Car Park discrimination - no EV's allowed
Discussion
GT9 said:
FMOB said:
Don't forget all the shrapnel as the car disintegrates in the explosion. The terrorists are going to love these things, instant car bomb on wheels, just add detonator.
Detonator being a 2016 diesel (non-hybrid!) Land Rover parked amongst a dozen or so fuel cell cars in an underground car park? Probably capable of demolishing an entire building in an instant, but fortunately, a fairly implausible scenario in the UK given fuel cell car sales and hydrogen availability for cars are both on life support.
Oh, and the ban on hydrogen in tunnels which I’m pretty sure will be extended to any public enclosed space.
GT9 said:
FMOB said:
Don't forget all the shrapnel as the car disintegrates in the explosion. The terrorists are going to love these things, instant car bomb on wheels, just add detonator.
Detonator being a 2016 diesel (non-hybrid!) Land Rover parked amongst a dozen or so fuel cell cars in an underground car park? Probably capable of demolishing an entire building in an instant, but fortunately, a fairly implausible scenario in the UK given fuel cell car sales and hydrogen availability for cars are both on life support.
Oh, and the ban on hydrogen in tunnels which I’m pretty sure will be extended to any public enclosed space.
I will admit that I'm not entirely up to speed with the latest tests, simulations and studies for hydrogen tunnel safety.
This is a topic that has been studied in great detail for at least two decades now, and I know there is a large EU consortium (HyTunnel) that is throwing lots of money at trying to convince themselves and everyone else it's all good.
There are also lots of research papers coming out of the Far East where fuel cell cars are more prevalent.
Much of the early work was done in the USA, as they already had the knowledge base and facilities to look into it.
My own reservations stem from work I was doing at the time with US research and development organisations studying various energy technologies.
The same organisations very familiar with large scale hydrogen production and handling in industrial applications.
And hearing and seeing first hand from them what happens when you play fast and loose.
The primary approach towards avoiding the accidental release and ignition is to make the tanks incredibly strong.
Which they are anyway to withstand the storage pressure.
The problem of a release and ignition is that the peak temperatures seen in the proximity of the car are much higher, up to say 2000 deg C vs 500 deg C for a petrol and a peak energy release of up to 20 MW vs 5 MW for petrol.
This is a very short lived spike though, so if you survive the heat and pressure wave that results, you should be good to head back to the dealership to replace the fuel cell car you just annihilated.
This is a topic that has been studied in great detail for at least two decades now, and I know there is a large EU consortium (HyTunnel) that is throwing lots of money at trying to convince themselves and everyone else it's all good.
There are also lots of research papers coming out of the Far East where fuel cell cars are more prevalent.
Much of the early work was done in the USA, as they already had the knowledge base and facilities to look into it.
My own reservations stem from work I was doing at the time with US research and development organisations studying various energy technologies.
The same organisations very familiar with large scale hydrogen production and handling in industrial applications.
And hearing and seeing first hand from them what happens when you play fast and loose.
The primary approach towards avoiding the accidental release and ignition is to make the tanks incredibly strong.
Which they are anyway to withstand the storage pressure.
The problem of a release and ignition is that the peak temperatures seen in the proximity of the car are much higher, up to say 2000 deg C vs 500 deg C for a petrol and a peak energy release of up to 20 MW vs 5 MW for petrol.
This is a very short lived spike though, so if you survive the heat and pressure wave that results, you should be good to head back to the dealership to replace the fuel cell car you just annihilated.
0ddball said:
Improves it's sprinkler system?
Maybe they are suggesting that water on an electric car fire is an issue and they are upgrading to foam? Is that a thing?
Probably because of the Luton airport fireMaybe they are suggesting that water on an electric car fire is an issue and they are upgrading to foam? Is that a thing?
Even through that was caused by a range rover
Electric cars pose a much bigger fire risk
Responder.First said:
donkmeister said:
Yes, I remember when Gordon Brown showed up at my house and twisted my nipples until I handed over the keys to my petrol car. "Drive this here manky smokey diesel y'bas!" were his parting words as he threw the keys to a 320d at me.
All the people who used to bang on about how their TDi was an absolute rocketship (within a 200rpm power band) that did 90MPG and cost £0 in VED, they were also forced. They should get com pen say shun for the lower fuel and VED costs they ensured due to dieselgate too.
