Joined
·
543 Posts
OLEV Call for Evidence and the Report on the 'Role of PiP and PiCG in EV Take-up.
Apologies to those who have seen these documents before. However, I have not seen the contents discussed in any EV fora - interesting? They are rebroadcast here in the context of OLEV's Call for Evidence on ULEV, which closes on 10 Jan 14.
Here are copies of the research, done by TRL, on behalf of OLEV:
Long Version:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-in-places-scheme-in-electric-vehicle-take-up
Summary:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...egy-for-ultra-low-emission-vehicles-in-the-uk
EV Matters has a major concern that, in the research phase, the views of EV Owners/Drivers was obtained by questionnaires - indeed questionnaires filled out as a mainly as a result of telephone interviews. Of course there is a huge fallacy in the use of questionnaires generally - in that the designer of the questionnaire will scope and define the questions based on their own perceptions and to a large extent predicate the results.(IMHO)
EV Matters does not seek to suggests that the results are not valid; however, they are certainly are weak in the reflecting the views that are discussed regularly in EV Chat-rooms.
The four recommendations in this report do nothing to reflect any need for charges in policy, or priority. Recommendations that include words like 'marketing', 'harmonising', 'improving.. existing' and 'investigation' are there to satisfy the reports sponsor - and, in the view of EV Matters, does not adequately reflects the strength of viewpoints in the EV Community.
EV Matters can't fail to observe that the report fails makes mention of the coherence, or reliability, of the EV charging infrastructure? Yet we know this is a source of daily frustration.
If the EV Community allows the Call for Evidence to pass by without an effective input - then the deficiencies of the current policies and strategies will be perpetuated?
Drive ON!
Apologies to those who have seen these documents before. However, I have not seen the contents discussed in any EV fora - interesting? They are rebroadcast here in the context of OLEV's Call for Evidence on ULEV, which closes on 10 Jan 14.
Here are copies of the research, done by TRL, on behalf of OLEV:
Long Version:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-in-places-scheme-in-electric-vehicle-take-up
Summary:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...egy-for-ultra-low-emission-vehicles-in-the-uk
EV Matters has a major concern that, in the research phase, the views of EV Owners/Drivers was obtained by questionnaires - indeed questionnaires filled out as a mainly as a result of telephone interviews. Of course there is a huge fallacy in the use of questionnaires generally - in that the designer of the questionnaire will scope and define the questions based on their own perceptions and to a large extent predicate the results.(IMHO)
EV Matters does not seek to suggests that the results are not valid; however, they are certainly are weak in the reflecting the views that are discussed regularly in EV Chat-rooms.
The four recommendations in this report do nothing to reflect any need for charges in policy, or priority. Recommendations that include words like 'marketing', 'harmonising', 'improving.. existing' and 'investigation' are there to satisfy the reports sponsor - and, in the view of EV Matters, does not adequately reflects the strength of viewpoints in the EV Community.
EV Matters can't fail to observe that the report fails makes mention of the coherence, or reliability, of the EV charging infrastructure? Yet we know this is a source of daily frustration.
If the EV Community allows the Call for Evidence to pass by without an effective input - then the deficiencies of the current policies and strategies will be perpetuated?
Drive ON!