38% of cars sold in China are now electric, Sinopec says the ICE is doomed

We obviously don't know how the sausage is made, and maybe it would be less impressive if we knew, but..
I'm impressed by China's proficiency in software. We all used to believe that the West, and Silicon Valley, was where all the progress happens. And China - just the cheap knockoffs and copying of whatever they can. But they're showing some stuff that couldn't be copied from anywhere because it doesn't exist anywhere else. Who knows, maybe the first really autonomous car is coming from China. No drama, no showoff, it will just appear ready for ordering at some point and will just work.

Comrade said:

You can have academic discussions all day long, but here are the facts.

A Tesla Y and a hybrid RAV4 are largely the same size and function vehicle. One goes 4 miles per kwh, which means at 20 cents per khw it costs $30 to drive 600 miles. And the hybrid RAV4 gets 39mpg, and at $3 per gallon it costs $46 to drive 600 miles.

Which a RAV4 can actually do on a single tank in optimal conditions, and still cost much less to purchase, with much better depreciation, and much less "refueling" headaches.

The total real cost difference is not multiples.

Click to expand...

One problem with cost comparisons is that you don't know the degree of subsidy or tax at the various stages of energy production. So it is a perfectly practical way to be guided on what to purchase (tho estimating future trends puts some wrinkles in that), but it is only somewhat related to actual energy production efficiency.

classicalgas said:

you're calling a hybrid a gasoline vehicle, that's dumb. Most sources consider them EV's, *because they have batteries and electric motors* You can't reasonably call a hybrid a typical ICE vehicle, so you're comparing oranges to apples.

Click to expand...

I would classify the car as ICE or EV based on where it gets its energy. If it gets it from the pump like a Prius does, it is an ICE. If it gets it from a charging station it is an EV. The lines get blurred with the plug-in hybrids that source their energy from external electrical sources.

I agree that it isn't typical, but I would still call it an ICE. A hybrid like a Prius is simply a modern and more efficient kind of an ICE. BTW, the new Prius has a lot of get up and go. Not pathetic at all. My concerns with hybrids is their added complexity. But if their complexity doesn't make them maintenance nightmares, I'd prefer them to a full EV in the U.S. at this time. Or at least in the SouthWest where I live.

classicalgas said:

Here's an apples to apples ICE vs EV comparison...Fiat 500 vs fiat 500 E

2019 500, manual transmission...2505 lbs, 32mpg combined
2019 500E 2980 lbs 112 MPGe

So, EV version of the same car, 3.5 times as efficient as the ICE version...even though four hundred and fifty pounds heavier

Click to expand...

MPGe does not include conversion and transmission losses. If your estimates of such losses you gave earlier are correct, then the advantage is about 1/2 of 3.5 or 1.75 times as efficient. That also seems to roughly jibe with the energy cost to the user. So maybe regulatory and subsidy issues add up about equally on both sides.

wturber said:

My concerns with hybrids is their added complexity. But if their complexity doesn't make them maintenance nightmares

Click to expand...

Toyota hybrids are more reliable than their gasoline only equivalents. They have planetary gear transmissions, no starters and no belts.

wturber said:

MPGe does not include conversion and transmission losses. If your estimates of such losses you gave earlier are correct, then the advantage is about 1/2 of 3.5 or 1.75 times as efficient. That also seems to roughly jibe with the energy cost to the user. So maybe regulatory and subsidy issues add up about equally on both sides.

Click to expand...

So? MPG doesn't factor in all the energy losses in getting gasoline to your car. Those are higher than for most electric generation.

The fact remains, that *IF* electricity (at your wall socket) was provided by a system exactly as inefficient as that used to get gasoline to your filling station, the EV would be three or more times as efficient as the ICE.

US Big oil gets trillions a year in various subsidies, and have for decades. EVs only gets billions ( in a good year)

Comrade said:

Toyota hybrids are more reliable than their gasoline only equivalents. They have planetary gear transmissions, no starters and no belts.

Click to expand...

The Prius is built like a tank, Toyota figures they sold the first ten yeas worth at a loss on every car, and even now are just paying down the R&D cots. A planetary is still a transmission, the Prius does have a starter motor... that doubles as an engine driven generator... and a second motor/generator that drives the wheels( and functions as a generator when regen braking is engaged.

classicalgas said:

.you're calling a hybrid a gasoline vehicle, that's dumb. Most sources consider them EV's, *because they have batteries and electric motors* You can't reasonably call a hybrid a typical ICE vehicle

Click to expand...

No.. a Hybrid is just that.. a “Hybrid” (not a PHEV, or a BEV)
All its energy comes from the gasoline it burns, some is stored in a battery ( kinetic regen) for reuse via an electric motor.
But that is not a vehicle powered by just electrical energy from an external source.
And most manufacturers today have hybrid models in their range……including the Chinese manufacturers !

classicalgas said:

*When looking at the number of vehicles recalled in 2020 due to fire risk, AutoinsuranceEZ found that ICE topped the table. The only two notable EV recalls were for the Hyundai Kona (82,000 units recalled due to faulty battery packs that could cause a fire) and the highly publicised Chevrolet Bolt EV recall (70,000 units recalled)*

per 100k sold... EV fires 25.1
ICE fires 1,529
Hybrid fires 3,474
I think I got the last laugh, and you look like a clown.

Click to expand...

Again, NO, …if you did not see the major flaw in the calculation used for that “AutoinsuranceEZ” study ….you are the clown !

wturber said:

I would classify the car as ICE or EV based on where it gets its energy. If it gets it from the pump like a Prius does, it is an ICE. If it gets it from a charging station it is an EV. The lines get blurred with the plug-in hybrids that source their energy from external electrical sources.

I agree that it isn't typical, but I would still call it an ICE. A hybrid like a Prius is simply a modern and more efficient kind of an ICE. BTW, the new Prius has a lot of get up and go. Not pathetic at all. My concerns with hybrids is their added complexity. But if their complexity doesn't make them maintenance nightmares, I'd prefer them to a full EV in the U.S. at this time. Or at least in the SouthWest where I live.

Click to expand...

No. What kind of car an ICE engine is in drastically changes what it's expected to do, and how efficiently it operates. In a hybrid, you can run a tiny engine at constant, or near constant, speed, and you only need a a small amount of power out of it (depending on how big your electric motor is ) Those factors boost the efficiency of the ICE far above anything you'll see in a pure ICE vehicle.

Hybrids are often classified as EV's by regulatory organizations, partly because they do tend to be less polluting and more gas efficient than strict BEVs, and function as a transition technology to BEVs. Hybrid tech makes them expensive, and prone to fires...in spite of major efforts by the manufacturers to make sure they get a good rep.

wturber said:

I agree that it isn't typical, but I would still call it an ICE. A hybrid like a Prius is simply a modern and more efficient kind of an ICE. BTW, the new Prius has a lot of get up and go. Not pathetic at all. My concerns with hybrids is their added complexity. But if their complexity doesn't make them maintenance nightmares, I'd prefer them to a full EV in the U.S. at this time. Or at least in the SouthWest where I live.

Click to expand...

Priuses are known for great reliability compared to most gas powered vehicles. Somehow the CVT lasts a long time even. Seems like owners don't pay a price for that complexity.

The additional cost premium of a hybrid is pretty low and the drawbacks ( goofy styling, poor acceleration, poor handling ) are gone from most models lately.

Nice interim solution if you don't have a plug and you live in petrolistan.

Hillhater said:

No.. a Hybrid is just that.. a “Hybrid” (not a PHEV, or a BEV)
All its energy comes from the gasoline it burns, some is stored in a battery ( kinetic regen) for reuse via an electric motor.
But that is not a vehicle powered by just electrical energy from an external source.
And most manufacturers today have hybrid models in their range……including the Chinese manufacturers !

Again, NO, …if you did not see the major flaw in the calculation used for that “AutoinsuranceEZ” study ….you are the clown !

Click to expand...

You're being obtuse...purposely or not, I can't tell. An ICE as used in a hybrid is not comparable to an ICE used alone, the reasons are obvious, and I've laid them out.

Show me the flaw in that insurance company study, several others show similar results.

Again, two cars, identical except one is ICE, one BEV...BEV gets 3.5 times the mileage the ICE does.

classicalgas said:

In a hybrid, you can run a tiny engine at constant, or near constant, speed, and you only need a a small amount of power out of it (depending on how big your electric motor is ) Those factors boost the efficiency of the ICE far above anything you'll see in a pure ICE vehicle.

Click to expand...

It also makes hybrids inherently much less efficient in manufacturing energy, labor, maintenance, and externalities than an ICE or BEV car. It's not a win. It's like corn ethanol, which is only a green fuel if you define it that way, not by its characteristics.

classicalgas said:

So? MPG doesn't factor in all the energy losses in getting gasoline to your car. Those are higher than for most electric generation.

Click to expand...

Cite your source please. But even if you are correct, you need to discount the MPGe by at least 40% using your own figures.

classicalgas said:

The fact remains, that *IF* electricity (at your wall socket) was provided by a system exactly as inefficient as that used to get gasoline to your filling station, the EV would be three or more times as efficient as the ICE.

Click to expand...

Well, that's a statement you make. But you haven't shown the evidence. In fact, the evidence you have shown suggests less than 2x as efficient using your apples to apples example. If you compare best to best, it seems to be less than that.

classicalgas said:

US Big oil gets trillions a year in various subsidies, and have for decades. EVs only gets billions ( in a good year)

Click to expand...

60% of electrical generation in the U.S. is from fossil fuels of some sort. It isn't EV subsidies per se that need to be considered. It is their sources of energy.

classicalgas said:

An ICE as used in a hybrid is not comparable to an ICE used alone,

Click to expand...

That is why its called a “Hybrid” ….but,..ALL its energy is generated by an ICE, using a hybrid drive train.

classicalgas said:

Show me the flaw in that insurance company study,

Click to expand...

the simple answer..
the USA alone has approx 270 million ICEs registered.
if , as suggested, there are 1520 fires per 100,000,.. that would imply there should be over 4 million fires ?…( as opposed to the actual < 200,000 reported fires)
What they seem to have done, is take the 13million or so ICEs sold per year in the USA, and compared it to the less than 200,000 pa reported total USA car fires !
The longer version..

Well here's what the NTSB has to say about their fire incident data collection:

There is no NTSB database that tracks highway vehicle fires. We do not know what data AutoInsuranceEZ used for its research, but it did not come from an NTSB database.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

….and here…https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a40163966/cars-catching-fire-new-york-times-real-statistics/
….and here also…

Hillhater said:

That is why its called a “Hybrid” ….but,..ALL its energy is generated by an ICE, using a hybrid drive train.

the simple answer..
the USA alone has approx 270 million ICEs registered.
if , as suggested, there are 1520 fires per 100,000,.. that would imply there should be over 4 million fires ?…( as opposed to the actual < 200,000 reported fires)
What they seem to have done, is take the 13million or so ICEs sold per year in the USA, and compared it to the less than 200,000 pa reported total USA car fires !
The longer version..

….and here…https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a40163966/cars-catching-fire-new-york-times-real-statistics/
….and here also…

https://www.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/comments/104oyv3

Click to expand...

In addition:

classicalgas said:

Show me the flaw in that insurance company study, several others show similar results.

Click to expand...

The "several others" that you're referring to are almost always going to be referencing the AutoInsuranceEZ report, and little or nothing else cited. Because it sounds good, of course that's what people want to hear, "EVs are several times less likely to catch fire than gas cars," but confirmation bias goes both ways.

We also are not saying that EV's are more likely to catch fire. What we are saying is, there's far far too many variables to make such a generic blanket statement like one type of car catches fire more often than the other.

Chalo said:

It also makes hybrids inherently much less efficient in manufacturing energy, labor, maintenance, and externalities than an ICE or BEV car. It's not a win. It's like corn ethanol, which is only a green fuel if you define it that way, not by its characteristics.

Click to expand...

I dunno about that.

An extra small motor, battery, and controller replaces 20-33% of the engine's displacement.
With that reduction, you also see:
- smaller muffler
- smaller catalytic convertors ( these are expensive and involve rare earths )
- smaller oil capacity
- smaller gas tank
- smaller brakes
- sometimes you also get to delete an alternator and starter
- sometimes you get to delete a transmission ( this is a net win for reducing complexity )

In some cases you are actually removing total number of parts when making the car a hybrid. Otherwise you're adding a few.

The 2.0L Toyota Prius motor + EV motor is the power-equivalent of a ~2.65L engine but has the fuel consumption of a <1.0L engine. That's amazing.

Hybrids are a great way to harness the strengths of the electric motor before your society is about to unlock the electric future on their technological development tree.

harrisonpatm said:

We also are not saying that EV's are more likely to catch fire.

Click to expand...

What we can say though, is that an EV fire is a very different and concerning problem compared to an ICE fire.
..It burns much hotter, much more violently,and burns much longer as there is currently no easy way to extinguish them.
But, no matter how keen anyone is to see a EV revolution, at any practical sales rate, it will take a very long time for even 50% of the 270 million registered cars in the USA alone, to be replaced by EVs……even if all buyers can actually be persuaded to want one !

neptronix said:

Somehow the CVT lasts a long time even.

Click to expand...

That's because "CVT" is just a concept. It's like the concept of "explosion". Early belt CVTs were like the Boston marathon explosion. They are bad. And Toyota's CVTs are like the fruity explosion of flavor from Starburst gummies. They are good.

Hillhater said:

What we can say though, is that an EV fire is a very different and concerning problem compared to an ICE fire.
..It burns much hotter, much more violently,and burns much longer as there is currently no easy way to extinguish them.

Click to expand...

You seem to be someone who's unfamiliar with gasoline-- um, "petrol".

Hillhater said:

That is why its called a “Hybrid” ….but,..ALL its energy is generated by an ICE, using a hybrid drive train.

the simple answer..
the USA alone has approx 270 million ICEs registered.
if , as suggested, there are 1520 fires per 100,000,.. that would imply there should be over 4 million fires ?…( as opposed to the actual < 200,000 reported fires)
What they seem to have done, is take the 13million or so ICEs sold per year in the USA, and compared it to the less than 200,000 pa reported total USA car fires !
The longer version..

….and here…https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a40163966/cars-catching-fire-new-york-times-real-statistics/
….and here also…

https://www.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/comments/104oyv3

Click to expand...

Sorry, you lost again...

US has 270 million *passenger vehicles* registered, they aren't broken down by type.

*Sweden, who saw mass adoption of EVs, now shows that about 40% of the cars on their roads are BEVs, or Battery Electric Vehicles, and has more knowledge and data about EVs than the U.S. As an example, in Sweden, between 2018 and 2022, only 29 EVs and 52 hybrids were reported to have caught fire. On average, battery-powered vehicles, including EVs and hybrids, accounted for only 1.9 percent of all passenger vehicle fires in Sweden annually, with the majority of vehicle fires involving gas- and diesel-powered cars*

*Roughly, in that case, gas-powered cars are 51 times more likely to catch fire than EVs. Yes, some of this has to do with the fact that electric cars on the road are often newer than some of their internal-combustion engine-powered counterparts, since most EVs have been on the road for the most part since 2012*.


Funny how closely that tracks the "questionable " Autoinsurance EZ numbers

The ICE in a hybrid is not working as hard, or expected to be as flexible as one in a straight ICE car, so the demands on it are lower and simpler, and as a result it runs more efficiently than an ICE working alone. So trying to use a hybrid engine as an example of ICE efficiency just makes you look ignorant. I don't know how to make that basic and critical point any more simple for you.

harrisonpatm said:

In addition:


The "several others" that you're referring to are almost always going to be referencing the AutoInsuranceEZ report, and little or nothing else cited. Because it sounds good, of course that's what people want to hear, "EVs are several times less likely to catch fire than gas cars," but confirmation bias goes both ways.

We also are not saying that EV's are more likely to catch fire. What we are saying is, there's far far too many variables to make such a generic blanket statement like one type of car catches fire more often than the other.

Click to expand...

*Sweden, who saw mass adoption of EVs, now shows that about 40% of the cars on their roads are BEVs, or Battery Electric Vehicles, and has more knowledge and data about EVs than the U.S. As an example, in Sweden, between 2018 and 2022, only 29 EVs and 52 hybrids were reported to have caught fire. On average, battery-powered vehicles, including EVs and hybrids, accounted for only 1.9 percent of all passenger vehicle fires in Sweden annually, with the majority of vehicle fires involving gas- and diesel-powered cars*

*Roughly, in that case, gas-powered cars are 51 times more likely to catch fire than EVs. Yes, some of this has to do with the fact that electric cars on the road are often newer than some of their internal-combustion engine-powered counterparts, since most EVs have been on the road for the most part since 2012*.


Funny how closely that tracks the "questionable " Autoinsurance EZ numbers

neptronix said:

I dunno about that.

An extra small motor, battery, and controller replaces 20-33% of the engine's displacement.
With that reduction, you also see:
- smaller muffler
- smaller catalytic convertors ( these are expensive and involve rare earths )
- smaller oil capacity
- smaller gas tank
- smaller brakes

Click to expand...

The fact that the automotive industry pushes more and more gigantic cars should tell you that production cost doesn't increase proportionally with increase in component size. Shopping for consumable parts for a commercial truck versus a consumer hybrid should tell you that as well. Pounds of steel are not the measure of a vehicle's resource footprint. They are only directly related to its per-mile energy consumption.

There is no version of a hybrid that doesn't cost more in resources to make and maintain than either an equivalent ICE vehicle or an equivalent BEV. It always combines the shortcomings and externalities of both.

classicalgas said:

*Sweden, who saw mass adoption of EVs, now shows that about 40% of the cars on their roads are BEVs, or Battery Electric Vehicles, and has more knowledge and data about EVs than the U.S. As an example, in Sweden, between 2018 and 2022, only 29 EVs and 52 hybrids were reported to have caught fire. On average, battery-powered vehicles, including EVs and hybrids, accounted for only 1.9 percent of all passenger vehicle fires in Sweden annually, with the majority of vehicle fires involving gas- and diesel-powered cars*

*Roughly, in that case, gas-powered cars are 51 times more likely to catch fire than EVs. Yes, some of this has to do with the fact that electric cars on the road are often newer than some of their internal-combustion engine-powered counterparts, since most EVs have been on the road for the most part since 2012*.


Funny how closely that tracks the "questionable " Autoinsurance EZ numbers

Click to expand...

Ok


That's the swedish study. Table 1 counts all the cars on the road per year, divided by drivetrain. In 2023, electric made up 291,678. Hybrid made up 463,093. Total number of cars was 4,977,163 (sorry, it's a pdf, really hard to copy and paste).

classicalgas said:

*Sweden, who saw mass adoption of EVs, now shows that about 40% of the cars on their roads are BEV

Click to expand...

Anyway, 463,093/4,997,163 is 9.2%, not 40%. And that's just the most recent year. In 2018, we have only 16,664 EVs per 4,870,783 total cars in Sweden, or 0.34%. So yeah, the data is indeed "questionable." And even if it wasn't, one country does not a rule make.

Your quote was from electrifynews.com. So I can imagine where their bias might lie, but also, they don't link any of their sources. But here's some more articles that do.


"In Norway, which has the world’s highest proportion of electric car sales, there are between four and five times more fires in petrol and diesel cars, according to the directorate for social security and emergency preparedness. The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency this year found that there were 3.8 fires per 100,000 electric or hybrid cars in 2022, compared with 68 fires per 100,000 cars when taking all fuel types into account. However, the latter figures include arson, making comparisons tricky."

Click that link, you get a "page not found" in Swedish.



"A report in May 2023 by the Swedish Contingencies Agency, found vehicles powered by ICE were twenty times more likely to catch fire than EVs in Sweden."

Click that link, you get a "page not found" in Swedish.



"According to the MSB's report, described by Warp News, 0.004% of all-electric and plug-in hybrid cars in Sweden caught fire in 2022, totaling 24 incidents."

Click that link, you get a "page not found" in Swedish.


Here's the only one that links the PDF of the study, which I linked above, but here it is again: https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/29438.pdf

Let me google translate from the PDF of the report:

"Approximately 4,800 events have been analyzed and categorized, and among them, 491 fires in electric or electric/hybrid vehicles and electric means of transport have been identified."


491 is a lot more than "only 29 EVs and 52 hybrids were reported to have caught fire" from the electrifynews.com article you quoted. So basically, the articles you're reading aren't even accurately reporting the report they're reporting on...

This is why I say confirmation bias. You read what you want to read, then you stop reading after you've made up your mind. It's okay, everybody does it.

For the record, again, I am not saying that one type of car is safer than the other. I'm saying, we don't know, there's too many variables, don't make blanket statments. Give us your opinions and say their opinions, that's fine, don't pass it off as fact and get upset when people disagree with your worldview.

Well, like i said.
If you don't have a plug, a hybrid is a great way to leverage electric efficiency at a lower cost of entry.
A prius will use 60% of the gasoline over it's life vs a typical midsize car. That's substantial.

Whether a EV is better or not is a moot point if you don't have a plug.

One last thing. From the Swedish report again:

"Approximately 4,800 events have been analyzed and categorized, and among them, 491 fires in electric or electric/hybrid vehicles and electric means of transport have been identified."
491/4800 = 10.2%. And from my post above, in 2023, 9.2% of all cars in Sweden are electric or electric/hybrid. So no, there isn't a case to be made for either side. Which the Swedish report itself admits!:
"Due to limitations in the quality and scope of the data and the way the selection has been made and analysed, the results do not constitute statistics in the sense that they are systematically collected data on all fires that have occurred during the period with electric or electric/hybrid vehicles and electric transport means. For example, there may be some events that were not found in the free text search, for example if the author of the incident report was not aware of or missed that it was an electric or electric/hybrid vehicle or electric transport means. Furthermore, the descriptions of how the battery has affected the accident course are of varying scope/level of detail."

Tl;dr = we just don't know for sure.