Slashdot Mirror
Electric Car Battery Prices Fell By 80% In the Last 7 Years, Says Study (electrek.co)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Electrek: A new study published this month by McKinsey and Company looks into how automakers can move past producing EVs as compliance cars and "drive electrified vehicle sales and profitability." Unsurprisingly, it describes battery economics as an important barrier to profitability and though the research firm sees a path to automakers making a profit selling electric vehicles as battery costs fall, it doesn't see that happening for "the next two to three product cycles" -- or between 2025 and 2030. That's despite battery costs falling from ~1,000 per kWh in 2010 to ~$227 per kWh in 2016, according to McKinsey. The company wrote in the report: "Despite that drop, battery costs continue to make EVs more costly than comparable ICE-powered variants. Current projections put EV battery pack prices below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, and suggest the potential for pack prices to fall below $100/kWh by 2030." Automakers capable of staying ahead of that cost trend will be able to achieve higher margins and possible profits on electric vehicle sales sooner. Tesla is among the automakers staying ahead of the trend. While McKinsey projects that battery pack prices will be below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, Tesla claims to be below $190/kWh since early 2016. That's how the automaker manages to achieve close to 30% gross margin on its flagship electric sedan, the Model S. Tesla aims to reduce the price of its batteries by another 30% ahead of the Model 3 with the new 2170 cells in production at the Gigafactory in Nevada. It should enable a $35,000 price tag for a vehicle with a range of over 200 miles, but McKinsey sees $100/kWh as the target for "true price parity with ICE vehicles (without incentives)": "Given current system costs and pricing ability within certain segments, companies that offer EVs face the near-term prospect of losing money with each sale. Under a range of scenarios for future battery cost reductions, cars in the C/D segment in the US might not reach true price parity with ICE vehicles (without incentives) until between 2025 and 2030, when battery pack costs fall below $100/kWh, creating financial headwinds for automakers for the next two to three product cycles." UPDATE 2/3/17: We have changed the source to Electrek and quoted McKinsey and Company -- the company that conducted the study.
start that diy project on some modded sports car...
"produced at 227 kWh per kWh in 2010"
"will be $ 190 per kWh and $ 20 per kWh less than $ 100 per kWh"
wtf?
> we can see that the same batteries can be produced at 227 kWh per kWh in 2010...
And it's in the original article, too. Someone needs a new editor...
God, is it so hard to write:
"In 2010 an electric car battery cost $x per kWh and usually had capacity y kWh, and by 2020 this will be $x' and y'."
It's starting to look as if electric cars and clean energy may actually be manage to kill off the fossil fuel industry in the foreseeable future. Will not be shedding any tears when that happens. This would also explain why Trump is in such a hurry to eradicate the EPA. If the price of clean energy keeps falling, eventually the only way Oil and Coal will be able to compete is if they do not have to respect any environmental legislation and the Trump admin fixes it so that they can pollute at will. Once the price of clean energy and electric vehicles falls below even the prices they can offer under those circumstances Oil and Coal will be in trouble. But then again who knows, maybe we will actually see numbers rivalling the women's march hitting the streets to protest the murder of the EPA in which case this may happen even sooner.
....why are electric cars still ridiculously expensive? For most of the models on the market I can get two or even three gas powered cars. Sure, there probably is a difference in the cost of operation, but the biggest hurdle is the initial cost....which is why I drive a 15 year old car, although it only has 61000 miles on it. I rarely drive more than about 15 miles a day, I'd be the perfect candidate for an EV, but an EV costs as much as a house in this region.
i give this post a solid 5/7..... per kwh.... per kwh in 2010
It's starting to look as if electric cars and clean energy may actually be manage to kill off the fossil fuel industry in the foreseeable future
I suppose that depends on what your definition of "foreseeable" is. Quite frankly I don't see it happening during my lifetime and according to actuarial tables I probably have around another 30-40 years left.
Here is what I I do see as possibilities/likelihoods within the next 40 years. Politics could obviously interfere with any/all of this
1) Hybrid and electric cars take major amounts of market share. They won't eliminate internal combustion engines but they will substantially mitigate their impact. If charge times can be made less than 10-15 minutes, electric vehicles will dominate market share in passenger vehicles. Luxury cars will mostly be hybrids within 10-15 years and the technology will trickle down from there.
2) Solar roofs will become a thing on high end houses and many commercial buildings. (added benefit of greater system reliability)
3) Wind farms and industrial scale solar become an increasingly important part of our energy portfolio. Probably not the majority but 30%+ is realistic. 50%+ is possible.
4) Batteries and power storage systems will improve significantly and solar/wind as well as transport will benefit in proportion.
5) Coal will remain expensive as long as natural gas is plentiful from fracking but coal will remain a large % of the US and Chinese energy portfolios due to the abundant amounts available in those two countries.
6) Oil and gas based fuels will continue to play a dominant role in our energy portfolios for at least another 30-40 years. Exact percent unclear but big number without question.
Things that could accelerate matters? Widespread adoption of carbon taxes. Removal of subsidies from fossil fuel industry. Appropriate levels of taxation on diesel/gasoline fuels commensurate with their environmental impact. Subsidies of renewable energy technology development. Continued increases in requirements to filter fossil fuel emissions and increased fuel economy standards. I wouldn't necessarily expect any of these but any or all of them would help.
The big obstacle? Politics. The fossil fuel industry has almost endless piles of money and politicians in their pockets. That's going to continue to be a real problem.
Wtf Trump has to do with this?
