Range anxiety is overrated
 

Car manufacturers have not marketed and informed their buyers that their EV offerings serve most if not all of their 'real world' needs. The buying public still believes that EVs are too expensive to own and they could not go far. Researchers from MIT and Santa Fe Institute have concluded that the average American average daily use is about 70 miles, lesser with AC used. This US average accounts 87% of vehicles on the road today and can be replaced by available low cost electric vehicles with standard battery size (overnight fully-charged), even if they could not recharge on that day. This range includes 93% of the urban commuters and even 80% of rural drivers. Only long range business/vacation travelers have to make recharging plans/charging logistics ahead of time.

Shorter-range electric cars meet the needs of almost all US drivers | Ars Technica

http://www.nature.com/articles/nenergy2016112

Translation: rather than come up with a solution to the problem, we'll just say it isn't a problem.

Sorry, this is a very real concern of the car buying public. This is a major turn-off for car buyers and as long as EV advocates try to discredit concerns rather than address them, EVs are going to continue to be a modest percentage of the market share.

Sure, you can get anywhere you need to go, but it takes planning and added time to go on a long trip. Why put up with the hassle of doing that when you could buy a similar car for half the price without the limitation? Car buyers are answering that question with their buying decisions...

I see 2 potential solutions.
One, enable a liquid fueled tow behind charging trailer, only problem with that idea is it looks like all the manufactures put their charge ports on the front or side of the vehicle. Ok, so relocate the charging port to the back, only problem there is every mass market electric vehicle I am aware is immobilized while charging.
That is the solution but it seems almost as if they have specifically went out of their way to engineer these vehicles so there is no way this could work with out heavy software and vehicle modifications.

Two by pass all the stupid technology on these electric cars. Call a guy with a big diesel powered roll back with liquid fuelled generator or a guy with a big diesel truck with car trailer and a generator. And that situation pretty much explains its self.

I don't see why they couldn't cram a small(10hp?) engine somewhere on board for backup power. It wouldn't add a lot of weight, if you kept the fuel tank small. It could be an add-on, like A/C, for those who actually want it. It would have to be designed to be there from the start, otherwise good luck making the components fit.

Want more? Tesla Model S P100D: 315-mile range, quickest production car in the world | ExtremeTech

For people who can afford two cars, range anxiety probably is fiction. They have an EV for daily commute type stuff and an ICE for everything else. But that's two cars in the place of one. I need one car to be able to carry me around on my 25-50 mile days and be completely ready to got 150 or 250 miles any given weekend. So range anxieties are an actual primary factor that has discouraged me from an EV as of yet. It is the primary factor, ahead of battery life and depreciation. I need to see entry level prices on good systems with much better than 100 mile EPA range before I can be tempted into one, I think.

Well, I guess I have range anxiety! I think I can make it safely and reliably to and from work with an EV, but not to my cabin after work .. a trip that I average every second weekend.

I have a high-way only commute that is 50 km (30 miles) one way, and I have been told that there is an opportunity to charge at work. It gets cold here (-40F), so the battery pack will need a heater if I am to drive it 4 seasons, like a real car.

I am building/converting an old Mazda MX6 and it looks like the curb weight is going to be 2700 lbs. So estimate around 270 watt-hours per mile .. if I am lucky. My Renault Fluenza pack (same chemistry as the original nissan leaf) is about 22 kw-h ... 81 miles, 130 km. Drop that to 65 miles and 105 km with a safety factor for head winds, rain, temperature, defogging windows, etc. Drop it further if I want my battery pack to last .. so I charge up to 80% and try to keep above 20% SOC ... That makes the practical range 52 miles or 83 km. MORE than enough to get TO work, but I NEED to charge before I come back HOME.

My trip to work and back is OK. But on Friday, when I get home from work and want to drive up to the cabin, 150 km away, the Mazda won't do it. So I will need to switch to a Dino burner for the weekend.

That's where I am .. not NOW, but in the hopefully near future .. until I can afford a Tesla (um, not really) or get an LG Bolt .. er .. Chevy Bolt .. which is sort of like a unicorn for me. I may hear about it and see pictures, but it may as well be mythical. I guess the Tesla Model 3 is sort of like that, too.

Which for me would mean three vehicles: the EV for short-range stuff, the Insight or similar for longer trips (70+ miles is something I do at least once a week), and a truck for hauling firewood, hay &c, going on rough dirt, pulling horse trailers...

The whole point of the article is that there are many people for whom existing vehicles have sufficient range. That may or may not be true, I don't know. The fact that many people on here, including myself, require a greater range does not alter the truth of the claim. Personally I don't know anyone who only ever uses a car for short journeys, but I can't say that such people do not exist. If I fell into that category I would use an EV.

There's a good reason cars have fuel tanks sized the way they are. It is because range anxiety *is* something that exists for most car buyers, whether they acknowledge it or not. Amusingly, it might also be one of the reasons the Tata Nano doesn't sell all that well. A 15 liter tank versus the 35 liter tank on an Alto means a real world range of up to 500 kilometers versus a thousand kilometer range.

Almost nobody ever uses up the range of their tank, but the convenience of going to the gas station just once a week or every two weeks is something they appreciate, as opposed to having to fill up every night. The extra range for cross-country trips is merely a side benefit.

-

Price is still a big factor. The price gap between the Leaf and the Versa it's based on is still a big one, and it'll take about a hundred thousand miles to simply ROI (so sue me... had to pull that off the net... no time to calculate)... about ten years for some... and you'll only get into the savings at the end of that... assuming nothing else has gone wrong with either car... (let's call the cost of servicing versus battery replacement a draw for the moment)...

Forbes is even more skeptical, painting payback (counting interest) at nearly 200,000 miles.

But who counts interest on car purchases? Not people buying new! :D

-

Still, people buying new can be swayed by emotional factors... which is why the Leaf sells, despite being a glorified Versa with a big battery. But for EVs to go fully mainstream, and the way forward if you're going to capture the end of the market that would rather not have to pay so much for a small car with limited range, is ride-sharing and shared-ownership... where people subscribe to a car service without taking ownership... leaving the potential open for that one-in-a-dozen who will need extra range for that day, taking the gasoline-powered option, while the rest share the all-electric fleet.

Not that this has worked out all that well in the past, but with the advent of Uber and Grab, it might just be possible to try again.

Some additional factors affecting range anxiety are the reduction of EV range for winter driving and the gradual reduction of range as the battery pack ages. So a new EV with a 100 mile range that meets your driving need may not meet it when driving in -10 degree F temperatures or with 8 year old batteries. When a gas car encounters reduced range due to cold temps or an old, out of tune engine, you can always pop into a gas station to refuel, something more difficult and slower to do with an EV.

And the point of many of our objections is that these scientists (or the reporters) seem to be blindly assuming that an average daily travel of 70 miles or less means that a 70 mile range is sufficient. But it's easy to show that this isn't always, or perhaps even usually, the case. For example, my approximate driving in the last week (which is pretty typical):

• *W - 0
  *T - 75 miles to lake
  *F - 5 miles to other lake
  *S - 25 miles to trailhead
  *S - 130 miles to friends' place
  *M - 0
  *T - 75 miles to lake

So less than 45 miles per day on average, but half of the trips exceed the 70 mile range.

What if you did your daily seventy-mile commute, barely got home and plugged in, and your wife, daughter, or handicapped deaf-mute nun has an emergency, and you cannot be there for them.

Hypothetical scenarios can get crazy, but emergencies do happen.

How about construction on your perfect commute requires you to find another way to get to and from work?

... and that's why I need the quad cab with the V8!

Since I own multiple vehicles I see the arguments against evs mostly meaningless or people could just own a volt

Except we aren't making arguments against EVs (or at least I'm not), we're making arguments against the idea that a 70 mile range is sufficient for most people. The argument would be just the same if the tank of an IC engined vehicle only held enough fuel for 70 miles, and you had to refuel it through a soda straw.

These days I'd be quite happy with a ~200 mile range, and even in the days when I used to make a regular 250 mile trip, Tesla's new 300 or so miles would be sufficient.

I don't have range anxiety, only financial anxiety. Why should I sacrifice range if the vehicle doesn't deliver the miles per dollar I can get in a conventional vehicle?

There are dozens of ways to get around occasional trips beyond the single charge range of an EV, but why should anyone be bothered with them if the vehicle doesn't have a substantial financial advantage over driving a conventional car?

The average household has 1.9 vehicles in the US. That means that many households have 2 or more, and could easily accommodate at least 1 EV. Again, it's pointless to the average person unless there is a significant financial advantage.

I have no doubt the cost to produce EVs will fall well below the cost to produce an internal combustion vehicle because it's a much simpler design. We've just had many more years to cut the cost of ICE vehicles and leverage economies of scale. Once EVs have some years behind it to increase volume and reduce production costs, people will be much less willing to fork over absurd amounts of money on a transportation appliance and will chose EV over ICE.

My second vehicle is a bicycle. I would not know where to park anything else.

How do I put a V8 on that? Tomato juice?

Got a couple of those, too. Now if someone would just invent bicycle tires/tubes that are impervious to goatheads...

Already know that you ecomodders are outliers with your yuuge long-range travels.

The report crunched the largest national household travel survey numbers; taking account of GPS data in all types of vehicle owners; topographical mileage, fuel economy data, even taking account of elevation changes and air temperature readings.
Their base point only on overnight fully recharged EVs. The lucky 25% of drivers never go further than 74 miles in a single day. The majority 87% math works, besides the same majority of those EV drivers also own an alternate vehicle too. Just in case, AAA members have EV Roadside Assistance, after 10-15 min charging, enough to escort & get you to a charging station.

We have driven our 2 EV's more than 45,000 miles, and we have never been stranded without a charge. We still have the Scion xD, and my son has been driving that a lot, because he has been commuting ~80 miles round trip (and that is more than our leases can support per day). I have driven our gas car 4 times in the last ~2 years.

I have found that as you drive an EV, you learn how far you can go, and the estimated range is very accurate, especially in warmer weather. As the weather gets colder, your expectations are gradually adjusted.

My spouse has anxiety about range, and so when I would be comfortable letting it go - we just plug in and charge, even if we don't really "need" too.

The caveat with driving an EV on longer trips - is you have to take the slower speed route, which can be a shorter distance, as well. And if you use quick charging, it adds ~30-60 minutes to getting where you are going, and on the return trip.

But you live in Massachusetts, no? They put things pretty close close together there.

Yes, but how does that matter? Range is range - and I have driven multiple times on trips right at the edge of the range, and trips that require a charge to complete.

Slight correction, we have over 46,000 miles total on our EV's.

Because if things are close together, then almost everywhere you want/need to go falls within a 70 mile range (or whatever), so an EV with a 70 mile range works. If it's a 40 mile trip to the grocery store, then even if there was a charging point at the store, you'd still have to hang around several hours waiting for the charging to take place. (And that's assuming someone else didn't get to it first, and left for a few hours :-()

James, those issues are true no matter where you live.

The Volt's design really solves the range issue relatively cheaply, compared to the Tesla solution of big, expensive batteries (which as cool as can be, love that car). For me a Volt would be the perfect temptation device, but when I test drove it I hated 4 person capacity and less cargo space than I anticipated. I know the new Volt seats 5, but why not the first? Were batteries that much larger 8 years ago? The Tesla seats 5. Why does a Tesla have so much more space than the Volt? The Volt has a generator the Tesla does not have, but the Volt probably has a smaller battery pack. Just wondering... rambling... I think about a second hand Gen1 volt for my daughter (currently 14 years old).

Why should a car have to seat 5 people? Why's that the magic number, and not 6, 8, 10...?

Seems obvious to me that if the car seats fewer people, it can be made smaller/lighter, and thus will have better fuel economy/battery range. If you look around you on the highways, you'll see few cars with more than one person in them, almost none with more than two. So, just as with the argument that a 70 mile range is sufficient for most trips, so would a 2-seater be sufficient.

For myself, if I were to buy a Volt, I'd likely take the rear seats out to create more cargo space.

Agreed

My relatives would only own old 3 row station wagons for a car and many times would fill all 9 positions.

Most 5 seat cars really are 4.5 seat and most adults won't sit in the rear.

At 6'3" I've never been bothered by too little space, just have to sit funny.

Having a volt, I can say that I've made 3 of the 4 seats useless so I could fit more cargo.

I've never need seating for 5, if so I have a mostly idle truck that fits 6

Silly argument

I believe the Honda Prelude went from a five-seater to four in 1991. I once had four other adults with me. That was fun! :)

It is nice to have the option for a fifth passenger, but if you only ever had one or two back there, they just might have enjoyed the setup slightly better.

Doesn't the Tesla have seats in the trunk?

Yes, but:

Here in New England where things are close together and the interstates were shoehorned in wherever we could find space, the back roads may well be a shorter distance. If they're not, the better mileage you get can still outweigh a few more minutes or miles of driving. Out where things are farther apart there may only be one road, or the speed of your choice may add so much time to the trip that it's just not worth it. It may be great to make that choice, but buying a car that turns it into your only option isn't going to be a popular idea.

Right, the issues and challenges driving an EV are the same, no matter where you live.

The right tool for the job...

EVs are the right tool for most jobs. The main thing that makes them untenable for some people is lack of access to charge at home; not range.

The only way range is a problem is if:

1. the EV owner is in a 1 vehicle family

and

2. the EV owner does not have close family or otherwise has a poor relationship and cannot borrow a vehicle

and

3. the EV owner has no friends

and

4. the EV owner does not have a credit card, so they are unable to rent a vehicle

or

5. the EV owner makes frequent long trips, in which case, a fuel efficient gasser such as the Prius makes more sense.

Another article referencing this study:

Electric-car range anxiety exists, but it's overblown, says MIT study

Or you get home to find the power is out at your house due to ice/heavy snow/wind taking down the power lines (something that can occur here up to a few times each winter) and you only have 5 miles left on your charge.

A coworker in my office usually arrives at 6am, but sent an email saying his gasser won't stay running when he starts it. He still isn't here even though he could have walked in about 30 min.

All technologies are susceptible to problems.

Again. As long as EV advocates have this mindset, EVs will not take over a significant market share.

Range anxiety is a very real reason people don't buy EVs even though the vast majority of car buyers do not meet your requirements. Yes, they could plan out a long trip with long stops at charging stations. Yes, they could pester a friend/family member to borrow their car. Yes, they could rent a car for the trip.

But why would they when they could buy a similar car for half the price without the limitations?

In spite of significant government incentives, EVs accounted for 0.66% of the new US car market in 2015... Looks like people are voting with their dollars here.

Or the EV owner drove his 70 mile range EV the 30 miles to work, then found out that due to fires/police shootings (both of which have happened on the highway that runs by my place), the 30 mile trip home just became 70.

If the EV owner keeps mooching off his family/friends, s/he will pretty soon have a poor relationship with them :-)

The nearest place I could rent a vehicle is about 15 miles. For some of my friends, it'd be 50 or so. So having to arrange vehicle shuttles for that seems like a major waste. Not to mention that last I heard, the car rental places were only supplying handicap-equipped (that is, automatic transmission) vehicles. I certainly wouldn't want to set out on a long trip driving an unfamiliar vehicle.

You kidding me? I'll let a rando drive my Prius if they want to swap for their BMW i3, Tesla, Spark...

Yeah, there are tons of reason why an EV is a poor choice for some people. Mostly, they cost too much. After that, it's access to charging. Even people with garages tend to store crap in them instead of their vehicles. A distant 3rd reason that might make an EV a poor purchase is the hassle that long distance trips might present, especially if they are frequent.

My point isn't that range isn't a concern, it's that it's a very minor one when compared to the other 2 big reasons preventing people from owning them.

I'm not convinced about that. If cost is the main reason why people don't buy EVs then most car buyers must know the cost of EVs. I doubt that is true, but perhaps that is just me. I have no idea what an EV costs because I first checked the range and decided they aren't for me so I never got as far as looking at the price. Won't most people will approach things in that order? IE Check if they want one before looking at the price?

Huh? The current crop of EVs are priced in the same ballpark as the upper end of what the major automakers offer - that is, not Ferraris, Porsches, or Bentleys. Though of course ANY new car costs more that I'm willing to spend on a vehicle (maybe when used ones get down under $10K or so), but other people obviously do spend that sort of money on their cars.

But storing stuff and being a workshop is what a garage is FOR. Why would anyone (outside of a high crime area) bother to put a car inside every night? For charging, you just park close to the door and plug in the cord.

Well, that may be the case for you, but it's not so for everyone, or I expect even the majority.