Navigant Research: plug-in electric vehicles close to becoming leading alternative fuel platform, best positioned to lead future
14 March 2019
From 2017 to 2018, PEV sales doubled in North America, and sales in Europe and China increased 39% and 77%, respectively, according to a new report from Navigant Research.
In 2019, multiple deployments of long-range battery EVs (BEVs) in crossover classes, as well as Tesla reaching full-scale production on the Model 3 and expanding its vehicle shipments to markets abroad, are setting the stage for continued market growth, Navigant says.
By 2030, annual PEV sales are estimated to be between 15% and 32% of the global light duty vehicle market, producing a global PEV population between 107 million and 190 million. This long-term growth is expected to be propelled by improving vehicle technology economics—a function of battery innovations, government transportation energy policies, oil price projections, and movements to price carbon.
—Scott Shepard, senior research analyst with Navigant Research
Though PEV market growth has been considerable, challenges remain. These include vehicle availability, consumer awareness, charging infrastructure, and threats from competing alternative fuels or fuel efficiency solutions.
Navigant believes that these challenges and threats are eroding with the natural cycle of technological development and concerted efforts by stakeholders (governments, automakers, and energy providers) to move the market toward lower emissions transportation, specifically electrification.
Of the competing powertrain options, PEVs are close to becoming the leading conventional alternative and are best positioned to lead the future light duty vehicle market, Navigant concludes.
It's nice to be backed up by the likes of Navigant.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 14 March 2019 at 02:50 AM
With 200+ mile EVs available in the $35k - $37k range from Tesla, Nissan, Hyundai, Kia and soon Volkswagen, PEVs have hit the tipping point.
Hard to see how H2 gets a toehold in the market now. Even Shell is investing in EV charging companies.
Somewhat paradoxically, a 200+ mile EV enables the use of 120v Level 1 charging, reducing infrastructure requirements and expense. When you have a large buffer, you can get by with 3-4 mph charging.
Posted by: electric-car-insider.com | 14 March 2019 at 07:29 AM
Short range (200 miles) lower price BEVs are OK for people with home charging facilities but are not practical for people without home charging facilities nor for wintertime driving and/or for longer trips or for e-taxis. e-buses, e-trucks, e-trains etc. That is where FCEVs come in?
Posted by: HarveyD | 14 March 2019 at 08:01 AM
@HarveyD
Chargepoint will put a Level 1 or Level 2 Charger at your Apartment or Condo or Workplace. For towns and urban areas they are already being installed in public parking facilities. Soon these will be as ubiquitous as parking meters.
For Winter driving check solutions by Eberspaecher, Bosch, Borg Warner, Mahle, and others (note: some may require a little fuel). Recently, researchers at Saarland University developed a heat pump that is two to three times more efficient than conventional heating and cooling devices. It uses the shape-memory alloy (SMA) Nitinol (nickel-titanium) and does not require any conventional refrigerant.
For longer trips, DC Fast Charging is now up to 350 kW and Germany is looking at up to 450 kW. Heliox in the Netherlands has chargers for buses that go up to 600 kW.
Posted by: gryf | 14 March 2019 at 09:03 AM
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 14 March 2019 at 01:42 PM
I agree with gryf that the near future looks good for more improved public/private charging facilities. Most if not all new residences will be equipped with Level II circuits for low cost chargers.
The problem remains with older (small and large) existing residences, apartment and condo buildings. Difficult to convince the majority, in small and large condos-apartment buildings, to share the high cost to install adequate electrical modifications. The 99+% of users/residents using recent expensive ICEVs are very reluctant and continue to block it? This anti-charging facilities majority will be around for another 10+ years.
Posted by: HarveyD | 14 March 2019 at 03:54 PM
Navigant has a history of stating the obvious and still being wrong.
Posted by: SJC | 14 March 2019 at 06:00 PM
So the same analyst from Navigant Research that said almost three years ago that EVs won't ever crash the oil market (See: https://seekingalpha.com/article/3970134-bloomberg-vs-navigant-research-will-evs-produce-new-oil-crash) is now predicting that: "By 2030, annual PEV sales are estimated to be between 15% and 32% of the global light duty vehicle market, producing a global PEV population between 107 million and 190 million."? What made him change his mind? When will investors start valuing the work of analysts that do the right analysis?
Posted by: Juan Carlos Zuleta | 14 March 2019 at 07:37 PM
If I were in charge of US energy policy, crashing the oil market would be one of my highest priorities!
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 14 March 2019 at 07:50 PM
This time I have to believe SAEP.
Given the opportunity, he would certainly crash the oil market, crash the NG market, crash the clean H2 market, crash the solar and wind markets, crash all energy consumption reduction programmes, crash smaller cars programmes, crash all health care programmes and crash whoever dare not to accept his dictates.
Hope that he will not get the job?
Posted by: HarveyD | 16 March 2019 at 07:16 AM
Come now, AlzHarvey. I've said many times exactly how I would crash the oil market: by substituting cheaper and cleaner natural gas and electricity. I've also said how I'd decarbonize the economy: substitute uranium and thorium for natural gas, providing both electric power and heat without any air emissions whatsoever. Hydrogen becomes pointless and mass reconstruction for energy reduction becomes unnecessary.
If you can't remember these things, it's just one more sign that assisted living is in your VERY near future.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 16 March 2019 at 08:01 AM
Yes, I remember how many times you supported:
1) NPPs, regardless of the unacceptable high cost, inadequate used fuel disposal and lack of general public acceptance.
2) the use of interim technologies like PHEVs using fossil fuel that you like to crash.
3) the general use of limited range, slow charging, over priced BEVs, even where 50% of potential users do not have access to essential home charging facilities.
4) your tenacious reluctance to accept that REs can and will produce 24/7 clean energy at a lower cost that latest NPPs.
5) your persistent reluctance to accept proposals from others.
6) your pertinacious habit to call other posters squalid names.
7) etc
Posted by: HarveyD | 16 March 2019 at 08:39 AM
Amazing how triggered some people can get when they're proven wrong. It's like their concept of self is tied up with being righteous and admitting error almost physically hurts them. But since he's provided a nice list, I'll just go down it:
This is of a piece with the leftist insistence on ideological uniformity. I cite sources and provide calculations when I think someone is wrong (at least the first time, I don't like to repeat myself). You, on the other hand, make bogus assertions left and right.
It's your persistent and unapologetic refusal to provide EVIDENCE that the "24/7" can be provided "at a lower cost" that should warn everyone that you're either (a) a propagandist, or (b) not playing with a full deck. I'll just repeat myself here one more time: SHOW ME. LCOE figures don't mean anything unless you've got the "24/7" covered too.
How is this stupid? Let me count the ways, AlzHarvey:
- I am not a BEV pusher. I have been saying for years that the PHEV occupies the sweet spot. Charging time matters a great deal less for PHEVs.
- You commented on this post about Tesla V3 supercharging... apparently without understanding it. 75 miles of range in 3 minutes is an "effective charging speed" of 900 MPH. Calling that "slow" is simply idiotic.
- You act as if providing home-charging access to the currently un-served 50% is impossible.
- You also act as if the 50% who DO have home charging access are somehow doing wrong if they use it, because 50% don't. Honestly, WTF?
All in all, your REEEEing has gotten stale.A combination of PHEVs and biofuels are capable of fully replacing petroleum motor fuels in the USA, and I presume Canada as well. That MAY be supplanted, but it is sufficient for a permanent solution.
You put your anti-nuclearism right at the top, don't you? Well:
While you're all in a tizzy, China is rolling out 400 MW(t) "swimming pool" reactors for district heating to get rid of the air pollution from coal stoves. There are people who have a clue about these problems. You are not one of them.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 16 March 2019 at 04:14 PM
BTW, reaching deep into the thesaurus for almost-incorrect words like "pertinacious" and "squalid" is classic paid troll behavior. Others who legitimately felt what you tried to obfuscate using five-dollar words would say something like "persistent" and "derogatory". But derogation is merited in your case.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 16 March 2019 at 05:29 PM
The first para is one of the best self-description of SAEP. Another 90% and he will not need a mirror?
Posted by: HarveyD | 17 March 2019 at 08:15 AM
The sickest part of dealing with you is watching you project your idiocy outward. Beating you about the head and shoulders with facts does not stop you from posting bullshit. You are either paid to post it, or too senile/stupid to understand why you are wrong.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 17 March 2019 at 09:08 PM
I don't want to call you names but a full check up would possibly find what has gone wrong with you in the last few months/years.
I'll try to contact medical specialists in your area to see if they help you before it is too late?
Posted by: HarveyD | 18 March 2019 at 07:51 AM
Add concern trolling to your list of offenses.
Posted by: Engineer-Poet | 18 March 2019 at 11:22 AM