No ICE from 2040?!?

[jet_noise]

PotatoSalad said:

Salamura said:

<snip>
With this technology, the well-to-wheel efficiency of electric vehicles has time and again been shown to be much poorer than gasoline and diesel cars (I should know, I work in this field).

The distance from London to Birmingham is 125 miles, Tesla can do over 200 today and once you're there just plug it in, 30 minutes on a supercharger gives you 80% of the maximum range. You're just making up nonexistent issues.

<snip>
Wireless charging already exists in some buses, in 25 years we might have it built in every parking space so people living in flats will always come to a fully charged car in the morning.

Salamura:
Can you point me to one of these studies, please?
The only stuff I could find from green-oriented sources suggested the opposite.

PotSal:
Maybe L-B is possible today with massive infrastructure investment and assuming all(!) destinations have fast charge capability. But L- Edinburgh say?
Charging time then becomes significant. Let's say we do waste our taxes on such infrastructure. All such sites would need to be, say, 8 times larger, assuming it takes 5 mins to fill with petrol compared to 30 with leccie. And already there are queues at peak times! Is recharge rage a thing yet?

Wireless charging is only up to 86% efficient (Wiki!). And that's at a much slower charge rate. Faster charging will have greater losses.

[Evanivitch]

jet_noise said:

PotSal:
Maybe L-B is possible today with massive infrastructure investment and assuming all(!) destinations have fast charge capability. But L- Edinburgh say?

It's been done, and flogged like a dead horse. Seriously, when will people stop using pointless scenarios only to be proven wrong?

London Edinburgh in 12.5 hours in 2014 in a P85S (no longer the largest range in the fleet). Against an idealised Google Maps time of 7hrs 39mins.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/electric-avenue-dri...

[jet_noise]

Evanivitch said:

jet_noise said:

PotSal:
Maybe L-B is possible today with massive infrastructure investment and assuming all(!) destinations have fast charge capability. But L- Edinburgh say?

It's been done, and flogged like a dead horse. Seriously, when will people stop using pointless scenarios only to be proven wrong?

London Edinburgh in 12.5 hours in 2014 in a P85S (no longer the largest range in the fleet). Against an idealised Google Maps time of 7hrs 39mins.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/electric-avenue-dri...

May I respectfully suggest that your example, rather than disproving my point, illustrates it rather well.

[Evanivitch]

jet_noise said:

May I respectfully suggest that your example, rather than disproving my point, illustrates it rather well.

Really? How long do you think it takes to drive from London to Edinburgh when traffic and roadworks is included?

Also, a number of key points:
1 charge was done using an Ecotricity rapid charger that took 2 hours. The equivalent Tesla Superchargers takes 45 minutes. The supercharger network has grown significantly.

2 The latest Tesla have a greater range than what was tested.

So is a EV as quick as a ICE? No. Is it perfectly capable of doing it on technology already 3 years old and in a reasonable time. Yes.

In fact this website says you can do it in a Tesla P100D in 8 hours, 10 mins, but just 27 mins to stop to charge. Practically a coffee stop.

https://www.evtripplanner.com/planner/2-8/?id=ntm0...

Edited by Evanivitch on Friday 28th July 09:53

[Uncle John]

It's hilarious how the Govt round us up like sheep and then kick us in the nuts.

Consider that we are inexorably moving to the electrification of transport.

Consider the need for more environmental solutions, less fossil fuels, more efficiencies. Blah de Blah...

Add in the fact we currently are not up scaling UK energy production in any meaningful way.

Factor in the current drive to have a smart meter in every UK house by 2020.

The shortfall of 'traditional' tax take due to the increased use of electric transport.

The need for most users to charge their electric vehicles overnight ready for the morning.

Voila!

We will be subjected to price bandings on electricity, monitored by smart meters. Prices per Kwh will be at there most expensive overnight, with some sort of vehicle tax attached to it. This will be where the Govt get their money from. So obvious and all under the environment banner.

[Ares]

98elise said:

Max_Torque said:

DoubleTime said:

I've got a funny feeling the hype around EV is going to fizzle out in the next 5 years. Hybrids will be the more obvious and logical choice.

I've got more than a funny feeling, in fact i'm both quite sure of it and i'd stake my reputation on it, that the precise opposite is going to happen!

Hybrids are a stop gap. they are expensive to develop, are insanely complex (having all the bits of an ICE and an EV) and in the real world, only offer minor improvements in energy consumption (compared to a pure EV).

As soon as the cost of pure EVs falls (next generation will be the cross over point) people will be test driving those in the dealers, and so far, ime, no one who's driven the EV version of a car prefers the hybrid version (in mainstream passenger cars, rather than some low volume hyper performance car).

People will learn to put aside their range anxiety, will become used to perhaps hiring a longer range car the few times a year they need to do long journeys. IME, it takes less than a month of driving an EV to make just about any ICE car feel like yesterdays technology. (In the same way that in less than 5 years, it went from no one to having a smart phone to EVERYONE having one........)

Agreed. I want a BEV on my drive because it's fundamentally a simple and reliable machine. I don't want or need hybrid tech taking up space and complicating the drivetrain. I'm completely happy to live with a reduced range.

Hybrids will be for people that absolutely must be able to drive many hundreds without stopping for a comfort break.

Range anxiety will be a thing of the past in less than 10yrs, ranges will be easier/better than ICE.

But Max is right, Hybrids are a stop gap, and emotional one as well as physical. They bring the performance gap, and deal with range anxiety, but it's mostly about emotional bridging. Jumping all the way to an EV is a big step. Getting to a 75/25 ICE/EV hybrid is still seen as a benefit. Extra power/less tax without cutting the main ICE umbilical chord.

[98elise]

lowdrag said:

We have some very technically minded people on this thread and it is interesting to follow. Now another question, on car manufacture and servicing. How long, since there are far fewer moving parts, will a fully electric car last with these wonderful new batteries? Will the car just be recycled when the batteries die, thereby creating pollution to manufacture a new one, or will we be changing them on a five or ten year basis? Will they need regular servicing, and will the annual MOT be still needed? I am on my third car in 25 years and expect the current one to do at least another ten years, or 125,000 miles if I keep to my usual schedule.

Batteries can be changed relatively simply. That need less servicing (the service items are minimal), and an electric motor should easily outlast an ICE. Modern cars can come to the end of their life when something as simple as a clutch goes. Ford wanted nearly 1k to change the clutch on an 02 mondeo I owned.

An MOT is of course needed. An EV has tyre brakes etc just like an ICE.

[Mr GrimNasty]

98elise said:

Evanivitch said:

Ali_T said:

Why are they so determined to focus on electric cars? We don't have enough lithium, we don't have the electricity infrastructure and we don't have any plans in place to improve either. Why isn't the focus on biofuel and hydrogen? Both can easily be introduced to the current infrastructure, remove the NOx problem and reduce or negate CO2?

Known lithium reserves were considered low because there wasn't the demand to drive exploration. In reality it's the 25th most abundant element in the earth's crust and economic reserves are growing constantly.

Also worth mentioning is that there is very little lithium in a "lithium" battery and as you've said it's actualy quite abundant.

Yer, just nobody mention the neodymium & nickel & graphite & cobalt etc. etc. mining pollution, at least it isn't the UK being polluted eh!

[kambites]

Mr GrimNasty said:

Yer, just nobody mention the neodymium & nickel & graphite & cobalt etc. etc. mining pollution, at least it isn't the UK being polluted eh!

You mean unlikely the enormous quantities of rare-earth elements which are mined for internal combustion powered cars every year?

[Mr2Mike]

98elise said:

Batteries can be changed relatively simply. That need less servicing (the service items are minimal), and an electric motor should easily outlast an ICE. Modern cars can come to the end of their life when something as simple as a clutch goes. Ford wanted nearly 1k to change the clutch on an 02 mondeo I owned.

The clutch failing didn't bring the Mondeo to the end of it's life, that was entirely your decision. What happens when a battery fails on a Tesla outside of the warranty period, which will be far more expensive than a clutch?

[Wacky Racer]

Sorry to sound thick but:-

Not read the whole thread, but a simple basic question.

Is it the SALE of petrol & diesel cars to be banned by 2040 or the USE of them?

I assume the former...in other words you will still be able to by a new ICE vehicle close or up to the deadline.......otherwise anyone with a collection of million pound classic supercars will find their fleet valueless overnight as they will be unusable museum pieces.

[kambites]

Wacky Racer said:

Is it the SALE of petrol & diesel cars to be banned by 2040 or the USE of them?

Sale.

I personally doubt we'll ever see a blanket ban on their use. Once new ones are no longer sold, the number on the roads will become insignificant within a few years.

[Evanivitch]

Mr GrimNasty said:

Yer, just nobody mention the neodymium & nickel & graphite & cobalt etc. etc. mining pollution, at least it isn't the UK being polluted eh!

Oh yes, because a modern ICE is made from wood and cotton and doesn't use anything mined from the ground...

Old argument, already put to rest.

N.b. my dad supplied nickel to the first Prius batteries, I'm more than aware of the environmental impact of it's production and other similar metals.

[austinsmirk]

good example of EV life.

we decided to go and see "Dunkirk" last night. I highly recommend it btw.

drove near to the cinema to a charging bay. plug car in. it didn't need to be adjacent because I'm not a bone idle moron and am capable of walking for 5 mins.

watch film, return to a more charged car.

And currently, the charging was totally free.


who wouldn't love to go to a petrol station and they say "here have the equivalent of dinosaur juice to do 60 miles with, for free"

[jet_noise]

Evanivitch said:

Really? How long do you think it takes to drive from London to Edinburgh when traffic and roadworks is included?

Also, a number of key points:
1 charge was done using an Ecotricity rapid charger that took 2 hours. The equivalent Tesla Superchargers takes 45 minutes. The supercharger network has grown significantly.

2 The latest Tesla have a greater range than what was tested.

So is a EV as quick as a ICE? No. Is it perfectly capable of doing it on technology already 3 years old and in a reasonable time. Yes.

In fact this website says you can do it in a Tesla P100D in 8 hours, 10 mins, but just 27 mins to stop to charge. Practically a coffee stop.

https://www.evtripplanner.com/planner/2-8/?id=ntm0...

Edited by Evanivitch on Friday 28th July 09:53

Ah, different circumstances. Rather than increasing my journey time by 50% for £80k I can decrease the increase(!) to 1/2hr for £130k.
Still no sale.

[Wacky Racer]

kambites said:

Wacky Racer said:

Is it the SALE of petrol & diesel cars to be banned by 2040 or the USE of them?

Sale.

I personally doubt we'll ever see a blanket ban on their use. Once new ones are no longer sold, the number on the roads will become insignificant within a few years.

So then by say 2060 when only (maybe 5% of cars on the road are petrol or diesel).....the rest have gone to the great scrapyard in the sky...petrol stations will be virtually redundant and will be closing down wholesale as their customer base as gone, there might be one every twenty miles or so.

Not good.

[GT119]

jet_noise said:

Salamura:
Can you point me to one of these studies, please?
The only stuff I could find from green-oriented sources suggested the opposite.

PotSal:
Maybe L-B is possible today with massive infrastructure investment and assuming all(!) destinations have fast charge capability. But L- Edinburgh say?
Charging time then becomes significant. Let's say we do waste our taxes on such infrastructure. All such sites would need to be, say, 8 times larger, assuming it takes 5 mins to fill with petrol compared to 30 with leccie. And already there are queues at peak times! Is recharge rage a thing yet?

Wireless charging is only up to 86% efficient (Wiki!). And that's at a much slower charge rate. Faster charging will have greater losses.

I'm guessing that Salamura has ignored that fossil fuels are refined using a whole lot of electricity. Each gallon not refined saves enough electricity to power an EV for something like 20 miles or more. This is one if the most compelling reasons for EV being the right technology for the future, but is generally totally overlooked. I get that there are other useful by-products from refining but I'd be very surprised if petrol/diesel isn't what drives crude oil consumption.

[bodhi]

GT119 said:

I'm guessing that Salamura has ignored that fossil fuels are refined using a whole lot of electricity. Each gallon not refined saves enough electricity to power an EV for something like 20 miles or more. This is one if the most compelling reasons for EV being the right technology for the future, but is generally totally overlooked. I get that there are other useful by-products from refining but I'd be very surprised if petrol/diesel isn't what drives crude oil consumption.

It's completely overlooked as the electricity to refine petrol doesn't come from the Grid, it comes from the refineries themselves.

[Toltec]

Ares said:

Range anxiety will be a thing of the past in less than 10yrs, ranges will be easier/better than ICE.

Before long it won't be any worse than taking a car that needs super unleaded to various parts of the country, going on holiday in my Impreza, for example, just needed some forward planning.

At some point it will be less the availability of rechargers and more how having to recharge affects your journey time, what will be the maximum distance you can do in a day, say 12 hours of travel. A closer match to ICE will come in time I suspect, helped by ICE times gradually increasing, twenty years ago I could do Dartford to Glasgow in 6 1/2 to 7 hours in a diesel van easily and repeatably, I doubt that would be possible now.

[GT119]

bodhi said:

It's completely overlooked as the electricity to refine petrol doesn't come from the Grid, it comes from the refineries themselves.

....and therefore needs to be part of a meaningful comparison of overall efficiency.