EV general discussion
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
The final analysis for 2018 was published yesterday. Total CO2 emissions fell by 2.2%. CO2 due to transport fell by 1.3%. Transport and domestic heating remain the sectors which are falling slowest (which is likely why they're now under such focus).
There isn't really one number for this though, is there? Fuel mix varies significantly by country and is generally getting cleaner all the time.
If it's 100,000km based on the EU average CO2 per Mtoe, it'll be somewhat less for the UK (~25% lower CO2 per Mtoe). Then there's the time factor; how recent are the figures used to get to 100,000km? The most recent final figures for the EU are for 2017, so they miss two years of improvements.
There isn't really one number for this though, is there? Fuel mix varies significantly by country and is generally getting cleaner all the time.
If it's 100,000km based on the EU average CO2 per Mtoe, it'll be somewhat less for the UK (~25% lower CO2 per Mtoe). Then there's the time factor; how recent are the figures used to get to 100,000km? The most recent final figures for the EU are for 2017, so they miss two years of improvements.
Last edited:
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
I’ve done the electrical vehicle charging course, I’m qualified to install all manner of charging points.
Even the guy teaching the course thought it was folly, he admitted to have being ‘bribed’ with a generous salary to teach the course.
EV are great in the short term, whilst most of us use internal combustion engined vehicles.
You just wait to see how things will work out when we all own one. (This isn’t ever going to happen) in fact this EV rubbish is more of a lie than the diesel being more green than petrol scam.
If anything electric 2 wheeled vehicles make more sense than electric cars and vans.
Makes me laugh when an owner of an electric vehicle states his car is 80% efficient.
It might be discharging the battery into forward motion, but how was this energy generated in the first place? How much efficiency was lost during this generation? How much efficiency lost charging and discharging the batteries?
As for batteries lasting 30 years? You’re utterly having a laugh, as I said I predict 5 years at max.
One final point, where is all the lithium coming from to make these batteries? Have you seen what a lithium mine looks like? Finally what happens to these ‘green’ batteries when they are at the end of their useful life?
I would happily own an EV whilst it suits my pocket to do so, but as a long term solution to save the planet it’s utter folly.
Even the guy teaching the course thought it was folly, he admitted to have being ‘bribed’ with a generous salary to teach the course.
EV are great in the short term, whilst most of us use internal combustion engined vehicles.
You just wait to see how things will work out when we all own one. (This isn’t ever going to happen) in fact this EV rubbish is more of a lie than the diesel being more green than petrol scam.
If anything electric 2 wheeled vehicles make more sense than electric cars and vans.
Makes me laugh when an owner of an electric vehicle states his car is 80% efficient.
It might be discharging the battery into forward motion, but how was this energy generated in the first place? How much efficiency was lost during this generation? How much efficiency lost charging and discharging the batteries?
As for batteries lasting 30 years? You’re utterly having a laugh, as I said I predict 5 years at max.
One final point, where is all the lithium coming from to make these batteries? Have you seen what a lithium mine looks like? Finally what happens to these ‘green’ batteries when they are at the end of their useful life?
I would happily own an EV whilst it suits my pocket to do so, but as a long term solution to save the planet it’s utter folly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
My Leaf is 5 years old and the battery hasn't lost any health or range. There are cars with batteries older than that. if you can't even get that argument right then no one should listen to a word you say.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
Number of cycles is more accurate than age to be honest.
Wasn’t it around 1000 cycles?
Yes no one will listen to what I have to say because this industry is worth billions.
People will ride it until the folly is exposed.
If governments where serious about emission control, why can I still go buy cars with insanely big engines and power outputs that would be more than sufficient to power an aircraft.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,094
- Location
- Surrey
I've no idea, if you can find a reliable source I'll read it.
Point 2: Freedom of choice. There'd be an uproar if Mr Small Dick couldn't go out and buy a 4L diesel Audi.
As for lithium mining, it's less environmentally damaging than drilling for oil IIRC.
he must be the absolute authority on all things EV. I bet you had a good chat about the Egyptians being aliens as well?
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
Maybe try logically addressing some of my points rather than resorting to insults?
Unless of course this is just an electric vehicle circle jerk?
@SkodaMart ignoring the insults as that isn’t cool but surely it’s up to you to back up your completely unsubstantiated (and inaccurate) points with evidence or sources rather than the other way round.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
OK then, would someone, obviously more intelligent than me care to answer my points of concern:
Starting with the obvious one:
How are we going to generate the electricity to power these electric vehicles when every petrol and diesel vehicle has been replaced?
I know with the vehicle charging course, there is a register, every new charging point has to be notified so that the electricity board can keep a track on demand on the national grid - they are fully aware that the current distribution network cannot support the future potential number of electric vehicles.
Starting with the obvious one:
How are we going to generate the electricity to power these electric vehicles when every petrol and diesel vehicle has been replaced?
I know with the vehicle charging course, there is a register, every new charging point has to be notified so that the electricity board can keep a track on demand on the national grid - they are fully aware that the current distribution network cannot support the future potential number of electric vehicles.
Do you see the flaw in your thinking here?
You're absolutely right. Currently, the infrastructure is not sufficient. That's not to say that it never will be. The problems associated with available power distribution are challenging, but not insurmountable, and not a reason to dismiss the entire concept as "folly".
Put it this away. Imagine we're having this discussion 130 years ago and I tell you that the idea of mass car ownership is folly because the current road network cannot support the future potential number of cars. Would you have agreed that that would have been a rather shortsighted proposition?
I'm not ignoring these issues. I recognise them, and they concern me to. But given the rate of technological advance, it would be a bit silly now to use them to say that electric car use will never become widespread.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
Just a rather obvious point, wouldn't it be far more sensible to limit passenger engined vehicles to 1.0 litre petrol and commercial vehicles to maybe 1.5 litre diesel now?
With immediate effect, also while we are at it limit top speed in the same way they did with HGVs to say around 70 or 80mph.
Getting these big oofing 4 x 4s off the road would be a start.
With immediate effect, also while we are at it limit top speed in the same way they did with HGVs to say around 70 or 80mph.
Getting these big oofing 4 x 4s off the road would be a start.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
So lets ignore the infrastructure for a moment. How are we going to generate the electricity assuming that the infrastructure was sufficient.
This is the golden question.
How about London be lovely and green with little bunnie rabbits hopping around on every traffic island, whilst we turn the northern coast of Scotland into a series of nuclear power stations? Its not like many people live there is it?
I include "power generation" as infrastructure, but, the answer is, I do not know. I'm not an electrical systems engineer. Ultra simplistically, yes, my solution would be "build more power stations", in whatever form that may be. Whether or not that is achievable becomes a question of politics and economics - but it still doesn't make it impossible.
Again, going back to my analogy - if I had asked you 130 years ago how to improve the infrastructure to support everyone owning a car, and you didn't know the answer right away, I would have been silly to dismiss the idea as impossible.
You asked for your points to be discussed logically, so I'm attempting to do so. So please don't resort to absurdity yourself.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
So lets limit top speed and engine size now, with immediate effect.
Why wait 15 years?
Also we need to eliminate unnecessary travel, we need to work closer to home.
But that's not what this is about is it? Its about smugly ripping it up in your Tesla because you can.
Why wait 15 years?
Also we need to eliminate unnecessary travel, we need to work closer to home.
But that's not what this is about is it? Its about smugly ripping it up in your Tesla because you can.
So how is this a more practical solution than EVs, when you consider the impact on society as a whole?
I mean, just to be clear - your advocating an immediate cessation of private vehicle ownership of any vehicle over 1.0 litres in engine size? So what about people who do need to own 4x4 vehicles, or own larger vehicles for whatever reason. What do they do?
