Discussion in 'Hybrid, PHEV & EV Electric Cars Forum' started by Stuart Wright, Jul 26, 2017.
Possible split/leak in turbo hose. Happened to my Focus last week.
I see so many diesels spewing smoke out like this. Especially from cars registered between 2005 and 2008.
Most people will charge their EVs at supermarkets - supermarkets will install the charging infrastructure to attract and keep customers and the use, I'm guessing, will be free or very cheap to compete. Supermarkets without a charging infrastructure will eventually die. And what could be simpler? Go, plug in, shop and done. No queues at petrol pumps and no smelly residue on hands either.
With the amount of focus on battery tech R&D it's not unreasonable to hope for a 2000 mile range battery pack by 2040. Getting the power in quickly will be a challenge if it's needed but not technically impossible even today. But for most people a quick charge at the supermarket, supercharger, or overnight is more range than they will need in a day.
Folks here is an interesting video about the future of electric and autonomous cars, the economics and some exciting thoughts on what the use of cars will be like in 20-30 years time.
Electric Vehicles Outlook | Fully ChargedWatch this video on YouTube
I've not read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been covered.
The target means that the infrastructure has to be in place by 2030, just 13 years off.
Why - well because in 2030 who will buy a diesel or petrol car knowing that it will have ZERO value when they come to sell it.
And it isn't just about have very fast charging technology, improving the range (distance) on a single charge, reduce the price of electric vehicles, and having abundant charging points everywhere. It is also the Electricity Production - they need to start building the power stations needed to source this electricity now - and in that case, green power won't cut the mustard they need to seriously embrace nuclear power.
Or fundementally change the way we live and work of course - remove the need to travel.
And what about buses and HGVs between them they seem to be accounting for about a third of pollution, between them almost as much as cars in total, but they seem to be exempt from the plans.
There is another factor.
ICE powered vehicles have a lot to wear out and go wrong in the drive train. EVs Have batteries, Electronics and electric motors which are much simpler to replace so you shouldn't have to scrap the whole car because the electronics for the drive train has worn out, pop it out and pop in a replacement.
Car life could be limited by the upholstery.
My sister and brother-in-law live in Norway, and there's a big push to EV. By 2025 no-one will be able to buy a domestic vehicle powered by fossil fuel, apparently. Charging points are everywhere, as are it seems Nissan Leafs and Teslas! EVs are heavily subsidised, and already some restrictions are in place if you drive a non-EV, from what I can make out. Charging points are being built into street lights and at supermarkets. Then again, Norway is pretty self-sufficient when it comes to energy supply, and even supplies the UK via undersea cables. Still, where there's a will there's a way, I suppose.
Yep, that's the way it is here. Teslas are everywhere other EVs and hybrids too. Every supermarket I go to has charging stations and more are being added all the time - we went to the library near us the other day and half a dozen new charging stations have appeared there since last time we visited just a couple of months ago. Almost all domestic electricity is hydro generated so power is pretty clean and has been forever - ironic given that Norwegian wealth is pretty much founded on its oil and gas resources.
I currently drive an ICE golf from 2008 and it's the last ICE car I will ever own - in a few more years we will switch, probably to a dual motor Model 3 or an equivalent from another manufacturer if they can match or beat it at that price point (I'd like a used Model S but I think my wife would kill someone or herself in one).
Reading HMG's announcement about the ban of fossil-fuelled cars by 2040, It does seem (to me) to not really address all of the pollution concerns. If I read it correctly, cars are banned, but not commercial vehicles, trains and so forth. What about our reliance on natural gas to fire a lot of our power stations, heat our homes, hospitals and businesses? The more I research this, the more I think that it's political bluster. We'd need to start building lots of nuclear power stations now to replace the gas and coal sites that we have now, but just look how long Hinckley 3 will take. Solar and wind power just don't cut it, as things stand. Diesel trains still run on an awful lot of the network, and HMG is back-tracking (no pun intended) on its commitments to support electrification. One area of pollution not touched on is farming, which is one of the biggest polluters of them all. Bovine methane, muck spreading and so forth are a very big contributor.
Lots of initiatives seem to fall by the wayside. There were plans to convert old car tyres into petrol -- the pilot plant was set-up, then nada. There was the idea of using farm animal waste to generate electricity, another idea that didn't get very far. Then, as I recall, was the idea that every house had to be fitted with solar panels. Something else that fizzled out. OK, HMG can't fund all of this, but so many of these ideas are hailed as the solution to our ever increasing electricity consumption, but never surface, either because without subsidy they're too expensive, or government red tape effectively kills everything off.
