That's roughly 300 megawatts of potential dispatchable load.

Herman:
Exponential in this case is only used because it sounds good to those who have not got a clue what it means.
Its linear, of course.

Good numbers and analysis Herman. There are a few things that make this market different from most.

1. Most OEMs do not advertise or promote their EVs. They don't really want to sell them, they are only producing enough to comply with ZEV mandates, and any limited marketing they do is only enough to make sure that the ~2k they produce actually move off lots.

2. The cars are, with a few exceptions, only sold in ZEV states. That hobbles sales further.

3. ZEV mandates start ratcheting up dramatically in 2018, so we'll see the OEMs start to produce and market more heavily in 2017.

4. That's the same year that Tesla will start selling the $35k 200 mile Model 3 so there will be another incentive to have a meaningful response from the OEMs because ordinary (non-wealthy) people will start to pay attention when the Model 3 becomes a phenomenon and the majority of people finally "get" $1gge implications on their personal finance (ie free car - lease payment covered by fuel cost savings).

I believe Clett identified the phenomenon perfectly. There's a gestation period, then things get exciting really fast. You peer at the the Petri fish for days and it looks like nothing's happening. Then you come back after getting bored and there's a massive colony.

I spend a lot of time in the field giving drives and talking to people. Hundred of people one month per quarter (nearly a thousand).

I've never seen or heard more excitement for any other car. A whole lot of people will be getting rid of their ICE or Gen 1 EV in 2017 & 2018 and driving a Tesla.

It will be more of a phenomenon even than the meteoric rise of Honda or Toyota.
It calls to mind the phrase "this time it's personal".

People are pissed off, and they're worried. For good reason. Now they can vote with their wallets and that fact is not lost on people who are paying attention. And every freak storm and drought only create greater resolve. This isn't speculation on my part, this is what I'm hearing in the field. Yes, it's a self selected crowd. But it's big, and it's growing.

Harvey,
If BEV, PHEV, and FCEV will do such a good job at conserving petrol, not as many GigaBattery Factory will be built, and you won't see as many BEV's as you would like to see.

As you can see, building such a factory representing huge investment cost and risk that they won't be over built. BEV will likely remain a niche market for enthusiasts due to the huge resource consumption.

For example, with Tesla's battery capable of 5000 cycles to reach 80% of capacity, it will last for 13 years if charged daily. If you only drive 60 miles a day, why do you want to have a battery pack capable of over 300-mile range? It is better off to have a PHEV-60 to best utilize the battery pack without waste, before calendar ageing.

In short, BEV's are resource hogs that can represent status symbols but not appropriate for the mass.
The role of FCEV is clear in countries that want to use renewable-energy fuel instead of petrol.

E-P:

Chernobyl! TMI! Fukushima!
(I just wanted to take care of all the putative counterarguments in advance.)

People on sailboats typically don't use stored water for long voyages.  Most appear to use reverse osmosis "water makers".  They don't rely on rain at all; they generate fresh water when they need it.  The lesson is that living at the mercy of the weather is a recipe for trouble.

People who claim "storage is THE solution" don't have a solution to the low EROI of RE without storage, let alone with it.  The low EROI means that the build-out of variable RE is being subsidized by fossil fuels.  The end state of that path is collapse.  So far, none of the RE supply chains can afford to run themselves (including the required buffering) on their own produced energy.  That is not going to improve enough by 2050 to allow the electric grid to be decarbonized, and that's our deadline for the 2°C target (which is already looking too risky).

There's a lot of Green denial out there; I just saw Bob Wallace declare that nuclear power is not dispatchable (while France's Westinghouse-based PWRs have been load-following for decades, and BWRs were designed for it from the outset)!  Now that centrifuge enrichment is the rule, the EROI of nuclear is well over 100.  It's the one option we've got that successfully replaces fossil fuels, and anyone asserting otherwise needs to provide an existence proof or STFU.