Hydrogen is the future, not BEVs?
Discussion
DonkeyApple said:
Or just capped finance secured against a vehicle at £40k for ICE and wound it down each year. No need for any subsidies eco waffle, politics or terrorising of the less affluent, no bans etc. Consumers wanting to spend more on a car would have just had to opt for an EV, meanwhile the ICE fleet would have just become steadily more economical. The whole car market is controlled by credit so credit was the blatantly obvious tool to use to drive the shift.
It is odd though, superior new technologies can generally be successful on their own merits without the old fashioned technology needing to be banned or legislated against. Even with the huge subsidy of almost tax free electricity being freely available, EV sales aren't exactly booming.We have a Tesla so I'm absolutely not anti-EV for the right use case but I do think there's still a lot of work to be done on the product before it's spectacularly better in the same way that a car is over a horse or a CD is over a cassette tape.
Snow and Rocks said:
It is odd though, superior new technologies can generally be successful on their own merits without the old fashioned technology needing to be banned or legislated against. Even with the huge subsidy of almost tax free electricity being freely available, EV sales aren't exactly booming.
We have a Tesla so I'm absolutely not anti-EV for the right use case but I do think there's still a lot of work to be done on the product before it's spectacularly better in the same way that a car is over a horse or a CD is over a cassette tape.
Agreed but there is a Catch22 scenario at play that the issue for 130+ years has been shot batteries and to force a solution to that problem took legislation to inspire the capex by the manufacturers and to incentivise there being early adopters. Today we've reached the point that bar pricing, EVs fundamentally work in the U.K. market but still using glorified laptop cells and only because of the legislation that created the investment. We could have done much of that legislation better but what's done is done. At least people have the freedom of choice and the switch is very slow and steady. It's just a shame it's all become a pitiful football match with all the associated vitriol. Using consumer credit legislation would have been far smarter and more civilised. We have a Tesla so I'm absolutely not anti-EV for the right use case but I do think there's still a lot of work to be done on the product before it's spectacularly better in the same way that a car is over a horse or a CD is over a cassette tape.
Snow and Rocks said:
It is odd though, superior new technologies can generally be successful on their own merits without the old fashioned technology needing to be banned or legislated against.
This isn't true at all.Analogue to digital had to be forced.
Leaded to unleaded had to be forced.
Coal had to be outlawed in vast areas to make people switch to gas.
Horses (and other oddball slow vehicles) had to be banned from various roads.
There was even a campaign against electricity back in the day...
Etc. Etc.
Old people usually just want to stick to what they have & often have the money and power to cause a fuss for a while.
Even commercial products need to be pushed hard with marketing and often lobbying.
The simple truth is that outside of the early adopter minority, we humans, are generally happier to stick with the way things are as even when superseded by superior alternatives there remains the simpler path of least resistance which is to not do anything. It's the niche of the early adopter who may struggle to understand the normal majority and even resorts to referring to this majority as 'Luddites' as a way of trying to rationalise what isn't in their nature to easily comprehend. They also may confuse a marathon with a sprint as may those at the other extreme end of the normal demographic who believe things are being forced on them right now when in reality they could be waiting 30 years for their turn and even die before they get their chance.
And we mustn't ignore the truth that there is a competitive advantage to developed nations in using global legislation to push industrial and manufacturing areas forward as it has historically prevented developing nations from being too competitive. Even more so if it deletes their key advantages of cheap labour and lax governance.
The simple truth is that outside of the early adopter minority, we humans, are generally happier to stick with the way things are as even when superseded by superior alternatives there remains the simpler path of least resistance which is to not do anything. It's the niche of the early adopter who may struggle to understand the normal majority and even resorts to referring to this majority as 'Luddites' as a way of trying to rationalise what isn't in their nature to easily comprehend. They also may confuse a marathon with a sprint as may those at the other extreme end of the normal demographic who believe things are being forced on them right now when in reality they could be waiting 30 years for their turn and even die before they get their chance.
And we mustn't ignore the truth that there is a competitive advantage to developed nations in using global legislation to push industrial and manufacturing areas forward as it has historically prevented developing nations from being too competitive. Even more so if it deletes their key advantages of cheap labour and lax governance.
autumnsum said:
Snow and Rocks said:
It is odd though, superior new technologies can generally be successful on their own merits without the old fashioned technology needing to be banned or legislated against.
This isn't true at all.Analogue to digital had to be forced.
Leaded to unleaded had to be forced.
Coal had to be outlawed in vast areas to make people switch to gas.
Horses (and other oddball slow vehicles) had to be banned from various roads.
There was even a campaign against electricity back in the day...
Etc. Etc.
Old people usually just want to stick to what they have & often have the money and power to cause a fuss for a while.
As an aside, I strongly suspect that most people, once they eventually do cross over to EV, sill be perfectly happy with their new car - once they've gotten used to it and appreciated the various day to day benefits. Anyone who really misses ICE and manual gearboxes etc, it's a perfect time to buy a great ICE car to keep and look after and enjoy as an investment. Nobody will ever take it away from you or ban it.
Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 23 April 16:17
TheDeuce said:
DonkeyApple said:
wisbech said:
Safety equipment (seatbelts, headlights etc) all had to be legislated for as well
As did consanguineous marriage, necrophilia and beastiality. Some folk just don't like change. 
f
king hell 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-64...
DonkeyApple said:
TheDeuce said:
DonkeyApple said:
wisbech said:
Safety equipment (seatbelts, headlights etc) all had to be legislated for as well
As did consanguineous marriage, necrophilia and beastiality. Some folk just don't like change. f
king hell https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-64...
TheDeuce said:
autumnsum said:
Snow and Rocks said:
It is odd though, superior new technologies can generally be successful on their own merits without the old fashioned technology needing to be banned or legislated against.
This isn't true at all.Analogue to digital had to be forced.
Leaded to unleaded had to be forced.
Coal had to be outlawed in vast areas to make people switch to gas.
Horses (and other oddball slow vehicles) had to be banned from various roads.
There was even a campaign against electricity back in the day...
Etc. Etc.
Old people usually just want to stick to what they have & often have the money and power to cause a fuss for a while.
As an aside, I strongly suspect that most people, once they eventually do cross over to EV, sill be perfectly happy with their new car - once they've gotten used to it and appreciated the various day to day benefits. Anyone who really misses ICE and manual gearboxes etc, it's a perfect time to buy a great ICE car to keep and look after and enjoy as an investment. Nobody will ever take it away from you or ban it.
Edited by TheDeuce on Tuesday 23 April 16:17
As above, legalisation is always needed to encourage change. Human nature is to avoid change, especially as you get older, and a government policy is usually the only way to achieve the necessary action. I'm still perplexed by the anti-EV agenda being promoted by some parts of the media (The Telegraph articles over the last few days are a joke), I can only guess that other forces are at play.
Yup. As Snow and Rocks says, it would be nice if it wasn't required though. If battery tech improvements had been sufficient to just mean the EV became the smarter choice then all of the last decade would have been far more peaceful on the car front.
It's the same issue with GH. That's only a thing because energy storage remains stubbornly crap and decades out of step with civilisation. Batteries today are still the equivalent of a caveman on the Google campus.
It's the same issue with GH. That's only a thing because energy storage remains stubbornly crap and decades out of step with civilisation. Batteries today are still the equivalent of a caveman on the Google campus.
DonkeyApple said:
Yup. As Snow and Rocks says, it would be nice if it wasn't required though. If battery tech improvements had been sufficient to just mean the EV became the smarter choice then all of the last decade would have been far more peaceful on the car front.
It's the same issue with GH. That's only a thing because energy storage remains stubbornly crap and decades out of step with civilisation. Batteries today are still the equivalent of a caveman on the Google campus.
It's worse than that...It's the same issue with GH. That's only a thing because energy storage remains stubbornly crap and decades out of step with civilisation. Batteries today are still the equivalent of a caveman on the Google campus.
Other tech is being held back to such an extent now that when a higher density battery does become mainstream, we're going to leap forwards decades in years - that'll mess up society and the world order no doubt, depending on who has the battery tech/patents and/or the resources to build them.
Humanoid robots and by extension discrete AI learning as a 'human' could in a very short space of time go from totally unaffordable to a no brainer in commercial terms and wipe out millions of currently human roles.
On the plus side, Mazda could make an eMX5 that weighs the same as the original but has twice the power. Swings and roundabouts
TheDeuce said:
It's worse than that...
Other tech is being held back to such an extent now that when a higher density battery does become mainstream, we're going to leap forwards decades in years - that'll mess up society and the world order no doubt, depending on who has the battery tech/patents and/or the resources to build them.
Humanoid robots and by extension discrete AI learning as a 'human' could in a very short space of time go from totally unaffordable to a no brainer in commercial terms and wipe out millions of currently human roles.
On the plus side, Mazda could make an eMX5 that weighs the same as the original but has twice the power. Swings and roundabouts
Absolutely. I've banged on for years on PH about how the human race's complete failure to date to solve the energy storage problem (we still use water battery technology from the Bronze Age!!) is now one of the core inhibitors to progress. The day that problem is finally solved is the day the human race enters a phase bigger than the internet revolution, the Industrial Revolution or the agrarian revolution. Solving the problem of how to efficiently store energy will lead to unimaginable change. Other tech is being held back to such an extent now that when a higher density battery does become mainstream, we're going to leap forwards decades in years - that'll mess up society and the world order no doubt, depending on who has the battery tech/patents and/or the resources to build them.
Humanoid robots and by extension discrete AI learning as a 'human' could in a very short space of time go from totally unaffordable to a no brainer in commercial terms and wipe out millions of currently human roles.
On the plus side, Mazda could make an eMX5 that weighs the same as the original but has twice the power. Swings and roundabouts
And forget the MX5!! I'll finally get my personal drone to take me to the pub and back, with a brief stop on the return to try and get a pee stream down a neighbour's chimney.
DonkeyApple said:
TheDeuce said:
It's worse than that...
Other tech is being held back to such an extent now that when a higher density battery does become mainstream, we're going to leap forwards decades in years - that'll mess up society and the world order no doubt, depending on who has the battery tech/patents and/or the resources to build them.
Humanoid robots and by extension discrete AI learning as a 'human' could in a very short space of time go from totally unaffordable to a no brainer in commercial terms and wipe out millions of currently human roles.
On the plus side, Mazda could make an eMX5 that weighs the same as the original but has twice the power. Swings and roundabouts
Absolutely. I've banged on for years on PH about how the human race's complete failure to date to solve the energy storage problem (we still use water battery technology from the Bronze Age!!) is now one of the core inhibitors to progress. The day that problem is finally solved is the day the human race enters a phase bigger than the internet revolution, the Industrial Revolution or the agrarian revolution. Solving the problem of how to efficiently store energy will lead to unimaginable change. Other tech is being held back to such an extent now that when a higher density battery does become mainstream, we're going to leap forwards decades in years - that'll mess up society and the world order no doubt, depending on who has the battery tech/patents and/or the resources to build them.
Humanoid robots and by extension discrete AI learning as a 'human' could in a very short space of time go from totally unaffordable to a no brainer in commercial terms and wipe out millions of currently human roles.
On the plus side, Mazda could make an eMX5 that weighs the same as the original but has twice the power. Swings and roundabouts
And forget the MX5!! I'll finally get my personal drone to take me to the pub and back, with a brief stop on the return to try and get a pee stream down a neighbour's chimney.
Pissing down a neighbours chimney whilst plod stands on the pavement helplessly demanding to know how drunk you are and whether you're the one driving is just a happy bi-product.
TheDeuce said:
DonkeyApple said:
Absolutely. I've banged on for years on PH about how the human race's complete failure to date to solve the energy storage problem (we still use water battery technology from the Bronze Age!!) is now one of the core inhibitors to progress. The day that problem is finally solved is the day the human race enters a phase bigger than the internet revolution, the Industrial Revolution or the agrarian revolution. Solving the problem of how to efficiently store energy will lead to unimaginable change.
And forget the MX5!! I'll finally get my personal drone to take me to the pub and back, with a brief stop on the return to try and get a pee stream down a neighbour's chimney.
And that's why hundreds of billions are being put into battery tech, the winner changes the world and can probably own a significant chunk of it.And forget the MX5!! I'll finally get my personal drone to take me to the pub and back, with a brief stop on the return to try and get a pee stream down a neighbour's chimney.
Pissing down a neighbours chimney whilst plod stands on the pavement helplessly demanding to know how drunk you are and whether you're the one driving is just a happy bi-product.
bigothunter said:
Sounds like fusion - only 20 years away but never gets any closer
I suppose it would sound like that to a person that isn't aware that one technology is theoretical, other than a few instances it's been forced into happening in an entirely chaotic manner, whereas the other has endless working prototypes. If that's what you mean?Both will happen but solid state cells will happen first - they're already dependably reproducable, it's the manufacturering process and fidelity that needs refining.
TheDeuce said:
I suppose it would sound like that to a person that isn't aware that one technology is theoretical, other than a few instances it's been forced into happening in an entirely chaotic manner, whereas the other has endless working prototypes. If that's what you mean?
Both will happen but solid state cells will happen first - they're already dependably reproducable, it's the manufacturering process and fidelity that needs refining.
What is the realistic objective energy density for these solid state cells?Both will happen but solid state cells will happen first - they're already dependably reproducable, it's the manufacturering process and fidelity that needs refining.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff