The electric car that can break the speed limit signals a new road order (87 mph, 100 mile range)

[jpak]

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/the-electric-car-that-can-break-the-speed-limit-signals-a-new-road-order-1211420.html

Forget milk float. Forget golf buggy. The tarnished image of the electric car is about to be smartened up. The first proper-performance, four-seater electric car from a major manufacturer is about to be launched on the UK market.

The i-MiEV – pronounced eye-meev – from Mitsubishi, is a saloon car which will carry four adults and reach a top speed of 87mph. It will be available in the UK, initially for leasing, from the middle of 2009 and can travel up to 100 miles without charging.

The i-MiEV marks a dramatic leap forward in quality from the vehicles which have so far dominated the electric car market in the UK (and can be sometimes glimpsed chugging about on the streets of London)

Both the Indo-US manufactured G-Wiz and the French-made Mega City are two-seaters strictly limited in specification and performance – the G-Wiz with a top speed of 50mph and a range on a full battery charge of 48 miles, and the Mega City even more restricted, with a top speed of 40mph and a range of 40 miles only.

<more>

[TheWraith]

1. $50,000, and it still looks like it won't pass the crash test standards.

Hell, if I'm going to pay that much I might as well go the rest of the way and get a real vehicle like a Tesla.

[jpak]

2. Ummmm...it passed the crash test and will cost £15-20K by 2010

ummm...reading comprehension?

<snip>

Developed from Mitsubishi's petrol-driven i-minicar, the i-MiEV is fully crash-tested, and offers double the speed of its predecessors. It also offers double the range on a battery charge – 80 to 100 miles – although this, of course, is still the major drawback for a consumer. You won't be using it to drive from London to Glasgow. And it takes six to seven hours to recharge at home.

<snip>

Mitsubishi says 100 miles will cost just 45p of electricity and zero road tax would offset its initial high cost. Prices should come down as production increases but still expect to pay £15,000-£20,000 by 2011.

<more>

[itsrobert]

4. That's around $30,000 US

No thanks.

[tinrobot]

8. A lot better than $100,000 for the Tesla

Prices are coming down. If this got below $25K, I think a lot of people would buy it.

[TheWraith]

9. Apples to oranges. The Tesla is a full size sportscar with a 220 mile range

As well as US crash-testing certification. It's worth noting that before they put it on hold due to the economy, their next model was planned at $50-60K.

[tinrobot]

13. Most people need oranges, not apples.

The proposed $60K Tesla sedan still had a 200+ mile range and performance on par with a $35-40K BMW.

The EV that will break the market open will compete with a Honda Civic, not a BMW or a Porsche.

Most people don't need fast cars and most won't need 200+ mile ranges. Sure, those features are nice, but also expensive. Most people would be fine with reasonably priced EV cars that seat four people and have a 75-100 mile range. When someone can make one of those for less than $25k, a huge market for EVs will appear.

[TheWraith]

14. Do not for a second think that you can skimp on range and have a successful EV.

The short range and long recharge time was part of what put a lot of people off of the EV1. Sure, you can make the argument that most people commute under 40 miles a day, but what happens on the days when you need to drive farther? What happens if you have an emergency and need to get somewhere? That's the FIRST thing that is going to enter people's heads when you tell them the car has X range and takes 8 hours to recharge. Unless you can perfect batteries that recharge in 5 minutes or so, or go the Volt route and offer a range extender, then in my opinion there's no way you can get away with less than 150-200 miles on a charge.

[tinrobot]

15. Those are all factors....

Range needs to go up, charge times and prices need to come down. Absolutely. We all agree on that. I think we're quibbling over the details.

Personally, I could live with an 80-100 mile range and overnight charging. Perhaps I'll be the early adopter, but I don't think I'll be alone.

[madokie]

16. For now use your gasoline or diesel powered vehicle

I want an ev that will go 40 or 50 miles which would cover about 99% of our driving. My neighbor built them an ev using a geo metro and they do almost all their driving in it and it cost him less than a dollar of electricity to recharge.

[TheWraith]

5. BRITISH crash-testing standards.

US standards are rather more stringent, in part because we've got a huge amount of freeways.

Those "offsets" are kind of like the tax credits that you get in the US. They're a reward if you can already afford the thing, but the fact is that they don't mean somebody in a blue-collar job can buy one of the things.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favor of EVs, but this one is bound to be dead on arrvial.

[RufusEarl]

3. Check this electric car out, it appears to be piratical to me...

http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com/

Peace!

[newfie11]

6. Awesome! n/t

[navarth]

7. Well, I certainly hope that people continue to innovate with transportation.

So good luck to them, I say. They will have to bring the price down, that's for damn sure. As for crash-testing...that would have to be looked into, I suspect.

But the 2 big problems I know of with electric cars are:

1. Where do you get the electricity? Gonna make more nukes for that power, or will solar do it? Possible MAJOR sticking point for me.

and

2. Have they figured out what to do with the batteries when they wear out? They don't last forever, do they? Having those batteries end up in a landfill would also be a MAJOR sticking point with me.

and

3. You need infrastructure for an electric car fleet, gotta plug 'em in somewhere if you need a recharge away from home, don't you? I really don't know whether that's an issue any more or not. BUT if we need an infrastructure for it, that would certainly come under the heading of green jobs, so that sounds rather good.

Hopefully they can solve these problems without creating bigger ones, that would be sweet. Hell I think we ought to be solving these problems right here in Detroit where they started, I hope we get our shit together and do just that! Innovation, baby!

[bananas]

10. Nuclear energy isn't needed at all.

Global energy use is about 15 TW, off-shore wind could provide over 70TW, so off-shore wind by itself could provide way more energy than we need. We also have on-land wind, solar, geothermal, hydro, and biofuels. So nuclear energy isn't needed at all.

The total amount of economically extractable power available from the wind is considerably more than present human power use from all sources. An estimated 72 TW of wind power on the Earth potentially can be commercially viable, compared to about 15 TW average global power consumption from all sources in 2005.

[TheWraith]

11. Offshore wind could provide 70 terawatts, as long as all the magic fairies flap their wings together

Let's deal with real numbers, shall we? How many offshore turbines, at what cost, would you need for power.

[diane in sf]

12. You plug them into the existing grid at night when there is surplus power.

The overabundance of power at night is one reason why energy companies like PG&E are lobbying for PHEVs.

You recycle dead batteries for electric cars, just like we do with old auto batteries now.

Wire up parking meters, battery swapping--lots of possibilities.