Electrification of the M3

[Altaran]

The infrastructure is going to require a HUGE amount of government incentives over an extended period of time. Companies have no incentive to create hydrogen filling stations when there's no customers to use them, and customers aren't going to buy hydrogen cars when hydrogen stations aren't commonly available. EVs had a much easier time with this because most charging is done at home-- people only really need to worry about public charging when going on on distance drives, which pretty much means along highways. I'm 40,000 miles into i3 ownership, and have used a public charger on one trip-- and only really because I wanted to try it.

For hydrogen powered ICEVs, people aren't going to be satisfied with filling stations on the highway-- they're going to want them to be as common as gas stations are now, or they'd be annoying.

That's also ignoring that EVs are a better experience for what normal people want from a car. 10% of the maintenance of an ICEV, silent operation, no need to warm it up, no need to get gas, etc, etc-- it's far more aligned with what non car people actually want their cars to be. People aren't using them yet, because they have illogical (most people) range thoughts, but once they get over that (actually experience one)... I don't think most people will want to move off an EV for DD use once they've experienced it.

I don't think hydrogen is likely to take off at this point.

Government is going to start investing here in Europe in more infrastructure.

But I agree with you, normal people are not likely to go for hydrogen ice. For that reason nobody is focusing on it for car application. There's developments ongoing for commercial usage, but different story.

The potential in hydrogen for personal cars lies in fuel cells. Its an EV at that point, just replace the batteries with a fuel cell and hydrogen tanks. Gets the nvh advantages, but has longer range.
If that comes, it leaves a niche for ice car guys to keep their old cars running with hydrogen ice.

As an alternative Porsche just announced they will start funding e-fuels development. (synthetically generated liquids that can be run on any conventional ice). That may be the best hope to be able to use our cars in the future...

Gesendet von meinem LON-L29 mit Tapatalk

[elbert]

Think about it, you can hoon guilt free in terms of your wallet(and the environment!) since you're not just guzzling gas. I live in the Bay Area and gas is not cheap here.

Not exactly. Top 3 sources of electrical power in the US: natural gas (38%), coal (23%), nuclear (20%). So pollution (or nuclear waste products) is still being generated, just at a different time point.
Even hydroelectric power can have a significant environmental impact in regards to flooding, wildlife, and water quality, which is why a new hydroelectric dam project in the US is highly unlikely.

[Obioban]

Not exactly. Top 3 sources of electrical power in the US: natural gas (38%), coal (23%), nuclear (20%). So pollution (or nuclear waste products) is still being generated, just at a different time point.
Even hydroelectric power can have a significant environmental impact in regards to flooding, wildlife, and water quality, which is why a new hydroelectric dam project in the US is highly unlikely.

Solar is increasingly a no brainer, for much of this country at least. The payback period at this point is 3-7 years, depending on your location. Since most panels have a 25-30 year warranty, you're pretty much throwing away money to not have solar these days. You can pay for it out of pocket, and break even in 3-7 years and then have free power for a guarenteed 18-27 years (plus however long the panels continue to be good out of warranty), or finance them for less then the cost of your electric bill and then go on to have free power once they're payed off.

... And then you can be pretty guilt free in your hooning :P

[franklin]

Interesting feedback. Now imagine an electric M3 with a with manual transmission?

https://www.motor1.com/news/380563/ford-mustang-lithium-manual-sema/

[newton22]

I'd only consider this on some ragged out convertible that needs salvaging. Otherwise no. Want an electric car, buy an electric car.

[Icecream]

... And then you can be pretty guilt free in your hooning :P

If you want to kid yourself haha. People pollute, you can dress it up however you want but so long as we keep adding billions of people to the planet, things will continue to worsen barring some incredible discoveries, restructuring of society (so we don’t commute, eat cold food, less meat, no ac, and stop buying new phones every year, treating our wardrobes as disposable etc, the list goes on). and ultimately reducing on a huge level the waste we produce by our endless desire for the best new piece of “tech” Or whatever so we can all sit around in our new disposable clothes in our air conditioned living rooms and watch tick Tock videos.. A couple solar panels just isn’t going to cut it on a global level. But if someone wants to ignore all that, then ok, pat yourself on the back, smile like an idiot and pretend the world isn’t going to rot because of you.
Not directed at you btw, I just letting out some steam lol.

[Calb]

Why not just take the bus?

[Obioban]

If you want to kid yourself haha. People pollute, you can dress it up however you want but so long as we keep adding billions of people to the planet, things will continue to worsen barring some incredible discoveries, restructuring of society (so we don’t commute, eat cold food, less meat, no ac, and stop buying new phones every year, treating our wardrobes as disposable etc, the list goes on). and ultimately reducing on a huge level the waste we produce by our endless desire for the best new piece of “tech” Or whatever so we can all sit around in our new disposable clothes in our air conditioned living rooms and watch tick Tock videos.. A couple solar panels just isn’t going to cut it on a global level. But if someone wants to ignore all that, then ok, pat yourself on the back, smile like an idiot and pretend the world isn’t going to rot because of you.
Not directed at you btw, I just letting out some steam lol.

If you're already DDing an EV (which is vastly less polluting than an ICEV over the lifespan of the vehicle) and generating your own power through solar, the marginal impact of hooning that car on the environment is pretty minimal. Basically tires getting worn faster :P

Barring a massive recession/depression (not that unlikely, imo), I think it's pretty unlikely we're going to have the kind of change you're mentioning (no commuting, cold food, less meat, no AC, people not buying endless shit, etc).

[Steve]

Not going to lie, this looks pretty fun.

[Arith2]

I don't really jump on the whole environmentalist band wagon but EVs are worse for the environment, currently due to manufacturing and battery life. Hydrogen engines produce significantly more greenhouse gases than anything... the by product is water. Water is the number one greenhouse gas that causes what environmentalists consider "damage". That's is why hydrogen is not being produced. It's also dangerous for the driver. CO2 is not very harmful to the environment in comparison. Emissions technology is constantly improving and from a convenience and practical standpoint, I don't think combustion engine are going anywhere for a long time.

Tesla has shut off super charging for 2016s and older to keep the batteries lasting longer. It really can damage the battery and significantly decreases the lifetime. Combustion engines can survive 100 years, batteries have about 10 years. They also cost ALOT more due to lithium and cobalt being so expensive.

EVs have their advantages which were stated and so do combustion engines. I wouldn't worry about either disappearing. Most vehicles may become hybrids though. You can have the advantages of both.

[heinzboehmer]

But there's a limit to how much water vapor can be held in the atmosphere. As soon as it becomes saturated (assuming nucleation sites are present and all that) it condeses and rains down. The amount that can be held is dictated by the atmosphere's temperature, which has been increasing due to the presence of non-condensable greenhouse gases (CO2, methane, etc.), whose condensation temps are significantly lower (read: basically unreachable) in normal atmospheric conditions.

It's a positive feedback loop (higher temps -> more water vapor -> higher temps -> etc) that wouldn't have been kicked off if the volume of other greenhouses gases in the atmosphere hadn't increased in the first place. Sure, limiting the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere will reduce the greenhouse effect, but that's more of a bandaid fix than anything else.

Lithium mining is pretty terrible for the environment though.

[Obioban]

I don't really jump on the whole environmentalist band wagon but EVs are worse for the environment, currently due to manufacturing and battery life. Hydrogen engines produce significantly more greenhouse gases than anything... the by product is water. Water is the number one greenhouse gas that causes what environmentalists consider "damage". That's is why hydrogen is not being produced. It's also dangerous for the driver. CO2 is not very harmful to the environment in comparison. Emissions technology is constantly improving and from a convenience and practical standpoint, I don't think combustion engine are going anywhere for a long time.

Tesla has shut off super charging for 2016s and older to keep the batteries lasting longer. It really can damage the battery and significantly decreases the lifetime. Combustion engines can survive 100 years, batteries have about 10 years. They also cost ALOT more due to lithium and cobalt being so expensive.

EVs have their advantages which were stated and so do combustion engines. I wouldn't worry about either disappearing. Most vehicles may become hybrids though. You can have the advantages of both.

EVs being worse overall for the environment is FUD spread by the oil lobby. They're not, and it's not even close.

Yes, batteries are worse to produce over one tank of gas and an EV is more damaging to produce than an ICEV. But, the overwhelming majority of EVs will only need that production once (and even those that don't will probably largely get used batteries out of crashed cars). If an ICEV goes 200,000 miles before being scrapped (over however many owners), and gets 20mpg during that time, it's using 10,000 gallons of gas-- that's 21,538 gallons of oil (513 barrels) that needs to be refined. And delivered to the gas station, which generates emissions itself. And, you know, the actual burning of the gas in the car.

Car batteries, outside of the first gen nissan leaf (which,uniquely, had no thermal management), are proving to be quite robust. Samsung, who makes the battery for my i3, says the battery is good for 583,000 miles before it's cycled out (<80% of original capacity). Tesla's batteries look to be good for a similar life expectancy:



Like all batteries, they're dropping off a bit quickly initially (over the first ~30,000 miles) then set in to linear decay-- they'll also be in the 400,000+ mile range before falling under 80% at that rate of decline.
(as in, from 70,000 km above to 270,000 km the capacity fell ~5%. Assuming decay continues at that rate (which it should), they'll hit 80% of original capacity at ~450,000 miles. And that's first gen Tesla battery tech (as the higher mileage data points are older cars-- new Tesla's should be better. Not to mention the million mile battery pack Tesla is supposedly unveiling later this month)

Tesla has not disallowed anyone to supercharge. Certainly fast charging anything is harder on the battery-- this is true of all batteries. It's also not the norm with EVs. As in, people imagine using them like ICEVs, where you drive 300 miles and then go to a charger and charge it. That's for suckers-- the EV good life is charging at home (which is slower) and leaving each day with a full battery. In my i3 ownership I have public/fast charged one time-- and that's just because I wanted to try it out. I use ICEVs for road trips, as they're better for that, but I'd imagine the majority of EV owners only use fast chargers for road tripping. Even then, most hotels at this point have slow chargers you can plug into overnight. One of the great things about EV ownership is no longer having to deal with going to the gas station/charge-- it makes filling up our other cars feel remarkably gross/antiquated/getting ripped off. You mean every 300 miles I have to pay $60 to touch a nasty public surface and stand in place for 5 minutes and sometimes get a nasty smelling fluid where I don't want it?

I also don't think gas is going anywhere, because there's purposes it's much better suited to-- towing, sports cars, off roading, etc. But for daily commuting, there's no contest in environmental impact over the lifespan of a car (or suitability for purpose).

Also, current ICEVs are going to have a shorter useable lifespan. Turbos (heat, pressure, complexity), direct injection, automatics, higher operating temps, all wheel drive, bla bla bla are all going to make modern ICEVs become not road worthy much earlier in their life. My M5 is about to roll over 200,000 miles, and that's not an unusually high mileage e39 M5. How many F10s do you think will ever make it there? Hybrids combine the complexity of ICEVs and EVs-- outside of toyota, I don't know how good their lifespan will be. By contrast, EVs are remarkably simple. One moving part engine, no transmission (on most), no fluids to change, brakes last much, MUCH longer (because they mostly don't get used), no exhaust components to crack, vastly less sensor, etc. There's not much to fail. Longer road life = smaller environmental impact. And when EVs do get taken off the road, their largest environmental component (the battery) almost always gets reused for house batteries, grid storage, parts, etc (unless it get damaged in a crash, in which case it gets recycled as the materials within are valuable).

My guess is we'll see a period of PHEVs, as they allow people to get into an EVs (most of the time) without range anxiety. PHEVs will let them experience some of the benefits of EV life, but also reason they don't need nearly as much range as they think (as they'll be mostly doing 100% electric driving despite only having, say, 50 miles of EV range). Next round, I'd guess they'll move on to an actual EV. I don't think most of those PHEVs will have a long lifespan-- I woudln't want to own any out of warranty that aren't made by Toyota.

The fossil fuel industry is spending over a billion dollars a year trying to confuse people and spread misinformation. They do this largely by focusing in on specific aspects, out of context, and ignoring the larger picture. Consider the source of things you read.

All that said, I don't think EVs are going to win out as DDs because of their environmental impact-- I think they're going to win out because they're dramatically better for how most people actually use cars. Cheaper net experience, quieter, easier, more space from a given size car (for bespoke EVs, not adapted ICEVs). Right now, I think we're just in a lag period where people don't realize it yet/haven't experienced it/are afraid of the unknown. For Jack and Jill average, that just want to get in a car, go to work, go home, the EV allows them to lose 90% of their maintenance and repairs (time and expense), lose 80% of their fuel costs (and the time you spend getting gas), have a quieter, more peaceful drive, have more space, and have a car that's instantly ready to go (pre conditioned interior climate and no engine warm up period).

...and yeah, turning the M3 into an EV would ruin it :P

[Arith2]

I guess we'll just disagree on EVs. I don't think they're more convenient and unless it's a nuclear plant providing the power, the just aren't more efficient. I spend about $40 to fill up my tank with 93 in 5 minutes. If all our cars were EVs, we'd be lucky to have 70% of the overall simply due to age. EVs won't stand the test of time simply due to science. Cycling affects lifespan but so does age. I don't want to buy a new car every ten years, and I won't.

Maintenance is still there and a heck of alot more expensive when something does break. It will just hit all at once. There are no at home repairs unless you're an electrical engineer. You only half way own the car ever. There will never be a Nam3forum for an EV.

From a comfort standpoint, I can't tell if my wife's Toyota Camry is running without putting my ear at the tailpipe or looking at the tach. It's an NA 2.5L that costs $30 every 400 miles in the city with no degradation. EVs are innovative but they're way over marketed for a mediocre product. Tesla is the most guilty of this.

At the end of the day, EVs are competing with ICVs and they'll most likely keep up with each other. It comes down to personal preference but ICVs has the biggest advantage... Price. Money talks and Lithium is EXPENSIVE.

[cudzich09]

"I don't want it because I like the way things are."
In other words, it's too much of an inconvenience for me. I'll just leave it at that.

This let it "burn" option we still have today on the table, sure is favorable to the mindset present [self included] in this thread. Anyway, it's just a matter of time, enjoy!

[Obioban]

I guess we'll just disagree on EVs. I don't think they're more convenient and unless it's a nuclear plant providing the power, the just aren't more efficient. I spend about $40 to fill up my tank with 93 in 5 minutes. If all our cars were EVs, we'd be lucky to have 70% of the overall simply due to age. EVs won't stand the test of time simply due to science. Cycling affects lifespan but so does age. I don't want to buy a new car every ten years, and I won't.

Maintenance is still there and a heck of alot more expensive when something does break. It will just hit all at once. There are no at home repairs unless you're an electrical engineer. You only half way own the car ever. There will never be a Nam3forum for an EV.

From a comfort standpoint, I can't tell if my wife's Toyota Camry is running without putting my ear at the tailpipe or looking at the tach. It's an NA 2.5L that costs $30 every 400 miles in the city with no degradation. EVs are innovative but they're way over marketed for a mediocre product. Tesla is the most guilty of this.

At the end of the day, EVs are competing with ICVs and they'll most likely keep up with each other. It comes down to personal preference but ICVs has the biggest advantage... Price. Money talks and Lithium is EXPENSIVE.

If you don't think they're more convenient, I don't think you've owned one. Owning one really brings to light lots of things that are annoying about ICEV ownership. Getting in to a car that's cold or hot, getting gas, warming up an engine, oil changes, spark plug changes, coils, limp mode, sensors, bla bla bla. When all you've owned is ICEVs you don't really notice it, because it's how life has always been, but once you've had to deal with none of it... suddenly you realize it actually is a bit annoying.

Where are you pulling 10 years for battery life from? BMW/Samsung says the battery in the i3 is good for at least 20 years, and there's lots of Models Ss on the road that are coming up on 10 years old at this point and still going strong.

Maintenance is not even close. All I do on the i3 is the cabin air filter and brake fluid every 2 years. I assume I'll have to do brakes at some point, but probably not before ~200,000 miles. On my 3 other cars I care about I do this: https://nam3forum.com/forums/forum/m...ockdown-thread

Batteries are historically expensive, but RAPIDLY becoming not. Later this month is Tesla's battery day, which should mark a significant jump forward (downward) in $/kwh (which I'm actually excited for, as I want to buy a couple power walls).



Oil is not trending similarly :P

A NA camry is about as low maintenance as an ICEV can get. It's also not at all representative of what the average person is buying, or what event will be available to buy new in the near future. Government mandated fuel economy and emissions targets are increasingly making it so auto manufactures can't produce ICEVs that are long term reliable/serviceable. Used cars will follow, as the existing used fleet ages out.

Which, by the way, I 100% agree is not a good thing (not endorsing it, just pointing out the reality of the situation). I try to buy everything in such a way that it's as close as possible to a one time purchase, that I won't be making again. I won't buy a house made before ~1970 (and REALLY not anything made in the last 10-20 years), I won't buy anything with Turbos or automatics, I avoid as much as possible anything made in China, etc. I am not concerned about the i3 not being long term viable. It can't rust. Upkeep is minimal. It really only has two expensive components-- the motor, which is $3000 new from FCP (with lifetime warranty) and the battery (easy to pick up for <$3000 used). I don't expect to be replacing either of those anytime soon, if ever. If they did, I would DIY the replacement-- neither looks to be particularly hard (or dangerous, if you disconnect the battery first). Otherwise it's just brake fluid and cabin air filters every 2 years, and drive.

I'm a bit of an extreme example (average ~100 miles/day and don't drive the most efficient cars), but for context: since we got the i3 (pre covid), we have been spending an average of $700 less per month on gas and car parts. Our electric bill has gone up ~$50 per month. That means by the money saved from owning the i3, minus the price of electricity the i3 is paid for in full in 29 months (the car cost $19,100 with 20,000 miles on it). Every mile the car drives after that it's functionally a free car, so even if spontaneously every part of the car failed... it was still good value. That math will be even more in our favor once solar is up and running.