Let me count the ways... How about we cover the most basic reasons he is relevant? He's president of one of the largest energy producing and energy consuming countries in the world. He has stated point blank that he thinks climate change is a hoax and that he wants to roll back regulations on fossil fuel emissions. He has significant personal investments in the oil and gas companies. Fossil fuel companies have a direct interest in preventing electric vehicles (and renewable energy) from becoming a thing because it hurts them economically.
So we have a president with a clear and obvious conflict of interest due to investments in oil and gas companies who has every reason (philosophic and economic) to oppose further development of electric vehicles and related technologies if they hurt the fossil fuel industry.
And the year after, better still
etc.
It is only at the point when a buyer will spend less on buying and running an EV over its lifetime, than the person would spend on buying and running a car that uses petrol or diesel that it makes economic sense.
The next question would be that if your intention is to "save the planet", would the cost difference be better spent on an EV or by being donated to one of the causes advocating less climate change?
(Of course, there is a third reason: to be able to brag look at me, I've got an electric car! Aren't I trendy / environmentally responsible / rich)
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
That was my reaction, too... insanely expensive 9V primary cells on the shelf, and even bulk ordered, rechargeables are looking more economical for 9V at this point because the price of rechargeables is so much lower now. The question is A) whether your smoke detectors are built to deal with the fast cutoff at end of charge for non-alkaline cells B) whether they are maintained by you alone so your rechargeables don't get swiped and C) whether there is some stupid rule that rechargeables aren't allowed even if the smoke detectors are compatible.so you don't get flagged during some sort of inspection and D) whether replacing the smoke detector with a model that does 3x AA is also an option.
Normally for something like low draw a smoke detector rechargeables would not make financial sense, but at these prices...
Someone had to do it.
o The vehicle is inherently power source agnostic.
o The vehicle changes power source based on the area it is in when it charges.
o An EV uses energy more efficiently than an ICEV.
o It's easier and more efficient to reduce pollution at one power plant than to upgrade/alter/replace large numbers of polluting vehicles. Coal plant pollution is highly accessible for pollution control. There are post-combustion products and ash. Both can be approached; while the EV produces zero additional distributed pollution itself.
o More non-coal power is coming online in many areas. You can already supplement whatever source is feeding power to your home with wind and solar. But this is unlikely to change anything about the coal plant, because...
o How you charge your car is extremely unlikely to change the coal plant's output. You're just using more of what is being produced if you charge from its output. The typical coal plant runs at a very steady rate; it takes a lot of time to fire up a coal fueled generator, so coal plants can't respond to power grid variations quickly. So they run at a capacity able to deliver what might be needed all the time. They don't generally sit there with idle generators, either. And if they can, that means the area is getting power from elsewhere to take up the slack, and that may very well be from sources other than coal.
o If you have an ICEV, your pollution footprint is fixed by your unbreakable link to the petroleum industry for the service life of the vehicle and/or the time you own it, whichever is shorter. But if you have an EV, the instant that coal plant is supplemented or replaced by a less polluting source (which is almost anything, coal plants are not great), your pollution footprint becomes smaller.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
From 2010 to 2016, battery pack prices fell roughly 80% from ~$1,000/kWh to ~$227/kWh
From 2013 to 2017, ranges of EVs have increased. The Nissan Leaf went from 75mi to 107mi, and the Tesla Model S went from 208mi to 249mi. This is mostly due to bigger battery packs (24kWh --> 30kWh and 60kWh --> 75kWh respectively).
In 2016, the battery pack cost is still ~$227/kWh, meaning that a 60kWh Tesla battery pack is ~$13600. The target cost for parity with ICE vehicles is $100/kWh, which is likely to happen sometime between 2025 and 2030.
(((dB)))
Where I live, my EV compares to a 38 MPG gasoline car in total CO2 output. http://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/images/2015/11/vehicles-m-emissions-map-with-notes.jpg
And importantly, your diesel won't bring 38 MPG if you are driving in stop-and-go traffic in the city, idling at stoplights, etc. You'll exceed that on the highway, but in the real world cars spend much of their time off the highway.
A Prius may have less CO2 output than a typical EV where I live, but those are a hybrid with gasoline generator, with similar drivetrains to electric cars (including a battery).
In California, where half our EVs are sold, an EV has total wheels-to-wells emissions comparable to 87 MPG. Better than any diesel or gasoline powered automobile.
These numbers are increasing as coal is phased out, and some drivers opt for 100% renewable energy as I have done.
They are. The Volt's base price has dropped from the mid 40's to about $33k. With more EV range. The current Leaf's price has also dropped, in spite of a capacity increase from 24 kWh to 30 kWh in the base model.
And the Bolt EV, with a net MSRP under $30k and 200+ miles of range, would not have been possible a few years ago. Soon the Model 3 will join it.
http://m.1688.com/offer/527488...
$200 per 1kwH module
Self driving cars will increase adoption of electric cars. Currently, the range is limited due to high cost of battery and very few fast charging stations are there. Imagine your office is 30 miles commute and charging station is 0.5 mile away from your office. You can't use cheap electric cars with 75-80 miles range. But if these are self driving, then you just get down at your office and the car will go to charging station and park itself.
It is also possible that self driving cars will make taxis cheaper than owning cars and most people will get rid of cars and use taxis (or at least have only 1 owned car per family). The self driving cars or taxis will charge batteries overnight, drive people during peak hours, charge around noon and drive back in evening.
So the future is electric cars even at current battery prices.