EVs... no one wants them!

[DonkeyApple]

tamore said:

to be fair, smartphones were cited. not 80s over the shoulder bricks.

still not a comparison that means anything though.

It even holds for smartphones. It took years before they were affordable, usable and even viable. Early adopters waved them around the office like tools while others frothed that they'd never surrender their Nokia. Also like tools. Meanwhile, the majority of folks just moved over to a smartphone when a contract was up for renewal and the product fit their needs.

We could use aircon in cars as a similar case. There it was, quite expensive and with some tools using it as a means to claim being special while other tools said they'd never have aircon and that it was for nonces. Meanwhile, everyone else just got it when it was logical to do so.

There's always a tipping point. The point at which the shopping princess loses his majestic dominance and the 'from my cold dead hands' punter goes silent and the product just becomes the norm. And the only people it's all of any importance to are coughing their teeth out in the old people's home while reminiscing about how it was so much better back when it was crapper.

[irc]

DonkeyApple said:

irc said:

Because home charging for EVs is a fraction of the price of public charging.

Petrol is also regressive given that the lower the income of the driver the more they tend to spend on petrol.

Now, if nothing were to change and let's say in 20 years time the cost differential between domestic charging and remote charging has remained (which it won't but for this exercise we will state this is the case), what's actually important is the differential between the cost of this remote electricity and the cost of petrol. At present, even this more expensive form of charging is cheaper than petrol so they would be better off in most cases.

No it isn't. Public rates are around 70p a kWh. For an EV doing 4 miles per kWh that is 17.5p per mile.

A car getting 45mpg with fuel at £6.75 per gallon is 15p per mile.

So petrol is cheaper despite the huge taxes on it.

[BricktopST205]

djc206 said:

Millions of people jobless? Where?

What do you think is going to happen to the ancillaries that supply the OEM's. The places that make turbochargers, pistons, spark plugs etc, fuel tanks, fuel pumps etc.

Electric motors are very simple things and batteries are very specific in their construction that require dedicated sites.

Governments need to put things in place to provide alternative work or end up with the situation you had in 70's and 80's with towns and cities becoming ghosts with the closing of manufacturing like coal mines and the steel industry. Only it will be ten times worse due to inflation since then.

Not only that but the Chinese will gain massively putting many legacy manufacturers out of business altogether. They have control over everything EV related. OEM's have realised this but it is too late really. Capitalism at its finest.

MG for example was a joke brand only 5 years ago. Today it is the 11th biggest selling brand in the UK. Selling more than Pug, Skoda, Renault, Citroen, MINI just to name a few and have the largest increase year on year. BYD will soon be flooding the market and consumers have very little loyalty outside of people like you and me who are car enthusiasts.

Like I said earlier the outlook looks a lot better for the UK as manufacturing is tiny here but on the continent not so much.

[BricktopST205]

Lil_Red_GTV said:

Erm, because of climate change? You may not have heard, but the scientific community reached a consensus a few years back that man-made climate change was going to be fairly catastrophic for humanity. Politicians and car manufacturers then decided that it wasn't unreasonable to try to avert that and switching to a slightly different form of transport propulsion seemed like a relatively easy way to so so. Heaven forbid that you might have to change your mindset though.

Population is predicted to increase by 1 billion in the next ten years. Electrifying Vehicles in the west is a drop in the ocean.

[Lil_Red_GTV]

By god you're right. Let's adopt a one child policy globally. That's got to be preferable to you having to stop for an extra 30 minutes at a motorway services.

[BricktopST205]

Lil_Red_GTV said:

By god you're right. Let's adopt a one child policy globally. That's got to be preferable to you having to stop for an extra 30 minutes at a motorway services.

I am saying we are fked regardless

[DonkeyApple]

BricktopST205 said:

Population is predicted to increase by 1 billion in the next ten years. Electrifying Vehicles in the west is a drop in the ocean.

Of that 1bn, how many will be punters borrowing money to consume vast amounts of excess food and tat versus the pesky folk in the third world who live an entire lifetime without ever clicking it buy it now?

And as this population argument always ends up at genocide, do we delete the chaps who don't own cars, don't shop for tat every day, don't live beyond their means or the nice chaps who are responsible for all the excess personal consumption?

Let me guess, the U.K. is only responsible for 1.02% of global carbon emissions?

In reality, if the global population is going to increase by 1bn, the logical solution is for the affluent to invest in the solutions that ensure this addition 1bn doesn't pollute like the previous 1bn in the West wouldn't you say? Not much point in expecting little baby Steve in the Congo to create the solutions to these issues. It's about as logical as blaming him for the mess. It's just easier.

[DonkeyApple]

irc said:

DonkeyApple said:

irc said:

Because home charging for EVs is a fraction of the price of public charging.

Petrol is also regressive given that the lower the income of the driver the more they tend to spend on petrol.

Now, if nothing were to change and let's say in 20 years time the cost differential between domestic charging and remote charging has remained (which it won't but for this exercise we will state this is the case), what's actually important is the differential between the cost of this remote electricity and the cost of petrol. At present, even this more expensive form of charging is cheaper than petrol so they would be better off in most cases.

No it isn't. Public rates are around 70p a kWh. For an EV doing 4 miles per kWh that is 17.5p per mile.

A car getting 45mpg with fuel at £6.75 per gallon is 15p per mile.

So petrol is cheaper despite the huge taxes on it.

That's a good point. They'll just have to wait patiently then. They don't appear to even want an EV so why are they upset?

[tamore]

BricktopST205 said:

Lil_Red_GTV said:

By god you're right. Let's adopt a one child policy globally. That's got to be preferable to you having to stop for an extra 30 minutes at a motorway services.

I am saying we are fked regardless

every generation says the same. adaptation is the human race's strongest point.

[survivalist]

tamore said:

BricktopST205 said:

Lil_Red_GTV said:

By god you're right. Let's adopt a one child policy globally. That's got to be preferable to you having to stop for an extra 30 minutes at a motorway services.

I am saying we are fked regardless

every generation says the same. adaptation is the human race's strongest point.

Pretty sure in the 1980s they were predicting that we’d run out of oil. I’d say is less adaption and more distraction.

[tamore]

survivalist said:

Pretty sure in the 1980s they were predicting that we’d run out of oil. I’d say is less adaption and more distraction.

to be fair, extraction techniques have come a long way.

at the end of the day, burning stuff to stay warm/cool or move about is pretty basic, and it's mucky old stuff when you think about it. we can and should do things in a better way.

[CG2020UK]

irc said:

DonkeyApple said:

irc said:

Because home charging for EVs is a fraction of the price of public charging.

Petrol is also regressive given that the lower the income of the driver the more they tend to spend on petrol.

Now, if nothing were to change and let's say in 20 years time the cost differential between domestic charging and remote charging has remained (which it won't but for this exercise we will state this is the case), what's actually important is the differential between the cost of this remote electricity and the cost of petrol. At present, even this more expensive form of charging is cheaper than petrol so they would be better off in most cases.

No it isn't. Public rates are around 70p a kWh. For an EV doing 4 miles per kWh that is 17.5p per mile.

A car getting 45mpg with fuel at £6.75 per gallon is 15p per mile.

So petrol is cheaper despite the huge taxes on it.

Spot on.

Few EVs are getting 4 miles per kWh as well.

Model Y or BMW IX is 3.1 mi/kWh. Works out at 30mpg for petrol.

Mercedes EQC down in the 2.5 range is under 25mpg.

Inside EV have a good table with average mi/kWh in the US.
https://insideevs.com/news/709706/electric-cars-en...

[JNW1]

DonkeyApple said:

It even holds for smartphones. It took years before they were affordable, usable and even viable. Early adopters waved them around the office like tools while others frothed that they'd never surrender their Nokia. Also like tools. Meanwhile, the majority of folks just moved over to a smartphone when a contract was up for renewal and the product fit their needs.

Well yes but if you go back to what PinkHouse said the comment was the migration to smartphones happened because they were better:

PinkHouse said:

When smartphones came in, people adopted them because they were better than the alternative available at the time and didn't require ever shifting threats or complete bans

And personally I think that's true. The change didn't require either government subsidies or threats to ban non-smartphones to make it happen, it happened naturally because people realised smartphones offered far better functionality.

And when the same's true of EV's I think it will be a similar story; yes there'll be a hardcore of ICE die hards who'll never want an EV but as soon as the concerns around range, recharging and affordability are allayed I think the vast majority of drivers will be happy to make the change when they see something better. Just like the vast majority of mobile phone users did with smartphones.

[Downward]

Unreal said:

They may have torque and acceleration but otherworldly is fantasy. There are plenty of iCE cars that match EV performance. Try following my GR Yaris powering out of a damp corner. Your car couldn't live with it despite having double the power.

This is one of the most embarrassing statements i’ve read on the forum, and that’s saying something.
Like being back at primary school.

[riskyj]

CG2020UK said:

Spot on.

Few EVs are getting 4 miles per kWh as well.

Model Y or BMW IX is 3.1 mi/kWh. Works out at 30mpg for petrol.

Mercedes EQC down in the 2.5 range is under 25mpg.

Inside EV have a good table with average mi/kWh in the US.
https://insideevs.com/news/709706/electric-cars-en...

The very website you quoted states “Tesla models have been rated as highly efficient, boasting 276 Wh/mi (172 Wh/km) for the Model Y Long Range AWD”

276 Wh/mi = 3.62 mi/kWh = 122MPGe ?

[GT9]

riskyj said:

The very website you quoted states “Tesla models have been rated as highly efficient, boasting 276 Wh/mi (172 Wh/km) for the Model Y Long Range AWD”

276 Wh/mi = 3.62 mi/kWh = 122MPGe ?

He's doing a cost equivalence comparing UK pump price with public charger electricity price per mile.
Clearly, it depends on the price of each 'fuel'.
Bu then mixing it up a bit with some US MPG references.
A US gallon is 3.79 litres, an imperial gallon is 4.55 litres.
US EV efficiency in MPGe is different to UK MPGe.
For imperial gallons, 4 miles/kWh is 160 MPGe for diesel or 142 MPGe for petrol.

Edited by GT9 on Thursday 23 May 22:38

[riskyj]

GT9 said:

He's doing a cost equivalence comparing UK pump price with public charger electricity price per mile.
Clearly, it depends on the price of each 'fuel'.
Bu then mixing it up a bit with some US MPG references.
A US gallon is 3.79 litres, an imperial gallon is 4.55 litres.
US EV efficiency in MPGe is different to UK MPGe.
For imperial gallons, 4 miles/kWh is 160 MPGe for diesel or 142 MPGe for petrol.

Edited by GT9 on Thursday 23 May 22:38

So nowhere near the 30mpg quoted by CG2020UK. Got it.

[nickfrog]

A very quick calculation tells me that at around 3.5 miles/kwh an EV will cost £100 / year on leccy using Octopus 7.5p night tariff if doing 5,000 miles/year. That's 2p per mile compared to around 16p at 40mpg for petrol.

Sounds too cheap. What have I missed?

Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 23 May 22:53

[tamore]

nickfrog said:

A very quick calculation tells me that at around 3.5kw/mile an EV will cost £100 / year on leccy using Octopus 7.5p night tariff if doing 5,000 miles/year.

Sounds too cheap. What have I missed?

nothing. if you can charge at home pretty much all the time, the savings are big. i reckon i've spent about £600 to do 16000 miles over the last 2 years. that's including the handful of rapid charges i've needed on trips.

shame public rapid charging is staying stubbornly high. smacks of profiteering.

[740EVTORQUES]

nickfrog said:

A very quick calculation tells me that at around 3.5 miles/kwh an EV will cost £100 / year on leccy using Octopus 7.5p night tariff if doing 5,000 miles/year. That's 2p per mile compared to around 16p at 40mpg for petrol.

Sounds too cheap. What have I missed?

Edited by nickfrog on Thursday 23 May 22:53

Nothing, I save do much from daily driving an EV that I can pay the insurance, servicing and VED of my previous ICE (911) so can justify keeping that for a weekend car and still be better off!