RE: Final EU vote on 2035 engine phaseout delayed
Discussion
Strangely Brown said:
None of this argument about engine efficiency and stuff makes any difference to me. Nor does any arguments about how the electricity is generated or supplied to the chargers, even if they can be made reasonably ubiquitous.
The elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
Do you drive while you are sleeping? That’s when most people chargeThe elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
911hope said:
The operations certainly are NOT carbon neutral.
Actually F1 has a vague plan to be neutral by 2030.
If anyone doesn't believe me, read their own presentation. (link below)
In it you will find that the proportion used by the cars is 0.7%
You will also find that their estimated emissions (just statements without underlying facts, so who knows if it relates to reality) conveniently omits the impact of 100's of thousands of spectator journeys.
https://corp.formula1.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/...
You didn't read the later posts.Actually F1 has a vague plan to be neutral by 2030.
If anyone doesn't believe me, read their own presentation. (link below)
In it you will find that the proportion used by the cars is 0.7%
You will also find that their estimated emissions (just statements without underlying facts, so who knows if it relates to reality) conveniently omits the impact of 100's of thousands of spectator journeys.
https://corp.formula1.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/...
That document is 3 years out of date too.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.net-zer...
Soupdragon65 said:
Strangely Brown said:
None of this argument about engine efficiency and stuff makes any difference to me. Nor does any arguments about how the electricity is generated or supplied to the chargers, even if they can be made reasonably ubiquitous.
The elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
Do you drive while you are sleeping? That’s when most people chargeThe elephant in the room and the main reason that I have zero interest in an electric car, even if it were the same price as the ICE equivalent, is charge time. If it means that I have to wait inordinate amounts of time to buy another 100 miles or so of range then it's a non-starter. It is not even a consideration.
You can only get the electrons from the grid into the battery so fast and, as it stands, that is not good enough.
I can refuel my ICE car at the rate of approx 100 miles / minute (500 miles range, under 5 minutes to fill the tank). Given that the average EV runs about 3 miles per kWH... OK let's be generous and say 4... no let's be really really generous and say 5 miles per kWH the time to fill 100 miles at a 50kW charger, assuming your car will accept that rate, is 24 minutes. That's unacceptable. People cannot be expected to add 20, 40, 60 minutes plus to their journeys, even if they manage to find a charger that is both working and empty when they reach it.
Edited by Strangely Brown on Sunday 19th March 16:59
Strangely Brown said:
Why do you people always assume that people have the ability to charge at home, and in any case how would a home charger help if you need to charge while on a longer trip?
I can refuel my ICE car at the rate of approx 100 miles / minute (500 miles range, under 5 minutes to fill the tank). Given that the average EV runs about 3 miles per kWH... OK let's be generous and say 4... no let's be really really generous and say 5 miles per kWH the time to fill 100 miles at a 50kW charger, assuming your car will accept that rate, is 24 minutes. That's unacceptable. People cannot be expected to add 20, 40, 60 minutes plus to their journeys, even if they manage to find a charger that is both working and empty when they reach it.
Electric cars charge at over 250kW already.I can refuel my ICE car at the rate of approx 100 miles / minute (500 miles range, under 5 minutes to fill the tank). Given that the average EV runs about 3 miles per kWH... OK let's be generous and say 4... no let's be really really generous and say 5 miles per kWH the time to fill 100 miles at a 50kW charger, assuming your car will accept that rate, is 24 minutes. That's unacceptable. People cannot be expected to add 20, 40, 60 minutes plus to their journeys, even if they manage to find a charger that is both working and empty when they reach it.
Edited by Strangely Brown on Sunday 19th March 16:40
It takes 5 minutes to add 100 miles of range.
JD said:
Strangely Brown said:
Why do you people always assume that everyone has the ability to charge at home, and in any case how would a home charger help if you need to charge while on a longer trip?
I can refuel my ICE car at the rate of approx 100 miles / minute (500 miles range, under 5 minutes to fill the tank). Given that the average EV runs about 3 miles per kWH... OK let's be generous and say 4... no let's be really really generous and say 5 miles per kWH the time to fill 100 miles at a 50kW charger, assuming your car will accept that rate, is 24 minutes. That's unacceptable. People cannot be expected to add 20, 40, 60 minutes plus to their journeys, even if they manage to find a charger that is both working and empty when they reach it.
Electric cars charge at over 250kW already.I can refuel my ICE car at the rate of approx 100 miles / minute (500 miles range, under 5 minutes to fill the tank). Given that the average EV runs about 3 miles per kWH... OK let's be generous and say 4... no let's be really really generous and say 5 miles per kWH the time to fill 100 miles at a 50kW charger, assuming your car will accept that rate, is 24 minutes. That's unacceptable. People cannot be expected to add 20, 40, 60 minutes plus to their journeys, even if they manage to find a charger that is both working and empty when they reach it.
It takes 5 minutes to add 100 miles of range.
Oh, and that's still 5 times slower than refilling a petrol tank.
Edited by Strangely Brown on Sunday 19th March 17:03
500TORQUES said:
911hope said:
The operations certainly are NOT carbon neutral.
Actually F1 has a vague plan to be neutral by 2030.
If anyone doesn't believe me, read their own presentation. (link below)
In it you will find that the proportion used by the cars is 0.7%
You will also find that their estimated emissions (just statements without underlying facts, so who knows if it relates to reality) conveniently omits the impact of 100's of thousands of spectator journeys.
https://corp.formula1.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/...
You didn't read the later posts.Actually F1 has a vague plan to be neutral by 2030.
If anyone doesn't believe me, read their own presentation. (link below)
In it you will find that the proportion used by the cars is 0.7%
You will also find that their estimated emissions (just statements without underlying facts, so who knows if it relates to reality) conveniently omits the impact of 100's of thousands of spectator journeys.
https://corp.formula1.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/...
That document is 3 years out of date too.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.net-zer...
You have stated that F1 is already carbon neutral, which it clearly is NOT.
"That is already carbon neutral." Your words at 12:50pm
The F1 2019 report states this and outlines their vague plan for carbon neutral by 2030.
You then reference a new article, which referenced toe 2019 report and says exactly the same stuff.
So, you have provided more evidence that your prior assertion is wrong.
Do you accept that?
Strangely Brown said:
Nope. SOME electric cars can charge at over 250kW at SOME chargers. That is not the reality for the vast majority of electric cars on the road or the market.
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you. Edited by Strangely Brown on Sunday 19th March 16:58
SpeckledJim said:
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you.
Wow. Dismissive and insulting in equal measure. I guess that's the elephant put down then.Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you.
Wow. Dismissive and insulting in equal measure. I guess that's the elephant put down then.911hope said:
Not sure what you think you have said in prior posts.
You have stated that F1 is already carbon neutral, which it clearly is NOT.
"That is already carbon neutral." Your words at 12:50pm
The F1 2019 report states this and outlines their vague plan for carbon neutral by 2030.
You then reference a new article, which referenced toe 2019 report and says exactly the same stuff.
So, you have provided more evidence that your prior assertion is wrong.
Do you accept that?
I already commented on my first post, what's up with you?You have stated that F1 is already carbon neutral, which it clearly is NOT.
"That is already carbon neutral." Your words at 12:50pm
The F1 2019 report states this and outlines their vague plan for carbon neutral by 2030.
You then reference a new article, which referenced toe 2019 report and says exactly the same stuff.
So, you have provided more evidence that your prior assertion is wrong.
Do you accept that?
911hope said:
bigothunter said:
DonkeyApple said:
The trouble is that there is no innovation involved in Liberty engaging Goldmans to calculate how many carbon credits to purchase on the open market to offset a fraction of the CO2 and general pollution a wholly unnecessary enterprise creates. 
I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
To survive long term, Formula 1 needs to go fully electric. Fundamentally an upgraded Formula E.I don't envy F1 these days as there is nothing they can do to truly fix the reality that they won't even be able to argue their waste is offset by trickle down to the road ICe market in a decade's time.
ICE Motorsport is only going to come under greater and greater assault from more and more corners as people seek to kill it off for good as they hate it, what it stands for and the sort of people who enjoy it.
Very sad.
ICE motorsport will become the domain of historic vehicles.
Changing it is simply greenwashing.
No one cares about Formula E. You have to to beg to get corporate hospitality to an F1 event whereas with Formula E you have to beg companies to stop throwing worthless tickets at you. They're utterly rubbish events.
If some Chilean tramp booze helps keep modern motorsport smelly and noisy then it has a value in that regard.
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you.
Wow. Dismissive and insulting in equal measure. I guess that's the elephant put down then.
t. DonkeyApple said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you.
Wow. Dismissive and insulting in equal measure. I guess that's the elephant put down then.t. I am not anti-EV. I am not anti-BEV either. They have their place for people with a usage profile that fits. What I am against is the blinkered BEV only approach that this country is forcing us down.
"Seeing the real numbers through the PR bulls
t" is excellent advice and should also be applied to "The Science" that is driving this net-zero crap.Strangely Brown said:
DonkeyApple said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Well then I recommend you stay with your ICE for the next 20 years, and then if you’re still alive, buy an EV that can charge very quickly, if that’s of great importance to you.
Wow. Dismissive and insulting in equal measure. I guess that's the elephant put down then.t. I am not anti-EV. I am not anti-BEV either. They have their place for people with a usage profile that fits. What I am against is the blinkered BEV only approach that this country is forcing us down.
"Seeing the real numbers through the PR bulls
t" is excellent advice and should also be applied to "The Science" that is driving this net-zero crap.SpeckledJim said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does this mean?
Do you think that batteries are the only fuel source for vehicles with an electric drivetrain?Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does this mean?
Do you think that batteries are the only fuel source for vehicles with an electric drivetrain?You can sidestep that by keeping the car you’ve got for now, and buying a PHEV in 2034. That’ll see you through to, what, 2050? And maybe by then your circumstances will have changed and you’ll have 20 minutes spare to charge an EV?
Strangely Brown said:
I am looking at the bigger picture and to the future and that is exactly why I see a problem.
I am not anti-EV. I am not anti-BEV either. They have their place for people with a usage profile that fits. What I am against is the blinkered BEV only approach that this country is forcing us down.
"Seeing the real numbers through the PR bullst" is excellent advice and should also be applied to "The Science" that is driving this net-zero crap.
Personally, I don't there is a blinkered EV only approach in the U.K. The clue being that we haven't set our dates in law. I am not anti-EV. I am not anti-BEV either. They have their place for people with a usage profile that fits. What I am against is the blinkered BEV only approach that this country is forcing us down.
"Seeing the real numbers through the PR bulls
t" is excellent advice and should also be applied to "The Science" that is driving this net-zero crap.The fundamental issue is that EVs remain more expensive and less versatile than their ICE equivalent. Pretty much everything else anyone talks about on PH is of zero relevance for the U.K.
The period that we are in now is the command economics phase whereby taxation and legislation bridge the affordability and versatility gap for enough people that they form a true market that can compete in a free market. The shorter that time period is the less pressure there is to switch as consumers always go for what is cheapest as a group.
In 2023 I don't see a single entity forcing me to switch to an EV. Just by considering the very slow rate of renewal I don't see anyone forcing me into an EV within the next 20 years. Given that it will be the lowest income workers who are the last to switch then I simply see zero problems with buying and burning petrol for many, many years to come.
It doesn't matter how many product worshipers try to tell me that their product is the only way and that I must join them now the numbers and reality don't support that. Nor does it matter how many adverts car companies take out to peddle their lowest selling product the reality is that these are years away from being their big sellers.
All of this is an evolution and we shouldn't in the U.K. be panicking as if it's a revolution. I don't feel that anyone or anything is forcing me to do anything but what I do see is loads of people running around wailing about stuff that they just need to stop and think about for a minute.
But this Germanic centric desperation to revert to 1940s emergency engineering of manufacturing a synthetic alcohol in a foreign country and importing it to try and solve an issue with Russia is just laughable if people think it has anything at all to do with allowing them to keep driving an ICE. It has nothing at all to do with punters and their cars. And one only has to look at the dodgy old geezers trying to push the idea in the U.K. to see right through the farce even if someone has no natural understanding of the basic science involved that reveals the idiocy of what these people are saying and trying to con everyone over
Edited by DonkeyApple on Monday 20th March 07:37
SpeckledJim said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
Strangely Brown said:
SpeckledJim said:
What does this mean?
Do you think that batteries are the only fuel source for vehicles with an electric drivetrain?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff