I don't understand. Are they following everything that's happening in the technology, or what ? Just a few weeks ago Envia Systems, Inc with backing of the US government announced they made a breakthrough in battery technology that will allow a $20,000 car to have a range of 300 miles, and the battery will be half as heavy as a conventional lithium battery. So, who's telling the truth ?

The energy density of the Model S 85 kWh battery is about 160 Wh/kg. This is a totally usable vehicle with a 300 mile range, proving that higher energy density is more a nice to have than a necessity.

Even a 600 mile battery will not do you any good if you must cover 800 miles. And even L2 charging can not fill up such a battery overnight for two consecutive days of long distance driving. What we need is fast charging.

Literally every petrol station along the motorway must have a fast charger. No need to check the navigation where a fast charger is available, just pull in and plug in.

Another improvement needed is that the batteries must be capable of fast charging in under 15 minutes (80%).

The next item on the wish list is of course a lower price.

'Current costs for a pure EV of ~$800/kWh at pack level translates into a pack cost of $21,000 for a 2012 medium-sized BEV with a range of 150 km (93 miles),'

If they reckon Nissan is paying $19,200 for the battery pack in the Leaf when the whole car costs around $35k they are nuts.
What is more they are simply ignoring what the car companies say on their costs if it doesn't fit their thesis.

Also ignored is that several companies including Panasonic and Dow Chemical are already producing NMC batteries.

It sounds to me as though the UK commitee on climate change is some bunch of nuts intent on getting everyone out of their cars and onto buses, and have got something fudged up to provide specious backing to their case.

One for the bin.

Davemart,

No, they're probably right on the money. Keep in mind, the Leaf is still $40k - the taxpayer reduces that to $35k. The rest of the Leaf is Versa, which makes money at it's ~$14k sales price at much higher volumes. The Versa gets to amortize it's development/tooling cost over a much higher volume, which the Leaf gets some benefit from - but not the whole thing.

ai_vin,

Yes, we must have a fast charger in every petrol station along the motorway, for the very same reason as all those petrol stations are there.

People want to refill/recharge when they think it's time and not worry whether the next petrol station has a fast charger. They end up charging way too soon, just to be on the safe side. This reduces the practical range drastically.

And no - people are not going to rent a car for longer trips. I can hear them thinking: "I own a car, why the hell should I rent one?"

The things you are mentioning require planning. Most people just want to hop in and drive. No fuss. If electric driving can't offer that, it won't happen.

We worry too much about today's very high cost and low battery performance. It is normal for all new technologies. We seem to forget that a flat LCD TV used to cost %5,000 instead of current $500 and a small laser printer used to cost $1100+ instead of $69 today.

If what they conservatively say about 2020 or 8 short years down the road ... i.e 1/3 the cost for 50% more range.... becomes reality, it would make BEVs almost affordable and almost highway practical with decent highway quick charge stations.

After 2020, progress will not stop, batteries will progressively better and cheaper. By 2030 or a few years before, BEVs will be fully competitive and more with ICEVs.

I would rent a car to go on a trip, I have done it before, it puts all those miles on their car, not mine.

Hydrogen fuelcell with efficient endless hydrogen production and fast fill-up look more promising.

I found this 56 minutes documentary about hydrogen fuelcells, im not telling fancy stuff.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76ujMtLr5Z8

IMHO, PHEvs are the way to go.

There are two ways to get a PHEv - a conventional "one car" solution like a Chevy Volt, or a "two car" solution where you have one EV and one ICE. When you buy the EV, you are awarded a certain number of days / weeks per year rental for the ICE (which is an equivalent level car).
The cost of this will be bundled into the car price.
It is like one of those car rental schemes. You could optionally allow your EV to be used by someone else while you have the ICE.
Governments could (if they wanted) pass laws to make it possible to have two cars on one insurance policy at no extra cost.

If you go for a 1 car PHEV, you may want a small battery (say 5KwH) to keep the cost and weight down.
The trick here is for the system to learn your commute and use the battery for the most suitable parts of the run. This is a simple enough machine learning problem once you have GPS.
Don't just run EV till the battery is down to 20%.
If governments want to encourage this, they could subsidize workplace chargers so you can charge at your job, effectively doubling battery capacity. They could do this for the first N (say 100K) people who apply with the registration documents of a suitable car.

Also, as many have said, fast chargers in every petrol station on motorways.

We don't have to go fully electric - there is a lot of fossil fuel to be saved by going partially electric, HEV or PHev.
It is a much better use of batteries to put them into many HEVs or PHEvs, rather than a few BEVs.

Interesting, because this report says that battery prices have dropped 14% in the past year to $689/kWh.

http://green.autoblog.com/2012/04/17/advanced-vehicle-battery-costs-drop-14-in-the-past-year-down-3/

Dave R-

But if you read that report carefully the authors suggest the reason for the price reduction is because there were far more supplies than demand.

I don't care what the Committee on Climate Change, Element Energy, Li-ion manufacturer Axeon, Prof. Peter Bruce of EastChem, USABC and many battery companies say, I think affordable batteries are just around the corner.

- and I have been saying this for 10 years.