Speak EV - Electric Car Forums banner

1 - 20 of 82 Posts

·
Registered
ONTO car hire referral code - a6b57
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
29,231 Posts
TBH I thought it was already policy, not something for consultation?

Strange, usually they have a set of pre-formatted questions so they can guide the response they want (to get the answer they want, presumably).

What are your collective views?

I am still for range extenders, but the 'electric' component of the car should be at least a real world 100 mile range, in practice 40kWh. Then, if such cars are still available as a specialty-buy, the sales reps have no real reason left to insist on long-range diesels (so long as the 40kWh of electricity a day is 'clean').
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
901 Posts
Yes it seems likely OLEV may have a position on this prior to asking for our opinions.
Nevertheless I think it’s the correct decision that’s it’s brought forward. Preferably sooner.
Let’s be honest the technology exists already. You can say the shorter the phase out the harder it is on manufacturers, But it’s same for more or less all of them. It’s going to happen so let’s tell them now and get on with it.
 

·
Registered
ONTO car hire referral code - a6b57
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
What are your collective views?
Yes, no form filling this time. Much more free form, which does at least give you a chance to say exactly what you want.

Personally, I'm solidly in favour of the ban covering all cars/vans that use petrol or diesel in any form (i.e. including hybrids and range extenders). With the massive task of trying to achive net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050, the sooner we can remove new fossil-powered cars from the equation the better. The tech is there and rapidly improving. Charging infrastucture is developing apace, but will probably need a push or two from govt to cope with the increasing number of BEVs and to address the issue of home charging for people living in flats or with on-street parking.

There are plenty of other much more thorny CO2 problems to deal with like shifting domestic and commercial heating systems away from natural gas. :unsure:
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
29,231 Posts
Yes, no form filling this time. Much more free form, which does at least give you a chance to say exactly what you want.

Personally, I'm solidly in favour of the ban covering all cars/vans that use petrol or diesel in any form (i.e. including hybrids and range extenders). With the massive task of trying to achive net-zero CO2 emissions by 2050, the sooner we can remove new fossil-powered cars from the equation the better. The tech is there and rapidly improving. Charging infrastucture is developing apace, but will probably need a push or two from govt to cope with the increasing number of BEVs and to address the issue of home charging for people living in flats or with on-street parking.

There are plenty of other much more thorny CO2 problems to deal with like shifting domestic and commercial heating systems away from natural gas. :unsure:
I would agree, if it was a technical matter alone. But there are those squidgy hominids in the middle with their peculiar ways and thoughts.

Thing is, if you say 'no, not at all', they'll do everything they can to get whatever-that-is rejected. But if you solve their perceived problem out for them already before they complain about it (a small REx on a big battery for long distance travellers) then they've got nowhere to go and you win the argument.

It's a dangerous play in politics; one strategy is to ask for the Moon and hope you get the sky at least, but the risk is the original request is refused and you simply end up back on the ground. The other strategy is to lower your target and offer a compromise that's so fair that no party can reasonably refuse it.
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
29,231 Posts
Bear in mind also about the resource argument. If you can halve the total battery everyone is lugging around unused for all but 5% of the time, and put a small generator to substitute for 20~40kWh worth of pack, then you reduce the strain on all the world's resources trying to make these things. Go look up how cobalt gets mined and ask yourself if you'd like to help reduce that burden on the earth and its people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
901 Posts
Bear in mind also about the resource argument. If you can halve the total battery everyone is lugging around unused for all but 5% of the time, and put a small generator to substitute for 20~40kWh worth of pack, then you reduce the strain on all the world's resources trying to make these things. Go look up how cobalt gets mined and ask yourself if you'd like to help reduce that burden on the earth and its people.
True enough.
I’m not sure if swapping cobalt mining for oil gas and coal exploration is a net loss, but cobalt mining is for sure not nice.
Cobalt is used for refining oil as well, but without doing the maths I think we’d need a lot more cobalt to make 100% BEVs with today’s batteries.

Rumour has it Tesla are about to launch a new battery.

Will we be able to ditch cobalt by the time the ban comes in?
 

·
Leaf lover
Joined
·
4,603 Posts
The transition to us all driving electric one day is not primarily about doing away with the internal combustion engine but accepting that electric motors should now be turning our wheels instead of them. Why because it is a better way of doing it.
What part the internal combustion engine plays, if any, depends how pragmatic we wish to make the transition.
My BMW i3 94Ah with a range extender allows me to do all my day to day mileage on electric but affords me no inconvenience on trips out of range whilst the charging infrastructure is still developing because I can make use of the existing well established petrol stations. So 95% electric, 5% petrol for me.
That is why I support the continued use of range extenders and why the industry should support their use. They have developed the ICE over so many decades, they still produce them by the millions, why not continue to use them in that very limited way to help the transition?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
901 Posts
The transition to us all driving electric one day is not primarily about doing away with the internal combustion engine but accepting that electric motors should now be turning our wheels instead of them. Why because it is a better way of doing it.
What part the internal combustion engine plays, if any, depends how pragmatic we wish to make the transition.
My BMW i3 94Ah with a range extender allows me to do all my day to day mileage on electric but affords me no inconvenience on trips out of range whilst the charging infrastructure is still developing because I can make use of the existing well established petrol stations. So 95% electric, 5% petrol for me.
That is why I support the continued use of range extenders and why the industry should support their use. They have developed the ICE over so many decades, they still produce them by the millions, why not continue to use them in that very limited way to help the transition?
Maybe because if we’re still buying ice cars in 2035 even range extenders we’re not gonna keep temperatures to 1.5C?
Your i3 is great technology but if we can build that in 201X we have to aim much higher for 203X.
We have to move faster to make net zero sooner.
 

·
Leaf lover
Joined
·
4,603 Posts
Maybe because if we’re still buying ice cars in 2035 even range extenders we’re not gonna keep temperatures to 1.5C?
Your i3 is great technology but if we can build that in 201X we have to aim much higher for 203X.
We have to move faster to make net zero sooner.
I look upon the issue as us being in a transition now. For me personally, since 2011. The 2035 is just a date in that transition when we make changes to regulations to what new vehicles we can purchase. After or even before 2035 other regulations will play a part in the transition.
Toyota have been producing parallel hybrids for two decades and had they switched to series hybrids (BEVs with range extenders) one decade ago imagine how many millions of drivers would now just be using 5% petrol for their mileage.
Why didn't that happen? I imagine because Toyota's leadership could not stomach the ICE being relegated to only generator duties and the realisation that it ultimately spelt the death of the ICE.
So for me it how quickly the transition progresses and how soon we reduce fossil fuel use, not how soon we can only buy new purely electric vehicles. Pragmatic rather than Purist. Fast transition rather than a slow transition.
What would you prefer?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
Maybe because if we’re still buying ice cars in 2035 even range extenders we’re not gonna keep temperatures to 1.5C?
Your i3 is great technology but if we can build that in 201X we have to aim much higher for 203X.
We have to move faster to make net zero sooner.
You could look at it another way.....,
2011 and the LEAF is released.
Me to my wife “look at this car, it could easily do you daily milage and we still own vehicle for long range if needed”
Wife “forget it” repeats the usual anti EV BS
2012 I spot the Volt and our Merc is costing more in fuel than she gets for her milage allowance so we are looking for a better mpg car. I book appointments with garages to test drive several cars.
A class Audi
Wife “it’s alright, it’s just a car” “what’s next”
She thinks we are going to drive the A class Merc next when we are really going to Chevy
Wife “what’s this car”
Me “it’s electric most of the time but will go another 250 miles on petrol if needed”
Wife starts car and pulls away, massive smile on her face “I like this, it’s so smooth and quiet”
8 years later she will never go back to fossil fuels and in fact pushed the range on my LEAF far closer to 0 than I ever had with no worries.
She would never have gone electric without the stepping stone, give everyone that chance with a decent sized battery and IMO no one will wasn’t a fossil car by 2030 meaning legislation won’t be needed to ban fossil fuels.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,686 Posts
Why don't we enforce PHEV new cars, or range extenders, but with a good 30 mile range from 2025, then up that to 80 mile range in 2030, then go full BEV from 2035 - that way there will be a good selection of EV sort of cars second hand for everyone to buy - this all or nothing thing will cause 50 million people to suddenly not be able to buy replacement cars if their old ones break
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
The vast majority ,80%? are bought by businesses. They have no interest in the fuel payed by user nor the nicities discussed on here but just hard economic facts of how much does it cost and how much money can they make. Large buyers and hire cos can get stupid discounts ,often 40%. Nobody is discounting EVs!
 

·
I'm not crazy, the attack has begun.
Joined
·
29,231 Posts
Maybe because if we’re still buying ice cars in 2035 even range extenders we’re not gonna keep temperatures to 1.5C?
Your i3 is great technology but if we can build that in 201X we have to aim much higher for 203X.
We have to move faster to make net zero sooner.
But, hang on there, you are saying that i3 technology is not good enough 'only because' it's not 2030's technology, yet?

That's non-sequitur.

Let me ask a different question; if every person who required 'a passenger car' and could make do with an i3 HAD an i3, would there even be any question of the amount of CO2 emission from passenger cars?

What would the CO2 emission be if everyone had a 120Ah i3 REx? And if that number you give me was so low as to be insignificant compared with other sources of emission, would you not then agree with Richard and I that, actually, the i3 already represents the aspirational technology we should aim for?
 

·
Registered
ONTO car hire referral code - a6b57
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Lots of interesting points raised here. Trying to predict where we’ll be with electric cars and charging infrastructure in 10 or 15 years’ time is tricky. I think a few things are quite likely by 2035, or even 2030:
  • Manufacturers will have a full range of BEVs in their product line up, so plenty of choice
  • BEVs will be more affordable as economies of scale kick in
  • Battery tech will have moved on in terms of capacity (greater), size (smaller), weight (lighter); all of which will deliver much better range for those who need it. I would expect a 400 mile plus range to be commonplace for some car categories.
  • New battery technologies will also see the need for cobalt reduce or disappear completely (see Samsung’s recent announcement about their battery breakthrough)
  • Public charging infrastructure will be vastly improved compared to what exists now, with a lot more charging hubs of 20+ charge points on/near motorways and other strategic routes (a la Tesla)
So, in my view, there’s still a good case for including hybrids, plug-in hybrids and range extended vehicles in the ban.
 
1 - 20 of 82 Posts
Top