[ad_1]
The history of the automobile emphasizes luxury, comfort, and aesthetics over performance, power, speed, and safety. It is true to its basic need – transportation and transportation. However, if we are looking to buy a car with more horsepower that is safe for everyday use and gives more mileage – gasoline powered cars are the best choice – both for highways and racetracks.
The theory is not just a wild speculation or a desktop projection, it is a simulation of the real world. UC Davis recently launched the “EV Project” which allowed car-users to simulate their commute in an EV (electric vehicle) as compared to a gas-powered vehicle. The project found that, a 50-mile round-trip commute could save an electric 2014 Chevrolet Volt owner nearly $1,000 in annual fuel costs compared to driving a gasoline-based 2014 Ford Focus. However, pure electric cars are more expensive than their gas-based counterparts. For example, the 2018 Ford Focus costs less than $18,000, while the 2018 Chevrolet Volt will set consumers back more than $34,000 and the all-electric Chevrolet Bolt more than $38,000. Solving the equation in this hypothetical scenario, it would take a Chevy owner more than 17 years to recoup the additional costs of buying an electric. In other words, EVs are not suitable for users who plan to remain in the vehicle for long periods of time. EVs also cost more than gas-based cars. They need charging infrastructure, plug-in accessibility and specialized maintenance workshops, which are not yet sufficient to meet growing consumer demand.
There is added concern when it comes to mileage and range. With a single charge, most elite EVs like the Tesla Model X, Model S, Model 3, Chevrolet Bolt and 2018 Nissan Leaf can only run an average of 225 miles in an ideal scenario. This number can drop as low as 170 on cold or hot days with the heater or AC at full blast. In such a situation, hybrid and gas based cars are a better option. To get the full potential of a hybrid, some auto buyers opt for a plug-in hybrid (PHEV). For example, the 2018 Chevrolet Volt has 53 miles of electric range and up to 420 miles with a conventional gas tank for longer trips.
It is true that EVs are environment friendly but they are not necessarily clean as electricity is generated somehow. It’s the equivalent of using the same fossil fuels – only cleaner. EVs run on lithium-ion batteries, which need to be sourced from the ground. Chemically, lithium is a corrosive alkali metal that gives off dangerous gaseous derivatives when exposed to moisture, resulting in increased environmental pollution. In application, this can cause EVs to emit dangerous gases or even catch fire if they are stored in cold climates or not maintained properly. Existing electric infrastructure of such technology does not provide provision for reusing batteries or recalibrating disposal costs. Fuel-based cars can be easily built, their engines swapped and the fuel filtered; But currently this is not the case with electric.
The technology for “transportation of the future” is still young and expensive compared to their gas-based cousins. EVs may be easier to charge, but they cost more in the medium- to long-term. Even the most advanced EV batteries eventually wear out and need to be replaced frequently. For such replacements, the Tesla Model 3 battery pack costs $190 per kWh and the Chevy Bolt battery pack costs $205 per kWh. Charging stations are another link in EV sustenance. In a state of euphoria, consumers can skip gas stations and ‘fill-up’ their EV either from a charging station on their way to work or via a spare solar array sitting in their home. In fact, while gas stations can be found every 1 mile on a regular highway, EV battery charging stations often cannot be found. People living in apartments or condos may have difficulty finding a charging plug-in. At a high cost, plug-ins are now only available in the most advanced countries such as the US and Western Europe. Not to mention, it becomes a deal breaker for many new buyers and a headache for auto owners in developing countries.
The perennial debate on the issue of automobile safety gains a lot of traction. In theory, EVs are less flammable than gas cars. However, once a fire starts, EVs are difficult to extinguish. In October 2017, a Tesla Model S caught fire after crashing into a concrete barrier on the Ahlberg Expressway in Austria. It took 35 firefighters to extinguish the fire. Most recently, on March 23, 2018, a Tesla Model X hit an unshielded median on Highway 101 in California and caught fire. The fire closed the highway for 5 hours, becoming a fighting nightmare for firefighters. EV motors are not responsible for such catastrophic accidents. Powerful villains are lithium-ion batteries that can fuel hot fires and give off intense heat and are hard to extinguish. Battery fires generate a range of toxic fumes, fumes and gases that pose a greater threat to daily commuting and the environment. Currently, only a small number of personnel at EV manufacturers have the expertise to deal with such electrical emissions and hazards. State firefighters and general passersby aren’t always aware of this ‘techno’ because EVs don’t come with a detailed manual ‘101 Putting Out Your EV Fire’!
Recent accidents are bringing back the debate on whether EVs are safer than diesel and gasoline-powered vehicles in terms of safety. In black and white, the Tesla Model X might have a near-perfect score for crash test safety ratings. But experience and records always prove stronger than rainbow promises and white-washed lab results. With technological breakthroughs, EVs could be the harbinger of a transportation revolution in the coming decades. Battery pack replacement costs could drop to at least $73 per kWh after 2030 and current range concerns could be a thing of the past. Hybrids and EVs can provide more options and more convenience for the demanding consumer end and new commercial setups. But at this stage, if we consider road safety for stress free travel, it is easier to bet on ‘combustion’ engines over battery operated motors.
[ad_2]
