RE: Final EU vote on 2035 engine phaseout delayed
Discussion
Klippie said:
GT9 said:
We have one of the best opportunities to electrify cars anywhere in the world.
Ok how does Mr avarage on £25k with a family afford to buy a £40k EV, Mr average probably runs a ten year old Focus costing a few grand...the low earning UK population will never be able to buy or run an EV...its fantasy land.You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
Archie2050 said:
How much do you think a 10 year old (£40k new) EV will cost?
It’s also like to be in much better mechanical shape than an ICE car provided the battery doesn’t self destruct the days after its manufacturer’s warranty expires.
That’s why the rate of adoption of EVs now matters so much in order to pump prime the whole second and third user ecosystem and IMO it’s a mistake to withdraw tax breaks too early. Introducing road tax on EVs in 2025 will not hurt new owners (who won’t care) aa much as used buyers (who may) for example, and VAT on public charging is regressive penalising those without a private drive to charge at home.
At the time a new Foucus wasn't £40k...will any reach ten years old with good battery range left, if a new battery has to be installed or perhaps can't be renewed what are the costs involved £10k-£20k who can afford that, how much would it cost to scrap an EV.It’s also like to be in much better mechanical shape than an ICE car provided the battery doesn’t self destruct the days after its manufacturer’s warranty expires.
That’s why the rate of adoption of EVs now matters so much in order to pump prime the whole second and third user ecosystem and IMO it’s a mistake to withdraw tax breaks too early. Introducing road tax on EVs in 2025 will not hurt new owners (who won’t care) aa much as used buyers (who may) for example, and VAT on public charging is regressive penalising those without a private drive to charge at home.
Edited by Klippie on Saturday 4th March 11:03
GT9 said:
Simple answer, you do nothing.
You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
It will never happen...there won't be that many cars registered because of the costs involved.You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
Don't get me wrong EV transport is a fantastic idea, it mechanicals appear to work quite well its the power source its the issue...there is no such thing as clean electricity so you might as well just use petrol.
Klippie said:
GT9 said:
We have one of the best opportunities to electrify cars anywhere in the world.
Ok how does Mr avarage on £25k with a family afford to buy a £40k EV, Mr average probably runs a ten year old Focus costing a few grand...the low earning UK population will never be able to buy or run an EV...its fantasy land.You're asking how does someone who buys used , affordable vehicles buy a new, expensive car that no one is forcing them to buy?
The sad fact is that lots of people just can't have an EV today for the same reason they can't have a Ferrari or a big house or any of the things they dream and aspire to one day have.
But they do have access to this thing called the 'used market'. This is where they buy cars that other people have previously owned and that at a lot less money. When this thing called 'time' is applied to a 'used' car the price will typically become lower. Lower is the opposite of higher.
If one uses this 'time' concept to look forward to 2035 one can see that there will be between 10-15 million used EVs of various ages, sizes, range and values in the U.K. At the same time there will also be around 20 million Used ICE cars to chose from.
Now, 20 million is a very big number. It's like you having a twin but there being 10 million of each of you. I believe the media likes to use football pitches to help people visualise numbers so imagine all the football pitches in the world, all filled with used cars of all shapes, sizes and values and you being free to select the one that you want.
It's amazing isn't it. And it's all going to be done for you by other people. You don't have to worry about a thing. Everyone else is going to sort it all out for you. How lovely is that. And to think, your neighbour who may not be as smart as you could be sitting there right now all confused and panicking about something that just isn't a problem and doesn't impact him at all. What a silly boy.
Klippie said:
Ok how does Mr avarage on £25k with a family afford to buy a £40k EV, Mr average probably runs a ten year old Focus costing a few grand...the low earning UK population will never be able to buy or run an EV...its fantasy land.
Ev will get cheaper once we start importing them from our soon to be masters China, Klippie said:
GT9 said:
Simple answer, you do nothing.
You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
It will never happen...there won't be that many cars registered because of the costs involved.You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
Don't get me wrong EV transport is a fantastic idea, it mechanicals appear to work quite well its the power source its the issue...there is no such thing as clean electricity so you might as well just use petrol.
I'm not an EV owner.
I'm perfectly fine with the notion that all cars operate on petrol.
What I'm not fine with is the half of all our cars operate on diesel and so do all our trucks and buses.
We get through 36 million tons of petrol and diesel each year.
Two-thirds of that is diesel.
That's our nemesis.
Either we replace those cars with EVs, or, if that can't be done, with petrol.
I believe we can do it predominantly with EVs.
Forget e-fuel and hydrogen, there is simply no way they will scratch the surface of 36 million tons.
It's distracting, and frankly irresponsible, to pretend otherwise.
If EVs do turn out to be viable, which I'm confident they will be, we can then start to convert the more mundane petrol cars over as well.
The approach I described above would mean that not a single PHer has their pride and joy taken away from them.
I'm also confident that within those 20 years, most PHers will start to appreciate the benefits that an EV might offer, and just as importantly, that the EVs on offer will be better cars, with a wider range of choice, and with a wider range of price points.
That's a win-win in my eyes.
Klippie said:
GT9 said:
Simple answer, you do nothing.
You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
It will never happen...there won't be that many cars registered because of the costs involved.You wait.
You wait for 15 or 20 years until there are 25 or 30 million EVs on the road and then you browse the used cars ads.
You find the car you like from a choice of around 7 to 8 million used electric car that will be on sale at any one point in time.
Exactly the same as for ICE cars.
Don't get me wrong EV transport is a fantastic idea, it mechanicals appear to work quite well its the power source its the issue...there is no such thing as clean electricity so you might as well just use petrol.
The weak point is the storage medium (batteries) which are far inferior to liquid fuel in both cost and density (volume and weight)
Happily a lot can be done this inferiority either with better design, improved tech or infrastructure and right now even with this limitation for a lot of people EVs are perfectly useable with little or now comprimise.
On the other hand the much bigger thermodynamic limitations of fossil fuel powered Internal Comnustion Emgine vehicles are unsolvable without rewriting the laws of physics.
That’s why clinging on to fossil fuels by way of synthetics is doomed to failure.
Klippie said:
At the time a new Foucus wasn't £40k...will any reach ten years old with good battery range left, if a new battery has to be installed or perhaps can't be renewed what are the costs involved £10k-£20k who can afford that, how much would it cost to scrap an EV.
EVs will create their own depreciation curve for starters and that will factor in any need to refresh or replace battery packs as well as the higher end of life value due to the battery and motor etc. And the financial services industry will make it all possible just as they do the ICE market. Edited by Klippie on Saturday 4th March 11:03
Jader1973 said:
kambites said:
Anyone would think that the German manufacturers had got hopelessly left behind with regards to electrification or something... 
VW have 6 EVs in the UK line up, Mercedes also have 6, and BMW have 5.Their models span multiple market segments. They also have existing dealer networks to sell and service, which is very important in transitioning from ICE to EV.
Tesla have 4 models and no dealer network.
Who is being left behind?
DonkeyApple said:
And how many miles could a million EVs have driven just using that electricity?
Straw man.If, say, you're generating masses of solar in a gulf state, it's not going anywhere other than into some kind of transportable fuel. You can't transmit it half way across the world to charge those EVs. Nobody is suggesting that you use power from the local grid to make this stuff.
Maybe cracking water for hydrogen makes more sense in some ways. But that's a different deabte.
Jader1973 said:
kambites said:
Anyone would think that the German manufacturers had got hopelessly left behind with regards to electrification or something...
VW have 6 EVs in the UK line up, Mercedes also have 6, and BMW have 5.Their models span multiple market segments. They also have existing dealer networks to sell and service, which is very important in transitioning from ICE to EV.
Tesla have 4 models and no dealer network.
Who is being left behind?
The Germans are generally a but conservaitve and hard headed about this stuff. For then most part they didn't tool up for EVs that weren't going to sell.
But they are all going very big on BEV now that the momentum is there. Which isn't to say they are nailed on to come out of this huge change in the same leadership position they held in the ICE era. But hopelessly left behind? Hardly.
rampangle said:
Straw man.
If, say, you're generating masses of solar in a gulf state, it's not going anywhere other than into some kind of transportable fuel. You can't transmit it half way across the world to charge those EVs. Nobody is suggesting that you use power from the local grid to make this stuff.
Maybe cracking water for hydrogen makes more sense in some ways. But that's a different deabte.
Or you don't export it at all but instead, use the massive competitive advantage of excess renewable energy to force Western industry to be moved to your country. If, say, you're generating masses of solar in a gulf state, it's not going anywhere other than into some kind of transportable fuel. You can't transmit it half way across the world to charge those EVs. Nobody is suggesting that you use power from the local grid to make this stuff.
Maybe cracking water for hydrogen makes more sense in some ways. But that's a different deabte.
The clue lies in the existing grey hydrogen industry. It is made where it is used. It's not transported or stored.
Why transport or store all your energy just to benefit the industrial needs of another nation when you can just move that industry to you?
That's what Germany and other Western markets are soiling themselves over.
DonkeyApple said:
Or you don't export it at all but instead, use the massive competitive advantage of excess renewable energy to force Western industry to be moved to your country.
The clue lies in the existing grey hydrogen industry. It is made where it is used. It's not transported or stored.
Why transport or store all your energy just to benefit the industrial needs of another nation when you can just move that industry to you?
That's what Germany and other Western markets are soiling themselves over.
Who said anything about all energy? We're talking about the best way to fuel cars in the medium term. In practice, I think the merits of the various options are more finely balanced than many make out.The clue lies in the existing grey hydrogen industry. It is made where it is used. It's not transported or stored.
Why transport or store all your energy just to benefit the industrial needs of another nation when you can just move that industry to you?
That's what Germany and other Western markets are soiling themselves over.
Installed infrastructure and ICE fleet is a huge advantage for synthetic fuels. Energy efficiency is a huge advantage for BEV. Etc. Working out which actually makes more sense is not remotely straight forward.
I don't really care too much what technology is used as long as it works; things always evolve.
On the other hand a politically driven process mandating radical change, more or less mandating a specific solution and setting incredibly tight deadlines (tightened further on a whim) isn't usually the route to a good outcome. A tight deadline or a radical change isn't a problem in itself but the way this process has been handled doesn't promote success.
Of course there are plenty who won't care because the outcome will be good enough to suit their purposes and all those problematic details are someone else's problem.
On the other hand a politically driven process mandating radical change, more or less mandating a specific solution and setting incredibly tight deadlines (tightened further on a whim) isn't usually the route to a good outcome. A tight deadline or a radical change isn't a problem in itself but the way this process has been handled doesn't promote success.
Of course there are plenty who won't care because the outcome will be good enough to suit their purposes and all those problematic details are someone else's problem.
Jader1973 said:
kambites said:
Anyone would think that the German manufacturers had got hopelessly left behind with regards to electrification or something...
VW have 6 EVs in the UK line up, Mercedes also have 6, and BMW have 5.rampangle said:
DonkeyApple said:
And how many miles could a million EVs have driven just using that electricity?
Straw man.If, say, you're generating masses of solar in a gulf state, it's not going anywhere other than into some kind of transportable fuel. You can't transmit it half way across the world to charge those EVs. Nobody is suggesting that you use power from the local grid to make this stuff.
The cars in the UK are consuming over 300 TWh of energy annually, when measured at the pumps.
That's just the cars.
300 billion kWh.
This is the same amount of energy that we currently generate for ALL electricity consumption in the whole of the UK.
Why not calculate how much solar energy that will require, accounting for all the upstream inefficiencies between the panels and the fuel pumps?
Then come back and tell us the timeline and cost to install that and in which century the work will be finished.
Don't forget to work out the carbon footprint associated with the production and installation.
And don't forget to include the cost and footprint of shipping it to the UK.
HINT: It's a bonkers idea.
rampangle said:
Who said anything about all energy? We're talking about the best way to fuel cars in the medium term. In practice, I think the merits of the various options are more finely balanced than many make out.
Installed infrastructure and ICE fleet is a huge advantage for synthetic fuels. Energy efficiency is a huge advantage for BEV. Etc. Working out which actually makes more sense is not remotely straight forward.
The best way is the only way. To use petrol while transitioning to EV. Installed infrastructure and ICE fleet is a huge advantage for synthetic fuels. Energy efficiency is a huge advantage for BEV. Etc. Working out which actually makes more sense is not remotely straight forward.
It is literally that simple. And it is exactly what the U.K. is and will keep doing. It's a very clear, simple path.
Markets such as Germany have far deeper structural issues with regards to energy let alone energy independence which is why they're scrabbling about and trying frankly insane fixes, falling back on wunderwaffe.
Their wanting license for eFuels isn't about keeping poor people able to use ICE but about their industrial base and protecting it.
And working out which makes sense is incredibly easy. Petrol is cheapest but electricity is cheaper still due to taxation differentials. Poor people are struggling to pay for either. EFuels are magnitudes more expensive, don't exist in viable quantities, won't for decades and can never be manufactured in anywhere near the volume required to be a viable replacement for fossil fuels in conventional use.
For potential market volumes we already know. We know how much wind energy in Chile can be theoretically harvested. We know the energy cost for converting it to hydrogen. We know the cost of importing the required amounts of fossil fuel derived CO2. We know the cost of forming the methane. We know the cost of forming the methanol. We know the cost of running FT and the additional carbon requirement. We know the cost of them shipping it to market. We know the cost of distribution. And we know why it would be very silly to ever think that eFuels can replace petrol in normal usage.
Edited by DonkeyApple on Saturday 4th March 13:30
pquinn said:
I don't really care too much what technology is used as long as it works; things always evolve.
The technology is very old and very well proven. We've been making these fuels for well over a hundred years. It's very straight forward chemistry. It's the physics of breaking covalent bonds and forcing them back together that is set in absolute stone and will never change. It's the laws of thermodynamics that define the amount of energy needed to deliver a litre of manufactured C4-C12 blends.
You can never change the reality that you need 10-20 times more energy for that litre of synthetic hydrocarbon than you do to just push a crappy EV along.
What is incredibly interesting and what we can start being played out in geopolitics today is the start of the repositioning of the energy economies as we transition from wholly oil based economies to one's powered by renewables. This shift is going to restructure global power enormously.
For example, some oil producing economies are going to wane in power while some oil importers happen to be geolocated perfectly for energy self sufficiency while other oil importers aren't and have very, very serious fiscal drags looming as they switch from being reliant on imported oil to being reliant on imported renewables.
There are three prime geolocations for near perfect renewable wind production. All three are Southern Hemisphere. These locations need to be at the exact eastern edge of an ocean body , aligned with the constant air stream and then need a large enough continental shelf to be able to install sufficient wind turbines. Chile is one. Western Australia another and the third is the West African coast.
There are also solar spots located in key geographical locations. We don't need to tax ourselves too heavily to appreciate that these will be equatorial in nature.
Where does this leave Europe? The Northern nations have been able to live off cheap nat gas since the 60s. Some of those northern nations have the right geography for some viable hydro. And some have access to shallow seas where wind power can be generated.
But not a single one is anywhere near as well positioned as the U.K. this miserable little island that juts of the Western edge of a Land peninsula of the Asian land mass happens to find itself sitting smack bang on the eastern side of the Atlantic Ocean. Not only that but what gives us our temperate climate, what makes us warmer than other countries at the same latitude when as an island we should be freezing is the Gulf and Jet Streams that we sit smack bang in line off and which deliver a constant and ideal flow of air. We are subsequently completely surrounded by shallow seas that allow us to install a near endless number of wind turbines.
Let's then look at France. It has no coastline in the right place. Where it does have coastline tends to be where there are heavy shipping lanes to restrict use. It has an enormous land mass and its topography is very good for wind. Its also got some fair opportunity for solar. With its nuclear backbone able to deliver in the same way the UK's nat gas can, things look generally OK for France.
Now we can consider the UK's and France's nearest and largest competitor Germany. Pretty f
ked to be honest. No gas. No real nuclear. No hydro beyond what already exists. No oil. Next to no coastline. Very high levels of forest due to topography so much less ability for on land wind. Not ideal location for solar. And then look at the enormous levels of highly energy intensive 20th century industry that can't compete against the US or Asia and the fact that they've spent 20 years poking an angry bear with a stick and taunting it and that bear looks to have had enough. Of the three economies, Germany is the largest but by far has the most toxic economic headwinds of the three and this is why they are desperately throwing any old shot against any old wall in the hopes that something might stick.
Getting eFuels permitted by hiding the true source of the carbon is a means to support local industry as opposed to a means to keep the less affluent mobile. These synthetic fuels are for Porsches, Bugattis, Lambos, Ferraris etc. as are the rules to allow small volume manufacture of such cars.
The peasantry must make do with chewing on electrons and be happy about it.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff