EVcast #190: 32.7 Million EVs by 2015 - Interview with the Lady Who Wrote the Report

most excellent show.

Phil

quote comment

I hope Susan's advise is in general better than what she said about solar panels and batteries.  She has the whole situation turned on its head.

1) Grid tied solar (no batteries in the house)

a) During the day, the power is put on the grid and you get credit for it from the power company

b) At night, you take power from the grid use the power to charge your EV.

c) Using net-metering laws, you have a free 95% efficient storage system.

2) Off-Grid solar with batteries in the house

a) During the day, you charge a large battery in your house with electricity from the solar panels.

b) At night, you transfer the electricity from the battery in your house to the battery in your car.

c) This will have some loss of efficiency, perhaps 20% loss

d) You need to purchase a large battery, (perhaps $10,000 worth) and maintain it over time.

Her idea that the batteries pay off quickly, but using grid tied net-metering is expensive, is completely at odds with the well known economics of solar panel systems.  There is a very good reason people don't have batteries in their house, it costs too much money.

   On the plus side, if you do have batteries in your house, you can use it for backup power.  But this is an expensive option and so most people with access to reliable grid power do not go for it.

     I don't know what Susan is thinking here.

   Quote: "the grid isn't going to pay you any money"???? If you give the grid a KWH, it will give it back to you at the same PRICE.  What is she talking about?

    Quote: "you lose too much energy sending it back onto the grid"????? Inverters are 95% efficient at putting the electricity on the grid.  Battery storage is about 80% efficient.  Again, what is she talking about.  Read a basic book about on-grid and off-grid applications of solar panels.  Everyone knows this.  The only time you use batteries is for off-grid applications.  Perhaps this is what Warren Buffet had in mind.

     Quote: "it is something like 75 years before the power companies are going to pay you enough to pay off the (solar panels) those batteries have a payback from 9 months to a year and a half, if you use it to charge your car."
      One more time we have to ask, what is she thinking.  A KWH has a certain value.  For me it is about 19 cents.  Now the value of the KWH is no different to me if I use it in my car or for my house.  So solar panels that are a poor investment to generate power for your house, will also be a poor investment for charging your car.  There is no difference.  Except with her idea, you also have to pay for a battery, which will be more expensive not less.

    Quote: "Solar is down under $1/watt".  Well if our market researcher did a little checking with other market researchers like these guys http://www.solarbuzz.com/ She would see that solar is currently $4.80 per watt.  But hey, this is an area that she says she has researched a lot.

   Quote:  "People haven't looked at the numbers".   I totally agree.  Susan is a person and she hasn't looked the numbers for solar panels.

    Someday, someone will have to explain to me why an obviously intelligent person falls into this situation of being so badly misinformed.  Perhaps she just listens to people and assumes what she is told is correct.  I guess if you don't check out the information for yourself, you can fall into this mis-information.

     Now the EVCast is responsible for further spreading this misinformation, however, Bo did try to gentle push back at some points.

Later
John C. Briggs

quote comment

Okay what is she talking about? 800 dollars for a solar panel? What fantasyland does she come from? Last time I checked a 3 to 5 Kw system will run you anywhere from 15 to 30 thousand dollars. Lets not forget the batteries we have to buy per her solution. There is no way you get a payback in under a year. I'm sorry but this is just plain wrong. And how can you not know how much gas you use per month and you an evcast show!

quote comment

Right now all Thin film batteries are Lithium based but not all Lithium batteries are Thin film. 

http://www.excellatron.com/

quote comment

Well... a solar panel is about $800. But that is mis-leading.  You need about 16 of them, plus rack, and an inverter...  So about US$26,000 full cost installed.

Oh, and that $800 panel typically produces 170 Watts or $4.70 per watt.

quote comment

First Solar reaches "dollar per watt milestone"

Thin-film solar manufacturer claims to have produced modules at cost of 98 cents a watt

BusinessGreen.com staff, BusinessGreen, 25 Feb 2009

"Thin-film solar cell manufacturer First Solar yesterday announced it has broken the $1 (70p) per watt cost barrier that is widely accepted as the point at which solar panels become cost competitive with fossil fuels.

The company said that during the fourth quarter of last year, the manufacturing cost for its solar modules stood at 98 cents per watt, taking it below the $1 per watt mark for the first time.

Mike Ahearn, chief executive at the company, hailed the achievement as a " milestone in the solar industry's evolution towards providing truly sustainable energy solutions", adding that it provided evidence that solar manufacturers could prosper in the long term even as government subsidies are reduced.

First Solar said it was confident that plans to more than double its production capacity through 2009 to more than one gigawatt would allow it to reduce costs further to a point where energy from solar panels can undercut that from natural gas and coal.

According to the company, it has already reduced costs from more than $3 a watt in 2004 to less than $1 a watt now and there is every indication that the trend will continue as production capacity increases"

Of course that's their production cost, not the cost you pay

quote comment

First, Bo and Ryan- an excellent interview, and what a coup.  Here's hoping that the hype and forecasting from this report spurs a much more aggressive approach into the EV sphere from investors and automakers alike.

Ouch! The blog comments are a little harsh guys!  There is an old saying- don't throw the baby out with the bath water.  She talked for an hour on a variety of things concerning EV's, and the solar and battery tech was a small part.  And even on that, I would want some clarification from her before throwing her and her report to the wolves.  It is hard to find much about her on the Internet, at least in the few minutes I looked- but she seems to have a good reputation for doing these type of studies, and has a wide, varied and knowledgeable background in several impressive areas.

My own thoughts, then, small as they are:

Not all, in fact I would venture to guess that not most, Utilities pay for electricity put into the grid by homes here in the US, much less in the World- and remember, she is speaking to a Global audience, not just a US audience.

Also, she is talking about payback for generating electricity for your EV, not for the house- and while her figures even for that seem very optimistic, perhaps she is looking at the time frame in her report, which pre-supposes costs of batteries and solar panels continuing to come down.  And if you look at the cost of a solar panel or two for use just to replace the gas you would use with an ICE vehicle, then payback does come faster than replacing the electricity you would normally get from the Utility.  And yes, I do understand that this is looking at the books from two different perspectives, and that the payback of using solar electrons from your house will not replace the electrons from the Utility for nearly the same savings- but for people looking to go green with their transportation, comparing the cost of installing a couple of solar panels to replace your Gasoline cost makes it an attractive sell.

Bo, everyone wanted a Prius... just this last year, when gas skyrocketed- that's why it took so long to get to a million vehicles.  Now that gas is down, there is no longer a waiting list.  Once gas goes back up, and I believe as well that it will, the market demand will also return, but this time there will be several companies ready to step in.

And most interesting, her comments about Th!nk and Ford.  I wondered about Ford re-buying Th!nk a few months ago- nothing insightful in this- it just seemed like a good match given their history and Ford's late start into the EV world this go-around, and Th!nk looking for investors.  I hope so- perhaps the Ox is not dead after all;-)

quote comment

Off topic a little bit but once the Chinese get into EVs and Solar pannels the price will drop like a stone- Americans are more creative and  have more good Ideas than anybody but take 5-10 years, if ever, to get to market, the Chinese seem to be able to get anything to market in six months.

quote comment

Paul,
    This woman present herself as an "expert" in the field and claims to have written research reports about solar power.   Almost everything she said about solar was wrong (except for panels costing $800).  I am not talking about someone being wrong about the future of solar.  I am talking about being wrong about the current well known state of solar power.

     OK, let's assume for the moment that she is completely wrong about solar which she has studied for some number of years.  Now do you really want to believe anything else this person has to say about the EV industry?  Why would you think she could do any better job with the EV industry than she did with the solar industry?  Throwing the baby out with the bathwater?  Dude there is nothing of value in the tub, don't be afraid to toss it.

    I could discuss my disagreements with her about the EV industry as well.  However, that is all just future speculation.  So there is a chance she might be right.  That is why I mostly criticized her about the solar field where she claims to be an expert.

But as for your comments, let me try to make some facts about solar clear.

1) Re: buying 1 or 2 solar panels.  Actually, smaller solar panels installations have an even worse ROI (return on investment) than larger ones due to fixed costs of installation.  So the idea that 1 or 2 solar panels is a good idea is not right.

2) Re: buying 1 or 2 solar panels.  2 solar panels might produce about 380KWH per year.  Assuming that your EV uses 0.2KWH/mile you could drive 1900 miles/year on your solar panels.  Most people would need a larger array to power 1 EV and a very large array to handle 2 EV (I am guessing that most houses have two vehicles).  So a vision of a solar powered EV future should probably be 32 panels at a cost of about US$52,000.  OH, and you might want to get another 32 to power your house, Hint: you ran out of roof space just supporting the two cars.

3) Re: Net metering:  44 states plus DC have net metering laws for solar
http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/resources/maps/netmetering_map.shtml

All the most populous states have net-metering laws on the books.  So, if you are a US citizen, there is a good chance that you have net-metering.
Also net-metering is the low-end of support for solar power.  If you live in Germany or perhaps Canada, you can actually get paid a premium for producing solar power.
    See the real damage this woman has done.  She left totally the wrong impression about solar.

4) ROI for car electricity versus house electricity:  I think you understand this already.  A KWH is a KWH whether it powers your car or your house.  To look at ROI you must look at the relative cost of a KWH from your solar panels compared to buying it from the grid.  It doesn't matter where the KWH is used.
    Regarding the ROI for an EV, she fails to point out that the EV requires an expensive battery to run and this reduces your savings in fuel costs.  Also in her scheme, you need two batteries, one in the car and one in the house.  The idea that there is a 9 month to 1.5 year payback is ridiculous. 

Regarding solar panels at $1/watt, boy this would be great. For now, this is just a claim.  The real number is US$3.57 is the lowest price available for thin-film solar.
http://www.solarbuzz.com/ look in the lower left corner of solarbuzz.  This is something you can actually purchase, unlike First Solar which is not selling their panels.  Ever wonder why that is?  Perhaps it is because they would sell them for $3.57/watt.  Even if they can produce for $1/watt, why would the sell them for anything less that $3.57/watt?  That would be bad business.

I was trying to figure this out.  A solar panel is a 40 pound aluminum frame with glass in it.  Finished goods made out of aluminum generally run about $3/pound.  So figure the panel costs about $120.  It is like a 3ftx6ft window for your house.  So it seems reasonable that it would cost $120 to make it.  Perhaps a high quality storm door is a good comparison.  It is made of aluminum and glass and is of similar size. 
   Now if that panel produces 160 watts. Then this is 75 cents per watt just for the glass and aluminum.  So without even the solar PV material, the panels are running 75 cents per watt.   So I don't think $1/watt is very likely in the current arrangement for solar panels.
    To get to $1/watt, we will probably need to have a material that is rolled onto the roof and not need the protection of glass and aluminum.
     Hopefully I am wrong.  I am a big fan of solar.  But I try to keep the numbers on the realistic side of things.
Later
John C. Briggs

quote comment

Bo,
   Perhaps we need a 2 minute cut-off for the guys on blog posts.  The guy before me just went on and on and on. 
Later
John C. Briggs

quote comment

John,

I guess it depends on how fast you can read.  But short and sweet never hurt anybody either.

I guess the wintergreen report of some 400 plus pages requires an equally lengthy response.

Hasbro

 PS - It's all in the numbers....

update: i just realized you were talking about yourself, ha.

quote comment

A guest said:

"There is no way you get a payback in under a year. "

And I contend that there is a way. Of course it will all depend on how you think about "payback." Here's my way:

I refinanced and took out extra money for my PV system. My monthly payment for the PV part of my loan was about $70/month. My average electricity bill was $72/month. Presto. The day I turned the system on, was the day it paid me back. I have since paid off the loan, so now I'll be getting payback for the next 30 years or so.

I do have a difference in opinion about EVs accelerating the payback period. John says they don't, and I say they do. And that is because with my metering system, not all kwh's cost the same. When I make them during the day, they are expensive - and I make lots of credit. My big usage comes during off-peak when I charge my car. The energy costs me very little. So having my big consumption during off-peak hours due to my EV charging means that it helps accelerate my PV payback tremendously.

Something else to consider is expensive tiers. Charging an EV makes your energy more expensive per kWh in most places because you pay more for using more. But with PV and EV, everything looks better because you stay out of the tiers AND you use off-peak power. PV + EV... there is no better deal in transportation.

quote comment

Darrell,
   That's some fancy math you got there.

    What you are talking about is really more Cash-Flow.  You were no worse off with the solar panels in terms of cash flow.  I understand the logic there.  I don't think this is the best way to look at it.  But it has a certain logic.

    If you purchase a PV system that costs $26,000,  it produces $570 worth of electricity per year.  We are talking about 45 years for the system to produce $26,000 worth of electricity.  But...
    If you consider government incentives, REC's, the future price of electricity, the 25 year life span of the panels, we might be talking about 15 to 30 years depending on the assumptions.
     However, it is worth noting that the real payback for these systems (government and personal dollars included) is extremely long.  For that reason, I think it is really not appropriate to talk about really short payback periods.

    I have also seen arguments that PV increases the value of your home so the payback is immediate.  I am also skeptical of this.

   I have read your website so I know that you know all the details and are just being brief here, so I will cut you some slack in my response.  But for other people reading this I just want to make a few things clear.
    First, Darrell has done a lot of electric conservation at his home to make what he is doing possible (I have done the same).  The average person probably cannot even power their home with a PV system, nevermind an EV and their home.  It takes a certain commitment.
    Second, right, tiered pricing is important.  We do not have that here in Massachusetts, I wonder how common this is.  I had great financial success with my water conservation efforts due to tiered pricing for water.
     Third, Darrell paid $42,000 for his RAV4 and perhaps another $30,000 for his solar panels.  The idea that he is saving money, is,... well,... let's just say interesting.  And I have made some of the same decisions, I got a Prius and solar panels.  But let's call it like it is, not cheap.
Later
John C. Briggs

quote comment

Excellent show!

I certainly don't agree with everything she said, but it was interesting to hear her explain her views.

Right:
-EV industry is FINALLY about to get rolling
-Worldwide view is important . . . India, China, and other emerging markets will be big EV grow markets due to acceptance of smaller vehicles.
-Lithium-Ion batteries are a game-changer.

Wrong:
-Solar panels do NOT pay off within a year even if you have an EV. (I love solar and they do pay off much faster if you have an EV but not that fast.)
-Battery based solar systems are not better than grid-tied systems (Unless you live in the middle of no where off the grid.) Solar works best WITH the grid. Solar generates the most power when utilities need it (on hot sunny days when everyone turns on their AC.) And Solar systems draw power from the grid when the utilities have excess capacity (at night when the work day is over.). Yes, the utilities don't pay much for the power . . . but it doesn't matter . . . it is a wash. You give them power during the day (and your meter spins backwards) and you get power back during the night (and your meter goes forward). With a properly sized system, it is a wash and you pay almost nothing to the utility. Just some minimal connection charge. So you get to use the utility as a giant perfectly efficient battery. And the utility uses you as a source of power when they need it most.

Unsure:
-She was very pro Th!nk. But Th!nk is currently in receivership! (AKA bankruptcy). They are NOT in great financial shape. (They did receive money nearly a year ago but they went belly up in December.) However, a recent story said they are just about to announce the sale of Th!nk City cars in the USA in 2010. (If the latter story is true, maybe she is right.)

quote comment

Darelldd,

JB was on the right track saying you had some interesting math.  Without solar panels you paid 72 dollar per month.  With solar panels you paid 72 dollars per month.  70 dollars for the loan and 2 dollars in the difference of electicity displaced.  However you could argue that you are getting something of value by substituting what you are paying for electricity for a payment on solar panels.  At the end of the loan you have solar panels, then they start to pay you back.  Out of curiosity what was the interest on the loan throughout the term?

Also Darelldd can give us more info on the size and capacity of your system?  Like what region your in, the cost of the system...ect?

Hasbro

quote comment

Hasbro,
    Darrell's information is on his website.
http://www.evnut.com/

Click "SOLAR" on the left hand navigation screen.

  All I can say is nice to be in California rather than Boston.   He gets 40% more out of his system than I do with mine.

Inverter: SMA America - SWR2500U-SBD "Sunnyboy"
Panels: (20) BP Solar 3160 150W (nom.) modules (3 kW DC output)
AC Output: 2.5 kW (I have already topped this)
Production (Year-round average output estimate): 351kWh/month

Contractor: Energy Efficiency

quote comment

John:

You win longest blog post award.  Kept writing I love reading your posts.  When I get a new computer I will use a reader with a Hawkins voice and play them all back to back.

Fred

quote comment

Fred,
    I only win the "Longest Post" award?   I was hoping to get the "Rant-iest Post" as well.  Well, I will keep working on that.
Later
John C. Briggs

quote comment

Great Show...I think this is an EVcast first.  You scooped all the other EV blogs, news services, list serves, and rumor mills.

quote comment

Here some predictions from a good article in the hybrid blog:

"Estimates for annual production of plug-ins—all of them global—are all over the map:

• The industry analysis firm Global Insight estimates that in 2015, 1.7 million standard hybrids will be built. But only 100,000 of that total will be plug-ins—and the number of pure electric vehicles will remain almost unnoticeable.
• More optimistically, European parts maker Robert Bosch LLC expects that in 2015, global production of electric vehicles (plug-in hybrids and pure EVs) will total between 300,000 and 500,000 units a year.
• General Motors said that it expects to sell 10,000 Volts in its first full year (2011) and 60,000 per year after that (2012 and beyond).
• French carmaker Renault—which is partnered with Nissan and has perhaps the most aggressive plans for pure electric cars—expects to sell more than 100,000 EVs a year starting in 2012."

Fred

quote comment

Well, this is the ongoing trend. Car manufacturers creating electric vehicles of their own. Based on an article that I have read, toyota is now modifying some toyota parts for toyota tundra. They have projected this one to be the most ambitious electric truck project next year. I just hope this would become successful coz I am really a toyota fan.

quote comment