No ICE from 2040?!?
Discussion
Plug Life said:
Because people are retarded like you and the vehicle manufacturers are happy to make the same polluting crap till the end of the world without external regulations. There's no "natural shift" without pushing.
No it's called the free market, manufacturers naturally tend to produce the best value and least polluting vehicles because it is in their own interests to make their cars desirable and profitable.As soon as the government starts to dictate, things get expensive and the environment suffers - the unintended consequences are ALWAYS worse than the problem they are trying to solve.
So far almost without exception, every green initiate has wasted money and damaged the environment or produced more, instead of less, CO2.
Only a moron would describe current cars or air quality as a problem.
Sadly the eco-loons have taken over the asylum.
AnotherClarkey said:
HedgeyGedgey said:
But the reason why teslas can go what 200miles? Without a charge is because the use of very rare and expensive raw materials for the motor (neodymium magnets I think they use, well my physics teacher told me haha) that's why a tesla will set you back what £70k+? And if 30million people in UK alone buy an electric car eith this type of motor then it's become even more expensive material to buy due to rarity. I honestly don't see this happening, sure pollution by vehicles is a big problem but I just don't think electric is the way forward. Surely if everyone who had an ICE vehicle and replaced them with an electric one, there'd be a power crisis? Surely the power plants wouldn't be able to cope with such an increase in usage, could be wrong but just thinking out loud here. Can't ban the enthusiast owning older petrol cars, be like banning people from living in old buildings/cottages due to being inefficient with central heating and costing more to heat up in the winter. Silly idea to ban petrol and diesel engines by 2040.
Tesla uses AC induction motors which do not utilise magnets. A Tesla uses no 'rare earth' metals such as neodynium (not that it is actually rare) in the battery or motor.HedgeyGedgey said:
But the reason why teslas can go what 200miles? Without a charge is because the use of very rare and expensive raw materials for the motor (neodymium magnets I think they use, well my physics teacher told me haha) that's why a tesla will set you back what £70k+? And if 30million people in UK alone buy an electric car eith this type of motor then it's become even more expensive material to buy due to rarity. I honestly don't see this happening, sure pollution by vehicles is a big problem but I just don't think electric is the way forward. Surely if everyone who had an ICE vehicle and replaced them with an electric one, there'd be a power crisis? Surely the power plants wouldn't be able to cope with such an increase in usage, could be wrong but just thinking out loud here. Can't ban the enthusiast owning older petrol cars, be like banning people from living in old buildings/cottages due to being inefficient with central heating and costing more to heat up in the winter. Silly idea to ban petrol and diesel engines by 2040.
Teslas are expensive, in the main due to being large, luxury cars, not because they have a small amount of Neodymium and Lithium, anyway, Neodynium isnt rare anyway and neither is Lithium, other battery technologies are available that use alternative elements and new ones will be developed. batteries are expensive to produce due to them being fairly complex arrays of thousands of individuals cells. Electric motors are cheap to produce, relative to an IC engine.
If everyone replaced their IC with an EV overnight then we would have a problem, but they wont and the systems will be upgraded to cope, where I live has 12 weeks of roadworks for power line upgrades, it will be a gradual change that has started and will gather momentum.
They wont ban existing petrol or diesel engines at all, they will stop the sale of new ones, or make it difficult or expensive to do so, there will of course be exceptions like there always is, but for most, average punters, we wont be able to buy a new IC engined vehicle.
If they could sort out the busses first that would be great. Also good luck running a taxi firm after 2040.
Ok so range and charge time will improve but its still basic maths. If you have lets say a 250kWh battery in 2040 that's going to take some serious juice to charge quickly. Lets say we want to charge it in 5 minutes, I can see some rather chunky power requirements.
Now plonk 10 cars all needing that 5 min charge in one place.
Liquid fuels are dirty but they are easy to transport and physically get into the vehicle.
Personally I see fuel cell cars as the only real option in this country, I don't think the grid could cope with just EVs.
Ok so range and charge time will improve but its still basic maths. If you have lets say a 250kWh battery in 2040 that's going to take some serious juice to charge quickly. Lets say we want to charge it in 5 minutes, I can see some rather chunky power requirements.
Now plonk 10 cars all needing that 5 min charge in one place.
Liquid fuels are dirty but they are easy to transport and physically get into the vehicle.
Personally I see fuel cell cars as the only real option in this country, I don't think the grid could cope with just EVs.
suffolk009 said:
I do find it funny that some people post on here about how much cheaper electric cars will be to run. They are now, but not for long.
Never in the history of government decisions has anything be done to save people money. As soon as EVs have become commonplace they will cost at least as much as our current cars do to run.
I think the fuel duty revenue number is about £27b per annum at the moment. But that's of the top of my head, I may be wrong.
and don't forget close to £4bn from VAT on fuel, and "road tax"Never in the history of government decisions has anything be done to save people money. As soon as EVs have become commonplace they will cost at least as much as our current cars do to run.
I think the fuel duty revenue number is about £27b per annum at the moment. But that's of the top of my head, I may be wrong.
That's quite a hole to fill.
I can't imagine the arabs and other countries that enjoy selling us petrol diesel will be very happy about all this . I also suspect the government will eventually charge a law to rip off the ev user to make up for lost fuel etc revenue.
That's assuming they don't u turn as they did for diesel owners having promoted them so heavily a short time ago.
That's assuming they don't u turn as they did for diesel owners having promoted them so heavily a short time ago.
Hackney said:
suffolk009 said:
I do find it funny that some people post on here about how much cheaper electric cars will be to run. They are now, but not for long.
Never in the history of government decisions has anything be done to save people money. As soon as EVs have become commonplace they will cost at least as much as our current cars do to run.
I think the fuel duty revenue number is about £27b per annum at the moment. But that's of the top of my head, I may be wrong.
and don't forget close to £4bn from VAT on fuel, and "road tax"Never in the history of government decisions has anything be done to save people money. As soon as EVs have become commonplace they will cost at least as much as our current cars do to run.
I think the fuel duty revenue number is about £27b per annum at the moment. But that's of the top of my head, I may be wrong.
That's quite a hole to fill.
Mr GrimNasty said:
No it's called the free market, manufacturers naturally tend to produce the best value and least polluting vehicles because it is in their own interests to make their cars desirable and profitable.
I'm having significant difficulty comprehending this statement. Are you suggesting that the emergence of EVs is as a result of consumer demand? Or that the massive reduction in average CO2 emissions of new cars is because of the market and not because of lawmakers?I'm no fan of big government either, but I am prepared to acknowledge that legislation has its time and place and this is one instance.
I'm old enough to have grown up with solely petrol cars.
then diesels started appearing in the later 80's. great MPG, but more to buy and very very slow. None seemed to be turbo. very very few about.
The by the early 90's they were everywhere. They had turbo's. Suddenly me and my mates were getting diesel cars. Wow look at us, we'd go- I'm getting 50/60mpg here instead of 20.
Thus I have more money to get drunk and chase girls, buy hair gel, get a new LP or CD, get a mountain bike or go to a rave on a moor somewhere.
want to go fast and scare yourself, well that was for our motorbikes, or cycles
no one bought them due to the environment. we bought diesels because they were far more reliable than petrol motors and were cheap to drive around in. win win win.
you have to remember in the 70-80-90's cars either rotted apart OR the engines failed. they didn't do 100k miles before one or the other.
lets be honest: ALL cars are utterly brilliant by comparison. they run for ever, don't really break and don't rust. Who puts a cill on a car for an MOT now ? no one. Could you even find a garage that could do it ? probably not.
All's that's happening here and I include myself as an EV owner is: Wow- diesel is a fortune. I'll have a cheaper fuel instead.
I've said it before: if you could run a car on pulped kittens and puppies or sex offenders/UKIP/BNP members/voters, I'd adopt that as a source of fuel if it was cheaper.
then diesels started appearing in the later 80's. great MPG, but more to buy and very very slow. None seemed to be turbo. very very few about.
The by the early 90's they were everywhere. They had turbo's. Suddenly me and my mates were getting diesel cars. Wow look at us, we'd go- I'm getting 50/60mpg here instead of 20.
Thus I have more money to get drunk and chase girls, buy hair gel, get a new LP or CD, get a mountain bike or go to a rave on a moor somewhere.
want to go fast and scare yourself, well that was for our motorbikes, or cycles
no one bought them due to the environment. we bought diesels because they were far more reliable than petrol motors and were cheap to drive around in. win win win.
you have to remember in the 70-80-90's cars either rotted apart OR the engines failed. they didn't do 100k miles before one or the other.
lets be honest: ALL cars are utterly brilliant by comparison. they run for ever, don't really break and don't rust. Who puts a cill on a car for an MOT now ? no one. Could you even find a garage that could do it ? probably not.
All's that's happening here and I include myself as an EV owner is: Wow- diesel is a fortune. I'll have a cheaper fuel instead.
I've said it before: if you could run a car on pulped kittens and puppies or sex offenders/UKIP/BNP members/voters, I'd adopt that as a source of fuel if it was cheaper.
austinsmirk said:
I've said it before: if you could run a car on pulped kittens and puppies or sex offenders/UKIP/BNP members/voters, I'd adopt that as a source of fuel if it was cheaper.
