UK Gov U-turn on ICE
Discussion
Clearly click-bait title and if mods want it merged with https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... please go ahead.
Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
Banning ICE cars and going all authoritarian on the public by forcing only the option of milk floats , was a stupid idea for parliament to roll out and even stupid for the likes of the Tories! (who were once revered as having an understanding of the needs of the economy)
Boris's ego/vanity trip on stating the UK must go Net0 when the infrastructure is not in place and won't be in place in the time scale, along with the cost to the public to fund the infrastructure and the additional cost of removing fossil fuels, was/is political and reality stupidity.
Some of the notes on the gov website refer to Sythetic fuels, although expensive to produce at the moment, this would have been the better option to pursue rather than mandating milk floats.
Boris's ego/vanity trip on stating the UK must go Net0 when the infrastructure is not in place and won't be in place in the time scale, along with the cost to the public to fund the infrastructure and the additional cost of removing fossil fuels, was/is political and reality stupidity.
Some of the notes on the gov website refer to Sythetic fuels, although expensive to produce at the moment, this would have been the better option to pursue rather than mandating milk floats.
Sui3471 said:
Clearly click-bait title and if mods want it merged with https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... please go ahead.
Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
It looks to be a well researched report but the conclusions seem at odds with the evidence gathered (guiding away from e-fuels for majority car use) and mainly seem to be written to take a pot shot at the government strategy. Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
And this line in the conclusions loses it a lot of credibility. There's sod all evidence that PHEVs are completing 80% of journeys on electric.
"Distributing those resources across more plug-in hybrid vehicles with smaller battery packs that enable 80 per cent of our journeys to be completed electrically yet retaining extended range using an ICE running on a sustainable fuel might be a better compromise."
malaccamax said:
It looks to be a well researched report but the conclusions seem at odds with the evidence gathered (guiding away from e-fuels for majority car use) and mainly seem to be written to take a pot shot at the government strategy.
And this line in the conclusions loses it a lot of credibility. There's sod all evidence that PHEVs are completing 80% of journeys on electric.
"Distributing those resources across more plug-in hybrid vehicles with smaller battery packs that enable 80 per cent of our journeys to be completed electrically yet retaining extended range using an ICE running on a sustainable fuel might be a better compromise."
i think that's miss-read, they are suggesting that 80% of electric journeys could easily be completed by a PHEV with the smaller battery pack, not that 80% of electric miles currently are.And this line in the conclusions loses it a lot of credibility. There's sod all evidence that PHEVs are completing 80% of journeys on electric.
"Distributing those resources across more plug-in hybrid vehicles with smaller battery packs that enable 80 per cent of our journeys to be completed electrically yet retaining extended range using an ICE running on a sustainable fuel might be a better compromise."
Sporky said:
If EVs are "milk floats", are ICE cars "death-cloud generators"?
Or is there a grown-up way to discuss this?
I use "milk floats" because it is a funny jibe against what many believe to be new technology solving a 21st century problem, when in fact milk float technology was used before WWII. And even though the tech lasted up in to the 80's I believe, they were certainly not efficient, nor much use in rural areas.Or is there a grown-up way to discuss this?
(Also saw the term used on PH a while back which made me laugh - so can not claim it to be my own
).Any way you raise a good point about "grown up way to discuss", and I think there really isn't a way to do this when the politics have decided that its not an issue for discussion.
Scientific principals have been abandoned, it is now consensus driven along with polarised political driven agenda. So I think many of us now accept that 'grown up' discussion was thrown out of the window years ago. Because inevitably when there is a discussion around milk floats its also about human CO2 emissions leading to a so called "runaway climate crisis", of which there is little to zero evidence that being the case.
If the government do indeed u-turn on banning ICE cars, I may have a reason to vote for them. (It seems some states in the EU are looking to u-turn also).
malaccamax said:
And this line in the conclusions loses it a lot of credibility. There's sod all evidence that PHEVs are completing 80% of journeys on electric.
"Distributing those resources across more plug-in hybrid vehicles with smaller battery packs that enable 80 per cent of our journeys to be completed electrically yet retaining extended range using an ICE running on a sustainable fuel might be a better compromise."
I wonder if it's as simple as 80% of journeys being less than the typical 20-40 mile electric range of a PHEV. Isn't the average car journey length in the UK about 8 miles?"Distributing those resources across more plug-in hybrid vehicles with smaller battery packs that enable 80 per cent of our journeys to be completed electrically yet retaining extended range using an ICE running on a sustainable fuel might be a better compromise."
The choice of words seems to be quite careful. "Enable 80 per cent of journeys to be completed electrically" isn't the same as saying "80 percent ARE being completed electrically".
Of course PHEVs are hugely attractive to company car drivers for BIK savings reasons, and a lot of them never get plugged in.
Edited by Limpet on Monday 6th March 15:12
I'd very much caution a "be careful what you wish for" approach.
The report talks about synthetic fuels as a future for all current stock (it does use that phrase), remember all the fun over ethanol in fuel? Is the new fuel going to be the same as the current price and no damage your engine? Perhaps one day, but be careful what you're forced into putting into your tank.
Hybrids also, again, can be the antithesis of a what a PH likes. Sure a few supercar manufacturers make them, but will other fun PH style cars be as much fun with a motor, battery and complex gearbox, added weight and servicing complexity? Possibly not quite so good.
And while PH is all battlefields over who is driving what propulsion form, councils across the county I live are busy with blanket 20mph speed limits, traffic gates and in no way spending any money on road repairs. Motorists of any sort are their enemy, and they're working very hard to make driving a car of any sort less attractive.
Be careful what you wish for.
The report talks about synthetic fuels as a future for all current stock (it does use that phrase), remember all the fun over ethanol in fuel? Is the new fuel going to be the same as the current price and no damage your engine? Perhaps one day, but be careful what you're forced into putting into your tank.
Hybrids also, again, can be the antithesis of a what a PH likes. Sure a few supercar manufacturers make them, but will other fun PH style cars be as much fun with a motor, battery and complex gearbox, added weight and servicing complexity? Possibly not quite so good.
And while PH is all battlefields over who is driving what propulsion form, councils across the county I live are busy with blanket 20mph speed limits, traffic gates and in no way spending any money on road repairs. Motorists of any sort are their enemy, and they're working very hard to make driving a car of any sort less attractive.
Be careful what you wish for.
Edited by phil4 on Monday 6th March 15:23
Limpet has got the understanding correct!
I know i'm fliting between one thread to the other on what is effectovely the same topic, but don't get hung up on the term "efuels" or "Synthetic" - they are just sub-sets of non-fossil liquid fuels, there are more that are ciovered under the umbrella term of "sustainable". The idea of these types are that they don't have the same issues that ethanol had created in certain vintage vehicles, the end chemistries are very much a "like for like".
I know i'm fliting between one thread to the other on what is effectovely the same topic, but don't get hung up on the term "efuels" or "Synthetic" - they are just sub-sets of non-fossil liquid fuels, there are more that are ciovered under the umbrella term of "sustainable". The idea of these types are that they don't have the same issues that ethanol had created in certain vintage vehicles, the end chemistries are very much a "like for like".
BatmanCryton said:
Sporky said:
If EVs are "milk floats", are ICE cars "death-cloud generators"?
Or is there a grown-up way to discuss this?
I use "milk floats" because it is a funny jibe against what many believe to be new technology solving a 21st century problem, when in fact milk float technology was used before WWII. And even though the tech lasted up in to the 80's I believe, they were certainly not efficient, nor much use in rural areas.Or is there a grown-up way to discuss this?
(Also saw the term used on PH a while back which made me laugh - so can not claim it to be my own
).Any way you raise a good point about "grown up way to discuss", and I think there really isn't a way to do this when the politics have decided that its not an issue for discussion.
Scientific principals have been abandoned, it is now consensus driven along with polarised political driven agenda. So I think many of us now accept that 'grown up' discussion was thrown out of the window years ago. Because inevitably when there is a discussion around milk floats its also about human CO2 emissions leading to a so called "runaway climate crisis", of which there is little to zero evidence that being the case.
If the government do indeed u-turn on banning ICE cars, I may have a reason to vote for them. (It seems some states in the EU are looking to u-turn also).
Oh, and the thought that ‘government’ and ‘strategy’ could be juxtaposed - well!
phil4 said:
Be careful what you wish for.
Yes, very much this.People in positions of authority do indeed view the motorist as (1) the enemy and (2) a cash cow.
At some point the public must realise that who they vote for are the very people who are step by step taking away their freedoms, and at the same time ramping up their cost of living.
Sui3471 said:
Clearly click-bait title and if mods want it merged with https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&... please go ahead.
Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
Thank you for sharing this report, it makes for very interesting reading. I’m working my way through it bit by bit - time permitting! The proper plan (‘plan b’) that you mentioned in the Mazda synthetic fuel thread could well be getting some steam. Last week the UK Gov transport committee issued a report detailing it’s vision for transport (all modes) and the energy vectors it felt best placed to accomplish that vision.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5803/cmsel...
although this does not set legislation, it is nevertheless a powerful document. It is very timely publication with the recent Germany/Italy announcement, though not choreographed to come out at the same time – it took a number of weeks and revisions to get right.
Do I have a vested interest – yep (my limited posting history will allude to this), but then so do most..
amongst all the news the last week regarding the Italy/Germany/Czech/Bulgaria announcement I notice that Aramco, Geely & Renault have agreed on a venture to produce powerplants designed to run on synthetic fuel at no less than 17 production facilities. Seems like quite a ballsy (but welcome as far as I’m concerned!) move considering the so called ICE ban.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff