EVs... no one wants them! (Vol. 2)
Discussion
GT9 said:
PinkHouse said:
There was another poster that admitted he's not ready to give up jetting abroad on holidays because there "isn't any viable decarbonisation path yet". It's a convenient excuse that ignores the very simple and 100% effective decarbonisation method that involves stopping flying
I didn't say there isn't a viable pathway, I said it will take longer.Your ability to make things up as you go is impressive, almost in Donald's league.
If we stop flying, what about the job losses, are they less worthy than the potential job losses you are unhappy about in the passenger car sector?
DonkeyApple said:
PinkHouse said:
Lotus have similarly binned their EV only commitments and are developing range extender hybrid tech into theie existing platforms which is a pretty good strategy as hybrids seem to be the best current solution. However they're still going to be hampered by complexity and reliability concerns and this is clearly seen in the used market. Look up the values of hybrid bmws, range rovers etc and their used values are much lower than pure ICE counterparts, even in many cases where the ICE has a much lower system power output.
Most people don't like the concept to dealing with batteries outside warranty periods
They won't really be 'developing' anything. They're just going to be taking another product off the line and sticking a Lotus badge on it. Most people don't like the concept to dealing with batteries outside warranty periods
Ie It'll be the new Zeekr hybrid.
PinkHouse said:
Except I'm not advocating we stop anything, it's those that want to cherry pick the activities that they claim are killing children locally while flying away to attend a climate summit that need to explain why they won't give up flying and other luxuries to fight climate change
Just because someone takes a flight doesn't mean they're not lowering their overall carbon footprint by other means. braddo said:
PinkHouse said:
Except I'm not advocating we stop anything, it's those that want to cherry pick the activities that they claim are killing children locally while flying away to attend a climate summit that need to explain why they won't give up flying and other luxuries to fight climate change
Just because someone takes a flight doesn't mean they're not lowering their overall carbon footprint by other means. braddo said:
PinkHouse said:
Except I'm not advocating we stop anything, it's those that want to cherry pick the activities that they claim are killing children locally while flying away to attend a climate summit that need to explain why they won't give up flying and other luxuries to fight climate change
Just because someone takes a flight doesn't mean they're not lowering their overall carbon footprint by other means. braddo said:
Just because someone takes a flight doesn't mean they're not lowering their overall carbon footprint by other means.
But it could be lower still by not flying? I do wonder with the whole green push if other areas will (should?) be looked at, but then all have potential negative workforce outcomes.I watched Ridley Scott's Napolean the other night and knew that some of it had been filmed on the common we walk our dogs (pets maybe one day on the radar?) from what I could make out it was minutes of a few different scenes (snowy/horsey ones) and they were present for a week or two with generators, fake snow, horses and minbuses shipping to and fro, from the hospitality/catering hub down the road.
What's the carbon foot print of such a (mediocre/marmite) film let alone a proper big budget hollywood block buster, then you have sport etc.
We've never really had to endure energy considerations beyond affordablilty before, so it will be interesting how we square, our desire to do everything we always have, with others around the globe wanting to eventually do what we currently do, with increasing population and need for GDP growth (else the debt based economy collapses) all while reducing carbon emissions?
PinkHouse said:
What is genuinely stopping them from lowering it by all means?
Surely that's the whole point of a viable decarbonisation strategy, to keep functioning in a very similar way but do it without burning stuff.It's not difficult to understand.
Granted, a bit more difficult to implement.
GT9 said:
PinkHouse said:
What is genuinely stopping them from lowering it by all means?
Surely that's the whole point of a viable decarbonisation strategy, to keep functioning in a very similar way but do it without burning stuff.It's not difficult to understand.
Granted, a bit more difficult to implement.
But...
I have installed solar panels, so have reduced my carbon footprint by 4750kg since March 2024 this year.
I have also added additional insulation, had the window seals all refreshed and a new front door fitted, to reduce the amount of oil I use for heating.
It's all about balance, if everyone makes some small steps, you actually get a long way...
- Flight CO2 calculator, need to start walking everywhere if I want to fly after looking at this!
monkfish1 said:
Even something as simple as being forced to display there prices prominently like petrol and diesel would bre a start.
FWIW I nipped into Cherwell Valley services and they had just that on a set of new (still wrapped in plastic and not yet open) chargers. A big sign akin to the ones you'd see outside petrol stations with p/kWh. Fastdruid said:
monkfish1 said:
Even something as simple as being forced to display there prices prominently like petrol and diesel would bre a start.
FWIW I nipped into Cherwell Valley services and they had just that on a set of new (still wrapped in plastic and not yet open) chargers. A big sign akin to the ones you'd see outside petrol stations with p/kWh. 
They display their max pricing on their website too:
Edited by plfrench on Friday 29th November 16:28
Richard-D said:
It does make a nonsense of the 'everyone needs to do their bit' argument though. Refusing to do the one thing that would make a huge difference whilst claiming that buying a new shiny car and being righteous about it is a significant contribution.
