Dear Cory Jensen,

You can refer to the following link to understand the dominant factors of your question: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/14/3863

The study MM Fazil posted seems very thorough. But these thorough studies, in my opinion, can sometimes be so dense with information that the most salient points become obscured. My inclination is to take a more engineering-oriented approach. Specifically, separate the different types of EVs, and then see what is involved in the public's acceptance of these different types. Lumping all together seems wrong.

The Prius and the Volt, for example, are hybrids. They have internal combustion engines (ICE), to keep the battery charged, and they are virtually no different to own, compared with traditional ICE cars. They will eke out better fuel economy than most standard cars, but if we're talking about net zero carbon emissions, they won't cut it.

The Teslas and Nissan Leaf are battery powered EVs. As of today, their main drawbacks are relatively short range, compared with ICE cars, but more importantly perhaps, scarcity of charging stations and long waiting time to be fully recharged. Those are the factors that will hinder public acceptance. In cold winter months, the situation is only made worse, as the battery will run down faster. For example, just to heat the car, even if the heating system consists of a heat pump, it's still going to draw energy. In ICE cars, winter heating is accomplished by exploiting wasted heat, from the ICE.

From Washington DC to NYC, you'll find enough recharging stations, today. But not other places. And, even then, you see the Teslas sitting there a long time, compared with the couple of minutes required at the gasoline pump.

Eventually, the infrastructure will improve. But more to the point, the recharging model changes too. For example, already now, we see recharging stations popping up in shopping centers. We have to get away from the idea that the only way to "refuel" is to make a dedicated stop at an elaborate gas station, with big tanks buried underground, with big trucks delivering the fuel, and so on. With battery powered EVs, think more in terms of plugging it in wherever you stop, or at home, and never having to make that dedicated refueling stop. Simple electrical outlets, no complicated, gas station-type of infrastructure.

If you have a garage where you live, a 230 V 50 amp circuit should be a good way to avoid those trips to the gas station. That should charge your battery EV in about 3 hours, from empty. But, you're not waiting impatiently for 3 hours, normally. You're eating dinner, watching TV, or putting the kids to bed.

Then, investigate other technologies. EVs can also be powered by hydrogen, via fuel cells. Filling times and range would be the same as ICE cars, but now you're a bit back to the elaborate filling station model, for refueling. A hydrogen tank would be at very high pressure, say 15,000 to 30,000 psi, so it's not something you're likely to do at home, or at the shopping center. Nice range and so on, but more complicated vehicle design, compared with a no-moving-parts and no-ultra-high pressure battery.

Another option, but probably not very attractive for the net zero carbon goal, the EV would have a standard fuel tank, to use various types of hydrocarbon fuels. Then, a hydrogen reformer on board, to separate out the hydrogen from the fuel, leaving CO2 behind. And then, same type of fuel cell, to generate electricity. Such a scheme should be considerably more efficient than ICE-powered cars, although CO2 is still a byproduct. And, this avoids those hydrogen tanks, at very high pressure. This type of car should be easy for the public to accept, much like today's hybrids. I'd expect the hydrogen reformer to require some kind of regular maintenance, though, compared with the battery or even the hydrogen tank models.

So, in my opinion, any analysis of "public acceptance" will vary drastically, with these different technologies, and also with time. As of now, hybrids are no problem, for public acceptance. In fact, it would be easy enough to mandate hybrid technology, and most people wouldn't even be the wiser. (I once rented a Prius, unknowingly, at night, drove it home, took off the next day, and didn't even realize, until later, that it was a Prius!! Seemed awfully quiet starting out, and at red lights, but other than that, no big difference!) But we really need to start thinking in terms of no gasoline stations at all.

As to maintenance and other associated ownership issues, battery powered EVs should be really nice to own. Very few moving parts, other than the normal drivetrain parts. And you know, no oil changes needed, no tune-ups needed. It's true that ICE have been developed to the point of requiring little maintenance too, in the past few years. Still, nothing like designing all that ICE complexity completely out of the picture!

I'm hoping for lighter batteries. Let's see what GM is coming up with, in their new battery design efforts. Hopefully something lighter than what Tesla is using!

As you have mentioned it is a multifaceted issue. One of the significant driving factors in marketing success of hybrid cars was their fuel efficiency and at the same time, its novelty (being first in the market) in the example of Toyota Prius. Nowadays, public awareness on environmental impact (air pollution) of cars been becoming a leading factor for the success of electric cars. However, there are still a couple of significant factors that are preventing electric cars to become very popular. They are their price and charge (battery capacity). At the same time, in some countries, like Norway and Germany, policies and at the same time, public awareness have become a main driving force for the success electric cars.

