UK may extend manufacture of hybrid vehicles beyond 2030

[Hayzee]

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/business-environment-and-energy/uk-government-hints-extra-hybrid-flexibility-2030-ban

[Flatcoat]

The sale and manufacture of hybrids after 2030 isn’t banned even now - however I do agree this whole nut zero targeting of ICE cars is a disaster waiting to happen and will have consequences for the economy and at the ballot box unless drastically watered down. Not one party has stood at an election proposing nut zero - politicians who deceive the electorate with such decisions will eventually rue that day. 

[Mojo1010]

No surprise

[Big_D]

Why are we not surprised.

Although the ICE will not be banned, I'm sure fuel costs will rise so we can't afford them.

[Basil-BarryC]

Or eventually someone will realise it’s not possible to generate all the electricity needed for electric vehicles, electric cooking and heating once they ban gas boilers, cookers, hobs etc

The Chinese are still putting coal fired power stations on stream, so the UK goes for nut zero and China, Russia, India even the US continue to pollute 

[FROSTYBALLS]

Seems to be just falling in line with the EU.....

[Cyker]

17 minutes ago, Basil-BarryC said:

Or eventually someone will realise it’s not possible to generate all the electricity needed for electric vehicles, electric cooking and heating once they ban gas boilers, cookers, hobs etc

The Chinese are still putting coal fired power stations on stream, so the UK goes for nut zero and China, Russia, India even the US continue to pollute 

Well it would be if we were doing something about it, but the reluctance and subsequent  show with building new nuclear power plants, and the pitifully  slow rollout of wind and solar and connecting them to the grid (Apparently there are loads of wind turbines and solar farms not connected to the grid because the electricity board can't keep up!), means we're well behind where we need to be...

 

[Strangely Brown]

11 hours ago, Basil-BarryC said:

Or eventually someone will realise it’s not possible to generate all the electricity needed for electric vehicles, electric cooking and heating once they ban gas boilers, cookers, hobs etc

The Chinese are still putting coal fired power stations on stream, so the UK goes for nut zero and China, Russia, India even the US continue to pollute 

Self-righteous idiocy has never been afraid to shout it proudly from the rooftops. Welcome to NewUK.

[YarisHybrid2016]

On 9/13/2023 at 8:17 PM, Cyker said:

(Apparently there are loads of wind turbines and solar farms not connected to the grid because the electricity board can't keep up!)

That is absolutely true! It's a farce.

If the UK ceased to exist, we'd only make a difference of less than 2%. Why the hell are we bothering with this madness when total eradication of the country would still make zero practical difference?!

This of course, ignores the fact the whole thing is total nonsense in the first place!

I really don't understand the problem with building new nuke plant. It's "only" £16 billion! We can afford that, but for some reason, we don't want to.

They chucked £60 billion at Big Pharma over the scamdemic. Something is deeply corrupt.

[Eddiefh]

On 9/13/2023 at 7:37 PM, Big_D said:

Why are we not surprised.

Although the ICE will not be banned, I'm sure fuel costs will rise so we can't afford them.

That’s my thoughts , fuel duty will increase in my opinion after 5 years 

[Marcusthehat]

Has anybody actually costed out the cost, pure financial, and in all the mined materials, primarily steel, copper and aluminium, never mind the exotic chemical plastics to insulate the conductors, plus the damage to the natural and hithertoo undisturbed  environment, of connecting all these potential wind farms to the grid? And however you "cost" a cable heavy enough for when the wind blows, but lies virtually unused, or only carrying a fraction of the rated current most of the time. Unlike transmission lines from conventional or nuclear power plants than can be sized for more predictable electricity outputs.

Same as getting all the old combined foul and storm water sewers replaced with 2 seperate systems.

Easy to postulate, near impossible to execute, at any approaching to the acceptable cost, that is.

[AJones]

A lot can happen in 7 years. In 2016 the only EVs you could get were either affordable models with small batteries like the Leaf with around 100 miles of range, or super expensive, premium end Tesla models.

Now there's massively more models, Battery sizes and range have significantly increased and there's more affordable models. For example, an MG4 long range EV now costs less than a hybrid Corolla. The price premium between an EV and a comparable, well spec-ed hybrid is not that great for the medium sized models and upward.

By the time 2030 arrives I suspect most people will be buying EVs purely because they're better and more attractive, a few may want to stick with a hybrid for their particular situation or personal preferences but they'll likely be a small minority.

[TonyHSD]

I think from what I can see, read and understand many are switching back to hybrids and ice from evs. Car owners are ditching their evs for ice cars as simply bevs are very unique cars with very unique use in real world and all bodies including car makers got it totally wrong. 
More manufacturers are adapting back to ice and starting to invest back in ice cars, engines, transmissions etc.  
VW are strangling to produce golfs and has a high demand for these but they have plenty of id’s that seems not as attractive as thought to be. 
The ev dream might end up sooner than my prediction of 2030.
A Battery gate is around the corner and bev’s might face a ban instead and ice to continue their existence with either synthetic fuels or gas.  
Nothing that came as forced switch from governments had a good outcome. Bev didn’t had future back in early 1900’s , likely to repeat now. Also bev heavy batteries are toxic pollution 100’s times worse than co2 from ice. Recycling it’s not clean either with huge impact on environment, something no one actually talk about. 
The negatives of producing and using bevs vs ice are bigger than positives and only the stupid idea of net 0 or whatever is and forced switch to evs everything will cause more issues in a long run than just keep using ice run on natural resources. 

[roadster-rav]

Politicians are notoriously bad at long term planning. If they are allowed to follow a one solution approach to "green" power a huge sum of money could be wasted on electric only solutions when the rest of the world goes ahead with alternatives such as hydrogen and that will leave us with an electric only infrastructure. The Battery electric car is just one of the white elephants which could look ridiculous in twenty years time. 

[Big_D]

55 minutes ago, TonyHSD said:

Also bev heavy batteries are toxic pollution 100’s times worse than co2 from ice. Recycling it’s not clean either with huge impact on environment, something no one actually talk about. 
The negatives of producing and using bevs vs ice are bigger than positives and only the stupid idea of net 0 or whatever is and forced switch to evs everything will cause more issues in a long run than just keep using ice run on natural resources. 

This is so true, and all the Green campaigners don't seem to mention this in their speeches, protests, and their other information when campaigning against ICE vehicles. 

We also don't have the infrastructure, as mentioned previously on this forum.

While I am no scientist, it would be great if we could run cars on water. Each molecule of water is made up of two atoms of Hydrogen, and one oxygen atom. If we could find a way to split these apart, I am sure we would be able to use this as a clean fuel source as they are both flammable elements.

So, until something better comes along, like a DeLorean running on a reactor powered by household waste, I do believe that Hybrids are currently the way to go. While hybrids also have the same Battery issues as a BEV, and the same emission issues as an ICE, they have the the best of both worlds.

[philip42h]

1 hour ago, Big_D said:

While I am no scientist, it would be great if we could run cars on water. Each molecule of water is made up of two atoms of Hydrogen, and one oxygen atom. If we could find a way to split these apart, I am sure we would be able to use this as a clean fuel source as they are both flammable elements.

The electrolysis of water to produce 'green' hydrogen is about 80% efficient - you lose 20% of the energy in the process. This is not too much of an issue if you already have spare 'free' electricity from renewable sources.

You have only to store and transport the hydrogen. The oxygen can be released to the atmosphere and will find its own way to the vehicle.

Then you have two options:

1. A hydrogen combustion engine - about 40-45% efficient. Which means that overall, you'll be using around 35% of the original energy to drive the vehicle.
2. A hydrogen fuel cell - about 50% efficient. Which means that overall, you'll be using around 40% of the original energy to drive the vehicle.

So, yes, we can "run cars on water" ...

Whereas, if you simply used the power you had in the first place to charge a Battery and power an EV you would achieve an overall efficiency of about 80%. In terms of energy efficiency, the BEV wins hands down ...

(but in all cases, you need to take account of how the electricity is generated in the first place)

[Big_D]

Thanks for the great explanation @philip42h. As I said, I am no scientist and was basing this on what I remembered from school.

[Cyker]

Nooo, the efficiency is far worse than that!! If Electrolysis only had a 20% loss, everyone'd be doing it!!!

There is a reason *NOBODY* uses electrolysis for the industrial production of hydrogen - It uses an absolute duck-ton of electricity, far in-excess of the energy you'd get back from the hydrogen.

One of the reasons water is so abundant on the planet, is oxygen and hydrogen *reaallly* want to stick together, and prying them apart requires enormous amounts of power.

This is why hydrogen is so expensive compared to petrol - Even when you consider having to drill for oil, transport the crude, refine it, and transport the refined product, it still costs less per litre to do this than produce 1L of hydrogen by electrolysis!!  

This is the big problem with 'green' hydrogen - It only becomes viable if we have so much electricity spare it's practically worthless.

The funny thing is, we could do this - One of the reasons the Grid is dragging their heels so much connecting up all these solar and wind farms, is they still don't know how to deal with the massive fluctuations of power generation, and even existing wind farms have to be shut down sometimes because they are producing *too much* power!  

If they could just get their  together and use that excess capacity for on-site hydrogen production, we might just be able to make it work...