The all things EV chat thread

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

If I want to buy a new car in a few years time, current petrol engined new vehicle phase-out timescales mean that I am going to have to. But not yet.

 

[bobmac]

If I want to buy a new car in a few years time, current petrol engined new vehicle phase-out timescales mean that I am going to have to. But not yet.

You would want to buy new, not nearly new?
If nearly new is good enough (2022-2024) there are 36,256 ICE cars for sale today on Autotrader alone.
I know you're not buying today but as more and more people switch to EV, I can see that number increasing.

 

[Mudball]

Does your cable not lock in when the car is locked?

It should do or else the cable could be stolen.

Name: Sarcasm
Time of Death: 9:56

While it is an unteathered charging point, it has an electronic lock. So it stays lock all the time. I will be in the market to get a longer charging cable since the current one needs the car to be parked in a certain way. It is easy at the moment, but it is not my car's historic natural parking position..

 

[PJ87]

Name: Sarcasm
Time of Death: 9:56

While it is an unteathered charging point, it has an electronic lock. So it stays lock all the time. I will be in the market to get a longer charging cable since the current one needs the car to be parked in a certain way. It is easy at the moment, but it is not my car's historic natural parking position..

That's why I went tethered, 7.5m cable which is just right. When it was the Corsa it was ok to charge anywhere I parked apart from was bit of a stretch if I parked one spot one way round. Still doable

Kia tho has the charge point on the front so it's perfect

 

[Mudball]

That's why I went tethered, 7.5m cable which is just right. When it was the Corsa it was ok to charge anywhere I parked apart from was bit of a stretch if I parked one spot one way round. Still doable

Kia tho has the charge point on the front so it's perfect

I like the Tesla approach.. chargers on both sides at the back.

Charging in front is good for home charging, but if you use a public charger, then you will have reverse out rather than drive away..

 

[PJ87]

I like the Tesla approach.. chargers on both sides at the back.

Charging in front is good for home charging, but if you use a public charger, then you will have reverse out rather than drive away..

I don't mind tbh, I drove in yesterday at the club and reversing out the camera is amazing so don't mind reversing out

 

[Jimaroid]

Whilst it's a valid point, and a concern if we do nothing we are doing the same / worse damage constantly just standing still.

At least with increased mining of materials it's for a long term plan to reduce usage rather than carry on as we were forever

Can you connect the dots between these statements (my emphasis) being drawn from the report? Already high impact, reducing availability and increasing demand. Doesn’t sound like a long term plan to me.


The stripping of Earth’s natural materials is already responsible for 60% of global heating impacts, including land use change, 40% of air pollution impact, and more than 90% of global water stress and land-related biodiversity loss, says the report, due to be released in February.
…
Higher figures mean higher impacts,” he said. “In essence, there are no more safe spaces on Earth. We are already out of our safe operating space and if these trends continue, things will get worse.
…
Electric vehicles, for example, use almost 10 times more “critical raw materials” than conventional cars, and reaching net zero transport emissions by 2050 would require increasing critical mineral extraction for them sixfold within 15 years.

 

[PJ87]

Can you connect the dots between these statements (my emphasis) being drawn from the report? Already high impact, reducing availability and increasing demand. Doesn’t sound like a long term plan to me.


The stripping of Earth’s natural materials is already responsible for 60% of global heating impacts, including land use change, 40% of air pollution impact, and more than 90% of global water stress and land-related biodiversity loss, says the report, due to be released in February.
…
Higher figures mean higher impacts,” he said. “In essence, there are no more safe spaces on Earth. We are already out of our safe operating space and if these trends continue, things will get worse.
…
Electric vehicles, for example, use almost 10 times more “critical raw materials” than conventional cars, and reaching net zero transport emissions by 2050 would require increasing critical mineral extraction for them sixfold within 15 years.

However we will turn down the use of fossil fuels which is a huge part of the above figure

Electric vechiles in the last example are moving away from colbate in batteries whilst it's used in refining of petrol and diesel

Whilst it is concerning any form of mining materials it is an important part of a shift to net zero

What's the other option? Do nothing at all?

 

[PJ87]

Now on a week of Kia ownership, (Coco as she has been named )

Night and day compared to the Corsa

Everything just works

Did an update today of the sat nav and entertainment.. downloaded to usb last night. Left doing in car park at work . Done within an hour. Perfect

The app just works. Wake up and press start whilst I get ready for work then off I go

Much more efficient, started with 80% battery today , used 20% worth of energy on my entire day which brings it on course to a 250 range based on that being 50 mile trip

Super comfortable, just use the adaptive cruise to and from work on 406 and let it steer itself .. obviously watching for other road users but certainly takes the stress out of driving.

Think tomorrow is the first day it's not going to be going anywhere since it arrived lol where as the Alhambra hasn't moved since.

Even more tempted to get rid of the Alhambra now .. the guys at work are talking about a swap plus cash deal ..

Tesla model s driver wants the Alhambra, nissan leaf driver interested in the model s and I'm interested in his leaf

The model s driver would need cash on top from the nissan driver tho lol but it's very tempting to get a 3rd hand EV that I know the history of .. (even driven it a couple times)

I was toying with ditching the car completely and going down to 1 car but Mrs says during the school holidays she needs a car when I'm working which is fair enough. (Didn't say which type of car tho )

 

[Bunkermagnet]

Can you connect the dots between these statements (my emphasis) being drawn from the report? Already high impact, reducing availability and increasing demand. Doesn’t sound like a long term plan to me.


The stripping of Earth’s natural materials is already responsible for 60% of global heating impacts, including land use change, 40% of air pollution impact, and more than 90% of global water stress and land-related biodiversity loss, says the report, due to be released in February.
…
Higher figures mean higher impacts,” he said. “In essence, there are no more safe spaces on Earth. We are already out of our safe operating space and if these trends continue, things will get worse.
…
Electric vehicles, for example, use almost 10 times more “critical raw materials” than conventional cars, and reaching net zero transport emissions by 2050 would require increasing critical mineral extraction for them sixfold within 15 years.

It's pointless. Apparently, 2 wrongs do make a right.

 

[PJ87]

It's pointless. Apparently, 2 wrongs do make a right.

Again I'll ask. What would you rather do? Continue as is just burning fossil fuel?

It may not be the best alternative but it's the best we have right now and better than what we are doing.

 

[PJ87]

This was a brilliant video a year ago from fully charged about hydrogen.

Michael Liebreich features who (from wiki)

Chairman and CEO of Liebreich Associates, through which he provides advisory services and speaks on clean energy and transportation, smart infrastructure, technology, climate finance and sustainable development

 

[cliveb]

Again I'll ask. What would you rather do? Continue as is just burning fossil fuel?

It may not be the best alternative but it's the best we have right now and better than what we are doing.

I can't speak for Bunkermagnet, but here's my response to your question...

What I would rather have is for the governments of the world to remove their blinkers and take a step back from pushing pure EV as THE SOLUTION via legislation.
Doing that dissuades research into other potential alternatives to ICE cars burning fossil fuels.

Suppose we lived in a perfect world where clean electricity was cheap and plentiful. Then it might actually be a good idea to manufacture gasoline (or similar) from H2O + CO2 + electricity so that vehicular transport could continue to use a fuel that is far more energy dense and quicker to replenish than any kind of battery. (Gasoline has ~9kWh per kg, about 30 times that of lithium batteries, and you can easily get 500kWh of gasoline into a car in a couple of minutes).
Yes, I know that this is far less efficient than just using the electricity directly to power cars. But if using batteries to power cars is significantly less convenient and the electricity is cheap enough, that's not an issue.

The above is just one possible scenario. There might be others yet to be discovered. Green hydrogen might still be worth investigating. (It doesn't look very promising right now, but with more research that might change).

By rushing headlong into a purely EV future, we are constraining ourselves. And legislation is actively placing such constraints on us. It's not worth spending the money to research possible other technologies if the law makers have already made up their minds, so those other technologies which might turn out to be way better than EVs in both practicality and environmental impact might never be found. Politicians need to think before jumping on bandwagons.

 

[PJ87]

I can't speak for Bunkermagnet, but here's my response to your question...

What I would rather have is for the governments of the world to remove their blinkers and take a step back from pushing pure EV as THE SOLUTION via legislation.
Doing that dissuades research into other potential alternatives to ICE cars burning fossil fuels.

Suppose we lived in a perfect world where clean electricity was cheap and plentiful. Then it might actually be a good idea to manufacture gasoline (or similar) from H2O + CO2 + electricity so that vehicular transport could continue to use a fuel that is far more energy dense and quicker to replenish than any kind of battery. (Gasoline has ~9kWh per kg, about 30 times that of lithium batteries, and you can easily get 500kWh of gasoline into a car in a couple of minutes).
Yes, I know that this is far less efficient than just using the electricity directly to power cars. But if using batteries to power cars is significantly less convenient and the electricity is cheap enough, that's not an issue.

The above is just one possible scenario. There might be others yet to be discovered. Green hydrogen might still be worth investigating. (It doesn't look very promising right now, but with more research that might change).

By rushing headlong into a purely EV future, we are constraining ourselves. And legislation is actively placing such constraints on us. It's not worth spending the money to research possible other technologies if the law makers have already made up their minds, so those other technologies which might turn out to be way better than EVs in both practicality and environmental impact might never be found. Politicians need to think before jumping on bandwagons.

Thanks Clive, that's actually a very good response rather than just moaning for the sake of it.

