Electric cars, does everyone really think they are amazing.
Discussion
our average kwh consumption to run the leaf, per month is 150 kwh. feck all basically.
That will equate to 8000 miles PA. That's £192 PA to drive 8000 miles.
Show me a hybrid/diesel or LPG car that will cost me "dust" to run.
as a household- an old 4 bed house, family and typical consumption- gas heating and a multifuel fire/electric my average spent was £100 a mth.
Its now £116.
I'm rather keen on data/figures and really this means my £ spend.
I reckon we'll see a lot of 40 Kwh Nissan NV 200 taxis or delivery vans on the road now. They'll corner the market completely now range has flown up.
the other point many of you have missed, is the repair/maintenance is nearly non existent. Commercial vehicles/taxis need a lot of repair/servicing to do big mileage. EV taxis from what I've seen simply don't, except tyres and wiper blades !
That will equate to 8000 miles PA. That's £192 PA to drive 8000 miles.
Show me a hybrid/diesel or LPG car that will cost me "dust" to run.
as a household- an old 4 bed house, family and typical consumption- gas heating and a multifuel fire/electric my average spent was £100 a mth.
Its now £116.
I'm rather keen on data/figures and really this means my £ spend.
I reckon we'll see a lot of 40 Kwh Nissan NV 200 taxis or delivery vans on the road now. They'll corner the market completely now range has flown up.
the other point many of you have missed, is the repair/maintenance is nearly non existent. Commercial vehicles/taxis need a lot of repair/servicing to do big mileage. EV taxis from what I've seen simply don't, except tyres and wiper blades !
Colonial said:
So, about how nearly every taxi in Australia has moved from LPG (of which the country has abundant resources) to hybrids...
Any comment? Or still going to ignore this?
DELETED: Comment made by a member who's account has been deleted.Any comment? Or still going to ignore this?
Tinrobot, everyone following this thread will know you only just manage to ask a question and then when your question is answered you pretend you actually meant a different question. 'What colour do you feel the sky is Simon' 'The sky is blue Tinman' 'Nooooo you avoided the question, you know what I meant now answer it'. 'Can you explain the question a bit better'. 'Hahaha you're avoiding my question and we all know why' 'I'm not avoiding a question what question haven't I answered'. 'Tip - feel'. 'Oh, if the sky is Blue it feels good'. 'Hahaha nooo you're still avoiding the question'. This sort of crap from someone who accused me of obfuscation and who doesn't see how taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
https://www.insuretaxi.com/2016/08/taxi-driver-sur...
UK Taxi drivers do 25-35k miles a year, less than 100 miles a day. which is less than 1 fast charge of 30-40 mins. or 1 overnight charge of 4 hours.
UK Taxi drivers do 25-35k miles a year, less than 100 miles a day. which is less than 1 fast charge of 30-40 mins. or 1 overnight charge of 4 hours.
SimonYorkshire said:
I don't know how taxi drivers in Oz go about their business but running EVs must be more (and I'm going to insert this text to make it more difficult for you to quote me out of context) profitable for them than running LPG vehicles - obvious in this case! But we can draw some other conclusions - Due to the restricted range and charging times involved with EVs, obviously in Oz the taxis are not running constantly because charging time is time off road time (so much for portable electricity) which would make EV taxis less profitable than LPG taxis. Oz taxi drivers are obviously not doing multiple 50 mile airport runs a day. Taxi drivers in Oz obviously aren't doing the type of late night driving where they continually pick up revellers from city centres and take customers home (maybe ten miles from city centre) before immediately returning to the city centre to pick up the next load and setting off immediately again.. Kind of a mad rush situation where the quicker the taxi driver can pick up and drop off, repeat without stopping over a period of about 3.5 hours the more fares he takes during that time, which is why such taxi drivers have the reputation of being mad behind the wheel, the type of driving that would quickly deplete an EV battery. Road fuel duty equivalent to road fuel duty on ice fuel obviously isn't being charged on electricity to charge the taxis, or why would taxi drivers want to self impose all the restrictions of range and charging time upon themselves? If you say these taxi drivers park outside their depot to charge, that's not the way it would work in the UK. There probably isn't enough space outside the UK depot for half of the taxi firms taxis to park anyway, but even if there were enough space the taxis would be parked close to where the 'action' is and where there probably isn't a charging point (not that they'd have time to charge anyway).
