Will Robocars vastly increase battery life?

We know electric cars are getting better and likely to get popular even when driven by humans. Tesla, at its core, is a battery technology company as much as it's a car company, and it is sometimes joked that the $85,000 Telsa with a $40,000 battery is like buying a battery with a car wrapped around it. (It's also said that it's a computer with a car wrapped around it, but that's a better description of a robocar.) (Update: Since this article was written, the cost of the Tesla battery has dropped to closer to $20,000.)


  • Discharging too close to empty
  • Getting too warm while discharging


Humans will drive as humans want to drive, and it's hard to change that. They will accelerate for both fun and to get ahead of other cars. They will take mixes of short trips and long trips. They don't know how long their trips are and demand a flexible vehicle always ready for anything.

Electric robotaxis change that game. They will drive predictably, rarely ever demanding quick acceleration. A driver likes zippy fun, a passenger wants a gentle ride. They can go even further, and set their driving pattern based on the temperature of their batteries. Are we making the batteries too warm? Then "cool off," literally. This applies both to fast starts and also slowing down. Regenerative braking conserves energy and increases range, but doing it too hard heats the batteries. Start slowing down sooner -- especially if you have data on what traffic lights and traffic are doing and it can make a big difference.


  • As I've noted before, battery swap doesn't work well for humans, but robots don't mind making an appointment or driving out of their way for a swap. This makes it easy to use batteries only in the sweet spot, and to charge them only at night on cheap power.

Robotaxis don't mind the loss of range all that much

As a battery ages, its capacity drops. Humans hate that -- having bought a car with a 100 mile range they won't accept it can now only do 60. For a human, that means time to replace the battery. For a robotaxi, that just means you have a shorter range, and you don't get sent on long range trips. Or you may decide that while before, you only charged to 60% to get maximum battery life, now you charge more, knowing it will eat the remaining life, but getting the most out of the battery.

Of course, as the range drops, now you run into another problem. You're carrying around the extra weight of battery for half the range, and it's costing you energy to do that, especially in an ultralight car where the battery is the biggest component of the weight. (This also enters into the math of whether it makes sense to charge only to 60%.) Eventually the time comes that the battery is not practical. This is the time to sell it. Tesla and others are working to produce a home and grid storage market for used car batteries. In those applications, the weight doesn't matter, just the cost for the remaining lifetime watt-hours. You care about the capacity, but you pay a market price for it.


Typical predictions for Lithium-Ion run from 500 to 1,000 cycles. Tesla's techniques seem to be beating that. With robotaxis, who knows just how many lifetime kwh we'll be able to get out of these batteries, or perhaps even other chemistries. Turns out that human drivers like a chemistry that keeps its life as long as possible then falls off a cliff. Slow decline is harder to sell -- but slow decline chemistries, like Lithium Iron Phosphate and others could make more sense for the robots that don't care.

Grid storage?

It's often suggested that electric cars could be used as grid storage. Problem is, with car batteries today, it costs around 15 cents to put a kwh into a battery and get it out. That means to be grid storage, you need to have the spot price on the grid be the price you bought at, plus 15 cents, plus a margin to make it worth this. Night power can get as low as 6 cents, so this does happen, but not as much as one might hope. The problem is that the grid's peak demand is around 4 to 7pm, which is also a peak time for driving. That's the last time most car owners will want to drain off their batteries to make a bit of money on the power. You will only do that if you know you won't be using the car. For a robotaxi fleet, that might be the case. Of course, selling power to the grid you will do it only at a rate that does not harm your battery or warm it up too much.

When the grid gets to a super peak, the price can really spike to attractive numbers. That's because building extra power plant capacity just for those rare days is expensive, and so almost any price is better. Here we could talk about cars as storage, when we know their batteries are not going to be used. That's even more true of batteries sitting in a battery swap facility.


Great post, and very insightful. I particularly enjoy how spot on you are on the difference in behaviour between the "human driver" and the "robot driver" and the resulting impact in technology and outcome resulting from difference in behaviour.

Just as massive containerships are owned and operated by a large entity (e.g. Maersk, Hapag Lloyd) and Burlington locomotives pull tank cars owned by petrochemical companies, I predict a bifurcation in personal transportation into large entities owning a fleet of what you describe as "Robotaxis" (used but not owned by private individuals, and paid on a per-trip basis) and individuals owning the "container"...what I call "transportation compartments". You as an individual would own a personal compartment, collapsible to a small footprint the same as a camping cup or an accordion bellows, and you would only sit in a seat customized for you, surrounded by all your personal "sound systems", etc. which would plug into power provided by the "carrier/powerplant/platform". As you well know, most automobiles sit stationary 97% of the time. It becomes uneconomical to own elaborate electronics, servos, motors, updated batteries, etc. when all you wish to do is get from home to work/fun. Whether you were in a messy compartment filled with potato chip crumbs, or a sparkling, sanitized, leather-encrusted bejeweled couch, would all be up to your personal choice, every time. All you would summon would be your hardware. And the footprint of your collapsed travel compartment (30 cm x 120cm) would be smaller than modern vehicle parking by 90x. You could own several compartments, including a "bucket" sportscar style, with the breeze in your face, if you wished! The power unit, once it picked you up, transported you, then dropped you off, would then be free to transport other objects/people, including cases of beer to stores, dry cleaning to homes, lumber to job sites (two-four units working cooperatively to carry outsized loads).

while I have written about the idea of having a small locker that can be stored in a depot and easily picked up and dropped off by cars that are about to give you a ride, even that would take some doing to get working, and you would not have this locker of stuff with you on any spur-of-the-moment trips, only planned ones, and worse, if you take a spur-of-the-moment trip one way, you can't easily have the locker for the return trip even if it's planned without shipping it -- which is doable but more work.

So I doubt we could scale it up. We are already carrying around all of our digital data and connectivity in a phone, so the car doesn't need anything in the way of electronics except basic peripherals -- sound system (if you don't just use headphones), screen, possibly keyboard/mouse though there are security issues with doing that.

And yes, it means you have to clean the car when done, or accept the cost of the car going off to a "car wash" where they clean it if you left it a mess. That cost would be not just the cleaning fee but some travel and downtime for the car. We might pay that -- we do it for rental cars which are cleaned after we use them.

So what's left is your "stuff." And that is better in a small locker than in a whole compartment.

The compartment is neat, but the time required to load and unload it at a suitable location, and the fact that you can't have it if you don't plan your trip well in advance with the compartment waiting near you are probably dealbreakers.

I don't understand how a "small locker in a depot" would be useful. I also don't understand where the idea of "load and unload it at a suitable location" fits...if you own it, as you do your present-day automobile, would you not treat it in the same manner? That is, clean your TC when you spill on it, or leave a water bottle inside, if it still has water to drink within it. Unlike a rental car, which you don't "own", bumper to bumper, if you own the TC, you clean it, you own it, you decide if you need windows or not, to look outside, you decide the interior (within limits)...all extremely individualized as your shoes. You don't "rent shoes" do you? Use them, then have them cleaned so someone else can use them?

As opposed to a "small locker at a depot", your own personal TC can return home, with your excess, without you!

Here, the collapsible cup:

I will send you a photo of the model of my transport compartment, collapsed, and expanded.

The idea of the "stuff locker" (described in some of my original articles from the prior decade) is largely the same as the compartment you talk about, but it's just a small locker, not a whole compartment, so it's much more portable and easy to store. The main advantages of a compartment, as I see it, are that you get to choose the style of seating, and you don't have to worry about leaving it clean and undamaged. In addition, you don't have to get the stuff out that you want out, such as keyboard or mouse.

That's nice but it comes with a large cost -- the compartment is itself much larger and much more expensive than a box, and takes more time to remove or insert, and more space to store it. It also requires a car that is specially adapted for the compartment, which seriously reduces the number of cars that might be available to you where you could use it. That one is the actual deal-breaker, I fear -- cars will not be standardized nor should they be standardized, not for decades. We want a period with freedom of design and lots of innovation and competition. While it would be nice if the car that is picking you up has a slot meant for your locker, the locker can be put in almost any car.

If you're in a hurry, you will of course get neither your locker nor your compartment, you just want the first car that can come to you.

With modest advance notice, there is time for the car to go pickup your locker, but may not be time to pick up a compartment, particularly because only cars ready for the compartment can go get it. So fairly often you will be electing to travel without the compartment.

Once you start a trip without the compartment or locker, you don't have it until you get back to where you left it.

Before any of this happens, I think we'll switch to the style New Yorkers use, which is the backpack, but we'll increase the number of in-building lockers in which to store your backpack yourself.

Interesting, as computers become more powerful also it will decrease consumption, although at this point some form of continuous recharge function may come in the end.

Add new comment