EVs aren't the future they are the now, they are a stop gap until something else can be found like hydrogen if that takes off .. but for now they are a very good solution to lower our emissions and reliance on fossil fuel

The brilliance of them imo are that if you get one they don't suddenly become useless if hydrogen becomes an option, they can exist together as part of a net zero future where as petrol cars have no place in net zero going forward

Like you say there is no perfect solution, however the ban imo is the right thing because without it manufacturers don't do the right thing and push the tech along. They see the £ signs and just continue as normal.

It's like that case in American where they knew global warming was serious but decided it was in their interest to bury it and push fossil fuels for money.

With an actual ban date all manufacturers need to work towards solving the issue

Tesla like we both agree are arrogant and annoying with their EV but I can't deny they have done a hell of a lot for the EV world

Long way to go but baby steps.

 

[Jimaroid]

What's the other option? Do nothing at all?

Did you actually read it? Because for example:

More remote working, better local services and low-carbon transport options such as bikes and trains could be as effective as ramped up vehicle production in meeting people’s mobility needs, with less harmful environmental impacts, the report says.

 

[GreiginFife]

Again I'll ask. What would you rather do? Continue as is just burning fossil fuel?

It may not be the best alternative but it's the best we have right now and better than what we are doing.

Problem is, its never going to be an either/or situation.

Fossil fuel extraction will still continue, at least, in the form of oil.

EVs still need lubricants. They still need tyres and they will, judging by the demand for cheap over anything else, still need plastic, and lots of it.

These are all petroleum by-products from crude oil. So whilst we might need less petrol and diesel, because these are by-products, we’ll still need a load of crude to produce them. All that will happen is the 60-odd percent thats not currently by-product will swap round and we’ll be drowning in excess petrol and diesel that now has no purpose.

So in addition to batteries as a power source, someone needs to be also looking at mass produced plastic replacement for interior parts and also proper synthetic oils. Unless you want to trust your old chip fat to stop your wheel bearings glowing red and sheering off at speed, of course.

 

[PJ87]

Did you actually read it? Because for example:

More remote working, better local services and low-carbon transport options such as bikes and trains could be as effective as ramped up vehicle production in meeting people’s mobility needs, with less harmful environmental impacts, the report says.

Yes I did. And I agree with that entirely. I am a big fan of the 15 minute city model.

Remote working should be considered more. Massively against returning to the office full time

Flying round the world for meetings that could be done on zoom. Just because it's "how it's done"

Repair where possible rather than replace

All new builds should be constructed with solar and battery storage

Big fan of ulez for reducing emissions

 

[PJ87]

Problem is, its never going to be an either/or situation.

Fossil fuel extraction will still continue, at least, in the form of oil.

EVs still need lubricants. They still need tyres and they will, judging by the demand for cheap over anything else, still need plastic, and lots of it.

These are all petroleum by-products from crude oil. So whilst we might need less petrol and diesel, because these are by-products, we’ll still need a load of crude to produce them. All that will happen is the 60-odd percent thats not currently by-product will swap round and we’ll be drowning in excess petrol and diesel that now has no purpose.

So in addition to batteries as a power source, someone needs to be also looking at mass produced plastic replacement for interior parts and also proper synthetic oils. Unless you want to trust your old chip fat to stop your wheel bearings glowing red and sheering off at speed, of course.

Whilst I agree and I'm not saying we stop fossil fuel entirely but we still need to tail off our usage. I'll give the example of the Kia. Vegan leather , the roof lining? Recycled wall paper, plastics ? Recycled , paint? It's some kind of low oil paint

Now that's not perfect but more manufacturers need to start doing the same.

 

[GreiginFife]

Whilst I agree and I'm not saying we stop fossil fuel entirely but we still need to tail off our usage. I'll give the example of the Kia. Vegan leather , the roof lining? Recycled wall paper, plastics ? Recycled , paint? It's some kind of low oil paint

Now that's not perfect but more manufacturers need to start doing the same.

My experience is that "recycled" plastics aren't always all that they are cracked up to be (having worked with a manufacturer a few years ago) and use only a small percentage of recycled material as "new" plastic is needed to make it viable.

Manufacturers won't move to more expensive production methods while the masses want cheap. They will look to use materials to build, primarily, to a price point to shift unit.

We won't tail off oil extraction whilst we still need jet fuel, bitumen, butadiene for rubber and other by products for lubricants.

Most vegan "leather", made from polyurethane. The names sound good, as long as you don't scratch too deep below the surface.

For me, we need to address the million and one other reliances on oil products before propulsion methods are top of the agenda.

 

[Jimaroid]

Repair where possible rather than replace

All new builds should be constructed with solar and battery storage

Look I generally agree but this logic keeps coming up and is really conflicted. From one statement to the next you've gone from recycle to build new. We can't build new to break free of a zero sum problem. It's easy to write down but is impossible to achieve. It's the very act of "building new" from what we dig out of the ground that is the problem in its entirety.

I really like cars and stuff too. But it's human behaviour that's the problem. Until something extremely radical is done to break our addiction we may as well just do whatever we want and enjoy what we've got.