You are exactly right. I do market research for a living and have just completed a study showing that cost far outweighs environmental or any other reasons for adopting EVs.It's kind of misleading because although they're looking to ban the sale of ICE vehicles they aren't going to ban the sale of Hybrids both Petrol & Diesel.
If everyone went to pure EV's then London alone would need two new power stations to cope with demand & given on how long it takes to approve a runway can you imagine how long it would take to get two new nuclear power stations approved.
Does that mean we're getting rid of speed humps as they're outside most peoples homes & are a cause of air pollution.
If everyone went to pure EV's then London alone would need two new power stations to cope with demand & given on how long it takes to approve a runway can you imagine how long it would take to get two new nuclear power stations approved.
Does that mean we're getting rid of speed humps as they're outside most peoples homes & are a cause of air pollution.
Edited by ZX10R NIN on Wednesday 26th July 16:40
J4CKO said:
Gilhooligan said:
It'll be interesting to know how, in the future, the electricity grid is going to cope with all this extra demand from EVs. We are already getting quite close to peak demand exceeding peak generating capcity.
Yeah, nobody has though of that and the capacity is completely fixed....As Oil use dwindles, what are all those companies that extract and flog it going to do ? sit there going "Please buy my lovely oil, several palaces to support and the Trillions are running out", or will they take a sudden and all consuming interest in providing energy for what comes next ?
Are folk going to put up with their hairdryer not coming on, lights going off or the telly going dark during the Game of Thrones season 22 finale ?
Does the surface of the earth get hit by vast amounts of solar energy every day, of which we harvest, tiny, tiny amounts, do the tides come in and out, does the wind blow ?
Do we already have a massive electricity distribution system in place ?
I'm genuinely interested in how they are going to achieve such a mass transition to electric vehicles. The grid in its current state won't cope with such demand. The issues with renewables, such as offshore wind farms oil and gas companies are already building, is the non steady nature of their generation. We will need some form of massive battery for the grid and huge investment in smart grid technology.
Then you've got the obvious issue of trying to charge your vehicle if it's parked on street.
The 2040 deadline seems massively ambitious to the point of being quite pointless.
Flibble said:
Same problems as diesel and petrol, so no not really. It's about NOx emissions, so any hydrocarbon is going to be an issue. Realistically it means EVs or hydrogen fuelled vehicles to get emissions low enough.
Well there's plenty of stuff which an ICE engine can run on which isn't hydrocarbon-based - alcohol fuels for petrol engines and vegetable oils for old-school diesels to give two examples. Use biological sources for the fuel and you negate / claw back some of the CO2 emissions. Mind you, running a car on 99% proof would seem like a tragic waste - but it can be done and has been done.A non-turbo petrol produces very little NoX - thanks to a lower compression ratio and combustion temps. Not much in the way of particulates and if it's in a good state of tune the monoxide levels should be low as well. The trade-off is more CO2 and poorer fuel efficiency.
You have to ask yourself if the 'powers-that-be' hadn't made such a song and dance about trying to target CO2 - maybe pushing less people out of their petrols and into diesels (many of whom didn't really need them) - would we be in this mess in the first place? What's the next bogeyman of choice once NoX is out of the way? Road noise? A new 'discovery' that EM fields from traction motors could possibly be responsible for the premature deaths of *insert slightly flakey figure here* each year?
Yes we would because those in charge aren't in charge anymore & the new people in charge have to show they're in charge by changing something that costs the general population money.
The problem is EV's are only environmentally friendly when it comes to air pollution the mining of the lithium (not just for EV's but in general) is affecting the water supply in those counties that mine it thus affecting their environment obviously transporting it around the world doesn't help, so in time they'll become the next diesel scandal.
Also although the reports I've heard on TV have predominantly talked about diesels the government are saying concils will only get grants for clean air zones if they target ICE cars the prefered method being the age of the vehicle rather than what ICE it has.
Finally if they really cared about air pollution they'd be removing all the speed humps in the UK which would immediately have a positive effect on air quality but they won't do that because it costs them (admittedly we pay in the end) not us.
The problem is EV's are only environmentally friendly when it comes to air pollution the mining of the lithium (not just for EV's but in general) is affecting the water supply in those counties that mine it thus affecting their environment obviously transporting it around the world doesn't help, so in time they'll become the next diesel scandal.
Also although the reports I've heard on TV have predominantly talked about diesels the government are saying concils will only get grants for clean air zones if they target ICE cars the prefered method being the age of the vehicle rather than what ICE it has.
Finally if they really cared about air pollution they'd be removing all the speed humps in the UK which would immediately have a positive effect on air quality but they won't do that because it costs them (admittedly we pay in the end) not us.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff