The New York Times suggests that Japanese automakers have invested so much money and resources in gasoline-electric hybrids that they are lagging behind in actual battery powered EVs.

Writers Ben Dooley and Hisako Ueno ponder why the usually dominant Japanese automakers are ignoring the EV market. They conclude:

Automakers in the United States, China, Europe and South Korea are already sprinting past their Japanese competitors. Toyota did not release its first battery-electric vehicle on the consumer market until early 2020, and then only in China. Honda is relying on G.M. to produce electric vehicles for the U.S. market.

Acknowledging that the Nisan Leaf established an early lead in plug-in EV space, Dooley and Ueno write:

But as the trail that Nissan blazed becomes increasingly crowded, Japan’s mighty auto industry is in danger of being left behind. While governments and automakers worldwide are staking out bold pledges to transition to electric-only vehicles, Japanese car companies and regulators are hedging their bets.

While no right thinking person would question the ability of the Japanese manufacturers to compete in the global EV market, it is astonishing that they are giving other car makers such a head start. Ignoring the demand for true electric vehicles could put the Japanese brands at a considerable disadvantage in the future. You never want to allow your competitors to advance so far ahead that you cannot catch up.

Still, one only has to look at Apple. The electronics company is seldom first to market; the iPhone and iPad being notable exceptions. In most cases however, Apple waits for other companies to establish a thriving market for a product or service. Then Apple releases a superior, higher priced offering and reaps substantial profits

Will Japan wait too long to Embrace Electric Vehicles>

The Japanese car industry might be taking this approach, hoping to sweep in after the other global manufacturers bloody themselves battling for market share.

The problem with that strategy is that not every company can be an Apple, and the other car makers are doubling down on EV Technology. There is no guarantee that it will be possible to develop a superior EV break through.

The Japanese makers appear to be playing a waiting game. The question is, how long can they wait?

The original New York Times article is here.

The post Electric Vehicles: How Long Will Japan Wait? appeared first on EV Snapshot.

According to Reuters, several lawmakers are demanding the Postal Service freeze the NGDV funding for the proposed new vehicles. Three lawmakers, all Democrats, want the funding halted until the contract can be further investigated. There are concerns that political favoritism enabled OshKosh Defense to win approval for their design.

In addition, California Congressman Jarad Huffman is troubled that the majority of the Next Generation Delivery Vehicles will powered by fossil fuels. The ICE powered vans seem to fly in the face of the federal mandate to adopt electrical power for federal vehicles.

Reuters reports:

Why would you put us back on that treadmill? You are going to have built these vehicles for obsolescence. Huffman told Reuters on Tuesday. “They will be the last vehicles running on fossil fuels on the road. It’s insane.”

There was no mention in the Reuter’s piece of the scheme to introduce the NGDV with ICE engines and convert them to full EVs as charging facilities become available. Either Huffman is unaware of the plan or he doubts it will be implemented in economical and timely manner.

I suspect we haven’t heard the last of the NGDV contract battles.

The post NGDV funding battle is not over appeared first on EV Snapshot.

After seven years of development, battery supplier Ample is poised to begin offering their battery swap technology to businesses, with the goal of ultimately expanding the service to individual consumers.

The concept behind’s Ample’s battery swapping strategy is elementary. Robots will be trained to remove discharged battery packs from an EV and replace them with fully charged ones. Drivers on a road trip could pull into an Ample Battery station and the robots would immediately go to work replacing the batteries, sort of like a robotic pit crew. The company claims they should be able to completely replace an EV’s battery packs in ten minutes.

I have to admit the idea is intriguing. If you ever used a cordless drill, you are familar with the concept. When the battery you are using becomes exhausted, you flick a switch and eject it. Snap in a new cell and year off to the races.

EVs are to like cordless tools

But EVs are altogether different than drill motors. Batteries on electric vehicles aren’t designed to snap out. Imagine if everytime you had to swap batteries on your cordless drill you had to remove several bolts, unsolder some wires and solder new leads in place. Easier to stick to a power drill connected with an AC cord.

Ample’s robots would need to know how to remove the batteries on a plethora of vehicles. Some might be relatively straightforward to service. But easy service and replacement isn’t typically a high priority for automotive engineers. Anyone who has ever been forced to disassemble half of an engine to replace an inexpensive sensor knows what I am talking about.

Can Ample create a strong battery swapping network?

If Ample can create a powerful network of battery swapping stations, then maybe automakers will have an incentive to design their cars so Ample’s robots have easy access. But it is a chicken and the egg situation. Ample will need to grow their network to a large enough size that drivers want to use it. Then they will put pressure on the car makers to make new vehicles compatible with Ample’s project. But unless the majority of EVs can be serviced at an Ample swap station they are unlikely to achieve the critical mass needed to force the car maker’s hands.

I am much more confident about the Consortium for Motorcycles and Light Electric Vehicles. According to a story in elective.com, motorcycle makers Honda, Yamaha, KTM and Piaggio have entered into an agreement to develop motorcycles and small vehicles that utilize a common, swapple batteries. Since the machines will be designed from the ground up to accept the common battery, it will be a simple matter to exchange batteries on these models.

There are three reasons why I see this as more practical than Ample’s more ambitious plan.

• The vehicles are designed from the ground up to use common, replaceable batteries
• Motorcycle batteries are smaller and lighter than battery packs used in EVs
• If the venture takes off, more manufactures are likely to join, strengthening the consortium

Ample, in contrast needs to train their robots to exchange heavier, semi-permeant battery packs that are secured by a wide variety of methods. Further more, in some vehicles, the battery packs are stuffed into whatever space the engineers can find, making them anything but a standardized design.

Adapters allow Ample batteries to fit any EV

Ample claims to have created plates that will allow their battery packs to be adapted to all EVs. But unless they convince manufacturers to design their vehicles to accommodate Ample’s standard battery packs, it seem some EVs would require extensive modification to allow the Ample batteries to be easily swapped.

Ample glosses over this in their website, which is heavy on info graphics but light on specifications. The company tells car makers “Compatible with any platform. No modification necessary.” The site goes on to state “The process of getting a new car on the Ample platform takes 2-3 months. Your EV can still support the original battery since the same vehicle design can support both offerings”

I’m confused. The website says, “No modifications necessary.” Yet, EV manufacturers will need to do some work to allow the Ample system to operate with their vehicles. Otherwise why does it require 2-3 months to integrate a car into the Ample system?

Can Ample make Battery Swapping simple and cost effective?

Ample has been at this for seven years. Maybe they have had time to address these concerns. But I wish they would provide more on how exactly this program will work.

Don’t misunderstand. I think Ample’s idea has great merrit. I hope they succeed. But the idea of robots undertang how to swap batteries on every model of EV ever made sounds fantastic. Being able to do it in ten minutes sounds too good to be true.

And you know what they say about that…

You can read more at Ample’s website.

The post Will Ample’s Modular Battery Swapping scheme succeed? appeared first on EV Snapshot.

According to CNBC, “The Detroit automaker will give a comprehensive and unprecedented look at its all-electric vehicle plans as well as show attendees roughly a dozen upcoming products…”

This sounds like major revelations will be forthcoming at the event. I am looking forward to seeing the promised “dozen” upcoming products.

While the briefing will provide journalists with an in-depth look at the upcoming electric powered cars and trucks from GM, CNBC contends the automaker will also be aiming at investors. There are naysayers who insist GM isn’t serious about EVs. They claim that GM has been slow to market and release electric vehicles, and EVs are still just a hobby for the Michigan based car maker.

According to CNBC, GM will use the press conference to backup the company’s assertion that GM will switch entirely to electric vehicles by 2035. They hope to show investors that are prepared to take on Tesla and the onslaught of other EVs slated to appear in the next decade.

Those who doubt GM’s intentions base their skepticism on the abortive EV1 program from the 1990s. The EV1 was ahead of its time. Those who leased the machine (it wasn’t available for purchase) apparently were quite happy with it. But GM recalled all the leased vehicles and crushed the majority of them.

EV proponents are still bitter over this move and insist that had GM continued developing the EV1 it would have advanced EV technology and left GM sitting where Tesla is today. Despite GM’s promise of an all electric future, cynics need reassurance that this time around, GM is truly committed to the electric car.

Hopefully, EV Day 2021 will demonstrate just how deep that commitment lies.

You can read the complete CNBC article here.

The post GM EV Day: Major Announcements Expected appeared first on EV Snapshot.

The gist of Edelstein piece is that Farley wants to prevent a repeat of the recent computer chip shortage that left automakers struggling to obtain sufficient chips for EV production. Those chips were primarily sourced offshore, meaning US car makers had to wrestle with manufacturers throughout the world to obtain an adequate supply of necessary components.

Farley wants to stave off a similar battery shortage as electric vehicle production multiples around the globe. Edelstein quotes Farley as declaring “We can’t go through what we’re doing with chips right now in Taiwan. It’s [battery production] just too important.”

The article also points out that offshore battery manufacturing is typically “dirtier” then similar cell production in the US. China is particularly egregious in this regard, Edelstein reports the CO2 emissions from Chinese battery factories are “60% to 85% higher than in the Europe and the U.S.” Edelstein writes the Chinese producers are investing in methods to lower CO2 emissions, but emissions are expected to rise in the near term.

I think it makes great sense to build EV batteries in the US rather than import them. There was a clamor to reduce our dependance on foreign oil, why should the US become addicted to foreign battery cells? While reduced C02 emissions and more domestic jobs are worthy goals, it is foolhardy to transfer the countries’ best technology and intellectual property to offshore producers.

Farley’s demand for greater US battery production is farsighted and intelligent. I just hope the US listens to him.

You can find Eldelstein’s report here

The post Ford wants to ramp up US battery production appeared first on EV Snapshot.

Where do you put the battery?

EV Conversions are becoming relatively common. Beyond DIY conversions, there is a growth of third-party shops that willing to transform ICE vehicles into full-scale electric transportation. Many small aftermarket companies currently offer basic modification parts and kits. Even major automakers are selling components that can be used to build your own EV.

Which leads to a pressing question. When you build an electric vehicle based on a gasoline car or truck, where do you place the batteries?

Batteries are crucial

But batteries are absolutely essential for an electric car or truck. And an EV battery pack needs to be many times the size of a typical fuel tank. You cannot replace an existing fuel tank with a similar size battery pack and achieve decent range. At least not with today’s technology.

This was abundantly clear when I saw the all-electric K5 Blazer-E created to showcase the new Chevrolet Electric Connect and Cruise package. Conceived as a concept vehicle for the recent SEMA360 show, the Blazer-E looks unchanged from its original 1977 configuration. The difference is the 200hp Bolt EV motor which Chevy dropped in to replace the original 175hp gasoline V-8.

The engineers took pains to maintain the original appearance of the Blazer-E. There is very little to betray the truck’s new electrified status. Even the original instrument cluster was rewired to display information about the electric motor.

Factory Blazer EV Conversion

The Blazer-E varies from a production Blazer in only one area, but it is a big one. A fairly large 60-kWh battery pack occupies almost all of the cargo area floor.

I have to admit I am a huge fan of the K5 Blazer. I have owned three of them and have put a considerable number of miles on each, both on and off-road. But I am not so sure about the Blazer-E. Since that battery takes up most of the cargo area, the conversion has taken a versatile five-passenger off-road machine and turned it into an oversized two-person runabout.

I have hauled tons of stuff in the back of my Blazers: building materials, camping gear, dogs, boat supplies, furniture, photography paraphernalia, road trip provisions and who knows what else. I spent many nights in the back of a Blazer. And I have carried people — lots of people — on trips long and short.

As it stands, none of this would be possible with the Blazer-E. If you built a subfloor over the battery, you could regain some of the cargo space, but the available capacity would be limited. Even worse, it doesn’t seem practical to include a rear seat. If you maintain the original rear seat height, there would be no legroom. Raise the seat sufficiently to provide legroom and there would be no headroom.

The trick would be to find a battery location that does not intrude into the cargo area. The Bolt motor takes up most of the free space in the engine compartment, so that is out. It might be possible to fit batteries into the narrow space between the inside bed walls and the outer sheet metal. But I am unsure how many battery packs could be installed in his location, and the extra weight might affect balance.

Finding an ideal EV conversion battery location

The ideal battery location would be underneath the stock Blazer cargo floor. This leaves the cargo area free for seating or transporting items.

I haven’t investigated the practicality of installing a battery in this location. Since Chevy Performance didn’t attempt this, it would probably entail a lot of work. There has to be adequate clearance for the rear differential, driveshaft and rear springs to move up and down. And since this is an offroad vehicle, the battery would require its own skid plate to protect it from rock damage.

Blazer-E: blazing a trail

Which doesn’t negate the worthiness of the Blazer-E and other conversions. People will continue configuring DIY EVs. And the conversions will get better and more practical.

Meanwhile, battery packs are getting lighter, smaller and more efficient. As technology improves, turning a gas burner into an EV will become much simpler.

Until then, however, battery placement remains the most daunting obstacle to building your own electric vehicle.

The GM Media Press Release can be found here.

The post EV Conversions: Where do you put the battery? appeared first on EV Snapshot.

Jay Ramey, writing for Autoweek, reports the US Postal Service has greenlighted a new postal vehicle to replace the current fleet of boxy Grumman LLV postal vans. The distictly odd-looking vehicles will be supplied by defense contractor Oshkosh Defense.

Here is the thought-provoking element. The initial run of the Oshkosh-built vans will utilize a conventional gasoline engine. As the electrical infrastructure matures, the new vehicles will dump the ICE for an electric motor and battery pack.

Is the USPS NGDV an EV or an ICE?

EV conversions are becoming commonplace. But this is different. The Next Generation Delivery Vehicles (NGDV) will be designed to ship with a temporary ICE powerplant. When the postal service deems the time is right, the gas engine and accessories will be yanked and replaced by an electrical drive train.

This has many advantages. EV conversions always entail some compromises, mostly concerning the location of batteries and other electrical components. Since the NGDV will be designed from the ground up as an eventual EV, most of those compromises can be bypassed.

The plan also allows the postal service to start replacing the old Grumman vans without waiting for the EV charging base to fully mature.

When will the NGDV become an EV?

According to Autoweek, the Postal Service doesn’t feel there will be sufficient charging capacity by 2023, when the first NGDVs are scheduled to go into service. The initial ICE arrangement will allow the NGDV to take to the road by that time. When the USPS has had a chance to build an adequate network of charging stations, they will convert the vans to electric power.

The PS intends to roll out charging points at different locations over time. It seems likely the service will operate ICE and EV versions of the NGDVs side by side.

Of course, this only makes sense if the cost of replacing the ICE can be recouped once the new drivetrain is installed. Considering the NGDV is designed from the ground up to be an EV, it should be possible to recover the investment in short order.

The ground-up philosophy resolves the dilemma that plagues many ICE to EV conversions: where do you find room for the batteries? As the chassis is already laid out to accommodate a battery pack, the conversion should be simple and straightforward.

The Autoweek report doesn’t mention whether Oshkosh Defence will build their own gasoline engines or source the powerplants elsewhere. If they incorporate an engine from an existing automaker, there would be a market for the used ICEs beyond the USPS. This could help to offset the conversion expense.

Considering the thousands of vehicles employed by the USPS, failure of the NGDV is not an option. The current Grumman vans require replacement. The contract has been awarded to Oshkosh, so they have to deliver.

The initial comments are mostly negative

The Autoweek website still allows comments, and the bulk of these seem highly negative. Many of these ridicule the look of the new van, particularly the immense front windshield. This can be chalked up to people being put off by unfamiliar styling. More disturbing is the criticism of Electric Vehicles in so many of the comments.

There seems to be a nearly uniform objection to the postal van’s electrification. The discussion ranges from an objection to the USPS “wasting” money on new vehicles (ignoring the fact that the current fleet is fast reaching obsolescence) to the often-heard objections to EVs in general. (Lack of range, unproven technology, etc.)

The negative tone of the majority of comments indicates a general loathing of EVs, at least by the readers of the site. There is a strong implication that the NGDV, particularly the electrified version, is another instance of wasteful government spending.

USPS will spend zero tax dollars on the NGDV

This ignores the fact the USPS is no longer funded by the government. According to the USPS website, “Zero tax dollars (are) used. The Postal Service receives NO tax dollars for operating expenses and relies on the sale of postage, products and services to fund its operations.”

The Postal Service is a functioning business, not a government charity. I trust they ran the numbers and determined that the NGDV will be cost-effective over the ten-year length of the Oshkosh contract. I intend to follow up on this story as it develops.

The nay-sayers may need to get used to the peculiar styling of the NGDV. My guess is we will be seeing a lot of them during the next decade.

You can see photos of the NGDV and read Ramey’s Autoweek article here.

The post USPS has a plan to turn ICE vehicles into EVs appeared first on EV Snapshot.

The pair aren’t the most likely candidates to dig into Apple Car technology. Warren doesn’t process a driver’s license and confesses she has no interest in obtaining one. Gruber does drive, but it is clear he is more interested in navigating a computer screen than making a road trip.

Despite their lack of interest in automotive subjects, Gruber and Warren manage to raise some engaging theories. Speculating as to why the worlds most profitable company might want to enter the auto market at this time, Gruber suggests an intriguing possibility. Could Apple be introducing dramatic new technology to disrupt the EV market?

One of Gruber’s inklings is that Apple may be developing lighter, more powerful batteries which would be superior to other EV power cells. While Gruber has no direct knowledge of what Apple may be planning, it would a typical Apple strategy to suddenly introduce technology that makes other EVs obsolete.

There are no hard facts here, but Gruber is known for his ability to suss out future technology advances. Apple, as usual, remains secretive about their rumored vehicle. Still, if you have any interest in EV rumors, this episode is worth a listen

The Apple Car episode can be accessed from the Daring Fireball site..

The post John Gruber and Christina Warren talk Apple Car appeared first on EV Snapshot.

Maple Majestic: an EV designed for Climate Friendly Driving.

Canadian company AK Motor International Corporation is teasing motorists with the Maple Majestic EV. Or at least a scale model of the Maple Majestic. It isn’t clear whether the company has created any working prototypes as yet, because the images and video on the Maple Majestic website are models. Very detailed models, to be sure. But still models rendered in an unknown scale.

The Maple Majestic is designed for snow

The concept behind the Majestic is intriguing. Appropriately for a Canadian manufacturer, Maple says the Majestic will be designed specifically to handle “extreme weather driving dynamics.” What does that mean? The Majestic offers several features designed to bolster winter driving.

The most notable innovation of the Majestic is the ability to adjust ride height by 150mm. That is almost six inches. The idea is you can lower the ride height for better handling when roads are clear. When you encounter deep snow, you can raise the body for greater clearance. The press release doesn’t explain the niceties of this procedure, but homebuilt low-riders have had a similar capability for decades. I assume there will be a control that uses either electric or hydraulic motors to lift and drop the body.

Another feature being touted by Maple is the track of the front and rear axles will be the same. The advantage here is that in deep snow the rear wheels will follow in the ruts created by the front wheels, instead of plowing a new track.

No details on the Maple Majestic’s drive train

Speaking of wheels, the latest press release is skimpy on driveline specs. It would seem logical that a vehicle designed for winter driving would offer four wheel or all wheel drive. That is only speculation, of course, but it makes sense that four wheel power would be standard or at least an option.

The Majestic’s 3100mm (122 inch) wheelbase is longer than similar sized EVs. Maple says this will improve driving in snow. In some cases that may be so, but experienced off-road drivers know a short wheelbase can prevent a vehicle from getting high-centered in solid snow.

What the longer wheelbase does offer is room for more battery. This is important in a vehicle deigned for cold weather operation. Batteries are far less efficient in frosty weather, so range will plummet along with the thermometer. Carrying a larger battery pack will help overcome this limitation.

When can you buy a Maple Majestic?

There is nothing in the press release or the Maple Majestic website to indicate when the climate friendly car will enter production or what it will sell for. The fact that they have resorted to models to show off the design indicates you probably won’t be able to buy a Majestic anytime soon.

Still, we can hope. The EV market is filled with various exciting vehicles that are “coming soon.” Some of these are nothing more than vaporware. Others need a strong shot of venture capital before they can start production. And others are certain to be built and sold, but the time frame is unknown.

I am not sure which of these applies to the Maple Majestic. It may never see the light of day. On the other hand, many people scoffed when Elon Musk first announced the Tesla. There are certainly applications for a winter grade driver’s EV. I’m hoping Maple can translate their scale models into an affordable winter driving machine.

Time will tell.

Maple Majestic Website

Full Majestic Press Release (PDF)

The post Maple Majestic: an EV designed for Climate Friendly Driving appeared first on EV Snapshot.

Abundant Charging Points are On The Way

A half a million charging points by 2025. And that is just Shell. Other oil companies, government facilities and car manufacturers are also adding new charging capacity at a tremendous pace. Tesla already has 17,000 Supercharger charging points located in approximately 2,000 charging locations. The automaker will undoubtedly add to that number in the coming years.

Whether or not you believe EVs will out pace ICE vehicles in the near term, these figures should give you pause. Shell and the other industry experts expect there will be a demand for those charging points. Currently, we don’t need that charging capacity. But Shell and the other charging industry leaders have run the numbers and are investing heavily in charging technology. They wouldn’t bankroll all those charging locations unless they anticipate a strong return on the dollar.

What About the Power Grid?

Those who are convinced that EVs will never overtake ICEs are quick to point out that all those charging points will stress the electrical grid beyond the breaking point. They contend that the current grid can barely support today’s electrical requirements. How can we add millions of electrical charging points without causing cataclysmic grid failure?

Those doomsayers fail to take in account that utility companies are hard at work beefing up the grid to meet future requirements. There may be isolated blackouts in certain areas as EVs ramp up. But energy companies see the trend and are also investing heavily in more capacity.

Never Ber Against Profit Driven Innovation

Innovation can also be expected to reduce demand on the grid. I have already discussed the flywheel technology being developed by Chakratec and other companies. Chakratec claims their system dramatically reduces the need for outside electrical power and is specifically designed to allow for EV charging where the grid is weak or unable to supply sufficient current to charge EVs. This is only one possible solution. Reducing power grid dependance will become a great profit center for energy companies. You can bet there is an army of electrical engineers investigating methods of solving this issue. There might or might not be a major breakthrough in this area, but I expect steady progress year by year. By the time Shell has installed those half-million charging points, the infrastructure to support them will be in place.

That infrastructure will be a very competitive space for the next decade or so. Battery companies will also play a role in the equation. Batteries that can be charged faster and with less energy will crush their competition. So power cell companies are exploring ways to make sure they can survive as consumers purchase EVs in greater numbers.

The battle for Power Dominence is just beginning

There will be big winners, but there will also be big losers. Companies that make wrong choices will wind up losing mammoth amounts of cash. Those that judge the EV trends correctly and invest wisely will generate immense profits.

We are fortunate to have a front row seat for this battle for automotive power supremacy. We are watching history unfold in real time, as EVmakers, utility companies and battery providers attempt to steamroll each other.

Pass the popcorn. The drama is just getting started.

The Shell press release is here.

The post Shell ready to add 500,000 Charging Points by 2025 appeared first on EV Snapshot.