I think much like EVs people are being bullied into them on Environmental grounds! Road tax and environmental concerns once again.All the people who used to bang on about how their TDi was an absolute rocketship (within a 200rpm power band) that did 90MPG and cost £0 in VED, they were also forced. They should get com pen say shun for the lower fuel and VED costs they ensured due to dieselgate too.
I used to pay considerably more road tax as I refuse to buy a diesel had some for work purposes only, people to bang on about tiny powerband torque benefits use and the green credentials, how they were saving the planet unlike EVs they weren't given disable style premium parking. I know people who bought diesels for local 3 mile trips due to roadtax/ved free or £30 per year.
Road tax on Sept 2006 was crippling on some petrol's remember, as some cars jumped from £190 ish to like £415, just because they were petrols.
All the time the manufacturers like VW conspired to defraud us and we have stored up health problems for future generations due to high toxic air in cities.
I do find it irksome when you question how green and sustainable EVs some people call you a conspiracy nut, when we had all this in the 90s-00s, I called it then how can that black stuff out the exhaust be better!
People sticking their heads in the collective sand and saying "this EV is completely green" should be reminded of the environmental impact of battery manufacturer. My personal view is any legislation should tackle the throwaway culture and make EVs a long-term keeper to minimise that. Tesla batteries are apparently good for 500k miles now, and the motors are good for 200k. That battery is an entire lifetime of motoring for the average driver with a couple of replacement motors. Maybe push for repairability and upgradability so that people view the chassis and drivetrain as something that contains the latest gizmos rather than part and parcel of it.
We don't flatten a house and replace it because it needs a new boiler, yet many average consumers take essentially this approach with cars.
donkmeister said:
My personal view is any legislation should tackle the throwaway culture and make EVs a long-term keeper to minimise that. Tesla batteries are apparently good for 500k miles now, and the motors are good for 200k. That battery is an entire lifetime of motoring for the average driver with a couple of replacement motors. Maybe push for repairability and upgradability so that people view the chassis and drivetrain as something that contains the latest gizmos rather than part and parcel of it.
We don't flatten a house and replace it because it needs a new boiler, yet many average consumers take essentially this approach with cars.
I appreciate the sentiment, the thing is, an EV's carbon footprint isn't meaningfully affected by how many times it changes hands.We don't flatten a house and replace it because it needs a new boiler, yet many average consumers take essentially this approach with cars.
And neither is the footprint affected much by how far and how fast you drive the car.
What little relationship currently exists is decaying with time anyway.
This concept of the car's environmental footprint during the ownership phase is the polar opposite to ICE car ownership, and unless you embrace that, the sentiment is built on wrong assumptions.
EV batteries in landfill, is, to put it bluntly, b
ks.Not only is there existing and impending legislation to prevent that, it makes zero economic sense to throw away valuable minerals that can be recycled without any loss of integrity, and with a recovery rate in excess of 95%.
The house analogy only works if you can demonstrate that 3 year old cars are being scrapped after their first ownership. Good luck!
GT9 said:
donkmeister said:
My personal view is any legislation should tackle the throwaway culture and make EVs a long-term keeper to minimise that. Tesla batteries are apparently good for 500k miles now, and the motors are good for 200k. That battery is an entire lifetime of motoring for the average driver with a couple of replacement motors. Maybe push for repairability and upgradability so that people view the chassis and drivetrain as something that contains the latest gizmos rather than part and parcel of it.
We don't flatten a house and replace it because it needs a new boiler, yet many average consumers take essentially this approach with cars.
I appreciate the sentiment, the thing is, an EV's carbon footprint isn't meaningfully affected by how many times it changes hands.We don't flatten a house and replace it because it needs a new boiler, yet many average consumers take essentially this approach with cars.
And neither is the footprint affected much by how far and how fast you drive the car.
What little relationship currently exists is decaying with time anyway.
This concept of the car's environmental footprint during the ownership phase is the polar opposite to ICE car ownership, and unless you embrace that, the sentiment is built on wrong assumptions.
EV batteries in landfill, is, to put it bluntly, b
ks.Not only is there existing and impending legislation to prevent that, it makes zero economic sense to throw away valuable minerals that can be recycled without any loss of integrity, and with a recovery rate in excess of 95%.
The house analogy only works if you can demonstrate that 3 year old cars are being scrapped after their first ownership. Good luck!
