Nissan Test 48 kwh Leaf (210 mile range)

http://www.electric-vehiclenews.com/2013/10/nissan-race-48-kwh-leaf-at-ecoseries.html


The consumption of the Leaf is an average of 30 kwh per 100 miles, so over 200 mile range with 48 kwh.

If the battery is heavier then it wouldn't exactly double the range and No one knows yet how much, if any extra space was taken up by the much larger battery.

No one even knows if they will offer 48 kwh in Leaf II. But that's 3-4 years away yet and anything is possible. 48 kwh would be a game changer in an affordable car, if they can make it affordable with a batter that size, still a long way off the Model S 85 kwh, but still pretty good.

No Interest ?

ted1

[Deleted User] wrote: »

http://www.electric-vehiclenews.com/2013/10/nissan-race-48-kwh-leaf-at-ecoseries.html


The consumption of the Leaf is an average of 30 kwh per 100 miles, so over 200 mile range with 48 kwh.

If the battery is heavier then it wouldn't exactly double the range and No one knows yet how much, if any extra space was taken up by the much larger battery.

No one even knows if they will offer 48 kwh in Leaf II. But that's 3-4 years away yet and anything is possible. 48 kwh would be a game changer in an affordable car, if they can make it affordable with a batter that size, still a long way off the Model S 85 kwh, but still pretty good.

If its 30kwh for 100miles, should it not be 60kwh for 200 miles

Also should you not be using km instead of miles

HandsomeDan

Needs to be a 'men looking for other men, to chat e.v.s and maybe more' section.

spank_inferno

Every month is another "game changer".

The game always manages to remain the same though.

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

If its 30kwh for 100miles, should it not be 60kwh for 200 miles

Also should you not be using km instead of miles

Yes, in theory but it depends on usage.

The EPA give 75 miles as a general rule, however a lot of people can get a lot more than this.

A bit like current ice cars.

HandsomeDan

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Needs to be a 'men looking for other men, to chat e.v.s and maybe more' section.

Don't be an idiot all your life.

spank_inferno

spank_inferno wrote: »

Every month is another "game changer".

The game always manages to remain the same though.

Twice the range would be a game changer in an affordable EV.

150 miles real range will still not be acceptable to many but it becomes viable for a whole lot more people.

TestTransmission

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Needs to be a 'men looking for other men, to chat e.v.s and maybe more' section.

Don't post in this thread again

Idbatterim

mad_lad maybe you can explain to me, why if range is the issue, why another battery couldnt be fitted if more range is required the odd time, is it issue of weight, i.e actually putting the battery in the boot or wherever, safety (i.e. wouldnt be protected enough in event of crash, cost? whats the point in having an expensive battery sitting around needlessly for the 2-3 times a year you might use it OR all of the above?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

The consumption of the Leaf is an average of 30 kwh per 100 miles, so over 200 mile range with 48 kWh.

.

Ah yes. I see my error. 30 and 30 = 60 haha.

150-170 miles should be achievable but up to 200 possible, dependent on driving style, conditions etc.

Idbatterim

Idbatterim wrote: »

mad_lad maybe you can explain to me, why if range is the issue, why another battery couldnt be fitted if more range is required the odd time, is it issue of weigh, i.e actually putting the battery in the boot or wherever, safety (i.e. wouldnt be protected enough in event of crash, cost? whats the point in having an expensive battery sitting around needlessly for the 2-3 times a year you might use it OR all of the above?

There are 2 issues with a bigger battery, that is size and cost.

Tesla have 60 kWh and 85 kWh option but the model S is a big car.

Swapping a battery is not an option unless it's done by robot. As the voltages required are lethal and not for consumer handling, they would also be too heavy.

Better place had envisioned many battery swapping stations but now they filed for bankruptcy.

But you made an excellent point not many seem to get and that is why carry a big expensive battery for the occasional use ?

I think if Nissan can offer 48 kWh for a real 150 mile range and make it capable of charging much faster then this would be much more acceptable.

The lips

Sorry to hijack the thread.

Is there any online calculator where I can see the vrt due on an imported leaf?

ROS.IE asks them to contact revenue for an accurate rate.

I am interested in getting one in the new year, never driven one but the numbers add up.

BMJD

none, according to this thread

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=84619519

0 VRT on electric car imports.

I think it has to be over 6 months old and 6k miles or they sting you for 23% VAT.

ei9go

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1087919_chevy-spark-ev-electric-car-no-retail-sales-in-canada-europe

And as for Europe, where the company is working to grow its Chevrolet brand as a less expensive volume alternative to the German Opel lineup?

"We have decided to defer the launch of the Spark EV in Europe," Fox said.

"The market for pure EVs is still in its infancy and volumes are rather low," he continued.

"We will carefully observe how the market develops over time, and react accordingly."

And there you have it: Consumers in Canada and Europe will not be able to buy a Chevrolet Spark EV

-

galwaytt

Deleted User wrote: »

No Interest ?

Loads of interest, just no money to buy one.

Next ?

ei9go

ei9go wrote: »

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1087919_chevy-spark-ev-electric-car-no-retail-sales-in-canada-europe

And as for Europe, where the company is working to grow its Chevrolet brand as a less expensive volume alternative to the German Opel lineup?

"We have decided to defer the launch of the Spark EV in Europe," Fox said.

"The market for pure EVs is still in its infancy and volumes are rather low," he continued.

"We will carefully observe how the market develops over time, and react accordingly."

And there you have it: Consumers in Canada and Europe will not be able to buy a Chevrolet Spark EV

Thanks for the link.

"We will carefully observe how the market develops over time, and react accordingly."

I thought the quote in the sentence was funny, how will they observe the market if they don't sell the cars ? surely they should release the car and if they sell well and good and if not then don't sell them ? it looks to me as if they don't want electrics to be successful !

That is really disappointing, I think it's not surprising though because the worlds auto makers hate electrics, they just do not want to invest in them because form a business perspective they have absolutely 0 need to.

They will sell them in California because they have to.

ICE cars are making so much money they they will not make electrics in huge numbers until Governments force them to or force us to change. Once people stop buying ICE cars the auto makers will make electric cars in huge numbers.

the German auto makers are under pressure from the Government to develop electric cars and this is why BMW released the I3 and VW the E-Up and E-Golf, they are nothing special and offer nothing much better then the Leaf range wise, The I3 will have more range as it's got a heated battery, (though this maybe an option as part of the winter pack).

The German auto makers have not been shy about their distaste for electrics and could have done much better, but to them why should they ? they make huge profits from ICE cars.

People will not stop buying ICE cars until they can't afford to run an ice car, range is one issue but even if they had a real 200 mile range they still wouldn't buy them because they can afford and are willing to keep pumping money into the tank, they don't realise how much money is actually going into the tank over a year.

There are lots of people who may only spend 20-30 a week in fuel and it's quiet affordable to them, so I think electric cars have a long way to go because I can't see petrol reaching 3 Euro's per Litre for a long time, if ever.

I don't think we'll come close to running out of oil for at least another 200 years and so the only way ICE cars will become unaffordable is through Government taxation and emissions regulations.

E.U Governments are not even discussing a proper charging infrastructure, or addressing the issues of charging for apartment owners or for work chargers.

The likes of Toyota are working on Hydrogen but while this may in theory sound best it's an incredibly inefficient way to drive. And governments are likely to tax the hell out of it and companies will charge for it too like petrol/diesel it won't nearly be as cheap as electricity.

By the time hydrogen fuel cells are affordable batteries will have improved greatly and re-charge times also.

But from a business sense auto makers are not going to change as long as they are making huge profits from the internal combustion engine. And people are not going to change because they don't want to, not just because of the range.

I think the ESB deserve a lot of praise for their efforts, as they are the only ones half interested in seeing electrics become successful , it's naturally in their interests but without the infrastructure there is no point at all.

Even free electric charging has not in the slightest bit interested the public.

Hopefully Leaf II will have a 48 kwh battery and be at least the same price.

B9K9

The Leaf is already pretty heavy; that higher capacity better not come with a weight (not to mention cost) penalty. If 98% of journeys work out OK with 24 kWhr pack, I cannot see the need other than anxiety reduction, and maybe end of life usability advantage.

NIMAN

The manufacturers simply have to do something to improve range, as thats the one reason that is given in 99% of cases as to why potential buyers will not buy an EV.

Simply adding twice the amount of batteries might be a non-starter due to weight, so I think they need to find a way of getting twice the range out of the same amount of battery, but I'm sure they are working on higher capacity batteries all the time.

Then again, all would probably have to be fast charging too. No point having a 200 mile range batery that takes 18hrs or more to charge.

There is no debating as to whether EVs have a future or not. I chat to some folk who believe they will die off like they did in the past, but I think they are here to stay this time, and once some of their limitations are overcome, they will sell. The fact that BMW, Audi, VW et al are now producing EVs, that a sign they ain't going away.

B9K9

Range anxiety is definitely the bugbear, and the reason for uptake being so slow. However I reckon that slowly the real world practicality will percolate into motoring lore. For us, we made the decision having realised we would almost never need public charging, and for those times we did go further from home, took on a willingness to expect some inconvenience in return for benefits of economy, environmentalism, comfort and luxury 98%-ish of the time. Not enamoured by the looks, but not totally put off either.

Look how we went from irregular mobile phone charging to charging every night, when smartphones became mainstream. And don't we depend on those yokes as much as the car;)?

traco

I covered 1300 miles last week and had to fill 3 times. Even getting 560 or so miles from a tank I'd prefer more. 750-800 would be my preference.

traco

traco wrote: »

I covered 1300 miles last week and had to fill 3 times. Even getting 560 or so miles from a tank I'd prefer more. 750-800 would be my preference.

Awe, god love ye, poor thing. Filling up the car 3 times. Such a hard life ! :rolleyes:

Range is an issue for a lot of people, but people tell me that they couldn't care less about what powers their car, ice cars do them fine, they are a known and trusted technology and it works and most people can still afford fuel so the incentive is not there.

I believe the greatest hurdle for electrics is they are still pretty new and people are naturally weary of new technology.

Range is part of the problem for electrics.

I know that I can do my 84 mile daily commute with a 5-10 min top up fast charge or longer on my lunch, depending on how much free leccy I want. The charger is 5 mins away.

I'd have a leaf in the morning but my job is too unpredictable and getting access to credit on contract is impossible and not having the safety of permanent employment is the greatest pain in the arse on earth.

jackofalltrades

Good to see Nissan listening to what customers want.

Deleted User wrote: »

150-170 miles should be achievable but up to 200 possible, dependent on driving style, conditions etc.

You'd be approaching the limits of what most people would drive in one go without a break. And in a lot of cases what people would drive in one day, which certainly would be a game changer.

But you made an excellent point not many seem to get and that is why carry a big expensive battery for the occasional use ?

If this car was to be released it would actually put a € price on what people are willing to pay for extra range.

For example if you bought a 200 mile range car for €35,000, and a 150 mile range was €5000 cheaper, it's going to get people thinking long and hard about the extra range. And if it is worth paying the extra for. Potential customers currently don't get to make this choice as most of the current electric cars don't meet their needs.

There are lots of people who may only spend 20-30 a week in fuel and it's quiet affordable to them, so I think electric cars have a long way to go..

If your putting €20-30 in your tank every week, and you talk to your neighbour and they're paying €1.50, that's going to get your attention. People seeing someone else getting a bargain, when they aren't, is a strong driver of behaviour. Especially when a lot of motorists just view a car as a white good.

Even if you got the range, you still have to create the incentive.

I know people that wouldn't touch n EV no matter what, because in their minds they are crap, they won't even entertain the idea of a test drive.

If you got people willing to buy new cars and who can afford petrol and diesel and are willing to pay for it, how do you try open their minds to the idea of an ev ?

jackofalltrades

Deleted User wrote: »

Even if you got the range, you still have to create the incentive.

The incentive already exists, massive savings in fuel costs.
Currently the low range makes buying an electric car risky for most people.
There worried someone will bring out a car with twice the range and the value of their car will plummet.
As the range increases this becomes less of an issue, and more people will get on board.

keithclancy

I think my issue with EVs is everyone that's 'for' them expects me to change my habits to make my life fit the car.

I believe it should be the other way around, if I was willing to fit my life around a form of transportation I'd get the bus.

PADRAIC.M

I remember back in 97 when I was up for training on the 1st gen Prius they had an EV rav4 out on testing, the range was 60 miles @ a max speed of 50 mph and a 24 hour charge time, the technology has come so far since then with hybrid and EV, but advancement in battery/ energy storage is what will hold it back for a long time,

NIMAN

The fact remains that an EV would suit a lot of peoples lifestyles, whether they would admit it or not.

There are a lot of people who drives small amounts, and there are no reason why they could not live with an EV, but I would say the majority of those afraid to buy an EV would give answers like "what about if I wanted to go to the airport", or "what if I needed to drive from Donegal to Cork", when they might do these things once every 3 years.

NIMAN

NIMAN wrote: »

The fact remains that an EV would suit a lot of peoples lifestyles, whether they would admit it or not.

There are a lot of people who drives small amounts, and there are no reason why they could not live with an EV, but I would say the majority of those afraid to buy an EV would give answers like "what about if I wanted to go to the airport", or "what if I needed to drive from Donegal to Cork", when they might do these things once every 3 years.

I think it's a combination of things, range being one, people can't change their frame of mind that they don't do 400 miles in one go so altering their thinking to plugging in every day isn't an easy task.

The rest is down to the lack of interest and the affordability of fuel. To the majority of people (as they see it) there simply isn't any incentive to go electric. Many people wouldn't even entertain the idea of a test drive.

Then there are the people that think anything with a battery is useless because their mobile phone battery lasts a year or two.

There is also the uncertainty of the technology.

People also do not embrace change easily, look at the amount of people who don't change to cheaper phone companies or electric companies because they are used to what they have, the rest can't be bothered or care less.

Certainly, the fast charger infrastructure needs to improve. While good as it may be it's not nearly good enough. The lack of motorway facilities means turning off the motorways for a charge.

It's not just the motorway network that needs coverage, there are many black spots, but there are a lot of trips that can be completed with the current amount of chargers.

lomb

undoubtedly in 50 -100 years cars will mostly be electric supplemented with a small diesel engine or hydrogen. Pure electric cars may be available if the range and fast charge infrastructure is in place, and I mean charge in 10 minutes etc.
In the mean time I intend to run the Arabic oil fields dry in my petrol car. I hope I don't live to see the day that electric cars take over. They are akin to a dishwasher or a washing machine. Petrol engines have a soul. Mad lad listen to this and tell me you want an electric car http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaR674ik-7M

lomb

lomb wrote: »

undoubtedly in 50 -100 years cars will mostly be electric supplemented with a small diesel engine or hydrogen. Pure electric cars may be available if the range and fast charge infrastructure is in place, and I mean charge in 10 minutes etc.
In the mean time I intend to run the Arabic oil fields dry in my petrol car. I hope I don't live to see the day that electric cars take over. They are akin to a dishwasher or a washing machine. Petrol engines have a soul. Mad lad listen to this and tell me you want an electric car http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaR674ik-7M

Sounds good alright. But how many cars sound like that that are affordable ? and affordable to run ?

Most people will never drive a car that sounds like that. In fact most people couldn't care less about cars that sound like that.

I think your prediction (50-100 years) is way off !

lomb

Deleted User wrote: »

Sounds good alright. But how many cars sound like that that are affordable ? and affordable to run ?

Most people will never drive a car that sounds like that. In fact most people couldn't care less about cars that sound like that.

I think your prediction (50-100 years) is way off !

Plenty used for very little money, if you have a good 200bhp+ petrol engine with an aftermarket exhaust. Diesel is useless in the noise respect as it cant rev as high a petrol. F1 engines have their manic noise due to the 15k+revving at full throttle. Most people don't care and want the cheapest highest social kudos machine that suits them.
The timeframe depends on the cheap availability of liquid fuels. I think oil will definitely be affordable for at least another 40 years. We haven't even had a century of real use of petroleum. When you think about it aviation will always burn oil and there will be no reasonable cost flights without cheap liquid fuels. The worlds economy depends on that.

lomb

lomb wrote: »

Plenty used for very little money, if you have a good 200bhp+ petrol engine with an aftermarket exhaust. Diesel is useless in the noise respect as it cant rev as high a petrol. F1 engines have their manic noise due to the 15k+revving at full throttle. Most people don't care and want the cheapest highest social kudos machine that suits them.
The timeframe depends on the cheap availability of liquid fuels. I think oil will definitely be affordable for at least another 40 years. We haven't even had a century of real use of petroleum. When you think about it aviation will always burn oil and there will be no reasonable cost flights without cheap liquid fuels. The worlds economy depends on that.

Yeah that's all well and good, but most people still wouldn't drive as they see it a big engined (noisy) car. That's mental to tax and has a serious petrol addiction.

Oil is affordable, remember all the tax we pay on fuel !

Lithium air batteries have theoretically almost as good as petrol energy densities, possibly greater. If they can make them last long enough that is.

Of course you still need fossil fuels to charge batteries, though more batteries on the grid will make renewable much more viable, however the inescapable fact is we will need much more nuclear if we're to replace fossil fuels.

HandsomeDan

Electric motor performance is massively superior to petrol. All that's missing is improved battery capacity mass charge time & cost - which if the head of research at Mitsubishi is so be believed, will be delivered in spades over the next decade.

traco

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Electric motor performance is massively superior to petrol. All that's missing is improved battery capacity mass charge time & cost - which if the head of research at Mitsubishi is so be believed, will be delivered in spades over the next decade.

If they can improve the batteries in terms of cost, reliability and capacity then I''d buy one. For the record I deal daily with the electonics manufacturing auto industry and sold Lithium Ion electric transport in my other business untill a few months ago.

From working with Lithium Ion batteries for the last 7 years I have seen no significant jump in their performance. They are a back art and have a noticeable rate of failure when cycled for the first few times.

There is a huge difference between hybrid and full electric, the hybrids restrict the battery usage range therby allowing a huge number of cycles hence the ability to off very long warranties. A battery as a sole source of power will have much greater demands and be cycled through a greater range (say 10%-100% as opposed to 60%-100%).

Batteries as far as I know are designed for cycles, ie number of charges, this can be improved but the costs increase significantly so manufactureres find a middle ground. The ones we used had a design life of 800 -1000 cycles which in supplying a 24x7 industrail install we expected to change them at smome stage between year 2 and 3.

For city, regular commutes they definitely are the future but my concern with them is resale as essentially the value in the car is the battery - its the engine realistically. Unlike a ICE which with regular oil changes will do 500k kms and has replacebale consumables the battery is what it is and will only degrate from new. I have't a clue how the battery rental / lease things operate so can't comment on those.

That makes resale value unpredicable at present as the market is not mature. There is also the question of battery cost and avaialbility. Mistubishi being a big player but Teslas forecast completes outstrips Mitsubishis production capability for the coming years (sure I read that somewhere but may be wrong). A signifant player in battery manufacturing went bankrupt (A123) which would concern me about manufacturing costs. Lithium is costly to mine and produce and presently there is no "cheap" litihium plus its a finite supply similar to oil.

It will be inetersting to see how it develops, my hope would be that the battery evolves into something other form of storage and that will lead to a game changer.

Anan1

traco wrote: »

Lithium is costly to mine and produce and presently there is no "cheap" litihium plus its a finite supply similar to oil.

Can the lithium be recycled from old batteries, or is it not reusable?

Sobanek

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Will be delivered in spades over the next decade.

Funnily enough that's what they said about an FSO 125p EV Prototype in 1987.

"By 2010, we'll be driving electric cars and petrol cars will be collector's items"

HandsomeDan

Sobanek wrote: »

Funnily enough that's what they said about an FSO 125p EV Prototype in 1987.

"By 2010, we'll be driving electric cars and petrol cars will be collector's items"

Battery tech has come on in spade since '87 though, and while they've not replaced ICE, e-cars are on our roads now, and will only improve.

ironclaw

Even as big a petrol head as I am myself, if I had the money, I'd buy the Tesla Roadster for the laugh / weekend car. Currently around GBP 75k for a 2012 model in the UK.

On that note, and I sincerely doubt it, any on Irish plates?

Soarer

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Electric motor performance is massively superior to petrol. All that's missing is improved battery capacity mass charge time & cost - which if the head of research at Mitsubishi is so be believed, will be delivered in spades over the next decade.

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Battery tech has come on in spade since '87 though, and while they've not replaced ICE, e-cars are on our roads now, and will only improve.

Uh oh!

You were warned! I'm telling mammy!

Sobanek

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Battery tech has come on in spade since '87 though, and while they've not replaced ICE, e-cars are on our roads now, and will only improve.

Sorry, mistyped it - 1978 I meant.

The 1978 FSO 125p EV Prototype had massive 670kg batteries and it even had "Efficient Dynamics" - energy recovery from brakes.

75kph top speed, one charge lasted for 50 miles / 80 kilometres.

That was 35 years ago and I don't think we've come a "long way" in terms of EV vehicles.

(The Renault Fluence ZE has a 185 km range and a top speed of 135 kph)

HandsomeDan

Sobanek wrote: »

Sorry, mistyped it - 1978 I meant.

The 1978 FSO 125p EV Prototype had massive 670kg batteries and it even had "Efficient Dynamics" - energy recovery from brakes.

75kph top speed, one charge lasted for 50 miles / 80 kilometres.

That was 35 years ago and I don't think we've come a "long way" in terms of EV vehicles.

(The Renault Fluence ZE has a 185 km range and a top speed of 135 kph)

Don't delude yourself, e-cars at current specs in 78 where nowhere near viable, whereas the current crop are on the verge.

Sobanek

I'm talking about the technology itself, not the availability.

HandsomeDan

Sobanek wrote: »

I'm talking about the technology itself, not the availability.

The two are inextricably linked.

There is a chasm between building a prototype and and a viable production model. Improvements in technology are what fills that.

I must research again, but last I remember there is enough lithium for hundreds of years.

I think lithium air batteries offer the greatest potential, but for now I think the biggest player in batteries will be Panasonic.

traco

Depends on the research. I've done a bit of googling out of curiosity and can't see anything consistent. Two sources are mineral or mining and then production via brine. If you take the brine scenario then there is no shortage as most of the planet is covered in salt water so bobs your uncle.

Various pages putting mineral reserves at 40 million tonnes from what I've seen and some forecast say 50% of that will be the max required to meet EV demands for the next 100 years.

What's not accounted for is other demands for lithium aside from EV and the brine plants don't seem to be cost effective or have the yield to make them viable yet. One interesting fact is that all producers increased their costs in 2013 as opposed to reducing them.

I must bookmark some links so I have them easy.

Batteries use very small amounts of lithium and while it's completely recyclable, it's not actually cost effective to do so. and lithium accounts for a tiny percentage of the cost of battery production.

Toyota and Mitsubishi are looking to secure their own reserves of lithium, though Toyota have abandoned full battery electric vehicles in favour of Hydrogen they still need lithium for their plug in prius which uses a small battery, and hydrogen cars will need batteries also as the fuel cell does not have the power to power a motor for automotive use.

I honestly do not believe hydrogen is the future for cars, perhaps heavy goods use.

traco

The battery in the leaf should have at least 24kg of lithium in it if this site is correct, just stumbled a cross it trying to figure out lithium reserves
http://www.lithiumexplorationgroup.com/about-lithium.php