Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,688
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
On that day you might use a public charger.
EV general discussion
- Thread starter Ricochet J
- Start date
Do they keep their cars for 15 years though? Or another way of looking at it, do they scrap them with <50k on the clock?
I was behind an old boy in the Post Office yesterday who was telling the woman at the counter that he'd just ordered his new (electric) car. He then went on to say he'd only done 5000 miles in his current one which was only 2 years old. Now you could argue that at around 2500 miles a year it is pointless for the guy to go electric BUT assuming he changes car again in a few years that is going to make a great low mileage used buy for someone and it will most likely go on to cover 100,000+ EV miles.
Likewise he could have bought himself another petrol car and... assuming he changes car again in a few years that is going to make a great low mileage used buy for someone and it will most likely go on to cover 100,000+ miles on dino juice.
If a car is going to be bought anyway it doesn't really matter what the cut off point for CO2 parity is, so long as eventually that car covers that many miles it will eventually pay off purely from a CO2 POV.
Or think, I've got quite a bit on today, maybe I'll do the weekly shop tomorrow instead.
The "what if" scenarios against EVs are endless but for every non stop 12 hour day people can come up with there is that constant counter argument of... but wouldn't be handy to wake up with a full tank every morning?
My only criticism of the report (which I’ve not read yet but the video explained the fuel figures) is that they used WLTP for the fuel consumption numbers. Everyone knows they are complete nonsense in the real world, even the EPA estimates are a bit optimistic (for both ICE and BEV).
I’d be inclined to agree that the tipping point is likely to be achieved a bit earlier, if that argument is indeed correct (it’s logical that is is given the EV relies upon having a lower impact when driven).
Also if you drive your car around town you’ll achieve the tipping point much faster as you use way more fuel in an ICE compared to the WLTP figure per mile. BEV (and fuel cell?) isn’t nearly as badly impacted.
Again I’ll make clear I haven’t read it and I have only watched the above but I most certainly will read it in time.
I don’t think anyone sensible is saying that? What they are saying is that when they do, they buy an electric one. In terms of impact, the best car is the one you already own. But that isn’t now things work in reality as people want new cars all the time and don’t value used/old cars.
Also see my point above about mileage figures. I assume that 3500 miles are mostly town driving and they get nothing like the WLTP number. You would need to cut that cross over point significantly.
Isn’t there also a wider point that while an EV has a bigger C02 impact to produce now, that gap will get closer and closer over time as the supply chains reduce their impact.
Eventually (and by 2050 of you believe the Paris agreement) there should basically be nothing in it.
As we already know, when it comes to the impact of driving, ICE is just never going to be able to reduce its impact in the same way that a BEV could in time. Again in theory, by 2050, the net impact of the grid should be zero. An ICE is never going to be able to match that. So in essence the BEV is already better but the direction of travel also favours the BEV. The question really is how quickly it can get to net zero and not if it is lower impact than ice which could never realistically get to net zero.
I’d be inclined to agree that the tipping point is likely to be achieved a bit earlier, if that argument is indeed correct (it’s logical that is is given the EV relies upon having a lower impact when driven).
Also if you drive your car around town you’ll achieve the tipping point much faster as you use way more fuel in an ICE compared to the WLTP figure per mile. BEV (and fuel cell?) isn’t nearly as badly impacted.
Again I’ll make clear I haven’t read it and I have only watched the above but I most certainly will read it in time.
I don’t think anyone sensible is saying that? What they are saying is that when they do, they buy an electric one. In terms of impact, the best car is the one you already own. But that isn’t now things work in reality as people want new cars all the time and don’t value used/old cars.
Also see my point above about mileage figures. I assume that 3500 miles are mostly town driving and they get nothing like the WLTP number. You would need to cut that cross over point significantly.
Isn’t there also a wider point that while an EV has a bigger C02 impact to produce now, that gap will get closer and closer over time as the supply chains reduce their impact.
Eventually (and by 2050 of you believe the Paris agreement) there should basically be nothing in it.
As we already know, when it comes to the impact of driving, ICE is just never going to be able to reduce its impact in the same way that a BEV could in time. Again in theory, by 2050, the net impact of the grid should be zero. An ICE is never going to be able to match that. So in essence the BEV is already better but the direction of travel also favours the BEV. The question really is how quickly it can get to net zero and not if it is lower impact than ice which could never realistically get to net zero.
Is it though? If a now car starts off costing 60% more in co2 to make, it doesnt matter if you do swap your car every 2 years. If you dont personally do the mileage needed in those two years to offset the extra co2 build costs, then all you are actually doing is adding to the co2 problem, not being "green"
Okay it gets skewed because obviously your second hand ICE car gets sold and the next person(s) may do big mileage so several years down the line then the EV goes past the break even point. Or perhaps not. I have bought 10 year ICE cars with less than 20,000 miles on the clock and with the lowe annual mileage I have done in them, its doubtful the ICE car would ever get to the required break even co2 miles before the end of its life.
And of course other emissions and emissions in towns/cities is a massive plus for going EV.
And yes some people on this forum have suggested that 10 year big engined V8 cars are scrapped and replaced with EV cars under the "green" argument.
No owner of a car they keep 3yrs is really doing anything to lower carbon impact of the new car. The benefit only exists once it gets in the hand of the next, or following owner.
odd really as the new car buyer guys get all the tax benefits
odd really as the new car buyer guys get all the tax benefits
It’s not just about you as an individual, consider the average impact across the U.K. fleet. They are not going to make you your own special ICE version because you might do low miles for the period you own it.
The break even point in Europe is 50k, the U.K. will be lower as our grid is one of the cleaner ones and one of the biggest.
Using WLTP for fuel consumption numbers is a bit of a fudge well in the favour of ICE which in reality will reduce it further. The 50k cut off could really be considered the worst case scenario and will get lower for the current fleet (not just new cars) over time.
The U.K. average mileage is about 8k so the average car will do considerably more over its average lifespan than even the 50k cut off.
The break even point in Europe is 50k, the U.K. will be lower as our grid is one of the cleaner ones and one of the biggest.
Using WLTP for fuel consumption numbers is a bit of a fudge well in the favour of ICE which in reality will reduce it further. The 50k cut off could really be considered the worst case scenario and will get lower for the current fleet (not just new cars) over time.
The U.K. average mileage is about 8k so the average car will do considerably more over its average lifespan than even the 50k cut off.
I agree. Just interesting those who claim they do it to save the planet when for their use they would be better in a ice.
Obviously the car carries on being used and then the real co2 benefits come in.
unless it’s like Norway where most EVs are just replaced when damaged rather than repaired. Seems Tesla take that approach with the one piece castings etc too
Obviously the car carries on being used and then the real co2 benefits come in.
unless it’s like Norway where most EVs are just replaced when damaged rather than repaired. Seems Tesla take that approach with the one piece castings etc too
ICE isn’t any different from that point of view for insurance repairs. Any significant damage beyond body panels and it’s written off, even if it’s very repairable. I’m not sure teslas single piece castings are really going to have an impact on repairs.
Most people do not want to drive a car that has had chassis damage, even even if repaired.
It’s not like those cars are just binned either, pretty much anything un damaged is taken off them and reused in the secondary market and the body is melted down into another car.
Most people do not want to drive a car that has had chassis damage, even even if repaired.
It’s not like those cars are just binned either, pretty much anything un damaged is taken off them and reused in the secondary market and the body is melted down into another car.
Im not claiming that, just claiming that its not black and white and the automatic assumption that anybody replacing their car should be buying an EV or they deserve to burn in hell for ruining the planet!
and WLTP for EV cars are out by 20% as well so the same applies.
And uk better at 43.5% renewable electric vs 37.5% average for the EU but its not like its double or anything.
And uk average miles driven was 7,400 in 2019 and the trend is for it to fall every year and obviously due to covid it was only 5,920 in 2020.
I do wonder when the average age of a car increases due to moving to BEV, if these people arguing about people keeping a car less than 3 yeas is a bad thing, or merely helping the transition along more quickly, and increasing the supply of used cars to those that can't afford or say BEV's are too expensive.
I am sure the naysayers will have disappeared by then though, or claim to remember suggesting nothing other than what has occurred.
Volvo haven't taken into account the re-use and recycling of the battery pack at the end of it's life by the way, just the initial manufacturing, so in 15-20 years after the cells/modules are moved on from another task, e.g.battery storage in an office or home, then all of the metals can be re-used.
I am sure the naysayers will have disappeared by then though, or claim to remember suggesting nothing other than what has occurred.
Volvo haven't taken into account the re-use and recycling of the battery pack at the end of it's life by the way, just the initial manufacturing, so in 15-20 years after the cells/modules are moved on from another task, e.g.battery storage in an office or home, then all of the metals can be re-used.
Exactly, you’ve just reinforced the point, even if the numbers are out slightly.
Yes the WLTP issues applies to both fuels as I said in an earlier post but is in a fudge in favour of ICE because ICE has a far bigger impact from its fuel use. If you used lower mileage numbers for both, the EV would gain back quicker because it’s 20% of a smaller number, this the difference between the two is actually bigger.
Bonding has been completed and now our Hypervolt is fully operational... well it charges the car at 7-7.1kWh, which is the main thing. App doesn't seem to want to connect despite showing a Wifi connection (seems quite a common issue online). Will try the old turn it off and back on again tomorrow, but for now just happy that we can take full advantage of the Octopus 4 hour 5p window and put in around 20-25kWh (allowing for load balancing with our hot water heater etc). Certainly beats the ~6-8 I was able to put in with the 3pin granny charger. 
Will finish off and tidy up the cabling when we have the house renovated later this year / early next year.
Will finish off and tidy up the cabling when we have the house renovated later this year / early next year.
Volvo haven't taken into account ....
Practically volvo batteries are chinese lg/catl - so their carbon footprint is apparently 3x USA batteries.
Boris hasn't yet signed up for, similar to EU, rules of origin for battery imports afaik ,which would indirectly penalise gratuitous carbon use;
longer term why not have a carbon tax on the new purchase, directly for that carbon cost, which would naturally be higher than ICE
(vw type) carbon offsetting is a bit of a con with trees being planted that may have been planted anyway.
Practically volvo batteries are chinese lg/catl - so their carbon footprint is apparently 3x USA batteries.
Boris hasn't yet signed up for, similar to EU, rules of origin for battery imports afaik ,which would indirectly penalise gratuitous carbon use;
longer term why not have a carbon tax on the new purchase, directly for that carbon cost, which would naturally be higher than ICE
(vw type) carbon offsetting is a bit of a con with trees being planted that may have been planted anyway.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 17,688
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
when Boris does and tells you please let us all know…
Oh sorry as part of Brexit and the UK Europe Trade & Cooperation Agreement there are already rules.
missed the point
imports of batteries into the UK rules , not eu imports of uk ev's
-> Our FREE* and uniquely flexible online English GCSE course means that even if you are ...