M.M. Fazil , thanks for the reference, I will have to spend sometime on this article.

Albert Manfredi , thanks for the detailed response! I am lumping complete EVs and hybrids together, I suppose ICE vehicle alternatives would have been more appropriate in the question itself. I should have known better.

On a recent tour de ICE alternatives it quickly became apparent the infrastructure to support these types of vehicles IS a major limitation. So if I had to modify the question to "How can EV transformation adoption be overcome, e.g. via policy?", this might be more appropriate. Along these lines, there are a few comparisons of support energy infrastructure needed in addition to continually evolving battery technology. We all know in our heart of hearts fossil fuels are limited and not a sustainable means to provide for energy. Further, many current electric sources are powered by fossil fuel resources (an even more troubling dilemma). In a deeper conversation with a colleague, we wondered how likely is it that consumers would purchase personal or decentralized electrical charging systems to support solar based energy and transportation systems?

Bottom line, great interaction Albert Manfredi , I hope we can continue and deepen this conversation!

Sulaymon Eshkabilov , I have to say, I also don't understand the drastically different styles for some ICE alternatives. Most consumers I have talked to don't like how certain styles look.

Going deeper into technology & prices's, how many parts/systems are in an all EV vs. a modern ICE vehicle? Surely simplicity of design can impact life cycle costs. After all, the Model T came with a tool kit so that customers could tune a horseless carriage all on their own. As an engineer I keep hearing fundamental lectures reminding me to: "Keep It Simple Stupid".

Cory, I had one such conversation with a passionate advocate of hydrogen-fueled EVs. His point was quite good. Hydrogen filling stations can produce their hydrogen locally, not in distant refineries, using perhaps wind and solar energy, to produce hydrogen from water.

He thought the 15,000 - 30,000 PSI issue, to store hydrogen, was not a show stopper. He thought such systems can be built into cars, at affordable prices.

Anyway, I think public acceptance will depend on whether the infrastructure is available, no matter the type of EV. I'm sure that back at the turn of the 20th Century, many people were skeptical about infrastructure for gasoline-powered cars too. And if you look at that objectively, the expensive refineries, having to transport the oil long distances, storing large quantities at distributed gasoline stations, that's way more complicated than what EVs would require!

The public has to educate itself, on what these Paris accords mean. If we are to reach net zero carbon anytime soon, the public has to understand that this won't be achieved only by politicians grand-standing. The transportation industry is a major carbon emitter.

As to producing electricity in individual homes, via solar panels or wind turbines, I'd keep that debate separate. Otherwise, you give people the impression that in order for EVs to be viable, they now have all this other stuff to worry about. Not true. Better not conflate different arguments.

Cory Jensen: Your arguments to make a system simple so customers can understand are quite arguable. No longer modern cars can be fixed or tuned/adjusted by their drivers/owners. Already modern cars are far more complicated that most customers can't fix most of generally encountered faults except for refilling some oils, radiator and wind-shield liquid tanks. Thus, most customers are not that much concerned about complexity of the modern cars due to engine type or powertrain type. Here we are excluding of course engineers (customers/drivers) or mechanics who can understand very well how ICE or EV or HEV function and how to make some adjustments.

Back to your question of what concerns most to general car owners is car's price tag, reliability, servicability, and their perceptions on environmental impact of their cars.

Cory,

So if I had to modify the question to "How can EV transformation adoption be overcome, e.g. via policy?", this might be more appropriate. Along these lines, there are a few comparisons of support energy infrastructure needed in addition to continually evolving battery technology.

So here, you are assuming battery powered EVs. A similar study could involve hydrogen powered EVs. They would also require much new infrastructure, to be acceptable to the public. Because, the public grew up in a world where gasoline stations have been well distributed. Tough act to follow, when starting from square 1.

But again, if you instead focus only on hybrids, or on EVs working off a hydrogen reformer (which extracts H2 from a hydrocarbon fuel and then sends that H2 through fuel cells), then public acceptance should be no problem at all. Because the gasoline stations are in place, and would continue to be used.

Another side note. Was there any "public policy" needed, to get the oil companies to build their networks of gasoline stations? I guess you're saying, today, we would need such public policy, because we wouldn't be starting from scratch?