Countries like Norway that can generate pretty much all of their power requirements from natural resources will be well-placed to move to 'domestic' EV by 2025 (albeit by subsidising EVs), but I doubt very much of the likes of the UK or France will hit the stated targets by 2040. All UK governments of whatever political colour promise much but deliver little, and this is just another one of those promises. As with all things, it will be poorly delivered and implemented, but will be hailed as a success nevertheless, even though it won't work and we'll end-up paying through the nose.
I'm all for EV, and I hope that my next vehicle will not need fossil fuel to propel it, but the UK fossil-fuelled car free (for new vehicles) by 2040? Fffft.
The difference between pollution from vehicles and things like power stations is that vehicle pollution occurs where people live and it i particularly nasty in terms of things like particulates, diesels being the worst in this regard. So, having promoted diesels in order to reduce CO2 emissions, governments inadvertently worsened the air quality, particularly in cities (as those of us with half a brain prophesied).
There are tens of millions of diesel (and petrol) cars on the roads. Reducing the number of these will have a significant effect on air quality in cities. In London at least, buses and taxis are being moved away from fossil fuels, and that will help, too. Commercial vehicles will follow the EV route as the technology improves/gets cheaper.
Yes, of course, pollution comes from other sources, but private cars are an easy target because they can be replaced quickly (a 10 year cycle vs decades for power stations), so it makes sense to go for the easy targets first.
Natural gas for heating burns very clean and is low in particulates.
Problem is Clem, our demand for electricity is decreasing not increasing.
Historical electricity data: 1920 to 2016 - GOV.UK
(Second tab in sheet)
Not denying there is an issue if we all use EVs, but the problem of electricity demand is decreasing generally.
Batteries have become the defacto power source for EVs because the industry and to some extent the public have ignored fuel cells after proving it can be done.
Hydrogen production is getting cheaper and at the end of the day for large diesles you can use diesel as the fuel, put it through a reformer and that bit of kit produces hydrogen rich fuel to the fuel cell. The emissions from the reformer are way more ecologically friendly than from a diesel compression engine. No range anxiety and it's a start to get rid of a large portion of pollution from large Diesel engines.
If they pursue this for lorry size diesels the cost would be bearable for business while they get batteries suitable for large vehicles or hydrogen fuel stations actually come into existence.
For cars the safety of using hydrogen will probably remain a factor for quite a while and batteries are getting there quickly enough at the moment.
I would guess the decrease is partly due to personal solar to a small degree recently. Generally though the big industrial plants have disappeared and we are all using more efficient electrical equipment.
It's been dropping since the 80s.
I'm guessing a combination of energy efficiency and reduced industrial demand.
In recent years I guess home generation will have made a small dent in demand.
I'm more than happy to accept all that's been posted above, but it still doesn't change the fact that every winter, there's always a continued worry about whether we'll have enough capacity to generate the electricity that we need during an extended cold period. If power consumption is reducing why is this always reported by the likes of the BBC every year? To my mind, we still don't enough generating capacity now, let alone to support millions of EVs.
Probably because production capacity has fallen too. As demand increases long term it is worth investing in production. Use increase and decreases in spikes and the supply business takes time to build capacity - they react to the long term trends.
Yes, probably. However, it's not as if winter is an infrequent occurrence! It's down, I think, to too much 'short-termism'. We seem to have lost the ability (or the intent) to look at the bigger, longer-term picture. It's not just energy production, but services like the NHS, the police force, and so forth. We seem to focus on 'now', rather than properly plan for the longer term. The Beeching railway cuts in the 1960s were a case in point to my mind. To stop little-used rail services was one thing, but to then immediately rip out the infrastructure, rather than stop and wait to see if what was proposed actually worked has left a lasting legacy that we all now suffer from.
It is all about profit. Nobody will provide capacity that isn't used the majority of the time.
Which is fine until the rolling power cuts kick-in ..., which will be far too late. I take your point though. Time to install that diesel-powered generator. Oh wait, I won't be able to get any fuel for it. Where are those candles? ;-)
Candles? The first known electric car was built in 1837 by a Scotsman:
History of the electric vehicle - Wikipedia
Also: "Rechargeable batteries that provided a viable means for storing electricity on board a vehicle did not come into being until 1859, with the invention of the lead–acid battery..."
Strange to think EVs were being developed long before electric lights were in use in houses.
My guess would be, overfueling by a "tuning" box. I've seen it so many times when guys insist on turning it up too high and believe they get more power from it. The reverse is true, bad for the engine and everyone, waste of fuel, and a reduction in power.
I'd like to go down the EV route, we mainly do short day trips these days but the issue for us would be charging. We live in a development with communal underground carparking so no way to get our own power supply down there. We don't use a car to go shopping as big shops we get delivered and smaller shops we go by foot/bus/tube etc.
We use our car to go see friends or to get out the city into the countryside and so finding an EV charging point at village pub car park or such just isnt going to happen.
Despite being in central London there is only 1 charge point within a mile and its a 0.6 mile walk, next closest one is 1.8 miles. Yes I can do it in 10 minutes, 15 if the Mrs is with me, but my idea of having a car isnt to have a 30 minute walk to get it and drop it back each time.
Haven't heard if there is any proposed solution to those of us with communial car parks? Do we have to start using the car more to be able to drive to a charging station, feels a little counter intuitive.
The winter problem is largely due to gas supply. Many power stations are powered by gas, so when the cold weather kicks in there is a double whammy of demand.
The other factor is that the government has been closing down the old coal power stations to meet emissions targets, but failing to get new ones built. They rely on foreign investment from the likes of the French EDF who will only built a power station if they are guaranteed a profit through high energy charges.
EVs are not a major factor in any of this, they are just caught up in the crossfire.
Maybe, but if the move to EVs takes place, then we will need more power generation. I can't see any way round that. The coal-fired power situation is somewhat annoying. According to some sources, the UK is sitting on over 400 years of coal, but the Thatcher government accelerated the demise of our mines, primarily by allowing cheap coal imports. Coal is a dirty fuel, but in Germany, which is also rich in coal, they've been busy building new power stations using coal and carbon sequestration. If the Germans can do it, I can't see why we can't. Using UK-sourced coal has many benefits -- employment, self-sufficiency, the ability to generate gas, and so on. However, with the mines having been disused for so long, it's probably too late, which is why we're now stuck on having to import foreign gas supplies. Wind and solar power will simply not deliver what we need in the future, if we're (eventually) to stop using gas as a power source, and we're not exactly rushing to replace our nuclear power stations or build new ones. Sure, the rolling blackouts predicted some years ago haven't yet arrived, due to us having mild winters of late, but it will only take one severe winter to demonstrate just how fragile and poorly planned our power generating infrastructure. In the UK, we can't plan anything with any degree of efficiency, which is why we only hold ~2 days worth of natural gas reserves, whilst the French hold 40. I strongly suspect that the move to support EVs will be half-*rsed here in the UK, just like everything else is that we do.
Ahem it was Wilson who closed many more mines than Thatcher ever did.
Sure infrastructure support will be a challenge but I think the UK can do it dispite its varied and sometimes isolated terrain.
The coal powered stations and who closed coal mines discussions/arguments aren't really part of the future IMO.
Coal is not clean and sequestration of CO2 attached to coal fired power stations isn't the panacea it might seem. Sure you can do (expensive) things to lessen impacts of burning coal but don't get fixated on that as the power source of the future like our federal government in power is over here. And we have millions of tonnes a year available.....
Pumped hydro for example to pump up during the day using solar and release at peak/night reduces base load demands. Less coal and gas required.
Ultimately batteries attached to renewables with a bit of pumped hydro for peak could replace the lot.
No I am not a tree hugger - just believe we should make an effort to reduce impacts.
One thing for sure - heaps of EVs need power so hopefully those that can will get power ready in time.
I think we should definitely utilise more wind - it's one of our biggest natural resources. The UK receives 25% of all of Europe's wind so we would be mad not to increase the (approx) 10% of the grid mix that it currently makes up.
I'm probably alone, but I quite like the look of it as well.
I guess anything is preferable to the sight of a great big ruddy power station!
It has always puzzled me how people oppose wind and solar based on their aesthetics, they're not exactly the biggest eyesore in the world, especially with these new solar roof tiles that look like a normal roof
Yes, sorry, I'd forgotten good ol' Harold Wilson.
Separate names with a comma.