Unfortunately I find this article all too believable. And it clearly illustrates the real problem that the we here and elsewhere have with the "prosperity mindset" that we developed in the 50's and 60's when the US was the leading economic and captial generating engine of the world.  Consumption became king and business like our auto companies were built around a need for continuous increasing growth in sales numbers. And we were successful; initially, first a car in every US home, then one for everyone in the world with a house and then two in every US home, etc. The companies, the stock market and, yes,we, the citizens became addicted to this need for growth. So it became a new car every three or four years.

Here in the US, we could afford this new addiction to a new car every few years.  At least we could in the good old days of the 1950's,60's ,70's and even the 80's but problems began to appear. The economic discussion belongs elsewhere but this article suggests that some people think that we will return to those days. I think it would be a great mistake if we did so and I do not think that we will though the big companies will try just because of momentum.

Here is why we will not go back to this model:

1. Building a new car from scratch or even from recycled materials requires more energy than it will probably use in its lifetime.
2. Energy will continue to be a valuable commodity in the near term
3. US citizens, the key consumer engine of the world, will not have the cash or credit available to purchase a new car every three or four years
4. New modular designs like the GM "skateboard" will allow customers to change the look and feel of their vehicles at much less cost than purchasing a new vehicle. 
5.  I hope a new 'grassroots' mom & pop industry of electrical hack shops will arise to offer modifications and upgrades of existing vehicles as well as the new generation of EV's soon to come from the big companies

One of the cars is going to take about 3 to 5 kilowatts of power to run a heating/ cooling system at full blast, so after 4 or so hours of A/C you will use about 15 kwhs.  That is pretty significant, especially with electric cars that have a range of only 120 miles.  The same is true with ICE cars.  You are going down the highway doing 35 mpg, then you turn on the A/C and all of the sudden you are doing 30 mpg.  So the article points out a something that we will all have to deal with until we get some higher density batteries.

As Mr. Kennington is saying: the replacement of obsolete battery packs is where the money is.  No wonder automotive companies are tightening their relationships with the battery sector (via JVs or acquisitions)...

The problem of cooling and heating is a secondary problem. It can be solved easily by passive cooling (www.wt-ewa.com) and independent heating (www.webasto.de/am/de/am_auto_heaters.html) . The real first problem is: Why, for heaven's sake, they are still hammering on "concept cars", when the EV is relatively simple (see also EV conversions link on this site)?

The answer is: the change of paradigm is painful for them. These all monumental assembly lines spiting heavy and costly relics of consumerism, should be downgraded to produce something simple as an electric lawn-mower? And not only that - the whole chain of business will break: spare parts, subcontractors, oil rafineries... They are not hammering on EV - it's solved long before (GM EV1) - they are hammering on sulution how to save the nice old business. But, this is lost struggle already - it will never be the same.

Renault in their ZE concept car seems to have got ahead of the game for heating and cooling, with reflective paint, thermos-flask like insulating panels and heat directed where it is most effective.

There are a lot of things that can be done beside increasing battery efficiency.

When oil was cheap there was no incentive to optimise for low power consumption.

I think the main market for EV parts will be new battery packs, not necessarily because the old one has failed but because better ones are available.

But believe me the OEMs are thinking about planned obsolescence, they always have.

The logical thing to do with EV's is to use fuel fired interior heaters, at least any that are used in areas with Colder Climates. It is typically six times more efficient to use a fuel powered heater than to idle a vehicle for heat. A Sedan will need about 2kw of heat to keep comfortably warm at around 0 degF. That's 16 hrs of heat from 1 gal of diesel burnt at 85% efficiency or 2 gal of Methanol burnt at 90% efficiency. Methanol of course being the 3rd cleanest burning fuel.

Laptops.. and desktops originally were NOT doorstops after 3 years. Originally, people upgraded hard drives, memory, graphics, etc, to keep the thing going for 5 or more years. Now, you can get a good laptop for much less, and the upgrade cycle does not make sense.

I'd expect the same with the electric cars. At $40k a pop, not many are going to buy a 3 year car. But, if I bought a VOLT next year, and in 2015, there's a battery upgrade that extends the electric only range to 80 miles, for a few thousand $$, I could go for that.

This idea of laptop cars is calling for a double answer. On one side, yes it is true that the present technology freeze will taw and a tsunami of innovations will come in, so a 2015 EV will be better then a 2012 EV. On the other side, there are already existing examples that seem to indicate that upgrades are at least as likely as full replacements. In aviation, new electronics means new cockpit equipment not a new 747. The B-52 bombers still have the same global shape as forty years ago but their equipments have been upgraded.

Conventional cars break down relatively fast, so upgrades don’t make much sense in comparison with replacement. But with an EV, upgrades can be a better option at least for while. Indeed there is no reason to change the wheels, the bodyframe, the led lights etc. It is enough to change the battery, perhaps some electronics but that’s about all. After maybe 15 years, you will be in for another car because of rust. And this is not forever since later, once the tech burst settles, the EV cars will likely see a better economic result from composite bodywork that are both lighter and longer lasting. In that case, it could be that EV cars start to become like houses and get passed from grandfather to grandchildren. Even more so if strategic parts like suspension systems can be done in more expensive materials like titanium or beryllium. No one would do that on a throw away car but it is another story for a generations lasting car. This kind of thinking can already be witnessed for buildings; made of wood when it must last a few decades, made of bricks or stones when it must last a few generations or a few centuries.

I think that the Heating and Cooling aspect of the article is an aside to the main principle - Automotive OEM's are going to have to develop a technology turn around time much like the cell phone manufacturer's in order to be sustainable. And much like with cellphones, people will be keen to upgrade their cars to the latest, 'coolest', technology.

Can you remember the cellphones of 6 years ago?