It's always good to hear the arguments against electric cars. Some are valid, some are idiotic, and some simply betray a lack of knowledge about how the auto industry really works.
Into that last category may go some comments by one William M. Colton, ExxonMobil’s vice president for corporate strategic planning.
At least 10 years away
In an interview with The New York Times, he commented that electric-car batteries were "not ready for prime time," that a breakthrough to make electric cars practical wouldn't come for at least 10 years, and that gasoline's much greater energy density meant that buyers would always choose cars with longer ranges.
In more detail, Colton estimates the cost per kilowatt-hour of electric-car battery packs at $800 to $1,000. That must fall by half or more, he says, before electric cars are practical.
Well, yes, that may be true for many buyers. But basic research will show that the cost-performance of consumer lithium-ion cells--the ones in your mobile phone or laptop--has fallen 6 to 8 percent a year since the first one was introduced in 1989. Most analysts expect the same for large-format automotive cells.
2020? We're there
That means that by 2020, those costs will indeed have fallen by half.
So, in fact, in just 10 years from last December's launch of such cars as the 2011 Nissan Leaf and 2011 Chevy Volt, electric vehicles could be cost-competitive on purchase price with gasoline cars? (Not to mention the much, much lower cost-per-mile for electrics.)
Gee, that sounds pretty good to us.
Colton also neglects to mention that it will take the industry as much as 10 years to get to the point where even 1 or 2 percent of global vehicle production (now roughly 70 million vehicles a year, perhaps 100 million by then) will be electric cars. That's about the same path that hybrid-electric vehicles followed, by the way.
Really big numbers
Right now, there's debate over whether the U.S. can accomplish President Obama's goal of a total of 1 million plug-in vehicles on its roads by 2015. And that total (over five years) would be less than 10 percent of annual U.S. vehicle production.
In other words, folks, it's going to take time to build the new infrastructure of lithium-ion cell plants, electric-motor assembly lines, and so forth before we see any significant volumes of electric cars.
Colton seems blithely unaware of that reality.
More efficient gasoline engines, more hybrids
Colton also believes that gasoline engines will become much more efficient, and sales of hybrid-electric vehicles will grow as the cost of their electric machinery and battery packs comes down and more makers launch hybrid models.
And he suggests that replacing coal with natural gas in electric power-generating plants may be the most cost-effective way of all to reduce carbon emissions.
We think he's right on those three points. In fact, we've published numerous articles saying essentially the same thing (less so on the power-plant issue, since this is a site about cars).
Is it really fear of the plug?
But we note that everything he approves of has a fossil-fuel component, whether it's gasoline or natural gas.
And we wonder whether he's emblematic of an oil industry that has finally acknowledged that efforts to control carbon emissions may be inevitable.
But more efficient gasoline cars and hybrids still require gasoline. Plug-in cars don't.
Sure, the electricity that powers them may be generated by burning coal, but it may also come from those efficient natural-gas plants, and increasingly from renewable sources like wind and various forms of solar power.
So we have to wonder if it's really the prospect of battery electric vehicles that use no gasoline at all, and potentially nothing at all out of an oil well, that really scares at least one oil-company executive.
What do you think? Leave us your thoughts in the Comments section below.
+++++++++++
Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!
By ev enthusiast Posted: 2/11/2011 9:26am PST
By Tom Moloughney Posted: 2/11/2011 9:42am PST
Sounds like Mr. Colton and his comrades are at the laughing stage. I suppose we should be ready for the fight, real soon....
By Phil Posted: 2/11/2011 10:35am PST
If you are going to keep using these numbers at least state that they are "disputed". Don't know how else to say it.
So we don't need to wait until 2020. The batteries are half-price now.
http://www.technologyreview.com/files/49959/Jan11%20Feature%20Electric%20Cars%20p61.pdf
suggesting price is between $600 and $1105/KWH today.
Given that the batteries can be purchased for less than $400/KWH, I still think the numbers are too high.
last time he [Mr. Colton] looked, the battery in the Leaf cost $17,000.
By his calculation, batteries cost $800 to $1,000 per kilowatt-hour
Also:
'after about 5 years at which time the battery should have approximately 80% capacity.'
Source: Clean Technica (http://s.tt/130ch)
Too many ums, 'we thinks' and general dodging in this interview for my liking.
By Chris O Posted: 2/11/2011 11:47am PST
By Scott Posted: 2/11/2011 2:30pm PST
By Chris O Posted: 2/12/2011 1:56am PST
By JP Posted: 2/12/2011 6:20am PST
Once again, please note that $400/KWH is retail not wholesale. I think GM could do better than retail prices.
