked.
Because the remaining 1%, topping-up oil, replacing gaskets, belts etc. is simply not where the bulk of ICE maintenance costs come from. This sort of stuff can be done cheaply and easily by your local garage.
The bulk of the ICE and EV maintenance costs is the same, the stuff that gets exposed to the wear-and-tear of the elements, i.e. your tyres, your windscreen, your shock-absorbers etc. etc.
An EV does not make you immune to getting nails in your tyres, chips in your windscreen, cracks in your shock-absorbers etc. ....
> Most manufacturers grantee their batteries , mine has a 10 year warranty
As with most things of this nature, I would be interested to see the wordings of such warranties, particularly the exclusion clauses. :)
> There's many studies comparing the cost...
And if we exclude studies funded/conducted by the EV companies or others with vested interests ? :)
i've heard, not 100% sure if true, that EV tends to push the tyres harder, as they accelerate harder. This means tyres lasts for less for an EV.
I would think the regen breaking might also put wear on the tyres, especially for those people who like it set in the more aggressive modes.
A ten year battery warranty means most used car buyers would be without a battery warranty. My current car was 12 years old when I got it, and in basically pristine condition. Good ICE cars are very durable in a way that the batteries in EVs simply aren't.
I'm on the sideline waiting for the battery tech to improve a bit more before buying my next (electric) car.
As an aside, I'm horrified by what new privacy invasive "features" these cars will include in all electric cars.
EVs have really high-end battery management systems and cooling, which will have a huge impact on battery life.
Heck even my phone is lasting better these days with just better software battery management in Android. My current oneplus 9 is going on three and a half years old and hasn't notably degraded in battery life. Whereas I'm pretty sure I remember all my previous phones having noticeable battery degradation after a year or so.
While true, the analogy is bad. The phones (and to some extent laptops) are notorious of the overcharge. The Li-Ion (cobalt) normally should be charged to 4.22V or so. Tool batteries usually do not go over 4.18V. Yet, the phones are happily pushing 4.35V - which provides longer life per charge initially, plus a proper planned obsolescence later.
EV do proper battery management AND cooling.
My main horror with EVs, particularly Teslas is putting everything on a tablet display in the middle.
Its like it was designed by some kid who's never driven a car.
Its a safety issue, frankly. IMHO.
And at least in case of Teslas it's mostly the higher models in higher trims, since those are the ones the early customers bought.
Notably the kid said the hardest thing about the swap was sourcing the replacement battery.
I really think given a few more years when millions of Model 3s/Ys reach their 2nd/3rd owners, we will see this become more routine.
Also people talk about pack replacements like they are a single monolith but many cars have packs composed of 10-20 modules. Some modules can even be repaired at the cell level. So costs can trend down over time.
2. You need to know a lot about batteries and even more about battery management system and then know how to integrate batteries + BMS into a car. Sure you might be able to reuse existing BMS for a car you are targeting but it will quickly become a bottle neck in your manufacturing if you do so.
3. Pairing of parts. Related to point 3. You might be able to build a battery pack, are you able to also force the car to take the battery pack? Car might outright refuse to talk to it, because it is not paired and OEM won't let you pair it, because "safety", but more like safety of their profits.
4. Shipping of Lithium batteries in general is huge PITA. Try to ship battery of any size with Fedex/DHL/UPS. They either outright refuse to or you will pay a lot of extra.
The insurance rates are higher because they gotta cover six months of rental car while some unobtanium back ordered headlight takes 3mo to ship to the one body shop in 100mi that won't actually get around to working on it for another 3mo (I'm exagerating a little here but not nearly as much as I wish I was).
We all pay for it on some level.
Quite frankly, I trust them a lot more than internet commenters. They have a financial incentive to have good statistics on how cars keep their value. What's more, I trust them a lot more to make recommendations based purely off those statistics, uncompromised by ideology and/or environmental concern. Internet commenters are the same clowns who would have me believe it's rational and practical to give up my car and rely on public transit... in America. So yeah, I bought a Jap ICE car.
Also "Jap" is considered a slur.
When I search online I see a lot of back and forth. Some claim EVs breakdown more other say ICE (https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-reliability-owner-s..., https://thedriven.io/2024/03/13/the-data-is-in-evs-far-less-...).
It does feel like who makes the car says more about the reliability than EV or ICE at this point.
Modern cars in general are quick to be totaled when they get into an accident because of this general trend. It's not isolated to EVs.
EVs are very repairable, but also just have far fewer moving parts and those they have are put through far less stress than comparable components in an ICE vehicle. It was obvious that they would be more reliable as long as the batteries were not an issue. The batteries aren't an issue, so EVs are way more reliable and will last a lot longer than ICE vehicles. The remaining issue to be solved is infrastructure for people in multi family buildings and road trips. We'll get there.
There's a Consumer Reports survey (note: not a study as widely mis-reported) that gets all the Google results when you search about EV reliability, which paints a terrible "80% worse than ICE" picture. But this is extremely misleading. First, it's lumping together any and all issues with cars from software glitches to a busted transmission. Obviously severity needs to be taken into account, but also many EVs are being either made by start ups like Rivian and Lucid or are on totally new platforms by legacy manufacturers and have had buggy software due to those issues like the VW iD4. But most of these issues do not make the car undrivable and get fixed via software updates, and should not be thought of in the same way as traditional car problems like "my check engine light came on and now the timing has been pulled back and my car is slow." Also, keeo in mind, it is a totally unscientific, self reported survey. So, I would not use it for purchasing decisions.
Instead, I'd look for scientific studies which are unfortunately much hardee to find on today's Google which is so biased for recency and wide reporting. One good resource is this site which at least addressed the battery reliability myth: https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths
Teslas are the most popular EV. That fact they're shit to repair DOES matter. It means if you're comparing a Model 3 to an Accord you might end up spending less on maintaining the Accord. Those are the real comparisons consumers are doing right now. Theoretical EV comparisons are worthless.
If I default on my auto loan, all the credit union gets out of it is repossessing the car. They therefore need to know what the car is actually worth and have a good idea of what the car will be worth for the extent of the loan period. If they mess this up they stand to lose money, not just on my car but every car they finance, and they're a conservative financial institution that doesn't like to lose money. Getting good statistics on cars is comparably cheap. It's hilarious that you don't know how this works.