Working Tesla modules sell for about £800 (last timeI looked at them) so the notion of them ending up in landfill makes no sense at all.
donkmeister said:
Fair enough - we always knew diesel was dirty and nasty, but often people say "we were forced into them" as if they had no choice, rather than just deciding "cheap is good".
It was going that way though, it reached the point at which there were various cars on the market only available in the UK as a diesel. 2010-2017 BMW X3 for example. It was getting increasingly difficult to buy new petrol cars and this in turn filtered through into the used market.I bought a 530d not because I wanted a diesel particularly but because in 2015 almost all of the used market for such a car was diesel whether you wanted one or not.
KAgantua said:
The EV thing does feel very much like the diesel thing all over again
I think it's more like the dawn of motoring. I am amazed at the similarities, the objections to EVs seem to me so amazingly similar to the objections raised back in the 19th/early 20th centuries to the motor car itself.It's totally not like the VHS v Beta thing at all, as some have said.
Louis Balfour said:
"We have been forced to act mainly due to the levels of sanctimony we have been experiencing", said Malcolm Tucker, a spokesperson for Alder Hay Foundation Trust.
"When we had the occasional Prius or Leaf driver to contend with the situation was tolerable. But now we are inundated with Teslas, the drivers of which are convinced they are saving the planet whilst being completely incapable of actually driving, we have had no option but to ban all electric vehicles. Yes, regrettably, that includes milk floats."
"Our decision to ban all electric vehicles was made finally as a result of a Model 3 owner causing structural damage to a supporting pillar in the car park. The vehicle veered out of control into the pillar and CCTV footage revealed that it was due to the driver being preoccupied with looking down their nose at the driver of a Range Rover Sport, who was parking in an adjacent bay".
Angela Kirby, leader of the Foundation Trust commented, "We don't want them in our hospital, comparing notes about how far they managed to travel on a full charge, why the public charging network is definitely improving and tutting about how unhealthy it is to have vehicles powered by fossil fuels in a hospital car park. I wish they would all just fk off."
The BBC approached Barry Wainwright, councillor for Outer Liverpool, for comment about proposals for a separate car park for the terminally self-righteous, but he was unavailable for comment.
Do you write for a living? Enjoyed that, well-done "When we had the occasional Prius or Leaf driver to contend with the situation was tolerable. But now we are inundated with Teslas, the drivers of which are convinced they are saving the planet whilst being completely incapable of actually driving, we have had no option but to ban all electric vehicles. Yes, regrettably, that includes milk floats."
"Our decision to ban all electric vehicles was made finally as a result of a Model 3 owner causing structural damage to a supporting pillar in the car park. The vehicle veered out of control into the pillar and CCTV footage revealed that it was due to the driver being preoccupied with looking down their nose at the driver of a Range Rover Sport, who was parking in an adjacent bay".
Angela Kirby, leader of the Foundation Trust commented, "We don't want them in our hospital, comparing notes about how far they managed to travel on a full charge, why the public charging network is definitely improving and tutting about how unhealthy it is to have vehicles powered by fossil fuels in a hospital car park. I wish they would all just f
k off." The BBC approached Barry Wainwright, councillor for Outer Liverpool, for comment about proposals for a separate car park for the terminally self-righteous, but he was unavailable for comment.
KAgantua said:
The EV thing does feel very much like the diesel thing all over again
Diesel failed because chasing CO2 emissions is counterproductive to NOx emissions and that's unique to the diesel engine. Planet health vs human health on a large scale if you like.
But both of those things were known at the outset though.
Clearly, some people don't believe in either or both of those things, but at a national and international legislation level, the point is valid.
If this is the same thing all over again, then you are going to have to tell me what the power struggle at play is, because I can't see it.
If it's because batteries catch fire and potentially harm 'all people', then that's obviously b
ks.In any case, solid state will make it a temporary thing.
Sometimes, details matter.
KAgantua said:
otolith said:
KAgantua said:
The EV thing does feel very much like the diesel thing all over again
In what respect?otolith said:
KAgantua said:
otolith said:
KAgantua said:
The EV thing does feel very much like the diesel thing all over again
In what respect?otolith said:
KAgantua said:
It was an off the cuff comment, and I sense you want to turn this into an arguement about EVs. I dont want to debate with you, so ill leave this here.
Fair enough, I assumed that you meant to imply that this was another mistake of the type made with diesel.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff