Coming out again 3rd qtr of 2012.
Anyone know anyone who got the initial batch made in 1997-2003?
Purportedly one easily paid off the entire price of the car both initial purchase and upkeep by the life-of-car savings in gas. People who had solar installed on their property said to run the RAV4 EV for wayy below gas powered costs. Even without solar, those who hooked into the grid at nightime (60% of daytime cost ave) were said to:
(2006 data)
As of May 2006, charging a RAV4 EV from full-dead to full-charge, at a rate of US$0.09 per kilowatt-hour, costs around US$2.70. As of May 2008, based on a gasoline price-per-gallon cost of US$3.80 and up and the non-EV 2003 RAV4 2-wheel-drive gasoline fuel efficiency of 27 mpg-US (8.7 L/100 km; 32 mpg-imp), the RAV4 EV costs approximately 25% as much to fully charge, and makes mileage in the RAV4 EV the cost equivalent to a 111.1 mpg-US (2.117 L/100 km; 133.4 mpg-imp) small SUV.
In addition, the RAV4 EV has a charge timer built into the dashboard that enables the vehicle to start charging at a specific time. As the RAV4 EV easily becomes the main cost of electricity in an average-sized home, this enables the owner to use a Time-Of-Day Meter to reduce electricity costs. This configuration is a standard practice with RAV4 EV owners. The price of electricity at night depends on the carrier, but is usually in the range of 60% of the normal rate. In the use of charging the RAV4 EV, this equates to a cheaper cost-per-mile, roughly equivalent to a vehicle capable of 166.6 mpg-US (1.412 L/100 km; 200.1 mpg-imp), based on a price of US$3.00 per gallon.
The new one at 54 grand purchase price.
I was researching the whole EV thing about 3 years ago, and read about the RAV4 EV... most every owner were really happy with them. Some of them still have the cars working, but I heard it's getting more and more difficult to find a replacement battery for them.
The original unit back in 2000 was 30K after rebates...
Also the new model uses lithium-ion batteries... which I suspect won't last as long as the original's NiMH.
A gas powered 2012 model costs 23k. How long do I have to drive this thing to make back the extra 22k? Seems like a waste to me.
Rich folks on the left will buy them. Lol
Depends on the price of gas and electricity in the future, I guess.
But you couldn't buy it if you wanted it anyways, as it's only being sold in California for the initial batch.
For the folks with solar power it would seem an absolute win for cost even at 50K.
As to the battery, haven't the oil pigs made good and sure any long lasting good ones get squealched? Remember the Ovshinskys?
I think some of those patents expired. At any rate, companies have moved to Li-Ion now. There's still quite a bit of improvement to be made on battery tech.
Nooooo.
Cliffnotes version is GM bought the rights to the great battery the Ovshinsky's made and then sold it to Texaco a week later.
This is how the oil pigs killed the good battery(s):
In part:
The oil companies simply don't want this to happen. Stan Ovshinsky built a very good battery for the EV-1, but GM bought it and then sold it to the oil companies. Talk about a control paradigm. "Oil companies Fearful of losing business to a competing technology, they supported efforts to kill the ZEV mandate. They also bought patents to prevent modern NiMH batteries from being used in US electric cars". -Reference.
Further Quote- Patent en brance of NiMH batteries
In 1994, General Motors acquired a controlling interest in Ovonics's battery development and manufacturing, including patents controlling the manufacturing of large nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries. In 2001, Texaco purchased GM's share in GM Ovonics. A few months later, Chevron acquired Texaco. In 2003, Texaco Ovonics Battery Systems was restructured into Cobasys, a 50/50 joint venture between Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices (ECD) Ovonics.[11] Chevron's influence over Cobasys extends beyond a strict 50/50 joint venture.
and...
Texaco sold the NiMH battery technology to Amoco. GM had a 60% controlling interest in the technology, and announced their sellout of world wide patent rights to Texaco on October 10, 2000. Six days later, Chevron bought out Texaco in a 100 billion dollar merger. Cobasys is Chevron's subsidiary, which effectively killed further development of the NiMH batteries for all-electric cars. Panasonic had developed a "E-95" NiMH battery that was powerful enough to energize an all-electric car at speeds to 80 mph, and with a range of 120 miles. The expected battery life was longer than the life expectancy of the vehicle, and in fact more than 1,000 of Toyota's RAV4 EV units have already surpassed the 100,000 mile mark. Cobasys successfully sued Panasonic for the sum of 30 million dollars, thus killing any further sales of EV-95 batteries. The batteries cannot be sold, or imported, into the US. Cobasys refuses to grant any other company the license to manufacture the EV-95 batteries, and will not even think of producing the EV-95 themselves, unless guaranteed a massive order by an OEM.
The only currently available alternative to a EV-95 NiMH battery is a lithium-ion battery pack, but these typically cost around $14,000, which is about 6 times as expensive as an EV-95, and haven't been around long enough to establish a proven track record.
America SCREWED AGAIN by a mega-corp? Say it ain't so!
Got a link to this "Cliff-Notes" version?
It's just the invisible hand of the free market at work tbh.
The best lies are based in some truth. That cut and paste was a good example of that. You realize that virtually all current electric cars (like the Toyota Prius) use niMH batteries, right? And that the relevant patents for niMh expire in 2014?
There's truth to what Fabbs posted, and current electric cars (like the Toyota Prius) had to use smaller capacity NiMH batteries, because Cobasys (Texaco) would not supply them high-capacity ones (and since they owned the patents, Toyota couldn't sell a car in the US with their own).
But my understanding is that Cobasys was recently sold to another (german?) company. Also that the patents expired or would expire soon.
NiMH is a cheaper than Li-Ion, but they have problems of their own, like memory loss. Li-ion are more expensive, but they pack much more energy too.
Oh there is definitely some truth to it but Cobasys did cross license the technology and patents with Panasonic and Toyota. Looked at it objectively it appeared to me to be more about getting a return on their investment through patent royalties than trying to with hold technology. And yes, Cobasys is now owned by a partnership between Samsung and Bosch.
Interesting. Looking into it further it looks like the patents didn't sell with the company. Either way, Chevron no longer has anything to do with the battery companies.
On July 28, 2009, Automotive News reported that Cobasys would be bought from Chevron and Energy Conversion Devices by battery maker SB LiMotive, a joint venture of Bosch and Samsung.[22] At the time of the 2009 Cobasys sale, control of NiMH battery technology transferred back to ECD Ovonics.[23] In October 2009, ECD Ovonics announced that their next-generation NiMH batteries will provide specific energy and power that are comparable to those of lithium-ion batteries at a cost that is significantly lower than the cost of lithium-ion batteries.[24]
On February 14, 2012 BASF announced that it had acquired Ovonic Battery Company from Energy Conversion Devices Inc.
It could mean that the patent doesn't yield any viable results. The patent claim might not be real. It might be too expensive of a process. The process may have expensive environmental impact for mass production. It wouldn't be the first time that something turns out to be only hype. Any one of several factors could make the claims BS.
Is this possible in the same category as the 100 MPG carburetor?
That's the german company!
That makes no sense.
Sorry, what do I need to elaborate on?
A 2001 patent infringement lawsuit brought by ECD Ovonics and Ovonic Battery Company, Inc. against Matsu a, Toyota, and PEVE was settled in July 2004. Settlement terms called for cross-licensing between parties of current and future NiMH-related patents filed through December 31, 2014. The terms prevented Matu a, Toyota, and PEVE from selling certain NiMH batteries for transportation applications in North America until the second half of 2007, and commercial quan ies of certain NiMH batteries in North America until the second half of 2010.
3 years to settle and no high capacity NiMH batteries for transportation applications in North America until 2007... plus royalties.
http://panacea-bocaf.org/theevstory.htm
There's a bunch more. I closed the window.
Bull patents don't get cross-licensed or receive multi-million dollar yearly royalty payments.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
