Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Electric cars?

Would you buy an electric car?

  • Already own one

    Votes: 10 5.1%

  • Yes - would definitely buy

    Votes: 43 21.8%

  • Yes - preferred over petrol car if price/power/convenience similar

    Votes: 78 39.6%

  • Maybe - preference for neither, only concerned with costs etc

    Votes: 37 18.8%

  • No - prefer petrol car even if electric car has same price, power and convenience

    Votes: 25 12.7%

  • No - would never buy one

    Votes: 14 7.1%
  • Total voters
    197
Jump to new
Sir Burr said:
So what do you reckon about this Osbourne Effect? I'm not interested in buying another ICE car and will wait for an EV that is similar on price.



Although in the mean time, not keen on getting bent over to pay $1700 for a dealer water pump replacement on a VW. A bit of back and forth ended up $600. That crap will be gone!
Click to expand...


Osborne effect is true for me.

I decided back in 2006 that I was going to wait for an electric car, after seeing the documentary “who killed the electric car” and “revenge of the electric car”.

In 2006 I told everyone that I wouldn’t replace my existing car till I could get electric, it took 13 years but that’s what I did.
 
qldfrog said:
I am more worried by the last mile than actual overall production
Very very similar actually to internet delivery issues and NBN
But let's stick to the wheeled ones.or the fact you can get quasi free ev on lease in the EU
Click to expand...
I would think as EV penetration becomes larger, building codes will be changed to make solar/battery combinations a prerequisite in the building codes.
But the longer that is put off, the cheaper the installation would be, so it isn't likely to happen for quite some time unless it is introduced to help the storage issue for the grid.
Also the price of electric vehicles has to drop and a supply of second hand ones has to develop so poorer people can buy one, that then brings in the problem of replacement batteries in older cars.
There is no point selling a car, that the battery is at the end of its useful life, so recycling and replacement technology has to be developed.
It wont all happen overnight.
Just my opinion.
 
over9k said:
I think he's realised he's cocked up and has dug his hole so far he needs to dig it back to plato.

He does not understand the very report he's using as his hill to die on.



Aftermarket parts are usually higher quality for lower cost. Hate to break it to you man but car dealerships make far more money servicing their cars & selling the parts for $ridiculous markup than they do selling the cars.

It's like how printers are cheap but the money is made in selling you the ink for 10,000% markup.
Click to expand...

I haven't cocked anything up. All I have done, is highlight the significant challenges and limitations to move to a significant EV uptake.

It is you that have no clue about the report, your claim that the electrical consumption of EVs will not require additional capacity is just nonsense.

The reports speak for itself, and they recommend that governments begin to act now.
 
basilio said:
What a head spinner we have here...:eek:

Chronos trotting out the Allegory of Platos Cave as he steadfastly attempts to "prove" that EV cars are wildly expensive in terms of energy infrastructure which in any case should be 3 squillion nuclear power stations.

And yet it just isn't. And this economic and physical reality has been repeatedly demonstrated across almost all people who have direct experience in the field.

Plato has a point. Interestingly enough a world that finally recognizes that clean renewable energy is the only way to proceed versus polluting, planet destroying finite fossil fuels is definitly a Plato moment.

And whatever one thinks there is no way Plato would countenance making 1 and 1 equal some fantastical amount - simply to justify some preconceived vision.
Click to expand...

You are definitely in the cave ;)

1110TWh by 2030, for 30% global EV uptake, concentrated in China and the EU, is a significant amount of electrical consumption. No surprise China are building and plan to build 100s of nuclear powerplants.
 
Chronos-Plutus said:
It is you that have no clue about the report, your claim that the electrical consumption of EVs will not require additional capacity is just nonsense.
Click to expand...

I've never claimed that. Not once.

Are you going to answer the question about rainfall or not?
 
over9k said:
I've never claimed that. Not once.

Are you going to answer the question about rainfall or not?
Click to expand...

You said: off-peak would be sufficient enough for the electrical consumption requirements of EV uptake moving forward over the coming decades.

I said: that we will require significant additional installed electrical capacity.

You want to talk about rainfall? Why? What about it?

I am actually a bit busy; happy to have a sensible and rational discussion, don't have time for trolling and mud slinging at the moment.
 
Not cars, but close enough.

One of these has made its way on to my wish list. Bit more tame than a dirt bike (I was never that good of a rider), less maintenance, no noise issues so much better in 'suburban bush' and can be registered which helps as we are a single car house hold

 
Chronos-Plutus said:
You said: off-peak would be sufficient

I said: that we will require significant additional installed electrical capacity.
Click to expand...

As more and more capacity gets installed to deal with a growing population and peak summer time use of aircons etc, it is a literal truth that off peak capacity will also grow, especially for the rest of the year when those aircons are off or idling.

but that is seriously my last comment to you on this subject, I have pointed out that I disagree with your analysis while also not disagreeing with the KPMG stuff.

No body here is saying that we won’t need more capacity in total over the next 26 years, we just don’t agree that it is an arguement against EV’s.

—————
So unless you want to talk about something else, or you want to talk about interesting details about how this added capacity can be achieved in the next 26 years as the demand grows, then I don’t really want to engage anymore.
 
Value Collector said:
As more and more capacity gets installed to deal with a growing population and peak summer time use of aircons etc, it is a literal truth that off peak capacity will also grow, especially for the rest of the year when those aircons are off or idling.

but that is seriously my last comment to you on this subject, I have pointed out that I disagree with your analysis while also not disagreeing with the KPMG stuff.

No body here is saying that we won’t need more capacity in total over the next 26 years, we just don’t agree that it is an arguement against EV’s.

—————
So unless you want to talk about something else, or you want to talk about interesting details about how this added capacity can be achieved in the next 26 years as the demand grows, then I don’t really want to engage anymore.
Click to expand...

I won't post into this thread anymore if we are all happy to move on.
 
Chronos-Plutus said:
I was happy to discuss the future of EVs, you just want an echo chamber.
Click to expand...
As more renewables are added to the grid the present concept of "off peak" will change. Time of use billing can further "balance" the changes in load.
The principal issue going forward will be how "storage" is integrated into the energy mix, as adding extra capacity via renewables - because it is already the cheapest form of generation - can be done in a canter, despite your unsound views on that matter.
In the USA and some other countries, new and replacement capacity via renewables must be bid with a storage component. We don't have such a policy.
If this was a discussion taking place in Europe, I would have greater concerns than here, as Australia, if it's smart, can do with renewables what the Saudis did for decades with oil.
 
Chronos-Plutus said:
You said: off-peak would be sufficient enough for the electrical consumption requirements of EV uptake moving forward over the coming decades.

I said: that we will require significant additional installed electrical capacity.

You want to talk about rainfall? Why? What about it?

I am actually a bit busy; happy to have a sensible and rational discussion, don't have time for trolling and mud slinging at the moment.
Click to expand...

No I didn't. I said the KPMG report is deeply flawed due to the assumptions it is based on.

Answer the question about the rainfall.

Chronos-Plutus said:
Exactly, stay in the cave.

I was happy to discuss the future of EVs, you just want an echo chamber.
Click to expand...

"You just want an echo chamber", coming from the guy that hasn't actually addressed or answered a single question or point I've made.
 
Dude from Nikola, Trevor Milton, just did a podcast on Tesla Charts. TC is big in the TESLAQ Twitter community. Fancy that aye, following and listening to someone with a Twitter account dedicated to bringing down Tesla???


Very compelling argument for why hydrogen is better for long range trucking. He is also a fan of EV tech in the right application. Nice to hear someone with nuanced argument who realises the most likely solution will be a combination of technologies.


Following Trevor’s line of reasoning, batt tech would have to make some major leaps forward for it to be superior to hydrogen. Few things I want to follow up, but he tells a good story


https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/tcs-chartcast-teslacharts-georgia-orwell-uYqMyJTiQKN/
 
fiftyeight said:
Dude from Nikola, Trevor Milton, just did a podcast on Tesla Charts. TC is big in the TESLAQ Twitter community. Fancy that aye, following and listening to someone with a Twitter account dedicated to bringing down Tesla???


Very compelling argument for why hydrogen is better for long range trucking. He is also a fan of EV tech in the right application. Nice to hear someone with nuanced argument who realises the most likely solution will be a combination of technologies.
Batteries are great for metropolitan light transport work, hydrogen great for heavy load long haul work. Just my opinion.


Following Trevor’s line of reasoning, batt tech would have to make some major leaps forward for it to be superior to hydrogen. Few things I want to follow up, but he tells a good story


https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/tcs-chartcast-teslacharts-georgia-orwell-uYqMyJTiQKN/
Click to expand...
All boils back to energy density, as the guy says, there is an application for both batteries and hydrogen.
Batteries are great for metropolitan light load work, Hydrogen great for heavy load long haul work. Just my opinion
 
That's not exactly new info though - it's range that's killing the uptake of electric cars.
 
over9k said:
No I didn't. I said the KPMG report is deeply flawed due to the assumptions it is based on.

Answer the question about the rainfall.



"You just want an echo chamber", coming from the guy that hasn't actually addressed or answered a single question or point I've made.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion that the assumptions are flawed, and I don't have to agree with your opinion.

What questions are you taking about?

Either way, we will not be seeing a 100% EV uptake, in Australia, until well past mid century, probably late century, provided EVs aren't replaced with some other technology. So throttle back you EV expectations or start buying more stock that make EVs. Either way I don't give a dam, as long as the grid isn't compromised with EV white anting, that people pay their own way for their vehicles, and the 10s of billions of dollars in fuel taxes are plugged with EV taxes.
 
Top