You could argue that no-one needs a passenger vehicle with a larger engine than 1.0 litres I guess...but that would be severely limiting for a huge amount of people I imagine, and it could have an enormous impact on society and the personal freedoms of many. That might be what you're getting at....that everyone will have to severely limit their personal choice....which is fine, I can understand that as an extreme point of view.
But do you seriously think that it would be a better long term solution than also investigating and developing the use of capable electric vehicles? You honestly think that because the adoption of EVs currently presents some challenging problems that we should instead just forget the whole idea and instead embark upon the very stringent changes you propose instead?
I'm not saying you're wrong - just want to be clear that's the approach you're suggesting.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
So the right to personal freedom is more important than the future of the planet?
Lets also not forget, motor vehicles are a privilege (or curse - depending on how you see it) brought to us by our current society. They are not a basic human right or need.
So who needs 4x4 vehicles? Not many I guess, farmers mainly and that would be classed as commercial vehicles as they already are.
I've nothing against a 4x4 drive train at all, my comment was big oofing 4x4 vehicles, i.e. the Chelsea tractor brigade.
Lets also not forget, motor vehicles are a privilege (or curse - depending on how you see it) brought to us by our current society. They are not a basic human right or need.
So who needs 4x4 vehicles? Not many I guess, farmers mainly and that would be classed as commercial vehicles as they already are.
I've nothing against a 4x4 drive train at all, my comment was big oofing 4x4 vehicles, i.e. the Chelsea tractor brigade.
Last edited by a moderator:
Just replying further because you ediited after my initial post.
Eliminating unnecessary travel and working closer to home - absolutely agree. Encouraging those who can, to work from home more would be a great start. Obviously not everyone can, but a lot of people in office jobs could easily do their job as well from a computer at home, rather than a different computer somewhere else. I agree that these are things we should strive for, but it will take time for society to change. Simply introducing your stringent limits on personal vehicle ownership from tomorrow is a "solution" which I would suggest is far more logistically demanding than the problems you state make the development of EVs "folly".
As for "ripping it up in your Tesla"...I'm not sure what you're getting at here? Are you claiming that EV proponents are solely interested in performance?
I never said that. In fact, I specifically asked if that was what you were getting at. And the reason I asked that is because I wanted to know if you were willing to accept what that position entailed.
But regardless, what you're trying to do here is frame the argument in a way which suggests that challenging your position means I'm disregarding the future well being of the planet. I'm not.
As far as I can see, there are plenty of people in this thread who are proponents of EVs because they feel they can be a solution to the environmental problems we are facing.
You've entered the thread, claimed that they aren't a solution because of existing issues (which aren't insurmountable), and presented a solution of your own which would mean major society upheaval.
I have simply questioned the validity of that stance, and now you're trying to Cathy Newman me and claim that I now am saying that personal freedom > the well being of the planet? Let's not be disingenuous. I am simply pointing out that you are taking an extreme position based on what I perceive to be a fallacious criticism of EV development, and that I don't think, overall, your solution is superior.
Anyone who needs to go off road. Anyone who might need them for towing large loads. Anyone who lives in a very rural area and needs reliable transport in bad weather.
What you now need to do is clarify what you mean by "need", otherwise the question is moot.
SkodaMart
SkodaMart
Need = cannot live without.
A farmer to round up his animals and access his fields, rescue services for example.
Anyhow, sorry this has gone off on a silly tangent.
My point is could more responsible vehicle selection, cutting out unnecessary journeys, employing local labour - people literally used to live where the job was not so long ago.
Could these measures delay or remove the need for an alternative source of energy for our vehicles.
A farmer to round up his animals and access his fields, rescue services for example.
Anyhow, sorry this has gone off on a silly tangent.
My point is could more responsible vehicle selection, cutting out unnecessary journeys, employing local labour - people literally used to live where the job was not so long ago.
Could these measures delay or remove the need for an alternative source of energy for our vehicles.
Last edited by a moderator: