troelb.bsky.social
Calling out misinformation on EVs since 2024 ^^
490 posts
35 followers
14 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
That depends on the timeframe. In 2024 Tesla outsold BYD BEVs. For Q1 2025, however, the stated facts are certainly true.
Time will tell how the race continues. If I had to guess, I'd go with BYD, but I don't have a crystal ball.
comment in response to
post
It's lovely, I've been driving it for 3 years now.
However, by now there are technologically more advanced cars available, but that depends on your market of course!
Is the Hyundai Inster available to you? That would be the top contender imo.
comment in response to
post
Das sind überwiegend kleine Speicher in Privathaushalten, oder?
Diese werden meistens nicht netzdienlich betreiben.
Wir lassen so viel Potential liegen. Auch können viele Elektroautos bereits bidirektional laden, ebenfalls ungenutzt. Immerhin kommen langsam auch ein paar Gridspeicher...
comment in response to
post
Klingt für mich ehrlich gesagt nicht nach GAU, sondern einem anstrengungslosen Füllartikel. Vielleicht schon frühes Sommerloch?
Der Inhalt beschränkt sich ja auf "viele Elektroautos gefallen Herrn Fleischhauer nicht".
Auf die realen Probleme, die es noch gibt, wird ja gar nicht eingegangen...
comment in response to
post
And trying to answer your question:
More capacity can be solved by "more of what we have already". So it can be simple within some limits.
Charging speed is difficult, because of heat losses (thus cooling needs) and stress on the battery. And there is an engineering trade-off between these goals.
comment in response to
post
I agree, range is overvalued and can be substituted by charging speed. Most people will need a break after 2-4 hours of driving anyways.
My guess is that this focus on range is just status quo bias / loss aversion.
But manufacturers seem to improve on both :)
comment in response to
post
Source: Trust me, bro.
XD
Again, lashing out is a poor substitute for evidence.
Since you figured me out already, please educate me about cell chemistry, form factor and cell voltage of the production line you were involved in :D
comment in response to
post
Globally, the share of people willing to switch back is less than one third. Source: www.mckinsey.com/featured-ins...
But of course, this is questionnaire data, not actual behavior and probably not representative of current and future EV drivers.
comment in response to
post
So from "nobody", we went to "a negligible share" (which turned out to be about 20% in the data you cited and is in the millions in absolute terms). Now we arrive at "but that's mostly temporary".
I guess you're not fully resistant to evidence after all. How about data on the "buy another one"?
comment in response to
post
Now here we have a testable hypothesis. My prediction is that EVs will continue to grab market share over the next years.
Currently, I'm laughing hard, since the evidence is overwhelming, but in the unlikely case you are right, I will thoroughly apologize.
Btw, lashing out is not evidence ;)
comment in response to
post
Reading isn't your strong suit, is it?
Let me rephrase it in the simplest way possible: Are millions of people per year buying electric cars, yes or no?
If the answer is yes, your claim that nobody wants EVs is already empirically debunked.
comment in response to
post
1. You're avoiding my question.
Would you explain how much of an inflation of these numbers we are talking about?
2. Are you aware, that the data source of your article is my source posted earlier (IEA)?
So is that data reliable or not?
3. Given your graph, what's your prediction for coming years?
comment in response to
post
Hmm, if your point is "transportation requires substantial energy", I'm much more inclined to agree.
comment in response to
post
By that line of argument, please also report on the fact that your great pump is an energy intense way of heating water. Putting a black hose in the sun would need way less energy after all...
comment in response to
post
Have you even read the article?
It's about a price dumping strategy that has been used in European markets for decades... I bought a zero-mileage used ICE car at about 2/3rd of MSRP 10 years ago.
Is your argument that tens of millions of EVs are produced but not used?
comment in response to
post
Behold, the market development of a product that "nobody wants".
* Scale in millions
(Source www.iea.org/data-and-sta...)
comment in response to
post
Btw, if you prefer a different reference: 2 guys walking the same distance would use at least as much energy than your EV.
Source for the consumption of walking: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15570150/
Feel free to do the math.
Still think your EV needs a lot of energy?
comment in response to
post
Okay, you didn't get it. Then I will assume you are engaging in good faith .
My point is that the heat energy leaving your shower head is a more relatable reference than electricity consumed by your awesomely efficient heat pump.
The whole thing is about making ~10 kWh relatable, right?
comment in response to
post
Did you not get my first post or are you just pretending to score some imaginary points?
comment in response to
post
That's probably one reason why they are so unpopular.
So they are a bad baseline for general showering behavior.
Typical values would be ~12 l / minute at 40° C.
If your cold water supply starts at 10° C, that's about 25 kW.
And those are conservative numbers: www.plumbworld.co.uk/blog/how-muc...
comment in response to
post
Your heart pump sure is great, but when talking about hot water, I think it makes more sense to calculate the warmth consumed rather than the electricity used.
In that way, your car used about 20 to 30 minutes of showering, which is not that much.
comment in response to
post
I don't know your local market, but if available, check out Hyundai Ioniq 6. It is a sedan and offers good long-range capability with high charging speed due to a 800 V architecture.
Used ones are available in Europe well below 30k.
comment in response to
post
- nicht jede Privatperson kann Zuhause laden. Aber praktisch jeder Arbeitgeber mit Fahrzeugflotte hat einen Standort an dem er Ladesäulen aufstellen kann.
- leider wird weiterhin viel Desinformation über EVs verbreitet (Brandgefahr, Kinderarbeit, ...), die bei professioneller Recherche entlarvt wird
comment in response to
post
Ich würde behaupten, dass Firmen die Finanzen eher präziser durchrechnen als Privathaushalte und sehe da andere Gründe weiter vorn:
- ein Selektionseffekt. Die meisten Stromer sind in Fahrzeugklassen, die typisch Firmenwagen sind
- als Firmenwagen sind Stromer steuerlich günstiger
comment in response to
post
This meme preys on the lack of knowledge about technology.
EVs only need about a third of the energy a gas car needs. So even when that energy is coming from fossil power plants, those require less fuel. In reality, though, the share of fossil fuels in the grid is dropping virtually everywhere.
comment in response to
post
I think that's temporary. Many people don't actually need that much range, but want it, because they're used to it.
At least that's my experience with a rather small battery (up to 150 miles of range). Surprisingly few trips need public charging.
But everyone has different needs.
comment in response to
post
Regarding the USA: Tesla was leading this market for years, but for political reasons, it's being abandoned now.
I don't think this should be political... But as a European, I welcome the increasing market share of European manufacturers.
comment in response to
post
Yes, that 1-in-4 figure includes plug-in hybrids, but not hybrid without a plug. But that's beside my point.
If you look at the total columns or just the blue ones: that is "catching on" according to my standards.
But you don't have to share those, of course.
comment in response to
post
How much market share is "catch on"?
www.iea.org/news/more-th...
comment in response to
post
While they emphasize their independence a lot, there is no information available on how emissionsanalytics is funded. They produce podcasts, blogs and fund chemical analyses. How do they afford that? No mention of any grand or academic support...
So either industry or political customers...?
comment in response to
post
Why would anyone do this? If you are concerned with emissions from battery production, just add them to a lifetime calculation (like the IEA did here www.iea.org/data-and-sta...)
So why come up with this weird metric? I don't know. My best guess is that it's their business model.
comment in response to
post
Now this one is wild!
A perfect example of "how to deceive with data".
It's a common strategy: if the target variable, doesn't fit your agenda, switch it! In this case they use CO2 reduction per kWh of battery, instead of CO2 reduction.
comment in response to
post
Do you want to get into climate justice? That's a whole new topic and one I'm not that much interested in, tbh.
I read the article and skimmed through the mentioned paper. The only point for hybrids is for very specific circumstances...
comment in response to
post
Agreed, in theory, plug-in hybrids could reduce emissions similar to EVs. The problem is that people don't drive them that way.
Also, the article clearly states that BEVs offer better emissions reduction than hybrids.
But looking at acceptance there might be a behavioral case for hybrids, too...
comment in response to
post
Unfortunately, I haven't driven any of those xD
How about ID4 or Q4 e-tron? Those are quite comfortable.
I also liked the Xpeng G6, even though it started to feel a little shaky at high speed, but still okay.
comment in response to
post
Source on real world hybrid emissions:
www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/the...
This is mostly a behavioral problem, not a technological one. Hybrids could be nearly on par with BEVs if driven "correctly".
comment in response to
post
I'd also challenge the price claim IF we consider total cost of ownership rather than sticker price, since hybrids are notoriously expensive to maintain and repair. However, this depends a lot on circumstances (local market, incentives, fuel prices, charging options).
comment in response to
post
That's impressive, and quite a specific number. Which ones did you like and dislike most?
I absolutely agree on range and towing, but disagree on driving feel (I guess that's largely subjective, though). You are factually wrong on real-world CO2 emissions, though.
comment in response to
post
That's exactly why I like EVs, heat pumps and renewables. Better technology allows reducing emissions without sacrificing (and sometimes gaining) quality of life.
Unfortunately, airplanes don't have such a nice replacement like ICE cars yet.
comment in response to
post
Really? How many of those have you driven? It where does that info come from?
And would you like to elaborate why and how hybrids are better? And which type of hybrid are you referring to (mild hybrid, full hybrid, plug-in hybrid, EREV)?
comment in response to
post
I thought they were a toy for virtue signaling rich people. That was until about 2020, when I started learning about the technology.
Then, a friend of mine leased an ID 4 and I experienced the smooth, silent and powerful drive.
Environmental benefits are a great bonus, too.
I'll never buy ICE again
comment in response to
post
Sounds good. EQE and EQS are good cars, but they are really expensive. You can get more power, range and/or charging speed at about half the price.
I'm not in that segment, but if you have the money and like the comfort and style of the brand, go for it :)
comment in response to
post
Mercedes-Benz just released their new platform, it will start deliveries in the coming months (July?). Before that, their EVs are either technologically inferior (like EQA, EQB) or overpriced (EQS).
But once they get their new platform rolling, they will catch up.
comment in response to
post
Ja, der Gebrauchtmarkt ist bei den Elektroautos noch nicht optimal, da der Hochlauf gerade stattfindet und auch technisch in den letzten Jahren viel passiert ist.
Dennoch würde ich es auf einen Versuch ankommen lassen: Gib mir einen exemplarischen Verbrenner, ich suche ein vergleichbares Angebot.
comment in response to
post
I would like to challenge that "free" part. Producing more of a good than is domestically consumed does not imply it's worthless.
Building a cable is apparently the cheaper solution compared to a hydrogen pipeline?
But then again, hydrogen can be stored in large quantities for weeks without wind
comment in response to
post
Now, electricity can be very cheap in some places. So there is a case for moving H2 to places with high electricity cost. That comes at the downside of international dependency, though, which -in times of trade wars- is unpleasant.
We do need it for steel and chemical industry anyway, though...
comment in response to
post
Yes, but assuming we talk about green H2, we need to produce it from electricity (electrolysis). That is about 50 kWh per kg H2.
So we have more than double the electricity demand. Plus losses from compression, transport and leaks.
Thus, H2 can't be cheaper than about 2.5 times electricity per kWh
comment in response to
post
I included 60% fuel cell efficiency there.
100 km cost by fuel is thus in Germany:
- 🔌 100 * .39€ = 39€ (charging publicly)
- H2 4 * 16€ = 64€
- ⛽ 27 * 1.5€ = 40,50€
Considering that most of the cost of trucking is fuel, H2 would need to become much (!) cheaper to be competitive.
comment in response to
post
I don't claim that the infrastructure for hydrogen is prohibitive for the technology. I only mentioned it because batteries need infrastructure investments, too.
The main argument against H2 is inefficiency, i.e. cost. A semi will need about 1 kWh/km, that's more than 4 kg H2 per 100km.
comment in response to
post
I didn't mention that one, because they seem to break down a lot and are afaik only available to selected customers...
Right now, they have a solid business case for fleets that have their own logistics centers to charge. We don't have the infrastructure to support a large fleet yet.