It doesn't make a nonsense of it at all if a person has reduced their carbon footprint. They might take a couple of flights per year and still have a lower footprint than yours?PinkHouse said:
Except I'm not advocating we stop anything, it's those that want to cherry pick the activities that they claim are killing children locally while flying away to attend a climate summit that need to explain why they won't give up flying and other luxuries to fight climate change
I don't particularly care about climate change but I can see the benefit of not spewing CO, NOx and <PM10 a few feet from where children spend 6 hours a day.For example.
It's mental to me that anyone could argue against that.
braddo said:
Richard-D said:
It does make a nonsense of the 'everyone needs to do their bit' argument though. Refusing to do the one thing that would make a huge difference whilst claiming that buying a new shiny car and being righteous about it is a significant contribution.
It doesn't make a nonsense of it at all if a person has reduced their carbon footprint. They might take a couple of flights per year and still have a lower footprint than yours?
t however.plfrench said:
It's still twice the price of the Tesla chargers, though.It says on the website they charge a flat rate of 75p, so no maximum as such, that is the cost.
For the polestar we have at the moment, that would cost £56.00 to charge from flat, in this weather the car is reporting 44 kWh/100 miles which is around 2.27 miles per kWh.
Which works out at around 19 mpg
If I use our i3s, which is telling me 3.3 miles per kWh
The cost to charge from empty would be £28.42, which works out at around 26 mpg.
I can't see them being that popular.
TheRainMaker said:
plfrench said:
It's still twice the price of the Tesla chargers, though.It says on the website they charge a flat rate of 75p, so no maximum as such, that is the cost.
For the polestar we have at the moment, that would cost £56.00 to charge from flat, in this weather the car is reporting 44 kWh/100 miles which is around 2.27 miles per kWh.
Which works out at around 19 mpg
If I use our i3s, which is telling me 3.3 miles per kWh
The cost to charge from empty would be £28.42, which works out at around 26 mpg.
I can't see them being that popular.
Assuming 15% loss that £28.42 for the i3 becomes £33.44 so roughly 22.6mpg (at the current £1.329 for petrol I paid earlier in the week).
The Polestar becomes about 15.5mpg equivalent.
Fastdruid said:
That's not including charging losses either!
Assuming 15% loss that £28.42 for the i3 becomes £33.44 so roughly 22.6mpg (at the current £1.329 for petrol I paid earlier in the week).
The Polestar becomes about 15.5mpg equivalent.
It’s ok, they’re throwing in 1 Nectar Point per £1 spent charging!!Assuming 15% loss that £28.42 for the i3 becomes £33.44 so roughly 22.6mpg (at the current £1.329 for petrol I paid earlier in the week).
The Polestar becomes about 15.5mpg equivalent.
greenarrow said:
Trevor555 said:
My first contribution to this topic, and I'm sure it's been pointed out already.
Paid £62 for a fast charge to get me just another 200 miles delivering a car to Scotland.
Hasn't exactly encouraged me to rush out and buy one.
That is terrible and a reason why I am not rushing out either. As the last poster said, horses for courses. My driving pattern is fairly unusual I would say. Three weeks a month by car generally sits on the drive most days or days shortish trips, max 10 miles each way. Once a month its a 520 mile round trip to the office, often diverting to Manchester from the Liverpool city centre office to visit my daughter, who lives on a busy road with no drive and no evidence of any chargers nearby. I would almost certainly have to use a motorway charger at least once, or if not, one of the local ones in a city, charging a fairly premium rate. My wife pointed out that if I had an EV I would have to factor in charging and find a cheaper alternative, but here's the rub, in my existing 10 year old diesel I don't have to. I just do the whole trip on one tank of fuel. So, seeing as the car is giving good service and has been reliable, I will stick with it for now as for me it does the job. BUT, I would love an EV as a second car for the local trips, I won't lie. They seem perfect for the urban trips where you want instant pick up and not to be polluting from the tailpipe in built up areas....Paid £62 for a fast charge to get me just another 200 miles delivering a car to Scotland.
Hasn't exactly encouraged me to rush out and buy one.
(1) Long trips away from home, such as Scotland holidays for me, or similar for you, will cost more than in the old petrol auto. The occasional rapid top-up on a long business day is different, because I can mentally "average" the 79p-p-kWh for 9kWh with the 23p-p-kWh I paid for 30kWh when I filled it up at home.
(2) I didn't rush out and buy an EV until my previous ICE car wouldn't go any more. So if your 10-year-old diesel is still working then stick with it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs...
Expect a lot more similar stories. Damn Telegraph anti EV bias shocking…
Expect a lot more similar stories. Damn Telegraph anti EV bias shocking…
Johnson897210 said:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/consumer-affairs...
Expect a lot more similar stories. Damn Telegraph anti EV bias shocking…
That article doesn't say what you thinks it says.....Expect a lot more similar stories. Damn Telegraph anti EV bias shocking…
Suggest you read it before getting your Johnson out in indignation.
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff