Batteries dead after 5 years

[98elise]

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

I totally agree. Easy to administer, easy to measure, rewards those that are efficient.

It's why VED should be on consumption. If you have an inefficient car but use it infrequently then you are still being green.

[DonkeyApple]

otolith said:

You could also discount for green tariffs, driving demand for renewables.

Yup. Taxing domestic electricity above a certain level while forcing households that use gas to change would generate enormous revenues from the initial burst of consumer spending as people changed boilers, replaced lots of household goods to be more energy efficient, installed home power generation solutions where possible and retailers took advantage of really using EV charging as a means to bring consumers in and keep them captive and spending.

A spanner in the works might be how to divert and sell the gas that we produce? I don’t know how long our gas production from the North Sea is estimated to continue or whether it is viable to sell it all abroad etc.

But it can’t be long before households that use gas come under pressure to change so as to reduce urban emissions?

[Evanivitch]

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

As if there weren't enough vulnerable people struggling to heat the homes as it is.

The move to electrical heating (heat pumps) has to be a carrot approach, because the alternative is that those at the bottom will be left behind.

[otolith]

Evanivitch said:

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

As if there weren't enough vulnerable people struggling to heat the homes as it is.

That's the point in a tiered tax - you want to hit people who are using their domestic electricity to charge a car, so you make the charge kick in above the typical domestic use level. That would also hit people who are unusually high electricity users for other reasons, but if my neighbour is being taxed for charging his car it's hard to argue that I shouldn't be taxed for heating a hot tub or whatever.

[RJG46]

pingu393 said:

A couple of questions...

Why carry the extra weight of a hybrid?

How will the government tax pure EV?

Why carry the extra weight of batteries only?

Road tax.

Edited by RJG46 on Friday 23 November 13:07

[DonkeyApple]

RJG46 said:

Why carry the weight of batteries only?

I would expect that aspect to be something that eventually changed. It’s currently hugely inefficient to lug around a massive battery pack capable of 200 miles+ if you are only using a few miles a day. You would expect that as people came to terms with understanding exactly what range they really need they will specify more suitable pack sizes and costs, thus saving on initial outlay, saving on maintenance costs and having a lighter so more efficient car?

[pingu393]

RJG46 said:

pingu393 said:

A couple of questions...

Why carry the extra weight of a hybrid?

How will the government tax pure EV?

Why carry the weight of batteries only?

A battery and an IC engine will weigh approximately the same in the future. Why carry both? Range anxiety and speed of charging are the best answers that I have seen. Both can be eliminated for most journeys through planning.

I suspect that IC hire cars with 24 hour availability will be needed for urgent long distance journeys.

I could survive for 364 days a year on well managed EV, but if I get a phone call saying my mum is dying, I want to be able to jump in a vehicle and get to her bedside 400 miles away without having to worry about running out of "go-juice".

[Greg_D]

otolith said:

Evanivitch said:

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

As if there weren't enough vulnerable people struggling to heat the homes as it is.

That's the point in a tiered tax - you want to hit people who are using their domestic electricity to charge a car, so you make the charge kick in above the typical domestic use level. That would also hit people who are unusually high electricity users for other reasons, but if my neighbour is being taxed for charging his car it's hard to argue that I shouldn't be taxed for heating a hot tub or whatever.

what about people like me who have 2 electric cars, a hot tub and a koi pond!!!! why should i pay a tax of a level commensurate with fuel duty to keep my fish water clean? apparently i use 6 times the national average in electricity!!!

[ElectricSoup]

pingu393 said:

RJG46 said:

pingu393 said:

A couple of questions...

Why carry the extra weight of a hybrid?

How will the government tax pure EV?

Why carry the weight of batteries only?

A battery and an IC engine will weigh approximately the same in the future. Why carry both? Range anxiety and speed of charging are the best answers that I have seen. Both can be eliminated for most journeys through planning.

I suspect that IC hire cars with 24 hour availability will be needed for urgent long distance journeys.

I could survive for 364 days a year on well managed EV, but if I get a phone call saying my mum is dying, I want to be able to jump in a vehicle and get to her bedside 400 miles away without having to worry about running out of "go-juice".

I survive this way, but as I'm in a family requiring 2 cars, we've got a diesel powered car for these occasional long journeys (Mum 200 miles away and I have done 1 urgent sprint down the road this year). 2nd car barely gets used. I'm saving a fortune over running 2 ICE cars. We need 1 newish, reliable car and can then get away with one older car for lower mileage, infrequent use. So I've got a 2015 Leaf for everyday, purchased 2nd hand on a £150 a month PCP (more mile allowance than I need), and a 2005 320CDi E Class estate. When I used to run a daily on diesel, I was spending 200-300 a month on fuel alone. I spent £250 last year (YEAR) on electricity charging the Leaf at home, and it will be less this year as I now charge at work. After 14 months of ownership, there is zero downside for me.

Edited by ElectricSoup on Friday 23 November 16:04

[otolith]

Greg_D said:

otolith said:

Evanivitch said:

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

As if there weren't enough vulnerable people struggling to heat the homes as it is.

That's the point in a tiered tax - you want to hit people who are using their domestic electricity to charge a car, so you make the charge kick in above the typical domestic use level. That would also hit people who are unusually high electricity users for other reasons, but if my neighbour is being taxed for charging his car it's hard to argue that I shouldn't be taxed for heating a hot tub or whatever.

what about people like me who have 2 electric cars, a hot tub and a koi pond!!!! why should i pay a tax of a level commensurate with fuel duty to keep my fish water clean? apparently i use 6 times the national average in electricity!!!

Because, going back to first principles, why are we taxing the car?

[pingu393]

ElectricSoup said:

pingu393 said:

RJG46 said:

pingu393 said:

A couple of questions...

Why carry the extra weight of a hybrid?

How will the government tax pure EV?

Why carry the weight of batteries only?

A battery and an IC engine will weigh approximately the same in the future. Why carry both? Range anxiety and speed of charging are the best answers that I have seen. Both can be eliminated for most journeys through planning.

I suspect that IC hire cars with 24 hour availability will be needed for urgent long distance journeys.

I could survive for 364 days a year on well managed EV, but if I get a phone call saying my mum is dying, I want to be able to jump in a vehicle and get to her bedside 400 miles away without having to worry about running out of "go-juice".

I survive this way, but as I'm in a family requiring 2 cars, we've got a diesel powered car for these occasional long journeys (Mum 200 miles away and I have done 1 urgent sprint down the road this year). 2nd car barely gets used. I'm saving a fortune over running 2 ICE cars. We need 1 newish, reliable car and can then get away with one older car for lower mileage, infrequent use. So I've got a 2015 Leaf for everyday, purchased 2nd hand on a £150 a month PCP (more mile allowance than I need), and a 2005 320CDi E Class estate. When I used to run a daily on diesel, I was spending 200-300 a month on fuel alone. I spent £250 last year (YEAR) on electricity charging the Leaf at home, and it will be less this year as I now charge at work. After 14 months of ownership, there is zero downside for me.

Edited by ElectricSoup on Friday 23 November 16:04

Is the purpose of EV cars not to save the planet? Having more than one vehicle is not saving the planet. Fuelling vehicles isn't killing the planet as quickly as building them is.

BTW, I have four vehicles (five if you include my mum's that I've just taken her to the shops in), so I'm not coming at this from a "holier than thou" pov, more from a "how does Joe Average square the circle" pov.


The best way that I could save the planet and minimise my carbon footprint would be to own one vehicle. It would have to be similar to a convertible XC-90, with the acceleration of an M3, and be classified as a car-derived van, and cost less than 15p/mile in fuel to drive.

I could carry the loads for my courier work. My mum could probably get in it. It would have the four seats that I need once or twice a year. It would give me the open-top enjoyment of my M Roadster. It would give me the lazy motorway miles of the 330 and have the economy of the Smart for the quick trips to town (<10 miles).

It's a shame that nobody makes such a beast.

[DonkeyApple]

Greg_D said:

what about people like me who have 2 electric cars, a hot tub and a koi pond!!!! why should i pay a tax of a level commensurate with fuel duty to keep my fish water clean? apparently i use 6 times the national average in electricity!!!

Might be worth making contact with the Court of European Human Rights to establish what section fk buckets and koi come under?

[Witchfinder]

pingu393 said:

The best way that I could save the planet and minimise my carbon footprint would be to own one vehicle. It would have to be similar to a convertible XC-90, with the acceleration of an M3, and be classified as a car-derived van, and cost less than 15p/mile in fuel to drive.
....
It's a shame that nobody makes such a beast.

Tesla Model X ticks most of those boxes.

[Evanivitch]

otolith said:

Evanivitch said:

otolith said:

DonkeyApple said:

Eventually I can imagine that domestic gas heating will be taxed out and households all switch to electricity. That’s then billed at a higher rate after a set amount is used.

That's the cheapest (and arguably fairest) way of doing it.

As if there weren't enough vulnerable people struggling to heat the homes as it is.

That's the point in a tiered tax - you want to hit people who are using their domestic electricity to charge a car, so you make the charge kick in above the typical domestic use level. That would also hit people who are unusually high electricity users for other reasons, but if my neighbour is being taxed for charging his car it's hard to argue that I shouldn't be taxed for heating a hot tub or whatever.

You're missing step 1) tax gas. Gas is the cheapest way to currently heat a conventional home. The investment required to buy heat pump and adapt the home to use it efficiently is prohibitive at this time.

[pingu393]

Witchfinder said:

pingu393 said:

The best way that I could save the planet and minimise my carbon footprint would be to own one vehicle. It would have to be similar to a convertible XC-90, with the acceleration of an M3, and be classified as a car-derived van, and cost less than 15p/mile in fuel to drive.
....
It's a shame that nobody makes such a beast.

Tesla Model X ticks most of those boxes.

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/cars/tesla/model-x

Did I not mention that it had to be affordable to Joe Average?

I'll pay the variables, someone else can pay the fixed .

[Witchfinder]

pingu393 said:

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/cars/tesla/model-x

Did I not mention that it had to be affordable to Joe Average?

I'll pay the variables, someone else can pay the fixed .

Got to be more affordable than buying, fuelling, insuring, taxing, servicing, and MOTing 4 or 5 different vehicles.

I wouldn't buy a second hand Tesla, it seems to be way more cost effective to get one new (especially an "in stock" car) on a PCP.

[pingu393]

Witchfinder said:

pingu393 said:

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/cars/tesla/model-x

Did I not mention that it had to be affordable to Joe Average?

I'll pay the variables, someone else can pay the fixed .

Got to be more affordable than buying, fuelling, insuring, taxing, servicing, and MOTing 4 or 5 different vehicles.

I wouldn't buy a second hand Tesla, it seems to be way more cost effective to get one new (especially an "in stock" car) on a PCP.

Not even close. My fleet cost less than £15k to buy and costs £1500 to insure (£1000 just to insure a van ). As I'm the only driver, multiple vehicles doesn't mean multiple fuel bills. Some are more expensive per mile, but I can only drive one at a time.

Annual servicing, MOTs and VEDs are more expensive, but mileage-based servicing would be much the same as a single vehicle doing the 100,000+ miles that I do per year.

For me, it is VERY much cheaper to run several cheap cars than one super machine.

[Donbot]

How many cars does the average household have? I wouldn't be surprised if the 'one EV, one ICE decision' makes next to no overall impact on numbers.

Edit. Seems it's about 1.2. So I suppose it would.

Edited by Donbot on Friday 23 November 18:59

[Witchfinder]

pingu393 said:

For me, it is VERY much cheaper to run several cheap cars than one super machine.

If you keep a spreadsheet and add it all up, including depreciation, I think you might be surprised.

[pingu393]

Witchfinder said:

pingu393 said:

For me, it is VERY much cheaper to run several cheap cars than one super machine.

If you keep a spreadsheet and add it all up, including depreciation, I think you might be surprised.

I don't have a spreadsheet for a car I don't have, but I'm sad enough to have spreadsheets for the cars I do have .

That's how I know that depreciation is a big chunk of the cost - hence the reason for not buying new. I know that there is little depreciation in EVs at the moment, but not having £60k of cash is as much a barrier as not having willingness to pay for a £60k loan.