Tinrobot, everyone following this thread will know you only just manage to ask a question and then when your question is answered you pretend you actually meant a different question. 'What colour do you feel the sky is Simon' 'The sky is blue Tinman' 'Nooooo you avoided the question, you know what I meant now answer it'. 'Can you explain the question a bit better'. 'Hahaha you're avoiding my question and we all know why' 'I'm not avoiding a question what question haven't I answered'. 'Tip - feel'. 'Oh, if the sky is Blue it feels good'. 'Hahaha nooo you're still avoiding the question'. This sort of crap from someone who accused me of obfuscation and who doesn't see how taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
You make a lot of assumptions based on zero factual evidence. Tinrobot, everyone following this thread will know you only just manage to ask a question and then when your question is answered you pretend you actually meant a different question. 'What colour do you feel the sky is Simon' 'The sky is blue Tinman' 'Nooooo you avoided the question, you know what I meant now answer it'. 'Can you explain the question a bit better'. 'Hahaha you're avoiding my question and we all know why' 'I'm not avoiding a question what question haven't I answered'. 'Tip - feel'. 'Oh, if the sky is Blue it feels good'. 'Hahaha nooo you're still avoiding the question'. This sort of crap from someone who accused me of obfuscation and who doesn't see how taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
SimonYorkshire said:
Toltec said:
ikarl said:
With regards to your paragraph about accepting that it will push 30 cars 100 miles, you accept that, but your calculations are off. A 30mw battery (which costs c.£30m) would allow 300 cars to travel 100 miles - so c.30,000miles.
You are being a bit too pessimistic too, 30MWh should get 300 cars more like 300 miles, though due to charging losses that may end up more like 250 - 270 miles.But people will say we don't really need to build any new power plants at all, we only need as many power plants as we have because electricity demand isn't a constant, there will easily be enough electricity to charge EVs during the night when electricity demand is at it's lowest. Let's say this quiet period 'night' is 12 hours long. Now you need double the 362 nuke power stations running at night just to charge those EVs. Now let's factor in grid storage, those batteries we've been talking about fitting in place of forecourt petrol tanks. Just had an even better idea, forget EVs, fit the batteries at power station sites, now we don't need most of the power stations we currently have, don't need to change any infrastructure at any site that currently isn't a power station, nobody has to suffer range anxiety or long charging times that EVs imply, the resources currently extended to develop EVs (which, with the battery tech coming to a stall means EV development is going to stall anyway) could be used to instead try to develop nuclear fusion power stations which really would make a difference (progress on fusion has stalled too). If we could build fusion power stations cheaply we wouldn't need much in the way of changes to infrastructure, wouldn't need to talk about batteries at power stations or below ground at petrol stations, we could have hydrogen powered vehicles and not have to mine any copper or lithium to produce power cables transformers and batteries, wouldn't have to worry about some bloke from the next town deciding he's going to become a religious fanatic and blow up one of those nuclear fission power stations.
Edited by SimonYorkshire on Tuesday 19th September 19:50
In the UK about 35m vehicles on the road, and each BEV will need an average of 7-8kWh of energy per day (based on the average mileage of 8k). Assuming all vehicles are BEV (which won't happen) thats about 30GWh total. Looking at a few scenarios for delivering 30GWh a day
> Spread evenly across the day would be 1.25GW.
> Confined to 12 hours per day it would be 2.5GW.
> Confined to just 6 hours overnight, then its 5GW.
We have about 10GW spare overnight so even if we were limited to just those hours we would have enough capacity. There are points in the day (especially winter) when changing might need to be throttled, but i suspect that will be managed by unit cost (ie making it cheaper at night).
That's assuming all cars are BEV only, which is I highly doubt will happen.
rscott said:
Simon Yorkshire said:
My maths are fine thanks, I've taught the subject. I'm at least among the top 1% of you in my understanding of electronics too and I have a very good grasp of physics.
Big claims.. what are your qualifications which make you such an expert in these subjects?I wouldn't rate my self on the top 25% let alone top 1% of engineers!
98elise said:
rscott said:
Simon Yorkshire said:
My maths are fine thanks, I've taught the subject. I'm at least among the top 1% of you in my understanding of electronics too and I have a very good grasp of physics.
Big claims.. what are your qualifications which make you such an expert in these subjects? I wouldn't rate my self on the top 25% let alone top 1% of engineers!
Colonial said:
SimonYorkshire said:
I don't know how taxi drivers in Oz go about their business but running EVs must be more (and I'm going to insert this text to make it more difficult for you to quote me out of context) profitable for them than running LPG vehicles - obvious in this case! But we can draw some other conclusions - Due to the restricted range and charging times involved with EVs, obviously in Oz the taxis are not running constantly because charging time is time off road time (so much for portable electricity) which would make EV taxis less profitable than LPG taxis. Oz taxi drivers are obviously not doing multiple 50 mile airport runs a day. Taxi drivers in Oz obviously aren't doing the type of late night driving where they continually pick up revellers from city centres and take customers home (maybe ten miles from city centre) before immediately returning to the city centre to pick up the next load and setting off immediately again.. Kind of a mad rush situation where the quicker the taxi driver can pick up and drop off, repeat without stopping over a period of about 3.5 hours the more fares he takes during that time, which is why such taxi drivers have the reputation of being mad behind the wheel, the type of driving that would quickly deplete an EV battery. Road fuel duty equivalent to road fuel duty on ice fuel obviously isn't being charged on electricity to charge the taxis, or why would taxi drivers want to self impose all the restrictions of range and charging time upon themselves? If you say these taxi drivers park outside their depot to charge, that's not the way it would work in the UK. There probably isn't enough space outside the UK depot for half of the taxi firms taxis to park anyway, but even if there were enough space the taxis would be parked close to where the 'action' is and where there probably isn't a charging point (not that they'd have time to charge anyway).
Tinrobot, everyone following this thread will know you only just manage to ask a question and then when your question is answered you pretend you actually meant a different question. 'What colour do you feel the sky is Simon' 'The sky is blue Tinman' 'Nooooo you avoided the question, you know what I meant now answer it'. 'Can you explain the question a bit better'. 'Hahaha you're avoiding my question and we all know why' 'I'm not avoiding a question what question haven't I answered'. 'Tip - feel'. 'Oh, if the sky is Blue it feels good'. 'Hahaha nooo you're still avoiding the question'. This sort of crap from someone who accused me of obfuscation and who doesn't see how taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
You make a lot of assumptions based on zero factual evidence. Tinrobot, everyone following this thread will know you only just manage to ask a question and then when your question is answered you pretend you actually meant a different question. 'What colour do you feel the sky is Simon' 'The sky is blue Tinman' 'Nooooo you avoided the question, you know what I meant now answer it'. 'Can you explain the question a bit better'. 'Hahaha you're avoiding my question and we all know why' 'I'm not avoiding a question what question haven't I answered'. 'Tip - feel'. 'Oh, if the sky is Blue it feels good'. 'Hahaha nooo you're still avoiding the question'. This sort of crap from someone who accused me of obfuscation and who doesn't see how taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
TA14 said:
98elise said:
rscott said:
Simon Yorkshire said:
My maths are fine thanks, I've taught the subject. I'm at least among the top 1% of you in my understanding of electronics too and I have a very good grasp of physics.
Big claims.. what are your qualifications which make you such an expert in these subjects? I wouldn't rate my self on the top 25% let alone top 1% of engineers!
TA14 said:
98elise said:
rscott said:
Simon Yorkshire said:
My maths are fine thanks, I've taught the subject. I'm at least among the top 1% of you in my understanding of electronics too and I have a very good grasp of physics.
Big claims.. what are your qualifications which make you such an expert in these subjects? I wouldn't rate my self on the top 25% let alone top 1% of engineers!
98elise said:
Possibly given how much of the global population is uneducated, however his grasp of engineering/physic seems a bit tenuous.
I think he does have a bit of a point about power station capacity though. I remember John Major's government being encouraged to authorise the construction of a new nuclear power station to guarantee a baseline supply. They delayed the decision, as did the Tony Blair government. Even now we're looking at ten years for it to come on line and the French aren't happy with the deal that they've signed. All in all that's the best part of forty years to get one power station built and adding any extra load requirement won't help. (I suppose that you could make the opposite argument and say that if 20 million vehicles would be stranded if the govt doesn't get a move on with power station replacement then that just the kick up the $%^&£ that the govt need)TA14 said:
98elise said:
Possibly given how much of the global population is uneducated, however his grasp of engineering/physic seems a bit tenuous.
I think he does have a bit of a point about power station capacity though. I remember John Major's government being encouraged to authorise the construction of a new nuclear power station to guarantee a baseline supply. They delayed the decision, as did the Tony Blair government. Even now we're looking at ten years for it to come on line and the French aren't happy with the deal that they've signed. All in all that's the best part of forty years to get one power station built and adding any extra load requirement won't help. (I suppose that you could make the opposite argument and say that if 20 million vehicles would be stranded if the govt doesn't get a move on with power station replacement then that just the kick up the $%^&£ that the govt need)rscott said:
He'd have a point of his calculations gave results which even vaguely correlated with those of the National Grid..
In case you missed the link provided by Pherlopolus, the National Grid don't think they have a problem: http://fes.nationalgrid.com/media/1264/ev-myth-bus...SimonYorkshire said:
taxation and incentives are the driving force behind that massive proportion of 0.3% of vehicles on the road being EVs, motivating forces that would (and will) immediately drop away as the playing field levels and road duty is applied to electricity.
There is a certain irony in this, given that the sole reason anyone converts their car to LPG is that it gets preferential tax treatment.TA14 said:
98elise said:
Possibly given how much of the global population is uneducated, however his grasp of engineering/physic seems a bit tenuous.
I think he does have a bit of a point about power station capacity though. I remember John Major's government being encouraged to authorise the construction of a new nuclear power station to guarantee a baseline supply. They delayed the decision, as did the Tony Blair government. Even now we're looking at ten years for it to come on line and the French aren't happy with the deal that they've signed. All in all that's the best part of forty years to get one power station built and adding any extra load requirement won't help. (I suppose that you could make the opposite argument and say that if 20 million vehicles would be stranded if the govt doesn't get a move on with power station replacement then that just the kick up the $%^&£ that the govt need)GT119 said:
rscott said:
He'd have a point of his calculations gave results which even vaguely correlated with those of the National Grid..
In case you missed the link provided by Pherlopolus, the National Grid don't think they have a problem: http://fes.nationalgrid.com/media/1264/ev-myth-bus...You may not be able to fast charge every UK car on a winters night at 6pm, however you can charge them all up if the load is spread.
Seems you cannot even agree among yourselves how many new power stations will be needed, whether people will need to charge EVs overnight, whether there will be a higher price to pay for charging during the day, whether charging during the day will always be possible, how long charging times will be if you need to charge during the day enroute to a destination, whether or not we'd need £multi-million batteries installed at thousands of sites around the country, what EV battery capacity (and therefore range) will be in X years, time scale for owners to move from ices to hybrids to pure EVs (or straight to pure EVs).
Why not get your heads together to reach a consensus and then join other discussions on this forum to see how well your consensus of this future (is that in 100 years or 2 years) looks to more moderate forum users most of whom would equate any change in practicality of their vehicle and ability to use it whenever however they like as a severe knock to their way of life despite '21 miles a day is average mileage'? You will find people will tell you where to get off, mock you and enlist users from similar threads to join them in mocking you and accuse you of being a troll.
I accept that LPG is a niche and will remain a niche - but being a niche is the only way it can be cheaper (government see it as a cleaner ice fuel and charge less duty on it). You need to accept that pure EVs may take over the role of most of the second cars on the driveway, the one that never really goes very far, but they won't take over the role of the 'main' car in the foreseeable future. Many of the main cars will become hybrids, of which I and others will continue in our niche field converting a small proportion of them to LPG. You also need to accept that as/if a greater proportion of vehicles run on electricity, government will still need all the revenue they were getting from duty on ice fuels, so road duty is likely to be charged on electricity. Charging duty on electricity will level the playing field for how much it costs to run an ice versus pure EV. If duty isn't charged on electricity and ice users are forced to pay higher and higher duty instead then as long as LPG is still cheaper than petrol at the pumps there is an even greater incentive for ice and hybrid users to convert to LPG.
Does anyone here really think that in 10/15 years there will be no pure ice vehicles on the road? All those new Rangerovers etc scrapped, whoever currently runs a 10 year old Rangerover running around in a Leaf instead, whoever might have run a 10 year old range rover in 10 years time running around in a new Leaf instead? In more than 10 years I will be converting some Rangerovers and some Astras built this year to LPG, the owners will be able to drive them as far as they like without long stops for recharging - You cannot say that in 10 years an hours charge at a supercharger will add any more range than an hours charge does today and you cannot explain if/how infrastructure could cope with 5 cars charging at even today's supercharger rates. I can picture what would happen if you buried something worth £30million quid below a garage forecourt - along comes a truck with a hiab and a couple of guys with jigger-picks to promptly dig it up and take it away to sell for £5million.
Why not get your heads together to reach a consensus and then join other discussions on this forum to see how well your consensus of this future (is that in 100 years or 2 years) looks to more moderate forum users most of whom would equate any change in practicality of their vehicle and ability to use it whenever however they like as a severe knock to their way of life despite '21 miles a day is average mileage'? You will find people will tell you where to get off, mock you and enlist users from similar threads to join them in mocking you and accuse you of being a troll.
I accept that LPG is a niche and will remain a niche - but being a niche is the only way it can be cheaper (government see it as a cleaner ice fuel and charge less duty on it). You need to accept that pure EVs may take over the role of most of the second cars on the driveway, the one that never really goes very far, but they won't take over the role of the 'main' car in the foreseeable future. Many of the main cars will become hybrids, of which I and others will continue in our niche field converting a small proportion of them to LPG. You also need to accept that as/if a greater proportion of vehicles run on electricity, government will still need all the revenue they were getting from duty on ice fuels, so road duty is likely to be charged on electricity. Charging duty on electricity will level the playing field for how much it costs to run an ice versus pure EV. If duty isn't charged on electricity and ice users are forced to pay higher and higher duty instead then as long as LPG is still cheaper than petrol at the pumps there is an even greater incentive for ice and hybrid users to convert to LPG.
Does anyone here really think that in 10/15 years there will be no pure ice vehicles on the road? All those new Rangerovers etc scrapped, whoever currently runs a 10 year old Rangerover running around in a Leaf instead, whoever might have run a 10 year old range rover in 10 years time running around in a new Leaf instead? In more than 10 years I will be converting some Rangerovers and some Astras built this year to LPG, the owners will be able to drive them as far as they like without long stops for recharging - You cannot say that in 10 years an hours charge at a supercharger will add any more range than an hours charge does today and you cannot explain if/how infrastructure could cope with 5 cars charging at even today's supercharger rates. I can picture what would happen if you buried something worth £30million quid below a garage forecourt - along comes a truck with a hiab and a couple of guys with jigger-picks to promptly dig it up and take it away to sell for £5million.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff