Hypx

The solution is to eliminate self-driving cars and instead invest more in mass transit and walkable neighborhoods.

We’re slowing turning smartphones into dumbphones again. Many of us used to rock 10+ year old phones, since phone calls and texting doesn’t need anything fancy.

Are you talking about FCEVs? You can also include directly electrified vehicles, but that is mostly mass transit.

And yes, electrification as a whole will succeed. But BEVs probably are not. I call them fads because they are just toys for the rich and they are unlikely to be affordable for most people.

It’s wrong because li-ion batteries at the time were way better than what it claims:

https://news.panasonic.com/global/press/en091218-2

This is from 2009, and already we reached 675 Wh/L. So there’s no way the DoE link is true.

Except those fundamental limits are far higher. The fact is that hydrogen stores energy at 120 MJ/kg. Even at 5% weight efficiency, that’s 6 MJ/kg. Or 1,666 Wh/kg. At 10%, it is 3,333 Wh/kg. Far beyond any battery.

Your link is seriously lying. 8x is the gap between lead-acid and li-ion batteries. The claims are simply impossible. The author must be unknowingly comparing lead-acid battery powered cars to li-ion battery powered cars. I cannot see any other way his claim is true.

A lithium-air battery is literally a fuel cell. In fact, what did you think hydrogen fuel cells were this entire time?

I would say that’s pretty unlikely there will be a 10x improvement in battery chemistry. At some point, we will have to deal with the fundamental limitations of the technology. That will likely imply a different kind of EV. Other conversations in this thread have brought up the FCEV, which is honestly the mostly likely guess for what comes after the BEV. In other words, the solution is to move beyond batteries, not pretend we can just improve batteries ad absurdum.

Also, this is basically the point of the book The Innovator’s Dilemma. Technology does not improve linearly exclusively. At some point, major shifts in the market will have to happen. If you think about this problem honestly, you probably have to conclude that the limitations of the BEV must be solved by a big leap forward, not incremental improvements in batteries. And if you can reach that conclusion, then you must realize that the BEV has to be a transitional technology. Perhaps, even a fad.

Again, we can all see your votes!

So basically downvote = disagree again.

Again, acting like you’re on Reddit just makes you a loser.

Are you going to reduce this post too? Is this post just another example of bad faith posting? Are you really that shallow?

LOL, proven to not just be a loser, but a dishonest loser too.

PS: You do know all favorites/boosts/reduces are public right? Like I can see that you are reducing all my posts. I’d prefer it if you don’t carry over this bit of Redditism.

LOL you’re such a loser.

Unlike you, I actually know something about the subject. BEVs are never going to be particular cheap cars. The only exceptions are things like neighborhood cars. Basically, the only make a BEV cheap is by not giving it any range.

In reality, it will be something else like FCEVs. And you should be more open to this possibility, not closemindedly think that it can only be the BEV.

Let me throw out a guess, you think it’ll be the hydrogen FCEV’s that will take over? Those can be pretty expensive right now though. Do you think the technology will improve and get cheaper over time by any chance?

Sure. In fact, FCEVs can be as cheap as ICE cars. They completely avoid the problem of needing giant batteries. As a result, their cost floor is the same as conventional cars today.

Can you really argue that BEVs will survive if you knew that? The better question is why would we even need BEVs if hydrogen cars prove to be far cheaper?

That’s ridiculous. You basically admitted that we switched from germanium to silicon, but that this apparently doesn’t count as a difference.

Not to mention that this is massively off-topic. The point is that batteries do not improve as fast as transistors did in the 1990s. Hence why an analogy is wrong.

And if you are aware that Moore’s law is (more or less) dead today, then you should understand the problem that batteries are facing. They too are hitting hard physical limits. You talk of solid state batteries but they are nowhere to be found right now. Clearly, this is a hard problem and future batteries will not magically be far superior.

But ultimately, there are other green ideas not called the BEV. Including other types of EVs. This is why I try to make it clear that I am talking about BEVs specific. Not EVs in general. Once other people become aware of this fact, it will become much clearer that the BEV is a fad. It is an expensive and very limited idea. It is arguably an idea stuck in the mid-2000s, and its advocates have simply failed to move on.

Yes, that is the argument. If it is a very expensive technology, it will only be for rich people. It could never be viable for poorer countries. Hence why it is a fad.

Last I checked, almost no human beings go into space. It is not at the level of “fad” because it is basically pure science and not a real market.

And please don’t use the word “EV” for this conversation. I’m talking about BEVs specifically. There are other types of EVs out there. Ones that will be much cheaper in the long-run. In fact, this is why I am 100% confident that BEVs are a fad. People who disagree with me simply aren’t aware that there are EVs that are not BEVs.

Maybe you should visit some poorer countries. BEVs are incredibly far away from being mainstream. Not to mention how much of the “success” of BEVs is due to subsidies. It is not an organic market.

The point is that you cannot compare BEVs to computers. And certainly not the period from the 1990s. BEVs are improving at a slow rate and will have major physical limitations preventing them from going beyond a certain level. That is the point.

And because of that, they are going to end up being a fad. By the time they are “ready” to take over, technology will have moved on and BEVs will be obsolete.

Are you seriously joking? A transistor today is much smaller and faster than what existed in 1947. That is what is driving Moore’s law.

Batteries evolve only very slowly, and run into hard physical limits at every step. As a result, BEVs are very expensive and have major downsides like weight, long recharge times, etc.

Because I want to tell the truth, not swallow marketing propaganda from Tesla. In reality, BEVs are a fad and no amount of wishful thinking will change that.

The name is a coincidence. I’ve used this name for a long time (from elsewhere to be clear).

The list is dominated by SUVs and pick-up trucks. The “below $40k” market is all subcompacts or compacts and are the equivalent of $20k ICE cars. It is not a competitive technology. If anything, it just proves how underwhelming BEVs actually are.

You’re joking? The first one on that list is literally the Hummer EV. Completely unaffordable for most people. This is just more evidence that BEVs are a fad, not the other way around.

There is no Moore’s law of batteries. BEVs are always going to be fairly expensive compared to other types of cars. They will not magically improve like PCs have.

Not to mention BEVs are old technology. They literally pre-date internal combustion cars.

This is why BEVs are fundamentally just a fad. It is a toy for rich white men and little else. It is fundamentally too expensive for normal people. They’re not even the most important car in the household, and is usually just the second car.