power limited, we have sized the battery to be able to indefinitely sustain a 60 mph climb on a 6
percent grade, and provided for peak acceleration power capability to be sustained for two
minutes.
All of these estimates are based on a set of assumed performance levels and OTA’s best guesses
about future battery costs and component efficiencies. Ongoing research programs, such as the
USABC, have as their goals improving EV component costs and efficiencies to values below
OTA’s values, and success at achieving these clearly would impact EV price and performance.
Moreover, some EV advocates have concluded that vehicle purchasers can be convinced to
purchase vehicles with generally lower performance than current vehicles, in particular with lower
range. To examine the implications of R&D success and shifts in vehicle purchasing behavior, we
estimated the effects of battery cost reductions, performance reductions, range reductions, and
component efficiency changes on the 2005 lead acid-battery-powered, intermediate-size EV.
Range reductions have a very large effect on vehicle cost and battery requirements; reducing the
range to 50 miles (real) reduces EV incremental price to $3,170 (from about $11,000), and
reduces battery size to less than 40 percent the size required for a range of 80 miles. Reducing
performance levels (with a range of 50 miles) provides only modest reductions in battery weight,
but reducing motor and controller costs reduces incremental price to $2,130. If battery costs fall
to $100 per kWh from $150, vehicle incremental price is reduced to $960, and including the
maximum level of component efficiency of motor/controllers and drivetrain reduces vehicle
incremental price to $410. Hence, it is theoretically possible to build a reduced range EV for a
very low incremental price in 2005, if the most optimistic assumptions were used in all
facets of the analysis. Even if range were kept at 80 miles, incremental price would be $4,125, if
very optimistic assumptions regarding performance, component efficiency and battery cost were
used. These findings are summarized in table 4-10, but it is emphasized that the base attributes
represent what OTA believes to be the most likely outcome of current R&D trends.
OTA’s analysis of EV performance and costs shows that the following four factors have
significant influence on the analysis results.llllRange. Vehicle weight and costs increase nonlinearly with range increases.Battery specifications. The usable specific energy and power strongly affect battery size for a given
range and performance level. Power requirements can set the minimum size for a battery in many
applications.Performance requirements. Relaxing the continuous and peak performance requirement has only a small
effect on battery and motor requirements, where batteries are sized for range, but can have a large effect,
if batteries are power limited.Component efficiency. Assumptions regarding the overall efficiency of the drivetrain (including motors,
power controllers, and gears) as well as the battery charge/discharge efficiency can affect the results,
with very optimistic assessments reducing casts by as much as 30 percent over the median estimates.In summary, the analysis finds that in 2005, mid-size EVs with a range of 80 to 100 miles
and reasonable performance would be priced about $11,000 more than an equivalent