EV cars, would you, wouldn't you?

EV cars, would you, wouldn't you?

Poll: EV cars, would you, wouldn't you?

Total Members Polled: 427

Yes, I would have an electric car: 72%
No, I have no interest, ICE all the way: 11%
No, technology and resources not available: 17%
Author
Discussion

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
ORD said:
Conspiracy theorist above made me laugh into my coffee. I am, for the record, not a paid infiltrator from those evil coal barons.

I didn't say that someone on a green tariff doesn't pay for green energy. He does. He just doesn't get it. He gets electricity from the distribution lines, which is a mix.
It was actually a decent post and made some very good points about not getting your information from Blogs, because many of them are simply bullst claims that are not backed up with actual evidence. I wouldn't have called it conspiratorial either, especially since nothing he posted is really up for dispute.

Yes, of course no one actually gets the same electrons that they have paid for, but this is a point of pedantry and a spurious argument.

The customer pays for green energy and so the supplier has to buy green energy, ultimately it doesn't matter which customer gets what.

pherlopolus

2,087 posts

157 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hufggfg said:
On the flip side, the "NO WAY I'M GOING ELECTRIC" argument seems to boil down to "I don't like change, and I'm not prepared to suffer any personal inconvenience or cost at all for the better of society"
I think that is it completely, there are people who do stupid numbers of miles a day who it probably wouldn't suit (I'm ignoring the can't charge at home, due to free public charging currently for 90% of the population), but a small EV Car would probably fit in as car 2 in most 2 car families.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hufggfg said:
hairyben said:
Most green people argument boils down to "it's us against the evil big corporations, if you don't believe us it's because you're too stupid". Like everyone they find their bogeyman.
I don't think that's true at all. Sure, I see your point about the real eco-loonies, but I think the majority of people who are pro-sustainability (myself included) just think that we need to consider the long term impacts of our consumption, and how we can tweak things to make it less harmful (and thus cheaper long term).

On the flip side, the "NO WAY I'M GOING ELECTRIC" argument seems to boil down to "I don't like change, and I'm not prepared to suffer any personal inconvenience or cost at all for the better of society"
Indeed.

A great many arguments boil down to it's us against the big corporations/govenment etc.

Anti vaxination, anti GMO, Climate change denial etc. One poster on this thread has already made a comment about EVs to this effect:

Terminator X said:
73% of you are sleepwalking towards what ever the Govt and / or Big Business want you to do. Cheap driving today as long as you live and work locally but taxed to the hilt once enough people are in them. No I've never been in one and have no plans to either shoot Likewise bloody driver-less cars!

TX.
The fact is that whenever someone believes something that is not well supported by evidence they tend to go down the "Blame government/big business" route. This includes people on all sides of the political spectrum.

hairyben

8,516 posts

182 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hufggfg said:
hairyben said:
Most green people argument boils down to "it's us against the evil big corporations, if you don't believe us it's because you're too stupid". Like everyone they find their bogeyman.
I don't think that's true at all. Sure, I see your point about the real eco-loonies, but I think the majority of people who are pro-sustainability (myself included) just think that we need to consider the long term impacts of our consumption, and how we can tweak things to make it less harmful (and thus cheaper long term).

On the flip side, the "NO WAY I'M GOING ELECTRIC" argument seems to boil down to "I don't like change, and I'm not prepared to suffer any personal inconvenience or cost at all for the better of society"
I'm very pro-sustainability and abhor the wastage our society produces, it's for this reason that I loath the lifestyle-greeny who believes any old st he's told so long as it comes from the right source, and dare you question his fragile dependency by talking about battery manufacture or the true environmental/energy costs of windymills compared to the meagre and unreliable output they scream "right winger" at you. It's no better than religion insofar as it's about having something to believe and not caring about the facts

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

189 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Jimbo. said:
300bhp/ton said:
I need to look further into this, but I just can't get the figures to work out. Been looking at the Leaf and Zoe and to do any sort of meaningful annual mileage, the battery rental just rapes you on monthly costs.
Then don't rent the battery. Lease the entire car then walk away once done.
I had a quick Google, never leased anything before. The monthly rate seemed fine, but you also had to pay £2-2.5k down in advance. I assume you don't get this back (correct me if wrong). But if that is the case, that seems a hugely expensive way to never actually own a vehicle.

300bhp/ton

41,030 posts

189 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
gangzoom said:
Phunk said:
60-80 miles.

Renault Zoe is approx the same, perhaps 5 miles more.

However Nissan have just released a Leaf with a bigger battery which should give a real world 90-110 mile range
I've had my Leaf over 6 months. The 100-0% range is actually very close to 90 miles. But you never will go to 0% - Your be stuck overwise. I recharge it once the battery drops to below 20%, so I plug mine in every 70 miles or so. Which for me is about twice a week.

Nissan has just released a new Leaf with a bigger battery which should mean a 100-0% range of 110+ miles. This is actually enough for me to go from Leicester to London without worry - My current Leaf can just about do it non-stop but the last 5-10 miles is very tight on charge - but it's good fun wink
So doing a 75 miles a day commute if probably not practical in one of these. Thanks. I did wonder if they would be viable, given fuelling them should be cheap.

PomBstard

6,728 posts

241 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Colonial said:
Considering one (Tesla S) for a work car if the finances stack up. My driving is 110km on mainly 70km/h+ roads, 40 minutes on a motorway. Then parked at work for 8 hours (3 phase power as well) and I do that twice a week. Otherwise it is either sat in my garage or doing similar distances around the region.

I'd want a fun second car for weekends, but I'd want that if I had any sedan for mainly commuting purposes.
And, bye-bye Bogans...

http://www.caradvice.com.au/386305/drag-race-model...

Worth watching the video just to see how quick the Tesla gets going

FiF

43,958 posts

250 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
ORD said:
Conspiracy theorist above made me laugh into my coffee. I am, for the record, not a paid infiltrator from those evil coal barons.

I didn't say that someone on a green tariff doesn't pay for green energy. He does. He just doesn't get it. He gets electricity from the distribution lines, which is a mix.
It was actually a decent post and made some very good points about not getting your information from Blogs, because many of them are simply bullst claims that are not backed up with actual evidence. I wouldn't have called it conspiratorial either, especially since nothing he posted is really up for dispute.

Yes, of course no one actually gets the same electrons that they have paid for, but this is a point of pedantry and a spurious argument.

The customer pays for green energy and so the supplier has to buy green energy, ultimately it doesn't matter which customer gets what.
Quite, he even went some way towards dealing with the reconciliation between electricity sold and purchased. It annoys me too the lazy smears when people use the argument about everything has gone through the grid so it's not green but from coal etc.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hairyben said:
hufggfg said:
hairyben said:
Most green people argument boils down to "it's us against the evil big corporations, if you don't believe us it's because you're too stupid". Like everyone they find their bogeyman.
I don't think that's true at all. Sure, I see your point about the real eco-loonies, but I think the majority of people who are pro-sustainability (myself included) just think that we need to consider the long term impacts of our consumption, and how we can tweak things to make it less harmful (and thus cheaper long term).

On the flip side, the "NO WAY I'M GOING ELECTRIC" argument seems to boil down to "I don't like change, and I'm not prepared to suffer any personal inconvenience or cost at all for the better of society"
I'm very pro-sustainability and abhor the wastage our society produces, it's for this reason that I loath the lifestyle-greeny who believes any old st he's told so long as it comes from the right source, and dare you question his fragile dependency by talking about battery manufacture or the true environmental/energy costs of windymills compared to the meagre and unreliable output they scream "right winger" at you. It's no better than religion insofar as it's about having something to believe and not caring about the facts
But how much of this is fact based?

There is false information on both sides of the argument and both sides like to get involved in name calling. There is also a tendancy to label anyone who doesn't agree as either a left wing eco loony or a right winger. As a believer in science I tend to dispair of both sides. The route to the truth never comes from the noisy lay people shouting from the sidelines in support of the arguement that happens to suit their world view, it comes from science.
It is for this reason that I don't have any time for the likes of George Monbiot or James Delingpole.

Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 8th October 12:10

DrTre

12,955 posts

231 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
But how much of this is fact based?

There is false information on both sides of the argument and both sides like to get involved in name calling. There is also a tendancy to label anyone who doesn't agree as either a left wing eco loony or a right winger. As a believer in science I tend to dispair of both sides. The route to the truth never comes from the noisy lay people shouting from the sidelines in support of the arguement that happens to suit their world view, it comes from science.
I agree totally. Using shale in the UK as an example, the objections are generally misplaced or unfounded (save for well integrity issues) however the actual amount/viability of shale gas in the UK is at best/present pretty much unknown, at worst totally non-viable/existent. The theoretical best rocks in Europe (Poland) have amounted to diddly squat so far. These standpoints are not in conflict with one another, and are defensible from regulator and industry alike but to voice them would mean being called a lefty by shale supporters and a fascist by greens.

Edited by DrTre on Thursday 8th October 12:57

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
pherlopolus said:
(I'm ignoring the can't charge at home, due to free public charging currently for 90% of the population),
90% of the UK population have access to free public charging points? That sounds completely unbelievable. Do you mean 90% of the population that currently own electric cars maybe, which is a pretty small number?

hairyben

8,516 posts

182 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Devil2575 said:
But how much of this is fact based?

There is false information on both sides of the argument and both sides like to get involved in name calling. There is also a tendancy to label anyone who doesn't agree as either a left wing eco loony or a right winger. As a believer in science I tend to dispair of both sides. The route to the truth never comes from the noisy lay people shouting from the sidelines in support of the arguement that happens to suit their world view, it comes from science.
It is for this reason that I don't have any time for the likes of George Monbiot or James Delingpole.

Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 8th October 12:10
My point is you can't discuss facts- as soon as you enquire/challenge you're on "the other side". Although this kind of ignorance/resistance is hardly restricted to the topic in question, it is *very* prevelent

DrTre with shale is a good example - not much real info about it, good or bad - but I get the impression that most of the opposition jump right on to that bandwagon with a "corporations drilling for gas? seems like the sort of thing my persona should oppose" then set about finding whatever "evidence" fits the conclusion.

liner33

10,640 posts

201 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
90% of the UK population have access to free public charging points? That sounds completely unbelievable. Do you mean 90% of the population that currently own electric cars maybe, which is a pretty small number?
I assume they mean that 90% of the population have free charging point within 80 miles of their home, seems a suitably vague statistic to throw about

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
liner33 said:
Mr2Mike said:
90% of the UK population have access to free public charging points? That sounds completely unbelievable. Do you mean 90% of the population that currently own electric cars maybe, which is a pretty small number?
I assume they mean that 90% of the population have free charging point within 80 miles of their home, seems a suitably vague statistic to throw about
There's one 1 mile from my home and I don't live in a city.

Devil2575

13,400 posts

187 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hairyben said:
Devil2575 said:
But how much of this is fact based?

There is false information on both sides of the argument and both sides like to get involved in name calling. There is also a tendancy to label anyone who doesn't agree as either a left wing eco loony or a right winger. As a believer in science I tend to dispair of both sides. The route to the truth never comes from the noisy lay people shouting from the sidelines in support of the arguement that happens to suit their world view, it comes from science.
It is for this reason that I don't have any time for the likes of George Monbiot or James Delingpole.

Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 8th October 12:10
My point is you can't discuss facts- as soon as you enquire/challenge you're on "the other side". Although this kind of ignorance/resistance is hardly restricted to the topic in question, it is *very* prevelent

DrTre with shale is a good example - not much real info about it, good or bad - but I get the impression that most of the opposition jump right on to that bandwagon with a "corporations drilling for gas? seems like the sort of thing my persona should oppose" then set about finding whatever "evidence" fits the conclusion.
Some of the objection to fracking is from the Green party/friends of the earth types, but a lot of it is from NIMBYS. A lot of the objections are actually very similar to objections against wind turbines i.e destroy/industrialise the landscape and affect house values.

hufggfg

654 posts

192 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
hairyben said:
My point is you can't discuss facts- as soon as you enquire/challenge you're on "the other side". Although this kind of ignorance/resistance is hardly restricted to the topic in question, it is *very* prevelent
Think we're all on the same page mostly, of taking a rational fact based approach, rather than a fundamentalist approach, but I think that the whole reason its really important to discuss facts.

I know what you mean, and you see it on PH all the time, people discussing interesting fact based things, and then someone chimes in with shouty, name calling, over generalising, rhetoric that doesn't move the discussion on at all, but the correct way to deal with these people is to keep to a cool calm discussion of the facts, rather than engaging in their name calling and getting frustrated that they're acting like idiots.


TransverseTight

753 posts

144 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
I'm a right wing lefty. Voted for everyone at least once. Like V8s and electric motors. All I know is that if you do your own research with an open mind, you'll realise fossils days are numbered as we are about to hit grid parity. Even the utility cos will be giving away solar to stick on your roof as it's cheaper than building another power station and fuelling it for 20 years. I don't think the generators are behind the PR it's the extractive industries. Big coal oil and gas (though some are vertical companies so probably complicit).

A lot of the debate has been about should gov pay for stuff. My views on that are balanced. Only to start with. I think the Tories are right to announce reducing the FiT for solar, but are doing it a bit too quick. If they said it would be phased out by 2020 with a decent slash this year it would stop the boom and bust that is expected at the end of this year. However they have the problem is that the demand is getting to high to fund it... so they need to tip toe carefully to keep people interested - but still balance the books for hard working people. (They need to come up with a new phrase). I also think they were right to take energy levies out of bills and into general taxation. Otherwise you are hitting people who can't really avoid buying energy. It's only a couple of quid a week, but to some people that's the difference between a new pair of shoes a year for each kid, or not.

EVs on the other hand have a long way to go before they get accepted by most. A lot of it is misconceptions. With over 2 million car sales a year I'd expect at least 10% to be EVs or about 200,000 a year - there's definitely that many people who have b) off street parking, b) a second family car c) do less than 60 miles a day. If you could just convince this small segment an EV is a better buy than dino burners you'd have the start of a market transformation.

The other key thing... don't just build pure EVs till batteries get to about half the price they are now (about 2022/3). The i3 REX has the balance right - 65-90 miles of EV range + an infinite range petrol tank for long journeys (as in you can fill up indefinitely at the existing network of petrol stations). PHEVs mean that if chargers are down, or already occupied (by a petrol only car grrrrr) then it's not the end of the world. Even Nissan were touting a REX type car at the Frankfurt motor show. It's no surprise the best selling EV is actually a PHEV - the Mistubishi Outlander. Question is can it be done at the cheaper end of the market without making them too expensive. Ie. a Leaf or Zoe REX? It's not really essential.. I've used 6 litres of fuel since May and that could have been avoided if I wasn't being lazy. Well by Lazy I mean willing to hang around for an hour on a slow charger, instead of whizzing of on the REX to a rapid charger.


pherlopolus

2,087 posts

157 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
Mr2Mike said:
90% of the UK population have access to free public charging points? That sounds completely unbelievable. Do you mean 90% of the population that currently own electric cars maybe, which is a pretty small number?
well the ecotricity charge points are free and fairly well spread out (if not in mid wales), not much point using them if you don't have an EV.

I do get your point though, how many people who live in the middle of wales travel more then 35 miles and don't have off street parking, I am not sure. But there are quite a few slower chargers dotted (4-6 hours for a full charge) around and the CYC/Chargemaster/Polar ones that you have to pay for.

But for the majority of the population I don't think there is any technological reason that they couldn't have an EV as the 2nd car.

RossP

2,523 posts

282 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
We have an i3 and an M4. Both utterly brilliant at what they do.

CorvetteConvert

7,897 posts

213 months

Thursday 8th October 2015
quotequote all
I urge everyone to try a 2014 or later Tesla sports car. My gawd are they good and fast!