Electric vehicles

[Jacob]

One thing the Covid saga has taught me is that, who controls the statistics supplies the numbers, so you can quote statistics all day on any subject and I would still look out of the window to see if it is raining. Yes, I had the first three jabs because at that stage I believed that I was protecting others, only to find that was a lie as transmission had not been tested.

Do you have evidence that it was a lie? Isn't it more likely that transmission was a reasonable working assumption, bearing in mind that it was clearly very contagious. Or do you think that the virus would stop with you and not be passed on? That really would require proof!

Proof of all this is Jacob trawling the internet to find staistics that support his argument on almost any subject.

Better to make an effort to find out the facts rather than just relying on your own idle prejudices or the Daily Mail.
You should try it yourself you might be surprised!

 

[MikeJhn]

The only thing that would surprise me is if Jacob agreed with someone instead of doing his usual Harry Enfield comedy "Only Me" impression, "You don't what to do it like that" always very funny.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Currently the most expensive chargers in the UK run at ~70-80p kWh - around 20-25p per mile.

Fuel in motorway services typically the most expensive is ~175p per litre (£7.80 per gallon) - around 20-25p per mile.

Based on current pricing and tax policies (which could change at any time) the worst case is that RV fuel costs are similar to ICE.

The plausible best case for EV is zero fuel cost if fed by PV installation at home. More likely if home charging using overnight rates of below 10p kWh the rate per mile will be ~3p.

All users vary - but averagely a car travels 9000 pa - 180 miles per week. Much of this will be daily short journeys (commute, school run, shops). A typical mid range EV will need recharging 1 or 2 times a week.

The focus on high cost motorway public fast chargers is completely disproportionate - many, possibly most EV drivers will never or very infrequently use them.

 

[John Brown]

John Brown, you might but I don't and I suspect many others don't.
All of this discusion about what powers vehicles is pointless. Any UK government decides its budget (and then overspends) and taxes the working people to fund it. If they loose one cash cow (motoring), they will tax whatever replaces it. So EV might bask in their cheap charging at the moment but no government of whatever colour will allow that to continue. While I am at my rant, The argument that you can dismiss company car drivers charging at expensive chargers "as the business pays" is absolutely wrong. No business pays any taxes, they COLLECT taxes from their customers and that is built into the selling price.

Only pointless if you don't believe that EVs can be greener, or if you don't believe being greener is a worthwhile goal.
Now I have to get back to those cats..

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Better to make an effort to find out the facts rather than just relying on your own idle prejudices or the Daily Mail.
You should try it yourself you might be surprised!

Agent Cob, The Gruinard, Novara etc. of course have no prejudices.

 

[Jacob]

Agent Cob, The Gruinard, Novara etc. of course have no prejudices.

They probably have opinions and points of view different from your own.. You shouldn't assume that anything you don't understand, or is contrary to the Daily Mail, is just prejudice or bias.
You will misunderstand a lot of things if you choose idly to be misinformed.
Hope that helps!

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Speak for yourself.

 

[Agent_zed]

Only pointless if you don't believe that EVs can be greener, or if you don't believe being greener is a worthwhile goal.
Now I have to get back to those cats..

I am pro being greener but I am not convinced that the current offering of EVs is actually green. They should be small light and economical, not the huge executive offerings that require the most amount of materials possible. Mining enough materials to replace all of the current cars with a new EV car with a huge battery is not green.

Companies dont' want you to do it but a much better way is to convert ICE cars to EV. Saving the need to create 80% of the car is far more green. But companies want to sell you a shiny new car instead.

 

[worn thumbs]

Companies dont' want you to do it but a much better way is to convert ICE cars to EV. Saving the need to create 80% of the car is far more green. But companies want to sell you a shiny new car instead.

Almost true,they actually want to get you signed up to their finance "package".

 

[Jacob]

I am pro being greener but I am not convinced that the current offering of EVs is actually green. They should be small light and economical, not the huge executive offerings that require the most amount of materials possible. Mining enough materials to replace all of the current cars with a new EV car with a huge battery is not green.

Companies dont' want you to do it but a much better way is to convert ICE cars to EV. Saving the need to create 80% of the car is far more green. But companies want to sell you a shiny new car instead.

They just want everybody to carry on buying their obsolescent, shiny, environmentally destructive, boy's toys, for as long as they can get away with it. Time is running out!

 

[Agent_zed]

Almost true,they actually want to get you signed up to their finance "package".

yeah everything seems to be on finance these days or some subscription. I almost fell off my chair when I read about BMW charging a subscription to be allowed to use the heated seats in your own car!! It would seem though they have abandoned that plan though after some backlash.

 

[Agent_zed]

They just want everybody to carry on buying their obsolescent, shiny, environmentally destructive, boy's toys, for as long as they can get away with it. Time is running out!

I'd have to disagree with the term 'boy's toys' as a significant amount of men and women have cars. Although it is probably true to say men tend to drive bigger cars generally speaking.

 

[trvlr]

I haven’t ploughed my way through the humongous pages of posts on this one, but…

A wee observation…. Whenever komissar Khan talks about ulez, the first thing he mentions is just how much money he’s taken in that month. Regardless of the whys, wherefores etc., or original reasons for the Livingstone inspired congestion charge, ulez is seen as a money spinner… And as for congestion in central London, it‘s not that much improved; especially around Hyde Park corner, Victoria, Westminster, Trafalgar Sq. and Oxford St/ Tottenham Ct. Rd., Bayswater through to Shepherds Bush/White City, Hammersmith and Chiswick and points west. Air quality may/may not have improved as much as he and his supporters claim. If one gets across some of the stats which appear from time to time in various online and print sources there is a lot of contradictory material there; depending on the biases/prejudices of those researchers and their conclusions.

The infrastructure for EV is woefully inadequate and regardless of promises various is likely to be so for a long time; and for the huge numbers of possible EV owners who do not have a driveway, may also be in a tower block… that is unlikely to improve for a very long time. And out in rural areas it will likely be a very long time before they get a decent network of reasonably priced charging points, or grid capacity to support them and those on domestic properties.

The proliferation of npr cameras currently installed in Greater London for ulez will inevitably be transformed into another money spinner - pay per mile - for KK if he‘s still around as mayor (hopefully not…) or his supporters. He promised to observe the views of the various boroughs and abide by them when proposing the expansion, and then gave them the equivalent of two (or is it now a one) finger salute, went ahead regardless.

The technologies which ought to be developed more fully are hydrogen powered vehicles, and also fuel cell systems. Both exist but lack proper funding for wider expansion.

 

[Jacob]

.......

The proliferation of npr cameras currently installed in Greater London for ulez will inevitably be transformed into another money spinner - pay per mile -

Good idea these money spinners. The user pays. The more the better. Also slower/safer traffic, cleaner air and money to reinvest in road infrastructure. Wins all round!

The technologies which ought to be developed more fully are hydrogen powered vehicles, and also fuel cell systems. Both exist but lack proper funding for wider expansion.

Hydrogen and ethanol are good for ICE but the technology missing is the electricity generation needed to produce them sustainably. State investment required - the scale is well beyond private enterprise. A few more speed cameras etc could raise a bit of cash! Or higher fuel taxes all round, now long overdue.

 

[sploo]

I am pro being greener but I am not convinced that the current offering of EVs is actually green. They should be small light and economical, not the huge executive offerings that require the most amount of materials possible. Mining enough materials to replace all of the current cars with a new EV car with a huge battery is not green.

Companies dont' want you to do it but a much better way is to convert ICE cars to EV. Saving the need to create 80% of the car is far more green. But companies want to sell you a shiny new car instead.

l suspect that a major issue here is battery technology. In order to be able to deliver sufficient current you need a have multiple cells working in parallel; so whilst I'd much prefer a 1300kg EV with 300hp and a range of 200 miles (vs a 2600kg EV with 600hp and a range of 400 miles) it doesn't out that way.

For the same reason, EV conversions - whilst certainly possible - are rarely particularly efficient in terms of the use of the space in the chassis. If you look at EV platforms they have significantly different layouts to CE cars (e.g. wide flat regions of batteries under the seats).

In time, as battery tech improves (and maybe also the efficiency of super capacitors), I've no doubt that a not-that-heavy and not-that-expensive EV will be feasible. Not least because an electric motor (and required ancillaries) is so much simpler than an ICE powerplant (with its required ancillaries).

 

[worn thumbs]

yeah everything seems to be on finance these days or some subscription. I almost fell off my chair when I read about BMW charging a subscription to be allowed to use the heated seats in your own car!! It would seem though they have abandoned that plan though after some backlash.

Ford have a different slant Ford wants to be able to shut down your air conditioner and radio if you miss a car payment—and the car could even drive away on its own .If anybody can be bothered to follow the link,it explains that Ford have patented a technology to remotely disable some features of a car if a finance payment is missed.I suppose the reason for the patent is to licence the technology to other car companies.Good wheeze that,getting the opposition to give you money.

 

[sploo]

The technologies which ought to be developed more fully are hydrogen powered vehicles, and also fuel cell systems. Both exist but lack proper funding for wider expansion.

The problem is that you've got to make the hydrogen fuel; which requires electricity. And any conversion process is never 100% efficient. Then once you've made the fuel you need to transport and store it for nationwide availability. Overall then, it doesn't appear to me to make a better case for itself than EVs.

Fully synthetic/carbon neutral fuels that can be transported, stored, and used as a direct replacement for petrol might be a more realistic alternative.

 

[Jacob]

The problem is that you've got to make the hydrogen fuel; which requires electricity. And any conversion process is never 100% efficient. Then once you've made the fuel you need to transport and store it for nationwide availability.

We already have nationwide transport in the form of fuel tankers

Overall then, it doesn't appear to me to make a better case for itself than EVs.

No batteries for a start!

Fully synthetic/carbon neutral fuels that can be transported, stored, and used as a direct replacement for petrol might be a more realistic alternative.

In theory sustainable electricity generation could be a lot cheaper, then ethanol becomes a good option.

 

[sploo]

We already have nationwide transport in the form of fuel tankers

I don't think you can transport liquid hydrogen in a tanker designed for gasoline.

 

[Jacob]

I don't think you can transport liquid hydrogen in a tanker designed for gasoline.

Just needs a new tank. The vehicles, the drivers and the infrastructure is already in place