On design complexity, unfortunately, the genie is out of that bottle. I agree with Sulaymon. In principle, battery-powered EVs are quite simple, as far as the basics. For example, you could have every wheel be an electric motor, the shaft being the only moving part, and no need for transmissions or differentials. But the devil being in the details, you still have lots of automation, such as stability control, ABS, a growing number of sensors for safety, battery status controls for recharging safely, to avoid thermal runaway, and also to avoid complete discharge, and the list goes on. Doubtful that most owners could easily diagnose problems. (On the plus side, these days, with built-in diagnostics, if you have the right equipment, some faults are easier to diagnose!)

Albert Manfredi , thank you again for commenting. My post was initiated after looking at the electric/hybrid vehicles in the market and talking with a consumer. In my comments I did suggest that a more broad topic of alternatives to ICE could be even more appropriate.

Even hydrogen fuel cell vehicles make use of a significant battery stack. https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/how-do-fuel-cell-electric-cars-work. I don't know of a hydrogen powered car that is available. Do you?

Currently, gas station infrastructure does not match charging technology/needs for all electric alternatives to ICEs. Don't you think parking lots with integrated solar panels make more sense? Large apartment complexes also have plenty of roof surface area where solar panels could be placed. Don't these options make energy infrastructure and transportation more resilient?

I operated a compressed natural gas vehicle and did make use of a gas pump like 'station' to fill its pressurized tank. This could be an option for Hydrogen powered vehicles too.

However, wouldn't it be even cooler if you simply had to add water to your hydrogen powered car?

The amount of policy that support fossil fuels is substantial and political. Support was partially intended to support growth and exploration. Why wouldn't there be similar support for alternatives? Here is one page I found quickly: https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs.

Design. I agree that some of the control systems are complex. However some of the components could be plug and play. This could change how tune ups work or the skills of mechanics (becoming coders, software curators and hardware engineers).

Related to design, I have already ready stories of folks trying to design their own 'faster' charging equipment which can lead to the risk of fire. Sounds like an area in need of innovation and to some degree standardization for safety purposes.

Cory,

I don't know of a hydrogen powered car that is available. Do you?

Hyundai, Toyota, and Honda, make such cars:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/hydrogen-cars-for-sale/

You have to be a little careful, because companies like BMW have also demonstrated hydrogen powered cars, but in their case, burning H2 as a fuel, in a standard ICE. That might be okay for the environment, but it's not an EV.

Currently, gas station infrastructure does not match charging technology/needs for all electric alternatives to ICEs.

Paradigm shift here: recharging stations, for battery-powered electrics, do not need to be limited to dedicated "gas stations." As you say, they can be in shopping centers, office parking lots, metered street parking spots, and of course, at home. I just saw a new one, just days ago, at a nearby small shopping center.

I operated a compressed natural gas vehicle and did make use of a gas pump like 'station' to fill its pressurized tank. This could be an option for Hydrogen powered vehicles too.

Indeed. Although the H2 pressure is going to be higher. The highest pressure used for methane, which requires the highest pressures among these hydrocarbon gases, is about 4600 psi. Other such gases are stored at much lower pressures. For H2, they are talking in the range 15,000 to 30,000 psi. But yes, H2 vehicles would need the same sort of filling station arrangement, as gasoline. But the H2 can be generated locally, not in distant oil wells and refineries.

However, wouldn't it be even cooler if you simply had to add water to your hydrogen powered car?

It takes energy to separate the H2 from the water. Giant solar panels on the car? Run only in bright sunlight? I mean, instead of doing this, why not just use that solar panel directly to make electricity for the EV? I don't think that is practical.

Design. I agree that some of the control systems are complex. However some of the components could be plug and play. This could change how tune ups work or the skills of mechanics (becoming coders, software curators and hardware engineers).

Tune ups would be unnecessary. But then again, today's ICE cars also need virtually no tuneups. We have knock sensing engines, that keep spark advance optimized continuously, we have electronic ignitions, that got rid of the mechanical points (which wore out in short order), and that provide way higher voltage to the spark plugs, and we have lead-free fuel, that prevents spark plug fouling. Consequently, changing spark plugs is quite rare, these days, and setting "dwell" and "advance" is a thing of the past. Also, those trouble-prone distributors, rotors, all gone.

In fact, even today's mechanics have to understand how to deal with microprocessors. Plenty of these, in modern cars. So, that aspect will not be so different.

Yet, EVs would need no oil changes, no air filter change, none of the reasons we still have today, for the more frequent regular maintenance of ICE cars.

Albert Manfredi , sure enough, California is hoarding all the hydrogen powered vehicles (~8000) and infrastructure (43 stations)! So they are not broadly accessible with a support infrastructure in the US, this explains why I don't see any in the Mid-Atlantic region.

Related to policy, it looks like some manufacturers are offering free fuel for 3 years or $15,000! Here is some more policy: https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/clean-transportation-program/clean-transportation-funding-areas.

Decentralized H2 generation plants could require a new type of workforce. Where is the research on steam reforming vs. electrolysis in an LCA format? There seems to be quite a bit of literature to sort through.

I don't think that using water as a fuel source is impossible. Like you mentioned earlier, the example set so far creates an inherent bias about how fueling and transportation looks, feels, etc. The field of catalysis is ever evolving and I used a water/solar cell, fuel cell demonstration kit during graduate school outreach events. Look how old school water heaters have decreased in volume to the small electric on demand units the size of a large picture on a wall.

Here's some 411 about Hydrogen fueling stations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soC2YlGULNU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usaQrCDORFY

There are hydrogen powered bicycles too, this could be an excellent way to test small sale adoption and technology dissemination.

I completely disagree about tune ups, the term is outdated and the automotive repair shops in my neighborhood always have customers. All things mechanical need maintenance to some degree and from my experiences most computers that utilize software need updates too. There are still cabin air filters-conditioning devices, shocks-suspension systems, tires, any linkage to things rotating. All interior components. Further, the state of some roads are not conducive to mechanical integrity no matter the drive train not to mention accidents. To me, tune up is an outdated term that now is really the maintenance required to keep a vehicle safe, working and moving. The move will be from 'grease-monkey' to that of a mechanic and 'mobile-computer-tech'. Just as long as it doesn't become like going to the Smart Bar when you have to take your car in......ug. Have you been to an Apple store during Covid?

After working with a robotic start up with integrated smart navigation technology and talking with car dealers, I think there is going to be a new expertise needed at customer interfaces as we realize self driving options. There are already many video resources for EV charging on line alone.

Thanks again for engaging!

Hi again Cory,

Decentralized H2 generation plants could require a new type of workforce.

Not that much of a workforce, I wouldn't think. And, all localized at each H2 filling station. I'm assuming the station would use solar panels, and the electric grid as backup or boost power, and water. All very available, with existing distribution systems, used by all manner of businesses and households. Compare this with a gasoline station, and what specialized and dedicated work force they depend on, from oil wells, to refinery, to the tank in each station.

The field of catalysis is ever evolving and I used a water/solar cell, fuel cell demonstration kit during graduate school outreach events.

But, you aren't creating energy, you're just converting energy. So the question becomes, if you have enough energy to extract H2 from water on board the car, while you are driving, and send that H2 through fuel cells, chances are good that you can use this energy source more directly, to move the car? Why go through that electrolysis of water step, in the middle? It's just math at work here.

There are still cabin air filters-conditioning devices, shocks-suspension systems, tires, any linkage to things rotating. All interior components.

And yet, none of these other maintenance needs come close to the frequency of oil changes, right? I haven't had a cabin air filter in any of my cars, for instance. Sure, you need new tires every so often, wheel alignments, or wheel rotation. Less than once a year. Fuel filter, and injector cleaning? EVs don't need that. Shock absorbers? Extremely rare these days. Maybe once, in the time you own the car. Transmission fluid change? Not needed in EVs. New muffler and exhaust? With an EV, that's out. Even with regular cars, that has become exceedingly rare, with stainless steel exhaust systems.

In fact, these days, the oil change sets the maintenance schedule. Along with that oil change, the dealer will suggest perhaps one other item, now and again.

Look how old school water heaters have decreased in volume to the small electric on demand units the size of a large picture on a wall.

Naw, not so fast. The ads never bother to mention the tradeoffs involved.

This is a problem of heat transfer. Sure, especially with gas heat, you will be able to heat the cold water fast enough, as it is flowing from the water main to your faucet, to have reasonably hot water. Especially if the cold water is not too cold. Yes. Years ago, we had a gas-powered tankless water heater, during the summer months, when the main heating system of the house was off. In winter, I'd turn a couple of valves, to bypass the tankless heater, and use the main heating system boiler instead, for the hot water.

But now, do that with an electric water heater. There's no free lunch. Regular water heaters distribute the energy demand, over time, by heating the water more slowly, while it is not being used. They require typically less than 5000 watts of power. Normally, you will have a 230 V 30 amp circuit, for a normal whole-house water heater.

These instant-hot tankless water heaters? Check out the specs. You have to call an electrician first, to set up a whole new circuit, for this little heater.

The traditional central water heaters, with a tank, come in two common flavors: 3800 watts or 4500 watts. So, instead of power in that range of values, with a tankless heater, which has to heat up water "instantly," you will need more like 15,000 watts, and more.

Looking at one now: 14.6 KW, and 3.5 gallons per minute. That's slightly more than two faucets, at a standard 1.5 GPM each. And substantial instantaneous power. In fact, our kitchen faucet is 2.2 GPM, so if someone is doing the dishes, they will be using up enough that anyone else will have less hot water than normal.

Or here's another. This one requires 18,000 watts, and provides 4 GPM of water. Yikes.

So, these tankless heaters require a dedicated circuit of 230 V at 80 amps, or more than 80 amps. If you check your breaker box, those would be the among biggest individual breakers you have, for the heavy 230 V loads. Right up there with the boost electric heat if you have a heat pump. But that's pretty scary. Many houses only get 200 amp service overall, even when they are all-electric, with no gas. That tankless heater takes a toll.

If you think in terms of instantaneous demand placed on the power grid, not so good. The goal should be more to reduce the peaks, and spread out the 24-hour load.

The ads for tankless water heaters also pretend that when not in use, traditional water heaters waste energy. Well, sort of, sure, but not much. Think in terms of a thermos bottle. It keeps your coffee or soup hot, for hours on end, if it's well designed. Ditto for modern water heaters too. Much as I like the small size of tankless heaters, their instantaneous power requirements make me hesitate.

Albert Manfredi , thank you again for engaging. My intent was to focus on literature, policy, data etc. especially focused on transformation. After some thought and reflection, it sounds like you are familiar with new vehicles. Your conversation makes me wonder what information is available on who owns new vehicles, for how long, and how that compares to those that buy-own USED vehicles for X/Y periods of time.

Maxim Vengerov

Cory, I don't know that there is any obvious "type," for who buys new vs used cars. You'll see all the usual tradeoffs, in articles like this one:

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/new-cars-vs-used-cars

On the other hand, this should only have a transient effect, on EV sales. For example, used car buyers certainly have been buying up such vehicles as the Toyota Prius. The time lag is probably not much more than 3-4 years.

But in the past couple of days, I was thinking, instead, about electric tankless water heaters. As I indicated already, the instantaneous power demands. of such devices, have always turned me off. To get one which more or less matches the hot water experience of regular water heaters, you have to go to the absurd extreme of 27 or even 36 KW (6 gallons per minute on the latter). The sales gibberish never seems to point this stuff out. Again, for comparison, normal water heaters come in a 3800 watt and a 4500 watt variety. Fed by a 230 volt, 30 amp breaker, or less.

But, thinking like a physicist, it's all a question of how energy is stored, right? In traditional water heaters, energy is stored, ahead of time, in the form of hot water in the tank. What if we store that energy ahead of time, in a battery, perhaps sitting under the small tankless heater?

You would have the same effect, only using electrical energy storage, instead of thermal. Consider a battery power supply, taking in no more than 4500 watts when charging, and then providing, say, 20,000 watts, fed to this tankless heater, for a period of about 15 minutes? You get hot water for 15 minutes, then the hot water becomes less hot, after the battery is discharged, until you give it a chance to recharge. Same effect you get with regular water heaters, but no water tank.

This is much the way hybrid cars work. Because the hybrid car has a really large battery, it can afford to have a small engine. If you need a burst of power, the battery provides that. Under normal driving, the small engine is more than capable of moving the car and charging the battery. It doesn't take much power to move a car, at a steady speed, even on interstates. Say, 12-14 hp only, for efficient cars, at 50 mph. Maybe 20 hp or so, at 70 mph. (Not for [obscene] SUVs and trucks, but for cars.)

Anyway, doing some online research, such batteries for tankless water heaters don't seem to exist, on the market. Similar battery power supplies, which provide 15 minutes of 230 V at 20,000 watts, seem to go for several thousand dollars. This explains why traditional water heaters are still being sold!