The EPA range of the NiMH EV-1 was 105 miles. That was, and is, sufficient for a good proportion of real-world use cases.
If the EV-1 had been allowed to succeed, who says we wouldn't have had lithium batteries sooner?
The EPA range of the NiMH EV-1 was 105 miles. That was, and is, sufficient for a good proportion of real-world use cases.
If the EV-1 had been allowed to succeed, who says we wouldn't have had lithium batteries sooner?
It's sufficient in the same way 1991 Ford Escort that needs every fluid checked every gas stop is "sufficient" for most commuting in the present day.
Just because you can make it work with a lot of care doesn't mean that most consumers don't want more.
Correct. It was never going to be a mass-market vehicle; it was an early adopter's product. Those products can still succeed, and their success proves the market and drives further innovation.
With so many discharge/recharge cycles common for a 105-mile range vehicle, how long would that NiMH battery last?
this[0] page makes it seem 500~1000 cycles till 80% starting performance is common. So if you were charging it every other day from a 40~50 mile round trip commute, after 3~5 years you'd go to charging it every day.
[0]https://www.batterystuff.com/kb/articles/battery-articles/pr...
As described there, this assumes slow overnight charging, and latest generation of batteries (not sure how viable that was the time of EV1).
Even LiOn batteries have charging patterns as the blocker to adoption, which means that practically, you'd get cars with less than 50% capacity by 2 years.
I mean 3-5 years doesn't sound that great to me since I've kept every car longer then that.
However, it's not like the lead went anywhere so recycling your batteries for new ones every 5 years could be very practical.
Also, not like it just keels over and dies, that's just the 80% performance criteria. Most people wouldn't need to replace the batteries at that point.
It's not obvious it would have succeeded, whatever meddling occurred. It's all a bit speculative.
Who didn't allow it to succeed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car%3F
> Mobil and other oil companies are also shown to be advertising directly against electric cars in national publications, [...] Chevron bought patents and a controlling interest in Ovonics, the advanced battery company featured in the film, ostensibly to prevent modern NiMH batteries from being used in non-hybrid electric cars.
> car makers engaged in both positive and negative marketing of the electric car [...] In later days it ran "award-winning" doomsday-style advertising featuring the EV1 and ran customer surveys which emphasized drawbacks to electronic vehicle technology
> the federal government of the United States under the Presidency of George W. Bush joined the auto-industry suit against California in 2002. This pushed California to abandon its ZEV mandate regulation.
> A portion of the film details GM's efforts to demonstrate to California that there was no consumer demand for their product, and then to take back every EV1 and destroy them. A few were disabled and given to museums and universities, but almost all were found to have been crushed. GM never responded to the EV drivers' offer to pay the residual lease value; $1.9 million was offered for the remaining 78 cars in Burbank, California before they were crushed.