Continuing to use this $1000/KWH amounts to carrying water for EV opponents.
Here is yet another article calling battery prices at $400/KWH (early 2012 delivery). The company is Better Place which should know a thing or two about battery prices.
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/ev-batteries-dropping-rapidly-in-price/
The $1000/KWH number has got to go, or at the very least have a parenthetic "disputed" hanging out near by.
Later
John C. Briggs
http://www.evsroll.com/Electric_Car_Battery_Cost.html
Later
John C. Briggs
By Chris O Posted: 2/12/2011 8:23am PST
@JP: ever heard of Google?
By james billmaier Posted: 2/12/2011 9:47am PST
James Billmaier
By The Driving Dutchman Posted: 2/12/2011 11:26am PST
By TurboFroggy Posted: 2/12/2011 4:45pm PST
By Chris Taylor Posted: 2/12/2011 10:06pm PST
while the EV1 was not a spectacular car (2 seater) its BATTERY was game changing. 25 year lifespan 100 mile range $4500.
Yeah I say thats good enough for primetime seeing as how that would make it entirely possible to make a FULL RETAIL $13,500 100mile range 4 door mid size sedan no rebates no subsidies.
sadly the leaf is not viable. its pay back time exceeds its lifespan even for someone like me who drives 40,000 miles a year.
The battery pack is too expensive and too short lived. they would have to get the leaf battery pack down to $1200 to be viable against NIMH.
The E95 nimh is the trick. thats what we need to force them to produce.
then SERIOUS R&D dollars will start to flow into electric cars and we can be done with this crap once and for all.
I contend that it we hard core pushed to convert to EV that inside 10 years we will have $1000 battery packs that go 300 miles to a charge and last essentially forever (longer than the life of the car)
I saw thats possible inside of 10 years if we "hard core" switch to EV's
By Crazy Posted: 2/12/2011 10:09pm PST
In either case you're both making the same point, that realistically electric cars wont be prime time until 2020.
You then say he's right on three other points, perhaps he's not that blithely unaware of reality as you try to accuse him of.
A poorly framed argument if you can call it one, but I suppose your editors paid you for this article anyway.
By John Crowne-Foster Posted: 2/12/2011 10:25pm PST
By John Posted: 2/12/2011 11:16pm PST
By Corey Posted: 2/13/2011 6:21am PST
As it relates to this article, the primary purpose seems to be to communicate how uninformed Colton is to numerous realities. I really doubt that he is this. In fact, I see a bit of truth in what the article writer says - and what the auto exec says. I guess I'm not convinced by either person - especially considering that both are advocates for a particular cause. One for green - and one for profit. Personally, I see the auto exec as in a more "informed" position on this topic. And, the auto exec knows that profits WILL come from green cars. Thus, there is little incentive for him to be anti-green. All manufacturers see that people want to move to green technology. Too bad that people are foolish enough to believe that buying a Toyota Prius is an amazingly wise choice. There is a lot more waste being created every time a new car is created. And, what about all of the toxic chemicals from the batteries? What about how many batteries these cars will require in a lifetime. Sadly, I see hardly any articles on these realities. Green cars haven't arrived the way some people are advocating.
By Corey Posted: 2/13/2011 7:05am PST
See "LED Products Billed as Eco-Friendly Contain Toxic Metals, Study Finds" on Science Daily.
ScienceDaily (Feb. 11, 2011) — Those light-emitting diodes marketed as safe, environmentally preferable alternatives to traditional lightbulbs actually contain lead, arsenic and a dozen other potentially hazardous substances, according to newly published research.
By JP Posted: 2/13/2011 9:13am PST
Funny, yes I found it.
Research on the dirtiness of cars shows that 90% of the pollution comes from the gasoline they consume and not the construction of the vehicle itself. So a 50MPG city Prius is one heck of a lot less polluting that anything else that you can buy. Well with the possible exceptions of EVs.
Sure get yourself a Nissan LEAF for about $25,000 after tax rebate. That should be less than the cost of your house if you live in the USA.
By Matt Posted: 2/13/2011 10:40pm PST
By Mike Posted: 2/14/2011 5:49am PST
By Mike Posted: 2/14/2011 6:00am PST
By JP Posted: 2/14/2011 7:42am PST
By Keith Johnston Posted: 2/15/2011 4:58am PST
Have an opinion?Join the conversation!