Diesel Vehicles

[daveh_rav4]

Can anyone seriously be considering purchasing a diesel vehicle after all the news media output over the last couple of days.... banning diesels from city centers, restrictions to diesels on certain highly polluted roads and surcharges for diesels entering certain city areas!.  All petrol and diesel vehicles will be banned from new sale in the UK by 2040...  looks like the internal combustion engine is finally coming to an end!

What will Jeremy Clarkson be road testing in future... milk floats and warehouse electric trollys LOL

[mickburkesnr]

It'll never happen. They can't even work out how they're going to meet current energy demand by 2030 let alone work out how they're going to ban cars, make up the deficit through loss of road tax and VAT on petrol.

Just keep smoking the asbestos cigarettes and chow down on the chlorine chicken. We'll be alright.

[fordulike]

The trouble with current electric vehicles is that they are either too expensive, VW e-up, Nissan LEAF, or too impractical, Renault Twizy.

As a builder and rider of electric bikes myself, I think that Battery technology is a long way from being useful on cars. Although the impending ban on petrol and diesel cars, may spurn car manufacturers to invest heavily in improving current Battery limitations.

[njbrice]

I can't see them banning all those black cabs in London and all the buses,lorries and ambulances from the cities.

 

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

 

[FROSTYBALLS]

The ban won't affect hybrids or plug-in hybrids - just conventional petrol or diesel vehicles.

[mickburkesnr]

49 minutes ago, njbrice said:

I can't see them banning all those black cabs in London

I seem to recall that Boris Johnson, when Mayor, requested that Black Cabs became electric. Now Nissan and London Taxi International are about to release electrified cabs in the near future. LTI even let one loose on the Goodwood Hill Climb!

But the Battery technology is way off, and I don't think it'll ever get to the point we need it to be at for it to be viable. I'm putting my faith in Hydrogen cars, they're the realistic future of motoring.

[IanML]

My idea is a plug-in hybrid with hydrogen fueled drive.  Short journeys on (relatively) cheap Battery, and long ones on hydrogen, plus capturing braking energy in the Battery.

Could be either an IC engine burning hydrogen, or a fuel cell.

[njbrice]

Continental have developed a new system that reduces NOx in Diesels by 60% that's impressive and if implemented by the manufacturers will give diesel a new lease of life,well until 2040. Hydrogen or Electric will prevail. I wonder what BP,Shell etc will be doing in 25yrs time

 

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

 

 

[IanML]

Selling liquid H2, I hope.

[Heidfirst]

8 hours ago, daveh_rav4 said:

Can anyone seriously be considering purchasing a diesel vehicle after all the news media output over the last couple of days.... banning diesels from city centers, restrictions to diesels on certain highly polluted roads and surcharges for diesels entering certain city areas!. 

Yes, they can be because Euro 6 diesels are clean (don't attract extra charges in city centres) & for certain things diesels are still the best option.

[IanML]

Current diesels are too unreliable because of all the anti-pollution gubbins.  Nothing to suggest the Euro6 versions will be any better.

[daveh_rav4]

12 hours ago, Heidfirst said:

Yes, they can be because Euro 6 diesels are clean (don't attract extra charges in city centres) & for certain things diesels are still the best option.

Diesel, and to a lesser extent petrol engines have already done the damage pollution wise. Our inner city air is becoming un-breathable with all the health and respiratory issues related to pollution.  Obviously diesel engines are not the soul culprit, but politicians are getting pressured to find an answer (and rightly so) and when politicians are looking for a scape-goat... the word diesel equals toxic!  You can claim all you want for modern diesel emissions... unfortunately (or fortunately) politically diesels are damned!  As some have suggested, perhaps hydrogen fuel may be a way forward?

[Cyker]

The problem with hydrogen is it isn't a *fuel* - There is no natural source of hydrogen we have ready access too.

Maybe if one day all nations and factions can put aside their differences and unite enough to take to the stars we could fly to Jupiter and Saturn to mine it with fancy space gas extractors, but down here on Earth the only way to generate large amounts of hydrogen is through electrolysis - which requires a huge amount of electricity - or chemical processes which are probably worse for the environment in the long term than burning fossil fuels.

Both of these processes consume *far* more energy extracting hydrogen than you'd get back from the hydrogen 'fuel'.

So really, it's only useful as a way to 'store' electricity because batteries suck.

But this only makes sense if the range and/or power of a hydrogen-powered car is loads more than a battery-powered car, and it just isn't right now.


The way this whole war on diesel is being done really narks me off - Why don't they incentivise petrols and hybrids they way they did diesels? We ALL knew diesels are worse for the environment, or at least air quality, than petrol, but the higher fuel efficiency, mpg and tax incentives, plus the lower CO2, are what persuaded me and, I suspect, many others to change.

Why are we not seeing any of that to encourage take up instead of sudden bans and penalizing toll taxes? I know I'm not going to do any major change until things settle... it wouldn't surprise me if they started adding a surcharge to electric cars if the take up becomes high due to lost car tax revenue and the collapse of the grid!

I find it ironic their whole push for diesel was to lower CO2 emissions - Now that that was successful, they can forget about it and now it seems they don't care how much CO2 your car produces judging by the new tax rules!

[Heidfirst]

5 hours ago, IanML said:

Current diesels are too unreliable because of all the anti-pollution gubbins.

They aren't if used (& maintained) in the appropriate manner for which they are best suited. If people are going to use them for 1/2 mile trips to the shops only ... 

But as  Daveh says all ICE are now politically on the chopping board. 

[FROSTYBALLS]

43 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

But as  Daveh says all ICE are now politically on the chopping board. 

No they aren't - as the new proposals don't apply to vehicles with hybrid or plug-in hybrid drivetrains, both of which have ICE's.

[Heidfirst]

OK, rephrased - all purely ICE cars (I haven't seen what, if anything,  they are proposing for buses, trucks etc. ...) are on the political chopping board.

Mind you, I see that they reckon that we will need another 10 power stations built to power all these electric cars. & that's before we mention local charging infrastructure. 

[IanML]

13 minutes ago, Heidfirst said:

OK, rephrased - all purely ICE cars (I haven't seen what, if anything,  they are proposing for buses, trucks etc. ...) are on the political chopping board.

Mind you, I see that they reckon that we will need another 10 power stations built to power all these electric cars. & that's before we mention local charging infrastructure. 

Again, it ain't necessarily so.  Hydrogen-fueled ICE is still a possibility, especially for the buses and trucks.  Unlike fossil-fueled ICE, the only exhaust product is water.   Of course, production of hydrogen would still require electricity, but that could well come from wind, tide and solar.

[Heidfirst]

2 hours ago, IanML said:

.   Of course, production of hydrogen would still require electricity, but that could well come from wind, tide and solar.

& currently hydrogen production  on a commercial scale requires a higher energy input to produce, transport etc. the hydrogen than burning the hydrogen produces ...

At least hydrogen has the advantage of being able to store energy produced  by wind etc. when energy production is high but user demand is low.

Mind you there are also people who say that over their whole lives energy output from wind turbines may not reach the amount of energy input required to produce & install them in the first place ...

[IanML]

9 hours ago, Heidfirst said:

Mind you there are also people who say that over their whole lives energy output from wind turbines may not reach the amount of energy input required to produce & install them in the first place ...

If true, that is unfortunate in the beginning of the "revolution", but once the preponderence of energy generation is "renewable", it would not matter as far as the environment is concerned.  The same applies to " currently hydrogen production  on a commercial scale requires a higher energy input to produce, transport etc. the hydrogen than burning the hydrogen produces".  

The remaining objections are due to cost, but the cost of not doing it is the planet.

[Heidfirst]

2 hours ago, IanML said:

If true, that is unfortunate in the beginning of the "revolution", but once the preponderence of energy generation is "renewable", it would not matter as far as the environment is concerned.  The same applies to " currently hydrogen production  on a commercial scale requires a higher energy input to produce, transport etc. the hydrogen than burning the hydrogen produces".  

The amount of energy usage with current technology is unlikely to dip much. Of course if there is a breakthrough in technology that may change but I doubt that there is going to be a big change in terms of mining/transporting/finishing the raw materials to manufacture & install the masts at least. The hope would be that we make turbines that have a higher % efficiency. & of course they have a limited life of ~20 years (& then need disposed of) so if that could be extended significantly that would help too.

I can't see how using more energy to mine/make/install/dispose them than they provide can't have a negative effect on the environment.

Similarly we need a breakthrough in Battery technology (& how we recycle/dispose of them) because the rare earth minerals currently used are limited in supply & mining them is definitely affecting the environment.

I have more faith in the car industry's ability to mass produce decent electric vehicles by 2040 than I have in the Government's ability to provide the necessary generation & distribution infrastructure by then ... Imo it's another narrow focussed political kneejerk reaction rather than looking at the whole scenario i.e. a replica of exactly what got us to where we are today ....

Of course they have 23 years to change/vary their minds but on past evidence that is as likely to be bad as good.

[FROSTYBALLS]

Toyota's solid state Battery may be a game changer -

https://www.forbes.com/sites/bertelschmitt/2017/07/25/ultrafast-charging-solid-state-ev-batteries-around-the-corner-toyota-confirms/#791283ae44bb

[FROSTYBALLS]

Also see http://blog.toyota.co.uk/toyota-alternative-fuel-future

https://www.wired.com/2017/04/toyotas-still-serious-hydrogen-built-semi-prove/

[Mark O]

You just know what they are softening us up for.....even more tax to pay for the "privilege" of driving those nasty, polluting internal combustion engines of course.....The fact that electric vehicles arguably present a greater environmental threat - how the extra electrical energy required is generated, infrastructure required, use of precious metals in electric motors, disposal of nasty lithium batteries, etc. completely eludes HMG - possibly deliberately -  and unfortunately, many of the folk that vote for them. The mantra is electric good, ICE bad, and therefore presents a great excuse for HMG to tax all who drive ICEs as they will have the mandate from thicko Joe Public who knows no better, believes the hype, and simply falls into line unquestioningly.        

[IanML]

Actually, I don't think there is any truth in the electric motors hype, and in 5 years time, no one will be using lithium batteries (see links in posts above).  The environmental threat of electric vehicles is being puffed up by - you guessed it - the American oil lobby.

[Mark O]

4 minutes ago, IanML said:

Actually, I don't think there is any truth in the electric motors hype, and in 5 years time, no one will be using lithium batteries (see links in posts above).  The environmental threat of electric vehicles is being puffed up by - you guessed it - the American oil lobby.

It is not so much the electric vehicles themselves - though if you have ever taken one apart you will perhaps understand better -  it is everything else required to make them a viable means of mass transportation. As aforesaid, I think the issue is something of a red herring in any event, and is simply being used as a vehicle (literally) with which to tax us even more.