Electric cars a white elephant ?

[Cyker]

35 minutes ago, Louie said:

...When did you last arrive at a petrol station just to discover that there was no available pump that worked...

Ironically I went to my Abridge Shell to refuel yesterday (145p/L!!!  ) but there were about 20 cars queued out of the station on the road ahead of me (The people in that village can not be happy with this...). 5-10 minutes later I was at the pump, only to discover they'd only got diesel and V-Power left, the 145p/L normal petrol had run out!  

So I drove home.

I probably won't try to refuel again until the weekend now... (Still got 98 miles of range left according to the GOM  )

 

 

[Derek.w]

Generating electric is already a problem thats why we building a new neclear reactor and bringing electric across from France.

Why dont we build water wheels generators rivers run 24/7 windpower/solar power is intermittent.

[Yugguy1970]

11 hours ago, Cyker said:

Ironically I went to my Abridge Shell to refuel yesterday (145p/L!!!  ) but there were about 20 cars queued out of the station on the road ahead of me (The people in that village can not be happy with this...). 5-10 minutes later I was at the pump, only to discover they'd only got diesel and V-Power left, the 145p/L normal petrol had run out!  

So I drove home.

I probably won't try to refuel again until the weekend now... (Still got 98 miles of range left according to the GOM  )

 

 

This is one area the petrol advocates conveniently forget.

Yes fuel is normally and usually easy to get, but it soon all goes to pot when there are tanker strikes or a refinery goes down for some reason.

I know electric has its own supply issues, but cables don't go on strike.

I do like Ev in that it minimises pollution at the point of use, so keeps your city and town air cleaner, and also gives you the chance to make the electric cleanly at the generator end.

Oil can never be clean, it can only be made to cause less pollution.

[Strangely Brown]

4 hours ago, Yugguy1970 said:

This is one area the petrol advocates conveniently forget.

Yes fuel is normally and usually easy to get, but it soon all goes to pot when there are tanker strikes or a refinery goes down for some reason.

I know electric has its own supply issues, but cables don't go on strike.

I do like Ev in that it minimises pollution at the point of use, so keeps your city and town air cleaner, and also gives you the chance to make the electric cleanly at the generator end.

Oil can never be clean, it can only be made to cause less pollution.

I am not sure that your analogy holds up.

IMO, a better comparison is that petrol stations are placed, sized and supplied to meet the pattern of demand that exists for that location. EV charging is not, yet, and is unlikely to be given the added complication of the time that it takes to recharge, even for exceptionally modest range.

The last major upset to petrol supply was when someone mentioned in a meeting that one refinery had an issue with getting some supplies to one particular retailer chain in one part of the country. Somehow that got leaked to the wonderfully well balanced and sane (not) UK press and it got exaggerated and misrepresented to the point that the wonderfully balanced and sane (not) British publish went mad with panic buying.

Because the buying pattern changed and outstriped the JIT supply system it escalated. i.e. This was a problem that was entirely self-inflicted as opposed to any lack of infrastructure.

Anyway, the cables might not "go on strike" but the supply can. Even today I read stories of people are being urged / paid to cut electricity use in order to protect the grid throughout Jan/Feb/March.

If they are worried about blackouts now how the hell are they going to cope as more and more people adopt EVs and, lord forbid, they actualy want to be able to use them.

I am not anti-EV. I am just not convinced BEV is the answer and the push to net-zero is going to cause more problems than it solves with the current approach.

 

[Wooster]

2 minutes ago, Strangely Brown said:

Somehow that got leaked to the wonderfully well balanced and sane (not) UK press...

I'm not a conspiracy theorist (well, maybe...) but someone said it was no coincidence that the panic buying of petrol was just before the mandatory selling of E10 petrol.  The garages had lots of E5 in their tanks and wanted to sell it all quickly.  So, they said 'there was no reason to panic buy' and (of course) lots of people panic bought.  And the petrol stations sold all their E5 petrol.  If it's true, it was a brilliant piece of gamesmanship! 

[Yugguy1970]

I think EV is one of the answers, just not the only one.

And for those us fortunate enough to be able to charge at home, we would never need to "panic buy" electric so there would be no issue there.

[Strangely Brown]

19 minutes ago, Yugguy1970 said:

I think EV is one of the answers, just not the only one.

And for those us fortunate enough to be able to charge at home, we would never need to "panic buy" electric so there would be no issue there.

Yes, I agree. It is a solution for some people where it fits their use. BEV will indeed be one part of the transport mix.

I am very glad that some manufacturers can see past the current EV fad and are investing in other technologies. H2 will undoubtedly play a big role in the commercial transport side of things, whether that be H2ICE or H2cellEV or something else I do not know, but BEV for haulage is pretty much a non-starter. The same applies to heavy plant: BEV will not work. 

Given that other solutions are required for the transport of everything that makes life work - if you bought it, a lorry brought it - then those solutions will also be adaptable to private cars.

As with all of these things the market will find the solution that is acceptable to the majority of the people.

[Hornet3D]

18 hours ago, Louie said:

Hi Guys

After the comprehensive response to my post I am definitely sticking with a Toyota hybrid for the foreseeable  future.

The whole EV concept to me has not been thought out by the manufacturers. As already mentioned the charging station infrastructure  is pretty now crazy when compared to standard filling stations. Why well when did you last visit a filling station and find that you have to wait for up to one hour or longer to get your car topped up.  When did you last discover that the pump nozzle does not fit your car.  When did you last arrive at a petrol station just to discover that there was no available pump that worked.

All manufacturers lie about the vehicle specs e.g. car range on full battery charge etc. So far all the EV's i have test driven the salesman has admitted that the the vehicle falls short by anything up to 50 miles for max range.  All this depends on a number of factors e.g. your speed, AC usage, entertainment system etc something the manufacturers have conveniently forgotten.

As already mentioned if you have an EV, a home charging station and travel moderate distances say locally then the EV is for you. 

This forum has me married to the Toyota brand simply because of the invaluable advice and assistance i get from members keep it up guys.

Hope Santa brings you guys something nice.

I don't think it is the manufacturers fault for the lack of charging structure it is more the EU and governments that have set a deadline for the move to the electric car without understanding the full implications of doing so or providing the money or conditions for companies to provide the infrastructure.   At least with electric cars there is an understanding of what they can supply and what is required to improve the situation.  When it comes to housing the proposed use of heat pumps is much further off the mark.

[Yugguy1970]

I'd like basically a hydrogen version of the hybrids we have now.  Imagine all the petrol stations as hydrogen, similar fuelling time to petrol.  Only pollution at point of use is water.  

Even a hydrogen fuel cell hybrid doesn't need anywhere near the same amount of batteries as a full EV.

[dennis10]

I'll never buy an EV because I refuse to prop up a corrupt, lying group of industries that are following an anti-human agenda designed to remove personal autonomy and freedom through the lie of man-made climate change and the zero carbon 'solution'.

The "science" is not remotely settled, in fact it is these days mostly bought and paid for through government think tanks and NGOs who provide funding for policy driven evidence creation.  These industries prop up their own narratives through "funding" that amounts to little more than bribes - Any real scientists that don't follow that narrative are cancelled out of existence, or at the very least are defunded and marginalized, which leaves us with a core group of "Yes men" driving change through corruption.  And there is no escape from it, it permeates all large corporations and government's these days - I don't like the way the world is going and I don't think any of you will either, which is why I refuse by the only means I have available to me - refuse to buy their snake oil.

[Kental]

When we had our BEV 7-4 years ago all the talk of the charging network being grown and expanded was the buzzword.

There were however many issues.

Firstly peoples mentality.  Bluewater shopping centre had a block of 8 podpoint 7kw chargers.  However finding a free one was nigh on impossible as my guess they were occupied day in and day out by the same cars (often PHEVs) for the whole day meaning very compulsive shoppers or centre staff.  Their PHEV would be brimmed in 1.5 hours (11kwh battery) so for 5 or so hours the charger would be redundant.  The spaces were also near the door!!!

Poorly thought out legislation.  Planning permission requirements said x chargers for a supermarket carpark. Great more chargers, however the legislation said nothing about them being maintained so after 6 months or so they were as useful as a chocolate tea pot.

So yes, the only charger I trusted was the one in my garage.  I had a 32 mile each way commute mainly on dual carriageways so that was the safe limit of the car in most weathers (unless very cold). The car had an NDEC 135 mile range (not sure what WLTP figure that equates to).  But the car was priced (for a short period) and at the time electricity was very cheap compared to petrol per mile to make it a viable 2nd car so we took advantage of it.

[Yugguy1970]

33 minutes ago, dennis10 said:

I'll never buy an EV because I refuse to prop up a corrupt, lying group of industries that are following an anti-human agenda designed to remove personal autonomy and freedom through the lie of man-made climate change and the zero carbon 'solution'.

The "science" is not remotely settled, in fact it is these days mostly bought and paid for through government think tanks and NGOs who provide funding for policy driven evidence creation.  These industries prop up their own narratives through "funding" that amounts to little more than bribes - Any real scientists that don't follow that narrative are cancelled out of existence, or at the very least are defunded and marginalized, which leaves us with a core group of "Yes men" driving change through corruption.  And there is no escape from it, it permeates all large corporations and government's these days - I don't like the way the world is going and I don't think any of you will either, which is why I refuse by the only means I have available to me - refuse to buy their snake oil.

Not sure I agree with much of this, I cannot believe 8 billion (soon to be 11) have no effect on this planet, but regardless, even if climate change IS a myth...

For most of the 90s I worked in central London during the week, escaping north at the weekend.  The pollution was FOUL.  I'd spend my Friday nights cleaning black snot out of my nostrils.  There's increasing evidence that living near busy roads causes respiratory diseases.

Wouldn't it be better if that didn't happen, if city and town air was clean, and whatever pollution was produced by energy generation was localised to the power station, which also arguably has better filtration than a car exhaust?

I agree EV shouldn't be the only solution but I would love less pollution.  They are even working on hydrogen direct engines that would give those who want manual and noise.

 

[Strangely Brown]

13 minutes ago, Yugguy1970 said:

Not sure I agree with much of this, I cannot believe 8 billion (soon to be 11) have no effect on this planet, but regardless, even if climate change IS a myth...

For most of the 90s I worked in central London during the week, escaping north at the weekend.  The pollution was FOUL.  I'd spend my Friday nights cleaning black snot out of my nostrils.  There's increasing evidence that living near busy roads causes respiratory diseases.

Wouldn't it be better if that didn't happen, if city and town air was clean, and whatever pollution was produced by energy generation was localised to the power station, which also arguably has better filtration than a car exhaust?

I agree EV shouldn't be the only solution but I would love less pollution.  They are even working on hydrogen direct engines that would give those who want manual and noise.

 

It's not the climate changing that is "unsettled", it is the extent of the anthropomorphic effect that is unknown. Yes, humans are having an effect. That much is a given. But how much of an effect and in what way is still under investigation.

Science - as opposed to "The Science" - or rather the data provides a lot of evidence for change and the human effect. Unfortunately that is massively misrepresented and distorted by the time it makes it to public consumption so the vast majority of people are basing live changing decisions on flawed information.

It's a different subject and unsuitable for this thread so if you want to have look for yourself then pick up a copy of Unsettled by Steven E. Koomin - Former Undersecretary for Science, U.S. Department of Energy under the Obama Administration. i.e. he is not just some climate denier and the book is actually about the misrepresentation of scientific data rather than arguing for or against climate change. And the best bit is that all of the data is available for people to look at themselves. Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. 🙂

[AndrueC]

21 hours ago, Strangely Brown said:

10 minutes at 22kW is a little over 3kW - assuming the car accepts that charge rate. With the average BEV returning approx 3miles per kWh that's about 9 miles. Not a particularly meaningful amount and probably even worse in winter conditions.

Oh, and 50 of those along a street would still require over 1MW of supply

Only if you expect all of them to be actively charging at the same time. If it's a single street then vehicles will be arriving at different times so the average load will be lower (older arrivals having finished charging before more recent arrivals). The chargers would be linked so might perhaps only allow 10 to be active at a time for a maximum load of 220kW. 50:10 doesn't sound like a terrible contention ratio to me even if we're talking about temporary parking. If we're talking about residents parking then it seems like a none issue. 50 parking bays with most vehicles being stationary for 10 hours (driven home, ignored until the morning commute) that gives us 20 half hour slots so call it three active chargers at a time for a total of 66kW.

[Wooster]

1 hour ago, Strangely Brown said:

unsuitable for this thread...

Yes, i know this should be about electric cars, but a question I've never had answered:  The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has increased from 0.028% of the atmosphere in the mid 1700s to 0.042% today.  Is such a tiny increase (and still a tiny % of the atmosphere) really causing climate change?

[Strangely Brown]

25 minutes ago, Wooster said:

Yes, i know this should be about electric cars, but a question I've never had answered:  The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has increased from 0.028% of the atmosphere in the mid 1700s to 0.042% today.  Is such a tiny increase (and still a tiny % of the atmosphere) really causing climate change?

 

No, seriously. It's not that straightforward and there are far more interconnected factors than just CO2. But that's the point. The media never tells you that. They would much rather go with the simple soundbite.

It really is worth looking into it more and then decide for yourself. What we should be getting is how to think, not what to think.

[Corollanutter]

On 12/13/2022 at 7:15 PM, TonyHSD said:

With today announced new fusion power successful experiment the beginning of the end of bev is even closer.  

TBH, I'm not sure I want something close to the temperature of the sun quite so close to me.. 🙂

[Yugguy1970]

Aye I've been reading about this too.  Fusion really is the holy grail of power generation.  Would be amazing if we could make it commercially viable.

[Cyker]

I'm not holding my breath on that. All that talk about Fusion giving unlimited cheap energy is in the same pile of marketing BS as the way EVs were originally sold to us.

Fusion will be at least as expensive to run as existing fission power plants; The main benefits are it isn't beholden to countries that have uranium, and there's no nuclear waste, but that doesn't mean it will be significantly cheaper as the construction and maintenance costs will still be huge, and I've not gotten into the profit margins!

I think Solar and wind will be the cheapest for some time as they have low setup costs and low maintenance. If they put a solar panel on every roof in the UK and invested in power storage to tide over night time we'd be in a much better place re. power.

 

 

[Mojo1010]

The timing of this fusion 'break-through' news is rather a coincident with an energy price crisis. A leading scientist say it's at least a couple of decades away for anything fusion. 

[AndrueC]

9 hours ago, Mojo1010 said:

The timing of this fusion 'break-through' news is rather a coincident with an energy price crisis. A leading scientist say it's at least a couple of decades away for anything fusion. 

Although it's a breakthrough it's worth pointing out that in practical terms the reactor came nowhere near to generating more power than went into it.

https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/14/nuclear_fusion_doe/

"Although the results are worth celebrating, they still show nuclear fusion is very, very far from being a practical source of energy. The initial energy required to fire the laser beams was 322 megajoules, with just over 2 megajoules delivered to the fuel capsule to trigger its implosion.

Comparing this with the 3.15 megajoules, or 875 Watt-hours, generated in the nuclear reaction, the overall energy produced by the NIF is still a net loss by quite a factor."

 

[Cyker]

That system's definitely not one of the leading ones; The last one of note I remember reading, which I think was one of the doughnut-shaped ones, was able to generate a net gain of 11 megawatts for a short period before something broke or overheated or something on it.

Promising but still not great given we need them running at gigawatt level to actually be useful.

The one thing that makes me laugh about all these advanced power generation systems, is they *still*, ultimately, end up with steam turbines doing the work to actually generate the electricity!

I keep thinking to myself there must be a more efficient way to turn all that energy more directly into useful power instead of wasting half it essentially boiling water to spin a pinwheel!

 

[AndrueC]

On 12/16/2022 at 5:09 PM, Wooster said:

The carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere has increased from 0.028% of the atmosphere in the mid 1700s to 0.042% today.  Is such a tiny increase (and still a tiny % of the atmosphere) really causing climate change?

That isn't a tiny increase. It's nearly doubled. If your salary increased by 70% would you call it a tiny increase?

CO2 has a significant warming affect. That's been known and proven for a long time. Even before the recent increase it was a significant factor.

"Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is a greenhouse gas. This means that it causes an effect like the glass in a greenhouse, trapping heat and warming up the inside. This effect is important: without the CO₂ that naturally exists in the atmosphere, Earth might be too cold to support human life. However, the atmosphere is very sensitive to changing levels of CO₂. Even though this gas makes up less than 0.1% of the atmosphere, it can have a huge effect on how much heat the planet's surface retains."

So you take something that already has a big impact on the temperature of the atmosphere and you double the amount of it. It doesn't matter how small that original %ge is. You've now potentially got double the warming effect.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-scientists-estimate-climate-sensitivity/

[Corollanutter]

Fusion?? Pffttt..  It's already been done...... 🤣

 

[TonyHSD]

On 12/16/2022 at 1:35 PM, Yugguy1970 said:

I'd like basically a hydrogen version of the hybrids we have now.  Imagine all the petrol stations as hydrogen, similar fuelling time to petrol.  Only pollution at point of use is water.  

Even a hydrogen fuel cell hybrid doesn't need anywhere near the same amount of batteries as a full EV.

The existing Toyota Mirai’s  have actually a similar size traction Battery under the seat same as their hybrids, but instead of ice has a fuel cell.